Since the losses due to card fraud are almost entirely borne by the banks, I have to assume it is more cost effective to take the losses than to chip all of the cards.
And do you suppose the bank's employees pay for the fraud out their own salaries? Of course not! The cost of fraud is paid by their honest customer's banking fees. Even if you as a customer get refunded by the bank, when a fraudulent transaction occurs on your account, the money has to come from somewhere.
Once one realizes this, then they realize that the banks have no incentive to pay for improved security, hence, the only reason that US banks haven't improved their security is because they would rather raise customer's bank fees instead of making the effort to try elliminate the problem.
I'm not sure if the original story did something to draw the readers attention to this analogy with the existence of the universe, but I don't recall that happening in the movie, had the screenplay writers done so, I may have been feeling more thoughtful afterwards, rather than mostly frustrated.
Donnie Darko for example was weird and arguably paradoxical, but the way it was done left me feeling very thoughtful at the end, which I appreciate, even after a few watches.
gurps_npc's comment does brings a minor amount of redemption to the plot, if that was indeed the intent of the story.
I still feel somewhat frustrated that it is a nevertheless impossible to have arrived at scenario, but yes, the existence of the universe is no less of a conundrum.
Most movies involving time travel generally try avoid paradoxes or major plot holes, but with Predistination actively embraces time travel paradoxes, taking them to the extreme.
Maybe someone thought it would make for a "deep" and clever plot, and I had no problem following it, but as I understand it completely, I just felt frustrated with it in the end, because, the science fiction of time travel aside, it's an impossible scenario with no logical resolution.
Anyway, without posting major spoilers I won't say anything more.
As for your argument about key loggers being "harder" to develop than other malware, keep in mind that a lot of malware these days is bought as a kit with a tonne of features. The people writing the malware are typically separate from the parties utilising the malware and once a password stealing module is written, it's available for everyone else to use, regardless of how hard it was write. Also, who said it had to be a key logger? It could be sniffing unencrypted memory, peeking forms in the browser window, it could be watching in countless different ways to avoid being detected as a key logger by AV.
And in regards to AV watching for key loggers, if they know to watch for key logger type activity, then it stands to reason they could also log attempts to read the password management API. In practice it's a cat and mouse game, as AV writers work to detect malware activity, malware writers work to avoid detection.
Malware writers are financially incentivised to come up with solutions, do not think that the hurdle required to get key sniffing is substantially different to that required for using the Windows API for password management, if it takes them a couple of weeks more to write one method, they might bill their clients more, or perhaps they are forced to include the feature so their clients don't use a competing product.
While you are a rare exception as you take extraordinary lengths to protect your credentials, for the vast majority of people, once they have malware, everything on their user profile is likely compromised and single password vault vs Windows API won't help them one bit, except that the Microsoft developed password vault is more convenient to users and likely better than a comparatively simple solution which would ship with a browser.
As a user who is already used to quickly pressing Win+L to lock their computer each time they leave their desk, leveraging the Windows APIs is exceptionally convenient, especially when I consider that I don't have to manage yet another password independently of my Windows login password.
Also, those of us who recognise that it's no longer mid-2000 and that Microsoft has become a company who arguably sets one of the best examples on how to develop software securely, I have confidence that their API for this is thoroughly tested and proven. For Google to even attempt to come close, they would need to expend considerable effort which would ultimately achieve, at best, a reinvented wheel which would also be less convenient for Windows users.
We had one guy who recently joined our team who knew Git and felt it was worth taking the plunge and moving to it, acknowledging that we would initially be frustrated at having to learn a new tool.
We use TortoiseGit along with Gitblit to host the repositories and at this point I have to say I am super happy we made the move. Learning something new is always a little painful, but it was well worth it in this case. If you're used to TortoiseSVN, then TortoiseGit really helps and I personally have not had to use a single Git command.
Git empowers you more as a developer because while SVN essentially forces its changes onto you as you fetch latest, with Git, you get much greater control in how and when you merge your changes with the repository. If you are uneasy about a merge, you can make a branch in just a few seconds and test it there first. The nicest though is how you can commit locally without having to push your changes to other users, this is especially useful if you are doing a refactor and want the ability to create rollback points every hour, but don't want other developers getting your not yet complete work. You create a branch locally, commit every 30 minutes or hour, then when the whole task is completed, you can merge your commits into one (if you want), then push to the central repository for the rest of the team.
If your refactor took a week, you can avoid the merge pain of other developers work by regularly pulling their changes into your perhaps every day or even every hour, and everytime you want to merge, you can roll it back if something turns our badly.
The thing to understand about Git is that there is no "central" repository authority like with SVN, instead everyone has there own repository and Git provides a nice way to selectively pull and push changes between different repositories in a way that you have much greater control over. In our corporate environment, we do use a central repository as that's where the backups happen and it's also much easier than trying to sync with peers. The end result is a process that in practice can work identically to SVN, but also gives developers greater power on their own computers, if they want it.
It really does empower you, but as with anything truly worth doing, there is effort required and you must be prepared to invest. I also recommended that at least one person on your team is already familiar with Git as an in person explanation to any issue you have is much faster than trying to research it online.
Your nickname suits you very well.
Cigarette smokers who do not recognize the imposing obnoxiousness of their entirely optional habit and the burden it places on society, are by definition, selfish.
As they have made themselves practically dependent upon their habit they will of course defend it tooth and nail. The very fact they made the completely irrational decision to smoke knowing all the negative impacts of it and then go on to *defend* their irrational decision, leads me to conclude they are either plain stupid or otherwise generally irrational, and hence, cannot be reasoned with.
Let me get this right, you've taken my general disapproval of a factually unhealthy and selfish habit which is a general burden on society, and compared it with genocide?
And you think *I'm* suffering psychological pathology?
Cigarette smoking is an unhealthy, selfish habit which is a general burden on all of society, but how does my wanting it to become undesirable through means of laws equate to "exterminating" people? What kind of person are you that you jump to such a conclusion?
Depends on where you are.
Where I am, it is against the law to urinate in public, probably as it is a health hazard and in general the community finds such behaviour unpleasant. Smoking in general public areas is not yet illegal in all places unfortunately.
And even if there are designated smoking areas, why do I have to pay extra taxes so that a council can make a special smoking area in a park, or in the price of my meal, subsidize the cost of the restaurant to build a special smoking area? Urination is an avoidable part of the human condition, smoking is not.
In regards to other unpleasantness, I encounter the way too much perfume problem maybe once every few years or if it's at the work place, that is something that can addressed by company policy. I live in a city and have no livestock farms anywhere near me and if a neighbour decides to use manure in their garden, sure it's unpleasant, but it's once a year and doesn't have the side effect of poisoning their garden.
Cigarette smoking is a selfish habit which is a burden on society and it's negative aspects dwarf any possible aspects, as a member of society it is my opinion we should weigh up whether or not we should really put up with such a burden. The only kind of person who would say otherwise is said selfish cigarette smoker.
I recently moved from Ireland to South Africa and had a NAS, laptop and two LCD screens shipped over.
With the NAS (http://www.readynas.com/?cat=4) I put it in the original antistatic bag and then in its box, padded with a bit of bubble wrap and these packaging air bags. I shipped it with all its hard drives inside.
With the screens I had their original packaging, a simple plastic bag, then placed inside polystyrene packaging then in their cardboard box.
With the laptop (oldish now, so wasn't too fussed), I just put it in a regular packing cardboard box with some clothes around it.
All items arrived fine, perhaps I was luckier than some, but it seems the shippers were reasonably careful with my goods based on the state of the boxes.
For my actual computer, I disassembled it, threw away the case and the rest I put in my checked in luggage, that way I didn't have to wait the 3 months for the shipping to happen. Shipping took a long time as I didn't have much to bring back and it took a little while for enough other people to come along so there would be enough to fill up the container.