vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
So let me see if I'm following.  You're only vaguely aware of the situation, unaware of the person we're discussing, and don't even seem to have read the article.   Why do you think your opinion holds weight? Sure, we could come up with a hypothetical where this makes sense, but that has nothing to do with the situation at hand.
Note that in the UK at least this scam - not so dissimilar from what you propose - seems be perfectly legal behaviour: Evidence to date is that both of you can expect to walk away without much consequence.
"Everyone who's giving a definite answer is just wrong - we just don't have enough information.  It depends on what these ""certificates"" say and what OP signed.    For all we know these are partnership agreements - or any old shit that some lawyer came up with.    Without seeing what, if anything, OP signed we're simply guessing as to what OP's legal and financial liability might be."
&gt; Nonsense! Mugging .... is so rare  Edited to reflect what I actually said, and to respond. Mugging is rare, but it's not non-existent. Being proactive about making yourself a poor choice of targets is important to staying safe. Your arguments have shown a pattern of this lack of fore-sight, so far. I'm not going to spend my life going in circles with you.  &gt; I am saying that cards that require you to enter a PIN cannot be used used when stolen or copied. Yes or no?  &gt; On the other hand, cards that require signature can be used when stolen or copied because signature is a worthless method to validate the charge. Yes or no?  I think you've broken, and it is clear that you are the one trying to keep the argument going for the sake of it. So I'm done.  &gt; Do you see? There are so many ways to make this system so much more secure and fraud proof... but, ON PURPOSE,  yep. but on purpose.
Lol you moron. Chip and pin significantly reduced physical retailer fraud when we introduced it in Europe (a decade ago? 15 years?) - a signature is absurdly easy to fake and retailers have little to no way of protecting against it.
Verify the signature against what? You are going to have a pad of paper and ask the customer to sign and compare it for every charge?  Also, FYI, per the credit card companies, you need just to check if the signature is on the card. They do NOT(!) ask you to compare signatures.
Under no circumstances can a contract between A and B be binding on C unless C (guest) is also party to the contract. Nor would a contract be upheld if it required B to exercise control they cannot reasonably be expected to have over C.  Cue lawsuit from angry brides.
I don't know, ask the various companies I'm forced to do business with why in the hell they want me to stop by their office so I can drop a check off vs just using some means of digital payment.  I would fucking LOVE to ditch paper checks.
"Most people cannot use pgp/gpg and setting it up would, in order to do that correctly, require voice fingerprint verification. Don't. Just write a word doc and either encrypt it when saving using the ""save as"" function or encrypt it using zip and email that to them. Then call them and tell them the password. Done."
Ask your bank to write a letter asserting that you have $xxxxx on deposit with them, on their letterhead? Though realistically, the chance of your getting hit with identity theft In this situation, when you presumably know exactly who you're dealing with, are vanishingly small.
You really don't know how it works. Clinton asked for a version of the bill without this and also requested a line item veto option. He got neither so he signed it holding his nose. This was pushed by one republican who fooled everyone.. Do you remember his name?
"Working retail myself, I do not accept an unsigned card without verification.  If I received one I would ask for ID and verify the photo with the Name. I would also let the buyer know it was unsigned and remind them that anyone finding it can sign it and use the card without issue. Putting on the back of the card ""SEE ID"" is the way buyers have protected themselves from thieves as long as people are actually looking at the cards.  How does this protect?  1- a lost card cant be signed by a complete stranger as there is already writing on the card.  2- It provides a photo identification for use. I know with today's technology that this is going away and fewer people are actually checking but shame on those companies who handle the cards and don't look. Obviously this process does not apply to self checks, but safety protocols there require a pin of some form that only the authorized user should know."
I don't think you'll find any sane person to agree with you here. That's one thing that should stay in the past,  nothing we use today and would be nearly as secure. Unless you want someone hacking into something we start a world war on accident...
Banks will be the ones running the service, just like JPMorgan runs the EBT system. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/10/01/jp-morgan-s-food-stamp-empire.html  Same with subprime mortgages - they say we need these programs to help the little people but it was really just to let banks issue moar debt knowing the gov would backstop them. And those people lost their fake home equity anyway.  You have to wonder at what point people will realize [we don't need banks](/r/Bitcoin ) any more than we need snail-mail today. This proposal is the merger of two dead and incredibly wasteful industries, both propped up by .gov.
I am confused as to why the author thinks people wouldn't do this.  If target wants to hand out free money they can be my guest.  edit: Target, PM me if you're interested in this sort of arrangement.
People who did it != what the requirements are. You're still shrieking and whining while still being wrong. The fact that few people take advantage of it doesn't mean it isn't possible. In fact, the fact that 17 people did it makes it demonstrably possible.   Also, starting a comment with 'Nope' then being provably wrong by a basic cursory google search is kinda the definition of being both condescending AND wrong.
