Federal key registrat

[harka at nycmetro.com]

 -=> Quoting In:jimbell at pacifier.com to Harka <=-
 
 > "Some of our
 >most important prosecutions have depended on wire taps."

 In> But is the average citizen substantially impacted by crimes that would
 In> be  assisted by good encryption?  Probably not.  
 
 And how about: "Would not the average citizen be assisted by good encryption to NOT be impacted by (certain) crimes?"
 And from that perspective, shouldn't the protection of millions of "average" citizens have much more importance than the "unprotection" (i.e. Clipper) of a few godfathers, who _might_ use e-mail and who _might_ use crypto?
 
 
 >Reno told the group that effectively regulating electronic encryption will
 >depend on finding a balance between protecting privacy interests while
 >stopping criminals from cashing in on the new technology.

 In> I see no need for a "balance."  I think that the advent of good
 In> encryption  has the effect of increasing the security of individuals.
 
 
 Absolutely. As somebody a few days ago already mentioned in connection with the CDA, the gov.'s have enjoyed a lot of centralized power so far. A medium like the Net is the antithesis to that kind of centralization. Now all over the world gov.'s try to
 hold on to the "old" way, which _only_ works if things are regulated, censored, outlawed etc.. That is what ensures the survival of centralized and hierarchical structures.
 But they are failing to realize, that people's conciousness changes _away_ from such limiting ways towards more open and natural relationships. The Net is maybe the (currently) most important medium in that process and will be hopefully the last nail in 
 the coffin of governments, as we know 'em.


 Harka

... "If cryptography is outlawed, no outlaw will use clipper" -:)
___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR]