I know with the technological spoofery it can be difficult to find the origin of the phishing. With dodgy registrars and others it can be difficult to find the owner of a domain.
But the money has to actually go *somewhere*. So why can't it be followed up at the point somebody moves it somewhere?
I'm saying that I do already contribute to society. Not that it makes me special, but to say people don't contribute whilst looking away from the fact that the fruits of a whole third of my labour go directly into society's coffers is wrong.
I effectively do community service for a third or more of my working time already.
"Hyper is a gradation above "overly" or "excessively". It's connotation is "to the Nth degree".
Come back when you've learned english. Hyper means excessive. Hyperthermia - excessive temperature. Hyperglycaemic - excessive blood sugar. Hyper means excessive, often can mean excessive to the point of harmful.
"What is more excessive than hyper, pray tell?"
So "hyper" means one specific quantity then, you can't have two people with different body temperatures, both of which have hyperthermia? (and no, the low body temp thing you're thinking of is hypothermia, the logical opposite of hyper).
"Back in the day, when they were superpowers, you can bet the equivalent was bandied about."
And look at what happened. That's exactly my point you idiot.
"I will consider the source."
Do so. It's clearly someone with more knowledge of history and the english language than you posess.
Whilst the reintroduction of the constitution IS very dodgy, the fact that the PM has signed it doesn't make it law. He doesn't have that kind of power. It is a declaration of intent. It now has to go through our houses of parliament and be ratified by the democratic rules of each counry.
So you have a long way before you can THINK about having a sensible argument on these matters. You clearly have no idea how the EU works.
. ..except that they have contributed to the welfare of society and the furtherance of national interest by risking life, limb, and happiness; by sacrificing liberties; and by suffering hardship.
What national interest? Why should national interest have anything to do with personal interest? I should be deciding the path of my own life as a sovereign and sentient being.
Society can suck my balls. As universal suffrage does cause the downturn you talk about, I more than ever reserve my right not to have to go to war for tools like GWB.
Nope, no it doesn't. That's the whole poit of participatory democracy, that the weak get to say what happens just as much as the strong. And not because the strong allow it, but because the weak are numerous and wily, and if the strong don't listen, then eventually the bloody revolution comes. That helps nobody in the long run.
Oh indubitably you'd end up with a nicer city. You'd also end up with people trying to buy their way out of it, or around it. You'd end up with folks refusing. Lots of very indignant people refusing to take part as they don't see why they owe anything to the rest of those a**holes out there.
And I'd have some sympathy with them. I work hard and pay my taxes. My time is worth more to me, to the economy and to the tax office when it's invested in what I'm most skilled at. Why should I not pay others to clean my environment for me?
I think it's a feedback loop, the more disconnected with each other (and with the state of things) people feel, the less likely they're going to want to do anything for anyone else. And they'll see community service as doing things for other people, not themselves.
Arguably you could achieve the same effect by having an efficient town government that uses tax money on important civic items rather than squandering them on god knows what.
Oh, my sides nearly split with that one. What a day that would be! And of course, as you rightly point out, people seem to have given up on politics lately, because it doesn't feel like they make any difference.
I see your point, that if people were directly involved in the maintenance of the city then they would have more of an interest. But I don't think it would work, because people are fundamentally lazy and selfish.
Whilst my above post is off topic, I'm not sure I see how it's a troll, I'm merely continuing the discussion and answering the points raised by the parent post. It's not even a particularly inflammatory post.
Of course, I guess "troll" will do because there is no "-1 anti-american" and I appear to have touched a nerve with this one.
The thing that gets me is that you're no longer describing a free society. You're describing one in which you need to perform certain duties before you can have a voice. And if we're talking about military service (which you're not doing exclusively) then the very point of it is to change people and break down their differences and opinions and subsume them to the chain of authority.
I have no problem with anyone who considers service to their society a moral duty. But make it a legal one and you're crossing the line to something other than participatory democracy and the right of man to self determination, IMHO.
