Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
User Journal

Journal Journal: Ancestry.com Passwords 2

When attempting to change your password on the genealogy website Ancestry.com, you get this not-so-helpful message:

New Password -- Your new password should be between 5 to 24 characters long and can be any combination of letters, numbers, and some symbols.

Really. Some symbols. Not that they're going to tell you which ones. Oh no, that would be too easy. You have to guess!

Comment Re:WTF? (Score 4, Interesting) 107

Boy, are you going to be surprised when you figure out how the Soviet Union used to dispose of nuclear reactors from ships and submarines. At least with the U.S. one it was an accident.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decommissioning_of_Russian_nuclear-powered_vessels

A Russian government report acknowledged in March 1993, that "during the period of 1965 to 1988 the Northern Fleet had dumped four reactor compartments with eight reactors (three containing damaged fuel) in the Abrosimov Gulf in 20 to 40 meters of water." Six other compartments, containing nine reactors in all, had also been dumped into the water in the 1960s and 1970s.

Submission + - Donald Trump Child Rape Victim's Story Was Completely Fabricated (inquisitr.com) 9

Okian Warrior writes: The Donald Trump child rape victim’s story, as revealed early this morning by Daily Mail, is a work of complete fiction.

Katie Johnson herself spoke with journalists about why she lied and made herself into the Donald Trump child rape victim. “We would have a rapist in the White House. I would feel horrified every single day if I stay in this country,” she said, making it apparent that, although the GOP-running presidential hopeful never sexually assaulted her, she still believes he’s a rapist.

Katie maintains that she was sexually abused on more than one occasion by Jeffrey Epstein during mid-1994. A separate informant told Daily Mail that her story “had been believable and compelling right up until the last minute,” when it was found out “Donald Trump’s name had been inserted into this, [and] he was not involved whatsoever.”

Comment Re: And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... (Score 1) 2837

Yes, but you need to take into account Baby Boomers are retiring at an ever increasing rate, which impacts the rate. The age demographic of the nation plays heavily into the workforce participation numbers.

http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/on-retirement/2014/07/22/12-baby-boomer-retirement-trends

Actually, the numbers, as a percentage, haven't been this LOW since 1978. Go to the BLS, choose "Civilian Labor Force Participation Rate - LNS11300000", then change the date range to anything from as far back as 1948 to present.

Comment Re: And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... (Score 1) 2837

Sorry, I'm totally non-partisan, being disgusted by political parties in general. It counts always.

And no, that number does NOT include those over the age of 18 only. The number it is based on is called the "civilian non-institutional population", of which the definition is:

In the United States, the civilian noninstitutional population refers to people 16 years of age and older residing in the 50 States and the District of Columbia who are not inmates of institutions (penal, mental facilities, homes for the aged), and who are not on active duty in the Armed Forces.

The age is 16+, which you can see in the BLS statistics for yourself.

So, it excludes young children, but assumes everyone 16 and older is working, which is a very outdated assumption. Retired doesn't count, unless you're actually in a nursing facility. Military doesn't count. Full-time students don't count. Housewives don't count. Etc.

There are too many caveats to that number for it to be useful as anything other than a misleading, FUD talking point. This article in the WSJ breaks this down nicely.

The real answer is complex, and you can't break it down to a single sound bite. I still maintain the U-6 is a more accurate representation for trying to convey the total unemployment/underemployment picture. I don't think you fall off of U-6 after a set period of time. As it is compiled from a survey, I think you fall off if you flat out say you've just given up looking.

While there are employment issues in the U.S., saying things like "there are 95 million people out of work" just isn't accurate. Most people have a basic understanding that there are approximately 300 million people in the U.S., and the go "OMG! 1/3 of the population is unemployed! Those people need jobs." And that just isn't true.

Comment Re: And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... (Score 5, Insightful) 2837

Using the number of Americans"not in the work force" is inaccurate and dishonest. That 95 million number includes both my parents, who are retired and living in a nursing home; my 18 month old grand daughter and my 8-year old son in elementary school; and my wife who is a traditional home maker and not interested in outside work.

None of the people in those categories should be considered in "unemployment" statistics, which is what you're doing by citing the 95 million non-working Americans.

U-6 from BLS is much more representative and is currently at 9.3â.... It includes people who want to work but have given up on despair, as well as people who want to work full time but can't get anything other than a few hours on a part-time gig.

Comment Re:Your responsibility as a clearance holder (Score 1) 733

Except, when its not. It all depends on what it is.

Case in point -- the Bradley Manning info from Wikileaks. I worked at an Executive Branch Agency where it was later found that some idiot had downloaded the material from Wikileaks and then e-mailed it to a couple of colleagues, internally to the Agency, before we blocked all access. This is on a non-classified e-mail server. It was discovered a couple of YEARS after the leaks actually happened. However, most of the material was STILL classified even after being out in the public for years.

So...destroy the drives in the Exchange servers that run the Agency e-mail? Destroy the drives of the various computers that had sent and/or received the e-mail? The SAN used for the storage array where the data was stored in a Windows shared drive?

Not according to DHS or the NSA. "Sigh. Just delete it. We have real shit to worry about." was what I was told by both Agencies.

The guy who did it got yelled at. "Officially counselled" is the term, though there was nothing put in his record. "You idiot!" was about the extent of it.

Comment Re:I own one... (Score 4, Informative) 128

Uh, what? That has to be a typo.

I have a 2013 with 95k miles on it. I still owe about $9,000. The deal will pay me about $18,000, so I'll walk away with $9,000 in cash after paying off the loan.

I'm headed over to my dealer this weekend to see what kind of incentive he'll give me on top of that for sticking with VW. Considering new Jettas start around $15,000, I could end up with a new car (2017 model year) for almost nothing.

Comment Re:Texting isn't typing (Score 1) 55

Then you have a major speech impediment and should probably see a therapist for it.

Using your post at a sample, I am able to read it aloud in 22 seconds at a conversational rate. This is the same rate I use reading stories aloud to my children. Using my slower, more enunciated "speech recognition" voice, usually reserved for Google input, it takes me 37 seconds and the only thing I had to correct afterwards was the ( and ) you used. That includes all of your punctuation and the automatic correction of "keboard" to "keyboard" that you missed. With Dragon Dictate, I'm closer to the 22 seconds than the 37, but I only use that at work.

Typing it out -- and I can touch type and quite a good clip -- gives me 75 seconds. That included two uses of the backspace key to correct my typing errors.

Yes, I greatly prefer to edit text using a keyboard. It allows for deliberation of thought as well as a much greater precision in actual editing. But, for just getting words to the page, even with basic formatting in place, speech recognition is by far faster.

Slashdot Top Deals

Science may someday discover what faith has always known.

Working...