regardless of whether trump is found guilty, he unethically obstructed the government

Author: n8nrgim

Posts

Total: 88
Slainte
Slainte's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 131
1
5
9
Slainte's avatar
Slainte
1
5
9
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Very simple.   Limited copies of physical paper are far more secure.  You dont have the risks attached to computing systems.  You can be certain that only certain people have access.  CERTAINTY.  If there is one copy of a document, then you can control who sees it..  If there is no digital copy then you  eliminate data integrity issues (the document cannot be manipulated) Single Trusted Source.  You reduce digital security threats which could include unwanted destruction from an EMP. Many top secret programs are not digitized, and people like Manning and Snowden show us why.  

Obvious Examples
a) the nuclear football, and the codes related thereto
b) designated survivor determination 
c) state department cables that are designated print only.  Those cables automatically get printed and the original digital message is destroyed ass it is printed.  It is never sent as an entire digital package.

These are obvious examples. Speculating that encryption will solve is pointless because every system has vulnerabilities.  The biggest vulnerability is to future quantum computing.  Lets say I steal a bunch of files with an RSA 4096 encryption today.  Quantum computing  could develop to  the point that in 3 or 4 years, I can break that encryption.    So all encrypted files are vulnerable. That is many governments understanding.  And they act accordingly.  

Oh and one more thing, the most obvious.  If there is no digital copy, then it is very hard to prove wrong doing, unless one can access the limited paper versions.  
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,491
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@FLRW
The PRA requires that all records created by Presidents (and Vice-Presidents) be turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) at the end of their administrations,” according to the statement released by the National Archives on Friday afternoon.
This seems like an opinion  statement. A simple google of the PRA shows this isn't true.

The statement that the Presidential Records Act (PRA) requires "all" records to be turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) is clearly too broad and oversimplified a claim. There are exceptions and allowances within the PRA that provide for the withholding, restricted access, or temporary restrictions on a great many records. Using the term "all" in this context can be misleading because it implies that there are no exceptions or circumstances where certain records may not be turned over. The exceptions outlined in the PRA, such as executive privilege, national security concerns, or privacy considerations, allow for the possibility of withholding or restricting access to various documents.

Restricted Access: One exception within the PRA allows for the restriction of access to certain records. This is typically done when records contain sensitive or classified information that could jeopardize national security or violate privacy rights. Restricted access ensures that such information is safeguarded and not disclosed inappropriately. Individuals may require special authorization or clearance to access these restricted records.

Temporary Restrictions: Another exception permits temporary restrictions on access to specific records. This is particularly relevant when records are related to ongoing investigations, pending legal actions, or matters requiring privacy protection. Temporarily restricting access allows for the proper handling and resolution of sensitive information before it is released publicly. Once the temporary restriction period expires or the circumstances change, access to the records may be granted.

Review and Consultation: The PRA mandates a process of review and consultation before the release of presidential records. This involves providing the incumbent and former Presidents, as well as other relevant individuals or entities, an opportunity to review the records and provide input. The purpose of this step is to identify any potential conflicts or concerns related to the disclosure of the records and to seek input from those who may have a significant interest in their contents.

Executive Privilege: The concept of executive privilege is recognized under the PRA as an exception to the release of certain records. Executive privilege allows the President to withhold records if it is determined that their release would be contrary to the public interest. This privilege may be invoked to protect sensitive decision-making processes, confidential advice, or other matters that could impact national security or the proper functioning of the executive branch. However, any assertion of executive privilege must be justified and subject to legal scrutiny to ensure its validity.


FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,348
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Greyparrot


Why would any out of office President need secret records?
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,491
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@FLRW
There's 7 other presidents besides Trump that could answer that for you.
Slainte
Slainte's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 131
1
5
9
Slainte's avatar
Slainte
1
5
9
-->
@FLRW
You do know that Presidents retain Top Secret Clearance when they leave office so they can counsel the new administration.  Trump is the only president in history that does not participate in that.
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,133
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@FLRW
“Recent media reports have generated a large number of queries about Presidential records and the Presidential Records Act (PRA). The PRA requires that all records created by Presidents (and Vice-Presidents) be turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) at the end of their administrations,” according to the statement released by the National Archives on Friday afternoon.
Don't care. Trump speeds too.
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,133
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@Best.Korea
Well, technically, you just need the text, the code and the meaning of letters. You dont need a computer. It just takes a really long time to read lol, so I assume it would be somewhat impractical but not impossible.
Fine, you practically need a computer. Or to be more verbose: Any encryption scheme that could be decoded by hand at faster than one letter per day is an encryption scheme that a computer could brute force in one day.
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,348
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Greyparrot