"The rationale behind that is people willing to risk their life for others would value the well being of society above theirs, so they would be great leaders that protect society instead of filling their own pockets with cash or abusing their power for their own benefit."
Yes, makes perfect sense.
Did you know Robert Mugabe was a military hero in Zimbabwe before turning into today's repressive dictator? And that many dictators come from military backgrounds and are propped up by military support?
Mr Heinlein had some fine, but flawed ideas. As I said in another post - what about those of us who do not wish to fight the battles of others?
"Europe has had the hyper-patriotic societies that led the world to war."
Why do you think that looking at the US concerns us so?
"you don't even know what the words "hyper" and "patriotic" mean."
Hmmm, lets look at some definitions. "Hyper" - prefix meaning excessive, above, or beyond, eg, hyperactive. "Patriotic" - Inspired by love for you country.
So, hyper-patriotic would be "excessively inspired by love for your country", which is exactly what I meant. The flag worship, the daily pledge recitations, the "GAWD BLESS AMERICA!", the reverence for the military. All very prominent parts of US culture.
"If a nation were hyper-patriotic, it would not tolerate dissent."
That would depend exactly _how_ excessive the patriotism was. As it is now there seems to be a large proportion of US society that refuses to question the government and a large portion that, as long as they're told there's a crisis on, will go along with any sort of behaviour (internment, torture) simply because it's the good ol' US of A doing it. And doing it to "bad" people who want to hurt america.
It's excessive enough that the phrase "anti-american" exists and is slung around. Maybe it just doesn't have the same asonance, but nobody says "anti-British" or "anti-French" as far as I know.
That is more than enough to qualify as excessively patriotic to many people.
"You are European and lump everyone in the U.S. together as one amorphous blob."
Nope, just looking at the overall impression of the society. Any society is made of individuals, yet countries can still have a character.
"You probably believe the U.S. is a police state that represses free speech or something."
No, but I think it has some weird soldier and flag worship issues.
"Europeans are so often tiresome. So many believe they are superior, but in trying to demonstrate it show how lacking they are."
Says the guy who clearly has no idea of the meaning of the words hyper and patriotic, which perfectly fit my original usage. By the way - nowhere did I claim that my society was superior (go on, show me where I did that, can't can you), just that yours isn't perfect and that the assumptions of the original poster (that people naturally choose military leadership) are not necessarily correct outside of the US.
Ah, right, so if I don't join the military I'm not interested in my rights. Gotcha.
Because I couldn't possibly care about my right to choose my own battles, rather than become the tool of a.... tool like George Bush.
No, I will not fight for the state. The state will never be aligned with every individual and the individual should never be subsumed into the state if he wants a say.
"Not to underappreciate your effort, but that was just a note/remark that in the future, you should try to refrain from making those comments instead of appologising for them"
Well, I'm not _that_ upset over it, I was quite annoyed by the multiple backslapping "Sony are going down the pan!" "yeah d00d!" comments that slashdot has been running for a decade now on the likes of MS. It's all fun I'm sure, but largely incorrect and masturbatory. The world doesn't run on logic or good practice, much to my own chagrin.
"You're not european, are you? People here DO care a lot about the credibility of a company"
British actually, yes. You have more faith in people than I can muster these days. Maybe if you're French then your compatriots have a little more in the way of moral fortitude when it comes to these matters. I'm not convinced the British do (we still have a labour government for a start).
"Sony has been announcing in some laptops included software that never was there."
First thing I did with mine was wipe it and put Ubuntu on there. Did notice it was jammed full of "Trial versions" of things (i.e. pay us if you want your data next month). Doesn't sound like you issue has had a lot of press.
Fine, just trying to clear the air with a minor capitulation on my part, I can see the effort was unappreciated.
"2) As I said later, freefall not in a size/market point of view, but from a credibility point of view."
Umm, yeah, and as I said, the average person doesn't give a crap. The rootkit stuff either didn't affect them personally, or they didn't understand what it was, or they didn't care. Either way they've forgotten by now.
"3) Yes, people do care. Wouldn't you care if you'd been mislead? "Here is your software!" "Gee, thanks! Erm... where's the software?" "It's not!" "No software?" "No. Just an empty box." "Ok, I don't care.""
What are you referring to there? I'm a geek and even I have no idea.
"4) People do care about their privacy."
You car about your privacy. I care about my privacy. It seems a lot of folks care more about so-called security. And another lot of folks never even thought of it. And most of them will never of heard of this rootkit thing from Sony. Let alone known what it was or what the implications were.
"6) Yes, lots of other companies do bad things in moral terms but there is one big difference between bad in moral terms and bad in business terms. They are not forcibly related."
Oh I agree, I just don't think Sony have tarnished themselves in the eyes of the public. Much like Joe Public doesn't know why some folks have a grievance against Microsoft. Or care.
"It seems that Sony has been making a lot of really bad mistakes and it is heading freefall."
is just wrong. The company may have made a few mistakes from the geek perspective, but people as a whole just don't care. It's a sad fact, but companies all over the world do far, far worse things (in moral terms) than Sony have done, yet continue to go from success to success. Look at MS, look at Coca Cola, look at Nestle.
BTW, those things I said about PS3 - look 'em up. All true. The "outselling Wii in Japan" thing was reported on/. within the last few weeks, the PS3 has been outselling the 360 in europe for a while now. Not that it'll have the same install base yet (not been out nearly as long), but the sales are outpacing MS I believe.
(I apologise for starting my last post with the word "moron", I hadn't had my coffee yet).
"It's the USAs' military might that saved Europe in WW1 and WW2"
That's a subject for debate, not proclamation, as is the rest of your nonsense about soviet satellites. Plus, given the Iraqi mess and the despicable things your country asks of its allies, I'm willing to say we don't want your sort of protection. And we don't need it.
"Plus, we're talking theoretically about a science fiction novel."
And people are proposing it as a good model and a natural one. It's not, it's only in the US that the military are seen as some sort of gods. To much the rest of the world they are brave people but that doesn't necessarily make them smart or right about anything.
Because they make powerful, lightweight laptops with very pretty screens.
They also make great TVs that not only perform well but are finished and styled well too.
Face it - they make good stuff and relatively few people heard of or care about this issue. And even if they did care, there's not many folks in the world that actually engage their brain when spending money.
Yeah, what with them filing for bankruptcy and pretty much giving stuff away just to get some cash flow as the general public decided to completely boycott...
Oh, wait, that's not what happened at all. Here's what happened - outside of a few geeks and a couple of other unlucky folks nobody cared. And even of those that did care, only a few geeks still do. Everyone else either didn't hear about it, didn't understand it, didn't care about it, or forgot. That's the way of the world.
"Even today, one of the qualifications that many people look for in their elected leaders is previous military service."
"Even today, one of the qualifications that many people IN THE USA look for in their elected leaders is previous military service."
The US has a weird, hyper-patriotic society that a lot of Europeans find bizarre, brainwashing and militaristic.
And only giving the franchise to people who have previously served in the military? Screw you! What gives you the right to decide that? What gives those citizens the right to decide how everyone else gets to live? Nothing whatsoever.
Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you were genuinely interested in this stuff, not just trying to be an asshole. I told you that my links weren't complete and I didn't have the time or energy to look for more. I invite you to look for yourself. No, the BBC are not a legal or banking institution. They are a British news source, and a very good one.
Your closing comments are utterly ridiculous. You should only use debit cards where you can't get credit and cash is no option? What nonsense.
Oh and this "Even if what you claim is true it's still so hard to find I bet the UK bank staff themselves don't know of such a promise/law" is also wrong, the banking code is a basic and fairly well known code. Their employees would have to know about it.
The holiday example there was not fraud in the way I was talking about, the cardholder agreed to the transaction and then didn't get the goods. That's a different matter. He was a complete IDIOT to do what he did as well, not using an accredited agent under the ATOL organisation. In fact the fact that he 1. Believed an internet site when it told him he'd won something and 2. proceeded to then pay them for it, tells me that Mr. Morissey was a grade A moron who was going to find some way to get himself scammed sooner or later. I'm only suprised it wasn't more cash and given in order to pay a few fees to get his TEN MILLION DOLLARS transferred out of nigeria... Even if the man had paid in cash he would have been screwed.
You are still protected if someone starts charging things to your card without your permission. You are not protected from being stunningly stupid. You also don't run the (very real) risk of getting into serious debt. A lot of people do with credit cards, and whilst that is their own fault it's an easy trap to fall into it seems. Hence the enormous levels of consumer debt in the US and UK.
Meh, whatever. I and my fellow europeans will continue using our debit cards, y'all keep on doing what you're doing, having vast amounts of debt is obviously working for you.
Laptop built-in wireless cards seem to have been just working lately.
NetworkManager is far from perfect though, and after a certain number of reconnects seems to just decide it isn't playing any more.
But yeah, Nvidia driver is now pretty easy, and if you pick the right external wireless card it's great.
Keep tuned for upcoming kernel developments though. The latest is 2.6.23. 2.6.24, the upcoming version, has a new wireless stack and a lot more in-kernel wireless drivers.
Slashdot Mirror
Why can't they just follow the money?
I know with the technological spoofery it can be difficult to find the origin of the phishing.
With dodgy registrars and others it can be difficult to find the owner of a domain.
But the money has to actually go *somewhere*. So why can't it be followed up at the point somebody moves it somewhere?
I'm saying that I do already contribute to society. Not that it makes me special, but to say people don't contribute whilst looking away from the fact that the fruits of a whole third of my labour go directly into society's coffers is wrong.
I effectively do community service for a third or more of my working time already.
It does depend, somewhat, on your definition of contribution.
I currently contribute somewhere around a third of my labour (in direct PAYE contributions) in the form of tax.
"Hyper is a gradation above "overly" or "excessively". It's connotation is "to
the Nth degree".
Come back when you've learned english. Hyper means excessive. Hyperthermia - excessive temperature. Hyperglycaemic - excessive blood sugar. Hyper means excessive, often can mean excessive to the point of harmful.
"What is more excessive than hyper, pray tell?"
So "hyper" means one specific quantity then, you can't have two people with different body temperatures, both of which have hyperthermia? (and no, the low body temp thing you're thinking of is hypothermia, the logical opposite of hyper).
"Back in the day, when they were superpowers, you can bet the equivalent was bandied about."
And look at what happened. That's exactly my point you idiot.
"I will consider the source."
Do so. It's clearly someone with more knowledge of history and the english language than you posess.
Whilst the reintroduction of the constitution IS very dodgy, the fact that the PM has signed it doesn't make it law. He doesn't have that kind of power. It is a declaration of intent. It now has to go through our houses of parliament and be ratified by the democratic rules of each counry.
So you have a long way before you can THINK about having a sensible argument on these matters. You clearly have no idea how the EU works.
. . .except that they have contributed to the welfare of society and the furtherance of national interest by risking life, limb, and happiness; by sacrificing liberties; and by suffering hardship.
What national interest? Why should national interest have anything to do with personal interest? I should be deciding the path of my own life as a sovereign and sentient being.
Society can suck my balls. As universal suffrage does cause the downturn you talk about, I more than ever reserve my right not to have to go to war for tools like GWB.
In the real world, might really does make right.
Nope, no it doesn't. That's the whole poit of participatory democracy, that the weak get to say what happens just as much as the strong. And not because the strong allow it, but because the weak are numerous and wily, and if the strong don't listen, then eventually the bloody revolution comes. That helps nobody in the long run.
Oh indubitably you'd end up with a nicer city. You'd also end up with people trying to buy their way out of it, or around it. You'd end up with folks refusing. Lots of very indignant people refusing to take part as they don't see why they owe anything to the rest of those a**holes out there.
And I'd have some sympathy with them. I work hard and pay my taxes. My time is worth more to me, to the economy and to the tax office when it's invested in what I'm most skilled at. Why should I not pay others to clean my environment for me?
I think it's a feedback loop, the more disconnected with each other (and with the state of things) people feel, the less likely they're going to want to do anything for anyone else. And they'll see community service as doing things for other people, not themselves.
Arguably you could achieve the same effect by having an efficient town government that uses tax money on important civic items rather than squandering them on god knows what.
Oh, my sides nearly split with that one. What a day that would be! And of course, as you rightly point out, people seem to have given up on politics lately, because it doesn't feel like they make any difference.
I see your point, that if people were directly involved in the maintenance of the city then they would have more of an interest. But I don't think it would work, because people are fundamentally lazy and selfish.
Whilst my above post is off topic, I'm not sure I see how it's a troll, I'm merely continuing the discussion and answering the points raised by the parent post. It's not even a particularly inflammatory post.
Of course, I guess "troll" will do because there is no "-1 anti-american" and I appear to have touched a nerve with this one.
The thing that gets me is that you're no longer describing a free society. You're describing one in which you need to perform certain duties before you can have a voice. And if we're talking about military service (which you're not doing exclusively) then the very point of it is to change people and break down their differences and opinions and subsume them to the chain of authority.
I have no problem with anyone who considers service to their society a moral duty. But make it a legal one and you're crossing the line to something other than participatory democracy and the right of man to self determination, IMHO.
"The rationale behind that is people willing to risk their life for others would value the well being of society above theirs, so they would be great leaders that protect society instead of filling their own pockets with cash or abusing their power for their own benefit."
Yes, makes perfect sense.
Did you know Robert Mugabe was a military hero in Zimbabwe before turning into today's repressive dictator?
And that many dictators come from military backgrounds and are propped up by military support?
Mr Heinlein had some fine, but flawed ideas. As I said in another post - what about those of us who do not wish to fight the battles of others?
Yes, just read up on it a bit more. It outsold the Wii in Japan for November, and is now firmly back in second place.
Still, not really an indication of a lost cause or a total flop is it?
"Europe has had the hyper-patriotic societies that led the world to war."
Why do you think that looking at the US concerns us so?
"you don't even know what the words "hyper" and "patriotic" mean."
Hmmm, lets look at some definitions. "Hyper" - prefix meaning excessive, above, or beyond, eg, hyperactive.
"Patriotic" - Inspired by love for you country.
So, hyper-patriotic would be "excessively inspired by love for your country", which is exactly what I meant. The flag worship, the daily pledge recitations, the "GAWD BLESS AMERICA!", the reverence for the military. All very prominent parts of US culture.
"If a nation were hyper-patriotic, it would not tolerate dissent."
That would depend exactly _how_ excessive the patriotism was. As it is now there seems to be a large proportion of US society that refuses to question the government and a large portion that, as long as they're told there's a crisis on, will go along with any sort of behaviour (internment, torture) simply because it's the good ol' US of A doing it. And doing it to "bad" people who want to hurt america.
It's excessive enough that the phrase "anti-american" exists and is slung around. Maybe it just doesn't have the same asonance, but nobody says "anti-British" or "anti-French" as far as I know.
That is more than enough to qualify as excessively patriotic to many people.
"You are European and lump everyone in the U.S. together as one amorphous blob."
Nope, just looking at the overall impression of the society. Any society is made of individuals, yet countries can still have a character.
"You probably believe the U.S. is a police state that represses free speech or something."
No, but I think it has some weird soldier and flag worship issues.
"Europeans are so often tiresome. So many believe they are superior, but in trying to demonstrate it show how lacking they are."
Says the guy who clearly has no idea of the meaning of the words hyper and patriotic, which perfectly fit my original usage. By the way - nowhere did I claim that my society was superior (go on, show me where I did that, can't can you), just that yours isn't perfect and that the assumptions of the original poster (that people naturally choose military leadership) are not necessarily correct outside of the US.
Ah, right, so if I don't join the military I'm not interested in my rights. Gotcha.
Because I couldn't possibly care about my right to choose my own battles, rather than become the tool of a.... tool like George Bush.
No, I will not fight for the state. The state will never be aligned with every individual and the individual should never be subsumed into the state if he wants a say.
"Not to underappreciate your effort, but that was just a note/remark that in the future, you should try to refrain from making those comments instead of appologising for them"
Well, I'm not _that_ upset over it, I was quite annoyed by the multiple backslapping "Sony are going down the pan!" "yeah d00d!" comments that slashdot has been running for a decade now on the likes of MS. It's all fun I'm sure, but largely incorrect and masturbatory. The world doesn't run on logic or good practice, much to my own chagrin.
"You're not european, are you? People here DO care a lot about the credibility of a company"
British actually, yes. You have more faith in people than I can muster these days. Maybe if you're French then your compatriots have a little more in the way of moral fortitude when it comes to these matters. I'm not convinced the British do (we still have a labour government for a start).
"Sony has been announcing in some laptops included software that never was there."
First thing I did with mine was wipe it and put Ubuntu on there. Did notice it was jammed full of "Trial versions" of things (i.e. pay us if you want your data next month). Doesn't sound like you issue has had a lot of press.
"1) Your caffeine levels are no excuse."
Fine, just trying to clear the air with a minor capitulation on my part, I can see the effort was unappreciated.
"2) As I said later, freefall not in a size/market point of view, but from a credibility point of view."
Umm, yeah, and as I said, the average person doesn't give a crap. The rootkit stuff either didn't affect them personally, or they didn't understand what it was, or they didn't care. Either way they've forgotten by now.
"3) Yes, people do care. Wouldn't you care if you'd been mislead? "Here is your software!" "Gee, thanks! Erm... where's the software?" "It's not!" "No software?" "No. Just an empty box." "Ok, I don't care.""
What are you referring to there? I'm a geek and even I have no idea.
"4) People do care about their privacy."
You car about your privacy. I care about my privacy. It seems a lot of folks care more about so-called security. And another lot of folks never even thought of it. And most of them will never of heard of this rootkit thing from Sony. Let alone known what it was or what the implications were.
"6) Yes, lots of other companies do bad things in moral terms but there is one big difference between bad in moral terms and bad in business terms. They are not forcibly related."
Oh I agree, I just don't think Sony have tarnished themselves in the eyes of the public. Much like Joe Public doesn't know why some folks have a grievance against Microsoft. Or care.
I'm no zealot, but your original remark:
/. within the last few weeks, the PS3 has been outselling the 360 in europe for a while now. Not that it'll have the same install base yet (not been out nearly as long), but the sales are outpacing MS I believe.
"It seems that Sony has been making a lot of really bad mistakes and it is heading freefall."
is just wrong. The company may have made a few mistakes from the geek perspective, but people as a whole just don't care. It's a sad fact, but companies all over the world do far, far worse things (in moral terms) than Sony have done, yet continue to go from success to success. Look at MS, look at Coca Cola, look at Nestle.
BTW, those things I said about PS3 - look 'em up. All true. The "outselling Wii in Japan" thing was reported on
(I apologise for starting my last post with the word "moron", I hadn't had my coffee yet).
"It's the USAs' military might that saved Europe in WW1 and WW2"
That's a subject for debate, not proclamation, as is the rest of your nonsense about soviet satellites. Plus, given the Iraqi mess and the despicable things your country asks of its allies, I'm willing to say we don't want your sort of protection. And we don't need it.
"Plus, we're talking theoretically about a science fiction novel."
And people are proposing it as a good model and a natural one. It's not, it's only in the US that the military are seen as some sort of gods. To much the rest of the world they are brave people but that doesn't necessarily make them smart or right about anything.
