You know that and I know that but the guy that controls the money will have a conniption fit if you try to spend any of it.
Then that guy that controls the money is an idiot, who needs to either be re-educated, or he needs to be removed from that position, because it's in the company's best interest, and for his own good....
There are two types of credit cards: secured and unsecured.
The concept of a "secured" credit card, makes about as much sense as a mortgage loan requiring you to capitalize an extra 20% fee, and a 100% down payment of the principal being borrowed, in order to get the loan.
if you let this kind of thing happen via lax security, your business should be halted, dissolved, and the proceeds divided between the affected people.
If it didn't happen to the Comodo certificate authority, who had signed a bunch of rogue SSL certificates: when their whole business model is to be a cert provider of reliable verified trust, then it won't happen to Target.
If it was exposed to the internet, someone went out of their way to be stupid or to steal.
Must apply Hanlon's razor here. Someone probably did something stupid.
Without evidence to the contrary; it could just as easily be a UIT (Unintentional Insider Threat), as
an Intended Insider Attack.
No, but the above poster may be attempting to make an argument for shared guilt.
That Target's negligence was so severe that it facilitated frauds which other actors will be committing, to the point of "aiding and abetting" the criminals who stole the numbers and other data and are in the process of hoc'ing them for fraudulent use.
I don't see how Aereo is any different than those cable providers who just were retransmitting from an antenna, and those cable providers have to ask permission.
A few years ago, there was a precedent set by Cablevision that no retransmission consent required For a customer that rents an antenna.
In ABC's petition.
They take issue with the fact, that Aereo is using a massive number of tiny coin-cell sized very inexpensive antennas mounted on a PCB
Each customer gets an antenna, but they are dynamically assigned.
Also, each customer's stream gets transcoded and saved to a customer-specific directory on shared hard drives.
So at some point the customer's stuff is getting blended in some sense; the customer isn't renting 100% of the delivery infrastructure, only the antenna and some disk space used to receive their content.
One of the arguments before the court is their system is engineered as a Rube Goldberg-like contrivance
whose sole purpose is to attempt to circumvent the intent of Congress and the copyright law; in regards to,
the requirement for consent to retransmission, AND the exclusive rights to public performance.
*as another poster mentioned, traditional methods for rating TV stations won't track what Aereo users are watching*
This, of course... is not Aereo's problem; when there a significant number of Aereo users, and eventually it becomes such that not including Aereo users would result in a non-representative sample, this becomes a problem the researchers and ratings agencies will definitely have to deal with.
They are no more leeches than Cable companies and other rebroadcasters and bundlers.
My guess would be that the net number of viewers of OTA television drop as a result of Aereo
Since each of their customers are renting a physical antenna from Aereo Each viewer is an OTA viewer: the OTA signal is received by the physical antenna they are renting, and then encapsulated for streaming over the internet.
There is no additional cost for the OTA broadcaster --- in fact, at some point, if all the OTA viewers are using Aereo, then the broadcaster could probably make a deal with Aereo to streamline their delivery, and reduce the number of kilowatts they need.
Since Aereo is playing TV unmodified --- the viewers do see all the ads
Since Aereo are only allowing viewers to join who are in the area of their antennas, and they restrict access based on IP addresses that geolocate to the broadcast area, they are not providing out-of-area viewers access to content.
Both the 5th grade school bully, and the 3rd grade victim are in the school Principal's office.
The principal has told the two to visit the school counselor, to attempt to force the two to apologize to each other.
The two have reluctantly agreed to follow the principal's command.
That doesn't mean the two won't be getting into another fight on the way to the counselor,
or be beating each other down again, after the forced apology in front of the school official.
It appears the SEC.
Has a rule requiring companies to audit their entire supply chain, for "Conflict Metals".
These supply line traceability audits would surely present a very high burden of compliance, and high costs, for this extra bureaucracy, even for a company like Intel.
Still...... Even if the company doesn't otherwise care where their metals come from, The SEC mandates independent third party supply chain traceability audits and reporting of audit information to the public and SEC and an annual conflict minerals report to the public, for manufacturers, and companies contracting an item to be manufactured.
Then there are..... companies who supply materials to the “issuers” (but are not themselves SEC-regulated) but who will almost certainly be required to conduct conflict minerals audits to meet the demands of those customers. Other estimates indicate that the total number of US companies likely impacted may exceed 12,000
Or you could have the people who want the iron ore to buy what is above it.
That might work for gold, but the iron ore isn't valuable enough.
They would rather instead force people to move, and offer them subsidized loans to build the replacement structure outside the area where there is iron ore to be mined.
But that's the point- they CAN do that. They take my order and charge me (and a million other people) on Jan 1st. They then wait until Jan 30th to tell us we aren't getting the items. They've had our money (well, our credit card company's money) in their accounts for 30 days, earning them interest.
And they've had the item that was being shipped to you tied up for those days, so they lost the opportunity to sell that item to someone else for the full correct price (A lost economic cost that is far greater than any 0.1% interest on a few bucks in the bank), when they come to find out some software error, allowed you to get the item into their order processing system with a lower price.
If there is the remote possibility of any interest depends on how frequently they get paid out from their merchant account, anyways. I'm not sure why you even mention it.... by law most business checking accounts aren't even allowed to pay interest, or no interest is paid out; more often than not, merchants have to pay a substantial monthly fee to their banks for their accounts that include a % fee for the processing of every transaction, and receive no interest.
More likely than not, some of the fees related to the processing of your credit card transaction won't be returned to the merchant after they "refund" you the purchase.
Retailers don't make money on the banking part of the equation. They spend a lot of money for the security and processing of transactions. Banking is their cost of doing business, not an extra bonus they receive in a few bucks a year interest.
So, it's not an equitable contract, then. If they have more rights than I do (being able to change the price unilaterally, and yank the delivery back days/weeks after I've already paid them), then it's Not a fair contract.
This doesn't mean it's not an equitable contract; you signed up for it, when you agreed to place an order, however --- both you and the retailer have certain risks and possible inconveniences involved in the transaction. It's a fair deal, in the sense, that if you didn't like it: you could purchase the item elsewhere, such as from a local brick and mortar venue.
And, of course, it's then perfectly okay for me to keep the item then, as it is technically 'unrequested merchandise' at the moment it's dropped off, right?
The only way you can "cancel" an item that has already been shipped, is either, for the item to never be delivered to you, or for you to refuse the delivery, causing the item to be sent back.
Any item that you originally ordered is not unrequested merchandise.
i'm not saying it's not possible, but if terorists haven't even been able to build and deploy a dirt nuke, how much of a threat is it that they'll be able to steal a high tech weapon, bypass all of its security measures and re-program it?
The higher the tech, and the more frequently deployed: the more likely.
I suspect, before long after killbots --- there will be police bots, and then private industry will get ahold of the technology, and we'll have "Company security guard" bots.
As far as defeating security.... Windows never put up much of a fight, and I suspect some of the bots might run Windows 8 or its logical successor.
Don't even try, most Agile detractors on Slashdot don't know the first thing about it, they just had a bad manager come in one day and tell them they were doing some Agile when they weren't
And you doubt that's what is happening in the government?
Scrum can be useful for some projects, but you need managers and developers that fully understand how the methodology is supposed to work, and can do things in an appropriate organized efficient way.
More likely than not; the government won't have anything approaching a faithful implementation and appropriate use of the whole of it.
humans have a pretty poor track record and it wouldn't take much to approve upon. if you think the man in the trenches is making good judgments about when and who to kill, you should talk to a vietnam vet.
Until some psycho gets ahold of a few of them, programs the bots to commit genocide against a race, builds a hit list --- or shoot anyone in a police car or police uniform, and unleashes them in NYC, Chicago, or Los Angeles.
Imagine what Hitler would have done with armies of killbots?
Switching from large commercial providers using a disciplined time-tested development methodology, to
a few (probably less-experienced) internal developers, using an ad-hoc "Agile" (probably undisciplined) software development methodology (that management probably just thought was cool).
What could possibly go wrong?
To extend the current IT solution we will be using a standard waterfall delivery approach largely using existing suppliers and commercial frameworks, in order to de-risk delivery and ensure UC continues to have a safe and secure introduction. The end-state digital solution will be delivered using an agile, and therefore iterative, approach as advocated by the Cabinet Office with significantly less reliance on the large IT suppliers delivering the current UC IT service.”
You don't have to subscribe to get a newspaper. Anyone can simply (and anonymously) purchase a newspaper.
That might be true for some newspapers -- but even if the newspaper required showing an ID to be logged in a database, in order to purchase without a regular subscription: it would still count as a public notice, as long as enough people in the community were buying it.
If you're not a member, you don't get that 'news
Anyone with access to an internet connection can freely become a "member" of Twitter.
Which is sufficient.
It is not required to provide anonymous access, for Public notices, records, and documentation, to be officiallyl recognized as public notices, records, documentation, etc.
In fact, to view public records at a courthouse, in general You have to show ID, and possibly sign a log.
Also; in general, you do not need to signup for membership on Twitter just to view or search tweets, aside from tweets from "private" (restricted) users. You only need a "membership" to use mobile devices, to send your own messages, or to use the convenient "follow" action --- to get notification of another user's tweets.
Although I do think it is a good thing in that it helps strengthen the community support and trust of the police department I have a feeling that it will end at some point in the near future with a lawsuit
This is possible... and the Police chief may be found in the wrong, if he isn't very careful about what representations he makes in public. There could later be made a claim of libelous defamation -- particularly if the twitter messages imply the target for action was affirmatively guilty, and not "Dismissed under suspicion or allegation of X".
I'm not a member of either and do not get his tweets or posts, so how is this a 'push for transparency'?
Not everyone subscribes to local newspapers, either; however, posting a public notice in one of them, to television, or other privately owned publicly accessible media, still counts as public notice, for example: for the purpose of substituted service (Service of process by publication, when an individual cannot be located) --- certain kinds of legal proceedings requiring that Public notice be given -- public notice before issuing broadcast or liquor licenses, public notices of important government meetings where the public is required to be able to comment upon, public notices for foreclosures, estate actions, probate.
Good luck killing me from across the room in a moment without a gun
You'd be surprised what a few poison-tipped blowdarts, or throwing darts, or throwing knives could do.
Or for that matter... any piercing dart whose tip is coated with an incurable biological pathogen such as Ebola.
There are plenty of popular ranged weapons to choose from.
Many deadly weapons could be constructed with materials that can be found readily in nature.
What would be interesting would be a coin that would combine the obvious market value of eGold, the anonymity of a Chaumian currency, with the popularity of BitCoin. Someone does this, it has a better chance of becoming a currency of choice.
How about a Meta cryptocurrency? It would be similar to Bitcoin -- but instead of merely having the right SHA-256 hash as proof of work; the proof of work would also have to include a transfer of Bitcoin tokens, maybe some other tokens in different cryptocurrencies simultaneously, and -- potentially, proof of an external transfer event (such as a transfer of precious metals rights)
Different tokens in the Meta cryptocurrency might have different requirements to transfer,
and therefore -- might have different value.
You might refer to "1 Gold Meta Bitcoin" or "1 Bronze Meta Bitcoin+Litecoin"
Slashdot Mirror
You know that and I know that but the guy that controls the money will have a conniption fit if you try to spend any of it.
Then that guy that controls the money is an idiot, who needs to either be re-educated, or he needs to be removed from that position, because it's in the company's best interest, and for his own good....
There are two types of credit cards: secured and unsecured.
The concept of a "secured" credit card, makes about as much sense as a mortgage loan requiring you to capitalize an extra 20% fee, and a 100% down payment of the principal being borrowed, in order to get the loan.
if you let this kind of thing happen via lax security, your business should be halted, dissolved, and the proceeds divided between the affected people.
If it didn't happen to the Comodo certificate authority, who had signed a bunch of rogue SSL certificates: when their whole business model is to be a cert provider of reliable verified trust, then it won't happen to Target.
You'll get a letter in about 3-4 months saying something like "insufficient credit history". Because you need credit history to get credit
There's a circularity issue there. If you can't send in an application and get credit without credit history, then nobody should have credit....
If it was exposed to the internet, someone went out of their way to be stupid or to steal.
Must apply Hanlon's razor here. Someone probably did something stupid. Without evidence to the contrary; it could just as easily be a UIT (Unintentional Insider Threat), as an Intended Insider Attack.
Stupidity does not equal fraud
No, but the above poster may be attempting to make an argument for shared guilt. That Target's negligence was so severe that it facilitated frauds which other actors will be committing, to the point of "aiding and abetting" the criminals who stole the numbers and other data and are in the process of hoc'ing them for fraudulent use.
I don't see how Aereo is any different than those cable providers who just were retransmitting from an antenna, and those cable providers have to ask permission.
A few years ago, there was a precedent set by Cablevision that no retransmission consent required For a customer that rents an antenna.
In ABC's petition. They take issue with the fact, that Aereo is using a massive number of tiny coin-cell sized very inexpensive antennas mounted on a PCB
Each customer gets an antenna, but they are dynamically assigned. Also, each customer's stream gets transcoded and saved to a customer-specific directory on shared hard drives.
So at some point the customer's stuff is getting blended in some sense; the customer isn't renting 100% of the delivery infrastructure, only the antenna and some disk space used to receive their content.
One of the arguments before the court is their system is engineered as a Rube Goldberg-like contrivance whose sole purpose is to attempt to circumvent the intent of Congress and the copyright law; in regards to, the requirement for consent to retransmission, AND the exclusive rights to public performance.
*as another poster mentioned, traditional methods for rating TV stations won't track what Aereo users are watching*
This, of course... is not Aereo's problem; when there a significant number of Aereo users, and eventually it becomes such that not including Aereo users would result in a non-representative sample, this becomes a problem the researchers and ratings agencies will definitely have to deal with.
They are no more leeches than Cable companies and other rebroadcasters and bundlers.
My guess would be that the net number of viewers of OTA television drop as a result of Aereo
Since each of their customers are renting a physical antenna from Aereo Each viewer is an OTA viewer: the OTA signal is received by the physical antenna they are renting, and then encapsulated for streaming over the internet.
There is no additional cost for the OTA broadcaster --- in fact, at some point, if all the OTA viewers are using Aereo, then the broadcaster could probably make a deal with Aereo to streamline their delivery, and reduce the number of kilowatts they need.
Since Aereo is playing TV unmodified --- the viewers do see all the ads
Since Aereo are only allowing viewers to join who are in the area of their antennas, and they restrict access based on IP addresses that geolocate to the broadcast area, they are not providing out-of-area viewers access to content.
Both the 5th grade school bully, and the 3rd grade victim are in the school Principal's office.
The principal has told the two to visit the school counselor, to attempt to force the two to apologize to each other.
The two have reluctantly agreed to follow the principal's command.
That doesn't mean the two won't be getting into another fight on the way to the counselor, or be beating each other down again, after the forced apology in front of the school official.
It appears the SEC. Has a rule requiring companies to audit their entire supply chain, for "Conflict Metals".
These supply line traceability audits would surely present a very high burden of compliance, and high costs, for this extra bureaucracy, even for a company like Intel.
