Slashdot Mirror
Phil Zimmermann Replies To CNet On Biden
A couple of days ago we discussed a CNet article on the tech voting record of Joe Biden, Barack Obama's running mate. Philip Zimmermann, who was mentioned in that piece, sends the following note to set the record straight.
"In his 23 August opinion piece in CNet, Declan McCullagh wrote on Joe Biden's suitability as the Democratic VP nominee, Declan quotes me, creating the impression I criticized Biden for some legislation that Biden introduced in 1991. Declan's quote from me is out of context because it does not make it clear that I never mentioned Biden in my original quote at all when I wrote about Senate Bill 266. Second, Declan's quote is drawn from remarks I wrote in 1999. Declan seems to be trying to draft me in his opposition to Biden, and, by extension, makes it seem as if I am against the Democratic ticket. I take issue with this."
Read below for the rest of Phil's comments.
When someone serves in the Senate for 30 years, we have to judge them by their whole body of work. Much has happened since 1991. I don't know what Biden's position would be today on the issue of encryption, but I would imagine it has changed, because I can't think of any politicians today who would try to roll back our hard-won gains in our right to use strong crypto. In fact, considering the disastrous erosion in our privacy and civil liberties under the current administration, I feel positively nostalgic about Biden's quaint little non-binding resolution of 1991.
Declan's article seems to imply that I would prefer McCain over the Democratic ticket. But McCain's stated policies on wiretapping, the Patriot Act and other policies that undermine privacy and civil liberties are a seamless continuation on the current administration's policies.
When someone serves in the Senate for 30 years, we have to judge them by their whole body of work. Much has happened since 1991. I don't know what Biden's position would be today on the issue of encryption, but I would imagine it has changed, because I can't think of any politicians today who would try to roll back our hard-won gains in our right to use strong crypto. In fact, considering the disastrous erosion in our privacy and civil liberties under the current administration, I feel positively nostalgic about Biden's quaint little non-binding resolution of 1991.
Declan's article seems to imply that I would prefer McCain over the Democratic ticket. But McCain's stated policies on wiretapping, the Patriot Act and other policies that undermine privacy and civil liberties are a seamless continuation on the current administration's policies.
For some reason, Declan thrives on trashing Dem candidates and gaining publicity for it.
Declan was responsible for the media misinterpretation of Al Gore's statement that he "took the initiative in creating the Internet."
McCullagh himself once claimed that "If it's true that Al Gore created the Internet, then I created the 'Al Gore created the Internet' story
that Biden is a shill for the media cartels who also hates encryption and Net Neutrality? To wit: Joe Biden Loves RIAA Biden loves RIAA, FBI tech Biden: Pro-Copyright Friend of RIAA, MPAA
Part of the hardcore faithful who believed in Apple long before it was cool again to do so
Let's compare Democrats and Republicans.
DMCA 1.0 - Repub congress, Dem President (Clinton) signed on gleefully.
DMCA provisions 2.0 (slipped in the various years), about evenly split between repub/dem congresses and repub/dem presidents.
Wiretapping indemnity? Just as much the fault of both sides of the aisle.
Running roughshod over the 1st amendment? Pretty much even. Republicans and Democrats seem to hate that pesky "free speech" thing when their problems are being exposed. "Middle of the Roaders" like Joe LIEberman are friends of censorship-mongers like the Parents' Television Council and Jack "About to lose his law license" Thompson. Democrat and Republican state legislatures and governors alike love to shove protesters into "free speech zones" where they can neither be seen nor heard.
Corruption? McCain takes lobbyist money, and I don't think anyone here doesn't have something to say about him. Obama takes lobbyist money. I lived in Chicago when Obama was connected to the Daly political machine, who make Louisiana corruption like William Jefferson look squeaky clean in comparison. Democrats run dirty tricks, Republicans run dirty tricks, and it doesn't really matter - both parties are dirty.
My question is: would Obama or Biden really be helpful to us? Are McCain and whoever he picks, either? And if not, why not? Because none of us are able to get in their faces and demand they actually represent the people.
But on the whole, I think I have a better shot at affecting the process with McCain in the WH and the Dem opposition in Congress. It beats the hell out of letting one party control all three sections - and that way, I'm reasonably sure at least one of them is working for me, or at least working against the other two that aren't working for me.
From someone who is inherently claiming to appreciate diversity, you seem to lack the understanding that Democrats do not all share the exact same worldview as each other.
Declan's worldview seems to be "Let me make up a whole bunch of shit about other people so I can sell copy/ads without any regard for the truth." If we're to take him as a proper representative of the Libertarians, then the Libertarians deserves to remain a fringe group. (Btw, I don't think we should take Declan as a proper representative of all Libertarians - I know some of them who are capable of making intelligent and honest assessments. Declan swims in similar waters as Ann Coulter.)
Bingo,
The EFF could not sue the government directly before as the government was claiming that all the information was classified.
Now we have the necessary proof that the illegal conduct occurred and that it was authorized by the government officers. That was the objective from the start.
The suits against the telcos are not completely over yet, nor will they be over until the next government takes office. The EFF will continue to litigate them in order to prevent the destruction of the evidence.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Opposing parties in control of different branches seems to be a good thing. When it's a choice of either a little being done through compromise or nothing being done through vitriol, politicians will generally choose the former, if only to claim that they are the ones that can cross the aisle to get things done.
I've said for a long time that I value the role that those on the far right and far left play. They are the anchors for their respective realms that keep the country generally on the right path. We do veer off on occasion, and sometimes badly so, but generally, the US does the right thing, especially when the requirement is that a given party compromise with the other to get a portion of its agenda past.
