At 2:49 AM 8/9/96, John F. Fricker wrote:
Isn't that the role of legislation? To implement solutions that society would not do on it's own?
The enabling technology is obviously off the self.
I think you may have misinterpretted my last sentence which was supposed to have had a ? at the end. Where's the proof reader when you need one!
"To implement solutions that society would not do on it's own?" Would not do, or could not do? It is within anyone's power to ask their psychiatrist what form of encryption he uses to protect his files. Likewise with doctors and hospitals. (Though I freely admit that one would not be likely to get very far. For at least the next decade or two, the reaction will likely be "Huh?" But "legislation" mandating a form of encryption is not the answer. For many reasons.) On this list at least, calls for passing laws to implement societal solutions are not usually smiled upon. This is not to say such discussions are out of bounds, only that you'd better make some persuasive arguments and not just appeal to our common sense sympathies for social engineering and more laws. --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."