php is everything, because each time a new technology was hip, they put it into php, without ever thinking if its good design to put everything anyone would ever want to use into the core of a programming language.
So what i want to say: you can use php for programming OO, but it won't be fun.
the problem is, people accept looooooong contracts for websites, which they do not even read. And those who read them, do not fully understand all implications. And you have no option to make a counter-offer, like strike out some paragraphs, make handwritten amendments or something like this.
But just as i said, i suppose Facebook does much "no one will ever know we're doing it, and if somebody finds out we write it into the fineprint and have the retroactive approval".
The Problem with data hogs like facebook is not what you know, what they are doing, but what you do not know, until its too late. You do not get a bad feeling, while they are abusing your data, you will only know it, when they are done with it and you feel the consequences, but then there is no way back. Thats the whole problem with networks where most of the data processing happens in background. you have no idea what they are doing.
thats the way i do it, too. But the default is to have a close button, so i mentioned it that way. anyway... the "load only on click" option is nice to have a fast starting firefox, when you leave your tabs opened, but while normal browsing i just close the unneeded tabs, thats my point.
Lets say, i publish something under these terms, then they change them again. of course they are not allowed to use the old material under the new terms without my consent, but i would assume they do it anyway. 99,99% of all people will not notice, the rest will not sue. And if i would like to sue them for doing so, i do not think there will be a good chance to win against a big corporation like facebook. So, as long as they try to cover it for most of us with new terms and implied consent, there will be never enough users going to court to stop them from changing their mind every other time.
as long as your password generator algorithm finds phrases, which are easier to memorize, it drops entropy, so a cracking-algorithm can use these propertys to shorten the wordlist. so it will not drop this-chicken-tastes-like-shit and not drop "this chicken tastes like shit", but maybe it will drop some combination of spaces/dashes, because it knows, that the generator algorithm knows, that human beings are having more problems to memorize irregular combinations of space/dash delimited words than just memorizing words with all the same delimiter.
of course you can say, the cracker does not know my generator algorithm, but even a cracker which assumes the generator as a black box, can identify by itself which words are more likely to be generated than others and order the wordlist in a way, that the more often generated words are tested first.
it will eventually find the right combination of wordlists as pattern and then the right entries in the wordlists to find "this chicken tastes like shit"
> if you take infinite time nope. there are only countable number of passphrases, independent of the path you enumberate them. so you can find every finite pathphrase even in finite time, only depending on the length of the passphrase. The path used for enumberation is only a constant factor.
okay, as an attacker, i do not have 3000 word dictinary, but a 1000 word verb-dictionary and a 1000 word noun dictionary, maybe 1000 attributes as well. then i generate sentences, which include a verb/noun/attribute ratio, like its common in spoken language, so i will match many phrases, which are like the ones someone who should choose a passPHRASE would make up. lets assume 3 words, then i come from 3000^3 to 1000^3, or more general verbs*nouns*attributes, when the phrase is something like "attribute noun verb". just add an article, but that very little entropy compared to the wordlists, and you get "the brown fox jumps". again some little entropy for the he/she/it s after jump, but thats nothing compared to choosing a word which is more rare.
but... you're not selecting the words at random in a "this chicken tastes like shit" sentence. some easy logic like "only one verb" would reduce the wordlist for the other words a lot
Slashdot Mirror
of course this is no problem, because they do not need to give anything back.
just remember: every file is copyrighted. The difference is, who the copyright holder is.
not to forget AOL and Google
php is everything, because each time a new technology was hip, they put it into php, without ever thinking if its good design to put everything anyone would ever want to use into the core of a programming language.
So what i want to say: you can use php for programming OO, but it won't be fun.
but maybe some erotic texts.
what is POEG the acronym for?
implies, there is no such thing as text-porn
Wikipedia does not host porn, only some nude pictures. no normal person would have any problem with them, if it wasn't for some prude society.
only if you allow fractional scientists
which is a good indicator.
you can rant to me, i am not using facebook and never did. I hope i can resist until facebook is going where myspace went.
the problem is, people accept looooooong contracts for websites, which they do not even read. And those who read them, do not fully understand all implications. And you have no option to make a counter-offer, like strike out some paragraphs, make handwritten amendments or something like this.
But just as i said, i suppose Facebook does much "no one will ever know we're doing it, and if somebody finds out we write it into the fineprint and have the retroactive approval".
The Problem with data hogs like facebook is not what you know, what they are doing, but what you do not know, until its too late. You do not get a bad feeling, while they are abusing your data, you will only know it, when they are done with it and you feel the consequences, but then there is no way back. Thats the whole problem with networks where most of the data processing happens in background. you have no idea what they are doing.
thats the way i do it, too. But the default is to have a close button, so i mentioned it that way. anyway ... the "load only on click" option is nice to have a fast starting firefox, when you leave your tabs opened, but while normal browsing i just close the unneeded tabs, thats my point.
Lets say, i publish something under these terms, then they change them again. of course they are not allowed to use the old material under the new terms without my consent, but i would assume they do it anyway. 99,99% of all people will not notice, the rest will not sue. And if i would like to sue them for doing so, i do not think there will be a good chance to win against a big corporation like facebook.
So, as long as they try to cover it for most of us with new terms and implied consent, there will be never enough users going to court to stop them from changing their mind every other time.
is there some easy option to filter out the sponsored tweets?
Free is not about the price, but about the freedom. And there are other compilers than the microsoft one.
why are you having tabs opened, if you do not use them? just click the little close button.
no, he will not. because no attacker has the time to wait with the gun at the head of the admin for you to log in.
as long as your password generator algorithm finds phrases, which are easier to memorize, it drops entropy, so a cracking-algorithm can use these propertys to shorten the wordlist. so it will not drop this-chicken-tastes-like-shit and not drop "this chicken tastes like shit", but maybe it will drop some combination of spaces/dashes, because it knows, that the generator algorithm knows, that human beings are having more problems to memorize irregular combinations of space/dash delimited words than just memorizing words with all the same delimiter.
of course you can say, the cracker does not know my generator algorithm, but even a cracker which assumes the generator as a black box, can identify by itself which words are more likely to be generated than others and order the wordlist in a way, that the more often generated words are tested first.
of course it would.
just choose a path like this:
nouns
verbs
attributes
noun verb
attribute know verb
[...]
it will eventually find the right combination of wordlists as pattern and then the right entries in the wordlists to find "this chicken tastes like shit"
but now, he's standing before the admin, not before you. Now your hashed password is still as strong as the hash.
> if you take infinite time
nope. there are only countable number of passphrases, independent of the path you enumberate them. so you can find every finite pathphrase even in finite time, only depending on the length of the passphrase. The path used for enumberation is only a constant factor.
okay, as an attacker, i do not have 3000 word dictinary, but a 1000 word verb-dictionary and a 1000 word noun dictionary, maybe 1000 attributes as well.
then i generate sentences, which include a verb/noun/attribute ratio, like its common in spoken language, so i will match many phrases, which are like the ones someone who should choose a passPHRASE would make up. lets assume 3 words, then i come from 3000^3 to 1000^3, or more general verbs*nouns*attributes, when the phrase is something like "attribute noun verb". just add an article, but that very little entropy compared to the wordlists, and you get "the brown fox jumps". again some little entropy for the he/she/it s after jump, but thats nothing compared to choosing a word which is more rare.
because you always need to look at the worst case, because it WILL happen someday.
you forgot the spaces
but ... you're not selecting the words at random in a "this chicken tastes like shit" sentence. some easy logic like "only one verb" would reduce the wordlist for the other words a lot