27 Central Banks Push Anti-Counterfeit Software

securitas writes "GlobeTechnology reports that the 27-member Central Bank Counterfeit Deterrence Group is behind the anti-counterfeit software in Adobe Photoshop CS, Ulead PhotoImpact, Jasc Paint Shop Pro and others. Consortium members of the Central Bank Counterfeit Deterrence Group include the USA, Canada, Germany, Japan, Australia and many more. Law enforcement agencies and banknote-issuing authorities say that it is a response to the rapid growth of digital counterfeiting. The software is distributed free of charge to hardware and software manufacturers and is voluntary to use. But the European Union is drafting legislation to force manufacturers to include anti-counterfeit measures in all systems, scanners or printers sold in Europe. Counterfeiting and anti-counterfeiting with Adobe Photoshop and other products like inkjet printers have been the subject of recent discussion on Slashdot."

Comments

If I've learned nothing else in 20+ years of learn

[Amsterdam Vallon]

ing... you CANNOT thwart technology.

We will overcome. We will adapt. We will survive. Look at P2P.

What's the problem?

[LostCluster]

Honestly, I don't see why people would be too up in arms about this. Digital copying of money can produce some pretty good fakes. And remember, the standard a counterfeit bill has to pass is not an expert's exam, but the exam of the kid at the grocery store. If the bad guy can successfully pass the bill there, it's too late.

Afterall, those who want to photograph money for inclusion in a poster or such in compliance with the too big, too small or other clearly-wrong copy rules spelled out in the law can still do so optically. Making images of money shouldn't be as easy as technology has made making images of everything else.

Re:What's the problem?

[mattjb0010]

Digital copying of money can produce some pretty good fakes

I'd still like to see how someone would go about copying transparent sections of notes, other than cutting a section out and using stickytape (which I've heard has been tried) that looks obviously dodgy.

Re:What's the problem?

[capz loc]

There are many anti-counterfeiting measures already implemented on paper money. (cotton-based(IIRC) paper, color-changing inks, watermarks, and metallic threads. Instead of changing US currency again, why not train cashiers and other handlers of money to utilize the features that are already in place?

Re:What's the problem?

[blincoln]

Honestly, I don't see why people would be too up in arms about this.

Constantly checking for counterfeits steals processing power that I should be able to use for things I want my PC to do.

The software is never going to be perfect, either. What recourse do I have if I'm designing something that looks enough like currency to trigger it, but actually has a legitimate purpose (e.g. a prop for a film)?

Finally, it's just another symptom of the nanny-state mentality that is pervading modern society. I shouldn't have automated systems watching over my every move to make sure I'm not doing anything unfavourable.

Re:What's the problem?

[DebianRcksLindowsLie]

Just wait until they start mandating what DRM, anti-counterfeiting, etc. software must be included in your operating system. Help Debian or your favorite Free Software OS get a foothold. Click the link in my .sig for more. Click my homepage for too much information.

Re:What's the problem?

[cujo_1111]

Didn't anyone tell you, the whole innocent until proven guilty ideal has disappeared.

We are all subversives until proven otherwise...

Re:What's the problem?

[C10H14N2]

They already do. However, there are many, many issues of US currency out there. Part of the problem is that all US currency is legal tender. If you can conterfeit a 1980 note, that's as good as a 2004. Could you tell a counterfeit 1980 $5 or $10 note with a line of people at your register? Would you sit there dutifully checking every bill under a UV light to make sure the paper is good? Nah, you just hope to god it's good and leave it to the bank to sort out, who most of the time don't check anything but the pH of $20 or larger notes anyway. You'll get more scrutiny with $50s and $100s, but hardly ever, if ever, $1-10 notes. Also, what of vending machines (read also: Slot Machines)? If you think that Vegas and Atlantic City haven't sent a few lobbyists out on this one, think again.

Re:What's the problem?

[BitterOak]

Honestly, I don't see why people would be too up in arms about this.

Because devices (hardware and software) that I buy and pay for should be working for me, not the government. My computer's CPU cycles should not be utilized against my will to ensure that I am complying with the law. Let the Secret Service buy computers to do their work, and let me use my computers to do my work.

Re:What's the problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

Instead of changing US currency again, why not train cashiers and other handlers of money to utilize the features that are already in place?

I used to work for a bank, and the reason that we considered the tellers to be the first and weakest line of defense against fraud was because a great many of them were ABSOLUTE FUCKING MORONS. We simply couldn't rely on them to catch fraudulent transactions in their daily work, so we had, as all banks do, vast behind-the-scenes anti-fraud systems in place. Basically, any time that the teller spotted something funny, that was purely a bonus. You give them a pat on the back, and send them back out on the line to do what they're supposed to do - customer service, not fraud prevention. I am quite certain that some of them would have cheerfully accepted "checks" written with a purple crayon on a McDonald's napkin, without so much as batting an eye - an issue complicated by the fact that a check written in purple crayon on a McDonald's napkin is not necessarily a priori invalid. But making those decisions is beyond their ability to do, so we don't expect them to do it - we have someone else behind them, whose job is to think about things like that.

You can spend some time in training, and it might help a little bit, but the reality is that the folks on the front lines have neither the time nor the temperament to do much more than look for one or two of the most obvious marks of fraud, and if the black hats are even slightly sophisticated, they'll beat those folks every time. That's why we have specialists, but counterfeiters and forgers, generally speaking, don't have to produce copies that will stand up to an electron microscopy examination of the fibers and a gas-chromatograph analysis of the inks. They just have to produce something that's believable to the GED-holder working the counter, and then they're gone. The trick is to produce some feature or combination of features that's A) very hard to copy, and; B) immediately obvious to the cashier who has an IQ to match her shoe size, and that's a taller order than many people realize.

Re:What's the problem?

[wibs]

Yes, this is the main problem. It seems to be generally agreed that this won't stop anyone who's serious, but when you're using image/pattern recognition to prevent scanning and printing, it's not a big leap to putting copyright enforcement patterns in magazines, books, etc etc. And as much as I can sympathize with wanting to protect your copyright, there are perfectly legitimate and legal reasons for scanning something out of your magazine/book/etc. The question is how long it will be before this kind of protection is implemented, and if we'll be told when it happens. Sorry for sounding paranoid, but it seems warranted.

Re:What's the problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, in many countries, coins were originally made out of metal of the same value as the coin. For example, there was 50c worth of silver in the original Australian 50c piece... the problem was that silver increased in price, so people started melting down the coins and selling them for a profit.

Re:What's the problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

the only true way to prevent counterfeiting is to have the legitimate currency producer have exclusive and restricted access to the materials required to mint money, those being:

1. paper
2. ink

The paper problem was solved long ago. Counterfeiters found it was cheaply available from the US government -- at the economical price of $1 per bill. They bleached out dollar bills and reprinted them as twenties and up.

By the way, has anyone figured out why merchants are allowed to get away with marking bills with those counterfeit detection pens? You may legally deface coins or currency any way you want to, cut them up and make jewelry out of them, hammer them flat, etc. However, once you deface them, it is a violation of federal law to put them back into circulation. So why do merchants get off scott free?

Re:What's the problem?

[Tassach]

The real problem is that printed paper currency is technologically obsolete, and has been for at least the last decade. We need a new kind of cash.

One solution would to go back to using coins made of precious metal, preferably where the value of the metal is close to the face value of the coin. Of course, governments hate this idea, as it destroys thier ability to conjure money from thin air. Gold coin is also impractical for large transactions, which is one of the main reasons we started using paper money in the first place.

Combined with modern anti-tamper technology, coins could be nearly impossible to counterfeit economically. No matter how good printing technology gets, it won't be able to reproduce a holographically etched hunk of gold. Even if the precious metal content is largely symbolic, it still serves the purpose of defeating counterfeiters by driving up the cost of the raw materials.

Won't stop the big crooks, but -

[Gleenie]

- it's not really designed to. Sure, the big organised crime gangs will get around it with no problems at all. But it will stop the casual counterfeiter. This is what it is designed to do.

The problem of course is that _sometimes_ it gets in the way of legitimate uses of digital technology. This is an example of one idiot ruining it for everyone. Life's like that. I pay high car insurance premiums because other people are stupid/lazy/drunk/asleep, even though I'm not.

Yeah, it's annoying, but that's life. It would just be nice if the companies would be more up-front about it. Good on Adobe for coming clean; but they needn't have denied it in the first place!

Re:Won't stop the big crooks, but -

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, he's not smoking anything. There are a lot of kids who have just scanned and printed off money on their inkjets. If you worry some standard heavy weight paper a bit, it actually feels quite like money paper. Nowhere near as durable, and someone who handles money daily would often be able to tell the difference. But not always. And a fair number of bills are passed off this way every year. This software is meant to keep people from being idiots. Whether we should do that, though, is a matter for debate.

