Short term, I guess its time for any remaining "programmers" to change their titles to "developers"
My title is Software Engineer.......... not only should I get to avoid the 8% decline in programming...
But the expected 0% growth in EE, as well, by having 'Software' in the name, instead of Electrical.
He represents the dysfunction present in the most bigoted of the Conservatives
I think the "conservatives" in government may be closet liberals. The congress do not even attempt major strides when they have a majority. They support the other party by yielding to them.
This is why you must vote for Bernie (if you're a liberal) or Trump (if you're a conservative).
I want to vote for the guy that supports doing away with the two party system, reduces all terms for elected officials by 50%, creates an Instant voter recall process for all offices, Changes the law so that An independent commission has to approve all salary increases for members of congress/senate based on reviews of individual performance, sets a 12 year career limit for politicians (Cumulative number of years in House/Senate), mandates that all elections be proportional representation based on popular vote Instant Runoff Voting, AND Restricts public access to congressional votes as necessary, in order to conceal from/prevent special interest groups from discovering whether or not specific members of congress voted for or against their special interest.
(In other words, do away with the excessive bit of transparecy that enables this pathological situation of representatives cowtowing....)
I am torn between Bernie/Trump, because no candidate really serves us. I am Pro Economic Liberty, I am against Institutionalized Theft or Tyranny of the majority, AND Pro-Personal-Freedom.
The Democrat party claims to support personal liberty, but then members go off and favor bullshit like "Gun Control.", And Health Care "Reform" that renders more people UNinsured than before; their members don't do a thing to counter privacy violations by the feds, they do nothing to reign in abuses by the TSA and the IRS "investigating" groups because if their political ideas... The Republican party claims to support economic liberty, but then they allow injustices like Absurd government spending, their party members in Congress lack the fortitude to actually act on their convictions and do what's necessary, they let Perpetual Copyright Extension slide, they do nil about Civil Forfeiture abuses, Patent System Abuses, and more, to go on and on, without lifting a finger.
Also, I feel both parties are highly hypocritical, and lately, all the representatives of both major parties seem to be cowards.
Otherwise... Please explain why Obama is so impotent and incompetent when dealing with important issues, and yet, nobody will stand up to him, not even members of the opposing party?
That is even worse..... Block programming with a GUI might teach some fundamental concepts, or they could just "point and click randomly until it starts working"
I'm not sure that it's possible to create a "GUI" for programming that would actually be approaching remotely efficient to write meaningful programs in.
But writing the code in a logically/procedurally precise structured language is part of the necessary discipline for coding: it's hard, and it's an essential element.
A transponder that would operate on what frequencies,
Frequencies and methods approved by regulators and agreed upon by the industry and whose use has been designated by the FCC for these types of applications.
and would respond to what, and for what purpose?
Response to authorized users, or authorized probing devices at a specified interval, for the purpose of radar surveillance and unique identification by providing unique drone registration code, manufacturer, and serial number to authorities, and to interested members of the public.
Not everyone has the cash to lock their guns up in a good safe.
You don't have to leave it at home, you can keep it on your person, or even lock it in your glovebox --- that is better than leaving it totally unsecured.
If you cannot afford to lock it up or take it with you at all times, or otherwise appropriately secure it (Such as by putting it in a bank safety deposit box, when you cannot secure it at home), then you cannot afford to own a gun.
The VM is emulating a real machine and presents a surface which mimics a real machine to Windows.
A VM doesn't "emulate" a real machine. A VM is a virtual container that actually runs on a real machine; you can't use a VM to run on a CPU/hardware architecture different from one the operating system will natively run on. With a virtual machine nothing is emulated, assuming you install the paravirtualized hardware drivers; the VM is segmented and scheduled, so it is an additional operating system instance running on the same hardware.
This works by the host running the CPU in virtual machine monitor mode, and scheduling VMs just like a normal OS schedules applications.
You're not "EMULATING" when running two different programs or two different OSes on the same hardware... That's called Multitasking, not emulation.
