Re: please stop the Mitnick stuff

[steve@aztech.com]

I don't usually rant, but nobody@replay.com (Anonymous) said:

#C'mon, Perry, give it a break.  Mitnick's case has to do with security
#issues as well as the violations of privacy and/or search and seizure
#the government used to arrest him.
#It may not be cryptography per se, but are you going to seriously argue
#that security, etc. is not encompassed in crypto issues?
#I found it interesting.  If you didn't, then all you had to do was
#delete it.  No one needs to read your personal crusade as *The One*
#who tells us what's relevant and what's not.

I too found it interesting reading (agreeing with your position).  I 
too found it to be off-topic/off-charter (agreeing with Perry's position.)

It really torques me when someone suggests: (in response to someone else's 
suggestion that something was off-topic) "just delete it."  I subscribe to 
a lot of mailing lists and news groups.  Anything that contributes to the 
noise/signal ratio, and doesn't aplologize for it is a bad thing, IMHO.

To be more on-topic, if Mitnick knew more about crypto and covert ops, he 
probably woudln't have been caught as easily.  When he was caught, the feds 
probably wouldn't have been able to gather as much evidence against him.

I'll stop ranting, now.  You probably don't know me, and probably don't 
care about why I don't care to read alt.fan.kevin.mitnick stuff on the 
cypherpunks list.

FWIW,

--
S