It's an interesting question, and one that has a few tentacles. A few thoughts come to mind: There's nothing wrong per se with these arrangements. I think it's a matter of doing what feels comfortable. Hopefully someone on here will have a personal experience to share.
It's just cute when somebody has no skin the game makes such generalized and cavilier assumptions and assertions without knowing the details. Bravo for you, youve got an opinion based on a headline-esque understanding without knowing the facts--- that's what'll make this country great again!
Well your caution is appreciated! I didn't even see it like that so thank you for pointing it out! I've been tying to read up on him and the company and things look legit but I'll still keep this info with me. Thank you again for watching out:)
Yeah, so will I.  Why let the bankers make all the money right?  Good explanation, it'll be interesting to watch what happens with it all.  What willl they do try to throw the Ali baba CEO in jail too like they did the megaupload guy
I agree I made my example very simplistic and other more sophisticated methods can be employed.  I was just trying to create simple illustration that these laws can be (and are) abused.  I don't believe BK laws were originally intended (the Spirit of the Law) for these mechanisms.  While not illegal I do think it's unethical.
Quick look through your post history definitely confirms that.  I still think you should delete the info that exposed her identity and seriously reconsider whether you can afford to make such a speculative and highly leveraged investment in a California weed shop.  In the end its up to you.
Shit happens, even to the most senior in their field. It was not intentional nor malicious, so, no problem for the client. Don't make it a bigger deal than it really is and don't beat yourself up. We're all human.
MAD. If they rat, they get caught, too.   Moreover, it can't be that hard to find a group of 4-5 people who aren't stupid. I can think of a dozen friends of mine off the top of my head I'd have complete confidence in if we decided to rob a bank.
One of us is misreading the other's message. I think FDIC is great. If a Congolese citizen wants to buy the company I work at right now, great. I just make an exception for state owned enterprises, royal families, et cetera.
I've seen many people sign a restaurant credit card receipt and walk away.  Easy enough for the wait staff to add a tip and total.  I doubt this is a high risk area compared to others, but in general, why not take the receipt for verification, or in the case of a good that can be returned, the receipt might be needed.
I don't want to repeat things that have already been said as I agree with most of them. There's just one little thing I'd like to add: If things go the way we're all expecting, this guy will eventually be in desperate need of a friend as he is extremely likely to lose most of his friends sooner or later. Perhaps all you can do is signal that you will not support him now (for obvious reasons), but that you'll be there for him when he may need you in the future...
"As somebody who works in the industry, this is the biggest fucking joke I've ever witnessed. The sad part is, if they have rich connections, they may actually get away with pulling in a few accounts.   ""We have good lawyers."" bahahaha"
I will not attach my name to either. Romney isnt great. Obama is just as bad just on different things. Regardless of who you might think the lesser evil is, I personally refuse to vote for evil at all.   Most people probably agree with me considering voter turnout is less than 50% in this country.
This is almost surely a scam.  Among other things:
I'm sure there is a way to do this. You will almost certainly need a government issued picture ID to do this, though.
Well, we found one way to get his fat ass to sign a budget. Catch him sunning himself on a closed beach and suddenly he finds his pen. He's such a douchebag. I'm happy he took down Little Marco but I'm extremely happy he didn't get any position of power out of it.
If you lived in a gang banger / drug dealer's house, ate his food, watched his TV, wore the clothes he provides, *while* being a legal adult fully able to move out and be independent if one chooses... wouldn't that *imply* acceptance and approval of the person's drug dealing lifestyle?
Honestly, probably just banks and it's not that they deserve it, more that it's in the public interest. I dunno, I don't think is has to be a slippery slope. I think that's why we need higher penalties, to keep us out of this scenario in the first place.
"Having no utilization makes you an outlier, it's an unusual circumstance for most people, and the scoring model cannot make any predictions based on it. If you think of it from the underwriter's perspective, zero utilization could mean all sorts of things... are you dead? indigent? unable to work?  When you buying a product (like money or insurance) whose pricing is based on risk, being ""weird"" will usually make you a higher risk. That said, it isn't the end of the world. If you are in this situation, I wouldn't lose sleep over it."
"FDIC is backed by the ""full faith and credit of the USA.""  Well, if the USA defaults, the full faith and credit of the USA would in my mind be worthless, thus, so would FDIC."
Good subs to research ICOs? I am all for cryptocurrencies and their usage, but I believe ICOs are an unfettered bubble. No one can raise millions in seconds from crowdfunded sources without it being a pump and dump scheme ... or a pretty well advertised product that everyone wants a piece (i.e. an IPO with a roadshow, but without the hassle of investment bankers or share placement or underwriting).  Laying out my thoughts in case you see any glaring faults right there. If not, sources would be appreciated.
Oh Yay!!! . what a recovery, was not AIG the insurance company that was left holding its own dick when the whole world defaulted in 2008.  If memory serves, it was unable to pay out on all those credit default claims and had to get a massive bail out just to keep the banking system from imploding.  The Fed must have bought a shit load of crap from them.  Ah . .October cometh and the Great Unwind . . we cannot very well rate a Systemic Risk AAA now can me.  Smart move gramma . .nice try . . . didn't fly
I read an article where this website did an interview with them and concluded its very sketchy and possibly illegal. They refused to give out their FDIC number and they got the high interest rate by selling personal customer information to third parties
I agree with you for the most part, but banks need *some* way of comparing the relative risk of various loan applicants; forcing them to use TweedleDee over TweedleDum is really failing to see the forest for the trees.   Equifax is *not* the problem here.  The fact that that entire *industry* is allowed to exist without our explicit permission, *is* the problem.
That's the same question I've been pondering.  How did they handle it in Canada umpteen years ago on their test run?   Obviously they're not giving out a lump sum at the beginning of the year, but what about month to month?
Thanks for that great explanation. I figured you were referring to FAFSA but wanted to be sure. I'm just having my first so i'm trying to plan for the future but I probably won't be paying for college either, it seems like trade schools may be the better deal nowadays.
Yeah, that's no typo. I could've spelled that name when I was 13, and anybody who's ever laid their hands on a finance book should be able to spell it, let alone somebody who claims to actually work there and to have traded millions on their behalf.
TIL, thanks for the pricing ballpark.  Yeah, auto-freeze would piss of their customers, but the alternative is entire cohorts of consumers *learning* to ramp down credit utilization *and teaching their children* because the consumer credit industry can't get its data management act together and the PITA factor rises so high consumers start to get taught by the breaches and their expenses and time to repair it on their end is not worth the credit: that's a secular long term trend that would piss off shareholders.
(Can't find the delete button on the Android app -- Family Loans are worth investigating but I'm not sure they're applicable to this case.)
RICO charges merely need evidence of a conspiracy from the higher-ups to direct illegal actions to the lower ones.   &gt;The RICO Act focuses specifically on racketeering, and it allows for the leaders of a syndicate to be tried for the crimes which they ordered others to do or assisted them, closing a perceived loophole that allowed someone who told a man to, for example, murder, to be exempt from the trial because they did not actually do it.  I'm waiting for a direction document with Jamie Dimon's signature and a attorney general with a set of balls.
(3) Except as provided under paragraph (4), an officer or employee of the Government Accountability Office may not disclose to any person outside the Government Accountability Office information obtained in audits or examinations conducted under subsection (e) and maintained as confidential by the Board or the Federal reserve banks. (4) This subsection shall not— (A) authorize an officer or employee of an agency to withhold information from any committee or subcommittee of jurisdiction of Congress, or any member of such committee or subcommittee; or (B) limit any disclosure by the Government Accountability Office to any committee or subcommittee of jurisdiction of Congress, or any member of such committee or subcommittee. ... http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/31/714 The people here who are under an illusion the federal reserve has any sort of beneficial attributes are deluded, where in reality it is banking on your countries increasing debt and impoverishing you and the nation your fathers conquered with a veil of legitimacy and a tattoo of tyranny since it's inception.
It is FDIC insured, there is no catch .. a few banks offer above 1% APY.  Alliant and Ally come to my mind.   Terms & Conditions
None of what you said is correct. Wells Fargo makes over half of it's net income from community banking. Investment Banking is tucked inside of the Wholesale division and represents a relatively small piece of that. Wells' auto portfolio is at $58 billion; by no means as large as say the mortgage exposure, but certainly nothing to sneeze at.
Scenario A: Scenario B: Scenario C: I have been in both scenario A and scenario B. The new companies had no problem with me opening an FSA under their program.
"Yeah... using let's encrypt for the SSL certs.... which I'm certainly not against, but provides even less guarantee they are who they say they are.  High probability of scam.  EDIT: Port 22 is wide open which gives me even less faith.  EDIT 2: I could not find ""Beam"" or ""Meet Beam"" on the FDIC registry either.  https://research.fdic.gov/bankfind/"
From my research it looks like its an income NOT effectively connected with the trade of business. This page has the exact details https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/effectively-connected-income-eci
So what, if anything, might this mean for those of us who still have those Countrywide mortgages?  BTW, my subprime mortgage is awesome. We rode out a bad year where the price shot up to $4,000/month. Today it's way down and we're paying only 2.5%.
