The intent, I think, is to keep you from *accidentally* leaving the
unencrypted text around. Obviously if you run it in something like
"script" you can save the output.
> There's a senseless (IMHO) law that you can't listen in on
> people's cel-phone conversations. The reason it's senseless is that
> [kinda like gun control] only the good guys will comply. It gives
> the end user (here the cel-phone customer) a false sense of security.
It's interesting to note that police can arrest you for what you say over
the cell-phone that someone else heard, as long as they weren't
*intentionally* listening for you. Bleh.
> We've been putting a lot of value on privacy here in the US
> lately. I'll have to go back and re-read the constitution, but I
> don't think we're guaranteed a right to privacy. Freedom of speech,
Depends on which constitution. Don't forget we have 51 of them if not more.
Many states have explicit rights to privacy in their constitutions.
--Darren
(This is drifting far from the newsgroup charter. Think about where you
reply to.)