Except since the Deregulate Business/Eviscerate Government Party Van arrived
Bill Clinton?
And you seem more than happy to let all that happen, because you imagine that you are so super-competent that you couldn't possibly make a bad decision which will ruin your life, and that you're somehow an island apart from society and thus untouchable by the ravages the rest of us are subject to.
I've made lots of bad decisions in my lifetime and have had to deal with the consequences of those decisions. You apparently seem to think that we should live in a World where we don't have to bear the responsibility for our decisions and the Government should step in and protect us from ourselves. I happen to disagree and will oppose you on the soap and ballot boxes.
Here, again, we see the attitude that you are above society and unaffected by it -- that harm to society as a whole has nothing to do with you, only those lameasses that have the temerity to make mistakes.
Harm to society is not a blanket right to start taking my rights away or giving the Government rights not proscribed in the Constitution. I view "harm to society" arguments in the same manner as I view "think of the children!". My obesity or lack thereof doesn't directly harm society. Hell, in my case it doesn't even impose an extra cost on society because I actually pay for my own health care. The KKK caused a lot of harm to society -- can we take away the 1st amendment to shut them down?
We're all in this boat together. And the sooner you learn that, the better off you'll be.
I don't want to be in your boat. I want to live my life with a minimal amount of interference from my neighbors and the government. If my actions don't directly harm you then you have no right to prevent me from engaging in them.
Easy fix: don't wear a seat belt, disable those nanny-state-required airbags, and ram your vehicle into a thick tree at high speed. You won't get a scratch, because you're impervious. That'll show 'em.
Again, the point is that my failure to wear a seat belt harms no one but me. Those nanny state airbags that you refer to raised the cost of my vehicle for questionable gain (harm in some cases). It's really no business of the state whether or not I place my life in extra jeopardy.
Then again, facts have a well-known liberal bias, so maybe, huh?
Actually the facts on any number of issues (gun control comes to mind) have a well known anti-liberal bias but keep believing your original statement if it helps to convince you of your own moral superiority.
Counterexample: Republicans still win elections. (Hee hee.) Bye!
Yes, every single thing that's wrong in this country is the fault of the GOP.
The poster stated if they physically try to force you to stop. IE, touching you. If you touch me without permission, that is assault and I will hurt / kill you if I feel the need to
I'm sorry but in most states if you shoot someone over simple assault you are going to pound-me-in-the-ass prison. You can't respond to someone slapping you by pulling out your.357 and blowing them away. The specifics of the law vary in different states but generally you need to be able to prove that a reasonable person would have feared for their life in that situation before you are justified in using deadly force. You'd have a hard time convincing the cops/grand jury of this if you killed someone for merely touching you.
Things get different if there's an actual disparity of force (i.e: 90 pound woman vs. 250 pound guy, or multiple adversaries against one guy) or if they do something that places your life in danger (picks up a baseball bat, tries to choke you, etc.) but if you kill someone who is unarmed you damn well better have gotten the shit beaten out of you before you resorted to deadly force.
Not being able to verify signatures a recent change with Visa.
If it's a recent change with Visa then somebody better tell them to update their website. Page 28 of that document if you are wondering.
The burden is NOT on the merchant if they followed the agreement and the card issuer gave them the green light on that sale.
Operative word being if they follow the agreement. Note: If the transaction is accepted with a non-matching signature and it turns out to be fraudulent, your business may be liable, even if all other procedures were followed.
No, you've wandered off onto a completely unrelated tangent. I was talking about laws that make wiretapping a crime. Hence, I'd really like to hear how it is that my ISP can get away with monitoring my packets. I never even mentioned law enforcement so I'm a little bit confused as to why you brought it up.
then law enforcement can still use it to prosecute you--so what if it was acquired illegally? All that matters is the government didn't acquire the information illegally
And your point is? This doesn't make it anymore legal for me to break into the neighbors house to prove she's selling drugs. Yeah, they might be able to use the evidence I collect against her -- but I'm still guilty of breaking and entering and will probably be charged for doing so.
Most computer parts I've seen are made in Malaysia, Indonesia, or Taiwan, not China.
Don't let the Chinese nationalists hear you refer to Taiwan as not being part of China. They get a little touchy about that and tend to start whining;)
The point is that the bank says "We have criteria to make sure you're able to pay us back, since, obviously, we want you to pay us back. [Compute, compute] Ok! Looks like you're in great shape, let's do this!" Meanwhile, they know you can't (or didn't get enough information to know)
In other words you want the bank to tell you whether or not you can afford the loan. Do you also expect your cellular phone company to make sure you can afford that plan you are on and the car salesman to make sure you aren't buying too much car?
