From: "Perry E. Metzger" <pmetzger@lehman.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 94 19:02:11 PST
To: rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain)
Subject: Re: Crypto Regulation Reform
In-Reply-To: <199402090119.RAA02591@mail.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199402090257.VAA09865@snark>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Robert Cain says:
> Please embarass me.  Do you always approch things with the hostility
> I am sensing, Perry?

No, but I've got a shock proof shit detector and you are triggering
it. One of the things that sets it off is odd claims being made before
implementation. You are making a very odd claim, which is that you can
beat the price on a Rockwell integrated modem module by building
something yourself -- given the economies of scale, a weird statement.
You are also claiming that given that you need to have a DSP doing
your modem work, and processing power to do your cryptography and DSP
horsepower to do your vocoder, you are still going to be able to beat
the price of mass-market modems that are falling to the $100 range
with your non-mass market product. Frankly, it sounds like a load of
crap. I might be wrong, of course -- I've been wrong before. However,
when people make strange claims to me about things they haven't
finished implementing yet that they don't sell, especially after
they've made lots of mistakes in their postings the previous week, it
sets off alarm bells in my head. I'm not saying its impossible, but
I'm saying that until you give me more evidence I'm not going to think
that your claim is credible, and I don't think any other reasoning
person should, either.

> Yes, every chip set and DSP on the market in excruciating detail.  It
> was only recently that I realized that I could use a simpler, cheaper
> solution.  I'm an EE as well as programmer and I've actually got bills
> of materials and schematics for this.  I'm not guessing.

When you have the product in hand and can actually sell it for less
than a modem, please get back to us. Right now, its vaporware.

.pm