11–20 of 275 posts
So any crypto researcher, in the USA, must be able to also defeat their own 2 channel crypto?
Also, since government compensation is listed, how does that work with intractable cryptanalysis of said work?
Feinstein is just the worst. She is the equivalent of Mitch McConnell for the Democrats. She fully understands exactly what she's proposing and she's the biggest hypocrite for it.
I really think this country would be better off if CA and TX were not allowed representation in the Senate (and I say this as a Texan).
What's the probability of this bill actually becoming law?
I think activism against it will matter a great deal. It should be close to SOPA-levels or even greater to be sure we can stop it. That said, as it is, I think things are like this: - House majority will not support it, unless it's dramatically watered down (The House has been quite privacy-friendly/anti-backdoors lately). However, that could still be bad news for us, if say they only demand large companies to never…
They still do not understand that it's not possible to force criminals to use government-approved encryption software. Criminals can write their own encryption.
The sooner we voice up and vote out those who support such unreasonable laws, the sooner we can progress as a society towards finding the right ways to keep each other safe.
Does anyone know if there is a list of representatives showing their positions on this bill?
Feinstein is just the worst. She is the equivalent of Mitch McConnell for the Democrats. She fully understands exactly what she's proposing and she's the biggest hypocrite for it.
If it's just Feinstein and Burr, they can keep dreaming, but I imagine there are a few more.
What are we going to do a out it? Maybe Wikipedia or Google will deface their own websites, and the bill will die only to resurrect shortly after.
A better solution would be for the millions of tech workers to unite and vote GOP just to send a message that we don't automatically vote for anyone or any party.
If California's vote is locked for a certain party, then it is taken for granted.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think activism against it will matter a great deal. It should be close to SOPA-levels or even greater to be sure we can stop it. That said, as it is, I think things are like this: - House majority will not support it, unless it's dramatically watered down (The House has been quite privacy-friendly/anti-backdoors lately). However, that could still be bad news for us, if say they only demand large companies to never…
Yeah I don't think Obama is neutral. He says the same thing as this bill. He says he "supports strong encryption", and says criminals should not be able to hide their digital communications from government. They still do not understand that it's not possible to force criminals to use government-approved encryption software. Criminals can write their own encryption. The sooner we voice up and vote out those who suppor…
I think in this instance this is a case of you assuming ignorance where malice is far more likely. Looking at the comprehensive mass surveillance of, well, everyone (by the NSA et al), I think the point here is to further the goal of population control i.e. they don't care about criminals who would write their own, they just want always-on access to everyone.
Tech workers should support senators like Wyden or R. Paul and take steps to really knock down Feinsteins or Burrs.
Feinstein is just the worst. She is the equivalent of Mitch McConnell for the Democrats. She fully understands exactly what she's proposing and she's the biggest hypocrite for it.
Will they simply be held in contempt of court until they finish brute forcing an encryption key at the heat death of the Universe?