[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Gee...
At 8:08 AM 4/28/94 -0700, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
>Do you think your fastidious compliance with the law will keep them from
>branding you a criminal, anyway? Wake up.
Errr, no, but they'd still need to prove it. Generally, it is easier to
get a guilty verdict when you have committed a crime than when you have
not.
>The whole purpose of wide-spread availability and use of strong crypto is
>to what "others" say or think, irrelevant. Strong crypto means never
>having to say you're sorry.
I'm not arguing this point. I agree. I just think that people should work
to change the current government policy through legal means before
resorting to illegal measures. I think we are seeing some sucess in this
area, with the hearings on Clipper and the push by at least one legislator
to ease the cryptography export restrictions. We are getting reasonable
press coverage, which is growing. Just like you only heard a bit about the
Internet a few years ago, but now you can't pick up a newspaper or magazine
without some mention of the Internet, you are starting to see articles
about Cryptography (like the WSJ article, or NPR's piece).
Bob
--
Bob Snyder N2KGO MIME, RIPEM mail accepted
[email protected] finger for RIPEM public key
When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl.