[HN Gopher] The Cannae Problem
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Cannae Problem
        
       Author : flobosg
       Score  : 112 points
       Date   : 2025-05-02 13:11 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.joanwestenberg.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.joanwestenberg.com)
        
       | roenxi wrote:
       | > Rome's eventual strategy--the Fabian strategy of delay,
       | harassment, and avoiding direct confrontation--wasn't intuitive
       | to Romans. It felt wrong.
       | 
       | My understanding of the story is Fabius was running the Roman
       | strategy before Cannae and had identified all the lessons of that
       | battle in advance. It was clear that in a pitched battle Hannibal
       | was going to do extremely well. It is a fascinating historical
       | example about how being right is not enough in politics, but
       | Fabius got a unique opportunity to demonstrate that he told them
       | so. It was clearly foreseeable and foreseen, so the entire
       | problem the Romans had was that their leadership operating
       | foolishly.
        
         | hueyp wrote:
         | Yes, he was appointed dictator before the consulship of varro /
         | paullus, but his strategy proved unpopular. It makes sense:
         | identity is hard and slow to change, and the romans had a
         | strong identity around aggressiveness.
         | 
         | That said, in the defence of romans, they were also open to
         | learning and integrating others ideas into their own. Scipio
         | africanus absolutely learned from hannibal, and was able to
         | layer aggressiveness, deception, and delay into his strategy.
         | Every metaphor is imperfect, and cannae is absolutely an
         | example of being blind / stubborn, but my quibble with the OP
         | would be that romans didn't _really_ change their aggressive
         | identity in the long term, and that identify continued to serve
         | them well for 100's of years after hannibal.
        
           | Attrecomet wrote:
           | We could adapt the comparison and imagine Kodak realizing the
           | digital business just enough to adapt a bit, but never shift
           | their focus: Just enable digital photography to make the
           | business case for any newcomer unviable, so they'll run out
           | of money before they start to turn a profit, but not innovate
           | enough to create the digital photography age we have today --
           | it would stay a niche market, for people for whom traditional
           | film really wouldn't work, just like it was in the years
           | leading up to the shift.
           | 
           | And then let's strain the comparison, when even overcoming a
           | genius general like Hannibal is no longer enough, and you
           | shift from a strategy of "who cares how many losses it takes,
           | Rome has more men" to the crisis of the third century, and
           | barbarian coalitions coalescing into what would become the
           | huge tribes and proto-states of the Migration Period, when
           | that strategy wasn't even viable for any day-to-day conflict,
           | given the severe military manpower constraints Rome faced,
           | and destroying your enemy in an attritional battle made way
           | for hurting them just enough that they were amenable to a
           | tolerable negotiated settlement. One could imagine the
           | widespread adoption of smartphones as the point where the
           | original market strategy of ignoring digital photography as
           | much as economically feasible would end, and the digital
           | photography era would finally start.
        
             | zahlman wrote:
             | Or we could take the real example of Philip Morris
             | successfully adapting to the declining popularity of (and
             | increasing legislation against) cigarette smoking and the
             | approach they've taken to cannabis (in places where it's
             | legal).
        
           | sevensor wrote:
           | Yeah, this was bad generalship, albeit on a much bigger scale
           | than the Republic was used to. The Romans were no strangers
           | to military disasters, but they were unusually resilient. The
           | conquest of Italy was far from a sure thing, and it included
           | numerous thrashings by the volscians, aequians, sabines,
           | veiians, et al.
        
       | soco wrote:
       | I would say science and why not also democracy are having their
       | Cannae moment right now. And it's painful to watch...
        
         | ogogmad wrote:
         | #NotAllDemocracies
         | 
         | More broadly, I think that Americans have been too arrogant and
         | have been prone to thinking that the only part of the world
         | which matters stops at their own borders.
        
           | readthenotes1 wrote:
           | In support of "democracy", some States tried to prevent Trump
           | from being on the 2024 ballot--that is, to prevent the demos
           | from selecting who they wanted.
           | 
           | There are several similar stories from Europe where the
           | putatively democratically elected leaders are working to save
           | the demos from itself.
           | 
           | So #NotAllDemocracies, but more than there should be
        
             | Attrecomet wrote:
             | It's not horribly unusual for a system that can be called
             | democratic with every right to exclude those that have
             | repeatedly stated, and shown in action, that they would not
             | actually abide by any result that goes against them. It's
             | the paradox of intolerance right there -- it's not those
             | defending the rules of democracy that are damaging it.
        
             | dudinax wrote:
             | A democracy has to protect itself from coup attempts
        
           | FredPret wrote:
           | This is a natural consequence of:
           | 
           | - major oceans on two sides, very similar country on one
           | side, and only one border with a truly different country
           | 
           | - 25% of the world's economy
           | 
           | - very easy to travel, work, and do business internally
           | across the US
           | 
           | - some cultural and lots of climate diversity inside the US
           | 
           | All of which means you can live a very full and happy life
           | without ever leaving the States or even thinking about what
           | happens outside of it.
        
         | Qem wrote:
         | That is happening in the energy sector. US owes a lot of its
         | initial development surge to early oil exploration. But now
         | China is making strides in green energy, fleet electrification
         | and renewables deployment, while the big oil lobby acts like an
         | anchor dragging US behind, hampering advance in those areas.
        
       | hangonhn wrote:
       | > The mighty armies of Carthage? Sent packing in the First Punic
       | War.
       | 
       | The first Punic War was won by the Romans by beating the mighty
       | NAVIES of Carthage at sea. Carthage was historically a sea power.
       | And the Romans did it by adopting new ideas and tactics.
        
         | inglor_cz wrote:
         | Most important wars in the Ancient Mediterranean had a major
         | naval component.
         | 
         | It can be argued that the collapse of the Western Roman Empire
         | in the 5th century AD was caused, or at least massively
         | hastened, by two negative naval events:
         | 
         | a) the Battle of Cartagena (461), where the Roman navy was
         | defeated by the Vandals, partly due to some captains being
         | corrupt [0]. This prevented Majorian, the last great Western
         | emperor, from reconquering North Africa;
         | 
         | and
         | 
         | b) the Battle of Cape Bon (468), again a massive failed effort
         | to crush the Vandals [1]
         | 
         | It is somewhat obscure to modern readers, but Vandals were
         | probably more dangerous at sea than on land.
         | 
         | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cartagena_(461)
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cape_Bon_(468)
        
           | hangonhn wrote:
           | This is so dang cool!!! No I didn't know that the Vandals
           | were more dangerous at sea. Thank you for sharing!!
        
         | johnnyjeans wrote:
         | In my view, it was won because the Elder Council underestimated
         | the threat. Had they known how the defense of Sicily was going
         | to go, they could have easily afforded to hire 50,000 more
         | celts and turned them out onto the Italic peninsula to raise
         | absolute hell. But hindsight is 20/20.
         | 
         | The Romans bet big and stretched their logistics to the
         | absolute limit to march every conscript they could muster down
         | to Sicily. The Italic peninsula was completely undefended. If
         | word had reached the army (many of whom were gang-pressed
         | enemies of the Latins) that their villages were burning, the
         | overwhelming majority would have revolted and fled to try and
         | make it back to their homes. There would have been no recourse
         | for the Romans, they spent literally everything they had
         | coercing their army together and getting them down south.
         | 
         | The Canaanites are a resilient kind of people, the Greeks
         | created the Phoenix as a metaphor for their civilizational
         | tenacity. They can bounce back from anything. But the Elder
         | Council made a very grave mistake. After the first Punic war
         | they did bounce back, but they never had a chance to stop the
         | Roman barbarians ever again. Their imperialism of the other
         | Italic tribes had become ingrained, and it allowed them to grow
         | too strong for a non-martial culture to castrate. The grave
         | danger of underestimation is the most important lesson to take
         | away from the Punic wars, imo.
        
