omniscience

Yes - the benchmark is neither perfection nor omniscience, rather the benchmark is the current state of affairs.

It's difficult to not share in the author's ambivalence, if not disdain, for the passing dawn of techno-omniscience.

My internet connection to the omniscience is down.

When your economic system is based on the idea that omniscience is required of everyone taking part, it is impossible to make statements about how fool proof the system is.

Or perhaps something without such stark, binary conclusions: The NSA has much competence, but not omniscience.

How exactly does one bridge the gap between our current processor capabilities and fucking omniscience?

It's not hard to explain how a government can have seeming omniscience in some cases, and still be bumbling in many others.

Extreme empiricism and knowledge acquisition in pursuit of omniscience, in my view, is not good for a human on a personal level.

Not have an Architect who claims omniscience and designs the whole project up from.

As I said, quite an impressive feat, I wish I had your god-like omniscience to be able to do that.

For there to be profit potential, the person who sells to you must be misinformed about the security's true value, which contradicts the assumption of omniscience.

Nobody keeps track of everything – this would require omniscience.

Would you prefer "random and haphazardly prioritized omniscience?" Reducing corruption among prison guards and raising violent crime solution rates is hard.

Prices in this market converge instantly upon the "true" value, which can be agreed upon by all market partipants because of their omniscience.

“Omniscience” is simplified when you can pause a virtual machine to inspect its memory.

Omniscience and omnipotence by states and corporations lead by very human, sometimes sick people, may make the world "safer" from small fish (and even that is not clear), but might also make powerful sadists untouchable.

Omniscience gets us the Locational history.