--- begin forwarded text
Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 23:10:32 -0400
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 04:10:29 +0100 (MET)
From: Ray Hirschfeld [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: FC00 update
Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Resent-Sender: [EMAIL
http://speechbot.research.compaq.com/
The "transcript" that is output by the speech recognition software
(and shown in small extracts on the Results and Details pages) rarely
matches what was spoken exactly, and often often does not read very
well. Because different people speak at
Original Message
Subject: The title you wanted is "In Print"
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 02:35:31 -0800
From: "Fatbrain.com New Title Notifications" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dear Keep Me Posted subscriber your email address here
It's here!
Rethinking Public Key Infrastructures and
It would be one thing if this law (enacted in 1950) restricted government
employees or contractors from disclosing cryptographic or COMINT info they
agreed to keep secret. But it seems to apply to anyone, including
journalists or cypherpunks, no matter how they obtained the data. That
raises
I beleive Justice Douglas made mention of this law in the Pentagon
Papers case as well, though the US did not bring this up in their case
agaisnt the Times Post.
Declan McCullagh wrote:
It would be one thing if this law (enacted in 1950) restricted government
employees or contractors from
