🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <894.517.uupcb@grapevine.lrk.ar.us> john.eichler@grapevine.lrk.ar.us (John Eichler)  writes:
>Theoretically this is wrong also.  If you've ever read any of Wiener's books
>on Cybernetics or know about the theory of control, any machine or organism
>derives its control through the use of feedback mechanisms.  I'm fully
>convinced and have been for years that one of the reasons that 'surprises'
>(implications expected at this point) happen in various government agencies is
>that such a feedback mechanism does not exist.
	What does a guy working for the NSA have to gain by
	participating in a free and open discussion like this except possible
	trouble with his boss?  You show an amazing naivete about how our
	government security apparatus works.	

>I have the sneaking suspicion that many of the government agencies feel that
>they know exactly what opinions the rest of us have and hence they have no
>reason to do any feedback.
	How charitable.  I have a sneaking suspicion they don't care.
	
>Perhaps they even regard this message as just so much noise with no 
>signal contained therein.
	Well, they can't always be wrong. ;-)

>AS long as the participants in such discussion would not flame I sincerely
>believe that something good can result for all parties.
	Why shouldn't we flame if they say something flammable?  Why
	should they be any more flame proof than you or I?  Because 
	they might get their bureaucratic hearts broken when they realize
	that a free people often disagree vigorously with the
	agents of their government? WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT.  THE NSA, 
	FBI, and the entire litany of 3 character alphabet soups are 
	OUR SERVANTS NOT OUR MASTERS.
	

>Wouldn't it be great is someday a message came across this channel that said,
>"My name is Sergeant O'Malley and the NSA has authorized me to answer some of
>your questions concerning public key cryptography provided that neither the
>question or answer affects U.S. security concerns."  They may ignore
>everything being said but wouldn't that be great for everyone on this
>newsgroup?  Especially today when so many people have great mistrust of our
>government as has been shown through repeated polls.
	You expect this from the organization that won't permit export
	of the unix password program because of "security concerns"?
	Do you know what kind of bureaucratic schlerosis we are dealing
	with here?  Have you not a clue to how totally out of touch those
	folks are?  They are the laughing stock of computer professionals
	because of this one fact.  They are a serious threat to American
	commercial competitiveness because of some of their less laughable
	mistakes.

	I am appalled at the level of trust and naive sympathy for the
	government security apparatus that I have seen in this discussion.
	I am beginning to doubt that Americans deserve what little freedom
	remains in their possession.


							smg