And that's enough, to make your life a living hell for a certain amount of time (be it brief or long, doesn't matter).
You know this from first-hand experience or from anecdotes and hear-say?
I've had dealings with police, courts and lawyers, both professionally and privately, on both sides (though not very often as defendant). In all my life there was one event that was really stressful and that was professionally.
Maybe we life in different countries or societies, but by and large, I've not seen this "ruin your life" part actually happen in cases on the level of "they ask you if they can check your phone". They happen, but mostly in the "they break down your door and arrest you for child porn" cases. Yeah, innocent people have been convicted of the highest crimes, and that does ruin your life. That is living hell, not having to deal with the justice system over some phone records.
Again, maybe we have different experiences and backgrounds, but most of the times I've dealt with police and judges, they were professional and while the results were not always what I wanted them to be, I cannot seriously complain about their behaviour. Maybe I've just been lucky, or maybe my own behaviour influences what I get back, or maybe the USA really has become this horrible police state.
Personal experience: I was stopped because I was on a bike on a sidewalk at 4 AM, the reason I was went there was to avoid getting hit by the same police car, they found a Swiss army knife on me I got fined $300, and accused/threatened with all sort of things so that I would feel lucky to get of with just a fine. I went to court and I won - I didn't get back my knife though, they LOST it-, it was a waist of my time, theirs and the judge's. But that's irrelevant). The premise is : if you look hard enough, you'll find something (bogus may be, but still). From a probabilistic stand point, what I described is bound to happen, question is when! I not saying all cops are like that, some are nice, approachable and reasonable (anecdote: few nights before the incident, in the same neighborhood, a friend of mine cut his leg on a glass door, we hailed a cab to go to the hospital -5 minutes ride- he refused, a police patrol was there, they saw us and offered us lift to the hospital) , some are simply assholes with a power trip, you're bound to encounter one of those a some point in time.
Ruin your life may be an exaggeration on my part, but my point still stands, as it is still a hassle that CAN ruin your life!
The anecdote above was in Montreal/Canada. I lived once in Algeria and more often that not we were harassed by the police for the mere fact of being there (but they had an excuse : power with no accountability, and they didn't actually give a shit about what the law actually said).
To finish, we're all judgmental assholes occasionally (quick, reaction without all the facts, and there could be a lot of reasons behind that, good or bad is irrelevant to this discussion), the difference with a normal person and figure of authority (cop for example) is that the normal person doesn't have the authority to act on it! And the way the laws are written, is just a mine field!
Sure they can find something that with enough creative interpretation someone could see as hinting to a crime, if they only squint strongly enough. But something that passes the giggle test? Share your wisdom.
And that's enough, to make your life a living hell for a certain amount of time (be it brief or long, doesn't matter).
if the card itself is stolen/lost, usually you notice it right away (at max a day?) and you can always cancel it (all it takes is phone call). As opposed to a cloned card, you want notice it until it's too late.
Besides, even the chip is not 100% safe.
I'm curious what shops you go to. I've never been cloned.
You're lucky (figure of speech). Usually the cloning thing requires the help of the cashier or the store owner (the terminals are modified), in most cases, I'd say what we call here : "depaneurs" (small stores where you buy beer, magazines, newspaper, cigarettes, milk, candy... etc).
In my case, it is there but NOT usable (whether I choose to use or not, is irrelevant), because there are no more "mag strip only" terminals where I usually buy stuff (exception noted in the US, from time to time I go there to buy gas --way cheaper and the borders are not very far --).
I live in Canada, my bank is BMO, I don't know a bout the others banks/countries
The mag strip is easy to copy, there were a big network of thieves that place modified terminal (with the complicity or merchants or their employees). The modified one copy the card (mag strip), by reading directly what the magnetic head reads, and the PIN by placing a pad between the buttons and the PCB.
I had, my card cloned twice, when I had the only the mag strip. Now? 0 times. If the merchant's terminal doesn't have the chip I don't use my card (the bank will refund me, but the hassle is not worth it -both times my card was disabled Friday evening, and my branch is closed for the weekend-).
If the terminal support the chip, my mag strip won't work anyways , so using it will only expose me to the risk of a cloned card and the hassle that comes with it (may be the merchant/clerk did something to the machine to force people to swipe the card, may be not, nothing to gain in trying).
With that said, I change it at least once a year, b/c at some point it starts acting funny (and it's free)
the do only if the reader doesn't support the chip. The moment it does (even if the chip on the card fails) any transaction is refused, it'll ask for the pin and everything, but will ultimately be refused. It is at least like this with my card. Tip: if the reader does support the chip and refuses yours for any reason at all, don't try the mag strip (it might be that the merchant is forcing the downgrade to clone your card).
Thank you, that was the one I was talking about. It was Cambridge not oxford, my bad. It made the headlines because of this http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14...
it's not "either or". All cards (at least where I live) have "the chip", they require a PIN. Not 100% safe but beats the magnetic strip (there was some fuss about this few years back, as some grade students --from Oxford if not mistaken-- found a way beat the system, the backers didn't like it.
If the terminal support the chip and the card has one, any attempt to use the mag strip is refused systematically (they all still have the mag strip). Some of them have nfc (or whatever it is called), mostly credit cards, if used this way no need for a PIN and it's exclusively for tiny transactions (less that $10 I think).
Of course there no reason to allow him. The response was very good/fast. But that's irrelevant, he wasn't given the opportunity he had it, and I doubt the street was empty (Ottawa is a dull -but beautiful- city, but still, not completely empty).
I didn't read much, on the event, when it happened (caught it on reddit by mistake), I turned on the TV to watch on CBC. Something is bugging me though, as you explained it the guy was quickly and switfly disposed of, before that, he should have had the chance to shoot anyone ( and it good thing he didn't), but why (genuine question)????
Again, tribal and authoritarian are not exactly the same thing (meaning if they were 2 sets they are different sets). There may be a correlation though. What was that thing about correlation and the other thing called cause/effect?
and you;re absolutely right, int that we're not ready for anything like that. But that's shouldn't be an obstacle to evolve in that direction!
the middle east has nothing to do with though (the situation has a lot of explanation, the lack of authority is not one of them).
it's not about who has the longest proverbial dick. it's not about, it just worked for you, or a bunch of other people. Where it works, well, it works there's nothing more. The big hairy problem is when it doesn't, in the case of sysv init (or openRC) the places to look for troubles are few an easy to read and modify. Take for For example the *KIT set, theses are very nice additions that simplified the life of a lot of people (including me), but only when everything was working, it stops working and hello 3/4 hours wasted to find out WHY exactly it wasn't working, b/c of the lack of documentation (a problem that was corrected lately) and cryptic messages if any at all. Source code is documentation you say? yeah sure, if you're home with nothing to do it's good, but a sysadmin with an already understaffed department doesn't have that luxury. You, me at home is one story, we have time, and are dealing with ONE system that is ours, managing hundreds of desktops, users and servers is an other beast all together!
the fact that technical committees of multiple distributions adopted systemd doesn't mean anything unless the reasoning behind it is bullet proof (I don't know as I wasn't there and didn't bother looking for it, did you?).
In both scenarios, the family's income as a whole takes a hit, with one scenario requiring less work In the case of these corporation it doesn't, they take the income spread it over different tax jurisdictions to minimize taxes for the same income.
A loophole is an unintended consequence of some rule. while exploiting the existence is not illegal, it certainly goes against the original intent of said rule.
I'm no expert on the subject, but it seams to me that taxing corporation is not the way it should go. Let the corporate entity be Tax those that derive income from that: shareholders, as you'd tax anyone else (say the janitor of said corporation).
(where I live daycare fees are tax deductible, I don't know what it yields as our son doesn't go to daycare, we are lucky enough that the grandparents live near by)
Exactly, the whole point of that exercise is to determine if going to work is worth it, not paying less taxes.
If, as you said, she end up poring her whole income in daycare there's nothing to gain (monetarily speaking that is, some may prefer to work).
That is why I said bad example.
No, even if they're in a higher tax bracket, they necessarily still have more money (as far as net income goes). That's the entire point of brackets instead of thresholds.
That's why I used "probably". (the certain events are a subset of probable events).
The cost of day care has nothing to do with taxes, so let's not make things more complicated than they need be. That one parent staying home to take care of kids is cheaper than sending kids to day care has nothing to do with taxes and everything to do with that parent's earning potential and the cost of day care. Even if taxes were 0% for everyone, it's still possible that having only one parent working would be more cost effective than having both parents work if the cost of day care exceeds the income of one of the parents. Orthogonal issues.
An intelligent individual has more to learn from understanding the formal aspects of a system (as perfect or imperfect as it might be), vs. rushing to quick poor conclusions based on "slang" and ignorance.
"Dictionary definition" is not slang/street talk, AFAIK, may be I'm mistaken? With that said, I wasn't trying to redefine legally "tax evasion", or implying it was fact. If it wasn't clear enough, I'm sorry. That was my humble opinion. Let me rephrase is : doing so, in MY book is tax evasion.
Slashdot Mirror
there's no reason to get up your ass and help yourself.
yes, there is: boredom.
And that's enough, to make your life a living hell for a certain amount of time (be it brief or long, doesn't matter).
You know this from first-hand experience or from anecdotes and hear-say?
I've had dealings with police, courts and lawyers, both professionally and privately, on both sides (though not very often as defendant). In all my life there was one event that was really stressful and that was professionally.
