:eek: NSFW :eek:
666
87 & 66 are sacred, though.
“Numbers” is not a euphemism, it’s the actual name of a type of gambling. Until recent years, it was always illegal. While there is still some illegal activity, playing the numbers has been mostly taken over by state lotteries now.
So if I understand this correctly, an illegal number is a code? 
Oh, I see. Thanks. 
No, some code is an illegal number. If the code could be used to unlock something encrypted, then it apparently becomes illegal to distribute, such as posting here. Or at least the mods think so.
So 2552 is legal, because it has no useful purpose in encryption (that I know of).
but 2553 is illegal, because it is widely be used as a decryption key (or part of one).
At least that’s the way it looks to me.
Keeping in mind that the numbers under discussion are typically large primes, in the multiple hundreds of digits–it has to decrypt or decrypt to something useful to someone before it can be construed as illegal.
Ummm…that doesn’t make sense to me. You’re saying a number used as an encryption/decryption key must be a prime number? Why? Why can’t any long number be used?
Primes are probably harder to crack. But this whole issue is silly and the mods are overreacting.
Also, he said typically. Where did you get must?
They’re just being ultra-conservative. The chances of SDMB getting sued is infinitesimal, but not zero. Hence the attitude. It certainly seems silly to worry about it.
Calling them “illegal numbers” is confusing and misleading.
Call them “decryption codes” and it makes more sense.
I think it is wrong to make having a particular number, being in possession of that number, illegal. What should be illegal is dissemination for the purposes of code-breaking, or actively engaging in code-breaking. Make actions illegal.
Having a 200 digit prime number does not mean you intend to use it to decrypt anything, or that you are even aware that number is a decryption code.
My non-lawyer opinion.
How the hell would you know if it’s an illegal number in the first place?
Lots of confusion in this thread.
Take something that is definitely illegal to posses in the US, such a flat out, no question about it, child porn picture. A computer image is just a string of 0s and 1s. I.e., it’s a large binary number. You can convert it to base 10 if that’s your thing. Having that number in your possession would be a bad thing. Ditto posting it here.
At the next level down would be a computer program that has been deemed illegal. The most famous example is a program to break DVD “encryption”. A program, like anything else stored on a computer, is just bits, i.e., a number. Some people took a compact version of the DVD decoding program and turned it into a base 10 number. Printed up t-shirts, posted it all over the web, etc. This number/program is illegal in the US thanks to digital anti-circumvention laws. But not too many people agree with this concept, so it’s widely protested. Going after every single person who possesses/posts these types of numbers is futile.
One interesting recent version of these is the posting of a matrix which can be used to make/decode Blue-ray videos. (But it can’t be used to decode in software Blue-ray movies like the DVD version. So it’s not a major breakthrough in practice.) It’s just a bunch of numbers. Technically illegal to post, etc. But the cat is out of the bag. The toothpaste can’t be put back in the tube, etc. But some skeevy electronics company trying to market a Blue-ray player that uses these numbers without paying for the right licensing fee is going to have a problem in the US. Hardware is easy to find and confiscate. (Although no doubt such players are starting to be made in less-stringent-about-the-details countries.)
Regarding encryption stuff. Lots of people use PGP and such for encryption. They post their public keys all over the place. If someone figured out a way to derive the private keys from these public keys and posted them, then there would be legal issues. If someone posted the code to derice the private keys, there’d be issues. If someone published a constructive proof that P=NP, then it’s a whole 'nother thing. Sure, people might use the proof to create the private keys, but if the author didn’t directly address that matter, they might have only a horrible civil nightmare, thanks to the right of any American to sue any one, as opposed to doing jail time.
Okay, so illegal numbers are out. Got it.
How about illicit numbers, like 69?
As previously pointed out, “illegal numbers” are usually large things, so 99.9999% of the numbers (probably much more) that have ever appeared on the SDMB in their context are OK.
But, if someone had a post that said nothing but
and so on for several more lines and nothing else, that’s an instant reason for the mods to get suspicious. It might be nothing (like the above example was, merely me typing random strings on the number pad - evidenced by the fact that there aren’t much zeroes because I kept forgetting to use my thumb on the 0 key as often as my fingers on 1-9) but a post with nothing but numbers definitely looks suspicious.
(I swear to Og that the above is merely my banging on the number pad. If it actually turns out to be something, I disavow knowledge of it. Unless it’s really cool. Then it was totally on purpose. )
It’s simple. All the moderators have to do is to post a list of all legal numbers. Then, if somebody wants to post a number, they could check the list to see if it’s legal. If it’s not on the list, don’t post it. Problem solved! You’re welcome.
How about illegal names?
Brfxxccxxmnpcccclllmmnprxvclmnckssqlbb11116 (pronounced “albin”), for example?
This is silly. Numbers by themselves do not represent anything. Yes, you can have a string of zeroes and ones in your computer’s memory that both represents a binay number and can represent a kiddie-porn image in the context of some encoding protocol (bmp or gif or jpg or tif or png, or whatever - there’s lot of them). However, in a different computational context (even within the same computer) the very same string might represent something completely different: a quite different, image, a sound file that plays America the Beautiful, the main executable of Microsoft Word, or complete gibberish. By the same token, any sufficiently long binary string could be parsed by some protocol (probably one that has not yet been devised, and is never likely to be, but nevertheless could be) into an illegal pornographic image. On some possible parsings (indeed, on many - perhaps even on an infinite number), the Microsoft Word executable file actually will display as a kiddie-porn image. (Don’t tell the teabaggers, or Bill Gates will probably be arrested!!)
If I were to distribute a number plus the information (whether conveyed directly or in some indirect, implicit way) that it is to be translated into a binary string and interpreted as a jpeg file (and if that then displays as a naked 5* year old), then I would be guilty of distributing kiddie-porn, and that complete package of information would be illegal. But the number on its own cannot be pornographic, and is not, or certainly should not be, illegal.** By itself, without context, it does not represent anything except that number.***
By the same token, the large primes that are used for encryption keys are just meaningless numbers unless they are also accompanied by the contextual information that they are encryption keys, and that they are applicable to a particular set of messages. If were to I pass along the information that this number can be used to decrypt this message (or type of message), then I would very likely be doing something illegal, but if I just mention the number without context (or in a different context - maybe it is the precise number of jellyfish in the world’s oceans, for instance), without giving any hint that can be used as a DVD encryption key, then to treat that as illegal would be ludicrous and totally unjust.
*In this context, any number under 18 is illegal :p
** I realize that they could make breathing illegal if they wanted to, but they shouldn't, and probably won't. I don't think our government is dumb enough to make any pure numbers illegal either - not until after the upcoming midterm elections, anyway.
***To nitpick my own words, numbers do not represent anything, even themselves. *Numerals* represent numbers. But the binary strings to be found in computer files and memories that get referred casually to as numbers are really numerals anyway. This whole conversation is really about numerals, not numbers.silently appreciates the nod to Berry’s paradox
Or, going the other way, if I have some illegal data of algorithmic complexity K(x) = n, i.e. if I can generate the data on some Turing machine T through a program n bits long, making ‘n’ an illegal number, then I can effectively construct a Turing machine T’ such that it can generate x using a program of at most n + c bits length, with c being the length of a program encoding a simulation of T on T’. Thus, if n is illegal, so must n + c be for all c; hence, if there exists one illegal number, all numbers are illegal.