1970-01-01 4 hours ago

1000% this. Fake info for everything that isn't directly tied to money or government. HN doesn't have my info. Apple doesn't have it. Google doesn't have it. Amazon doesn't have it. Microsoft doesn't have it. They don't care who I really am, and that hasn't, ever never, been a problem for using their stuff. They want your real ID. They do not need it. At all.

▲ cloverich an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> They want your real ID. They do not need it.

I think that is exactly backwards. Many of the companies integrating with KYC/AML providers (such as my company) definitely don't want to be dealing in ids, just like most companies don't want to be dealing in storing credit card numbers (and the compliance that goes along with it). Its why Stripe exists, and its why ID verification companies exist.

	▲	x0x0 39 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I'd like to agree, but I don't. If companies didn't want to be involved, they would aggressively be pushing governments to provide ways to confirm age w/o transmitting any other data. Primarily because you can't leak data you never had in the first place. I don't see that happening.

▲ londons_explore 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Remember that just typing 'John Smith DOB 1/1/1900' into a random webform and clicking submit to get in is technically wire fraud.

Sure, it usually won't be prosecuted... Until you upset the wrong person and they're looking for a crime you did...

▲ araes 40 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Fraud (Wikipedia, United States):

  - Misrepresents a material (non-trivial) fact in order to obtain action or forbearance by another person
  - The other person relies upon the misrepresentation
  - The other person *suffers injury* as a result of the act or forbearance taken in reliance upon the misrepresentation.

Damages in fraud cases is normally computed using

  - Recovery of damages in the amount of the *difference between the value of the property* had it been as represented and its actual value
  - Out-of-pocket loss, which allows for the recovery of damages in the amount of the *difference between the value of what was given and the value of what was received*.

Usually also heavily implied it needs to involve money in some significant way:

18 U.S.C. § 1343

  (...)'any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises'(...)

Fraud cases also usually heavily apply burden of court practice on the prosecution, to prove fraud and substantial losses. If you type 'John Smith DOB 1/1/1900' the "victim" has to prove it caused them to suffer injury and that there was a significant difference between the value of the property (non-trivial).

▲ fc417fc802 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I don't believe it's wire fraud unless you deceive the other party for monetary gain. I realize that's not quite the correct definition but AFAIK it's quite close to it.

▲

londons_explore an hour ago | parent [-]

The gain is that you get to access the website. Fraud simply requires gain, not necessarily monetary benefit.

	▲	1970-01-01 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		That's not it. There is 2 parts 2 fraud. Part 1: misrepresentation of fact Part 2: harm or loss due to that misrepresentation You must prove both. https://definitions.uslegal.com/f/fraud/#:~:text=and%20upon%...

▲ 1970-01-01 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

So is breaching all your PII into the universe. Choose your battles or they will be chosen for you. Aside, I'm technically 126 years old in some DBs. Nobody cares.