Still...... Even if the company doesn't otherwise care where their metals come from, The SEC mandates independent third party supply chain traceability audits and reporting of audit information to the public and SEC and an annual conflict minerals report to the public, for manufacturers, and companies contracting an item to be manufactured.
Then there are..... companies who supply materials to the “issuers” (but are not themselves SEC-regulated) but who will almost certainly be required to conduct conflict minerals audits to meet the demands of those customers. Other estimates indicate that the total number of US companies likely impacted may exceed 12,000
For the tidy sum of $495, you can rent their videos for 4 weeks.
Yeah... how generous of them 30 day access to the archived course (includes videos, discussion boards, content, and Wiki)
Many of the free Moocs only allow you access to archived course material, like.... practically forever :)
Or you could have the people who want the iron ore to buy what is above it.
That might work for gold, but the iron ore isn't valuable enough.
They would rather instead force people to move, and offer them subsidized loans to build the replacement structure outside the area where there is iron ore to be mined.
was Silkroad.
But they were shutdown.
Overstock might be the first major mainstream retailer accepting BTC that sticks with legal products.
But that's the point- they CAN do that. They take my order and charge me (and a million other people) on Jan 1st. They then wait until Jan 30th to tell us we aren't getting the items. They've had our money (well, our credit card company's money) in their accounts for 30 days, earning them interest.
And they've had the item that was being shipped to you tied up for those days, so they lost the opportunity to sell that item to someone else for the full correct price (A lost economic cost that is far greater than any 0.1% interest on a few bucks in the bank), when they come to find out some software error, allowed you to get the item into their order processing system with a lower price.
If there is the remote possibility of any interest depends on how frequently they get paid out from their merchant account, anyways. I'm not sure why you even mention it.... by law most business checking accounts aren't even allowed to pay interest, or no interest is paid out; more often than not, merchants have to pay a substantial monthly fee to their banks for their accounts that include a % fee for the processing of every transaction, and receive no interest. More likely than not, some of the fees related to the processing of your credit card transaction won't be returned to the merchant after they "refund" you the purchase.
Retailers don't make money on the banking part of the equation. They spend a lot of money for the security and processing of transactions. Banking is their cost of doing business, not an extra bonus they receive in a few bucks a year interest.
So, it's not an equitable contract, then. If they have more rights than I do (being able to change the price unilaterally, and yank the delivery back days/weeks after I've already paid them), then it's Not a fair contract.
This doesn't mean it's not an equitable contract; you signed up for it, when you agreed to place an order, however --- both you and the retailer have certain risks and possible inconveniences involved in the transaction. It's a fair deal, in the sense, that if you didn't like it: you could purchase the item elsewhere, such as from a local brick and mortar venue.
And, of course, it's then perfectly okay for me to keep the item then, as it is technically 'unrequested merchandise' at the moment it's dropped off, right?
The only way you can "cancel" an item that has already been shipped, is either, for the item to never be delivered to you, or for you to refuse the delivery, causing the item to be sent back.
Any item that you originally ordered is not unrequested merchandise.
i'm not saying it's not possible, but if terorists haven't even been able to build and deploy a dirt nuke, how much of a threat is it that they'll be able to steal a high tech weapon, bypass all of its security measures and re-program it?
The higher the tech, and the more frequently deployed: the more likely.
I suspect, before long after killbots --- there will be police bots, and then private industry will get ahold of the technology, and we'll have "Company security guard" bots.
As far as defeating security.... Windows never put up much of a fight, and I suspect some of the bots might run Windows 8 or its logical successor.
Don't even try, most Agile detractors on Slashdot don't know the first thing about it, they just had a bad manager come in one day and tell them they were doing some Agile when they weren't
And you doubt that's what is happening in the government?
Scrum can be useful for some projects, but you need managers and developers that fully understand how the methodology is supposed to work, and can do things in an appropriate organized efficient way.
More likely than not; the government won't have anything approaching a faithful implementation and appropriate use of the whole of it.
humans have a pretty poor track record and it wouldn't take much to approve upon. if you think the man in the trenches is making good judgments about when and who to kill, you should talk to a vietnam vet.
Until some psycho gets ahold of a few of them, programs the bots to commit genocide against a race, builds a hit list --- or shoot anyone in a police car or police uniform, and unleashes them in NYC, Chicago, or Los Angeles.
Imagine what Hitler would have done with armies of killbots?
Switching from large commercial providers using a disciplined time-tested development methodology, to a few (probably less-experienced) internal developers, using an ad-hoc "Agile" (probably undisciplined) software development methodology (that management probably just thought was cool). What could possibly go wrong?
To extend the current IT solution we will be using a standard waterfall delivery approach largely using existing suppliers and commercial frameworks, in order to de-risk delivery and ensure UC continues to have a safe and secure introduction. The end-state digital solution will be delivered using an agile, and therefore iterative, approach as advocated by the Cabinet Office with significantly less reliance on the large IT suppliers delivering the current UC IT service.”
You don't have to subscribe to get a newspaper. Anyone can simply (and anonymously) purchase a newspaper.
That might be true for some newspapers -- but even if the newspaper required showing an ID to be logged in a database, in order to purchase without a regular subscription: it would still count as a public notice, as long as enough people in the community were buying it.
If you're not a member, you don't get that 'news
Anyone with access to an internet connection can freely become a "member" of Twitter. Which is sufficient. It is not required to provide anonymous access, for Public notices, records, and documentation, to be officiallyl recognized as public notices, records, documentation, etc.
In fact, to view public records at a courthouse, in general You have to show ID, and possibly sign a log.
Also; in general, you do not need to signup for membership on Twitter just to view or search tweets, aside from tweets from "private" (restricted) users. You only need a "membership" to use mobile devices, to send your own messages, or to use the convenient "follow" action --- to get notification of another user's tweets.
Although I do think it is a good thing in that it helps strengthen the community support and trust of the police department I have a feeling that it will end at some point in the near future with a lawsuit
This is possible... and the Police chief may be found in the wrong, if he isn't very careful about what representations he makes in public. There could later be made a claim of libelous defamation -- particularly if the twitter messages imply the target for action was affirmatively guilty, and not "Dismissed under suspicion or allegation of X".
I'm not a member of either and do not get his tweets or posts, so how is this a 'push for transparency'?
Not everyone subscribes to local newspapers, either; however, posting a public notice in one of them, to television, or other privately owned publicly accessible media, still counts as public notice, for example: for the purpose of substituted service (Service of process by publication, when an individual cannot be located) --- certain kinds of legal proceedings requiring that Public notice be given -- public notice before issuing broadcast or liquor licenses, public notices of important government meetings where the public is required to be able to comment upon, public notices for foreclosures, estate actions, probate.
Good luck killing me from across the room in a moment without a gun
You'd be surprised what a few poison-tipped blowdarts, or throwing darts, or throwing knives could do. Or for that matter... any piercing dart whose tip is coated with an incurable biological pathogen such as Ebola.
There are plenty of popular ranged weapons to choose from.
Many deadly weapons could be constructed with materials that can be found readily in nature.
What would be interesting would be a coin that would combine the obvious market value of eGold, the anonymity of a Chaumian currency, with the popularity of BitCoin. Someone does this, it has a better chance of becoming a currency of choice.
How about a Meta cryptocurrency? It would be similar to Bitcoin -- but instead of merely having the right SHA-256 hash as proof of work; the proof of work would also have to include a transfer of Bitcoin tokens, maybe some other tokens in different cryptocurrencies simultaneously, and -- potentially, proof of an external transfer event (such as a transfer of precious metals rights)
Different tokens in the Meta cryptocurrency might have different requirements to transfer, and therefore -- might have different value.
You might refer to "1 Gold Meta Bitcoin" or "1 Bronze Meta Bitcoin+Litecoin"