[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: New crypto bill to be introduced
Two observations:
* Jim Bell would be unduly suspicious if _anyone_ introduced a crypto
bill in Congress. I'm not surprised that here on conspiracypunks someone
would be raising alarums without knowing what they're talking about.
* Jim Bell says we're "overdoing it on this 'List of Shame' thing." Not
at all -- we're proud to be on it! And you, Jim Bell, are one of my
primary suspects for authorship.
-Declan
Excerpts from cypherpunks: 28-Mar-96 Re: New crypto bill to be i.. by
jim [email protected]
> While this does sound like progress, I'm suspicious. Peter Junger's
> analysis raised serious doubt as to the ability of bill to open up the
> crypto export market as it purported to.
>
> And where, exactly, did this these changes come from? Who was consulted?
> What recommendations were NOT taken?
>
>
> >We have put our "List of Shame" numbers on our nametags.
> >-Declan
>
> You're overdoing it on this "List of Shame" thing. You don't know
> who actually made those anonymous postings, and it's been observed that
> those names seem to correspond nicely with an NSA-hate list. It would not
> take a great deal of imagination to conclude that the NSA was motivated to
> de-focus our anger at the Leahy bill and replace it with a great deal of
> back-stabbing commentary. (If that was the intent, it succeeded...)
>
> On the other hand, I've also noticed that there hasn't been a lot of
> specific analysis of the Leahy bill in the last few weeks, and my suggestion
> that the Leahy bill be informally re-written to address Junger's objections
> (as well as my own, and Tim May's, etc) has not resulted in a great deal of
> repair work. Now, miraculously, a replacement bill appears that includes
> SOME repairs. (obviously, we have to wait to hear how most of it
comes out...)
>
>
> I get the impression that we are being sequentially offered ice cream cones
> with decreasing amounts of poison in them, in the hopes that at some point
> we'll bite. It seems to me that whoever is writing these bills should be
> willing to make a statement about what his goals are, and who he's talking
> to as he crafts them, and what changes he was UNwilling to include.