1996-03-26 - Let’s NOT “Raise their Awareness”

Header Data

From: tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 727f0701d137ba2b5f6427d7ed1a821dd1d634f89c64d6134e6421a8d731fe58
Message ID: <ad7cc52907021004d50e@[205.199.118.202]>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-03-26 10:23:12 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 18:23:12 +0800

Raw message

From: tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May)
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 18:23:12 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Let's *NOT* "Raise their Awareness"
Message-ID: <ad7cc52907021004d50e@[205.199.118.202]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 3:15 AM 3/26/96, jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
>At 01:22 AM 3/25/96 -0500, Declan B. McCullagh wrote:
>> Leahy Bill has NOT A CHANCE IN HELL of passing, and so is worth
>> supporting to raise awareness of crypto.
>
>Washington is the last place where we wish to raise awareness of
>crypto

I try to avoid "me too" echoes, but this is worth concurring with, strongly.

Nothing good can come out of "raising awareness," especially of an issue
where the Consitution is already pretty clearly on the side of the right to
speak in whatever language one chooses, to keep diaries in code if one
wishes, to whisper to others, to place curtains on windows, to lock doors,
and so on. (I suppose Jim Bell will point out that the Constitution
contains no explicit language about placement of curtains....)

Whenever Congress gets "exercised" about some subject, laws are often the
result. And often the seemingly minor things thrown in to satisfy some
interest end up ensnaring us in a new set of regulations.

No thanks.

We already can freely encrypt. We already can use any strength of cipher we
can get. We already can deposit a spare key with our mother-in-law or with
a friend in Lichtenstein. What more do we need?

Free export of crypto products would be nice. But not if the quid pro quo
for this is giving up some of the freedoms we already have.

And "raising awareness" also increases the chances for _international
treaty_ discussions. Frankly, the U.S. will be the instigator of any such
treaty discussions, so the more ignorant the diplomats and legislators are,
the better. Then they'll be less likely to broach the subject with their
Italian, German, French, and Russian counterparts...the more of an "urgent
issue" crypto is, the more it is being publically debated, the greater will
be the likelihood that diplomats and legislators will "do something!"

Remember the First Rule of Politics: "Look important and pass laws."


--Tim May

Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software!
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1  | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."









Thread