       | 2mlWQbCK wrote:
       | Do you really need this to explain WordPerfect or Lotus 1-2-3?
       | They, like many others, built their castles on Microsoft's land.
       | Isn't it that easy? What could they have done realistically once
       | Microsoft decided they wanted to own the market for word
       | processors and spreadsheets?
        
         | yonisto wrote:
         | At the higher level (CEO) no one thought Windows 3.11 will
         | succeed. So much so that even MS thought that OS/2 would do
         | better (and it was technically superior). So neither Lotus nor
         | WP were willing to invest in a windows version prior to the
         | launch. It was not an inevitable outcome.
        
         | toast0 wrote:
         | WordPerfect and Lotus 1-2-3 ran on many platforms, including
         | Unix (I don't know which flavors).
         | 
         | I don't think people would want to have to boot directly into
         | WP to do word processing and into 123 to run spreadsheets,
         | especially in the age of multitasking and embedding.
         | 
         | There wasn't some alternate strategy they could have pursued.
         | Microsoft developed market power with DOS and Windows, which
         | simultaneously means that productivity tools _need_ to be
         | offered on that platform or they can 't make sales, and that
         | Microsoft has the ability to priviledge its own productivity
         | tools.
         | 
         |  _Maybe_ you could try to play hardball when Microsoft started
         | their productivity tools and convince them to cancel it, but
         | that would have been anti-competitive and also needs a lot of
         | prescience to predict Microsoft 's future actions.
        
         | hughw wrote:
         | But you can't turn that into a business book and speaking
         | engagements.
         | 
         | The article strikes me as yet another shallow, masquerading as
         | deep, insight you find in the business paperbacks at the
         | airport shop.
        
       | yonisto wrote:
       | October 7 comes to mind. The Israelis had almost all the data
       | about the attack but convinced themselves it will not happen.
        
         | immibis wrote:
         | Some say October 7 was allowed to happen because the Israelis
         | were running low on casus belli. And look how far they've been
         | able to stretch it!
        
           | slashdev wrote:
           | That's the cynical take, and it's been said about 9/11 as
           | well. I don't think it's actually true in either case - but
           | it's impossible to say with 100% certainty.
        
             | dragontamer wrote:
             | 9/11 was after an election year.
             | 
             | Oct 7th was during an election after Bibi started to
             | directly take power out of Israeli courts.
             | 
             | It makes very little sense for George Bush to try to create
             | a problem so far away from reelection.
             | 
             | That being said, it's a bit conspiracy theorist to blame
             | Bibi without evidence. But if any evidence came up, the
             | timing and overall political environment makes more sense.
        
               | yonisto wrote:
               | Israel elections were on November 1st 2022, the next
               | elections will take place around November 2026.
        
               | dudinax wrote:
               | They had bombs in Hezbollah pagers. At this point I'd
               | need to be convinced mossad didn't know about thousands
               | of hamas soldiers massed for an attack.
        
           | yonisto wrote:
           | Those same 'Some' actually believe that Palestinians were
           | expected to be murderers and rapists, and they played their
           | role for perfection?? Who would have thought...
        
         | myth_drannon wrote:
         | I also thought about October '23 but also October '73. Iron
         | Dome made the government (not idf) captive of "conception" and
         | the multi billion dollar fence... The whole system was so
         | fragile. Also the Yom Kippur war and the Bar-Lev line, same
         | belief in powerful defence lines and captive of old concepts.
         | 
         | At least an attack on Hizbollah was out of the box thinking,
         | which gives some credit to the establishment.
        
       | 4ndrewl wrote:
       | So they went from "The strategy can win it" to "The strategy
       | cannae win it"?
        