Maybe we life in different countries or societies, but by and large, I've not seen this "ruin your life" part actually happen in cases on the level of "they ask you if they can check your phone". They happen, but mostly in the "they break down your door and arrest you for child porn" cases. Yeah, innocent people have been convicted of the highest crimes, and that does ruin your life. That is living hell, not having to deal with the justice system over some phone records.
Again, maybe we have different experiences and backgrounds, but most of the times I've dealt with police and judges, they were professional and while the results were not always what I wanted them to be, I cannot seriously complain about their behaviour. Maybe I've just been lucky, or maybe my own behaviour influences what I get back, or maybe the USA really has become this horrible police state.
Personal experience: I was stopped because I was on a bike on a sidewalk at 4 AM, the reason I was went there was to avoid getting hit by the same police car, they found a Swiss army knife on me I got fined $300, and accused/threatened with all sort of things so that I would feel lucky to get of with just a fine. I went to court and I won - I didn't get back my knife though, they LOST it-, it was a waist of my time, theirs and the judge's. But that's irrelevant). The premise is : if you look hard enough, you'll find something (bogus may be, but still). From a probabilistic stand point, what I described is bound to happen, question is when! I not saying all cops are like that, some are nice, approachable and reasonable (anecdote: few nights before the incident, in the same neighborhood, a friend of mine cut his leg on a glass door, we hailed a cab to go to the hospital -5 minutes ride- he refused, a police patrol was there, they saw us and offered us lift to the hospital) , some are simply assholes with a power trip, you're bound to encounter one of those a some point in time.
Ruin your life may be an exaggeration on my part, but my point still stands, as it is still a hassle that CAN ruin your life!
The anecdote above was in Montreal/Canada. I lived once in Algeria and more often that not we were harassed by the police for the mere fact of being there (but they had an excuse : power with no accountability, and they didn't actually give a shit about what the law actually said).
To finish, we're all judgmental assholes occasionally (quick, reaction without all the facts, and there could be a lot of reasons behind that, good or bad is irrelevant to this discussion), the difference with a normal person and figure of authority (cop for example) is that the normal person doesn't have the authority to act on it! And the way the laws are written, is just a mine field!
Sure they can find something that with enough creative interpretation someone could see as hinting to a crime, if they only squint strongly enough. But something that passes the giggle test? Share your wisdom.
And that's enough, to make your life a living hell for a certain amount of time (be it brief or long, doesn't matter).
most people are above police suspicion.
you mean under the police radar? given any reason at all (rub the wrong way for example), they'll look, and they'll certainly find.
replicant?
how would a phone fit in those things anyways?
Besides, even the chip is not 100% safe.
I'm curious what shops you go to. I've never been cloned.
You're lucky (figure of speech). Usually the cloning thing requires the help of the cashier or the store owner (the terminals are modified), in most cases, I'd say what we call here : "depaneurs" (small stores where you buy beer, magazines, newspaper, cigarettes, milk, candy ... etc).
In my case, it is there but NOT usable (whether I choose to use or not, is irrelevant), because there are no more "mag strip only" terminals where I usually buy stuff (exception noted in the US, from time to time I go there to buy gas --way cheaper and the borders are not very far --).
....It is at least like this with my card. ...
I live in Canada, my bank is BMO, I don't know a bout the others banks/countries
The mag strip is easy to copy, there were a big network of thieves that place modified terminal (with the complicity or merchants or their employees). The modified one copy the card (mag strip), by reading directly what the magnetic head reads, and the PIN by placing a pad between the buttons and the PCB.
I had, my card cloned twice, when I had the only the mag strip. Now? 0 times. If the merchant's terminal doesn't have the chip I don't use my card (the bank will refund me, but the hassle is not worth it -both times my card was disabled Friday evening, and my branch is closed for the weekend-). If the terminal support the chip, my mag strip won't work anyways , so using it will only expose me to the risk of a cloned card and the hassle that comes with it (may be the merchant/clerk did something to the machine to force people to swipe the card, may be not, nothing to gain in trying).
With that said, I change it at least once a year, b/c at some point it starts acting funny (and it's free)
the do only if the reader doesn't support the chip. The moment it does (even if the chip on the card fails) any transaction is refused, it'll ask for the pin and everything, but will ultimately be refused. It is at least like this with my card. Tip: if the reader does support the chip and refuses yours for any reason at all, don't try the mag strip (it might be that the merchant is forcing the downgrade to clone your card).
lol you should google your sig made me laugh even though i havent a clue what your sig really means i had to search it.
1^2=1; (-1)^2=1; 1^2=(-1)^2; 1=-1; 1=0.
^ this? what's so funny about it? (there's an error/catch, obviously)
Thank you, that was the one I was talking about. It was Cambridge not oxford, my bad. It made the headlines because of this http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14...
You buy into the fad that equal means same
equivalent (as in mathematical equivalence relation, mind you "equal" is one) would be more suited
it's not "either or". All cards (at least where I live) have "the chip", they require a PIN. Not 100% safe but beats the magnetic strip (there was some fuss about this few years back, as some grade students --from Oxford if not mistaken-- found a way beat the system, the backers didn't like it.
If the terminal support the chip and the card has one, any attempt to use the mag strip is refused systematically (they all still have the mag strip). Some of them have nfc (or whatever it is called), mostly credit cards, if used this way no need for a PIN and it's exclusively for tiny transactions (less that $10 I think).
Of course there no reason to allow him. The response was very good/fast. But that's irrelevant, he wasn't given the opportunity he had it, and I doubt the street was empty (Ottawa is a dull -but beautiful- city, but still, not completely empty).
I didn't read much, on the event, when it happened (caught it on reddit by mistake), I turned on the TV to watch on CBC. Something is bugging me though, as you explained it the guy was quickly and switfly disposed of, before that, he should have had the chance to shoot anyone ( and it good thing he didn't), but why (genuine question)????
Again, tribal and authoritarian are not exactly the same thing (meaning if they were 2 sets they are different sets). There may be a correlation though. What was that thing about correlation and the other thing called cause/effect?
and you;re absolutely right, int that we're not ready for anything like that. But that's shouldn't be an obstacle to evolve in that direction!
the middle east has nothing to do with though (the situation has a lot of explanation, the lack of authority is not one of them).
anarchy and chaos are different things too. Just saying.
it's not about who has the longest proverbial dick. it's not about, it just worked for you, or a bunch of other people. Where it works, well, it works there's nothing more. The big hairy problem is when it doesn't, in the case of sysv init (or openRC) the places to look for troubles are few an easy to read and modify.
Take for For example the *KIT set, theses are very nice additions that simplified the life of a lot of people (including me), but only when everything was working, it stops working and hello 3/4 hours wasted to find out WHY exactly it wasn't working, b/c of the lack of documentation (a problem that was corrected lately) and cryptic messages if any at all. Source code is documentation you say? yeah sure, if you're home with nothing to do it's good, but a sysadmin with an already understaffed department doesn't have that luxury. You, me at home is one story, we have time, and are dealing with ONE system that is ours, managing hundreds of desktops, users and servers is an other beast all together!
the fact that technical committees of multiple distributions adopted systemd doesn't mean anything unless the reasoning behind it is bullet proof (I don't know as I wasn't there and didn't bother looking for it, did you?).
BTW, I'm not a us citizen, I'm Canadian.
In both scenarios, the family's income as a whole takes a hit, with one scenario requiring less work
In the case of these corporation it doesn't, they take the income spread it over different tax jurisdictions to minimize taxes for the same income.
A loophole is an unintended consequence of some rule. while exploiting the existence is not illegal, it certainly goes against the original intent of said rule. I'm no expert on the subject, but it seams to me that taxing corporation is not the way it should go. Let the corporate entity be Tax those that derive income from that: shareholders, as you'd tax anyone else (say the janitor of said corporation).
(where I live daycare fees are tax deductible, I don't know what it yields as our son doesn't go to daycare, we are lucky enough that the grandparents live near by)
Well, technically there is (at least where I live). Even with 0 revenue, there is a tax declaration at the end of the year with a 0 balance.
Exactly, the whole point of that exercise is to determine if going to work is worth it, not paying less taxes. If, as you said, she end up poring her whole income in daycare there's nothing to gain (monetarily speaking that is, some may prefer to work). That is why I said bad example.
No, even if they're in a higher tax bracket, they necessarily still have more money (as far as net income goes). That's the entire point of brackets instead of thresholds.
That's why I used "probably". (the certain events are a subset of probable events).
The cost of day care has nothing to do with taxes, so let's not make things more complicated than they need be. That one parent staying home to take care of kids is cheaper than sending kids to day care has nothing to do with taxes and everything to do with that parent's earning potential and the cost of day care. Even if taxes were 0% for everyone, it's still possible that having only one parent working would be more cost effective than having both parents work if the cost of day care exceeds the income of one of the parents. Orthogonal issues.
Again, that was exactly my point.
An intelligent individual has more to learn from understanding the formal aspects of a system (as perfect or imperfect as it might be), vs. rushing to quick poor conclusions based on "slang" and ignorance.
"Dictionary definition" is not slang/street talk, AFAIK, may be I'm mistaken? With that said, I wasn't trying to redefine legally "tax evasion", or implying it was fact. If it wasn't clear enough, I'm sorry. That was my humble opinion. Let me rephrase is : doing so, in MY book is tax evasion.