If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
Those idiot password changes
"Diesel" wrote
| We have been changing our forms of communication for hundreds of | years, texting is just | | In some respects we have yes. However, our primary method of | communication as a species is still performed by reading body | language and emotion. Neither of which communicates well over text | based communications systems, past or present. | I think that there's also another aspect that people often don't recognize. Texting is quick, easy, and often done "on the go". It's casual. The art of language is ignored. Ideas are not well thought out or carefully expressed. It goes with a hasty mode of being. That's OK for, "I'm running 10 minutes late". It's not OK for, "I was thinking about Mom's death..." Years ago I used to spend an afternoon writing a letter to someone. Then I'd wait 2-3 weeks for a response. That was thoughtful writing. I rarely spend so much time with email. (I don't text at all.) |
Ads |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
Those idiot password changes
Diesel wrote:
Chris news Jun 2018 07:41:25 GMT in alt.windows7.general, wrote: Diesel wrote: Nil Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:57:28 GMT in alt.windows7.general, wrote: They respond to text messaging only, which is totally inadequate for real communication. I was discussing this very issue with a co worker today. We both agreed that texting just doesn't work for real communications. What on earth is "real" communication? Complete communication. You can't represent body language or emotion reliably over text based communications. That's true, however, I wouldn't call texting any less real than other forms of communication. We have been changing our forms of communication for hundreds of years, texting is just In some respects we have yes. However, our primary method of communication as a species is still performed by reading body language and emotion. Neither of which communicates well over text based communications systems, past or present. Not sure it's our primary method. Personally and professionally speaking in person is done with the minority of our contacts. another option. It's perfectly possible to communicate via text - millions do it every day. I don't believe anyone stated otherwise. It's one thing to communicate and another to have a complete conversation.If you need specific answers to specific questions which require nothing more than a technical response, text based communications of all kinds typically serve that purpose well. If you're having a 'heart to heart' discussion, text based communications platforms are not the most efficient or reliable manner in which to do that. You cannot read body language (at all) and it's difficult to accurately pickup on emotions via text as well. Harder, but not impossible. Better to communicate via text than not at all. |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
Those idiot password changes
On 6/13/2018 8:34 AM, T wrote:
If you pick a good solid password that is not hacked by the bad guys first attempt at running tables at you, why change your password just to give him a second chance to find you in his tables?* Changing your passwords constantly is not a good security feature. It's hard to remember if you change passwords frequently in many many accounts. Keep in mind though that picking an easy password is even worse. The best ones are run on phrases.* Mine are up to 30 characters. You just canNOT escape from lucky hackers! -- @~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!! / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! /( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you! ^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3 不借貸! 不詐騙! 不*錢! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 不求神! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA): http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
Those idiot password changes
Chris news
Jun 2018 07:28:57 GMT in alt.windows7.general, wrote:
Complete communication. You can't represent body language or emotion reliably over text based communications. That's true, however, I wouldn't call texting any less real than other forms of communication. We'll have to agree to disagree then. Texting has it's uses, but.. real communication never was intended to be one of them. In some respects we have yes. However, our primary method of communication as a species is still performed by reading body language and emotion. Neither of which communicates well over text based communications systems, past or present. Not sure it's our primary method. Personally and professionally speaking in person is done with the minority of our contacts. It's a fairly simple thing to google and independently verify. No need to take my word for it. Technology is great, don't get me wrong, but, it's not a suitable replacement for in person communications, either. I don't believe anyone stated otherwise. It's one thing to communicate and another to have a complete conversation.If you need specific answers to specific questions which require nothing more than a technical response, text based communications of all kinds typically serve that purpose well. If you're having a 'heart to heart' discussion, text based communications platforms are not the most efficient or reliable manner in which to do that. You cannot read body language (at all) and it's difficult to accurately pickup on emotions via text as well. Harder, but not impossible. Better to communicate via text than not at all. In so much as to acknowledge the important message and indicate you'll be there in person (if possible) shortly or call them using your voice, to speak with them. -- To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber stalking, it's highly recommended you visit he https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php ================================================== = 'No one told me when to run; I missed the starting gun.' -- Pink Floyd |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
Those idiot password changes
"Diesel" wrote in message
36ntxlbWOQm8F.8j67YA0ygNa3QmxQYTU7... That's true, however, I wouldn't call texting any less real than other forms of communication. We'll have to agree to disagree then. Texting has it's uses, but.. real communication never was intended to be one of them. Texting suffers compared with a paper letter or an email in that people don't write complete sentences and because of limitations on the number of characters in a text (at least historically) and the problem of typing on a tiny on-screen keyboard, people become very terse and abbreviate words. |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
Those idiot password changes
NY wrote:
"Diesel" wrote in message 36ntxlbWOQm8F.8j67YA0ygNa3QmxQYTU7... That's true, however, I wouldn't call texting any less real than other forms of communication. We'll have to agree to disagree then. Texting has it's uses, but.. real communication never was intended to be one of them. Texting suffers compared with a paper letter or an email in that people don't write complete sentences and because of limitations on the number of characters in a text (at least historically) and the problem of typing on a tiny on-screen keyboard, people become very terse and abbreviate words. Being able to write concisely and clearly is a strength not a weakness. Multi-paragraph emails are just as capable of being nonsensical as a 140 character tweet/txt. You adapt to the medium. |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
Those idiot password changes
"Diesel" wrote in message ...
Wolf K Wed, 13 Jun 2018 01:30:01 GMT in alt.windows7.general, wrote: On 2018-06-12 20:45, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: In message , T writes: Hi w10 and w7, I have been bitching about this for ages. Time to rethink mandatory password changes https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/blog...03/time-rethin k-manda tory-password-changes If you pick a good solid password that is not hacked by the bad guys first attempt at running tables at you, why change your password just to give him a second chance to find you in his tables? Changing your passwords constantly is not a good security feature. Agreed. Keep in mind though that picking an easy password is even worse. The best ones are run on phrases. Mine are up to 30 characters. Well, best as a combination of security and chance that you'll remember them. Best for security alone are as near totally random as you can get, but they're going to be impossible to remember. -T A good source of phrases is your own history. Eg, this sequence derives from a couple of sentences about my life: mbswbligsihttttfthomtbaf. Convert a few letters to numerics or capitals, and may look "as near totally random" as you desi mbswb11gs1HtTttft60Mt6af Would the word flmwombat have any meaning to you? Damn, now you gave away most of my favorite pswd. No privacy anymore... -- Buffalo |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Those idiot password changes
Chris wrote:
NY wrote: "Diesel" wrote in message 36ntxlbWOQm8F.8j67YA0ygNa3QmxQYTU7... That's true, however, I wouldn't call texting any less real than other forms of communication. We'll have to agree to disagree then. Texting has it's uses, but.. real communication never was intended to be one of them. Texting suffers compared with a paper letter or an email in that people don't write complete sentences and because of limitations on the number of characters in a text (at least historically) and the problem of typing on a tiny on-screen keyboard, people become very terse and abbreviate words. Being able to write concisely and clearly is a strength not a weakness. Multi-paragraph emails are just as capable of being nonsensical as a 140 character tweet/txt. You adapt to the medium. That's not what NY said, but they you're trying to divert from the issue. Clarity is lost with overuse of acronyms, abbreviations, or initalisms along with the abundance of mispellings (accidental or deliberate) from using a device that is not ergonomically designed for the physical characteristics of humans. Texting is an modern example of humans miscommunicating due to overly-condensed and overly-short verbiage. Find someone that writes poorly in their texts. Have them compose a message of 500 words long. You'll realize that they are just as inept in written communication no matter what the venue for delivery. Texting just amplifies