       | OhMeadhbh wrote:
       | I used to talk about this at IBM, though mostly couched in the
       | phrase "we have become an organization optimized for a business
       | environment that no longer exists."
       | 
       | And if you came within 50 yards of an ROTC department in the
       | 1980s, the staff there would drag you into a discussion of
       | Cannae. It was one of the first battles young officers are
       | taught. Like religious scripture, you can find _something_ in the
       | records to support just about any lesson (though obviously
       | military instead of moral.)
       | 
       | It's good to see this tradition persist.
        
         | 1oooqooq wrote:
         | they probably picked it up on the military boarding school most
         | higher ups went to.
        
           | OhMeadhbh wrote:
           | One of the interesting things about the US military is the
           | uniformity of training. There's an entire group in the Army
           | called TRADOC, or Training and Doctrine Command. The US
           | military is sort of slow to adopt new ideas, but once they
           | do, TRADOC makes sure everyone gets them pounded into their
           | heads. I haven't been in the Marines for close to 35 years,
           | but I can still tell you what BAMCIS is an initialism for and
           | could probably still call in a fire mission.
           | 
           | Even though leaders who attend boarding schools at West Point
           | and Annapolis have a leg up politically, the US military has
           | been open to good ideas coming from places other than service
           | academies. Modern Maneuver Warfare came from a political
           | rando. But he was a political rando with a decent idea and
           | access to pentagon staff.
           | 
           | And no one seems to know who came up with the "lazy
           | commanders" concept that is so often attributed to Moltke.
           | It's a decidedly American concept that couldn't possibly have
           | survived the Prussian Army of the 19th century. (The best
           | source I've heard is Kurt von Hammerstein-Equord, which is a
           | little surprising, but maybe he said it right after WWI.)
           | 
           | But yes... military boarding schools in Maryland and New York
           | cast a long shadow over the US armed services.
        
             | ok_dad wrote:
             | Annapolis smacks you upside your head whenever you start to
             | get an ego about having come from Annapolis, so most of the
             | people I know get along fine with ROTC or other sources of
             | officers. Generally, the political connections come from
             | outside the experience at the academy, most of the folks I
             | went there with were just regular people with no political
             | connections, and today they are still just regular people.
             | The folks who rise to the top like Captains or Admirals all
             | have the connections they have from their families or
             | elsewhere.
        
               | OhMeadhbh wrote:
               | Yup. My dad retired as a bird colonel and went to Baylor,
               | then OCS. And I think Colonel Day who lived across the
               | street came from a random university in Iowa. But my dad
               | had more than 10 air medals, a couple DFCs, multiple-
               | award silver star, bronze star w/ V and Colonel Day had
               | the most amazing array of ribbons topped with a CMH. So
               | another way is to kick ass and get a lot of awards.
               | Though I don't know if that gets you into the General
               | ranks. I think there's an assumption that Generals have
               | to be pretty politically aware and people who rack up the
               | medals and awards may be "opinionated." I mean... there's
               | a reason John McCain retired as a Captain and not an
               | Admiral, despite family connections.
               | 
               | Which is to say... I think you're onto a general rule,
               | but like everything else there are exceptions.
        
       | bob1029 wrote:
       | > Their mental maps of how battles should unfold were so
       | ingrained that they couldn't recognize when the territory had
       | changed.
       | 
       | This feels like the core aspect of most bad leadership I've
       | experienced.
       | 
       | Organizations _can_ turn on a dime, even very large ones, if
       | leadership allows themselves to recognize and adapt to the new
       | terrain.
       | 
       | The central challenge with this is that the adaptation process is
       | painful, often requiring a 1v1 contest to the death with one's
       | own ego.
        
       | topkai22 wrote:
       | From the title, I thought this article was going to be about how
       | Hannibal won an incredible number of victories in the Second
       | Punic War, but Carthage still lost the war and had to take
       | devasting terms of surrender.
       | 
       | It's about how Rome was defeated at Cannae due their
       | overconfidence and inability to adapt, but doesn't examine how
       | Rome ended up winning in the end. It is interesting how dependent
       | on framing case studies are.
        
         | zahlman wrote:
         | >but doesn't examine how Rome ended up winning in the end
         | 
         | There's quite a bit about Fabius' tactics in TFA, actually.
        
           | 1980phipsi wrote:
           | I don't recall that in The Force Awakens?
        
             | zahlman wrote:
             | (In case your confusion behind the joke was serious: "the
             | f[ine] article", common HN slang.)
        
               | jamiek88 wrote:
               | Fine, foregoing, fucking.
               | 
               | Depends on you!
        
         | jkmcf wrote:
         | Rome only recovered because Hannibal didn't march on Rome.
        
           | cwmma wrote:
           | Rome recovered because if its literally unmatched in the
           | ancient world ability to recruit armies and put orders of
           | magnitude more men in the field as a portion of their
           | population.
           | 
           | Hannibal never marched on Rome because he knew he could never
           | take it. Doing a siege in the area most loyal to Rome would
           | have been suicidal for his force.
        
             | csunbird wrote:
             | Hannibal was basically in a hostile land, without proper
             | logistics support. There was no way that he can stay still
             | and lay siege, only way he was able to survive so far was
             | his ability to stay mobile and live off the land.
             | 
             | In case of siege, the Romans would not need to fight, they
             | could simply wait until his army slowly died from
             | attrition.
        
           | vondur wrote:
           | I thought that was due to him not having the equipment needed
           | to carry out a successful siege. His strategy was to defeat
           | the Roman Army in the field and then peel away their allies
           | in the peninsula.
        
         | hodgesrm wrote:
         | It's also worth noting that some of the Roman commanders were
         | simply bad, and Hannibal himself was not without flaws.
         | 
         | The best example of the former is Gaius Flaminius, who was
         | defeated by Hannibal at Lake Trasimene. [0] Livy memorably
         | describes Flaminius as "not sufficiently fearful of the
         | authority of senate and laws, and even of the gods themselves."
         | Hannibal took advantage of his rashness to lure Flaminius into
         | an ambush in which he and his entire army were annihilated.
         | 
         | Furthermore you could argue--and may still do--that Hannibal
         | didn't even completely win Cannae, because he failed to attack
         | Rome after his victory. His commander of cavalry remarked at
         | the time, "You, Hannibal, know how to gain a victory; you do
         | not know how to use it." [1] I'm personally inclined to think
         | Maharbal was correct, but that's the advantage of hindsight.
         | 
         | These accounts are both based on Livy, who didn't let facts to
         | get in the way of a good story.
         | 
         | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lake_Trasimene
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cannae#Aftermath
        
           | acjohnson55 wrote:
           | Coincidentally, the excellent podcast, Tides of History, is
           | currently doing a miniseries on the Punic Wars, and just
           | covered why Cannae didn't end the war.
           | 
           | https://wondery.com/shows/tides-of-
           | history/season/5/?epPage=...
        
           | ithkuil wrote:
           | Also, Rome defeated Carthage when Hannibal was no longer a
           | player
        
         | dijksterhuis wrote:
         | hehe, and here i was thinking it was gonna be some scottish
         | variant of the scunthorpe problem.
         | 
         | (cannae = cannot)
         | 
         | https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Glossary_of_Scottish...
        
         | 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
         | "It is interesting how dependent on framing case studies are."
         | 
         | She fails to consider specifically that so-called "tech"
         | companies also operate via "orthodoxy". There are enormous
         | "gaps" in their "mental models and reality". As such, there are
         | similarly-sized opportunities for "disruption" and
         | "innovation". But as we have seen through documentary evidence,
         | sworn testimony, and Hail Mary tactics like deliberately
         | destroying evidence and giving false testimony in federal
         | court, these companies rely on anti-competitive conduct. This
         | is not merely an "inability to adapt", it is an inability to
         | compete on the merits. One could argue the ability to
         | effortlessly raise capital coupled with the large cash reserves
         | of these companies results in a certain "overconfidence".
         | 
         | This is of course not the frame she chooses to adopt.
        
