Neal Stephenson responds with wit and humor (2004)

Neal Stephenson contends that hacking tools will not be protected by the U.S. Second Amendment, arguing that the Founding Fathers envisioned flintlocks, not code, and that courts would likely deem code non-weaponizable. He cites Matt Blaze to frame the issue as a First Amendment matter and advocates public vulnerability disclosure. Stephenson dismisses criticism that science-fiction writers lack literary respect, noting that genre authors are often undervalued by mainstream literary circles.