The person I was replying to did not. But he has weighed in on the matter. From https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/12/my_priorities...: "Under a Clinton administration, my list would have looked much the same. Trump's election just means the threats will be much greater, and the battles a lot harder to win. It's more than I can possibly do on my own, and I am therefore substantially increasing my annual philanthropy to support organizations like EPIC, EFF, ACLU, and Access Now in continuing their work in these areas.
My agenda is necessarily focused entirely on my particular areas of concern. The risks of a Trump presidency are far more pernicious, but this is where I have expertise and influence."
> I really like Schneier and while i'm pretty sure of his political leanings, he doesn't seem to be the type of guy that would abandon his love of logic and reason for some political temper tantrums.
The person I was replying to did not. But he has weighed in on the matter. From https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/12/my_priorities...: "Under a Clinton administration, my list would have looked much the same. Trump's election just means the threats will be much greater, and the battles a lot harder to win. It's more than I can possibly do on my own, and I am therefore substantially increasing my annual philanthropy to support organizations like EPIC, EFF, ACLU, and Access Now in continuing their work in these areas.
My agenda is necessarily focused entirely on my particular areas of concern. The risks of a Trump presidency are far more pernicious, but this is where I have expertise and influence."
> I really like Schneier and while i'm pretty sure of his political leanings, he doesn't seem to be the type of guy that would abandon his love of logic and reason for some political temper tantrums.
You're right, he doesn't. That's my point.