[HN Gopher] Steve Wozniak used to tip from printed sheets of $2 ...
___________________________________________________________________
Steve Wozniak used to tip from printed sheets of $2 bills
Author : tjhill
Score : 348 points
Date : 2023-01-29 10:20 UTC (12 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (web.archive.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (web.archive.org)
| yreg wrote:
| > [The Secret Service agent] asked my for some picture ID. I have
| some fake photo ID's that a friend made for me years before, when
| we could make realistic photo ID's from our computers. Almost
| nobody else could do this because printers weren't good enough.
| But I had an expensive early generation dye sublimation printer
| and made some fake ID's for fun. I had one favorite fake ID that
| I'd used for almost every airplane flight, domestic and
| international, that I'd taken for many years. It says "Laser
| Safety Officer" and has a photo of me with an eyepatch. It also
| says "Department of Defiance" in an arc, in a font that looks
| like "Department of Defense" to the casual glance.
|
| > As I opened my wallet, I considered whether I should risk using
| this fake ID on the Secret Service. It probably amounted to a
| real crime. I had my driver's license as well. But you only live
| once and only a few of us even get a chance like this once in our
| lives. So I handed him the fake ID. He noted and returned it. The
| Secret Service took an ID that said "Laser Safety Officer" with a
| photo of myself wearing an eyepatch.
|
| Woz plays life like an RPG.
| FatActor wrote:
| Just because he does "tame" things doesn't mean he's not
| abusing his privilege as an uber-rich white dude. He's a
| million times better person than Musk, but this is still
| immature behavior that not everyone could get away with because
| of what they look like. But hey, he's a hacker god so blank
| check I guess.
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| Another interesting story from the Apple founders...
|
| https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/steve-jo...
|
| Steve Jobs met his biological father accidentally at a
| restaurant.
| 77pt77 wrote:
| How the hell can you travel internationally with a fake US ID?
| mertd wrote:
| He is a true hacker. He simply had to find out if his exploit
| worked on the secret service.
|
| I love the story.
| jejeyyy77 wrote:
| People go to prison for a lot less these days.
| b3orn wrote:
| > It probably amounted to a real crime.
|
| I'm not a lawyer, I have no idea how criminal law in the USA
| works, but why would this be a crime? He didn't fake a
| Department of Defence ID, he created an ID for a fictional
| Department of Defiance, it may look similar, it may appear as a
| "real" ID because it's not just a piece of paper, but it's
| about as real an ID as a gym membership card.
| frozenport wrote:
| Additionally impeding an investigation by wasting time is a
| crime.
| retrac wrote:
| Not a lawyer either, but in Canada the core issue would be
| intent to decieve or mislead, as with fraud in general. It's
| not illegal to use a fake name or alias, nor print your own
| IDs (as long as you're not forging government IDs). But doing
| either to manipulate through deception, or mislead
| investigators, is a crime - fraud or public mischief. I
| believe it's broadly similar in the USA? Now, he may have
| lacked the intent to actually make it a crime, but I wouldn't
| want to have to argue that in front of a judge.
| P_I_Staker wrote:
| Just lying to a federal agent is a pretty serious crime, I
| think. Wouldn't be much of a stretch to assume trying to pass
| a fake ID could be one, also.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| Giving a false ID to law enfordement? That is a crime. Giving
| a forged ID to the secret service, the people in charge of
| detecting counterfeiting? That's just idiocy. Misspelling
| department of defense doesnt make the ID ok any more than
| printing a tiny lol in the corner of your fake dollar bills.
|
| (Also, falsely claiming a relationship with the military is
| downright dishonerable.)
| ztrww wrote:
| > false ID
|
| Showing a counterfeit driver's license, passport etc. is
| obviously a crime. What he did was equivalent to showing
| your company issued ID. Would that be a crime?
| sandworm101 wrote:
| It had a logo meant to fool a casual observer into
| reading "department of defense". Inserting a misprint
| doesn't make something ok if they decide you were
| intending to create a false impression in a hurried cop.
| hanselot wrote:
| Would a secret service officer be considered a casual
| observer?
| hueyluey wrote:
| What do you mean by "dishonerable" here? Is this an
| instance of how Americans love the military so much that
| it's difficult to understand for people from other
| countries (where being a military isn't different from
| being a shop owner, or carpenter or doctor or whatever)?
| fundad wrote:
| Military and police are America's most popular social
| programs, have the most powerful constituencies and their
| budgets grow constantly.
| mojomark wrote:
| Hard to answer this without delving down a political
| rabbithole. In the USA, there is sentiment for both
| military service members (not to be conflated necessarily
| with the military industrial complex or military
| campaigns), "first responders" (police, firefighters, EMS
| and hospital workers, etc.).
|
| The sentiment for the military and first responders is
| that they either have already, or could at any moment, be
| called upon to put their health and life at risk on
| behalf of the rest of us citizens and allies - so that
| the rest of us can live a free and peaceful life in
| pursuit of happiness. The sentiment is one of sincere
| gratitude of the deepest variety.
|
| I personally don't think the existence of this ID card
| mocking the DoD is anything but harmless fun. In fact,
| the freedom to make such content is a part of the freedom
| of speech the DoD works to protect. However, as much as I
| enjoy Woz, I agree that giving a false ID to someone a
| law enforcement agent who is simply trying to do their
| job, isn't smart or too funny, it's intentionally
| obfuscating a process and stealing time (tax payer
| dollars) from the agent trying to do their potentially
| deangerous job and prosecute true bad actors.
|
| Law enforcement in the US is far from perfect, and trust
| me, there's a place and value to peaceful civil
| dissobedience. However, there's also a psychological and
| monetary cost. The costs of Woz's act seem very benign to
| me, but I can see how others could easily get spun-up
| about it - especially if your job is law enforcement.
| WXLCKNO wrote:
| I think that's what he means too. Other people are
| talking about sacrifice.
|
| It's a job, like any other job. People do it because they
| want to get paid and military worship is ridiculous.
| influx wrote:
| Serving in the military is different from other jobs as
| soldiers may be sent to dangerous situations where there
| is a risk of death. Although many Americans believe the
| decisions made by politicians that put military personnel
| in harm's way have not been good, this does not take away
| from the bravery of those who voluntarily choose to serve
| their country.
| quesera wrote:
| Americans want to believe. Call it "optimism", if you're
| feeling generous.
|
| American exceptionalism is a thing to believe in which
| satisfies all of the needs of a believer. It's part of
| the belief triad "god-family-country".
|
| The military is an extension of the country. There is
| very little visible military presence in the US, and the
| military has no role in civilian affairs except in cases
| of temporary callup for natural disasters etc.
|
| And yet it's a very big military, so everyone has some
| adjacency to present or historical members of the
| military.
|
| In short, it's the perfect object of optimistic belief.
| The military is consistently the "most trusted" part of
| American society -- perhaps because all the things it
| does, it does elsewhere.
|
| And for the most part, American foreign policy is _pretty
| similar_ across political lines, so there 's no inherent
| partisan rift, making it an easy and safe thing for
| everyone to agree on.
|
| A foreigner might argue that that is a flimsy basis for
| belief. They might point to some tragic events visited
| upon the world by the US military. They might say that
| Normandy was a long time ago and it doesn't justify
| everything that's happened since then.
|
| Many Americans would agree with that. But that's the
| outsider's view. First and foremost, internally, the
| military is a jobs program. And it's very very good at
| that! Tons of training and education, incredible amounts
| of commerce and technology, genuine personal development,
| and on the whole very little international malfeasance.
|
| Americans are optimistic people.
| latchkey wrote:
| > Americans are optimistic people.
|
| My optimism died the second time Bush Jr. was elected,
| but I'm only 49.
| z3c0 wrote:
| I think the political group being spoken of here would've
| been the crowd reinvigorated by his election.
| latchkey wrote:
| Mission accomplished
| coeneedell wrote:
| No matter what country you're in, the military is in a
| position of authority (except maybe Costa Rica).
| Generally people consider a lie to be worse if it's a lie
| you can use to get power.
| xkqd wrote:
| And usually a position of sacrifice. Therefore, it's
| pretty respected over here and making a false claim is
| pretty taboo.
|
| Definitely taboo enough to get you chewed out, and almost
| enough to risk a physical altercation.
| scarface74 wrote:
| I once ran a 5K as part of an Army fundraiser. It was for
| civilians. The Army gave every runner a T-shirt with the
| Army logo very prominent.
|
| Someone asked me when I was in the Army and not thinking
| about why they asked I just said I wasn't.
|
| They almost started to chew me out until I mentioned it
| was given to me as part of an Army sponsored fundraiser.
| waltbosz wrote:
| Reminds me of a time in 7th grade when I wore a band
| t-shirt that I had received as a gift. A kid in my class
| took exception because he doubted that I even owned any
| of their albums. The kid called me a "poser".
|
| It also makes me think of my uncle who is a very proud
| labor union member. He gets upset if anyone says anything
| disparaging about labor unions.
|
| My point is, it sounds to me like people taking honor in
| being a member of an exclusive club, and they don't like
| it if other people do things to belittle their club
| membership, like by pretending to be a member.
|
| I wonder if there is some psychological term for that
| behavior.
| projektfu wrote:
| Maybe it falls more under group dynamics/sociology.
| Interesting question.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| Authority isnt the word. Im in the military and that
| gives me absolutely zero authority in civilian life. It
| would be a crime for me to even attempt to wield such.
| But i do expect a modicum of extra respect for people who
| give up time/money/priviledges of civilian life in order
| to serve thier country. I dont expect cops to let me get
| away with speeding, but i do expect them not to detain me
| by the roadside in uniform for a "random" check.
| z3c0 wrote:
| I agree with you overall, but that "serve their country"
| line makes me cringe every time. The military's
| operations are vast and numerous, but also politically-
| motivated and, at times, disgustingly utilitarian.
| Obviously, no grunt should bear that burden, but I feel
| better served by the post office.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| It is cringe worthy, but when you get orders for a multi-
| year posting far away from friends and family, it really
| does feel like servitude. It was -30 outside this
| morning. My car hates me for bringing it here.
| lttlrck wrote:
| Sorry to be blunt, but you chose that life. There are
| vast numbers of people serving their country economically
| (albeit perhaps indirectly) in uncomfortable
| circumstances and they all deserve respect.
| quesera wrote:
| Some people join the military to serve their country.
|
| But everyone in the military is indoctrinated to believe
| that they _are_ serving their country.
|
| Some of them are shipped overseas. Some live in Virginia
| Beach. Some are physically endangered. Some sit behind a
| desk.
|
| There are good and noble people who choose a life of
| service. Some of them are in the military. Some of them
| are food kitchen volunteers.
|
| Not everyone in the military is noble, or serving their
| country. Any more than any other federal employee.
|
| It's difficult to know the appropriate level of respect
| or honor to give to a random person displaying the
| paraphernalia of military service. "Thank you for your
| service" is free, and perhaps genuinely felt and received
| in some cases (but also vacuous at times).
|
| I've worked with a lot of ex-military folks. And several
| members of my family are current or former members. I
| can't think of a single trait that is common to all of
| them.
|
| Not physical fitness. Not leadership skills. Not honesty
| or honor or respectability. Not intelligence or grit or
| perseverance or fashion sense.
|
| The median is probably higher than the average across the
| whole population. So there may be a correlation. Except
| fashion sense!
|
| However this does not persuade me that there's a reason
| to differentially treat military vs random citizens in
| your example of a traffic stop. But I'm also not a cop!
| z3c0 wrote:
| Without a doubt, it is servitude, but I feel it downplays
| the plight of servicemen like yourself to roll it up into
| that "of country". The expended lives towards obtuse ends
| is far more tragic than that of something noble like
| life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I wish you
| luck on your tour, wherever it is.
| sicp-enjoyer wrote:
| Do you think the soldiers should see themselves as
| capitalists in it for themselves?
| JeremyBanks wrote:
| [dead]
| quesera wrote:
| > No matter what country you're in, the military is in a
| position of authority
|
| In the United States, the military has no authority over
| citizens. It's a foundational law. Exceptions can be made
| under temporary and unusual circumstances.
| xeromal wrote:
| In the US, the military is actually used for combat
| operations so the risk of being injured or killed is
| higher than being "a shop owner, or carpenter or doctor
| or whatever". The majority aren't but you're still
| signing up for it when you join so you are given an
| amount of elevated respect. It's not something you sign
| up for willie nillie. You're obligated to serve for at
| least a tour (4 years I believe) and in those 4 years,
| you've lost every bit of free-will. It's a sacrifice that
| I wasn't willing to make so kudos to those who do.
| neoromantique wrote:
| As almost everywhere in the world.
|
| Enrolling into military is a choice and you know risks
| beforehand, there's nothing about that choice that
| deserves worship-like cult status military has in US.
| [deleted]
| sicp-enjoyer wrote:
| And why do you think they take those risks? Do you think
| they would if people treated it like a job at mcdonalds?
| Would their families support them in being away for so
| long for 30k/year?
| quesera wrote:
| Some of them absolutely would, yes.
|
| But psychologically, the drive to be a part of something
| important is very strong, especially in young men.
|
| The military has a rich mythology that plays into, and
| perpetuates, this.
|
| This is not bad or unhealthy! But it is also not
| _inherently_ good. There are other groups which use the
| same tactics to recruit people for bad services. It very
| very much depends.
| Aeolun wrote:
| > In the US, the military is actually used for combat
| operations
|
| This is true for most forces. All the US allies working
| in Iraq/Iran weren't robots.
| throw_away1525 wrote:
| [flagged]
| [deleted]
| sicp-enjoyer wrote:
| Consider the following:
|
| 1. Although military people are paid, it's not enough to
| compensate the amount of time, health risks, and loss of
| normal rights and freedoms experienced by young people.
|
| 2. Are we better off or worse off if people think of
| service as just a job to pay the bills? I'm not naiive
| about this, but we want people to take it seriously, not
| treat it like a retail job at the mall.
|
| 3. A small number will ultimately die. I think you would
| be a foolish leader/government to give those people who
| died for you anything but respect if you hope for similar
| sacrifice in the future.
| lr1970 wrote:
| > Giving a forged ID to the secret service, the people in
| charge of detecting counterfeiting?
|
| Well, he was on a thin ice but nevertheless still within
| bounds of the law. He did not forge or fake the ID, it was
| a fictitious one like Disney World passport. The ID had his
| real name on it, no lies there. The $2 bills were legit as
| well. And mocking federal agent was not a crime.
| monocasa wrote:
| Presenting a fictitious Disney World passport to law
| enforcement as a real ID would be just as much as a crime
| as trying to deposit fake money from a child's playset at
| the bank. It's the action of trying to deceive that
| pushes it into criminal territory.
| zuminator wrote:
| If it has his true name and photo on it, it's real
| identification. It's just not official or governmental
| identification. What makes a forged ID "forged" is not
| that it's not state issued, it's that it passes itself
| off as being state issued.
| monocasa wrote:
| A reasonable person would interpret it as a department of
| defense ID. That's the standard that is going to be used
| against you in court. Identification intrinsically has
| provenance at the core of it's concept.
|
| Just like you'd be fucked if you tried to deposit dollars
| for the federal bank of amerigo, your fake country.
| golemotron wrote:
| > I'm not a lawyer, I have no idea how criminal law in the
| USA works, but why would this be a crime?
|
| The US has streamlined this relative to other countries. You
| don't have to commit a crime, you just irritate a LEO and
| they find the crime for you.
| zeroonetwothree wrote:
| The US is hardly the country with the most law enforcement
| corruption. Indeed we are pretty low on the list.
| lqet wrote:
| But you wouldn't board an international flight with your gym
| membership card.
| ztrww wrote:
| I would if I could..
| rcstank wrote:
| In 2023? No. In 198X? You didn't even need an ID.
| dghughes wrote:
| I drove alone to the US from Canada for a trip in 1999 no
| passport (never had and still don't have one). The US
| Border Agents used my driver's license as proof of my ID.
|
| But they were convinced my goal was to go there to live.
| they tore my car apart, took everything out of luggage.
| They let me go but thought I was never coming back.
|
| All I was doing was going to a Thanksgiving dinner in
| Scranton.
| lancepioch wrote:
| I think it was about 2008-2009 that Canada started
| requiring US citizens to have their passport. Before
| that, they would take most US state ids.
| zeroonetwothree wrote:
| How do you know what they thought? And if they truly
| believed that why would they let you through?
| raverbashing wrote:
| I don't think gyms even do that anymore. It's mostly
| electronic tags/cards now
| Shraal wrote:
| I'm also not a lawyer but AFAIK it often boils down to
| intent. You could argue that he tried to deceive someone with
| it.
| everforward wrote:
| Not a lawyer either, but this doesn't appear to statutorily
| require intent. This is the relevant law[1].
|
| I think the easiest way to prosecute this would be under
| the "authentication features" section:
|
| (1) the term "authentication feature" means any hologram,
| watermark, certification, symbol, code, image, sequence of
| numbers or letters, or other feature that either
| individually or in combination with another feature is used
| by the issuing authority on an identification document,
| document-making implement, or means of identification to
| determine if the document is counterfeit, altered, or
| otherwise falsified
|
| If he had replicated any of those things, he committed a
| crime just by making the ID. Using the ID likely has
| additional penalties, but just making it is a felony by
| itself. It seems likely he did, because I think missing
| seals and watermarks (if those existed at the time) would
| stand out as obvious to a secret service agent or the TSA.
|
| 1: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1028
| zuminator wrote:
| If Sara was 12 when this happened then this occurred
| around 1998 or so. At that time the "authentication
| features" provisions of the law didn't exist, as they
| were added in 2003. (See the "Notes" tab in your link).
| VWWHFSfQ wrote:
| I don't even think it's arguable. He intended to deceive a
| Secret Service officer with fake federal government
| credentials, and apparently succeeded in doing so. I
| believe that is a felony. The judge may reduce the charge
| or throw it out later though because of the obvious
| wackiness of it.
| zinekeller wrote:
| Yeah, the ID itself might be judged confusing enough to
| be legally a counterfeit (which is a crime in itself)
| while the intentional intent to deceive lawful
| authorities adds another case to the table.
| bushbaba wrote:
| He's Woz. A household name. I suspect the secret service
| agent also noticed it being a fake ID but didn't want to
| deal with the litany of paperwork in arresting woz for
| the crime. Maybe the agent also got a chuckle out of it
| as well.
| ShamelessC wrote:
| Hate to break it to you, but if "Tim Apple" isn't a
| household name, Wozniak certainly isn't. Steve Jobs
| _maybe_ is, but even that is likely overestimating the
| public's knowledge.
| njharman wrote:
| It's a Felony to lie to federal agent. Who doesn't know that?
| Under 18 U.S.C. SS 1001, it's a felony crime to: make a
| "false statement" to an agent of the > federal government
| related to a federal matter. ... A "false
| statement" can be: a material omission. a
| material misrepresentation, or. using a fraudulent
| document.
|
| Proffering a fake id when asked for a real id is clearly
| using a fraudulent document.
| etothepii wrote:
| Is it a fake id in this sense if it had his real name on?
| AlecSchueler wrote:
| It wasn't issued by the entity claimed so yes.
| 0134340 wrote:
| It wasn't issued by the Dept of Defiance? I'd say it
| defiantly was.
| brookst wrote:
| So if I go to a bar with an ID from Missisippi, that's
| not fake ID because I just made that state up?
|
| Please do not try this kind of thing in real life.
| techdragon wrote:
| Yes but it wasn "fake"... it was "entirely made up".
| There's a legitimate difference here that I'm sure lawyers
| would have a field day with. And I'd imagine the agent
| would have requested additional Id if they actually cared
| since it's a simple enough thing to ask again if they took
| one look at it and weren't satisfied.
| brookst wrote:
| "One simple trick" wasn't a thing back in the timeframe
| of this story. No gold-fringed flags, no sovcits, no
| "technically I didn't lie".
| Aeolun wrote:
| I'm wondering if you could argue that you were asked for
| 'an ID', not 'your US passport or drivers license'.
| causality0 wrote:
| He could also just be lying about the story.
| MiddleEndian wrote:
| People don't always check IDs that well, even people whose
| job is 90% checking IDs. A friend of mine is a bouncer who
| has memorized every state's ID (he catches a lot of IDs that
| scan at other places) and usually gets multiple fakes a night
| while working.
|
| He got an obvious fake from a blond 6'2" guy. He gave it to
| our dark-haired 5'7" friend with a very different facial
| structure and told him to try it at several other bars in the
| area. Said friend got into every bar.
| AuthorizedCust wrote:
| How is that ID fake? It would have to imitate some ID issued by
| some organization to be fake.
|
| I think "novelty ID" may be more correct. Just like those
| novelty dollar bills that kind of look like real currency in
| some ways but still have significant distinctions.
| [deleted]
| dist1ll wrote:
| Isn't it pretty irresponsible to commit a felony while you have
| a daughter and wife to take care of?
|
| I find his nonchalant delivery quite jarring. I don't
| understand what's going through his head here.
| cmrdporcupine wrote:
| Shit was very different, in terms of interaction with the
| security apparatus of the state, pre-9/11.
| fxtentacle wrote:
| Yeah. Imagine bringing ESTES toy rockets in hand luggage
| nowadays. They used to be a popular gift for kids.
| crispyambulance wrote:
| It was a different era, people were more cool and playful
| back then.
| ramraj07 wrote:
| Not to mention not looking like a minority was a fairly
| strong shield back then and even is today.
| whiddershins wrote:
| ChatGTP, please write a comment that will derail this
| conversation with random divisive rhetoric.
| ramraj07 wrote:
| What do you want to chat with Guanosine Tri Phosphate,
| precursor to the G in ATGC dna code?
| [deleted]
| cultofmetatron wrote:
| no kidding, you could bluff your way out of a murder
| charge or even convince the police that your naked
| bleeding victim screaming to get away from you was better
| off in your care. (see jeffery dhamer)
|
| edit: 2 downvotes? seriously? here's a source
| https://toofab.com/2020/06/19/white-cops-handed-a-
| dying-14-y...
| lupire wrote:
| That was arguably homophobia, not racial preference.
| JuniorBalleg wrote:
| When an entire population is far more homogeneous than
| most modern Western states, the heightened social trust
| and cohesion permits this kind of harmless fun (among
| many other benefits). It's one of those sacrifices made
| to accommodate diversity which is almost impossible to
| quantify and existentially unsettling to even try.
| pjc50 wrote:
| Struggling to work out when the nondiverse America ever
| existed, that Woz could have been in?
| hindsightbias wrote:
| Born & raised in:
| http://www.bayareacensus.ca.gov/cities/SanJose50.htm
|
| Even Atherton was more diverse back then.
|
| Lives in Los Gatos:
| https://censusreporter.org/profiles/16000US0644112-los-
| gatos...
| JuniorBalleg wrote:
| It's not binary. Mark Potok of the SPLC has a poster on
| his wall tracking the demographic decline of Whites in
| America. You don't need to look far - official population
| statistics, your kid's school, or your local Walmart - to
| see this massive, rapid demographic shift in action.
|
| You're welcome to argue the absence of causation.
| ilyt wrote:
| Clearly you haven't read or been in any post-soviet
| country, near perfect "ethnical cohesion", doesn't stop
| crime or increase trust in any way.
|
| Frankly that's arrogant and narrow-minded view;
| homogenous culture might cause less conflicts and
| problems _when the culture itself_ is one promoting that
| in the first place
| enedil wrote:
| What do you mean? For instance, Poland escaped Soviet
| block, is almost unilaterally composed of Polish people,
| and yet look at the chart:
| https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-
| explained/index.php...
|
| The countries with lowest crime numbers in EU per capita
| are (ordered by crime rate increasing): Slovakia,
| Hungary, Estonia, Cyprus, Slovenia, Czechia, Poland,
| Bulgaria, Croatia, Lithuania, Romania.
|
| All of them are socially pretty homogenous. Most of them
| escaped Soviet block. Some even escaped Soviet Union. On
| the other hand, look at the countries from the other side
| of chart (this time, rate decreasing): Belgium, Spain,
| Portugal, Sweden, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Germany.
|
| As this data concerns only EU, there is no UK here, but
| as I remember, it had around 3x crime rate as the
| Republic of Ireland, which would put it on the tops of
| the EU list.
|
| Of course, increased diversity might not be the only
| differentiator between the countries from the top of the
| list and those from the bottom, but I think it defeats
| your point (almost as if you were racist for having
| irrational fears against living in a post-soviet society,
| which aren't backed by numbers).
| qwytw wrote:
| I think focusing exclusively on latest data is
| problematic. Many post soviet countries had huge amounts
| of crime in the 90s and early 2000s. Crime rates
| gradually decreased after they joined the EU until they
| reached their current levels.
|
| The degree of ethnic homogeneity did not increase during
| that time, if anything it slightly decreased (or
| significantly in some major cities).
|
| One possible explanation is that people willing to engage
| in low level crime simply moved to richer western
| countries because well they were (and still are)
| richer... e.g. in Norway Lithuanians are the second
| largest group of people who are imprisoned (after local
| Norwegians). The situation is similar in some other
| Western European countries. I'm not an expert but if I
| wanted to rob/steal from people and businesses I'd
| probably do that in Norway, Germany, or Switzerland
| rather than Romania or Lithuania. The risk versus reward
| ratio seems much better there. Also there prisons are way
| nicer (especially in Norway).
| enedil wrote:
| This is disingenuous to say that people emigrated in
| order to do crime. But you could also find statistics on
| sexual assaults which also suggest that rape is a lot
| more prevalent in western europe (and probably, that the
| rates since the 90s didn't change much on the east).
|
| I would say, that based on my experience on growing in
| Poland (I was born in 1998), the people become richer and
| suddenly everybody now seems to be minding own business.
| So after you fill some economic needs, the will to pick
| on people decreases. But that will is surely dependent on
| how much you trust others are think similar (and won't
| rob you).
|
| Anyway, the parents' commenter point was > near perfect
| "ethnical cohesion", doesn't stop crime or increase trust
| in any way
|
| I can't see why should it be true. Perhaps it doesn't
| stop crime completely, but perhaps it actually increases
| trust. Based on the argument above we can't know.
| KptMarchewa wrote:
| That's true for countries in which russia directly
| meddles. Countries that thrown off the yoke, like Czechia
| or Poland have one of the lowest crime rates in the
| world.
| qwytw wrote:
| You might be correct now. They are probably correct about
| the 90s or early 2000s.
|
| Then again crime rates in Belarus for instance don't seem
| to be much higher than in Poland or Lithuania.
| shrimp_emoji wrote:
| Hahaha. Great point.
|
| The U.S. is one of the higher-trust societies, socially,
| while also being extremely racially diverse.
|
| It sounds like pro-social culture and your people being
| rich probably matter more than race, and Eastern Europe
| has a critical deficit in both of those. :p
| ilyt wrote:
| Mostly thanks to "inheriting" it from russia in form of
| being post-soviet satellites... it took decades for most
| countries (and for other it is still in progress) to get
| from "you need bribe or connections to get anywhere in
| bureaucracy" for example.
| manimino wrote:
| People often refer to the Scandinavian countries or Japan
| as examples of low ethnic diversity and high trust.
|
| Are there any quantitative studies on this topic? It
| would be a stronger argument if a clear trend was
| observable over many countries.
| ramraj07 wrote:
| What's the argument supposed to be? Homogeneity in
| service of peace?
|
| I'd rather live in a diverse hellhole than some
| whitewashed "utopia".
| butlerm wrote:
| I think you are failing to distinguish between 'is' and
| 'ought' here.
| landemva wrote:
| If I was searching for comparisons, I would look at
| Stockholm and suburbs in 1990s compared with present. I
| am told there are now areas where those born in .se and
| the police just avoid due to take-over by gangs of (some)
| recent immigrants.
| [deleted]
| dbingham wrote:
| > the heightened social trust and cohesion permits this
| kind of harmless fun
|
| This needs a citation. It's the sort of "common sense"
| all too often advanced by people with - frankly - racist
| or ethnonational agendas.
| jameslk wrote:
| > This needs a citation. It's the sort of "common sense"
| all too often advanced by people with - frankly - racist
| or ethnonational agendas.
|
| Jumping straight to claiming someone has a racist or
| ethnonational agenda because they didn't provide a
| citation seems uncharitable. It comes off as a worse form
| of sealioning. I'm not sure if you're trying to do that
| intentionally but I mention it so you can understand the
| hostility it may create.
|
| https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2
| 007...
|
| From Wikipedia on the study:
|
| _Harvard professor of political science Robert D. Putnam
| conducted a nearly decade long study on how diversity
| affects social trust. He surveyed 26,200 people in 40
| American communities, finding that when the data were
| adjusted for class, income and other factors, the more
| racially diverse a community is, the greater the loss of
| trust. People in diverse communities "don't trust the
| local mayor, they don't trust the local paper, they don't
| trust other people and they don't trust institutions,"
| writes Putnam._
|
| That said, there can both be problems and benefits of
| something, and in his research on diversity this is
| considered:
|
| _Putnam says, however, that "in the long run immigration
| and diversity are likely to have important cultural,
| economic, fiscal, and developmental benefits."_
|
| _He asserted that his "extensive research and experience
| confirm the substantial benefits of diversity, including
| racial and ethnic diversity, to our society."_
| georgeburdell wrote:
| Have you ever nodded your head in agreement at the
| assertion that the middle east/Africa/etc is so screwed
| up because the colonial powers drew arbitrary borders?
| scarface74 wrote:
| I knew I read something somewhere and this is the closest
| I could find. But I think it's related.
|
| So when I asked ChatGPT
|
| > Are countries with less racial diversity more likely to
| have a larger safety net"
|
| because my GoogleFu was failing me, of course it gave me
| a non controversial generic answer.
|
| But when I asked it for citations it gave me this
|
| > A 2018 study published in the journal Social Science
| Research, which found that countries with more ethnically
| diverse populations tend to have less generous welfare
| states.
|
| Which led me to this link
|
| https://academic.oup.com/esr/article/37/1/89/5934740
|
| > First, vignette experiments established a consistent
| and pervasive deservingness gap: welfare recipients
| belonging to the ethnic ingroup are more likely to be
| considered deserving of welfare support than the ethnic
| outgroup
| dbingham wrote:
| That's _very_ circumstantial evidence that requires more
| examination. Is that a direct result of the diversity -
| or of the history that generated that diversity in the
| first place?
|
| In most countries that are ethnically diverse, that
| diversity was created through various forms of
| colonialism. Often with racial imperialism deeply
| ingrained in it. Which means those countries have long
| running strains of racist ideas and ideologies that forms
| the foundations of the ethnic "in group" and "out group".
|
| Which is not to say that ethnic strife doesn't exist in
| non-colonial countries as well, but that this line of
| thinking and examination is a) extremely complex, b)
| inextricable from the history of the systems under
| examination, c) inextricable from deep histories of
| racist thought - often imposed by colonnial or
| imperialist powers, and d) similar to social darwinism in
| that it is often presented as common sense, but leads to
| some _very_ dark places when taken, unexamined, to its
| logical conclusion.
| scarface74 wrote:
| That last paragraph sound like the same non committal
| answer I got from ChatGPT at first. That's not meant to
| be a criticism, just a random aside.
|
| You do raise a fair point
| dbingham wrote:
| Yeah, I mean, there's a good reason for that. To do the
| topic justice requires a lot of pretty delicate work. The
| only way to give a shorter answer with out tripping into
| dangerous territory is for it to look something like my
| last paragraph.
| ipaddr wrote:
| When everyone comes from the same background and/or
| culture there is a shared understanding. Mix two
| different cultures and you have less shared background
| mix in 100 and you have little.
|
| It's not a race issue when this is experienced in
| Africa/Japan/Sweden/Finland.
|
| Calling new idea to you racist is racist. Most of the
| times the word racist is used it is used incorrectly and
| often in a racist way.
| dbingham wrote:
| It's not a new idea to me. It's an idea I've encountered
| many times, often propping up arguments of various kinds
| against pluralistic societies - which is an argument
| implicit in the comment above. Those arguments lead
| directly to ideas around ethnonationalism and segregating
| societies by cultural background, which is a direct
| analog for ethnicity.
|
| There's a straight line between that argument - which
| again, almost always gets through around with out any
| kind of citations or research support - and ethnic
| cleansing. It's directly attached to racist ideas.
| Similar to social darwinism, it's something that seems
| like relatively harmless common sense on the surface, but
| leads to horrific implications when followed to its
| logical conclusion.
| [deleted]
| jlawson wrote:
| Interesting. So you don't actually argue that it's
| untrue.
|
| You just argue that people shouldn't acknowledge it
| because doing so would lead to policies you think would
| be immoral.
|
| I'm just not sure that this anti-truth stance is tenable
| or really worth it. What if we can acknowledge the facts
| and then... handle them in a non-evil way?
|
| Or perhaps even use that knowledge to head off terrible
| outcomes that might otherwise happen? E.g. Lebanon-style
| ethnic civil wars.
|
| I generally think that knowing the truth is useful and
| equips you to do good things. You just need a non-
| childish moral system to integrate it (too easy to feel
| moral if you just wish away the hard facts of the
| universe).
| kfajdsl wrote:
| Maybe this struck a nerve because I'm an American born-
| and-raised PoC, but frankly I believe this is a bad
| opinion that is often pushed by racists (even if the idea
| itself isn't necessarily inherently racist).
|
| Heightened social trust in people of one's own ethnicity
| isn't a fact of life, it's just racism. It's what causes
| PoC to be profiled by law enforcement, on average have
| worse outcomes for the same crimes in the justice system,
| etc.
|
| I know that this isn't just the way humans are wired. I
| met so many people (including police) in my life that I
| would consider truly "colorblind" and treat everyone with
| respect, regardless of their ethnicity.
|
| Different shared cultural values (as opposed to just
| differing race) is also not as much of a problem as some
| make it out to be. First, most cultures of people that
| are immigrating to the US (I can't speak for Europe, I'm
| not very in the loop) have values largely compatible with
| Western ones. Second, most immigrants will at least
| somewhat assimilate into the culture of their host
| country, especially after a generation or two. Note, this
| doesn't mean throwing away their native culture.
|
| I'd also like to point out that Woz's America was
| definitely NOT homogenous.
| JuniorBalleg wrote:
| >Heightened social trust in people of one's own ethnicity
| isn't a fact of life, it's just racism.
|
| It is a fact of life, it's natural and there's a clear
| evolutionary impetus for it. I would argue that this _is_
| how we are wired.
|
| Of course we feel more comfortable among our own. You are
| far more at ease if you walk into a room to be surrounded
| by people just like you, rather than strangers from the
| other side of the world with their alien appearances,
| behaviours, and even smells! Who knows how the reptilian
| subconscious analyses this information - are we at war?
| conquered? lost? isolated? kidnapped?
|
| In a more modern sense, we can more readily let out guard
| down among our own, knowing we share a common history,
| culture, humour, etc, while we must precariously navigate
| the invisible minefield of sensitivities in a more
| diverse group.
| ModernMech wrote:
| I don't find this to be true in my experience. Pretty
| much any moderately-sized university campus in America is
| a counterpoint to what you're saying. These communities
| can be very diverse, and while it's true that you can
| often find various cliques that split along various
| demographic lines, members of diverse university
| communities still live, learn, and work in close
| proximity.
|
| I think implicit in your comment is the assumption that
| people with different backgrounds are somehow defacto
| strangers. But what makes it all work on a university
| campus, imo, is that everyone has a purpose; there are no
| scary strangers because everyone's motivations are well-
| understood, since everyone on campus has a job to do. No
| one is _really_ a stranger.
|
| It doesn't matter if you are of a different color or
| gender, or that you come from a place I've never been to,
| or that you speak a language I've never heard, or that
| you eat food I've never tasted. My lizard brain doesn't
| kick in when I interact with you because you are just
| here to study and learn, or to help in that process.
|
| As an example, I am a professor and I have a new
| colleague. He is from the other side of the world, he was
| born a decade before me, he eats food different from
| mine, he worships a different God than I do. But we get
| along just fine, and that's because despite all those
| differences, we still have more in common than not. And
| even if we didn't, we still have to rely on one another
| and work as a team to achieve a common goal.
| erosenbe0 wrote:
| Correct. It's mostly social and not based on 'looks,' per
| se. Let's give an example. I'm white as a ghost. But from
| pre-school age I went over to my Indian neighbor's house
| to play. I'm fond of the cooking and the accent of
| Indian-born English speakers is totally normal for me,
| probably more normal than a Southern accent.
|
| Now if I go to India to do some work I will seek out some
| other Americans to befriend while there, perhaps
| naturally looking for people like me. But by this I mean
| other Americans whether Indian-American or otherwise -- I
| don't mean whites who literally look like me. Get it?
| erosenbe0 wrote:
| You are only confirming that nominally, ethnicity and
| race are not important.
|
| For example, a white American of Slavic descent is more
| comfortable in a room of non-white Americans who also
| smell of Budweiser than they would be in a room of
| Russians in Russia speaking Russian and smelling of
| vodka. Get it?
| prmph wrote:
| This is a very good comment, and just about exactly what
| I was about to say.
| lupire wrote:
| How many of those colorblind people (of the ones who are
| married), and married outside their race and/or religion?
| tonmoy wrote:
| What source do you have to show there was higher social
| trust and cohesion at that time?
| FearlessNebula wrote:
| It's more that he is affluent. Try to imagine white trash
| pulling this stunt and it wouldn't go well either.
| whiddershins wrote:
| I'm assuming you don't know this: white trash is a slur.
|
| As in, deeply offensive to some people.
| ilyt wrote:
| Sir, you horse just shat on the ground, please take it
| and your white-knighting somewhere else
| thesagan wrote:
| It is a derogatory term and I have no idea why people are
| downvoting that sentiment.
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_trash
| burnished wrote:
| [flagged]
| FearlessNebula wrote:
| I apologize, it wasn't my intention to offend anybody
| slackfan wrote:
| As proud trailer trash -- fucking with the feds is a time
| honoured tradition, and we have done similar and gotten
| away with more.
|
| Please stop being so condescending.
| scarface74 wrote:
| So why is it that "rural America" seem to hold the local
| police in such high regard. But think the Federal police
| are so bad?
| slackfan wrote:
| Because we get a statement showing what the PD used our
| tax money for, every single year, vs the endless black
| hole of the IRS. Also we can fire and disband them if we
| so wish. For us "Defund the police" is not a toothless
| meme, it's a reality that we can implement if the police
| become a nuisance. For instance my town fired the
| entirety of its' PD a good decade ago.
|
| Counterpoint; why do city folk hold their police
| deparments in such low regard and scream for their
| defunding yet somehow hold the federal enforcement
| agencies in some do-no-wrong-holier-than-thou limelight?
| scarface74 wrote:
| I've never known federal police to stop and frisk, racial
| profile, be accused of police brutality or stop someone
| for "suspiciously" walking through his own neighborhood
| where the county is only 2.9% Black (my 6 foot 3 step son
| who grew up in the burbs all of his life), we lived in
| the most affluent county in the metro area (this was
| Atlanta metro not saying much in the grand scheme of
| things) and we had a household income twice the median
| since I work remotely for $BigTech.
|
| But that didn't stop them from thinking "we didn't belong
| here".
|
| It's the same reason NWA never wrote a song called "Fuck
| the FBI"...
| slackfan wrote:
| They absolutely do all of that, if you live within 100
| miles of a federal border, and anywhere else they happent
| to have jurisdiction. Being detained by feds sans warrant
| is patently unfun, lemme tell you that.
|
| I suppose I'm happy for you having the privilege to live
| such a sheltered life where you don't see any of this.
| scarface74 wrote:
| You mean Customs and Border Protection - another
| department that is aggrandized by the same people who
| "Back the Blue"?
| Quarrelsome wrote:
| I mean, we still end up in jail cells for a few hours.
| But sure, we might get off with a slap on the wrist.
| ipaddr wrote:
| Probably the stupidest discussion on hw.
| [deleted]
| tukantje wrote:
| [flagged]
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| Woz was notorious for his pranksterism.
| ShamelessC wrote:
| [flagged]
| jensensbutton wrote:
| [flagged]
| dereg wrote:
| I can't help but shake my head at most of these comments.
| There was a time when we celebrated anecdotes like this here
| on Hacker News. I've seen this story circulated many times
| but this is the first time I've seen this sort of reaction.
| These aren't rose colored glasses, anyone can look up threads
| of old in which we cheered such defiance toward authority.
|
| People are frothing to frame this story with 2023 glasses
| and, to me, this reaction makes it all the more clear how
| today's culture is so corrosive. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it's
| not about privilege of rich white men. Maybe it's about the
| rigid conformism that the tech industry has imbued in its
| people in this past decade. The screams of people glued to
| Anki preparing for leetcode interviews, not understanding why
| someone would dare challenge the status quo. Regardless, it's
| a sign of the times.
| jsnell wrote:
| Nothing says "challenging the status quo" like a multi-
| millionaire messing with normal people who are just trying
| to do their job...
|
| I'm sure I when I first read this story, I thought it was
| hilarious. But since then, I've gained at least little bit
| of empathy. Think of this story from the perspective of the
| other people. Woz is being a total piece of shit, wasting
| their time being intentionally as suspicious as possible,
| just to waste their time and then pull off a "a-ha, this is
| actually some really obscure legal tender that I as a rich
| guy can afford to spend to have a cool story to tell about
| showing up a casino security guy".
| JasonFruit wrote:
| > normal people who are just trying to do their job...
|
| When it's the Secret Service, that's not "normal people",
| and their job is to figuratively or literally stomp
| anyone who doesn't sufficiently respect the immensely
| powerful people they insulate. Portraying them as regular
| Joe victim here is nonsense.
| 3pac wrote:
| Counterpoint: Their job is to protect with the highest
| professionalism, indeed with their life, a
| democratically-elected person whose opinions and actions
| they may personally disagree with or even resent. It is a
| very honorable position if you ask me.
| JasonFruit wrote:
| I don't agree with that framing, but we can agree that
| they are acting as a projection of the power and
| privilege of the person they are protecting, and that in
| acting on that person's behalf, they remove perceived but
| unlikely potential threats that the average citizen would
| have to simply tolerate. Even if they're just plain folks
| in private life, their profession is an expression of
| power and privilege.
| mardifoufs wrote:
| This just sounds like "thin blue line" rhetoric to me.
| They are still in a position of power, even over a
| millionaire.
| 0x445442 wrote:
| This was Woz being Woz. Striking it rich didn't change
| him. This very behavior is the reason Apple exists.
| Respectfully, lighten up.
| joshmanders wrote:
| > Woz is being a total piece of shit, wasting their time
| being intentionally as suspicious as possible, just to
| waste their time and then pull off a "a-ha
|
| You know who's really wasting peoples time? Secret
| Service and a casino security guard because he tipped
| with legal tender that they haven't seen before, so they
| think he's some counterfeiter or something.
|
| I'd fuck with authority who was too stupid to realize
| that $2 bills are very much legal tender.
| thatguy0900 wrote:
| I mean, it's not just a 2,its a 2 you see him rip out of
| a book in front of you. If I had taken that at any of my
| retail jobs my boss would be on my ass, even if I knew it
| was legit. You think the casino owner really wants
| security making judgment calls about whether a dudes
| custom made book of perforated money is legal tender or
| not?
| boomboomsubban wrote:
| If you worked someplace handling money and saw a bill
| with perforated edges, you'd definitely consider it
| suspicious. That doesn't require someone to be stupid.
| voxic11 wrote:
| If my entire job was enforcing currency counterfeiting
| laws then I would probably have to be pretty stupid to
| think that perforated edges is a strong indicator of
| counterfeiting.
| RogerL wrote:
| Not only that, but why does having lower cognitive
| ability suddenly mean that others have free rein to mock
| you, make your workplace unpleasant, and so on? People
| are just trying to do their job and aren't necessarily
| educated on the intricacies of federal law on currency.
| nouveaux wrote:
| The reason why it used to be celebrated on HN, and why GP
| laments the change is that Woz hacked security. This is a
| great example of social engineering and it's in the vein
| of the old 80's hacker mentality. Besides for the fun
| story, it is a security breach that all these security
| personnel failed to pick up on.
|
| I agree with the GP that this kind of thing should be
| celebrated on HN and we should encourage the next
| generation to continue hacking.
| jsnell wrote:
| I don't think any security breach was demonstrated here.
|
| Now, Woz was obviously an amazing hacker back in the day
| and has a reputation of being a good person. So one would
| imagine there are stories that show him being really
| clever that are, you know, actually clever rather than
| just showing off an information asymmetry about trivia
| (re: these sheets of $2 bills). Where the punchline is
| something wholesome, rather than him humiliating
| strangers who have done literally nothing wrong.
| enedil wrote:
| I don't get how you inferred anybody was humiliated
| there.
| jsnell wrote:
| No deep inferrence needed. The entire discussion with the
| security guy is about toying with him, eventually he
| tricks the guy, "scores a point" and is ever so pleased
| at himself:
|
| > But I had got a big point on him and I was quite
| satisfied in that
|
| Like, I can sort of understand the humor value of giving
| away $2 bills as a tip since they're rare and some people
| don't know about it. But there is literally no value in
| baiting people as to whether this is legit money or
| counterfeit, except for Woz to feel superior to them. And
| it's not an isolated occurence! He clearly does this all
| the time, so often that he has multiple variants of the
| script.
|
| This is not a story to celebrate. It is not challenging
| the status quo, it is not rebelling against authority, it
| is not a smart hack, or whatever y'all are describing it
| as. It is an ugly story of a man with a lot of wealth
| punching down, playing games using the little people as a
| prop purely for his own amusement, repeatedly, and then
| bragging about it.
| posterboy wrote:
| > him humiliating strangers who have done literally
| nothing wrong.
|
| Seems to be an opportunity if good faith predicts that
| they won't do him any serious wrong.
| rhaway84773 wrote:
| It's still celebrated. One of the articles with the most
| staying power on the HN front page I've seen in a while
| was the "owning an airline" one.
|
| While people did debate the ethics of it, the hacking was
| admired because it was someone not in a position of power
| hacking an entity that was. It also illuminated a massive
| security risk which could now be fixed.
| hyperhopper wrote:
| And also it uncovered a bit of hidden authoritarian
| secret anti-citizen secret bits.
|
| Something that drastically limits and can be used to
| oppress people like a nation-wide travel restriction
| should be public and require due cause. Not a mystical
| list where one day you realize "wow guess my life is
| fucked"
| ilyt wrote:
| The man is dead inside already, leave him alone
| workaccount21 wrote:
| Agreed, even events like DEFCON and the general infosec
| scene seem to be leaning more and more towards
| "conformance". It used to be a badge of shame to be a fed
| and now I feel uncomfortable talking poorly about the US
| intelligence community. I hesitate to complain because
| those who questioned the status quo in the past had the
| same types of people breathing down their neck. I will
| simply ignore them and continue doing my own thing
| monocasa wrote:
| Hell, half the DEFCON goons are .gov employees or
| contractors now in their day job.
| Sakos wrote:
| The people here have largely become insufferable outside of
| highly technical topics.
| [deleted]
| rimliu wrote:
| [flagged]
| smoldesu wrote:
| Unless the parent made their account when they were 2
| years old, I don't think so.
| bowsamic wrote:
| We've moved past that naivety to a place of higher social
| consciousness
| alar44 wrote:
| I fucking hope this is satirical.
| bowsamic wrote:
| No, everyone is more aware of hurting each other now
| mardifoufs wrote:
| Those poor secret service agents.
| ss108 wrote:
| > anyone can look up threads of old in which we cheered
| such defiance toward authority.
|
| Maybe it's good if the industry has ceased having such a
| teenagery view of things. The article won't load for me,
| but it seems there was no meaningful protest against some
| illicit government abuse of authority here. Dude was just
| printing and using fake IDs because he could.
|
| As a millennial who used to be much more simpatico with
| your way of thinking, I would say I've become very against
| it because it is exactly the sort of attitude that I have
| seen lead people to Trumpsim, anti-vaxxing, etc. It's just
| irresponsible and arrogant to think that
| authority/government = bad and that any sort of finger to
| the man is intrinsically worth celebrating.
| CalRobert wrote:
| I think things like this were more likely to get laughed
| off or at most a scolding from a judge back then _, as
| opposed to some BS terrorism-related charge, back in the
| day. I think back to what I did in high school with model
| rocket engines and the like and I 'd probably be convicted
| of something now.
|
| _ Standard caveat of being a middle class white dude makes
| this easier.
| kome wrote:
| yes, conformity and fear of authority is strange here. no
| more hackers, just business ppl.
| scarface74 wrote:
| Yes why should people fear authority? It's not like there
| is a history of corruption and brutality in the police
| department or five policemen beating a man to death in
| Memphis within the last week.
| koonsolo wrote:
| In my experience, business ppl are the ones who like to
| break the rules more than others. I would argue most
| people here are employed engineers, and they mostly love
| following rules.
