Podcasts about professor mcconnell

Joshua Brandon Holden, the author of The Mathematics of Secrets, Cryptography from Caesar Ciphers to Digital Encryption, graduated with a degree in pure math and went on to teach at the University of Massachusetts and Duke. He discovered that he was spending most of his time on teaching, so he sought jobs where they would reward teaching. He then worked at the Rose Hulman Institute of Technology, where he did both teaching and research.  Common Misconceptions about Cryptography Joshua discusses common misconceptions about cryptography and its connection to the internet. He explains that people often knew about cryptography in ancient times but don't know about the throughline. Older theories of cryptography were implicitly mathematical but not explicitly, while new theories are very explicitly mathematical. Joshua aims to open up the connection between older forms of cryptography and the new ones, stating that everyone has some ability to do all of it in varying amounts. He talks about the current state of cryptography online, including public key cryptography, which originated in the 70s and gained popularity in the 90s with internet commerce. Public key cryptography allows users to send secret messages through a one-way key, which is only decrypted by the sender who has a different key. This is important for sending credit card information to companies like Amazon or Walmart. However, end-to-end encryption means middlemen are no longer able to decrypt messages, so it's crucial to look carefully at providers' policies to determine if they stay in the loop. Joshua talks about the networks and relationships within the cryptography field, including the opportunities for professionals to work in private camps, government agencies, and academia. He notes that while there is money and space in the field, there is also a lot of space for professionals to stay updated on the latest theories and developments. Quantum Computers in Cryptography The conversation turns to the potential of quantum computers in cryptography and the potential for breaking encryption systems. He believes that quantum computers are expected to be better at breaking the problems used in creating mathematical problems used in special public key systems, such as encryption used by browsers to protect credit card information and communications. He also discusses the development of quantum resistant cryptography, which is a more complex system but the basic principles of quantum resistance systems are still relatively graspable for anyone with high school algebra and a willingness to dig deep. By applying enough computing power to end-to-end encryption systems, it is possible to break them. The only way to achieve perfect secrecy is to have a secret key, which is as long as the conversation. This method was supposedly used for the famous red phone between the White House and the Kremlin during the Cold War. Keeping Your Data Safe In terms of security, Joshua advises people to know their threat model and consider the potential threats they face. Some people may worry about powerful governments trying to break their communications, while others may be concerned about corporate spies, children, or random people passing by. For those worried about corporate espionage, it is recommended to look for end-to-end encryption systems. While quantum computers may not be easy to break, they do not guarantee that someone can't break the system with enough computing power. Class Field Towers Explained Joshua talks about his research in the field of mathematics, specifically in the area of class field towers. He explains why imaginary numbers are not square roots but rather arbitrary choices. He also discusses the concept of Galois groups, which track the number of ways complex numbers can be shuffled around without making a difference. He explains that class field towers consist of rational numbers, real numbers with irrational decimals, and complex numbers on top of them. These towers record the complexity of each jump made in the tower.  Joshua talks about the role of computers in mathematical research, stating that there is more computer usage in this area due to improved software tools and more applications in cryptography. He identifies two traits that are most useful for being successful in mathematical research: perseverance and curiosity. Perseverance is the reason most people persist. In graduate school or postgraduate school, those who stick with their passion and interest in math may be more likely to succeed in mathematical research. He encourages students to not give up on problems that require a different kind of math, even if it's not necessary for their career. He believes that having a sense of curiosity about everything comes from the fact that in mathematics, all one needs is to  just think hard about things and talk to others. This gives one a sense of confidence that they can figure things out without the need for special abilities or tools. Influential Harvard Professors and Courses Joshua mentions Math 25, an honors calculus course. He also enjoyed Professor McConnell, who he still maintains a friendship with. He also shares his experience with changing his name, which was the first of his non-professional wanderings.  Timestamps: 04:33 Cryptography and its applications in online security 11:57 Cryptography, public key systems, and quantum computing 21:07 Encryption, mathematics, and data security 27:49 Mathematical research and talent 33:41 Math education, career choices, and personal growth Links: Website: https://wordpress.rose-hulman.edu/holden/the-mathematics-of-secrets/

The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". This panel discussed "Federal Consent Decrees: Good Governance, an Expansion of Federal Power, or Both?"In a 1987 article entitled Why Hold Elections?, Professor Michael McConnell noted a trend that had been emerging since the 1970s: the use of consent decrees to settle federal lawsuits against state and local governments. These decrees are entered as judgements enforceable by contempt, but without full litigation. Nonetheless, these decrees often contain hundreds of requirements that dictate the policies, budgets, and personnel of local government agencies for years or even decades. Professor McConnell thus warned: "To the extent that consent decrees insulate today's policy decisions from review and modification by tomorrow's political processes, they violate the democratic structure of government. They should be repudiated before they become a common part of the legal landscape." In 2018, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a memo noting that consent decrees "raise sensitive federalism concerns" and announcing a new set of policies governing (and limiting) DOJ’s use of consent decrees. In April 2021, Attorney General Garland repudiated the Sessions memo, stating that the "Department will return to the traditional process that allows the heads of litigating components to approve most settlement agreements, consent decrees, and the use of monitors in cases involving state and local governmental entities."This panel will explore the important topic of federal court consent decrees to settle claims against state and local governments. Panelists will explore the history of such decrees and the arguments for and against their use. Panelists will also discuss the dueling approaches to DOJ’s use of such decrees, as outlined in the Sessions and Garland memos.Featuring:Mr. Andrew McCarthy, Senior Fellow, National Review Institute; Contributing Editor, National ReviewMr. Jesse Panuccio, Partner, Boies Schiller Flexner LLP; Former Acting Associate Attorney General, U.S. Department of JusticeProf. Robert Percival, Robert F. Stanton Professor of Law; Director of the Environmental Law Program, University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of LawMr. Benjamin S. Wolf, Former Legal Director and Institutional Reform Project Director, ACLU of IllinoisModerator: Hon. Elizabeth “Lisa” Branch, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

