15648

神经网络昆斯林的新闻组分类2006

Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!magnesium.club.cc.cmu.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!news.service.uci.edu!beckman.com!dsg4.dse.beckman.com!a_rubin
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: Screw the people, crypto is for hard-core hackers & spooks only
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail] (Arthur Rubin)
Date: 21 Apr 93 22:42:20 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> 
 <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: Beckman Instruments, Inc.
Nntp-Posting-Host: dsg4.dse.beckman.com
Lines: 24

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John F Carr) writes:

>In most cases information you come by properly is yours to use as you wish,
>but there are certainly exceptions.  If you write a paper which includes
>sufficiently detailed information on how to build a nuclear weapon, it is
>classified.  As I understand the law, nuclear weapons design is
>_automatically_ classified even if you do the work yourself.  I believe you
>are then not allowed to read your own paper.

This has now been thrown out by the courts.  (The "Progressive" case.)

>A less serious example: if you tell drivers about a speed trap they are
>about to run into, you can be fined, even though you might argue that you
>broke no law when you discovered the location of the policeman.  The charge
>is interfering with a police officer, which is quite similar what you would
>be doing by reverse engineering the Clipper chip.

This is outright illegal.  It DOES violate the first amendment.  If you
would, give a case in which your "speed trap" example has been upheld by
the courts.
--
Arthur L. Rubin: [e-mail] (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea
[e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] (personal)
My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer.