101–110 of 454 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Consideration doesn't have to be denominated in dollars.
Consideration can be as minimal as "your continued employment with this company." It does not have to be any sort of additional dollar amount.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Consideration is a common law concept as far as I can tell. As someone unfamiliar with how it came to be: Why was consideration introduced? What's the rationale, the goal behind it?
IANAL A contract is what lets you sue someone over a private transaction. That's what it does, that's all it does. If for whatever reason you're not willing to bring a contract dispute to court, then your contract doesn't do anything and you wasted your time writing it. Contract = right to sue for breach of contract. In order to sue someone, you need to be able to describe what damages have been done to you. The goal…
This is categorically incorrect.
Damages for breach of contract are supposed to put you back in the position you'd have been in had the contract been performed. It's not related to the value of the consideration.
Consideration is one of the things needed to make a contract binding in English law (along with offer & acceptance, and "intention to create legal relations").
Jurists still debate the rationale for consideration, but the best answer I've found is that contract in English law is seen as an exchange or a “bargain”. There is no gratuitous contract, donations are not contractual right.
By comparison, a contract under French law is based on "consent of the parties" and the theory of individual autonomy. There's no requirement for consideration.
In a "mutual NDA", consideration is easy to find; each party agrees not to disclose confidential information disclosed by the counterparty.
Another way to make an agreement binding without consideration is to sign it as a deed.
https://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/anneprudhomme/entry/consequences...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Consideration is a common law concept as far as I can tell. As someone unfamiliar with how it came to be: Why was consideration introduced? What's the rationale, the goal behind it?
IANAL A contract is what lets you sue someone over a private transaction. That's what it does, that's all it does. If for whatever reason you're not willing to bring a contract dispute to court, then your contract doesn't do anything and you wasted your time writing it. Contract = right to sue for breach of contract. In order to sue someone, you need to be able to describe what damages have been done to you. The goal…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> a chance at getting a job Yes, that is exactly right. > doesn't seem like a gain Why not? If you don't think that's a gain, why are you wasting your time doing the interview in the first place?
OTOH, I've heard that you can't be forced into an NDA with the consideration of only continued employment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm guessing if you used a popular web-based email service, or any browser email client, then this would be possible.
Possibly, but you'd still have to (try to) "render" it in your browser by opening the mail. On a similar note, your web mail could fetch images in emails ahead of time, but that would still be out of your browser's context
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The bank may be able to demonstrate that the vulnerability was not exploited by, e.g., showing that the order preview page was first loaded with the same parameters, or showing a same domain referer.
Maybe the bank should've used this method to prevent the problem in the first place by just checking that the referer request header was from their domain.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not at all. You're making bets based on public information only you have realized is meaningful before informing the rest of the public to make money off that discovery. Quite a few folks make a lot of money this way and (nearly) everyone benefits: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-04/how-a-25-...
Maybe but I, personally, would not want to take the risk that I might need to defend that proposition in court.
It's public information.
Now if someone who works at the bank had told you about it, you'd be in a lot of trouble.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it's HSBC, but they do similarly horrific stuff. Almost all banks have a truly terrible online service. I'm a happy user of N26. I very, very highly recommend it to all european customers. I'm never dealing with shitty bank service again. https://n26.com/ (Email me if you want a referral invite).
Wells Fargo and Schwab seem ok in my experience. Wells Fargo even updated their site with slick new UI and menu options are actually findable. Amazing!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it's HSBC, but they do similarly horrific stuff. Almost all banks have a truly terrible online service. I'm a happy user of N26. I very, very highly recommend it to all european customers. I'm never dealing with shitty bank service again. https://n26.com/ (Email me if you want a referral invite).
Wells Fargo and Schwab seem ok in my experience. Wells Fargo even updated their site with slick new UI and menu options are actually findable. Amazing!
It's people like you who keep companies like that in business and encourage such atrocious activity.