They claim an actual improvement. In places outside the US, that fraud could land them in jail (though, in practice, almost never does, though fines can be handed out).
Then their GGs would show a nice little old lady going thru security instead of the actual person.
GG isn't AR. You could pull that trick with the MS holo glasses, but not GG. At best you could hack the "terrorist warning" to "VIP priority" when the back-end identifies the terrorist.
I remember when they first came out, the response was that the person in the US suffering a loss to someone in Nigeria committed fraud first (usually by signing an affadavit claiming money they know they have no claim to). And that the law didn't cover two fraudsters defrauding each other. I can't find anything on that now, though based on the wording of the law and the means of the scam, the person being defrauded comitted a violation of 419, so turning the other person in is a confession to fraud.
Even though it has -nothing- to do with the cryptocurrency at all, it is just the same type of scam as previously.
It's more like a 419 scam. They are called 419 because that's the law that makes them *legal*. The presumption with bitcoin is the same. Anyone using it is a criminal, so they won't call the "real" cops on them, just whine about it on forums and such. The "official" responses are a whole lot like "that's what you get for using bitcoin".
At least they gave them a bill, rather than just saying "no". That's more transparent. If someone comes up with the money, then we can see what it bought. A multi-agency activity could have lots of cost in getting the documents together for a single response.
What state did Chine get in? Why was it that way in China, but in the US, where Heroin was sold by Bayer in mainstream stores, there weren't similar problems?
You got modded down because you are saying "nuh uh" without any evidence, and common sense (and any historical knowledge) shows that China wasn't as addicted as you imply, simply because the British made it available.
And by what measure do you measure your calories out? Standard nutrition says "calories eaten vs calories burned" because there's no measurement of calories "removed". Physics may work, but is not applicable to the practical application of diet. Nobody is saying that physics is wrong. just that it's useless in this particular applied category.
The problem is that "physics" doesn't define the definition of "calorie" in this context. You are wrong, and using the wrong terminology. The reason so many people are arguing with you isn't that they don't understand what you said, but that what you said is simply wrong. And you are going back to explain how what you said isn't what you meant, without realizing you were wrong in the first place.
SS isn't for you. It's for everyone. If you kept your money, what would you want done with the elderly who don't have enough to live off of? Soylent green?
Carrying a gun doesn't meet that definition. There have been a number of possies that formed in modern Dallas where long guns were open-carried, without issue. All were in response to poor police response in poor areas.
If you don't want government intervention you can't be a hypocrite and expect it to intervene on your behalf.
Yes, like SS should be abolished, and the old people who die destitute from neglect deserved it for not saving when they were younger. You'd better abolish our democracy as well while you are at it, as most people support a "safety net" of some kind (yes, even the ultra-conservative). So you won't get your way when it comes to a vote.
Yeah, it's not like every president in recent history didn't admit to using drugs, then becoming president. With a record like that, they should all be banned. Maybe then more people will grow up to do respectable jobs.
Ah yes, truthfully exposing actual current racism is "white guilt" and should be dismissed and ignored.
Not sure how it hit 5 inciteful, but it's a on-topic response to the previous comment, which was about drug use in conservative states.
Is your comment any more on-topic on a post about ash? No? Then that makes you a hypocrite. And dismissing the race situation pegs you as a conservative (and yes, a libertarian is a "conservative" by the US definitions, and a "neo-liberal" by international definitions).
Fingerprint readers have been criticized as being able to be circumvented, but they will likely soon have temperature/electrical signal sensing to detect a live finger. We're ramping up sensing.
A cheap pulse/OX sensor isn't too much, and could be incorporated in most readers. It's harder to fake blood with a reasonable level of oxygen in it pulsing at a human-range heartbeat.
The MERCHANT is liable for the fraud and has to repay any income acquired related to fraudulent use of said card.
Nope. If they get an "authorised" response, then they are fine. That's why you never see paper anymore (unless the machines are down). They get live authorizations. If the bank authorizes the payment, then the merchant isn't liable anymore.
If you still have the card, you are liable for $0 as long as it's reported within 60days of the statement date containing the fraudulent transaction(s).
