Category: Do the Right Thing

Posted on

Once More Into the Breach

. . .or not.

I see articles occasionally about the death of passwords, creating effective passwords, blah-blah. Well, passwords and the insecurities created by stupid (or lazy. . . or more like both) people and their password habits aren’t going away any time soon, and most of the articles suggesting improvements are seriously lacking in effective counsel. Most now suggest pass phrases with common substitutions of symbols and numbers for letters, but really, how many folks will do that? Others suggest using password managers (I often suggest this, myself, but even users who have PAID me for consulting rarely make even the exceptionally minimal effort to effect this change in their behavior *sigh*).

So, what’s a solution? When it comes to ID10T errors like lazy or stupid (or both) password behavior, the only solutions seem to be either eliminating the users or letting them reap the effects of their bad behaviors.

*meh*

Now, I’ll admit that my own normative password policies would definitely not appeal to most users, although it baffles me why that case is, save for excessive laziness on their part. OK, so here’s a loose outline of a process that’s super simple and easier than most pass phrase processes. That it is similar to my own is purely coincidental. 😉

Select a song from childhood or early youth that can you reliably “sing” mentally. Or choose a memory shared only with people you have not seen for many years.
Extract an inner verse from the song or a visual from the selected memory.
Using the verse as a passphrase, extract ONLY the first letter of each word in the verse; using the visual of the memory, create a passphrase and do the same thing.
Now, with those passwords extracted from the passphrases, make your substitutions of symbols and numbers, as appropriate.

There. Relatively long, complex, fairly uncrackasble (in any reasonable amount ot time), easy to remember passwords. I have a couple passwords created by means similar to this that are 60-some-odd characters long, though most websites don’t allow passwords that are really all that long. No problem typing such passwords, because the pass phrases they are built on are extremely memorable, and I really don’t have problem typing long passwords.

Of course, for non-critical sites, I go ahead and use LastPass. *shrugs* I only allow it to autologon to sites that have no (genuine) PII for me and where I DGARA about some bad actor getting in, but I still use strong passwords, anyway. Oh, and a good VPN ALWAYS when online.

As for my devices, a good firewall (actually, firewalls on the devices that do not conflict with a hardware firewall for the network), strong passwords, encrypted PII, solid backups of data, and physical control of access will have to suffice.

Still, I cannot recall the number of calls (OK, I could go back on my records, but that’s where I will pead laziness *heh*) I have had from folks who “forgot” (or worse, “mislaid”–which means they had it written down somewhere) the passwords for their computers. *smh* Baffles me. It truly does.

Posted on

Had to *SMH* in Amazement

Saw a comment that was only moderately “gabberflastering” on a forum that shall go unnamed. Guy said he had to write in thew sharps and flats that were in the key sig to remind himself when he played through a piece.

Say what?!?

Whenever I taught music or directed volunteer music groups, I generally taught beginning music readers to use the “STARS” system or a variant that is even simpler, for those in volunteer choirs whose music reading chops were. . . only slowly emerging:

S – Sharps or flats in the key signature
T – Time signature and Tempo markings
A – Accidentals not found in the key signature
R – Rhythms ; silently count the more difficult notes and rests
S – Signs , including dynamics, articulations, repeats and endings

Every class session or rehearsal included using something likethe “STARS” system before reading every new piece. *shrugs* Regular exercise of “reading” through a new piece (or reviewing one not seen in a while) really aided in sight reading. Of course, “STARS” is just an extremely simplified version of score study any competent conductor does, but it seemed to be enough to alleviate the “write in the sharps/flats for reminder” issue. . . especially since each freakin’ line in a score begins with the key sig. . .

Posted on

Silly, Sad, or Disingenuous?

I have a dirty little pleasure. I lurk (and sometimes–rarely–participate) on Quora, mainly in order to keep track of just how low literacy and rhetoric can sink (is sinking, still) in these DisUnited States. Here:

In the wake of another mass shooting, do you support the NRA who is saying “anti gun doctors should stay in their lane,”or are you with the doctors who treat the victims?

Answering such a question is a waste of time, because the question is illegitimate on its face.

“. . .do you support the NRA who is saying ‘anti gun doctors should stay in their lane,’ or are you with the doctors who treat the victims?”

The questioner creates a class “anti-gun doctors” and sets the NRA against that class, but also, by asking if one—contra the NRA, in the questioner’s construction—is “with” (in support of) doctors who treat the victims, creating an equivalence between “anti-gun doctors” and “the doctors who treat the victims” implying that doctors who are NOT “anti-gun” don’t treat victims. . . or worse, implying there are not doctors who are not “anti-gun.”

All-in-all, it’s a question that was either formed poorly by someone who just cannot use English literately or it was formed by someone intending to semantically slant the question in an illegitimate manner. Either way, it’s a less than useful question from an arguably useless questioner.

But, frankly, on some issues, a question formed like this one would be better than most.

Posted on

Why Even Have a Constitution?

