Lots of people already write their names in books. I wasn't really one of them, but I'm becoming unenamoured with physical media lately. And the point is that you are indeed supposed to prevent someone else from using the same book for this purpose. That's not really unreasonable. If you give it away or resell it, they're not making any money off that, so why would they give you the ebook free or discounted?
I'm dubious old editions will work in the first place. You need to take a picture of the copyright page, and it will likely want to match to the specific editions in question. Also when I emailed to make a suggestion about being able to re-take your copyright page signature picture, he commented on how I was naughty for using a pencil:P
I'm fairly sure it's not intended for old printings. Your old edition of anything won't work. It needs to have the copyright page from the edition in question. Lots of people already put their names in books, this isn't any different.
Uh, abuse of rights of non-citizens to enter a country they've no inherent right to visit, and to use a banking system they've no inherent right to use?
That's not exactly the poster-child for due-process abuse, you might want to find another.
Canadians can be prosecuted for hate crimes, which includes the manner in which one denies the Holocaust.
("ZIONIST CONSPIRACY!" better be carefully phrased as "POOR ZIONIST RESEARCH AND TABULATION!")
As a residential user from 1996, I had Netscape and never once paid for it. I don't know anyone who has. It's possibly my ISP paid for it. Was that a thing?
You might want to actually cite some reliable studies that insist a traditional gender split is required, rather than simply stable families with multiple active guardian members for the child. For example, does your study actually show that a mother with two extremely involved grandparents, or two doting fathers, are inferior to a mother and father. To my knowledge, no such study has been found reliable (ie: not NOM-funded).
I'm betting this "successful black" was born middle or upper class and received proper nutrition and education growing up, and denies the benefits that gave them.
I know this is a joke, but I suspect you're an ass regardless. I mean, he's the one who eats more chocolate, because he actively consumes her share in order to enlarge his overall supply, and she's the fat one?
Myself, I figured something like #1, that they were getting their foot in the door before the TSA tries to shut it (or claim it's already shut), even temporarily, making it an ordeal of inertia to open again.
Yeah, my client cards have Cirrus/PLUS logos, or at least one of them. I've used my bank card in the US that way.
I never considered CVV1 to be that secure, because all you need is the card to commit the fraud. The signature is practically useless. The CVV2 is the same, because it's ON the card in question. That's why I like Interac so much by comparison, it always requires the PIN. (Well, OK, now it has a tap-thing where you can make small purchases without a PIN.) I have lost my Interac client card so many times I'm on #31 (the temporary replacement card they give you counts, so I've probably actually lost around half of that number) and none of the lost cards has represented a significant security risk as far as I'm aware. I've lost fewer credit cards, but that's a combination of using them less, not having them as long, and worrying about them more (probably in that order), but each one could have been used at a merchant and undoing the damage would have been annoying at best.
Considering the success of Interac in Canada, I don't think there's a GOOD excuse that CCs have taken so long to go PIN, and that chip tech has taken so long to cross the Atlantic. I do hear that US banking's a mess because it is (or was) a Frankenstein patchwork of organizations, but that's not a GOOD excuse:P
Canadian debit cards work almost universally via the Interac system, which is a PIN protected EFTPOS-only network. Only recently have your foul CC perversions made their way to this side of the border. (They use the same machine though, so I'm not sure what you mean by "machine that takes signatures". I'm assuming a mag stripe CC does the same handshaking as Interac, except it doesn't check a PIN and relies on the laughably insecure singature instead.)
My bank recently issued me an online VISA debit card, which is even wierder and less secure! No mag stripe, no chip, no PIN, for internet use! I guess that's Interac's fault for not evolving fast enough I guess?
It's especially harder when there's less motivation to innovate toward achieving technologies that allow that nuance. That's the extent of the claim that film was, once upon a time, racist.
Slashdot Mirror
Lots of people already write their names in books. I wasn't really one of them, but I'm becoming unenamoured with physical media lately. And the point is that you are indeed supposed to prevent someone else from using the same book for this purpose. That's not really unreasonable. If you give it away or resell it, they're not making any money off that, so why would they give you the ebook free or discounted?
If a publisher doesn't have a current edition of it, you can't get it. So there's no point in bemoaning your 1987 edition of anything let alone 1847.
I'm dubious old editions will work in the first place. You need to take a picture of the copyright page, and it will likely want to match to the specific editions in question. Also when I emailed to make a suggestion about being able to re-take your copyright page signature picture, he commented on how I was naughty for using a pencil :P
I'm fairly sure it's not intended for old printings. Your old edition of anything won't work. It needs to have the copyright page from the edition in question. Lots of people already put their names in books, this isn't any different.
The app is provided for the verification process. Once you're verified it sends you a download link.
Uh, abuse of rights of non-citizens to enter a country they've no inherent right to visit, and to use a banking system they've no inherent right to use? That's not exactly the poster-child for due-process abuse, you might want to find another.
Canadians can be prosecuted for hate crimes, which includes the manner in which one denies the Holocaust. ("ZIONIST CONSPIRACY!" better be carefully phrased as "POOR ZIONIST RESEARCH AND TABULATION!")
As a residential user from 1996, I had Netscape and never once paid for it. I don't know anyone who has. It's possibly my ISP paid for it. Was that a thing?
No one has ever denied that the earth's climate changes over time. This is a falsehood and a distraction.
So? They're still alive.
I think the connector on my Samsung Galaxy Note 3 is not USB.
Could you say hipster a few more times?
What work? Their college essays?
You might want to actually cite some reliable studies that insist a traditional gender split is required, rather than simply stable families with multiple active guardian members for the child. For example, does your study actually show that a mother with two extremely involved grandparents, or two doting fathers, are inferior to a mother and father. To my knowledge, no such study has been found reliable (ie: not NOM-funded).
I'm betting this "successful black" was born middle or upper class and received proper nutrition and education growing up, and denies the benefits that gave them.
I know this is a joke, but I suspect you're an ass regardless. I mean, he's the one who eats more chocolate, because he actively consumes her share in order to enlarge his overall supply, and she's the fat one?
Actually you didn't even get to post, because you saw those mentions AS YOU TYPED THEM OUT.
Myself, I figured something like #1, that they were getting their foot in the door before the TSA tries to shut it (or claim it's already shut), even temporarily, making it an ordeal of inertia to open again.
That's a lot like saying you shouldn't make sure your buildings are up to code for the expected San Andreas big one, because it hasn't happened yet...
User customizable by necessity, no? It's pretty crap right out of the box, last I heard.
Yeah, my client cards have Cirrus/PLUS logos, or at least one of them. I've used my bank card in the US that way.
:P
I never considered CVV1 to be that secure, because all you need is the card to commit the fraud. The signature is practically useless. The CVV2 is the same, because it's ON the card in question. That's why I like Interac so much by comparison, it always requires the PIN. (Well, OK, now it has a tap-thing where you can make small purchases without a PIN.) I have lost my Interac client card so many times I'm on #31 (the temporary replacement card they give you counts, so I've probably actually lost around half of that number) and none of the lost cards has represented a significant security risk as far as I'm aware. I've lost fewer credit cards, but that's a combination of using them less, not having them as long, and worrying about them more (probably in that order), but each one could have been used at a merchant and undoing the damage would have been annoying at best.
Considering the success of Interac in Canada, I don't think there's a GOOD excuse that CCs have taken so long to go PIN, and that chip tech has taken so long to cross the Atlantic. I do hear that US banking's a mess because it is (or was) a Frankenstein patchwork of organizations, but that's not a GOOD excuse
Canadian debit cards work almost universally via the Interac system, which is a PIN protected EFTPOS-only network. Only recently have your foul CC perversions made their way to this side of the border. (They use the same machine though, so I'm not sure what you mean by "machine that takes signatures". I'm assuming a mag stripe CC does the same handshaking as Interac, except it doesn't check a PIN and relies on the laughably insecure singature instead.) My bank recently issued me an online VISA debit card, which is even wierder and less secure! No mag stripe, no chip, no PIN, for internet use! I guess that's Interac's fault for not evolving fast enough I guess?
Why would you be so unpleasant? :(
Ah, so for the act of a nation, its citizens are cursed? No. The responsibility of citizens for their nation has limits.
It's especially harder when there's less motivation to innovate toward achieving technologies that allow that nuance. That's the extent of the claim that film was, once upon a time, racist.