Wouldn't it be cheaper for him to just wait for his new ID to arrive so he can get verified?
154 karma · joined July 20, 2017
Idk man, seems like the article does claim that the builders weren't slaves.
Also, given the way trophic pyramids work, feeding crops to a cow and feeding the cow to people results in a loss of energy compared to feeding the people plants. By that, I mean it's more expensive to raise a cow and use it to feed 10 people than it would be to give those 10 people crops.
Without disclosure/client choice it could slow down someone's computer and and be portrayed as malicious ("If they can mine potentially valuable coins while I'm on the site, what else could they be doing while serving my browser content?")
"I donate a quarter million a year and you give it to a black who killed her own son? Guess Yale could use a new building with my name on it"
Still though, the US needs to have a good hard look at de-monetizing the prison industrial complex, humanizing post-incarcerated people, and disassembling the economic incentives to use the 13th amendment for disenfranchisement.
Also, it threw a 500 internal server error after linking Twitter
Whether you like it or not, entertainers produce goods or entertainment-related services within an economy. That's the definition of an industry.
Whoever files a class action should make a motion such that anyone can purge their PII from a credit authority that's experienced a public hack such that their PII was exposed, or some other sort of incentive for these too-big-to-improve companies to do their job
> Right to Opt-Out of this Arbitration Provision. IF YOU DO NOT WISH TO BE BOUND BY THE ARBITRATION PROVISION, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO EXCLUDE YOURSELF. Opting out of the arbitration provision will have no adverse effect on your relationship with Equifax or the delivery of Products to You by Equifax. In order to exclude Yourself from the arbitration provision, You must notify Equifax in writing within 30 days of the date that You first accept this Agreement on the Site (for Products purchased from Equifax on the Site). If You purchased Your Product other than on the Site, and thus this Agreement was mailed, emailed or otherwise delivered to You, then You must notify Equifax in writing within 30 days of the date that You receive this Agreement. To be effective, timely written notice of opt out must be delivered to Equifax Consumer Services LLC, Attn.: Arbitration Opt-Out, P.O. Box 105496, Atlanta, GA 30348, and must include Your name, address, and Equifax User ID, as well as a clear statement that You do not wish to resolve disputes with Equifax through arbitration. If You have previously notified Equifax that You wish to opt-out of arbitration, You are not required to do so again. Any opt-out request postmarked after the opt-out deadline or that fails to satisfy the other requirements above will not be valid, and You must pursue your Claim in arbitration or small claims court.
You know how many people make apps/IAPs and charge back? A lot of people, so they can't go through every single case, ban one person but not another, and have inconsistent policies. Otherwise, the people who get banned see posts from people who CBed and didn't get banned, and they wave the exceptions in the face of Google. You're basically asking for a workaround to a fraud-related shutdown.
Once you issue a chargeback on a merchant, it's like pissing in their bed or cheating with a girlfriend: you can apologize and never do it again, but it breaks the trust, sometimes irrevocably. They don't owe you shit, as they already paid the bank $25 and Visa/MC about $8 per chargeback.
Even if you paid them back, they have no idea if you'll continue to pay back the CB fees with stolen cards until you either give up, or make enough IAP money to run off.
SFYL
https://www.consumerfinance.gov/
Not just about the hack, but the fact that their "check to see if you were affected by our shit" sites include a ToS that waives your right to participate in a class-action lawsuit.
Of course, social media can and usually is doctored, but influencer culture definitely takes celebrity product endorsement and plays it out to its logical conclusion.
The dust hasn't quite settled, but everyone using social media to stunt on others does affect the mental health of people who consistently use these platforms. I'd say that it negatively impacts culture because it promotes building these facades and advertising said facades.
I'm almost certain that a lion's share of cam girl-related chargebacks are jerks who dispute the $200 they sent for personalized nudes and dirty talk during their refractory period.
And card fraud is still possible; the risk is removed from the models, and placed on the exchanges that people use for fiat-to-LiveStar token liquidity.
Also, ICOs see rampant price fluctuations: am I wrong to think that independent models and merchants don't want to see their earnings skyrocket and plummet during one of their sessions? It makes more sense to create a platform for models to accept ETH
Most of the big things are either tied around vice or price. If an early adopter (or group of them, depending on your Spoofy theories) decide to manipulate the price enough to pump the price and create floors, they can. I haven't seen a killer app that specifically adds to people's lives in a way that doesn't provide liquidity to human rights violators (backpage, DNMs, kids/adults committing fraud, etc).
Sure, there's Venezuela using and mining Bitcoin because their currency is unusable, but Bitcoin wasn't designed precisely for them.
Shite companies love to prop up their use cases on developing country citizens (Coinbase with their 'African mothers will use us for businesses instead of M-Pesa' ), but the practical matter at hand is that most of these developing countries don't have stable enough internet and crypto-liquidity in a way that's conducive to using crypto on their phones.
Where's the funding round for decentralized Wi-Fi balloons, or a legitimate competitor to M-Pesa? They're about as practical as another decentralized storage platform with minimal commits since the token sale and an ICO that raised a quarter billion based on hype
The spoofy and Tether thing does lead to some suspicious stuff as well
It costs a lot of man hours to add infrastructure work for that, and they're setting a precedent that they'll support every single fork that people speculate with.
I personally think this is lazyman bullshit where people harp about how Coinbase being amicable with the feds are bad until they want to file suit lol. People who were knowledgeable enough about the fork but too lazy to learn how to move their Bitcoin out, not have their private keys stolen/lost, and redeem the coins on two chains without fucking up feel entitled to free money that costs Coinbase man hours and technical debt. Despite all ideals about them technically controlling the BCH, they should be able to draft a legal document placing their licensing at stake that asserts they're not claiming customer BCH and get back to answering my limit increase email.
*Disclaimer: I don't work for Coinbase or a Bitcoin company
That way, a registered nurse/healthcare official who has a job/career to lose if someone overdoses. Nothing is stopping a random dealer using a DNM from cutting a batch with fentanyl, and anonymity means they can fake reviews and hide it