I advocate passphrases for their reduced burden. Increased complexity will statistically cause a variety of other behaviors. Any low entropy (patternlike) behavior can be emulated, and we spent 10-20 years teaching poorly, increasing the complexity tax for tiny entropy gains.
superman is weak. We get that. Superman1! is just as weak. Fuck everything that has ever suggested otherwise. $up3rm@n is almost as bad. zxcvbnm is not strong. Neither is qrafzvwtsgxb. We see what you did there. Obviously, anything using those patterns is a form of low entropy, with days numbered.
rrrybgdtsmmmmlibad is a nursery rhyme and adds zero (mental recall) burden. Does your kid like Bob the Builder and Spongebob? cwfiwliap. These even dominate the brain tax required by correcthorsebatterystaple, which is frankly a four-letter password in a bigger alphabet, begging for pwning.
It's possible that futuristic tech can be powered by mass dumps (probably lifted from google) of our written text (such that iwtbotiwtwot from dickens or tbontbtitq from shakespeare become weak) but phrases are likely to lean on personal interests, contemporary events/pop culture. Leverage a single unfolding point of mental recall for your brain, not a pile of them. Which are adhering to a heap of rules that will only yield brief, first-derivative resilience.
>dont LIKE IT? DONT buy the product. Yeah. Think about THAT next time, ShanghaiBill.
Think about your onerous "I don't like laptops made with shitty keyboard design" expectation next time you buy a laptop that says Shitty Keyboard on the box.
Oh wait, that made zero sense. Wow, what kind of dumbfuck would think it did?
> helpfully provided a void that you can scream into while they do whatever they were going to do anyway This is EXACTLY what a lot of businesses intentionally pay for. To be inaccessible while pretending they are. To be insulated from the second party. Never had a job as a phone jockey?
Not that your job has to be exclusively about it. A secretary has duties besides being interference.
>The people who have "cellphone addictions" really wont use any of these features
And it's really not a good idea to force otherwise, at the consumer level.
If you'd like more forceful interference on product operation, you want to legislate higher than a vendor, who sells multi-nationally anyway.
Either demand their products are designed differently in your particular locale (ie our country is a snowflake) or, if you're designating a category of people, formally define the affliction and that anyone afflicted is subject to whatever terms you desire.
Don't fake outrage over an opt-in, because a courtesy offering is the most you can impose. If you want civic imposition, use civic channels.
I'm not putting a political lean on this post. I'm not offering an opinion on whether your "X is allowed to purchase/use" or "N hours per week" restriction on [certain] citizens is rational or not. My intent is to make it clear where you would mandate that from, mandate upon citizens of $nation.
When countries have congressmen/equivalent that pretend they can control the internet as part of their endless life of posturing, the correct answer is to move them off the adult table and block them.
Repeat until they decide they want to sit at the grown-up's table again, instead of playing Imaginary Level Of Reach And Obligations.
It will take little time for people to write OS/browser tools for performing automated captures when the "open this webpage for the 'email' to be viewed" prompt is seen.
Those AAA studios are 1) Redirecting their resources towards said lucrativity ("it's just good business")(konami/squeenix are especially transparent about the redirecting) 2) Taking advantage of the culture shift to dilute AAA titles
"GTA V has made more money than any book, film, record or video game ever released." That's great, right? Studios will be willing to front millions to refine quality titles, right?
A lot of that was due to the $500M that has flowed out of the GTA:O freemium MMO. Studios don't want to front millions, they want to drop $10,000 on a few interns for a weekend and try to be the next Flappy Bird.
That's (1). The (2) is all the game-compromising practices that are bleeding into the AAA games. $500M coming out of a thin crew and mediocre servers is a very loud data point and you better fucking believe RDR2 is going to show it. It won't be lootboxes, but only an idiot thinks they're the only way.
Room enough for both? No, the quarters are cramped and the disease is contagious.
>and advertisers are more capricious than they had hoped
Like when a C-level sees the latest shiny and buys 1000 of them. All it takes is one email in the right place.
The hawkers know this well. For either of these topics. But I don't have enough inklings to guess if censorcreep around nootropic vids would be financially or politically driven.
> they endanger the digital publishing of news stories
So do eyelids. You can offer whatever content you want. That's it. That's all you can do online: Offer. Whether it's a credential-restricted content (ie premium) or simply open pages, the viewer decides whether to access. The viewer decides whether to subscribe, literally (paywall) or figuratively. Can't force buyers, can't force viewers.
Whether the selective mechanism is eyeballs or software is irrelevant.
Normally the remarks are "users will still tunnel to it" but it's a good laugh that they're still upright out in the open. And I hope it stays that way, if only as a reminder that decentralization means a resistance to being killed.
"If you're blocked from information, the block isn't for your sake." is a solid enough axiom to start from.
