Regarding my comment below:
Ed Gerck writes: [...]
BTW, I think that Gwin was struggling to express the notion that source code (syntax) is a device whenever there is a clear binding between that source code and known semantics, together with proper pragmatics (the enviroment, as defined in semiotics), in order to perform the desired function.
I received some private postings which questioned it by questioning its logical consequences, as for example:
So the judge should forbid publishing/export of Applied Cryptography and the PGP Book with source code, right ?
First, IMO, this subject is hard to discuss because it is politically involved and also applies just to a particular set of countries -- so it is not based on a "universal" ruling. Further, I also think it is absurd to try to outlaw cryptography because it is essential and not just to obtain privacy (as in my posting on logical semantics and crypto, some months ago [1]). In fact, I think that cryptography is needed to provide *secure routing* [1] (a property that is more basic than secure content and which I think will be impossible to forbid in the future). However, I also think that the arguments being thought by each side may carry their own intrinsic worth. Further, even though the whole subject is IMO ephemeral because unworkable, some of those arguments may have a far reaching consequence and transcend the issue. Should we overlook that? IMO, no. Even thrash can be recycled ;-) My remark above was in this line of reasoning. So, it ought not to be extrapolated to printed books -- I am not at all concerned about the legal aspects. In fact, laws can be wrong and IMO this is a clear example. But, regarding printed books -- yes, the comment above (and others in that line) are right. If this logic exercise is carried to its fully immoral end, then books should not be allowed to carry complete and workable source code. Which does not show that the argument is illogical, just immoral. Technically, the argument is sound. As Hume pointed out a long time ago, if we were guided only by reason and logic then surely I should prefer to destroy the rest of the world instead of enduring even a small pain in one of my fingers. While this shows that logic is not all, it also shows that one cannot deny logic by moral or ethics but rather define what precedes what in case of conflict, for each society. While this can have different answers for different societies, eg where in some suicide is moral, the cryptography issue may take a different twist if the link to secure routing is further investigated and cryptography is not only used just for secure content as it is today. Thanks, Ed Gerck =========== Reference: [1] http://www.mcg.org.br/trustdef.htm#A.4.1 ______________________________________________________________________ Dr.rer.nat. E. Gerck egerck@novaware.cps.softex.br http://novaware.cps.softex.br --- Meta-Certificate Group member, http://www.mcg.org.br ---