11–20 of 263 posts
If you are in California the DMV makes tens of millions of dollars a year selling all the data you give to the DMV, which is why I give them a P.O. Box.
CADMV claims on their web site that they cannot accept a P.O. box as a residence address. I have yet to find anything in California state law supporting this policy, though IANAL. Their enforcement seems to be quite lax.
This is a sacrifice we just have to be willing to make as a society if we want to project kids from the horror of using the internet
This is a sacrifice we just have to be willing to make as a society if we want to project kids from the horror of using the internet
If you are in California the DMV makes tens of millions of dollars a year selling all the data you give to the DMV, which is why I give them a P.O. Box.
This is a sacrifice we just have to be willing to make as a society if we want to project kids from the horror of using the internet
If you are in California the DMV makes tens of millions of dollars a year selling all the data you give to the DMV, which is why I give them a P.O. Box.
Am I missing something? What do you mean the DMV makes tens of millions of dollars a year selling data to itself?
If you are in California the DMV makes tens of millions of dollars a year selling all the data you give to the DMV, which is why I give them a P.O. Box.
Am I missing something? What do you mean the DMV makes tens of millions of dollars a year selling data to itself?
This is a sacrifice we just have to be willing to make as a society if we want to project kids from the horror of using the internet
Using ZKP as the EU proposes is the only way to prevent this data being leaked to unreliable third parties and leaves the knowledge with the institution it derives from in the first place.
I don't know why HN rails against it constantly, it is the obvious technical and organizational solution to this issue.