MY advice to merchants? Don't ship to Singapore, Eastern Europe, or Central America. To processors, don't sign merchants in Singapore, Eastern Europe, or Bahamas.
Safekey, 3DSecure, etc have some potential. AVS and shipping checks also.
But the simplest way is to use the stolen card to buy gift cards, use these to purchase merchandise, and fence that via reship or whatever, even eBay.
Once the gift card is used, the link to the original cardholder is lost, AVS is useless. In fact, use out of town mules to use the gift cards, bus them in and out, and even the video of them at the register is useless. Nobody in Seattle is going to look at mug shots from Sacramento to figure out who used that hot gift card at Nordstrom's.
EMV cards will stop this. Then it's on to Amazon Prime and same-day delivery to the mark's home address, where your mule just happens to be waiting in the driveway for their daughter - while the actual resident is at work. This scam is used to hijack cell phones ordered fraudulently and delivered home while the residents are away working for a living. AVS can't stop this. Only vigilance, and maybe SMS alerts of purchases over a certain amount, though with cell phone financing you can just put the down payment on the card and walk away...
Apple Pay got slammed with various signup scams initially, had to fix that, the issuers and processors have to be quick and responsive. The crooks are clever, and usually quicker..
That and nobody really knew what the F)(* was going on in the other nation. Until we got more spies in country and much better reconnaissance than the U-2 could deliver we were guessing. And guessing wrong was assumed to be terribly bad.
The Cuban missile crisis being a case in point. Proving we could launch rockets as big as we cared to was a weird saber rattling exercise, and impressing third-world leaders let us build bases everywhere and such.
I remember. I kept a scrapbook. Sputnik was a big deal. Not so much the Redstones and Atlases blowing up on the pad. My father should have bought stock in Florida concrete plants.
Other than the atmosphere, this is entirely demonstrable in the Sahara, Taklamakan, or Mojave deserts. Tents. The Apollo LEM was made with foil walls, FPS, double-walled tents with a minimal atmosphere inside seem entirely possible, and once established are a fairly good base from which to build better, unless we decide to tunnel down and go underground.
Despite the warnings, I'm not really seeing the insurmountable habitat issues. Getting it there is still the big problem, and NASA shows no signs of being very creative at that. I expect a Tesla to get there first.
"Until then, you're much better off building condos in the sahara with nice swimming pools because that will be a a lot cheaper and a MUCH MUCH easier sell."
Building them in Southern California worked. Just fix the plumbing in the Sahara, problem solved. Ditto for Mars, though NASA seems to think they only need some pipes on the planet, not pipes all the way back to Earth.
As a self-described Conservative Republican, my complaints with Boehner, McConnell et al are:
0. Boenher stated that winning Republican majorities in the House and Senate would give him and McConnell the ability to pass legislation to accomplish the stated Republican goals of repealing the ACA, forcing the President to appoint more moderate judges etc., and enact tax reform to grow the economy.
1. When the House and Senate (the Senate being the 'problem' fixed) were in fact won by the Republicans, Boehner then explained that without a Republican President, they could not get legislation signed into law, and lacking a majority sufficient to override a veto, they still could not do anything.
2. Then Boehner explained that passing such legislation as even resolutions to temporarily defund Planned Parenthood couldn't be done because to do so would likely result in a 'government shutdown', which would further tarnish the Republican Party reputation, risk the presidential election, and so result in at least four more years of inaction.
Why am I so disillusioned by this?
- If winning Republican majorities in the House and Senate results in continuing gridlock, is the solution now to control the Executive and Legislative branches outright? Is this a reasonable expectation? Mr. Boehner, your requirement that this be done so that you can in fact govern is unrealistic and frankly wrong. You have failed.
- And when given the Congressional majorities you said you needed, you failed to act. Even to send those bills we expected you to, for a certain veto, if for no other reason than to demonstrate the difference between the two dominant political parties. If there is in fact one.
- Then, if for no other reason than to at least do what you said you would, you failed to pass even minimal legislation to accomplish what your constituents and fellow Republicans overwhelmingly demand. You have ignored your pwn party faithful.
From my vantage point, Mr. Boehner acts the same way no matter the majority he has in the House, fails to act at all, and indeed continues to avoid either confronting or compromising with the Democratic Party. at least, we cannot see any meaningful action.
If he will not act, and if he correct and without the Presidency nothing can be accomplished, then does it matter who is Speaker? I say yes, it does:
> First, a new Speaker must begin meeting with Democrats. If a veto-proof coalition is necessary, form it. Find a way. OR report to us that indeed the effort was made, and so far individual Democrats refuse to consider compromise. This I doubt, but I'm unaware of even the effort by the current Republican House leadership. And no effort to show us that...
> A new Speaker must make the point that traditional efforts, such as adding amendments to budget resolutions, are not 'Republican shutdown theater', despite the claim. If the House sends this to the Senate, and the Senate also passes it, the President then can decide if he believes this or some other provision is sufficiently outrageous that he will veto the resolution, let the government shut down as much as it will, and consequences be damned. Democrats in the Congress can then choose to compromise or not, and so register their intention to let the government fail rather than pass such intolerable provisions. Eventually one side or the other will surrender.
Lightning fried an entire sheriff's department I had the joy of supporting some years ago. Not just NICs, since most were built onto the motherboards. Not just switches, but UPSs, radios, telephone systems, lighting, even the main UHF antenna disappeared. They dispatched out of a car for a few days.
We got their network and PCs replaced about 4 hours before the software people arrived and rebuilt the 911 system. The base station was replaced a half hour or so before we finished. Emergencies. God help me I love them so.
Us Mericans forget that most of the world doesn't recognize individual rights that we both do and have historically required our government to protect and preserve. Free speech is not well protected in most of the world. Possession of weapons similarly is not a recognized right in much of the world. Due process, freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, many of our rights are not considered by the rest of the world to be rights at all.
We are really quite different, thankfully so. We should be careful of how we change our nation. These rights are hard to keep.
this 'right to be forgotten' was never about public interest. It's about private interest, the real interest some individuals have in avoiding unpleasant or downright nasty information about them being available.
Sometimes that's just not really so easy to defend. But the EU has been fooled into this.
Most of the 'problems' can be solved or overcome
on
Let's Not Go To Mars
·
· Score: 1
The living conditions described in several posts are disturbingly similar to those on the ISS.
Sending heavier equipment in advance would solve some problems upon arrival, such as building habitat, industrial processes, etc. Even sending them well in advance so a crew has some hope that their tools and machines will be available to them, which makes the voyage somewhat more tolerable.
Solar power on Mars is not as useful as on Earth, but not without some application. So nuclear power is probably the answer, and we will have to decide if we want to do that.
Obviously food and water are critical, and if the plans to grow and extract these on Mars fails, then the crew returns unexpectedly soon. If that's not possible, then we don't send people we want back, or who want to come back if it doesn't work out.
All of this is basic planning. It's not the planning, it's the execution. And budget. I vote we try the Moon first, on a small scale. Useful experience.
The A-10 is an excellent LAS aircraft. It's being retired for a variety of reasons; reduce expenses to funnel money to the F-35, to create a need for a LAS replacement, to reduce the number of airframes and enhance the need for a multi role fighter.
The MQ-1/MQ-9 are prop driven, but the RQ-170 has a turbofan, and surveillance drones get repurchased and weaponised. I suspect props were not chosen for some inherent advantage any more than slow speed also aids the pilot in managing a difficult task. But these all do make prop driven drones useful and the current state of the art.
There are effective countermeasures against MANPADs. Some of the 70s-era stuff still works.
I'm always disappointed when straight-up strobe blinders aren't deployed, but I know the collateral damage is a problem. At least the make the MANPAD incorporate some sort of sensing and targeting assistance, which can then be challenged with always-on IR jamming.
But, admittedly, the standard ECM paradigm against all surface launches was to deny the targeting long enough to exit the area, or illuminate the launch and let something destroy it. With fast movers this is measured in seconds. LAS missions measure this in multiple minutes, and have a habit of coming back for more. It is a tough environment. The A-10 has the disadvantage of jet exhaust, the A-29 has a much lower IR signature. But A-10s didn't fall out of the sky with SA-7s stuck in them.
How about the Army buys the A-10- from the Air Force? The Marines and Navy IWO can buy A-29s. The F-35 can then be delayed another 10 years, to great benefit.
Hell, of they don't have skills in XP and 2003, it's either train or hire new. Those are legacy tech, your staff should be nailing these now.
And if they can get control of the existing tech, they have a chance at mastering the new. If they can't even handle the old, well, a new crew is in your future.
A turboprop sure could be a fabulous close ground support aircraft. So could the A-10, and we already have those.
Trying to develop the F-35 into a jack-of-all-trades is proving to top expensive, too difficult, too much. We really should reconsider some of the multiple roles projected for the F-35, and keep the A-10.
The right way is to detect the characteristic driving pattern and the OBD port in use. Port in use, presume testing. When the driving parameters match the test cycles, control emissions to spec for those specific conditions. Driveability is not being tested.
Once the port is closed, back to performance parameters, emissions be damned.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, it is complicated.
Simpler to tap your phone. Link to a prepaid card, low balance, manage refills offline.
MY advice to merchants? Don't ship to Singapore, Eastern Europe, or Central America. To processors, don't sign merchants in Singapore, Eastern Europe, or Bahamas.
Safekey, 3DSecure, etc have some potential. AVS and shipping checks also.
But the simplest way is to use the stolen card to buy gift cards, use these to purchase merchandise, and fence that via reship or whatever, even eBay.
Once the gift card is used, the link to the original cardholder is lost, AVS is useless. In fact, use out of town mules to use the gift cards, bus them in and out, and even the video of them at the register is useless. Nobody in Seattle is going to look at mug shots from Sacramento to figure out who used that hot gift card at Nordstrom's.
EMV cards will stop this. Then it's on to Amazon Prime and same-day delivery to the mark's home address, where your mule just happens to be waiting in the driveway for their daughter - while the actual resident is at work. This scam is used to hijack cell phones ordered fraudulently and delivered home while the residents are away working for a living. AVS can't stop this. Only vigilance, and maybe SMS alerts of purchases over a certain amount, though with cell phone financing you can just put the down payment on the card and walk away...
Apple Pay got slammed with various signup scams initially, had to fix that, the issuers and processors have to be quick and responsive. The crooks are clever, and usually quicker..
That and nobody really knew what the F)(* was going on in the other nation. Until we got more spies in country and much better reconnaissance than the U-2 could deliver we were guessing. And guessing wrong was assumed to be terribly bad.
The Cuban missile crisis being a case in point. Proving we could launch rockets as big as we cared to was a weird saber rattling exercise, and impressing third-world leaders let us build bases everywhere and such.
I remember. I kept a scrapbook. Sputnik was a big deal. Not so much the Redstones and Atlases blowing up on the pad. My father should have bought stock in Florida concrete plants.
Why is Phobos a good sport for a control station, but the surface of Mars is not?
You'an engineer, you have a reason. I'm not, I'm almost dying to know.
" The US should tell Europe: get your sh*t together and clean up your own backyard, or we will deal with the consequences."
FTFY
The USA has a long history of policing the world for the benefit if the USA AND the world.
Sing the Marine Corps Hymn in your head.Know where Tripoli is? Why Marines were there? When? How the Marines were established?
And it worked.
Other than the atmosphere, this is entirely demonstrable in the Sahara, Taklamakan, or Mojave deserts. Tents. The Apollo LEM was made with foil walls, FPS, double-walled tents with a minimal atmosphere inside seem entirely possible, and once established are a fairly good base from which to build better, unless we decide to tunnel down and go underground.
Despite the warnings, I'm not really seeing the insurmountable habitat issues. Getting it there is still the big problem, and NASA shows no signs of being very creative at that. I expect a Tesla to get there first.
Don't forget to make the return mission independent of surface assistance. They will be on their own, right?
"Until then, you're much better off building condos in the sahara with nice swimming pools because that will be a a lot cheaper and a MUCH MUCH easier sell."
Building them in Southern California worked. Just fix the plumbing in the Sahara, problem solved. Ditto for Mars, though NASA seems to think they only need some pipes on the planet, not pipes all the way back to Earth.
As a self-described Conservative Republican, my complaints with Boehner, McConnell et al are:
0. Boenher stated that winning Republican majorities in the House and Senate would give him and McConnell the ability to pass legislation to accomplish the stated Republican goals of repealing the ACA, forcing the President to appoint more moderate judges etc., and enact tax reform to grow the economy.
1. When the House and Senate (the Senate being the 'problem' fixed) were in fact won by the Republicans, Boehner then explained that without a Republican President, they could not get legislation signed into law, and lacking a majority sufficient to override a veto, they still could not do anything.
2. Then Boehner explained that passing such legislation as even resolutions to temporarily defund Planned Parenthood couldn't be done because to do so would likely result in a 'government shutdown', which would further tarnish the Republican Party reputation, risk the presidential election, and so result in at least four more years of inaction.
Why am I so disillusioned by this?
- If winning Republican majorities in the House and Senate results in continuing gridlock, is the solution now to control the Executive and Legislative branches outright? Is this a reasonable expectation? Mr. Boehner, your requirement that this be done so that you can in fact govern is unrealistic and frankly wrong. You have failed.
- And when given the Congressional majorities you said you needed, you failed to act. Even to send those bills we expected you to, for a certain veto, if for no other reason than to demonstrate the difference between the two dominant political parties. If there is in fact one.
- Then, if for no other reason than to at least do what you said you would, you failed to pass even minimal legislation to accomplish what your constituents and fellow Republicans overwhelmingly demand. You have ignored your pwn party faithful.
From my vantage point, Mr. Boehner acts the same way no matter the majority he has in the House, fails to act at all, and indeed continues to avoid either confronting or compromising with the Democratic Party. at least, we cannot see any meaningful action.
If he will not act, and if he correct and without the Presidency nothing can be accomplished, then does it matter who is Speaker? I say yes, it does:
> First, a new Speaker must begin meeting with Democrats. If a veto-proof coalition is necessary, form it. Find a way. OR report to us that indeed the effort was made, and so far individual Democrats refuse to consider compromise. This I doubt, but I'm unaware of even the effort by the current Republican House leadership. And no effort to show us that...
> A new Speaker must make the point that traditional efforts, such as adding amendments to budget resolutions, are not 'Republican shutdown theater', despite the claim. If the House sends this to the Senate, and the Senate also passes it, the President then can decide if he believes this or some other provision is sufficiently outrageous that he will veto the resolution, let the government shut down as much as it will, and consequences be damned. Democrats in the Congress can then choose to compromise or not, and so register their intention to let the government fail rather than pass such intolerable provisions. Eventually one side or the other will surrender.
> A new Speaker must at least try.
Lightning fried an entire sheriff's department I had the joy of supporting some years ago. Not just NICs, since most were built onto the motherboards. Not just switches, but UPSs, radios, telephone systems, lighting, even the main UHF antenna disappeared. They dispatched out of a car for a few days.
We got their network and PCs replaced about 4 hours before the software people arrived and rebuilt the 911 system. The base station was replaced a half hour or so before we finished. Emergencies. God help me I love them so.
Good reason to set up the cameras in your data center.
" If you're following Information Security best practice you shouldn't have any unconnected sockets in your office"
As in, "If you're following Information Security best practice you shouldn't provision for expansion or unexpected demand".
Sure.
It's a Layer 1 attack.
Same as a lightning strike. Rare, but fascinating and devastating when they hit dead on.
Us Mericans forget that most of the world doesn't recognize individual rights that we both do and have historically required our government to protect and preserve. Free speech is not well protected in most of the world. Possession of weapons similarly is not a recognized right in much of the world. Due process, freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, many of our rights are not considered by the rest of the world to be rights at all.
We are really quite different, thankfully so. We should be careful of how we change our nation. These rights are hard to keep.
this 'right to be forgotten' was never about public interest. It's about private interest, the real interest some individuals have in avoiding unpleasant or downright nasty information about them being available.
Sometimes that's just not really so easy to defend. But the EU has been fooled into this.
The living conditions described in several posts are disturbingly similar to those on the ISS.
Sending heavier equipment in advance would solve some problems upon arrival, such as building habitat, industrial processes, etc. Even sending them well in advance so a crew has some hope that their tools and machines will be available to them, which makes the voyage somewhat more tolerable.
Solar power on Mars is not as useful as on Earth, but not without some application. So nuclear power is probably the answer, and we will have to decide if we want to do that.
Obviously food and water are critical, and if the plans to grow and extract these on Mars fails, then the crew returns unexpectedly soon. If that's not possible, then we don't send people we want back, or who want to come back if it doesn't work out.
All of this is basic planning. It's not the planning, it's the execution. And budget. I vote we try the Moon first, on a small scale. Useful experience.
The A-10 is an excellent LAS aircraft. It's being retired for a variety of reasons; reduce expenses to funnel money to the F-35, to create a need for a LAS replacement, to reduce the number of airframes and enhance the need for a multi role fighter.
The MQ-1/MQ-9 are prop driven, but the RQ-170 has a turbofan, and surveillance drones get repurchased and weaponised. I suspect props were not chosen for some inherent advantage any more than slow speed also aids the pilot in managing a difficult task. But these all do make prop driven drones useful and the current state of the art.
There are effective countermeasures against MANPADs. Some of the 70s-era stuff still works.
I'm always disappointed when straight-up strobe blinders aren't deployed, but I know the collateral damage is a problem. At least the make the MANPAD incorporate some sort of sensing and targeting assistance, which can then be challenged with always-on IR jamming.
But, admittedly, the standard ECM paradigm against all surface launches was to deny the targeting long enough to exit the area, or illuminate the launch and let something destroy it. With fast movers this is measured in seconds. LAS missions measure this in multiple minutes, and have a habit of coming back for more. It is a tough environment. The A-10 has the disadvantage of jet exhaust, the A-29 has a much lower IR signature. But A-10s didn't fall out of the sky with SA-7s stuck in them.
How about the Army buys the A-10- from the Air Force? The Marines and Navy IWO can buy A-29s. The F-35 can then be delayed another 10 years, to great benefit.
Hell, of they don't have skills in XP and 2003, it's either train or hire new. Those are legacy tech, your staff should be nailing these now.
And if they can get control of the existing tech, they have a chance at mastering the new. If they can't even handle the old, well, a new crew is in your future.
A turboprop sure could be a fabulous close ground support aircraft. So could the A-10, and we already have those.
Trying to develop the F-35 into a jack-of-all-trades is proving to top expensive, too difficult, too much. We really should reconsider some of the multiple roles projected for the F-35, and keep the A-10.
Emission standards apply to light trucks (SUVs, etc). Just different ones.
The right way is to detect the characteristic driving pattern and the OBD port in use. Port in use, presume testing. When the driving parameters match the test cycles, control emissions to spec for those specific conditions. Driveability is not being tested.
Once the port is closed, back to performance parameters, emissions be damned.