"Simply opening one of the card readers will completely brick them."
Irrelevant if you not trying to send fraudulent transactions over the network yourself. If you are just skimming cards then you don't need a real transaction at all. You sell the info and let other people make widely dispersed fraudulent transactions.
"There's a reason chip+pin was introduced and that was to separate a merchant even more from the customer's credit card. Now there's no reason for you to hand your card over to the waitress anymore and wait while she disappears with it in the back room."
The latter does not depend on the former at all. The handheld terminals I've had experience with in Europe will take chin+pin, chip+signature, and stripe+signature cards. Also, in all cases the merchants have still handled the card themselves.
Chip+pin was developed to shift liability from the CC network back to the card holder. If you claim a fraudulent transaction the CC company respond that you entered the PIN therefore it is your own fault so pay up.
"he merchant should not have access to a card either physically or via a non-tamper-proof and non-certified piece of equipment."
And how do you the normal customer recognize the certified equipment?
Besides which the whole thing is moot in the US since in the US I have not yet seen a terminal that will operate purely on chip+pin and I've only heard of one bank that even offers chip+pin. (I have one card that is chip+signature that typically works in Europe except for train ticket kiosks.)
The story is about someone who took positive action which would subvert any business continuity preparation, regardless of whether his motives were pure or not.
There are no federal traffic police so speeding can only be charged at most at state-level granularity. The fact that they don't know exactly where the law was really broken means the state has not presented evidence that proves that the accused actually broke the law in their jurisdiction. The defendant doesn't have to tell any prosecutors anything about where he was and was not speeding.
The only question is whether it would rally be worth someone's time to pursue a constitutional law appeal over some traffic tickets.
Let's stipulate that the time stamps are accurate, and therefore he had to exceed some speed limit somewhere. However, there are no federal traffic cops who can cite him based on his his average speed. State police in NY and California only have the time on one end of the path their their state, and others have neither end, so there's no way to show that in any specific jurisdiction the speed limit was definitely violated.
"the profiling is effective security. Are you saying that Americans should continue to Abhor things even if that attitude places them directly in harm's way, basically causing widespread cultural self-harm?"
Effective profiling is effective. "Don't let the sand nigger on the plane" is not effective profiling, so it's just racial profiling. "The spic is an illegal immigrant", "the nigger is a crack-head mugger", these are also not effective profiles. They are not effective because they do not help in identify those actually intending to commit a crime.
Osama bin Laden was left handed. Would that make targeting left-handed people effective profiling? Of course not, you'd be overwhelmed with false positives of left-handed people who are not terrorists. There are even more Arabs in the US than there are left-handed people, so profiling Arabs is not effective profiling, it is only racial profiling.
Treating all usages of "profiling" as equal is the same tactic that the ID people use with "theory", implying an equivalence between "scientific theory", "conspiracy theory", and "cockamamie theory".
"If they just want to kill people, there are plenty of other places to do that at lower risk. "
They don't want to just kill people, they want to terrorize people. That's why they are called terrorists.
The security line is what is claimed to keep you safe from terrorists. Attacking it specifically demonstrates that it makes you *less* safe. And to crib the joke from another comment, there's no security line before the security line, so the risks of getting caught are lower than trying to get actually inside of some secure area.
My conclusion is that terrorist on average are dumb.
" If you want LAN speeds in the much less densely populated US, it is going to be very costly."
Why not start with the high density areas first? The thing about low density areas is that MOST PEOPLE DON'T LIVE THERE.
New Jersey has 25% greater population density than Belgium, and over twice the density of Switzerland. How to the low density portions of the US explain why New Jersey can't have it as good as Belgium or Switzerland?
Slashdot Mirror
It is the correct response if the thing he needs to communicate is that he's an unproductive asshole.
So you agree that your communication skills need work. ;-)
"This is the captain. We have a little problem with our entry sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and then explode."
"Simply opening one of the card readers will completely brick them."
Irrelevant if you not trying to send fraudulent transactions over the network yourself. If you are just skimming cards then you don't need a real transaction at all. You sell the info and let other people make widely dispersed fraudulent transactions.
"There's a reason chip+pin was introduced and that was to separate a merchant even more from the customer's credit card. Now there's no reason for you to hand your card over to the waitress anymore and wait while she disappears with it in the back room."
The latter does not depend on the former at all. The handheld terminals I've had experience with in Europe will take chin+pin, chip+signature, and stripe+signature cards. Also, in all cases the merchants have still handled the card themselves.
Chip+pin was developed to shift liability from the CC network back to the card holder. If you claim a fraudulent transaction the CC company respond that you entered the PIN therefore it is your own fault so pay up.
"he merchant should not have access to a card either physically or via a non-tamper-proof and non-certified piece of equipment."
And how do you the normal customer recognize the certified equipment?
Besides which the whole thing is moot in the US since in the US I have not yet seen a terminal that will operate purely on chip+pin and I've only heard of one bank that even offers chip+pin. (I have one card that is chip+signature that typically works in Europe except for train ticket kiosks.)
"Great job with that transparency, US Patriot Act."
FTFY
-1 irrelevant
The story is about someone who took positive action which would subvert any business continuity preparation, regardless of whether his motives were pure or not.
A duplicate key is irrelevant if someone takes it upon themselves to change the lock and not tell anyone... such as in this case.
"they sure as hell shouldn't be tested on whether they're smart enough yet to realize whichever adult wrote the question is an idiot."
I think recognizing that adults are idiots is the #1 life skill for a child to learn.
Do we really look to these people for coding style?
"If I am in a meeting I scheduled, and someone my rank or lower answers their phone,"
If you assume that someone of "lower rank" cannot have something more important than you turn up on short notice, you have already failed.
"doing what your boss asks of you, even when it's wasting your time in a useless meeting, is your job!"
Not only is wasting time because by boss asked me to not my job, it's not my boss's job to ask me to waste time.
"Ask him... under legal consequences for lying. He can't deny all of them. "
He doesn't have to say a damn thing. Silence is not lying.
There are no federal traffic police so speeding can only be charged at most at state-level granularity. The fact that they don't know exactly where the law was really broken means the state has not presented evidence that proves that the accused actually broke the law in their jurisdiction. The defendant doesn't have to tell any prosecutors anything about where he was and was not speeding.
The only question is whether it would rally be worth someone's time to pursue a constitutional law appeal over some traffic tickets.
Cited in what jurisdiction?
Let's stipulate that the time stamps are accurate, and therefore he had to exceed some speed limit somewhere. However, there are no federal traffic cops who can cite him based on his his average speed. State police in NY and California only have the time on one end of the path their their state, and others have neither end, so there's no way to show that in any specific jurisdiction the speed limit was definitely violated.
If you are trying to kill a few specific people, use guns, not bombs.
or "they" consider this to be the noise.
"the profiling is effective security. Are you saying that Americans should continue to Abhor things even if that attitude places them directly in harm's way, basically causing widespread cultural self-harm?"
Effective profiling is effective. "Don't let the sand nigger on the plane" is not effective profiling, so it's just racial profiling. "The spic is an illegal immigrant", "the nigger is a crack-head mugger", these are also not effective profiles. They are not effective because they do not help in identify those actually intending to commit a crime.
Osama bin Laden was left handed. Would that make targeting left-handed people effective profiling? Of course not, you'd be overwhelmed with false positives of left-handed people who are not terrorists. There are even more Arabs in the US than there are left-handed people, so profiling Arabs is not effective profiling, it is only racial profiling.
Treating all usages of "profiling" as equal is the same tactic that the ID people use with "theory", implying an equivalence between "scientific theory", "conspiracy theory", and "cockamamie theory".
Short arms
LOLWATT?
"If they just want to kill people, there are plenty of other places to do that at lower risk. "
They don't want to just kill people, they want to terrorize people. That's why they are called terrorists.
The security line is what is claimed to keep you safe from terrorists. Attacking it specifically demonstrates that it makes you *less* safe. And to crib the joke from another comment, there's no security line before the security line, so the risks of getting caught are lower than trying to get actually inside of some secure area.
My conclusion is that terrorist on average are dumb.
That's also assuming they have the same Rent's exponent.
"Moore's Law isn't even a law... it's a prediction."
A prediction, and an observation... just like any other scientific law.
"Is ANYTHING in NYC cheap? "
Compared to Zurich? Everything.
" If you want LAN speeds in the much less densely populated US, it is going to be very costly."
Why not start with the high density areas first? The thing about low density areas is that MOST PEOPLE DON'T LIVE THERE.
New Jersey has 25% greater population density than Belgium, and over twice the density of Switzerland. How to the low density portions of the US explain why New Jersey can't have it as good as Belgium or Switzerland?
"Would you trust, for example, a VPN service that has accepted payments from the FBI?"
Why would getting paid make them more or less untrustworthy? Would you trust a VPN service that let's the FBI in for free?
"Anyone they trade with, then, becomes tainted by association."
Don't look now, but of the 10 currencies of which I currently have paper bills ALL of them have easily OCR-able serial numbers. Oh noes!