One of Trump's fundraising emails was: "MAR-A-LAGO: RAIDED." The alleged email goes on to say, "The nuke codes are 15-25-50-80," and then asks, "Can I count on you to donate," above several different dollar amounts below the question.
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,133
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@Slainte
Limited copies of physical paper are far more secure.  You dont have the risks attached to computing systems.
What risks of a computing system is greater than the risk of having an unencrypted copy that can be physically stolen?


You can be certain that only certain people have access.  CERTAINTY. 
You can have certainty that only people with the decryption key have access to a file.

It would hardly help in this case since one of the people with access seems to not care if it's classified or not.

If it had been a file that existed (which I believe is the case if it was important at all), it could be re-encrypted. Or the computer systems with the key that Trump had access to before would be taken from him so that he no longer had access.

Of course he could just take a picture of the documents, which brings us back to the fact that nothing in the world can keep something a secret if someone who was given the secret doesn't care if its a secret.

So there is no CERTAINTY there whatsoever. The only potentially relevant differences are in how easy it is to steal the information.


If there is one copy of a document, then you can control who sees it.. 
If a file is encrypted then you can control who sees it, a hell of a lot better than a piece of paper in fact because a paper cannot enact counter-measures when someone takes a picture of it.


If there is no digital copy then you  eliminate data integrity issues (the document cannot be manipulated) Single Trusted Source.
If there is only one document then it can be replaced with an altered version and no one would have an original to prove it was a fake.

You reduce digital security threats which could include unwanted destruction from an EMP
EMP hardening is straight forward science and optical disc backups are not vulnerable. Also the only way to produce a significant EMP is a specially designed nuclear bomb, and paper is not immune to nuclear fire.

Many top secret programs are not digitized, and people like Manning and Snowden show us why.
I like to prefix those names with "heroes". Heroes like Manning and Snowden.

As for how they got the information, they were or had access to insiders.

a) the nuclear football, and the codes related thereto
b) designated survivor determination 
No idea if this is accurate, but they managed to pry those from Trumps fingers didn't they? Maybe because they were actually critical instead of the white noise of an inefficient paper pushing system which is being weaponized by virtue of the gullibility of the left-tribe masses.


c) state department cables that are designated print only.  Those cables automatically get printed and the original digital message is destroyed ass it is printed.  It is never sent as an entire digital package.
Any evesdropper would get the entire package simply by listening long enough. Rather this points to the danger of paper, why destroy paper if it's so easy to keep track of it?

The paper is the risk, not the encrypted electronic data.

Quantum computing  could develop to  the point that in 3 or 4 years, I can break that encryption.
Complicated, won't get into it now.

Oh and one more thing, the most obvious.  If there is no digital copy, then it is very hard to prove wrong doing, unless one can access the limited paper versions.  
Not following.

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,491
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@FLRW
 The alleged...
Are you ever interested in facts?
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,348
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Greyparrot


OMG, you are saying I'm a Trump?
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 277
Posts: 8,270
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
computer could brute force in one day
Actually, no, the computer cannot brute force this encryption.

In order to brute force, computer guesses what each character means.

However, this encryption feeds the computer with lots of false characters unrelated to the text.

The computer cannot make sense out of it. Therefore, it is impossible for a computer to break this encryption.

The only way to decode text encrypted this way is to know the code for pattern. Without that, no one can decode it. And code for pattern can only be known to the creator and anyone the creator tells.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,491
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@FLRW
I am saying it is rare that you post a fact on this site. Most of it is just regurgitated TDS opinions.

