Re:Email privacy bill unanimously passes U.S. House
by rhizome on Thursday April 28, 2016 @11:06PM
(#11593531)
You're implying that there has been a vote on F-B at some point so far.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Email privacy bill unanimously passes U.S. House
by studentrob on Thursday April 28, 2016 @11:29PM
(#11593601)
Nope, I'm not. Congressmen discuss bills with each other before releasing. They usually won't come out with something unless there's some support. Obama's been asking for this legislation since Cyrus Vance's whitepaper in November 2015 [1]
For further play-by-play you can skim the white house daily briefings for references to encryption and/or feinstein over the last few months [2].
[1] https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/pubrelease/dont-panic/DA_Repor...
[2] https://encrypted.google.com/search?safe=off&q=encryption+fe...
Re:Email privacy bill unanimously passes U.S. House
by rhizome on Saturday April 30, 2016 @03:02PM
(#11603042)
If all of this inside-baseball is what's underpinning your point, then "wouldn't give" is indeed doing a lot of work in your original statement.
Re:Email privacy bill unanimously passes U.S. House
by studentrob on Saturday April 30, 2016 @08:00PM
(#11604218)
Oh brother. It was shorthand. Sorry if you didn't get my meaning at first but I think you get my point now.