Dare I suggest...

[Anonymous Coward]

that rather than trying to fix the software that can copy notes, you design a note that's harder to copy in such a fashion? Maybe something that has a clear window, shadow image, fluorescent printing, and more? Something that makes it much easier for the end user to check (in several ways) the authenticity of a given note?

It's a never ending game. As E. E. Smith said, what physical science can devise, physical science can analyse and reproduce. We just have to keep moving the bar higher than the counterfeiters can easily reach. If the typical US bank note is too easily copied by technology available to the home user, then it's time for the typical US bank note to be updated. Not for the technology to be crippled...

Good and Bad

[HappyCitizen]

What is the point, if anyone really wants to conterfiet software, they'll find a copy of older versions around. It will work just as well. Heck, why not use paint, with some skill that could work. This won't deter those who truely want to counterfiet. Maybe it will save a few $100 a year from those who are lightly considering it, but mainly it will kunut people who want crystal clear images which the software determines to look like money. This hurts, not helpes IMO

What is the real problem?

[ObviousGuy]

The heart of the problem is that the legal tender is easily replicable. Coins are harder to reproduce and the payoff is much lower than paper money. Paper money, because it must be printed is susceptible to counterfeiting.

The counterfeiters who are truly making a dent in the money supply don't use Photoshop, though. For the most part, they have real drum printers and very sophisticated printing plates. They are printing money onto real fiber paper. They certainly aren't printing bills out on their Epson Deskjet onto White Shark recycled office paper.

At the extremely low level of low-cost counterfeiting which these software controls attempt to prevent, there simply isn't enough money being produced to worry about. The guy in his basement printing maybe a hundred thousand dollars a day out of his inkjet printer can only use so much of that before getting red flagged by some clerk who notices that his $100 bill isn't quite right (usually because the paper is different).

These software controls don't do anything to attack the real problem of counterfeiters who are doing the real damage printing millions of dollars which are indistinguishable from real money.

good reason for this?

[maliabu]

i would imagine anyone printing counterfeits out of a computer/printer are amateurs, thus the number of notes printed are limited, therefore they can be used fairly easily without getting caught.

how many times does the shopkeeper in a gas station look so carefully on the notes you pass on to him?

so maybe, just maybe, this kind of Anti-Counterfeit measure is enough to put a lot of people off that wishful thinking.

Genuine question.

[totatis]

This is a genuine question : how is it a bad thing ?

For me, that means two things :
1) if you want to do some parody bill, well, you'll still can, you'll just have to make sure that even from far it looks like parody.
2) 15 years old kids that get drunk for the first time and think that it is a good idea to make some cheap bill to get that coke free won't go 15 years in jail.

This thing just means that if you want to make false money, you'll have to dig a little bit. And if you do, it's clear that you wanted to counterfeit, and you'll go to jail. On the other hand, some kid won't be able to pool a cheap prank that can get him in serious troubles. Good chances are that he'll think "hey, if i've got to go to www.falsemoney.ze, maybe the police/secret service/whatever will notice, so maybe I shouldn't".

Remember, this thing is not, has never been, and will never be to deter mafias from counterfeiting. It's just to make it hard enough for Joe Schmoe that he has to think about his actions, and then decide that it would be stupid to risk 15 years for a prank.

Re:Genuine question.

[1u3hr]

This is a genuine question : how is it a bad thing ?

Today it's currency. Tomorrow it's anything with the Disney digital watermark. Or Playboy. Next it's illegal to sell hardware or software without this DRM. No need to make it illegal to own or make, it'll just be practically impossible for most people to avoid.

Of course, criminals will still counterfeit and copy whatever they want; it's "users", or as they prefer to call us, "consumers", who will lose out.

completely voluntary...

[the-build-chicken]

"excuse me sir, I represent the 27 banks the currently back all major mutual funds that invest in your company and keep it afloat. We would like you to put this software in your product please"

Funny how the word voluntary seems to be changing of late.

legislated software features??

[dilvie]

Does anybody else think it's a BAD idea to try to legislate software features? Am I the only one who thinks that could cause a lot of problems? - Eric

useless

[Vincman]

AFAIK the crack to Photoshop CS has already been released weeks ago. Not that I sympathise in this case, but any self-respecting hacker will see it as a challenge to break such rules, especially when it receives attention in the press.

Maybe this is just another sign that cash is an inferior medium, and there needs be a better alternative?

