As a non-us citizen, what is the distinction between an ATM and a Debit card for you?
Typically, one can only use an ATM card with an ATM machine, while a Debit card can be used like a Credit Card with merchants. Some banks offer combined ATM/Debit cards that work with both cases. Those physical cards are usually issued by the bank through the vendor that provides the bank's Debit/Credit card services, like VISA or MasterCard. I don't want a debit card, just an ATM card. (a) I have a credit card with a high limit and pay it off every month and (b) don't want my checking account funds available directly through a debit card as it's less safe and see "a".
Debit cards are an immediate form of "check" payment. I'll use a CC in those cases, which (c) provides a 30-day float on my money and (d) more safety as none of my funds are exchanged until I pay the CC bill. Yes, debit cards typically provide fraud guarantees, but the money is taken immediately and you must request it be returned, unlike a CC in which one simply disputes a charge w/o paying it (or not) until the dispute is resolved.
If something dicey happens on your credit card, it is the vendor's problem -- the vendor does not have money yet.
If something dicey happens on your debit card, it is your problem -- the money already left the account.
I do not have a debit card. After I cut up the fourth debit card and demanded a clean ATM card with no debit feature, the fifth time I just changed banks.
A few years ago SunTrust wanted to "upgrade" my ATM card to an ATM/Debit card. I wrote a letter to the President of SunTrust explaining my reasons for not wanting an Debit card but rather just an ATM card and threatened to move my accounts to another bank if they would not accommodate me. A week later I got a call from his assistant who told me they got many other such requests and would be sending me an ATM only card -- been using it ever since.
Apparently, when they switched from VISA to MasterCard as the vendor for their ATM, Debit and Credit cards, they initially chose to issue ATM/Debit and Credit cards, but not just ATM cards. They still issue ATM/Debit cards as the default but will now issue an ATM only card instead on request.
Debit cards are unnecessary if you have a credit card and you pay off your balance every month.
It's very easy to quickly consume media, especially from the web - news, games, pics, texts, tweets, videos, etc... - but those sources often don't get refreshed as quickly. For example, I have a *bunch* of free time and I can easily read through all the various news sources without them posting anything new for a while.
I'm guessing that youngsters aren't used to having to constantly create their own entertainment, like "back in the day". When I was a teenager, there was NO: Internet, cell-phones, TiVo/DVRs, not many VCRs, and cable TV had just started becoming a thing (with few channels) -- before that it was just ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS.
Hah good one. There's no limit on a corporation's "need" for money.
While I don't generally disagree, this comment was more to contrast that Facebook *depends* on your data to make money (as I said later in the sentence).
I disagree. Trump *benefits* from WaPo attacks because WaPo is seen as elitist, what better proof to your base that you're doing the right thing than when a "swamp-supporting" newspaper is upset with you.
You mean the "swamp-supporting" newspaper that investigated, uncovered and reported the Nixon / Watergate scandal that lead to President Nixon's impeachment and resignation? Can't imagine why Trump and his base would be upset with them... Oh, wait.
Hasn't Trump been the master of manipulating the tax code to his own benefit? Didn't he say during one of the debates that not paying taxes for multiple years, because of a bankruptcy filing, made him "smart"?
So... Instead, we should have elected Trump's accountant.
Continuing that point, Sears was a great retailer for a *long* time, but they failed to innovate and keep up with the changing landscape. I'm not sure their purchases of Kmart and Lands' End and sale of the Craftsman brand did them any favors in the long run. More recently Sears is basically owned and operated by a bunch of hedge fund people who seem intent on chopping it up, selling things off and picking the carcass clean.
You're missing some of the point. The US Congress has mandated the USPS to completely pre-pay into its retirement fund at (a) an accelerated rate for (b) all their employees, even ones who aren't even close to retirement. The USPS would be fine financially if they could pay into the fund more reasonably, like every other corporation does (that still have pensions). This was done by Congress partly to hinder the USPS and foster a case to privatize it -- 'cause "it's losing money". Seemingly, you've drunk their Kool-Aid.
Do we all just reflexively side either pro or anti Trump then proceed to rationalize...
Trump's problem with Amazon is really about his dislike of Jeff Bezos and The Washington Post (Jeff owns both) and the things the newspaper writes about Trump. Trump calling things "fake news" doesn't make them actually so...
