And they're totally right about that! I used to only eat inorganic foods because they were cheap. I had almost no energy, was getting thin, and incredibly constipated. The doctor told me to start eating organic foods and I started feeling better in hours./P.
This is actually Apple's fault. Every Swift based framework includes a metric ton of extra code so that swift can execute inside of the app. I think it adds about 180MB per framework, if I am remembering correctly. So just using 5 third party Swift libraries puts you at almost a gig of storage just from Swift.
Give it a few years. Charging stations in the parking area will become an important competitive point for apartment and condo complexes, just as parking spots and swimming pools are now.
That is already starting to be the case. In fact, it is already the case at many hotel brands as well. The big name ones all have electric vehicle chargers at their properties with VIP parking for them.
Winner, a contractor with Pluribus International Corporation, began working for a government agency based in Georgia in February.
Most agencies have offices all over the country, but which one is based in Georgia, other than the CDC? If this contractor was working for the CDC why would he have access to cyberhacking information? Cover?
It's a poorly worded sentence. The agency in question is the NSA and the company, Pluribus International, is based out of Georgia. Or at least the leaker was. The article I read this morning made it clear that it was an NSA document that was leaked, the NSA that tracked the leak down, and an NSA system was used to find the document to begin with.
Honestly, who the heck trusts that their laptop would not be seriously damaged or stolen if they check it in their baggage? I've had things that were MUCH LESS fragile than a laptop completely destroyed in checked baggage.
I had four pounds of chocolate stolen out of a checked bag once upon a time. Seriously. The bag was checked, it was locked, and there was a $400 bottle of scotch in the bag as well. They cut my lock off, ate or disposed of all 4 pounds of chocolate, and then put the lock inside of the center most paper wrapper of the top 1 pound box of chocolate.
med school grads aren't shit until they've done a residency and passed their boards.
That's not entirely true. I dated a doctor and she said that they could easily enter into the pharmaceutical industry as a research doctor without any residency. They can also work under the supervision of any licensed doctor (like a glorified PA) without residency. They just can't get their own license to practice on the general public without a residency. She also suggested (though I cannot verify the veracity of this statement) that most medical directors at research clinics were doctors who had lost their license for whatever reason (drug abuse, inappropriate relations with patients, etc). They're fully qualified doctors but unable to practice outside of a research environment. She also suggested that a lot of the researchers at the CDC don't bother with residency as well.
That's just plain dumb, right? Flight crews can't remember more than one 4 digit number?
Why not distinct codes for each plane, or each flight? If there's only one master code for all planes, all a potential hijacker has to do is kidnap a flight attendant and beat it out of them.
As it is, there might as well not be a code at all. It'd be just as secure to use "Shave and a haircut" as a secret knock.
Except that there is a lockout that can be enabled while the plane is in flight. So even having the code does not guarantee you access to the flight deck.
We dont really have any way to protect against the possibility that the pilot may be not want to live..
That's not remotely true. The actions of that GermanWings pilot would have never worked in the US. When a pilot leaves the cockpit, someone else from the crew takes his place. If you watch you'll see that they notify the flight attendants that someone is planning to leave the flight deck. Two flight attendants come forward. One blocks the aisle with a cart and the other goes into the cockpit before the pilot leaves. The US requires there to be at least two people inside of the cockpit at all times. So unless you find a rare situation where both pilots want to die, or one pilot is willing to have a physical altercation with the other prior to killing the entire flight, you'll be okay. They are not allowed to eat the same meals. One would not be messing with the others meals to drug them. Perhaps they could drug them through their coffee, but otherwise there are no real situations where a pilot can destroy the other plane without some sort of physical struggle.
If I didn't want to support version 1.0 anymore, I'd EOL it and give it up into the public domain, but I'd still have copyright over version 30 (which is actively supported).
And if someone else wanted to 'pirate' v1.0 and release it and build on it themselves, they'd be legal in doing so, but unless they were supporting it themselves, then their modifications would be public-domain as well.
(Of course, my logos and such would be trademarked, not copyrighted, so they'd have to do something like IceWeasel vs. Firefox.)
Sure but you might be giving away part of the source for 30.0 if it still uses parts of 1.0. So you'd be giving up copyright on something you are actively using. And by public domain I assume you must mean something like a BSD or an MIT license because I think that GPL would have to follow the same rules as any business.
Slashdot generally doesn't like ludicrously-long copyright terms, right? What if we made maintenance a requirement for retaining copyright over software? If Microsoft (or whoever) wants to retain a copyright on their software for 70 years, then they'd better be prepared to commit to 70 years of support. If they want to EOL it after 5 years or 20 years or whatever, and wash their hands of responsibility, that's fine, but then it's public domain. Why should we let companies benefit from software they don't support anymore?
This could also work for art works, as well -- because copyright exists "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts," we could make it a requirement that an author (or company, or whatever) needs to be distributing (or licensing for distribution) a work to have copyright on it. When it's out of print, it enters the public domain.
So what, if you release version 1.0 of your software you have to support it indefinitely if you still want to copyright that code that still exists from 1.0 and is now being used 30 years later in 30.0? That doesn't seem very reasonable from that perspective. They make no money off 1.0 at that point in time. No one uses it, why are they still supporting it? The cost of buying software would be astronomical. You wouldn't even be able to advance open source as it does now, either. Not unless you exempted Linus from supporting the original Linux kernel long after it's lost its usefulness.
The theory is that if you press the laptop up against the fuselage in the passenger cabin, you can bust a big enough hole to bring the airplane down; if it's in the hold, there's no opportunity to do that.
That's a silly theory since a bomb destroys a plane by overpressurizing the fuselage. Just having it go off in the hold is probably enough pressure to do that. Any bomb that can rip through the frame can probably cause the pressure required to make the airframe disintegrate.
North Americans seem to be too stupid to use them. There are three on the small island I live on. Even the locals can't seem to figure out how to use them properly. They work magnificently well in Europe though. Perhaps because the Europeans require more than passing a multiple choice test and tipping your examiner when you're 16.
You must live in Bermuda. The drivers in Bermuda are... interesting.
How about we stop trying to fund California (which by the way provides well more than its share of tax revenues to the federal gov't compared to its receipts) using taxes on new industries and new people who help us create new value, and instead remove the tax protections for entrenched old people who got here first, got theirs, and now are happy to put most of the share of the burden on everyone else? Prop 13, unions, local regulations that prevent affordble housing -- I'm looking at you.
So what do you want to do, make all those nasty old people who no longer contribute anything leave the state? And you do realize that there are millions of people in California that would not be able to afford their homes without prop-13? What you'd have is all the middle class people forced to sell and all the rich people buying up property and renting it out at high prices because California is such a desirable place to live.
So, if you consider not being able to predict the future a screwup, you must think you're Moses.
I used to work with Moses. Guy over-engineered everything. All this time I thought he was just being a little bit pendantic but now I see that he was just predicting the future.
>When the ad plays on a TV or radio, or some ad code runs on a mobile or computer, it emits ultrasounds that are picked up by the microphone of nearby laptops, desktops, tablets or smartphones. SDKs embedded in apps installed on those devices relay the beacon back to the online advertiser, who then knows that the user of TV "x" is also the owner of smartphone "Y"
Imagine you're on your phone and browsing the web. You load one of those ads, and your phone now broadcasts your advertiser-assigned unique ID via ultrasound. OK. Who says it has to be another device YOU own that picks it up?
How difficult would it be to drop listening devices in high traffic areas that listen for those tones, sending location information back to whoever? And that's just to augment other devices that might be infected with a listen-and-report app.
This isn't an advertising tool, it's a ubiquitous surveillance tool for three-letter-agencies that advertisers have discovered. That is, of course, assuming it actually works outside a lab and isn't just an untested fantasy the ad types latched onto.
Anyway, IF phones can both transmit and detect ultrasonic tones (which I question), it's only a matter of time until someone produces a 'secure' phone that has physical filters in line with the speaker and mic wires to filter out anything outside the range of human hearing.
Your phone definitely already does this if you visit the right websites. I have seen several big name URLs play ads (don't ask me the URLs cause I forget them, but they're mostly news related) that cause the music I am listening to to pause and for some embedded audioclip to play in that website. Drives me freaking nuts!
Tell that to all the murderers who have failed to disclose where they have disposed of bodies, weapons, and other bits of evidence.
Being compelled to tell the authorities where you disposed of the body would constitute testifying against yourself. But if the authorities already know where the body is, and have sufficient evidence to constitute probable cause for a warrant, you can be compelled to provide them with access to the location (if they need your help, which they generally wouldn't).
Show me one case where this has happened. They've had people confess to the crimes and still refuse to provide information about the body.
But you can be compelled to provide access to physical evidence, documentation (paper or electronic), biometric data or virtually anything else, even if you know full well that doing so will incriminate you.
Tell that to all the murderers who have failed to disclose where they have disposed of bodies, weapons, and other bits of evidence. They did not provide access whatsoever to that information. But I am sure they just didn't get the memo, and it's not that you're misinterpreting the 5th amendment. You absolutely do not have to help build the case against yourself. They're allowed to take physical evidence like blood, breath, and DNA because you do not have to be actively involved in that. You certainly aren't going to stop breathing just so you can't be subjected to a breathalyzer. In this case, you would be actively providing evidence in your incrimination. If this case is so high priority, they can find a way to break the encryption. Consider it like a safe. They can't force you to provide the combination. If they want into the safe, they will hire someone to help them do so. If they're unable to find someone capable of physically opening that safe then they're just out of luck.
Once you get past your mid-fourties, you just don't have enough time or energy to begin retraining from the beginning. Generationally thing will work out. Your kids will get jobs in the new fields. But you may be left behind and that's hard.
I'm sorry to hear that you plan to remain stagnant for half of your life. I'd like to hope that I will continue to learn and improve until the day I die.
When they "discover" that they cannot hire/lure 2000 tech workers in/to Indiana, they will make the claim the indeed there is a tech labor shortage in the US.
Oh I thought they were just going to change the name of Bangalore to Indiana or something!
You can usually install another radio into a car, FWIW. You don't need to get a completely new car.
Do you still drive a car from the 90s? You would lose a lot of functionality in a modern car by attempting to replace the radio system. Shit my car is 14 years old and the radio is a headless box that provides power in, audio out, and a wiring loom to the CANbus that integrates with the dash, steering buttons, console display, central buttons, GPS system, etc.
You do realize that there are CANBUS adapters for every single car on the market, right? At least, the ones in the US market. Plus who the hell wants their car stereo communicating with the other devices on the CANBUS? That's just poor security right there just so that you can do things like turn the stereo off when the car is off and the door opens.
You can usually install another radio into a car, FWIW. You don't need to get a completely new car.
You can always install another radio into a car. But it might not integrate with any of the things in the car, and it might not even fit into the dash these days.
There are adapters for all that fancy shiz that you'd probably actually care about. Just go to crutchfield and check for yourself. All those stereos integrate with the CANBUS these days (which is really stupid to do from a security standpoint, BTW), and there are adapters which allow after market devices to communicate on the bus.
> Cloners have been available in the US for these cards for years
Prove this statement because it smells like bullshit to me.
Point me towards a cloner (or even an article that describes how to) for chip & pin cards or stfu with your hyperbolic bullshit. HINT: incorrect implementations of emv. (ie: using non-random UN's) aren't clones.
Again, we don't have chip and pin in the USA. We have chip and LOL. It's a farce. Cloners have been available for years.
Can you point us to a resource that shows that you can clone a chip for online processing? To my knowledge, you cannot. Since the US has a floor limit of $0, all transactions go online and you cannot use a cloned card. Not to mention that Chip + PIN is completely possible in the US, and is expected to roll out in the next year or two. In my experience, it's actually the US based credit card processors that don't want to support PIN right now, and not the issuing banks.
The statement he has no First Amendment right because he is not a US citizen is an embarrassing statement by a US official.
If they want to try him in the US then they must do so in accordance with US law. The first amendment would protect him in a US trial on US soil whether he is a citizen or not. This is why they really try to avoid criminal proceedings against the prisoners at Gitmo.
And the American regulation requires that the chipped card checks the bank balance and do all the handshakes between multiple networks in real time before it allows the transaction to take place, hence the extra delay.
That is not typically the reason for the delay. The fact of the matter is that the US region required online processing for EMV because at least 90% of the transactions in the US were already online only. There are some significant attacks against offline EMV that are entirely mitigated by online processing. There are no known attacks on Online EMV with card present. Even without a PIN, you cannot duplicate someone's card or skim it. You can steal someone's card and use it, but you cannot create a cloned copy of the card and use it.
The problem in the US is entirely with poor implementations. The most inexpensive terminals manually check a list of supported brands against the card's brand(s) one at a time. The brands have IDs that can be incredibly specific. A lot of the processors I've worked with want to manually add each and every ID to their configuration basically saying "I support North American MasterCard. I support Australian MasterCard. I support European MasterCard..." for basically every region in the world when they could just say "I support MasterCards of all types." So the card terminal sits there for a solid 10- 20 seconds just going through its list asking the card "Are you this brand?" Literally. Regulations in the US require you to support "US Common Debit" if you're going to allow debit transactions. There is literally one additional ID that is required to be supported in the US versus other regions. Furthermore, you'll find that transactions go online and receive approval in Europe somewhere on the order of 70+% percent of the time and are still faster than US transactions. I'm working on a project right now for a company halfway across the world from me and, when I have control of the terminal flow, I can run through the entire process from the US, 8000 miles, back to the US for issuer authorization, then back that 8000 miles to the processor and back to me in about 300-400ms. With a processor who lives in the same city, I can complete a transaction in 100-200ms on a slow day.
When I say that, I'm obviously excluding transactions that require prompts, but one where I have the terminal flow set to run the transaction from end to end the instant the card is inserted into the terminal with no further human interaction required.
As opposed to Europe, where the European chipped card could work in a place with no phone reception and no network access, the balance would be kept on the card, and the balance would later be reconciled in a central ledger at the end of the day, or at the end of the week (I'm not sure which). But this of course made the card super fast to use.
They have not done this in Europe or anywhere else in a long time. I think the last card issued that behaved in this way was around 2007. Some of them haven't expired in their countries of origin and you still have to support this capability in some regions, but it's being phased out. You cannot trust a balance from an offline transaction. The terminals all have a transaction ceiling which, when hit, a transaction is forced to be processed online. In the US that limit, from a liability standpoint, is $0. For most European merchants, they use somewhere on the order of 20-40 pounds/euros/whatever. Basically a high enough limit that you can recharge your metro card. That limit is also based on the type of merchant as well. The majority of card fraud occurs at gas stations and the industry has completely different rules for unattended gas pumps.
And also, some chipped cards are allowed to be used without the pin, because not everything on a chipped card is encrypted, and that's ok for some businesses because they'll limit the amount of the transaction when the pin is not used
Slashdot Mirror
organic = healthy,
And they're totally right about that! I used to only eat inorganic foods because they were cheap. I had almost no energy, was getting thin, and incredibly constipated. The doctor told me to start eating organic foods and I started feeling better in hours./P.
perfecting art of bloatware and spyware.
This is actually Apple's fault. Every Swift based framework includes a metric ton of extra code so that swift can execute inside of the app. I think it adds about 180MB per framework, if I am remembering correctly. So just using 5 third party Swift libraries puts you at almost a gig of storage just from Swift.
Give it a few years. Charging stations in the parking area will become an important competitive point for apartment and condo complexes, just as parking spots and swimming pools are now.
That is already starting to be the case. In fact, it is already the case at many hotel brands as well. The big name ones all have electric vehicle chargers at their properties with VIP parking for them.
Most agencies have offices all over the country, but which one is based in Georgia, other than the CDC? If this contractor was working for the CDC why would he have access to cyberhacking information? Cover?
It's a poorly worded sentence. The agency in question is the NSA and the company, Pluribus International, is based out of Georgia. Or at least the leaker was. The article I read this morning made it clear that it was an NSA document that was leaked, the NSA that tracked the leak down, and an NSA system was used to find the document to begin with.
Honestly, who the heck trusts that their laptop would not be seriously damaged or stolen if they check it in their baggage? I've had things that were MUCH LESS fragile than a laptop completely destroyed in checked baggage.
I had four pounds of chocolate stolen out of a checked bag once upon a time. Seriously. The bag was checked, it was locked, and there was a $400 bottle of scotch in the bag as well. They cut my lock off, ate or disposed of all 4 pounds of chocolate, and then put the lock inside of the center most paper wrapper of the top 1 pound box of chocolate.
med school grads aren't shit until they've done a residency and passed their boards.
That's not entirely true. I dated a doctor and she said that they could easily enter into the pharmaceutical industry as a research doctor without any residency. They can also work under the supervision of any licensed doctor (like a glorified PA) without residency. They just can't get their own license to practice on the general public without a residency. She also suggested (though I cannot verify the veracity of this statement) that most medical directors at research clinics were doctors who had lost their license for whatever reason (drug abuse, inappropriate relations with patients, etc). They're fully qualified doctors but unable to practice outside of a research environment. She also suggested that a lot of the researchers at the CDC don't bother with residency as well.
And how is it different from the "God made it so"?
you must respect my authoritah.
Respectfully,
God
That's just plain dumb, right? Flight crews can't remember more than one 4 digit number?
Why not distinct codes for each plane, or each flight? If there's only one master code for all planes, all a potential hijacker has to do is kidnap a flight attendant and beat it out of them.
As it is, there might as well not be a code at all. It'd be just as secure to use "Shave and a haircut" as a secret knock.
Except that there is a lockout that can be enabled while the plane is in flight. So even having the code does not guarantee you access to the flight deck.
We dont really have any way to protect against the possibility that the pilot may be not want to live..
That's not remotely true. The actions of that GermanWings pilot would have never worked in the US. When a pilot leaves the cockpit, someone else from the crew takes his place. If you watch you'll see that they notify the flight attendants that someone is planning to leave the flight deck. Two flight attendants come forward. One blocks the aisle with a cart and the other goes into the cockpit before the pilot leaves. The US requires there to be at least two people inside of the cockpit at all times. So unless you find a rare situation where both pilots want to die, or one pilot is willing to have a physical altercation with the other prior to killing the entire flight, you'll be okay. They are not allowed to eat the same meals. One would not be messing with the others meals to drug them. Perhaps they could drug them through their coffee, but otherwise there are no real situations where a pilot can destroy the other plane without some sort of physical struggle.
If I didn't want to support version 1.0 anymore, I'd EOL it and give it up into the public domain, but I'd still have copyright over version 30 (which is actively supported).
And if someone else wanted to 'pirate' v1.0 and release it and build on it themselves, they'd be legal in doing so, but unless they were supporting it themselves, then their modifications would be public-domain as well.
(Of course, my logos and such would be trademarked, not copyrighted, so they'd have to do something like IceWeasel vs. Firefox.)
Sure but you might be giving away part of the source for 30.0 if it still uses parts of 1.0. So you'd be giving up copyright on something you are actively using. And by public domain I assume you must mean something like a BSD or an MIT license because I think that GPL would have to follow the same rules as any business.
Slashdot generally doesn't like ludicrously-long copyright terms, right? What if we made maintenance a requirement for retaining copyright over software? If Microsoft (or whoever) wants to retain a copyright on their software for 70 years, then they'd better be prepared to commit to 70 years of support. If they want to EOL it after 5 years or 20 years or whatever, and wash their hands of responsibility, that's fine, but then it's public domain. Why should we let companies benefit from software they don't support anymore?
This could also work for art works, as well -- because copyright exists "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts," we could make it a requirement that an author (or company, or whatever) needs to be distributing (or licensing for distribution) a work to have copyright on it. When it's out of print, it enters the public domain.
So what, if you release version 1.0 of your software you have to support it indefinitely if you still want to copyright that code that still exists from 1.0 and is now being used 30 years later in 30.0? That doesn't seem very reasonable from that perspective. They make no money off 1.0 at that point in time. No one uses it, why are they still supporting it? The cost of buying software would be astronomical. You wouldn't even be able to advance open source as it does now, either. Not unless you exempted Linus from supporting the original Linux kernel long after it's lost its usefulness.
The theory is that if you press the laptop up against the fuselage in the passenger cabin, you can bust a big enough hole to bring the airplane down; if it's in the hold, there's no opportunity to do that.
That's a silly theory since a bomb destroys a plane by overpressurizing the fuselage. Just having it go off in the hold is probably enough pressure to do that. Any bomb that can rip through the frame can probably cause the pressure required to make the airframe disintegrate.
North Americans seem to be too stupid to use them. There are three on the small island I live on. Even the locals can't seem to figure out how to use them properly. They work magnificently well in Europe though. Perhaps because the Europeans require more than passing a multiple choice test and tipping your examiner when you're 16.
You must live in Bermuda. The drivers in Bermuda are... interesting.
How about we stop trying to fund California (which by the way provides well more than its share of tax revenues to the federal gov't compared to its receipts) using taxes on new industries and new people who help us create new value, and instead remove the tax protections for entrenched old people who got here first, got theirs, and now are happy to put most of the share of the burden on everyone else? Prop 13, unions, local regulations that prevent affordble housing -- I'm looking at you.
So what do you want to do, make all those nasty old people who no longer contribute anything leave the state? And you do realize that there are millions of people in California that would not be able to afford their homes without prop-13? What you'd have is all the middle class people forced to sell and all the rich people buying up property and renting it out at high prices because California is such a desirable place to live.
So, if you consider not being able to predict the future a screwup, you must think you're Moses.
I used to work with Moses. Guy over-engineered everything. All this time I thought he was just being a little bit pendantic but now I see that he was just predicting the future.
>When the ad plays on a TV or radio, or some ad code runs on a mobile or computer, it emits ultrasounds that are picked up by the microphone of nearby laptops, desktops, tablets or smartphones. SDKs embedded in apps installed on those devices relay the beacon back to the online advertiser, who then knows that the user of TV "x" is also the owner of smartphone "Y"
Imagine you're on your phone and browsing the web. You load one of those ads, and your phone now broadcasts your advertiser-assigned unique ID via ultrasound. OK. Who says it has to be another device YOU own that picks it up?
How difficult would it be to drop listening devices in high traffic areas that listen for those tones, sending location information back to whoever? And that's just to augment other devices that might be infected with a listen-and-report app.
This isn't an advertising tool, it's a ubiquitous surveillance tool for three-letter-agencies that advertisers have discovered. That is, of course, assuming it actually works outside a lab and isn't just an untested fantasy the ad types latched onto.
Anyway, IF phones can both transmit and detect ultrasonic tones (which I question), it's only a matter of time until someone produces a 'secure' phone that has physical filters in line with the speaker and mic wires to filter out anything outside the range of human hearing.
Your phone definitely already does this if you visit the right websites. I have seen several big name URLs play ads (don't ask me the URLs cause I forget them, but they're mostly news related) that cause the music I am listening to to pause and for some embedded audioclip to play in that website. Drives me freaking nuts!
Tell that to all the murderers who have failed to disclose where they have disposed of bodies, weapons, and other bits of evidence.
Being compelled to tell the authorities where you disposed of the body would constitute testifying against yourself. But if the authorities already know where the body is, and have sufficient evidence to constitute probable cause for a warrant, you can be compelled to provide them with access to the location (if they need your help, which they generally wouldn't).
Show me one case where this has happened. They've had people confess to the crimes and still refuse to provide information about the body.
But you can be compelled to provide access to physical evidence, documentation (paper or electronic), biometric data or virtually anything else, even if you know full well that doing so will incriminate you.
Tell that to all the murderers who have failed to disclose where they have disposed of bodies, weapons, and other bits of evidence. They did not provide access whatsoever to that information. But I am sure they just didn't get the memo, and it's not that you're misinterpreting the 5th amendment. You absolutely do not have to help build the case against yourself. They're allowed to take physical evidence like blood, breath, and DNA because you do not have to be actively involved in that. You certainly aren't going to stop breathing just so you can't be subjected to a breathalyzer. In this case, you would be actively providing evidence in your incrimination. If this case is so high priority, they can find a way to break the encryption. Consider it like a safe. They can't force you to provide the combination. If they want into the safe, they will hire someone to help them do so. If they're unable to find someone capable of physically opening that safe then they're just out of luck.
Once you get past your mid-fourties, you just don't have enough time or energy to begin retraining from the beginning. Generationally thing will work out. Your kids will get jobs in the new fields. But you may be left behind and that's hard.
I'm sorry to hear that you plan to remain stagnant for half of your life. I'd like to hope that I will continue to learn and improve until the day I die.
When they "discover" that they cannot hire/lure 2000 tech workers in/to Indiana, they will make the claim the indeed there is a tech labor shortage in the US.
Oh I thought they were just going to change the name of Bangalore to Indiana or something!
You can usually install another radio into a car, FWIW. You don't need to get a completely new car.
Do you still drive a car from the 90s? You would lose a lot of functionality in a modern car by attempting to replace the radio system. Shit my car is 14 years old and the radio is a headless box that provides power in, audio out, and a wiring loom to the CANbus that integrates with the dash, steering buttons, console display, central buttons, GPS system, etc.
You do realize that there are CANBUS adapters for every single car on the market, right? At least, the ones in the US market. Plus who the hell wants their car stereo communicating with the other devices on the CANBUS? That's just poor security right there just so that you can do things like turn the stereo off when the car is off and the door opens.
