I must concur with George Gleason's remarks about "sneaking around in the shadows of legality". I find myself getting a little uncomfortable with some of the more anarchistic ideas expounded in this and similar groups. My interest in cryptography is very simple. I'm not interested in overthrowing the government by force. Although I find "digital cash" to be an interesting concept worthy of pursuit at least as an academic exercise, I'm not trying to evade income taxes, establish an underground economy or conceal criminal activity. And although I do believe that drugs, gambling, prostitution and other vices ought to be legalized on both practical and philosphical grounds, I am not particularly interested in using cryptography to protect the lowlifes who inhabit these professions. I am *very* interested, however, in cryptography's enormous potential to protect individual privacy. With widely available strong cryptography, the average individual will finally have the technical means to draw a tight circle around the private aspects of his or her life. The individual need let no one, especially the government, enter without his or her permission. Until now, we have had to depend entirely on the goodwill of government to respect and obey those provisions of the Bill of Rights that deal with privacy. Often this "good will" has been sadly lacking. But now we can finally put some real teeth into the guarantees of the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments. If you want to plot political strategy for an upcoming election, or if you want to talk to your attorney about some legal action, or even if you just want to discuss your sex life with your spouse or SO, cryptography can guarantee you an unprecedented degree of privacy. Just as good fences make good neighbors, we may well find that in the hands of the people, good cryptography will make for good government. That's why I find cryptography so interesting, and that's how we should sell it to the public. Phil