Not trolling (really), but... to address your comments. The problem with Trump is that about 99% of everything he says is either flat-out wrong or easily-provably false. The safe, rational bet is to stand on the opposite side of whatever he's talking about.
The tweet in the TFS looks to be full of errors and/or half-truths, except for the part about harming retailers -- but is that really Amazon's fault or the people and retailers that sell through them. As to the other statements, Amazon *pays* the USPS to delivery things, albeit at a discount -- just like FedEx and UPS do for some last-mile deliveries. As for how much taxes Amazon and their retailers pay, that's on the State and Federal Congresses and the laws they pass. However, I have trouble believing that Trump and the Republicans want a rich person and company to pay *more* taxes, especially after the tax hand-job they gave their buddies and themselves in the recent tax bill.
As an Apple user, I'm honestly surprised by this and don't expect it to continue for much longer.
To be fair, Apple sells actual products and provides services for those products. Facebook just provides a service "for free". Apple doesn't need money from your data while Facebook depends on it. The value of Apple depends on the value their products provide to you. The value of Facebook and their service depends on the value of your data - to you and others.
... for now.
As an Apple user, I'm honestly surprised by this and don't expect it to continue for much longer.
To be fair, Apple sells actual products and provides services for those products. Facebook just provides a service "for free". Apple doesn't need money from your data while Facebook depends on it. The value of Apple depends on the value their products provide to you. The value of Facebook and their service depends on the value of your data - to you and others.
When I was a sysadmin, my systems were set up to page/text me when a problem occurred. If it was ultimately something that had a business impact (like having to keep a system down outside a maintenance window), I was the one calling my boss at 2 am... He always took those calls from me as he knew I wouldn't be calling if it wasn't important and I needed input or had to give him a heads up.
In the best of situations, it works both ways and the boss doesn't call you unless it's important and you're really needed. You both know the other will answer and you can count on each other to do what's needed to get the job done and also not abuse that trust or relationship. Less optimal situations may require that you find another job.
Can you retrain thousands of older, high school educated factory workers to become coders, creative types, etc.? Even if you theoretically could, would they want to,...
That's a good point. Removing "needing the money" from the equation, blue-collar jobs are often vastly different than white-collar jobs and appeal to different people differently. Factory jobs are usually 9-5 (or some shift) schedule with no responsibilities outside those hours. We all know that coding, sysadmin and other high-tech and/or creative jobs have more fluid hours. Sure, some of like that and are wired well for that, but not everyone is.
There are reasons other than lack of or access to higher education that people choose blue-collar jobs. There are lots of people with 160 IQs washing dishes at Denny's (I read this in a book called "Gifted Grownups" about gifted adults people who don't achieve what others would call their potential -- either by choice or circumstance.)
In addition, retrained workers also have to compete with worker with longer experience and, perhaps, higher education/training in the fields they are trying to enter.
Just what is wrong with lower skilled people getting less income? Or inversely, what's wrong with paying higher skilled people more? You should be paid based on what you bring to the table. If all you offer is a warm body that's nominally slightly smarter than a chimp, we should pay you slightly more than we would a chimp.
The first official (and required by the Dodd-Frank laws) CEO vs. Employee pay ratio reports are in, noting the average ratio is currently about 270:1 (it was 42:1 in 1980) with the CEO of Honeywell, Darius Adamczyk, topping the list at 333 times as much as a median Honeywell employee last year. From: http://www.latimes.com/busines...:
The raw figures are these: Adamczyk, $16.8 million. Median employee: $50,296.
I can't seriously believe any CEO brings that much to any table, and this kind of disparity implies we're all worker chimps.
Slashdot Mirror
As a non-us citizen, what is the distinction between an ATM and a Debit card for you?
Typically, one can only use an ATM card with an ATM machine, while a Debit card can be used like a Credit Card with merchants. Some banks offer combined ATM/Debit cards that work with both cases. Those physical cards are usually issued by the bank through the vendor that provides the bank's Debit/Credit card services, like VISA or MasterCard. I don't want a debit card, just an ATM card. (a) I have a credit card with a high limit and pay it off every month and (b) don't want my checking account funds available directly through a debit card as it's less safe and see "a".
Debit cards are an immediate form of "check" payment. I'll use a CC in those cases, which (c) provides a 30-day float on my money and (d) more safety as none of my funds are exchanged until I pay the CC bill. Yes, debit cards typically provide fraud guarantees, but the money is taken immediately and you must request it be returned, unlike a CC in which one simply disputes a charge w/o paying it (or not) until the dispute is resolved.
