the most amusing thing is the exclamation mark on such a banal opening move.
It's been decades. That means "Check!" right?
Ken Thompson's Unix Password
81–90 of 665 posts
Re: Ken Thompson's Unix Password
#82Re: Ken Thompson's Unix Password
#83Interestingly enough, this password does not show up on haveibeenpwnd!
Re: Ken Thompson's Unix Password
#84Re: Ken Thompson's Unix Password
#85the most amusing thing is the exclamation mark on such a banal opening move.
It's been decades. That means "Check!" right?
Re: Ken Thompson's Unix Password
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not if you play chess. 1. d4 is played probably more than half the time in professional games. It can lead to lots of different openings, closed and open (but not at the same time).
Really? I though 1. e4 was more common. TIL!
Re: Ken Thompson's Unix Password
#87disappointed he didn't use algebraic notation. Could have been: e4e5f4ef
Re: Ken Thompson's Unix Password
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
My first password ever was qazwsx and I used it until I learned that it's included in "known" password text files and thus instantly crackable. However, I wonder how safe it is to take an "easy" password like /.,/.,/., and then add a bunch of exclamation points to the end, so that it's both long and not part of a dictionary. I'm sure password crackers are advanced enough to first try taking common passwords and then…
best practices have changed from using a complex password with lots of upper/lower and symbols to use something longer but easier to remember. More strength from misspellings and a few symbols My Fav0riT Pas%werd is actually pretty solid compared to df22@$Fasdf because the latter is more crackable
It also doesn't require any special characters and its quite easy to remember.
Re: Ken Thompson's Unix Password
#89> (those familiar know the hash-rate fluctuates and slows down towards the end) Could someone explain this to me, why does it slow down towards the end?
Re: Ken Thompson's Unix Password
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is the beginning of the closed game, which is what the article says. Seems like a vacuous nitpick.
Pedantry might as well be correct: calling q2-q4 "the beginning of a closed game" hides the fact that it's also the beginning of many other validated openings: https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Chess_Opening_Theory/1._d4 Advancing the queen's pawn 2 squares is a very common first move in chess at all levels. It's disingenuous to call this the beginning of any one of the specific possible openings in the above list.
There is nothing incorrect about the article's statement.