Worse than Myspace? If so, that's an interesting, developer-centric attitude. I can't find one person over the age of 14 who thinks Myspace is a better user experience than Facebook.
People are stupid. Their opinions are stupid and lousy indicators of a product's quality. YouTube users are more satisfied? Have you seen the user comments on YouTube? Have you ever been able to find something you need on YouTube hidden amongst the millions of complete time-waster outlets for any idiot with a camera?
People who like their stuff like their stuff, regardless of how good or bad it really is. Saying Facebook has bad user satisfaction is a byproduct of populist group-think: "I heard something about Facebook giving out my private information (that I willingly host on the Internet)...damn those bastards! But I'm not giving up my Facebook because it's too important to me!".
Seriously, if it so abysmal, stop using it. Not enough people have that sort of character, though. It's too easy to bitch about things without actually doing anything about it.
Yet another group can see right through the glare and focus on the content behind it. See my comment below--I believe some people physically can't control their focus on different planes of vision, so they hate the glossy glare.
After reading this thread, it seems that there is a certain, err, "vision type" (for lack of better term) that cannot focus correctly if distracted by gloss. It's almost like those people who can't see the 3d images in the blob-artwork, but in reverse--they can't stay focused on the screen and are constantly distracted by the 3dish images that are created by reflections and the such.
Since I don't have this problem, it is clear to me (pun intended) that glossy finish looks better.
I just changed mine to "2Hotdogs!". Easy to remember, especially since I have to change it every 60 days on several different networks. When I stick to the mantra of # then a phrase beginning with a capital letter ending in !, I always pass the password requirements. (my networks allow passwords to begin with a number, otherwise YMMV)
Once they start gathering their metrics, IT will notice the sharp increase in IT help-desk tickets for "locked accounts" and rethink their overly complex password requirements.
Having a password strong enough to defeat brute force automated attacks is a great idea...when the data you are protecting is valuable enough to ever be threatened by such a sophisticated tool. Putting a 15+ character password on my yahoo account seems a bit much overkill.
If people have to be sharing their passwords back and forth to get the work done, then there's obviously a problem with the password system. Any system that makes legitimate work hard to accomplish is just like the slashdot meme about those who are willing to give up freedom for security deserve neither. So now, since we're talking about computers, it's ok to require people to give up freedom in the name of security?
So just who IS my favorite musician then? Kidding aside, those types of recovery tools are fine for things like my Steam or PS3 accounts, but not acceptable for my bank account.
My problem is if I'm not concerned enough about an account getting hacked because somebody can guess that Steve Gadd is my favorite musician, then there probably doesn't need to be a login to begin with.
Or worse yet, when three of your favorite sites have three different rule sets--none of which allow you to use a familiar password that you'll not likely forget.
One work site I use requires 2 upper, 2 lower, 2 special and 2 numbers--AND--at least 10 characters. Good thing the first four requirements fill up 8 of those 10, but at the same time, they don't leave much left to use for the last 2.
Seems like they had to hold the laser on the target for a long time until it worked. If you can keep a laser beam on target that long, you might as well use the laser to guide an effective, high explosive round to it.
I used to be right of center. I am now left of center. I have not changed. The political spectrum around me has shifted. The problem with the right is that the far-right used to be the last 5% of the spectrum, but it seems to be about 50% of the spectrum now.
Supporting the Iraq war doesn't automatically default somebody's ideology to "far right". Supporting the continuing Iraq war does, in my opinion. And I believed in WMD because Iraq used them, so they obviously existed at some point. Remember how many left-leaning politicians (and countries) supported the beginning of the Iraq war, because it was a legitimate, UN-backed ultimatum. The deadline passed and the consequences began. Yes, everything after "mission accomplished" has been not support worthy except by the most right-leaning, but the initial reason and implementation was supported by most everyone, regardless of political ideology.
I don't see it as a Washington Post scare mongering tactic at all. In fact, as someone working in the TS arena for nearly 20 years, I appreciate my new database of potential employment.
Actually, an unmarried person is not capable of committing adultery. If a married guy has sex with an unmarried woman, the man is the adulterer. If a married woman has sex with an unmarried man, the woman is the adulterer.
Slashdot Mirror
Worse than Myspace? If so, that's an interesting, developer-centric attitude. I can't find one person over the age of 14 who thinks Myspace is a better user experience than Facebook.
Or publicizes information that you specifically told them to keep private.
...that you willingly gave to them, knowing it is virtually impossible and totally unrealistic to assume it will remain private.
People are stupid. Their opinions are stupid and lousy indicators of a product's quality. YouTube users are more satisfied? Have you seen the user comments on YouTube? Have you ever been able to find something you need on YouTube hidden amongst the millions of complete time-waster outlets for any idiot with a camera?
People who like their stuff like their stuff, regardless of how good or bad it really is. Saying Facebook has bad user satisfaction is a byproduct of populist group-think: "I heard something about Facebook giving out my private information (that I willingly host on the Internet)...damn those bastards! But I'm not giving up my Facebook because it's too important to me!".
Seriously, if it so abysmal, stop using it. Not enough people have that sort of character, though. It's too easy to bitch about things without actually doing anything about it.
That's my point. This cheaper laser takes too long to destroy the target. An HE round destroys it instantly (at greater cost, obviously).
Plus, since it's new technology, they'll sell it at a 1,000,000% mark-up. I know, because I'm a defense contractor ;-)
Yet another group can see right through the glare and focus on the content behind it. See my comment below--I believe some people physically can't control their focus on different planes of vision, so they hate the glossy glare.
After reading this thread, it seems that there is a certain, err, "vision type" (for lack of better term) that cannot focus correctly if distracted by gloss. It's almost like those people who can't see the 3d images in the blob-artwork, but in reverse--they can't stay focused on the screen and are constantly distracted by the 3dish images that are created by reflections and the such.
Since I don't have this problem, it is clear to me (pun intended) that glossy finish looks better.
Typing five words in a row correctly is not actually that hard.
I don't think it is an issue of difficulty, rather an issue of time (and carpal tunnel).
I just changed mine to "2Hotdogs!". Easy to remember, especially since I have to change it every 60 days on several different networks. When I stick to the mantra of # then a phrase beginning with a capital letter ending in !, I always pass the password requirements. (my networks allow passwords to begin with a number, otherwise YMMV)
Once they start gathering their metrics, IT will notice the sharp increase in IT help-desk tickets for "locked accounts" and rethink their overly complex password requirements.
I like it, except for the fact that I have to type in a login/password combo at work easily over 50 times a day.
Except for the next day when you rattle off your mnemonic device, "I grew up at 367 Oak street ..."
Having a password strong enough to defeat brute force automated attacks is a great idea...when the data you are protecting is valuable enough to ever be threatened by such a sophisticated tool. Putting a 15+ character password on my yahoo account seems a bit much overkill.
If people have to be sharing their passwords back and forth to get the work done, then there's obviously a problem with the password system. Any system that makes legitimate work hard to accomplish is just like the slashdot meme about those who are willing to give up freedom for security deserve neither. So now, since we're talking about computers, it's ok to require people to give up freedom in the name of security?
So just who IS my favorite musician then? Kidding aside, those types of recovery tools are fine for things like my Steam or PS3 accounts, but not acceptable for my bank account.
My problem is if I'm not concerned enough about an account getting hacked because somebody can guess that Steve Gadd is my favorite musician, then there probably doesn't need to be a login to begin with.
Or worse yet, when three of your favorite sites have three different rule sets--none of which allow you to use a familiar password that you'll not likely forget.
One work site I use requires 2 upper, 2 lower, 2 special and 2 numbers--AND--at least 10 characters. Good thing the first four requirements fill up 8 of those 10, but at the same time, they don't leave much left to use for the last 2.
Seems like they had to hold the laser on the target for a long time until it worked. If you can keep a laser beam on target that long, you might as well use the laser to guide an effective, high explosive round to it.
I wish my American friends understood this joke. As an American who used to live in England, I want my page 3 girl here in the US, dammit!
I used to be right of center. I am now left of center. I have not changed. The political spectrum around me has shifted. The problem with the right is that the far-right used to be the last 5% of the spectrum, but it seems to be about 50% of the spectrum now.
I think you'll find the non-existent WMDs over in Syria by now.
Supporting the Iraq war doesn't automatically default somebody's ideology to "far right". Supporting the continuing Iraq war does, in my opinion. And I believed in WMD because Iraq used them, so they obviously existed at some point. Remember how many left-leaning politicians (and countries) supported the beginning of the Iraq war, because it was a legitimate, UN-backed ultimatum. The deadline passed and the consequences began. Yes, everything after "mission accomplished" has been not support worthy except by the most right-leaning, but the initial reason and implementation was supported by most everyone, regardless of political ideology.
I don't see it as a Washington Post scare mongering tactic at all. In fact, as someone working in the TS arena for nearly 20 years, I appreciate my new database of potential employment.
FYFFY
Actually, an unmarried person is not capable of committing adultery. If a married guy has sex with an unmarried woman, the man is the adulterer. If a married woman has sex with an unmarried man, the woman is the adulterer.
Yes, because you have so many choices when it comes to Internet providers if you live here in the US.
So much for economic freedom when your choices are Giant Cable company or crappy satellite alternative.
Because we're filthy rich Americans that can afford our one or two choices per region?
FTFY.
Classic requirements over-engineering.