Typing in a 6 letter word that I remember is much quicker than opening a program, typing in my master password, finding the account that I want to log in to, clicking on the log-in button, then switching back to the browser. Even describing what you need to do is too long and complicated.
You know how I know you've never even
Argument from complete ignorance is bad form, man.
--
BMO
Ask for "inconsequential" slashdot password
Raymorris dodges it
Tells me "yelp password"
Go to yelp
Yelp requires email address as login
Look up raymorris' email on slashdot
(email not shown publicly)
Try various raymorris@$MAILPROVIDER via "lost password"
None exist, not the top 5 anyway.
Google search site:yelp.com "ray morris" or "raymorris"
Nothing.
Whatever, man.
--
BMO
have you never heard of the very time-tested wisdom against putting all your eggs in one basket?
Have you ever heard of backups? For someone supposedly technically astute, you seem to have dropped that idea on the floor. I'll pick it up for you.
--
BMO
I know it's poor form to bitch about moderation, but "offtopic?" Really?
It never crossed anyone's mind to type the name into a web browser? You know, just to make sure that it didn't link to something like lemonparty?
--
BMO
So then tell me what your slashdot password is if it's that trivial.
I can be trusted. I have a 5 digit UID!
--
BMO
Using a password manager makes it just as easy to have secure passwords as it is to have easy to remember passwords that you recycle everywhere.
And it fills them in for you, automagically, when you have to do the "new password" and "confirm new password" fields on a new site.
People complaining that password managers are complex never used one.
--
BMO
Eric S. Raymond is crying in his beer about his "hotgirl69" problem.
Fuck'em.
--
BMO
Lastpass fills in both the "new password" and "confirm new password" automagically after you've generated a secure password. This makes passwords for trivial sites even more trivial to use.
I cannot even imagine what I would have had to do when I had to re-set all my passwords one night and
Life is easier with a password manager. It literally is.
--
BMO
Microsoft researchers have determined that reuse of the same password for low security services is safer than generating a unique password for each service.
This has to be a fucking joke. It has to be. bmo looks at calendar. Huh, it's not April 1.
And what, exactly, is a "low security service?" The only "low security service" I can possibly think of is stuff like Mailinator where you don't even use a password.
Remember when the entire Youporn chat login credentials file was leaked? You know, the one with real names, aliases, emails, and passwords in cleartext? Remember? Nearly every single password was usable on Facebook and the same password was reused in email.
People had fun with that. I was in
Yahoo lost control of my fucking credentials twice showing logins from Romania and Sweden. I no longer use Yahoo Mail as a result, except as a throw-away, and the last time pushed me over the edge into using a password manager that holds -unique to every site- passwords that I can't even remember myself at 25 characters of complete ASCII gibberish. And you know what? It's easier on top of being more secure.
Lose control over your login credentials at one place, and the rest is vulnerable if you recycle them elsewhere. Password re-use over multiple sites is fucking bad. Anecdotes aren't data but I don't care about your calculations because my reality trumps your poorly researched paper.
--
BMO
Are those things relevant for all programmers any more?
Only the employed ones.
Two lions who, escaping from the zoo, split up to increase their chances but agree to meet after 2 months. When they finally meet, one is skinny and the other overweight. The thin one says: âoeHow did you manage? I ate a human just once and they turned out a small army to chase me â" guns, nets, it was terrible. Since then I've been reduced to eating mice, insects, even grass.â The fat one replies: âoeWell, I hid outside the door at One Microsoft Way and ate a manager a day. And nobody even noticed!â
--
BMO
Basically, if you are thinking your browser is a "platform", or you are thinking "the web" is "a platform" in the traditional programming sense, as the OP obvious is, then you are an idiot.
No, actually, he's quite right. It's a different method of programming, a different paradigm altogether. He didn't talk about programming the browser so that part of your statement is irrelevant, but as a design platform the web truly is different. At least before people tried to change a markup language into a full page layout and presentation language.
The problem with web applications - and the intrinsic problem of abstraction of the complexity that's solved by historical runtime environments that the OP likes, is that the render is independent. The whole article the other day about the Google device lab:
http://mobile.slashdot.org/sto...
Completely and totally underscores the fact that markup and rendering are separate from each other, and that the system doing the markup has to understand, and either have variant code that it outputs so that it renders the same in as many browsers as possible -- or you need an entire device lab, because you've given up on solving the problem, and are willing to employ someone other than a "Normal Human" (per the current article) in order to chip away on a per device basis, until you exhaustively cover all possibilities.
The separation on the render is the problem with the web, as a platform, and it's why it's * not* "a platform", it's "N back ends * M browsers" number of platforms.
This separation is the same mistake that was made when window management was separated from X windows, such that you didn't get the same look and feel on all applications based on having a particular X Terminal/X Server on which the render took place. In other words, the primitives were too primitive, and you ended up drawing boxes and lines and patterns, instead of "pop up menus" and "menu bards" and "dialog boxes".
What the OP in this article is bemoaning as being missing is a self-enforcing emergent property of the design decision to separate rendering from markup, and to separate markup from UI logic, and separate business logic from everything else. It's why web services are so complicated, and why they are so fragile.
The only thing that ever came close to dealing with the issue overall, at a high level, was WebObjects, and even then, it didn't try to do it in a way that was renderer/backend/middleware/security model/web server agnostic.
So again, I'm going to say that web services isn't a *platform* in the traditional sense of a computer running one of half a dozen 80x24 block mode terminals to front end a COBOL program was a platform, and that anyone who thinks it is
About as great a job as they are doing emulating a company that makes cell phones and tablets.
Let's not make a big deal out of this. 640kg of reactor-grade plutonium is only enough for a bit over 100 fission bombs / fusion bomb first stages, merely enough to make the recipient roughly tied for being the world's sixth most armed nuclear power.
Nothing to see here.
Clearly, you have never built a fission device, if you think you could get that many of them out of 640kg of even weapons grade Plutonium. You need to probably go back and read "The Curve of Binding Energy" and recalculate the neutron numbers to determine critical mass, assuming a pareto optimal design, because you are more than a bit high with "100"...
You could build a lot of dirty bombs with something like that, but you are likely better off just robbing a radiomedicine unit at a large research hospital to get the materials, or stealing a truck out of a fast food restaurant in Mexico City...
Physician: One upon whom we set our hopes when ill and our dogs when well. -- Ambrose Bierce