This, my obtuse friend, is known as "fraud" and "predatory lending".
No, fraud would be telling someone that the loan is going to cost X amount per month when you know it's really going to cost Y. Fraud is not telling them that it's going to cost X amount when they can only afford to pay Y amount. At the end of the day you know (or you should know) how much loan you can afford and it's your responsibility not to borrow more than that. The bank owes you no responsibility to figure this out for you. It owes it's shareholders and depositors the responsbility of making sure you aren't likely to default but that's another discussion.
"Predatory lending" is so broadly defined that it's hard to know exactly what it means. I would tend to think it would mean the activities of payday lenders or Tony Soprano. You apparently think it should include my local community bank if they make the mistake of believing me when I give them my word that I can repay the money I'm about to borrow.
Ahem. PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS . Meaning a large percentage of the population is having major trouble. Meaning the society is apt to lose many citizens/consumers/producers/etc., or the capacity thereof. Meaning if you don't do something, the whole state -- including you -- will suffer. Don't give me "hey, not my problem, man". The scenario I set up is specifically large and bad enough that you will have a problem. Yet you still sit there saying "why should I care, as long as I don't have to pay five cents extra for a soda". That's not just callous, that's self-sabotaging. Which makes me think, again, that you're making it your business not to get it. Ok, one more.
The large percent of the population is having self-inflicted trouble. Penalizing the people who aren't having trouble by making them pay more for a product that is completely harmless when consumed in moderation makes absolutely zero sense. Orange juice actually has more calories in it than soda does and if consumed to excess would also lead to weight gain. Should we tax that too?
I'm sorry but I don't think it's any business of the state what I choose to put into my body. Whether I'm filling it up with Pepsi, OJ, vegetables, big macs, THC, booze or tobacco, it's none of your fucking business. It's also none of your fucking business whether or not I wear a seat belt but the nanny staters managed to pass that into law too.
Wow. On this one, you're just tossing in whole new concepts. I read and back up your idea for a fact-checking agency ("PRESS RELEASE: This crap about Obama being a Muslim is stupid, and you're stupid if you believe or repeat it.") and you switch to "you want to censor people!!1!". I'm getting dizzy from the changing-the-subject whiplash.
Who gets to hire the staff for the fact-checking agency? Politicians? Hmm, might the fact-checking agency then have a political slant? Why don't you grow up and realize that most people are actually smart enough not to need Governmental assistance to figure out when someone is lying to them.
Dogs are much cooler than cats anyway. They don't always make good mousers though. Depends on the breed. We had a dachshund growing up that was a better mouser than any cat -- but our border collie wouldn't even bother to chase them.
Likely the contract you signed gives then permission to look at any data going over the wire
Contracts don't give them the right to violate the law. If the law makes wiretapping a crime then a contract doesn't negate that crime. If you sign a contract that states "Shakrai can have sex with me anytime he wants" that doesn't give me a get out of jail free card when I rape you.
You can make that your policy but it doesn't mean your policy is actually enforceable. Try reading the Fair Credit Billing Act sometime. If you tried to pull that shit on me you'd lose big time.
Now, (under 99.9999% of all merchant agreements) merchants are not allowed to verify signatures
Says who? Our merchant agreement says that we are supposed to verify signatures.
or ask for ID.
Your right about that part. Mastercard will actually fine you if you ask for ID or post minimum purchase amounts. Visa isn't as aggressive (in my experience) but can do the same thing if they get a bug up their butt.
The push for RFID chips is not about security, it's about shifting the burden on the user, instead of the banks.
The burden has never been on the banks. If my card is lost and used to buy $2,000 worth of crap at Best Buy then Best Buy is going to be out the money when they lose the chargeback. You think the bank is going to allow themselves to take the hit? Can I have some of what you are smoking?
And what push for RFID chips? Other than a handful of novelty credit cards I've never come across them.
regardless of whether the cat is actually a good mouser, it's your responsibility to give it a good home
That would be the luck. Convince your boss to let you get a cat and then you get something as fat and lazy as my girlfriends cat. She watched a mouse walk across the living room floor once and didn't move. Umm, why exactly are we keeping a roof over your head and feeding you if you aren't gonna pull your weight again?
If you put the Senate and the upper chambers in each state legislature into some 'other category' where they're say chosen by what?
The Senate was originally chosen by the Legislatures of the individual states. Your State Senators could be chosen by your County/Parish Legislature. They aren't picking themselves.
