OK, here I am typing in an IE5.5 dialog box. I've tried linux a couple times, and given up after a couple of days both times. The reason has always been the lack of aplications. I *like* the linux environment. There aren't any linux apps I need. A good shell would add a lot to windows. (yes, I've tried cygwin. last time I tried it was too slow and never felt wuite native. felt like an add-on program in ways command.com didn't.) But, I really need wine to be more fully operationsal before I can switch. Last I tried switching to linux (actually, my friend tried it, but we tried out all my apps too), it was still in need of the ability to:
Play DVDs
Rip DVDs / encode to DivX
Play DivX
(As best I can tell, Wine support for directshow filters and a DVD ASPI layer would solve those)
Games would be nice, but I don't use them that much and I'm not too picky. Get a few of the popular ones working (including something by blizzard), I don't really care which, I'll be happy.
Oh, and linux NEEDS A BETTER WEB BROWSER!!! Netscape and mozilla are both slow, they do a poor job with dialog boxes, drop down menus, text boxes, etc. Haven't tried Konqueror, but I doubt it's all *that* much better. I do like the better cookie/ad managment under the various linux browsers though.
MP3 playing linux does a fine job with.
Word processing I can deal with star office. I really do prefer MS office for anything of a size I will ever do in the near future though.
So basically, I need Wine better before I switch, not the other way round. I don't plan to even try this out.
They don't really seem to be promoting the "Hippie" culture beyond trying to get a sense of community. I think they are actually a decent set of ads, targeted of course mainly at IBMs customers.
Re:pictures are the key - but even then...
on
Anticryptography
·
· Score: 2
We're not trying to communicate with pre-industrial civilisations. We're trying to communicate with a civilization capable of picking up relatively faint radio signals. Therefore, they have already developed a _lot_ of math, physics, geometry, and information about the structure of the universe. Or they use radio to communicate and somebody with really good "hearing" is listening to the sky one night.
But, take a look at DX8. MS said "here's a DX8 pre-release spec." Nvidia replied "No, it's not. DX8 needs to be THIS." MS said "oh, ok," and changed it. Nvidia, not MS defined DX8. They also knew beforehand that this would happen. So they got to design for DX8 before anyone else knew what it was. A significant advantage. Mind, I like features, and my reaction can best be described as "drooooool," but DX8 is more a description of the GF3 than the GF3 is an implementation of DX8.
It means that the combustion occurs above mach 1. A normal ramjet is quite capable of operation above mach 1. However, the incoming air is slowed down and pressurized before combustion. In a scramjet, the air is still moving at supersonic speeds relative to the combustion chamber and fuel injectors. I've seen trying to keep a hydrogen/gasoline/whatever flame alive in those conditions (at the qantities of fuel burned by standard jet engines and more) compared to keeping a candle lit in a hurricane. It's difficult. No, REALLY. The benefit of a scramjet is that it can operate at REALLY high speeds. A ramjet loses too much energy slowing the air down to work above about mach 3-5. The concept is *similar* but fundamentally different.
I saw no analysis of the fact that multiple computers I am connected to will be connected to each other. I believe the paper essentially looks at gnutella as a tree with the searcher at the root. This is clearly wrong. I believe that the result of this is: less bandwidth per search due to repeated queries being dropped, and less hosts reachable due to fewer new nodes at each level out. However, it actually makes things worse, because a node may recieve a query multiple times, it just won't pass it on more than once. SO, bandwidth per search per node hit by search goes up. It scales WORSE thn predicted.
Also, this means that the population P DOES have an effect on the number of reachable users, because as P increases the number of redundant connections will decrease. Don't have the math to prove it, but I think that's the way it works.
Also, is there analysis of why gnutella can't scale in terms of P? I can see why it won't scale in terms of number of users I can reach, but why not in total users, IF users are content to let themselves be limited to a small fraction of the network (this should be enforced by the clients. I know people can wrte their own, but they shouldn't write them to allow huge TTLs).
But the point is that the memory already exists, and (I believe) the buffers are often separate from the routing tables. In one buffer, out another. As long as the router can route at full wire speed, there is no problem. You're just using memory that wasn't fully used before.
If they don't keep your credit card info after the sale, they can't sell it when they get bought. There should be an option where they don't keep it. If you wan't them to keep it for one-click-shopping, then that's your decision and your problem when shit happens. Presumably, this guy wouldn't check that box.
