In the United States, there is effectively nobody in this position. The committee hearings on anti-trust and encryption have little overlap between interested parties or ideology.
“After the 2016 FBI–Apple encryption dispute, Feinstein and Richard Burr sponsored a bill that would be likely to criminalize all forms of strong encryption in electronic communication between citizens”
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dianne_Feinstein
She was on senate subcommittees that handles all sorts of legality for technology companies.
* Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism * Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Refugees
* Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the Law
* Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law (Chair, 117th Congress)
From her gov CV page: “The Judiciary Committee has one of the broadest jurisdictions in the Senate, ranging from criminal justice and immigration issues to antitrust and intellectual property law.“
Source: https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/thejudicia...
Again: > In the United States, there is effectively nobody in this position. The committee hearings on anti-trust and encryption have little overlap between interested parties or ideology.
> there is effectively nobody in this position.
Wrong. There are people and Feinstein is a great example of someone who worked quite hard to kill encryption while also being on various committees handling anti-trust.
If her anti-encryption bill passed or if she was able to push through some anti-trust through the Judiciary committee she would brag about it in her reelection campaign.
Feinstein is perfect model for someone who would gladly tout her legacy while on the judiciary committee and equally her accomplishments on a national security subcommittee.
You are wrong sir, now tuck your tail and go away. I’m done wasting my time with you. But now I know you quite well, you are a narcissist and you have to have the final word. So go ahead and prove me right…