More to the root problem, though, why the hell would they alter the well-established criteria for a dangerous fall to reduce the load on their ambulance network?
because probably each country has its own well established criteria?
We use the same system for both sender-initiated transfers (one time bills), standing orders (rent) or receiver-initiated transfers (regular bills with varying amounts, automatic debit and most uses of your debit card)
All these transactions can either be initiated by a paper form (rather expensive) or electronically.
I find it silly that your entire country seems to be unable to manage basic home economics. We'll call it even.
Because we pay less overdraft interest on our debts than americans pay on their regular credit card debts?
But granted, with a working credit card ecosystem there was probably hardly any need to modernise the cheque system. (read: getting rid of it) And with the combination of debit cards, bank accounts and overdraft, there is still hardly any need over here for credit cards. I tend to call THAT even.
And for the rest of your comment: Its something between right on spot, wrong translations (for things that probably can't be translated) and BS. I'll start with the last: Gouvernment only stepped in and regulated the price on international money trensfers.
Wiring money: Isn't that what "Western Union" does? then at least the german expression "telegraphische Anweisung" would be close to sending something "by wire" and the costs would be the same. What you described as EFTS sounds pretty much similar to how we do it over here, but with the use cases "A sending Money to B" and "B receiving money from A's account" cost about the same. There is a slightly more secure, more expensive (and less used) way of transfering money which actually includes the bank checking B's permission to withdraw from A's account, but thats just more cost (but far from $25) and more hassle.
So it's no wonder you're trying to keep that cheque-zombie alive!
$25 for transfering money from account to account? It's rather around 25ct over here! (ok, on average. It's usually more for buissness accounts, but less for personal accounts (usually you get a large enough number of free transactions))
At most you pay around 1Eur if you dare using actual paper forms for the transactions.
I herewith propose the use of the expression "legal alchemy" to describe the creative usage of ones own patents, but with more effort put into legal than technical creativity.
Not to be confused with the Patent Troll, which refers to maliciuos use of aquired patents with no creativity at all.
PersonallyI don'tknow of any breaches at all. But yes, written passwords are probably a bigger concern for internal attacks from mischievious co-workers.
No. At least in the german-legalese dialect there is a differnece between things the state organizes (but is paid for by fees) and things the state actually PAYS for (with tax money, without taking care from which tax the money comes)
A Euro from a TV-fee has to be spent for TV. A Euro from a TV-tax could be spent for anything. Thus giving the state much more control over public broadcasters.
Last two shops I worked in were small enough that the support guy was able to recognize my voice on the phone as proof of ID.
That post was driven by an experience back at university when the password resetting process stopped only short of writing "I will not forgett my password" 100 times on the blackboard. (But included admitting your stupidity to the 'BOFH on duty')
If IT departments really would care about password security, and insist on complex passwords AND not writing them down, they should start treating a forgotten password as something normal, and not a chance to ridicule that poor guy who forgot it again.
Whats worse for security? Resetting that poor guys password twice a week or have him trying to avoid is by using a post it under his keyboard?
You can stretch even them beyond recognition and your case will still be accepted to go to court. But judges (for unknown reasons except the OLG Hamburg) usually dismiss it when you stretched it beyond reason.
There are, but there are also laws to protect people (and organizations) from libel and untrue reporting.
In short: if you don't claim something is a fact but only your opinion, you're pretty much free to say anything. If you claim sonething is a fact, and the subject of the fact doesn't like it, court might ask you to proove that you double-checked your "facts" first.
This news is nothing special. You're almost expected to go that route if you hear about bad news are to be published (and you employ a lawyer...) but considering the standard of journalism in public tv, scientology hasn't much of a chance to pull that documentary off the air.
The problem with this - your card has no biometrics (pictures, fingerprints, etc) - so you can steal someones social security card and then use that to gain work...which is not what we want.
Uhmm... Using a stolen SSN to get a job... Wouldn't that mean the social security benefits aquired over the years in that job would be credited to the original owner of that number?
Slashdot Mirror
More to the root problem, though, why the hell would they alter the well-established criteria for a dangerous fall to reduce the load on their ambulance network?
because probably each country has its own well established criteria?
Uhmm. no. Thank you.
As I already said, lending money to people who obviously won't be able to pay it back ist stupid.
Increasing the risk of not getting your money back is only more stupid.
I've bought 3 cars in my life for under $200 each, you don't "need" to buy a car on credit.
Let me guess.... Those were the last 2 weeks?? :-)
And then actually elevating that risk by a higher rate helps exactly how?
Talk about self fullfilling prophecies.
"Hmm.. I'd guess you couldn't pay back a loan with 16% a rate, so I'll lend you for 25%!"
No need to worry.
In the next release it will be cut out again completly.
At least we don't have to sign up to something besides a regular account to pay bills (/or collect money)
Could we at least agree that "wiring money" is obsolete here too?
Ah.
We use the same system for both sender-initiated transfers (one time bills), standing orders (rent) or receiver-initiated transfers (regular bills with varying amounts, automatic debit and most uses of your debit card)
All these transactions can either be initiated by a paper form (rather expensive) or electronically.
