[gcb]

that's the most dodged response ever.

i think for his question to even be made, it was assumed he was being accused of possessing encrypted something.

Let's attach the old guy from france that got into the 3 strike law without even having a computer at the time. Now let's say instead of getting the IP of that old guy from france, the police got the IP of the comment above yours, from let's say mr Buttle. Now they confuse him with Mr Tuttle and assume he has encrypted criminal data. but all they could find on his computer is the file "not_encrypted_i_promise".

he is then throw in jail because he failed to provide the password. His infective defense was that he was "playing" with philosophical questions regarding encryption.

[tedunangst]

Then explain that to the judge. The defendant in this case is not claiming to be the victim of mistaken identity.

[gcb]

that was even less to the point. you are good

ignore the mistaken identity, was just a means to reach the false/wrong accusation resulting in the experiment he just did convicting him.

[tedunangst]

I don't see the problem. People get convicted based on faulty evidence. The sad fact is it happens. [Yes, that is a problem, but...] Why is cryptography special?

[gcb]

read the comment that started this thread.

the guy has a file that is pure garbage. not encrypted.

the law officers THINK it's encrypted. the judge orders him to give the key. ...there's no key. it's honestly garbage data.

That's what make encryption special. It were a safe, the police could crack it open somehow. with encryption, they can just claim it's too advanced to be cracked and that will be treated like you are lying.