Hacker News Reader

Comment by pmoriarty | Hacker News Reader

This is yet another sign, if one was needed, that the rich can afford to buy themselves privacy while the poor can not.

I Bought my cable modem on day one of establishing service. The cable company demanded my Driver's License and SSN none the less.

If you pay for the service after consuming it, you are by definition using a line of credit.

For cable you'd have to load a prepaid balance into your account, from which the the cable provider could debit by usage. As soon as the balance hits 0, service is shut down.

Most people don't want to deal with that hassle.

I believe that is actually because of the billing period. You're billed at the end of the usage period rather than the beginning.

With verizon FiOS I am billed at the beginning of the month and yet I still had to hand over my SSN. Who else am I going to go to, Comcast? I paid for the first month's service when I signed up and I pay for each month before the beginning of the month. For example, I paid for 11/02 to 12/01 on or before the due date which was 10/27. In other words, I paid for the month of November before November began. I have no Verizon equipment. The ont was already here when I moved here. I bought my own modem/router. I can provide proof if you don't believe me.

its billed in arears i assume.

The poor can borrow money from source (yes, divulging their identity to that one source, and paying interest) and buy products in cash from all their vendors.

Lending to the poor not only barely happens, it’s a market overrun with predatory lenders. I remember an ad that used to run on late night TV that buried something like 150% APR in the fine print, attempting to avoid US regulation by nature of being operated on a Native American reservation.

Who took them down, you ask? That oh so useless CFPB.

Edit: Here they are. Look at the image of this woman’s loan:

https://www.freep.com/story/money/personal-finance/susan-tom...

I don't understand why reservations are allowed to assert sovereign immunity while acting as commercial entities

No it isn't. The wealthy are renting modems, dvrs, and cable boxes just the same.

He didn't say that the rich automatically get privacy and the poor don't. He said that the rich can afford privacy. The poor cannot afford it even if they desire it.

I've long since resigned myself to the fact that getting privacy is a struggle and costs money, and most people won't bother.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com