Yeh, random thought? No, Hollyweird program featuring “feddle gummint” law enFARCEment at its. . . contemporary norm spurred this.

“The powers of the Legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the Constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing, if these limits may at any time be passed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction between a government with limited and unlimited powers is abolished if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed, and if acts prohibited and acts allowed are of equal obligation.”

The US Constitution was intended and designed to circumscribe, restrain, LIMIT federal powers, to first prevent it from infringing on individuals’ rights while enabling it to have just enough power to protect individuals from those who would infringe on those rights, but only in areas where the states did not already have that responsibility.

Now, “feddle gummint” powers have been so illegitimately stretched, the Constitution seems to largely be a dead letter, trotted out to be disingenuously twisted into support for whatever “feddle gummint” overstep is the latest power grab, and “stare decisis” means whatever is convenient.

*shrugs*

What to do. You tell me.

Posted on

The Proper Use of a “Splainsit Stick”

Any time I see “[Whatever]-splaining” used by someone to dismiss an argument, I know the person using the term is really saying, “I don’t have an argument, and I just don’t want to listen, so I’ll use this nonsense term instead of putting my fingers in my ears and chanting, ‘la-la-la-la. . .’ and maybe the horrible person using facts and reason will just go away and leave me with my chosen, ignorant opinions.”

At that point, I realize that the only proper response is raucous mocking.

And that, dear reader, is how one uses a “Splainsit Stick.”

Posted on

Disunity in the Body Politic and Society as a Whole

Many folks bemoan the obviously divided state of our society, but that’s really just either a thoughtless dismay or a disingenuous appeal to rally around destructive values. Mankind (yes, I use the time-honored term; I am not a Child of Darkness–at least in that regard) has always been divided into Children of Light and Children of Darkness, always has been for all of recorded time. I prefer to view the obvious divisions now in plain view as clarifying a time to choose which side one is on: Light or Darkness.

If you should decide to choose Light, then recall also these things:

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”? Edmund Burke (in a letter addressed to Thomas Mercer).

And

“The light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed.”

And

“What fellowship does light have with darkness?”

Division should be a Very Good Thing, but it depends on the children of Light not hiding that Light but shining it into the Darkness.

Posted on

“Gunsplaining,” “Mansplaining,” and Other Lame Excuses for Ignorance

Any time I see “[Whatever]-splaining” used by someone to dismiss an argument, I know the person using the term is really saying, “I don’t have an argument, and I just don’t want to listen, so I’ll use this nonsense term instead of putting my fingers in my ears and chanting, ‘na-na-na-na. . .’ and maybe the horrible person using facts and reason will just go away and leave me with my chosen, ignorant opinions.”

At that point, I realize that the only proper response is raucous mocking.

Posted on

2018 Polls: The Stupid Vote Gains Ground

In future, vote all red, folks. (*sigh* Lesser evil and all that.) You will have all the years after you die to vote blue.

At least there’s one good thing out of the Repugnican’ts losing the House: hopefully it will gridlock Congress. I say hopefully, because

  1. When Congress isn’t passing laws, at least it’s not making things horribly worse and
  2. MAYBE it will gridlock. . . if the Repugnican’ts in Congress can overcome their predilection for bending over and begging, “Please. May I have another?”

It could happen. . .

Posted on

A General Summary (Voting Guide) from Six Years Ago

These are just a few examples from which to generalize. Not all will have any direct application to any one election.

This year, again, I’m voting primarily against stupidity and evil.

Stupid or evil? (Or both?)

“Pro-choice” (which is really, “Deny ANY choice to the unborn”)
The Thugs Standing Around program of full employment for goons and petty tyrants
“feddle gummint” tyrannical meddling in citizens’ lives while actively enabling outlaws
The Cult of Anthropogenic Climate Scare-ism
Enablers and apologists for the hate cult of the Butcher of Medina evil
One can select any issue dominated by the lies of the Mass MEdia Podpeople Hivemind, politicians *gag-spew*
and Academia Nut Fruitcakes and plug it right into the “Stupid or Evil” matrix for consideration.
Punishing job producers for success
Encouraging sloth and greed by robbing those who are productive to give to those who are not (including cronies of politicians who milk the public purse and abscond with our grandchildren’s futures)
You get the drift.

Posted on

For the Polls Tomorrow. . .

Do NOT encourage everyone you meet/know to vote! The Founders were justly leery of too much democracy (which is why they designed the Constitution to create a representative republic with some democratic elements). Always remember Third World County™’s corollary to Santayana’s Axiom:

“In a democracy (‘rule by mob’), those who refuse to learn from history will be the majority and will dictate that everyone else suffer for their ignorance”

ONLY encourage those who are well-informed and who have a rational bent to vote. Actively discourage the ignorant, misinformed, DISinformed, and notably brainwashed from voting. Their influence is uniformly negative, no matter their unthinking, uncritical, ignorant political bent.