Vendor of X does a study showing that people would be safer using X.
The easiest way to create and remember strong passwords is with a password manager, like Dashlane, which generates unique passwords for you, saves them to your account, and autofills them online.
Seriously, it's time to rethink passwords because if you don't like that I write all this shit down in a spreadsheet that I print out and stuff in a binder, well, it beats the other guys post-its on their monitors.
NOT ON THE COMPUTER!
For work passwords, WRITE them down (pen) on a piece of paper and keep that piece of paper in your wallet.
For home passwords, WRITE them down and then that piece of paper like any other important piece of paper for your home.
If you do it on the computer you do not know that the system has not saved it to a temp file or something that a cracker will find.
People who will physically break into your house and steal your computer are a different threat than people who will break into your computer via the Internet. Protections against one will not help against the other.
Think of the chores that need doing around your house: would you rather have a specialized robot for each task, or a humanoid robot than can do all, even assist in 2 man jobs like putting up a shed?
That does not require a humanoid robot. A spider-type robot would probably be more effective.
And why not have a specialized robot for each task? You don't see too many hybrid microwave oven/vacuum cleaner/cars do you? Why build a general purpose robot that needs a vacuum cleaner so it can clean the house? You're back to buying individual machines AND a machine to operate them.
Is it slow because there's a lot of data in total being transferred, or does CSMA just collapse (gridlock) so hardly anybody is getting anything?
Usually it is because of data. But not necessarily that simple.
You can see 16 SSID's but if no one is transmitting traffic right then then there shouldn't be a problem.
If someone else is transmitting data then it depends whether he is on the same channel as you (or one that overlaps yours). With the 2.4GHz range there are only 3 channels that don't conflict/overlap each other. 1, 6 and 11. If he's not on your channel then there shouldn't be a problem.
Finally, if he is transmitting and he is on your channel then the issue is whether he's using enough broadcast power to cause problems with your communications. Basically, a WiFi channel is the same as a bunch of people sitting in a room and yelling whenever they want something. The more broadcast power, the louder he's yelling. And most people crank their systems up to max power if that's an option.
There is also another possibility. Anything that uses electricity can generate radio frequency "noise". Such as a microwave oven. Which can also cause problems with WiFi transmission.
So the easiest way would be to set up a fake access point with graphics stolen from Comcast's real site and then collect the usernames/passwords from people who are trying to connect to it.
Then use those to login to other Comcast sites and do whatever evil you want to.
The best part is that the poor person whom you're framing will have a more difficult time clearing his name because the evil activity happening in his name is happening in his city.
So prison is "easy" it's just that you don't want to do the time?
Apparently you have problems with English as well as with math. Whether something is "hard" is independent of whether you want to do it or not.
Whether something is "easy" is independent of whether you want to do it or not.
Not wanting to do it *does* make it "hard".
No it does not. As I've already pointed out. YOU might say that 100 addition problems are "hard" because YOU do not want to do them. But a child could do them in 10 minutes.
So your usage of "hard" would include things that an 8 year old child could do in 10 minutes.
The problem is that some people may never master these low-level computations due to undiagnosed cognitive disabilities (i.e. discalculia or problems with working memory) and this content is being used as a gate-keeper to higher-level mathematics which the person could potentially master with appropriate support.
Yes. And that is why the tasks should be used to identify those who have not mastered the concepts instead of just to assign a grade.
That way the reason(s) why the person had a problem can be checked.
It's the same as if a teacher were to fail a person with dyslexia because she couldn't keep up with a reading assignment.
When I started being home-schooled (for health reasons, not religious reasons), my Mom bought Saxon math books. They may still have a large number of problems, e.g. 100, but they mix up old types of math problems with newly learned types. That way I didn't forget old learning and I was less bored, while still learning new material.
Why would you forget addition if you were doing multiplication?
I disagree completely. Repetition leads to boredom. Boredom leads to difficulty concentrating. Difficulty concentrating makes it hard.
So you are saying that you would have trouble completing 100 addition problems right now because it would be "hard" for you? A task that a child could complete in 10 minutes.
Doing the same thing 100x is only "simple but hard" if you can actually do it accurately.
I agree. But I disagree with TFA's comment about "simple but hard".
Repetitive != Hard
Once you understand the concepts then doing 100 problems is no more difficult than doing 10. It just takes 10x longer to finish them all.
And that is the purpose of assigning a large number of tasks. Someone who does NOT understand the concept can work through 10 problems in an hour. Someone who DOES understand the concepts can do 10 problems in a minute.
So the 100 problem task is used to find those who did not finish because they did not have time because they did not understand the concepts.
Any teacher handing that out to someone who can already do it isn't doing their job properly.
Yes. Once they've completed the 100 problem task the first time they've shown that they've mastered the concepts so they can move on.
But we've become so focused on getting a grade (A, B, C...) for doing the work that we've lost sight of WHY we were doing the work in the first place.
You would give up the limited time for teaching needed information in the programming class to teach the tools.
If the tools take that much teaching then you've chosen the wrong tools. They should be 15 minutes at the most (with a handout on how to install them).
Knowing how to set up a web server is not important. Almost all the web programmers I have worked with couldn't set up a server and never needed to because there is someone like me whose job is doing that.
At which point you're getting into the "magic" aspect of a "science" degree. Their code will be running on a web server or in a web browser. There is no reason why they should not know the basics of setting up both.
Particularly when their code might depend upon a specific module being loaded on the web server.
Chances are those classes you think should be dumped are required by the certifying authority for this to qualify for an AAS.
A class on Algebra? Again, make it a prerequisite to the program. Use the slot to add another database program.
Many of the classes will be for people new to programming, so programming tools, etc. will be needed.
They won't be much use outside of a programming class. So don't spend time on them by themselves. Teach the IDE and github or whatever within the class itself.
The idea being to provide the students with as great a depth of knowledge in the core technologies as possible.
There is no need for a basic web server admin class.
I disagree. If the program is about how to write code for the Web then knowing how to set up part of the Web is important.
Screw all that CompSci crap - we don't use it in 99.9% of our code.
It's not whether you use it in your code.
CompSci teaches you the fundamentals that AJAX and JSON and such are built upon. That way you know what the alternatives are and what their strengths/weaknesses are.
The problem I see with that is that you don't have enough tech.
You have 5 courses that I would consider "electives". English I and English II being examples of such.
You have 5 "intro" courses.
Which leaves 3 stages of web development and 1 stage of database... whatever. You have more electives than core.
Which leaves a basic math class and a project class. Dump the math class. If they don't have it already they can make it up outside of that program. Add another database class.
Also dump the "programming tools" class. They can pick that up in their programming classes. Add a class on basic web server administration. Install Apache and add modules and read logs. Install IIS and so forth.
So, why do many of us perceive Whole Foods and the Creation Museum so differently?
Maybe it is because the stuff the author finds objectionable is just a segment of the stuff available there? But the Creation Museum is 100% about creationism.
Can anyone with deeper understanding explain this?
Stop being so modest. You've already hit the important issues.
But if I may add to your post. Getting ACCESS over-the-air to do any of that requires 1 of 3 situations:
1. A "back door" installed by the vendor. That is an account (username/password) that is, SUPPOSEDLY, only known by the vendor. That gives root access. This varies from vendor to vendor and product to product. So anything based upon this would only be able to hit WiFi routers A, B & C from vendor X. Not a real risk.
2. A vulnerability in a running service that can be exploited to get root access. Again, this varies from vendor to vendor and product to product. So anything based upon this would only be able to hit WiFi routers A, B & C from vendor X. Not a real risk.
3. The victim changing what is usually a DEFAULT setting NOT to allow over-the-air root access. And then using a password that is crackable in less than X years. This seems to be what the paper is describing.
And then a LOT of WiFi routers within communication range of each other, all with scenario #3 (although different passwords). So that one cracked WiFi router can run a process (remember, hacked firmware) to find the password of another such router.
So, yeah, you had it right.
I'd say that there isn't really any way that this could work anywhere except in a lab. As a very badly designed "experiment".
Worms hop from system to system without the need for any human interaction. They exploit vulnerabilities in services listening on ports. Worms need a network.
A virus infects other files with copies of itself. But an uninfected machine still needs someone to run one of those files on the uninfected machine to infect the uninfected machine.
Viruses are a lot less common now. Mostly you see trojans and worms and "blended" threats that are a mix of trojans and worms.
Say you have a company that markets itself as a christian tour group that visits holy sites important to that faith. Can they refuse a group of staunch atheists out of fear that they might ruin the expensive trip for the other customers?
No. Because that "fear" is unsubstantiated with that group of atheists. The same as if they refused a group of blacks "out of fear that they might ruin the expensive trip for the other customers".
Fox favors conservatives, MSNBC favors liberals. BET favors black entertainers. Businesses have biases.
Liberals can watch Fox. Conservatives can watch MSNBC. So that is not the same as NOT providing a service to a class of people.
Businesses have markets. Markets are not biases. The people who own the business have biases. They cannot let their biases influence which classes of people they will serve.
You can hold whatever beliefs you want in private. And you have the right to publicly speak about those beliefs. And you have the right to freely congregate with others who also hold those beliefs.
2. The freedom not to be forced to do X.
No one is telling you that you have to congregate with blacks / gays / whatever in private.
BUT, once you open a PUBLIC business then you must treat all classes of people the same regardless of what your PRIVATE beliefs are.
Segregationists weren't practicing a right.
Yes they were. It was legal for them to do so. And a lot of black people were injured and killed in fighting to change those laws.
No. It would be similar to allowing restaurants to refuse to serve black customers.
This is not about business. It is about the personal beliefs and prejudices of the person owning that business. Those beliefs are not the same as business.
They'd have to contract it done, probably by the same company that would have done it anyway.
The first problem with that is that it is not being done "anyway". The ISP's are not putting in new connections.
The second problem is who owns the pipes once they are installed. If a private company owns then then there is the same problem again.
If the government owns them then there can be competition.
Just as with the government putting in roads. It doesn't matter which delivery company runs on the roads. The government supplies the infrastructure (via taxes) and the competition competes on services.
Slashdot Mirror
Vendor of X does a study showing that people would be safer using X.
NOT ON THE COMPUTER!
For work passwords, WRITE them down (pen) on a piece of paper and keep that piece of paper in your wallet.
For home passwords, WRITE them down and then that piece of paper like any other important piece of paper for your home.
If you do it on the computer you do not know that the system has not saved it to a temp file or something that a cracker will find.
People who will physically break into your house and steal your computer are a different threat than people who will break into your computer via the Internet. Protections against one will not help against the other.
That does not require a humanoid robot. A spider-type robot would probably be more effective.
And why not have a specialized robot for each task? You don't see too many hybrid microwave oven/vacuum cleaner/cars do you? Why build a general purpose robot that needs a vacuum cleaner so it can clean the house? You're back to buying individual machines AND a machine to operate them.
Usually it is because of data. But not necessarily that simple.
You can see 16 SSID's but if no one is transmitting traffic right then then there shouldn't be a problem.
If someone else is transmitting data then it depends whether he is on the same channel as you (or one that overlaps yours). With the 2.4GHz range there are only 3 channels that don't conflict/overlap each other. 1, 6 and 11. If he's not on your channel then there shouldn't be a problem.
Finally, if he is transmitting and he is on your channel then the issue is whether he's using enough broadcast power to cause problems with your communications. Basically, a WiFi channel is the same as a bunch of people sitting in a room and yelling whenever they want something. The more broadcast power, the louder he's yelling. And most people crank their systems up to max power if that's an option.
There is also another possibility. Anything that uses electricity can generate radio frequency "noise". Such as a microwave oven. Which can also cause problems with WiFi transmission.
All of the WiFi routers (access points) would be under central control for things like assigning them to specific channels.
But the "owner" (student) of the router will get to set things like SSID and QoS and such.
So the easiest way would be to set up a fake access point with graphics stolen from Comcast's real site and then collect the usernames/passwords from people who are trying to connect to it.
Then use those to login to other Comcast sites and do whatever evil you want to.
The best part is that the poor person whom you're framing will have a more difficult time clearing his name because the evil activity happening in his name is happening in his city.
Apparently you have problems with English as well as with math. Whether something is "hard" is independent of whether you want to do it or not.
Whether something is "easy" is independent of whether you want to do it or not.
No it does not. As I've already pointed out. YOU might say that 100 addition problems are "hard" because YOU do not want to do them. But a child could do them in 10 minutes.
So your usage of "hard" would include things that an 8 year old child could do in 10 minutes.
Yes. And that is why the tasks should be used to identify those who have not mastered the concepts instead of just to assign a grade.
That way the reason(s) why the person had a problem can be checked.
It's the same as if a teacher were to fail a person with dyslexia because she couldn't keep up with a reading assignment.
And I think that that says everything that needs to be said on the subject.
It's not that it is "hard" it is that you do not want to do it.
Why would you forget addition if you were doing multiplication?
So you are saying that you would have trouble completing 100 addition problems right now because it would be "hard" for you? A task that a child could complete in 10 minutes.
I agree. But I disagree with TFA's comment about "simple but hard".
Repetitive != Hard
Once you understand the concepts then doing 100 problems is no more difficult than doing 10. It just takes 10x longer to finish them all.
And that is the purpose of assigning a large number of tasks. Someone who does NOT understand the concept can work through 10 problems in an hour. Someone who DOES understand the concepts can do 10 problems in a minute.
So the 100 problem task is used to find those who did not finish because they did not have time because they did not understand the concepts.
Yes. Once they've completed the 100 problem task the first time they've shown that they've mastered the concepts so they can move on.
But we've become so focused on getting a grade (A, B, C ...) for doing the work that we've lost sight of WHY we were doing the work in the first place.
If the tools take that much teaching then you've chosen the wrong tools. They should be 15 minutes at the most (with a handout on how to install them).
At which point you're getting into the "magic" aspect of a "science" degree. Their code will be running on a web server or in a web browser. There is no reason why they should not know the basics of setting up both.
Particularly when their code might depend upon a specific module being loaded on the web server.
A class on Algebra? Again, make it a prerequisite to the program. Use the slot to add another database program.
They won't be much use outside of a programming class. So don't spend time on them by themselves. Teach the IDE and github or whatever within the class itself.
The idea being to provide the students with as great a depth of knowledge in the core technologies as possible.
I disagree. If the program is about how to write code for the Web then knowing how to set up part of the Web is important.
It's not whether you use it in your code.
CompSci teaches you the fundamentals that AJAX and JSON and such are built upon. That way you know what the alternatives are and what their strengths/weaknesses are.
The problem I see with that is that you don't have enough tech.
You have 5 courses that I would consider "electives". English I and English II being examples of such.
You have 5 "intro" courses.
Which leaves 3 stages of web development and 1 stage of database ... whatever. You have more electives than core.
Which leaves a basic math class and a project class. Dump the math class. If they don't have it already they can make it up outside of that program. Add another database class.
Also dump the "programming tools" class. They can pick that up in their programming classes. Add a class on basic web server administration. Install Apache and add modules and read logs. Install IIS and so forth.
I agree. And this is stupid.
From the summary:
Maybe it is because the stuff the author finds objectionable is just a segment of the stuff available there? But the Creation Museum is 100% about creationism.
That's the way I'm reading it. The hacked firmware does BOTH. It still acts as a WiFi router so it isn't discovered.
But it ALSO acts as a client to connect to another WiFi router.
And it runs a new process to crack the password to that router's Over-the-Air root access.
And some means of uploading the hacked firmware to the newly cracked router.
Stop being so modest. You've already hit the important issues.
But if I may add to your post. Getting ACCESS over-the-air to do any of that requires 1 of 3 situations:
1. A "back door" installed by the vendor. That is an account (username/password) that is, SUPPOSEDLY, only known by the vendor. That gives root access. This varies from vendor to vendor and product to product. So anything based upon this would only be able to hit WiFi routers A, B & C from vendor X. Not a real risk.
2. A vulnerability in a running service that can be exploited to get root access. Again, this varies from vendor to vendor and product to product. So anything based upon this would only be able to hit WiFi routers A, B & C from vendor X. Not a real risk.
3. The victim changing what is usually a DEFAULT setting NOT to allow over-the-air root access. And then using a password that is crackable in less than X years. This seems to be what the paper is describing.
And then a LOT of WiFi routers within communication range of each other, all with scenario #3 (although different passwords). So that one cracked WiFi router can run a process (remember, hacked firmware) to find the password of another such router.
So, yeah, you had it right.
I'd say that there isn't really any way that this could work anywhere except in a lab. As a very badly designed "experiment".
Worms hop from system to system without the need for any human interaction. They exploit vulnerabilities in services listening on ports. Worms need a network.
A virus infects other files with copies of itself. But an uninfected machine still needs someone to run one of those files on the uninfected machine to infect the uninfected machine.
Viruses are a lot less common now. Mostly you see trojans and worms and "blended" threats that are a mix of trojans and worms.
My problems with TFA are:
1. Are they being paid by the word because they're throwing massive amounts of bullshit into it.
2.
That would be a "worm". Not a "virus". And a worm that attacks WiFi routers is NOT new.
And there have been lawsuits against them for exactly that reason.
http://www.seattlepi.com/lifestyle/article/So-far-women-only-gyms-are-allowed-by-the-courts-1133532.php
We still have women-only bathrooms. We still have some women-only sports teams.
No. Because that "fear" is unsubstantiated with that group of atheists. The same as if they refused a group of blacks "out of fear that they might ruin the expensive trip for the other customers".
Liberals can watch Fox. Conservatives can watch MSNBC. So that is not the same as NOT providing a service to a class of people.
Businesses have markets. Markets are not biases. The people who own the business have biases. They cannot let their biases influence which classes of people they will serve.
1. The freedom to do X.
You can hold whatever beliefs you want in private. And you have the right to publicly speak about those beliefs. And you have the right to freely congregate with others who also hold those beliefs.
2. The freedom not to be forced to do X.
No one is telling you that you have to congregate with blacks / gays / whatever in private.
BUT, once you open a PUBLIC business then you must treat all classes of people the same regardless of what your PRIVATE beliefs are.
Yes they were. It was legal for them to do so. And a lot of black people were injured and killed in fighting to change those laws.
No. It would be similar to allowing restaurants to refuse to serve black customers.
This is not about business. It is about the personal beliefs and prejudices of the person owning that business. Those beliefs are not the same as business.
The first problem with that is that it is not being done "anyway". The ISP's are not putting in new connections.
The second problem is who owns the pipes once they are installed. If a private company owns then then there is the same problem again.
If the government owns them then there can be competition.
Just as with the government putting in roads. It doesn't matter which delivery company runs on the roads. The government supplies the infrastructure (via taxes) and the competition competes on services.