I don't believe that the Republican platform is the best for the United States, but I agree with some parts of it. Likewise, I don't believe that the Democratic platform is the best for the United States, but I agree with some parts of it. There are members of Congress that I approve of and respect on both sides of the aisle, and sometimes they are in the far corners but they actually believe that they're doing the right thing, and not just being shrill naysayers of those not in their party.
It seems to me that we get the least good done when it's all one party or when the process degenerates to "We're not them!", and the most good done when we are forced to work together. Someone always feels left out in the latter case because their preferred position got cut out of the final deal, but that's how our system -- with or without parties -- was always intended to work.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
Was back in the mid-1980s, when he was beating the drum for protectionism to keep TI and Intel in the DRAM business. His plan was basically to fuck over the entire computer industry to protect two vendors from competitors who were doing a far better job. He's why we had that period of memory prices actually going up for a short while. That's when I decided he was a pig-ignorant, big-government interventionist that we'd all be far better off without.
In the years since then, he's been one of the assholes who promoted the DMCA, he voted for the Iraq war and the Patriot act, (in fact, he bragged quite a bit at the time that the patriot act was based on a similar attack on the bill of rights that he'd written shortly after the Oklahoma City attack.)
So, when faced with his first major decision, the guy spewing all this hogwash about "change we can believe in" chooses an apparatchik who's spent half of his life in the senate, voting for anything that could possible increase the power of the federal government.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Until Obama and other Democratic congress critters gave in to the Bush Administration and telco lobbying this summer, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) outlawed wiretaps without a warrant, and had done for over 30 years. The rules were well-known to the telcos and their attorneys.
Several telcos were asked to break the law by the Bush Administration; one, Qwest, responded by asking for documentation that the request was constitutional. It was not provided, and they did not tap. They were also excluded from certain lucrative federal contracts.
Consider the AT&T Fulsom Street tap: all traffic passing through AT&T's Fulsom Street, SFO CO passed through a splitter into a room controlled by the Feds. Consider that an individual unwarranted wiretap has a $1500 penalty, and multiply that by the number of customers whose traffic they carry in a day.
Why do you think the telcos lobbied for immunity?
Why are they paying for the Democratic convention in Denver?
And what of Obama's support for illegal wiretapping indemnity?!?
Right! As you so astutely observe, there's absolutely no difference between caving in to an authoritarian policy when under intense political pressure and drafting said policies with the plan of getting them passed via creating said political pressure.
Rock Us, Dukakis.
I've read enough of your police state + compromise with Islam crap in the UK and I can see that it is absolute crap. You can turn London into Al London if you like, but I prefer Washington DC to stay Washington DC, and if the Muzzies don't like it, then fuck them. They've already shit up their own part of the world and can't even put together a meaningful economy despite loads of oil money, and we're supposed to adopt elements of that failed culture?
Get real.
The economy of their part of the world was "shit up" by an elite few, usually backed by larger richer nations, often the United States. That's one of the reasons that terrorists exist at all. Poverty and a perception of exploitation and disdain from America creates terrorists. For every terrorist killed in Iraq, we're making 10 more who will show up in 10-30 years. Doing smaller, targeted, not publicized operations is the only military option than would actually make progress.
If or when the Chinese start to call in their debts on America and the economy here starts to tank on a level that makes the current downturn seem laughable, idiots here will start taking up the same sort of views that idiots in say, Iran, have now. If an American terrorist group attacked China and blew up a building, and the Chinese in response occupied the western United States, you and your buddies, along with a lot of other poorly educated, quick tempered people will be motivated to become terrorists yourselves. Then maybe you'll have a more nuanced perspective on today's radical Islam.
"I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
Only one major corporation refused to go along with Bush's little wiretapping plan, Qwest. The CEO of Qwest, at that time, just happens to be in jail now (theoretically for a backdating scandal). During his trial and in his counter suit he claimed not only that he was being punished for not cooperating with the Patriot Act, but that the wire tapping system was being implemented by NSA 7 months before 9/11.
Most people dismissed his claims assuming he was grasping at straws, trying to stay out of jail. But employees at several other telcos have confirmed his story.
did you miss the legislation that almost passed between '92 and '94?
There was one piece of legislation you should be referring to theOmnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993. Which was fiscal responsibility at it's core, as it included both tax increases and spending decreases. It can be directly traced to the balanced budget as you can see in this 1998 CBO report 'WHAT CAUSED THE 1998 SURPLUS?--CBO'S EXPLANATION'. You might find that the effect of the Republican congresses was a gain of 11 billion in spending. Many such as yourself actually credit legislative gridlock with the budget surplus, when in reality it was this really tough bill which produced the surplus. I'll agree that the top end was a little high, but it did the trick, until Bush got in office and decided to finish his Dad's war, while putting money in his supporter's pockets.
I blame the Republicans for not scaling back wasteful government programs when they had the chance...Now if you're willing to take your blinders off and have an informed conversation, we can do that.
I submit to you, that you, sir, are the one with blinders. They never take the chances they have to reduce spending, or balance the budget, or build nuclear power plants, or reduce foreign oil. For all their talk about government being the problem rather than the solution Republican's sure do love to add federal jobs and contracts (especially contracts). Even Roe v. Wade is still law even though there should be a supreme court which would overturn it in a second. The fact that every couple of years, they keep fooling people into believing the same platform they couldn't (or maybe wouldn't) deliver on, is amazing. The fact that people such as yourself continue to spout out Republican Lore as if it's the truth would be funny, if it weren't for the seriousness of the problems we face.
The grass is only greener, if you don't take care of your own lawn.