Re:as usual, blame the users for trying
on
Too Many Passwords
·
· Score: 1
(BTW, this is basically a dupe from about four or five years ago...)
Huh? The study came out today! Poor Zonk catches enough flak already, without hassling him over this.
Unless you're saying that we've heard this before, which is certainly true (we get a story like this every week or two), but until the lesson starts to sink in to admins' heads, I say keep 'em coming!
At least part of the problem in my workplace is that there are dozens of different webapps (which is a problem in and of itself), each of which has a different login/pass combination. It is simply impossible to not write them down.
A simple solution would be to just eliminate password protection on most of them. They're only available on the intranet -- is there really a serious threat of people hax0ring other workers' accounts and taking their online sexual harassment training for them?
Is it really so hard to just say google can't make a web based email service that is perfect for everyone.
And, by the way, I like GMail. I just find this issue an odd shortcoming for the company that is literally synonymous with search. (And think that a great web search engine, a nice webmail service and a few utilities hardly justifies the fawning here over Google, as if it's the reincarnation of Bell Laboratories.)
It seems like a nicely designed, fun little site to me, and a decent contest. I'm hardly crushingly disappointed, but then I don't get what you dweebs expected they were going to offer -- Gabrielle Union was going to come to your parents' basement and play Halo with you?
Geez, if Google was going to have a game development contest, with a $10k prize and all entries becoming their property, we'd be hearing how it's the greatestest thing EVAR!
"from:" restricts the search to the sender lines -- it doesn't widen the search over a straight keyword query.
Playing with it a bit, it looks like a search for "smith" misses email from "jsmith", regardless of whether "from:" is used. So the problem isn't quite what I had said, but I'd still call that really, really lame. I mean, they are Google!
No, what I don't get about GMail is why the search function (on which, in the GMail model, you are totally dependent) doesn't seem to search the sender's name! I frequently need to come up with a search term that will hit the message text after it fails to find a sender. Even Lotus Freaking Notes, which can't tell you whether you've replied to an email, can search on sender's name.
And, yeah, the blurb here is about as inane as I would guessed -- OMTFG, "Google search to Google mail, Google Earth to Google Moon"! M$ is doomed, doomed!
First, can we please drop this inane persecution complex stuff? There is no one against video games about health care public policy. No one! (Except maybe the Taliban, what's left of them.)
A more useful question, it seems to me, is what one gets out of such games. It seems like their "educational" value is limited to demonstrating the correctness of the underlying ruleset, which is to say, the correctness of the developers' prejudices. Passing that off as "learning" seems entirely counterproductive to me.
"One great story I heard was of a family who evacuated their home in Texas and decided to drive all the way to New York for the event making the best of a difficult situation."
Whatever -- I love Excel, tolerate Word, hate Windows and am quite confident that this Google hype is way overblown. My self-esteem doesn't ride on how much I hate Microsoft; if yours does, go pin another medal on yourself.
I was writing up a similar comment, made a last-second decision to play it safe and actually RTFA -- and it turns out that that'd be precisely the point of said FA.
Easy life over there at news.com -- pull up old articles from 1996, replace "Netscape" with "Google", "Marc Andreesen" with "Larry Page" and "bring your dog to work" with "20% of employees time working on their own projects". The "nightmare scenario" line in the headline, both here and there, even comes out of a Microsoft memo from 1995.
People who are right get higher weights in our system...
Out of curiosity -- do you have empirical evidence that weighting people's guesses on their track record gives better accuracy than equal weighting does? It's not obvious to me that that would be so.
Seriously, at this rate, I see this coming as the next logical step for Google. Bioharvesting of nerds for fun and profit. Especially nerdy gamer chix!
I like how you put this in bold and still managed to catch an Informative...
...developers seem to have relocated from Canada to Port Villa, Vanuatu
No, the address on their domain name registration has been been relocated to Vanuatu. I very much doubt that developers themselves would move to Vanuatu over a barely-operational P2P scheme. If you're going to do make a move like that, there are much nicer places in the South Pacific.
Why is it that the emulator field attracts such a high percentage of nuts and weirdos? That's not to disparage the real people in it (like the WINE guys), who are frequently terrific engineers, but just a comment on the number of goofballs tagging along with them.
So then are you saying that only security experts run Linux, or that all Linux users somehow magically learn about what "root" is upon installation?
More to the point, this whole reverence for the magical power of "root" is an anachronism from the days when Unix use meant a multi-user system. It's pure superstition in single-user Linux systems where the user/admin has exactly as much power to cause damage as he has to do anything else, regardless of the security scheme.
Or do you go scanning and discovering holes on other's network for you to offer them your solution?
