• conciselyverbose@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      That’s a terrible definition, but “codes” is doing the heavy lifting.

      It is not a code, in that definition, if it does not require knowledge of a key to decode.

      It is literally impossible for anything that doesn’t have a secret key to qualify as cryptography. That is the entire defining trait.

      • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        That’s a terrible definition

        How so?

        And what do you think I’ve been talking about this whole time if not forms of substitution?

        • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          The “key” is the mapping of cipher alphabet to message alphabet.

          There has to be a secret to be cryptography. The meaning has to be hidden without the secret information (though primitive/weak attempts can have a small enough search space to be brute forced). But the content being hidden without that information is the entirety of what the word means.