<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[RSS Feed]]></title><description><![CDATA[RSS Feed]]></description><link>http://direct.ecency.com</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 May 2026 13:14:23 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="http://direct.ecency.com/created/kskuldeep/rss.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title><![CDATA[The Supreme Court’s decision in Carpenter v. United States is not quite a full manifesto for digital privacy, but it insists that there is a new discussion to be had, and it tries to set the terms.]]></title><description><![CDATA[Everyone or almost everyone in America has a cell phone, but, in a 5, 4 decision on Friday, the Supreme Court decided that this does not mean that all Americans are subject to close surveillance of their]]></description><link>http://direct.ecency.com/kskuldeep/@kskuldeep/the-supreme-court-s-decision-in-carpenter-v-united-states-is-not-quite-a-full-manifesto-for-digital-privacy-but-it-insists-that</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://direct.ecency.com/kskuldeep/@kskuldeep/the-supreme-court-s-decision-in-carpenter-v-united-states-is-not-quite-a-full-manifesto-for-digital-privacy-but-it-insists-that</guid><category><![CDATA[kskuldeep]]></category><dc:creator><![CDATA[kskuldeep]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2018 09:04:27 GMT</pubDate><enclosure url="https://images.ecency.com/p/3W72119s5BjVs3Hye1oHX44R9EcpQD5C9xXzj68nJaq3CeJTq2MTX3BsfU1X3DEKA1igG3L5HJFWfjZxweUbPAPtZLa2NT3gxCU6pWiurZi2nU9BQt6xHt?format=match&amp;mode=fit" length="0" type="false"/></item></channel></rss>