Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:£B{: (Score 1) 498

I just fill in completely random strings of characters and either store them in a password manager, or just not bother at all.
The idea being that if I forget the password for your website it couldn't have been that important to me in the first place.
I used to try giving "smart" answers to the questions that couldn't be guessed.
But it turns out that 10 years later, I can't remember what I answered to "what is your drivers license number?"
So I just skip that entirely.

Comment The absolute worst (Score 1) 498

Several rules I absolutely hate for passwords:
* Maximum number of characters (bonus points if it's 8 or less).
* Require a special symbol, but only !@#$%^&* are allowed.
* Can't reuse your last 5 (or some other number > 1) passwords.
* Maximum number of characters plus requiring a number, a lower case, an upper case, and a symbol.
* Last but not least: Websites with maximum number of characters for password that silently discard whatever characters go over the length. And yes, I did encounter this one. At least the limit was 30 characters, so I guess it could have been worse.

Comment Re:Interesting story (Score 1) 553

No they aren't.
There are many domains where you can work as a programmer without ever encountering a binary tree or an abstract class.
And who just memorizes all these random algorithms just to recite them at a moments notice?
If I have to implement a binary tree for whatever reason I will read up on it.
Maybe instead they should have a test to implement the rs-232 protocol or maybe small micro controller simulator.
Or whatever particular topic some person thinks is absolutely a must know for you to be considered an engineer.

Comment Re:Haskell (Score 1) 339

Pretty much. I'm sure that this new concepts thing is an improvement over whatever they have; but when I compare it to the equivalent in Haskell I almost want to cry. The way they do it in Haskell seems so much cleaner and less of an after thought.
Any type simply declares that it implements Ord, or Show, or whatever you need, and then functions can declare that they require a type to implement that.
Of course Haskell has it's own problems with error messages not being entirely useful and code being slow as shit if you don't know exactly how to optimize.

Slashdot Top Deals

Machines take me by surprise with great frequency. - Alan Turing