Because they make powerful, lightweight laptops with very pretty screens.
They also make great TVs that not only perform well but are finished and styled well too.
Face it - they make good stuff and relatively few people heard of or care about this issue. And even if they did care, there's not many folks in the world that actually engage their brain when spending money.
Moron.
Sony products are everywhere. I saw lines of people taking away sony tvs when they were on offer at a supermarket in the UK the other day.
PS3 outsells xBox 360 in the EU.
It's currently outselling the Wii in Japan.
They aren't going anywhere.
Yeah, what with them filing for bankruptcy and pretty much giving stuff away just to get some cash flow as the general public decided to completely boycott...
Oh, wait, that's not what happened at all. Here's what happened - outside of a few geeks and a couple of other unlucky folks nobody cared. And even of those that did care, only a few geeks still do. Everyone else either didn't hear about it, didn't understand it, didn't care about it, or forgot. That's the way of the world.
"Even today, one of the qualifications that many people look for in their elected leaders is previous military service."
"Even today, one of the qualifications that many people IN THE USA look for in their elected leaders is previous military service."
The US has a weird, hyper-patriotic society that a lot of Europeans find bizarre, brainwashing and militaristic.
And only giving the franchise to people who have previously served in the military? Screw you! What gives you the right to decide that? What gives those citizens the right to decide how everyone else gets to live? Nothing whatsoever.
Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you were genuinely interested in this stuff, not just trying to be an asshole. I told you that my links weren't complete and I didn't have the time or energy to look for more. I invite you to look for yourself. No, the BBC are not a legal or banking institution. They are a British news source, and a very good one.
Your closing comments are utterly ridiculous. You should only use debit cards where you can't get credit and cash is no option? What nonsense.
Oh and this "Even if what you claim is true it's still so hard to find I bet the UK bank staff themselves don't know of such a promise/law" is also wrong, the banking code is a basic and fairly well known code. Their employees would have to know about it.
The holiday example there was not fraud in the way I was talking about, the cardholder agreed to the transaction and then didn't get the goods. That's a different matter. He was a complete IDIOT to do what he did as well, not using an accredited agent under the ATOL organisation. In fact the fact that he 1. Believed an internet site when it told him he'd won something and 2. proceeded to then pay them for it, tells me that Mr. Morissey was a grade A moron who was going to find some way to get himself scammed sooner or later. I'm only suprised it wasn't more cash and given in order to pay a few fees to get his TEN MILLION DOLLARS transferred out of nigeria... Even if the man had paid in cash he would have been screwed.
You are still protected if someone starts charging things to your card without your permission. You are not protected from being stunningly stupid.
You also don't run the (very real) risk of getting into serious debt. A lot of people do with credit cards, and whilst that is their own fault it's an easy trap to fall into it seems. Hence the enormous levels of consumer debt in the US and UK.
Meh, whatever. I and my fellow europeans will continue using our debit cards, y'all keep on doing what you're doing, having vast amounts of debt is obviously working for you.
There's a difference between "lost or stolen cards" and fraud liability.
If you have lost your card you have some liability. If you have had it stolen you need to tell the company ASAP and have very minimal libaility. IMHO.
As for citations:
The Banking Code which all UK banks are signed up to. Check out section 12.12
Admittedly this is a voluntary agreement and not backed by law, but it's a start.
The BBC say that the law states you are not liable for any fraud if you are still in posession of the card.
Can't find a relelvant law right now (and am not entirely sure what to search for), but those ought to get you started.
Laptop built-in wireless cards seem to have been just working lately.
NetworkManager is far from perfect though, and after a certain number of reconnects seems to just decide it isn't playing any more.
But yeah, Nvidia driver is now pretty easy, and if you pick the right external wireless card it's great.
Keep tuned for upcoming kernel developments though. The latest is 2.6.23. 2.6.24, the upcoming version, has a new wireless stack and a lot more in-kernel wireless drivers.