What's the math for the cost of getting banned from Google for some stupid AI reason?

I thought they did go through the law and courts system.

The average cotton bag has an artificially low number by misleading statistics. Alice uses one bag 100 times, Bob uses 99 bags one time each. If you sample a grocery purchase and check how many times that bag is used in its lifetime it is 50.5 on average. But if you sample a bag and check how many times it is used in its lifetime, it is 2.

Those apps are internet ID checks brought to the real world. You're right to be suspicious. They do keep leaking data or getting found out to be storing everything forever or forming profiles of a person's movements.

Because the word "simply" isn't. Every time a programmer says "just" or "simply" about someone else's system, it's a lie.

Germany has Schufa and it keeps getting sued for the whole concept of it being illegal I believe.

> What does an "identity verification" company even do?

Handles the multitude of ID document standards around the world while providing a simple Boolean flag to websites that are required to check if you're an adult.

Then inexplicably keeps the data and gets hacked in the most obvious way possible.

Legislating insurance prices is illegal for good reason. Either it's too high and the government has just siphoned a lot of money to insurance company shareholders, or it's too low and the government has effectively made it illegal to provide that insurance.

Negligence isn't a crime in itself. It is an explanation or cause for other crimes. And there is nothing illegal in the US about selling pictures of people's drivers licenses.

> Negligence isn't a crime in itself. It is an explanation or cause for other crimes.

Correct, like being criminally negligent of a child, if you leak data through long-known vectors (for argument’s sake), one could argue you are criminally negligent in securing the private data.

It doesn’t really go that way, often, now.

It could, as more e.g. water treatment and energy providing facilities get pwnd.

Except the US has no law that you have to secure private data or that not securing it is a crime.

Pretty sure I just cited it.

Good luck arguing against their conviction rate.

> there is nothing illegal in the US about selling pictures of people's drivers licenses.

18 U.S.C. § 1028 makes certain transfers involving identification documents criminal. It specifically covers a driver's license or personal identification card and provides enhanced penalties for transferring such documents.

1028 expressly recognizes electronic transfer as satisfying its interstate-commerce requirement.

What are you talking about?

I don't think this is a real way to test for ADHD.