From: Adam Shostack <adam@bwh.harvard.edu>
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 94 11:00:29 PST
To: lake@evansville.edu (Adam Lake)
Subject: Re: Pondering Clipper
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9403200147.A19855-0100000@uenics.evansville.edu>
Message-ID: <199403201906.OAA01899@duke.bwh.harvard.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Not repeating what James Hicks had to say:

| 1.) From what I am hearing (largely propaganda from both sides) Clipper
| will be OPTIONAL.

	While Clipper might start out 'optional' the government
intends to use its massive purchasing power to make it the de facto
standard.  If the government buys 50 or 100K Clipper phones, all of
the sudden, Clipper phones are the standard.  And like DOS, people
will buy it because it is standard and cheap, not because it is
better.

	Also, the development of clipper was done with tax dollars.
The government has no need to recoup its investment in developing the
chip.  Therefore, they can sell the chips at the cost of
manufacturing, and forget the R&D.  That ability to ignore the bottom
line is a pretty powerful mechanism.  If a clipper phone costs $100
less than the alternative, because we the taxpayers already paid for
it, Clipper becomes more and more the only choice.

Adam


	

-- 
Adam Shostack 				       adam@bwh.harvard.edu

Politics.  From the greek "poly," meaning many, and ticks, a small,
annoying bloodsucker.

Have you signed the anti-Clipper petition?