Of course, they have no idea how much or little you have contributed to other charities, or your financial situation. Peer pressure contributions are never a good thing, and the old business model of United Way was to do just that. Your take home pay should be spent on charities however you wish.
I do remember my company asking us to write political leaders in a certain city encouraging them to approve a municipal deal. While I can understand the company's position here, it felt really sleazy. It's not my job to be a lobbyist or get involved with the pestilence of politics.
But the cards can be skimmed, and they have been! Getting the PIN is extremely simple, so don't even count on that as security. So it's just a matter of intercepting the data going to the bank as a man-in-the-middle, replicating even temporarily a card, predicting the upcoming "random" number, and so forth.
I'm not saying chip and pin is worse than mag stripe, but they are not so completely secure as the marketing would have you believe. Don't trust the banks or others when they say the cards "cannot be read". They have the same sorts of vulnerabilities as ATM in many cases; relying on cheap manufacturers who don't follow best practices on security, over confidence of the security, assuming a PIN is private, or willingness to accept a certain level of loss.
They are protecting their customers because they wish to retain them as customers in the future. If they cave in to the FBI on this then there would be a drop in the number of customers. So enlightened self interest means they have to also be nice to their customers. Any company that's not a monopoly has to respect its customers if it wants to succeed.
I was thinking at first you were just a Democrat basher. But there is some truth here. Democrats do appear to be very skittish around appearing to be "soft on crime" as that's the most common accusation they face from opponents. So the puff up and try to look tough. However many of the really hard core anti-crime bills are introduced by Republicans first with Democrats falling in line later. Often when you get a Republican doing the right thing and reining in police power it's a middle of the road moderate doing so, not a tea party favorite.
You can't tell anything at all about a person based upon the party they register with. Especially true with political office since they're often required to pick just one party if they want any chance of winning in their region or district.
I rarely get ads on my phone becuase I don't use apps that are serving up ads. I do get ads inserted by youtube on my television though, can't use adblock or ublock for that. I did put a "lite" ad filter on my router but it's not blocking youtube ads so it's no help unless I can figure out the relevant addresses.
Even a KKK leader will know how to at least *pretend* to be a gracious and polite human being when running for president. As much as you may hate FDR, Obama, Hillary, Bernie, whatever, when did any of them ever say "look at that face, who would ever vote for that?"
If the federal government came and told Kentucky not to do something then Kentucky officials would be up in arms about state's rights and the overly broad reach of the fds. But it's apparently ok if the state officials get to tell the locals what to do or not to do. Maybe "state's rights" really means keeping power in the state house instead of keeping power local to where it is used?
Except if you listen he's not at all eloquent. It really sounds like he needs a speech coach. Rather than pausing with "um"s and "ah"s, he repeats the last thing he said while thinking up the next non-sequitur to relate. He talks like he's talking in tweets.
Except all those Germans arrested and put into camps for having the wrong political views or being too educated. And the SA brown shirts going around and beating people who belonged to other parties. No, he did a lot of wrong to the Germans.
Even if Trump had good ideas, he's a horrible person. Remember when the big campaign against Bill Clinton was that he had low character? Trump has the lowest character of any candidate I have ever seen, and that includes David Duke. A Trump presidency would be a national embarrassment, he'd probably insult our allies based upon how they look. There would be a huge surge in sales of "I'm really Canadian" tee shirts.
When Republicans are seriously considering voting for Hillary then you know something's wrong with the guy. My mother is about as right wing as you can get and she's completely repulsed by him, so it's not just mainstream moderate Republicans who hate him. He very likely will cause the Republican party to split.
You can't even say good things about him because he hasn't even given us a hint about what his actual policies will be, we can only guess based upon his boorish personality, past history of being a blowhard, and Atlantic City.
Except Davron and Darvocet were tested. Testing does not guarantee that harmful products are prevented from getting to market. But the lack of testing will guarantee that they'll get through.
Don't even dig that deep. It's a bit like Fitbit, or probiotic yoghurt, etc. I'm sure they'd love to be able to say it helps with your health but they can't.
You could give away the plans and such. However then you're still going to be liable if the product doesn't work right or the user was not properly advised on how to use it. Better to sell a consumer product designed for exercise, it warns you if you're being a couch potato or that it's time to stand up from your desk and walk around, but never ever mention diabetes. Let the diabetes part make the rounds by word of mouth.
But because we've had a sad history of medical quackery leading to serious harm and death even for something as trivial as shampoo, we passed laws a long time ago to require the testing and regulation. You can't really get around that and go back to the good old days without bringing back some of the bad along with it.
There's an advantage here I've noticed over a lot of consumer products. It's that because of the high cost up front that you can sometimes afford to actually spend time designing it right in the first place. And just the fact that it has to be examined in detail by third party agencies will cause some developers to not create their usual half assed crap. When you have to sit in front of a grumpy panel to explain why your software crashed and what you will do to ensure it never happens again then maybe you learn that quality is an important goal (not always of course, some people will never learn).
Slashdot Mirror
All Writs Act essentially just says that the courts can do stuff without needing micromanaging from congress.
Last I heard, the scouts were accepting gays and were not destroyed as a result.
Of course, they have no idea how much or little you have contributed to other charities, or your financial situation. Peer pressure contributions are never a good thing, and the old business model of United Way was to do just that. Your take home pay should be spent on charities however you wish.
I do remember my company asking us to write political leaders in a certain city encouraging them to approve a municipal deal. While I can understand the company's position here, it felt really sleazy. It's not my job to be a lobbyist or get involved with the pestilence of politics.
I keep my terrorist plans on Google+. That way no one will find them.
Those are pinkies. The feces are the waters off the coast of New Jersey.
I've never heard "skid" in that context before, and I've been reading slashdot a long time.
But the cards can be skimmed, and they have been! Getting the PIN is extremely simple, so don't even count on that as security. So it's just a matter of intercepting the data going to the bank as a man-in-the-middle, replicating even temporarily a card, predicting the upcoming "random" number, and so forth.
I'm not saying chip and pin is worse than mag stripe, but they are not so completely secure as the marketing would have you believe. Don't trust the banks or others when they say the cards "cannot be read". They have the same sorts of vulnerabilities as ATM in many cases; relying on cheap manufacturers who don't follow best practices on security, over confidence of the security, assuming a PIN is private, or willingness to accept a certain level of loss.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://people.csail.mit.edu/r...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-...
http://krebsonsecurity.com/201...
http://phys.org/news/2015-03-b...
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/m...
They are protecting their customers because they wish to retain them as customers in the future. If they cave in to the FBI on this then there would be a drop in the number of customers. So enlightened self interest means they have to also be nice to their customers. Any company that's not a monopoly has to respect its customers if it wants to succeed.
And if Apple gets a phone model where they can't break their own encryption, they'll try to sell it in China.
We'll get a hotfix for that after it ships.
More likely a lot of people will get retrials.
I was thinking at first you were just a Democrat basher. But there is some truth here. Democrats do appear to be very skittish around appearing to be "soft on crime" as that's the most common accusation they face from opponents. So the puff up and try to look tough. However many of the really hard core anti-crime bills are introduced by Republicans first with Democrats falling in line later. Often when you get a Republican doing the right thing and reining in police power it's a middle of the road moderate doing so, not a tea party favorite.
(I'm affiliated with no political party)
You can't tell anything at all about a person based upon the party they register with. Especially true with political office since they're often required to pick just one party if they want any chance of winning in their region or district.
I rarely get ads on my phone becuase I don't use apps that are serving up ads. I do get ads inserted by youtube on my television though, can't use adblock or ublock for that. I did put a "lite" ad filter on my router but it's not blocking youtube ads so it's no help unless I can figure out the relevant addresses.
Even a KKK leader will know how to at least *pretend* to be a gracious and polite human being when running for president. As much as you may hate FDR, Obama, Hillary, Bernie, whatever, when did any of them ever say "look at that face, who would ever vote for that?"
If the federal government came and told Kentucky not to do something then Kentucky officials would be up in arms about state's rights and the overly broad reach of the fds. But it's apparently ok if the state officials get to tell the locals what to do or not to do. Maybe "state's rights" really means keeping power in the state house instead of keeping power local to where it is used?
Except if you listen he's not at all eloquent. It really sounds like he needs a speech coach. Rather than pausing with "um"s and "ah"s, he repeats the last thing he said while thinking up the next non-sequitur to relate. He talks like he's talking in tweets.
Except all those Germans arrested and put into camps for having the wrong political views or being too educated. And the SA brown shirts going around and beating people who belonged to other parties. No, he did a lot of wrong to the Germans.
A real life version of Network? (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074958/)
Even if Trump had good ideas, he's a horrible person. Remember when the big campaign against Bill Clinton was that he had low character? Trump has the lowest character of any candidate I have ever seen, and that includes David Duke. A Trump presidency would be a national embarrassment, he'd probably insult our allies based upon how they look. There would be a huge surge in sales of "I'm really Canadian" tee shirts.
When Republicans are seriously considering voting for Hillary then you know something's wrong with the guy. My mother is about as right wing as you can get and she's completely repulsed by him, so it's not just mainstream moderate Republicans who hate him. He very likely will cause the Republican party to split.
You can't even say good things about him because he hasn't even given us a hint about what his actual policies will be, we can only guess based upon his boorish personality, past history of being a blowhard, and Atlantic City.
Except Davron and Darvocet were tested. Testing does not guarantee that harmful products are prevented from getting to market. But the lack of testing will guarantee that they'll get through.
Don't even dig that deep. It's a bit like Fitbit, or probiotic yoghurt, etc. I'm sure they'd love to be able to say it helps with your health but they can't.
You could give away the plans and such. However then you're still going to be liable if the product doesn't work right or the user was not properly advised on how to use it. Better to sell a consumer product designed for exercise, it warns you if you're being a couch potato or that it's time to stand up from your desk and walk around, but never ever mention diabetes. Let the diabetes part make the rounds by word of mouth.
But because we've had a sad history of medical quackery leading to serious harm and death even for something as trivial as shampoo, we passed laws a long time ago to require the testing and regulation. You can't really get around that and go back to the good old days without bringing back some of the bad along with it.
There's an advantage here I've noticed over a lot of consumer products. It's that because of the high cost up front that you can sometimes afford to actually spend time designing it right in the first place. And just the fact that it has to be examined in detail by third party agencies will cause some developers to not create their usual half assed crap. When you have to sit in front of a grumpy panel to explain why your software crashed and what you will do to ensure it never happens again then maybe you learn that quality is an important goal (not always of course, some people will never learn).
The devices I worked on were extremely expensive on their own. None of these were "gadgets".