The House of Representatives voted to impeach President Trump for a second time this week, with a vote of 232 in favor, 197 against, and 4 not voting. Prior to the vote, host Jeffrey Rosen sat down with two experts on the Constitution and presidential power—Cristina Rodriguez of Yale Law School and Michael McConnell of Stanford Law School. They shared their thoughts on the article of impeachment passed by the House; the charge against President Trump of incitement of insurrection in the wake of the mob invasion of the U.S. Capitol; the meaning of high crimes and misdemeanors under the Impeachment Clause; if Section 3 of the 14th Amendment should be invoked to disqualify President Trump from holding office again; how the current media and information landscape may have contributed to polarization and events culminating in the riot; what reforms might help; and more. Professor McConnell is the author of the new book The President Who Would Not be King, and professor Rodriguez is the co-author, with Adam Cox, of The President and Immigration Law. Additional resources and transcripts available at constitutioncenter.org/constitution/media-library Questions or comments about the podcast? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org.

The House of Representatives voted to impeach President Trump for a second time this week, with a vote of 232 in favor, 197 against, and 4 not voting. Prior to the vote, host Jeffrey Rosen sat down with two experts on the Constitution and presidential power—Cristina Rodriguez of Yale Law School and Michael McConnell of Stanford Law School. They shared their thoughts on the article of impeachment passed by the House; the charge against President Trump of incitement of insurrection in the wake of the mob invasion of the U.S. Capitol; the meaning of high crimes and misdemeanors under the Impeachment Clause; if Section 3 of the 14th Amendment should be invoked to disqualify President Trump from holding office again; how the current media and information landscape may have contributed to polarization and events culminating in the riot; what reforms might help; and more. Professor McConnell is the author of the new book The President Who Would Not be King, and professor Rodriguez is the co-author, with Adam Cox, of The President and Immigration Law. Additional resources and transcripts available at constitutioncenter.org/constitution/media-library Questions or comments about the podcast? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org.

How and when should Christians engage, as Christians, in the public square? When it is appropriate to use specifically religious arguments on questions of public policy? What is the effect on the church? Professor McConnell will offer very tentative thoughts about how to negotiate these difficult questions.Michael W. McConnell is the Richard and Frances Mallery Professor and Director of the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford Law School, and a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution. From 2002 to the summer of 2009, he served as a Circuit Judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. McConnell has held chaired professorships at the University of Chicago and the University of Utah, and visiting professorships at Harvard and NYU. He has published widely in the fields of constitutional law and theory, especially church and state, equal protection, and the founding. In the past decade, his work has been cited in opinions of the Supreme Court second most often of any legal scholar. He is co-editor of three books: Religion and the Law, Christian Perspectives on Legal Thought, and The Constitution of the United States. McConnell has argued fifteen cases in the Supreme Court. He served as law clerk to Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. and is Of Counsel to the appellate practice of Kirkland & Ellis.

Many secularists argue that the First Amendment prohibition on the establishment of religion is a guarantee of a purely secular public square, requiring the exclusion of religious voices and institutions. Some religious people respond in kind, by opposing the separation between church and state. Professor McConnell will argue that both are wrong. Church-state separation originated in Protestant Christian teaching, was promoted by the most evangelical sects in America at the founding, and rests on Christian theological principles. Michael W. McConnell is the Richard and Frances Mallery Professor and Director of the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford Law School, and a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution. From 2002 to the summer of 2009, he served as a Circuit Judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. McConnell has held chaired professorships at the University of Chicago and the University of Utah, and visiting professorships at Harvard and NYU. He has published widely in the fields of constitutional law and theory, especially church and state, equal protection, and the founding. In the past decade, his work has been cited in opinions of the Supreme Court second most often of any legal scholar. He is co-editor of three books: Religion and the Law, Christian Perspectives on Legal Thought, and The Constitution of the United States. McConnell has argued fifteen cases in the Supreme Court. He served as law clerk to Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. and is Of Counsel to the appellate practice of Kirkland & Ellis.

-- Michael McConnell, Mallory Professor of Law, Stanford Law School and Director of the Stanford Constitutional Law Center Among the many rights and freedoms that Americans enjoy, what is the correct Constitutional status of the right of religious freedom? Is it a right that should have priority over other rights and as such is a "first freedom"? Or is it a right equal to other rights? These questions are at the heart of the current national debate over religious freedom, contraception, and the new federal health care law. Professor McConnell, one of the leading Constitutional theorists on religious freedom, will address such questions and more in a talk especially keyed to our times.

Just before the opening of the new term of the U. S. Supreme Court, the magazine First Things published a summary of the highlights of the 2010 term. The article was called “A Free Speech Year at the Court,” and it was written by Michael McConnell, director of the Constitutional Law Center at the Stanford Law School. On this edition of Dialogues, Professor McConnell talks with host Ken Myers about how the Court is increasingly collapsing all First Amendment freedoms into freedom of speech, a trend he finds disturbing.

In this chapter of Darwin or Design, I talk with Dean Donald McConnell of Trinity Law School. We talk about ID, Creationism and the Law. Professor McConnell practiced real estate litigation with the firm of Harbin & Frost. previously he was with Baker, Hostetler, McCutchen, Black, where he practiced personal injury defense and commercial shipping litigation, including representation of Underwriters of Lloyds of London defending their insured companies and vessels. Professor McConnell has taught at Trinity Law School since 1988. He is a past recipient of the Teacher of the Year Award. Professor McConnell teaches Legal Institutions and Values.