A VM isn't "hardware emulation" either, not any more than a FreeBSD Jail is Operating System emualtion.
At least they won't waste any on that there highfalutin' edumacation.
I agree.... just take the money from VW, and instead of giving the fines to the government: use that money to form a new tax-exempt non-profit trust organization whose purpose is the reduction of emissions through the research and development of zero-emissions technologies and products, AND compel VW to provide resources to this trust, AND use only power systems developed and approved by this trust in newly manufactured products.
but isn't this precisely what https transports are supposed to do?
I don't think the OP gets a choice in the matter. Most IP cameras and IP camera system transmit the video feed over a UDP-based protocol; it's generally RTP/RTSP; and support for SRTP/SRTCP is sparse and far between (Unless you spent mucho more $$$ to purchase high-end equipment that specifically supports it!). The only way you're going to be wrapping RTCP in HTTPS is with a SSL VPN that supports encapsulating arbitrary TCP protocols and the UDP-based RTP streams as well.
If the goal of the OP is to make sure that nobody is watching his home's video other than the security company, I'd suggest using https streaming
The OP's cousin should probably just accept the risk that some unauthorized third party could in theory be watching the video data, Concentrate on making sure a third party can't Control or Disable the camera (What is really important!), understand that risk, and mitigate it by placing the cameras where they will meet security objectives without a huge risk to privacy objectives.
Legally speaking.... the OP's cousin will have already lost any legal expectation of privacy, the second they hired an outside company and shipped camera video out of their exclusive physical control, local law enforcement/FBI/etc can compel the disclosure of such video data in the hands of a 3rd party without needing a warrant or subpoena, and even bar the monitoring company from informing that footage has been provided; it's no different than requesting transaction records from a retailer.
The reality of the situation is; security monitoring companies are totally focused on physical security, the ones likely to offer affordable services are going to be local SMBs for the most part, and they are likely to have little knowledge of IT Security topics.
Unless you've found a highly exceptional security provider in the local area that promises privacy of your video footage, most companies will just not care , and might not fully understand these issues, the issue is so universally neglected, that you will need a contract requiring end-to-end encryption, AND the OP will have to pay the monitoring company enough money for them to care.
And then, unless you are paying a couple thousand a month, then it is probably a tall order to require a custom VPN solution "just to protect a home's ccTV feeds".
It's irrelevant, anyway - PCI-DSS will mandate it at some point for any site that accepts credit cards
It is already required by PCI-DSS to be using the proper encryption strength, which would be SHA-2 for TLS certificates, and using SHA-1 would clearly be strictly non-compliant with the PCI DSS requirements, since current vendor recommendations and best practices say not to use certificates with old weak hashing algorithms such as MD5 and SHA-1, and Google/Microsoft have already announced that SHA1 is considered weak, and SHA1 certificates will be distrusted by all major browsers during 2016; Google/Chrome also announced they would be treated as insecure at the start of January 2016.
See PCI DSS v3 Requirement 4.1, Testing Procedure 4.1.f
4.1.f Examine system configurations to verify that the proper encryption strength is implemented for the encryption methodology in use. (Check vendor recommendations/best practices.)
that don't support SHA-2 will be left without access to encrypted websites.
This is much ado about nothing. The devices that cannot support it are dead ended already, They are not safe to use, so it makes sense that very soon they won't even be allowed to be used with SSL websites, even if the Webmaster wanted them to work. All the SSL websites I manage are already using SHA-2 certificates Besides you DONT use an OS without SHA2 support and have zero issues today
Also, the SHA-1 certs are considered weak and unsuitable for secure usage at this point, even sites such as Amazon and BankOfAmerica are using SHA-2 certs.
I think all the major e-tailers have X509 certs with a SHA-2 signature at this point.
Someone who, for example sells illegal drugs online rather than by phone, is a drug dealer
It's not cybercrime for some guy to be selling illegal drugs online. The guy already broke the law in the real world, and the actual exchange will definitely occur in the real world (If he he/she is indeed selling), the online / website type platform is just a communication channel.
That's like suggesting that if he used a telephone to make the deal, that it would be a phone crime.
It's not (But there really are telephone crimes that exist, such as toll fraud). The phone or internet is not part of the criminal act; it's just a communication channel between actors in this case, Unless you're talking about the "thought crime" of two people discussing or using the online medium to advertise / agree to / and moving forward with an act or transaction participants know to be illegal.
And there are activities that are cybercrime, such as hacking / stealing and distributing stolen digital information.
With stolen information, the actual goods are likely exchanged online, so that's quite different, and is cybercrime...
There's a difference between true cybercrime and using internet-connected personal electronic devices, networks, or telephone services, in a way that furthers a crime which is a totally materialized crime that occurs in the physical world.
Okay, I know this is off topic and I apologize, but can we agree that its time to stop calling them "Cybercriminals"?
These people are called cybercriminals to provide information about what kind of criminals they are; it doesn't mean they are to be looked at as privileged or special; You don't call a serial killer just a "criminal"; These people who deal in batches of stolen credit card or social security numbers for mortgage or Tax Refund fraud are much worse than common criminals, just like you refer to criminals who are serial killers differently than you refer to muggers or jaywalkers. A thief probably only robs from a few people, cybercriminals are "Mass Thieves", and the penalties should be more severe --- they are criminals that use what the average person would consider technically sophisticated methods or tools involving the abuse of technology as a fundamental aspect in the commission of their crimes.....
They are not thieves in the traditional sense, other than their intention is essentially to get money they have not earned, E.g. those selling copies of other peoples' credit card numbers, And their chance at a profit is supported by another criminal's expectation of using those numbers to defraud banks out of $$$, but some of these criminals are also referred to as frausters and identity thieves.
Are you yelling at people selling beakers and bunsenburners?
One step at a time.... our governments are still in the process of trying to get drones (and firearms) made illegal to sell to consumers by requiring FAA registration / Background checks against the secret zero-accountability No-Fly List, which also happens to be a list that may include people for no reason other than they are politically opposed to both parties' views and/or to that list's existence.
If they allow you to reserve tickets for 5 days, before completely claiming and registering the ticket to set the attendee in stone, then you can still buy tickets and hold your raffle, as long as the event is not sold out. and you hold your raffle promptly. You just have the winner register the tickets, still within the initial delay period.
If you miss the 5 day cutoff, then you pay an extra $100 for a X day extension, or the tickets get auto-refunded minus an administrative charge; either way, you can still work out ONE transfer by having them not registered at first and the initial registration after buying/reserving them be to the intended recipient.
* the concept doesn't work so well for announcing raffle prizes a month before doing the raffle.
What about companies or other entities who want to purchase a bunch of tickets to raffle off or hand out as prizes?
The organizers might say that this is not allowed, especially if the event has already sold out. Those companies or other entities could just pick another prize besides tickets, or the organizer might decide that X number of tickets are allowed to be sold for use with verified raffles/prize events.
I suppose the company that wants to do a raffle goes through a process of paying to reserve the tickets for non-profit raffle/redistribution, which requires declaring the date of the raffle, paying for the reservation on the tickets, then having notarized, a "No-resale " contract and applying for an extension/exception on the requirement to register, providing they promise to supply the registration information electronically, on the date of the raffle.
If they're a community or church org, then the applicant also shows proof of their non-profit status.
If they're a publication, TV channel, or radio station, they show proof through their press credentials.
If they're another kind of corporate entity, then they show proof of their incorporation, including description of their business, and prove/confirm/verify they are not a holding company, or small shell company, they are well-capitalized/have significant financial resources, and are an actual company providing a good or service to the public, the kind of business they are in has no remote relation to arbitrage, financial instruments, or ticket reselling, etc, etc.
If they want to fix it, they should restrict transfers on tickets --- make tickets only refundable. NOT transferrable unless are still at least N tickets available for sale at the time the transfer is requested; once all the tickets are sold out, no transfer of a ticket to a different owner.
Also, within 5 days of ticket purchase, you should be required to register the legal name of each person who will be attending, and/or visit a ticket kiosk to have a picture taken and recorded with the ticket.
Any attempt will be refused for admission to the event using the ticket by a person that ticket was not registered to.
By disallowing transfers, and only allowing refunds (Refunded tickets can then be resold by the event administration company); they cannot be scalped in the first place.
If you set your prices properly, there should be no margin for scalpers.
There is typically guaranteed to eventually be more demand for tickets than available seats, for a popular event. Organizers want their fans to attend their event; setting an extortionate price would generate ill will. Instead, they choose to use TIME to decide who gets in ----- Whoever pays first, gets their tickets. Unfortunately, this doesn't account for scalpers who have significant motivation to rush to the head of the line and commit resources to hogging tickets.
Also, Except when scalpers manage to buy up all the tickets, then they are essentially manipulating the market by buying tickets that other people want and expecting to resell them.
This scheme is planned to run for two or three weeks.
It sounds like a "trial run"; if deemed successful, then it can be made permanent during week 3.
Do you really think that people are going to buy another car just to cover that short period?
No.... they're more likely to just "ignore" the scheme and drive their car anyways.
Not like everyone's license plate gets thoroughly checked.... heck; I see people driving with no license plate at all, all the time.
I'd bet if they get caught and pulled over, they'll say they weren't aware of the scheme, blah blah blah, and weren't appropriately informed or alerted in any way, blah blah blah....
Slashdot Mirror
Short term, I guess its time for any remaining "programmers" to change their titles to "developers"
My title is Software Engineer.......... not only should I get to avoid the 8% decline in programming... But the expected 0% growth in EE, as well, by having 'Software' in the name, instead of Electrical.
He represents the dysfunction present in the most bigoted of the Conservatives
I think the "conservatives" in government may be closet liberals. The congress do not even attempt major strides when they have a majority. They support the other party by yielding to them.
This is why you must vote for Bernie (if you're a liberal) or Trump (if you're a conservative).
I want to vote for the guy that supports doing away with the two party system, reduces all terms for elected officials by 50%, creates an Instant voter recall process for all offices, Changes the law so that An independent commission has to approve all salary increases for members of congress/senate based on reviews of individual performance, sets a 12 year career limit for politicians (Cumulative number of years in House/Senate), mandates that all elections be proportional representation based on popular vote Instant Runoff Voting, AND Restricts public access to congressional votes as necessary, in order to conceal from/prevent special interest groups from discovering whether or not specific members of congress voted for or against their special interest.
(In other words, do away with the excessive bit of transparecy that enables this pathological situation of representatives cowtowing....)
I am torn between Bernie/Trump, because no candidate really serves us. I am Pro Economic Liberty, I am against Institutionalized Theft or Tyranny of the majority, AND Pro-Personal-Freedom.
The Democrat party claims to support personal liberty, but then members go off and favor bullshit like "Gun Control.", And Health Care "Reform" that renders more people UNinsured than before; their members don't do a thing to counter privacy violations by the feds, they do nothing to reign in abuses by the TSA and the IRS "investigating" groups because if their political ideas... The Republican party claims to support economic liberty, but then they allow injustices like Absurd government spending, their party members in Congress lack the fortitude to actually act on their convictions and do what's necessary, they let Perpetual Copyright Extension slide, they do nil about Civil Forfeiture abuses, Patent System Abuses, and more, to go on and on, without lifting a finger.
Also, I feel both parties are highly hypocritical, and lately, all the representatives of both major parties seem to be cowards.
Otherwise... Please explain why Obama is so impotent and incompetent when dealing with important issues, and yet, nobody will stand up to him, not even members of the opposing party?
That is even worse..... Block programming with a GUI might teach some fundamental concepts, or they could just "point and click randomly until it starts working"
I'm not sure that it's possible to create a "GUI" for programming that would actually be approaching remotely efficient to write meaningful programs in.
