Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

OPERATIONS RESEARCH MODEL IN CONVENTIONAL MILITARY DECISION-MAKING Farrid Hidayat; Suroso; Farrithullah; Kurniawan Yudhana; Hidayadtullah; Muchammad Furqon; Adhi Sudhibiyo; Rahmayanti Febrien
Jurnal TNI Angkatan Udara Vol 5 No 2 (2026): Jurnal TNI Angkatan Udara Triwulan Kedua
Publisher : Staf Komunikasi dan Elektronika, TNI Angkatan Udara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62828/jpb.v5i2.214

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the robustness and risk of military decisions through the application of an operations research model based on sensitivity analysis. Conventional military decision-making has historically relied on doctrine, experience, and the intuition of commanders. This approach is adaptive, but has limitations in testing the resilience of military decisions to changes in strategic and operational parameters. The research methodology uses a quantitative approach with operations research modeling and sensitivity testing for key parameters such as time, cost, and risk. The main results indicate that military decisions based on operations research models have a more consistent level of robustness than conventional approaches. The study's conclusions confirm that operations research models play an effective role as objective and measurable military decision-support systems. This research contributes to strengthening the systems and decision science approaches in the study of conventional military decisionmaking.
BITCOIN AS A SYSTEM THAT RESISTS RECOVERY A NON-LINEAR SYSTEM DESIGN STUDY ON SCARCITY AND SECURITY Farrid Hidayat; Suroso; Kurniawan; Hidayadtullah; Muchammad Furqon; Farrithullah; Dikatamasania; Adhi Sudibiyo
Jurnal TNI Angkatan Udara Vol 5 No 2 (2026): Jurnal TNI Angkatan Udara Triwulan Kedua
Publisher : Staf Komunikasi dan Elektronika, TNI Angkatan Udara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62828/jpb.v5i2.215

Abstract

This study aims to structurally examine why loss of access to Bitcoin is permanent and to assess claims regarding the possibility of recovery, master keys, or backdoors in the Bitcoin system. This study departs from the general trend that positions Bitcoin solely as a monetary innovation, while its most radical aspect lies in its system design. Bitcoin is analyzed as a non-linear formal system that defines ownership through cryptographic facts, rather than through identity, intent, or social context. The methodology used is a conceptual-design analysis based on cryptographic studies, protocol architecture, empirical precedents of human error, and the implications of network consensus. The main results demonstrate that irreversibility and loss of access are not system failures, but rather direct consequences of Bitcoin's design axioms, which tie ownership to high-entropy private keys and reject all forms of discretionary authority. The analysis also shows that claims of backdoors, whether mathematical, implemental, hardware, or temporal, are structurally incoherent without undermining the fundamental assumptions of cryptography and decentralized consensus. The study's conclusions affirm that Bitcoin's resilience stems not from adaptive flexibility but from deliberate rule rigidity. This research's contribution lies in mapping Bitcoin as a system design artifact that resists recovery, while also expanding the Bitcoin discourse from the monetary realm to the study of system design, applied cryptography, and the philosophy of technology.