It may not necessarily be malicious, but it can be assumed (fuck off citationboy) to serve the other side of the table. Sealed judgements, sealed transcripts, sealed devices, sealed software. If something happens behind closed doors without you, that's a disadvantage, big or small.
Conversely, the power to conceal is always an advantage, big or trivial. It's optional for fuck's sake. You control it.
While intentionally staying blind to the ocean of databases we've been swimming in for 50 years. Their form, their technical structure may have changed over the decades, but we've been compiling since we learned how to make electronics store data.
Granted, it's an invisible ocean, and it's impossible to mentally picture in any detail. Thank god it's all a pile of christmas wire, spaghetti, incompatible with each other, held by actors with no intrinsic incentive to meld. Cars have VINs but there's no master DB, just connected pools, often poorly. But every year this majestic and mighty clusterfuck surrounding our 21st century lives, that absolute king of all katamari blobs, becomes slightly more compatible with itself.
I'd be happy if people just understood that logging =/= monitoring. No, "google" (FBI, etc) isn't watching your porn tastes. But their algorithm is.
A server openly offering files is more like reading your browser history after it became stapled to the town noticeboard. Whether you "accidentally" stapled it or another actor did is also immaterial.
GP went too far in assuming that no security = no designation = morally in the wild. I would accept that a "this document is restricted to [dept] eyes only" stamp qualifies. But that's my moral opinion - an insurance policy could accuse you of having effectively released the information. And that accusation would hold in court.
Data is a contagion. Knowledge is either quarantined or In The Wild. If you or a group wants to behave like you own information, it'll need to be in the former.
That's not a moral opinion, that's logistics. They're trade secrets, not trade dibs.
Slashdot Mirror
I advocate passphrases for their reduced burden. Increased complexity will statistically cause a variety of other behaviors. Any low entropy (patternlike) behavior can be emulated, and we spent 10-20 years teaching poorly, increasing the complexity tax for tiny entropy gains.
superman is weak. We get that.
Superman1! is just as weak. Fuck everything that has ever suggested otherwise.
$up3rm@n is almost as bad.
zxcvbnm is not strong. Neither is qrafzvwtsgxb. We see what you did there. Obviously, anything using those patterns is a form of low entropy, with days numbered.
rrrybgdtsmmmmlibad is a nursery rhyme and adds zero (mental recall) burden. Does your kid like Bob the Builder and Spongebob? cwfiwliap. These even dominate the brain tax required by correcthorsebatterystaple, which is frankly a four-letter password in a bigger alphabet, begging for pwning.
It's possible that futuristic tech can be powered by mass dumps (probably lifted from google) of our written text (such that iwtbotiwtwot from dickens or tbontbtitq from shakespeare become weak) but phrases are likely to lean on personal interests, contemporary events/pop culture. Leverage a single unfolding point of mental recall for your brain, not a pile of them. Which are adhering to a heap of rules that will only yield brief, first-derivative resilience.
>dont LIKE IT? DONT buy the product.
Yeah. Think about THAT next time, ShanghaiBill.
Think about your onerous "I don't like laptops made with shitty keyboard design" expectation next time you buy a laptop that says Shitty Keyboard on the box.
Oh wait, that made zero sense. Wow, what kind of dumbfuck would think it did?
>In America, the Computer Fraud and Abuse [A]ct
Stopped reading here. Thought we were talking about competent laws. My mistake.
> helpfully provided a void that you can scream into while they do whatever they were going to do anyway
This is EXACTLY what a lot of businesses intentionally pay for. To be inaccessible while pretending they are. To be insulated from the second party. Never had a job as a phone jockey?
Not that your job has to be exclusively about it. A secretary has duties besides being interference.
Did you think the problem is just BWM-bondsman?
Or the problem is adX-adY for s/ millions of ads?
Choose the dichotomy carefully, one is plain wrong while the other reveals your shitty understanding.
>The people who have "cellphone addictions" really wont use any of these features
And it's really not a good idea to force otherwise, at the consumer level.
If you'd like more forceful interference on product operation, you want to legislate higher than a vendor, who sells multi-nationally anyway.
Either demand their products are designed differently in your particular locale (ie our country is a snowflake) or, if you're designating a category of people, formally define the affliction and that anyone afflicted is subject to whatever terms you desire.
Don't fake outrage over an opt-in, because a courtesy offering is the most you can impose. If you want civic imposition, use civic channels.
I'm not putting a political lean on this post. I'm not offering an opinion on whether your "X is allowed to purchase/use" or "N hours per week" restriction on [certain] citizens is rational or not. My intent is to make it clear where you would mandate that from, mandate upon citizens of $nation.
Good.
When countries have congressmen/equivalent that pretend they can control the internet as part of their endless life of posturing, the correct answer is to move them off the adult table and block them.
Repeat until they decide they want to sit at the grown-up's table again, instead of playing Imaginary Level Of Reach And Obligations.
didn't this flavor of the week get slashvertised two days ago?
Auto capture mods.
It will take little time for people to write OS/browser tools for performing automated captures when the "open this webpage for the 'email' to be viewed" prompt is seen.
Sorry, I've misplaced my link to the video showing the demo of the ipod-wheel macbook.
https://www.cnet.com/news/nint...
Article says posted yesterday
Had me until the end
Those AAA studios are
1) Redirecting their resources towards said lucrativity ("it's just good business")(konami/squeenix are especially transparent about the redirecting)
2) Taking advantage of the culture shift to dilute AAA titles
"GTA V has made more money than any book, film, record or video game ever released." That's great, right? Studios will be willing to front millions to refine quality titles, right?
A lot of that was due to the $500M that has flowed out of the GTA:O freemium MMO. Studios don't want to front millions, they want to drop $10,000 on a few interns for a weekend and try to be the next Flappy Bird.
That's (1). The (2) is all the game-compromising practices that are bleeding into the AAA games. $500M coming out of a thin crew and mediocre servers is a very loud data point and you better fucking believe RDR2 is going to show it. It won't be lootboxes, but only an idiot thinks they're the only way.
Room enough for both? No, the quarters are cramped and the disease is contagious.
>and advertisers are more capricious than they had hoped
Like when a C-level sees the latest shiny and buys 1000 of them. All it takes is one email in the right place.
The hawkers know this well. For either of these topics. But I don't have enough inklings to guess if censorcreep around nootropic vids would be financially or politically driven.
TFS isn't challenging the undefeatable majority.
Isn't that why forking is proposed? We're abandoning the unsalvageable, not chasing it.
Isn't that why forking is proposed? We're abandoning the unsalvageable, not chasing it.
It's hardware-oriented as is, but that sort of detail is very much susceptible to drift. Lord knows "Hacker" was.
I don't think big brother cares
The device you sent that with is called a computer.
It isn't limited by feelings.
> they endanger the digital publishing of news stories
So do eyelids. You can offer whatever content you want. That's it. That's all you can do online: Offer. Whether it's a credential-restricted content (ie premium) or simply open pages, the viewer decides whether to access. The viewer decides whether to subscribe, literally (paywall) or figuratively. Can't force buyers, can't force viewers.
Whether the selective mechanism is eyeballs or software is irrelevant.
QQ, blocking the signal is harrrrrrd. Ha.
Normally the remarks are "users will still tunnel to it" but it's a good laugh that they're still upright out in the open. And I hope it stays that way, if only as a reminder that decentralization means a resistance to being killed.
Human wants to see it with his eyeballs? Sure.
Scan it to a digital state of infinite duration scope and use? No deal.
What hurts is that your average surface dweller thinks it's the other way around.
I don't think it needs to be anecdotal.
"If you're blocked from information, the block isn't for your sake." is a solid enough axiom to start from.
It may not necessarily be malicious, but it can be assumed (fuck off citationboy) to serve the other side of the table. Sealed judgements, sealed transcripts, sealed devices, sealed software. If something happens behind closed doors without you, that's a disadvantage, big or small.
Conversely, the power to conceal is always an advantage, big or trivial. It's optional for fuck's sake. You control it.
OMG I HATE SPAM CALLERS
While intentionally staying blind to the ocean of databases we've been swimming in for 50 years. Their form, their technical structure may have changed over the decades, but we've been compiling since we learned how to make electronics store data.
Granted, it's an invisible ocean, and it's impossible to mentally picture in any detail. Thank god it's all a pile of christmas wire, spaghetti, incompatible with each other, held by actors with no intrinsic incentive to meld. Cars have VINs but there's no master DB, just connected pools, often poorly. But every year this majestic and mighty clusterfuck surrounding our 21st century lives, that absolute king of all katamari blobs, becomes slightly more compatible with itself.
I'd be happy if people just understood that logging =/= monitoring. No, "google" (FBI, etc) isn't watching your porn tastes. But their algorithm is.
Your front door is property designated private.
A server openly offering files is more like reading your browser history after it became stapled to the town noticeboard. Whether you "accidentally" stapled it or another actor did is also immaterial.
GP went too far in assuming that no security = no designation = morally in the wild. I would accept that a "this document is restricted to [dept] eyes only" stamp qualifies. But that's my moral opinion - an insurance policy could accuse you of having effectively released the information. And that accusation would hold in court.
Data is a contagion. Knowledge is either quarantined or In The Wild. If you or a group wants to behave like you own information, it'll need to be in the former.
That's not a moral opinion, that's logistics. They're trade secrets, not trade dibs.
When you put it that way...
...it sounds even MORE valuable to know.
>tell us how it worked
If it does that means we never needed any solution in the first place, dumbass.