Then I would have to pay for more printer ink. A small amount yes, but it adds up over time. As the mailman is already bringing me other mail and the bank is already printing out other statements, it takes no extra resources to print nor bring me mine.
I'd also have to ensure my printer is plugged in at print time if I automated it. I keep my printer unplugged until I'm using it. So printing it out would be extra work for me; a small amount, but still enough for me to prefer the convenience of the bank printing it for me. Since I am not afraid of someone having the info (because still no one has told me why I should fear it), I am not afraid of it being in my mailbox, and therefore I have no reason to give up that convenience. Not that I'm putting down anyone for which not getting a paper statement is more convenient, or takes less resources, or etc.; but for my lifestyle, right now, I want paper statements.
That was my first thought! But apparently, they're talking about LINKING TO copyright-violating material. Sigh. That's like arresting someone for saying "Hey, there's a house cooking meth on 5th street." Or more accurately, it's like having the library detain someone and cover their mouth because they said that in the library, and saying that if they don't, the library will be shut down and all employees arrested.
But you're just explain to me why someone would be more willing to steal this information online; I'm asking what the danger is in this information being taken by someone, online or off.
Personally, two reasons. 1. We have savings accounts for our kids, and with the younger ones don't want to require them to view the statements online just yet.. 2. I run a home business, and when I'm figuring out financial things, doing my taxes etc. I just find it easier to deal with paper.
My inlaws get paper statements because they refuse to do any online banking, which is a good thing as they occasionally get viruses that would grab their banking info if they did...
Good point. If you use paypal like that, it would give out little more info than anyone walking down your street - or anyone looking at Google maps, for those of you yelling that it's different online for some reason - can already see.
So you are saying the point is not the protection of your account, but the punishment of the person stealing your account? How is it "dangerous" for the person stealing your information to not be punished?
Anyone going through my mail could them post that info on the internet. You don't need a credit card to use paypal. You need paypal to ACCEPT paypal transactions, transactions from the many people in the world that can't/won't get a credit card, that can't get a bank account with a debit card that works as a credit card, or don't trust other online credit card processors. The amount of money it would take to use a processor with bank regulations would mean I would be making no profit.
could be gotten by opening up my bank statement. Address, account number, past purchases, account balance (though likely a couple of days out of date). Heck anyone walking down the street can get my address, can see previous purchases if I have my curtains open, and could use my address to find my phone number. I'd be much more worried about someone waking up to my mailbox and opening my bank statement, but only because then they're right at my door (and could come in and attack me), rather than who-knows-where viewing it on the internet. But why fear that information getting out at all? My bank account has protections against use by unauthorized people, and if I had a real credit card it would as well (personally I use prepaid credit cards which don't have such protections, but I only put on what I'm going to use). I have at least half a brain and don't leave money in paypal. So I'm not sure exactly the fear here. Paypal can't even be used for adult services, so it's not like someone is going to print out your fleshlight purchases and send it to your boss/wife/etc..
If Paypal were regulated like a bank, all similar services would be as well, and that would just raise the bar of entry and ensure no competitor ever puts up a fight against paypal. It would also eventually ensure that people that can't get a bank account or credit card for whatever reason, can't do online transactions. (I'm sorry but I am willing to take peoples' money even if they overdrew their account when they were a broke college student and ended up in Chexsystems.) Paypal sucks, but personally I NEED what it does, as do MANY other people - so either it needs to keep doing it or someone else has to start doing it better. If someone could start a service doing what it does but with all the regulations of a bank, they'd be doing it.
I'm pretty the family of the deceased will report it as stolen. Also just because a phone is blocked doesn't mean it can't be tracked; you'd be giving the police a good track to follow from your murder, even if you sold the phone quickly.
Children will learn anything they are allowed to learn. If you don't give them a phone until 10, then they won't learn to us a phone until 10. But if you give a 3 year old a phone they certainly CAN learn to answer a phone, make calls, and say something like "I'm by the red building" or "I'm near a pond" or follow the instructions to find the nearest adult and hand them the phone. I know that is real-life and realistic because I have seen it happen with my 4 kids.
I have 4 kids, I have "lost" my kids before, and I would still never put a tracking device on them. Instead I taught them to stay in the area and ask for help by saying "Would you please call my mother Amanda on the intercom?" when they are somewhere that has an intercom, and "Would you please call my mother Amanda on your cellphone? Her number is..." when we're not. When I "lost" them I was either called on the intercom, or returned to the last place I had seen them to find them asking someone for help. A BRAIN is the only device they can't drop/lose/disable.
That would be any smartphone; give yours to a 3 year old and they'll figure out how to call people. You can even put a shortcut on the "desktop" of the phone, with a picture of mom or dad, and tell the kid "if you get lost, press this to call mom/dad."
Very true, and we are seeing this now with people in their early 20s, suddenly thrust out into the world after a lifetime of never being given a chance to make mistakes, to learn independence, etc.
In many states, offering an equivalent education is all that is needed to actually be an unaccredited school/university. For example, since I homeschool in Indiana, my house is an unaccredited school called "The Matthews Academy", I can register for anything an accredited school would register for (educational discounts, field trips, Book It, etc. etc.), and I can even give diplomas. There's nothing at all shady/fishy about that site; the issue is that they're giving out real education for free.
Children learn by doing. They learn to be independent by practicing it. Forcing them to sit in a classroom all day and "overseeing" everything for them ensures they will never mature. Ask anyone dealing with young adults; this treating teenagers as babies thing is causing huge problems in society.
The original reason for forcing kids to go to school in the US and Canada was that they were taking all the jobs, since they were willing to be paid less. The movement to give the jobs back to adults at the higher pay somehow morphed into some valiant effort to "protect" "children."
"Doctors and government health officials should set limits, as they do for alcohol"
I completely agree, since the actual limit they currently put on there in most countries and most states in the US is; children can not purchase alcohol, but it's up to their parents to decide when and how much they drink.
Slashdot Mirror
Then I would have to pay for more printer ink. A small amount yes, but it adds up over time. As the mailman is already bringing me other mail and the bank is already printing out other statements, it takes no extra resources to print nor bring me mine.
I'd also have to ensure my printer is plugged in at print time if I automated it. I keep my printer unplugged until I'm using it. So printing it out would be extra work for me; a small amount, but still enough for me to prefer the convenience of the bank printing it for me. Since I am not afraid of someone having the info (because still no one has told me why I should fear it), I am not afraid of it being in my mailbox, and therefore I have no reason to give up that convenience. Not that I'm putting down anyone for which not getting a paper statement is more convenient, or takes less resources, or etc.; but for my lifestyle, right now, I want paper statements.
You do know you can cuddle with your wife and watch tv at the same time, right?
That was my first thought! But apparently, they're talking about LINKING TO copyright-violating material. Sigh. That's like arresting someone for saying "Hey, there's a house cooking meth on 5th street." Or more accurately, it's like having the library detain someone and cover their mouth because they said that in the library, and saying that if they don't, the library will be shut down and all employees arrested.
(I apologize for the typos, I swear my keyboard is malfunctioning.)
But you're just explain to me why someone would be more willing to steal this information online; I'm asking what the danger is in this information being taken by someone, online or off.
Personally, two reasons. 1. We have savings accounts for our kids, and with the younger ones don't want to require them to view the statements online just yet.. 2. I run a home business, and when I'm figuring out financial things, doing my taxes etc. I just find it easier to deal with paper.
My inlaws get paper statements because they refuse to do any online banking, which is a good thing as they occasionally get viruses that would grab their banking info if they did...
Good point. If you use paypal like that, it would give out little more info than anyone walking down your street - or anyone looking at Google maps, for those of you yelling that it's different online for some reason - can already see.
So you are saying the point is not the protection of your account, but the punishment of the person stealing your account? How is it "dangerous" for the person stealing your information to not be punished?
Anyone going through my mail could them post that info on the internet. You don't need a credit card to use paypal. You need paypal to ACCEPT paypal transactions, transactions from the many people in the world that can't/won't get a credit card, that can't get a bank account with a debit card that works as a credit card, or don't trust other online credit card processors. The amount of money it would take to use a processor with bank regulations would mean I would be making no profit.
could be gotten by opening up my bank statement. Address, account number, past purchases, account balance (though likely a couple of days out of date). Heck anyone walking down the street can get my address, can see previous purchases if I have my curtains open, and could use my address to find my phone number. I'd be much more worried about someone waking up to my mailbox and opening my bank statement, but only because then they're right at my door (and could come in and attack me), rather than who-knows-where viewing it on the internet. But why fear that information getting out at all? My bank account has protections against use by unauthorized people, and if I had a real credit card it would as well (personally I use prepaid credit cards which don't have such protections, but I only put on what I'm going to use). I have at least half a brain and don't leave money in paypal. So I'm not sure exactly the fear here. Paypal can't even be used for adult services, so it's not like someone is going to print out your fleshlight purchases and send it to your boss/wife/etc..
If Paypal were regulated like a bank, all similar services would be as well, and that would just raise the bar of entry and ensure no competitor ever puts up a fight against paypal. It would also eventually ensure that people that can't get a bank account or credit card for whatever reason, can't do online transactions. (I'm sorry but I am willing to take peoples' money even if they overdrew their account when they were a broke college student and ended up in Chexsystems.) Paypal sucks, but personally I NEED what it does, as do MANY other people - so either it needs to keep doing it or someone else has to start doing it better. If someone could start a service doing what it does but with all the regulations of a bank, they'd be doing it.
I'm pretty the family of the deceased will report it as stolen. Also just because a phone is blocked doesn't mean it can't be tracked; you'd be giving the police a good track to follow from your murder, even if you sold the phone quickly.
Children will learn anything they are allowed to learn. If you don't give them a phone until 10, then they won't learn to us a phone until 10. But if you give a 3 year old a phone they certainly CAN learn to answer a phone, make calls, and say something like "I'm by the red building" or "I'm near a pond" or follow the instructions to find the nearest adult and hand them the phone. I know that is real-life and realistic because I have seen it happen with my 4 kids.
Is everyone else's kids mentally disabled or something? All 4 of my kids could use phones at 2 without eating them or throwing them into duck ponds.
It is hard to believe, but everything he said is true.
I have 4 kids, I have "lost" my kids before, and I would still never put a tracking device on them. Instead I taught them to stay in the area and ask for help by saying "Would you please call my mother Amanda on the intercom?" when they are somewhere that has an intercom, and "Would you please call my mother Amanda on your cellphone? Her number is..." when we're not. When I "lost" them I was either called on the intercom, or returned to the last place I had seen them to find them asking someone for help. A BRAIN is the only device they can't drop/lose/disable.
That would be any smartphone; give yours to a 3 year old and they'll figure out how to call people. You can even put a shortcut on the "desktop" of the phone, with a picture of mom or dad, and tell the kid "if you get lost, press this to call mom/dad."
Very true, and we are seeing this now with people in their early 20s, suddenly thrust out into the world after a lifetime of never being given a chance to make mistakes, to learn independence, etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_labor_laws_in_the_United_States#Activism_against_child_labor
http://www.continuetolearn.uiowa.edu/laborctr/child_labor/about/us_history.html
>The National Child Labor Committee’s work to end child labor was combined with efforts to provide free, compulsory education for all children
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/367352?uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21101184617233
Or just look up anything about the beginning of compulsory education, it will show you how it was intertwined with the end of child labor.
Aren't the subtitles openly available to anyone?
In many states, offering an equivalent education is all that is needed to actually be an unaccredited school/university. For example, since I homeschool in Indiana, my house is an unaccredited school called "The Matthews Academy", I can register for anything an accredited school would register for (educational discounts, field trips, Book It, etc. etc.), and I can even give diplomas. There's nothing at all shady/fishy about that site; the issue is that they're giving out real education for free.
Children learn by doing. They learn to be independent by practicing it. Forcing them to sit in a classroom all day and "overseeing" everything for them ensures they will never mature. Ask anyone dealing with young adults; this treating teenagers as babies thing is causing huge problems in society.
The original reason for forcing kids to go to school in the US and Canada was that they were taking all the jobs, since they were willing to be paid less. The movement to give the jobs back to adults at the higher pay somehow morphed into some valiant effort to "protect" "children."
We're not even going to pretend you can't own/hoard knowledge, anymore?
there is no way I will get up at 7:30.
"Doctors and government health officials should set limits, as they do for alcohol"
I completely agree, since the actual limit they currently put on there in most countries and most states in the US is; children can not purchase alcohol, but it's up to their parents to decide when and how much they drink.