Absofreakinglutely do **NOT** any such thing. **NEVER** intrude on a network unless you have **EXPLICIT** **WRITTEN** authorization to do so. You're going to be very, very sorry if you make a practice of doing such things.
I realize that it's impossible to make this point here without a stream of common-sense-impaired nerds lining up to insist that some stupid analogy makes unauthorized intrusion a great idea. You can listen to them or listen to me...
1) Reading "Are games simply too complex for digital immigrants to grok?", I had a mental image of a pompous, prissy jackass -- that almost perfectly matches Jason Della Rocca's picture. Except for the weird facial hair. What the hell is that?
2) There's an odd bit of projection in the essay. He keeps tossing out these pairs of government action where the same government (or members thereof) promote one aspect of gaming and criticize another, and flips out at how they're supposedly saying VIDEO GAMES GOOD!!!! and VIDEO GAMES BAD!!!! Uhh, hello -- _they're_ making the distinction between some games and others. It's Angry Hat Guy who can't seem to grasp that it's possible to criticize, say, GTA but not the industry as a whole.
3) On the other hand, it's the first positive coverage Kathleen Blanco has had in a while...
Perhaps you could get a magstripe writer, scan the card, and re-write only what needs to be there to get the door to open.
Oh, that should get your honeymoon off to a rousing start! "Hmmm, padding with zeros didn't work, maybe random data will. Honey, could you go outside and try this one?"
My point isn't "poeple ovr 30 r 2 old 2 use teh computarz lol!!11". It's "I have trouble getting my fellow oldsters to play with me, as a lot of them grew up on Atari 2600s and are intimidated by new controllers."
Are there really people out there who look at a video game controller and say "oh my god, that's so scary, I cannot possibly fathom it! run away!!"
You bet. Lots of them.
Are these people capable of playing a video game, even with the simplest of controllers?
Of course they are. One might certainly ask how much money is to be gained from those people (mostly 30 and over) regardless of the simplicity of the controller. But there are plenty of non-moronic people who find a Playstation or XBox controller intimidating
Humans are fantastic at mapping thought to motion. Typing, playing musical instruments, walking, dancing, swimming, driving a car: give us feedback for a minute motion, and we learn bloody fast.
Yeah, it's not like anyone has ever looked at a piano and said "Gee, that's too hard to learn." Look at all the "musicians" who have embraced "mash-up" crap as an alternative to learning a real instrument. Are they all "retarded monkeys"? OK, they are, but nonetheless there are non-morons who are scared off by overly complex gaming.
At one meeting, a famous producer turned down an urgent call from one of his biggest stars so that he and Garland could keep talking about computers. "He turns to me and says, 'Hey, kid, when was the last time somebody told you you were more interesting than Axl Rose?'"
Uh, sorry to burst your bubble, guys, but in 2000 I was more interesting than Axl Rose!
At any rate, I'm at a loss to understand what today's round of fake-ass outrage is about. Record labels tried to shut down illegal filesharing but also tried to get what value they could out of the data. That's wrong why, exactly? This is even lamer than yesterday's fake-ass outrage over "OMTFG, they're suing single mothers!!!"
Slashdot Mirror
Huh? The study came out today! Poor Zonk catches enough flak already, without hassling him over this.
Unless you're saying that we've heard this before, which is certainly true (we get a story like this every week or two), but until the lesson starts to sink in to admins' heads, I say keep 'em coming!
A simple solution would be to just eliminate password protection on most of them. They're only available on the intranet -- is there really a serious threat of people hax0ring other workers' accounts and taking their online sexual harassment training for them?
And, by the way, I like GMail. I just find this issue an odd shortcoming for the company that is literally synonymous with search. (And think that a great web search engine, a nice webmail service and a few utilities hardly justifies the fawning here over Google, as if it's the reincarnation of Bell Laboratories.)
Geez, if Google was going to have a game development contest, with a $10k prize and all entries becoming their property, we'd be hearing how it's the greatestest thing EVAR!
Playing with it a bit, it looks like a search for "smith" misses email from "jsmith", regardless of whether "from:" is used. So the problem isn't quite what I had said, but I'd still call that really, really lame. I mean, they are Google!
No, what I don't get about GMail is why the search function (on which, in the GMail model, you are totally dependent) doesn't seem to search the sender's name! I frequently need to come up with a search term that will hit the message text after it fails to find a sender. Even Lotus Freaking Notes, which can't tell you whether you've replied to an email, can search on sender's name.
And, yeah, the blurb here is about as inane as I would guessed -- OMTFG, "Google search to Google mail, Google Earth to Google Moon"! M$ is doomed, doomed!
A more useful question, it seems to me, is what one gets out of such games. It seems like their "educational" value is limited to demonstrating the correctness of the underlying ruleset, which is to say, the correctness of the developers' prejudices. Passing that off as "learning" seems entirely counterproductive to me.
"One great story I heard was of a family who evacuated their home in Texas and decided to drive all the way to New York for the event making the best of a difficult situation."
Whatever -- I love Excel, tolerate Word, hate Windows and am quite confident that this Google hype is way overblown. My self-esteem doesn't ride on how much I hate Microsoft; if yours does, go pin another medal on yourself.
I hit Submit anyway, though.
Easy life over there at news.com -- pull up old articles from 1996, replace "Netscape" with "Google", "Marc Andreesen" with "Larry Page" and "bring your dog to work" with "20% of employees time working on their own projects". The "nightmare scenario" line in the headline, both here and there, even comes out of a Microsoft memo from 1995.
"A patch has already been released" is indeed a convincing response. "You have the source code so fix it yourself" is, to put it mildly, not.
Also on the plus side, the Washington Post link crashes my IE, so I can't even read the anti-Firefox news. Score another for Mozilla!.
Out of curiosity -- do you have empirical evidence that weighting people's guesses on their track record gives better accuracy than equal weighting does? It's not obvious to me that that would be so.
I like how you put this in bold and still managed to catch an Informative...
This "story" isn't even that -- it's pure fantasy pulled straight out the Register's ass. There's no actual news behind it.
No, the address on their domain name registration has been been relocated to Vanuatu. I very much doubt that developers themselves would move to Vanuatu over a barely-operational P2P scheme. If you're going to do make a move like that, there are much nicer places in the South Pacific.
Why is it that the emulator field attracts such a high percentage of nuts and weirdos? That's not to disparage the real people in it (like the WINE guys), who are frequently terrific engineers, but just a comment on the number of goofballs tagging along with them.
More to the point, this whole reverence for the magical power of "root" is an anachronism from the days when Unix use meant a multi-user system. It's pure superstition in single-user Linux systems where the user/admin has exactly as much power to cause damage as he has to do anything else, regardless of the security scheme.
Absofreakinglutely do **NOT** any such thing. **NEVER** intrude on a network unless you have **EXPLICIT** **WRITTEN** authorization to do so. You're going to be very, very sorry if you make a practice of doing such things.
I realize that it's impossible to make this point here without a stream of common-sense-impaired nerds lining up to insist that some stupid analogy makes unauthorized intrusion a great idea. You can listen to them or listen to me...
2) There's an odd bit of projection in the essay. He keeps tossing out these pairs of government action where the same government (or members thereof) promote one aspect of gaming and criticize another, and flips out at how they're supposedly saying VIDEO GAMES GOOD!!!! and VIDEO GAMES BAD!!!! Uhh, hello -- _they're_ making the distinction between some games and others. It's Angry Hat Guy who can't seem to grasp that it's possible to criticize, say, GTA but not the industry as a whole.
3) On the other hand, it's the first positive coverage Kathleen Blanco has had in a while...
Oh, that should get your honeymoon off to a rousing start! "Hmmm, padding with zeros didn't work, maybe random data will. Honey, could you go outside and try this one?"
My point isn't "poeple ovr 30 r 2 old 2 use teh computarz lol!!11". It's "I have trouble getting my fellow oldsters to play with me, as a lot of them grew up on Atari 2600s and are intimidated by new controllers."
You bet. Lots of them.
Are these people capable of playing a video game, even with the simplest of controllers?
Of course they are. One might certainly ask how much money is to be gained from those people (mostly 30 and over) regardless of the simplicity of the controller. But there are plenty of non-moronic people who find a Playstation or XBox controller intimidating
Humans are fantastic at mapping thought to motion. Typing, playing musical instruments, walking, dancing, swimming, driving a car: give us feedback for a minute motion, and we learn bloody fast.
Yeah, it's not like anyone has ever looked at a piano and said "Gee, that's too hard to learn." Look at all the "musicians" who have embraced "mash-up" crap as an alternative to learning a real instrument. Are they all "retarded monkeys"? OK, they are, but nonetheless there are non-morons who are scared off by overly complex gaming.
Uh, sorry to burst your bubble, guys, but in 2000 I was more interesting than Axl Rose!
At any rate, I'm at a loss to understand what today's round of fake-ass outrage is about. Record labels tried to shut down illegal filesharing but also tried to get what value they could out of the data. That's wrong why, exactly? This is even lamer than yesterday's fake-ass outrage over "OMTFG, they're suing single mothers!!!"