Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: How do I restore Javascript based posting? (Score 1) 68

by turp182 (#49350875) Attached to: PayPal To Pay $7.7 Million For Sanctions Violations

This is way off topic, but I have reset things and tried others. Slashdot can be difficult to navigate at times.

I attempted to but I can't figure it out, and I'm sick and tired of the pure HTML posting and moderating interface (it sucks wiffle balls).

I have enabled in NoScript.

Comment: Re:OFAC knowledge here (Score 1) 68

by turp182 (#49350827) Attached to: PayPal To Pay $7.7 Million For Sanctions Violations

Thanks for the info. I understand and can appreciate the implications of the OFAC lists (basically a simple form of economic warfare against specific individuals and parties, preventing them from using certain global financial companies).

But, OFAC checks are supposed to be performed before any funds are transferred (prior to contract entry in my experience). So they generally can't be seized or impounded by the US financial system, because letting them in at all is illegal (I'm sure they are at least frozen if a company, such as Paypal, performs transactions for a restricted party).

Comment: OFAC knowledge here (Score 2) 68

by turp182 (#49350555) Attached to: PayPal To Pay $7.7 Million For Sanctions Violations

I'm not sure if this is good or not, but it does represent a valid usage of OFAC (Office of Foreign Asset Control) regulations.

I've designed international life insurance admin systems that involved OFAC checks. Resolution requires manual verification.

OFAC provides a list of people that you cannot do business with if you are a US company (possibly if you have a US presence, I'm not sure though, I worked for a US company). It is basically a list of terrorists or otherwise sanctioned individuals that the US blocks financial transaction with.(Osama is still there as far as I know, he was our test case).

I've always considered OFAC to be a Federally mandated job program. Same for Sarbanes-Oxley (worked with that a lot as well). Just extra regulation requiring more bodies at every financial company.

I coined the never heard phrase "OFAC is to preventing terrorism as Sarbanes-Oxley is to preventing fraud" (I have an actuarial and IT background, so it's funny to me).

But in this case, initial appearances would suggest that the fine is justified. If the person on the OFAC list is justifiably on the list.

And that justification is my problem with the system. The rules are pretty secret, anyone could end up on the list and not be able to fight it. It's like the no-fly list which even impacted a Kennedy:

Interesting for sure.


+ - CIA tried to crack security of Apple devices->

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes "The CIA led sophisticated intelligence agency efforts to undermine the encryption used in Apple phones, as well as insert secret surveillance back doors into apps, top-secret documents published by the Intercept online news site have revealed.

The newly disclosed documents from the National Security Agency's internal systems show surveillance methods were presented at its secret annual conference, known as the "jamboree"."

Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Why can't they fairly negotiate? (Score 1) 61

by turp182 (#49185621) Attached to: SpaceX's Challenge Against Blue Origins' Patent Fails To Take Off

How about Elon Musk himself? He doesn't seem to be a patent shrill (he makes things, faster than we expect in most cases). He didn't create all of the patents he controls, but those working for him did (assumption, he may have bought some patents, bet he's using them). He's into solar, space, electric cars (all thanks Dr. Seuss, "and Mars").

He's pretty incredible actually. And he's more than a millionaire.

Comment: Re:Last straw? (Score 1) 533

So we "rushed" to leave the single longest military engagement in the history of the United States? (Afghanistan is probably #1 now, but we're having problems with stability)

What would stability have looked like? Everyone getting lattes at Starbucks?

The reason we have ISIS is because the US invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. It was a war of attrition from day one on the part of those who call the area home. The current result is not a surprise, the only question was how long would we occupy? The balance of power shifted and the bad guys just went underground, planning what they would do after the US left. And then they did it.

Comment: Re:UPS - No Problem. (Score 1) 320

by turp182 (#49123851) Attached to: FedEx Won't Ship DIY Gunsmithing Machine

Smithsonian Magazine has an article in their current issue about copiers. The Soviet Union controlled access to copiers initially.

I haven't read the article yet, but it sounds interesting (Smithsonian Magazine is a gem, the TV channel, a travesty):

The topic at hand is a history chorus, and it's rhyming...

The universe is an island, surrounded by whatever it is that surrounds universes.