this company earns over 700 million because normies can't into gpg
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
this company earns over 700 million because normies can't into gpg
this company earns over 700 million because normies can't into gpg
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
More like "because they're forced to use it". The normal people replacement for GPG is botnet shit like SSO and 2FA. Docusign just sucks for everyone and I know plenty of tech illiterates who hate it so much that they use an email that says "I agree" or a PDF with a scribble signature annotation instead.
Digital signature carry legal weight here so I never used a program, just pasted my signature, or in rare cases, printed a pdf, signed it with regular pen, scanned it in color and emailed it for exporting goods and shit.
The American public relies too much on microshaft and odd software like turbotax or docusign.
>The normal people replacement for GPG is botnet shit like SSO and 2FA.
No, it isn't. You're a total moron if you think SSO or 2FA is in anyway a GPG replacement.
>need password to unlock hard drive
>hard drive contains GPG key
your computer is your 2nd factor, if you are a competent computer user
Forced to is the correct word. This is just kosher garbage for morons. Don't pay too much attention to it.
>make a document signing software that's automated
>sell it to these guys for $165 million
>meanwhile there are anons on this board arguing daily just on which OS to use and which programming language is the best
Well yeah, OP (and all posters of threads like this) are just seething that they didn't think of it first and get free money. Autistic NEETs have a real problem understanding that technical brilliance and business case rarely overlap.
You missed the crucial step: "know the right people".
For normal computer users, it is. Trusting a tech company to manage the keys makes sense if you don't want responsibility.
Can you even find your old accounts to sign new documents?
normal computer users links all of their shit and have their phone auto sign on
tbh there's karmic weight to taking advantage of morons. You're better off not doing it.
They're not morons. Time is money and unless an org has IT staff that can setup their own document signing they are just going to grab something off the shelf. Docusign offers a free tier but for companies that use it a lot they will just pay the small fee. The latest acquisition is just a way to expand their services. You guys just don't know how to negotiate an offer.
The point I was making earlier is that there are probably anons here with the technical know how to make such software worthy of an acquisition like that but they can't get out of their own way
>Docusign offers a free tier but for companies that use it a lot they will just pay the small fee.
Docusign's pricing is not as advertised, just fyi
nah, it's not that, they convinced companies that there way of digitally signing documents is the way to go.
Modern tech is the biggest scam out there.
>Posted from iPhone X
the brazilian government has a free document signer that is applicable to all legal documents.
anglos are just dumb
>free
are you entirely sure about that, monkey? no one works for free
Its FOSS. I forgot the name. Probably still costs money to serve it but you're not paying a license fee
It's financed with taxes, obviously, but it's probably cheap. It's a webpage for signing .PDF files or loose files with a detached signature using PKI.
The certification is done by the Federal Government itself, they already have your data like name, birth date, ID numbers, etc. You just register an account and a device for 2FA and you use your account for every fed gov services, like Gov.uk in the UK.
It's optional. You can buy digital certificate tokens too, those are very secure but they have a few bureaucratic steps to acquire. Registering such tokens fraudulently are very, very rare.
For private matters, you can use whatever you want, with different standards of acceptability by the courts. DocuSign is widely used by some companies. It's not as solid if the other party claims they have not signed the document and there's no proof the email address doesn't belong or wasn't provided by the other party, for example. But it's the same elsewhere, basically.
restaurant industry is worth like 3.5 trillion globally yet you can cook at home
>this company earns over 700 million
And I bet they don't encrypt any of the legal documents or metadata.
From what I've heard the employees can't either.
These threads are hilarious because almost nobody ever understands what problems are being solved and why businesses pay for a solution.
Go on and explain it then
no.
there's not much to it:
>customers can sign securely, easily, and without travelling/meeting with a rep.
>document management for company
this is not worth 700M
>this is not worth 700M
The people paying for it somewhat disagree
it's not actually $700 million per document
moron
Does docusign have additional legal status? Otherwise wouldn't everybody just use the signature feature in their pdf editor?
Most people don't use pdf editors
I always wondered why this was. Preview comes standard.
An ESign signature, which Docusign is, and others are too, is a legal signature, so it is equal in status.
In the case of a dispute, a court will examine whatever evidence there is that the signing took place legally, so any additional evidence besides the signature can be used to support it.
A PDF signature, on its own, is not actually a valid ESign signature because it doesn't have the associated "Agreement to ESign" agreement recorded, disclosure forms signed, etc. BUT, the overriding point for a signature is whether or not both partys agree to it. So as long as the person who gets the signed doc is OK with a PDF signature, it's fine and legally binding. If there is a dispute, then other evidence will have to be shown. For example, other emails where the contract is discussed, or showing that after the signature the person who signed acted like they had signed a contract and used the services they were contracting for etc.
Basically the same if someone had signed a doc with a pen and mailed it back - how do you know who signed it?
you'd be surprised what counts as a digital signature -- almost anything with varying levels of assurance
Well that is what I thought, but I worked somewhere that transitioned to docusign for some particular groups and documents. They were selective in the licenses, so that is why I thought it might be a legal thing. It does make it harder to sign for other people.
>making money is BAD
DocuSign is for corpos, not for individual users
>have to DocuSign^TM something
>forgot my account or whatever
>just make a new account and shit out the default signature
>nobody complains
How exactly is this supposed to achieve anything?
If you're representing a company then no, you will not be making a bunch of throwaway accounts. Real life isn't reddit
Haha yeah. I don't have a job.
finding things that tech people do all the time easily and making it simple for normies is a common business idea. see dropbox. see visicalc. etc.
Exactly. Everyday anons here are jerking themselves off to how beautiful their code is and how fast it run while never seemingly working on anything the world at large would ever care about. Even right now I'm having this conversation in multiple threads. Normies just want you to make their lives easier and there are enough of them out there that companies are able to make millions off of that premise.
literally just typing your name in a text field counts as a signature already, the only reason this exists is for mindless corpos who always think "better safe than sorry" and happily spend frickoff9999dollar on what would be an extremely petty nonsense argument
Im not really convinced that DocuSign signatures will hold up under legal scrutiny
Probably browser-fingerprinted to frick. If you went up against them in court, I'm pretty sure there'd be some {$bigTech} glowies who'd appear from nowhere and """prove""" you were exactly at a given location on a given device when the document was """signed""".
A government office recently needed a copy of my diploma, and the university made me download a "signed" PDF. It was a normal PDF with printing disabled and a 7-character alphanumeric code in the top left I was supposed to be able to type that code into this shitty third party website and it would "cryptographically attest" that, like, I dunno; the alphanumeric code was valid?
The site didn't recognize the alphanumeric code at all and in the end I got so annoyed that I just re-encoded the PDF to enable printing and attached a note telling the government to call my university if they needed proof I'd graduated. And this was a fricking huge university! You've definitely heard of it.
The entire private "identity" industry is a scam, apparently.
If clickwrap agreements hold up, why wouldn't a signature?
I guess generally if you ended up in court claiming a digital signature wasn't your the company being able to demonstrate that you behaved as if you have signed the contract and made use of their services would be sufficient evidence for adhesion.
Like you cant sign a lease and pay rent for 6 months and then pretend you never signed it
It counts, if you get a mortgage you have to sign 900 docusign documents
t. guy who is supposed to close on a house tomorrow but the lender is still playing fricking games with me acting like my credit score is 0
>have to use this piece of shit for some form
>expect it to be some sort of cryptographic signature management
>it's literally just shitty PDF annotation software and a server that stores a copy of the document
fricking how