Most banks will have an inbound ACH limit of around $10,000. I'm sure Paypal has an outgoing limit as well, that is well less than $100,000; let alone millions.
A few million dollars an hour for PayPal's error, then give back the money when asked. Likely, he'd not have any charges, and get to keep a few million dollars for his trouble. Instead, he'll get nothing but some news articles.
They would most certainly discover the error pretty quickly, when reviewing the unusual transaction; which would no doubt result in his account being frozen,
and maybe get his name on the ACH blacklists / Chexsystems.
Bank Error In Your Favor means you Go Directly To Jail if you try to spend the money.
Unless you use the money to buy out all your bank's stock, before they notice. And your first act as new CEO and director of the board is to take the company private, and make the "error" go away quietly
The question the becomes, are we at risk of inflation if we helicopter-drop billions of dollars on the people? Maybe. Maybe not.
Our president blows a billion$$$ every day on gas money; helicopter-dropping a few billion would probably have no appreciable effect.
Frankly, the $1.5 trillion stimulus would have probably been better if he had divided the $1 trillion by $230 million people, and given every American individuals an equal amount, excluding individuals earning more than $80,000, and excluding individuals part of a married couple where the couple's earnings exceed $120,000 ; in other words.... approximately $40,000 extra money to be received by every American; instead of throwing away the $1 trillion on crappy programs and tax breaks for corporations.
You have to fail to report and file your taxes properly, as required, and given reasonable time, before there is even a chance of that happening.
And to get the orange jumpsuit; I do believe you have to have committed fraud, or failed to pay after they sent an invoice, for a considerable length of time.
Just having a multi-billion$$ tax bill alone, doesn't land you in jail.
It may result in penalties and adverse asset forfeitures and seizures by IRS enforcement agents, however..
Wait... so you're worried about children being able to bypass a (should be) child-safe weapon lock/safe, but expect a "this room is off limits" rule to stop them?
No... the point is; the child's familiarity with the room is reduced, so if there is a lockbox or hidden compartment in the wall there somewhere, the child doesn't know exactly where to go looking for it, especially if the closet or room is also kept locked --- its just an extra layer of obscurity / fear to create for the child to break the rules..
If they were rummaging about in there, it should become noticed long before they find the lockbox mounted to the wall above the top shelf, that the child can't reach, not even on their tippy-toes.
Although they should be on the NMS and syslog servers too... and many Juniper M/T series devices, which are very frequently used by large carriers for core and edge routers, have a hard drive mounted on the/var filesystem,
that the routers' syslogs get written to.
Rebooting sounds like an act of desperation. It's almost never the cleanest way, and it almost always incurs additional downtime, causes more outages, or further lengthens the network downtime --- since you require 3 to 5 minutes for a reboot, then maybe 3 to 5 more minutes for routing protocols to reconverge.
And god help your soul, if you reboot a Cisco device such as a 72xx or Catalyst 65xx running BGP with 3 or 4 copies of a full table, and with 8 or 9 total peers.
That one weak moment, when reboot was chosen may result in 60 to 90 minutes of trying to coax the network back up gently.
Calm down before you all jump on the "Enable" wagon. It's actually a decently details filing with less ambiguous wording than assumed.
That is an oddity... technology patents are normally supposed to be a possible-invention-space filling function; where you have one invention, but the patent is designed to fill out as much of the space of other possible inventions as possible --- often the wording is apparently intentionally vague, and they try to say as little specific as possible, to avoid having an overly narrowly scoped patent.
Unfortunately, glassy metals only have an atomic structure similar to glass, and not the appearance of glass.
Or fortunately... depending on how you look at it. Apple would manufacture the device as a single solid piece of material molded around the internal components, and you would NEVER be able to open up your iPhone or tablet and have a peek inside, As-Opposed to it just being really really hard to do so....
Will the next version of reader come complete with a PWN ME sign hung automatically around the back of your computer, and included in the Acrobat plugin version string announced by the web browser in the User Agent headers towards every site you visit?
Yes. Any discussion of responsibly combining parenting and weapon ownership relies on actually being responsible. Imagine that.
Even responsible parents aren't going to necessarily visually inspect stored away weapons every day.
If the kid can very easily defeat the measure, then its existence may do more harm than good.
It might be better to just keep the gun tucked away in a locked strongbox, discretely tucked away in a hidden compartment with heavy furniture in front of it -- or private closet/other room that's "off limits" for the kids to enter.
and even if they do the odds are in favor of nothing fatal happening the first time, and you have a cut cable telling you that you have a serious problem on your hands that demands immediate action.
This is assuming you regularly check up on the status of your weapon, and it hasn't gone missing.
Or the cable strangely disappeared one day.
(The kid discretely caused the cable to become misplaced, after you had unlocked it and set it aside for routine maintenance on the gun)
you posted 40 minutes of anti-gun FUD propagandist bullshit? Classy.
That's why the guy was in the video explaining how these tinky bike-lock-like devices and $1 trigger locks really only exist to satisfy ridiculous gun regulations --- and the best safety practice, really is to avoid needing the cheesy trigger locks in the first place, is to visit the shooting range frequently: make sure to take your kids with you, trained in the safe and proper use of firearms, and have them shoot often there as well? Pfft....
Personally... I think it would have been funnier to have a video with someone struggling to defeat cheesy $1 trigger locks -- and maybe failing (Hopefully, not accidentally shooting themselves in the process of trying to defeat the trigger lock).
Trigger locks and safes will do the same thing, and not mess up and get you killed when you need it to work.
Yeah... they would be better off making the hand reader a feature of a gun safe, to provide owners an option for faster access to their guns, than having to enter a combination.....
In addition, they could add the 'enter combination option' as a backup
Prison is punishment. The only reason for anyone to be reformed is that they accept their wrong doing and that the punishment was justified and fit the crime.
Punishments are rarely justified, AND they rarely fit the crime. But I remind ye, that there is not a single person who has not sinned.
And the laws are so complicated; I can about guarantee there is not a single person living in the US today, who has not committed an act that can be prosecuted and convicted as a felony. And if I recall correctly, the average person commits about 3 felonies a day.
But nonetheless: crime rates would probably be lower, if every single US person were required to spend 1 24 hour period in a jail, within 30 days of their 18th birthday, as an enhanced deterrant against the possibility of future criminal behavior.
If that's your thinking on things, you should always be buying 2 year old models of hardware because they're cheap compared to their performance.
Yes.... if you want the most product for the lowest cost, buying as late as possible makes sense, because of the time value of money.... even if the product 2 years later were exactly the same price;
you would have saved on opportunity cost and cost of capital: you could have invested that money over the 2 years and earned a return --
this is assuming the product didn't provide you a benefit over those 2 years that was worth more than the value in opportunity cost.
If the direction of the price change was the opposite; say a $150 price increase.
Could they reasonably expect every buyer to come in and pay the difference?
It seems to be a violation of equal protection under the law.... I as an individual can't go out and get a personal plate assigned to me and not a specific vehicle.
Furthermore; I would be subject to getting a ticket from the automated system.
I wonder what Microsoft will do for customers who purchased a tablet right before the price drop?
MS should do nothing. They were among the few people to buy something above the value the market would ultimately be willing to accept.
This is not Microsoft's responsibility to deal with.
When you buy something, you should be doing your due diligence to make sure you are getting more in product value than cash value you are trading for it.
If you make a bad trade: it's not the manufacturer's duty to try and console you about your decisionmaking error.
This is why we say "better to let a hundred guilty men go free than have one innocent man go to prision."
I can agree this is a good ratio. 100 guilty going free per 1 innocent person going to jail;
that is essentially a guilty conviction ratio of 1%.
Which is essentially to say, we can send 1 innocent person to jail, for every 100 we send to jail.
Or 10000 innocent people for every 1 million people we send to jail.
But on top of that, if you were accused of a crime you did not commit but did not have a solid alibi for, would you accept that you were one of the ones that simply "must go to jail", in order to not let a single guilty go free?,
No. I would absolutely hate that, but as soon as I had been accused of a crime, I would now be subject to a bias.
That is: I would personally no longer be capable of applying a rational judgement about what the public should really do --- I would have a position influenced by a personal desire, at which point, it could be logical for the government to ignore the objection to the infringement against personal justice.
But that's owing to the fact, that the purpose of the courts is to provide justice for society -- that is, justice for the social order - in the aggregate, justice is to be ensured, BUT individuals are never guaranteed to be allowed to have personal justice.
After all... there are plenty of times where a person has a family member killed, BUT the perpetrator cannot be convicted due to lack of evidence, OR the district attorney decides based on prosecutorial discretion to avoid pressing any charges---- personal justice is not a function the governments exist, to assure period.
Slashdot Mirror
Most banks will have an inbound ACH limit of around $10,000. I'm sure Paypal has an outgoing limit as well, that is well less than $100,000; let alone millions.
A few million dollars an hour for PayPal's error, then give back the money when asked. Likely, he'd not have any charges, and get to keep a few million dollars for his trouble. Instead, he'll get nothing but some news articles.
They would most certainly discover the error pretty quickly, when reviewing the unusual transaction; which would no doubt result in his account being frozen, and maybe get his name on the ACH blacklists / Chexsystems.
Bank Error In Your Favor means you Go Directly To Jail if you try to spend the money.
Unless you use the money to buy out all your bank's stock, before they notice. And your first act as new CEO and director of the board is to take the company private, and make the "error" go away quietly
The question the becomes, are we at risk of inflation if we helicopter-drop billions of dollars on the people? Maybe. Maybe not.
Our president blows a billion$$$ every day on gas money; helicopter-dropping a few billion would probably have no appreciable effect.
Frankly, the $1.5 trillion stimulus would have probably been better if he had divided the $1 trillion by $230 million people, and given every American individuals an equal amount, excluding individuals earning more than $80,000, and excluding individuals part of a married couple where the couple's earnings exceed $120,000 ; in other words.... approximately $40,000 extra money to be received by every American; instead of throwing away the $1 trillion on crappy programs and tax breaks for corporations.
. Was their debit, before or after he spent all the money they credited to him?
You have to fail to report and file your taxes properly, as required, and given reasonable time, before there is even a chance of that happening.
And to get the orange jumpsuit; I do believe you have to have committed fraud, or failed to pay after they sent an invoice, for a considerable length of time.
Just having a multi-billion$$ tax bill alone, doesn't land you in jail.
It may result in penalties and adverse asset forfeitures and seizures by IRS enforcement agents, however..
We have yet to hear from the person who's account was debited by the same amount. No doubt that guy is in hospital with a heart attack.
Naw... i'm sure he just fled the country.
Otherwise he will be asked to pay tax on his income! :-)
The 1099 form doesn't have enough space; the number would get truncated to 2,147,483,648
And he could easily pay off the IRS So his taxes would be more limited than one might think.
Wait... so you're worried about children being able to bypass a (should be) child-safe weapon lock/safe, but expect a "this room is off limits" rule to stop them?
No... the point is; the child's familiarity with the room is reduced, so if there is a lockbox or hidden compartment in the wall there somewhere, the child doesn't know exactly where to go looking for it, especially if the closet or room is also kept locked --- its just an extra layer of obscurity / fear to create for the child to break the rules..
If they were rummaging about in there, it should become noticed long before they find the lockbox mounted to the wall above the top shelf, that the child can't reach, not even on their tippy-toes.
Logs on those devices are in memory
Although they should be on the NMS and syslog servers too... and many Juniper M/T series devices, which are very frequently used by large carriers for core and edge routers, have a hard drive mounted on the /var filesystem,
that the routers' syslogs get written to.
Rebooting sounds like an act of desperation. It's almost never the cleanest way, and it almost always incurs additional downtime, causes more outages, or further lengthens the network downtime --- since you require 3 to 5 minutes for a reboot, then maybe 3 to 5 more minutes for routing protocols to reconverge.
And god help your soul, if you reboot a Cisco device such as a 72xx or Catalyst 65xx running BGP with 3 or 4 copies of a full table, and with 8 or 9 total peers.
That one weak moment, when reboot was chosen may result in 60 to 90 minutes of trying to coax the network back up gently.
Calm down before you all jump on the "Enable" wagon. It's actually a decently details filing with less ambiguous wording than assumed.
That is an oddity... technology patents are normally supposed to be a possible-invention-space filling function; where you have one invention, but the patent is designed to fill out as much of the space of other possible inventions as possible --- often the wording is apparently intentionally vague, and they try to say as little specific as possible, to avoid having an overly narrowly scoped patent.
Unfortunately, glassy metals only have an atomic structure similar to glass, and not the appearance of glass.
Or fortunately... depending on how you look at it. Apple would manufacture the device as a single solid piece of material molded around the internal components, and you would NEVER be able to open up your iPhone or tablet and have a peek inside, As-Opposed to it just being really really hard to do so....
Will the next version of reader come complete with a PWN ME sign hung automatically around the back of your computer, and included in the Acrobat plugin version string announced by the web browser in the User Agent headers towards every site you visit?
Yes. Any discussion of responsibly combining parenting and weapon ownership relies on actually being responsible. Imagine that.
Even responsible parents aren't going to necessarily visually inspect stored away weapons every day.
If the kid can very easily defeat the measure, then its existence may do more harm than good.
It might be better to just keep the gun tucked away in a locked strongbox, discretely tucked away in a hidden compartment with heavy furniture in front of it -- or private closet/other room that's "off limits" for the kids to enter.
and even if they do the odds are in favor of nothing fatal happening the first time, and you have a cut cable telling you that you have a serious problem on your hands that demands immediate action.
This is assuming you regularly check up on the status of your weapon, and it hasn't gone missing.
Or the cable strangely disappeared one day.
(The kid discretely caused the cable to become misplaced, after you had unlocked it and set it aside for routine maintenance on the gun)
you posted 40 minutes of anti-gun FUD propagandist bullshit? Classy.
That's why the guy was in the video explaining how these tinky bike-lock-like devices and $1 trigger locks really only exist to satisfy ridiculous gun regulations --- and the best safety practice, really is to avoid needing the cheesy trigger locks in the first place, is to visit the shooting range frequently: make sure to take your kids with you, trained in the safe and proper use of firearms, and have them shoot often there as well? Pfft....
Personally... I think it would have been funnier to have a video with someone struggling to defeat cheesy $1 trigger locks -- and maybe failing (Hopefully, not accidentally shooting themselves in the process of trying to defeat the trigger lock).
That's why I have been giving my internal domains silly like .zyxprivnet for at least 15 years...
zyxprivnet sounds like a cool gTLD to register... i'll get right on it.
On the other hand... .LOCAL and .LAN are unlikely to be allowed as a TLD; since .LOCAL has prior use by Apple
for Bonjour/Multicast DNS.
Also, .INVALID and .LOCALDOMAIN are reserved private TLDs.
Trigger locks and safes will do the same thing, and not mess up and get you killed when you need it to work.
Yeah... they would be better off making the hand reader a feature of a gun safe, to provide owners an option for faster access to their guns, than having to enter a combination.....
In addition, they could add the 'enter combination option' as a backup
Prison is punishment. The only reason for anyone to be reformed is that they accept their wrong doing and that the punishment was justified and fit the crime.
Punishments are rarely justified, AND they rarely fit the crime. But I remind ye, that there is not a single person who has not sinned.
And the laws are so complicated; I can about guarantee there is not a single person living in the US today, who has not committed an act that can be prosecuted and convicted as a felony. And if I recall correctly, the average person commits about 3 felonies a day.
But nonetheless: crime rates would probably be lower, if every single US person were required to spend 1 24 hour period in a jail, within 30 days of their 18th birthday, as an enhanced deterrant against the possibility of future criminal behavior.
If that's your thinking on things, you should always be buying 2 year old models of hardware because they're cheap compared to their performance.
Yes.... if you want the most product for the lowest cost, buying as late as possible makes sense, because of the time value of money.... even if the product 2 years later were exactly the same price; you would have saved on opportunity cost and cost of capital: you could have invested that money over the 2 years and earned a return -- this is assuming the product didn't provide you a benefit over those 2 years that was worth more than the value in opportunity cost.
This is the base ideal behind "reasonable doubt". Each case is unique, each case is evaluated on its own merits.
Innocent people can still be subject to evidence that would put them away - beyond any reasonable doubt, that only unreasonable doubts would exclude.
Take for example... DNA evidence. You have a "match" with only a 1 in 100 million chance of a false match in the DNA database.
But there are 400 million people in the database, so you expect there to be 4 people out there who would be matches.
The real criminal doesn't happen to be in the database, and an innocent person does happen to be in the database.
Chances are very good the jury will convict, because the 0.00000025 probability of an error is deemed an unreasonable doubt.
If the direction of the price change was the opposite; say a $150 price increase. Could they reasonably expect every buyer to come in and pay the difference?
It seems to be a violation of equal protection under the law.... I as an individual can't go out and get a personal plate assigned to me and not a specific vehicle. Furthermore; I would be subject to getting a ticket from the automated system.
I wonder what Microsoft will do for customers who purchased a tablet right before the price drop?
MS should do nothing. They were among the few people to buy something above the value the market would ultimately be willing to accept.
This is not Microsoft's responsibility to deal with.
When you buy something, you should be doing your due diligence to make sure you are getting more in product value than cash value you are trading for it.
If you make a bad trade: it's not the manufacturer's duty to try and console you about your decisionmaking error.
This is why we say "better to let a hundred guilty men go free than have one innocent man go to prision."
I can agree this is a good ratio. 100 guilty going free per 1 innocent person going to jail; that is essentially a guilty conviction ratio of 1%.
Which is essentially to say, we can send 1 innocent person to jail, for every 100 we send to jail. Or 10000 innocent people for every 1 million people we send to jail.
But on top of that, if you were accused of a crime you did not commit but did not have a solid alibi for, would you accept that you were one of the ones that simply "must go to jail", in order to not let a single guilty go free?,
No. I would absolutely hate that, but as soon as I had been accused of a crime, I would now be subject to a bias. That is: I would personally no longer be capable of applying a rational judgement about what the public should really do --- I would have a position influenced by a personal desire, at which point, it could be logical for the government to ignore the objection to the infringement against personal justice.
But that's owing to the fact, that the purpose of the courts is to provide justice for society -- that is, justice for the social order - in the aggregate, justice is to be ensured, BUT individuals are never guaranteed to be allowed to have personal justice.
After all... there are plenty of times where a person has a family member killed, BUT the perpetrator cannot be convicted due to lack of evidence, OR the district attorney decides based on prosecutorial discretion to avoid pressing any charges---- personal justice is not a function the governments exist, to assure period.