quote: Well I have to admit that this is genius. The guys from the Pirate Bay have a a 30million SEK fine which they say they won't pay. However they have come up with a plan where all their users can join in which works like this.
Everyone sends a small amount of money in an electronic transfer to the law firm that represnted the music industry. Suggested amount is 1 SEK (equivalent to 0.13 USD. Apparently the law firm's bank account is only allowed 1000 electronic transactions before it starts to cost them, the account holder money.
The charge per transfer at this point is, wait for it... 2 SEK. Thus after the first 1000 SEK, if people send just 1 SEK it will cost the law firm more than the money they receive to process.
Welcome to the Distributed Denial of Dollars attack (DDo$)
posted
It's interesting, but I'm not sure in my mind where it falls morally on the scale between "non-violent protest" and "terrorism".
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:It's interesting, but I'm not sure in my mind where it falls morally on the scale between "non-violent protest" and "terrorism".
Actually, it seems pretty clear to me that this is pretty clearly encouraging vandalism.
Whatever else you think of pirating or file-sharing or what have you, this is encouraging vandalism-morally if not legally.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
One of the bemusing things about modern life- the electronic world seems to be forcing us to adapt our language, and often leaves us struggling with words and metaphors that almost but don't quite fit, like "stealing" that leaves the thing stolen still available to the owner.
"Vandalism" is an interesting description. At first it calls to mind grafitti and the like, things that might make a business less attractive but not actively interfere with the running of same, but throwing a rock through a window or slashing tires might also be vandalism, and could possibly cause a business to shut down completely.
The reason "non-violent protest" and "terrorism" come to my mind is that either could do an entity harm, though in the former case it's more likely a result of lost business (through loss of public stature or boycott) and in the latter it's more likely more direct harm (preventing the entity from acting and making others afraid to follow the example, etc.)
There's also something of a question as to how much this is "do you recognize how many people feel negatively about your actions" (peaceful protest) and how much this is "feel our wrath and tremble in fear" (terrorism).
Like I say, the internet age seems to make many words into "almosts".
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: The reason "non-violent protest" and "terrorism" come to my mind is that either could do an entity harm, though in the former case it's more likely a result of lost business (through loss of public stature or boycott) and in the latter it's more likely more direct harm (preventing the entity from acting and making others afraid to follow the example, etc.)
Except that this activity, if it goes as planned, isn't a matter of 'could possibly' interfere or harm the business. If this goes as planned, it certainly will cause harm.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:For some reason, it's hard for me to side against them, though.
Not for me. In my personal opinion, this sort of thing will prove more damaging at least in the short run to opponents of the labels rather than the labels themselves.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Honestly, the real shameful thing is the fee structure. The "attack" sounds like a useful way to highlight an absurdity inherent in the banking fee structure. I doubt the law firm would actually get STUCK with a large bill (doesn't seem wise for the bank to advertise that sort of liability), but this would certainly be a nuisance for both the firm and the bank.
What makes this different, if anything, from something like a street march that interferes with a firm making money?
The way things are going, the Swedish government will hurry up and make a law against making small payments in support of someone convicted of copyright infringement (or whatever related crime the PB guys were convicted of)
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
The only thing that charging these people is going to do is have other people take their place. Pirate bay is one of the best set up sharing sites I know.
Posts: 549 | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Wait a second. Sending them money is vandalism?
Sending them money in such a way that it costs them money to receive it, more money than is sent, with the intention to cause them to lose money?
Sure sounds like vandalism to me.
Not to me. We didn't make them sign a contract like that, nor are we responsible for the consequences.
Then again I once paid my rent to a bad landlord in unrolled pennies, then took a picture of him kicking me out of his office. When he took me to court the pictures proved he was lying. Not only was the debt wipe off, but he was found guilty of lying to the court.. Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rappin' Ronnie Reagan: How does electronically transferring money involve the destruction of property?
It's not a perfect analogy, but what is?
Knowingly sending money in such a way that it costs the recipient more money than the transfer doesn't seem very different from throwing through a window half the cost of repairing it.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:How does electronically transferring money involve the destruction of property?
I'm not sure why some folks are just saying stuff like 'electronic transfer of money'. That's rather like saying, "All I did was give him an egg roll with shrimp," when the eater is allergic to shellfish. Not as bad, of course, but the principle of only bearing responsibility for the exact, specific thing done and nothing it's connected to is the same.
As for how it's like destruction of property, I consider it like vandalism because it's not exactly vandalism and it's not exactly theft, even though the result is the same. I'm just as happy to call it theft, though. If I'm at a poker game and am deliberately losing to someone else in order to help a third party cheat, I can hardly say, "All I did was lose some money!"
