SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the you-mean-sombody-hadn't-realised? dept.
The New York Times published an article on Sunday confirming what we've all assumed — that internet privacy policies are so full of loopholes as to be meaningless. They found that of the 100 top alexa-ranked english-language websites, 85 had privacy policies that permitted them to disclose users' personal information in cases of mergers, bankruptcy, asset sales and other business transactions.
When sites and apps get acquired or go bankrupt, the consumer data they have amassed may be among the companies' most valuable assets. And that has created an incentive for some online services to collect vast databases on people without giving them the power to decide which companies, or industries, may end up with their information.
"In effect, there's a race to the bottom as companies make representations that are weak and provide little actual privacy protection to consumers," said Marc Rotenberg, the executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a nonprofit research center in Washington.
Original Submission
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Tuesday June 30 2015, @10:56PM
I don't know for sure.
Get change elsewhere first? Acquire your currency in person in a bank, since they can't scan the cashing leaving drawers the same way they do the dispensers?
I don't know about validating it. It was just in the tutorial literature for the CRM application I was working on a tiny piece of.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday June 30 2015, @11:41PM
since they can't scan the cashing leaving drawers the same way they do the dispensers
Says who? They could scan the packets placed into the drawer in the morning.
Most banks don't co-mingle deposits of cash with the content of the drawer. So deposits of cash never make it to the drawer to mess up the serial number order.
But Basically I've never heard one single case of serial number recording on dispensed cash from a cash-machine. Such would have found its way into news paper stories about catching crooks, or court testimony. I suspect its apocryphal.
Such a system would be useless in proving chain of transactions, because If you and I swap hundred dollars bills for street goods, and then someone swapped that money for a bar tab, or for a lap dance, nobody would be aware of those transactions.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Wednesday July 01 2015, @01:00PM
Right, and that's why bad data gets into these systems about people. They're imperfect.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday July 01 2015, @04:38PM
Yet, I challenge you to find one authoritative source that says Cash Machines record who gets which serial numbers.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Wednesday July 01 2015, @08:27PM
I cannot do this. I'm half considering revealing the name of my previous employer, and their product name, and half realizing that would be an impotent measure to impress internet strangers that hurts my professional ethics.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday July 01 2015, @10:32PM
Still, even without violating your employers NDA, there would be dozens of such references on the net if it were true.
It would have appeared in court testimony.
It would be in news papers.
There would be people moaning about it on privacy grounds.
But all you ever see is people speculating without a single on line reference.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.