The anomaly itself is pretty weak and doesn't have any coherent logic to it. I understand what the author wants it to be, but it's a transparent mechanism for the moral conflict he wanted to set up. It requires some unstated sentience or mind-reading power to interpret the intended calculations with desirable outcomes and without influencing any number of similar models. Less charitably, it's plot armor.

This article's plot is a three-trick pony: someone uses the anomaly for a good cause (and is usually punished for it); someone uses it for wacky selfish and trivial ends (cue laugh track); or the effects of the anomaly cause comically improbable misfortune or death. It's a stew of the same usual stuff you get from wish-granting and tychokinetic anomalies with little extra character; everyone has the same voice. And it's long! It has five of the same interview where someone is asked why they did something, they give their reason, and everybody sits there silently or goes "oh, um, shit" in a faux-emotional moment. The only thing this builds up to is me becoming a serial killer. Callaghan is the one character with a consistency greater than sludge, but it only emerges at the last possible scene.

I like the concept of the ending. It's the payoff, right? I like thinking of things in terms of setup and payoff, and when you think about it, it is a smart idea. Write an article that makes you angry, angry that the Authority doesn't use their abilities to improve the world. Then say "Hey, there's a GOI for that!" and who is it? The RCPA! Clever; it's a much better way to characterize a group than making them another cannon-fodder military to fight against, that's for sure.

At least… on paper. But the only anger I got from this was irritation at how daft everybody is.

On 29/05/64, a payment of 220,000HKD was received by Wong ██ ████ from an Authority front. Dr. Lai has denied all knowledge of this incident.

Oh boy, I wonder what happened there. Of course the Authority doesn't make good decisions when you write them too stupid to prepare a sandwich. What did I get? I got an anomaly that never made sense, and a bunch of the same thing happening. It's a storyline with only two or three beats, and the full runtime definitely suffers for it. 2/5

As much as I love this article, though, it does have its issues. Nothing major, in my opinion, but mistakes nonetheless. The fact that an anomaly like this would be at least a purple, for example. Are you telling me it's not possible for someone to use this to calculate the likelihood of a meteor strike dangerous enough to end all life on Earth?

Also, the procedures on personnel using the anomaly aren't really clear. The Containment Procedures section only says you need unanimous approval from the two people to move the anomaly offsite, then around the middle of the page it says you can use it with approval from one of the two people, and then at the end it says you can use it with unanimous approval. Very confusing.

Lastly, and this is really minor, I'd appreciate some context on what language all these interviews are happening in. The interviews with the Hong Kong students were probably in Chinese, so are we to assume Dr. Lai is Chinese? So is the final interview also supposed to be in Chinese, then?

Anyway, this was an incredible article still. Magnificent work.

Crit 1: http://rpcsandbox.wikidot.com/dummie-s-sandbox-of-infinite-wonders
Crit 2: http://www.rpc-wiki.com/forum/t-7810590/printed-probability-papers

If anyone wants to add your take on RPC-378 usage, please do so. The limit is that is has to be set during 1968 to 1978. If enough people are satisfied with it, then I'll make a collab.

06/05/2020 Update: Self rated due to raiders.