And then, whenever you need your password, just "ask Slashdot"! Of course there will then be some jokers who post incorrect passwords, but they will be modded down rapidly since anyone can check whether the password is correct or not. Just go with the "+5 informative" one.
AFAIK they do have them. They even had extremist imams advocating the destruction of western society and for a while just let them continue unopposed. I don't remember how they finally managed to get them to stop (if they did), but it was quite a scandal.
The US officially has freedom of speech, until they decide not to let you fly on airplanes anymore. And if you say anything that's unacceptable to some fraction of the population, you lose your job. Unfortunately Europe is heading the same way, though.
The bitcoin system doesn't require any particular number of bitcoins. In fact there's no such thing as "a" bitcoin, there's just a network that keeps track of how much everyone has. Bitcoins can currently be subdivided up to 8 decimal places (one bitcoin is 10^8 satoshis) but it just takes a software update to create even smaller units. So even if there's just one tenth of a bitcoin left, fractions of that can still be used just as easily. If you "destroy" bitcoins (by destroying the keys needed to use them), the remaining bitcoins just become worth more.
The only reason why so many bitcoins are created, is as a method of distributing the initial coins. People have to use (some might call it "waste") processing power to be rewarded with new bitcoins, and anyone can mine them. Once enough coins are in circulation, we just keep using those (or what's left of them) like we use ordinary money. Except nobody can create any more.
The idea is that you transfer the coins before the feds can get to them. As they are taking your computers out of the building, someone in the other building transfers the coins to the contingency wallet (which can consist of a piece of paper stored pretty much anywhere). The feds are left with an empty wallet and no way of getting to the funds.
Actually, it's the other way around. From their point of view, they will embrace just fine. From our point of view, they never will.
If you fall into a black hole, outside observers will see you slowing down to a halt, and your watch stopping, before you reach the event horizon. For you, though, time will continue normally and you will cross the event horizon in a finite amount of time.
In fact, depending on what coordinate system you use, black holes may not even exist yet. Every "almost-black-hole" is stuck in time at the stage just before the last bit of matter falls in to make it an actual black hole. But since coordinate systems are inherently subjective, that doesn't really matter.
They didn't actually observe the black holes spiraling towards each other. They're just looking at an image with strangely shaped jets and have come to the logical conclusion that this is what probably happened during the many thousands of years preceding the event we're witnessing now.
Well, time does slow down in the vicinity of a black hole, so they may still be "just about" to embrace, and forever will be from our point of view. Depending on what coordinate system you use, of course.
We can never actually see something cross the event horizon of a black hole, objects will always slow down to a halt before the event horizon (even though from the point of view of the object itself, time continues normally and it crosses the boundary in a finite amount of time). I expect the same is true for black holes collapsing into each other. The whole thing will just appear to freeze.
Galaxies are travelling away from us faster than the speed of light from them can reach us. Aren't they traveling faster than light? Oh, that's expansion... So, if it's space that's moving then the matter doesn't have to travel through space to achieve faster than light speeds.
That's just the result of a weird (put pragmatically practical) definition of space-time coordinates called "co-moving coordinates".
According to the "normal" rules of special relativity, the speed of light relative to us is the same everywhere, there's no such thing as "space itself expanding", and nothing goes faster than light. However, using those same definitions, we are the oldest part of the universe (using our reference system), all distant galaxies moving away from us at high speed are aging more slowly, everything gets more distance-contracted further out, and at a distance equal to the speed of light times the age of the universe, the big bang is only just beginning and time is standing still. Not just because we have to wait for the light to get here, but "right now", correcting for the travel time of light. It's just a result of relativistic time and distance contractions. Other civilisations out there will use themselves as the reference point and will have a similar view centered around them. In fact, we may say that they don't exist yet while they say we don't exist yet and both are correct from their point of view.
However, since that's not a very practical and certainly not an objective model (no matter how correct it is), cosmologists decided to use a different coordinate system. A meter anywhere in the universe is defined as what's measured by a one meter stick that is moving together with the rest of the expanding universe (undoing distance contraction), and time is defined to be the time indicated by local clocks that are also traveling together with the expanding universe (undoing time contraction). The effect is that with this coordinate system, the universe is nicely homogenous, the same age everywhere, truly infinite, and there's no longer anything special about our location.
The downside is that the speed of light is now relative to the local "expanding space", and this space can exand more quickly than the speed of light. There's nothing physical about this "space", it's just a mathematical artefact resulting from the coordinate system we chose.
Very distant objects that exist "now" in the second model, will never be visible to us because their light is trying to get to us on a kind of cosmic conveyor belt moving the other way more rapidly. In the first model, those objects don't exist yet and never will because local time has slowed down to an asymptotic halt. The definition of "now" is just "the collection of events that we happen to have assigned the same time coordinate to", and this depends entirely on the choice of coordinates. There's no such thing as an objective "now". But no matter what coordinates you use, we all agree that we will never see those objects.
Both point of view are "correct", we are just measuring things a bit differently but all conclusions are the same. And no matter what model you use, nothing can ever overtake an actual photon in vacuum. Something at a distance may move faster than a photon here, but that just depends on how we define "time", "distance" and "speed". Nothing actually goes faster than a ray of light at the same location.
Most keyloggers probably just look for sequences of "a few keys - Tab - a few keys - Enter", they have millions of keyloggers out there, are they really going to spend their time looking over logs manually? The automatic detectors will give them plenty of accounts, no need to do 1000 times more work for 10% extra.
Even salted passwords can be cracked easily if they're not strong enough. It takes a little more time, but for passwords like "123456" it will take just a few microseconds, if that.
2) Authentication Questions: the ever popular list of ten questions about things that you did thirty-five years ago, or where there could be multiple possible answers. Where did you meet your spouse? (Which one?) What was the name of your childhood pet? (Again, which one?) What was your favourite TV show at age 13? (Damned if I know.) What was the Zip Code of your Grade Three elementary school?
In other words, my money is secured through the use of a list of questions that any of my Facebook followers could find in about five minutes. Assuming that I ever put anything truthful on Facebook.
Never use a truthful answer for those questions. Just use an extra password as the answer. Of course that doesn't solve the problem of 99% of people actually typing correct answers to those questions, getting hacked, and possibly compromising your information via information they have about you.
Really, these security questions ought to be outlawed rather than required.
Use a password like "pass123word", first type "password", then place the cursor between the fourth and fifth character, then type "123". They'll need something a bit more sophisticated than a simple keylogger to catch those.
I remember many years ago some old version of Mac OS X refused to let you move the cursor in between already typed password characters, I filed a bug report and got "behaves as intended", but fortunately they came to their senses some time afterwards.
Slashdot Mirror
And then, whenever you need your password, just "ask Slashdot"! Of course there will then be some jokers who post incorrect passwords, but they will be modded down rapidly since anyone can check whether the password is correct or not. Just go with the "+5 informative" one.
AFAIK they do have them. They even had extremist imams advocating the destruction of western society and for a while just let them continue unopposed. I don't remember how they finally managed to get them to stop (if they did), but it was quite a scandal.
The US officially has freedom of speech, until they decide not to let you fly on airplanes anymore. And if you say anything that's unacceptable to some fraction of the population, you lose your job. Unfortunately Europe is heading the same way, though.
Oh, that's OK then. Surely we don't want to teach children to respect a partner!
In other words, porn is an ideal lubricant for slopes.
Perhaps the flutes were infested with termites. That might warrant their destruction.
Well, they did have holes in them, so that might explain it.
And then they haven't even started enhancing it yet! We might even get a picture of the LRO reflected in the solar panels.
The bitcoin system doesn't require any particular number of bitcoins. In fact there's no such thing as "a" bitcoin, there's just a network that keeps track of how much everyone has. Bitcoins can currently be subdivided up to 8 decimal places (one bitcoin is 10^8 satoshis) but it just takes a software update to create even smaller units. So even if there's just one tenth of a bitcoin left, fractions of that can still be used just as easily. If you "destroy" bitcoins (by destroying the keys needed to use them), the remaining bitcoins just become worth more.
The only reason why so many bitcoins are created, is as a method of distributing the initial coins. People have to use (some might call it "waste") processing power to be rewarded with new bitcoins, and anyone can mine them. Once enough coins are in circulation, we just keep using those (or what's left of them) like we use ordinary money. Except nobody can create any more.
The idea is that you transfer the coins before the feds can get to them. As they are taking your computers out of the building, someone in the other building transfers the coins to the contingency wallet (which can consist of a piece of paper stored pretty much anywhere). The feds are left with an empty wallet and no way of getting to the funds.
That would be millibitcoin, not micro. Micro means a millionth.
Some exchanges allow you to short bitcoin, or take leveraged positions. Kraken.com, for example.
Now a new character for the Muppets: the Swedish Judge!
It's emulating Windows instead of AmigaOS?
All this is difficult to know for sure. We can hardly go and take a look.
Sure you can! Just too bad you can't get the information back to us.
Actually, it's the other way around. From their point of view, they will embrace just fine. From our point of view, they never will.
If you fall into a black hole, outside observers will see you slowing down to a halt, and your watch stopping, before you reach the event horizon. For you, though, time will continue normally and you will cross the event horizon in a finite amount of time.
In fact, depending on what coordinate system you use, black holes may not even exist yet. Every "almost-black-hole" is stuck in time at the stage just before the last bit of matter falls in to make it an actual black hole. But since coordinate systems are inherently subjective, that doesn't really matter.
They didn't actually observe the black holes spiraling towards each other. They're just looking at an image with strangely shaped jets and have come to the logical conclusion that this is what probably happened during the many thousands of years preceding the event we're witnessing now.
Well, time does slow down in the vicinity of a black hole, so they may still be "just about" to embrace, and forever will be from our point of view. Depending on what coordinate system you use, of course.
We can never actually see something cross the event horizon of a black hole, objects will always slow down to a halt before the event horizon (even though from the point of view of the object itself, time continues normally and it crosses the boundary in a finite amount of time). I expect the same is true for black holes collapsing into each other. The whole thing will just appear to freeze.
Galaxies are travelling away from us faster than the speed of light from them can reach us. Aren't they traveling faster than light? Oh, that's expansion... So, if it's space that's moving then the matter doesn't have to travel through space to achieve faster than light speeds.
That's just the result of a weird (put pragmatically practical) definition of space-time coordinates called "co-moving coordinates".
According to the "normal" rules of special relativity, the speed of light relative to us is the same everywhere, there's no such thing as "space itself expanding", and nothing goes faster than light. However, using those same definitions, we are the oldest part of the universe (using our reference system), all distant galaxies moving away from us at high speed are aging more slowly, everything gets more distance-contracted further out, and at a distance equal to the speed of light times the age of the universe, the big bang is only just beginning and time is standing still. Not just because we have to wait for the light to get here, but "right now", correcting for the travel time of light. It's just a result of relativistic time and distance contractions. Other civilisations out there will use themselves as the reference point and will have a similar view centered around them. In fact, we may say that they don't exist yet while they say we don't exist yet and both are correct from their point of view.
However, since that's not a very practical and certainly not an objective model (no matter how correct it is), cosmologists decided to use a different coordinate system. A meter anywhere in the universe is defined as what's measured by a one meter stick that is moving together with the rest of the expanding universe (undoing distance contraction), and time is defined to be the time indicated by local clocks that are also traveling together with the expanding universe (undoing time contraction). The effect is that with this coordinate system, the universe is nicely homogenous, the same age everywhere, truly infinite, and there's no longer anything special about our location.
The downside is that the speed of light is now relative to the local "expanding space", and this space can exand more quickly than the speed of light. There's nothing physical about this "space", it's just a mathematical artefact resulting from the coordinate system we chose.
Very distant objects that exist "now" in the second model, will never be visible to us because their light is trying to get to us on a kind of cosmic conveyor belt moving the other way more rapidly. In the first model, those objects don't exist yet and never will because local time has slowed down to an asymptotic halt. The definition of "now" is just "the collection of events that we happen to have assigned the same time coordinate to", and this depends entirely on the choice of coordinates. There's no such thing as an objective "now". But no matter what coordinates you use, we all agree that we will never see those objects.
Both point of view are "correct", we are just measuring things a bit differently but all conclusions are the same. And no matter what model you use, nothing can ever overtake an actual photon in vacuum. Something at a distance may move faster than a photon here, but that just depends on how we define "time", "distance" and "speed". Nothing actually goes faster than a ray of light at the same location.
Yep, I was just talking about keyloggers. Plenty of other malware out there, unfortunately.
Most keyloggers probably just look for sequences of "a few keys - Tab - a few keys - Enter", they have millions of keyloggers out there, are they really going to spend their time looking over logs manually? The automatic detectors will give them plenty of accounts, no need to do 1000 times more work for 10% extra.
(I hope)
If people can smash my windows or break my lock to get into my house, why should I bother locking the door?
Even salted passwords can be cracked easily if they're not strong enough. It takes a little more time, but for passwords like "123456" it will take just a few microseconds, if that.
2) Authentication Questions: the ever popular list of ten questions about things that you did thirty-five years ago, or where there could be multiple possible answers. Where did you meet your spouse? (Which one?) What was the name of your childhood pet? (Again, which one?) What was your favourite TV show at age 13? (Damned if I know.) What was the Zip Code of your Grade Three elementary school?
In other words, my money is secured through the use of a list of questions that any of my Facebook followers could find in about five minutes. Assuming that I ever put anything truthful on Facebook.
Never use a truthful answer for those questions. Just use an extra password as the answer. Of course that doesn't solve the problem of 99% of people actually typing correct answers to those questions, getting hacked, and possibly compromising your information via information they have about you.
Really, these security questions ought to be outlawed rather than required.
And you could turn it off without using 2FA?! Seriously?!
Use a password like "pass123word", first type "password", then place the cursor between the fourth and fifth character, then type "123". They'll need something a bit more sophisticated than a simple keylogger to catch those.
I remember many years ago some old version of Mac OS X refused to let you move the cursor in between already typed password characters, I filed a bug report and got "behaves as intended", but fortunately they came to their senses some time afterwards.
O, and make it magnetic too, please!