At 12:21 PM 4/27/94 -0700, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
Wrong on both counts. Getting it out legally would be nice--it's a great *fallback* position--but that's not the object of the game. The idea is to get it out and make it widely available. Period.
Maybe of your game. My game is to get cryptography available to all, without violating the law. This mean fighting Clipper, fighting idiotic export restraints, getting the government to change it's stance on cryptography, through arguements and letter pointing out the problems (I love Phil Karn's CJ request, because it points out some of the idiocy behind some of the regulations). This means writing or promoting strong cryptography. By violating the law, you give them the chance to brand you "criminal," and ignore/encourage others to ignore what you have to say.
The Constitution and other laws are not magic talismans. It is fantasy thinking that technical compliance with the government's laws renders them "completely powerless." A Smith & Wesson beats four-of-a-kind.
I'm not sure I understand what you are saying here. Them being the laws or the government? Bob -- Bob Snyder N2KGO MIME, RIPEM mail accepted snyderra@dunx1.ocs.drexel.edu finger for RIPEM public key When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl.