Talk:Two Generals' Problem

Talk:Two Generals' Problem

Diagram for section "Illustrating the Problem"

I believe a diagram would help better visualize the problem then just plain text ShiberToast (talk) 18:15, 12 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Issue with "Proof by Symmetry" subsection in section "Proof"

Proof by symmetry assumed that the attacker can send fake messages, but in the problem, the attacker can merely intercept messages. Should the subsection be removed? ShiberToast (talk) 18:38, 12 February 2020 (UTC)Reply


(Good) source for "first proved unsolvable"

"The Two Generals' Problem was the first computer communication problem to be proved to be unsolvable" is a very strong but questionable statement. What about the various halting problems? Church, Turing, Godel, etc were working on unsolvable problems in the 1930s and 40s. Without an explanation and a great reference, I think we should drop that statement. --Drpixie (talk) 00:55, 2 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

agreed Titaan123 (talk) 08:29, 24 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
Yes, the halting problem was proved unsolvable long before the two generals' problem.
However, the halting problem is not a "communication problem".
I added a reference that says the closely-related, more complicated, Byzantine generals problem was "one of the first" computer communication problems proven to be unsolvable. It seems likely to me that two generals' problem was solved before that.
It would be nice if we found a reliable source that specifically named the first few computer communication problems proven to be unsolvable. (If it turns out that the two generals' problem wasn't proven until much later, what Wikipedia article would be best for mentioning that source?). --DavidCary (talk) 22:20, 31 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Engineering approaches

I dont think this sentense is right, but it's hard to say with all the negation:

There is no algorithm that they can use (e.g. attack if more than four messages are received) that will be certain to prevent one from attacking without the other. 

There seems to be a trivial algorithm they can use to guarantee no one attacks without the other: Simply don't attack. In other words, the article does not guarantee that the algorithm is required to make progress. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2025-41753-41 (talk) 10:27, 19 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.