Engaging in debates and discussions on a debate site requires a certain level of maturity and intellectual rigor. Presenting childish opinions in such settings is generally considered unproductive and can hinder meaningful discourse. Childish opinions often lack substance, as, by definition, they tend to be simplistic, emotional, or based on personal biases, or based on regurgitated talking points from corporate media rather than based on objective evidence or thoughtful analysis. By mostly focusing on presenting and promoting childish opinions, you habitually fail to contribute to the overall quality of the discussion and are often perceived as lacking credibility. In order to foster constructive dialogue and promote the exchange of well-reasoned arguments, you should engage in forum discussions with a mindset of intellectual maturity, thoughtful analysis, and a willingness to engage with different perspectives. This allows for a more fruitful and productive exchange of ideas, while also facilitating a deeper understanding of the topic at hand where you will be open to grow and to change.

I'm not sayin you shouldn't hate Trump, but simply having the virtue of that opinion doesn't excuse lazy thinking.
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7

“Donald Trump was 100% authorized to keep everything he kept. And it was actually the Department of Justice that actually had to return materials because they took things they were not allowed to possess and had to return them,” Bobb noted further.”

IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,342
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
Donald Trump was 100% authorized to keep everything he kept. And it was actually the Department of Justice that actually had to return materials because they took things they were not allowed to possess and had to return them,” Bobb noted further.”
That’s a lie. Bobb now needs her own attorney.

And Judge Aeileen Canon was rebuked by the appeals court for a lack of legal competence 

IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,342
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
Engaging in debates and discussions on a debate site requires a certain level of maturity and intellectual rigor.
The a real classic coming from you SubTeach. 

Grats on being a successful gay

This seems like an opinion  statement. A simple google of the PRA shows this isn't true.
That’s a lie.

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,491
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10

"Hey guys, welcome to the Liberal Hive Mind, the channel solely focused on exposing the abundant hypocrisy of the left. The people know, man, the people know. Clearly, the people know what's going on. I don't know exactly what the Democrat establishment is trying to accomplish here. There's one side that says the Democrat's strategy is to artificially promote Donald Trump, basically turning him into a martyr to guarantee that he's the Republican nominee. Because from their perspective, they'd rather go against Donald Trump than Ron DeSantis.

And then there's the other angle that they're just trying to stop Donald Trump at any and all costs because they know they can't beat him without resorting to these corrupt tactics. The whole Ron DeSantis angle, as if they'd rather have Trump than DeSantis, not exactly sure about that one considering the polling data. I'm more inclined to believe that it's simply a continuation from 2017 to now of the endless witch hunt to destroy Donald Trump.

They want him out of the way because they understand that he is the only current clear-standing threat to the Uni-party establishment. And so, for the sake of this video, we're going to operate under that understanding. The Democrats are trying to destroy Donald Trump because obviously, he's a clear threat to their power. Well, if that is their goal, if the goal is to render Donald Trump unelectable because of all these criminal indictments, he can't vote for a criminal. If that's the goal, well, boy, are Democrats failing.

The people know, once again, Donald Trump is indicted, and once again, Donald Trump is surging beyond belief. Let me show you guys exactly what I mean by that. Alright folks, we've already got the polling data from two separate pollsters. Let's first start off with the CBS report, which finds that the Trump indictment helps Donald Trump more than it hurts him.

Start with Republican primary voters because we're in the heat of this campaign. They say it does not matter. They expressly say that this will not change their views, and maybe that doesn't surprise. They've been with Donald Trump for years. But what's interesting is the why. When you ask if they're more concerned that this is politically motivated or if there's a national security risk, they come down heavily on the politically motivated side, with 76 percent of them saying that.
And you know what's interesting about this is you juxtapose that against the broader public who is much more split, and in many cases, the public says these aren't mutually exclusive. It can be in part both. But the Republican primary voter, Donald Trump is still on top, and this hasn't changed anything. I'm sure leftoids are shrieking in horror. ***"What is wrong with these Republican voters? How could they be more highly motivated to vote for a criminal facing criminal indictment?"**
Or... here's the thing, leftoid....

Republican voters have this unique ability to critically think and, of course, observe nuance and double standards. You know when Hillary Clinton responded to the Trump indictment with this tweet that we pointed out earlier, bringing this back in light of recent news, blah blah blah, but her emails, gloating over the Trump indictment, while I understand that all you leftoids with your CNN brains simply clap like a bunch of seals, "Earth, Earth, home, I'm with her, Donald Trump's a criminal."

Well, I understand that that's the case for you. We, on the other side, have a little bit of a different reaction, especially when we're armed with the facts from James Comey's assessment of Hillary Clinton's emails back in 2016, where he wrote, and I'm quoting, "You can see the document right over here, although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information."

