Not even close. 1 of a possible 170k words is NOT the same as 1 of a possible 26 characters. In fact, there are 6538 times as many possibilities per instance.

• HCBS1! assuming always capitals, a number and a a possible exclamation point is 26^4*10*2 = 9.1e6
• HCBS1! assuming always lower or upper case, a number and a a possible exclamation point is 52^4*10*2 = 1.4e8
• HcBs1! assuming 6 completely random upper case letters, lower case letters number and special characters (20 possible special characters) = (52+10+20)^6 = 3.0e11
• HorseCorrectBatteryStaple1! assuming 4 words (170k possible words), first letter capitalized, 1 number and a possible exclamation point = 170k^4*10*2 = 1.6e22
• HorseCorrectBatteryStaple assuming 4 words (170k possible words) and NOTHING else = 170k^4 = 8.3e20 (that's an 8 with 20 zeros, or 83 ExaPasswords)

So even without adding any numbers, special characters or character substitutions, 4 random words are inconceivably more secure than even completely random sequences of characters.

Just 4 words would take

Even then it's a bad idea. Lots of websites still mix user uploaded data (images, files, etc) and interactive interfaces on the same domain. If you need 2 pages of your website to talk to each other (whether one opened the other or not), use the f*cking server as a proxy like a sane person.

There's a big difference between a commissioner and the chairman.

As much as I hate lobbyists, an oversight commission should have representation from the industry over which that commission has oversight. Otherwise you end up with bullshit like the current drone regulations where drone manufacturers and users are excluded from discussions and people flying actual airplanes end up writing all the rules for something barely more dangerous than a kite.

Putting that representative in the position of chair not only enables but implicitly encourages corruption and negligence.

Probably not, but there are certainly some people in that group that would, so why not give them the chance. Trying to find the best thing to train out of work people in is a fools errand, instead we need to find as many things as possible and give them some bloody options. The majority of people are not cut out to be programmers, nor teachers, nor electricians, nor plumbers, nor English teachers, but most of them is suitable for at least 1 of those, so the more options that are provided to the most people, the more of them will be able to find something that DOES suit them.

Stop trying to gatekeep entire swaths of the population from joining your profession and let everyone at least give it a shot if they want to. It'll make you look like much less of a jackass.

Unless they essentially set up their website's server to act as a proxy for certain url patterns. In which case, the advertisers get everything they want and XSS becomes literally impossible to prevent. I'm not saying what we have now is acceptable, advertising no the internet is absolutely garbage and the fact that online advertisers won't accept anything less is bullshit. 10 years ago we didn't have any of this and even today we don't have any of this on any other platform (radio, tv, newspapers, posters, billboards, etc). Advertisers need somebody with authority to tell them to turn off the crap and go pound sand.

Last I checked, attributes didn't nest, which very quickly invalidates the provided example once the real world gets its hands on it.

Gait recognition exists, though an individual may struggle to acquire enough input data to build accurate profiles.

Contrary to what you see in the movies, you can only have a geosynchronous orbit at the equator. In fact, geostationary orbit is technically a single orbit exactly above the equator at a specific altitude (a 1-dimensional line) which is an extremely inefficient way to organize satellites. It would also mean no satellites over Canada, Russia, Australia, and a lot of other populated areas. And that's not even considering that most countries try to launch their rockets as close to the equator as possible to take advantage of the natural 460m/s speed boost you get versus near either of the poles, which would just make for more things for them to hit. In fact, a lot of satellites are in low earth orbit which goes North/South almost directly over the poles. The angle is offset from the poles such that as the earth spins under it, it slowly goes North/South (then South/North on the other side) and slowly scans the entire planet until ending up back over the same spot (going in the opposite direction) about a week later, then going the original direction over the spot the following week (and so on). This way a single satellite can image the entire earth instead of needing a separate satellite for every X square km of ground you want to image. If the satellite is set up to look down slightly to the East or West (instead of straight down), that means it can image/scan the west side of a building, then a week later scan the other side of it (which is VERY helpful for terrain mapping).

Lots of things are objectively true, lots of things are objectively false and I'd argue very few opposing views are anywhere near equally valid. This is the kind of bullshit pseudo-logic that leads to conspiracies about chem-trails, flat-earths, young earth creationism and holocaust denial.

If you don't think rally racers have an in-depth understanding of physics, go watch one tune their car before a race. They use Newtonian physics and fluid dynamics constantly when adjusting airfoils, shocks, springs, camber and choosing the compound and tread they're going to use in their tire for each race depending on the design, shape and conditions of the track including the weather and how many cars will be racing ahead of them which can affect tarmac temperatures and depth and consistency of lose gravel and dirt on off-road sections.

Well, it wasn't practical ... until the US government graciously donated all the necessary RND resources and leaked the final product to the Internet. The centrifuge-specific parts aren't terribly reusable, but the framework and detection algorithms they power could definitely be reused elsewhere, and probably already have been at this point.

That's a horrible idea. I don't even bother applying to job ads that don't list the language(s) needed.

That's like a "car driver" ad that doesn't say what type of car you'll be driving. Any professional driver should be able to learn to drive just about any car very quickly, but there is a HUGE difference between a limo driver and a taxi driver, even though they both drive 4-wheeled vehicles with passengers to and from reasonably close locations. Not only are there skill differences (using the taxi dispatch system versus navigating narrow spaces and bumps in a limo), but the level and type of interactions with the clients is completely different and some people simply don't WANT certain work environments and you're wasting their time and yours having them come in for an interview they will immediately walk out of after 5 minutes.

Simliarly, there is a HUGE difference between a job posting for PHP and Javascript than one for Python and CUDA or one for embedded C and assembly. A Javascript and CSS developer is going to have to be aware of XSS and SQL injection not to mention NPM and Compores. A Python/CUDA position is likely dealing with machine learning or other math-intensive work where a strong math background will play a big part and a C/Assembly position may involve microprocessors where a background in basic electronics would be beneficial.

There are also languages that I will specifically avoid. If a "Software Developer" job posting asks for NodeJS and Electron, I'll skip that ad because I personally can't stand Javascript and don't enjoy web developement. A job for Python or C on the other hand is usually a completely different type of development and is something I'm much more likely to apply for and a position that the company is much more likely to hire me for.

If you want the best employees, tell them as much as you can about the position right from the start or they'll just skip your vague uninformative ad for another one and you'll only get applications from the desperate job seekers that keep failing interviews.

Subtract a couple of 3's?

If you can remember, let alone recite, 4h2k~l389YUkjh289*(shl3k=ljhs while being hit with a $5 wrench, you have a better memory than me.

If you think cookies are the only, or even primary, method of cross-site tracking these days, you have some serious catching up to do. Install the RequestPolicy extension for Firefox and take a look at how many companies are getting their shit loaded on a HUGE percentage of unrelated websites. Javascript, flash objects, images, chat systems, like buttons, the list goes on.