Now it's fixed.
> it can be a small problem, I think, when "non-random" sequences are removed from possible random number generations. [...] it may take a fair slice out of the available keyspace
This is true, and could be a problem if everyone's PIN were randomly generated. Since most PINs are selected by users and conform to a known, decidedly non-uniform distribution, this actually makes sense. If it's known that e.g. 1234 is over-represented in the pool of PINs, that would be one of the first ones an attacker would try. Therefore, it makes sense to filter that out. But note that it's the over-representation of the PIN and the fact that attackers are aware of this skew that makes it worth avoiding, and not anything inherently insecure about "runs" or "pairs".
There are three basic types of volcano, based on the composition of the magma.
Basaltic. Heaviest magma. Eruptions produce thick, slow, lava flows. Most beautiful, least dangerous. examples: Hawaii (Mauna Loa).
Andesitic. Lighter magma of mixed composition. Eruptions are explosive; much more dangerous. West coast of North America (Mt. St. Helens, Mt. Redoubt)
Rhyolitic. Lightest magma. Eruptions can be cataclysmic. Most dangerous; if you live within 1000 miles of a big eruption, you can kiss your ass goodbye. (Yellowstone, most volcanoes in New Zealand.)
One thing we learned while on an Earthwatch volcano-monitoring expedition some years ago is that there are no "dead" volcanoes. We are merely talking in those cases about extremely long between-eruption periods, which can be millions of years.
I'm sure it's no picnic to have to deal with Time Warner. My cable company is Charter, and there is no joy there either. But let's cut straight to the quick:
After the year we have had, with deflation raging and with the consequent loss of jobs and other economic suffering all around, for anyone to demand a fee increase from anyone over anything is an OUTRAGE.
I have another complaint along similar lines. Why should there be any secret agreements between these companies, or any two corporations for that matter? Whatever the reasons why they might want to keep the agreements secret, the secrecy would seem to make public oversight difficult or impossible.
Granted, the entities involved are free to make some informal agreements among themselves. (They aren't free to make agreements to fix prices, hidden or otherwise!) But if they want to be able to use the legally constituted court system to enforce such agreements, then the contracts should be completely open and available to public inspection. (And not just after a lawsuit is filed: from the moment of signing.)
Aside: why should there be public oversight in this and similar cases? Imagine if your power were out for two days because of some secret spat between power companies!
Never mind the editors: what kind of imbecile spells the name wrong not once but three times when he includes a quotation which contains the correct spelling?
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso