HD Radio: Eduardo contradicts himself - LMFAO!
 

spamtrap1888 wrote:

All workers pay into Social Security, but illegals can't collect it.
Thank the next illegal worker you see, for helping reduce the SS
deficit.

That's exactly it, and this is why nobody is going to rock the boat about
illegal immigration.

Personally, I'm against illegal immigration, especially from Mexico because
Mexico is strictly against illegal immigration from the U.S. You have to have
your papers on you at all times when in Mexico, and you can be stopped by the
federales or by any local cop who may suspect you of being in the country
illegally.

HD Radio: Eduardo contradicts himself - LMFAO!
 

In article ,
(David Kaye) wrote:

You did say "checksum", a word that has a particular meaning, especially to
techies like us. You're just plain wrong and you don't want to admit it.
Just say you're wrong, okay?

Do you honestly believe I don't know what a "checksum" is? If so, then
my only error was overestimating the contextual comprehension of the
readers of this group.

Granted, I should have used the term in quotes.

--
John Higdon
+1 408 ANdrews 6-4400
AT&T-Free At Last

HD Radio: Eduardo contradicts himself - LMFAO!
 

On 12/08/10 12:39 PM, John Higdon wrote:
In ,
Don wrote:

On 08/12/2010 12:39 AM, John Higdon wrote:
It is rather difficult to "make up" and SSN. Like credit card numbers,
they have checksums. A bogus SSN will drop a flag the moment it enters
an SSN-savy computer.

*BZZZRRRTTT*

http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/248

SSNs have no checksums or check digits whatsoever.

Thank you for playing; the exit is - that way.

Of course they have no checksums. I'm surprised so many people did not
catch the non-literal use of the term. They do have formats and you are
tempting fate to just pull a number out of your ass.

The format is will publicized. I don't know what would make you have
thought that there was a checksum, since there isn't.

HD Radio: Eduardo contradicts himself - LMFAO!
 

In article ,
(David Kaye) wrote:

spamtrap1888 wrote:

All workers pay into Social Security, but illegals can't collect it.
Thank the next illegal worker you see, for helping reduce the SS
deficit.

That's exactly it, and this is why nobody is going to rock the boat about
illegal immigration.

The states and local governments are the ones footing the cost of the
drain of illegal immigrants, not the Federal government. As far as I
know, the state and local governments are not reimbursed from this
supposed windfall (as they rightly should be).

--
John Higdon
+1 408 ANdrews 6-4400
AT&T-Free At Last

HD Radio: Eduardo contradicts himself - LMFAO!
 

John Higdon wrote:

Do you honestly believe I don't know what a "checksum" is? If so, then
my only error was overestimating the contextual comprehension of the
readers of this group.

I'm looking for an "Sorry, I was wrong" from you. It will be an historic
occasion when I read it. Heck, you've seen me admit I'm wrong, many times.
Is it so hard to admit you're wrong?

HD Radio: Eduardo contradicts himself - LMFAO!
 

On 8/12/10 15:48 , David Kaye wrote:
John wrote:

Do you honestly believe I don't know what a "checksum" is? If so, then
my only error was overestimating the contextual comprehension of the
readers of this group.

I'm looking for an "Sorry, I was wrong" from you. It will be an historic
occasion when I read it. Heck, you've seen me admit I'm wrong, many times.
Is it so hard to admit you're wrong?


But he wasn't.

I understood precisely what he meant. It was a casual use of a
term that has a specific denotation, but also connotes a wider
context when there isn't an alternate specific term.

There is no checksum for SSN's. He knows that. We all do.

But the term is a decent analog for what he was trying to say,
without going into a lengthy description of the process from which
SSN's are generated.

Let it go.

Just as we'll let 'an historic occasion' go for you.

HD Radio: Eduardo contradicts himself - LMFAO!
 

In article ,
(David Kaye) wrote:

I'm looking for an "Sorry, I was wrong" from you. It will be an historic
occasion when I read it. Heck, you've seen me admit I'm wrong, many times.
Is it so hard to admit you're wrong?

Likewise, when I'm actually *wrong*.

--
John Higdon
+1 408 ANdrews 6-4400
AT&T-Free At Last

HD Radio: Eduardo contradicts himself - LMFAO!
 

On Aug 12, 1:21*pm, (David Kaye) wrote:
John Higdon wrote:
Of course they have no checksums. I'm surprised so many people did not
catch the non-literal use of the term. They do have formats and you are
tempting fate to just pull a number out of your ass.

You did say "checksum", a word that has a particular meaning,

- especially to techies like us.

SIR ! - Step Back From The 'TECHIES' . . .

Please Do Not Touch The 'TECHIES'

that about sums it up - check check - mtdan ~ RHF

HD Radio: Eduardo contradicts himself - LMFAO!
 

On 2010-08-11 21:24:55 -0700, John Higdon said:

Returning from a diving trip to Cabo some years back, I carried nothing
with me other a simple photocopy of my birth certificate. I was assured
that was all I needed (and in times past didn't even need that for
automobile border crossings) for the air trip to Baja. Upon return, I
was stopped by immigration at the airport of entry back into the US. I
was told that the photocopy wasn't certified (and hence worthless). They
didn't even want to see my CDL.

Sadly, CA issues two kinds of COLBs ... an "official" copy of the COLB,
and which requries a sworn statement in order to get one, and a
"non-official" copy of the COLB, and which DOES NOT require a sworn
statement.

Of course, no sworn statement is required if you are the so-called
"registrant" (the person for whom the COLB is being requested).

But, for other, related persons, such as children of the "registrant",
spouse or former spouses of the "registrant", grand-parents or
grand-children of the "registrant", a sworn statement is required.

(You are required to swear, under penalty of purgery, that you are
entitled by statute to receive a copy of the COLB of the "registrant").

Anyway, upon the recent death of my father, in Germany, the German
officials would not allow him to be burried unless and until they had
in their hands a COLB. His passport was not acceptable for this purpose.

The State of California took precisely THREE MONTHS and three days to
issue to me an "official" COLB.

Immigration officials undoubtedly expected an "official" COLB, as this
document has all kinds of special features which makes it nearly
impossible to counterfeit. For their purposes, an "non-official" COLB
is worthless, as you discovered.

As you do, John, I also always travel with my passport.

HD Radio: Eduardo contradicts himself - LMFAO!
 

You neverrr live twiceeeeeee, James Bond.
Sekert aigint 007 used to work at an auto parts store.People would come
in and ask for a can of Bondo so they could patch up their old rusty
dented up clunkers.
cuhulin

HD Radio: Eduardo contradicts himself - LMFAO!
 

I don't know if 007 ever worked at an auto parts store or not, I only
made that stuff up.

My snail mail September 2010 Popular Science magazine showed up here
this morning.There is an article in the magazine about new LED light
bulbs.
http://www.lsgc.com
http://www.sylvania.com
http://www.gelighting.com
http://www.lighting.philips.com
http://www.popsci.com
cuhulin

HD Radio: Eduardo contradicts himself - LMFAO!
 

On Aug 16, 8:40*am, Peter wrote:
On 2010-08-11 21:24:55 -0700, John Higdon said:

Returning from a diving trip to Cabo some years back, I carried nothing
with me other a simple photocopy of my birth certificate. I was assured
that was all I needed (and in times past didn't even need that for
automobile border crossings) for the air trip to Baja. Upon return, I
was stopped by immigration at the airport of entry back into the US. I
was told that the photocopy wasn't certified (and hence worthless). They
didn't even want to see my CDL.

Sadly, CA issues two kinds of COLBs ... an "official" copy of the COLB,
and which requries a sworn statement in order to get one, and a
"non-official" copy of the COLB, and which DOES NOT require a sworn
statement.

Of course, no sworn statement is required if you are the so-called
"registrant" (the person for whom the COLB is being requested).

But, for other, related persons, such as children of the "registrant",
spouse or former spouses of the "registrant", grand-parents or
grand-children of the "registrant", a sworn statement is required.

(You are required to swear, under penalty of purgery, that you are
entitled by statute to receive a copy of the COLB of the "registrant").

Anyway, upon the recent death of my father, in Germany, the German
officials would not allow him to be burried unless and until they had
in their hands a COLB. His passport was not acceptable for this purpose.

The State of California took precisely THREE MONTHS and three days to
issue to me an "official" COLB.

- Immigration officials undoubtedly expected
- an "official" COLB, as this document has all
- kinds of special features which makes it nearly
- impossible to counterfeit. For their purposes,
- an "non-official" COLB is worthless, as you discovered.

-if- One local government agency can make
an official looking 'legal' one.

-then- Another national government agency
can make an official looking 'phony' one.

HD Radio: Eduardo contradicts himself - LMFAO!