It's relatively easy to get this kind of bandwidth cheaply. Just do what the spammers do: steal it. Use open relays and the like. But there are a few caches: it's illegal. it's unethical. it only works for spam -- you don't get that much bandwidth, you just get to use that much bandwidth for free to send many copies of the same thing. Also, open relays can only be used to steal bandwidth for email -- which is so small as to not be worth stealing UNLESS you plan to use it for spam. I personally have much less of a problem with companies that buy all their own badwidth and then send UCE from their own servers directly -- they are only stealing from the recipient, and not from some relatively innocent 3rd party whose bandwidth they stole. Some companies do this. Unfortunately, it's hard to tell which from the stuff that lands in your inbox. I would assume they are also the ones that seem relatively nice about giving you opt-out mechanisms, but I don't know.
You have a right to talk, print up things, post a webpage, etc, and I have a right to voluntarily choose to go listen. That is the extent of free speech protection guaranteed by the first amendment as I see it. The government cannot interfere with your ability to make protected free speech or my ability to listen to you make it in whatever form you are making it.
However, I have a similar right to NOT listen. You cannot take away that right any more than the government can. Therefore, it is perfectly OK for you to set up a web page about your product or your political campaign but not for you send me email.
In a similar vein, it is only ok for political and other solicitors to come to my house because I have explicitly agreed to let them by not posting no tresspassing/no soliciting signs. I could, and could tell them to get off my land whenever they appeared, and that would be the opt-out answer to that problem. Some people do that. But they have no inherent right to make you listen to them by wandering onto your property. They can stand somewhere and you can go talk to them, or you can agree to let them come talk to you either explicitly or implicitly, but that's about it.
I'm not so sure about this... I've played RPGs like that, and I've also played RPGs where Team Evil got replaced by multiple squablling players (groups created by GM) who all had their own agendas running anywhere from coincidental to the players' to exactly the opposite, with many having completely orthogonal agendas that were by the end of the game revealed to basically completely orthogonal. The point can be not just to defeat Evil in whatever form it takes, but to have fun describing your characters through their actions and their relationships with each other. Combat and fighting Evil or the enem du jour has its place, but there is more to it that can't really be tossed into a strictly zero-sum or non-zero sum category. Also, many times characters have similar goals so that all the characters can come out ahead, but different enough that some characters get closer to achieving their own agendas than others, occasionally at the expense of other character's agendas. The players can meanwhile have a great deal of fun with the politics and knowledge games external to the official RPG game. I think RPGs are a perfect example of what the original poster asked for, and can be much more difficult to analyze than many posts suggest. They seem to model real life in that. Strange, isn't it?
For those who haven't looked at the responses in the link above, the basic point is this:
There are times when accelerating is the best approach to avoiding an accident.
The best solution I see to this is to introduce a time-lag, where a driver can step on the gas to any amount briefly (15s?), is then given a warning noise followed shortly by a forced gradual speed reduction. Thoughts?
I think people are missing the point here, mainly because the article does somewhat too. I recently learned in an intro class on the mind (covering philosophy, psychology, neurobiology, drugs, and other related subjects in a fashion that gets depth on many specific areas; very cool class) about mirror neurons. I don't have the source, but the teacher implied that they have been reasonable well known in monkeys for some time.
The new part of this is twofold: the discovery of evidence for the presence of mirror neurons in humans, and the realtionship with language. The scientists seem to be saying that mirror neurons provide a common understanding that is the basis of communication and language and empathy, and that I think is interesting -- to see something that had been connected with imitation and learning tied so closely to language.
Normally, I'd be of the opinion that Sony shouldn't be allowed to shut down the auctions. I can't quite figure out a good way to articulate that right now, but anyway...
In this one, I sort of think there should be a place for things to be *just a game*. Yes, you can still play with your limited resources just paying for the subscription, but my past experience is that this sort of thing causes problems for those who either can't or don't wish to spend so much money. (Disclaimer: I have not played EQ. Perhaps someone who has could share their views? Thanks). I really think there should be a place for online games that require a simple fee to play and where there isn't a way to spend more money on it -- I think it adds a lot to the feel of the game to know that people really worked on their own to get where they are in game status (or at least that most of them did). So, I think the decision is up to Sony, and my understanding of the EULA is that these people "agreed" not to sell items. I have all sorts of problems with EULAs, including this one, and I believe that these people basically are morally in the right. But isn't there some way that a game can be just a game, and not about spending money to get ahead? I used to play MMORPGS, but got out not long after this sort of thing became common.