Either the people chuse their government or they don't! Its kind of binary
So when do I get to vote on the next round of FCC commissioners? Oh wait, I don't..... so I guess I don't get to choose every part of my government, do I?
The 4th amendment only applies to government actors, or private citizens who are acting in such a capacity that they are deemed the equivalent of a government actor.
Who said anything about the 4th amendment? I said there are generally laws on the books (here is New York's law) that make it illegal for private actors to intercept communications. If I take my alligator clips and jack into the neighbors phone line I don't think I'm going to get away with it by pointing out that the 4th amendment only applies to government actors.
Clearly, you need to deploy one or more Rat Zapper Battle Stations [ratzapper.com]
OMG, that's fucking awesome:
Rat Zapper Battle Station
The ultimate weapon in the war against rats and mice!
Designed for restaurants, bakeries, ranches, large homes, facilities managers and pest control operators, our Battle Station, will allow you to monitor trap activity without checking individual Rat Zappers. Our Battle Station allows up to 16 Rat Zappers to be monitored from a single location and you can use multiple monitor panels in close proximity to monitor many more Rat Zappers if necessary. Great for Integrated Pest Management (IPM).
Rat Zapper "Battle Station". Why am I picturing Jerry saying something to the affect of "That's no peanut butter, that's a space station!" Que the Imperial March boys and girls, these fuckers don't stand a chance....
Anyway, it's not as if you can't find out where the pres is generally going to be at any one time: the Whitehouse press office put out that info every day!
They don't generally tell you which car in the motorcade he happens to be in though.....
Slashdot Mirror
Except since the Deregulate Business/Eviscerate Government Party Van arrived
Bill Clinton?
And you seem more than happy to let all that happen, because you imagine that you are so super-competent that you couldn't possibly make a bad decision which will ruin your life, and that you're somehow an island apart from society and thus untouchable by the ravages the rest of us are subject to.
I've made lots of bad decisions in my lifetime and have had to deal with the consequences of those decisions. You apparently seem to think that we should live in a World where we don't have to bear the responsibility for our decisions and the Government should step in and protect us from ourselves. I happen to disagree and will oppose you on the soap and ballot boxes.
Here, again, we see the attitude that you are above society and unaffected by it -- that harm to society as a whole has nothing to do with you, only those lameasses that have the temerity to make mistakes.
Harm to society is not a blanket right to start taking my rights away or giving the Government rights not proscribed in the Constitution. I view "harm to society" arguments in the same manner as I view "think of the children!". My obesity or lack thereof doesn't directly harm society. Hell, in my case it doesn't even impose an extra cost on society because I actually pay for my own health care. The KKK caused a lot of harm to society -- can we take away the 1st amendment to shut them down?
We're all in this boat together. And the sooner you learn that, the better off you'll be.
I don't want to be in your boat. I want to live my life with a minimal amount of interference from my neighbors and the government. If my actions don't directly harm you then you have no right to prevent me from engaging in them.
Easy fix: don't wear a seat belt, disable those nanny-state-required airbags, and ram your vehicle into a thick tree at high speed. You won't get a scratch, because you're impervious. That'll show 'em.
Again, the point is that my failure to wear a seat belt harms no one but me. Those nanny state airbags that you refer to raised the cost of my vehicle for questionable gain (harm in some cases). It's really no business of the state whether or not I place my life in extra jeopardy.
Then again, facts have a well-known liberal bias, so maybe, huh?
Actually the facts on any number of issues (gun control comes to mind) have a well known anti-liberal bias but keep believing your original statement if it helps to convince you of your own moral superiority.
Counterexample: Republicans still win elections. (Hee hee.) Bye!
Yes, every single thing that's wrong in this country is the fault of the GOP.
The poster stated if they physically try to force you to stop. IE, touching you. If you touch me without permission, that is assault and I will hurt / kill you if I feel the need to
I'm sorry but in most states if you shoot someone over simple assault you are going to pound-me-in-the-ass prison. You can't respond to someone slapping you by pulling out your .357 and blowing them away. The specifics of the law vary in different states but generally you need to be able to prove that a reasonable person would have feared for their life in that situation before you are justified in using deadly force. You'd have a hard time convincing the cops/grand jury of this if you killed someone for merely touching you.
Things get different if there's an actual disparity of force (i.e: 90 pound woman vs. 250 pound guy, or multiple adversaries against one guy) or if they do something that places your life in danger (picks up a baseball bat, tries to choke you, etc.) but if you kill someone who is unarmed you damn well better have gotten the shit beaten out of you before you resorted to deadly force.
I know most of them in reality wouldn't even stand up and complain at a McDonalds about getting the wrong drink
And then you have this guy ;)
then just shoot them. Don't even give it a second thought.
Then continue your study of the internal workings of the iPhone from pound-me-in-the-ass prison ;)
You also have to account for your neighbor who is addicted to porn and downloads it constantly seeding at 100% for days on end.
Hey, don't talk about me like that when I'm not around ;)
Not being able to verify signatures a recent change with Visa.
If it's a recent change with Visa then somebody better tell them to update their website. Page 28 of that document if you are wondering.
The burden is NOT on the merchant if they followed the agreement and the card issuer gave them the green light on that sale.
Operative word being if they follow the agreement. Note: If the transaction is accepted with a non-matching signature and it turns out to be fraudulent, your business may be liable, even if all other procedures were followed.
I think my comment was directly on point.
No, you've wandered off onto a completely unrelated tangent. I was talking about laws that make wiretapping a crime. Hence, I'd really like to hear how it is that my ISP can get away with monitoring my packets. I never even mentioned law enforcement so I'm a little bit confused as to why you brought it up.
then law enforcement can still use it to prosecute you--so what if it was acquired illegally? All that matters is the government didn't acquire the information illegally
And your point is? This doesn't make it anymore legal for me to break into the neighbors house to prove she's selling drugs. Yeah, they might be able to use the evidence I collect against her -- but I'm still guilty of breaking and entering and will probably be charged for doing so.
You compare it to the signature on the back of the card. If they don't match you refuse to complete the sale.
Most computer parts I've seen are made in Malaysia, Indonesia, or Taiwan, not China.
Don't let the Chinese nationalists hear you refer to Taiwan as not being part of China. They get a little touchy about that and tend to start whining ;)
A: Across the Pacific Ocean.
Well they are technically across the Atlantic Ocean and Eurasian Continent as well ;)
The point is that the bank says "We have criteria to make sure you're able to pay us back, since, obviously, we want you to pay us back. [Compute, compute] Ok! Looks like you're in great shape, let's do this!" Meanwhile, they know you can't (or didn't get enough information to know)
In other words you want the bank to tell you whether or not you can afford the loan. Do you also expect your cellular phone company to make sure you can afford that plan you are on and the car salesman to make sure you aren't buying too much car?
This, my obtuse friend, is known as "fraud" and "predatory lending".
No, fraud would be telling someone that the loan is going to cost X amount per month when you know it's really going to cost Y. Fraud is not telling them that it's going to cost X amount when they can only afford to pay Y amount. At the end of the day you know (or you should know) how much loan you can afford and it's your responsibility not to borrow more than that. The bank owes you no responsibility to figure this out for you. It owes it's shareholders and depositors the responsbility of making sure you aren't likely to default but that's another discussion.
"Predatory lending" is so broadly defined that it's hard to know exactly what it means. I would tend to think it would mean the activities of payday lenders or Tony Soprano. You apparently think it should include my local community bank if they make the mistake of believing me when I give them my word that I can repay the money I'm about to borrow.
Ahem. PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS . Meaning a large percentage of the population is having major trouble. Meaning the society is apt to lose many citizens/consumers/producers/etc., or the capacity thereof. Meaning if you don't do something, the whole state -- including you -- will suffer. Don't give me "hey, not my problem, man". The scenario I set up is specifically large and bad enough that you will have a problem. Yet you still sit there saying "why should I care, as long as I don't have to pay five cents extra for a soda". That's not just callous, that's self-sabotaging. Which makes me think, again, that you're making it your business not to get it. Ok, one more.
The large percent of the population is having self-inflicted trouble. Penalizing the people who aren't having trouble by making them pay more for a product that is completely harmless when consumed in moderation makes absolutely zero sense. Orange juice actually has more calories in it than soda does and if consumed to excess would also lead to weight gain. Should we tax that too?
I'm sorry but I don't think it's any business of the state what I choose to put into my body. Whether I'm filling it up with Pepsi, OJ, vegetables, big macs, THC, booze or tobacco, it's none of your fucking business. It's also none of your fucking business whether or not I wear a seat belt but the nanny staters managed to pass that into law too.
Wow. On this one, you're just tossing in whole new concepts. I read and back up your idea for a fact-checking agency ("PRESS RELEASE: This crap about Obama being a Muslim is stupid, and you're stupid if you believe or repeat it.") and you switch to "you want to censor people!!1!". I'm getting dizzy from the changing-the-subject whiplash.
Who gets to hire the staff for the fact-checking agency? Politicians? Hmm, might the fact-checking agency then have a political slant? Why don't you grow up and realize that most people are actually smart enough not to need Governmental assistance to figure out when someone is lying to them.
Dogs are much cooler than cats anyway. They don't always make good mousers though. Depends on the breed. We had a dachshund growing up that was a better mouser than any cat -- but our border collie wouldn't even bother to chase them.
Likely the contract you signed gives then permission to look at any data going over the wire
Contracts don't give them the right to violate the law. If the law makes wiretapping a crime then a contract doesn't negate that crime. If you sign a contract that states "Shakrai can have sex with me anytime he wants" that doesn't give me a get out of jail free card when I rape you.
You can make that your policy but it doesn't mean your policy is actually enforceable. Try reading the Fair Credit Billing Act sometime. If you tried to pull that shit on me you'd lose big time.
Now, (under 99.9999% of all merchant agreements) merchants are not allowed to verify signatures
Says who? Our merchant agreement says that we are supposed to verify signatures.
or ask for ID.
Your right about that part. Mastercard will actually fine you if you ask for ID or post minimum purchase amounts. Visa isn't as aggressive (in my experience) but can do the same thing if they get a bug up their butt.
The push for RFID chips is not about security, it's about shifting the burden on the user, instead of the banks.
The burden has never been on the banks. If my card is lost and used to buy $2,000 worth of crap at Best Buy then Best Buy is going to be out the money when they lose the chargeback. You think the bank is going to allow themselves to take the hit? Can I have some of what you are smoking?
And what push for RFID chips? Other than a handful of novelty credit cards I've never come across them.
regardless of whether the cat is actually a good mouser, it's your responsibility to give it a good home
That would be the luck. Convince your boss to let you get a cat and then you get something as fat and lazy as my girlfriends cat. She watched a mouse walk across the living room floor once and didn't move. Umm, why exactly are we keeping a roof over your head and feeding you if you aren't gonna pull your weight again?
His fault for trusting someone else with his card details.
The credit card company would disagree. It would actually be the merchants fault for not checking the signature on the back of the card.
If you put the Senate and the upper chambers in each state legislature into some 'other category' where they're say chosen by what?
The Senate was originally chosen by the Legislatures of the individual states. Your State Senators could be chosen by your County/Parish Legislature. They aren't picking themselves.
Either the people chuse their government or they don't! Its kind of binary
So when do I get to vote on the next round of FCC commissioners? Oh wait, I don't..... so I guess I don't get to choose every part of my government, do I?
The 4th amendment only applies to government actors, or private citizens who are acting in such a capacity that they are deemed the equivalent of a government actor.
Who said anything about the 4th amendment? I said there are generally laws on the books (here is New York's law) that make it illegal for private actors to intercept communications. If I take my alligator clips and jack into the neighbors phone line I don't think I'm going to get away with it by pointing out that the 4th amendment only applies to government actors.
I am not a lawyer
Obviously ;)
Clearly, you need to deploy one or more Rat Zapper Battle Stations [ratzapper.com]
OMG, that's fucking awesome:
Rat Zapper Battle Station
The ultimate weapon in the war against rats and mice!
Designed for restaurants, bakeries, ranches, large homes, facilities managers and pest control operators, our Battle Station, will allow you to monitor trap activity without checking individual Rat Zappers. Our Battle Station allows up to 16 Rat Zappers to be monitored from a single location and you can use multiple monitor panels in close proximity to monitor many more Rat Zappers if necessary. Great for Integrated Pest Management (IPM).
Rat Zapper "Battle Station". Why am I picturing Jerry saying something to the affect of "That's no peanut butter, that's a space station!" Que the Imperial March boys and girls, these fuckers don't stand a chance....
(Really, my friend bought a car on his American Express while in college...).
If he waited a few years he could have defaulted on it and gotten a Governmental bailout ;)
Anyway, it's not as if you can't find out where the pres is generally going to be at any one time: the Whitehouse press office put out that info every day!
They don't generally tell you which car in the motorcade he happens to be in though.....
But then you have a bear to help you deal with the operatives
What if the operatives are from a country that the bear likes more than us?
U.S. Presidents have had subcutaneous tracking implants for some time now.
Please explain this statement by using <sarcasm> or <tinfoil hat> tags so we can figure out if we should laugh or mock you ;)
The #1 thing that is going to guarantee his security is this- if he dies, Biden becomes president.
If that was his approach to security he would have asked Dick Cheney to be his running mate ;)