Re: Andy Grove on Clipper

[tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)]

Mike McNally wrote:

> Jamie Lawrence writes:
>  > Grove, on the other hand, has no place making statements like that,
>  > unless Intel has a political science wing I haven't heard of.
> 
> My recollections from a brief stint with Intel in the early 80's is
> that the company is quite conservative, and that Mr. Grove's personal
> outlook is largely responsible.  Before I get torched, I hasten to
> point out that "conservative" does not of course necessarily imply
> "Clipper supporter"; there are certain statist philosophies that do so
> imply, however, and some of those can be lumped into the category
> "conservative".
> 
> I could be way wrong.  Perhaps Mr. May could add more.  It is
> distressing (though not surprising) to know that there are individuals
> in positions of power in cyberspace-related industries who hold
> opinions antithetical to "ours".
 
Caveats: I knew Grove moderately well when I was at Intel. I didn't
see the CNN episode mentioned here. 

Yes, Grove is probably a conservative--he's at least a Republican
(supported Bush). However, such terms are misleading. Clipper comes
out of a "liberal" administration, not Reagan/Bush (though it no doubt
started there...).
     
Support or non-support for the crypto issue is complicated. Many of
those being asked what they think have not given the issue much deep
thought, and the phrasing of questions is key. 

What is more accurate to say is that the "power structure" in general
is, as it usually is, worried by loss of its power and its ability to
instill fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Whether it's claims of         
terrorism, child pornographers, or tax evaders, the national security
state will push for any and all laws that preserve and enhance its
power.                                                              
                                                                        
I expect nothing from politicians, nor from corporate executives asked
to comment on public policy. Would we expect them to endorse crypto
anarchy? Tools that undermine their own corporate cultures?  Doesn't
mean they're "right," to the extent "right" and "wrong" has anything
to do with things. (I've written extensively about this, and won't
here.)
  
As for Grove, he escaped from Hungary as a teenager, excelled in
school (incl. CUNY, Berkeley), became the leading MOS researcher
(making MOS stable was a very big deal in the mid-60s and enabled
Intel to begin its course to the top of the heap in ICs). He's
personally liberal in a lot of areas, fiscally conservative, and
things like crypto are complicated issues.

The debate is being presented--cf. the recent articles and comments
by Denning, Parker, Gore, etc.--as an issue of keeping "fortress-like"
crypto out of the hands of criminals and terrorists. This even while
Clipper advocates cheerfully admit it won't cause criminals and such
to use Clipper! Anyway, when the debate is couched this way, I'm not
at all surprised that folks like Grove would adopt the party line.

I never have thought we can win the hearts and minds of voteres. Too
many of them have shown a demonstrated willingness to use the State to
steal my property, to invade my home, to tell me I have to have some
permission slip to do something, etc. I don't have  time to elaborate
on this point here, but what strong crypto allows is and end-run
around democracy. And that's why many of us support strong crypto.


--Tim May
  


-- 
..........................................................................
Timothy C. May         | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,  
tcmay@netcom.com       | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
408-688-5409           | knowledge, reputations, information markets, 
W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA  | black markets, collapse of governments.
Higher Power: 2^859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available.
"National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."