Jerry Don Bauer
Posts: 135 Joined: Nov. 2012
|
Quote (Cubist @ Nov. 20 2012,14:16) | Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Nov. 20 2012,10:32) | Quote (Cubist @ Nov. 20 2012,09:15) | Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Nov. 19 2012,12:55) | And why do you have trouble defining CSI? It is a well defined concept of modern ID thought.... is it information that calculates out above the upper probability bound? Is it specified information? Then, if it is both complex and specified it is therefore CSI... |
Since you seem to think CSI is, in fact, a well-defined concept, Jerry, I have a question for you. But before I ask my question, I have to explain a bit of background. Now, I don't pretend to be fully au courant with all the niceties of this CSI thingie, but if my limited understanding is correct,
- Random garbage doesn't have any CSI
- Meaningful language does have CSI
- Converting a statement from one format to another (as, for instance, using an encryption algorithm to make a meaningful statement difficult to read) does not alter the statement's CSI.
So if this CSI thingie genuinely is the sure-fire Design-detection tool which you ID-pushers assert it to be, it seems to me that you should be able to use it to distinguish random garbage from meaningful text that only appears to be random garbage.
Background explained. Here's the question:
Which of the following character strings, String A or String B, is the encrypted text, and which is the garbage? And please show your work, so we know you're not just guessing. Character string A:
Code Sample | ={¡ ¿ ¬&={‹ +ZrKU hg"Ix œgFZ" uaM?j œ?Uhg >”H¿œ jCZrK ,MjRœ Lu"gF ZœKZ¢ g[)Zh Z"KXM gcR"K XMgaX -KcZY [ lœX œ??U? ?waR, XmŒwM Zvœ>Z ngo”_ v”U’T XV Xv Zuyw… y ,.! ¡‡!…& |
String B:
Code Sample | jk?2J ^'VE¡ ?hS-c Z “(# ]'6"8 0‹cWd Yfv” BlGæB “a”?" B2#“_ 9‹g¡y £B…?J @Se&y ¬œ4Sp …'T4? #ƒq”- 6[¢Of 1#3?} œ-§”÷ UTe…T Fdg›“ O÷iŒ. H¬^¿- ¢?Jv= ±1Q^o ‘O];v :?QE( 5qŒ3L |
|
Hey Cubist:
It's correct...random garbage is not CSI...CSI must communicate.....
Language is not REALLY germain to CSI either unless we are somehow relating language to matter/energy.... |
Hold it. Language is "not REALLY germain" to something that, according to you, "must communicate"? How in the name of Klono's curving carballoy claws can language NOT be "germain" to anything for which "communication" is necessary? Do you actually read any of the verbiage you type, Jerry?
Quote | And yes, we can distinguish meaningful information from garbage by honing into it's specificity....No specificity....no CSI... |
Yes, and one of those two strings is very specific indeed, being that it's an encrypted version of a particular English text. So according to this "honing into its specificity" schtick, yes, a CSI-detecting protocol should be able to distinguish between encrypted text and random garbage. So. Since you assert that you are, indeed, able to "distinguish meaningful information from garbage by honing into its specificity", would you care to actually, like, you know, distinguish meaningful information from garbage by honing into its specificity? By, let us say, identifying which of two apparently-random strings is, in fact, not random at all, but, rather, is encrypted text?
Quote | The rest of that post pretty much shows a lack of understanding of the CSI concept... But you admit that up front and it's OK as I'm used to it......This will hopefully become clearer as we progress. |
Since language is, apparently, "not REALLY germain" to this CSI thingie that "must communicate" and since you didn't even pretend to use this CSI thingie to determine which of the two strings was the encrypted text I strongly doubt that further discussion will arrive at any outcome even vaguely reminiscent of 'clearer'. Except perhaps in the sense that it will become increasingly more clear that you ain't got nothin' but bullshit |
OK stop.........Do you really think that probability statistics apply to words we use? How would one go about calculating this? There is NO specificity in a string of words.......how would the use of previous words dictate the probable origin or use of future ones?
CSI, as I have previously pointed out, deals with matter/energy and its information content....What got you off into languages?
|