From: David Honig <honig@otc.net>
To: Jim Gillogly <cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 637df118533f54a07e624196cf5feb880069bc70a9317817e7f9d57f97423e31
Message ID: <3.0.5.32.19980108093331.007c6100@206.40.207.40>
Reply To: <md5:2F4707F94158BBCDE58F1FC30140DD96>
UTC Datetime: 1998-01-08 18:44:25 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 02:44:25 +0800
From: David Honig <honig@otc.net>
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 02:44:25 +0800
To: Jim Gillogly <cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality
In-Reply-To: <md5:2F4707F94158BBCDE58F1FC30140DD96>
Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980108093331.007c6100@206.40.207.40>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
At 05:09 AM 1/8/98 -0800, Jim Gillogly wrote:
>Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote:
>> scientists who agree to government secrecy to develop
>> their inventions are agreeing to a lot more than
>> mere secrecy. they are committing to a paradigm that
>> is at odds with science itself, which only advances through
>> the open literature.
>
>Why limit your annoyance to government scientists? Scientists
>in private industry are in the same position, developing (e.g.)
>algorithms and analytical methods protected by trade secrets.
>Society recognizes this tendency and tries to advance science
>anyway by offering patent protection. You don't make money by
>giving away your intellectual capital. Seems to me that schools
>and independently wealthy scientists/foundations are the only
>ones who don't merit your censure on this count.
>--
Nuri was obviously going through the angst of realizing responsibility
as a creative technologist.
You are adding antibusiness sentiments to this.
The fact is, you choose who/what you work on. And face it, many government
scientists think they're wearing white hats. As do those in industry and
academia, as well as the independant investigator.
The British scientist reporting on his discovery of PK was not *bitter* that
others found it too. He was explaining the secretive context of its
development in one closed shop. He undoubtably thinks his work was Good.
It is only some readers who are thinking that the Brit is trying to usurp
something. He's not.
I thought the Brit's explanation was helpful for understanding PK beyond the
confusing complexity of the RSA-implementation of it. It does not detract
from
the efforts (or patents) of anyone, that PK has been discovered multiple
times.
------------------------------------------------------------
David Honig Orbit Technology
honig@otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu
"How do you know you are not being deceived?"
---A Compendium of Analytic TradeCraft Notes,
Directorate of Intelligence, CIA
Return to January 1998
Return to “David Honig <honig@otc.net>”
Unknown thread root