21–30 of 169 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Other countries' court systems are just as exploitable, but go unexploited, out of (presumably) a lack of interest / lack of social mores that predispose toward suing people.
Situations like these keep bringing me back to the idea that important actions should require an actual, in person, human notary seal. Contract signings, online court service, title changes, etc should not be valid without an offline record examiner who affirms under threat of perjury that the parties involved are who they claim (or are claimed to be).
The existing system isn't foolproof but, by and large, it works perfectly well. If the transactions in TFA truly were fraudulent, no court is going to hold her liable. The bigger problem here is a US court being happy to issue ex parte judgments for someone who should have been trivially contactable.
This is absurd. This is just as much as indictment of ridiculous American courts as it is the corporations prosecuting such a case. What is happening in that clown country that a civil case against a person who wasn't even involved in the infraction can be judged liable when they are not even present to defend themselves? America is a bully nation.
I don’t understand what the companies hope to gain out of this aside from loads of bad publicity?
Situations like these keep bringing me back to the idea that important actions should require an actual, in person, human notary seal. Contract signings, online court service, title changes, etc should not be valid without an offline record examiner who affirms under threat of perjury that the parties involved are who they claim (or are claimed to be).
Eh, I was forced to have a notary do something and it ended up being an apparently 20 year old dude at a UPS store looking at some papers for a few seconds. Not exactly the high trust exercise it’s made out to be.
I'm sure this is an unpopular idea on HN, but at least it's a way that our governments could use facial recognition/fingerprints/retina to reduce fraud.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah there it is, the eternal "better things are not possible" retort to any given criticism.
The comment you are replying to didn't say that all.
My brother in law had his identity stolen about 6 months ago. He went through the normal routine of cancelling everything, putting holds on everything, etc. He thought he was in the clear, until last week, he received a letter in the mail for a summons for several felonies, including fraud, in the state of Utah (he lives in PA). It is insane to me that PayPal, Venmo, VISA, etc, all can allow someone who isn't him to…
It's just so frustrating and deflating to go through the process. It's a chore that shouldn't really be our problem - but it is and it feels terrible to be beholden to that process and ultimately come out losing in the end when you get a letter like that in the mail.
I had a identity theft come up a few years ago and I'm still dealing with it (all the way back from 2016!). But at the end of the day, I really shouldn't complain because things could always have been worse.
I just empathize with your final sentiment completely. We're just...beholden to it. Bleh.
Situations like these keep bringing me back to the idea that important actions should require an actual, in person, human notary seal. Contract signings, online court service, title changes, etc should not be valid without an offline record examiner who affirms under threat of perjury that the parties involved are who they claim (or are claimed to be).
Some countries/jurisdictions do exactly that, and trust me, it's a massive pain in the ass. Would you really want to visit a notary just to set up an eBay account? Because that's what you're proposing. The existing system isn't foolproof but, by and large, it works perfectly well. If the transactions in TFA truly were fraudulent, no court is going to hold her liable. The bigger problem here is a US court being happy…
>She was then served electronically with papers from the US District Court of Florida outlining Adidas' case against her. I don't get it, based on this[1] it looks like electronic service is only possible if the party consented. That seems fairly reasonable. How would this have happened? Is there more to this? The docket for this case is here: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66634655/adidas-ag-v-th... . I'd be v…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Eh, I was forced to have a notary do something and it ended up being an apparently 20 year old dude at a UPS store looking at some papers for a few seconds. Not exactly the high trust exercise it’s made out to be.
I suspect this could be improved by, say, installing the same biometric recognition machines they have use for border control at every post office/bank/etc. These machines could attest that you are present and signing something. They would still require some oversight, but one person could oversee many machines. I'm sure this is an unpopular idea on HN, but at least it's a way that our governments could use facial re…
Situations like these keep bringing me back to the idea that important actions should require an actual, in person, human notary seal. Contract signings, online court service, title changes, etc should not be valid without an offline record examiner who affirms under threat of perjury that the parties involved are who they claim (or are claimed to be).
Some countries/jurisdictions do exactly that, and trust me, it's a massive pain in the ass. Would you really want to visit a notary just to set up an eBay account? Because that's what you're proposing. The existing system isn't foolproof but, by and large, it works perfectly well. If the transactions in TFA truly were fraudulent, no court is going to hold her liable. The bigger problem here is a US court being happy…
That's a very good idea.