Tacking up passwords is standard practice everywhere I have ever worked. I bet if you took a stroll around your offices, you would find a handful. That mentality is exactly why this doesn't work. If you make security unwieldy, people will just go around it. I usually remember my passwords just fine. Until I get to about the 5th one, and then I start guessing when I come back from a vacation or a long weekend. Sometimes I win, sometimes I lose.
I have a strong and moderately complex password for my computer login. The problem is that I am required to change it often. I don't have problems with my other passwords.
There's another problem at the work place. I have to change my password every 4 months to a moderately strong password. It cannot be a password I have used in the last 6 months or any of my last 6 passwords. The result? My password is prominently tacked up on my cubical wall. Seriously I can only remember so many passwords before I just can't do it anymore. If I enter the wrong password 3 times, my account locks up.
It doesn't help that breaking into gainful employment as a fresh graduate can be extraordinarily difficult when everyone demands a minimum of 2 to 5 years experience. If your school does not push students into internships and co-ops before they graduate and the students don't have any connections, most students are screwed if they don't have the drive to send out a resume to a new job posting every single day (not that I actually sympathize with those who don't). Schools need to admit to the fact that not only do they need to provide a diverse education and basic theory on which to build solid skills tomorrow, they also need to develop a real practical skill set today, no matter how basic. Had I not gone out of my way to take a one day LabVIEW seminar in college that I found out about almost as an afterthought in a department e-mail, I'm not sure if I ever would have managed to get a break in to industry.
I'm no longer convinced that it's about how much you eat, but rather what you eat. You can feast on carrots, green beans, peppers, and broccoli all day and I would put money down that you won't gain weight from it. Our society is overloaded with high calorie, low nutrition snack foods and deep fried dinners. The idea that you can eat what ever you want so long as you burn it off is just plain misleading. Yes you can go to McDonalds and not fall off the bandwagon. But if you're going to McDonalds every week, or several times a week, there's no way that any normal person, no matter what their metabolism is, is going to be able to just "burn it off".
Just a note. I actually do hit up the McDonalds drive thru roughly once a week when I don't get a chance to take a lunch to work. I order a salad, which are actually quite good and filling.
Overweight is a minor issue, and I'm not entirely convinced that our definition of overweight is even appropriate. It's obesity that's the real problem. When you approach obesity, your biological processes start to get screwed up.
The fact is that if you're truly eating right, you're going to be eating a crap load of food, no matter who you are. The difference is in the content of that food. People just need to stop snacking (an extremely common cause of large amounts of uncounted calories) and stop eating crap. Just because those kids look skinny, doesn't mean they're healthy. Eat whole grain breads, brown rice, beans, and for god's sake eat lots of vegetables. It's sad that even our school lunches are indirectly required by the government to be crap. We don't need to eat meat every day. McDonald's food is killing us, and we're to blame for it because we're buying it.
Aside from the fact that the parents are almost always to blame in cases of child obesity, what exactly is wrong with "fat camp"? Quite honestly, morbid child obesity without a clear medical explanation should be grounds for child abuse.
Except for the fact that it's the parents that are sending their kids to this place. Believe it or not, parents actually have an over riding authority on what their kids will and will not do even in the US.
Why is this so complicated to you? If you make a law, you apply it to every single case that falls under that law. If hazing is illegal, the law should clearly define hazing, and every single case of hazing should be prosecuted. This is why it's so important that definitions be carefully considered in Congress. Fumbling around with this "I'll know it when I see it" idiocracy is really just laziness.
You either allow free speech or you don't. You either allow consenting adults to engage in BDSM or you don't. There shouldn't be a slippery slope here.
Sorry to burst your bubble on your understanding of American history, but there is a fairly wide difference in the situation. France helped us in a revolution for independence from their long time enemy (centuries) England. The Iranians are in a civil upheaval for the complete toppling of a regime. The colonies directly petitioned France over the course of weeks for assistance primarily in dealing with the world dominating British naval fleet (though some other assistance was offered later). The French government of the time also suffered heavily from the assistance they gave the colonies in terms of money drain and some suggest that the cultural impact on France is what led to the very bloody and chaotic French Revolution. To the best of my knowledge, neither Congress nor the POTUS have been officially petitioned by any leaders in the protests in Iran.
And you think pulling even further away from the moral high ground is going to help? The more evidence we give them, the more they will be able to use it as leverage against the Iranian citizens.
I don't. The more we interfere here, the more likely it is that someone new is going to form a grudge against us. Why can't we just let people revolt without our interference? If the protests in Iran escalate to a civil war, then we need to stay the hell out of it. If we don't, how are we going to respond if the revolt loses and the Iranian government accuses us of encouraging violence and discord in their country? Do we really have to wonder why the Iranian government thinks we're a bunch of bullies?
I care because if you become incapacitated in a collision because you were not wearing your seat belt, there is a period of time where you cannot have control over your car (because you're no longer in it) and you put the lives of anyone else around you at a greater risk. Not to mention that a 150-200 lb fleshy projectile is dangerous.
Are you sure you want to just iterate over the array? Here are some of the reasons I would need to think this through. What if your array is a million elements long? What if you want to use the same solution in the future to do something more complex than += 5? Without any more context that "add 5 to each element in an array" the problem should be looked at more critically before choosing the simple fix. MATLAB was created specifically to deal with these types of problems.
When it comes to implementation questions, it doesn't matter whether or not you know the basics. It's really a matter of how long ago you looked at it. It's far more important to know how to find the answer and understand it than it is to be able to pull the answer out at a moment's notice without warning. I have a quality system at work that I have to train on and know. It's several hundred pages long. You think I can memorize the whole damn thing? No, but I know how to find the answer to any quality system question in it.
Not to mention that a strong theoretical background makes you flexible and quickly trainable for a wide variety of tech jobs. My engineering education has made it possible for me to bounce between manufacturing, product development, quality, and test engineering. My ability to stay competitive would have been greatly hampered if my education programmed me for a specific job.
It sounds to me like you need to up the experience level you're looking for. You can't expect a college graduate at any level to be ready to be plugged into your process with little to no support. Having a college degree, for better or worse, only shows that you're trainable and provides the foundation knowledge so that you can be trained fast in a wide variety of disciplines. If you're willing to choose a new grad carefully and nurture their professional development, they can serve you very well for a long time. If you don't have time for that, then ignore their education background and go straight to their experience.
I'm just a little curious what makes a new article more important than another. When I pick up a newspaper, its rarely the front page article that interests me.
Slashdot Mirror
Tacking up passwords is standard practice everywhere I have ever worked. I bet if you took a stroll around your offices, you would find a handful. That mentality is exactly why this doesn't work. If you make security unwieldy, people will just go around it. I usually remember my passwords just fine. Until I get to about the 5th one, and then I start guessing when I come back from a vacation or a long weekend. Sometimes I win, sometimes I lose.
I have a strong and moderately complex password for my computer login. The problem is that I am required to change it often. I don't have problems with my other passwords.
There's another problem at the work place. I have to change my password every 4 months to a moderately strong password. It cannot be a password I have used in the last 6 months or any of my last 6 passwords. The result? My password is prominently tacked up on my cubical wall. Seriously I can only remember so many passwords before I just can't do it anymore. If I enter the wrong password 3 times, my account locks up.
It doesn't help that breaking into gainful employment as a fresh graduate can be extraordinarily difficult when everyone demands a minimum of 2 to 5 years experience. If your school does not push students into internships and co-ops before they graduate and the students don't have any connections, most students are screwed if they don't have the drive to send out a resume to a new job posting every single day (not that I actually sympathize with those who don't). Schools need to admit to the fact that not only do they need to provide a diverse education and basic theory on which to build solid skills tomorrow, they also need to develop a real practical skill set today, no matter how basic. Had I not gone out of my way to take a one day LabVIEW seminar in college that I found out about almost as an afterthought in a department e-mail, I'm not sure if I ever would have managed to get a break in to industry.
I'm no longer convinced that it's about how much you eat, but rather what you eat. You can feast on carrots, green beans, peppers, and broccoli all day and I would put money down that you won't gain weight from it. Our society is overloaded with high calorie, low nutrition snack foods and deep fried dinners. The idea that you can eat what ever you want so long as you burn it off is just plain misleading. Yes you can go to McDonalds and not fall off the bandwagon. But if you're going to McDonalds every week, or several times a week, there's no way that any normal person, no matter what their metabolism is, is going to be able to just "burn it off".
Just a note. I actually do hit up the McDonalds drive thru roughly once a week when I don't get a chance to take a lunch to work. I order a salad, which are actually quite good and filling.
Overweight is a minor issue, and I'm not entirely convinced that our definition of overweight is even appropriate. It's obesity that's the real problem. When you approach obesity, your biological processes start to get screwed up.
