The public does not know enough to understand what "hashed" means and even less so what bcrypt is. Hence this nonsensical talk about "encrypted" passwords. Nobody does that on server-side, not event those that have absolutely no clue.
Bcrypt means that if you have a reasonable password and they used a reasonable cost-factor, then it is secure. It also means that a good password remains secure regardless of cost-factor, but a good password is secure after a single, non-salted conventional crypto-hash.
Could not agree more. I started looking into blocking only when the flashing and animation insanity started. Blocking was not a lot of effort, but suddenly I could find the web again under all that trash. Will keep blocking, unless they make all ads non-intrusive and they get the problem of malicious ads fixed effectively and permanently. As neither will be happening...
Same here. Last was the full edition of the latest Batman disaster ("Asylum" and "City" were fine), and no issues at all resulted. Maybe they have a detector for people that abuse the system by driving this to extremes.
And if you have played less than 1 hour (or what it two?) Anyways, I recently used this on the latest Batman PC game, which really sucked in all regards, and had the money back shortly afterwards.
That will cut down on the need to advertise. That products nobody sane really wants get heavily advertised for is no surprise, and the advertising is the lesser unethical thing there.
And it just happens to be among the most evil acts that human beings can commit, as it is not merely about killing somebody, it is about complete destruction of a person.
Seriously, how dishonest can you get? It is still not clear how to disable MS snooping completely and permanently in Win10 and, as updated cannot be blocked permanently at the moment, there is a permanent risk of them stepping up the snooping at any time. And they have the gall to claim they respect their user's privacy? This is a direct and blatant insult to any of their private customers.
99.9999999% of organizations will choose to measure something more concrete in hopes that it will be a reasonable proxy for productivity. It won't be.
And that is the real problem. There is no known way to overcome it. But MBA bean-counters that lack any understanding of reality will go for metrics every time, regardless of how misleading they are, because these cretins are unable to do anything else.
Hahahahahahahaha! Ah, the naivety of people thinking they are smart. The slackers will be the only ones with the time to spoof the metrics, so they will look like model employees. Others, not so much. Reminds me of the guy that outsourced his job to India.
And that is the other thing the metrics-fanatics overlook consistently: Most metrics are easy to spoof. Quite often it does not even require smart people to do it. At the same time, application of metrics significantly lowers loyalty, as people rightfully perceive themselves to be seen as "just a number". So unless the metrics bring massive increases in productivity, using them is already a losers game.
Indeed. Metrics are very tricky. Applied wrongly (the standard case) they harm you a lot. Also, in many cases, "productivity" is not what it seems to be, unless you are a mindless factory worker that only produces more or fewer of a specific part and quality is not a concern. For example, I have made brief remarks in meetings that ended up preventing massive losses to customers. How do you measure that? Right, you cannot.
There is also the little problem that the step to completely making up "evidence" is a small one. They are already lying under oath to a court on how they got the evidence. If that becomes routine, why not just plant drugs on everybody they do not like where it is plausible and lie about that under oath? I am sure a significant amount of that is already going on, it is just so easy for them to improve their numbers and make themselves look good.
"Parallel construction" is a technique right out of a police state, because it can easily be used to put anybody behind bars. Most people commit small crimes all the time. It is not the job of law enforcement to police those, it is their job to prevent large and significant crimes from becoming too common in order to keep society functioning. If they have access to masses of "evidence" obtained illegally or completely made up, then they are out of control. There are excellent reasons to limit the power of law enforcement. Not doing so has drastic negative consequences for society in the long run.
The second problem is that there is a good reason not to have secret agencies feed law enforcement. The thing is, secret agencies are not bound by law in how they obtain their information, so nobody has any protection against them or any recourse under the law. Having them give information to law enforcement completely negates the essential checks and balances any working legal system has. Hence the DEA and FBI had to commit perjury on a mass-scale in order to use that information. That they were willing to do so already demonstrates the problem very clearly.
To make it amply clear: If secret agencies feed law enforcement in your state, then you life in a police state or worse.
Excellent analysis. Sorry, no mod-points or you would get them.
My take is that the west and especially the US somehow believes that they have "made it" and that originality, ideas and inventiveness are not longer required and now have to be suppressed as disruptive factors. This is of course the sure way to become a "has been" as a society.
If you take into account the added effort of protecting you privacy and having it break on patches you cannot refuse, I would say the Win10 downgrade is excessively expensive.
I disagree. Especially things like multiplication tables are massively counter-productive. Learn to estimate, but exact calculation is a task for machines, not for humans. Same for the constants: Those you actually need you will learn automatically, for all others, a rough idea about their value if completely enough.
That is rather unlikely. The people that wrote the test protocol where doing the industry a favor and very likely left the door wide open to this kind of cheating intentionally.
Huh? And why do you assume I do not know that? The "design" here was rather obviously not done by the lab. In fact it is so obvious that I did not bother to mention it.
Slashdot Mirror
The public does not know enough to understand what "hashed" means and even less so what bcrypt is. Hence this nonsensical talk about "encrypted" passwords. Nobody does that on server-side, not event those that have absolutely no clue.
