Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Amateurs... (Score 1) 367

by bickerdyke (#48931239) Attached to: Why ATM Bombs May Be Coming Soon To the United States

But what if they would find out that there is MORE stained money found in the debris than there was inside?

In what way would that benefit a thief to leave money, stained or not, at a crime scene?

I left open the option "just for lulz". Yes, not everyone personally benefits from causing confusion.

Sounds to me like either a source for lulz or a way to wash (somehow literally) dirty money. (with a little inside help of course)

Nevermind. I didn't realize you were the actors in Office Space that had to look up the dictionary definition of money laundering.

Money laundering only works if you get the "clean" money back after it's been "laundered". If you have a guy on the inside that would get the money after it's been replaced, whether it's extra or not, it's not money laundering. It's just plain theft. And you wouldn't even need to go through hassle of laundering it, they would just steal it to begin with.

I even wrote "literally" laundring it - like removing stains.

And there is a huge difference if your inside man is replacing extra money: it won't be missed, lowering the risk of detection.

Sorry I'm not comming up with laid out plans for the perfect crime as a response to a /.-post, but I guess getting finding a way to have someone trusted (like another bank) replacing your stained bills would be the way to go if you were in that line of business.

Comment: Re:Amateurs... (Score 4, Interesting) 367

by bickerdyke (#48930909) Attached to: Why ATM Bombs May Be Coming Soon To the United States

Many times, it destroys the money completely in the process, but as it seems, usually enough remains that the practice continues.

Well, it's not their money they're destroying...

The most effective measure taken to discourage the practice was to pack bags of dyes inside the ATM cassetes, so that the money is stained and rendered unusable. If you try to deposit stained money, it'll be confiscated on the spot.

Hmm... they can take the stained money, but neither deposit or spend it.....

They're probably going to leave behind stained money, as it is of no use to them. The bank, on the other hand, of course will re-deposit their own stained money....

But what if they would find out that there is MORE stained money found in the debris than there was inside?

Sounds to me like either a source for lulz or a way to wash (somehow literally) dirty money. (with a little inside help of course)

Comment: Re:Positive pressure? (Score 3, Insightful) 367

by bickerdyke (#48930851) Attached to: Why ATM Bombs May Be Coming Soon To the United States

Several manufacturers now make various anti-gas-attack modules: Some absorb shock waves, some detect gas and render it harmless,

Well, somehow I don't think those manufacturers haven't tried your idea yet. It's not about preventing this kind of attack would be particularly difficult - it just hasn't been neccessary so far.

Comment: Re:US Datacenter hands over non US data (Score 1) 197

by bickerdyke (#48902693) Attached to: Google Handed To FBI 3 Wikileaks Staffers' Emails, Digital Data

Foreign dependencies because multinational companies wnat to make business in those countries, too. Most countries demand that a part of your company is in that country if you want to sell something there. (Or at least a local distributor who is responsible for what is imported and sold)

It's tax reasons why those companies exist in Ireland, and not in France or Germany.

Comment: Re:i LOL at the lousy excuse ! (Score 1) 197

by bickerdyke (#48902667) Attached to: Google Handed To FBI 3 Wikileaks Staffers' Emails, Digital Data

Fuck man, stop giving us this shitty excuse!

Under US laws Google has to pay *A SHITLOAD OF TAXES* and what Google did?

Google shifted its money, via accounting, around the world, to Ireland, to Luxembourg, to many other tax havens, so that it doesn't need to pay those taxes

No. Obviously Google hasn't to pay a "shitload of taxes" as US (and other countries) laws allowed them to legally shift their money around the world.

You're mixing that up with "should have to pay"

If a thing's worth doing, it is worth doing badly. -- G.K. Chesterton

Working...