But writing the code in a logically/procedurally precise structured language is part of the necessary discipline for coding: it's hard, and it's an essential element.
A NSL can only require that you deliver information in their possession; if other demands are made, then they are unlawful.
There is no law that allows compelling the manufacturer of a device to add any surveillance feature.
A transponder that would operate on what frequencies,
Frequencies and methods approved by regulators and agreed upon by the industry and whose use has been designated by the FCC for these types of applications.
and would respond to what, and for what purpose?
Response to authorized users, or authorized probing devices at a specified interval, for the purpose of radar surveillance and unique identification by providing unique drone registration code, manufacturer, and serial number to authorities, and to interested members of the public.
Not everyone has the cash to lock their guns up in a good safe.
You don't have to leave it at home, you can keep it on your person, or even lock it in your glovebox --- that is better than leaving it totally unsecured.
If you cannot afford to lock it up or take it with you at all times, or otherwise appropriately secure it (Such as by putting it in a bank safety deposit box, when you cannot secure it at home), then you cannot afford to own a gun.
If you think you are somehow going to make someone pay or whatever ....
You can send them a nasty letter, and they might think about reforming.
Presumably, they won't have gathered the info on you or YOUR vehicle, unless you provide detailed information about yourself.
I would strongly caution against threatening anybody, however.
RC aircraft are usually not large enough to allow for a registration number to be read unless one is holding the device in one's hand.
I would suggest they require a mandatory transponder that is designed to always be in operation when the craft is operating.
The VM is emulating a real machine and presents a surface which mimics a real machine to Windows.
A VM doesn't "emulate" a real machine. A VM is a virtual container that actually runs on a real machine; you can't use a VM to run on a CPU/hardware architecture different from one the operating system will natively run on. With a virtual machine nothing is emulated, assuming you install the paravirtualized hardware drivers; the VM is segmented and scheduled, so it is an additional operating system instance running on the same hardware.
This works by the host running the CPU in virtual machine monitor mode, and scheduling VMs just like a normal OS schedules applications. You're not "EMULATING" when running two different programs or two different OSes on the same hardware... That's called Multitasking, not emulation.
A VM isn't "hardware emulation" either, not any more than a FreeBSD Jail is Operating System emualtion.
At least they won't waste any on that there highfalutin' edumacation.
I agree.... just take the money from VW, and instead of giving the fines to the government: use that money to form a new tax-exempt non-profit trust organization whose purpose is the reduction of emissions through the research and development of zero-emissions technologies and products, AND compel VW to provide resources to this trust, AND use only power systems developed and approved by this trust in newly manufactured products.
I think being able to type moveForward(100); is a far cry from actually being able to code.
Being able to write off a few lines or follow a tutorial, or hold a sword, and slash some rabbits, does not a Jedi make.
You're not saying it right, he's Scottish, so he's Trrrrrrump.
Trump is NOT a true Scottsman. He's at best a wannabe.
can't raise red flags without being called an ignorant or a pro-(something evil).
Anyone who relies on ad hominem attacks is a moron or a charlatan in regards to the subject matter.
So I encourage raising legitimate red flags, and then mocking anyone who replies with such.
but isn't this precisely what https transports are supposed to do?
I don't think the OP gets a choice in the matter. Most IP cameras and IP camera system transmit the video feed over a UDP-based protocol; it's generally RTP/RTSP; and support for SRTP/SRTCP is sparse and far between (Unless you spent mucho more $$$ to purchase high-end equipment that specifically supports it!). The only way you're going to be wrapping RTCP in HTTPS is with a SSL VPN that supports encapsulating arbitrary TCP protocols and the UDP-based RTP streams as well.
If the goal of the OP is to make sure that nobody is watching his home's video other than the security company, I'd suggest using https streaming
The OP's cousin should probably just accept the risk that some unauthorized third party could in theory be watching the video data, Concentrate on making sure a third party can't Control or Disable the camera (What is really important!), understand that risk, and mitigate it by placing the cameras where they will meet security objectives without a huge risk to privacy objectives.
