sweet sounds like a great defence. No your honour I am not a hacker, all I did was sending carefully crafted packets to a server, it is not my fault it responded and gave me root access.
Yes, there is certainly a line somewhere.
You can (though shouldn't) have a session ID in the URL, for example. Is spoofing that to get stuff you shouldn't OK too?
Whether the line can be drawn at document.aspx?id=X+1 is the question...
But your employer can't possibly know about all your deductions or other income so the withholdings are sort of a guess. That's why you have to file taxes: so the exact amount of taxes can be calculated, and you either receive a refund or pay depending on whether your employer's computers over or underestimated your taxes. Think about it: how can your employer know about your earnings on investments or part-time work or about your real estate depreciation deductions, etc., etc. Would you even want your employer to know all that stuff? That's why people are responsible for doing their own taxes.
The flip side of that though is that the government does know that stuff, for most people.
If we're going to tolerate all the mandatory reporting that makes the government know all that for most folks, then I see no reason that "doing your taxes" shouldn't be reserved for those few in special situations. We might as well get some benefit from big brother knowing all.
Lets be clear, editing the address line is not hacking, not in any way, shape or form.
Well, to be annoyingly pedantic, there's a line somewhere - for example, you can (though certainly shouldn't) have a session key in a URL, for example...
This situation in TFA is, of course (or should be, anyway), far far on the legal side of the line.
Why are government officials using services like these for "secure" messages anyway?
Seriously? Government officials who do this insane thing now are going to be trusted to use some French home brew thing instead? Surely there must be rules they are breaking now by doing this?
Write laws that prevent hardware manufacturers from putting security patches behind paid fees. In the enterprise space, this is far too common, under the guise of "service contracts" and is fucking ridiculous. Its just a way for large companies to milk more money from other large companies, and those smaller companies that cannot always afford to pay continual service contracts are the ones getting fucked over and exploited because of things like this.
So, legislate that you get security updates forever, for free?
If Quakers thought it is immoral to charge different people different prices, model corporations think it is their primary mission to charge based on the customers' ability to pay, not based on reasonable profits.
And strangely, the consumers also think their primary mission is to pay as little as possible, not enough to give the seller "reasonable profits".
We still haggle, basically; we just do it in much slower speed.
Poor people tend to be more likely to be the victims of property crimes than rich people when you count by incidence and not value--a lot of criminals are really lazy and would rather rob a guy nearby for $2 than go to the trouble of trying to find somebody who has more money.
Tying enforcement of property rights--which is actually one of the original three natural rights--to net worth is just screwing the poor over worse.
It's pretty amazing, isn't it?
Even as a kid, I remember wondering why burglars and such seemingly couldn't figure out how to go over a bridge. Um, the nice houses are over here...
"the leaders of the tech companies don't see the darkness the FBI sees"
They see a different, more dangerous kind of darkness: one brought about by the FBI and law enforcement and the rest of the government itself. The 4th amendment and the broader right to privacy itself is supremely important to avoiding a tyrannical government.
Er, except when it comes to "progressive" causes. In that realm, it's perfectly fine to, say, target you with the IRS for wrongthink:)
Food, shelter, energy tend to have a fixed cost per person per year. At the very minimum, there should be an income level (aka standard deduction) below which you pay little or no tax. Tax discretionary income, not income needed for necessities.
There is, pretty much. While it's vastly overcomplicated, huge swaths of the US population, lower and middle income, pay no real income taxes (save payroll type taxes which at least theoretically are directly tied to benefits, now or future).
I'd say there are definitely paid shills and trolls here and have been over about 10 years, now.
I dont' really care; since I realize that this place has long been invaded and ruined. I still speak my mind and the message still does get out. but it is a shame that the invasion of social media has mostly ruined it, as a true communication medium.
Or it could be that a larger proportion of reasonable people simply disagree with you.
Currently I'm watching "Requiem" - a Netflix Original (according to Netflix), that I last noticed running on the BBC (BBC Wales), and was produced by the BBC, and was on BBCiplayer. So not really originally Netflix or?
I've seen similar labeling on Amazon Prime Video. An "Amazon Original" that I swear first aired somewhere else.
The media, hollywood, most comedians, all of the big tech companies, and most social media is 24-7 hardcore anti-Trump for almost 2 straight years now. You see a couple of posts on slashdot that are right-leaning get modded up and all of a sudden it's "wildly conservative" now.
Might want to get your sensitivity meter adjusted just a touch.
Not to mention the story selection and summaries are massively tilted left.
It still matters not one bit. Unless the main cause of death becomes accidents with near complete and instant fatality, eventually a person gets sick and needs expensive medical care. Instead of big pharma selling you meds for Alzheimers, they sell you meds for something else.
And? What's wrong with spending money to improve your condition or make life more comfortable/fun?
Slashdot Mirror
More competition in this space would be good. It's disheartening that such a big player as Amazon can't break in.
Millions of millennials will need to learn cursive writing so that they can fill out a check.
I don't think you understand what cursive writing is. Or if you do, can you tell us what you think it has to do with writing a check?
Ahhh ... I think this is the first time I literally "LOL"ed over an web post!
It can't be real! It's too perfect!
fine (issue penalties) to people for paying late!
As long as the fine payment system stays down too, you'll be alright ...
sweet sounds like a great defence. No your honour I am not a hacker, all I did was sending carefully crafted packets to a server, it is not my fault it responded and gave me root access.
Yes, there is certainly a line somewhere.
You can (though shouldn't) have a session ID in the URL, for example. Is spoofing that to get stuff you shouldn't OK too?
Whether the line can be drawn at document.aspx?id=X+1 is the question ...
What next, evacuating an entire shopping mall because someone wrote "Bomb" on a sticky note and slapped it on a garbage can?
Well, local school did that due to a scrawl in a bathroom ...
But your employer can't possibly know about all your deductions or other income so the withholdings are sort of a guess. That's why you have to file taxes: so the exact amount of taxes can be calculated, and you either receive a refund or pay depending on whether your employer's computers over or underestimated your taxes. Think about it: how can your employer know about your earnings on investments or part-time work or about your real estate depreciation deductions, etc., etc. Would you even want your employer to know all that stuff? That's why people are responsible for doing their own taxes.
The flip side of that though is that the government does know that stuff, for most people.
If we're going to tolerate all the mandatory reporting that makes the government know all that for most folks, then I see no reason that "doing your taxes" shouldn't be reserved for those few in special situations. We might as well get some benefit from big brother knowing all.
Used the same URL tweaking method in my degenerate youth ... they weren't government documents though.
(Though doubtless accessed by many government officials ...)
Lets be clear, editing the address line is not hacking, not in any way, shape or form.
Well, to be annoyingly pedantic, there's a line somewhere - for example, you can (though certainly shouldn't) have a session key in a URL, for example ...
This situation in TFA is, of course (or should be, anyway), far far on the legal side of the line.
Sadly, Americans still think they have the best and greatest in the world.
You mean New Yorkers?
Few other Americans care about subways.
Why are government officials using services like these for "secure" messages anyway? Seriously? Government officials who do this insane thing now are going to be trusted to use some French home brew thing instead? Surely there must be rules they are breaking now by doing this?
Write laws that prevent hardware manufacturers from putting security patches behind paid fees. In the enterprise space, this is far too common, under the guise of "service contracts" and is fucking ridiculous. Its just a way for large companies to milk more money from other large companies, and those smaller companies that cannot always afford to pay continual service contracts are the ones getting fucked over and exploited because of things like this.
So, legislate that you get security updates forever, for free?
Do donut manufacturers agonize over donut addiction?
Do we expect them to?
If Quakers thought it is immoral to charge different people different prices, model corporations think it is their primary mission to charge based on the customers' ability to pay, not based on reasonable profits.
And strangely, the consumers also think their primary mission is to pay as little as possible, not enough to give the seller "reasonable profits".
We still haggle, basically; we just do it in much slower speed.
Poor people tend to be more likely to be the victims of property crimes than rich people when you count by incidence and not value--a lot of criminals are really lazy and would rather rob a guy nearby for $2 than go to the trouble of trying to find somebody who has more money.
Tying enforcement of property rights--which is actually one of the original three natural rights--to net worth is just screwing the poor over worse.
It's pretty amazing, isn't it?
Even as a kid, I remember wondering why burglars and such seemingly couldn't figure out how to go over a bridge. Um, the nice houses are over here ...
"the leaders of the tech companies don't see the darkness the FBI sees"
They see a different, more dangerous kind of darkness: one brought about by the FBI and law enforcement and the rest of the government itself. The 4th amendment and the broader right to privacy itself is supremely important to avoiding a tyrannical government.
Er, except when it comes to "progressive" causes. In that realm, it's perfectly fine to, say, target you with the IRS for wrongthink :)
Food, shelter, energy tend to have a fixed cost per person per year. At the very minimum, there should be an income level (aka standard deduction) below which you pay little or no tax. Tax discretionary income, not income needed for necessities.
There is, pretty much. While it's vastly overcomplicated, huge swaths of the US population, lower and middle income, pay no real income taxes (save payroll type taxes which at least theoretically are directly tied to benefits, now or future).
I'd say there are definitely paid shills and trolls here and have been over about 10 years, now.
I dont' really care; since I realize that this place has long been invaded and ruined. I still speak my mind and the message still does get out. but it is a shame that the invasion of social media has mostly ruined it, as a true communication medium.
Or it could be that a larger proportion of reasonable people simply disagree with you.
I'd be pretty impressed if 20% of what the cable company carried was produced by them.
OK, but what does Netflix Original mean?
Currently I'm watching "Requiem" - a Netflix Original (according to Netflix), that I last noticed running on the BBC (BBC Wales), and was produced by the BBC, and was on BBCiplayer. So not really originally Netflix or?
I've seen similar labeling on Amazon Prime Video. An "Amazon Original" that I swear first aired somewhere else.
The media, hollywood, most comedians, all of the big tech companies, and most social media is 24-7 hardcore anti-Trump for almost 2 straight years now. You see a couple of posts on slashdot that are right-leaning get modded up and all of a sudden it's "wildly conservative" now.
Might want to get your sensitivity meter adjusted just a touch.
Not to mention the story selection and summaries are massively tilted left.
Yeah! Gonna Like and tweet this, bro!
It still matters not one bit. Unless the main cause of death becomes accidents with near complete and instant fatality, eventually a person gets sick and needs expensive medical care. Instead of big pharma selling you meds for Alzheimers, they sell you meds for something else.
And? What's wrong with spending money to improve your condition or make life more comfortable/fun?
So... what???
This obsession is insane.
I predict a 3000% increase in Rickrolling.
Available only as a smartphone app.
There's likely a reason for that; to get permissions it would not get on a PC. No thanks.
"We techies are so very environmentally responsib ... ooh, shiny bitcoin!"