"It’s unlikely that firefighters would consider creating a hole in the tank because of fears that could create a spark that might ignite the volatile and flammable gas."
As someone who works for the DoD, the so called "disturbing" language in the paper is very commonplace in this industry. Idk if or why Red Hat is trying to redact the paper, but I'm sure it's not because they're embarrassed their software is killing people. That's par for the course for defense contractors.
I think you need to rigorously define your macrostates. If your two states are "my friend's password" and "not my friend's password" then the macrostates are perfectly objective. You don't know what macrostate the system is in, but that doesn't change the fact that the system is objectively in one of those two macrostates.
If you define your macrostates using subjective terms (e.g. "a string that's meaningful to me" or "a string that looks ordered to me") then yeah, your entropy calculations will be subjective.
I'm open to outsiders improving inefficiencies. The concern is that these are kids, barely out of college. They don't have the domain-specific knowledge required to rework these complex systems, no matter how smart they are. Plus, given Musk's track record, they were likely chosen more for their loyalty to Musk than for their technical acumen.
Per https://apnews.com/article/california-chemical-tank-leak-c1f...