Handsignatures are Ridiculous!
Handsignatures are totally ridiculous, I can't believe they have legal effect in the 21 century with a population that supposedly has an average IQ of 90.
I have always wondered that there is something wrong with signatures, even as a kid, when I saw my father sign checks. It seemed to me so easy to forge. But now as an adult it's literally mindboggling to me how ridiculous this idea is.
I just got home from my notary, we signed some contracts on one of my business dealings. She literally told me to sign the papers 2 times in order to make sure that it will not become forged.
I didn't want to be rude or to ask questions, she is a good person, I know her for a long time. But I could not grasp how she didn't realized the obvious nonsense of this.
Yes of course 1 copy stays in her archive, 1 at me, and 1 at the other party. However this still doesn't make sense from a logical standpoint.
I mean how hard it is to forge a hand signature? Just the one in the title picture? It's just CTRL+C, CTRL+V .... Literally.
And I believe you don't even need a notary to create a legally binding contract, it is just optional. So if some guy signs a contract with another one, just 2 parties, that is also a legally binding contract, I believe. Like if you open a broker account or a bank account, you don't need a lawyer for that.
And even if you do it through a notary, it's not like there could be no malicious entity that would maliciously forge your handsignature and sign documents with it. This was literally happening in most of the corporate world throughout the 80's and 90's.
So it's totally ridiculous to have hand signatures that can be that easily falsified. It literally looks like this:
And then I am seeing Banks and other institutions using "touchscreen signatures", whereas instead of signing things on a paper, you sign it on a touchscreen.
It's totally ridiculous, and it just shows you the amount of disrespect these people have for your intellect. Let me sum it up for you:
BIOMETRIC DATA IS BULLSHIT, AND IT'S HORRIBLY INSECURE!
This means: fingerprint, retina scan, hand signature, stamps, seals, DNA, "mother's maiden name" and other similar things are all bullshit, it can be easily guessed or faked. It provides 0 security, this really means 0 security, and it's exactly like the fence on the sidewalk in the picture above.
You are the one who is fooled by believing that these things make you more secure. And the banks and others horribly insult you when they make you use nonsense like these. So what is the alternative?
Public Key Cryptography
Yea. Actual intelligent people have invented Public Key Cryptography, that actually works, and it's actually unique to you, and nobody else can replicate it, given if the private keys are secured. This is how it should be done.
- You create a private key securely, and you don't give it out to anyone (hence remaining private)
- You derive a public key from the private key, which you do give out to the people you choose
- You sign a message with your private key, where the private key won't be exposed, and the output can't be reverse-engineered
- The other party then decrypts the output with the public key, and gets the message
This is how you can prove your identity. This is how Bitcoin works. Your Bitcoin public key (not the address but the xpub key) is exactly this, and a Bitcoin transaction is nothing more than just signing a message with a private key to prove ownership of the money.
So there is no reason why similar identity systems could not be implemented for people to have security. Biometrics is a huge scam. And you don't need to put a microchip inside your brain to prove your identity. You just need a pair of cryptographic keys.
Luckily there are easy to use GUI softwares for this:
Sources:
- https://pixabay.com
- Font by: http://www.iconian.com , License: http://www.apache.org/licenses (v2.0)
- https://www.memecenter.com/gawenirs
I'm rather disturbed at how easy it is to get ID as long as you have the correct information.
Yep, with some basic social engineering, technically everyone's bank account can be wiped out, if a persistent hacker get's to work.
Either the bank IT personnel are complete morons, or they literally don't care about their customers at all.
I can't believe the security experts are not screaming out loud about this obvious threat.
The majority like to remain asleep. If they are awakened, they readily fall right back. I remember Blockbuster video asking me for my social security number to open an account. I never did get an account there. The guy at the counter gave me the weirdest look when I said 'no, I like to protect my personal information'. The people haven't changed much in thirty years. The majority are still gullible. Identity theft seems like a brand new thing every few years. Wells Fargo was even opening fake bank accounts in their customers names, recently, and people still have accounts there. I guess Annie Lennox was right when she said 'some of them WANT to be abused.' So 'sweet dreams' to the majority, to the rest of us, awake!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeMFqkcPYcg
An expert hacker can hack any bank eventually. The banks and other large orgs. are trying hard to stay one step ahead of them. It is a tough game.