So, one question: is there a way for the proverbial "nice company" (as opposed to big bad profit-seeking corp) to build something that is "just a game" without this happening to it, and can people not attack them when it happens?
Also, does Sony fit the bill in this case? They certainly have profit motives, but I think they're trying to keep the gamers that share my view in doing this. So i guess I really don't know where I stand on the lawsuit. I do know that I wish people wouldn't make the suit necessary in their minds and just play the game for once. I know, I'm being idealistic. I'll stop whining now.
I've asked this several times before, but have yet to see a satisfactory answer: why does it have to be that we can break this? I will readily agree that you can break DVD-style encryption if there is a software player to take apart. Tamper-proof hardware is different, but I won't worry about that for now. But my point is, this is watermarks, not encryption.
Watermarks and encryption are two very different things
Watermarks attempt to identify different copies by embedded sounds. I see no theoretical reasons these sounds can't be irrevocably embedded. I happen to believe that the hackers will continue to win, but not because they by definition must be able to eventually, as with software based encryption (DVD, and I believe CPRM). So does anyone have a reason that it will be broken, other than a belief that the hackers are sufficiently good and the RIAA/MPAA sufficiently not? Is there any "proof" that it can be done, as there is for the fact that you can "simply" copy/paste the software DVD player's code to read the MPEG2 stream? anyone? please?
I also think we need a better way for developers to communicate anonymously and securely so that this stuff can be broken without as much worry about the DMCA, etc.
So doesn't Blizzard keep backups? it seems to me they should fix the hole, restore the backups, and criminally prosecute the perpetrators. I can't imagine they aren't guilty of unauthorized computer access or whatever its called. I also can't imagine that Blizzard doesn't have good log files.
Is a one-page, easy to understand flyer that explains to Joe User why this is BAD for HIM RIGHT NOW. Not why future historians will be pissed, not why his rights are being trampled on, and not why it means Linux has problems. It needs to explain clearly and concisely (don't tell him it has 8 different crypto keys and is hard to break -- he doesn't care) why it will prevent him from doing what he does already every day, or why it prevents hime from doing things he knows he should be able to do but probably doesn't (backups). Then, we all need to whenever we're in Best Buy or whatever and see someone looking at hard disks, hand them a copy, and answer any questions. That will do more than any amount of griping on slashdot or in newspapers ever can. So, is there such a flier that can be printed off, and if not, and you're interested in helping, send me an email. If there's support, I'll help.
Is to decrease fraud in offline sales. It seems that a lot of fraud is hapening in these sales, because there isn't the whole post a comment thing. This gives them a way to deal with it. If someone does something that someone thinks is fraud in an offline sale, they can crack down and tell that person not to sell offline any more. It's really just fair warning. I think they know they shouldn't (and won't!) do anything about the majority of offline sellers who don't commit fraud and won't be complained about. Though I still don't think they should do it, I believe it is just standard legal cover-your-ass move.
I feel like playing with this, but am always reluctant to put a new OS on my HDD containing lots of useful stuff. Besides, the last repartition attempt failed (no data lost, thankfully). So, does anyone have a bootable CD ISO I can burn that doesn't need to touch the HDD? I still can't get to the web site quickly...
OK moderators, forgive me, but it is a VALID question. I don't really know enough about what he's done to know more than it looks like he rewrote everything really small and compact and (presumably) efficient. That's cool. Now what? The site seems slashdotted, so would someone mind telling me what's great here? I just don't think enough of us understand well wnough what was done to see how it's cool in detail greater than what I said above. So please, enlighten us. Thanks.
They use technical means to prevent deep linking. Can't the browser just tell it the refering page is the root domain? ie say the you were referred by www.fubar.com and not slashdot. Seems easy enough. Or maybe a right-click option "Open with alternate referring link."
Anyone want to try it out? there's no reason our browsers have to play the game any nicer than their servers do...
What (technically) is to prevent people more knowledgable about the whole thing from analyzing the programs that use the encrypted stuff to break it? The whole piece of software resides in memory at some point, and can be picked apart and attacked by a determined and sufficiently knowledgable user. At some point, the algorithm to tell the drive you have the key gets executed and can be intercepted.
I have for some time maintained that it is perfectly possible to build secure hardware, but they are trying to bring software in to the equation as well. That suggests to me that we can break it. So, we need to get FreeNet or a better similar thing working (and used enough!) so that the developers who are capable can develop without getting caught. We have the technology to win this until Intel/AMD/etc get in on it. Fight it technically, and also in the minds of the consumers and in the courts at every turn. My hat is off to those who will surely break this, as it is to those who did for DVD.
Shouldn't EggHead be held responsible for the loss of those CC#'s? As in, there were plenty of industry-accepted techniques for securing CC#'s that they didn't use. Shouldn't they be legally responsible for, at the very least, all costs to the credit card company of dealing with bogus charges and replacements on those cards? I really don't think the credit card company should have to pay. suppose it costs $10 worth of time and resources to reprint a CC. thats thirty seven MILLION dollars that I really don't want to pay for in the form of interest rate hikes. I think the CC companies should file a lawsuit demanding recompense. Yes, it was bad luck that it happened to egghead. but they were negligent. In the same sense that if I don't put a fence around my pool and some kid drowns in it, I am responsible because I was negligent. Perhaps that very direct cost to egghead would help wake up the industry to this very real danger.
Slashdot Mirror
Play DVDs
Rip DVDs / encode to DivX
Play DivX
(As best I can tell, Wine support for directshow filters and a DVD ASPI layer would solve those)
Games would be nice, but I don't use them that much and I'm not too picky. Get a few of the popular ones working (including something by blizzard), I don't really care which, I'll be happy.
Oh, and linux NEEDS A BETTER WEB BROWSER!!! Netscape and mozilla are both slow, they do a poor job with dialog boxes, drop down menus, text boxes, etc. Haven't tried Konqueror, but I doubt it's all *that* much better. I do like the better cookie/ad managment under the various linux browsers though.
MP3 playing linux does a fine job with.
Word processing I can deal with star office. I really do prefer MS office for anything of a size I will ever do in the near future though.
So basically, I need Wine better before I switch, not the other way round. I don't plan to even try this out.
They don't really seem to be promoting the "Hippie" culture beyond trying to get a sense of community. I think they are actually a decent set of ads, targeted of course mainly at IBMs customers.
We're not trying to communicate with pre-industrial civilisations. We're trying to communicate with a civilization capable of picking up relatively faint radio signals. Therefore, they have already developed a _lot_ of math, physics, geometry, and information about the structure of the universe. Or they use radio to communicate and somebody with really good "hearing" is listening to the sky one night.
But, take a look at DX8. MS said "here's a DX8 pre-release spec." Nvidia replied "No, it's not. DX8 needs to be THIS." MS said "oh, ok," and changed it. Nvidia, not MS defined DX8. They also knew beforehand that this would happen. So they got to design for DX8 before anyone else knew what it was. A significant advantage. Mind, I like features, and my reaction can best be described as "drooooool," but DX8 is more a description of the GF3 than the GF3 is an implementation of DX8.
It means that the combustion occurs above mach 1. A normal ramjet is quite capable of operation above mach 1. However, the incoming air is slowed down and pressurized before combustion. In a scramjet, the air is still moving at supersonic speeds relative to the combustion chamber and fuel injectors. I've seen trying to keep a hydrogen/gasoline/whatever flame alive in those conditions (at the qantities of fuel burned by standard jet engines and more) compared to keeping a candle lit in a hurricane. It's difficult. No, REALLY. The benefit of a scramjet is that it can operate at REALLY high speeds. A ramjet loses too much energy slowing the air down to work above about mach 3-5. The concept is *similar* but fundamentally different.
Also, this means that the population P DOES have an effect on the number of reachable users, because as P increases the number of redundant connections will decrease. Don't have the math to prove it, but I think that's the way it works.
Also, is there analysis of why gnutella can't scale in terms of P? I can see why it won't scale in terms of number of users I can reach, but why not in total users, IF users are content to let themselves be limited to a small fraction of the network (this should be enforced by the clients. I know people can wrte their own, but they shouldn't write them to allow huge TTLs).
Also, what of the reflectors?
But the point is that the memory already exists, and (I believe) the buffers are often separate from the routing tables. In one buffer, out another. As long as the router can route at full wire speed, there is no problem. You're just using memory that wasn't fully used before.
If they don't keep your credit card info after the sale, they can't sell it when they get bought. There should be an option where they don't keep it. If you wan't them to keep it for one-click-shopping, then that's your decision and your problem when shit happens. Presumably, this guy wouldn't check that box.
