Sure, I'll explain it in simpler terms. Imagine we're talking about making changes to something important, like a lock on a door that many people use. We want to make sure the lock is strong and secure.
1. One of the ideas being discussed is about how this lock works. Right now, it might not be as secure as we'd like. There's a risk that if we keep using it as it is, it could be easier for someone with bad intentions to figure out how it works. We have a way to make it safer, but it involves some changes to the lock.
2. Another issue is about the way the lock is set up. Right now, the way it's set up could make it easier for someone to break in. We need to make sure the lock is set up in a way that's really hard for people to predict.
3. The lock also has some problems when it's used a lot. The more it's used, the less secure it becomes. If we use it a lot, like thousands of times, it could become very easy for someone to break it.
4. People have already found ways to break this kind of lock in the past, and not all locks are checked properly to make sure they're secure.
5. Finally, the way this lock was designed is based on some assumptions, but those assumptions might not be true in reality. This means the lock could be vulnerable to unknown attacks, making it less safe.
So, the question is, should we keep using this lock the way it is, even though it might not be very safe, or should we make some changes to try to make it more secure? That's what's being discussed.
Oddbean new post about login | logout 