1994-09-23 - Re: National Research Council

Header Data

From: Jim Gillogly <jim@acm.org>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: ecafbf3f0e3fc3e4a27d3d2e9f4a482c1ad55109252e350e276f08ae06992eed
Message ID: <9409231846.AA00599@mycroft.rand.org>
Reply To: <5AFFF612@warehouse.mn.org>
UTC Datetime: 1994-09-23 18:47:09 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 23 Sep 94 11:47:09 PDT

Raw message

From: Jim Gillogly <jim@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 94 11:47:09 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: National Research Council
In-Reply-To: <5AFFF612@warehouse.mn.org>
Message-ID: <9409231846.AA00599@mycroft.rand.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



> Is it me or are there a disproportionate amount of legal/government/military/
> types on this list?  Keeping this in mind, do you really think any of our
> comments will go anywhere but in the old circular file?

Disagree.  Looks balanced or perhaps even weighted toward good guys to me.
I haven't met many of them, but certainly Marty Hellman, Peter Neumann,
and Willis Ware are on the Good Guys side.  Willis (a colleague here at
RAND) is carefully neutral on the political stuff, but is strongly
pro-privacy.  I assume Sam Fuller is the guy who was on my thesis
committee back at C-MU 20 years ago, and he was sensible and non-political
then.  Another half dozen of them appear from credentials to be business
and academic.  Very few appear to be obvious government types.

	Jim Gillogly
	2 Winterfilth S.R. 1994, 18:44





Thread