[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Parker on Clipper
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> In the 21-Mar-94 issue of Computerworld p.4 the following statment is
> attributed to Donn Parker of SRI, "We have to make strong, nonescrow
> encryption a crime". I do not remember Parker making a statement like
> this previously, is this a new position for Parker or is my memory
> going bad?
He is quoted in the March issue of Scientific American as saying ``You
can't have absolute privacy. A democracy just can't operate that way.''
(page 101) The article goes on to say
The question is not whether cyberspace will be subjected to
legislation but rather ``how and when law and order will be
imposed,'' Parker says. He predicts that the current state of
affairs will get much worse before the government steps in ``to
assure privacy and to protect the rights people do have.''
I was so incensed that I began writing him a letter questioning this. I
might have carried through, but I couldn't find an email address for him
right away. (Anyone have it handy?) His attitude reminds me of claims
by DERD & Co. (love that new designator! what does the R stand for?)
that ``if you knew what I know, you too would favor government
surveillance''.
You write almost as if you are surprised that he in particular would
express these positions. I was unaware of his existence before reading
this Scientific American piece, so I had no preconceived notions. Why
were you surprised?
John E. Kreznar | Relations among people to be by
[email protected] | mutual consent, or not at all.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.3a
iQCVAgUBLY+VbMDhz44ugybJAQHXXgP8CtmWmGKRtkH0NQP82BvEn2HKA4yETXGw
/1ztpQncJ/joInhIacuuGYLuPqf3q4ahBRWBa4l2+KHvn2f5Epsb71i2DUsTt/DT
QQdxsUEX5DfeX4JFd0yVceYCkeC0Pd4yCXYlFy6xwl/HYgyQjtnx7F+97+XiWjNi
VHvXjZo26n8=
=ilkn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----