You can usually install another radio into a car, FWIW. You don't need to get a completely new car.
You can always install another radio into a car. But it might not integrate with any of the things in the car, and it might not even fit into the dash these days.
There are adapters for all that fancy shiz that you'd probably actually care about. Just go to crutchfield and check for yourself. All those stereos integrate with the CANBUS these days (which is really stupid to do from a security standpoint, BTW), and there are adapters which allow after market devices to communicate on the bus.
> Cloners have been available in the US for these cards for years
Prove this statement because it smells like bullshit to me.
Point me towards a cloner (or even an article that describes how to) for chip & pin cards or stfu with your hyperbolic bullshit. HINT: incorrect implementations of emv. (ie: using non-random UN's) aren't clones.
Again, we don't have chip and pin in the USA. We have chip and LOL. It's a farce. Cloners have been available for years.
Can you point us to a resource that shows that you can clone a chip for online processing? To my knowledge, you cannot. Since the US has a floor limit of $0, all transactions go online and you cannot use a cloned card. Not to mention that Chip + PIN is completely possible in the US, and is expected to roll out in the next year or two. In my experience, it's actually the US based credit card processors that don't want to support PIN right now, and not the issuing banks.
The statement he has no First Amendment right because he is not a US citizen is an embarrassing statement by a US official.
If they want to try him in the US then they must do so in accordance with US law. The first amendment would protect him in a US trial on US soil whether he is a citizen or not. This is why they really try to avoid criminal proceedings against the prisoners at Gitmo.
And the American regulation requires that the chipped card checks the bank balance and do all the handshakes between multiple networks in real time before it allows the transaction to take place, hence the extra delay.
That is not typically the reason for the delay. The fact of the matter is that the US region required online processing for EMV because at least 90% of the transactions in the US were already online only. There are some significant attacks against offline EMV that are entirely mitigated by online processing. There are no known attacks on Online EMV with card present. Even without a PIN, you cannot duplicate someone's card or skim it. You can steal someone's card and use it, but you cannot create a cloned copy of the card and use it.
The problem in the US is entirely with poor implementations. The most inexpensive terminals manually check a list of supported brands against the card's brand(s) one at a time. The brands have IDs that can be incredibly specific. A lot of the processors I've worked with want to manually add each and every ID to their configuration basically saying "I support North American MasterCard. I support Australian MasterCard. I support European MasterCard..." for basically every region in the world when they could just say "I support MasterCards of all types." So the card terminal sits there for a solid 10- 20 seconds just going through its list asking the card "Are you this brand?" Literally. Regulations in the US require you to support "US Common Debit" if you're going to allow debit transactions. There is literally one additional ID that is required to be supported in the US versus other regions. Furthermore, you'll find that transactions go online and receive approval in Europe somewhere on the order of 70+% percent of the time and are still faster than US transactions. I'm working on a project right now for a company halfway across the world from me and, when I have control of the terminal flow, I can run through the entire process from the US, 8000 miles, back to the US for issuer authorization, then back that 8000 miles to the processor and back to me in about 300-400ms. With a processor who lives in the same city, I can complete a transaction in 100-200ms on a slow day.
When I say that, I'm obviously excluding transactions that require prompts, but one where I have the terminal flow set to run the transaction from end to end the instant the card is inserted into the terminal with no further human interaction required.
As opposed to Europe, where the European chipped card could work in a place with no phone reception and no network access, the balance would be kept on the card, and the balance would later be reconciled in a central ledger at the end of the day, or at the end of the week (I'm not sure which). But this of course made the card super fast to use.
They have not done this in Europe or anywhere else in a long time. I think the last card issued that behaved in this way was around 2007. Some of them haven't expired in their countries of origin and you still have to support this capability in some regions, but it's being phased out. You cannot trust a balance from an offline transaction. The terminals all have a transaction ceiling which, when hit, a transaction is forced to be processed online. In the US that limit, from a liability standpoint, is $0. For most European merchants, they use somewhere on the order of 20-40 pounds/euros/whatever. Basically a high enough limit that you can recharge your metro card. That limit is also based on the type of merchant as well. The majority of card fraud occurs at gas stations and the industry has completely different rules for unattended gas pumps.
And also, some chipped cards are allowed to be used without the pin, because not everything on a chipped card is encrypted, and that's ok for some businesses because they'll limit the amount of the transaction when the pin is not used