RFC Errata


Errata Search

 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 2 records.

Status: Reported (1)

RFC 8774, "The Quantum Bug", April 2020

Source of RFC: INDEPENDENT

Errata ID: 6077
Status: Reported
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT

Reported By: Ángel
Date Reported: 2020-04-01

Section 1 says:

time travel will never work (or it would already have been used).

It should say:

time travel is still not available in the consumer market.

Notes:

While the introduction section may allow some more leniency, its discarding of RFC6921 based on an unfounded dismissal of time travel shows a lack of the required technical competence that should be cardinal for a serious publication such as this [RFC 3935]. The simplistic "it would already have been used" misses any rigorous testing and falls for the fallacy best described by the 19th century aphorism Absence of Evidence Is Not Evidence of Absence [QUOTE-INV]. Not only do we lack any method to detect whether time travel has been used already (with 'already being used' defined as the timestamp of either point of the time travel journey being prior to the current point in time, i.e. satisfying a lesser-than operation when the representations of their TAI [IEEE1588] values are checked with the comparison defined in [RFC2550]) but there are also many sensible reasons for time travel invented in the future not leading (coronavirus-aside) to an interaction with 2020 human beings (much less to a widely known one), as has been thoroughly studied in [WHY-HAVENT].



[RFC6921] Hinden, R., "Design Considerations for Faster-Than-Light
(FTL) Communication", RFC 6921, DOI 10.17487/RFC6921,
April 2013, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6921>.

[QUOTE-INV] Quote Investigator "Absence of Evidence Is Not Evidence
of Absence", 17 September 2019

[IEEE1588] IEEE, "IEEE Standard for a Precision Clock Synchronization
Protocol for Networked Measurement and Control Systems",
IEEE Std 1588-2008, DOI 10.1109/IEEESTD.2008.4579760, July
2008.

[RFC2550] S. Glassman, M. Manasse, J. Mogul, "Y10K and Beyond", RFC 2550,
April 1999, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2550>

[WHY-HAVENT] World Building Community, "If time travel is possible in the
future, no matter how distant, why haven't they come back to
tell us?", August 2016
<https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/51210/if-time-travel-is-possible-in-the-future-no-matter-how-distant-why-havent-the/51377>

Status: Held for Document Update (1)

RFC 8774, "The Quantum Bug", April 2020

Source of RFC: INDEPENDENT

Errata ID: 6075
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT, PDF, HTML

Reported By: Pickle Surprise
Date Reported: 2020-04-01
Held for Document Update by: Adrian Farrel
Date Held: 2020-04-01

Section Abstract says:

   This
   will lead to a perceived round-trip time of zero seconds on some
   Internet paths, a capability which was not predicted and so not
   included as a possibility in many protocol specifications.

It should say:

Suggested text...
   The
   no communication theorem holds, and there will be no perceived
   round-trip time of zero seconds on some Internet paths, a
   capability which was not predicted and so not included as a
   possibility in many protocol specifications.

Notes:

This report has been marked as "held for document update" so that the authors can consider it when a revision to the RFC is made.
At that time, the authors may want to think about the following points:
- The original text says "perceived round-trip time of zero seconds". Of course, the
perception of a zero round-trip time says nothing about the actual time: none of
the laws of physics apply to perception.
- The well-known "no-communication theorem" is predicated on the assumption
that the laws of quantum mechanics hold, but that it is clearly not the case on
March 32nd.
- The proof of the no-communication theorem depends on an understanding of
Hilbert Space. Mr Space is notably hard to comprehend.
- The no-communication theorem is classically described in relation to
communications between Alice and Bob, but we know that the Internet is For All,
and so our concerns should extend wider than just Alice and Bob to include
Charlie, Daphne, Eustace, and Felicity.
- The proof of the no-communication theorem depends on the Born rule, but while
there is one Born every minute, it is generally accepted that there is no change
through the Born identity.

Report New Errata