Legally speaking.... the OP's cousin will have already lost any legal expectation of privacy, the second they hired an outside company and shipped camera video out of their exclusive physical control, local law enforcement/FBI/etc can compel the disclosure of such video data in the hands of a 3rd party without needing a warrant or subpoena, and even bar the monitoring company from informing that footage has been provided; it's no different than requesting transaction records from a retailer.
The reality of the situation is; security monitoring companies are totally focused on physical security, the ones likely to offer affordable services are going to be local SMBs for the most part, and they are likely to have little knowledge of IT Security topics.
Unless you've found a highly exceptional security provider in the local area that promises privacy of your video footage, most companies will just not care , and might not fully understand these issues, the issue is so universally neglected, that you will need a contract requiring end-to-end encryption, AND the OP will have to pay the monitoring company enough money for them to care.
And then, unless you are paying a couple thousand a month, then it is probably a tall order to require a custom VPN solution "just to protect a home's ccTV feeds".
It's irrelevant, anyway - PCI-DSS will mandate it at some point for any site that accepts credit cards
It is already required by PCI-DSS to be using the proper encryption strength, which would be SHA-2 for TLS certificates, and using SHA-1 would clearly be strictly non-compliant with the PCI DSS requirements, since current vendor recommendations and best practices say not to use certificates with old weak hashing algorithms such as MD5 and SHA-1, and Google/Microsoft have already announced that SHA1 is considered weak, and SHA1 certificates will be distrusted by all major browsers during 2016; Google/Chrome also announced they would be treated as insecure at the start of January 2016.
See PCI DSS v3 Requirement 4.1, Testing Procedure 4.1.f
that don't support SHA-2 will be left without access to encrypted websites.
This is much ado about nothing. The devices that cannot support it are dead ended already, They are not safe to use, so it makes sense that very soon they won't even be allowed to be used with SSL websites, even if the Webmaster wanted them to work. All the SSL websites I manage are already using SHA-2 certificates Besides you DONT use an OS without SHA2 support and have zero issues today
Also, the SHA-1 certs are considered weak and unsuitable for secure usage at this point, even sites such as Amazon and BankOfAmerica are using SHA-2 certs.
I think all the major e-tailers have X509 certs with a SHA-2 signature at this point.
Someone who, for example sells illegal drugs online rather than by phone, is a drug dealer
It's not cybercrime for some guy to be selling illegal drugs online. The guy already broke the law in the real world, and the actual exchange will definitely occur in the real world (If he he/she is indeed selling), the online / website type platform is just a communication channel.
That's like suggesting that if he used a telephone to make the deal, that it would be a phone crime.
It's not (But there really are telephone crimes that exist, such as toll fraud). The phone or internet is not part of the criminal act; it's just a communication channel between actors in this case, Unless you're talking about the "thought crime" of two people discussing or using the online medium to advertise / agree to / and moving forward with an act or transaction participants know to be illegal.
And there are activities that are cybercrime, such as hacking / stealing and distributing stolen digital information.
With stolen information, the actual goods are likely exchanged online, so that's quite different, and is cybercrime...
There's a difference between true cybercrime and using internet-connected personal electronic devices, networks, or telephone services, in a way that furthers a crime which is a totally materialized crime that occurs in the physical world.
Okay, I know this is off topic and I apologize, but can we agree that its time to stop calling them "Cybercriminals"?
These people are called cybercriminals to provide information about what kind of criminals they are; it doesn't mean they are to be looked at as privileged or special; You don't call a serial killer just a "criminal"; These people who deal in batches of stolen credit card or social security numbers for mortgage or Tax Refund fraud are much worse than common criminals, just like you refer to criminals who are serial killers differently than you refer to muggers or jaywalkers. A thief probably only robs from a few people, cybercriminals are "Mass Thieves", and the penalties should be more severe --- they are criminals that use what the average person would consider technically sophisticated methods or tools involving the abuse of technology as a fundamental aspect in the commission of their crimes.....