       | DuckConference wrote:
       | What the fuck is happening? How is some "what the spanish
       | inquisition taught me about SAAS sales" linkedin spam getting
       | near the top of the HN feed?
       | 
       | Also the author's knowledge of roman history seems to be to the
       | level of a summary of an inaccurate youtube video.
        
         | immibis wrote:
         | This is a link aggregator for founders of tech startups funded
         | by venture capital - never forget it.
        
       | aidenn0 wrote:
       | The mention of Blockbuster/Netflix reminds me of a series of
       | articles that was posted on HN about a decade ago, but I can't
       | find now. The thesis was that the demise of Blockbuster was
       | overdetermined, and it was floundering long before Netflix got
       | any degree of popularity.
        
         | fellowniusmonk wrote:
         | Also, if you know the inside ball on Netflix/Blockbuster then
         | you've heard that blockbuster did massively fund a break into
         | digital and streaming at a time that conceptually wasn't "too
         | late" but Netflix was way ahead of them on classification
         | systems and predicting lifetime customer ROI.
         | 
         | Netflix had cutting edge marketing automation teams that
         | sabotaged every single dollar and every sales initiative by
         | dumping low and _negative_ value consumers (dorm IP addresses,
         | etc.) onto every single loss leader marketing initiative
         | Blockbuster launched. They had "independent" free signup
         | marketing flows for "free stuff" etc, and if they identified
         | good clients they would be sent to Netflix, predicted "bad
         | customers" they would actively send to blockbuster.
         | 
         | Netflix's "counter marketing" team was extremely successful.
         | Indeed is a good example of a company that has had similar
         | expertise in their org as well.
         | 
         | Oddly enough the short hand lesson people learn about
         | blockbuster is both true and a slight of hand.
        
       | sevensor wrote:
       | I think the Sicilian Expedition would have better served the
       | point here. Cannae is a disaster, but the Republic bounces back.
       | Syracuse was a point of no return for Athens.
        
       | thesurlydev wrote:
       | Where has this blog been all my life.
        
       | 1minusp wrote:
       | I thought this was about scots/scottish dialects.
        
       | cameldrv wrote:
       | I see this with the U.S. military today. If you look at what has
       | happened in the last year in Ukraine, the Ukranians are building
       | about 250,000 drones a month. I'm not sure the U.S. military
       | would prevail against such a force. The U.S. has some very nice
       | drones, but in quantities that are hundreds of times less, due to
       | extremely expensive military procurement.
        
         | ithkuil wrote:
         | It's a lot about resilience to defeat.
         | 
         | Some states can suffer tremendous losses and yet they can
         | eventually prevail due to their stronger industrial capability
         | in the long run.
         | 
         | That's what allowed the US to defeat the Japanese in WWII.
         | Japan had a capable military apparatus at the start of the war
         | but they were not able to scale their production at the same
         | rate as the much larger US.
         | 
         | The only way for a smaller state to defeat a bigger one is to
         | go all in and win quickly.
        
           | pmontra wrote:
           | That was not the case for Vietnam vs the USA or for
           | Afghanistan vs the Soviet Union. I'm both cases there were
           | internal anti war movements, especially in the USA, and (for
           | the smallest state) the resolve to outwill the largest one,
           | no matter how many years and deaths it would take.
        
             | ithkuil wrote:
             | Well of course this logic works only if both belligerants
             | go all in.
             | 
             | A defender who feels an existential threat can outpace an
             | attacker that is fighting a war far away from home without
             | any strong stakes.
        
         | tintor wrote:
         | Expensive in peace time.
         | 
         | In war time or emergencies there will be immense pressure to
         | cut through inefficiencies.
        