Now, of course, "no intent." Hillary Clinton must have just been ignorant of the basic laws concerning her handling of classified information as a private citizen, in a private capacity. There is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information. We know that Hillary Clinton is actually guilty of what they're accusing Donald Trump of. We also know that Hillary Clinton's staffers smashed their cell phones and smashed hard drives, bleach bit hard drives, to cover up evidence of criminal wrongdoing.

So maybe, armed with the basic facts and basic nuance over here, we're not instantly willing to jump on the bandwagon that Trump's a criminal and this indictment is legitimate. Oh, but the documents, the documents. CBS's Catherine Herridge, during that same segment, goes into some of the details pertaining to these documents. Catherine, you've been doing reporting about the risk assessment, about just what was in these documents. Educate us on that.

Well, what jumps out to me, John, is when you go to the section on the willful retention of National Defense information, by my count, there are 21 top-secret documents. And the disclosure of top-secret information has the expectation of exceptionally grave damage to national security. But what stands out to me is some of the classified codings, like TK or Talent Keyhole. You don't see that very often. That's about intelligence from overhead imagery.

For example, if we're looking at a terrorist target, do we have such good visibility that we can count the hairs on their head? Can we see what they're eating for breakfast on their terrace patio? Those are capabilities that we don't want our adversaries to know that we have. Then also special access programs or SAP. These are highly restricted programs because of the sensitivity of the intelligence and the technology, such as stealth technology, for example.

Think of classified information like the Pentagon special access programs. Are these handful of rooms where there's just a limited number of keys to control and restrict access to that information? So it's not just secret, it's the top of the top of the top. Some of these are way beyond top-secret, like I said, Talent Keyhole. When you're talking about special access programs or SCI, sensitive compartmentalized information, these really are the crown jewels of the US intelligence community.
Some of these documents are way beyond top secret national security documents, and leftoids' brains start instantly imploding here. "Oh my Lord, way beyond top-secret documents, while he's definitely a criminal this time." But of course, nobody seems to take five seconds to think while she's simply describing the nature of the documents. Again, these are still Donald Trump's personal presidential records. They're literally his documents.

And it's not like he had them just laying around in his garage next to his Corvette like sleepy creepy piss pants Biden, or at his office in Chinatown. It's not like he had thousands of classified documents on an unsecured private email server at his personal home like Hillary Clinton did. No, he had these documents safely stored at his home in Mar-A-Lago with 24/7 Secret Service protection.

And probably the most important part, I mean the core of this initial accusation targeting Donald Trump was the destruction of classified information. Remember the infamous supposed damning photographic evidence of documents being torn up and flushed down the toilet at Mar-A-Lago? It was literally just a random piece of paper in a toilet bowl. But the initial charges were the destruction of classified information. But as it turns out, those photographs were not taken inside Mar-A-Lago, but in a public restroom at a Walmart.

So the whole case seems to be falling apart even before it begins, and the American people are seeing through it. They're not buying into this politically motivated attack on Donald Trump. In fact, it's only making him stronger. And this is not just limited to Republicans. Even among independent voters, the CBS report found that 63% say the indictment will not change their views of Trump, and among Democratic primary voters, 56% say the indictment will not change their views.

So despite the left's desperate attempts to destroy Donald Trump, it seems to be backfiring, and Trump's support is only growing stronger. The people know, man, the people know. The Democrats' strategy to undermine Trump with these indictments is failing, and they're only strengthening his position. It's just another example of the left's hypocrisy and their fear of Trump's power.

TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
That’s a lie. 
Your greatest hits. Classic denialism with zero facts to back it up. Just ad hominems and strawman arguments. 

TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@Greyparrot
Now the question here is will double_r read the entirety of that transcript or cherry pick something from here or there to rebut with, without reading it in its entirety? 
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,491
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@TWS1405_2
I was really just posting for the polling among independents, but I included it all for context.
DavidAZ
DavidAZ's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 345
1
2
8
DavidAZ's avatar
DavidAZ
1
2
8
-->
@n8nrgim
 if i say 'fuck it let's watch the world burn', it's only cause i'm partly MAGA myself.
Ummm . . . That is not the purpose of MAGA.  The idea of MAGA is to literally "Make America Great Again" and a way to do that is to bring our government back into the hands of the people, where it belongs, to rid it of corruption and bring society back to freedoms from a tyrannical government.  Greyparrot said it right, Trump exposed the corruption and now they plan on teaching him a lesson.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,491
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@DavidAZ
they plan on teaching him a lesson.