They are not thieves in the traditional sense, other than their intention is essentially to get money they have not earned, E.g. those selling copies of other peoples' credit card numbers, And their chance at a profit is supported by another criminal's expectation of using those numbers to defraud banks out of $$$, but some of these criminals are also referred to as frausters and identity thieves.
Are you yelling at people selling beakers and bunsenburners?
One step at a time.... our governments are still in the process of trying to get drones (and firearms) made illegal to sell to consumers by requiring FAA registration / Background checks against the secret zero-accountability No-Fly List, which also happens to be a list that may include people for no reason other than they are politically opposed to both parties' views and/or to that list's existence.
If they allow you to reserve tickets for 5 days, before completely claiming and registering the ticket to set the attendee in stone, then you can still buy tickets and hold your raffle, as long as the event is not sold out. and you hold your raffle promptly. You just have the winner register the tickets, still within the initial delay period.
If you miss the 5 day cutoff, then you pay an extra $100 for a X day extension, or the tickets get auto-refunded minus an administrative charge; either way, you can still work out ONE transfer by having them not registered at first and the initial registration after buying/reserving them be to the intended recipient.
* the concept doesn't work so well for announcing raffle prizes a month before doing the raffle.
What about companies or other entities who want to purchase a bunch of tickets to raffle off or hand out as prizes?
The organizers might say that this is not allowed, especially if the event has already sold out. Those companies or other entities could just pick another prize besides tickets, or the organizer might decide that X number of tickets are allowed to be sold for use with verified raffles/prize events.
I suppose the company that wants to do a raffle goes through a process of paying to reserve the tickets for non-profit raffle/redistribution, which requires declaring the date of the raffle, paying for the reservation on the tickets, then having notarized, a "No-resale " contract and applying for an extension/exception on the requirement to register, providing they promise to supply the registration information electronically, on the date of the raffle.
If they're a community or church org, then the applicant also shows proof of their non-profit status. If they're a publication, TV channel, or radio station, they show proof through their press credentials. If they're another kind of corporate entity, then they show proof of their incorporation, including description of their business, and prove/confirm/verify they are not a holding company, or small shell company, they are well-capitalized/have significant financial resources, and are an actual company providing a good or service to the public, the kind of business they are in has no remote relation to arbitrage, financial instruments, or ticket reselling, etc, etc.
If they want to fix it, they should restrict transfers on tickets --- make tickets only refundable. NOT transferrable unless are still at least N tickets available for sale at the time the transfer is requested; once all the tickets are sold out, no transfer of a ticket to a different owner.
Also, within 5 days of ticket purchase, you should be required to register the legal name of each person who will be attending, and/or visit a ticket kiosk to have a picture taken and recorded with the ticket.
Any attempt will be refused for admission to the event using the ticket by a person that ticket was not registered to.
By disallowing transfers, and only allowing refunds (Refunded tickets can then be resold by the event administration company); they cannot be scalped in the first place.
If you set your prices properly, there should be no margin for scalpers.
There is typically guaranteed to eventually be more demand for tickets than available seats, for a popular event. Organizers want their fans to attend their event; setting an extortionate price would generate ill will. Instead, they choose to use TIME to decide who gets in ----- Whoever pays first, gets their tickets. Unfortunately, this doesn't account for scalpers who have significant motivation to rush to the head of the line and commit resources to hogging tickets.
Also, Except when scalpers manage to buy up all the tickets, then they are essentially manipulating the market by buying tickets that other people want and expecting to resell them.
This scheme is planned to run for two or three weeks.
It sounds like a "trial run"; if deemed successful, then it can be made permanent during week 3.
Do you really think that people are going to buy another car just to cover that short period?
No.... they're more likely to just "ignore" the scheme and drive their car anyways. Not like everyone's license plate gets thoroughly checked.... heck; I see people driving with no license plate at all, all the time.
I'd bet if they get caught and pulled over, they'll say they weren't aware of the scheme, blah blah blah, and weren't appropriately informed or alerted in any way, blah blah blah....