News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Deep dive into the UK air traffic control meltdown by moritzwarhier on Monday September 11, 2023 @06:34PM (#37474607)
Sounds like a helpful idea with considerable implementation complexity, including the potential for new disastrous failure modes.
Re:Deep dive into the UK air traffic control meltdown by zarzavat on Tuesday September 12, 2023 @04:17AM (#37478137)
Not really because each point is only adjacent to a small neighborhood of other points, so if you want to test every possibility then your search space only grows by a constant factor proportional to the maximum degree of the graph.

As for implementation complexity, you would hope they would use formal verification for something like this.

Re:Deep dive into the UK air traffic control meltdown by codeulike on Tuesday September 12, 2023 @04:20AM (#37478156)
But its how the waypoint codes work in practice - they are contextual. If Air Traffic Control tell a plane to head for waypoint RESIA, they mean the one nearby, not the one 4000 km away.
Re:Deep dive into the UK air traffic control meltdown by moritzwarhier on Tuesday September 12, 2023 @02:36PM (#37485586)
Have to admit, I read the article in full detail only after commenting and I see your point.

Especially since the implenting company is called out explicitly for failing to achieve this, and the risks of changing the well-established identifiers are also illustrated.

Perfect might be the enemy of the good then, or the standardization thing at least is a separate topic.