their poor written communication skills. Peculiarly there are poor texters that switch their style when changing to a different communication venue, like writing an essay or sending e-mail. They're lazy or cutsy in one form but proficient in other forms. They change their style according to context. Alas, most of the poor texters that I've encountered are also poor e-mailers and doc writers. Finding a good texter is like finding a good apple in a barrel of rotten ones: the majority reflects the style of the communication venue, and texting sucks for clarity and intelligibility. Part of the cause is the enforced reduction in the length of the communication and of texters trying to compose within that limit. When you call someone and get their voicemail that says you have 10 seconds to leave a message, the caller has to quickly cogitate a response but often stumbles in execution. Goldfish have been proven to have longer retention spans than humans. Sad. Way too often writers think they should write like they talk. After all, these same writers are speaking the words in their head as they read or write so that's how they write: how they talk. Those are two different communication skills. Babies learn to talk by copying and repetition. Writing is a learned skill that takes practice but too often humans don't expend the effort to practice and improve. They write like they talk which results in poorly written communication. What boobs think reverting to hieroglyphics is better communication? That language died because it was vague and skewed to interpretation. Christianized Egyptians replace hieroglyphics with the Coptic alphabet without which interpretations (not exact transcripts) of earlier Egyptian text would not be possible. Yet today we have modern hieroglypics in the form of emoticons, so texters (and e-mailers) are devolving to hieroglyphics. Cutsy and overly abbreviated communication is vague communication. Yes, texters can be succint and still be clear. Yes, texters can communicate well. That's not typical. The technology is crippling their practice in /writing/ well. Reinforcement makes them bad texters. |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Those idiot password changes
VanguardLH wrote:
Chris wrote: NY wrote: "Diesel" wrote in message 36ntxlbWOQm8F.8j67YA0ygNa3QmxQYTU7... That's true, however, I wouldn't call texting any less real than other forms of communication. We'll have to agree to disagree then. Texting has it's uses, but.. real communication never was intended to be one of them. Texting suffers compared with a paper letter or an email in that people don't write complete sentences and because of limitations on the number of characters in a text (at least historically) and the problem of typing on a tiny on-screen keyboard, people become very terse and abbreviate words. Being able to write concisely and clearly is a strength not a weakness. Multi-paragraph emails are just as capable of being nonsensical as a 140 character tweet/txt. You adapt to the medium. That's not what NY said, but they you're trying to divert from the issue. What exactly isn't what NY said? I'm simply trying to express an opposing view. Clarity is lost with overuse of acronyms, abbreviations, or initalisms along with the abundance of mispellings (accidental or deliberate) from using a device that is not ergonomically designed for the physical characteristics of humans. Texting is an modern example of humans miscommunicating due to overly-condensed and overly-short verbiage. Find someone that writes poorly in their texts. Have them compose a message of 500 words long. You'll realize that they are just as inept in written communication no matter what the venue for delivery. Texting just amplifies their poor written communication skills. Peculiarly there are poor texters that switch their style when changing to a different communication venue, like writing an essay or sending e-mail. They're lazy or cutsy in one form but proficient in other forms. They change their style according to context. Alas, most of the poor texters that I've encountered are also poor e-mailers and doc writers. Finding a good texter is like finding a good apple in a barrel of rotten ones: the majority reflects the style of the communication venue, and texting sucks for clarity and intelligibility. Part of the cause is the enforced reduction in the length of the communication and of texters trying to compose within that limit. When you call someone and get their voicemail that says you have 10 seconds to leave a message, the caller has to quickly cogitate a response but often stumbles in execution. Goldfish have been proven to have longer retention spans than humans. Sad. Way too often writers think they should write like they talk. After all, these same writers are speaking the words in their head as they read or write so that's how they write: how they talk. Those are two different communication skills. Babies learn to talk by copying and repetition. Writing is a learned skill that takes practice but too often humans don't expend the effort to practice and improve. They write like they talk which results in poorly written communication. What boobs think reverting to hieroglyphics is better communication? That language died