1997-01-16 - Re: Newt may be more receptive to encryption now

Header Data

From: Declan McCullagh <declan@pathfinder.com>
To: Scottauge@aol.com
Message Hash: 75deba1e309feb84d31500b96e626e826c698018bf4ae0ab6153ffa2383868f6
Message ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970116113332.7821C-100000@cp.pathfinder.com>
Reply To: <970116095948_1444710331@emout10.mail.aol.com>
UTC Datetime: 1997-01-16 16:36:39 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 08:36:39 -0800 (PST)

Raw message

From: Declan McCullagh <declan@pathfinder.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 08:36:39 -0800 (PST)
To: Scottauge@aol.com
Subject: Re: Newt may be more receptive to encryption now
In-Reply-To: <970116095948_1444710331@emout10.mail.aol.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970116113332.7821C-100000@cp.pathfinder.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


I think what's important to stress is that technical fixes work, laws
don't.

Net-advocates in DC are already planning to suggest to Republicans that
they use crypto as a hammer to nail Gore (the chief White House supporter
of the current policy) and draw votes and cash from Silicon Valley.

-Declan


On Thu, 16 Jan 1997 Scottauge@aol.com wrote:

> 
> Given his troubles with this "hay seed" scanner recording democrats, ol' Newt
> may be more receptive to encryption.
> 
> Our privacy certainly is getting trashed by this presidency and I am hoping
> an impeachment is coming down the line.
> 
> Since the congress is who makes the laws, maybe we all can focus some snail
> mail to these guys.
> 
> Perhaps EFF could even draft some laws for our protection (what a joke - just
> to keep busy body beaurocrats outta our business).
> 
> What does it matter anyhow, these guys dont read their own 300 - 5000 page
> laws anyhow....
> 
> Hopeless....
> 
> 






Thread