The ISPs will be tasked to carry out deep packet inspection - which implies that they will also be able to collect your bank details which, of course, will be entirely secure and never leaked or misused
SSL is designed to be secure against packet inspection as deep as you like.
Seeing as (certainly in the UK) cheques can be bounced and the funds clawed back weeks after they have supposedly cleared, you'd be a fool to accept a cheque for anything that large. EFT all the way.
As has already been mentioned elsewhere in the thread, instructing your bank to transfer cash directly is cheap, fast and easy in the UK. Which, I suspect, is going to be the alternative to cheques.
Nowadays normal, freem electronic bank transfers from a normal, free, uk current account, takes about 2 hours between banks.
They haven't got it fully ironed out in every bank yet - Abbey can receive fast payments but for some reason only in some circumstances. I've seen payments between two accounts take a few hours one day then a few days only a couple of weeks later.
With your system, can you give people money by only knowing their name, like you can with checks? I have to look up the spelling of my landlord's name every month in the school directory when I write my check (though I could set my bank to snail mail a printed check automatically every month). Do you need to know more than that, like the recipient's bank account number?
Yes, you do need the recipients bank details.
I'm not sure how just knowing their name could ever work. How does the bank know which John Smith to credit?
It's not even a particularly original strategy. The British used to employ almost identical tactics back in the late 19th/early 20th century. Back then, the prerequisite of a British campaign was that the enemy should under no circumstances carry guns -- even spears made us think twice. The kind of people we liked to fight were two feet tall and armed with dry grass.
And of course cheques, which hold the sender's bank details and as soon as they are presented go into a database which also holds the recipients bank details for said cheque, are completely untraceable.
I have never been charged for a bank transfer in the UK - and its a regular occurance between my group of friends, to pay for weekends away et all. Perhaps we are spoiled in the UK, I've heard too many horror stories and oddities about the US system, you guys just don't seem to have personal accounts setup as nicely as we do here.
A number of people are taking banks to court over bank charges, claiming they're unfair. If they ultimately get their way (a recent court defeat isn't the end of the matter), the banks aren't going to accept the loss of their biggest cash cow overnight. They'll come up with something else.
Expect to wind up paying a monthly fee for the "privilege" of having an account. Don't be too surprised to see per-transaction fees too.
(Just to clarify for our American cousins): Personal bank accounts in the UK usually accrue zero charges for daily use (taking out and paying in money, transfers between banks etc).
Where you do pay is if you exceed your overdraft limit by even one penny (something which is very easy to do when the bank automatically gives everyone a debit card, encourages them to use it and most businesses accept them without further charge). Do that and the bank will charge you for being over your overdraft limit, they'll write you a letter and charge you for writing that letter, they'll slap on another charge for every couple of weeks you're over the limit and they'll charge swingeing interest on the overdraft (including their charges). Each of these charges can be up to £25-30.
Do the same thing next month and you get charged again.
Some acceptable alternative, that doesn't involve having a computer of a rather insecure mobile phone, will need to be devised before phasing out cheques completely.
Maybe we could write a little note with our bank details on instructing the bank to pay the small business? He could then take it to the bank and get cash - or even just put it straight into his account.
... being as I live in the UK. But frankly, why bother?
My local MP is a Labour MP, and (like many Labour MPs) has never voted against anything dreamt up by the party leadership in her life. They could put forward a bill which puts under 18's to death by torture for jaywalking and she'd probably vote for it.
The only silver lining is that this parliament will be cut short by a general election next year, which with any luck will get shot of Labour for a nice long time.
Makes me glad Linus told them where they could stick the GPLv3 with regards to the Kernel (Proverbially speaking of course)
He didn't have a lot of choice in the matter anyway. The Linux kernel doesn't require contributors to assign their copyright to a single entity, nor is it licensed with the ".... or any later version" clause commonly seen in GPL software.
It could only become GPLv3 with the consent of every single contributor. Some of them have moved on to develop other things, others have died so that may take a while.
I don't know about that, I think it would depend on the product. Take TiVo for example. if they would have done it the way RMS wanted and released their source code and allowed the TiVo to be "hackable" they would have been out of business in under 90 days because the next week the Internet would have been filled with "ZOMG! Get FREE TIVO and COPY ALL THE CONTENT OFF THE MACHINE with our new Lulz code!".
Hence why not everyone's adopted GPLv3 and why the Linux kernel itself does not include the "... or any later version" clause.
Though a lot of products also use Samba code and from version 3.2 (I think), that is definitely GPLv3. I suspect a lot of companies may maintain 3.0 versions of Samba for this reason.
Reasonable lawyers resorting to suing as a last resort?
My God, the world is ending. Quick, I'll start looking up oceanic seismic sensor data for anything about the size of an Old One, and you look to the sky for the flaming hellfire!
