Post #4277052
2026-07-30 12:57 UTC
The Chamber's letter is - to use a technical term - *flaming garbage*. It raises the most spurious objections imaginable, claims about the bill's language that are belied by its plain, easily understood text. These objections are demolished in a letter the Electronic Frontier Foundation sent to the Supervisors:
https://www.eff.org/document/letter-sf-bos-re-surveillance
17/
Replies (1)
-
@pluralistic@mamot.fr 2026-07-30 12:57
In the letter, EFF explains that claims that surveillance pricing will *lower* prices are overblown and not borne out by evidence. But more importantly - as EFF points out - privacy is a human right, and the idea that you should have to give up your privacy to get a fair price is just a fancy way of saying that privacy should be the exclusive preserve of people who can afford to pay more: https://www.eff.org/wp/privacy-first-better-way-address-online-harms#Legislation 18/