That you are not liable doesn't mean the bank won't tell you you are liable, and threaten bad things if you don't pay them back. If it went to court, the bank would lose, but they know most people don't know the rules, and that most people don't want to go to court. If you have your card, and were skimmed at a bank ATM, then the bank holds 100% of the liability. You have the physical card, and report it stolen within 60 days of the fraudulent charges. The merchants all got "authorized" responses from the bank. So the bank eats the loss. They'll do all they can to prevent it, including threatening illegal acts against their customers.
Or are you asserting that no bank in history has ever acted unethically?
Sure they do. They want "officer discretion" so when little Georgie (Bush) does coke, he'll be let off with an unofficial warning that doesn't touch his permanent record, but little Nigger has a dime bag of pot, and he gets 10 years in jail, or pleads guilty to felony distribution for a $100 fine and time served. The punishment doesn't sound like much, except never getting to vote again, or own a firearm.
That's how the red states roll. Neo-Apartheid. I was born white in one, and had plenty of friends of various ethnic backgrounds. The big lie is that it doesn't happen, mainly told by people who have seen it happen, but refuse to believe it because it would make them "evil" to endorse and condone it.
I'm curious as to where this "they can track what you buy" comes from, credit card statements very rarely detail what you actually bought at the store.
They track what you spend, where, and when. Yes, they don't know that you bought a pound of potatoes, rather than a pound of apples, but they will have a pretty good idea of what you buy in most cases. $39.99 at onlineporn.com is exactly the 6 months subscription, so wonder what that purchase was... (I have no idea if that site or price is real, if it is, it's a coincidence, I swear).
Slashdot Mirror
If they're stupid enough to be taken in by this crap, they deserve what they get.
So all frauds should be legal because, caveat emptor?
They claim an actual improvement. In places outside the US, that fraud could land them in jail (though, in practice, almost never does, though fines can be handed out).
Then their GGs would show a nice little old lady going thru security instead of the actual person.
GG isn't AR. You could pull that trick with the MS holo glasses, but not GG. At best you could hack the "terrorist warning" to "VIP priority" when the back-end identifies the terrorist.
Vegas does it on 20 year old PCs. I think you are the one that doesn't know how it works.
I remember when they first came out, the response was that the person in the US suffering a loss to someone in Nigeria committed fraud first (usually by signing an affadavit claiming money they know they have no claim to). And that the law didn't cover two fraudsters defrauding each other. I can't find anything on that now, though based on the wording of the law and the means of the scam, the person being defrauded comitted a violation of 419, so turning the other person in is a confession to fraud.
Why don't you try educating yourself instead of sticking shit in your body.
I've never stuck shit in my body. Since your premise is provably wrong, so must be your conclusion.
Even though it has -nothing- to do with the cryptocurrency at all, it is just the same type of scam as previously.
It's more like a 419 scam. They are called 419 because that's the law that makes them *legal*. The presumption with bitcoin is the same. Anyone using it is a criminal, so they won't call the "real" cops on them, just whine about it on forums and such. The "official" responses are a whole lot like "that's what you get for using bitcoin".
At least they gave them a bill, rather than just saying "no". That's more transparent. If someone comes up with the money, then we can see what it bought. A multi-agency activity could have lots of cost in getting the documents together for a single response.
What state did Chine get in? Why was it that way in China, but in the US, where Heroin was sold by Bayer in mainstream stores, there weren't similar problems?
You got modded down because you are saying "nuh uh" without any evidence, and common sense (and any historical knowledge) shows that China wasn't as addicted as you imply, simply because the British made it available.
And by what measure do you measure your calories out? Standard nutrition says "calories eaten vs calories burned" because there's no measurement of calories "removed". Physics may work, but is not applicable to the practical application of diet. Nobody is saying that physics is wrong. just that it's useless in this particular applied category.
To get fat from energy, you need said energy to be absorbed form your gut into your bloodstream. Your idea how digesting works is wrong.
Bacterias don't 'transfer energy' to the body. They simply split stuff up and the body takes the waste/remains of that splitting.
We'll ignore the incorrect formatting for the quote, but note the words quoted. Nowhere does the word "bacteria" appear in the quote.
Also, you put "transfer energy" in quotes. This should imply that it is somewhere quoted, especially when you are nit picking. It isn't.
Your reply is a non sequitur. He didn't say what you assert he said.
You are wrong. He is right. Give it up.
The problem is that "physics" doesn't define the definition of "calorie" in this context. You are wrong, and using the wrong terminology. The reason so many people are arguing with you isn't that they don't understand what you said, but that what you said is simply wrong. And you are going back to explain how what you said isn't what you meant, without realizing you were wrong in the first place.
So between "taking in", "putting out", and "storing" everything eventually adds up to 0.
So you said nothing useful, in a pompous and pretentious manner. Go it. Everyone should have ignored your meaningless comment.
SS isn't for you. It's for everyone. If you kept your money, what would you want done with the elderly who don't have enough to live off of? Soylent green?
The quest to prevent misuse (by force) is worse than the alternative.
In the 1800s, drugs were universal and 100% legal. There were fewer problems from them. It wasn't until Prohibition started that the problems started.
Carrying a gun doesn't meet that definition. There have been a number of possies that formed in modern Dallas where long guns were open-carried, without issue. All were in response to poor police response in poor areas.
If you don't want government intervention you can't be a hypocrite and expect it to intervene on your behalf.
Yes, like SS should be abolished, and the old people who die destitute from neglect deserved it for not saving when they were younger. You'd better abolish our democracy as well while you are at it, as most people support a "safety net" of some kind (yes, even the ultra-conservative). So you won't get your way when it comes to a vote.
Yeah, it's not like every president in recent history didn't admit to using drugs, then becoming president. With a record like that, they should all be banned. Maybe then more people will grow up to do respectable jobs.
Ah yes, truthfully exposing actual current racism is "white guilt" and should be dismissed and ignored.
Not sure how it hit 5 inciteful, but it's a on-topic response to the previous comment, which was about drug use in conservative states.
Is your comment any more on-topic on a post about ash? No? Then that makes you a hypocrite. And dismissing the race situation pegs you as a conservative (and yes, a libertarian is a "conservative" by the US definitions, and a "neo-liberal" by international definitions).
Fingerprint readers have been criticized as being able to be circumvented, but they will likely soon have temperature/electrical signal sensing to detect a live finger. We're ramping up sensing.
A cheap pulse/OX sensor isn't too much, and could be incorporated in most readers. It's harder to fake blood with a reasonable level of oxygen in it pulsing at a human-range heartbeat.
The MERCHANT is liable for the fraud and has to repay any income acquired related to fraudulent use of said card.
Nope. If they get an "authorised" response, then they are fine. That's why you never see paper anymore (unless the machines are down). They get live authorizations. If the bank authorizes the payment, then the merchant isn't liable anymore.
If you still have the card, you are liable for $0 as long as it's reported within 60days of the statement date containing the fraudulent transaction(s).
That you are not liable doesn't mean the bank won't tell you you are liable, and threaten bad things if you don't pay them back. If it went to court, the bank would lose, but they know most people don't know the rules, and that most people don't want to go to court. If you have your card, and were skimmed at a bank ATM, then the bank holds 100% of the liability. You have the physical card, and report it stolen within 60 days of the fraudulent charges. The merchants all got "authorized" responses from the bank. So the bank eats the loss. They'll do all they can to prevent it, including threatening illegal acts against their customers.
Or are you asserting that no bank in history has ever acted unethically?
Sure they do. They want "officer discretion" so when little Georgie (Bush) does coke, he'll be let off with an unofficial warning that doesn't touch his permanent record, but little Nigger has a dime bag of pot, and he gets 10 years in jail, or pleads guilty to felony distribution for a $100 fine and time served. The punishment doesn't sound like much, except never getting to vote again, or own a firearm.
That's how the red states roll. Neo-Apartheid. I was born white in one, and had plenty of friends of various ethnic backgrounds. The big lie is that it doesn't happen, mainly told by people who have seen it happen, but refuse to believe it because it would make them "evil" to endorse and condone it.
I'm curious as to where this "they can track what you buy" comes from, credit card statements very rarely detail what you actually bought at the store.
They track what you spend, where, and when. Yes, they don't know that you bought a pound of potatoes, rather than a pound of apples, but they will have a pretty good idea of what you buy in most cases. $39.99 at onlineporn.com is exactly the 6 months subscription, so wonder what that purchase was... (I have no idea if that site or price is real, if it is, it's a coincidence, I swear).
He's not violent,
He tried to get someone killed for lols. How is that "non violent"?