It's relatively easy to get this kind of bandwidth cheaply. Just do what the spammers do: steal it. Use open relays and the like. But there are a few caches: it's illegal. it's unethical. it only works for spam -- you don't get that much bandwidth, you just get to use that much bandwidth for free to send many copies of the same thing. Also, open relays can only be used to steal bandwidth for email -- which is so small as to not be worth stealing UNLESS you plan to use it for spam. I personally have much less of a problem with companies that buy all their own badwidth and then send UCE from their own servers directly -- they are only stealing from the recipient, and not from some relatively innocent 3rd party whose bandwidth they stole. Some companies do this. Unfortunately, it's hard to tell which from the stuff that lands in your inbox. I would assume they are also the ones that seem relatively nice about giving you opt-out mechanisms, but I don't know.
You have a right to talk, print up things, post a webpage, etc, and I have a right to voluntarily choose to go listen. That is the extent of free speech protection guaranteed by the first amendment as I see it. The government cannot interfere with your ability to make protected free speech or my ability to listen to you make it in whatever form you are making it.
However, I have a similar right to NOT listen. You cannot take away that right any more than the government can. Therefore, it is perfectly OK for you to set up a web page about your product or your political campaign but not for you send me email.
In a similar vein, it is only ok for political and other solicitors to come to my house because I have explicitly agreed to let them by not posting no tresspassing/no soliciting signs. I could, and could tell them to get off my land whenever they appeared, and that would be the opt-out answer to that problem. Some people do that. But they have no inherent right to make you listen to them by wandering onto your property. They can stand somewhere and you can go talk to them, or you can agree to let them come talk to you either explicitly or implicitly, but that's about it.
I'm not so sure about this... I've played RPGs like that, and I've also played RPGs where Team Evil got replaced by multiple squablling players (groups created by GM) who all had their own agendas running anywhere from coincidental to the players' to exactly the opposite, with many having completely orthogonal agendas that were by the end of the game revealed to basically completely orthogonal. The point can be not just to defeat Evil in whatever form it takes, but to have fun describing your characters through their actions and their relationships with each other. Combat and fighting Evil or the enem du jour has its place, but there is more to it that can't really be tossed into a strictly zero-sum or non-zero sum category. Also, many times characters have similar goals so that all the characters can come out ahead, but different enough that some characters get closer to achieving their own agendas than others, occasionally at the expense of other character's agendas. The players can meanwhile have a great deal of fun with the politics and knowledge games external to the official RPG game. I think RPGs are a perfect example of what the original poster asked for, and can be much more difficult to analyze than many posts suggest. They seem to model real life in that. Strange, isn't it?
There are times when accelerating is the best approach to avoiding an accident.
The best solution I see to this is to introduce a time-lag, where a driver can step on the gas to any amount briefly (15s?), is then given a warning noise followed shortly by a forced gradual speed reduction. Thoughts?
The new part of this is twofold: the discovery of evidence for the presence of mirror neurons in humans, and the realtionship with language. The scientists seem to be saying that mirror neurons provide a common understanding that is the basis of communication and language and empathy, and that I think is interesting -- to see something that had been connected with imitation and learning tied so closely to language.
In this one, I sort of think there should be a place for things to be *just a game*. Yes, you can still play with your limited resources just paying for the subscription, but my past experience is that this sort of thing causes problems for those who either can't or don't wish to spend so much money. (Disclaimer: I have not played EQ. Perhaps someone who has could share their views? Thanks). I really think there should be a place for online games that require a simple fee to play and where there isn't a way to spend more money on it -- I think it adds a lot to the feel of the game to know that people really worked on their own to get where they are in game status (or at least that most of them did). So, I think the decision is up to Sony, and my understanding of the EULA is that these people "agreed" not to sell items. I have all sorts of problems with EULAs, including this one, and I believe that these people basically are morally in the right. But isn't there some way that a game can be just a game, and not about spending money to get ahead? I used to play MMORPGS, but got out not long after this sort of thing became common.
So, one question: is there a way for the proverbial "nice company" (as opposed to big bad profit-seeking corp) to build something that is "just a game" without this happening to it, and can people not attack them when it happens?
Also, does Sony fit the bill in this case? They certainly have profit motives, but I think they're trying to keep the gamers that share my view in doing this. So i guess I really don't know where I stand on the lawsuit. I do know that I wish people wouldn't make the suit necessary in their minds and just play the game for once. I know, I'm being idealistic. I'll stop whining now.
Watermarks and encryption are two very different things
Watermarks attempt to identify different copies by embedded sounds. I see no theoretical reasons these sounds can't be irrevocably embedded. I happen to believe that the hackers will continue to win, but not because they by definition must be able to eventually, as with software based encryption (DVD, and I believe CPRM). So does anyone have a reason that it will be broken, other than a belief that the hackers are sufficiently good and the RIAA/MPAA sufficiently not? Is there any "proof" that it can be done, as there is for the fact that you can "simply" copy/paste the software DVD player's code to read the MPEG2 stream? anyone? please?
I also think we need a better way for developers to communicate anonymously and securely so that this stuff can be broken without as much worry about the DMCA, etc.
So doesn't Blizzard keep backups? it seems to me they should fix the hole, restore the backups, and criminally prosecute the perpetrators. I can't imagine they aren't guilty of unauthorized computer access or whatever its called. I also can't imagine that Blizzard doesn't have good log files.
Is a one-page, easy to understand flyer that explains to Joe User why this is BAD for HIM RIGHT NOW. Not why future historians will be pissed, not why his rights are being trampled on, and not why it means Linux has problems. It needs to explain clearly and concisely (don't tell him it has 8 different crypto keys and is hard to break -- he doesn't care) why it will prevent him from doing what he does already every day, or why it prevents hime from doing things he knows he should be able to do but probably doesn't (backups). Then, we all need to whenever we're in Best Buy or whatever and see someone looking at hard disks, hand them a copy, and answer any questions. That will do more than any amount of griping on slashdot or in newspapers ever can. So, is there such a flier that can be printed off, and if not, and you're interested in helping, send me an email. If there's support, I'll help.
Is to decrease fraud in offline sales. It seems that a lot of fraud is hapening in these sales, because there isn't the whole post a comment thing. This gives them a way to deal with it. If someone does something that someone thinks is fraud in an offline sale, they can crack down and tell that person not to sell offline any more. It's really just fair warning. I think they know they shouldn't (and won't!) do anything about the majority of offline sellers who don't commit fraud and won't be complained about. Though I still don't think they should do it, I believe it is just standard legal cover-your-ass move.
I feel like playing with this, but am always reluctant to put a new OS on my HDD containing lots of useful stuff. Besides, the last repartition attempt failed (no data lost, thankfully). So, does anyone have a bootable CD ISO I can burn that doesn't need to touch the HDD? I still can't get to the web site quickly...
OK moderators, forgive me, but it is a VALID question. I don't really know enough about what he's done to know more than it looks like he rewrote everything really small and compact and (presumably) efficient. That's cool. Now what? The site seems slashdotted, so would someone mind telling me what's great here? I just don't think enough of us understand well wnough what was done to see how it's cool in detail greater than what I said above. So please, enlighten us. Thanks.
So is it more power effective to get a box of these or a box of PIIIs? (In Million Floating Point Operations per Joule)
They use technical means to prevent deep linking. Can't the browser just tell it the refering page is the root domain? ie say the you were referred by www.fubar.com and not slashdot. Seems easy enough. Or maybe a right-click option "Open with alternate referring link."
Anyone want to try it out? there's no reason our browsers have to play the game any nicer than their servers do...
I have for some time maintained that it is perfectly possible to build secure hardware, but they are trying to bring software in to the equation as well. That suggests to me that we can break it. So, we need to get FreeNet or a better similar thing working (and used enough!) so that the developers who are capable can develop without getting caught. We have the technology to win this until Intel/AMD/etc get in on it. Fight it technically, and also in the minds of the consumers and in the courts at every turn. My hat is off to those who will surely break this, as it is to those who did for DVD.
Why, with a non-standard keyboard, of course... and of course, U usually follows Q.
Shouldn't EggHead be held responsible for the loss of those CC#'s? As in, there were plenty of industry-accepted techniques for securing CC#'s that they didn't use. Shouldn't they be legally responsible for, at the very least, all costs to the credit card company of dealing with bogus charges and replacements on those cards? I really don't think the credit card company should have to pay. suppose it costs $10 worth of time and resources to reprint a CC. thats thirty seven MILLION dollars that I really don't want to pay for in the form of interest rate hikes. I think the CC companies should file a lawsuit demanding recompense. Yes, it was bad luck that it happened to egghead. but they were negligent. In the same sense that if I don't put a fence around my pool and some kid drowns in it, I am responsible because I was negligent. Perhaps that very direct cost to egghead would help wake up the industry to this very real danger.