| ilyt wrote:
| Yes but they ask lawyers how exactly they can break the
| rules and not get caught
| UniverseHacker wrote:
| I disagree, a key social purpose of complex legal rules
| is regulatory capture that allows powerful people to stay
| powerful. Smart powerful people don't have to break the
| rules, they follow them in practice but not in spirit,
| whereas people without access to lawyers and legal
| sophistication break rules unknowingly, even when
| following them in spirit.
| koonsolo wrote:
| I'm talking in the practical kind of way: speeding,
| parking where you're not supposed to, "better to ask
| forgiveness than permission" kind of things, creative
| bookkeeping (I'm from Belgium :D), ... .
|
| No idea what kind of high profile business owners you
| know, but in my circle in Belgium, most are small
| business owners. In my experience, employees like to
| follow rules, business owners like to push their
| boundaries.
| andrepd wrote:
| Well to play devil's advocate, handing a police officer a
| joke ID is just a silly bit of fun, not really a "challenge
| to the status quo".
|
| Amusing story tho.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| That was before we knew that real people suffer after
| pulling similar stunts. We all know of someone who did
| something stupid and has faced a lifetime of consiquence.
| Nobody dares put a fake bomb in a school locker (Woz did
| that) or give false documents to police for fun. Such
| things are no longer jokes. They screw up entire lives.
|
| I used to ride fast motorcycles. I know people who ran from
| the police for fun. Better camera tech in recent years
| means nobody gets away with that anymore. And when caught,
| your life grinds to a hault.
| ztrww wrote:
| I'm really unsure whether doing the same thing now would
| have a high risk of "screwing up" your life. It's not
| like he showed anyone a counterfeit ID. What he did is
| the same as showing a random company ID. Not exactly
| grounds for arrest especially if he can provide a
| driver's license if asked to.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| It was a counterfeit ID. If the cop reading it walks away
| with the reasonable, but false, belief that the person
| works for the dod, he has presented a counterfeit ID. If
| he did it to trick the cop, he has knowingly presented
| false information/lied to police.
| sbarre wrote:
| And people jaywalk all the time.
|
| Can we stop being so obtuse and only look at the letter
| of the law and think about the actual practical real-life
| consequence as a measure of severity? This was a joke,
| and no harm was done.
|
| Are you really advocating for a felony offence here?
|
| This is the same line of thinking, just reversed, that
| people use to say "well it's not illegal" when someone
| does something super shitty that actually has awful
| consequences.
| fzeroracer wrote:
| The letter of the law is that he presented a counterfeit
| ID to a federal officer where lying to a federal officer
| is a very serious offense.
|
| You can argue that 'well it was a joke!!' but if you were
| to joke around to your nearest FBI officer about how you
| have a bomb in your home and you're going to use it I
| imagine they wouldn't find it very funny.
| [deleted]
| jameshart wrote:
| What happened to 'don't talk to the cops without a lawyer
| ever?'
|
| Is there an 'unless you're Woz and it might be funny'
| exception to that rule?
|
| The fact is there is, and always has been, a 'wealthy
| white guy' exception to that rule and these kinds of
| shenanigans just draw attention to it.
| [deleted]
| pjc50 wrote:
| I don't know why this is downvoted, it's correct. Social
| media means that pranks are no longer ephemeral, and we
| can also be more aware of how badly wrong it could go.
| thinkyfish wrote:
| "Such things are no longer jokes. They screw up entire
| lives." But should they screw up lives? Why should we put
| up with authorities that can't take a joke. This is the
| foundation of the culture of defiance that hacking was
| all about expressing.
| Aeolun wrote:
| > Why should we put up with authorities that can't take a
| joke.
|
| Probably because the number of instances of people with
| real bombs has gone up. It's not a joke any more because
| the real bomb isn't the exception.
| abledon wrote:
| > But should they screw up lives? Why should we put up
| with authorities that can't take a joke.
|
| They key concept here is 'trickery', and how 'tricked'
| someone is on a spectrum. Society trusts our authorities
| to give their best efforts to keep our daily actions
| within the realm of 'the law'.
|
| There is a spectrum of what one considers a 'joke'. If
| you tell an authority a dad joke, when they ask you a
| serious question, that is a fine place on the spectrum to
| joke with authorities. If you are giving them fake IDs to
| _trick_ them (and thus, trick society at large, who have
| delegated power to the authorities by vote etc...), that
| is not a good thing, to trick others you are living with,
| at the far end of the 'joke/trickery' spectrum.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| They shouldn't, but they do. Just because a law or policy
| is wrong doesn't mean it isn't a solid reality that other
| people cannot afford to joke about. I'm not s fan of US
| drug policy, but I wouldn't dare carry a bag of false
| drugs just to make fun of police officers who cannot tell
| the difference.
| cloutchaser wrote:
| You are right (sometimes), but so is the prankster for
| challenging authority sometimes.
|
| A healthy society both has rule following and rule
| challenging. Sometimes there's too much rule following,
| sometimes there's too much chaos, and then things balance
| themselves out ideally.
|
| If anyone says only one side is the right one, they are
| ideologically captured. It's like saying only left or
| right is the right way to govern a country. It's both and
| neither. We need this conflict within society to arrive
| at healthy decisions.
|
| Get rid of one side at your peril.
| ipaddr wrote:
| "Better camera tech in recent years means nobody gets
| away with that anymore."
|
| Because police rely on technology committing a crime
| without your cellphone means you most likely will not get
| caught. We live in an age where wearing masks is
| acceptable. Where people let you steal from stores and
| where crime is ignored unless it's on twitter.
|
| You can get away with so much more today.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| > You can get away with so much more today.
|
| Depends if you have something to lose. I suspect a lot of
| readers here are in the middle ground, where their net
| present value (including career/family/political/etc
| opportunities) is not high enough where they can afford
| to shield themselves without big sacrifices. But it is
| also not low enough to worth risking losing it all.
|
| For example, they might be able to afford a house in a
| nice school district, daycare, saving for retirement,
| paying for healthcare, and taking care of elderly
| parents, but a job loss from one spouse could easily
| derail this train, and certainly legal expenses would.
| EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK wrote:
| I don't know about how ubiquitous cameras are in NYC, but
| in China you will absolutely get caught by cameras, and
| no, a mask will not help you.
| JoeAltmaier wrote:
| There are US cities with drones in the air taking
| pictures of the city. Say somebody robs a bank. Review
| the picture history from when they arrived at the bank,
| go backward watching their car until you find out where
| they live. Drive over and arrest them.
|
| This 'time machine' feature of ubiquitous surveillance is
| going to be a brave new world.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| Better dash camera on police cars, and police body cams,
| mean they always have your plate number. You cannot run
| for fun if they already know where you live/work.
| andrepd wrote:
| > Where people let you steal from stores and where crime
| is ignored unless it's on twitter.
|
| Well ngl, you sound like you could use less time on the
| internet yourself. This statement is just preposterous
| unless you spend hours of your life every day obsessing
| over twitter drama.
| DarknessFalls wrote:
| I appreciate this comment more than you could know. The
| color is getting sucked out of life by people like this.
| scarface74 wrote:
| And of all people to demonize, _Steve Wozniak_?!!
| [deleted]
| ShamelessC wrote:
| This is an objective _abuse_ of authority/power by an
| ultrawealthy, tone-deaf "hacker", who frankly didn't seem
| to remember any of his engineering skills when he spoke at
| my university ten years ago.
|
| Please tell me you see that. Or at least, are not
| personally ultrawealthy yourself.
| Aeolun wrote:
| I think it's more that we used to believe a secret service
| agent could take a joke.
|
| Right now you'd have to be worried they draw a gun and
| shoot you, or arrest you and jail you for life. Zero
| tolerance!
| [deleted]
| curtis3389 wrote:
| Hacking was aggressively criminalized. We lost Aaron
| Swartz. There are real threats to people with curiosity
| these days, and that seems to be an intentional result of
| the laws and enforcement in the US.
| yetihehe wrote:
| > There are real threats to people with curiosity these
| days
|
| Don't try to be too curious then, or you will be
| prosecuted.
| foobiekr wrote:
| In my personal observation, a lot of what spoiled the
| zany fun of using technology for rule breaking was the
| rise of really evil large tech companies. It kind of took
| the mirth out of it because their evil willingness to do
| anything to Hoover up more data is always sitting there
| in the background.
| kingkawn wrote:
| Ffs man just stop
| starkd wrote:
| Or maybe this is just a story that didn't really happen. Not
| exactly something that can be readily fact-checked.
| SergeAx wrote:
| The presense of wife actually makes this trick much safer.
| She is a capable adult and can take care of herself and
| daughter.
| [deleted]
| gandalfian wrote:
| If it has his correct details is it actually a fake ID?
| oytis wrote:
| Yes
| AuthorizedCust wrote:
| It's only fake if it's imitating an ID issued by some other
| organization.
| aqfamnzc wrote:
| If I print a student ID issued by a non-existant
| university, is it a fake ID?
| Ekaros wrote:
| Probably. Certainly using one to gain student discount or
| like is fraud.
| lupire wrote:
| It depends on what is being asserted, I suppose. Is it
| used to prove an accreditation?
| akerl_ wrote:
| Yes.
| dxdm wrote:
| Yes.
| ztrww wrote:
| Not necessarily
| papito wrote:
| [flagged]
| ThunderSizzle wrote:
| I dont know anyone that thinks this.
|
| Most dare devils do it for the thrill, and don't really
| think past the moment. And many of the extreme negative
| examples end in prison or death or similar, regardless of
| race.
| rwalle wrote:
| "I don't know anyone..."
|
| Well, maybe, ask people you know if they would dare do
| the same thing. You may then see that there is a
| difference in the way people respond to the police
| depending on the race.
|
| Sorry but your own life experience and how you think
| about this incident really do not apply to others.
| thewrongthinker wrote:
| [flagged]
| tukantje wrote:
| Your racism is showing.
|
| What level of stupidity does someone need to think that
| it is only "muh European people" that have "an innate
| curiosity and self confidence"?
| tukantje wrote:
| I am quite an upstanding person, didn't commit crimes and
| when I see police I change the side of the street I am
| walking on even.
|
| As a minority, the police is scary. It only takes one bad
| apple for my life to take a turn for the worse. As it turns
| out, there is a non-negligible percentage of the population
| that hates my guts because of colour, so might as well be
| safe.
| ThunderSizzle wrote:
| Not to belittle your stance, but everything you said is
| true regardless whether your a minority or not.
|
| Police can be scary, regardless if their skin color
| matches yours or not. They have near absolute authority
| to do nearly anything, and you'll lose in a he said-he
| said court case. But good officers can also be a
| substantial positive impact on society.
| erosenbe0 wrote:
| Woz is embellishing for dramatic effect. Decades ago, picture
| ID meant anything. You could get on a plane sometimes with a
| school ID. Before holograms and bar codes on driver's
| licenses, all IDs were presumed to be garbage and just a way
| to get the spelling of a person's name if in fact the ID was
| real.
|
| Woz was not in custody and is therefore exaggerating about
| being Mirandized. He played a prank by giving his clown
| employee ID. It was in Casinoland where people had goofy job
| titles and this wouldn't have been so crazy. Nothing to see
| here.
|
| That said, if he had been in actual trouble or has been
| committing forgery, the clown ID would have been a bad move.
| RogerL wrote:
| Mid 80s I flew home to visit family. Wallet was stolen
| while rock climbing (I foolishly left it at the base in my
| pack). Have to fly home, what to do?? Easy peasy. Go to the
| local ski mountain where I knew the employees, had them
| make me a bogus laminated employee card with my photo on
| it, and flew back home using it for my id. No problem.
| landemva wrote:
| I flew in mid-90s with no ID on tickets booked in name of
| office manager.
|
| Can still fly in USA without ID. The checkpoint "agents"
| have you sign a special form. Last summer I "Scotch"
| taped the crap out of the barcode and picture on my
| passport. Checkpoint person asked me why and I mumbled
| because the real answer was "to see what happens." She
| called supervisor and he quickly waved me through. May be
| different effect at immigration.
| tankenmate wrote:
| To be convicted the prosecution needs to prove mens rea
| (providing a fake ID isn't strict liability), his thinking of
| why he chose to do this would make prosecution a fair bit
| harder (but obviously not impossible).
| D13Fd wrote:
| https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1028
|
| His quote reads like a confession...
| scotty79 wrote:
| > I don't understand what's going through his head here.
|
| Defiance
| fsloth wrote:
| I don't understand why you presume woz had a responsibility
| to "take a care of his wife"?
| dist1ll wrote:
| People in a romantic relationship usually take care of each
| other.
| rwalle wrote:
| Yeah. It would never occur to me to ask such a question.
| I guess time has changed and people will find problem in
| each and every sentence.
| fsloth wrote:
| In context of "the husband has potentially dangerous
| quirky hobbies, should he stop them or not", not "it's ok
| to go ahead and ruin your familys finances" - the latter
| is not really a realistic scenario here.
| NikolaNovak wrote:
| In most western marriages, people agree to take care of
| each other, frequently explicitly as part of their
| ceremony.
|
| Source: attended 100+ weddings as a photographer.
| fsloth wrote:
| Maybe it's my nordic background where people value
| independence (perhaps patholohically so). In general if a
| husband had any moderately dangerous hobbies it would
| sound a bit weird where I'm from that they stopped them
| just because they got married and had kids.
|
| And if they had apprehended Woz he would probably had a
| lawyer to bail him out and smooth things over. So coming
| from these two directions the argument that fooling
| around was somehow traitorous behaviour towards his wife
| sounded really odd.
| cactusplant7374 wrote:
| > And if they had apprehended Woz he would probably had a
| lawyer to bail him out and smooth things over.
|
| One can have a good lawyer but that lawyer cannot change
| the facts of the case.
| drdec wrote:
| A lawyer can help you decide which facts to reveal and
| which to withhold. A good lawyer will prevent you from
| making the state's case for them.
| cactusplant7374 wrote:
| Facts in my comment refer to the information the
| prosecutor has at their disposal.
| drdec wrote:
| I thought the context of this discussion was concerning
| an interview with law enforcement, in this case the
| Secret Service.
| lupire wrote:
| So? Law is about men's rea and judge-ment, not mere
| facts.
| [deleted]
| ericmay wrote:
| In American marriages and maybe this is a general
| Anglosphere cultural tradition you're expected to provide
| and sacrifice if need be for your family (including
| spouse/kids). So if you had a hobby of, idk, drag racing
| cars it might be expected you give that up in some
| marriages, though certainly not all. Also if you have a
| child your hobby can wind up leaving your spouse with
| sole child responsibilities which typically falls on the
| mother. So you wind up with a father who works and then
| does their hobby, and you end up with a mom that also
| works and _their_ hobby becomes raising a child. This can
| cut both ways or course.
|
| I think I was listening to a world-famous rock climber
| who had toned down their extreme sports adventures (toned
| down for them) because they didn't want to die and leave
| their spouse and child without a father over the pursuit
| of a hobby. So it's a maturity thing too.
| fsloth wrote:
| Most definetly, maturity and actual level of danger.
|
| I don't think anything Woz has done is moderately
| dangerous. If they wanted to lock him up I'm sure he
| could call to a competent lawyer and state he is a
| respectable citizen who _co-founded the friggin Apple_.
|
| Woz has an extremely long history of egging people of
| authority and I don't think he's ever been to court from
| those escapades (please correct me if I'm wrong).
| hnfong wrote:
| Maybe you're right that his actual risk is non-existent
| because some people are more equal than others.
|
| I would hope we're not in such a world though.
| fsloth wrote:
| This was not as much about privilege than about Woz
| having a life long experience of trying to bend
| conventions and rules and probably had a good intuition
| how far he could goof off given his social and financial
| status etc.
| NikolaNovak wrote:
| Right. I just don't know if "giving a fake Id to secret
| service " counts As a"pre-existing _hobby_ " :-)
| fsloth wrote:
| It's Woz, I think it counts :)
| alephnerd wrote:
| You guys only value independence for Western Europeans.
|
| Alligevel vedtager I en "Ghettopakke", der lovligt
| legaliserede at splitte migrantfamilier fra hinanden. I
| er lige sa darlige som resten af andre hvide mennesker,
| jeg har modt.
|
| [0] - https://euromedmonitor.org/en/article/4895/Denmark:
| -Ghetto-P...
|
| [1] - https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2020/10/un-
| human-rig...
| fsloth wrote:
| I'm not sure why you are venting, but if you are having a
| hard time in your life I'm sorry you are going through
| that.
|
| Now, our discussion was about Woz's zany antics, but I
| still have to clarify some geographical things:
|
| 1. Western Europe[0] and nordics[1] are two disjoint sets
| of countries
|
| 2. Of 28M nordic people only roughly 1/5 is Danish. And,
| there is very little political cohesion between the
| countries, except by national parliaments copying
| established successfull schemes from each other when it
| suits them individually
|
| Personally, I am a Finn and had to google translate the
| bit of Danish in your message - I don't really follow
| Danish politics but I don't think it's fair to think
| every Dane would support this bill. This is actually the
| first time I read about this.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_geoschem
| e_for_E...