because it was vague and skewed to interpretation. Christianized Egyptians replace hieroglyphics with the Coptic alphabet without which interpretations (not exact transcripts) of earlier Egyptian text would not be possible. Yet today we have modern hieroglypics in the form of emoticons, so texters (and e-mailers) are devolving to hieroglyphics. Cutsy and overly abbreviated communication is vague communication. Yes, texters can be succint and still be clear. Yes, texters can communicate well. That's not typical. The technology is crippling their practice in /writing/ well. Reinforcement makes them bad texters. You've just proved my point. You've written five paragraphs veering from how writers write to Egyptians hieroglyphics regarding how to communicate well, when the last paragraph is probably all you needed. Long form is not necessarily better nor more "real" communication. |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
Those idiot password changes
"NY"
o.uk Fri, 29 Jun 2018 08:58:58 GMT in alt.windows7.general, wrote: "Diesel" wrote in message 36ntxlbWOQm8F.8j6 7YA0ygNa3QmxQYTU7... That's true, however, I wouldn't call texting any less real than other forms of communication. We'll have to agree to disagree then. Texting has it's uses, but.. real communication never was intended to be one of them. Texting suffers compared with a paper letter or an email in that people don't write complete sentences and because of limitations on the number of characters in a text (at least historically) and the problem of typing on a tiny on-screen keyboard, people become very terse and abbreviate words. Those are additional issues with the communications method, yes. -- To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber stalking, it's highly recommended you visit he https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php ================================================== = An optimist is simply a pessimist with no job experience. |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Those idiot password changes
"Buffalo" news
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 19:12:19 GMT in alt.windows7.general, wrote:
Damn, now you gave away most of my favorite pswd. No privacy anymore... [g] -- To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber stalking, it's highly recommended you visit he https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php ================================================== = Today is a good day to bribe a high ranking public official. |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
Those idiot password changes
On Sat, 7 Jul 2018 21:02:50 -0000 (UTC), Diesel wrote:
Texting suffers compared with a paper letter or an email in that people don't write complete sentences and because of limitations on the number of characters in a text (at least historically) and the problem of typing on a tiny on-screen keyboard, people become very terse and abbreviate words. Those are additional issues with the communications method, yes. Teenagers huh! |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
Those idiot password changes
mechanic
Sun, 08 Jul 2018 10:06:15 GMT in alt.windows7.general, wrote: On Sat, 7 Jul 2018 21:02:50 -0000 (UTC), Diesel wrote: Texting suffers compared with a paper letter or an email in that people don't write complete sentences and because of limitations on the number of characters in a text (at least historically) and the problem of typing on a tiny on-screen keyboard, people become very terse and abbreviate words. Those are additional issues with the communications method, yes. Teenagers huh! I've seen persons who are no longer teenagers do the same thing so... -- To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber stalking, it's highly recommended you visit he https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php ================================================== = As goatherd learns his trade by goat, so writer learns his trade by wrote. |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
Those idiot password changes
In alt.comp.os.windows-10 Diesel wrote:
mechanic Sun, 08 Jul 2018 10:06:15 GMT in alt.windows7.general, wrote: On Sat, 7 Jul 2018 21:02:50 -0000 (UTC), Diesel wrote: Texting suffers compared with a paper letter or an email in that people don't write complete sentences and because of limitations on the number of characters in a text (at least historically) and the problem of typing on a tiny on-screen keyboard, people become very terse and abbreviate words. Those are additional issues with the communications method, yes. Teenagers huh! I've seen persons who are no longer teenagers do the same thing so... So? ICN! ..!.. -- Quote of the Week: "I got worms! That's what we're going to call it. We're going to specialize in selling worm farms. You know like ant farms. What's the matter, a little tense about the flight?" --Lloyd Christmas (Dumb and Dumber movie) Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly. /\___/\Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org / http://antfarm.ma.cx / /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit- | |o o| | ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and URL/link. \ _ / ( ) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|