🚀 go-pugleaf

Erik.Lindano@ofa123.fidonet.org writes:
> Writes Ken Pizzini:
>  > > You are absolutely wrong.
>  >
>  > Oh, c'mon now.  If the scheme is to be used by more than a small 
>  > handful of people then at least the executable will be available 
>  > for analysis.  And with a suitible effort at disassembly/
>  > decompiling it can be analysed for the underlying algolrithm.
>  
>  You are thinking in very conventional ways. Perhaps we use a
>  hexadecimal Ouija board to point at letters and don't really know 
>  WHAT it'll do next... :-)  It's determined by the spirits. 
>  A spiritual key. (Actually, I have been authorized to say now that
>  NuCrypt relies on the use of embedded 2048-bit shifting keys.)

you're ignoring the point. if the algorithm is going to run on a computer
it has to use "conventional ways". there are no hexadecimal Ouija 
board devices available for computer i know of. (if you've developed 
one, great, but you haven't claimed that yet, so this is a red 
herring.) any applications written to use this method still have to 
use the good ol' machine language.

anything that can be understood by a computer can be understood by a
human, given enough effort. -that- is the point. your algorithm
will eventually be known. 

jason, who doesn't care a bit about NuCrypt, but finds these claims
	rather absurd.

--
`,`,`, "greed & fear" `,`,`,`,`,`,` jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu ,`,`,`