I find it silly that your entire country seems to be unable to manage basic home economics. We'll call it even.
Because we pay less overdraft interest on our debts than americans pay on their regular credit card debts?
But granted, with a working credit card ecosystem there was probably hardly any need to modernise the cheque system. (read: getting rid of it) And with the combination of debit cards, bank accounts and overdraft, there is still hardly any need over here for credit cards. I tend to call THAT even.
And for the rest of your comment: Its something between right on spot, wrong translations (for things that probably can't be translated) and BS. I'll start with the last: Gouvernment only stepped in and regulated the price on international money trensfers.
Wiring money: Isn't that what "Western Union" does? then at least the german expression "telegraphische Anweisung" would be close to sending something "by wire" and the costs would be the same. What you described as EFTS sounds pretty much similar to how we do it over here, but with the use cases "A sending Money to B" and "B receiving money from A's account" cost about the same. There is a slightly more secure, more expensive (and less used) way of transfering money which actually includes the bank checking B's permission to withdraw from A's account, but thats just more cost (but far from $25) and more hassle.
Another poster stated fees of $25 for transfering money.
I'd stick to sending those clumsy paper forms too...
So it's no wonder you're trying to keep that cheque-zombie alive!
$25 for transfering money from account to account? It's rather around 25ct over here! (ok, on average. It's usually more for buissness accounts, but less for personal accounts (usually you get a large enough number of free transactions))
At most you pay around 1Eur if you dare using actual paper forms for the transactions.
I herewith propose the use of the expression "legal alchemy" to describe the creative usage of ones own patents, but with more effort put into legal than technical creativity.
Not to be confused with the Patent Troll, which refers to maliciuos use of aquired patents with no creativity at all.
Yes. I'm afraid german language is sometimes a bit closer to that accurate but unreadable legelase.
Plus, you missed a NOT in my posting. "if it was a tax, the revenues would NOT have to be spent exclusivly for public broadcasters in return."
It's the fees on X that have to be spent on X.
PersonallyI don'tknow of any breaches at all. But yes, written passwords are probably a bigger concern for internal attacks from mischievious co-workers.
No. At least in the german-legalese dialect there is a differnece between things the state organizes (but is paid for by fees) and things the state actually PAYS for (with tax money, without taking care from which tax the money comes)
A Euro from a TV-fee has to be spent for TV. A Euro from a TV-tax could be spent for anything. Thus giving the state much more control over public broadcasters.
No. if it was a tax, the revenues wouldn't have to be spent exclusivly for public broadcasters in return.
It is as optional as owning a computer or tv is optional. And there are several non-optional fees as e.g. sewage fees.
And you just gave the right example that GEZ IS avoidable. (if you choose to live as hermit, but hey, it IS your choice)
Uhmm.. yes.
Last two shops I worked in were small enough that the support guy was able to recognize my voice on the phone as proof of ID.
That post was driven by an experience back at university when the password resetting process stopped only short of writing "I will not forgett my password" 100 times on the blackboard. (But included admitting your stupidity to the 'BOFH on duty')
If IT departments really would care about password security, and insist on complex passwords AND not writing them down, they should start treating a forgotten password as something normal, and not a chance to ridicule that poor guy who forgot it again.
Whats worse for security? Resetting that poor guys password twice a week or have him trying to avoid is by using a post it under his keyboard?
Of course.
But as "true" is in the eye of the beholder, it's often the courts job to decide if something is true.
In other words: It's not libel when it's true, but you don't need lies to _sue_ for libel. But it helps if you actually plan to _win_ that libel case.
You can stretch even them beyond recognition and your case will still be accepted to go to court. But judges (for unknown reasons except the OLG Hamburg) usually dismiss it when you stretched it beyond reason.
me too, but it's rather a TV fee than a TV tax.
(similar to Great Britains TV License)
You don't need to be a recognized entity to sue. If you would affected in any way by a publication, you could also sue as an individual.
if a group of X people (+ 1 lawyer) shows up in court to sue, it's rather about legal details if they are treated as a group or individuals.
There are, but there are also laws to protect people (and organizations) from libel and untrue reporting.
In short: if you don't claim something is a fact but only your opinion, you're pretty much free to say anything. If you claim sonething is a fact, and the subject of the fact doesn't like it, court might ask you to proove that you double-checked your "facts" first.
This news is nothing special. You're almost expected to go that route if you hear about bad news are to be published (and you employ a lawyer...) but considering the standard of journalism in public tv, scientology hasn't much of a chance to pull that documentary off the air.
Given a large enough Lecture hall with enough students with laptops...
AdHoc-WiFi and P2P copying (or simpel SMB shares) would be enough for distraction with or without internet.
ah ok. weh have tax-numbers for that...
The problem with this - your card has no biometrics (pictures, fingerprints, etc) - so you can steal someones social security card and then use that to gain work...which is not what we want.
Uhmm... Using a stolen SSN to get a job... Wouldn't that mean the social security benefits aquired over the years in that job would be credited to the original owner of that number?