Re:What happens to open source image software?

[iminplaya]

This could be the first step in the criminalization(sp) of open source software. What starts out as voluntary usually ends up becoming mandatory(Anyone remember the "double-nickel" on the american interstates?)

Re:Stupid Journalists...

[timeOday]

Are you trying to say those who print money at home with computers aren't "hackers"?

Uh, what am I missing? Of course they're not hackers. What they're doing has nothing to do with hacking, therefore they're not hackers.

Open Source Firmware

[femto]

How long before we see open source projects to replace the processing elements of peripherals?

For example, with a printer, something along the lines of a microcontroller (running embedded linux) which connects to the print head, print head drive circuits and paper drive circuits. The existing printer is used only toprovide a mechanical chassis.

It might even make financial sense. Buy that entry level printer, which uses similar mechanical components to that high end printer, and end up with an 'open source' solution that exceeds the capabilities of the high end printer but costs less. Alternatively, don't throw out that obsolete printer but reuse the chassis and convert it into a state-of-the-art printer.

Re:Can't we just go cashless?

[Grey_14]

First off, Nothing is as anonymous as cash, Though money can be tracked by S/N, Cards would be so much easier to track, and if they werent, than they'd be easier to counterfit than cash. And as for coins? It's bad enough when the couch eats 35 cents in change after you lie back to enjoy a movie, How bout if the couch ate $35? That'd be no fun, same issue to, Dimes etc. arent that hard to counterfit, the question is, why?, If coins were worth more, there would just be a bigger interesting in counterfitting coins.

Re:Stupid Journalists...

[kfg]

Correct. They are no more hackers, in any sense of the word, than someone who uses a computer to type in the latest Stephen King short story and putting it on usenet is.

Or someone who rips a CD.

Or copies an unprotected propriatary file.

Mere use of a computer is not hacking.

The correct term for the people in this case is "counterfeiter."

KFG

Re:gimp and sane illegal

[Trejkaz]

You'd want to hope by "scanners" they meant the hardware. If the hardware (or at least the firmware within) incorporates the feature, only hacking that firmware would remove the "feature." The last thing we'd want to see is someone having to write a patch to GIMP to implement this useless feature.

But since this is happening in the EU, this begs a question... how does the machine know it's money? The colour? Certainly not the pictures since I'm led to believe each EU country has a different picture on it.

One thing's for sure, anyway. In the EU, settling on a specific, single picture per note would do more to prevent counterfeiting than preventing a few pieces of scanner hardware from working.

Nanny-State Mentality

[handy_vandal]

Finally, it's just another symptom of the nanny-state mentality that is pervading modern society.

The nanny-state mentality (nice phrase) isn't peculiar to modern society -- it's common throughout history.

Check out, for example, the history of sumptuary laws ... or how Calvinist Geneva was practically a police state ... or how Sparta was literally a police state ... or how most of Roman history is characterized by subordination of the individual to the state ... for that matter, consider that most of human history is characterized by the institution of slavery.

On the balance, the nanny state has been the historical norm; widespread respect for individual initiative is a relatively recent phenomenon.

-kgj

Post-Government Cash Cards

[handy_vandal]

So, the question is - don't you all think it will come down to point where the Government issues cash cards?

I think it's more likely that government as we know it will fail altogether, and credit card companies will step in to fill the void.

-kgj

Old stuff

[Tom-the-Great]

What is stopping someone from just using Photoshop 7 or an older printer.

I have sacanned a 1 dollar bill into photoshop 7 and printed it on my espon printer (after putting Mr.T's face in the bill) and it looked suprisingly real, and my printer is an old ink jet.
If there is a will, there is a way.
Having anti-counterfit software won't stop it.

Re:Anti-counterfeit is good

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm as concerned as anyone about the expansion of copyright and all of the negative consequences for society at large.

But anti-counterfeit measures are good, unless you wish to see the destruction of the civil institution that is money. Sure, money has its problems, sometimes even if you have a lot of it. But counterfeiting robs *everyone* who works for a living, and rationally we should be in favor of the strongest protections necessary.

You should be skeptical (OK I'm American) of any questionable measures (don't use the Patriot act to equate counterfeiting with terrorism (unless you think that counterfeiting is a form of terrorism, since it has the effect (but not the aim) of destroying society)), but consider it war in defense of a fundamental pillar of society.

Censorship snowball.

[Deleriux]

Money doesnt bother me. What bothers me is whats next to be deemed 'untasteful' to manipulate?

