Gee...

[Bob Snyder]

At 12:21 PM 4/27/94 -0700, Sandy Sandfort wrote:

>Wrong on both counts.  Getting it out legally would be nice--it's a great
>*fallback* position--but that's not the object of the game.  The idea is
>to get it out and make it widely available.  Period.

Maybe of your game.  My game is to get cryptography available to all,
without violating the law.  This mean fighting Clipper, fighting idiotic
export restraints, getting the government to change it's stance on
cryptography, through arguements and letter pointing out the problems (I
love Phil Karn's CJ request, because it points out some of the idiocy
behind some of the regulations).  This means writing or promoting strong
cryptography.

By violating the law, you give them the chance to brand you "criminal," and
ignore/encourage others to ignore what you have to say.

>The Constitution and other laws are not magic talismans.  It is fantasy
>thinking that technical compliance with the government's laws renders
>them "completely powerless."  A Smith & Wesson beats four-of-a-kind.

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying here.  Them being the laws or
the government?

Bob

--
Bob Snyder N2KGO                                     MIME, RIPEM mail accepted
snyderra at dunx1.ocs.drexel.edu                       finger for RIPEM public key
         When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl.