That's because the UI (as it were) has been designed that way.
I would argue that it's because, logically, they're the same. If anything, I'd say their UI makes them arbitrarily different; people are taught to think of a credit card as a 'card' that you get paper 'bills' for, and a bank account as an 'account' - bills for an account are a nonsense idea; it's (usually) already in the black. Paying money into it might be to eliminate a debt/overdraft, but you don't think of that process as paying a 'bill'.
for a simple example, banks can't usually tell you that you can't withdraw your assets, but they can and do stop access to your credit at their discretion, for example if they detect a pattern of spending they don't like
Frankly, so what? A bank can't stop you spending money you've alrady paid into your own account. That's not a financial risk for them. Credit is; they might be able to suspend it, but they've already lost what you've nabbed. Yet, the latter gets MORE protection? Doesn't that sound mad to you?
But you said you can get the same protections with a check card; it's just that you don't have to pay ridiculous amounts of interest for buying something, because you're taking the money directly out of your checking account. So, why don't you use one of them?
How much do you have to pay for your bank account and debit card again?
Me? Why, nothing. Mind you, I'm quite lucky to be in the UK, where not paying for our current accounts seems to be an anomoly (despite the fact that banks are some of the highest profiting orgnizations in the country WITHOUT regular account charges). Some banks like HSBC ('the world's local pickpocketers') are trying to introduce charges. I hope they crash and burn.
There is also the legal problem - per law, debit cards represent a transaction between you and the merchant (you pay, you get), while credit cards are between the credit card company and the merchant and in stage 2 between you and the credit card company.
Right. I think there should be legislation to make a debit card more like a credit card, except linked to your current account. I mean, I see a credit card account as fundamentally the same as a current account; it's like a current account with a £2000 overdraft, that you just never take into the black (if you have £2000 credit on your card). All you need to do with debit cards is switch 'credit card company' with 'bank' (and, incidentally, these are often the same entities. Almost all banks offer their own credit cards; why should these have any higher protections than a debit card?)
Bah. I think you're pointing the finger of blame at the messenger. We use debit cards extensively over here in the UK, and they're good, because they help to reduce people's tendancy to use credit (as provided by an, erm, credit card) and just take the money (that they have) directly out of the bank account. I wouldn't be fooled into thinking that's a bad thing. It just seems to happen that debit card systems have less protections for the customer, but I don't think that's inherent to debit cards; banks just need to shape up and offer the same protections as the do for credit cards. I don't know why they currently don't.
Did MB/GB/TB really mean mebibyte, gibibyte, and tebibyte, at any time though? I can't remember when they did; they've always been mega, giga, tera, to my memory.
By what standard? what is the magical moment when its 'close enough' that we should start the conversation as to if it is or if it is not human. Hell there were slave owners who thought Africans were less evolved humans and thus not accorded human rights.
I don't know 'exactly' when sentience begins, and I doubt there's a single or well-defined moment; it probably happens slowly, over time. However, it's disingenuous for you to say that that means ANY abortion should be wrong. There is a pretty well-defined area when we know an embryo is non-sentient, one when we know it is sentient, and a grey area in the middle. During the first of those periods, abortion should be legal.
There are those who argue until a kid is able to grasp some really basic concepts (well past birth) it is nothing but a bundle of reflexes.
So what? I doubt there are so many who would argue the other way - that a few hundred cells in a womb experience sentience.
Please point me at you sentience meter so we can measure this.
And please point me to yours that judges the quality of life of animals so we can decide whether to kill and eat them, or accidentally step on them, or not. No I don't have a meter, I have my common-sense reasoning, and I'm using it.
are you really saying an ant is more complex than this?
Perhaps not. However, that is still not very complex in the scheme of things, and as one of your bulletpoints helpfully says, that still weighs only as much as a letter. It's miniscule, and your case only gets weaker when you go back week-by-week (from week 12, which is when that description is taken from).
If I take a handful of dirt and put it alone it a perfect environment what will it become? Nothing but dirt.
Fine. Then take a virus. Humans ultimately evolved from them. In a perfect environment (the Earth), it will evove into many viri and eventually billions of humans. Yet, I don't afford it anywhere near the respect I do a well-developed human.
If people want an abortion, let them have one. If they cannot make up their mind fast enough, then they should finish what they started and put it up for adoption (I'm against partial birth abortion). This would be where I part ways its all well and good to say "if you don't want one don't have one" but that is the same half @55 logic used by slave owners. Abortion is about human life and when it comes to protecting that is an absolute.
You do realise that, for weeks after conception (actually, several months), an embryo is nowhere near close to human life, right? It has no sentience? An ant is a more complicated organism? You might as well pick up a handful of dirt and say it has the 'potential for human life' because its particles could be transformed into an embryo with the right technology.
Well, when you consider that several different versions of a product exist, and it costs the company $0 extra to sell 'ultimate premium uber-l33t' edition (not crippled) instead of 'Home' edition (crippled), any logical person would suggest that every copy sold should be the former. Only in the twisted world of the monopolized software market is a purposely crippled product sold at the same overhead as the uncrippled one.
Yeah, I know about development costs, but it still seems like a stupid situation to me. Companies should always be offering customers the best product they can at that price.
Be thankful you're not a UK citizen. We have to put up with all that, except immigrants also use the National Health System, are paid to look after themselves and their babies (that they come to the country pregnant with), and are given housing in preference to indigenous citizens - all of which costs the taxpayer £100,000s per immigrant.
As far as I can tell, that's just Yet Another Interface for iptables. The trouble with iptables is that it's quite ancient and works using IP addresses and ports, and DOESN'T look at application binaries. eg. How do I tell iptables (or Firestarter) to allow 'firefox' (hash ABCD) to access port 80 but anything else accessing port 80 (any other hash) and I will get prompted, deny by default?
One thing that Linux seems to be missing is an application-based software firewall. The kind that exist on Windows, where it detects the hash of the binary connecting out, and allows you to allow/deny access on an app by app basis. It's frustrating that there's nothing like Sygate/ZoneAlarm for Linux yet; it would really be useful. I know most software on Linux is reliable and trustworthy, but it helps to avoid malware or stupid programs phoning home that shouldn't be; it also has the added benefit of dropping any unsolicited incoming traffic on a port you haven't specifically opened (portscans to your IP are rendered useless).
I never did try it on blank disk (not formatted with any file system). The XP installer not being able to continue without one was always annoying.
Erm, the XP installer should install just fine onto a disk that already has an NTFS or a FAT32 partition on it; in fact, the former is the only way to get XP to run with FAT32 (it won't create them itself).
Slashdot Mirror
They've got some "bad" [cnn.com] publicity [reuters.com] last week
Wow, it was so bad they've managed to get it removed from both the sites you linked!
but it's plainly obvious what's going on when people distribute and download verbatim copies of full movies.
You don't have to use verbatim. There's memorex, imation, philips....
And the rest of the ocean counts as US territorial waters, right? ;-)
That's because the UI (as it were) has been designed that way.
I would argue that it's because, logically, they're the same. If anything, I'd say their UI makes them arbitrarily different; people are taught to think of a credit card as a 'card' that you get paper 'bills' for, and a bank account as an 'account' - bills for an account are a nonsense idea; it's (usually) already in the black. Paying money into it might be to eliminate a debt/overdraft, but you don't think of that process as paying a 'bill'.
for a simple example, banks can't usually tell you that you can't withdraw your assets, but they can and do stop access to your credit at their discretion, for example if they detect a pattern of spending they don't like
Frankly, so what? A bank can't stop you spending money you've alrady paid into your own account. That's not a financial risk for them. Credit is; they might be able to suspend it, but they've already lost what you've nabbed. Yet, the latter gets MORE protection? Doesn't that sound mad to you?
But you said you can get the same protections with a check card; it's just that you don't have to pay ridiculous amounts of interest for buying something, because you're taking the money directly out of your checking account. So, why don't you use one of them?
Why would you convert to polish? There are people who could translate it, you know. Security by obscurity.
Never heard of them, they don't exist over here. It sounds ideal; why, then, do people still use credit/debit cards over there?
How much do you have to pay for your bank account and debit card again?
Me? Why, nothing. Mind you, I'm quite lucky to be in the UK, where not paying for our current accounts seems to be an anomoly (despite the fact that banks are some of the highest profiting orgnizations in the country WITHOUT regular account charges). Some banks like HSBC ('the world's local pickpocketers') are trying to introduce charges. I hope they crash and burn.
There is also the legal problem - per law, debit cards represent a transaction between you and the merchant (you pay, you get), while credit cards are between the credit card company and the merchant and in stage 2 between you and the credit card company.
Right. I think there should be legislation to make a debit card more like a credit card, except linked to your current account. I mean, I see a credit card account as fundamentally the same as a current account; it's like a current account with a £2000 overdraft, that you just never take into the black (if you have £2000 credit on your card). All you need to do with debit cards is switch 'credit card company' with 'bank' (and, incidentally, these are often the same entities. Almost all banks offer their own credit cards; why should these have any higher protections than a debit card?)
Debit cards are bad
Bah. I think you're pointing the finger of blame at the messenger. We use debit cards extensively over here in the UK, and they're good, because they help to reduce people's tendancy to use credit (as provided by an, erm, credit card) and just take the money (that they have) directly out of the bank account. I wouldn't be fooled into thinking that's a bad thing. It just seems to happen that debit card systems have less protections for the customer, but I don't think that's inherent to debit cards; banks just need to shape up and offer the same protections as the do for credit cards. I don't know why they currently don't.
Had anyone tried to enforce the, dare I say it, stupid laws in place, they would have ended up with millions behind bars.
Like those arrested for possessing cannabis?
Did MB/GB/TB really mean mebibyte, gibibyte, and tebibyte, at any time though? I can't remember when they did; they've always been mega, giga, tera, to my memory.
Yes, new words must come into being. What makes making up "denialist" better than using "denier"?
The same thing that makes 'burglarize' better than 'burgle'.
By what standard? what is the magical moment when its 'close enough' that we should start the conversation as to if it is or if it is not human. Hell there were slave owners who thought Africans were less evolved humans and thus not accorded human rights.
I don't know 'exactly' when sentience begins, and I doubt there's a single or well-defined moment; it probably happens slowly, over time. However, it's disingenuous for you to say that that means ANY abortion should be wrong. There is a pretty well-defined area when we know an embryo is non-sentient, one when we know it is sentient, and a grey area in the middle. During the first of those periods, abortion should be legal.
There are those who argue until a kid is able to grasp some really basic concepts (well past birth) it is nothing but a bundle of reflexes.
So what? I doubt there are so many who would argue the other way - that a few hundred cells in a womb experience sentience.
Please point me at you sentience meter so we can measure this.
And please point me to yours that judges the quality of life of animals so we can decide whether to kill and eat them, or accidentally step on them, or not. No I don't have a meter, I have my common-sense reasoning, and I'm using it.
are you really saying an ant is more complex than this?
Perhaps not. However, that is still not very complex in the scheme of things, and as one of your bulletpoints helpfully says, that still weighs only as much as a letter. It's miniscule, and your case only gets weaker when you go back week-by-week (from week 12, which is when that description is taken from).
If I take a handful of dirt and put it alone it a perfect environment what will it become? Nothing but dirt.
Fine. Then take a virus. Humans ultimately evolved from them. In a perfect environment (the Earth), it will evove into many viri and eventually billions of humans. Yet, I don't afford it anywhere near the respect I do a well-developed human.
Quimby: I'll admit I used the city treasury to fund the murder of my enemies. But as Gabbo would say, ``I'm a bad widdle boy.''
Crowd: Yaaaaaay!
If people want an abortion, let them have one. If they cannot make up their mind fast enough, then they should finish what they started and put it up for adoption (I'm against partial birth abortion).
This would be where I part ways its all well and good to say "if you don't want one don't have one" but that is the same half @55 logic used by slave owners. Abortion is about human life and when it comes to protecting that is an absolute.
You do realise that, for weeks after conception (actually, several months), an embryo is nowhere near close to human life, right? It has no sentience? An ant is a more complicated organism? You might as well pick up a handful of dirt and say it has the 'potential for human life' because its particles could be transformed into an embryo with the right technology.
Well, when you consider that several different versions of a product exist, and it costs the company $0 extra to sell 'ultimate premium uber-l33t' edition (not crippled) instead of 'Home' edition (crippled), any logical person would suggest that every copy sold should be the former. Only in the twisted world of the monopolized software market is a purposely crippled product sold at the same overhead as the uncrippled one.
Yeah, I know about development costs, but it still seems like a stupid situation to me. Companies should always be offering customers the best product they can at that price.
Why bother with 1 and 2?
Find yourself a US female to hunker up with? :-)
Be thankful you're not a UK citizen. We have to put up with all that, except immigrants also use the National Health System, are paid to look after themselves and their babies (that they come to the country pregnant with), and are given housing in preference to indigenous citizens - all of which costs the taxpayer £100,000s per immigrant.
Doesn't that strike you as a pain in the ass to have to do for each app, instead of a firewall prompting you on an app-by-app basis? It does me.
As far as I can tell, that's just Yet Another Interface for iptables. The trouble with iptables is that it's quite ancient and works using IP addresses and ports, and DOESN'T look at application binaries. eg. How do I tell iptables (or Firestarter) to allow 'firefox' (hash ABCD) to access port 80 but anything else accessing port 80 (any other hash) and I will get prompted, deny by default?
... and by former, I meant latter.
I don't really see the downside.
One thing that Linux seems to be missing is an application-based software firewall. The kind that exist on Windows, where it detects the hash of the binary connecting out, and allows you to allow/deny access on an app by app basis. It's frustrating that there's nothing like Sygate/ZoneAlarm for Linux yet; it would really be useful. I know most software on Linux is reliable and trustworthy, but it helps to avoid malware or stupid programs phoning home that shouldn't be; it also has the added benefit of dropping any unsolicited incoming traffic on a port you haven't specifically opened (portscans to your IP are rendered useless).
I never did try it on blank disk (not formatted with any file system). The XP installer not being able to continue without one was always annoying.
Erm, the XP installer should install just fine onto a disk that already has an NTFS or a FAT32 partition on it; in fact, the former is the only way to get XP to run with FAT32 (it won't create them itself).
Use the interweb.
Must you use that incredibly retarded term, even in jest? It doesn't help anything, and I've had enough of hearing it in 'House'.