Anonymous (nobody@replay.com)
Mon, 25 Jan 1999 19:00:37 +0100
At 09:43 AM 1/25/99 -0500, Robert Hettinga wrote:
>At 12:18 AM -0500 on 1/25/99, Anonymous wrote:
>
>> The men in suits have guns. And will use them if you don't play
>> by their linguistics.
>
>Right. And there's a commie under every bush, our present presidential
>administration not withstanding, :-). That just sounds like the same old
Apparently you took me too literally, bringing up suggestions
of cloak and dagger paranoia. Things are more subtle. We all
wear suits and chat politely here.
But suppose that this weren't just a hobby, or an academic career -that
you were going to sell something for real, in the US, not just
to (essentially government controlled) banks.
Now suppose there were an agency whose goal is to impede crypto
as much as possible. With buddies in the IRS. Or with evidence
(read: leverage) that you explained something substantial to a furriner.
How would your venture-cap angels like to spend some years
funding legal cases?
Remember, you need a license from the government to conduct business.
>Anyway, I'm getting real tired of the whole geeks-vs-spooks, geeks-vs-cops
>political crypto-regulatory thing.
So Phil Z didn't almost go to jail?
So ISPs' machines aren't seized at the whims of prosecutors?
>strong financial cryptography on a geodesic public internet is now,
>demonstrably, just as important in that regard as railroads, or
>automobiles, or electricity were.
Computers : Networked computers :: Steam engine : Railroad
Some things become much more useful when connected.
(Standarization helps too..)
......
RH, You are right that perhaps only the Amish can prevent widespread
crypto, in the very long term. I wish I could share your optimism
for the next decade or so. 1984 is a work in progress.
"Tomorrow, we can all sit back, and laugh.." -King Crimson
The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Sat Apr 10 1999 - 01:18:05