Linux crypto killer apllication

[Robert J. Hansen]

Brian Smith wrote:
> It is reasonable to choose to protect a secret for the rest of one's 
> life (~100 years).

You're committing two logical fallacies here: the first is you're 
begging the question, and the second is the assumption of facts not in 
evidence.

This discussion is about tradeoffs, and whether what is to be gained by 
adopting very large keys would be worthwhile given the sacrifices which 
would have to be made.  By saying "it's reasonable to choose to use 
extremely long keys", you're skipping the entire debate and moving 
straight to the conclusion you want to reach, leaving the original 
question unanswered.  Namely: is it worth it?

My crystal ball for the future is very hazy.  That's good news, 
actually.  Everyone's crystal ball is hazy.  I at least know it.

Trying to predict what computing power will be like in 100 years is 
absolute folly.  It's ridiculous.  It's so silly it doesn't deserve to 
be taken seriously.  If, in 1870, you were to ask Charles Babbage to 
prognosticate 100 years into the future for his Analytical Engine, do 
you really think he would have foreseen the internet, distributed 
computation, quantum computers, hypercomputation, the Church-Turing Thesis?

If, in 1935, you were to ask Alonzo Church about the significance of his 
research and where it would take us in 100 years, what do you think he 
would've said?

Saying "it's reasonable to choose to protect personal secrets for 100 
years" is on faulty logical grounds because you _can't_ choose to 
protect secrets for 100 years.  You can't look that far into the future.

100 years from now the world will be unrecognizable to us.  Scientific, 
mathematical and technological advances we haven't even imagined yet 
will be old-hat.  The world of that future will be indistinguishable 
from magic -- and I am at a loss for how anyone can defend against magic.