4 ms·

> I don't know what the best solution to this will look like Changing the law to require that banks prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they entered into a co

by u801e 6y ago

> I don't know what the best solution to this will look like Changing the law to require that banks prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they entered into a contract with you. The burden should be on the bank/creditor to prove that they extended a line of credit to you. It shouldn't be up to you to prove that you didn't. I mean, imagine if you could hold any company liable for fraud if you received a phishing email that appeared to be from them.

Terr_ 6y ago
Indeed, it's an incentive problem. Banks create shitty systems because when their systems fail someone else suffers. Even the phrase "identity theft" is a misleading attempt to shift the blame, as humorously depicted in this Mitchell & Webb comedy sketch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS9ptA3Ya9E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS9ptA3Ya9E
- TedDoesntTalk 6y ago
  Thx for that video.... it's great!
hakfoo 6y ago
I believe it needs to be a person-to-person interaction. You want a line of credit? You have to go into a physical location, get photographed, maybe a fingerprint scan. Ideally, we centralize the data. This serves several goals: 1) It provides a huge resource bank for fraud detection. On the small scale, you can flip the records to law enforcement as soon as someone says that their identity was stolen. On a big scale, you could identify serial fraudsters-- if the same guy applies at 12 banks under 12 names, a red flag needs to go off as soon as he steps into bank No. 13. 2) It makes applying for credit a serious, conscious thing that discourages frivolous use. The Klarna/Affirm style "instant credit" disappears. I think there are many people who will be better with their money just because of the shame of going into a bank and admitting they need another credit line. 3) You have an opportunity for direct intervention. Applying for credit may be a crisis signal-- maybe te guy taking your picture has some basic training and guidance to ask "are you undergoing financial abuse by a spouse?" or "you know that you're buying into a classic 419 scam?"

by u801e 6y ago

Terr_ 6y ago

Indeed, it's an incentive problem. Banks create shitty systems because when their systems fail someone else suffers. Even the phrase "identity theft" is a misleading attempt to shift the blame, as humorously depicted in this Mitchell & Webb comedy sketch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS9ptA3Ya9E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS9ptA3Ya9E

TedDoesntTalk 6y ago
Thx for that video.... it's great!

hakfoo 6y ago

I believe it needs to be a person-to-person interaction. You want a line of credit? You have to go into a physical location, get photographed, maybe a fingerprint scan. Ideally, we centralize the data. This serves several goals: 1) It provides a huge resource bank for fraud detection. On the small scale, you can flip the records to law enforcement as soon as someone says that their identity was stolen. On a big scale, you could identify serial fraudsters-- if the same guy applies at 12 banks under 12 names, a red flag needs to go off as soon as he steps into bank No. 13. 2) It makes applying for credit a serious, conscious thing that discourages frivolous use. The Klarna/Affirm style "instant credit" disappears. I think there are many people who will be better with their money just because of the shame of going into a bank and admitting they need another credit line. 3) You have an opportunity for direct intervention. Applying for credit may be a crisis signal-- maybe te guy taking your picture has some basic training and guidance to ask "are you undergoing financial abuse by a spouse?" or "you know that you're buying into a classic 419 scam?"