Plenty of Fish Hacked • Hacker News Board

Re: Plenty of Fish Hacked

#101

Post by motherwell » Mon, Jan 31, 2011, 10:20 PM UTC

mahmud wrote: post #8

This is extortion, plain and simple.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion

> Extortion, outwresting, and/or exaction is a criminal offense which occurs when a person unlawfully obtains either money, property or services from a person(s), entity, or institution, through coercion.

Where is the coercion? Is there a threat here to do something? I can't see it. In fact, the opposite - the damage is already done.

The coercion would exist only if there was a threat to do something bad from the extorter, which really, I can't see at all.

Re: Plenty of Fish Hacked

#102

Post by chrisbolt » Tue, Feb 01, 2011, 12:28 AM UTC

ErrantX wrote: post #27

AgentConundrum wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you European? I only ask because my friend in London is the only person I've ever heard of using such a device. Unfortunately, such a thing seems all but unheard of here in Canada. Our debit and credit cards are being replaced with cards with chips embedded, which could be a sign that such devices are coming, but for now I'm afraid my password is my only real line of defense online. I have noticed that when I log…

> Our debit and credit cards are being replaced with cards with chips embedded Do you want to know something scary about that. We've had Chip and PIN as the de-facto standard in the UK for some years now (although I do remember it coming in). The really scary thing is; my parents remember it being widely used in Germany in the late 80's. Has it really taken that long to get to Canada?

In Canada, Debit has always been swipe and PIN, but Credit is only recently becoming chip and PIN.

Re: Plenty of Fish Hacked

#103

Post by njmanwhore » Tue, Feb 01, 2011, 12:54 AM UTC

I don't understand why the victim of a crime is being given a hard time.

Scenario: I own a safe with all my personal information locked inside of it; a Safe Cracker (let's call him...Chris) comes along a cracks me safe. Chris call me as says to me 'yeah, I cracked your safe if you don't hire my company to fix you safe's vulnerability maybe your personal information might get out.'

Who is the bad guy in that situation the dope with the safe, with a 1-2-3-4 combination or the guy who takes the dopes information and attempts to use it for his own personal gain.

NOTE: To anyone who still thinks the dope is more to blame; please send me your address i'll rob your apartment/house then sell your things back to you (don't worry I'll also sell you new locks).

Re: Plenty of Fish Hacked

#104

Post by ralsina » Wed, Feb 02, 2011, 10:55 AM UTC

loboman wrote: post #90

jarin wrote: post #82

From the TechCrunch article comments: "Roberto Alsina Just a small clarification about this bit: "They then start talking about money because they need to incorporate a company that can deal with companies outside of Argentina and that will cost $15,000. They also needed to know if they were going to make over $100k/year or 500k/year as that would require different registrations…" I am from Argentina, and I own a com…

Many freelancers work as monotributistas or responsables inscriptos, exporting services that way. And it's perfectly legal. For a single person shop this would be the first case I hear of, of an incorporate company setup that way.

Yes, it's perfectly legal, but is incredibly stupid in this case because of the liability.

If you work on security this way, you are going to get sued eventually. If you are a monotributista or responsable inscripto, you will lose everything. A SRL (like a LLC) is the logical way to handle this kind of work.

What I meant by illegally is that it would be illegal if he was already incorporated as a SRL and exporting services (he needs to do the escrow to do that legally).