         | Bearstrike wrote:
         | This comment is correct as written: The U.S. is under-equipped
         | with small UAS.
         | 
         | However, if you're suggesting that that the U.S. is blind to
         | the importance of small UAS (given the context of the article),
         | that is fortunately not the case.
         | 
         | The U.S. started taking note of the importance of small UAS as
         | early as the second Nagorno-Karabakh war in 2020, where their
         | use was prevalent. The continued appearance of small UAS (and
         | their increased volume) throughout the war in Ukraine cemented
         | the place of small UAS in future combat.
         | 
         | The recognition of how small UAS are changing the game is a big
         | reason (but not the only reason) the Army cancelled the FARA
         | program. Manned Aviation at the scale it is done in the past is
         | not how wars will be won. It isn't going away, but it's
         | roles/prevalance is changing.
         | 
         | If you're truly interested, see the DoD memos this week that
         | include info about the Army's shift in focus with respect to
         | aviation and unmanned systems.
        
           | pmontra wrote:
           | It's probably "Army Transformation and Acquisition Reform"
           | https://www.defense.gov/news/publications/
           | 
           | I wonder if UAS include small FPV drones. The language of
           | those announcements is necessarily vague.
        
           | cameldrv wrote:
           | They may recognize that it's an issue, but the problem is
           | going to be procurement and manufacturing. Ukraine is
           | building FPV drones for about $500 each. A Switchblade 300,
           | which is roughly comparable to these, costs $60,000.
           | 
           | At those prices, we will never have the kind of quantities
           | that Ukraine and Russia have.
        
       | karmakaze wrote:
       | > Roman soldiers fought in a checkerboard formation, with the
       | front line engaging the enemy, then cycling to the back to rest
       | while the next line moved forward. This rotation system allowed
       | Romans to maintain constant pressure while preventing fatigue.
       | 
       | The first thing that comes to mind is StarCraft2 Stalker blink
       | micro. They have shields that regenerate over time, so the front
       | wave fights until shields are low then fall back to recharge.
       | 
       | The 2nd part is also covered by general SC2 tactics, concave
       | fronts increase attacking numbers more than convex defenders'.
        
       | roxolotl wrote:
       | One thing that's difficult about this is knowing if accepting a
       | differing strategy than orthodoxy will actually be successful.
       | Absolutely effort should be put into breaking out of the Cannae
       | Problem but it's easy to fall into a reverse trap where simply
       | because something is unorthodox it must mean it's the solution to
       | the current challenge.
        
       | senderista wrote:
       | Coincidentally, this morning I listened to a podcast that tries
       | to take a first-person POV on this battle:
       | 
       | https://wondery.com/shows/tides-of-history/episode/5629-expe...
        
       | Thrymr wrote:
       | The business side of this is largely a retelling of The
       | Innovator's Dilemma: large successful businesses often struggle
       | to adapt to nimble challengers that can innovate in ways that are
       | structurally very difficult in the larger org.
        
       | frutiger wrote:
       | > It's August 2, 216 BCE
       | 
       | Did August exist before Augustus?
        
         | jjmarr wrote:
         | If the author said "Sextilis 2, 216 BCE" you wouldn't know it
         | was late summer.
         | 
         | And BCE didn't exist before Jesus Christ (AD/BC was invented in
         | 525). So the period-accurate translation is "Sextilis 2, the
         | year of consuls Lucius Aemilius Paullus and Gaius Terentius
         | Varro".
        
