Interesting. as someone in the US, I've found myself more gravitated towards philosophy as a means to get through the political state of affairs. I think right now I feel like my agency should be more deliberate if I have the bandwidth for it, since jobs and other stressors subtract from free time.

This is what I keep telling myself.

How do you know an unstructured set has a message within it to begin with? I think something requires some frame in order to call itself encrypted information. Which is why I suggested that there must be some constraint on how loose that frame can get.

not quite sure what u mean, could u elaborate pls?

And I think this is why the "intuition" of memory to exist like you stated. I think without it may be hard to argue that there was information stored within the structure to begin with

This important message needs to be decoded very quickly. It would be of high interest for the encoder to right it in an structured way such that a decoder doesn't need to be a supercomputer of infinite scale.

With a computer with infinite memory and infinite time I'm sure that such a decoder could exist. Although, where do we draw the line where the decoder is actually an encoder?

I think an insightful constraint is to consider if the person who wrote the code had some very important message...

By the way, a good book that has a more elaborate and well formed argument about this topic is Douglas Hofstadter's "Godel, Escher, and Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid". I highly recommend.

I think these "intelligent" arrangements are broken up into a couple different segments. There's the decoder that is required. But the arrangement also needs to be considered. a random string of 1's and 0's doesn't mean anything to the decoder so there must be value intrinsic to that string.

but i think the main difference here is in how the public views the motivation behind each presidency? If we view it thru the pro-democracy lens than I wouldn’t consider their cases equivalent. Conversely both are refusing to give up their power which is a fair point, but perhaps one is more just 🤷‍♂️

consider that maybe it’s the position’s integrity that needs to be preserved, not the person holding it.