From: jya@pipeline.com (John Young)
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 17:34:11 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Tim's Mac Tales
Message-ID: <199608072350.XAA09867@pipe6.t1.usa.pipeline.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Finger your delete key: 
 
 
What caught my eye in Tim's remarks about Apple was his continued use of
Macs. Why was that enticing? 
 
 
It has to do with what hard-headed physicists know about hardware that
soft-headed coders don't. 
 
 
So my curiosity: does Tim know Intel intel that we don't know, and can't
tell it? More generally, do chip physicists know what crypto coders don't,
about the covert features of those world-pervasive chips inside? 
 
 
Would Tim tell, could Tim disclose intel, what the world doesn't know about
Intel, about what Intel's hard-headed Moore, the immigrant physicist,
whispers in utmost secrecy to Microsoft's soft-headed Gates, the
American-way coder? Is soft-hearted OS code the front for cold-hearted
hardware spying? 
 
 
Maybe the most that Tim can tell without exposing Intel is that Tim uses
Macs. 
 
 
Still, is Motorola more trustworthy than Intel, and if so, for whom? What
do Apple insiders know that the world needs to know about the deals of
Intel insiders, are they working with inside the Beltwayers, gobbling
world-markets, gobbling intel chip by chip? Is Motorola doing the same with
its adorable cellulars and satellites and boards and hardware galore, using
benign code to conceal hardware malice? 
 
 
Dreamy, maybe, but hard-hearted Tellers did it to the Oppenheimers, and
everyone knows that physicists truly enjoy playing dice with God. 
 
 
(Hold on, Tim, this is the way I write after thirty years of grinding out
grim technical reports.)