re: Chutzpah! FBI Calls Privacy Extremists Elitist

>Addressing a workshop on how far society should go in trading off
>privacy for effective law enforcement, McDonald said privacy activists
>had fought any balance in proposed encryption legislation.

> ... Extreme privacy
>positions were ultimately elitist and nondemocratic in that they
>presumed the views of a knowing privacy cognoscenti should pre-empt
>the views of the nation's elected officials and the Supreme Court,
>McDonald said.

This reminds me of the state legislature that tried to change the
value of pi to something simpler in order to help students
struggling with their homework. Fortunately, someone had the
good sense to bring in a "knowing mathematics cognoscenti" to
pound some sense into the politicians.

>Extremists presumed that the citizens could not trust the elected
>government and the Supreme Court to make decisions or to correct
>mistakes if any are made, McDonald said.

Where is Thomas Jefferson when you really need him?

Martin Minow
minow@apple.com

On Fri, 26 Sep 1997, Martin Minow wrote:
> 
> This reminds me of the state legislature that tried to change the
> value of pi to something simpler in order to help students
> struggling with their homework. Fortunately, someone had the
> good sense to bring in a "knowing mathematics cognoscenti" to
> pound some sense into the politicians.

The University of California, now prohibited from making race a factor in
the admissions process, is currently proposing to ignore SAT scores
altogether to improve minority enrollmnent...

--Lucky

Re: Pi.... 

I believe the enlightened Legislator who attempted to legislate Pi was
none other than Jesse Helms (although this could be a legislative
myth!) and when Ol'Jesse proposed it (because he was "sick of all these
egg-heads with their big numbers") John Glenn said something on the
order of ' if your legislation passes Senator, I wouldn't want to
driver over any bridges in your state!'

But more to the point, this is more of the divide and conquer strategy
that worked so well for the Reagan-era republicans.  Ridicule what you
wish to destroy, give no quarter to other opinion, and repeat a lie so
often that it becomes the truth.  Nothing new here.  "We" just have
yet to get organized enough to use the same tactic in return and for
the moment Freeh & Co. have much more reliable and regular access to
the mainstream press who are willing to print whatever they say.


What we need, really, is a good advertising agency...


_DHMS


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David HM Spector                                         spector@zeitgeist.com
Network Design & Infrastructure Security                 voice: +1 212.580.7193
Amateur Radio: W2DHM (ex-N2BCA) (ARRL life member)       GridSquare: FN30AS
-.-. --- -. -. . -.-. -  .-- .. - ....  .- -- .- - . ..- .-.  .-. .- -.. .. ---
"New and stirring things are belittled because if they are not belittled, 
the humiliating question arises, 'Why then are you not taking part in them?'"
                                                        --H. G. Wells

At 12:18 AM -0700 9/26/97, I wrote:
>> ... Extreme privacy
>>positions were ultimately elitist and nondemocratic in that they
>>presumed the views of a knowing privacy cognoscenti should pre-empt
>>the views of the nation's elected officials and the Supreme Court,
>>McDonald said.
>
>This reminds me of the state legislature that tried to change the
>value of pi to something simpler in order to help students
>struggling with their homework.

Before we go too far down the "stupid politicians" path, I would
like to clarify what I was attempting to say.

Cryptography is mathematics; it exists in the real world. Legislating
against cryptography will, ultimately, be as effective as changing
the value of pi by legislation or passing a Papal edict that the
the earth is the center of the universe. Pass whatever edict you please:
"and, yet it moves."

Martin Minow
minow@apple.com