Re:Oh, get real

[The Wicked Priest]

Fortunately, open source has already secured a position of economic importance, so this is never going to happen.

There will be conflicts ahead, of course, and not just on this counterfeiting issue. Another that's already threatening, here in the U.S., is the broadcast flag for digital television. That seems equally incompatible with open source.

It will be, ah, interesting to see how this plays out in the next few years.

what would be the problem?

[Lord Bitman]

Allow perfect scanning, perfect printing, and simply don't allow an exact-scale bill to be printed. All other arguments aside, I don't see how anyone would be hurt by not allowing a bill to be printed within 10% of its true scale. All else being the same, what's wrong with this?

Re:Can't We Do Better Than Franklin?

[CaptainTux]

Any other ideas? Twigs with notches in them?

The barter system. Yes, it's as old as time but it still works very well. It's secure, simple, and really nearly eliminates the class system our entire society is based on. Even B2B transactions can be done in barter (American, Continental, and a few other airlines do this routinely as well as most of the Fortune 500). One of the nice things is that, with barter, ANY product is within ANYONE'S reach. It just becomes a matter of connecting buyer and seller.

The Real Problem

[burris]

The problem is that once these copy protection controls are installed everyone will want to use them. Markus Kuhn of Cambridge University has discovered one of the patterns used for detection of bank notes, known as the EURion Constellation. Sure, it's not that big of a deal when only bank notes have the constellation, but expect to see the constellation start showing up in the darndest places.

Soon everyone and their brother will start printing the Constellation onto whatever they feel needs "copy protection." You'll see it printed on photographs and forms and all kinds of junk. Regular people will have their right to make copies and the ability to use their own equipment usurped by others abusing a mechanism that was only supposed to inconvenience counterfeiters.

Re:The Real Problem

[dmeranda]

You are exactly right, it's not about anti-counterfeiting technology, but rather the inevitable exploitation of this for other purposes with much darker motives. Although I believe that protection of currencies is extremely important, this mechanism is particularly open to abuse. Not abuse by our governments, but by corporations and other control-centric organizations. It's a simple watermarking technique which anybody can use for any print material.

This will essentially be free copy protection which may someday be ubiquitously enforced in all hardware and with the backing of law. And it will be law based upon fraud and counterfeiting, rather than copyright law. So what few "freedom" holes are left in the DMCA and its like will now be plugged up by anti-counterfeit laws. If laws are created (and they WILL come), are we going to have equivalent circumvention exemptions?

In fact I thought I had heard someplace that these anti-copying patterns were already being discovered in certain print publications. Even if laws aren't passed, there is nothing to stop the damage possible now. The hardware and software is already in place in the hand of the unsuspecting public.

Re:The Real Problem

[swilver]

Actually, this is not a problem. If software refuses to open/edit a significant percentage of pictures, people will look for other software. The more this mark is abused, the less copies of software that supports it will be sold as it slowly becomes unusable.

End result would be that the mark is outlawed for everything except currency (I seriously doubt such a law could be enforced), or they'll be forced to drop the protection altogether to avoid bankrupting the copier/scanner/image processing industry.

If there's a will, there's a way

[eaglebtc]

What difference does it make that these companies are including these forced anti-counterfeit measures? Crackers are willing to go ANY length necessary to defeat any and all anti-piracy measures. As a matter of fact, a patch for Adobe Photoshop CS was released just a few weeks ago that turns off the built-in currency-scanning mechanism.

People have a right to use software that does not impose arbitrary restrictions upon them. When Adobe has a virtual monopoly on the image editing market (because their software is really freakin' good), it is in their best interest not to alter the software in such a way that pisses off their customers.

Both Adobe and the Government need to learn a lesson from the recording industry: don't alienate the consumers by adding "features" that restrict their personal rights. Uncle Sam does not need to get involved in this process; what he should do instead is invest more energy into training cashiers pens that change color on fake money, and train cashiers better on how to spot fakes.

Re:gimp and sane illegal

[Thomas Shaddack]

Then all the graphics industry will desert the region, people with digital cameras will get mightily pissed that they can't print the pics of their children with sufficient clarity, and drug couriers will switch to shipping chips.

If you ban a technology, only criminals will use it. If you ban a popular technology, you turn most of the population into criminals.

It would make sense in printers.

[SharpFang]

As "end targets" of the process, they transform data into false money. Not much can be done further. Cutting, macerating to make them look old, or whatever you plan to do with fake money. And if they don't look like real, you can safely print them and assume they are not real.