Bcrypt means that if you have a reasonable password and they used a reasonable cost-factor, then it is secure. It also means that a good password remains secure regardless of cost-factor, but a good password is secure after a single, non-salted conventional crypto-hash.
Could not agree more. I started looking into blocking only when the flashing and animation insanity started. Blocking was not a lot of effort, but suddenly I could find the web again under all that trash. Will keep blocking, unless they make all ads non-intrusive and they get the problem of malicious ads fixed effectively and permanently. As neither will be happening...
Same here. Last was the full edition of the latest Batman disaster ("Asylum" and "City" were fine), and no issues at all resulted. Maybe they have a detector for people that abuse the system by driving this to extremes.
And if you have played less than 1 hour (or what it two?) Anyways, I recently used this on the latest Batman PC game, which really sucked in all regards, and had the money back shortly afterwards.
I just get "not encoded for your device", which is funny. Maybe my final de-installation of Flash a few months back is to blame?
That will cut down on the need to advertise. That products nobody sane really wants get heavily advertised for is no surprise, and the advertising is the lesser unethical thing there.
The problem is that a lot of seemingly anonymous data can be de-anonymized very easily. There is no harmless "analytics" data.
I am sure people very much like her have bragged about that in the past. Some people barely qualify as human. She is one of them.
And it just happens to be among the most evil acts that human beings can commit, as it is not merely about killing somebody, it is about complete destruction of a person.
Seriously, how dishonest can you get? It is still not clear how to disable MS snooping completely and permanently in Win10 and, as updated cannot be blocked permanently at the moment, there is a permanent risk of them stepping up the snooping at any time. And they have the gall to claim they respect their user's privacy? This is a direct and blatant insult to any of their private customers.
I would agree to that.
99.9999999% of organizations will choose to measure something more concrete in hopes that it will be a reasonable proxy for productivity. It won't be.
And that is the real problem. There is no known way to overcome it. But MBA bean-counters that lack any understanding of reality will go for metrics every time, regardless of how misleading they are, because these cretins are unable to do anything else.
Hahahahahahahaha! Ah, the naivety of people thinking they are smart. The slackers will be the only ones with the time to spoof the metrics, so they will look like model employees. Others, not so much. Reminds me of the guy that outsourced his job to India.
And that is the other thing the metrics-fanatics overlook consistently: Most metrics are easy to spoof. Quite often it does not even require smart people to do it. At the same time, application of metrics significantly lowers loyalty, as people rightfully perceive themselves to be seen as "just a number". So unless the metrics bring massive increases in productivity, using them is already a losers game.
Indeed. Metrics are very tricky. Applied wrongly (the standard case) they harm you a lot. Also, in many cases, "productivity" is not what it seems to be, unless you are a mindless factory worker that only produces more or fewer of a specific part and quality is not a concern. For example, I have made brief remarks in meetings that ended up preventing massive losses to customers. How do you measure that? Right, you cannot.
There is also the little problem that the step to completely making up "evidence" is a small one. They are already lying under oath to a court on how they got the evidence. If that becomes routine, why not just plant drugs on everybody they do not like where it is plausible and lie about that under oath? I am sure a significant amount of that is already going on, it is just so easy for them to improve their numbers and make themselves look good.
"Parallel construction" is a technique right out of a police state, because it can easily be used to put anybody behind bars. Most people commit small crimes all the time. It is not the job of law enforcement to police those, it is their job to prevent large and significant crimes from becoming too common in order to keep society functioning. If they have access to masses of "evidence" obtained illegally or completely made up, then they are out of control. There are excellent reasons to limit the power of law enforcement. Not doing so has drastic negative consequences for society in the long run.
The second problem is that there is a good reason not to have secret agencies feed law enforcement. The thing is, secret agencies are not bound by law in how they obtain their information, so nobody has any protection against them or any recourse under the law. Having them give information to law enforcement completely negates the essential checks and balances any working legal system has. Hence the DEA and FBI had to commit perjury on a mass-scale in order to use that information. That they were willing to do so already demonstrates the problem very clearly.
To make it amply clear: If secret agencies feed law enforcement in your state, then you life in a police state or worse.
Right on the mark. This simplistic "personality typing" primarily serves to separate those with big egos from their money.
Excellent analysis. Sorry, no mod-points or you would get them.
My take is that the west and especially the US somehow believes that they have "made it" and that originality, ideas and inventiveness are not longer required and now have to be suppressed as disruptive factors. This is of course the sure way to become a "has been" as a society.
The criminal mind-set is obviously strong with the FBI. No surprise there.
If you take into account the added effort of protecting you privacy and having it break on patches you cannot refuse, I would say the Win10 downgrade is excessively expensive.
So this is really just about forcing more people to move to Win10. Figures.
I disagree. Especially things like multiplication tables are massively counter-productive. Learn to estimate, but exact calculation is a task for machines, not for humans. Same for the constants: Those you actually need you will learn automatically, for all others, a rough idea about their value if completely enough.
That is rather unlikely. The people that wrote the test protocol where doing the industry a favor and very likely left the door wide open to this kind of cheating intentionally.
Huh? And why do you assume I do not know that? The "design" here was rather obviously not done by the lab. In fact it is so obvious that I did not bother to mention it.