Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 286 posts

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#201

Post by Ancalagon »

socalnate1 wrote: post #196
argd678 wrote: post #104

It seems like companies only get the message when there’s jail time involved. None of the companies would freeze my credit since their web sites said some unspecified value couldn’t be verified for me, despite confirming my data was indeed lost. Pretty sure, like other regulations that include jail time, this wouldn’t have happened or their website to freeze my credit would have worked.

Why is Hacker news so obsessed with sending people to jail? Literally every time any sort of corporation get's fined (for nearly anything), there is a loud call to send people to prison. It's like there is this undercurrent of bloodthirstiness and hatred for large companies and their leaders that get's brought to the surface.

Because frankly wealthy, successful, rich people like those leading equifax (and many other major corporations) are not punished in the same way normal people are.

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#202

Post by Bhilai »

bradleyjg wrote: post #126

Equifax wants global peace. Class lawyers and settlement administrators want a big payday (in cash, not credit monitoring). The judge wants the case off his docket. No one represents the interests of the class. Class action lawsuits aren’t designed to further the interests of the class. They are designed to encourage ad hoc, profit driven, independent regulators. Whether this is a good idea or not is a tough question…

But why not do your job as a citizen and send a simple letter objecting to this settlement - https://www.equifaxbreachsettlement.com/faq Q#25

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#203

Post by the_watcher »

Something I've wondered always wondered when reading through class actions: do multiple class actions suits over the same set of facts ever happen? Are they possible?

It seems technically possible: Class action settlement reached, somehow a huge portion of the impacted class opts out of the settlement (extremely unlikely, but possible). Opted out class members somehow organize a subsequent action.

Is the above possible? By opting out, you explicitly keep your own individual right to bring action against the defendant, but does it bar class action participation? There's a moral hazard argument that allowing this would create a perverse incentive on the part of the class legal representation to encourage class members to opt out of the settlement and organize subsequent actions.

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#204

Post by bdamm »

the_watcher wrote: post #197
thedanbob wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to see the courts force Equifax to pay $X to everyone whose information they leaked, whether they request it or not. But this settlement doesn't seem to be about actually punishing Equifax at all or fairly recompensing those affected.

This is a very, very imperfect method of figuring out the key question here ("Would Equifax just file for bankruptcy?"), but their enterprise value is ~$20B, and paying out $125 per person would cost over $18B, so it seems pretty clear you'd need to reduce the per person payout. It would take more work than I can put in right now to decide what it should be, but finger in the wind halving it seems like the right star…

Bankruptcy seems quite appropriate. They not only failed to maintain the security of the data, they also provided no identity theft protection to the public (unless you asked for it), and as a company appeared to have no plan for this event. Given that they were entrusted with the identity data for basically all Americans, that is inexcusable.

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#205

Post by journalctl »

the_watcher wrote: post #197
thedanbob wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to see the courts force Equifax to pay $X to everyone whose information they leaked, whether they request it or not. But this settlement doesn't seem to be about actually punishing Equifax at all or fairly recompensing those affected.

This is a very, very imperfect method of figuring out the key question here ("Would Equifax just file for bankruptcy?"), but their enterprise value is ~$20B, and paying out $125 per person would cost over $18B, so it seems pretty clear you'd need to reduce the per person payout. It would take more work than I can put in right now to decide what it should be, but finger in the wind halving it seems like the right star…

Would bankruptcy be so bad? “Sorry, Equifax. Due to some recent financial irresponsibility, we’ve unfortunately had to lower your score. To zero.”

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#206

Post by pimmen »

socalnate1 wrote: post #196
argd678 wrote: post #104

It seems like companies only get the message when there’s jail time involved. None of the companies would freeze my credit since their web sites said some unspecified value couldn’t be verified for me, despite confirming my data was indeed lost. Pretty sure, like other regulations that include jail time, this wouldn’t have happened or their website to freeze my credit would have worked.

