Length: 30 Strength: Strong - This password is typically good enough to safely guard sensitive information like financial records. Entropy: 115.4 bits Charset Size: 26 characters
Giving each word a Capital letter increases it.
AlligatorTerrorizesNewYorkCity
Length: 30 Strength: Very Strong - More often than not, this level of security is overkill. Entropy: 139.9 bits Charset Size: 52 characters
Assuming computer will use Fake Newspaper Headlines trying to guess a password. More likely, a computer will recognize that it is very long password, and assume that it is uncrackable and move on, not wasting CPU resources on long passwords. And I hadn't really thought of the Alligators in New York City. My original example of a city was Amsterdam but changed it to New York City, thus proving your next point about Agent K!
Entropy is key to a good Password. Increasing the password length is one of the easiest ways to increase entropy in a password. Very few people can remember a password like "Xl5xX8lB4XI5" which would take a single computer about 25 thousand years*
However, using long words "alligatorterrorizesnewyorkcity" would take 22 septillion years*
That being said, I also agree that generating new passwords should be done with a Password Manager, however the first password is always the hardest. Which is why three long seemingly random words is much easier and safer, IMHO.
The problem isn't cleaning up the mess. The problem is throwing away a valuable item when you're cleaning up the mess. This is why I have taught my kids, that if they don't want to throw something away, is to have a place for it, and ALWAYS put it in its rightful place. This creates an Order from which everything else becomes easier.
I've seen shops where everything is left out and never put away. I've seen shops that are nice and neat and everything is in place. Guess which one spends more time looking for things than keeping it straight in the first place.
Here is the crux of the issue. Secrets are only as good as those keeping them. If you take a picture to send to your "boyfriend", you have basically told him a secret. Your secret is only as good as your boyfriend is. And when you dump him (or otherwise), and you no longer trust him, he still has your pictures and posts them up on Girlfriend Revenge (or whatever).
In JLAW's case, her pictures were stored in the cloud. Guess what, the cloud isn't as secure as everyone is wanting. Be it bad protocols, bad passwords, bad whatever. The choice, however, to take naked pics and send them, was the first "bad decision" she made, why? Because the moment she did this, she lost control. Period. The crime ("sex crime") is almost irrelevant to the discussion, because that was simply the means of the escape.
IMHO, bad decisions tend to lead to bad outcomes. "What could possibly go wrong?"
My religion? What, exactly, is my religion? (do you even know?) Do Straw-man Arguments win in your crowd? Or is it religion bashing that works?
People without religion (atheists) have killed more people, (than my religion) just because they are religious (Soviet Union, China), so can I toss all Atheists into the same bucket? And from the sounds of it, you're more likely to side with them (atheism killing people of religion) than with me, who happens to believe ALL life is valuable, and that I don't have to kill anyone in the name of my religion.
Death Panels have already taken place, under Federal rules/regulations. Luckily for the little girl, Sebelius didn't get her wish and the girl survived the death panel (of one).
My dad was part of the Civilian Engineers working state side during WWII (Radiological research aka RADAR at MIT) There simply wasn't that many men stateside, especially during the latter parts of the war. I would suggest to you, that women in IT back then was done partly out of necessity, rather than gender based roles.
He told stories of walking down the streets of Boston and having people look at him funny, as he wasn't in uniform, as if to ask "Why aren't you fighting son?" I can only imagine what it was like seeing very few young men on the streets of America because every one else was off to war.
The problem with "last resort" options is that we will do anything to avoid them, even when we should. Simply because there is no line that has been drawn that says "ENOUGH!"
I have a huge problem with a government that tells me I have to buy a product simply because I am alive. We live in a tyranny, it is just that most people are too afraid to say it. And that says something.
Assholes are assholes, because they don't give a shit about anyone but themselves. These are borderline sociopaths, who love to skirt around the edges and fuck everyone else up, simply because they can. Giving them "geek street cred" for breaking things for the rest of us is not noble cause.
Case in point, your suggestion, just because someone can leach 100% of the bandwidth from a mom n pop WiFi setup, will simply mean that nobody will be able to use it, because the choice of having a BitTorrent client running at the coffee shop screwing everyone, or paying someone to configure and maintain it will mean no wifi at the coffee shop. Which means BitTorrent guy will lose out as well, he is just too stupid to care.
You haven't proven women in IT are being threatened by the IT version of the KKK. And until your post, nobody even suggested that women were being threatened by IT KKK types.
But if you mention Somalia, you'll gain street cred in the Strawman crowd, but only if you do so in the next 30 minutes.
1) Start with yourself. Do you drive? Stop, completely, using any Petrol Products to get anywhere. If you're unwilling to do so, why should I be willing?
2) Ordinary people DO not make a difference. Exceptional people make a difference. And by Exceptional, I mean either the best or worst (the exceptions). Ordinary people follow extraordinary ones, that is what makes them ordinary.
20 years ago, was DotCom bubble. Go back 40 years. If you're going to cast a wide net, cast it all the way back to the start of the industry, watch the bubble come and go, and watch the rise and fall of women in IT.
Selectively picking arbitrary points to compare is lazy insufficient answer.;)
The Second Amendment is the appeals court for the whole Constitution. When the laws and government that is supposed to uphold those laws don't, the last resort is a well armed "victim". So, you're actually wrong, it is an appeals court.
Or maybe, many women want to be treated that way by sociopath predators like Politicians. A lot of women are attracted to power and wealth and tolerate the abuses because it garners them access to their goals, and IT people offer no such attraction or access.
Sorry, but being socially awkward is not a crime, and perpetuating stereotypes of men in IT is just as bad as your claims of sexism in IT. I'll paint you with the same brush you paint others with, nice n broad.
I happen to be in IT, and the women in IT I know are strong healthy and don't let a little social awkwardness affect their view of guys in IT.
I am not anti-feminist, but what I am about to say is likely something they might say. The problem with many Feminists (and others) , is that they cry wolf. And there is a whole group of people that follow after those claims, repeating them ad nausium, long after proven false. Earlier this week, there was a suggestion that we need more women in IT, and it was due to some sort of latent sexism or whatever in the industry. The reality is, IT might have all the women interested in it, and that women aren't really all that interested in IT careers. Crying "sexism in IT" is not helpful in the discussion, and quite frankly, tends to end any discussion. The cry itself is a kind of "troll" comment. It requires no thought, and causes great harm.
Is there sexism in IT? I'm sure there is. Is it endemic to IT? I'm pretty sure it isn't.
It isn't exclusive to women at all. There are plenty of men's lives that have been ruined by false claims of rape. Hell, if I wanted, I could make the same claim about entire races, as Al Sharpton created a fiction that people STILL believe to this day, which was proven false a long time ago.
Trolling is easy because WE (all of us) want to believe the worst in humanity. Humanity is flawed, often terribly so. But we are also exceptional. And often, we are both, at the same time.
People who don't think that is threatening, should post their own SS#, Address, Children's names on a picture on the internet and see what happens. I mean, if there is no threat, what are they afraid of?
Just to be sure we're talking about the same "choice", I see that Sweden has two or three Cable providers. The idea of a Cable provider going to COLO facility is crazy, unless they are splitting available Cable frequencies. To be honest, it looks like the "choice" is pathetic even if it does what I suggested. Then I look at the number of Cable Channels offered and I think I currently have more shopping channels those cable providers carry (slightly sarcastic). the number of channels is pathetic.
Which is, exactly what I would expect from Socialistic monopolies.
No, Sweden doesn't do what I suggested. Not even close, in practice or in principle. I suspect that my idea of "choice" is really alien to Scandinavians, who are used to their two (or three) crappy choices and think they're awesome.
Finland MIGHT be what I expect, however, I suspect that there are just a number of small city/regional cable companies.
Slashdot Mirror
Length: 30
Strength: Strong - This password is typically good enough to safely guard sensitive information like financial records.
Entropy: 115.4 bits
Charset Size: 26 characters
Giving each word a Capital letter increases it.
AlligatorTerrorizesNewYorkCity
Length: 30
Strength: Very Strong - More often than not, this level of security is overkill.
Entropy: 139.9 bits
Charset Size: 52 characters
Assuming computer will use Fake Newspaper Headlines trying to guess a password. More likely, a computer will recognize that it is very long password, and assume that it is uncrackable and move on, not wasting CPU resources on long passwords. And I hadn't really thought of the Alligators in New York City. My original example of a city was Amsterdam but changed it to New York City, thus proving your next point about Agent K!
Thanks!
Berma Shave!
qwerty7890
Short Passwords lengths ARE useful, to learn how to avoid bad websites!
Sites that limit password lengths are also skimping on other security.
Entropy is key to a good Password. Increasing the password length is one of the easiest ways to increase entropy in a password. Very few people can remember a password like "Xl5xX8lB4XI5" which would take a single computer about 25 thousand years*
However, using long words "alligatorterrorizesnewyorkcity" would take 22 septillion years*
* according to https://howsecureismypassword....
That being said, I also agree that generating new passwords should be done with a Password Manager, however the first password is always the hardest. Which is why three long seemingly random words is much easier and safer, IMHO.
The problem isn't cleaning up the mess. The problem is throwing away a valuable item when you're cleaning up the mess. This is why I have taught my kids, that if they don't want to throw something away, is to have a place for it, and ALWAYS put it in its rightful place. This creates an Order from which everything else becomes easier.
I've seen shops where everything is left out and never put away. I've seen shops that are nice and neat and everything is in place. Guess which one spends more time looking for things than keeping it straight in the first place.
Here is the crux of the issue. Secrets are only as good as those keeping them. If you take a picture to send to your "boyfriend", you have basically told him a secret. Your secret is only as good as your boyfriend is. And when you dump him (or otherwise), and you no longer trust him, he still has your pictures and posts them up on Girlfriend Revenge (or whatever).
In JLAW's case, her pictures were stored in the cloud. Guess what, the cloud isn't as secure as everyone is wanting. Be it bad protocols, bad passwords, bad whatever. The choice, however, to take naked pics and send them, was the first "bad decision" she made, why? Because the moment she did this, she lost control. Period. The crime ("sex crime") is almost irrelevant to the discussion, because that was simply the means of the escape.
IMHO, bad decisions tend to lead to bad outcomes. "What could possibly go wrong?"
"I cannot explain the OP's experience, as it runs completely counter to mine."
I can explain. I'd rather not have to. But it basically comes down to (IMHO), "I don't know how to Gmail"
My religion? What, exactly, is my religion? (do you even know?) Do Straw-man Arguments win in your crowd? Or is it religion bashing that works?
People without religion (atheists) have killed more people, (than my religion) just because they are religious (Soviet Union, China), so can I toss all Atheists into the same bucket? And from the sounds of it, you're more likely to side with them (atheism killing people of religion) than with me, who happens to believe ALL life is valuable, and that I don't have to kill anyone in the name of my religion.
Death Panels have already taken place, under Federal rules/regulations. Luckily for the little girl, Sebelius didn't get her wish and the girl survived the death panel (of one).
http://www.lifenews.com/2013/0...
I would suggest, next time, before you mouth off, to actually know what the hell you're talking about, because you're really looking stupid right now.
My dad was part of the Civilian Engineers working state side during WWII (Radiological research aka RADAR at MIT) There simply wasn't that many men stateside, especially during the latter parts of the war. I would suggest to you, that women in IT back then was done partly out of necessity, rather than gender based roles.
He told stories of walking down the streets of Boston and having people look at him funny, as he wasn't in uniform, as if to ask "Why aren't you fighting son?" I can only imagine what it was like seeing very few young men on the streets of America because every one else was off to war.
The problem with "last resort" options is that we will do anything to avoid them, even when we should. Simply because there is no line that has been drawn that says "ENOUGH!"
I have a huge problem with a government that tells me I have to buy a product simply because I am alive. We live in a tyranny, it is just that most people are too afraid to say it. And that says something.
Assholes are assholes, because they don't give a shit about anyone but themselves. These are borderline sociopaths, who love to skirt around the edges and fuck everyone else up, simply because they can. Giving them "geek street cred" for breaking things for the rest of us is not noble cause.
Case in point, your suggestion, just because someone can leach 100% of the bandwidth from a mom n pop WiFi setup, will simply mean that nobody will be able to use it, because the choice of having a BitTorrent client running at the coffee shop screwing everyone, or paying someone to configure and maintain it will mean no wifi at the coffee shop. Which means BitTorrent guy will lose out as well, he is just too stupid to care.
You haven't proven women in IT are being threatened by the IT version of the KKK. And until your post, nobody even suggested that women were being threatened by IT KKK types.
But if you mention Somalia, you'll gain street cred in the Strawman crowd, but only if you do so in the next 30 minutes.
1) Start with yourself. Do you drive? Stop, completely, using any Petrol Products to get anywhere. If you're unwilling to do so, why should I be willing?
2) Ordinary people DO not make a difference. Exceptional people make a difference. And by Exceptional, I mean either the best or worst (the exceptions). Ordinary people follow extraordinary ones, that is what makes them ordinary.
Thank you, but I think that makes my case about last mile being the problem, not regulation. Competition solves many problems.
20 years ago, was DotCom bubble. Go back 40 years. If you're going to cast a wide net, cast it all the way back to the start of the industry, watch the bubble come and go, and watch the rise and fall of women in IT.
Selectively picking arbitrary points to compare is lazy insufficient answer. ;)
The Second Amendment is the appeals court for the whole Constitution. When the laws and government that is supposed to uphold those laws don't, the last resort is a well armed "victim". So, you're actually wrong, it is an appeals court.
Or maybe, many women want to be treated that way by sociopath predators like Politicians. A lot of women are attracted to power and wealth and tolerate the abuses because it garners them access to their goals, and IT people offer no such attraction or access.
Sorry, but being socially awkward is not a crime, and perpetuating stereotypes of men in IT is just as bad as your claims of sexism in IT. I'll paint you with the same brush you paint others with, nice n broad.
I happen to be in IT, and the women in IT I know are strong healthy and don't let a little social awkwardness affect their view of guys in IT.
I am not anti-feminist, but what I am about to say is likely something they might say. The problem with many Feminists (and others) , is that they cry wolf. And there is a whole group of people that follow after those claims, repeating them ad nausium, long after proven false. Earlier this week, there was a suggestion that we need more women in IT, and it was due to some sort of latent sexism or whatever in the industry. The reality is, IT might have all the women interested in it, and that women aren't really all that interested in IT careers. Crying "sexism in IT" is not helpful in the discussion, and quite frankly, tends to end any discussion. The cry itself is a kind of "troll" comment. It requires no thought, and causes great harm.
Is there sexism in IT? I'm sure there is. Is it endemic to IT? I'm pretty sure it isn't.
It isn't exclusive to women at all. There are plenty of men's lives that have been ruined by false claims of rape. Hell, if I wanted, I could make the same claim about entire races, as Al Sharpton created a fiction that people STILL believe to this day, which was proven false a long time ago.
Trolling is easy because WE (all of us) want to believe the worst in humanity. Humanity is flawed, often terribly so. But we are also exceptional. And often, we are both, at the same time.
People who don't think that is threatening, should post their own SS#, Address, Children's names on a picture on the internet and see what happens. I mean, if there is no threat, what are they afraid of?
Possibly. Though I don't think liberals want to watch much of Joel Osteen. ;)
Just to be sure we're talking about the same "choice", I see that Sweden has two or three Cable providers. The idea of a Cable provider going to COLO facility is crazy, unless they are splitting available Cable frequencies. To be honest, it looks like the "choice" is pathetic even if it does what I suggested. Then I look at the number of Cable Channels offered and I think I currently have more shopping channels those cable providers carry (slightly sarcastic). the number of channels is pathetic.
Which is, exactly what I would expect from Socialistic monopolies.
No, Sweden doesn't do what I suggested. Not even close, in practice or in principle. I suspect that my idea of "choice" is really alien to Scandinavians, who are used to their two (or three) crappy choices and think they're awesome.
Finland MIGHT be what I expect, however, I suspect that there are just a number of small city/regional cable companies.
And from this list, "No" the countries you listed do not do what I suggested. Not even close. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...
Because small monoculture Scandinavian countries are the same as the Melting pot of the world that has a multicultural world view.