Depending on where you are in the world, AIUI many courts consider themselves the last resort and are generally not impressed by people not even attempting to resolve issues amicably.
The problem is that Oracle is at least twenty years ahead of all of their competitors in database technology. Oracle 7, ca 1991, has a better overall implementation than the latest and greatest from IBM, Microsoft, PostgreSQL, MySQL, and so on. I mean MySQL is barely out of the 'toy' stage (special purpose applications excluded). In the intervening two decades Oracle has widened the gap. That means for a certain classes of OLTP applications, people tend to think you are suicidal if you recommend anything else.
The only way to minimize this problem is to bring (open source) databases closer to parity, even with where Oracle was twenty years ago. PostgreSQL is the only one that comes close in the open source world. MySQL started out with so many bizarre design decisions and gratuitous incompatibilities, that I wonder if it will *ever* come close, at least not without losing backward compatibility in a big way.
And then they just implemented it with a SIM card (which makes me think the AT&T network abstracts it as a standard cell phone). I wonder what happens if you stick that SIM card in a cellphone (probably doesn't work or else it would've been in the article).
Any half-sane HLR will allow the provider to provision only specific services to the SIM card. I'd imagine the only thing provisioned to these cards is internet access.
One would hope Microsoft would have a whole brace of Plan B's in place at the drop of a hat, particularly considering the recent Danger/Sidekick fiasco. However, anyone who has worked with Microsoft products for any length of time and continues to do so must be fairly used to the triumph of hope over experience by now.
Slashdot Mirror
The ISPs will be tasked to carry out deep packet inspection - which implies that they will also be able to collect your bank details which, of course, will be entirely secure and never leaked or misused
SSL is designed to be secure against packet inspection as deep as you like.
No, the GP is speaking bollocks. It may be true for BACS (or the new faster payments system) but it's certainly not the case for CHAPS.
Otherwise I would have had great difficulty buying the house I'm sat in right now.
You'd better tell my solicitor that. They think the money for my last two homes went via CHAPS transfer.
Seeing as (certainly in the UK) cheques can be bounced and the funds clawed back weeks after they have supposedly cleared, you'd be a fool to accept a cheque for anything that large. EFT all the way.
As has already been mentioned elsewhere in the thread, instructing your bank to transfer cash directly is cheap, fast and easy in the UK. Which, I suspect, is going to be the alternative to cheques.
Even there, anyone can see that if you used the proper accounting methods, the budget was probaly way more than $300.
Since when did anything involving movies ever use proper accounting methods?
Nowadays normal, freem electronic bank transfers from a normal, free, uk current account, takes about 2 hours between banks.
They haven't got it fully ironed out in every bank yet - Abbey can receive fast payments but for some reason only in some circumstances. I've seen payments between two accounts take a few hours one day then a few days only a couple of weeks later.
AFAICT, generally more common with movies from relatively unknown writers or based on relatively unknown books.
Probably because not even Hollywood would have been stupid enough to, eg, screw JK Rowling over the first Harry Potter film.
With your system, can you give people money by only knowing their name, like you can with checks? I have to look up the spelling of my landlord's name every month in the school directory when I write my check (though I could set my bank to snail mail a printed check automatically every month). Do you need to know more than that, like the recipient's bank account number?
Yes, you do need the recipients bank details.
I'm not sure how just knowing their name could ever work. How does the bank know which John Smith to credit?
I know, but I was hoping to be modded insightful which would have been hard if I'd admitted I was shamelessly quoting from a sitcom.
It's not even a particularly original strategy. The British used to employ almost identical tactics back in the late 19th/early 20th century. Back then, the prerequisite of a British campaign was that the enemy should under no circumstances carry guns -- even spears made us think twice. The kind of people we liked to fight were two feet tall and armed with dry grass.
They will for a CHAPS transfer, but a BACS transfer is almost always free. I've never been charged using Lloyds, Abbey or Smile for a BACS transfer.
And of course cheques, which hold the sender's bank details and as soon as they are presented go into a database which also holds the recipients bank details for said cheque, are completely untraceable.
I have never been charged for a bank transfer in the UK - and its a regular occurance between my group of friends, to pay for weekends away et all. Perhaps we are spoiled in the UK, I've heard too many horror stories and oddities about the US system, you guys just don't seem to have personal accounts setup as nicely as we do here.
A number of people are taking banks to court over bank charges, claiming they're unfair. If they ultimately get their way (a recent court defeat isn't the end of the matter), the banks aren't going to accept the loss of their biggest cash cow overnight. They'll come up with something else.
Expect to wind up paying a monthly fee for the "privilege" of having an account. Don't be too surprised to see per-transaction fees too.
(Just to clarify for our American cousins): Personal bank accounts in the UK usually accrue zero charges for daily use (taking out and paying in money, transfers between banks etc).
Where you do pay is if you exceed your overdraft limit by even one penny (something which is very easy to do when the bank automatically gives everyone a debit card, encourages them to use it and most businesses accept them without further charge). Do that and the bank will charge you for being over your overdraft limit, they'll write you a letter and charge you for writing that letter, they'll slap on another charge for every couple of weeks you're over the limit and they'll charge swingeing interest on the overdraft (including their charges). Each of these charges can be up to £25-30.
Do the same thing next month and you get charged again.
Some acceptable alternative, that doesn't involve having a computer of a rather insecure mobile phone, will need to be devised before phasing out cheques completely.
Maybe we could write a little note with our bank details on instructing the bank to pay the small business? He could then take it to the bank and get cash - or even just put it straight into his account.
... being as I live in the UK. But frankly, why bother?
My local MP is a Labour MP, and (like many Labour MPs) has never voted against anything dreamt up by the party leadership in her life. They could put forward a bill which puts under 18's to death by torture for jaywalking and she'd probably vote for it.
The only silver lining is that this parliament will be cut short by a general election next year, which with any luck will get shot of Labour for a nice long time.
(Supposedly, prostitution isn't the only job which could be called "the world's oldest profession")
Midwifery couldn't have started until roughly nine months after the first instance of the world's oldest profession. Try again.
Only if you assume that the first ever act of sexual congress which resulted in a baby was paid for.
Looks like something you've written has become a copy/paste troll.
Not sure whether I should be congratulating or commiserating.
Makes me glad Linus told them where they could stick the GPLv3 with regards to the Kernel (Proverbially speaking of course)
He didn't have a lot of choice in the matter anyway. The Linux kernel doesn't require contributors to assign their copyright to a single entity, nor is it licensed with the ".... or any later version" clause commonly seen in GPL software.
It could only become GPLv3 with the consent of every single contributor. Some of them have moved on to develop other things, others have died so that may take a while.
I don't know about that, I think it would depend on the product. Take TiVo for example. if they would have done it the way RMS wanted and released their source code and allowed the TiVo to be "hackable" they would have been out of business in under 90 days because the next week the Internet would have been filled with "ZOMG! Get FREE TIVO and COPY ALL THE CONTENT OFF THE MACHINE with our new Lulz code!".
Hence why not everyone's adopted GPLv3 and why the Linux kernel itself does not include the "... or any later version" clause.
Though a lot of products also use Samba code and from version 3.2 (I think), that is definitely GPLv3. I suspect a lot of companies may maintain 3.0 versions of Samba for this reason.
Reasonable lawyers resorting to suing as a last resort?
My God, the world is ending. Quick, I'll start looking up oceanic seismic sensor data for anything about the size of an Old One, and you look to the sky for the flaming hellfire!
Depending on where you are in the world, AIUI many courts consider themselves the last resort and are generally not impressed by people not even attempting to resolve issues amicably.
OK, I read the PDF. First thing that grabbed me was "Judge Scheindlin".
Isn't that the judge on Judge Judy?
The problem is that Oracle is at least twenty years ahead of all of their competitors in database technology. Oracle 7, ca 1991, has a better overall implementation than the latest and greatest from IBM, Microsoft, PostgreSQL, MySQL, and so on. I mean MySQL is barely out of the 'toy' stage (special purpose applications excluded). In the intervening two decades Oracle has widened the gap. That means for a certain classes of OLTP applications, people tend to think you are suicidal if you recommend anything else.
The only way to minimize this problem is to bring (open source) databases closer to parity, even with where Oracle was twenty years ago. PostgreSQL is the only one that comes close in the open source world. MySQL started out with so many bizarre design decisions and gratuitous incompatibilities, that I wonder if it will *ever* come close, at least not without losing backward compatibility in a big way.
Do you know, I'm nearly sure I read something very similar only a couple of days ago.
Except it wasn't you saying it.
This leaves to my mind a few possibilities:
Do you mind if I ask which it is?
And then they just implemented it with a SIM card (which makes me think the AT&T network abstracts it as a standard cell phone). I wonder what happens if you stick that SIM card in a cellphone (probably doesn't work or else it would've been in the article).
Any half-sane HLR will allow the provider to provision only specific services to the SIM card. I'd imagine the only thing provisioned to these cards is internet access.
Maybe I should re-word that.
One would hope Microsoft would have a whole brace of Plan B's in place at the drop of a hat, particularly considering the recent Danger/Sidekick fiasco. However, anyone who has worked with Microsoft products for any length of time and continues to do so must be fairly used to the triumph of hope over experience by now.