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/feds/files/2017090pap.pdf) reduced by 99%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; 25 Although COFI mortgage rates are similar to traditional fixed-rate mortgage rates in some periods, COFI mortgage rates are considerably below traditional fixed-rate mortgage rates in most periods.  &gt; Some FixedCOFI mortgage simulations are originated in a low interest rate environment and then experience 17 First Draft 2/9/2016 Current Draft 8/18/2017 a string of positive Treasury shocks that push the path of COFI mortgage rates higher than the traditional fixed-rate mortgage rate for the remainder of the mortgage.  &gt; The COFI mortgage rate hovers around the traditional fixed-rate mortgage rate for the following ten years and then rises above the fixed-rate mortgage rate for the rest of the mortgage.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6wouyf/fed_improving_the_30year_fixedrate_mortgage/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~200238 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **Mortgage**^#1 **rate**^#2 **Fixed-COFI**^#3 **payment**^#4 **Fixed-Rate**^#5"
But . .but . .Fitchy baby . .sweetheart . .dahlink . .  You do remember how you were exposed as total and complete ignorant fraudulent assholes in 2008 . . .you poor babies . .you really didn't have a clue  But now that you have recovered your composure or at least put on a straight enough face not to look like total clowns, we are more interested in what is the state of the all that garbage you rated aaa that the Fed is putting up for sale next month.  Do tell muffin . . .I hear it could sink the global economy into a 4.5 trillion dollar depression . . .we do await your wisdom on such a pressing matter
I'm NMLS with a bank, won't name it, but you can buy and sell points up to .5 if I remember right.  Might be 1% but it's the difference between 1300 and 1700 if I remember right for monthly payments.
If iban and name don't match. This shud have been refunded. Logic says so. Otherwise they just ask for iban without other details if they won't be considered
that means fiscal year 2015,Most internal company in China or India have different fiscal year to estimate financial state when it run to the end of year
how safe is my money As safe as it can get. Most Banks would be registered under FDIC. See the list here if a specific bank is covered or not. Bank of America is covered. How does this work, and is there something I need to do so I am covered by it? Should I be getting a certificate or something?Is BOA under the scope of this Deposit insurance? It only covers if the bank fails, i.e. goes bankrupt. The FDIC steps in and either oversees a merger of the failed bank with another bank, or in the worst case, pays the depositors upto $250,000.  Does it cover me if someone steals my money? The FDIC does not cover if someone steals your money. if someone hacks my computer and transfers all my money? This will be determined on a case to case basis. If the loss of money is because of your negligence, i.e. you gave your password etc to someone else or did not take enough precautions to safegaurd ... including allowing someone to hack you computer ... in such cases it is a crime and you would need to file police complaint and the bank will on best effort basis try and reverse the transfer. If this was due to the bank's error; i.e. Bank did not ensure right controls/security was in place resulting in loss of your money, the bank is liable and will pay you back. So cases like someone forged your signature on a check etc. are the bank's responsibility.
"Did your CTO let a major group use ""admin/admin"" as the administrator password?    And did the job posting for your CTO have a note  saying the primary responsibility could be learned or did they look for someone who already knew their shit? Read TFA, they explicitly said ""security can be learned"".  This was a case of pre-choosing the person for the position."
I'm on my phone, so being verbose is tough, but if you want to discuss this please ping me and I'd like to discuss it with you.  I am happy to give you specific examples. I gave a couple in another comment.
Like I said, I absolutely believe and admit that there are people using ICOs as a vehicle for schemes.   That said, there are also individuals like [Brendan Eich](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Eich) who are accomplished and trusted individuals participating in the market as well. Brendan is the creator of JavaScript and a cofounder of Mozilla. He also created the [Brave Web Broswe](https://brave.com/) and through that launched an ICO for his cryptocurrency, [Basic Attention Toke (BAT)](https://vimeo.com/209336437) whose ICO gathered [$35MM in under 30 seconds](https://www.coindesk.com/35-million-30-seconds-token-sale-internet-browser-brave-sells/). I want you to read that again: $35MM in 30 seconds given to a proven and renowned technologist who has been an important figure in shaping the web as we know it for him to cut out the middle men, banks, VCs, and everyone else and have the capital needed to focus on building and launching a new project.    Is everyone Brendan Eich? Absolutely not, but it is important that a market like this exists so that the Brendan Eich's of the world can venture down these paths to accomplish great things, even if that means suffering through scams.  Finally, on the subject of ICOs themselves: are ICOs a bubble? Maybe, but if and when it pops, it will simply clear the way for the value added projects. It is important to note that the majority of ICOs that take place are outside of the US and bar US citizens from participating. Additionally, the majority of project teams within the US that seek to issue an ICO through the proper legal channels are seeking legal counsel to help structure the deals, usually costing anywhere between $100-300K.   To answer your question regarding subs, I would suggest following:  • /r/CryptoCurrency   • /r/ethereum   • /r/btc   • /r/Bitcoin   These are good basic starting points that can help you learn abd branch out from there. Another great resource for news is [Coindesk](https://www.coindesk.com/).  Hope this helps and I am happy to discuss further if needed.