I believe the enlightened Legislator who attempted to legislate Pi was none other than Jesse Helms (although this could be a legislative myth!) and when Ol'Jesse proposed it (because he was "sick of all these egg-heads with their big numbers") John Glenn said something on the order of ' if your legislation passes Senator, I wouldn't want to driver over any bridges in your state!'

Alas (according to my failing memory) it was legislator from my home state of Indiana during the early part of this century, who had planned to make a killing in textbooks if Pi == 3.0 was accepted. Fortunately he was called on it when it went before the whole legislature. I just have to wonder, how much of what we hear from various LEAs is due to the political desires of the people doing the talking -- I'd suspect that a majority of line officers (or the majority of those who are informed on the topic) would have something quite different to say. "In a confusing situation, follow the money. If there isn't any money, follow the power." Domestic crypto controls just fall _way_ too easily into the trap of increased state power (vs. the actual percentages of crimes whose investigations are impeded by crypto) to make me think that this is anything other than just a blatant political move on the part of the LEA managers. ========================================================== Mark Leighton Fisher Thomson Consumer Electronics fisherm@indy.tce.com Indianapolis, IN "Their walls are built of cannon balls, their motto is 'Don't Tread on Me'"