------
quote:Not to me. We didn't make them sign a contract like that, nor are we responsible for the consequences.
We're not responsible for the consequences...if we take action that directly results in those consequences? I'm afraid that doesn't make much sense to me, Kwea.
quote:Then again I once paid my rent to a bad landlord in unrolled pennies, then took a picture of him kicking me out of his office. When he took me to court the pictures proved he was lying. Not only was the debt wipe off, but he was found guilty of lying to the court.. [Big Grin]
That's not really similar at all.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rappin' Ronnie Reagan: How does electronically transferring money involve the destruction of property?
It's not a perfect analogy, but what is?
Knowingly sending money in such a way that it costs the recipient more money than the transfer doesn't seem very different from throwing through a window half the cost of repairing it.
I think rivka's analogy is pretty sound. Or, if you deposited payments on the top of Mt. Everest, used PayPal+ which required an exorbitant downpayment to receive sent funds.
I'll be honest, I like rivka's version best.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it's hilarious too, but that doesn't make it right. I think "the Man" is kinda stupid in the way they try to prevent internet piracy (the specific demographic they're trying to beat is the EXACT kind of person who loves solving puzzles, preferably with ironic solutions). But while I admit I have "acquired" some things less than legally, I have sympathy for the people that do so without shame.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Except that this activity, if it goes as planned, isn't a matter of 'could possibly' interfere or harm the business. If this goes as planned, it certainly will cause harm.
True- but frankly, I doubt it will come to that. It's the sort of thing a customer in good standing could warn a bank about and have the bank either forbid all electronic transactions for a time, limit the minimum deposit to above the transaction fee, or move all funds to a different account. And most banks wouldn't want to allow their customers to be vulnerable to such an attack- it would gain them a small profit in the short term, but harm account-holder confidence in the long run.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kwea: Then again I once paid my rent to a bad landlord in unrolled pennies, then took a picture of him kicking me out of his office.
Man. What did he do that caused you to do that?
I own a triplex, and rent out the two units I'm not living in. I'm really not sure what I'd do if one of my tenants were to pay me in pennies. It would take hours to roll the things, and the automatic change counters all charge a percentage, which would be significant with this munch money. I wonder if my bank would count them for free if I were depositing them into my account.
Maybe I should specify a minimum denomination for cash rent payments the next time I have to draw up a lease.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I wonder if my bank would count them for free if I were depositing them into my account.
Chevy Chase bank will change coins to dollars with no fee, and with no proof of investment in the bank.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting. I don't think that there are any Chevy Chase branches around here, but I'll have to see if any of the area banks do offer this service.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: Wait a second. Sending them money is vandalism?
In much the same way that throwing a purse full of quarters through my window would be.
Part of the mismatch is that a window is not designed to accept purses of quarters in any way. A bank account is designed to accept money, just not in this form. I think thats why some people are not too keen on the usage of the word vandalism, its an imperfect "real-world" analogy to a more abstract problem.
quote:Originally posted by Kwea: Then again I once paid my rent to a bad landlord in unrolled pennies, then took a picture of him kicking me out of his office.
Man. What did he do that caused you to do that?
I own a triplex, and rent out the two units I'm not living in. I'm really not sure what I'd do if one of my tenants were to pay me in pennies. It would take hours to roll the things, and the automatic change counters all charge a percentage, which would be significant with this munch money. I wonder if my bank would count them for free if I were depositing them into my account.
Maybe I should specify a minimum denomination for cash rent payments the next time I have to draw up a lease.
I asked him to fix my sink 4 times over 3 weeks, and he never did. I withheld rent (50% I believe, for 2 months), as allowed by law, until he did so, but I didn't use certified mail for the last notification. He claimed I never informed him. He locked me out illegally so that I had to break in to my own apartment.
I waited until he was manning the front desk at the office, while his secretary was on lunch, and came in with an army duffel and a hand duffel filled with pennies. I had to have help carrying them in, it was pretty funny.
The counter was really high, and he was on the phone so he didn't know what I was doing until I dumped all $300 (or so) on to his lap, over the counter.
I had a friend filming the whole thing, because I knew with his temper he would blow up and come after me. Funny thing is all he had to do was tell me they needed to be rolled coins and I would have had to sit there, in front of him, and roll them again (I got them rolled from the bank, and had to unwrap them....too all night).
He blew up, came after me, and I got it all on film. He took me to court, not realizing my friend had been filming though the glass doors of his office, and claimed I had never paid him a dime.
I stood up and said I never gave him a dime, but I gave him $400 worth of pennies, which are legal tender. The judge didn't believe me, so I offered the tape proving I had paid him, however unconventionally.
He got fined and cited for lying, and I got off. The judge said it was the most creative thing he had seen in all his years as a housing judge. He also said that I would have had to wrap them if my landlord had asked me to, and the only reason I got away with it was my landlord was on tape threatening me and ordering me off his property. Then he said my landlord was an idiot. Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've never done anything like that, but lord knows I've wanted to.
University of Miami once almost threatened to cancel my semester of classes (worth $8K at the time) because I was short $0.04 in my payments. They sent me six letters by mail (do the math on postage) notifying me of it.
I wrote them a check for the amount.
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I also had the receipt from the bank proving I had gotten $400 (I think it may have been less than that, but my rent was $425 for an efficiency, so that's the number I am using....it's been almost 15 years since this happened...lol) from the bank, in case he wanted to claim I was short. Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
:: laugh :: You know, now that you relate the story, I think I remember your having posted about it before. That's pretty damned funny (and it sounds like he deserved it).
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Part of the mismatch is that a window is not designed to accept purses of quarters in any way. A bank account is designed to accept money, just not in this form. I think thats why some people are not too keen on the usage of the word vandalism, its an imperfect "real-world" analogy to a more abstract problem.
Exploit lacks the connotative ring that vandalism or theft has, though.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kwea: I waited until he was manning the front desk at the office, while his secretary was on lunch, and came in with an army duffel and a hand duffel filled with pennies. I had to have help carrying them in, it was pretty funny.
The counter was really high, and he was on the phone so he didn't know what I was doing until I dumped all $300 (or so) on to his lap, over the counter.
Wow. Accord to my calculations, given the average mass of a penny (pre- 1982 mint is 3.1 grams, post 82 is 2.5 grams, and pennies have a half life of between 25 and 50 years) those bags weighed anywhere between 180 and 280 pounds- probably around 240 at least. That's insane.
I believe in many countries small currency exploits are illegal for these reasons.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
40,000 pennies... O_o That reminds me of penny drives we'd do as a kid at our church - over a summer we raised over $1,000. (100,000 pennies) That was a sight to see.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
There was an article on NPR this morning that the mint is cutting back on producing 2009 coins. (collectors grab them now--they will be valuable due to their relative scarcity).
The reason...
Two things are happening during the recession. A) Not as many people are passing currency around. B) Very many people are taking those old jars of loose coins and putting them back in circulation. They assume its because in tight times people need every penny. I believe its because of troublemakers like you and your 40,000 pennies.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
My husband and I have a change jar. We roll the coins ourselves. The change jar is for whatever games he wants to buy. The store owner gives him a really hard time when he comes in with a hundred dollars in change.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can't see why, especially if he goes to the trouble of rolling them. That just saves the store manager the trip to the bank for change. People can be such dicks even when you're being helpful.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's also now officially day three without any cigarettes. Give a a guy a break. I'm gonna go chew a nicorrete and have a good cry.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's an amount of pennies that you really could swim in like a dolphin - dig through like a mole - throw up in the air and let them rain down over you.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
But it always occurred to me watching Duck Tales, that if Uncle Scrooge actually swam in those coins, he would first die by landing on them head first, and then be crushed by their weight as he swam through them. I was possibly morbid as a child.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The secret to the money swim is having your vault equipped with a powerful upward air flow that slightly separates and elevates the coins as it blows through, and a vibration generator that simulates earthquake liquefaction. It becomes no more difficult or dangerous than swimming through greased ball bearings.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rappin' Ronnie Reagan: How does electronically transferring money involve the destruction of property?
It's not a perfect analogy, but what is?
Knowingly sending money in such a way that it costs the recipient more money than the transfer doesn't seem very different from throwing through a window half the cost of repairing it.
I've been thinking about this. Under this definition, I think just about anyone who's charged a small purchase (a few dollars or less) on a credit card is quite probably guilty of vandalism.
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Which is why many small stores require minimum purchase amounts when using a card... and some even charge $0.50 if you use a card for your transaction.
Posts: 1323 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Magson: Which is why many small stores require minimum purchase amounts when using a card... and some even charge $0.50 if you use a card for your transaction.
If they accept Visa and Mastercard, those stores are almost certainly violating terms of service. A condition of accepting those cards is not to set a minimum transaction amount and surcharges are almost never OK. I see places getting away with it, and usually comply with the merchant's wishes without complaint, but it's still against the rules set by the card issuers. You're not supposed to accept those cards if the benefit from additional sales volume doesn't offset the losses at the individual small transaction level.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
