You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
See, I think *if* you fail to uphold reasonable care in a blatant way - and I think phone companies have failed this way - then I have no issue with extremely high levels of liability. Failing to verify identity at all in an identity system is blatantly unreasonable.
Sorry Peter but you're in the grip of a severe delusion here. There is no such thing as a singular "identity" that is even remotely the same for the phone company's own relationships with its own customers and somebody trusting a stranger to hold $100Ks of crypto for them.
In these cases providers *aren't even trying*. Yes identity is complex, but that's not the problem here.
Because for their phone business it doesn't make sense for them to try, that's why. They are a phone company not an "identity" company. That 3rd parties don't understand this, or want to free ride and demand services from them they didn't pay for, is very much not their fault.
Meh. Everyone has a responsibility to take due care, regardless of what they think their business is. Remember, if they had accidentally accepted a fake ID, I wouldn't want to hold them liable.
Here's an example I ran into the other day: https://www.petzl.com/CA/en/Sport/Ropes/RAD-LINE-6-mm … That product is fucking dangerous; 6mm is insanely skinny for a rope. But it has it's uses, and Petzl makes perfectly clear what they are and how to use it safely. They've done their part.
People *will* incorrectly use Petzl RAD LINE for higher energy climbing fall arrest and get themselves killed when it snaps. I'm OK with that, because Petzl has made a good product for its niche and explained that clearly.
I'm less OK with one of their older products: https://www.petzl.com/CA/en/Sport/Lanyards/SPELEGYCA … The SPELEGYCA is a bad idea: doesn't meet it's niche well, and is very easy to misuse even without intending too. Petzl makes some effort to explain that. But I could buy an argument that it's not due care.
Petzl knows their users are going to buy SPELEGYCA lanyards and accidentally climb above their anchors, *and* they know that a dynamic rope solution would weigh about the same, work better, and not kill people. So in a lawsuit I'd be happy to see them shoulder some liability.
See, this stuff isn't black and white: I'd rather see these decisions made based on what a company could have easily done. AT&T getting their customer service techs some basic anti-social-engineering training, *or* discouraging 2FA, is easy and would prevent a lot of harm.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