The fact is that if you're truly eating right, you're going to be eating a crap load of food, no matter who you are. The difference is in the content of that food. People just need to stop snacking (an extremely common cause of large amounts of uncounted calories) and stop eating crap. Just because those kids look skinny, doesn't mean they're healthy. Eat whole grain breads, brown rice, beans, and for god's sake eat lots of vegetables. It's sad that even our school lunches are indirectly required by the government to be crap. We don't need to eat meat every day. McDonald's food is killing us, and we're to blame for it because we're buying it.
Aside from the fact that the parents are almost always to blame in cases of child obesity, what exactly is wrong with "fat camp"? Quite honestly, morbid child obesity without a clear medical explanation should be grounds for child abuse.
Except for the fact that it's the parents that are sending their kids to this place. Believe it or not, parents actually have an over riding authority on what their kids will and will not do even in the US.
I still hear Obama and other talking about reducing our dependence on foreign oil. It's not as hot as it was last year, but it's still a hot topic.
Technically the tax payers don't want to pony up for something they're going to have to pay for again privately.
The reason is obvious. "Dependence on foreign oil"TM is a popular political sound bite right now.
Why is this so complicated to you? If you make a law, you apply it to every single case that falls under that law. If hazing is illegal, the law should clearly define hazing, and every single case of hazing should be prosecuted. This is why it's so important that definitions be carefully considered in Congress. Fumbling around with this "I'll know it when I see it" idiocracy is really just laziness.
You either allow free speech or you don't. You either allow consenting adults to engage in BDSM or you don't. There shouldn't be a slippery slope here.
Personally I find people's general repressive attitudes toward sex to be disgusting and offensive.
I believe the term I've heard used is "I'll know it when I see it."
It's simple. Secret top secret meetings are being held... secretly.
What if it was a face on a picture of two dogs going at it? Is it bestiality?
I think it would be called child exploitation bestiality.
Sorry to burst your bubble on your understanding of American history, but there is a fairly wide difference in the situation. France helped us in a revolution for independence from their long time enemy (centuries) England. The Iranians are in a civil upheaval for the complete toppling of a regime. The colonies directly petitioned France over the course of weeks for assistance primarily in dealing with the world dominating British naval fleet (though some other assistance was offered later). The French government of the time also suffered heavily from the assistance they gave the colonies in terms of money drain and some suggest that the cultural impact on France is what led to the very bloody and chaotic French Revolution. To the best of my knowledge, neither Congress nor the POTUS have been officially petitioned by any leaders in the protests in Iran.
And you think pulling even further away from the moral high ground is going to help? The more evidence we give them, the more they will be able to use it as leverage against the Iranian citizens.
I don't. The more we interfere here, the more likely it is that someone new is going to form a grudge against us. Why can't we just let people revolt without our interference? If the protests in Iran escalate to a civil war, then we need to stay the hell out of it. If we don't, how are we going to respond if the revolt loses and the Iranian government accuses us of encouraging violence and discord in their country? Do we really have to wonder why the Iranian government thinks we're a bunch of bullies?
I care because if you become incapacitated in a collision because you were not wearing your seat belt, there is a period of time where you cannot have control over your car (because you're no longer in it) and you put the lives of anyone else around you at a greater risk. Not to mention that a 150-200 lb fleshy projectile is dangerous.
Are you sure you want to just iterate over the array? Here are some of the reasons I would need to think this through. What if your array is a million elements long? What if you want to use the same solution in the future to do something more complex than += 5? Without any more context that "add 5 to each element in an array" the problem should be looked at more critically before choosing the simple fix. MATLAB was created specifically to deal with these types of problems.
When it comes to implementation questions, it doesn't matter whether or not you know the basics. It's really a matter of how long ago you looked at it. It's far more important to know how to find the answer and understand it than it is to be able to pull the answer out at a moment's notice without warning. I have a quality system at work that I have to train on and know. It's several hundred pages long. You think I can memorize the whole damn thing? No, but I know how to find the answer to any quality system question in it.
Not to mention that a strong theoretical background makes you flexible and quickly trainable for a wide variety of tech jobs. My engineering education has made it possible for me to bounce between manufacturing, product development, quality, and test engineering. My ability to stay competitive would have been greatly hampered if my education programmed me for a specific job.
It sounds to me like you need to up the experience level you're looking for. You can't expect a college graduate at any level to be ready to be plugged into your process with little to no support. Having a college degree, for better or worse, only shows that you're trainable and provides the foundation knowledge so that you can be trained fast in a wide variety of disciplines. If you're willing to choose a new grad carefully and nurture their professional development, they can serve you very well for a long time. If you don't have time for that, then ignore their education background and go straight to their experience.
I'm just a little curious what makes a new article more important than another. When I pick up a newspaper, its rarely the front page article that interests me.