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_countries
| alephnerd wrote:
| Yea. It was moment of venting tbh. I just get pissed off
| when a handful of commentators from Scandinavia act
| "holier than thou" when there is still some real racism
| and toxic commentary around migrants. With a mom who's
| "Mirpuri" (the actual term is Pahari or Dogra. Mirpuri
| means from Mirpur Tehsil in AJK) background. I've heard
| down the grapevine how much it sucks for the community in
| DK and NO.
| fsloth wrote:
| It _is_ a bit weird you got triggered by this out-of-
| context association when we were discussing the ethics of
| Woz 's story, but you are correct, nordics are quite
| racist: https://harvardpolitics.com/nordic-racism/ - I
| would not say there is "some real racism" but call it a
| pretty entrenched position unfortunately.
| alephnerd wrote:
| Agreed that I got triggered and completely derailed this
| thread, and totally apologize about it btw. It just gets
| annoying sometimes when people from any community
| (America, Nordics, China, etc) get on a high horse
| sometimes.
|
| Idk, for some reason the idealization of "Nordics"
| (itself a highly contentious term - is Estonia nordic? is
| Greenland?) on internet forums gets annoying, because I
| can just tell it's white people (in reality Western
| European+American, not like Romanians, Bosnians, Turks,
| or Albanians got it better in Malmo) talking to other
| white people and just completely ignoring the very real
| elephant in the room.
|
| Once again sorry about that but I think that offhand
| comment the GP made was the straw that broke the camel's
| back for me.
| fsloth wrote:
| No problem :)
|
| Nordic countries is a well defined collection
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_countries -
| Greenland/Nuuk is part of them given it is a region of
| Denmark.
|
| I don't think the racism can be helped short term -
| nordics have been isolated polities that only in past
| decades have had large flows of migrants from different
| cultures. (Well, apart from Sweden attempting to conquer
| Europe in the 17th century but it did not end well).
|
| If it's any consolation nordic people can be quite
| xenophobic even toward each other so it's not as if they
| would be uniquely harsh towards specific ethnicity. Every
| non-native will be discriminated against pretty much
| equally, regardless of origin or complexion. They abhor
| anything unfamiliar regardless of complexion. The general
| narrative of historical racism in these areas is quite
| different as compared to more cosmopolitan western
| countries such as UK, France or US.
|
| Law of Jante is a pretty good framework for understanding
| the nordic mindset
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante) - the
| baseline response even towards in-group members that are
| different will be severe.
|
| It's changing, but change will take time.
| szundi wrote:
| Those times you would not go to jail for having fun with an
| agent.
| moomoo11 wrote:
| That is why he is Woz and you are.. who?
| decremental wrote:
| [flagged]
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| Yeah, my reaction was -- after he read you your miranda
| rights, why were you even talking to him without a lawyer?
|
| But after thinking about it more -- and I'm in my mid-40s --
| I think what it also reminds us of is that law enforcement
| actually used to be a lot more reasonable -- to be clear,
| this may probably only apply to white people who appear as if
| they are not poor. But I think maybe the police (whether
| local or national security) have actually maybe gotten a lot
| more intense in the past 30 years. Possibly actually more
| intense for everyone.
|
| The risks of "messing with" security personel, at least for
| middle-class-appearing white guys, was very definitely a lot
| less back then.
| htag wrote:
| < The risks of "messing with" security personel, at least
| for middle-class-appearing white guys, was very definitely
| a lot less back then.
|
| I don't think this jives with your comment that law
| enforcement use to be reasonable. I think this highlights
| unequal enforcement of the law, depending on who is
| considered undesirable.
| scarface74 wrote:
| > think what it also reminds us of is that law enforcement
| actually used to be a lot more reasonable
|
| No, it just use to be a lot less recorded...
|
| And no minority with a sense of history would say that
| police have ever been "reasonable"
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| So in my comment that was only like five sentances, one
| of them was "to be clear, this may probably only apply to
| white people who appear as if they are not poor", right?
|
| I'm curious if you are old enough to remember the 80s,
| although I'm not going to bet any precious precious
| donuts about it.
|
| How state violence and repression was in the 80s isn't
| good enough, agreed. But things actually do change, get
| better and worse in different dimensions. If we insist
| that things have always been exactly as they are, then it
| seems fatalistic, they can't possibly change, this is the
| way it's always been and always will be. But things do
| change. If they were better in some ways 30 years ago,
| then this isn't inevitable.
|
| Woz was a prankster, including against those in
| authority. Look up some of the pranks the MIT "hackers"
| pulled back in the day. Today, some of them would
| probably get you arrested on domestic terrorism charges.
| This is not an improvement, even if it's true that the
| police of course have always been brutal in some times
| and places, especially depending on social position of
| the victims. But nobody (I hope) is looking for equality
| of brutal discipline, equally oppressive to all.
| scarface74 wrote:
| Yes, I was born in 19 _74_ hence the username. I also
| grew up in the south and heard plenty of first hand
| accounts from my grandparents and my still living Black
| parents.
|
| And as it was revealed last week in Memphis, I don't
| anymore breathe a sign of relief when I see a Black cop
| than when I see a White cop.
| Volundr wrote:
| There might be some truth to this, but I suspect a lot of
| this perception has more to do with the dramatic increase
| in recording equipment in the general public. Given how
| often police officers get away with pretty clear cut abuse
| even when there is video, it's not hard to imagine the
| majority of this behavior was getting swept under the rug.
| aflag wrote:
| I get the daughter, but why does the wife need being taken
| care of?
| gonzo41 wrote:
| Well at that time, micro-dosing lsd perhaps.... :P
| Asooka wrote:
| No less irresponsible than charging a man with a felony over
| an obvious joke.
| ramraj07 wrote:
| How is using fake IDs to board airplanes a joke? Only
| because we are mostly sure this particular man is an
| innocent manchild, but how exactly does that generalize?
| fxtentacle wrote:
| Your word choice of "manchild" is really really weird. I
| don't see anything childish about the story, he's just a
| playful man.
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| I don't recall if it was specifically 9/11 that it
| changed, but I definitely recall that you did not used to
| have show to ID to get on a plane at all.
|
| And at some early points when you did, it was more just
| like kind of informally showing you were the ticket-
| holder, not really about security. His "fake ID" saying
| he was a "laser inspector" is really just an employee ID
| for a very unsuccesful business he started, right? If
| they take an employee ID, what's the difference. it
| just... wasn't actually a big deal back then.
|
| But yeah, in general... it's kind of painful to remember
| how much less we interacted with security checkpoints 30
| years ago, and how much we've gotten used to living in a
| security state. The phrase "show me your papers" used to
| be a kind of shorthand for the idea that in a "fascist"
| state threatening law enforcement is always asking you
| for ID, but in "America" we can live our lives without
| interacting with such security apparatus. I doubt people
| think about it like that, as we live it now too, it's
| totally normalized.
|
| that the reader may find it hard to believe that you
| didn't really have to show official ID to get on a plane,
| or that you could use a homemade employee ID... just
| demonstrates how normalized and forever-seeming the
| security state has become.
|
| Although last I checked, you could actually still fly
| _without_ ID, you need to fill out a form and get extra
| screening /pat down. Don't know if the "Real ID" stuff
| has changed that or what.
| iso1210 wrote:
| Still the case in the UK, no law saying you have to
| provide any ID on a domestic flight (although you'll need
| a boarding pass), certainly I don't whenever I fly
| domestically (rarely). Some airlines require ID for
| ticket purposes (to prevent you from selling your ticket
| to someone else). Flights between the UK and Ireland are
| a little trickier, you don't need a passport, as long as
| you can prove you are either British or Irish. If you
| don't have a photo ID you can fly from the UK to Belfast
| and then drive/train/bus to the Republic.
|
| The requirement for a passport and appropriate visa on
| international flights departing from the UK is I think
| solely an airline requirement, as if you land in a
| country you don't have a right to immigrate to the
| airline gets fined. If you're flying privately it's a
| different matter.
|
| Obviously you need a passport or other authority to
| travel when you get to the border of another country
| (Ireland being the obvious exception for the UK).
| [deleted]
| crispyambulance wrote:
| It was the mid 80's, well before 9-11. Airport security
| was far more lax. Everything was far more lax. There was
| no way to easily verify ID anyway.
| ksaj wrote:
| Yes, it was a very different world than it is now.
|
| I had a 22 caliber rifle when I was a tween. That wasn't
| uncommon because I lived in the country, and you pretty
| much needed such things to scare coyotes and wolves off
| the yard without hurting them. Obviously it _can_ kill
| them, but you don 't actually shoot them - you shoot
| close enough they understand the sound from your gun, and
| the sound on the ground right in front of them. Pretty
| effective.
|
| It got jammed once, so I walked into town with it cocked
| open over my shoulder to get it fixed. They can't be
| fired when cocked open.
|
| Nobody batted an eye. Not that people did that all the
| time, but everyone knew everyone, and easily figured the
| story would turn out more simple and mundane than the
| optics.
|
| It was the early 80's and there was a lot less angst. And
| it was just a simple local hardware store that fixed it
| for me. By the 90's, that would never fly, and no
| hardware store would fix a kid's gun (or anyone's for
| that matter) in that very same town. By then you needed a
| Firearms Acquisition Cert, which no tween could possibly
| get.
|
| I used to buy cigarettes for my mom, too. That was also
| legal back then.
|
| The 80's was a sort of cross over period that way.
| LinuxBender wrote:
| This is still a thing in some places. I am in a very
| rural area. It is not uncommon for hunters to get out of
| their vehicle at the gas station here with their rifles
| to reposition their gear. It would probably be unsettling
| to a tourist.
| hindsightbias wrote:
| Rifles in truck window gun racks was a thing. In my high
| school parking lot.
| dsomers wrote:
| Exactly this. As late as the 2001 I could cross into the
| US from Canada with as little as my birth certificate,
| which I often did. That was just a cotton blended paper
| with tattered edges with some writing, and the crest of
| my province printed on it. There wasn't even a photo on
| it! It was closer to writing, 'I'm daniel plz let me in'
| on a napkin, than it is to my passport of today with its
| photo, barcode, and RFID chip that they can cross
| reference their data base with.
| jrumbut wrote:
| Funny enough I went to Canada for a quick trip in with my
| (non-real ID) driver's license and birth certificate,
| stayed a couple extra days, and arrived back at the
| border just hours before the switchover to requiring a
| passport/real ID went into effect.
|
| I wonder what would have happened?
| ramraj07 wrote:
| Sure, but no matter how far back in history you go this
| hasn't applied to everyone. My dad had to jump through
| hoops to attend a conference in the states in the 90s.
| Including sitting in a line on the sidewalk in front of
| the US embassy for hours, as a well respected doctor in
| his 40s, curious what your thoughts are about that. Then
| I come to Canada in 2008 and hear people talk about all
| their trips to Europe and South America and they didn't
| know what a visa meant. The world is a very unfair place,
| and first world people especially non-minorities never
| knew how bad it was for others. Perhaps post 2001 kind of
| leveled the Playing field in some ways.
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| > As late as the 2001 I could cross into the US from
| Canada with as little as my birth certificate,
|
| Growing up in Detroit in the 80s (which some people don't
| realize is right on the border with Canada -- and that
| you travel _south_ across a bridge to get to Canada! look
| it up) -- we generally didn 't even bring our birth
| certificate. which may be a testament to our social class
| -- they _could_ ask for a birth certificate if they
| thought you seemed "suspicious" (which i'm sure is
| racially coded), but for 90%+ of crossings, and 100% of
| our crossings, it was a two question interview without
| showing any paperwork at all. "What is your citizenship?
| What is your purpose of travel? OK, go through." No
| showing of ID at all -- not even a driver's license!
|
| [And again, they _could_ ask for ID -- a driver 's
| license or birth certificate -- if they wanted. I am
| positive at least 9 out of 10 crossings they did not. I
| am indeed sure that the race and class appearance (and
| accent) of the crosser was significant].
|
| We used to patriotically brag (in the time of the cold
| war and berlin wall) that this was how borders between
| two stable "free" countries, the US and Canada, could be,
| "the longest open border in the world".
|
| It makes me really sad to think about how much we have
| gotten used to living in a security state, that does not
| need to be that way.
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| (I'm realizing in my memory that not only did you show no
| paperwork, for the majority of crossings for people they
| did not deem "suspicious", you didn't even provide your
| name at all. I guess they could have been recording your
| license plate, not sure if they were, but there was no
| record left of the individual people crossing).
| rmason wrote:
| Actually before 9-11 you could enter Canada with only a
| Michigan drivers license. I did it all the time, had
| friends in Windsor and I'd drive down just to have dinner
| with them.
|
| Now you need either a passport or a special Michigan
| drivers license. Last time I renewed in person after
| COVID I tried to get one. The lady behind the counter
| said you don't want one of those. I asked her why and she
| told me that I'd hold up the line behind me. Since I was
| renewing months after my license expired due to the
| office being closed at the beginning of COVID I didn't
| argue with her.
| ilyt wrote:
| > There wasn't even a photo on it!
|
| I mean, picture of a baby isn't exactly useful...
| OJFord wrote:
| As _little_ as a birth certificate?
|
| You can _still_ cross EU borders with just a driving
| licence, or government issued ID where they have them.
|
| (In practice the vast majority using planes and boats at
| least probably do take a passport, I always did from the
| UK, but in theory you don't need one, so if you weren't
| planning to go elsewhere you wouldn't even need to get a
| passport.)
| alexanderchr wrote:
| No, a drivers license is not enough, you're supposed to
| bring a passport or a national id card. For UK nationals
| that meant a passport since the UK never had a national
| id card.
|
| Within Schengen you can get away with just a drivers
| license since there are no checks, but that doesn't make
| it allowed.
| [deleted]
| messe wrote:
| > You can still cross EU borders with just a driving
| licence, or government issued ID where they have them.
|
| For anybody unfamiliar with Europe, I just want to add
| that there aren't any checkpoints or border crossings,
| you just drive through or walk over. Half the time you
| won't even notice you're doing it. You're just supposed
| to have your ID on your person when you do.
|
| Ireland (and previously the UK) is the only major
| exception to this, as it's part of the common travel area
| alongside the UK. In practice, this doesn't make a huge
| difference when you're an Irish or EU citizen (it does if
| you're a tourist who needs a different visa to visit), as
| it's an island, and airlines require a form of ID to
| board anyway. When travelling from Ireland to Schengen, I
| usually have a passport in my carry on luggage as a
| backup, and take my passport-card (similar to a national
| ID card) in my wallet.
| dfawcus wrote:
| I though the point of the Irish passport card was that it
| is a passport (not a national ID card), but that the only
| place where it is needed / accepted is in other EU MS
| (due to format, and lack of ability to be stamped)? Note
| - the EU includes a passport union, which has been in
| place since the EEC days.
|
| i.e. that there should be no need to also carry your
| passport, unless intending to travel on outwith the EU?
| messe wrote:
| You're right there isn't any need to have the passport
| booklet when travelling within the EU. I have the
| passport card on me almost 100% of the time when I'm not
| at home, as it's kept in my wallet. So I use that when
| flying within the EU as well.
|
| However, when I'm traveling to somewhere that has a hotel
| safe, or somewhere secure enough to leave valuables, I'll
| bring the full passport booklet in my carry-on along with
| me, and leave it there when I go out. That way, in the
| unlikely event I should lose my wallet / passport card, I
| still have the full booklet to travel home on, rather
| than having to arrange emergency travel documents for the
| flight back.
|
| I haven't needed it yet, but I don't see the harm in also
| taking it. It's not as if it takes up an obscene amount
| of space in my carry-on luggage, nor am I risking losing
| it by carrying it on my person at all times. It's purely
| there for peace of mind, and a backup in the very
| unlikely event I need it.
| [deleted]
| pell wrote:
| >For anybody unfamiliar with Europe, I just want to add
| that there aren't any checkpoints or border crossings,
| you just drive through or walk over. Half the time you
| won't even notice you're doing it. You're just supposed
| to have your ID on your person when you do.