My recent story can be shared here: I did sign with the certified notary in presence, still, the file was rejected by the embassy with the reason that the notary didn't write a sentence LONG enough. A half month was then wasted ridiculously! No trust can be fulfilled this way at all, but it's still rigidly requested.
Once I had a permit denied because the request form had some coffe stains on it, which they had put on it, because they can't even handle the documents correctly.
Damn I hate bureaucrats so much.
Another interesting post profitgenerator. Signatures on legal documents have traditionally represented a ' sign of nature' or sign of a living, breathing soul and are usually supposed to be signed in ink, preferably red ink to indicate the signing in blood. So I've heard.
Thanks again.
I've read that in Ancient Greece and Rome, they have used them as well, especially when slaves were freed.
Slaves and their master had to sign their names on a relinquishment contract, and the master made the slave free.
However the slaves could not write , so most of the time they just crossed an X on the paper.
It's literally ridiculous how easily that could have been abused. But yes, in 2000 years, lawyers still didn't became smarter.
There are those who would argue that the Roman Empire never really ended, it simply assumed the identity of the Roman Catholic church, and carried on controlling the world with religion rather than politics and warfare. So it would make sense.
Well I don't care, but I believe the Roman Republic was indeed a great country, up until Julius Caesar destroyed it and turned it into a militaristic empire.
Before that it was the most civilized and most prosperous place. Taxes were practically nonexistent. You had trial by jury. There was no police, except town watchmen, that were only occupied in keeping the towns safe, and not harrassing innocents. And you could trade freely without any regulations.
It was really the most libertarian country of them all. The US in 1776 was a joke compared to it.
I mean literally taxes in Rome were about 2-3% of your estate. No income tax, no sales tax, no nothing.
Even the slaves had better life conditions that some of the sweatshop workers of today, basically all masters took care of their slaves and bought healthcare for them, which can't be said about current corporations. And certainly it was a less brutal slavery than egyptian slavery, or even american slavery.
I have to be honest and say that I don't know enough about Roman or Egyptian history so can't comment on that but if what you are saying is true about the Roman Empire pre Julius Caesar, then it sounds like a decent place.
I like your sentiments regarding freedom as well. If you get time please check out my post 'So we want to be free?...Really?' and let me know what you think.
Cheers
The Roman Republic, not the Empire, that is the main difference.
Ancient Egypt was a shitty place, a total theocracy combined with an absolute monarchy and brutal slavery. There wasn't anything good there that I can point too.
But Rome was indeed a great place pre Caesar, I mean you literally had politicians say these things:
When was the last time you heard a senator say things like this? It was so long ago.
Sorry. My mistake. :(
love that quote! Think I'll put it ion a tee shirt. :)
Cheers buddy. Much appreciated. I'll look into the Roman Republic.
Cool. I just looked it up, it was a 3% tax according to a source, that was levied on property, and some flat license fees that were really tiny if you engaged in trading. Like if you bought yourself a place to trade in a market you rented out that place for a flat fee.
But other than that, absolutely no other taxes: no income tax, no sales tax, nothing else.
And there weren't even that many slaves in the beginning. And most slaves were housemaids, or people who worked in the garden.
Most farming jobs were done by the peasants, so slaves in some cases had better quality life than the farmers.
It was more like servants than slaves. They had full rights to move in the city, to marry, or even to buy property.
So it wasn't that harsh slavery as the other forms of that time.
My hand signature looks like that of a mentally challenged 4 year old. I refuse to master it. XD
Yes, except the average joe cannot secure his computer.
That's true, but we can have some kind of hardware device that will do that, like how bitcoin hardware wallets became popular to simplify the handling of Bitcoin.
Lets hope so. Steem kind of moved in this direction by creating recovery options. I had to move my bitcoins after a breakin. Fortunately, the robbers were apparently not interested in my backup or coins.
Another thing is company stamp. That's still pretty much treated as official very often.
Yes I mentioned stamps too. It's ridiculous as well.
They stamp and then sign the documents. As if the extra step of stamping would actually make it more secure, than without it.
Public Key Cryptography works for now, that is, until they invent a super dooper hooper pooper computer. At that point we move on to something else. I wonder what that will be?