Why is Hacker news so obsessed with sending people to jail? Literally every time any sort of corporation get's fined (for nearly anything), there is a loud call to send people to prison. It's like there is this undercurrent of bloodthirstiness and hatred for large companies and their leaders that get's brought to the surface.

Maybe not jail time but I would really want the board to be personally responsible for what they did. Or, if they can argue that they made sure their corporation had a good security culture, the executives who broke the company regulations need to be personally responsible.

Seriously, someone needs to be rehabilitated from this before they can be sent back into society. After someone gets out of jail from grand theft auto they need to understand that what they did was wrong and treating people like that hurts them. I’m not saying the executives need jail time and emotional trauma, but at least some sort of therapy where they’re confronted with the fact that doing this stuff with a hundred million people is not nice and has consequences. They should fundamentally rethink their lives and what brought them to do such a careless thing with people’s data, just like a convicted felon.

Edit: made it clearer that I meant the decision makers, not all owners.

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#207

Post by mixedCase »

socalnate1 wrote: post #196
argd678 wrote: post #104

It seems like companies only get the message when there’s jail time involved. None of the companies would freeze my credit since their web sites said some unspecified value couldn’t be verified for me, despite confirming my data was indeed lost. Pretty sure, like other regulations that include jail time, this wouldn’t have happened or their website to freeze my credit would have worked.

Why is Hacker news so obsessed with sending people to jail? Literally every time any sort of corporation get's fined (for nearly anything), there is a loud call to send people to prison. It's like there is this undercurrent of bloodthirstiness and hatred for large companies and their leaders that get's brought to the surface.

Jail time means a lot to people who usually commit high-stakes white-collar crimes since they have a lot to lose in those cases. A very material risk of facing it would definiely help prevent others from committing those crimes.

If you slap them in the wrist and let them carry on with a fine it makes it very easy for a psychopath to just risk it.

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#208

Post by fuzz4lyfe »

the_watcher wrote: post #197
thedanbob wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to see the courts force Equifax to pay $X to everyone whose information they leaked, whether they request it or not. But this settlement doesn't seem to be about actually punishing Equifax at all or fairly recompensing those affected.

This is a very, very imperfect method of figuring out the key question here ("Would Equifax just file for bankruptcy?"), but their enterprise value is ~$20B, and paying out $125 per person would cost over $18B, so it seems pretty clear you'd need to reduce the per person payout. It would take more work than I can put in right now to decide what it should be, but finger in the wind halving it seems like the right star…

If your business leaked millions of private records in a similar manner, would you expect to remain in business afterward?

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#209

Post by the_watcher »

bdamm wrote: post #204
the_watcher wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very, very imperfect method of figuring out the key question here ("Would Equifax just file for bankruptcy?"), but their enterprise value is ~$20B, and paying out $125 per person would cost over $18B, so it seems pretty clear you'd need to reduce the per person payout. It would take more work than I can put in right now to decide what it should be, but finger in the wind halving it seems like the right star…

Bankruptcy seems quite appropriate. They not only failed to maintain the security of the data, they also provided no identity theft protection to the public (unless you asked for it), and as a company appeared to have no plan for this event. Given that they were entrusted with the identity data for basically all Americans, that is inexcusable.

Sorry, should have been more clear: I wasn't commenting on whether or not bankruptcy is fair to Equifax or not, I was meant "Would Equifax avoid paying the money out via bankruptcy protections (from which companies can actually emerge from in better position)?" I assumed the OP cared primarily about receiving the settlement.

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#210

Post by the_watcher »

fuzz4lyfe wrote: post #208
the_watcher wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very, very imperfect method of figuring out the key question here ("Would Equifax just file for bankruptcy?"), but their enterprise value is ~$20B, and paying out $125 per person would cost over $18B, so it seems pretty clear you'd need to reduce the per person payout. It would take more work than I can put in right now to decide what it should be, but finger in the wind halving it seems like the right star…

If your business leaked millions of private records in a similar manner, would you expect to remain in business afterward?

As I clarified above, I was thinking about whether or not the 147M affected would actually receive anything, not about fairness of the punishment.
Post reply on HN