Slashdot Mirror

It could correspond to an increased use of DuckDuckGo as a search engine default. DuckDuckGo typically includes a Wikipedia page in a feature box, next toits top-line search item, if a domain is typed in the URL bar without a TLD designator.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent....

Worth investigating.

The "up to" is true, but you still have a lower limit where it's not acceptable anymore, a wider span for DSL than fiber though. Generally a quarter of advertized capacity is the "up to" so if you have a 100/100 you should never be below 75.

In the UK, our ISPs tend to say "up to" and then "minimum guaranteed", sample (I actually got above the up-to estimate, 80Mbps), so I guess I'm in some ISP lied to me statistics?

I haven't seen zxcvbn mentioned before, a similar look at password strength from 3 years ago.

https://blogs.dropbox.com/tech...

Demo is here: https://dl.dropboxusercontent....

Personally I like the output of http://www.kurtm.net/wpa-pskge... for passwords:

o|IRcWY;g_V]C}9'.@]@,]!YF.[Yj{K@QmuFCo%%!=~+ab,e2(pU97{V-)Qm*T

I wonder how these stack up... ahem with intels new offering.

I feel like this term HMTL5 is misleading - its a codec war between h.264 and vp8. Google threw down with buying On2 and open sourcing it to escape paying for h.264 which microsoft owns. It's inside the webm container with vorbis which is under rapid adoption.

Adobe still has its clutches on flash, and its premiere which refuse to support it officially, same with apple. But lets take a look at what does support it. Wow, only apple and IE, fancy that.

Adding to the fact imgur and 'gfycat' try and fence sit by creating a wrapper and container both an mp4 and webm file with the latter offering a baseline profile on their h.264 inside the mp4 for wider support and imgur shitting the bed.
The multiple amounts of profiles available for h.264 might create better quality/size comparisons on benchmarks with vp8 but does the codec a disservice when trying to become a standard. Plus, its still licensed code.

Unfortunately the way this is presented, and the alleged hardware used makes this sound a little trite and like a silly project. I would like to say that that's probably the result of the reporting. Having flicked through the paper, IMHO this looks like a pretty interesting finding and a worthwhile bit of research.

Paper is here. https://dl.dropboxusercontent....
:
Lets mention a few things:
-Dr Lawrence has made here data available. That's something not enough people in this field have done, much to everyone's detriment.
-"Running Matlab". probably refers to the use of Psychtoolbox(psychtoolbox.org/), rather than some clunky game coded in matlab
-I could find no reference the the pentium 3 or 17" screen anywhere, The paper notes the participants performed the task at home (and the researchers laptop was involved for training). I suspect these specs were copied in error from another notable (but older) research paper. That said, some researches, working with emotion and images, may conduct work with x" screen that seems odd. This is done to be able to compare results with previous works (size of image and distance to image effect some experiments). Don't know if this was the case here.
-The results of this type of simple training are quite interesting, I would point out that participants were also filling out food diary's etc, This in itself could enhance the effect of the training software,

All said, I do have a concern though.
The control group were given a task rating household objects rather than foods. This would have made the control group keenly aware that they were in the control group. I am curious how much of the effect was the result of "increased food consciousness" caused by reading the diaries. I would have preferred to see the control group told to 'reject foods that were imported' or something that still had them filling out food diaries for a legitimate reason.

The great thing about statistics and graphs is that by carefully selecting your data you can do things like this with them.

Do we know who the creditors are? I was under the impression that it was the networks.

Typically, "real" creditors take precedence over tort claimants in the US.

In the case of Aereo, a 2019 filed recently lists Quality Investment Properties, L3 (yes, that L3), and C7, basically for providing physical space, power, and telecom services.

im hoping they don't do something stupid and disable the GodMode trick.

could somebody please either try that trick by creating the folder from scratch or grab https://dl.dropboxusercontent....??

A cute (open source?) strength tester I have been playing with recently is made by a guy at Dropbox. It has some flaws**, but it's cute and it analyzes weaknesses.

** Mostly dictionary size, but in order to run in the browser without sending the password to a server for analysis, the dictionaries need to be small enough to load in a reasonable time.

You aren't familiar with reality, are you?

Yeah, I have no idea what I'm talking about. It's not like I've actually worked in London and the City of London and I'm not sitting in a hotel right now in the City of London (yes, I took that just now, just for you. You may recognise the famous Lloyd's Building in that picture on the left side), oh wait.

It uses the same roads

What does this even mean? There are villages that use the same roads as towns, that doesn't make them part of that town.

the same utilities

Actually, the service departments are separated from London? But even if it weren't, it's still considered a separate 'entity' in culture, history, legality and geography.

By your logic, taking out a piece of a completed puzzle, covering it in a colored marker, and then putting it back would make that piece of the puzzle separate from the rest of the entire puzzle around it

By your logic, it must be part of America because America is connected by the same planet.

A strong password CAN be easily remembered. How about remembering 10 and 11?

"Ten!!!!!!!!!!!"

That's 10 and eleven "!" characters.

There are a number of ways to calculate password effectiveness. If you assume zero knowledge of the password characteristics, then the 290 million years the website you linked to calculated may be accurate.

Hackers, however, have typically found that certain patterns are used by humans more frequently than others, and instead of brute-forcing the password from the beginning (following UTF-8 order " ", " ", " !"... etc.), you can instead skip a significant part of the overall password space by only testing these common patterns.

I prefer this tool, which evaluates password entropy. The figures it comes up with do tend to presume that something about the structure of the password is known (i.e: in your example that it is a word followed by a repeating symbol), but IMO this is a good figure to base your password decisions off as it represents a worst-case scenario, and not the best-case scenario the tool you linked presumes.

Using that tooling instead, your passwords strength and estimated crack time is as follows:

• password: Ten!!!!!!!!!!!
• entropy: 18.669
• crack time (seconds): 20.836
• crack time (display): instant
• score from 0 to 4: 0
• calculation time (ms): 3

FWIW, (and purely for the sake of comparison) one of the passwords I use online has, according to this tool, an entropy of 61.819 and a crack time of 203355820622500.06s (about 6.4 million years). And yes, it's something I both change often and have memorized.

Yaz

..Supposedly the best way to get hired, is to answer all of the questions as if you were Ned Flanders. Hard working and honest, but not too ambitious, compliant.

This is not a "supposedly". I have done it, multiple times. There's even an answer key for the test: Unicru Answer Key

(your name) > Options > Exclusions. You should see something like this.

Here is a diff between 7.1a and 7.2. The most interesting thing is that there are 2073 line additions and 10163 line deletions.

as far as settings go there is a trick that has been around for a while now

"To activate God Mode in Windows 8, follow the steps below:

1. Go to the Desktop
2. Right-click and select New Folder.

3. Right-click on the New Folder and select Rename.
4. Change the name of the folder [just copy & paste the following string]: GodMode.{ED7BA470-8E54-465E-825C-99712043E01C}

5. Open the folder and you will find every utility Windows 8 has under the sun.

Note: With God Mode, you can easily access all the Administrative options and make any desired adjustments.

Enjoy!"

or just for "fun" https://dl.dropboxusercontent.... is pre rigged for your amusement

You do know that this doesn't give you access to anything you can't already get to by using the start screen search box, right?

as far as settings go there is a trick that has been around for a while now

"To activate God Mode in Windows 8, follow the steps below:

1. Go to the Desktop
2. Right-click and select New Folder.

3. Right-click on the New Folder and select Rename.
4. Change the name of the folder [just copy & paste the following string]: GodMode.{ED7BA470-8E54-465E-825C-99712043E01C}

5. Open the folder and you will find every utility Windows 8 has under the sun.

Note: With God Mode, you can easily access all the Administrative options and make any desired adjustments.

Enjoy!"

or just for "fun" https://dl.dropboxusercontent.... is pre rigged for your amusement

zxcvbn rates that as 78 bits of entropy; 72 without the ~.

But if everyone starts using some foreign words or terms with accented characters transliterated, it becomes just another part of a cracker's dictionary, and not much better than "The boy causes rain." (59 bits, still an excellent password).

https://dl.dropboxusercontent....

Try this: https://dl.dropboxusercontent....

https://dl.dropboxusercontent....

This has been a problem for many years as this old cartoon shows:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent....

My obvious password detector, published in 1984

I came across this password strength detector the other day. It really cheered me up, as it uses a scientifically-justifiable approach (information entropy FTW!) and it laughs in the face of a number of tricks that many people recommend despite them being actually weak (replacing "o" with "0" only really adds one bit of security, which is nearly nothing, whereas adding another word adds far more despite being easier to remember).

Oh, Apple is far and a way the most profitable manufacturer in the PC market. It makes more money from Mac sales than Dell, HP. Lenovo, Asus, and Acer make from all their WinPC sales combined.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/30697024/asymcopcshare2012.png
http://www.asymco.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Screen-Shot-2013-04-16-at-4-16-4.16.46-PM-620x587.png

(all stats from Asymco)

But the dominating the PC market is dominating a market that doesn't have a future. Or rather, not a big one.

My personal number is a little higher than 80, and it includes a lot of freeway driving. I get 3.9 miles per kilowatt hour with a 22 kilowatt battery - which is 85.8.

If I'm driving almost exclusively freeway, 70 is much more realistic.

Here's a pretty good pair of charts of a leaf's potential mileage at different speeds with 100% battery, and another with "worn" 93% battery:
http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/35284720/postfiles/leafcharts/LEAFrangeChartVersion7G100.pdf
http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/35284720/postfiles/leafcharts/LEAFrangeChartVersion7G93.pdf

A side story: One day I drove to work, and then planned on picking up my wife from the airport on the way home. I work 35 miles from home, so this was pretty much the extent of my no-charge mostly-freeway range. My wife's plane was delayed, so I decided to eat dinner next to the office where there was a free charger. Her flight was further and further delayed, so I visited a book store, did some more shopping, etc. By the time my wife's was actually inbound, I had a full charge, but still had 35-40 minutes to make the 20-mile drive to the airport without any traffic. Now bored senseless waiting for my wife, I left the charger with an estimated 88 miles on the car -- a magic estimate which must be based on both recent and overall driving history. By the time I drove 20 miles through town on 35mph streets, I had an estimated 101 remaining before the mileage estimates caught up with my battery usage and I started dropping from 101 back into the 90's.

A little old lady driving to church can easily get 100+ on a charge.
Leadfooted freeway maniacs can only get 70 or so.

My personal number is a little higher than 80, and it includes a lot of freeway driving. I get 3.9 miles per kilowatt hour with a 22 kilowatt battery - which is 85.8.

If I'm driving almost exclusively freeway, 70 is much more realistic.

Here's a pretty good pair of charts of a leaf's potential mileage at different speeds with 100% battery, and another with "worn" 93% battery:
http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/35284720/postfiles/leafcharts/LEAFrangeChartVersion7G100.pdf
http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/35284720/postfiles/leafcharts/LEAFrangeChartVersion7G93.pdf

A side story: One day I drove to work, and then planned on picking up my wife from the airport on the way home. I work 35 miles from home, so this was pretty much the extent of my no-charge mostly-freeway range. My wife's plane was delayed, so I decided to eat dinner next to the office where there was a free charger. Her flight was further and further delayed, so I visited a book store, did some more shopping, etc. By the time my wife's was actually inbound, I had a full charge, but still had 35-40 minutes to make the 20-mile drive to the airport without any traffic. Now bored senseless waiting for my wife, I left the charger with an estimated 88 miles on the car -- a magic estimate which must be based on both recent and overall driving history. By the time I drove 20 miles through town on 35mph streets, I had an estimated 101 remaining before the mileage estimates caught up with my battery usage and I started dropping from 101 back into the 90's.

A little old lady driving to church can easily get 100+ on a charge.
Leadfooted freeway maniacs can only get 70 or so.

Sleep deprivation treats depression, or at least sort of. It lasts less than a day, and the rebound is hell. One's concentration is shot due to the sleep deprivation anyway, so productivity gains are limited, and add to that the effects of needing to catch-up on sleep. However, it does seem to temporarily improve mood for some people.

I know its fashionable to hate on Google right now, but isn't TFA saying things Google didn't say?

For example, TFA claims:-

Google’s version, as it admits in its response to McClendon, flatly prohibits subscribers from using “any type of server:”

But if you look at Google's actual response, they say :-

Your Google Fiber account is for your use and the reasonable use of your guests. Unless you have a written agreement with Google Fiber permitting you do so, you should not host any type of server using your Google Fiber connection, use your Google Fiber account to provide a large number of people with Internet access, or use your Google Fiber account to provide commercial services to third parties (including, but not limited to, selling Internet access to third parties).

'Should not' carries a very different meaning from 'Must not'. The first provides guidelines, the second is an absolute ban.

TFA fans the flames by telling users that clause stops them from using Google Fiber from doing a lot of things most people would not consider to be unfair use, such as :-

But Google’s legally binding Terms of Service outlaw Google Fiber customers from running their own mail server, using a remotely accessible media server, SSHing into a home computer from work to retrieve files, running a Minecraft server for friends to share, using a Nest thermometer, using a nanny camera to watch over a childcare provider or using a Raspberry Pi to host a WordPress blog. ...
The server ban also prohibits you from attaching your personal computer to Google Fiber if you are using peer-to-peer software, because that works by having your computer be both a client and a server.

However Google did not say that any of uses were prohibited. What Google does say in its response is that :-

Furthermore, Mr. McClendon’s request that the Commission modify Google
Fiber’s ToS is based on his desire to host a server for use in his business.Google Fiber
does not currently support business use of its service. Google Fiber is a residential
offering only.

There are many things Google does that I dislike (give me back iGoogle!) but lets crucify them for what they do, not made-up tales/fears.

You also avoid you add more complexity, cpu usage, memory usage, & other forms of added I/O as well as electricity usage that dns servers entail

Okay, I'm going to pretend I don't know what I'm talking about now...

I tried to generate a hosts file to block all of example.com and all it's subdomains using your wise advice that it's smaller and more efficient. Knowing that DNS hostnames are limited to 255 characters in length, I wrote a program that generates every possible character combination possible for example.com subdomains. I grew kind of bored after waiting two hours and the file had grown to 65.9 GiB and it was still growing, so I aborted mid generation since the hard-drive I was going to stick it on didn't have much space anyway. I then installed a fresh install of Windows, it worked quite well resolution wise.

Then, I added the hosts file, which should have no penalty compared to my DNS system on Linux as you say. However I discovered resolution stopped working entirely. Even after reboots, resolution would not work any more. The system also became significantly sluggish and I got warnings that windows was running out of memory.

Clearly I am doing something wrong, so please explain to me what I did wrong with the generation of my hosts file (grab a copy here) it appears to be significantly larger than my zone file despite the fact it is largely incomplete. My zone file (grab a copy here) on Linux is significantly smaller.

Lameness filter forced me to split up my comment.

You also avoid you add more complexity, cpu usage, memory usage, & other forms of added I/O as well as electricity usage that dns servers entail

Okay, I'm going to pretend I don't know what I'm talking about now...

I tried to generate a hosts file to block all of example.com and all it's subdomains using your wise advice that it's smaller and more efficient. Knowing that DNS hostnames are limited to 255 characters in length, I wrote a program that generates every possible character combination possible for example.com subdomains. I grew kind of bored after waiting two hours and the file had grown to 65.9 GiB and it was still growing, so I aborted mid generation since the hard-drive I was going to stick it on didn't have much space anyway. I then installed a fresh install of Windows, it worked quite well resolution wise.

Then, I added the hosts file, which should have no penalty compared to my DNS system on Linux as you say. However I discovered resolution stopped working entirely. Even after reboots, resolution would not work any more. The system also became significantly sluggish and I got warnings that windows was running out of memory.

Clearly I am doing something wrong, so please explain to me what I did wrong with the generation of my hosts file (grab a copy here) it appears to be significantly larger than my zone file despite the fact it is largely incomplete. My zone file (grab a copy here) on Linux is significantly smaller.

Lameness filter forced me to split up my comment.

Wrong.

Here's the photo:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/48490966/IMG_5277.jpg

And here's the RAW of it:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/48490966/IMG_5277.CR2

The jpeg one was adjusted in lightroom to make it look more like real life. I adjusted the white balance (the camera's auto white balance picked a rather blueish hue), bumped the exposure up a bit (was a tad underexposed, still is, but good enough), disabled the chroma noise removal (not enough noise in the shot to justify it), and enabled lens profile correction for the camera (remove the remaining fisheye). The RAW is included for comparison. If memory serves, this one was taken with the paperwhite on full brightness.

Here's the photo:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/48490966/IMG_5277.jpg

And here's the RAW of it:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/48490966/IMG_5277.CR2

The jpeg one was adjusted in lightroom to make it look more like real life. I adjusted the white balance (the camera's auto white balance picked a rather blueish hue), bumped the exposure up a bit (was a tad underexposed, still is, but good enough), disabled the chroma noise removal (not enough noise in the shot to justify it), and enabled lens profile correction for the camera (remove the remaining fisheye). The RAW is included for comparison. If memory serves, this one was taken with the paperwhite on full brightness.