If something dicey happens on your credit card, it is the vendor's problem -- the vendor does not have money yet. If something dicey happens on your debit card, it is your problem -- the money already left the account.
I do not have a debit card. After I cut up the fourth debit card and demanded a clean ATM card with no debit feature, the fifth time I just changed banks.
A few years ago SunTrust wanted to "upgrade" my ATM card to an ATM/Debit card. I wrote a letter to the President of SunTrust explaining my reasons for not wanting an Debit card but rather just an ATM card and threatened to move my accounts to another bank if they would not accommodate me. A week later I got a call from his assistant who told me they got many other such requests and would be sending me an ATM only card -- been using it ever since.
Apparently, when they switched from VISA to MasterCard as the vendor for their ATM, Debit and Credit cards, they initially chose to issue ATM/Debit and Credit cards, but not just ATM cards. They still issue ATM/Debit cards as the default but will now issue an ATM only card instead on request.
Debit cards are unnecessary if you have a credit card and you pay off your balance every month.
It's very easy to quickly consume media, especially from the web - news, games, pics, texts, tweets, videos, etc... - but those sources often don't get refreshed as quickly. For example, I have a *bunch* of free time and I can easily read through all the various news sources without them posting anything new for a while.
I'm guessing that youngsters aren't used to having to constantly create their own entertainment, like "back in the day". When I was a teenager, there was NO: Internet, cell-phones, TiVo/DVRs, not many VCRs, and cable TV had just started becoming a thing (with few channels) -- before that it was just ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS.
Who modded that down, ...
Though your ID would seem to indicate otherwise, you must be new here. :-) :-(
Things get modded down because "reasons".
Apple doesn't need money from your data
Hah good one. There's no limit on a corporation's "need" for money.
While I don't generally disagree, this comment was more to contrast that Facebook *depends* on your data to make money (as I said later in the sentence).
....our Sun is not the brightest.
Neither are any of the mentally challenged that kneel before the genitalia of the cult of EU.
Finally, a simple explanation for Brexit.
How do you mod True and Insightful?
The most common way? +1 Troll :-)
Comcast Supports Ban On Paid Prioritization, Except For 'Specialized Services'
Like access to prompt, polite Customer Support. Just kidding... we're funny.
Sorry. Not on Facebook -- again, on the right side of History :-)
The overhead for smaller businesses is much higher than for Amazon, not to mention the cost of a storefront.
And here's an example. I recently purchased the science-fiction novel, "The Three-Body Problem".
Guess who I bought it from.
If anything it reinforces the perception of people on the left as smug.
Perhaps, but more so than not, no the right side of history.
I disagree. Trump *benefits* from WaPo attacks because WaPo is seen as elitist, what better proof to your base that you're doing the right thing than when a "swamp-supporting" newspaper is upset with you.
You mean the "swamp-supporting" newspaper that investigated, uncovered and reported the Nixon / Watergate scandal that lead to President Nixon's impeachment and resignation? Can't imagine why Trump and his base would be upset with them... Oh, wait.
Hasn't Trump been the master of manipulating the tax code to his own benefit? Didn't he say during one of the debates that not paying taxes for multiple years, because of a bankruptcy filing, made him "smart"?
So... Instead, we should have elected Trump's accountant.
The problem is Trump is a think skinned little twat that acts like a toddler with diapers full of shit; his supporters aren't much better.
Ironically, the word you're looking for is "snowflake". :-)
Amazon is just Sears-on-your-iPad.
Continuing that point, Sears was a great retailer for a *long* time, but they failed to innovate and keep up with the changing landscape. I'm not sure their purchases of Kmart and Lands' End and sale of the Craftsman brand did them any favors in the long run. More recently Sears is basically owned and operated by a bunch of hedge fund people who seem intent on chopping it up, selling things off and picking the carcass clean.
Sears has a bigger problem than plunging sales
Sears workers describe decay in failing stores
You're missing some of the point. The US Congress has mandated the USPS to completely pre-pay into its retirement fund at (a) an accelerated rate for (b) all their employees, even ones who aren't even close to retirement. The USPS would be fine financially if they could pay into the fund more reasonably, like every other corporation does (that still have pensions). This was done by Congress partly to hinder the USPS and foster a case to privatize it -- 'cause "it's losing money". Seemingly, you've drunk their Kool-Aid.
Do we all just reflexively side either pro or anti Trump then proceed to rationalize ...
Trump's problem with Amazon is really about his dislike of Jeff Bezos and The Washington Post (Jeff owns both) and the things the newspaper writes about Trump. Trump calling things "fake news" doesn't make them actually so...
Not trolling (really), but... to address your comments. The problem with Trump is that about 99% of everything he says is either flat-out wrong or easily-provably false. The safe, rational bet is to stand on the opposite side of whatever he's talking about.
The tweet in the TFS looks to be full of errors and/or half-truths, except for the part about harming retailers -- but is that really Amazon's fault or the people and retailers that sell through them. As to the other statements, Amazon *pays* the USPS to delivery things, albeit at a discount -- just like FedEx and UPS do for some last-mile deliveries. As for how much taxes Amazon and their retailers pay, that's on the State and Federal Congresses and the laws they pass. However, I have trouble believing that Trump and the Republicans want a rich person and company to pay *more* taxes, especially after the tax hand-job they gave their buddies and themselves in the recent tax bill.
Remember that the ratio is to the "median" (middle) employee salary, not average.
... for now.
As an Apple user, I'm honestly surprised by this and don't expect it to continue for much longer.
To be fair, Apple sells actual products and provides services for those products. Facebook just provides a service "for free". Apple doesn't need money from your data while Facebook depends on it. The value of Apple depends on the value their products provide to you. The value of Facebook and their service depends on the value of your data - to you and others.
Exactly.
I got your back Fake Tim Cook :-)
... for now.
As an Apple user, I'm honestly surprised by this and don't expect it to continue for much longer.
To be fair, Apple sells actual products and provides services for those products. Facebook just provides a service "for free". Apple doesn't need money from your data while Facebook depends on it. The value of Apple depends on the value their products provide to you. The value of Facebook and their service depends on the value of your data - to you and others.
Fixing one problem in haste sometimes creates other problems.
For example, as Jason Mendoza, from The Good Place, noted:
Jason: Any time I had a problem, I threw a Molotov Cocktail and, boom, I had a different problem.
When I was a sysadmin, my systems were set up to page/text me when a problem occurred. If it was ultimately something that had a business impact (like having to keep a system down outside a maintenance window), I was the one calling my boss at 2 am... He always took those calls from me as he knew I wouldn't be calling if it wasn't important and I needed input or had to give him a heads up.
In the best of situations, it works both ways and the boss doesn't call you unless it's important and you're really needed. You both know the other will answer and you can count on each other to do what's needed to get the job done and also not abuse that trust or relationship. Less optimal situations may require that you find another job.
Can you retrain thousands of older, high school educated factory workers to become coders, creative types, etc.? Even if you theoretically could, would they want to, ...
That's a good point. Removing "needing the money" from the equation, blue-collar jobs are often vastly different than white-collar jobs and appeal to different people differently. Factory jobs are usually 9-5 (or some shift) schedule with no responsibilities outside those hours. We all know that coding, sysadmin and other high-tech and/or creative jobs have more fluid hours. Sure, some of like that and are wired well for that, but not everyone is.
There are reasons other than lack of or access to higher education that people choose blue-collar jobs. There are lots of people with 160 IQs washing dishes at Denny's (I read this in a book called "Gifted Grownups" about gifted adults people who don't achieve what others would call their potential -- either by choice or circumstance.)
In addition, retrained workers also have to compete with worker with longer experience and, perhaps, higher education/training in the fields they are trying to enter.
Just what is wrong with lower skilled people getting less income? Or inversely, what's wrong with paying higher skilled people more? You should be paid based on what you bring to the table. If all you offer is a warm body that's nominally slightly smarter than a chimp, we should pay you slightly more than we would a chimp.
The first official (and required by the Dodd-Frank laws) CEO vs. Employee pay ratio reports are in, noting the average ratio is currently about 270:1 (it was 42:1 in 1980) with the CEO of Honeywell, Darius Adamczyk, topping the list at 333 times as much as a median Honeywell employee last year. From: http://www.latimes.com/busines...:
The raw figures are these: Adamczyk, $16.8 million. Median employee: $50,296.
I can't seriously believe any CEO brings that much to any table, and this kind of disparity implies we're all worker chimps.
Until now changing settings had been complex, spread over at least 20 screens, which had frustrated users.
Which was actually the objective - make it too long / complicated so people don't read / change things.