Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
Recent Comments:
Galley Gossip: How do flight attendants survive on such a small salary? {Gadling}
Nov 29th 2011 8:36PM @dickn2000b: You missed the point. Yes, the pay is 20 and hour. But they are only getting maybe 80 hours a MONTH at first. If one isn't getting a lot of hours, then it's irrelevent what the hourly wage might be for the most part. I could pay you $1000.00 an hour, but only have you work for an hour a month. Guess what, depsite your huge hourly wage, you'd only make $1000.00 a month, $12,000 a year. Yet using your logic you shouldn't complain because you're making $1000.00 an hour. :P
Your hotel room safe: not as safe as you think {Gadling}
Sep 7th 2011 2:11PM @1JayFresh: I'll post this one last time. 1) Your comment only makes sense if one assumes this is literally the only site on the Internet with any connection at all to hotel safes. I'm quite sure other travel blog sites have posted this, either now or in the past. This very article links to one dated 2009. I haven't read that article but obviously this isn't the first ever article about hotel safes on the Internet. 2) Most crooks whom are targeting hotel safes probably already know to try a set of factory default numbers like 0000 on a lark, on the off chance management is lazy or forgot a safe. 3) I'd think it better to inform everyone that although probably very uncommon, it is possible that a hotel safe might not be changed from the default password by management so that the crooks aren't the only ones who know this.
Otherwise, I think it's a lot better to POST the information, then keep everyone in the dark thinking that somehow people who DO want to steal via safecracking don't already know this.
Your hotel room safe: not as safe as you think {Gadling}
Sep 7th 2011 2:04PM @john: Uh-huh. As opposed to only one guy who stayed in a hotel in Ontario and some crooks knowing it? :P
It's not like crooks do nothing but log onto an AOL travel blog on the off chance they give tips on how to break into hotel safes.
THAT and all they suggest is to check safes to see if the hotel management are too lazy to change the reset/default password keycode. I'd think a crook who's actually breaking into rooms to loot the safe would know to try 0000 on a lark just in case.
You know..basic logical assumptions..oh skip it.
Your hotel room safe: not as safe as you think {Gadling}
Sep 7th 2011 10:36AM And how absurd for someone to read WAY too much into the article and somehow get that they are saying ALL safes use 0000 as a default code. Oh well, I guess people wish to read what they WANT from a short blog post, as opposed to what was really posted.
Your hotel room safe: not as safe as you think {Gadling}
Sep 7th 2011 10:34AM @Vik: The article doesn't say that EVERY single safe uses 0000 as the reset password. IT ONLY says that someone found one at a hotel in Markham, Ontario that used that. It then advised people to check to be sure it isn't set for 0000. Your comment would only make sense if the article came to the conclusion that every safe is set to 0000 and can't be changed. It does not say that AT ALL. So the article is quite true since it reported about ONE safe in Ontario being set for 0000, and thus that one should check to see if that works on a room safe. If it does, then store things somewhere else. If it doesn't, then all is well most likely with the room safe.
So anyway, good job making the wrong assumption and reading WAY too much into this article.
Your hotel room safe: not as safe as you think {Gadling}
Sep 7th 2011 10:29AM @John: Actually, one would think that for the most part, people reading articles on a blog dedicated to travel would oh I don't know, be interested in travel and either CAN afford to do so, or are saving up so they CAN do so. You know, the logical assumption about such a blog site.
Your hotel room safe: not as safe as you think {Gadling}
Sep 7th 2011 10:26AM @Kittymack: So you're saying it would be better if they DIDN'T post this information, so that the crooks who ALREADY know all about it can exploit it? How many crooks would prefer it if that they DIDN'T post this so they could continue to exploit it?
Anyway, your comment is also very illogical due to 1) Other sites, not just this blog will probably post this, or have in the past, 2) I suspect most thieves robbing from hotel room safes get their information from places other then some AOL blog.
Otherwise, this was probably already common knowledge to the very people we don't want to know about this. At least now people whom aren't in a hotel to loot room safes know to check them as well.
Mila Kunis | Fashion With Benefits {Stylelist}
Jul 22nd 2011 5:33PM @Karenkbone: And it's a good thing she has the taste to avoid your waterbed like the plague then.
Eric Dane, Rebecca Gayheart Expecting Second Child {PopEater}
Jul 9th 2011 5:52PM I see someone is mildly obsesses with celebrities...
Should Casey Anthony Pose for Playboy? {PopEater}
Jul 6th 2011 10:53PM I'd think though that a journalist would know the difference between a news blog and a gossip blog though. Calling this news is like calling a head of lettuce a chocolate cake.
Having said this, yes this article is pure tripe and a bit distasteful. But like me, you did click on the link to post, even if to post disdain. Thus giving the article one more hit, telling AOL that this sort of article is of interest, even if only long enough for you to be critical of it. So, if anything you just encouraged AOL to publish another one just like it.
