With much of the EU going into negative interest rates, keeping it in the bank, even at 0% inflation, will be a money-loser. Give it time, they'll have to bring it back.
Check out this interview with an economist. From 2010
Trump wants to legalize companies to bring in that money into the USA without having to pay taxes. Basically a big present he'll give them.
Its much like the choice the media companies have where they can either get some money from letting people like Netflix distribute their content internationally. Or they can force people like Netflix to restrict access to media based on geolocation and get zero money because people start pirating again.
Either you can try to force the tax issue and get nothing or you can look the other way and get something.
What are they going to do to figure out the jurisdiction anyway? Use Maxmind Geoip? Thats hopelessly unreliable! How else are they supposed to do this?
Hey, I know! Lets set up a special UN taskforce!
We can call it UNIT; United Nations Internet Taskforce! Need some kind of doctor and brigadier though.
The prospect of the punishment does make someone think twice about committing crimes.
Take a petty crime for example, speeding. Increasing the fine does help reduce the speed for some people. After all, the cop with a radar could be hiding anywhere.
Yes, that would be under 'prospect of being caught'.
In reality, its a combination; prospect of being caught plus punishment, but prospect of being caught is really the determining factor. People have a high prospect of being caught for speeding, so the punishment deterrent kicks in. For other crimes the prospect of being caught is the main factor.
More spent to defend the defendant, longer trial, and the thing that most people don't know - the taxpayer ends up paying for all their appeals if they are on death row. But life in prison, we are not on the hook for that.
Right so the answer to that is to avoid the lengthy and expensive process of prosecution. Accusation should be enough, then its off to the nitrogen-filled room.
a) 1. Deterrence. If even one person decides to not rape or murder because of the risk of getting slowly burned to death then it's good.
It is never the prospect of the punishment that makes someone think twice about committing crimes.
It is the prospect of being caught that makes them think twice. If they estimate their chances of not being caught are good, they commit the crime. You can make the punishment as gruesome as you like, it makes no real difference.
We need more executions to reduce overcrowding in prisons. There are some people whose crimes affect thousands or even millions of people. Authors of malware and hackers who carry out data breaches can harm millions of people with one crime. There's no good reason why we should pay to incarcerate these criminals or release them back to society to commit more crimes. The best solution is to execute them. We should be increasing the number of executions, not phasing them out.
Good stuff, the world needs less 'Murcans!
Heres an even better idea; execute any 'Murcan who ever killed anyone, ever. The last person to die will be the executioner committing suicide. And then 'Murca will be at peace.
For those who don't get the joke. The Godess Isis of the Ancient Egyptian religion was "worshipped as the ideal mother and wife as well as the patroness of nature and magic. She was the friend of slaves, sinners, artisans and the downtrodden, but she also listened to the prayers of the wealthy, maidens, aristocrats and rulers."
Isis! Apophis! Osiris!
EEEE AAAA OOOO!
O Thou burning sword of passion, that art tempered on the anvil of flesh! I adore Thee, Evoe! I adore Thee, IAO!
O Thou slimy lust of the grave, that art tangled in the roots of the tree! I adore Thee, Evoe! I adore Thee, IAO!
I would say that in the current climate ANYONE who lives in the USA and who works in computer or network security, and doesn't work for the US government, should get out of the USA while they can.
And go where? I have to say that the list of countries that will not just ship you back to the US does not include a lot of wonderful places.
This is your second attempt to troll with an inane comment and I'm the only one exactly dumb enough to respond. Try being more, or less, subtle.
Hey what with all the federal laws, state laws, county laws, city by-laws, regulations etc etc you really never know whats legal unless you walk around with a team of lawyers! Even then its doubtful, theres probably some jurisdiction where walking around with a team of lawyers is illegal!
That is foolish. You shouldn't trust a computer or network that is insecure. It doesn't mean that computers and networks are bad or not useful. You just can't trust them to be secure.
I agree. The thing is that at this point in the development of computer systems what people should really be preparing for is for all that encrypted data to be 'out there' because quantum computing is quite plausibly going to be able to break any of the widely used encryption systems available today. Ie its not if but when your encrypted data goes public. Its just like SETEC Astronomy.
Back in the old country I actually had a friend who developed his own operating system, from the ground up, because he didn't trust anything from anyone else.
It was a lot of work to build and he couldn't really do much with it... Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your perspective) civilization requires that people work together and trust one another.
The FBI can't "sneak into" your house either. If you think the intelligence agencies in the US and Germany play by the rules then you are hopelessly naive.
Indeed, in the USA theres no need for them to 'sneak' in. No, they walk in openly and serve NSL's to anyone who witnesses them.
I don't think her actions are the actions of someone who conscientiously wants to avoid aiding the government in violating people's privacy. Her actions are the actions of someone who is afraid of being caught for doing something she knows she could get in trouble for. Her actions are the actions of a criminal.
Yes, something criminal like helping people hide their data from the US government.
Something fishy is going on here. If she's running and offering this bad of an excuse ("I don't want people to get hurt") it sounds like she's got something more I important to hide. Don't be surprised when more of this unravels and she turns out to be complicit in some illegal activities on that network.
If single developers can introduce flaws then the system can't be trusted anyway.
Look at the history of Linux related security holes, especially the ones that have come to light since Snowden. Based on the amount single-developer flaws that have opened gaping security holes and based on your assertion, I doubt theres any software, open source or otherwise, that can be trusted.
No, what she is saying is the FBI may believe she can which puts her in a very bad position. If she is successful she "undermine(s) the Tor system -- and expose(s) Tor users around the world to potential spying" and if she is not she is imprisoned for contempt of court. I can see why she left. I can also see why so many security professionals keep their passport current. Way to keep the USA in the forefront of security; scare them to Germany.
I would say that in the current climate ANYONE who lives in the USA and who works in computer or network security, and doesn't work for the US government, should get out of the USA while they can.
Doubtful, since the reason is rarely one based in reality.
There are a few, very few, jobs where drug screening makes sense and is an important safety issue. Anyone working with addicts sure should not be one himself, same for people working with children and youths since they not only might represent a role model, they also may introduce them to these things. I guess we can agree on these things not being very beneficial.
Testing for drug addiction, as opposed to drug use, is a whole different thing. Hell, I've known a doctor who used heroin on a regular basis. Was not addicted; knew his metabolism, knew exactly how much heroin he was taking.
The users were informed in advance that their data would be posted on other web sites, available in search results, and that people would be able to collect them. You voluntarily make it public knowing that, you can't then complain that someone else is collecting it.
Laws in the EU require that each individual specific use of the data must be approved by the owner of the data, thats the user not the hosting provider or service provider. You can't contract out of the law with TOS.
Slashdot Mirror
With much of the EU going into negative interest rates, keeping it in the bank, even at 0% inflation, will be a money-loser. Give it time, they'll have to bring it back.
Check out this interview with an economist. From 2010
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Trump wants to legalize companies to bring in that money into the USA without having to pay taxes. Basically a big present he'll give them.
Its much like the choice the media companies have where they can either get some money from letting people like Netflix distribute their content internationally.
Or they can force people like Netflix to restrict access to media based on geolocation and get zero money because people start pirating again.
Either you can try to force the tax issue and get nothing or you can look the other way and get something.
Personal private date means just that. You make it available to the public at large, it is no longer personal PRIVATE data, due to YOUR actions.
Sheesh, not MY actions, I never used the website I swear. Are you hoping someone you know used it so you can get some dirt on them?
What are they going to do to figure out the jurisdiction anyway? Use Maxmind Geoip? Thats hopelessly unreliable! How else are they supposed to do this?
Hey, I know! Lets set up a special UN taskforce!
We can call it UNIT; United Nations Internet Taskforce! Need some kind of doctor and brigadier though.
The prospect of the punishment does make someone think twice about committing crimes.
Take a petty crime for example, speeding. Increasing the fine does help reduce the speed for some people. After all, the cop with a radar could be hiding anywhere.
Yes, that would be under 'prospect of being caught'.
In reality, its a combination; prospect of being caught plus punishment, but prospect of being caught is really the determining factor. People have a high prospect of being caught for speeding, so the punishment deterrent kicks in. For other crimes the prospect of being caught is the main factor.
The short answer is lawyer fees.
More spent to defend the defendant, longer trial, and the thing that most people don't know - the taxpayer ends up paying for all their appeals if they are on death row. But life in prison, we are not on the hook for that.
Right so the answer to that is to avoid the lengthy and expensive process of prosecution. Accusation should be enough, then its off to the nitrogen-filled room.
a)
1. Deterrence. If even one person decides to not rape or murder because of the risk of getting slowly burned to death then it's good.
It is never the prospect of the punishment that makes someone think twice about committing crimes.
It is the prospect of being caught that makes them think twice. If they estimate their chances of not being caught are good, they commit the crime. You can make the punishment as gruesome as you like, it makes no real difference.
Is that the same right conservatives claim when not wanting to bake a cake for a homosexual wedding?
Forcing someone to perform the act of baking is just cruel
We need more executions to reduce overcrowding in prisons. There are some people whose crimes affect thousands or even millions of people. Authors of malware and hackers who carry out data breaches can harm millions of people with one crime. There's no good reason why we should pay to incarcerate these criminals or release them back to society to commit more crimes. The best solution is to execute them. We should be increasing the number of executions, not phasing them out.
Good stuff, the world needs less 'Murcans!
Heres an even better idea; execute any 'Murcan who ever killed anyone, ever. The last person to die will be the executioner committing suicide. And then 'Murca will be at peace.
For those who don't get the joke. The Godess Isis of the Ancient Egyptian religion was "worshipped as the ideal mother and wife as well as the patroness of nature and magic. She was the friend of slaves, sinners, artisans and the downtrodden, but she also listened to the prayers of the wealthy, maidens, aristocrats and rulers."
Isis! Apophis! Osiris!
EEEE AAAA OOOO!
O Thou burning sword of passion, that art tempered on the anvil of flesh! I adore Thee, Evoe! I adore Thee, IAO!
O Thou slimy lust of the grave, that art tangled in the roots of the tree! I adore Thee, Evoe! I adore Thee, IAO!
and all the other 167 cries of adoration.
I would say that in the current climate ANYONE who lives in the USA and who works in computer or network security, and doesn't work for the US government, should get out of the USA while they can.
And go where? I have to say that the list of countries that will not just ship you back to the US does not include a lot of wonderful places.
Well no English speaking country, thats for sure.
This is your second attempt to troll with an inane comment and I'm the only one exactly dumb enough to respond. Try being more, or less, subtle.
Hey what with all the federal laws, state laws, county laws, city by-laws, regulations etc etc you really never know whats legal unless you walk around with a team of lawyers! Even then its doubtful, theres probably some jurisdiction where walking around with a team of lawyers is illegal!
That is foolish. You shouldn't trust a computer or network that is insecure. It doesn't mean that computers and networks are bad or not useful. You just can't trust them to be secure.
I agree. The thing is that at this point in the development of computer systems what people should really be preparing for is for all that encrypted data to be 'out there' because quantum computing is quite plausibly going to be able to break any of the widely used encryption systems available today. Ie its not if but when your encrypted data goes public. Its just like SETEC Astronomy.
100% correct. Congratulations.
Back in the old country I actually had a friend who developed his own operating system, from the ground up, because he didn't trust anything from anyone else.
It was a lot of work to build and he couldn't really do much with it... Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your perspective) civilization requires that people work together and trust one another.
Yes, all those jews that fled from Germany in the 1930's were cowards too who had done nothing wrong.
And then those Jews who stayed in Italy and supported Mussolini. Things didn't work out too well for them actually.
The FBI can't "sneak into" your house either. If you think the intelligence agencies in the US and Germany play by the rules then you are hopelessly naive.
Indeed, in the USA theres no need for them to 'sneak' in. No, they walk in openly and serve NSL's to anyone who witnesses them.
I don't think her actions are the actions of someone who conscientiously wants to avoid aiding the government in violating people's privacy. Her actions are the actions of someone who is afraid of being caught for doing something she knows she could get in trouble for. Her actions are the actions of a criminal.
Yes, something criminal like helping people hide their data from the US government.
Just hang them in serial from the Burj Khalifa.
In serial??
Parallelization is where its at.
Something fishy is going on here. If she's running and offering this bad of an excuse ("I don't want people to get hurt") it sounds like she's got something more I important to hide. Don't be surprised when more of this unravels and she turns out to be complicit in some illegal activities on that network.
This is the USA, most things are illegal.
If single developers can introduce flaws then the system can't be trusted anyway.
Look at the history of Linux related security holes, especially the ones that have come to light since Snowden. Based on the amount single-developer flaws that have opened gaping security holes and based on your assertion, I doubt theres any software, open source or otherwise, that can be trusted.
Oh. Then the system isn't very secure, is it? I don't know "Isis Agora Lovecruft". Should I trust her code?
Wait WHAT? Her *name* is Isis!?!?!? How the fuck wasn't she on the no-fly list!
Sheesh, there go your TSA and Homeland security dollars right there! Those guys really dropped the ball on this one!
No, what she is saying is the FBI may believe she can which puts her in a very bad position. If she is successful she "undermine(s) the Tor system -- and expose(s) Tor users around the world to potential spying" and if she is not she is imprisoned for contempt of court. I can see why she left. I can also see why so many security professionals keep their passport current. Way to keep the USA in the forefront of security; scare them to Germany.
I would say that in the current climate ANYONE who lives in the USA and who works in computer or network security, and doesn't work for the US government, should get out of the USA while they can.
Doubtful, since the reason is rarely one based in reality.
There are a few, very few, jobs where drug screening makes sense and is an important safety issue. Anyone working with addicts sure should not be one himself, same for people working with children and youths since they not only might represent a role model, they also may introduce them to these things. I guess we can agree on these things not being very beneficial.
Testing for drug addiction, as opposed to drug use, is a whole different thing. Hell, I've known a doctor who used heroin on a regular basis. Was not addicted; knew his metabolism, knew exactly how much heroin he was taking.
Drop the test. Duh.
What other countries in the world do this? I've never heard of it outside the stories I hear from the USA.
The users were informed in advance that their data would be posted on other web sites, available in search results, and that people would be able to collect them. You voluntarily make it public knowing that, you can't then complain that someone else is collecting it.
Laws in the EU require that each individual specific use of the data must be approved by the owner of the data, thats the user not the hosting provider or service provider. You can't contract out of the law with TOS.