T >Denning, Andy Grove, and others. In this campaign, the second T >approach mentioned above will be dominant: a focus on pedophiles who T >"encrypt their list of victims," a focus on "terrorists who form T >virtual networks around the world," and a focus on "money launderers T >who use crypto anarchy to spread their poison." I agree of course that technological fixes are superior to political argument. In fact, I *use* technological fixes as a political argument. For example, "While you might like to censor video nasties, you should know that censorship is no longer technologically feasible. There are so many different communications channels that you can't possibly block all of them." It can be convenient to work on some anti Clipper/DTI soundbites though. Since coding sentences are more my specialty than coding software... "The administration wants us to spend $300 million of our own money to help them perform just a few wiretaps a year. It isn't worth it." "Yeah, and we could use torture to catch pedophiles too. Do you favor torture?" "Strong cypyto *prevents* crime by protecting people from criminals." "The government didn't think we needed strong crypto until the market demanded it. Why should we trust their judgement as to what kind we need?" "How does the government think that it can compete in a software and hardware market that will frustrate the brightest marketers around." "I guess the government thinks that forcing Microsoft, Novell, and IBM overseas so that they can incorporate strong crypto into their products is a good idea." DCF "Do you suppose the Feds can completely upgrade their hardware/software crypto system every 6 months to keep up with the market?" "In 1946, Soviet and U.S. electronics technology was approximately equal and the U.S. had a 10-year lead in nuclear weapons technology. By 1986, U.S. and Soviet nuclear weapons technology was approximately equal but the U.S. had a more than 10-years lead in electronic technology." Trust the market. --- WinQwk 2.0b#1165