I think that this is a, 'we don't have any gays in Iran,' type of situation.
We need to kill the dumbass myth that the best programmers started when they're in diapers. The exception isn't the kid who've been making simple games for the last 6 years before academy or college, that's simply a kid who has 6 years more experience with loops, conditionals, and a handful of calls that can draw sprites onto the screen. A good student should be able to understand and properly apply those concepts in a few months and now their at the same level here. A great student is one who knows how to learn things that have not been taught to him. While the kid who taught himself programming in middle-school has this attribute, he's not the only one in the world who does.
Of course everyone there was talking about delivery over the Internet a third of the name is dedicated to the Internet as a delivery platform. Frankly I'd find it weird if anyone who was in the streaming media business talked about how awesome bundled packages of television channels are.
The best way to create customers is to tell them that they are dirty, disgusting perverts and that if their family and friends knew what they where doing they'd be disowned.
Wait, if this is the world they want to pretend we live in, why would I ever buy a physical copy when it can be easily discovered. A password protected file of all my torrents is so much safer.
Remember how bad Microsoft Office was when you transitioned to 2007? Everything moved and you couldn't find anything! Now imagine that you are used to doing everything the same way for 12 years now. It's going to take a few weeks to figure out how to do your every day tasks again. A company can train you, costing profit; or they can wait for you to figure it out yourself, costing sales.
Say a company makes 10k a year for each employee, that's 200 dollars a week. Each of their employees makes another 500 a week in their own salary which means that the employee brought 700 dollars into the company each week. Say it takes just a week for an employee to catch up and perform his duties at 100% of pre-upgrade level and during this time, he performs at only 50%.... Now the employee is bringing in 350 but taking out 500. Your upgrade, which even if it's free, is now $350. This will take nearly an entire month to break even. For what? Long term gains 6 months from now.
My passwords all come in the following variations
tell me again how strong password policies prevent re-use.
Can this be killed off? I don't mean this account, I mean the actual meatbag behind it.
I'll create a GUI interface using Visual Basic to track the IP address. Then we can send a fake DMCA request to his ISP to identify the user's real name. From there, we hire an assassin.
But, but... Sarah Brightman's vacation plan's in 2015 are in peril!
You are about to receive a butt load of hate from us.
... and avoid sharply worded questions.
50 bucks says an atheist wrote that line as an easter egg.
Why aren't passphrases more common?
Far easier to remember Hot grits down your pants with a petrified Natalie Portman than miJFsVXx3!, and potentially far more secure by virtue of character number.
Catchphrases fail because:
People are lazy: I don't want to type more than I need to if I am going to log a few thousand times.
Capitalization requirements: Are your proper nouns capitalized? What about every word? What about the first?
String length limits and special symbols required: Is Ms. Porman's name hyphenated, or did I put that somewhere else, does that symbol even count? And where the heck did I put that '1'?
***************** oh, crap, did I misspell a word?
People like short email addresses. Do intials plus a random number.
Not all initials are good initials, some people will have offensive phrases or sexual innuendo's... I would know, I am one of those.
He's done * research *. All those peer-reviewed science things on Fox News...
It took quite a while for me to find this from Fox News, there were 2 pages of liberal and non-partisan sites bashing them before I found something on Fox, although I think the line that says 'By LiveScience Staff' might be the only reason I found something like this at all there.
It doesn't give an exact number, but at least they say that that the primary source of new Carbon in the atmosphere since 1750 has been man made. So I guess that puts a lower limit of 1 on that number.
Please cite a source on this. I would love to see if this is truly fact. My own research into the matter suggests not, but I am willing to be wrong. Where are you getting the figure "100 times more"? It is quite interesting that your number works out so exactly to 100.
P.S. @Moderators - "Informative". Really?
If you were any more obtuse, I'd be able to use you as a decent approximation for pi.
First 5 links all agree with a number on the order of 100 time greater, I stopped bothering to look after that.