information, entropy, law
The text is not easy to understand, does not claim to be true, is the author's point of view (my). If you have a bad mood, no desire to worry and argue, it is better not to read.
( link to blogpost )
Is there something absolute in computer science? Everything is so relative ... Hundreds of formats, conventions, agreements and agreements.
How can you judge anything in such a virtual world? How are the laws of jurisprudence applied to this world?
Unless the recognition found on a disk in the txt file in general can be a proof? The physical basis of the information — the magnetic field of the disk tracks — is the only thing that does not require interpretation and is accepted equally by all. Everything else between the magnetic heads and the letters on the monitor requires some interpretation. And interpretations, in turn, may be different. Say, in my PC, the magnetic field in the HDD will go through these stages of transformation before it reaches the monitor:
continuous (anti-discrete) physical disturbance flow - division into sectors - discrete logical 1/0 - disk partitioning table (MSDOS, BSD, Atari) - file system - fs logic elements (files + folders) - Character conversion table (ASCII - EBCDIC) - Table encodings () (ANSII, ASCII, UNICODE (1-2-3-4byte) local encodings (windows *, iso *)) - Typography and presentation.
If at least at one stage, interpretations do not converge, we will get the perfect entropy or almost it. Why, and by what right, the inquiry bodies believe that everyone uses the same coding standard? This is not so ... to recall at least a jumble of encodings ...
We understand further. With the conversion algorithm, any data can be represented by any data. {It is known that if containers are not used, the output of any reliable block cryptoalgorithm is closest to entropy.} Coincidentally, it turned out that your entropy file (or cryptocontainer, say from truecrypt or dm-crypt) contains such a set data, which, being processed by a certain cryptoalgorithm, for definiteness Skipjack with the key "TaomamboPumumbo00", and then interpreted as a doc file, contains a state secret for which they can plant. In one day, they can really come to you and plant ... for a long time ... the accusation will look absurd, but in what, in fact, it differs from the current charges related to IT, there are presets and predestinations, for example, in that Are you using MSDOS partition table, NTFS, ASCII ...
The attempts of some (RIAA, MPAA) to present even more complex and ambiguous formats look as something unambiguously interpreted even more strangely. Let's say you downloaded a pirated mp3. Recall the RIAA. Not to mention the fact that mp3 is a complex, non-standardized format, the question is what publishers have rights to. On any information upon receipt of which, the argument (== source, stdin, in, data) was the property of the RIAA or any information that can be presented in such a way that during reproduction it would be to some extent identical to that which the RIAA owns?
Rounding out, draw conclusions. Any information in the presence of a conversion algorithm can be represented as any information. The concept of information equivalence (in the law) is not defined, however, it is used tacitly.
Questions for reflection: Do the amendments to Part 4 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation make sense due to the impossibility of unequivocal identification of information in IT?
( link to blogpost )
Is there something absolute in computer science? Everything is so relative ... Hundreds of formats, conventions, agreements and agreements.
How can you judge anything in such a virtual world? How are the laws of jurisprudence applied to this world?
Unless the recognition found on a disk in the txt file in general can be a proof? The physical basis of the information — the magnetic field of the disk tracks — is the only thing that does not require interpretation and is accepted equally by all. Everything else between the magnetic heads and the letters on the monitor requires some interpretation. And interpretations, in turn, may be different. Say, in my PC, the magnetic field in the HDD will go through these stages of transformation before it reaches the monitor:
continuous (anti-discrete) physical disturbance flow - division into sectors - discrete logical 1/0 - disk partitioning table (MSDOS, BSD, Atari) - file system - fs logic elements (files + folders) - Character conversion table (ASCII - EBCDIC) - Table encodings () (ANSII, ASCII, UNICODE (1-2-3-4byte) local encodings (windows *, iso *)) - Typography and presentation.
If at least at one stage, interpretations do not converge, we will get the perfect entropy or almost it. Why, and by what right, the inquiry bodies believe that everyone uses the same coding standard? This is not so ... to recall at least a jumble of encodings ...
We understand further. With the conversion algorithm, any data can be represented by any data. {It is known that if containers are not used, the output of any reliable block cryptoalgorithm is closest to entropy.} Coincidentally, it turned out that your entropy file (or cryptocontainer, say from truecrypt or dm-crypt) contains such a set data, which, being processed by a certain cryptoalgorithm, for definiteness Skipjack with the key "TaomamboPumumbo00", and then interpreted as a doc file, contains a state secret for which they can plant. In one day, they can really come to you and plant ... for a long time ... the accusation will look absurd, but in what, in fact, it differs from the current charges related to IT, there are presets and predestinations, for example, in that Are you using MSDOS partition table, NTFS, ASCII ...
The attempts of some (RIAA, MPAA) to present even more complex and ambiguous formats look as something unambiguously interpreted even more strangely. Let's say you downloaded a pirated mp3. Recall the RIAA. Not to mention the fact that mp3 is a complex, non-standardized format, the question is what publishers have rights to. On any information upon receipt of which, the argument (== source, stdin, in, data) was the property of the RIAA or any information that can be presented in such a way that during reproduction it would be to some extent identical to that which the RIAA owns?
Rounding out, draw conclusions. Any information in the presence of a conversion algorithm can be represented as any information. The concept of information equivalence (in the law) is not defined, however, it is used tacitly.
Questions for reflection: Do the amendments to Part 4 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation make sense due to the impossibility of unequivocal identification of information in IT?
')
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/18650/
All Articles