Regulating re-shipping or breaking re-shipping? I use a mail forwarder because I live in Panama. There are many things I can buy online that are simply not available locally, from my wife's designer shoes for her tiny feet whose size no store ever carries stock, to the latest computer parts for me. They all get shipped to my mail-forwarder in Miami (took all of 15 minutes to set up an account), and it all gets re-shipped to me. Takes about a week to clear customs, etc, and it's expensive as hell since we're talking air freight, 10-50% duty on CIF depending on what I buy, and inflated handling fees. But in my income bracket it's not such a big deal because the alternative is not having it at all - it's cheaper than flying to the US and staying in a hotel and bringing stuff back myself (something I used to do long before re-shipping was invented).
The point I am making is that re-shipping has valid, legitimate uses and it creates jobs. Customs Panama is happy they get revenue on stuff I buy. The airline is happy. The freight forwarding company is happy. And the store is happy. However sometimes existing regulations and policies make it difficult. Sometimes an online store won't take my credit card because it's not emitted by a US bank. All foreigners must be money launderers, right? Sometimes my mail forwarder is in someone's database and they simply refuse to ship (Apple is famous for this. OMG heaven forbid I buy a super secret tech iPod made in China and ship it to my mail forwarder, no, I must wait 10 months for them to decide to sell it outside the US and pay an extra $400 mark-up to the local retailer for the privilege of having it in his store for a day or two). Screaming for regulation is only going to make it even more difficult for legitimate people like me to get legitimate goods delivered to far away places.
What you need to do is to go after credit card fraud. THAT is the problem, but banks don't want to talk about it. It's easier for them just to pay some losses as a cost of doing business and only go after the really big fraudsters. And often these fraudsters are getting the credit card info DIRECTLY from the databases of the banks themselves, either by hacking the software or hacking the people (ahh those corruptible humans). Fix the problem at its source, don't try to make it harder for people to practice international shopping.
You cannot accuse much less convict people for something they haven't done yet. Once you do that, we're at despotism and there's nothing stopping them from convicting you or me for whatever reason. The laws have already been pushed too far. Why do you think it's time to abandon them? How likely are you to die in a "terror" event?
Because a blockchain is something oh-so-innovative. IIRC it's just an implementation of a doubly-linked list. Wow. Those haven't been around since the dawn of the computing era.
"Distributed" is marketing bullshit anyway. When you start your computer your program has to look somewhere for an entry point into the network, be it one of many nodes to a database, the last good node, a root node, a hard-coded node etc. No program can just pull a successful lookup to the "distributed" database out of its digital ass. So if you take out that or those nodes, it really doesn't matter what kind of voodoo code you write. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link.
You're making the mistake of assuming that that thing on his head is hair. My understanding is that it's an alien being that has bonded with "The Donald" and taken possession of his body many years ago, using him as a marionette. It's quite obvious that his current run at the Presidency of the United States would benefit this alien race no end if he succeeded.
No it was not. Probability of a kid bringing a bomb to class is in the millions if not the hundreds of millions to one. It is the right decision to suspect anything BUT a bomb, since that is by far the most likely outcome.
threatened with expulsion unless he made a written statement
Someone trying to play lawyer. IANAL and even I know that any lawyer will immediately seek to toss that statement out as having been made under duress. I think this is another example of a school district throwing public money away, because they are eventually going to be giving this kid a lump sum or be torn apart in court.
These are school teachers, not bomb experts. All they know is that it was a box with some sort of digital timer on it. You think they were going to perform a full forensic analysis of it before they called the cops?
This is the excuse used nowadays to park your brain in the closet and let someone else do the thinking for you. It's quite unfortunate and it actually has arisen due to the exuberance of American lawyers and American court systems in seeking or handing out multimillion dollar jackpots to people. Can you tell a person is dead? I mean - are you a doctor? Are you an EMT? His head is on the other side of the fucking freeway, but ARE YOU QUALIFIED TO SAY HE WAS DEAD?
So seriously the kid could have had a cardboard box that beeped, and your argument would apply. Or are you trying to say that a LCD is either a necessary component of a bomb, or predictive for the presence of a bomb? He could have just said "I made something and it's in my backpack" and of course the entire backpack COULD contain an explosive device. Who are you to say? You're not bomb experts.
Seriously people you have turned into a nation of cuckolds and cowards.
Perhaps teachers need to sit down and realize that "zero tolerance" really means "intolerance" but it seems that what they are really aiming for is "irrational". Kids arrested for drawing on desks, drawing pictures of guns, shaping their fingers like a gun...etc. Sheesh my generation would not have made it two weeks into school without being locked in maximum security prisons.
Well congratulations. If this technical minded little boy ends up being processed as a "potential terrorist" you can bet your ass he WILL end up disliking the government that did this to him. Thus America creates another terrorist. Maybe that's the whole idea, I don't know anymore.
Bezos said the company hopes to launch people from Exploration Park later this decade.
Someone needs to remind Jeff that launching people is the easy part. In fact when you sit people on top of that much rocket fuel, it's pretty hard NOT to launch them. Getting them to where they need to in one piece, however. Well that's tricky.
The companies are the ones who need to be checking to see if the content is actually infringing, or is fair use. The problem is in their eyes there is no such thing.
The problem is there are zero consequences for claiming something is infringing when it isn't, but everything to gain by doing it if and when it gets taken down. Oh yeah lawyers who spam cease and desist notices are risking their career and being "disbarred" by doing this. Please provide evidence of a single lawyer who has lost his right to practice because of it? But if mass mailing takedown notices results in stuff getting taken down it 1) enlarges the pool of people you can potentially sue/exploit a settlement fee from and 2) reduces the amount of content out in the wild which increases demand for "legitimate" paywalled stuff. Win win.
You cannot agree to someone breaking the law, no matter how many weasel words you use. You just go ahead and try to draw up a contract that allows you to kill people with impunity and see how far you get.
Way to miss the point. Well done. Continue with your agenda. Apparently it's all you know. My point is that if a bank is pointing towards a particular option it's because it's the one they are going to make the most money on (read that as it's the one everyone else is going to lose the most money on), period. Banking is merely legalized theft.
Slashdot Mirror
Regulating re-shipping or breaking re-shipping? I use a mail forwarder because I live in Panama. There are many things I can buy online that are simply not available locally, from my wife's designer shoes for her tiny feet whose size no store ever carries stock, to the latest computer parts for me. They all get shipped to my mail-forwarder in Miami (took all of 15 minutes to set up an account), and it all gets re-shipped to me. Takes about a week to clear customs, etc, and it's expensive as hell since we're talking air freight, 10-50% duty on CIF depending on what I buy, and inflated handling fees. But in my income bracket it's not such a big deal because the alternative is not having it at all - it's cheaper than flying to the US and staying in a hotel and bringing stuff back myself (something I used to do long before re-shipping was invented).
The point I am making is that re-shipping has valid, legitimate uses and it creates jobs. Customs Panama is happy they get revenue on stuff I buy. The airline is happy. The freight forwarding company is happy. And the store is happy. However sometimes existing regulations and policies make it difficult. Sometimes an online store won't take my credit card because it's not emitted by a US bank. All foreigners must be money launderers, right? Sometimes my mail forwarder is in someone's database and they simply refuse to ship (Apple is famous for this. OMG heaven forbid I buy a super secret tech iPod made in China and ship it to my mail forwarder, no, I must wait 10 months for them to decide to sell it outside the US and pay an extra $400 mark-up to the local retailer for the privilege of having it in his store for a day or two). Screaming for regulation is only going to make it even more difficult for legitimate people like me to get legitimate goods delivered to far away places.
What you need to do is to go after credit card fraud. THAT is the problem, but banks don't want to talk about it. It's easier for them just to pay some losses as a cost of doing business and only go after the really big fraudsters. And often these fraudsters are getting the credit card info DIRECTLY from the databases of the banks themselves, either by hacking the software or hacking the people (ahh those corruptible humans). Fix the problem at its source, don't try to make it harder for people to practice international shopping.
You cannot accuse much less convict people for something they haven't done yet. Once you do that, we're at despotism and there's nothing stopping them from convicting you or me for whatever reason. The laws have already been pushed too far. Why do you think it's time to abandon them? How likely are you to die in a "terror" event?
GP probably has $40k of credit card debt at a low low 20% APR and thinks he's getting a sweet deal.
Lawyers gotta eat too!
Because a blockchain is something oh-so-innovative. IIRC it's just an implementation of a doubly-linked list. Wow. Those haven't been around since the dawn of the computing era.
In no way does it look like a salt shaker.
Either that or it was the invitation to a hunting trip with Dick Cheney...
and nothing of value was lost
"Distributed" is marketing bullshit anyway. When you start your computer your program has to look somewhere for an entry point into the network, be it one of many nodes to a database, the last good node, a root node, a hard-coded node etc. No program can just pull a successful lookup to the "distributed" database out of its digital ass. So if you take out that or those nodes, it really doesn't matter what kind of voodoo code you write. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link.
You're making the mistake of assuming that that thing on his head is hair. My understanding is that it's an alien being that has bonded with "The Donald" and taken possession of his body many years ago, using him as a marionette. It's quite obvious that his current run at the Presidency of the United States would benefit this alien race no end if he succeeded.
Seriously I stopped using AVG like 9 years ago when they started dicking around caching web pages and sticking their nose where they didn't belong.
Of course slashcode doesn't like so many caps but here goes anyway:
MELON MELON MELON
+++OUT OF CHEESE ERROR+++
?REDO FROM START
With apologies to the late Terry Pratchett.
I think Satya should just trust to karma and accept the answer that Cortana gives him.
Only if he put his hands up and/or stated "I can't breathe".
It was the right decision to suspect of a bomb
No it was not. Probability of a kid bringing a bomb to class is in the millions if not the hundreds of millions to one. It is the right decision to suspect anything BUT a bomb, since that is by far the most likely outcome.
Yet these are the people you entrust with teaching your kids. This should make you think.
threatened with expulsion unless he made a written statement
Someone trying to play lawyer. IANAL and even I know that any lawyer will immediately seek to toss that statement out as having been made under duress. I think this is another example of a school district throwing public money away, because they are eventually going to be giving this kid a lump sum or be torn apart in court.
These are school teachers, not bomb experts. All they know is that it was a box with some sort of digital timer on it. You think they were going to perform a full forensic analysis of it before they called the cops?
This is the excuse used nowadays to park your brain in the closet and let someone else do the thinking for you. It's quite unfortunate and it actually has arisen due to the exuberance of American lawyers and American court systems in seeking or handing out multimillion dollar jackpots to people. Can you tell a person is dead? I mean - are you a doctor? Are you an EMT? His head is on the other side of the fucking freeway, but ARE YOU QUALIFIED TO SAY HE WAS DEAD?
So seriously the kid could have had a cardboard box that beeped, and your argument would apply. Or are you trying to say that a LCD is either a necessary component of a bomb, or predictive for the presence of a bomb? He could have just said "I made something and it's in my backpack" and of course the entire backpack COULD contain an explosive device. Who are you to say? You're not bomb experts.
Seriously people you have turned into a nation of cuckolds and cowards.
Yes feminized. As in effeminate. Look it up, it's fair use of a word that's been in the dictionary for hundreds of years.
ZERO TOLERANCE!!!!!!!!!
Perhaps teachers need to sit down and realize that "zero tolerance" really means "intolerance" but it seems that what they are really aiming for is "irrational". Kids arrested for drawing on desks, drawing pictures of guns, shaping their fingers like a gun...etc. Sheesh my generation would not have made it two weeks into school without being locked in maximum security prisons.
Well congratulations. If this technical minded little boy ends up being processed as a "potential terrorist" you can bet your ass he WILL end up disliking the government that did this to him. Thus America creates another terrorist. Maybe that's the whole idea, I don't know anymore.
Bezos said the company hopes to launch people from Exploration Park later this decade.
Someone needs to remind Jeff that launching people is the easy part. In fact when you sit people on top of that much rocket fuel, it's pretty hard NOT to launch them. Getting them to where they need to in one piece, however. Well that's tricky.
The companies are the ones who need to be checking to see if the content is actually infringing, or is fair use. The problem is in their eyes there is no such thing.
The problem is there are zero consequences for claiming something is infringing when it isn't, but everything to gain by doing it if and when it gets taken down. Oh yeah lawyers who spam cease and desist notices are risking their career and being "disbarred" by doing this. Please provide evidence of a single lawyer who has lost his right to practice because of it? But if mass mailing takedown notices results in stuff getting taken down it 1) enlarges the pool of people you can potentially sue/exploit a settlement fee from and 2) reduces the amount of content out in the wild which increases demand for "legitimate" paywalled stuff. Win win.
You cannot agree to someone breaking the law, no matter how many weasel words you use. You just go ahead and try to draw up a contract that allows you to kill people with impunity and see how far you get.
Way to miss the point. Well done. Continue with your agenda. Apparently it's all you know. My point is that if a bank is pointing towards a particular option it's because it's the one they are going to make the most money on (read that as it's the one everyone else is going to lose the most money on), period. Banking is merely legalized theft.
Surely you can trust a BANK. And of all the banks, Citibank is surely the most trustworthy. /SARCASM