Welcome to Gaia! :: Posts By User Unknown User | Forum

Nice try, but that is not canadian law. Please, when you pull random sources out of your a** that do not mean anything to the legislation in the country involved you look pretty silly.

Really, I do not think so. Do you really think they are going to be tossing people in jail for non-sexual conversations with children? Use your brain. And seriously, what business do you have talking to a child? What do you want to know the latest pokemon ash katchum caught? Was there some juicy gossip on the middle school playground that you just have to hear?

Ok guys, now I am an adult who is into anime and cartoons. I may have contact with a child online for totally non-sexual purposes. I go to anime conventions with lots of kids who are way younger than I am who share the same fandom. It would be extremely rare if I were to try to meet someone if I found out they were a child. If I did meet them I would want and expect their parent to be present, and that their parents would know about our conversations if they occurred.

Seriously, are you really thinking about the situation here as an adult. If you are talking to someone online and you found out that they were a little kid wouldn't you find someone else around your age to talk to, even if it is not sexual? I am not saying there is anything wrong with kids, but they are just not experienced and worldly enough to make you want to fly across country and meet them.

I see no problem with this law.

It is not unethical, it happens all the time. The service does not happen automatically, it is something that you have to do so they were paying someone to do it on their behalf.

I am amazed at how far this has gone. People really believe that the credit card companies and credit agencies are looking out for their best interests.

So, there was a company that went out and started to lock down people's Identities. Most people are not familiar with the ways to protect themselves so this company did it for them and charged a fee. Since the credit card companies are so eager to give anyone a credit card that they do not confirm identity with the person they are making the contract with these sort of services would be useful for people who would like to make sure that they are protected.

Now, These people would sign up with lifelock and the company would put a fraud alert on their credit report. Since the fraud alert expires every 3 months, the company would continue to have this fraud alert placed on that persons identity. What this does is it makes most creditors contact the person asking for the loan through the information that is in their system that you had provided. Why they don't do this automatically every time is a mystery to me. Why you would be responsible for their screw ups when they give out credit lines in your name without making absolutely sure they are dealing with you is beyond me.

However, below I have a link to a blog which links to the court ruling on behalf of the credit reporting companies that prevents companies like lifelock from providing even these basic services for people for a fee.

Now, they say you are free to do it yourself, and you are. The problem I have with this is that if you do not take some of these measures companies can issue credit on your behalf without really making sure it is you. When a company comes along and puts a stop to it for a rather small fee, the credit reporting companies block them.

My question is why would you do that? No one is saying lifelock did anything against their customers wishes. lifelock tried to do what they claimed they were charging for by putting alerts on their customers identities that would make it hard for someone to take out a loan on their name without first contacting them through the information they provided to the system.

links to decisions


This decision is evidence that the credit reporting companies are happy with the weaknesses in the system that allow them to make mistakes and give money to criminals and then ruin good people's names.

I am happy these people are out there speaking against gay rights. These people are so ******** nutty faux news has to go against them. The only real problem I have is not with the WBC. We all know where they are coming from, and that sort of disgusting attitude is clearly visible. My problem is more with faux news because they are not really too far off of the WBC ideals. They just pretend to be more moderate.

Well, someone always has to be the d**k. Thank you for being that guy.