[chrismorgan]

The visual signal there is utterly meaningless for assessing how much is exposed.

For analogy, take https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RANDU: it was very popular in its day, and its distribution looked good to the naked eye, but plot it in more than two dimensions and you see that it’s actually extremely terrible, failing spectral tests badly.

The information has been captured; the fact that one visualisation of it doesn’t expose that information is irrelevant and gravely misleading (as in: I don’t want someone that hasn’t already realised this working on this kind of stuff, because they’re dangerously ignorant and/or naive; I would rather they stop, and go and learn about the risks in detail before continuing).