I had to check TurboTax yesterday, and it asked me to update my password (idiots, I just want to buy the damn thing not have an account). It had those rules. I don't see the point. "12345" is good enough for me here, nothing bad really happens if someone can break in except that they can download copies of the software which doesn't bother me any. Sometimes I'm tempted ot just pick random characters that I forget, then when I need to get back in I'll just click the "I forgot my password" button...
It's even more absurd when it's the most trivial of web sites. To enter a forum for a game for instance and they'll have more complex password rules than E-trade has.
Granted, never use the same password in two places and assume that the password wil be in plain text somewhere for the entire world to see. Beyond that I should be allowed to have a bad password for sites that I don't care about. If it takes me a couple minutes to retrieve my thumbdrive with all the passwords and lock it back up again, then I'm just not going to bother going back to that web site a second time.
I use a Mac at work, but there are various servers around and the password is shared. I think it's Active Directory that handles this. But one day there was a corporate training class given by a third party web site. They sent out the user name and password to use to log into the class. The password was my password from 6 months prior. That is, a third party company knew my private work password.
I was confused by this. OSX I assume uses the BSD style of never storing the actual password, which should be a standard method that anyone with a brain would know. So I can only guess that Microsoft iin their typical ham fisted style actually keeps the actual password around or sends it over the air in a way that it can be extracted, and then IT was able to all send all our passwords to a third party.
If jobs were really up already and the economy was booming then why was there such a big following for Trump by people who were out of work for such a long period of time? I'm not a Trump fan but his basic campaign was "everyone else sucks, I'm the only one who can get your old jobs back". The economy is great for me as an engineer, but it sucks badly for the unskilled laborers, it sucks for union jobs, it is rather lackluster for service jobs, etc.
One company at a time, right. That's incredibly time consuming and negligable. A hundred jobs on day one, a hundred jobs on day two, and so on, does not add up to these numbers. You do not increase job numbers signficantly by doing negotiations through force of personality.
Things are cyclical, we always have ups and down. Also the president is not a dictator, there are so many different parts of government involved, and even if taken as a whole government policies are not the biggest factor in the economy. But for some reason people like to point to the current president as the source of all economic movements.
An impeachment is for crimes. Merely lying or failling to do the job is not cause for impeachment. Although in practice whether there is an impeachment or not depends upon politics. Both times we've had impeachments there was little chance of them succeeding which makes the goal of political grandstanding more obvious. Nixon didn't get impeached because he resigned, and it was clear to him that the impeachment would succeed.
(and at this point in time, I really miss having Nixon to kick around)
More like Microsoft uses extra CPU cycles to do the same thing. Seriously I've got the fastest computer I've ever owned at work, and the frigging Outlook on is slow, takes a couple seconds to delete an email. It seems that the faster computers get the slower the applications get.
The machines are expensive. Get a machine cheap enough to replace a few low pay workers and it won't be a very good machine. And the part that is being automated here is negligible. The machines are not carrying in the bags of produce, they're not moving ingredients from the box into the hopper, they're not sweeping the floors, and so forth. All you've done is removed a couple people from the front counter.
Smaller restaurants are an easy business to set up initially. People use the standard grill because it's a commodity workplace piece of equipment, then they hire minimum wage workers (or under) to do a standard job, and the market is anyone on the street. Having to buy an expensive machine makes things much more difficult, and it tends to attract those with higher incomes looking for a new experience (the gadget freaks who love to see technology at their table even if their $5 burger costs $15 because of it).
True, history shows that private industry is corrupt, will break and bend whatever rules it can, and acts against the interests of society. Lack of an arbiter like the government leads to monopolies, low wages, child labor, unsafe workplaces, and so forth. Anyone who thinks the workers as individuals can negotiate fairly with the employers is naive. Most workers can not easily barter their services to a different employer as easily as libertarians seem to imply.
Of course, they will blame it all on only being partially free market. They seem to truly believe that if everything is torn down and we rebuild as pure free market driven by private industry that all will magically work out. Charity just can't handle all the loose ends by itself, we already have such a selfish society that I see people look at me like I was stupid when I mention giving money to charity.
Pay scales are not really logical. Especially at the higher end. People used to bitch about unions paying on seniority instead of skill, but that's exactly how it works in the salaried sector as well.
Job market is stretched. When I wsa a kid, much of these fast food restaurant jobs were handled by part time college or high school students, for extra spending cash. Now it seems most people are older and need the money.
That's just goofy. Though I have worked places where the in-houe recruiters were contractors and they'd also do goofy things to get people past the interview, passing along resumes that clearly weren't a fit for the jobs, and so forth. In every way they'd act like they were paid on commision.
Slashdot Mirror
I had to check TurboTax yesterday, and it asked me to update my password (idiots, I just want to buy the damn thing not have an account). It had those rules. I don't see the point. "12345" is good enough for me here, nothing bad really happens if someone can break in except that they can download copies of the software which doesn't bother me any. Sometimes I'm tempted ot just pick random characters that I forget, then when I need to get back in I'll just click the "I forgot my password" button...
It's even more absurd when it's the most trivial of web sites. To enter a forum for a game for instance and they'll have more complex password rules than E-trade has.
Granted, never use the same password in two places and assume that the password wil be in plain text somewhere for the entire world to see. Beyond that I should be allowed to have a bad password for sites that I don't care about. If it takes me a couple minutes to retrieve my thumbdrive with all the passwords and lock it back up again, then I'm just not going to bother going back to that web site a second time.
I use a Mac at work, but there are various servers around and the password is shared. I think it's Active Directory that handles this. But one day there was a corporate training class given by a third party web site. They sent out the user name and password to use to log into the class. The password was my password from 6 months prior. That is, a third party company knew my private work password.
I was confused by this. OSX I assume uses the BSD style of never storing the actual password, which should be a standard method that anyone with a brain would know. So I can only guess that Microsoft iin their typical ham fisted style actually keeps the actual password around or sends it over the air in a way that it can be extracted, and then IT was able to all send all our passwords to a third party.
If jobs were really up already and the economy was booming then why was there such a big following for Trump by people who were out of work for such a long period of time? I'm not a Trump fan but his basic campaign was "everyone else sucks, I'm the only one who can get your old jobs back". The economy is great for me as an engineer, but it sucks badly for the unskilled laborers, it sucks for union jobs, it is rather lackluster for service jobs, etc.
One company at a time, right. That's incredibly time consuming and negligable. A hundred jobs on day one, a hundred jobs on day two, and so on, does not add up to these numbers. You do not increase job numbers signficantly by doing negotiations through force of personality.
Too bad that Repubicans won't do anything for them either.
Things are cyclical, we always have ups and down. Also the president is not a dictator, there are so many different parts of government involved, and even if taken as a whole government policies are not the biggest factor in the economy. But for some reason people like to point to the current president as the source of all economic movements.
In other words, resurrect Republicans from the 70s and 80s?
Maybe we should give him the Nobel peace prize too, we haven't gotten into any new wars during that month.
So they're like penalty points that you can redeem for stuff you don't want?
Oh ya, google. I spent all day trying to remember that name of the search engine I wanted to use..
An impeachment is for crimes. Merely lying or failling to do the job is not cause for impeachment. Although in practice whether there is an impeachment or not depends upon politics. Both times we've had impeachments there was little chance of them succeeding which makes the goal of political grandstanding more obvious. Nixon didn't get impeached because he resigned, and it was clear to him that the impeachment would succeed.
(and at this point in time, I really miss having Nixon to kick around)
Squirrel!
More like Microsoft uses extra CPU cycles to do the same thing. Seriously I've got the fastest computer I've ever owned at work, and the frigging Outlook on is slow, takes a couple seconds to delete an email. It seems that the faster computers get the slower the applications get.
Maintenance cost of the equipment adds up too.
Become lobbyists where they can barter their lack of skills to others who have a lack of skills.
The machines are expensive. Get a machine cheap enough to replace a few low pay workers and it won't be a very good machine. And the part that is being automated here is negligible. The machines are not carrying in the bags of produce, they're not moving ingredients from the box into the hopper, they're not sweeping the floors, and so forth. All you've done is removed a couple people from the front counter.
Smaller restaurants are an easy business to set up initially. People use the standard grill because it's a commodity workplace piece of equipment, then they hire minimum wage workers (or under) to do a standard job, and the market is anyone on the street. Having to buy an expensive machine makes things much more difficult, and it tends to attract those with higher incomes looking for a new experience (the gadget freaks who love to see technology at their table even if their $5 burger costs $15 because of it).
True, history shows that private industry is corrupt, will break and bend whatever rules it can, and acts against the interests of society. Lack of an arbiter like the government leads to monopolies, low wages, child labor, unsafe workplaces, and so forth. Anyone who thinks the workers as individuals can negotiate fairly with the employers is naive. Most workers can not easily barter their services to a different employer as easily as libertarians seem to imply.
No, that's lower case L libertarians. Upper case L Libertarians believe that a passive rock can do better than a government.
Of course, they will blame it all on only being partially free market. They seem to truly believe that if everything is torn down and we rebuild as pure free market driven by private industry that all will magically work out. Charity just can't handle all the loose ends by itself, we already have such a selfish society that I see people look at me like I was stupid when I mention giving money to charity.
Pay scales are not really logical. Especially at the higher end. People used to bitch about unions paying on seniority instead of skill, but that's exactly how it works in the salaried sector as well.
Job market is stretched. When I wsa a kid, much of these fast food restaurant jobs were handled by part time college or high school students, for extra spending cash. Now it seems most people are older and need the money.
Never underestimate the persistance of a determined idiot.
Problem solved, we're no longer letting Serifs into this country.
That's just goofy. Though I have worked places where the in-houe recruiters were contractors and they'd also do goofy things to get people past the interview, passing along resumes that clearly weren't a fit for the jobs, and so forth. In every way they'd act like they were paid on commision.
I have considered that in the past, having part of the interview basically be a mock code review.