There is no technical reason why password length should be restricted
Other than that a user has to finish accurately typing the passphrase on a mobile device's on-screen keyboard before the CSRF key for the login form times out.
someone who physically possesses the token has three guesses of my unlocking passphrase before the token locks itself forever and zeroes out the stored keyfile
If fat-fingering your passphrase thrice will make your data permanently inaccessible, then you better have damn good backups and a damn good data plan with which to restore them when and where you need your data.
Not in any services I subscribe to.
What does "password strength" really mean?
If people used a textual representation of number obtained from a reliable hardware random number generator then the meaning would be unambiguous. It's the number of digits in that number. But most people don't do that (perhaps more should).
So what does it mean to say that a password has so many bits of entropy? Well, I guess it means how many truly random bits it would take to index their password from the universe of passwords the user considered. This is more an exercise in psychology than it is in mathematics. You have to figure out how users generate passwords or discount passwords. For example requiring a mix of upper and lower case letters doesn't add as much entropy as you'd think, because most users are mediocre typists who'll avoid using the shift key too often. Requiring digits means that many people will just "0" for "o" and "1" for "L".
So it's really easy to concoct passwords which you know are bad, because you know the methods used to select which passwords you'd consider; if the developers of the strength meter don't take your particular generation algorithm into account the meter will show the password to be stronger than you know it to be.
I'm imagining a kind of competitive tomboy/sibling rivalry thing, with the girl not always winning, but showing she can give as good as she gets. It'd put a "new" (ish) spin on the old Top Gear formula.
A fourth car races by.
It opens, and the words Top Gear: Mark II appear.
It's a young British woman of mixed Asian descent.
The crowd goes wild.
Seriously, an exotic woman driving exotic cars too fast? Who'd watch that?
I would, because I'm a man and I'm not afraid to admit that on some level I'm a pig. Ideally she'd be smart and funny too, because I don't like to think of myself as being a total pig, but either way I'm in.
Meanwhile, the BBC has a chance to reinvent Top Gear with younger presenters
Nailed it. It's like the old saw about the Chinese character for "crisis" being made up of characters for "danger" and "opportunity". No matter what happens now they're going to lose some of their long-term fans. But at some point young people aren't going to be so keen on watching some ancient codger behaving like an ass.
If they play this right it could become like Dr. Who, with a reboot every few years to bring in fresh blood.
Sure. But the man verbally abused and bullied a subordinate. Then he physically assaulted him -- or perhaps by that point the physical altercation was mutual.
At some point you have to ask yourself whether you have your priorities straight. As a fan of the show I'm sorry to the big ape gone. As a fan of civilized behavior I'm happy to see at least a minimum standard of decency in behavior getting enforced.
Except for pages accessed via SSL
Which means that once your favorite sites adopt HSTS, Data Saver becomes useless.
Then the problems are that 1. too many offenses are arrestable, and 2. too many people arrested for whistleblowing are given prison terms.
Just not over RF broadcasts.
Then all the bad guys have to do to deny you freedom of speech is deny you wired Internet. This means you have to transmit your Internet connection over RF.
The Beeb are not a government organisation. They are independent of HMG (at least in name).
They are not directly tax-funded. Subjects in the UK pay a TV licence (currently about £145, IIRC) that subsidises the organisation in the UK.
The BBC in the UK are, I believe, non-profit - meaning only that they spend all of their £5 billion+ endowment each year. The details are less clear on BBC Worldwide, at least as far as I can find; I have a sneaking suspicion that that organisation is actually a for-profit centre and somewhat independent from the BBC in the UK. Don't quote me on that, however - it's conjecture and speculation on my part.
That depends on whether the Crichton estate or Amblin/Universal decides to "accidentally" this project.
Sat if you just need data.
Exede.com says satellite caps are similar to those of LTE.
I mean, what kind of cool inventions have come out of Australia lately?
An anonymous comment mentioned Wi-Fi. The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) is responsible for at least a dozen other inventions.
"Little else matters than to write good code." -- Karl Lehenbauer
