Re: there are plenty of better and cheaper competitors
The only serious contender I have seen is on a few websites is google checkout. which obviously is a whole different kind of bad.
3884 publicly visible posts • joined 22 Jun 2009
I always thought they should have used the iPod Touch form factor & case as their low-rent smart phone model.
Forget aping the 5s with the 5c. Put a basic smart phone (crap camera, no 4g) in a iPod touch shiny case and it will set like hot cakes. Important - don't lose the slimness. No iphone has ever felt as good in my hand as my touch does.
Where does this no rights for foreigners begin and end in USian law?
Presumably if Im on trial for murder I don't get treated much differently whether I'm from the US or not.
(i.e. access to the shitest lawyer I cant afford and banged up on remand in some corporate run SuperMax hell hole)
Other than immigration and extra-border type scenarios where does the different treatment begin and end?
Who is behind Public Citizen - whilst their analysis is correct that this may give google an unfair advantage - the argument that it impacts any consumer is completely spurious. The only impact this will have is on other big corporates who don't have access to Skyboxes data.
Any "consumer" who dabbles in commodities markets is already so outclassed by the big institutions the skybox deal would be a tiny sliver of an increment. Take most traders out of the support structures they have in banks and they would struggle to compete - let alone the average joe on the street.
Fact is that if you are playing the markets for anything more than steady long term growth you are a tiny tiny minnow in an ocean chock full of sharks.
fuck off.
Honestly GCHQ must make it a priority to gather as much dirt on the Home secretary as possible. Every one in recent history has been a rampant authoritarian fascist on this subject regardless of their political persuasion.
Either that or they are Manchurian Candidating every home sec upon apointment.
I can't speak for Canadian tax authority but in the UK I don't see why there would be different rules for bitcoin than there already are for currency and commodity trading. The volatility issue happens with those too. Generally speaking you pay tax on any profits you make on your investment, subject to legitimate tax deductions, allowances and tax mitigation methods.
Generally you pay cap gains at 25% over the first 10k although there are income tax options too.
I for one am looking forward with amusement to the first bitcoin ISA. :)
I would have thought the beauty of using cats is that once you reach a critical mass of them - it doesn't matter whether 1 cat or many cats pass by your target - you can be assured that one will at some point.
Besides the logical next step is equipping them with Google Glasses and guiding them to their target with judicious application of AR fluttering birds and scampering mice.
Thanks Matt - funniest post ever. You have obviously never worked in financial services.
Every bank CFO and CIO has behaved exactly as you have assumed they wont.
Even if they wont - there is some ladder climbing PHB below them who will.
Source :10 years FS IT experience.
"The UK's disdain for customising commercial software is, however, something Australia may do well to consider."
Really - not my experience. My statement would be more along the lines of :
"The UK's inability to restructure processes to support out of box functionality rather than mandate bespoke builds is something Australia would do well to avoid as an example."
to be fair this is not just a UK Govt failing but industry as well. I would be strongly surprised as to whether most other nations are any different. I also hold the vendors to blame for COTS software that is a million miles away from real world use cases - otherwise where would they get their consultancy revenue from?
Example - every Sap programme I've ever heard of.
Mybe its only my reading of the article but the inference I was making was that whilst Datalink had been found guilty of using trade secrets in Canada - it hadn't in the US. Meaning that it is still free to help sell its products in the US, hence having distributors - that seeing a crafty buck - set up websites that can cover both US and Canada.
I have to wonder here if the root cause is failure of the aggrieved party to go after Datalink in the US via copyright, patents or what ever other due process exists and therefore instead getting the Canuck judge to extend the reach of his judgment into the US - albeit only for those results accessible by a Canuck domain (.ca).
The fact that the distributors are playing whack-a-mole with google over the domain names - suggests to me they may be a little bit shady. i.e. the only reason to try to get around the block is if they know of and are deliberately trying to flout the judges order.
Having said that - with their vaunted search prowess Google should excel at whack-a-mole of this type.
That's pretty much Crapita's raison d'etre. Take something of value, borg it, and toss the drained husk away.
Crapita is basically a vampire - sucking all the goodness out of its acquisitions with no long term benefit to anyone - just getting a temporary prop to its balance sheet and underneath is just a withered husk itself.
Where's Buffy when you need her?
Your terminology is wrong and your point poorly explained. Private banks are something different to high street banks. The word you were looking for was leverage.
And high street banks DO lend out deposits - albeit with a significant leverage ratio attached. ie if you can reasonably predict the rate of default you can actually afford to lend out more money than you actually have.
example. If you have an average amount owed at default is £100 on a £1000 loan, and you have £1000 worth of deposits, you can actually afford to leverage those £1000 deposits by lending 10 x £1000 out = £10,000 - which is how banks use debt to grease the wheels of the economy.
In reality the maths gets more complex when you add in the ratio of defaulters to non-defaults so the ratio can go sky high.
Plus one for the incomprehensible to mere mortals bit.
I was lucky(?) enough to be taught Molecular Physics as a proto-boffin by the great boffin Harry Kroto.
We were all 3rd year physics undergrads - not one of us understood a single word he said. The huddle around the teaching assistant who explained things to us mere mortals after class was the biggest I ever saw.
Sadly I neglected my nascent boffinry career for one in IT.
eh? What kind of basis do you have for the drivel you have just spouted?
I'm no MS fan but even ai can see there's a major difference between an in the open and up front court order and some NSA sponsored data slurp.
for the record they can't ignore this - they risk fines and jail time for contempt of court. Instead they are continuing to fight it at the legal level. It's also irrelevant if it's a publicity stunt - if it results in case law making the next chancers to try this much less likely to be sucessful then it serves its purpose.
Every US corp with a European base - and that's most of them - can see their cushy double Irish South sandwiches at risk from this so I suspect the behind the scenes pressure to squash this is immense.
And that's even before the case is examined on its legal merits which are dubious to say the least.
Interesting no-one mentions that Google have being doing exactly the same as Apple on android for years.
The stock keyboard on my Nexus 5 does Swype style typing out of the box.
Apparently "one faceless corp does same as another faceless corp" doesnt play well to the biases of the more bigoted of the commentard zealots on here.
No we dont. Informants generally make a conscious choice to inform. When you dont make that conscious choice you are just being used as a tool or a dupe.
Its an important point - most people dont seriously consider the data will be used against them, and in a right thinking and operating society they shouldnt have to.
Nice paranoia commentard. I presume that for consistencies sake you are NOT one of those who think the banks and ftse100 run the country?
This is what I love about conspiracy freaks - you only have to put 2 differing sets of them in a room and what the fur fly. Much more humane than badger baiting. Although there is always a danger that they will come up with a theory SOOOOO twisted it explains both opposing views.
Write 100 times
"Never ascribe to conspiracy what can be adequately explained by cockup"
Grow up you child.
Or alternatively shut down all your accounts, hand your house back and go and live on the streets somewhere.
On a more relevant note - I would question how closely the threat models are between say something like Zeus compared to what a state actor would employ which presumably is where most of the "govt" expertise lies. Besides how can we trust GCHQ and friends not to game the tests to weaken defenses in an area they are most interested it.
The bigger threat imo is espionage at a bank - not a massive money slurp.