"You take on the intelligence community they have 6 ways to Sunday of getting back at you."

-Chuck Schumer, currently the 3rd most powerful person in government.
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,133
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@Best.Korea
computer could brute force in one day
Actually, no, the computer cannot brute force this encryption.

In order to brute force, computer guesses what each character means.

However, this encryption feeds the computer with lots of false characters unrelated to the text.
It's been a long time since encryption compression factor was 1:1, i.e. there is no requirement for each character of the encrypted message to relate to one character of the original message.


The computer cannot make sense out of it. Therefore, it is impossible for a computer to break this encryption.
Then it's time to make yourself rich because you can make a lot of money off a simple encryption that can't be brute forced despite having what a single byte of complexity?


The only way to decode text encrypted this way is to know the code for pattern. Without that, no one can decode it. And code for pattern can only be known to the creator and anyone the creator tells.
They call that the encryption key.

Brute forcing means to try encryption keys at random until the message makes sense.

IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,342
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
Classic denialism with zero facts to back it up. 
You need facts to know a former President can’t take classified documents to his house and store them in a bathroom and then lie about it, say he doesn’t have any documents, and try to get his attorneys, including Bobb to lie and say all documents have been returned.

IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,342
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@DavidAZ
The idea of MAGA is to literally "Make America Great Again" and a way to do that is to bring our government back into the hands of the people, where it belongs, to rid it of corruption and bring society back to freedoms from a tyrannical government.  Greyparrot said it right, Trump exposed the corruption and now they plan on teaching him a lesson.
That’s absolute nonsense.

Make America Great Again means make America White again.

Trump was corrupt. That’s what Bill Barr. Liz Cheney. and Chris Christie say.
DavidAZ
DavidAZ's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 345
1
2
8
DavidAZ's avatar
DavidAZ
1
2
8
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Make America Great Again means make America White again.
This is an odd claim, but one I would suspect from you.  Tell me, how does MAGA mean racist?

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,491
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@DavidAZ
He is worried Trumpanzees will take us back to 1965 when systemic racism was outlawed unlike what we have today with protected classes of victims.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 277
Posts: 8,270
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Brute forcing means to try encryption keys at random until the message makes sense.
Sadly for computer, not in this case.

First, this encryption code does not say what the characters mean. It only says which characters are real and which are fake. After finding out which characters are real, you must still translate them.

So if I say:

124345678906541899

How is a computer going to translate this?

It wont.

Because the encryption code cannot be guessed.

Computer would have to accurately guess that only first, second and last characters count. Only then it would know that real characters are "129" And then it would have to guess what "129" means.

The text with 2 characters alone would contain 3 possible code patterns and 180 possible meanings, as opposed to traditional encryptions where it would only have 120 possible meanings.

The advantage of this method of encryption is that real coded text can be hidden among millions of fake characters that mean nothing. In fact, you can make the first million characters in text literally an arbitrary rambling and computer would spend eternity trying to figure out what that rambling means when it doesnt mean anything.

Further, there is evolving encryption, which is when code changes meaning.

For example, "1" mentioned the first time means "N", while the second time it is mentioned it changes meaning to "Y".

This triple encryption where:
1) Computer must guess which part of text is an actual encrypted message and which is randomly put there as an irrelevant text to confuse computer
2) Computer must guess what each character in encrypted message means
3) Computer must guess the evolution and changes in meaning of characters

Long story short, computer would need more than billion of years to actually translate it with brute force.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 23,491
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Best.Korea
This encryption is almost like the WW2 enigma code. A proto-computer broke the code using educated guesses.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 277
Posts: 8,270
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Greyparrot
Enigma code didnt include fake text. Every part of text had meaning. Therefore, computer could create a pattern based on repetition of text.

However, in my encryption, characters can repeat for thousands of times and yet be meaningless each time, disturbing the pattern of repetition.

Computer would be forced to guess the meaning of meaningless text, and only the person with code for pattern would know which part of text actually has meaning and which part of text is fake.