       | t43562 wrote:
       | Symbian's Operating System really was superior. After all it was
       | fully multitasking and all operating system calls were
       | asynchronous. And it was written in C++ so the inside of the
       | operating system was object oriented and easy to understand.
       | 
       | The failure was that Nokia made 20 products at a time where Apple
       | made 1.
       | 
       | The effort to support the huge amount of variation was enormous
       | and the low spec hardware made the software extremely difficult
       | to get working at acceptable performance. So instead of 1 bug
       | fixed once you'd have 20 sets of partially different bugs. The
       | decision to save money by using low spec hardware also negatively
       | affected the way application level software was designed and made
       | it extremely effortful.
       | 
       | Building it took days and they insisted on using the RVCT
       | compilers which though better than GCC were much slower. If
       | they'd had enough RAM on the phone and enough performance to
       | start with then it would not have been necessary to cripple
       | development like this to eke out performance.
       | 
       | This is all about Nokia's matrix organisation which they created
       | to optimise the model that was working for them - lots of phones
       | at different price points. Apple made it obvious that this was
       | unnecessary. One expensive phone that made people happy was
       | better.
       | 
       | There were other aspects to their failure which they did try to
       | fix - such as having an app store and addressing user experience
       | issues. They just couldn't do it effectively because they
       | insisted on building many phone models.
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | I had the fortune of being in one of the launch markets for
         | Ricochet, which tried to sell a wireless modem back in the days
         | of the Psion 5 and before GPRS was really a thing.
         | 
         | The modem had I found the highest mAh rechargeable batteries so
         | I could use the internet in cafes. Never really got it to be a
         | daily use device. But that is still one of my favorite keyboard
         | designs ever. The double hinge on the clamshell was really
         | cool.
        
       | hinkley wrote:
       | I don't play milsim but I do play Age of Wonders and find the
       | oblique order works better.
       | 
       | Hannibal put his strongest units on both flanks. Frederick the
       | Great put more units on one flank, and when that broke they
       | crushed sideways along that end of the formation. Unzippering the
       | entire front line. It also, I suspect, put the opposing general
       | in mortal danger sooner, since he now has to retreat when the
       | battle is only half over.
       | 
       | Having your strongest on one end means you can't get separated
       | into two groups. Unlike a game with an omniscient general you
       | risk losing communication with half your army if things go
       | poorly.
       | 
       | But it's more common in games, where the general is omniscient
       | and fatigue does not exist (so running across the map takes time
       | but not energy), to see the lines fall back at a diagonal,
       | forcing the enemy to chase down the far end of the formation,
       | while it falls back to the center and the center joins the flank.
       | By the time the battle is fully joined, the overmatched flank is
       | nearly defeated, and the formations can roll up on the enemy's
       | center within a turn or two, while the rest stalls for time.
        
       | w10-1 wrote:
       | Strengths are weaknesses insofar as they bias you against
       | building alternative capabilities. This is true on the personal
       | level as well.
       | 
       | As for military red teams, a more relevant example might be from
       | Japan in the 1980's: when they did product development, they set
       | up distinct groups that had to take different approaches and
       | compete for the chance to be the ultimate product.
       | 
       | The difficulty with taking this too far is anxiety,
       | undifferentiated fear, splitting focus and attenuating
       | priorities. That drains you and makes you ineffective. Players
       | too weak to confront you directly sow discord in your ranks. That
       | brings us back to questions of loyalty and validating that the
       | critical perspective is being adopted in good faith. (Sadly all
       | at work today in the US.)
        
       | chasil wrote:
       | > Kodak and digital photography: Kodak actually invented the
       | first digital camera in 1975. But the company was so committed to
       | its film business model that it couldn't adapt its thinking when
       | digital technology began to take over.
       | 
       | The opposite of this is "knife the baby" which I first heard in a
       | stage production of (I think) _The Agony and the Ecstasy of Steve
       | Jobs_.
       | 
       | The Macintosh would far supplant the cash cow of the Apple ][
       | (Apple 2).
       | 
       | Jobs did it anyway.
       | 
       | This appears to contradict both confirmation bias and groupthink
       | (mentioned in the article).
       | 
       | https://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/18/theater/reviews/the-agony...
       | 
       | https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/microsoft-asked-appl...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-05-02 23:00 UTC)