this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2025
386 points (94.1% liked)
Greentext
6011 readers
1409 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Japan is living in the year 2000, since 50 years.
Are they still using fax?
Largest market for fax machines...
and floppy discs
Not true. Their goverment stopped requiring floppy disks... *checks notes* ...last year!
im sure its still the biggest market.
On God.
There are some things where fax still makes sense. Maybe I'm old, but I'm not a fan of "digital signatures" and "digital seals" for professional licenses. In cases where a document needs to be signed and/or sealed, I would much prefer a fax to a PDF with a "digital seal". But that's just me and I'm a weird dude.
Edit: Turns out fax is insecure. Did not know this but it makes sense.
Modern PDF signing creates a digital fingerprint showing the device it was used on, whose credentials were used, a timestamp, and even a location if location services are turned on.
But yea, I guess all that just can't compete with the ironclad security of a fucking ink pen. Oh, sorry. A copy of an ink pen. So much more secure and traceable.
Nope.
Fax is insecure, you'd be better off signing w/o a "digital seal" or whatever and emailing it in. You can also print, sign, scan, and send, just like w/ a fax, but send as a PDF instead of insecurely over the telephone wires. I've done both digital signatures and scanned regular signatures, both work and are better than fax.
I don't use fax... I was not aware that it was insecure but I guess that makes sense.
Looking back, I think we can say that the year 2000 was a much better time than 2025
what does that even mean?
I think it means that they were ahead of the curve prior to the year 2000, which is when they started to fall behind the curve.
Not going to comment on the accuracy, but it makes sense to me.
I actually find this interesting, part of me wonders if there technological advancement meant they didn't need to make changes/innovation, which led to others having issues having to innovate beyond what Japan did.
Hence why they are still stuck in 2000s