|
| The above is only true in the Schengen zone. As soon as
| you cross the border to a non-Schengen country or you
| arrive from a non-Schengen country you will go through
| normal border control (with some exceptions). This
| includes multiple EU countries beside Ireland like
| Romania, Bulgaria or Cyprus. And many non-EU countries
| like Bosnia, Serbia, Monaco, Kosovo, Andorra, Ukraine,
| Turkey, Russia, etc.
| ajuc wrote:
| > As soon as you cross the border to a non-Schengen
| country or you arrive from a non-Schengen country you
| will go through normal border control (with some
| exceptions)
|
| Nothing in EU is as simple, therefore it's not only a
| Schengen/non-Schengen thing. For example a border between
| North and "regular" Ireland isn't marked in any way, you
| just cross a brook or a field.
| messe wrote:
| > you just cross a brook or a field.
|
| Or walk to the other side of the room. The border cuts
| through a number of houses and businesses as far as I'm
| aware.
| usrusr wrote:
| But it also includes certain non-EU countries, like
| Switzerland. You won't notice having crossed the border
| before your phone notifies you that it just disabled data
| thanks to roaming charges getting capped at 50 without
| confirmation.
|
| (I'm exaggerating, but only slightly.. the irony is that
| I used to have data roaming included in Switzerland, but
| the network forced me to a new plan that doesn't have
| that because the old one was almost but not quite
| complying with EU roaming rules)
| phil21 wrote:
| > As little as a birth certificate?
|
| Lost in translation I think. You could cross the border
| to Canada with just your state issued ID/drivers license
| as well back then.
|
| What OP is saying is that it was even more lax than that.
| OP brought a piece of paper that is trivially forged, no
| photo on it, that basically just said in writing who they
| were with no additional ID needed.
| yakubin wrote:
| Where do birth certificates contain photos? That...
| doesn't sound very practical. (Imagining an elderly
| person handing in their photo as a toddler to border
| control.)
| usrusr wrote:
| In the boarding line of a flight between EU destinations
| (well, Schengen destinations), I usually see about one
| couple clinging to their passports. They stand out as if
| they were dressed up in victorian age safari gear.
| CalRobert wrote:
| You can cross schengen borders with nothing.
| dsomers wrote:
| > As little as a birth certificate?
|
| I get what you're getting at, but in Canada birth
| certificates from the 80s had a wallet sized version that
| had no more information than a drivers license, but it
| didn't even have a photo on it. It was just a little pice
| of paper. I remember that's very different from modern
| birth certificates.
|
| I also crossed into the U.S. with my health card that
| only had my name on it and a number that is meaningless
| to the US boarder agency, also no photo.
| concordDance wrote:
| Within-country airplane boarding shouldn't need ID. The
| security theatre procedures are the joke here.
|
| Showing fake IDs is harmless.
| Symbiote wrote:
| In much of Europe that's still the case. You can use an
| electronic or home-printed boarding pass and travel
| within the Schegen Zone and not be checked otherwise.
|
| I've never tried to buy a ticket with false details
| though.
| MrPatan wrote:
| Do you have to show your papers when you board a bus?
| ramraj07 wrote:
| Yes, you have to now, actually, in most greyhounds in
| most cities within 100 miles of the US border.
| iso1210 wrote:
| That's so sad in the "land of the free"
|
| Do you have to show photo ID when filling up with gas
| within 100 miles of the border?
| blowski wrote:
| I used to have to show a photocard with my travel pass.
| It had a picture of a lemming on it and yet it was never
| rejected.
| OJFord wrote:
| You didn't _have_ to do that though, you presumably could
| 've paid cash or card or whatever for a single ticket?
| The photo I assume was just to stop people sharing a
| pass.
| ilyt wrote:
| It's making a joke out of procedure to check ID that
| doesn't serve any purpose (even if it might be funny only
| to prankster) when even obvious fakes pass without
| problem.
| sneak wrote:
| The fact that fake IDs work means that blacklisted people
| can board aircraft.
|
| This is true regardless of whether or not non-criminals
| like Woz can.
|
| A non-criminal using a fake ID is a victimless "crime",
| and as it is harmless, there is no moral issue with the
| performance of the act.
| KyeRussell wrote:
| You only think that it's not a joke because over 20 years
| ago some people committed the single most successful act
| of terrorism in recent history. Was Woz meant to look
| into the future and be mindful of your presumably
| American sensitivities?
| iso1210 wrote:
| Bush and the Congress in general certainly did commit the
| single most successful act of terrorism in recent
| history. I'm not sure how showing ID would have prevented
| that though. The US public brought it on themselves, and
| today's world is a world away from the hacking culture of
| the 1980s
| ramraj07 wrote:
| I'm Indian and india had fairly strict airline procedures
| even before 2001. Because flight terrorism has a longer
| history than 9/11. Im curious how you concluded I might
| be too America focused when you ignored all the countries
| that has had to battle terrorism for much longer.
| joxel wrote:
| Imagine simping for the TSA this hard
| stavros wrote:
| It's interesting now normalized it's become to have to
| show your papers before boarding public transport.
| hyperhopper wrote:
| How is it not a joke? It's something funny.
|
| There is no harm in it. You may argue, "what if he was a
| terrorist!" But he wasn't. He caused no harm here.
| justsomehnguy wrote:
| If I understand it right what while the ID was 'fake' it
| had his real name on it. So it wasn't more 'fake' than
| your job ID card with the same data on it.
| zxcvbn4038 wrote:
| I had a replica of the Bad Mother F#cker wallet from pulp
| fiction. One of the TSA people asked to see my id but I think
| he was so busy staring at my wallet he didn't actually look at
| my id when I handed it to him.
| esaym wrote:
| > It probably amounted to a real crime.
|
| Risky, but it doesn't sound like a forged government ID
| (driver's license, etc). It might have even had his actual name
| on it.
| mxtihvb wrote:
| From Walter Isaacson's biography:
|
| Woz and Jobs got their first big break from selling physical
| copies of the 'Blue Box', a device which allowed you to place
| long-distance phone calls through intelligently breaking AT&T's
| phone routing network. In today's 'wire fraud' day and age, this
| 100% would have been illegal -- so note that these two people
| made today's most valuable company!
|
| Relatively speaking, printing a photo ID or $2 bills is
| _nothing_. It is the _hacker_ spirit (notice we are on a site
| called _hacker_ news!).
| csallen wrote:
| _> I 'd already transferred the maximum yearly tax free gift of
| $10,000 to each of my kids._
|
| If I'm not mistaken, one tip I've heard is that one can transfer
| more than that in gifts yearly, and although that requires filing
| a gift tax return with the IRS, it doesn't mean necessarily mean
| _paying_ any tax. There 's a lifetime maximum that has to be hit,
| and it's extremely high. (I'm not a lawyer nor an accountant, and
| this is not legal or tax advice, yada yada)
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| The nuance is that if you gift below the yearly reporting
| amount, it does not count towards the lifetime maximum, since
| it never has to be reported.
|
| So if Woz had given $10,001, then he would have had to file it,
| and then when he died, it would have added $10,001 towards his
| total lifetime gift tax exclusion from his estate (currently
| $13M). But if he gave $10k (or whatever yearly reporting
| maximum) per year until he dies, then all of that does not get
| counted towards the $13M lifetime gift tax exclusion, so in a
| way, it is an additional tax reduction when the estate gets
| passed down.
| lupire wrote:
| That's (hard to detect) tax fraud.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| No, it is perfectly legal. It is called the annual
| "exclusion" amount, because you get to exclude it from
| estate tax calculations.
|
| https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-
| employe...
|
| > What can be excluded from gifts?
|
| > The general rule is that any gift is a taxable gift.
| However, there are many exceptions to this rule. Generally,
| the following gifts are not taxable gifts.
|
| >Gifts that are not more than the annual exclusion for the
| calendar year.
|
| >Tuition or medical expenses you pay for someone (the
| educational and medical exclusions).
|
| >Gifts to your spouse.
|
| >Gifts to a political organization for its use.
|
| >In addition to this, gifts to qualifying charities are
| deductible from the value of the gift(s) made.
|
| https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-
| employe...
| rcstank wrote:
| It's not fraud at all. It's following tax laws.
| lupire wrote:
| The bit about taxes is nonsense, or else he intentionally
| substantially overpaid taxes just for a joke. But he's a
| billionaire so maybe he did.
| someweirdperson wrote:
| > and it's extremely high
|
| "Extremely high" is relative (some 11 million, probably less at
| that time?), considering the person telling this story.
| O__________O wrote:
| Related US Mint page for $2 bill sheets:
|
| https://catalog.usmint.gov/paper-currency/uncut-currency/?&p...
|
| Basically he tells story in a way that average person assume he's
| printing fake bills, when in reality he's just cutting and
| binding sets of uncut bills into a notepad.
|
| Lying to a federal investigator though is a federal crime and one
| that's frequently resulted in prison sentences.
|
| Worth noting that Jobs & Woz first product was actually a device
| to make illegal free calls:
|
| http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2012/10/steve-jobs-f...
| waltbosz wrote:
| When I win the lottery and purchase my decommissioned
| lighthouse to put it on top of my decommissions missile silo,
| I'm going to wallpaper my new home with uncut sheets of
| $2-bills.
| schwartzworld wrote:
| What's the justification for them charging so much more than
| the cash value?
| TheFreim wrote:
| > wonderful gifts for the collector or "hard to buy for"
| person on your list
|
| They seem to be primarily made as collectibles or silly
| gifts, I'd expect that most people who have them would not
| spend them.
| xpe wrote:
| Woz didn't lie according to his account. Technically, he gave a
| fake ID, but not a fake drivers license. I say this b/c DL's
| don't show occupation. My understanding is that it had his
| correct name. So I don't see a lie that most prosecutors would
| care about given the whole situation.
|
| Not to mention that it is not a good look for a secret service
| agent to not know the details of the actual currency he is
| tasked to protect (e.g. available in perforated sheets). I
| suppose it is possible the agent got called in not knowing the
| specific details warranting arrest*, but that would be even
| worse.
|
| * Am I right to think that Woz was arrested given that he was
| read his Miranda rights?
| Zanni wrote:
| Available in sheets, yes; perforated, no. Woz had them
| perforated at the printer when he had them bound into pads.
| That's why, I assume, the repeated mention of the agent
| running his fingers over the perforations.
| O__________O wrote:
| > makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the
| same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or
| fraudulent statement or entry;
|
| https://codes.findlaw.com/us/title-18-crimes-and-criminal-
| pr...
| doctor_eval wrote:
| But was it _materially_ false? im not sure his fake
| occupation was at all relevant, and since the document
| identified Woz, I suspect it was _materially_ true.
| O__________O wrote:
| Stating obvious, ultimately all individuals are
| responsible for their respective interpretations of the
| law and even judges error in their interpretations. That
| said, in my opinion, if an individual intentionally
| provides false statements or produces false documents to
| a federal investigator, that doing so is always a crime
| regardless of if it's done to evade an investigation,
| material to a given investigation, etc -- in part because
| knowing if a particular individual is being intentionally
| truthful is always material to an investigation.
| ilyt wrote:
| But "document" contained his true name and picture
| O__________O wrote:
| Woz per his own statements said he had to them provide
| his drivers ID and passport. No idea why you're taking
| his account of the story as anything more than yet
| another lie - which is the point, he knew providing a
| fictional ID was an intentional misrepresentation of the
| truth, which I turn calls into questions any additional
| information he provides, which in turn makes it material
| to the investigation.
| doctor_eval wrote:
| That's not my understanding of materiality at all.
|
| If the material information he provided was true then all
| the other silliness is just silliness. I mean, the agent
| is going to search on the name, probably find a photo in
| a license database, and confirm the guy is who he says he
| is, and that is the only point of asking for ID. They are
| hardly strong authenticators, and no professional is
| going to take some random bit of ID and use the non-
| identifying data on it to make decisions. What do you
| think they are going to do with the data anyway?
|
| The fact is also that Woz did nothing wrong. So why does
| he have to automatically cowtow to an authority figure?
| He provided the materially important information in a
| humorous way. He didn't do anything wrong. He poked the
| bear, but only a little bit.
|
| Finally - not every citizen has a passport or even a
| drivers license. So even if requested, it's not always
| possible to produce it.
|
| Honestly - I admire Woz, but I will admit that I find his
| pranks to be a bit self indulgent. So what? He literally
| did nothing wrong and poked a bit of fun at the state.
| akerl_ wrote:
| You don't need to be mirandized when you're arrested. That's
| a tv show trope. Miranda warnings are more frequently given
| as part of questioning, which may start on the scene of the
| arrest but often occurs later.
| O__________O wrote:
| Additional notable information on the topic:
|
| https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/police-
| questioning-m...
| j-bos wrote:
| IANAL You also don't need to Mirandized at all. Miranda is
| only needed to use any (direct product of) evidence or
| starments given by suspect during the interaction in court.
| lelandfe wrote:
| As some additional color, Miranda rights have been
| aggressively weakened over the last decade, and the
| current Supreme Court majority appears to really dislike
| them on their whole.
|
| Berghuis v. Thompkins in 2010[0] made it so that the
| suspect has to _explicitly_ invoke their own right to
| remain silent - simply remaining silent is not enough.
| And just last year in Vega v. Tekoh[1] the Court decided
| that it is not a violation of your civil rights if you
| are not Mirandized, and you therefore cannot sue over it.
|
| Together, this basically means that its incumbent on
| every single citizen to be aware of their Miranda rights,
| and to know the magic words to say. And you should
| really, really keep track of if your rights are read to
| you while you're in custody - police will certainly try
| to admit un-Mirandized evidence, even after all of that.
|
| > _Those magic words, legal experts told USA TODAY, must
| be affirmatively and explicitly stated as, for example,
| "I want my lawyer and I want to remain silent" or "I want
| my lawyer and am invoking my right to remain silent." And
| then you should stay silent._
|
| [0] http://archive.boston.com/news/nation/washington/arti
| cles/20...
|
| [1] https://archive.ph/kvKaB
| geomark wrote:
| Are you even legally required to provide ID to a federal
| officer? I know in some states that you are not required to
| provide ID to a police officer unless there is evidence you
| have committed a crime. Quite a few ornery citizens like to
| video themselves rejecting police officer's requests for ID.
| lupire wrote:
| 1. Not being required to provide id is not a defense
| against actively lying to a officer.
|
| 2. If you are reasonably suspected of being involved in
| something illegal, you can be detained until identified by
| some means.
| iSnow wrote:
| Why on earth do they even sell those sheets? It'll just cause
| confusion.
| twoodfin wrote:
| $2 bills in general cause enough confusion that a few
| souvenirs are unlikely to make much difference on the margin.
| lizknope wrote:
| I bought some in 1987 when I went on a tour of the Bureau of
| Engraving and Printing. It was in the gift shop and I was 12
| and thought it was really cool so my parents bought it for
| me. I still have them in a folder along with other souvenirs.
| I would never think of actually cutting them up and spending
| them. The novelty souvenir value is that they are uncut.
| harimau777 wrote:
| There was a restaurant in my home town that always gave you
| your chain in $2 bills. It was a silly thing that they were
| known for. I could potentially see something like this
| facilitating that.
| O__________O wrote:
| $2 bill are still among the denominations currently
| produced in US. Any bank should be able to provide them if
| requested. Bills I linked from the US Mint to are in
| uncirculated condition, which is not a requirement for
| obtaining $2 bills; meaning $2 bills you get from the bank
| may or may not have been in prior circulation, might have
| been stamped by the bank, etc.
| baron816 wrote:
| I'm willing to bet HN bought out the $2 sheets because of this.
| papito wrote:
| I asked at a bank recently for 100 $2 bills (I needed it for
| tipping on a cruise ship). The tellers were extremely curious
| about what it was for. I got 100 still-bundled bills, like in
| crime movies!
| incone123 wrote:
| If this isn't something tellers see quite regularly, then what
| do other cruise passengers do?
|
| I asked for a lot of PS5 (smallest denomination note in UK) at
| the bank once because I was going to a music festival (before
| mobile card payment was routine). They asked me casually why I
| wanted them and I explained. Seems to be a Know Your Customer
| thing.
| michaelt wrote:
| My bank tells me it's to help protect vulnerable customers -
| for example, if you want PS2000 cash to pay some builders,
| they'll ask whether the builders have started work yet.
|
| Although who knows if that's the whole reason?
| tomalpha wrote:
| It very much is to protect vulnerable customers, but it's
| not wholly altruistic. UK Banks are (mostly) required to
| make customers whole if they've been defrauded unless
| they've been grossly negligent. The banks have tried to
| interpret the "gross" part fairly broadly but the regulator
| and Financial Ombudsman (legally mandated arbitration for
| consumers where that's actually a good thing) interpret
| "gross" as more extreme than "almost anything". The result
| of which is that banks are keen to show that they took
| every possible step to prevent someone being scammed -
| whether popping up notices during online payments, or
| asking in person. If they don't, they can very easily be
| required to reimburse the customer themselves.
|
| Edit: digging up a citation suggests that it might be a
| voluntary code that banks are signed up to [1], but the
| regulatory regime has still swung much more in favor of the
| customer.
|
| [1] https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/debt-and-
| money/banking/ban...
| incone123 wrote:
| That's true for large amounts and there are a lot of scams
| so it makes sense. But this is around small denominations -
| I was only getting a few hundred GBP in PS5s for a
| festival.
| ElfinTrousers wrote:
| There are plenty of people around who would stab you,
| never mind cheat you, for a few hundred pounds.
| ztetranz wrote:
| I didn't know this was a practice but I suspect some of it
| might be to detect overly trusting elderly people being
| ripped off. If it prevents some of that then it's probably
| a good thing.
| bell-cot wrote:
| Certainly not the whole reason, these days. But having
| known a few extremely gullible people, who were blatantly
| scammed out of thousands of dollars, it is enough reason.
| whstl wrote:
| I also get asked this questions if I buy gift cards at the
| supermarket or pharmacy these days. They have to "unlock"
| the card at their computer, so they ask if it's _really_
| for a gift or if it 's some shady person on the phone.
|
| If you watched Kitboga videos on Youtube, you know scammers
| often ask for gift cards as payment.
| rswskg wrote:
| For a period I was withdrawing 5k cash weekly. I was required
| to wait for 20 minutes each time and give a reason why. I
| settled on 'money fight' as it seemed to upset them the most.
| PaulRobinson wrote:
| If they can't just give you the money they have on hand
| (perhaps deposited by other customers), you are increasing
| the cost of the transaction for them. Cash is expensive.
| People complain about card transactions, but wait until you
| need to deal with cash deposits and withdrawals regularly -
| that adds up quick, and is the main reason why a lot of
| businesses in the UK have moved to card only since the
| pandemic.
|
| It's also the case that criminals prefer cash, and a large
| number of small denomination notes could be used to
| facilitate a large number of small value crimes more easily.
|
| Drug dealing is the obvious one, but there are others. I
| witnessed a shoplifters being stopped by a security guard
| once, with PS200 worth of goods in their coat (booze,
| steaks), and they offered a PS5 note - "it's all I have" -
| and by making that offer of payment, they reduced the crime
| and the penalty somewhat to the point the manager and
| security officer removed the goods, asked them to leave and
| told them they weren't welcome any more - no police involved.
| For all that bank knew, you were running a gang of
| shoplifters doing this.
| _nalply wrote:
| Why does offering payment reduce crime?
|
| In my jurisdiction it is enough if it is evident that you
| intent to steal something. Theft can only be prosecuted if
| there is intent. Usually if they suspect someone
| shoplifting they wait and spring the trap when there are
| enough clues, for example someone briskly walking to the
| exit.
|
| One story: My wife got stopped in a departement store
| because she took an item in a sub-shop in the underground
| floor. It's not a mall. Then she went upstairs to look for
| more things to shop. The police was there after a short
| time. This means the shoplifting surveillance system has
| already sent out an alert to the police when my wife was on
| the stairs, because employees aren't allowed to hold
| people. But my wife didn't walk briskly to the exit but
| strolled around and when stopped she told them she wanted
| to pay for all things together. The police people even
| laughed and the employee directed my wife back downstairs
| to pay.
| papito wrote:
| They were genuinely curious ("which cruise!"). It caused so
| much commotion that all three tellers got out of their seats
| - one of them went in the back to look while the others
| wanted to know more. My teller held the bundle in his hands
| and noted on its pristine state. I think he was jelly.
|
| The banks often have the $2 notes, but you have to ask
| explicitly.
| Eleison23 wrote:
| [dead]
| helsontaveras18 wrote:
| I do not understand how the story ended.
|
| And that was a very odd story... he is an edgy guy.
| 082349872349872 wrote:
| It ended on (a) a yet more unbelievable note than everything up
| until that point, and (b) noting that lots of money changed
| hands that day, but that all the financial details are
| ancillary to the story, which is what was important.
|
| I don't know if I'd say "edgy", so much as a hacker -- and
| there have been hackers in all generations, eg
| https://books.google.ch/books?id=V3ByEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA575&lpg=P...
| lupire wrote:
| He's showing off (or lying) that he's so rich they he can
| throw away $7500 as a joke because he's already committed to
| giving his daughter $10M+.
| xboxnolifes wrote:
| He didn't throw away $7500. He gave his daughter $7500,
| which left him out $7500 due to tax reasons.
| ShamelessC wrote:
| This definition of "hacker" is effectively synonymous with
| "edgy and deviant". You can maybe add "intelligent", but eh,
| that's giving too much credit.
| [deleted]
| dorfsmay wrote:
| I can't help but wonder if the lack of https on woz.org is
| intentional or simply overlooked.
| indigodaddy wrote:
| For anyone having trouble with the archive.org link as I was..:
|
| https://archive.ph/n8vwp
| risfriend wrote:
| This seems like a plausible thing to do if you run out of change
| to tip, banks may not easily give out bundles of $2 in cash
| simply because of shortage and found this another way to grab lot
| of $2 notes.
| [deleted]
| dsq wrote:
| Was Wozniak already "the Woz" of Apple fame when this story took
| place? In which case I assume he could afford the best lawyers on
| the planet if necessary, plus the President calling to get him
| out of trouble.
|
| An ordinary civilian might fall down that hole never to come out
| again. Just showing a fake ID to a fed could be met with serious
| retribution.
| alpaca128 wrote:
| I'm pretty sure Wozniak didn't yet have a 12 year old daughter
| before Apple.
| tbarone wrote:
| That was the most surprising thing to me by far.
|
| Dangerous game to play, imagine trying to convince a judge that
| "I was not intentionally looking for trouble".
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| Yeah, no government likes it when you mess with their
| currency.
| xpe wrote:
| Right.
|
| It also would seem likely that at least one protector of
| said currency (the agent in the story) didn't know his
| domain (currency sheets are legit).
|
| Unless he just wanted to harrass Woz, or maybe because they
| suspected him of other mischief and wanted to see if he
| misstepped.
| tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
| You can buy currency sheets.
|
| You cannot buy perforated currency booklets.
|
| It's reasonable to be suspicious about the latter,
| especially as I suspect Woz didn't start the interview
| with "I bought the currency sheets then had them turned
| into this" - and anyways, by that time the agent had a
| checklist to run through, likely including the passport
| numbers etc. as mentioned in the article.
|
| Even knowing that the bills are being sold in sheets, you
| wouldn't want to be the agent who let someone go who was
| doing everything exactly as Woz did except for getting
| the currency sheets from the guy printing the North
| Korean superbills...
| DonHopkins wrote:
| Woz's old friend John Draper knew how to call President Richard
| Nixon get out of trouble when he ran out of toilet paper, and
| later Woz paid for Draper's attorney fees when he got busted
| for being involved with duplicating BART cards:
|
| https://en-academic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/139493
|
| Legends
|
| One oft-repeated story featuring Captain Crunch goes as
| follows: Draper picked up a public phone, then proceeded to
| "phreak" his call around the world. At no charge, he routed a
| call through different phone switches in countries such as
| Japan, Russia and England. Once he had set the call to go
| through dozens of countries, he dialed the number of the public
| phone next to him. A few minutes later, the phone next to him
| rang. Draper spoke into the first phone, and, after quite a few
| seconds, he heard his own voice very faintly on the other
| phone. He sometimes repeated this stunt at parties. Draper also
| claimed that he and a friend once placed a direct call to the
| White House during the Nixon administration, and after giving
| the operator President Nixon's secret code name of "Olympus",
| and asking to speak to the president about a national
| emergency, they were connected with someone who sounded like
| Richard Nixon; Draper's friend told the man about a toilet
| paper shortage in Los Angeles, at which point the person on the
| other end of the line angrily asked them how they'd managed to
| get connected to him.[8] Draper was also a member of the
| Homebrew Computer Club.[2]
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32723420
|
| DonHopkins 4 months ago | parent | context | favorite | on: How
| MetroCard works (2005) [pdf]
|
| Then there was the time the infamous phone phreak John "Cap'n
| Crunch" Draper got busted for forging BART Cards... Steve
| Wozniak and his son also got mistakenly busted and thrown in a
| holding cell for 4 hours because he had a (real) BART card that
| didn't work, so he got pissed off and ended up paying for
| Draper's attorney fees, and Draper copped to a misdemeanor of
| altering MUNI tickets, and went on probation for a year, but
| did not lose his job at Autodesk.
|
| https://techmonitor.ai/technology/just_tacky
|
| >TECHNOLOGY. March 1, 1987. JUST TACKY! By CBR Staff Writer.
|
| >Aw c'mon John, forging the electronic characteristics of BART
| tickets is just tacky! John Draper, who inter alia wrote the
| Easy Writer word processing package, has been caught with
| $2,500 of forged access tickets to the San Francisco Bay-Area
| Rapid Transit subway system, and fellah, BART, which has never
| fully recovered from the teething troubles in the early days
| when trains used to whistle through stations at 60mph with the
| doors wide open, can't afford it; Draper's real claim to fame
| is that he discovered in the 1960s that a toy whistle given
| away in packets of a glutinous and bilious-coloured sugared
| corn puff cereal called Cap'n Crunch was pitched just right to
| mimic the tones AT&T used to set up long-distance calls, so
| that packs of the sickly Cap'n sold out as kids rushed to claim
| the whistles that enabled them to call auntie in Montana or
| Mary in Maine; that was ingenious if wicked, but forging BART
| tickets - tacky, John, tacky.
|
| https://digibarn.com/collections/audio/digibarn-radio/06-05-...
|
| >DigiBarn Radio: John Draper @ Autodesk (1985)
|
| >Listen to John Draper talking about his Autodesk period, the
| BART card fiasco and more! (8MB MP3, recorded May 2006)
|
| https://www.digibarn.com/collections/audio/digibarn-radio/06...
|
| >John Draper at the Digibarn's Homebrew@30 event
|
| >Thanks Tom Barbalet for recording this rare interview with
| John Draper (aka "Captain Crunch" or "Crunchman" these days)
| about his life at Autodesk, and the BART (Bay Area Rapid
| Transit) cards fiasco. Also included here are other life and
| times of "Crunch".
|
| https://digibarn.com/collections/audio/digibarn-radio/06-05-...
|
| Partial transcript (listen to the whole thing for the full
| story about the BART card fiasco -- I'm just transcribing the
| part about Woz getting arrested here):
|
| [...]
|
| John Draper: So Woz game me a Mac I could use, and Woz also go
| me a ... Cause Woz got hassled by the BART cops too.
|
| Here's what happened, here's what happened at that point.
|
| Woz went to go see the Oakland A's game. And what he wanted to
| do, he had his son with him. So his son I think at the time was
| about 9 years old. And he wanted to take his son to the Oakland
| A's game.
|
| And his son says "Hey, daddy, can I ride BART?" Sure, why not?
| So he goes to Hayward BART, er, he goes to Hay- not Hayward,
| yeah, he goes to Hayward BART, yeah, parks the car, and rides
| BART to the Oakland Coliseum. Ok.
|
| So what happened was, his son's BART card didn't work. He put
| it in to the turnstile, and it got rejected coming back. And
| Woz goes over to the BART attendant and says "Well my card
| doesn't work", he says "look, it comes back, it came back and
| said rejected or something."
|
| And the guy, the BART attendant says "Wait right here." He gets
| on the phone, calls the BART cop. BART cop takes Woz and his
| son down to the Lake Merit Station, ok. At which time they
| grilled Woz about what he'd, that he'd, and they were claiming,
| accusing him of tampering with the cards, and they threw Woz
| and his son in a holding cell for like six hours.
|
| Tom Barbalet: So let me get this straight.
|
| John Draper: Until they could get an expert to come in and take
| a look at that card, to make sure that the card had not been
| tampered.
|
| Tom Barbalet: And the card was a regular card that they just
| bought.
|
| John Draper: Yeah, just a regular card that they just bought.
|
| Tom Barbalet: So they knew your connection with him?
|
| John Draper: No they did not know my connection with him.
|
| Tom Barbalet: So how did, why was he...
|
| John Draper: His card didn't work. They suspected that he had
| tampered with the card.
|
| Tom Barbalet: But surely that would have happened to, just in a
| sample size, a hundred, maybe two hundred people in the Bay
| Area.
|
| John Draper: I don't know the details, all I know is they
| arrested him and his son, and they held them up in a, put him
| in a holding cell for four hours, until they can wake up a, get
| the BART engineer to get out and examine the card, and once
| they figured out it was their fault, they let him go.
|
| Tom Barbalet: Right.
|
| John Draper: So when Woz found about the BART fiasco that I
| did, thing, that I got roped into, Woz says, "I got this
| attorney, I'll pay for, I'll pay for your legal attorney fees.
| Go see this guy. So I went and say this guy, this attorney. So
| he was handling my case in the BART thing.
|
| [...]
| gelstudios wrote:
| The patron saint of hackers is making the rounds again. Whether
| you are a fan or not, his book "iWoz" is full of these stories
| like trolling casino pit bosses with the pad of bills.
|
| A few years ago I had the privilege of meeting the woz after an
| event at which he was a speaker.
|
| I was surprised at how humble and patient he was with people
| vying for his attention, many asking for him to autograph laptops
| and whatever else they had at hand.
|
| I got his attention when I asked him about tetris and we geeked
| out a bit over it. Thats a story for another day but I did walk
| away from that conversation with a prized souvenir -- an
| autographed $2 bill: https://imgur.com/gallery/TQo0KOi
|
| ... and a laser cut steel business card :)
| bentobean wrote:
| > I carry large sheets, folded in my pocket, and sometimes pull
| out scissors and cut a few off to pay for something in a store.
| It's just for comedy, as the $2 bills cost nearly $3 each when
| purchased on sheets.
|
| > When he said that they don't make bills like this I asked "They
| don't?" as though I thought it was quite normal to have sheets.
| My answer was also so emotionless as to confuse him about me, and
| to make me seem even more evasive. This, again, I do for a
| comedic effect.
|
| Is it just me, or does the man simply not understand what
| _comedy_ is?
|
| I enjoy a good joke as much as the next guy. That said, if you
| are routinely paying for items at the register by cutting bills
| off of a sheet with scissors and handing the police a fake ID
| when asked for identification, you're basically asking for
| trouble. And you're almost certainly going to waste a lot of
| people's valuable time.
|
| Generally speaking, I do really like Woz as a person. But in this
| particular instance, he does kind of come across as a big pain in
| the ass.
| brailsafe wrote:
| As a Canadian, somehow I didn't know the U.S still used $2 bills
| ElfinTrousers wrote:
| I've lived my entire life here and was well into my 40s the
| first time I ever saw one. When I did get hold of one, I did
| what many people do with it, which is to tuck it away in a side
| pocket of my wallet as a curiosity, rather than spend it.
| xboxnolifes wrote:
| You will almost never come across them unless someone goes out
| of their way to obtain them like Woz.
|
| Outside of one rare occurrence where I received change in
| golden dollars and $2 bills, the only time I've seen $2 bills
| was when my father would buy them to tip with.
| TAKEMYMONEY wrote:
| I've had _Americans_ refuse to accept my $2 bills because they
| thought they were a joke instead of real currency
| Aardwolf wrote:
| Despite being similar value, for euros, the bills only start at
| 5 euro, while 1 and 2 euro are coins.
| ilammy wrote:
| There is also a story that US cannot change the design of
| their $1 bill because of Big Vending.
| hnfong wrote:
| Inflation might get things moving! :)
| brailsafe wrote:
| Same in Canada
| JoeAltmaier wrote:
| Lots of timid, humorless folks having trouble imagining not being
| a sheep and always coloring inside the lines.
|
| I for one wish there were more real people around, living life
| for liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Like we were intended
| to live.
| filchermcurr wrote:
| And I, for one, am glad that society as a whole doesn't behave
| this way. Imagine how obnoxious it would be if every other
| social interaction was somebody messing with you. Wonderful.
| ztrww wrote:
| Is every other person you interact with is a federal agent or
| a TSA employee?
| xpe wrote:
| Very little is what it seems. Jordan Peterson makes a
| convincing argument that dominance hierarchies (having
| biologically existed longer than sex differentiation) drive
| significant portions of many interactions even today. So if
| you think of social interactions in this way, many people may
| (sort of) "mess with you" in the sense that they are testing
| your position in some hierarchy.
|
| All of this said, I haven't seen a critical analysis of
| Peterson's theory, which from what I can tell, does not
| connect the dots, so to speak, from biological behavior to
| individual intentions. Still, I think it is fair to say that
| individual intentions are not required for Peterson's
| explanation. The human brain does much that is neither
| conscious nor intentional in the usual senses of the words.
|
| This theory is really interesting to explore and extrapolate.
| I'll give an example. Let's say someone treats you with a
| normal level of politeness. You could argue that they are not
| messing with you, and not challenging your position in any
| dominance hierarchy. But perhaps this shows they feel
| confident enough to address you as a peer. Or perhaps they
| feel like they are in a higher position, and have no need to
| flaunt it. In any case, your subsequent response will provide
| a lot of data for the other person.
|
| I think of the number of times that people humble brag. Or
| the subtle things people do to demonstrate knowledge. The
| more I think about it, the more I think Peterson's theory is
| useful in an explanatory sense.
|
| To be clear, I'm not saying I agree with any moral philosophy
| that suggests such behavior is ideal from an ethical
| perspective.
| bdhess wrote:
| Imagine how obnoxious it would be if you were detained by a
| federal agent for totally legal behavior.
| scotty79 wrote:
| Instead we have someone in every other social interaction
| trying to sell or upsell something.
| bentobean wrote:
| Can you imagine being the kid behind the register at Woz's
| neighborhood 7-11... Having to put up with him pulling out
| his pair of scissors and his sheet of $2 bills every time he
| drops by for a Coke?
|
| "Haha, yes yes, Woz - You're very funny. Got me again."
| Jochim wrote:
| It's easy to "live life for liberty and the pursuit of
| happiness" when your actions do not have meaningful
| consequences for yourself or your loved ones.
| 082349872349872 wrote:
| When said actions (paying for something with legal tender)
| were both (a) legal and (b) harmless, I would say the way to
| fix any current inequities are to ensure everyone ("with
| liberty and justice for _all_ ") would also fail to suffer
| consequences beyond missing one's daughter's athletic meet.
| EugeneOZ wrote:
| History with fake IDs is quite different.
| strogonoff wrote:
| The story about Wozniak tipping perforated $2 bills is about a
| person who breaks the pattern by behaving very suspiciously
| after fully satisfying the initial profiling measures. It is
| funny in how that puts people around him into an awkward
| position, but make the protagonist subtly different (e.g., say
| he has much darker skin, some innate attribute that reveals
| poor upbringing, or whatever else is used for discrimination in
| your place and time) and the story may not have had a happy
| ending. How many stories would we never read about for that
| reason?
|
| When the element of comedy hinges on hero being privileged it
| doesn't mean it's not funny, but it does prompt a thought
| experiment as to whether a world where there's no such
| profiling and everyone is treated equal base trust is possible,
| and if so whether such a story could be funny in that world.
| Taking high-trust societies I can think of as examples, I
| suspect either total surveillance or high value placed on
| following protocols sincerely with the goal of not creating
| awkwardness would be implied, in which case probably not.
| nickpeterson wrote:
| To be fair, this is sort of a mixture of white privilege and
| changing times as well. I have a much less cool version of a
| situation where I was pulled over a few years back by state
| highway patrol at night. Apparently after I had stopped for gas
| I forgot to flick my lights on and was driving with them off. I
| didn't notice because the highway section I was on had lots of
| lights along it and I have pretty good vision. The officer
| asked me if I knew I was driving with my lights off, and I told
| him, "my friends call me hawkeye".
|
| I'm 30-something white guy, I can easily imagine not feeling
| comfortable trying that stupid joke if I was anyone else.
| SnowHill9902 wrote:
| "* privilege" is just non-nerd Bayesian updating.
| sublinear wrote:
| That's not an example of "white privilege". It has neither do
| with being white nor privilege and everything to do with
| culture.
| dumbgoy wrote:
| [flagged]
| ramphastidae wrote:
| I for one wish there were fewer people around chiding others
| with tired platitudes for not living their day-to-day lives
| like someone with $100m in their pocket.
| jsz0 wrote:
| One of the greatest flaws of modern society is how we
| systematically beat this natural childlike enthusiasm for bending
| the rules out of people. I'm just old enough to remember when 'it
| was just a joke' was a legitimate excuse that could get you out
| of trouble. If the joke was funny and didn't hurt anyone you
| might get a slap not he wrist but people of all ages appreciated
| your effort to make the world a less grim place.
| xavdid wrote:
| The problem you run into is that people can do legitimately
| harmful things, and claim it was "just a joke". It ruins it for
| everyone, unfortunately.
| cardanome wrote:
| I don't get the humor.
|
| Oh, look, that was so funny putting myself into a situation that
| most people would be scared shitless to be in and might not have
| ended well for them! Let's just waste everyone's time so they can
| humor me on a joke! I am such an edgy rich white guy! A real
| hacker!
|
| What an absolute tool.
| lupire wrote:
| You seem to have it backwards. They wasted his time.
| corobo wrote:
| > that was so funny putting myself into a situation that most
| people would be scared shitless to be in and might not have
| ended well for them!
|
| Same attitude paid off in his little Apple computer hobby.
| chrismarlow9 wrote:
| Wow there are some angry people in these comments.
| implements wrote:
| Well, I guess Woz was being a "prankster" - and from Wikipedia:
| _"A practical joke, or prank, is a mischievous trick played on
| someone, generally causing the victim to experience
| embarrassment, perplexity, confusion, or discomfort"_.
|
| I can see the playful side of it, but _people and places where
| pranks are not generally well received_ would be federal agents
| and casinos - so from the 'victims' point of view I expect they
| could have done without the bother.
| lupire wrote:
| Why does a casino, a legalized scam operation, deserve
| respect?
|
| When you are a retired billionaire, you have freedom to
| explore.
|
| See also Penn Jillete's airport "security" protest, though he
| wasn't retired or a billionaire , but was willing to spend
| his time/money/privilege fighting for our rights.
| [deleted]
| erikerikson wrote:
| [2011]
| Invictus0 wrote:
| This comment section is really disappointing. Should change the
| name of the site to Anal-Retentive Snobs News.
| Slighted wrote:
| Its unfortunate how many people can't take a joke. Wozniak
| certainly wasn't wasting anyone's time as the bills were legal.
| Wozniak didn't have to deal with the SS agent either and
| could've easily invoked his 5th amendment right to silence, but
| he was cooperative instead. Based on the story, it doesn't look
| as though he claimed his fake ID was a legitimate one either
| and just handed it over as part of a generic question.
|
| No, don't try to tell me how the secret service agent and the
| casino employees were victims and how this somehow ties into
| white privilege or some crap like that. Try spending some time
| off the internet and return to real life.
| thrdbndndn wrote:
| ..and web.archive.org is down.
|
| Probably not hugged to death, since their server is unstable for
| quite awhile.
| jabart wrote:
| As a kid I was in the store with my parents and we were in line
| for the register. Some guy turned around and looked at me and
| said "Hey kid, ever seen a $2 bill before?" I said no, and he
| ripped off a $2 from a pad and handed it to me. To this day I
| have this $2 bill because I thought it was fake. This is the
| midwest, no way was this Woz but now I feel that this might not
| be a fake $2 bill anymore.
| jesprenj wrote:
| Can one buy uncut sheets of euro banknotes?
| Tade0 wrote:
| Haven't heard of any, but when it was first introduced, the
| Euro was fairly easy to copy.
|
| There was a man in Italy nicknamed il Professore who was
| notorious for producing them in bulk while not being
| particularly conspicuous about it.
|
| According to an anecdote from one of his family members when a
| cashier tried to confirm whether the 20EUR banknote he gave her
| was legitimate he said "lady, it costs me 18EUR to make one of
| these, so I don't even bother".
| PartiallyTyped wrote:
| Could that be the inspiration of "the professor" in Netflix's
| "Money heist"?
| dianfishekqi wrote:
| [Woz's $2 bill sheets]
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJ1TIYxm1vM
| pigtailgirl wrote:
| -- He was on Steve-O's podcast - few months ago - the whole
| episode is hilarious - - the $2 bill stuff - its at 1:25:25 -
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRi8r0XQFHU - Steve-O (guy from
| jackass) podcast is great - btw --
| curiousgal wrote:
| > _But I had got a big point on him and I was quite satisfied in
| that._
|
| I hate this attitude so much.
| filchermcurr wrote:
| Agreed. I found this whole story made him sound very unlikable.
| Like he considers everybody to be below him to the point of
| being playthings. Kind of gross.
| concordDance wrote:
| Everyone should play with everyone else and have a good time.
| thombat wrote:
| And if the person you're playing with isn't having a good
| time as a result? If you're the guy at the head of the
| queue dicking around, while behind you are the people
| waiting to get on with their lives?
| squillion wrote:
| Yeah, what a self-absorbed, giant jerk. He missed his
| daughter's competition but of course he'd do it again anytime
| for the lulz.
|
| BTW the basic facts might be true but the details reek of
| bullshit.
| astrostl wrote:
| I 'bought' a bunch of (cut) $2 bills from a bank ages ago to use
| for tips, and people do love it.
| [deleted]
| spiritplumber wrote:
| Due to this story, if I am teaching basic electronics or how to
| use a 3d printer to kids, I "pay them for the day's work" with a
| new $2 bill (which you can get at any bank if you ask and wait a
| few days). I like them because instead of having some guy on the
| back they have a pretty painting of the Constitution. I sometimes
| to have to explain to the parents that yes it's real money.
| mgaunard wrote:
| [flagged]
| enriquto wrote:
| Considering the author and the subject of this text, you
| shouldn't discard that a kind of xkcd 326 situation is at play
| here.
| someweirdperson wrote:
| A peak is followed by a decline. Why try to intenionally peak
| it, when there's a chance that it might get even better?
| mgaunard wrote:
| the correct word is "pique", obviously.
|
| "peak" doesn't make any sense in this context.
| kidme5 wrote:
| The end of this story (paying taxes on $7500 winnings) seems to
| be hinting at something. Is the message that of course nobody
| follows all the rules? (Pays those gift taxes)
| haunter wrote:
| You can still buy uncut sheets
|
| https://catalog.usmint.gov/paper-currency/uncut-currency/
| nly wrote:
| That markup though!
| haunter wrote:
| Sounds like printing money is actually a good business!
| xpe wrote:
| ...when you have a track record of relative currency
| stability.
| bhaney wrote:
| Looks like every single thing is out of stock, so maybe not.
| nohuck13 wrote:
| Wow, checked that link an hour ago and almost everything was
| in stock then.
| xpe wrote:
| Yay, go lemmings!
|
| The true spirit of Woz is not to copy existing social
| hacks.
|
| > Brian: Look, you've got it all wrong! You don't need to
| follow me. You don't need to follow anybody! You've got to
| think for yourselves! You're all individuals!
|
| > Crowd: Yes! We're all individuals!
|
| > Brian: You're all different!
|
| > Crowd: Yes, we are all different!
|
| > Man in crowd: I'm not...
|
| > Crowd: Shhh!
|
| Source: Monty Python
| implements wrote:
| I mean, it's a neat idea, but ... what do you do with them?
|
| Framing one as a picture would seem to invite a burglary, and
| as a source of individual notes it's much cheaper to go to a
| bank.
|
| Edit: Not intended as a critical question, btw - I was just
| wondering how you'd use them.
| nestorD wrote:
| You don't use them as money but they have consecutive serial
| numbers which has uses...
| rajamaka wrote:
| What uses?
| implements wrote:
| Yeah, I'm intrigued now!
| rightbyte wrote:
| Dunno. Easier to remember the range than more spread out
| numbers?
| haunter wrote:
| >what do you do with them?
|
| Use them to tip like Steve Wozniak? :D
| themitigating wrote:
| A personality can be constructed out of eclectic objects
| scotty79 wrote:
| Giftwrap a pendrive with a fraction of Bitcoin?
| lizknope wrote:
| I bought some in 1987 as a souvenir at the gift shop after I
| toured the Bureau of Printing and Engraving. I still have
| them in a folder and to me it is a pretty cool souvenir to
| remember that trip as a 12 year old kid. I would never think
| of cutting them up and using them.
| neilv wrote:
| The hundreds could be Sweet 16 birthday gift wrap for the
| keys to a Lamborghini.
| xpe wrote:
| Yes! And let a fulfilling life of unchecked hedonism ensue!
| basementcat wrote:
| Initially I misparsed your message and imagined gift
| wrapping the car with SWEET16 source code.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWEET16
| santiagobasulto wrote:
| Decoration, collecting, etc. What's the use of a II A.C.
| Roman coin?
| shaky-carrousel wrote:
| No sane burglar would see a framed sheet of bills and think
| "yeah, that surely is a totally legit uncut sheet of bills".
| [deleted]
| adastra22 wrote:
| wallpaper?
| boeingUH60 wrote:
| Take a photo like Steve Mnuchin
|
| https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-world/ct-mnuchin-
| money...
| davidgrenier wrote:
| Why is everyone here assuming uncut sheets aren't legal tender?
| A look at their faq reveals:
|
| ``Because the individual notes on uncut currency sheets are
| legal tender, they may be cut apart and spent.''
| haunter wrote:
| I think it's the cutting up that makes it wonky. Not being
| legal or not but instantly suspicious if you see one with
| scissor cut edges or imagine making it perforated
| Symbiote wrote:
| Does this mean you occasionally find poorly cut bills in normal
| circulation?
|
| If I received one, I'd also be suspicious.
| sneak wrote:
| Sometimes. I used to buy the sheets and rip out bills with
| half a bill on the surrounding 4 edges. They make fun party
| gifts.
|
| https://s3.sneak.cloud/sneak-public/2003/2003-02-19.jpg
| lesquivemeau wrote:
| I really like this image: It's eight days older than me,
| but the quality is as good as it gets. Most of the photos I
| have from my early years are quite low-res because they
| were taken with early digital cameras. Hope these people
| are doing well!
| lupire wrote:
| How do you know the age?
| sneak wrote:
| There's a date in the filename.
|
| That said, I think it may be misdated, as I think the
| image is from closer to 2007/8, as I think I shot it on a
| 40D which only came out in Aug 2007. I've gone through 3
| or 4 generations of photo library management software
| since then and the metadata may have gotten mangled.
| warner25 wrote:
| You can tell the age from the $1 bill itself. It looks
| like it was printed in 2006 and has the signature of Hank
| Paulson, Secretary of the Treasury from 2006-2009. You
| can compare it to his signature: https://en.wikipedia.org
| /wiki/Henry_Paulson#/media/File:Henr...
| acomjean wrote:
| Would explain some of my poor luck using bills in vending
| machines...
| xpe wrote:
| And... when you work in a casino, being suspicious is part of
| the job description.
| brightball wrote:
| I'm going to have to try this. Clemson fans travel to away
| games with stacks of $2 bills stamped with Tiger Paws. Been a
| tradition since the 70s when Georgia Tech wanted to cancel our
| annual series, so our fans showed up in Atlanta spending the $2
| bills everywhere to make sure everyone knew the economic impact
| when we came to visit. It was a big deal to our fans because we
| weren't going to bowl games every year back then, so our game
| in Atlanta was the big trip for the season.
|
| Been a tradition ever since and our reputation as fans who
| "travel well" helped ensure bowl game preferences for years.
|
| https://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/sports/college/clemso...
| Animats wrote:
| Oh, the notebook full of tear-off dollar bills. That used to be a
| thing. I once read that it was originated by the publicity
| director of Palisades Amusement Park in New Jersey. Although
| setting them up for 4-up and perforated is over complicating
| things.
| markus_zhang wrote:
| This guy is a legend. A living example my engineer self can look
| up to.
| rvieira wrote:
| It's funny and a bit sad that society is so complex we (I) don't
| even know something as "simple" as what the forms of acceptable
| currency are.
| mv4 wrote:
| Re: "I had one favorite fake ID that I'd used for almost every
| airplane flight, domestic and international, that I'd taken for
| many years."
|
| How times have changed.
| atorodius wrote:
| What a trip of a story.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-01-29 23:01 UTC)