131–140 of 494 posts
Mr. GRAHAM, Mr. BLUMENTHAL, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. DURBIN, Mrs. HYDE-SMITH, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mr. HAWLEY, Ms. CORTEZ MASTO, Mr. TILLIS, Ms. HASSAN, Ms. ERNST, Mr. WARNER, Ms. MURKOWSKI, Mr. WHITEHOUSE, Ms. COLLINS, Ms. HIRONO, Mr. CRUZ, Mr. RUBIO, Mr. CORNYN, and Mr. KENNEDY Article understated things by calling it a "group" of senators. That's a lot of senators already willing to get this thing off the ground.
I find myself consistently disappointed when reading blog posts like this. I generally agree with the principles that the EFF advocates for, but it's hard to see this post as anything other than rage-bait. I can't trust it to be an accurate source of information on what this bill actually does. For example, I've repeatedly seen claims that this bill would effectively outlaw end-to-end encryption, but the bill explici…
I'm so tired. I wish we didn't have to keep going through constant attacks on our privacy. I know they're hoping that people will give up after a point out of weariness, and I'm afraid when it comes to many people they're right.
I feel like we just have to hold out for another couple of decades - until there aren't any boomers left in government. This whole clusterfuck is a result of old people not knowing their ass from a pihole.
As I've said before, complaining about privacy will only take you so far because the issues are too abstract for many people. While right-wing attacks on abortion and contraception may seem irrelevant to tech issues, they also attack the legal basis for privacy, which is not explicitly written into the US constitution. It'd be wise to focus a little less on individual bills and a little more on the broader strategic…
As if the "intelligence community" that ran Jeffrey Epstein is going to use their shiny new surveillance powers to eradicate pedophilia.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, what quantifiable benefit is the public gaining from the EFF? Do you know where your money goes? Does what they publish reach anybody new? Or is it just preaching to the choir?
Can't give up like this. If there is anything I have learned is that persistence will eventually pay off. Louis Rossmann [1] has been fighting the good fight for right to repair for so many years and while it isn't quite there yet and there have been lots of downs, there have also been lots of ups [2]. Nothing's infallible. [1] https://www.youtube.com/@rossmanngroup [2] https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/11/apple-an…
E.g., I stopped giving money to Mozilla because I was dissatisfied by where that money was going, what it wasn't being spent on, what it was being spent on instead, and how ineffective they were.
Great that Rossmann got results, but is the methodology that the EFF is using the same as what Rossmann has used? Is it even an appropriate comparison when one is a threat from government, and the other is a matter of anti-consumer ethics with corps?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I met her at an SVLG dinner and had a discussion about encryption; it became instantly clear she doesn’t know what a computer is past that it is a TV that takes input, and that encryption is just “evil people wanting to do evil things.” There was no reasoning with her either, frankly because she is well-aged, and thus thinks herself “wise” with very little left to learn. It was honestly infuriating. [edit] In case an…
Everyone should watch these two hearings: https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/hearings/open-hearing-fi... https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/hearings/open-hearing-fi... Feinstein shows her true colors. The first is 2013, right after Snowden leaked the presidential surveillance program. These are our elected officials who oversaw the program. They knew of its existence before the leak. The second is 2017, right after…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I met her at an SVLG dinner and had a discussion about encryption; it became instantly clear she doesn’t know what a computer is past that it is a TV that takes input, and that encryption is just “evil people wanting to do evil things.” There was no reasoning with her either, frankly because she is well-aged, and thus thinks herself “wise” with very little left to learn. It was honestly infuriating. [edit] In case an…
I met her in 2003, along with her aides at a party I was invited to (in a fluke) in Palm Springs. She was a moron then, and now she's a senile moron. Her aides, who ended up hanging out with me all weekend, were a perfect illustration of the donor class kids who weren't that smart but got into ivy League schools by legacy admissions. Zero intellectual curiosity, super aware of social status, everything they said seem…
and I know many people her age that have
there’s people that make excuses for it and there’s people that don’t. I don’t buy “brain plasticity”, my observation is that it comes down to who your peers are, what social consequences you have
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do Kentuckians keep re-electing Mitch McConnell?
That makes more sense to me than Feinstein really. He looks after wealthy Kentucky interests, and is a very powerful senator shaping policy for the whole Republican Party; Feinstein seems unaware of Silicon Valley’s interests and basically votes along party lines.
I think it is more accurate to say that both of them have transitioned into iconic status. The political/marketing machinations have lofted their identities so high that it barely matters that they are humans at all. They are brands. There is also the basic senate rules mentioned elsewhere, which institutionalize seniority.
Look at the list of longest serving US senators and ask yourself if Feinstein is really an anomaly:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_members_of_the_United_...
Edit to add: remember when we used to have this conversation about Strom Thurmond or Robert Byrd? It's idiomatic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because she's not a Republican, and competitive primaries for long-time incumbents are often political suicide for the challenger. Voters have a poor set of choices and select the least bad.
California uses "jungle primaries" where the top two vote getters regardless of party advance to the general election. You can't blame the two-party system here, voters could easily choose another Democrat if that's what they wanted.
I mean, sure, if the democratic vote was a monolith that was capable of making a single choice or even knowing what its own choices would be we could say that it must be this way because people want it like this. Rather than it being yet another consequence of antiquated voting systems incrementally improving while claiming all the hard work is already done
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even among the dinosaurs in the US Senate, Feinstein stands alone in her striking ability to be willfully ignorant about anything developed after the steam locomotive. The country would be an objectively better place if both the House and Senate had a mandatory retirement age.
I think the reasoning behind not having an age cap in Congress is that if the people want to elect someone who is old, they should be able to do so. The ultimate check in a democratic society is the people, and like a different commenter said, it's strange that the voters of California continue to vote for Feinstein.
If that were true, why aren't we allowed to elect someone younger than 30?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_candidacy_laws_in_the_U...
"United States Senator:
Minimum age: 30"