Posts by marcellothearcane 99 publicly visible posts • joined 3 Sep 2020
I'm confused by the valuation - surely nobody would pay the $3m for this stolen property*, which is obvious by following the blockchain?
Like how if someone stole a famous and recognisable artwork, they wouldn't be able to sell it on.
Unless the theft here is just a dog-in-the-manger style denial of the original owners being able to sell them on; in which case, what's the motive?
*For an extremely permissive definition of property
Not even - the only unique (and non-fugible) thing about an NFT is an ID in the blockchain of choice. I could make an NFT pointing to exactly the same metadata/URI as yours - see the Ethereum NFT schema standard RFC here: https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-721
> Every NFT is identified by a unique uint256 ID inside the ERC-721 smart contract. This identifying number SHALL NOT change for the life of the contract. The pair (contract address, uint256 tokenId) will then be a globally unique and fully-qualified identifier for a specific asset on an Ethereum chain.
The request is probably something like "give me all the information you have on so-and-so, now" and IP addresses get carried along with that.
In a genuine emergency, more data is probably better than not enough, especially as someone would have to sift through it to see what is relevant.
Yes, but that's how the legal system works.
Rest assured*, the threats will be considered as an aggravating factor, which will mean a bigger punishment.
You have a much greater chance of conviction based on evidence, rather than hearsay - otherwise it's her word against his, and he could flatly deny it. With actual physical evidence of intending to track her (note they mention his wanting to know where she was to back up the claim), they will hopefully be able to create a restraining order.
Al Capone was finally arrested for tax evasion.
* I am not a lawyer.
They didn't notice because they didn't drive with it on.
As far as I can tell from the article, the tracker was installed after she had called the cops.
Welch, the affidavit says, eventually arrived at The Family Safety Center "where instead of coming inside, he approached [his girlfriend's] vehicle and squatted down beside the front passenger-side tire."
When officers inspected the vehicle, they apparently found an Apple Watch – determined to belong to Welch – strapped to one of the wheel's spokes.
Banks probably don't care - after all, they issued contactless bank cards that don't even need to be removed from your wallet (or pocket).
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/contactless-payment-card-theft-how-is-the-data-stolen-and-what-can-i-do-to-protect-myself-10409319.html
Granted, everyone loses from new malware.
However, a lot of malware-slingers are script-kiddies or worse, and just spit out old stuff which antivirus programs pick up.
Fine, nothing is really going to save you from a determined, targeted attack; but if antivirus saves my less-technical colleagues & grandparents, that's a good thing as far as I'm concerned.
I've had Eset delete malware attachments from our company's public-facing email address, which I'm thankful for.
Nation-states observe the principle of par in parem non habet imperium, 'Between equals there is no sovereign power'. This is affirmed in Article 2 (1) of the UN Charter, which holds that no state is in subjection to any other state. John Austin therefore asserted that 'so-called' international law, lacking a sovereign power and so unenforceable, was not really law at all, but "positive morality", consisting of "opinions and sentiments...more ethical than legal in nature."
No no, he doesn't sell any shares. He goes to the bank and says "give me a loan of $485m". The loan is secured based on the fact that he has access* to that and more in Amazon shares.
That's how rich people end up paying very little/no tax - their personal finances show massive debts, rather than vast amounts of money under the mattress.
*He doesn't really - Bezos couldn't sell any significant number of shares, as (a) if the owner sells shares in their company, it's bad news and the share price would tank, leading to (b) the market probably wouldn't buy them.
All too often, that's not an economically sound option.
A lot of the drivers are not financially stable enough to go without a job, and you can be sure that Amazon work you hard enough and for long enough hours to prevent you being able to find other opportunities.
And even then, I'd expect drivers to consider the devil they know to be better than the devil they don't.
It begs the question: *why* do they want so much data? I don't have a Facebook account, and I've never been contacted by them, and any advertising I've suffered (which is partially Google too) has either been absolutely irrelevant or something I've just looked at - which I don't see why they'd need my details for.
Is it just that there are some data fetishists at Facebook who collect data for its own sake?
If I understand correctly...
You can trace where it goes, but not the people at the end of it.
The ledger just shows "wallet abc123 sent 100 currencies to wallet def456".
The fun starts when you own lots of wallets, and split the money up and send it round in a complicated set of transactions - there are also services like banks where lots of people send plausibly legitimate money in and it comes out in various directions, but you can't work out which bits are the stolen money. You can also convert to any of the thousands of cryptocurrencies and send it across borders with ease.
It's all standard money laundering techniques which are old hat. Crypto just lets criminals have a new and fairly unreglated way of laundering it.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2023
