Rare condition incompatibility of public key

[Robert J. Hansen]

John W. Moore III wrote:
> "Bring them to rationality slowly & infinitesimally?"  I'd rather hit My
> thumb with a hammer.  Frustration relief is more easily accomplished.

Agreed.

> Discussions of 'Trust' rank up there with those surrounding Sex,
> Religion & Politics; as soon as views on Trust are introduced a
> subjective minefield has been entered.  As soon as beliefs are
> challenged the other party lays their ears back and closes their mind.

Agreed.

> I am reminded of the ancient axiom "A man convinced against His will
> remains unchanged forever still."

Agreed.

This is why I believe in the "small doses" approach: over time, they get
the idea that they're changing their own minds.

There's a thoroughly mediocre movie, _The Way of the Gun_, which has a
scene in which two criminals talking with each other sum up my basic
view of human nature:



Longbaugh: But, you know, then you got the other side [of the cops and
       robbers equation]: these trigger-happy [expletive] all about the
       shooting and posturing and "you don't know who I am" kind of
       thing, the "I been to prison..."

Sarno: Yeah, because you got _caught_, you dumb --

Longbaugh: These days, it's almost like they want to be criminals more
       than they want to commit crime!

Sarno: Well, that's... that's not just crime, you know.  That's the way
       of the world.


... There are a lot of people in the world who want to be seen as smart,
savvy people who know how to keep their communications secure from
unwarranted intrusion.  There are a lot fewer people who want to make
the investment of time and effort required to actually _be_ smart, savvy
people who know how to keep their communications secure from unwarranted
intrusion.

I find that learning how to tell the two apart is extraordinarily useful.