@LizaGoitein Nope. It's carved out on both, which is one of 10 reasons to believe they'll use it. @JohnWonderlich
@HarleyGeiger Do you agree it would be far mroe effective to say "no corporate identifier" @LizaGoitein @SeanVitka @JohnWonderlich
-
-
@emptywheel@LizaGoitein@SeanVitka@JohnWonderlich Effective, sure. Impossible for security & political reasons, definitely. -
@HarleyGeiger I mean it's ok. If you've determined it is impossible to end bulk, just admit that.@LizaGoitein@SeanVitka@JohnWonderlich -
@emptywheel@LizaGoitein@SeanVitka@JohnWonderlich Again, they named ECS in nonexclusive clause that should encompass large financial inst. -
@HarleyGeiger But if you're so confident, change transparency provisions to avoid THAT carve out@LizaGoitein@SeanVitka@JohnWonderlich -
@emptywheel@HarleyGeiger@SeanVitka@JohnWonderlich Anything can be abused. This would end bulk collection if faithfully implemented. -
@LizaGoitein It wouldn't. We're talking abt sustaining known programs under carved out language@HarleyGeiger@SeanVitka@JohnWonderlich
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.