hrehhf

Isn't that against the law (Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) ?

Suppose Alice is a "victim of identity theft". BigBank gives $10k to Fraudster as a loan, thinking that Alice is the actual recipient. Experian, Transunion and Equifax report this loan as a debt which Alice owes to BigBank.

Who is the real victim? The credit reporting agencies want to convince people that the consumer is the victim, and so Alice bears the burden and risk of clearing her name. But it is the credit reporting agencies inflicting this upon Alice. BigBank is the victim who lost money, and BigBank bears the responsibility for making the mistake of giving out a loan in Alice's name. The Fraudster committed a crime against BigBank, not against Alice. It is Experian, Transunion and Equifax, by holding this fraudulent loan against Alice, who are victimizing Alice.

The idea that Alice was victimized by Fraudster is a concept being perpetuated by the credit reporting agencies as a way to absolve themselves of responsibility, and place the burden upon the consumer, and to avoid realistic identity-verifiction which might slow or complicate the practice of issuing large amounts of debt to the general public.

Off topic rant:

It bugs me when people mix our standard numerals with Roman numerals, such as 12MM to mean twelve million. They are different numerals and the meaning is not defined when they are used together.

And Roman numerals are not like SI suffixes, meaning they are not multiplicative; Roman numerals are additive, so MM is two thousand, not one million. Also, M is an SI suffix, so 12M means twelve million and 12MM just looks like a typo.

Obviously people do not use SI suffixes may not feel the same way, this is just my pet peeve because I use SI suffixes in science.

I'm surprised to learn this is such a common thing that it has a name "California No", and it also reminds me that there is something wrong with the people of California :)

In my experience, someone who can't say no is not being polite; they are being quite rude. Stringing people along is rude. It is far more polite to outright tell someone that you are not interested and then everyone can move along. Even for dating, I can't speak for other people, but a simple "not interested" is more polite than being ambiguous. There is no "growing number" of folks who react violently because violent reactions, in general, have decreased over time -- and if anything, a clear "no" is likely better than being unclear. In my experience someone would be more angry at being misled over a period of time.

> I don't know how long this country can survive with this rampant corruption and profiteering.

So far it has been 241 years.

> Source: I knew the guy who did the research and published the findings.

That's not really a source. If this was published, then tell us where! The published findings would be the source.

>both don't guarantee true privacy as we can't see the servers.

What do you define as true privacy? Why isn't other privacy "true"?

What do you mean by "see the servers"? Surely you can see them as computers at the other end of a TCP connection, and the server cannot read the cleartext of an E2E encrypted message.

By the way, your https certificate for lambdauniversity.com is broken (it is for github, not your domain), and www.lambdauniversity.com/contact returns a 404.

> Adults in poverty often need intensive counseling, psychiatry, substance abuse therapy, and a support network of caring individuals.

You have assumed poverty in adults is caused by mental health problems and, in general, that is false. What about the rest of the adults, without mental health issues, in poverty? Poverty is caused by lack of gainful employment. There are a great many people able and willing to work but do not have gainful work and that puts them in poverty.

It appears that they are finding the private keys for transactions that already occurred. Reusing an address is not part of Bitcoin's design and it was never intended for people to do that. By not reusing addresses (not reusing private keys) I think one would be immune to this attack. The article doesn't seem to have much detail; anyone have more detail on this?

Edit: The details are in the URL posted by alphydan; it looks like address reuse does not matter with their method.

I guess I didn't understand what you meant by "not in Europe." I thought you meant geographically.

I'm American and I live in the US. My parents are Turkish, and also US citizens. We do not like how things are going in Turkey and I agree that now there is no way Turkey will join the EU.

What about you?