But what about scanners and editing software? Bullshit. I scan in $1 to paste my face in and morph it to pink. How illegal is that? I want to include a pile of bills in a clipart I create. I want to create textures for a game I write. I can't, because the data - before being processed - is considered "intended for illegal use". That's complete bullshit. Scanners and image processing software are no place for anti-counterfeiting measures.

It's like I approach a military base and put a film in my camera. I get arrested for taking photos of military objects, even though I didn't even aim my camera at them, and never intended to.

Open Source and government mandates

[crucini]

That seems equally incompatible with open source.

It could be, or not. If the open source program respects the flag, the vast majority of people won't modify and recompile it. Look at xpdf, which respects the anti-copying flags of Adobe. If it's illegal to distribute the "hacked" version, a vanishingly small percentage of users will have it.

So it could be used as an argument against open source, but it's a disingenuous argument. A few people might hack their TV app, just like a few people might rip out their catalytic converter to get more performance.

I notice that Adobe has not claimed that xpdf violates the DMCA. You can modify xpdf into a circumvention device, but it isn't a circumvention device as shipped.

Re:The real counterfeiters are using printing pres

[StrawberryFrog]

The fact of the matter is that the "big boys" in counterfeiting are NOT using a $50.00 scanner and a $19.99 inkjet printer.

Perhaps the problem they are facing is that a few big boys are being joined by lots of little boys? ... much like the RIAA's current problems dealing with many ordinary people with networked computers.

Don't force criminals to be dishonest!

[Futurepower(R)]

If legal copies of Photoshop don't work, criminals will only have pirated copies. Wow, big cultural shift there. Think of the awesome deterrent power of that law. Think of all those would-be counterfeiters who will say, "I'll steal from people I don't know, but I would never steal from Adobe."

I often think that only skilled programmers should be allowed to make laws. Those who are making laws now are so illogical that they would never have run-time bugs because they would never get anything to compile.

If you spend several years writing complex programs and debugging them, you develop respect for your own imperfect logic, and for the need to check your work, 90 or 900 times if needed. You develop respect for logic itself, and for the operation of your brain.

Many people become lawmakers because they are somewhat popular, and got elected, only that. For some of them, if clicking on File/Save causes the program to exit, that's okay. It's better not to spend too much time thinking.

Re:gimp and sane illegal

[ahillen]

By the way, there is no longer any German Central Bank.

There is. It is just not the highest authority any more in the genaral fiscal matters. In the Euro countries, all national central banks still exist. Part of their responsibilities is to manage the currency supply of their respective countries. The directors of the national central banks also form the board of directors of the European Central bank.

That is, at the moment, for each value of coin (from 1 cent to 2 Euros) there are 12 different types.

+ Vatican City + San Marin +Monaco = 15 types ;)

Just add the mark to all your pictures

[swilver]

Simply add this Eurion Constellation mark to all your pictures, documents, etc.. Programs incorporating a mechanism that prevents you from altering such pictures will simply become unusable up to the point nobody wants to use them anymore or the protection is removed.

Re:Solution: purely electronic money

[russotto]

If banks want electronic payments so badly, THEY CAN STOP CHARGING A MONTHLY FEE FOR ELECTRONIC BILL PAYMENT! To be fair, a lot of credit card companies don't -- but who wants to go to each different credit card site to pay those bills? And that still leaves the other bills.

Re:NEWSFLASH

[Anonymous Coward]

>Society isn't a computer and the legal system isn't a program.

I see we have yet another master of the obvious.

Too stupid to make the leap between laws and computer programs to boot. All lawmakers are is computer programmers who set parameters in latin and confusing legalese, on paper.

A program is a set of instructions that allow the user to set parameters and do calculations.

In the case of the law, no parameter setting necessary as the parameters are fixed. The humans do the calculations to see if the action of the accused violated the parameters set forth in the law.

Being that the law is generated in confusing legalese and latin that normal people can't necessarily understand, this creates the need for attorneys. (Convenient isn't it?)

What the guy is trying to say, is that if programmers wrote the law, they would see the loopholes, and correct them, before it became a problem. In fact they would probably write a program to check the laws for loop holes.

Unfortunately he doesn't realize that the loopholes are usually intentially provided for special interest groups and attorneys to exploit and make money with them.

Our legal system makes me want to vomit every time I think about it.

l8,
AC