Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

It's not the WaPo, it’s the anonymous sources trying to send a message. Or maybe Amazon, which is really good at killing strong privacy bills.

There was very little about what she was holding out for, so it’s hard to say if it is unreasonable. Cantwell could very well be listening to her constituents - there has been a privacy and tech equity coalition watching her over the years.

Privacy bills come down to: 1. What data is covered? 2. Opt-in vs opt-out: is the default assumption my data will not be collected and shared, or that it will be unless I opt-out? 3. Enforcement - only the attorney general or can someone file a lawsuit? The article states that she wanted protection against forced arbitration which as her constituent I would agree with her on that. 4. Whether states can pass stronger laws at their level. California has a large delegation and a strong state law which is a consideration in the House.




McMorris Rodgers is also certifiable, not to put too fine a point on it


Your comment is too terse for me, I can't parse it. Both Cantwell and Rodgers are moderate politicians from opposing parties in the state of Washington. What certification are you referring to?


certifiable meaning insane, Rodgers is usually not considered moderate by any stretch


Yes, but she’s also not seeking re-election which gives her a little more freedom. Definitely an interesting choice of collaborators there though.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: