Also, some stores (Walmart, for one) have ceased processing my bank card as chip-and-sig, they only allow it to run as chip-and-PIN.
That's only possible with debit cards. Credit cards from issuers that implemented chip-and-signature have no PIN associated with them and it's impossible for the retailer to run them as chip-and-PIN. Right now, the only credit card I have that gets run as chip-and-PIN is my Target store card.
When I got my first EMV cards I called the various issuers to complain about the fact that they were chip-and-signature (the literature was disgusting because it bragged about this; "No need to remember a PIN!"). One of the customer service reps actually told me that chip-and-signature was more secure than chip-and-PIN because "your signature verifies your identity".
What alternatives? Getting a signature that no teller ever verifies or checking the name against your ID (which again, never actually happens)?
The implementation in the US uses chip-and-signature (as described in the article) rather than chip-and-PIN. The article is saying that chip-and-signature is less secure than the alternatives; not that chip-and-PIN is less secure.
Obama has consistently acted as if hacking a private company is worse than hacking the government. This attitude predates him.
Hacked the pentagon and stole technical data on a top secret weapon system? Meh, that's just what governments do. Hacked into Apple and leaked the release date for the next iPhone? Cyberterrorism!
The DNC has been working hard to change the story from one about how they rigged the primary in collusion with the Clinton campaign and the media to one about Scary Russian Hackers. Unfortunately they've been rather successful.
The claim was that there are countries that "ban or restrict", and the request was for a list of that "banned or restricted". These countries restrict research.
from the fine wikipedia article "India banned in 2004 reproductive cloning, permitted therapeutic cloning."
And did you notice that I didn't include India? If you want to criticize the list that I provided then look only at the countries in my list. I specifically tailored it to not include countries that only restricts or bans cloning. This is why I gave the list to begin with instead of just linking to the Wikipedia site, something that took me less than two minutes to find so I don't know why you couldn't look up the list yourself in the first place.
Seriously, so many people are quick to demand "citation, plz" for easy to find information about well-known facts that it dilutes the calls for evidence of the claims of absolute quacks.
Now without know the exact South Carolina hunting regulations and without knowing how that specific road was classed I can't say if the hunters violated any law by shooting in the direction of the road.
What protects a plane flying over your property from physical threat from you is not that there are living people on board, but airspace rules. Your property does not extend indefinitely into the sky. At a certain altitude it becomes public property. This is why planes are able to fly over your property without an easement, and it's why governments are able to regulate building heights.
As long as this drone was within this space, it was not trespassing. Of course, if it was high enough to be in controlled airspace then it would have legal problems.
Bottom line is regardless of whether or not it's legal for the drone to be where it was, the hunters had no right to shoot it. Let's say that you and I are in some sort of neighbors' over what you're doing on your property (we'll say what you're doing is legal, but it causes a nuisance to me), so I sneak on over with a camera to photograph how bad it is. I've broken the law by trespassing. If you catch me, this does not give you the right to destroy my camera. You call the cops and they give me a citation; destroying my property would give me just as much right to call the cops as you have.
I don't see why it's so popular on Slashdot to hate people who believe in some sort of God.
It's not so much hate as it see you as no different than people who believe it's possible to talk to the dead or find water underground by passing a bent piece of wood over it.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, some stores (Walmart, for one) have ceased processing my bank card as chip-and-sig, they only allow it to run as chip-and-PIN.
That's only possible with debit cards. Credit cards from issuers that implemented chip-and-signature have no PIN associated with them and it's impossible for the retailer to run them as chip-and-PIN. Right now, the only credit card I have that gets run as chip-and-PIN is my Target store card.
And ATM cameras aren't verifying your identity. They're to keep a record in case of fraud/theft.
When I got my first EMV cards I called the various issuers to complain about the fact that they were chip-and-signature (the literature was disgusting because it bragged about this; "No need to remember a PIN!"). One of the customer service reps actually told me that chip-and-signature was more secure than chip-and-PIN because "your signature verifies your identity".
What alternatives? Getting a signature that no teller ever verifies or checking the name against your ID (which again, never actually happens)?
The implementation in the US uses chip-and-signature (as described in the article) rather than chip-and-PIN. The article is saying that chip-and-signature is less secure than the alternatives; not that chip-and-PIN is less secure.
Wow, and I thought your first post would be the dumbest thing I read today.
Tom Wheeler has really proven himself as a regulator.
Go home, Donald, you're drunk.
Obama has consistently acted as if hacking a private company is worse than hacking the government. This attitude predates him.
Hacked the pentagon and stole technical data on a top secret weapon system? Meh, that's just what governments do. Hacked into Apple and leaked the release date for the next iPhone? Cyberterrorism!
The DNC has been working hard to change the story from one about how they rigged the primary in collusion with the Clinton campaign and the media to one about Scary Russian Hackers. Unfortunately they've been rather successful.
People need to learn the basics of user security.
Posted from my deceased relative's account.
The claim was that there are countries that "ban or restrict", and the request was for a list of that "banned or restricted". These countries restrict research.
from the fine wikipedia article "India banned in 2004 reproductive cloning, permitted therapeutic cloning."
And did you notice that I didn't include India? If you want to criticize the list that I provided then look only at the countries in my list. I specifically tailored it to not include countries that only restricts or bans cloning. This is why I gave the list to begin with instead of just linking to the Wikipedia site, something that took me less than two minutes to find so I don't know why you couldn't look up the list yourself in the first place.
Seriously, so many people are quick to demand "citation, plz" for easy to find information about well-known facts that it dilutes the calls for evidence of the claims of absolute quacks.
"Going to Beijing again. looooooollll!!1"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell_laws
Within a short time, non-violent creatures became dominant over intentionally or accidentally violent ones by a ratio of more than 100:1.
Were you able to track the ratio of intentionally violent to accidentally violent ones?
How I wish I could!
Germany, Austria, Italy, Finland, Greece, Ireland, Portugal, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, United States, New Zealand...
It's a mutant space goat. We better get the telephone cleaners and hair dressers loaded onto B Ark.
How exactly does one shoot a simplified hybrid language?
Now without know the exact South Carolina hunting regulations and without knowing how that specific road was classed I can't say if the hunters violated any law by shooting in the direction of the road.
This is Slashdot, so don't let that stop you.
You do realize that roshambo is Rock-Paper-Scissors, don't you?
What protects a plane flying over your property from physical threat from you is not that there are living people on board, but airspace rules. Your property does not extend indefinitely into the sky. At a certain altitude it becomes public property. This is why planes are able to fly over your property without an easement, and it's why governments are able to regulate building heights.
As long as this drone was within this space, it was not trespassing. Of course, if it was high enough to be in controlled airspace then it would have legal problems.
Bottom line is regardless of whether or not it's legal for the drone to be where it was, the hunters had no right to shoot it. Let's say that you and I are in some sort of neighbors' over what you're doing on your property (we'll say what you're doing is legal, but it causes a nuisance to me), so I sneak on over with a camera to photograph how bad it is. I've broken the law by trespassing. If you catch me, this does not give you the right to destroy my camera. You call the cops and they give me a citation; destroying my property would give me just as much right to call the cops as you have.
Which was the AC's point. Using absurdity to point out the fallacy of kyrio's statement.
TLDR: The statistics don't agree with my personal beliefs so the research must be wrong.
I don't see why it's so popular on Slashdot to hate people who believe in some sort of God.
It's not so much hate as it see you as no different than people who believe it's possible to talk to the dead or find water underground by passing a bent piece of wood over it.
Whenever I have a mob of neighbors at my door complaining about the noise, I ask myself What Would Lot Do?