No one has the right to sue unless an actual crime against the student took place. My SSN was possible stolen from a new employee state database recently (used to determine if someone owes child support they are skipping out on) and the attitude was that since the information was not used yet, we were on our own to protect ourselves. The police even refused to take a report because as far as they were concerned, the only victim was the state agency (never mind the cost and effort I had to go through to protect my current accounts and verify that someone has/is not using my information to commit a crime).
I think that once places that hold information are held responsible (even if it is to pay for credit monitoring for 2 years for anyone whose information could have been stolen), then we will see a real concern about security. Right now, all anyone has to pay for is postage to notify a person and time to investigate. In this case for example, if UCLA had to pay for credit monitoring for 800,000 people for 2 years (at about $100/year/person), I am sure $160,000,000 would force them to make sure this does not happen again. Otherwise, we will hear more stories of this type.
Yes you do but you do not have to tell the government through what method you made the money. If you put the figure on the 1040 line where you put in gambling income, then the IRS will not question it (especaially if they do not receive a 1099G). The only place it could look weird is if you get interest income on the account and have to list the bank on Schedule B. Other than that, the IRS only wants the numbers.
In fact, if you are a real savy taxpayer and good at record keeping, you can deduct the expenses of going to Canada/Mexico as an expense related to the income you received up to the amount of income you earned.
For those persons who live near the International Border (both north and south), why not open a bank account in another country. US laws only affect US banks. Plus, you do not have to tell anyone if you take less than $10,000 across the border.
According to the article, it looks like IBM was looking to start to expense stock options prior to the new SEC rules taking effect. If looks like they sprung it on everyone at the last minute which put analysts in an uproar because they had to readjust their numbers at the last minute, then the expenses were not in line with what the analysts predicted (were actually less).
Simply put, IBM tried to do the right thing for its investors and the public but flubbed it and the government now seems hell bent to punish IBM (They have been looking for something for years regarding investor relations) and will not stop until they get something, even if it is a technicality. This allows them to say that they are going after the big guys while getting the Enron execs off the hook.
IBM really did nothing wrong. They simply followed public opinion and did what the SEC was going to require them to do anyways. In actuality, the SEC should use this to guide other companies into complying with the new rules since IBM was the first. Instead, they are going to punish IBM.
All I have to say to this comment is RTFA. The article said that the airlines are really under so much government regulation that they are puppets of the government.
Granted, the airlines like this rule because they can charge whatever they want for each seat. However, the airlines have not made this a directive and in fact, if it were not for the law, the rules of competition would allow an airline to not require IDs and cause the others to follow suit if the airline that did not require IDs took too much business.
The ID requirement is a directive from the government who then refuses to show this directive so that it can be challenged in the courts. The airlines are required to follow this directive if they wish to continue to operate as an airline.
The fight is not about private company requirements. It is about government requirements that are considered "secret" and therefor cannot be challeged.
Because I am my own employee and can make my own hours, I drive a School Bus as my side job. I find it works well because of the split between shifts allows me to talk to customers during the day and yet, I am also available during off hours.
Do you mean like Ancestry.com's contract violation.
Ancestry.com created a contract with people who submitted their work to the ancestry.com website saying that the persons work would be available for free (note that the person who submitted the work was not paid for it.)
Now ancestry is changing to a system that charges people to look at other peoples works. I think however that many of the submitters could stop ancestry through contract law but.....
I would not pay for the works anyways. There is no quality control. I would rather do queries and talk to the fellow genealogist directly. At least I can find out their sources for their information.
Try to use a telephone (even a cell phone) after a disaster such as a hurricane or tornado. Even the terrorist of 9/11 has shown that phones cannot be relied upon.
Ham radio on the other hand only needs an antenna (A simple piece of wire can do that) and some type of power source such as a running car or generator.
Yes, the telephone works 98% of the time but when it fails for the 2%, it is nice to have something to fall back on.
The LDS Church already stores records in a mountain vault in Utah. The records are various records that the church has obtained for storage and use in their Family History Library and Centers.
Granted, Most of the records in the vault are dated before 1930 but this idea is really old.
Why do I have to purchase from Indies to prove that the drop was not from piracy?
What if the $50 Million drop was spent on board games or currently, due to the fact that millions are either out of work or working at jobs that pay alot less.
If car sales dropped, would the auto industry accuse the conumers of building their own Chevrolet, even if there was an easy way to do so?
To attribute any drop to piracy is an invalid argument because there are too many reasons why sales would drop.
Charter is not playing ball. At least not in Minnesota or Wisconsin from what I see. Charter converted most of their users to their service (similar to what AT&T did/is doing).
It looks like Charter, AT&T, and most Canadian Cable providers saw this coming and prepared with contigency plans (even if they would not acknowledge it until the last minute). The only companies I see that must play ball are Comcast, Cox, and Cablevison.
@home though has already lost 1/2 of its subscriber base if not more. I do not see how this will help
Slashdot Mirror
No one has the right to sue unless an actual crime against the student took place. My SSN was possible stolen from a new employee state database recently (used to determine if someone owes child support they are skipping out on) and the attitude was that since the information was not used yet, we were on our own to protect ourselves. The police even refused to take a report because as far as they were concerned, the only victim was the state agency (never mind the cost and effort I had to go through to protect my current accounts and verify that someone has/is not using my information to commit a crime).
I think that once places that hold information are held responsible (even if it is to pay for credit monitoring for 2 years for anyone whose information could have been stolen), then we will see a real concern about security. Right now, all anyone has to pay for is postage to notify a person and time to investigate. In this case for example, if UCLA had to pay for credit monitoring for 800,000 people for 2 years (at about $100/year/person), I am sure $160,000,000 would force them to make sure this does not happen again. Otherwise, we will hear more stories of this type.
Yes you do but you do not have to tell the government through what method you made the money. If you put the figure on the 1040 line where you put in gambling income, then the IRS will not question it (especaially if they do not receive a 1099G). The only place it could look weird is if you get interest income on the account and have to list the bank on Schedule B. Other than that, the IRS only wants the numbers.
In fact, if you are a real savy taxpayer and good at record keeping, you can deduct the expenses of going to Canada/Mexico as an expense related to the income you received up to the amount of income you earned.
For those persons who live near the International Border (both north and south), why not open a bank account in another country. US laws only affect US banks. Plus, you do not have to tell anyone if you take less than $10,000 across the border.
OK,
According to the article, it looks like IBM was looking to start to expense stock options prior to the new SEC rules taking effect. If looks like they sprung it on everyone at the last minute which put analysts in an uproar because they had to readjust their numbers at the last minute, then the expenses were not in line with what the analysts predicted (were actually less).
Simply put, IBM tried to do the right thing for its investors and the public but flubbed it and the government now seems hell bent to punish IBM (They have been looking for something for years regarding investor relations) and will not stop until they get something, even if it is a technicality. This allows them to say that they are going after the big guys while getting the Enron execs off the hook.
IBM really did nothing wrong. They simply followed public opinion and did what the SEC was going to require them to do anyways. In actuality, the SEC should use this to guide other companies into complying with the new rules since IBM was the first. Instead, they are going to punish IBM.
All I have to say to this comment is RTFA. The article said that the airlines are really under so much government regulation that they are puppets of the government.
Granted, the airlines like this rule because they can charge whatever they want for each seat. However, the airlines have not made this a directive and in fact, if it were not for the law, the rules of competition would allow an airline to not require IDs and cause the others to follow suit if the airline that did not require IDs took too much business.
The ID requirement is a directive from the government who then refuses to show this directive so that it can be challenged in the courts. The airlines are required to follow this directive if they wish to continue to operate as an airline.
The fight is not about private company requirements. It is about government requirements that are considered "secret" and therefor cannot be challeged.
Because I am my own employee and can make my own hours, I drive a School Bus as my side job. I find it works well because of the split between shifts allows me to talk to customers during the day and yet, I am also available during off hours.
Do you mean like Ancestry.com's contract violation.
Ancestry.com created a contract with people who submitted their work to the ancestry.com website saying that the persons work would be available for free (note that the person who submitted the work was not paid for it.)
Now ancestry is changing to a system that charges people to look at other peoples works. I think however that many of the submitters could stop ancestry through contract law but.....
I would not pay for the works anyways. There is no quality control. I would rather do queries and talk to the fellow genealogist directly. At least I can find out their sources for their information.
Try to use a telephone (even a cell phone) after a disaster such as a hurricane or tornado. Even the terrorist of 9/11 has shown that phones cannot be relied upon.
Ham radio on the other hand only needs an antenna (A simple piece of wire can do that) and some type of power source such as a running car or generator.
Yes, the telephone works 98% of the time but when it fails for the 2%, it is nice to have something to fall back on.
The LDS Church already stores records in a mountain vault in Utah. The records are various records that the church has obtained for storage and use in their Family History Library and Centers.
Granted, Most of the records in the vault are dated before 1930 but this idea is really old.
Why do I have to purchase from Indies to prove that the drop was not from piracy?
What if the $50 Million drop was spent on board games or currently, due to the fact that millions are either out of work or working at jobs that pay alot less.
If car sales dropped, would the auto industry accuse the conumers of building their own Chevrolet, even if there was an easy way to do so?
To attribute any drop to piracy is an invalid argument because there are too many reasons why sales would drop.
Charter is not playing ball. At least not in Minnesota or Wisconsin from what I see. Charter converted most of their users to their service (similar to what AT&T did/is doing).
It looks like Charter, AT&T, and most Canadian Cable providers saw this coming and prepared with contigency plans (even if they would not acknowledge it until the last minute). The only companies I see that must play ball are Comcast, Cox, and Cablevison.
@home though has already lost 1/2 of its subscriber base if not more. I do not see how this will help