That stuck out to me as well. I'd certainly never seen Ctigroup's mark. But then, I'm not a Citigroup customer, so they wouldn't be thanking me.
The other thing I find amusing is that Citigroup's mark is "THANKYOU", not "thank you". That's certainly because you can't trademark a plain common phrase like "thank you", but "THANKYOU" is not commonly used at all.
And yet, Citigroup isn't suing because someone used their mark "THANKYOU", they're suing because someone is using an untrademarkable common phrase.
That's really scummy, but then we're talking about Citigroup -- a company that is famous for being as scummy as they can get away with.
"I don't have any good answers to these questions"
I don't have a good answer, but I have a realistic answer. People and the agencies themselves need to stop expecting that it's possible to catch every bad guy before he does something bad.
It's just not going to happen. Further, the harder everyone tries to make it happen, the more our society degenerates into the very thing that we have been afraid of for generations.
The realistic answer is: we do the best we can do without sacrificing our principles, liberties, or freedoms. When bad guys kill people, we have to recognize that it's not necessarily because the cops failed to do their jobs right.
What they should not do is to talk people into engaging in illegal acts.
If the feds seriously believe that a specific person is going to do something dangerous, then they should do what cops do: put them under surveillance and arrest them the moment that they actually break a law.
"The lack of privacy occurs if I use someone else's card without permission."
The comment I was replying to did not make that limitation. It asserted that there is no expectation of privacy at all.
The point you are making is valid to an extent, but in the case of credit card transactions the expectation of privacy in the moment would certainly remain even if the card was being used fraudulently. That's because nobody involved aside from the crook can know that the use is unauthorized at the moment. That expectation of privacy would dissolve, of course, the moment the card holder gives the cops or credit card company permission to investigate the transaction.
It's crazy stupid, but one bank and one credit union I use do this. I never would have believed it until I had a most enlightening conversation with a teller when I was changing my PIN on one card. That led me to start actually looking at the data stored on the stripe, when I discovered a second that also stored the PIN.
Aside from the idiocy that a crook can just read the PIN off the stripe, there's the additional idiocy that, with about $20 worth of equipment, you can also change the PIN on someone else's card.
"I DON'T CARE if in her heart of hearts Clinton believes in the TPP as long as she stands against it."
This is the point. It's pretty unbelievable to think that she'll stand against it. She's in favor of not just TPP, but the entire philosophy behind it. Even if, somehow, she actually stands against it, she will continue to support other agreements that are of the same type.
They pretty much don't anymore. The security problems aside, Blackberry seems to be incapable of creating a phone that is actually desirable anymore.
Corporations and governments are basically the only entities willing to put up with them anymore, and that's basically because of the Enterprise BBM security stuff that isn't available to ordinary consumers.
Since the warrants they require are from the courts of the nation the user is in, the requirement is of little meaning. Warrants only mean that the action is legal in the given nation. They do not mean that the action is proper or ethical.
"If you have not committed crimes I am not clear how you can be worried about anything."
Ahh, I see now. You believe that governments are virtuous and that if you aren't breaking the law then you have nothing to fear. I doubt if anything I could say would disabuse you of this fallacy, but there are lots of longstanding examples of how wrong this is.
The relevancy to current devices is corporate attitude. Blackberry's stance is clear and assertive enough that it's pretty safe to assume their behavior is no different with any of their devices or services.
"Blackberry devices are the most secure on the planet of course they are more locked down than Apple's."
This is simply untrue. If it's possible to Blackberry to give information about user communications or the data on the devices, then not only aren't their devices the most locked down, you can't even argue that they're locked down at all.
Yep. This particular argument takes an already corrupt legal doctrine (the third party doctrine) and makes it even worse. That reasoning renders it legally impossible to have any privacy at all outside of your own head.
The magnetic strip on the back of a debit or credit card is a type of "external electronic storage device, [that] is designed simply to record the same information that is embossed on the front of the card." Accordingly, the information embossed on the front of the card and recorded in the magnetic strip will only be different if the card has been tampered with.
This is factually incorrect. The magnetic strip on many debit cards, including two that I have, includes information that is not on the front of the card, including the card's PIN.
"if there's a real better way, you better believe countries will adapt to it."
What counts as a "better way" to you? The "better" that the corporations who yearn for things like the TPP want is pretty different than the "better" that people like me want.
Things like TPP just help to ensure that corporations will get their "better", while the citizenry that governments are supposed to represent get the "worse" end of the stick.
"Logically, the most qualified person (man or woman) to run for president would be a CEO of a company."
I strongly disagree with this. First, the job of being President isn't analogous to the job of being CEO. Second, the nation is not a company and should not be run like one.
On the post: Citigroup Sues AT&T For Saying 'Thanks' To Customers
Re: Widely?
The other thing I find amusing is that Citigroup's mark is "THANKYOU", not "thank you". That's certainly because you can't trademark a plain common phrase like "thank you", but "THANKYOU" is not commonly used at all.
And yet, Citigroup isn't suing because someone used their mark "THANKYOU", they're suing because someone is using an untrademarkable common phrase.
That's really scummy, but then we're talking about Citigroup -- a company that is famous for being as scummy as they can get away with.
On the post: The FBI Says Its Homegrown Terrorist Stings Are Nothing More Than A Proactive Fight Against 'Going Dark'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Mixed feelings
I don't have a good answer, but I have a realistic answer. People and the agencies themselves need to stop expecting that it's possible to catch every bad guy before he does something bad.
It's just not going to happen. Further, the harder everyone tries to make it happen, the more our society degenerates into the very thing that we have been afraid of for generations.
The realistic answer is: we do the best we can do without sacrificing our principles, liberties, or freedoms. When bad guys kill people, we have to recognize that it's not necessarily because the cops failed to do their jobs right.
On the post: Court Says Free Speech Rights For Prisoners Not 'Clearly Established,' Gives Pass To Retaliatory Actions By Officials
Re:
On the post: Will We Ever Really Get Flying Cars?
Re:
On the post: The Cable Industry Trots Out Mitch McConnell To Fight Against Cable Box Competition
Re: Re: Why would anyone believe anything a politician says?
Politicians are not just like us. It takes a certain, (thankfully relatively rare) kind of personality to be able to stomach being a politician.
That's part of why I think that if someone wants to be in office, that's a sign that they may not be the sort of person you want in office.
On the post: The FBI Says Its Homegrown Terrorist Stings Are Nothing More Than A Proactive Fight Against 'Going Dark'
Re: Mixed feelings
If the feds seriously believe that a specific person is going to do something dangerous, then they should do what cops do: put them under surveillance and arrest them the moment that they actually break a law.
On the post: Appeals Court: No Expectation Of Privacy In Credit Card Magnetic Strips
Re: Re: Re:
The comment I was replying to did not make that limitation. It asserted that there is no expectation of privacy at all.
The point you are making is valid to an extent, but in the case of credit card transactions the expectation of privacy in the moment would certainly remain even if the card was being used fraudulently. That's because nobody involved aside from the crook can know that the use is unauthorized at the moment. That expectation of privacy would dissolve, of course, the moment the card holder gives the cops or credit card company permission to investigate the transaction.
On the post: Appeals Court: No Expectation Of Privacy In Credit Card Magnetic Strips
Re: Re: Not true
Aside from the idiocy that a crook can just read the PIN off the stripe, there's the additional idiocy that, with about $20 worth of equipment, you can also change the PIN on someone else's card.
On the post: Hillary Clinton's Paperback Memoir Deletes Inconvenient Support Of TPP That Was In The Hard Cover Version
Re: God save us from purists.
This is the point. It's pretty unbelievable to think that she'll stand against it. She's in favor of not just TPP, but the entire philosophy behind it. Even if, somehow, she actually stands against it, she will continue to support other agreements that are of the same type.
On the post: BlackBerry: We're Here To Kick Ass And Sell Out Users To Law Enforcement. And We're (Almost) All Out Of Users.
Re:
Corporations and governments are basically the only entities willing to put up with them anymore, and that's basically because of the Enterprise BBM security stuff that isn't available to ordinary consumers.
On the post: BlackBerry: We're Here To Kick Ass And Sell Out Users To Law Enforcement. And We're (Almost) All Out Of Users.
Re: Very biased article
Since the warrants they require are from the courts of the nation the user is in, the requirement is of little meaning. Warrants only mean that the action is legal in the given nation. They do not mean that the action is proper or ethical.
"If you have not committed crimes I am not clear how you can be worried about anything."
Ahh, I see now. You believe that governments are virtuous and that if you aren't breaking the law then you have nothing to fear. I doubt if anything I could say would disabuse you of this fallacy, but there are lots of longstanding examples of how wrong this is.
On the post: BlackBerry: We're Here To Kick Ass And Sell Out Users To Law Enforcement. And We're (Almost) All Out Of Users.
Re: Re: Dear Government...
On the post: BlackBerry: We're Here To Kick Ass And Sell Out Users To Law Enforcement. And We're (Almost) All Out Of Users.
Re: Re: Everyone should have known this from India's demands
On the post: BlackBerry: We're Here To Kick Ass And Sell Out Users To Law Enforcement. And We're (Almost) All Out Of Users.
Re: Re: Re: Re: "security"
This is simply untrue. If it's possible to Blackberry to give information about user communications or the data on the devices, then not only aren't their devices the most locked down, you can't even argue that they're locked down at all.
On the post: House Attacks Net Neutrality, Cable Box Reform With Sneaky Budget Rider
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Appeals Court: No Expectation Of Privacy In Credit Card Magnetic Strips
Re: Court Jesters and Pretzel Logic
It's insane.
On the post: Appeals Court: No Expectation Of Privacy In Credit Card Magnetic Strips
Re:
How is that ridiculous? Is it ridiculous to expect a private conversation to be private? This is no different.
On the post: Appeals Court: No Expectation Of Privacy In Credit Card Magnetic Strips
Not true
This is factually incorrect. The magnetic strip on many debit cards, including two that I have, includes information that is not on the front of the card, including the card's PIN.
On the post: Google Comes Down On The Wrong Side Of The TPP
Re:
What counts as a "better way" to you? The "better" that the corporations who yearn for things like the TPP want is pretty different than the "better" that people like me want.
Things like TPP just help to ensure that corporations will get their "better", while the citizenry that governments are supposed to represent get the "worse" end of the stick.
On the post: Watch The President Use Fair Use To Support A Trade Deal That Undermines Fair Use
Re: Re: Decent presidents
I strongly disagree with this. First, the job of being President isn't analogous to the job of being CEO. Second, the nation is not a company and should not be run like one.
Next >>