Gelernter's piece

[Carl Ellison <cme@sw.stratus.com>]

I wish I could stop each person advocating Clipper and get them to explain
how this will give access to criminals' conversations before they

Even DERD backed way down from there on Science Friday last week -- saying
that Clipper *wasn't* for giving access to criminal conversations -- just
for making sure that the gov't standard didn't shoot the gov't in the foot.

Given that more reasonable stance, the next step is to eradicate from the
record (before the jury sees it) any mention of criminal behavior or
wiretaps of criminals as a justification for Clipper.

From that point, I think we could have a reasonable debate.