-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In list.cypherpunks, mmarkley@microsoft.com writes:
FutureNerd writes
| 1) The more people protect their privacy, the less profit there is in | privacy invasion, so that there will be fewer people doing it and | the techniques and infrastructure of spying might develop more | slowly.
It seems that the more people protect their privacy the greater the profit will be in finding ways to invade that privacy.
I don't think that's necessarily true. There may be a greater incentive to penetrate privacy, but the penetration comes at greater cost. When costs go up, profits go down (assuming the value received remains the same).
On the other hand if your information is closely guarded then it costs a lot more to get that information.
Exactly. The idea is to make it cost more to get the information than the information is worth. - -- Roy M. Silvernail [ ] roy@sendai.cybrspc.mn.org Freinds don't let friends spam Usenet. Member, Anti Spam Committee Internet, International "Hey, at least everyone knows our acronym!" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAwUBLiIAgRvikii9febJAQHvpAQAmWksvr39kh6VIQDS/DcJ1ShWRnfFBCyI npeKRDhDkSuEltIoCrG3MsMqNEEM/jHyV40r7qs4hM89qXp+40Ffk/u0ZNjD0GwK Vv9CMxwswnQ3pXTAYha5HpE8mBchDECngelORWuDtJUUx4zuN/MLBNk2o/kfNjZR EmJgBLXFG7A= =kJph -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----