Not true. Liability has always been with the business. The credit card companies want to make some more $$ from the transaction fees and from selling new hardware.
No, grandparent was correct. If you take a trackdata swipe on a card that had a chip on it, and the data gets intercepted, you (the merchant) are now liable. Previously (and currently with chips) the network ends up taking the hit and chalking it up to the fraud percentage.
Its even worse, because you can't get a PIN even for international use; using chip+sign cards in Europe is an exercise in bafflement for the merchants.
What's to stop them from keeping the data encrypted, not allowing access, and just using a second account (call it a guest account like on a PC) that has no access to the stored and encrypted data but does allow then to use a second profile until it can be replaced with a proper sensor?
Technically nothing, but security is a really touchy area. The more code that you have that says, "Well, we think there's been a breach, but let's be super-clever instead of just shutting down," the easier it is for someone to escalate and gain privileges, which in this case includes the ability to generate Apple Pay tokens at will.
Not really. The idea behind some regulations is in fact to promote a level playing field. Remember that restrictions that are lifted from "Transit Companies" like Lyft and Uber are also lifted from the next guy to come along, even though they're policies don't necessarily match. Or Uber will run low on drivers and drop some of their policies, because there's not any kind of legal requirement for them not to.
I think its better stated to say that most tools are crap compared to the good ones. Also, today, most tools are made in China. Therefore most tools made in China are crap when compared to good tools.
Dupers are annoying, sure, but at least its understandable when something gets reposted a few days later. Maybe there are other source articles with fresh perspectives, for example. This one, however, is still on the front page (admittedly it is below the fold, so there's still room for "improvement"). I mean, really?
And yet, there are literally millions of assholes like me who use Uber constantly, and would take a ride managed by Uber over a taxi any day.
Yup. And so long as investors are willing to pump billions of dollars into those services, they'll be good value too. Of course once the money dries up they'll either get very terrible or very expensive (or both), but for now it shouldn't surprise anyone that they're nicer than the alternatives that have to pay for themselves (while actually being externally measured to make sure that they're not overcharging you).
GM will also work with Lyft to set up a series of short-term car rental hubs across the United States, places where people who do not own cars can pick up a vehicle and drive for Lyft to earn money
But that's totally different from a taxi company, because... er... freedom!
I used to favor a Linux Desktop Environment. But a good Desktop Environment has good printer drivers, webcam drivers, scanners, something better than X11, and all sorts of extra stuff that programmers will not care about.
Don't we already have OS X though? Because that's basically what you just described...
Of course since Java is almost painfully backwardly compatible, it's just as easy for them to move to a Java 8 runtime as to move to a new Java 6 runtime. Those who don't care about security probably haven't been keeping up with patches in the first place.
Yup. Just as happened with OS/2, once people realize that they can support both platforms by writing the "common" software, but only your platform by writing "your" software, they'll never write another line of "your" software again.
The only way to prevent that is to have some APIs that are only accessible through "your" software. Of course, convincing everyone to write "common" software and then making it suck just means that you've become a terrible Android device.
Ethics? I'm no fan of ads, but I'd say that in this case the people who want to continue using the service that Yahoo! has been providing them while going out of their way to prevent the sole mechanism through which the provider is compensated for providing that service are the ones with the ethical problem here. They were offered a deal (email in exchange for ad views) and are now reneging on their side of the deal, not even offering to move to a paid account to remove the ads.
Even better, have a cash price in there and then have terms in which on an ongoing basis exposure may be used to offset the fees. That way if the company you're working with decides not to provide the exposure they promised (for any reason), the contract simply falls back to its default state rather than changing from a default of exposure to a new cash basis. That may have been the intent - you said "revert", but the structure can make a huge difference when it comes time to collect.
The difficulty is that errors in computer software are notorious for being hard to test for, hard to document, hard to validate, and hard to assess the impact of. In many ways its like trying to assess the delivery of a bridge without having had inspectors check the rebar or a structural engineer seal the design.
There were some small male Marines who had some issues with the 1911, but they made do and everyone had everyone else's respect.
When you're spending upwards of a million dollars to train and deploy a Marine, not to mention risking their life, I'd rather make sure the they had the equipment they needed to be successful rather than forcing them into a "one size fits all" approach when there's no reason to.
I guess with your method at least they died with respect, instead of living with effectiveness. So there's that...
That's $12/hour for a f'n landline, not a no-credit-check mobile. Our commercial POTS lines with unlimited long distance and all the other features run about $35/mo for comparison.
Its also extorting money from our most vulnerable, making it harder for them to stay in touch with the outside world which in turn makes it more likely that they will reoffend (and cost the state far more money later, if that's the only way to measure these things).
Its almost as if people making these policies have some kind of incentive to keep people coming back to jail. Weird...
I'd imagine that that was true about lots of other things in prison that aren't charged on a per-minute basis though - or is it only telephones that prisoners are hard on?
Slashdot Mirror
Not true. Liability has always been with the business. The credit card companies want to make some more $$ from the transaction fees and from selling new hardware.
No, grandparent was correct. If you take a trackdata swipe on a card that had a chip on it, and the data gets intercepted, you (the merchant) are now liable. Previously (and currently with chips) the network ends up taking the hit and chalking it up to the fraud percentage.
Its even worse, because you can't get a PIN even for international use; using chip+sign cards in Europe is an exercise in bafflement for the merchants.
It sure made the cost of flying across the Atlantic far more reasonable though.
What's to stop them from keeping the data encrypted, not allowing access, and just using a second account (call it a guest account like on a PC) that has no access to the stored and encrypted data but does allow then to use a second profile until it can be replaced with a proper sensor?
Technically nothing, but security is a really touchy area. The more code that you have that says, "Well, we think there's been a breach, but let's be super-clever instead of just shutting down," the easier it is for someone to escalate and gain privileges, which in this case includes the ability to generate Apple Pay tokens at will.
Not really. The idea behind some regulations is in fact to promote a level playing field. Remember that restrictions that are lifted from "Transit Companies" like Lyft and Uber are also lifted from the next guy to come along, even though they're policies don't necessarily match. Or Uber will run low on drivers and drop some of their policies, because there's not any kind of legal requirement for them not to.
I dunno, "fish-cheese" has a certain je ne sais quois to it all by itself.
Hackaday editor Mike Szczys, apparently, which makes a strange twisted kind of sense.
Case in point, the famous Bridge to Nowhere, built right here in RedStateVille USA.
I always preferred the Universal Nut-Rounder.
I think its better stated to say that most tools are crap compared to the good ones. Also, today, most tools are made in China. Therefore most tools made in China are crap when compared to good tools.
Dupers are annoying, sure, but at least its understandable when something gets reposted a few days later. Maybe there are other source articles with fresh perspectives, for example. This one, however, is still on the front page (admittedly it is below the fold, so there's still room for "improvement"). I mean, really?
And yet, there are literally millions of assholes like me who use Uber constantly, and would take a ride managed by Uber over a taxi any day.
Yup. And so long as investors are willing to pump billions of dollars into those services, they'll be good value too. Of course once the money dries up they'll either get very terrible or very expensive (or both), but for now it shouldn't surprise anyone that they're nicer than the alternatives that have to pay for themselves (while actually being externally measured to make sure that they're not overcharging you).
GM will also work with Lyft to set up a series of short-term car rental hubs across the United States, places where people who do not own cars can pick up a vehicle and drive for Lyft to earn money
But that's totally different from a taxi company, because ... er ... freedom!
I used to favor a Linux Desktop Environment. But a good Desktop Environment has good printer drivers, webcam drivers, scanners, something better than X11, and all sorts of extra stuff that programmers will not care about.
Don't we already have OS X though? Because that's basically what you just described...
Of course since Java is almost painfully backwardly compatible, it's just as easy for them to move to a Java 8 runtime as to move to a new Java 6 runtime. Those who don't care about security probably haven't been keeping up with patches in the first place.
Yup. Just as happened with OS/2, once people realize that they can support both platforms by writing the "common" software, but only your platform by writing "your" software, they'll never write another line of "your" software again.
The only way to prevent that is to have some APIs that are only accessible through "your" software. Of course, convincing everyone to write "common" software and then making it suck just means that you've become a terrible Android device.
Not seeing a good path to victory here.
Ethics? I'm no fan of ads, but I'd say that in this case the people who want to continue using the service that Yahoo! has been providing them while going out of their way to prevent the sole mechanism through which the provider is compensated for providing that service are the ones with the ethical problem here. They were offered a deal (email in exchange for ad views) and are now reneging on their side of the deal, not even offering to move to a paid account to remove the ads.
Even better, have a cash price in there and then have terms in which on an ongoing basis exposure may be used to offset the fees. That way if the company you're working with decides not to provide the exposure they promised (for any reason), the contract simply falls back to its default state rather than changing from a default of exposure to a new cash basis. That may have been the intent - you said "revert", but the structure can make a huge difference when it comes time to collect.
The difficulty is that errors in computer software are notorious for being hard to test for, hard to document, hard to validate, and hard to assess the impact of. In many ways its like trying to assess the delivery of a bridge without having had inspectors check the rebar or a structural engineer seal the design.
I don't know, if you detonate a nuclear device on somebody's head that would probably do the trick.
The recoil on those things is a little extreme, though.
There were some small male Marines who had some issues with the 1911, but they made do and everyone had everyone else's respect.
When you're spending upwards of a million dollars to train and deploy a Marine, not to mention risking their life, I'd rather make sure the they had the equipment they needed to be successful rather than forcing them into a "one size fits all" approach when there's no reason to.
I guess with your method at least they died with respect, instead of living with effectiveness. So there's that...
To use a tied phrase, "This." From what I've seen you are entirely correct in your assumptions, at least in many cases.
That's $12/hour for a f'n landline, not a no-credit-check mobile. Our commercial POTS lines with unlimited long distance and all the other features run about $35/mo for comparison.
Its also extorting money from our most vulnerable, making it harder for them to stay in touch with the outside world which in turn makes it more likely that they will reoffend (and cost the state far more money later, if that's the only way to measure these things).
Its almost as if people making these policies have some kind of incentive to keep people coming back to jail. Weird...
I'd imagine that that was true about lots of other things in prison that aren't charged on a per-minute basis though - or is it only telephones that prisoners are hard on?
Thank you - all very interesting and meaningful details.