There's a problem with this - I've never heard of this requirement short of you being on a sex offender's list(or on parole).
Of bigger concern is keeping an accurate address on your driver's license, but not everyone has those as well, and getting that updated is always very low priority.
Hmm...
As Ruir said, 'who says she works'. The IRS really doesn't care as long as it's books balance, and it works on an annual basis. They could get last year's information fairly easily, but that's not the address they're looking for, now is it?
I think you have too much confidence in the abilities of skip-tracers. Plenty are found, yes, but plenty also fall through the cracks. Consider federal fugitives who often aren't found for years. Most are caught quickly, yes, but some manage to hide.
The easiest way to do what she's doing is to simply shack up with a boy-toy and not have your name on any bills. No credit cards that aren't still at the old address, same with the bank account.
For example, from your link on skiptracing:
Often, the job becomes more than mere research since one must often employ methods of social engineering, which involves calling or visiting former neighbors, or other known contacts to ask about the subject, sometimes under false or misleading pretenses.
If she's only communicating with family through facebook and actually has the geolocation features turned off... It'd take a warrant to facebook to get them to give them IP address/location information.
Records that "skiptracers" use may include phone number databases, credit reports (including information provided on a loan application, credit card application, and in other debt collector databases), job application information, criminal background checks, utility bills (electricity, gas, water, sewage, phone, Internet, and cable), social security, disability, and public tax information
Thus my 'not working'(at least above the table, legally), which takes care of job apps, background checks, social security, and such, 'using the old address for bank/credit cards(doable with the internet), and 'living with boy toy' which takes care of the rest.
And facebook can be more reliable than physical mail? We're going to bank all of this on the reliability of a single third party entity?
I'm going to boil all of this down to 'You appear to have more faith in the USPS than I do'. The USPS is also a third party entity, after all. Process servers are third party entities. Etc...
My mother received a piece of mail literally TWO YEARS after I sent it. It came partially torn, in a plastic bag with an apology letter from them.
There was a bit of a local scandal a few years back where it turned out that a group of process servers were lying about making contact, forging signatures on paperwork.
If it were simply enough to say "we know this account really belongs to this person and that they actively login and use the account", then we wouldn't need certified mail or people to serve a summons in person.
As opposed to a certified letter to an address that may not even be where a person lives anymore?
They tried the other two ways; she was hiding her address ergo they failed at notifying her the latter two ways. The judge made a dispensation in this case, doesn't mean that it'll become a standard method.
It was explicit in the summary that the account was active and that was part of the decision. As was that the ex was hiding by not leaving a forwarding address to be traditionally served.
Today facebook can be more reliable than physical mail. Plenty of people move, after all, more than those that simply abandon their facebook accounts. I think, at least.
I'm picturing it like driving a car designed for power steering and brakes, with both out. Its even harder than for a car designed without those features to begin with because the car without was designed to work well woithout the systwm. With it they only expect it to be operated that way in an emergency, thus 'close enough' is seen as acceptable.
As MightyYar said, that's going by 30 year old technology for the train automation. Also very few people think that self-driving cars are ready today, more like 5-10 years in the future, minimum.
The article itself lists subsidized prices for the smart phones, which is why he's quoting $649 for a 16GB module, and I pulled $199 from the article.
I looked at the iPhone 6 tear down and the chip sizes are not that much smaller than a laptop's chips. So it's just miniaturized case, motherboard, battery and camera (and the battery holds a lot less charge than a laptop battery).
I haven't looked at that teardown, but I'm willing to bet that there's a lot FEWER chips because there's more integration within them, not to mention the engineering to fit that many into such a tight space. Mounting chips on BOTH sides of the motherboard? That's not normally seen in laptops or desktops.
Anyways - from a quick count I got 18 chips in an iphone 6.
In my laptop the RAM alone is 16 chips. Yes, it's a desktop replacement laptop.
I think it might be the case of 'normal user' vs 'power user' in deciding to only offer 16GB and 64GB phones. You have 'most' people who are like Sarten-X and 16GB is 'plenty'.
Then there's power users like you who will use more than the base amount. Now considering this population of people who want more local storage, how many are going to be satisfied with a 32GB model if a 64GB version is being offered for 'only' $50* more? After all, you already 'know' that you're going to bust 16GB, which means your phone will be half full.
It's entirely possible that Apple noticed a 'hockey stick' effect in it's sales - lots and lots and lots of 16GB models, lots of 64GB models, but the 32GB model was selling the least. So why have it? Odds are the 32GB users will grumble a bit and buy the 64GB model anyways.
*It seems like it'd be pretty standard: $199 for 16GB, $249 for 32GB, $299@64.
The ultimate strategy is to duplicate it in so many different areas that at least one of them survives. Preferably multiple ones.
The more critical the data, the more spots you duplicate it in.
Though you have to realize that eventually everything will be lost.
Glass master CDs? Anything that's sufficiently shielded, and the shielding isn't actually all that hard to make?
That might make the guy who has that current agreement with Audi very sad.
I think that the odds are good that the car companies might be required to buy the dealers out.
In your scenario your going to hate it when you need warranty work and the dealers tell you that you need to take it to an authorized warranty repair center for directly purchased cars. BTW that service center is three states over.
Why? Tesla has repair/maintenance centers located even in areas where it can't legally sell it's cars due to the stealership laws.
Second would be to simply authorize independent repair shops to do warranty work, who the manufacturer would pay standard rates to in order to do it.
Of course, the AC is wrong in most respects.
1. They're not selling 'carbon credits', they're selling ZEV credits(Zero Emissions Vehicle).
2. The price isn't $30k per car, the penalty itself is only $5k per missed ZEV, so logically Tesla has to sell them for less. Maybe $4k each.
It's not small change, but it's only about 5% of the vehicle.
How are you powering the timer/microcontroller?
I'm not disputing that it'd be easy to do - as a matter of fact I believe that most chargers/cars already have more complex logic installed to control charging in order to save money via drawing when electricity is at it's lowest rates.
Of course, if 'everybody' starts getting EVs said lowest rates might go away, but it'd still be cheaper than gasoline.
He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion
