If someone knows basically how you do it, they could probably figure it out. Remember, a lot of "hacked" accounts are compromised by people known to the victim, or by people who can have a look at your personal information, (like your Facebook account - how locked down is that?). Otherwise, I suppose any single password will look random. You ever considered looking into a good password manager? You only have to remember one good password, and the password manager can create strong unique, (yet, memorable, if so desired), passwords for each account. I'm always amazed at the contortions people put themselves through when the solution is so simple. After all, you're on a computer already, so why not use some software?
Right! My online banking forced low complexity passwords! Letters and numerals only, relatively short max length. I wrote them about this, and they replied with some crap about their servers being secure. On top of which, they blocked autofill, so that I always had to open my password manager and look up the password. Fucking annoying. Of course, BB&T is no longer my bank.
I think they found it to be a side benefit. The truth is, they began this two-step authentication crap because all the idiots using bad passwords would end up with their accounts "hacked", and then cause the web site administrators endless trouble trying to sort it out. The problem here is that few people use password managers, and this is because Microsoft did not see fit to include one with their operating system. Mac OS has come with a well integrated password manager since at least 2002, but the user had to, you know, use it. As I tell all my friends, particularly after receiving a spam email from their account, I've used that password manager since 2002, and have never had an account compromised. Nevertheless, I have to put up with constant bullshit - two-step authentication/information harvesting schemes, having to wait for an email before I can finish logging in, or regularly being asked to change my password "for security reasons" - all because of these dolts who won't use a password manager.
Being anti GMO is every bit as nonsensical as being an anti-vexer.
Certainly, inasmuch as most anti-GMO people don't seem to understand the issue at all. The problem isn't eating the food, the problem is in releasing novel DNA combinations into the wild. Just as the effects of releasing non-native species into an environment are unpredictable, (and often disastrous), novel DNA is non-native everywhere. And, unlike we once thought, DNA doesn't stay put. Unrelated organisms trade DNA, (although I suppose this could happen in your gut). That should be the thing that worries you.
My theory is that Trump is a stooge for the Clinton campaign.
Ha! If only we had politicians who were that smart. Listen, my friend, nobody thought an idiot like Reagan could get elected. We've had thirty years of policies that have been disastrous to working people, the same working people who continue to vote Republican. The Republican Party decided to go after the racists, the religious nuts, and other right-wing loonies to gain votes. What they didn't count on was these people taking over the Party. Between that, and Fox News, they went from being the party of the rich, to being the party of the disaffected ignorant. Now, Trump comes along, and instead of speaking with a dog whistle, he says out loud everything the other Republicans only hinted at, and they love him for it. Don't kid yourself, the man could be elected.
There was huge amounts of what we today call collateral damage, but back then they didn't use the term "collateral damage".
Collateral damage is unintended destruction, (whether of people or infrastructure). The planners of the Dresden bombing, and all the other fire bombings done during WW II, fully intended the destruction of those cities, and the deaths of their inhabitants. The idea was to cause the complete demoralization of the enemy. There is no collateral damage in total warfare.
Well, unless they start censoring the internet within their borders, these laws are as useless as, say, anti-pirating laws. If people want strong encryption, they'll get it. This only affects the non-technical/lazy.
My mom walked me to kindergarten, but ok, we lived in the projects then. After that, of course we all walked. But, that was back in the day. Somehow, over the last thirty years, people have become ultra-fearful when it comes to children, perceiving danger everywhere. I'm really blown away sometimes at how restrictive children's lives have become, especially compared to my own childhood.
While there isn't a specific law regarding children walking alone, this type of thing falls under "health and human services" where all kinds of unconstitutional things go on. Health officials were given wide-ranging powers back when communicable disease was still an issue, (think: quarantine), but since that time, they've extended their purview into other areas not normally thought of as disease related. Almost anything can be accomplished by invoking "public health", and almost anything can be shoe-horned into that category.
Really? I'd love to be able to muck around with wires in my brain, stimulating this part, and that, just to see what happens. I would certainly do it to regain music! But from a practical point of view, I can understand your objection.
When I first began seeing these "Cookies Exist" banners, (I see a lot of them, using a European server through my VPN), I was immediately suspicious. I mean, who needs to be told web sites use cookies? Why do you have to click something? I was surprised to find out this was an actual EU law. Glad my initial paranoia's been vindicated, though.
That is correct. White Castle has been making sliders since 1921. Apparently they neglected to patent it, though, as there is a copycat operation in the South called Crystal's.
I'm constantly amazed that people no longer seem to understand what a search engine is, or how it works. Even governments, such as the European Union, who presumably have people on the payroll to explain these things to them, seem to think Google = The Internet itself. Of course, Google doesn't help itself when it manipulates search results for its own purposes. Once you've started down that road, you can no longer pretend to be merely a neutral indexer of the web.
There's a difference between having an unpopular opinion, and being an abusive dick. I don't think it can be called censorship if you're removing a platform for the latter. Of course, that can be a fine line to walk sometimes.
I'm glad one company is using the tax law as intended. What do we do about all the other fuckers who aren't willing to even pay that pittance? Apple is a prime example. They send both their manufacturing, and their profits, (and therefore our tax revenue), overseas. They're not helping anyone but themselves. Personally, if I were king of the US, I'd deport them.
Just because we have all these new wireless products doesn't mean someone will be sitting around collecting the packets. The idea that a thief would wait until your socks indicated you've fallen asleep, then come steal your TV or do some other nasty thing, is just preposterous. Who would even think up such a thing?
The sensors are abundant enough and the driving conditions paranoid enough that the auto-driven car has time to come to a full and complete stop.
Clearly you've never had a deer jump in front of your vehicle. I can tell you from experience that you have time for fuck all, let alone coming to a complete stop, (which may in itself be dangerous). Assuming the car's AI can even distinguish between a deer and a pedestrian in every situation, deciding which way, (or whether), to swerve can be a complicated decision. In a small vehicle, like a car or an SUV, there is real possibility of the deer coming through the windshield and killing an occupant. If there's traffic nearby, swerving into, or in front of those vehicles can cause death or injury to occupants of either or both vehicles. What if there's an eighty-thousand pound semi-truck a few car lengths behind you? There can be all sorts of complicated contingencies in such a situation. Machines can think faster than humans, but how do you code for what are essentially moral decisions? In other words, what's the logic? How do you weigh one bad situation versus another? I'd like to see that script!
The whole point of organizing people into a society, whether a tribe, a city-state, or a nation-state, is that by helping weaker members, you increase the strength of the entire group. This is so plainly obvious, it boggles my mind that some don't get it. And often, the same people who want to pretend they're simply a self-sufficient individual are the same people who are obnoxiously nationalistic, yet seemingly oblivious to how they've benefitted from the very policies they decry. Of course, they often support one of our biggest, most bloated welfare programs - defense. Yes, that's a welfare program!
Slashdot Mirror
When I read the headline, I thought it going to be about rewarding employees for choosing good passwords. Perhaps you shouldn't try that, either.
"...do you think this can be reasonably safe?"
If someone knows basically how you do it, they could probably figure it out. Remember, a lot of "hacked" accounts are compromised by people known to the victim, or by people who can have a look at your personal information, (like your Facebook account - how locked down is that?). Otherwise, I suppose any single password will look random.
You ever considered looking into a good password manager? You only have to remember one good password, and the password manager can create strong unique, (yet, memorable, if so desired), passwords for each account. I'm always amazed at the contortions people put themselves through when the solution is so simple. After all, you're on a computer already, so why not use some software?
Right! My online banking forced low complexity passwords! Letters and numerals only, relatively short max length. I wrote them about this, and they replied with some crap about their servers being secure. On top of which, they blocked autofill, so that I always had to open my password manager and look up the password. Fucking annoying. Of course, BB&T is no longer my bank.
I think they found it to be a side benefit. The truth is, they began this two-step authentication crap because all the idiots using bad passwords would end up with their accounts "hacked", and then cause the web site administrators endless trouble trying to sort it out.
The problem here is that few people use password managers, and this is because Microsoft did not see fit to include one with their operating system. Mac OS has come with a well integrated password manager since at least 2002, but the user had to, you know, use it. As I tell all my friends, particularly after receiving a spam email from their account, I've used that password manager since 2002, and have never had an account compromised. Nevertheless, I have to put up with constant bullshit - two-step authentication/information harvesting schemes, having to wait for an email before I can finish logging in, or regularly being asked to change my password "for security reasons" - all because of these dolts who won't use a password manager.
Being anti GMO is every bit as nonsensical as being an anti-vexer.
Certainly, inasmuch as most anti-GMO people don't seem to understand the issue at all. The problem isn't eating the food, the problem is in releasing novel DNA combinations into the wild. Just as the effects of releasing non-native species into an environment are unpredictable, (and often disastrous), novel DNA is non-native everywhere. And, unlike we once thought, DNA doesn't stay put. Unrelated organisms trade DNA, (although I suppose this could happen in your gut). That should be the thing that worries you.
My theory is that Trump is a stooge for the Clinton campaign.
Ha! If only we had politicians who were that smart. Listen, my friend, nobody thought an idiot like Reagan could get elected. We've had thirty years of policies that have been disastrous to working people, the same working people who continue to vote Republican. The Republican Party decided to go after the racists, the religious nuts, and other right-wing loonies to gain votes. What they didn't count on was these people taking over the Party. Between that, and Fox News, they went from being the party of the rich, to being the party of the disaffected ignorant. Now, Trump comes along, and instead of speaking with a dog whistle, he says out loud everything the other Republicans only hinted at, and they love him for it. Don't kid yourself, the man could be elected.
There was huge amounts of what we today call collateral damage, but back then they didn't use the term "collateral damage".
Collateral damage is unintended destruction, (whether of people or infrastructure). The planners of the Dresden bombing, and all the other fire bombings done during WW II, fully intended the destruction of those cities, and the deaths of their inhabitants. The idea was to cause the complete demoralization of the enemy. There is no collateral damage in total warfare.
Well, unless they start censoring the internet within their borders, these laws are as useless as, say, anti-pirating laws. If people want strong encryption, they'll get it. This only affects the non-technical/lazy.
My mom walked me to kindergarten, but ok, we lived in the projects then. After that, of course we all walked. But, that was back in the day. Somehow, over the last thirty years, people have become ultra-fearful when it comes to children, perceiving danger everywhere. I'm really blown away sometimes at how restrictive children's lives have become, especially compared to my own childhood.
While there isn't a specific law regarding children walking alone, this type of thing falls under "health and human services" where all kinds of unconstitutional things go on. Health officials were given wide-ranging powers back when communicable disease was still an issue, (think: quarantine), but since that time, they've extended their purview into other areas not normally thought of as disease related. Almost anything can be accomplished by invoking "public health", and almost anything can be shoe-horned into that category.
Please, you want to screw up my retirement program? It's the only way I can grow my money. I call it Pennies to Ingots!
Dynamic range compression is one of the audio effects I use most often.
You, and every producer/engineer lately.
"...no wires in my brain please!!!
Really? I'd love to be able to muck around with wires in my brain, stimulating this part, and that, just to see what happens. I would certainly do it to regain music! But from a practical point of view, I can understand your objection.
Nice understanding of RIAA equalization you have there! :eyeroll:
Either you're incapable of taking care of your records, or you've only heard them sampled on 90's Hip Hop CDs.
I won't miss him and his awful music.
Both Hunky Dory and Ziggy Stardust are true masterpieces. If you grew up listening to his post-seventies work, you can be forgiven your opinion.
When I first began seeing these "Cookies Exist" banners, (I see a lot of them, using a European server through my VPN), I was immediately suspicious. I mean, who needs to be told web sites use cookies? Why do you have to click something? I was surprised to find out this was an actual EU law. Glad my initial paranoia's been vindicated, though.
That is correct. White Castle has been making sliders since 1921. Apparently they neglected to patent it, though, as there is a copycat operation in the South called Crystal's.
I'm constantly amazed that people no longer seem to understand what a search engine is, or how it works. Even governments, such as the European Union, who presumably have people on the payroll to explain these things to them, seem to think Google = The Internet itself.
Of course, Google doesn't help itself when it manipulates search results for its own purposes. Once you've started down that road, you can no longer pretend to be merely a neutral indexer of the web.
We seem to have a lot of young people familiar with computers in the US, but with no English skills. Maybe this will work out after all?
There's a difference between having an unpopular opinion, and being an abusive dick. I don't think it can be called censorship if you're removing a platform for the latter. Of course, that can be a fine line to walk sometimes.
No taxation without representation!
I'm glad one company is using the tax law as intended. What do we do about all the other fuckers who aren't willing to even pay that pittance? Apple is a prime example. They send both their manufacturing, and their profits, (and therefore our tax revenue), overseas. They're not helping anyone but themselves. Personally, if I were king of the US, I'd deport them.
Just because we have all these new wireless products doesn't mean someone will be sitting around collecting the packets. The idea that a thief would wait until your socks indicated you've fallen asleep, then come steal your TV or do some other nasty thing, is just preposterous. Who would even think up such a thing?
The sensors are abundant enough and the driving conditions paranoid enough that the auto-driven car has time to come to a full and complete stop.
Clearly you've never had a deer jump in front of your vehicle. I can tell you from experience that you have time for fuck all, let alone coming to a complete stop, (which may in itself be dangerous). Assuming the car's AI can even distinguish between a deer and a pedestrian in every situation, deciding which way, (or whether), to swerve can be a complicated decision.
In a small vehicle, like a car or an SUV, there is real possibility of the deer coming through the windshield and killing an occupant. If there's traffic nearby, swerving into, or in front of those vehicles can cause death or injury to occupants of either or both vehicles. What if there's an eighty-thousand pound semi-truck a few car lengths behind you? There can be all sorts of complicated contingencies in such a situation. Machines can think faster than humans, but how do you code for what are essentially moral decisions? In other words, what's the logic? How do you weigh one bad situation versus another? I'd like to see that script!
The whole point of organizing people into a society, whether a tribe, a city-state, or a nation-state, is that by helping weaker members, you increase the strength of the entire group. This is so plainly obvious, it boggles my mind that some don't get it. And often, the same people who want to pretend they're simply a self-sufficient individual are the same people who are obnoxiously nationalistic, yet seemingly oblivious to how they've benefitted from the very policies they decry. Of course, they often support one of our biggest, most bloated welfare programs - defense. Yes, that's a welfare program!