Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Citizen, 2015-04-16, Page 5THE CITIZEN, THURSDAY, APRIL 16, 2015. PAGE 5. Betcha I can tell you what your computer password is. It’s 12345, right? No? Then it’s got to be PASSWORD. Wrong again? Say, you’re wilier than the average computer user. Seriously. The two most common passwords in North America, for the second year running, are 12345 and the even less challenging PASSWORD. What does this tell us? That people are stupid? I don’t think so – I think it tells us that people are annoyed and ticked off at the ridiculous computer protocol that compels us to commit strings of meaningless numbers, letters and symbols to memory in order to gain access to stuff on our own machines. That’s why some people all but ignore the ritual by using the simplest passwords they can think of. (Some disgruntled users are a little more inventive – the third, fourth and fifth most popular passwords are LETMEIN, BASEBALL AND QWERTY.) Of course it’s not just your laptop or your tablet anymore. You need passwords for an increasing number of everyday gadgets – thermostats, car consoles, access to your own front door, not to mention password-protected programs like Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter. And those passwords need to be increasingly cryptic. Experts advise us they should be at least 15 characters long and include a mix of lower and uppercase letters, numbers and symbols, but no recognizable words. Got a good one? Great – now you need to change it. Every month. Oh yeah – and you’ll need different passwords for everything on your devices that needs to be ‘safe’ from Russian cyberhackers, domestic thieves and, oh yes – CSIS. How many different passwords? Five years ago, according to LastPass, a company that makes password-storage software, most people averaged about 21 passwords. Today, the number is up to 81. Let me repeat that: the number of passwords used by the average customer is 81. And here’s the kicker: Even the trickiest ones aren’t worth diddly-squat. Mat Honan could tell you all about that. A while back, hackers digitally eviscerated him in less than an hour. They burrowed into the guts of his iPhone, iPad and MacBook, stole every file and document he owned and deleted every photo he’d ever put on his computer. Naturally they discovered his bank accounts, credit card numbers and other personal data on the way. Was Honan careless? Not really. His passwords were all strong, consisting of random numbers, letters and symbols, as recommended. But we don’t call them computer ‘viruses’ for no reason. Once a hacker has a morsel of information about you, he can link it to pretty much everything you’ve ever put on your laptop. Honan figures all he needs is your name, the city you were born in plus 20 minutes and a $4 investment in a crooked foreign website. And then he will own you – lock, stock and PayPal account. But that’s not the direction he’s taken. Instead he’s written a book called Kill The Password. Millions of computer users are adopting an even simpler philosophy. We could call it “Screw the Password”. They are using intentionally lame passwords like 12345 and LETMEIN because they accept the fact that hackers are too cunning and sophisticated to fool and that the entire idea of online security is a joke. These people are trying to pass as small fry in the digital ocean, hoping that the sharks and barracudas will ignore them and go after bigger fish. Screw the password. This could be the start of something big. Maybe we’ll cut back on storing our intangible valuables – sensitive data, personal photos, private thoughts – on crummy unreliable electronic gizmos and go back to keeping them where we used to store them. You know – in our heads. Perhaps we’ll stop exposing our vulnerabilities on digital venues where we can’t even begin to guess the size or nature of the audience. Maybe – just for a few minutes a day – we’ll put aside our iPods and Androids and BlackBerrys and Macs to take a look at the actual world and the real people around us. Possibly – just possibly – we’ll even get a life. Arthur Black Shawn Loughlin Shawn’s Sense Seventy-two million dollars may seem like a lot of money but when you’re dealing with major corporations and ventures, it can seem like it isn’t really all that much. However, with $72 million, the Indian Space Research Organisation was able to not only launch a spacecraft but also manage to get it into orbit around Mars. How does that stack up? Well the North American Space Agency has put billions into similar projects. But that number, $72 million, happens to be just north of what the Toronto Maple Leafs paid out to their players in 2014. I’m picking on the Leafs here, but, really, I could point to any Canadian team. The Toronto Blue Jays paid substantially more than $72 million to their players last season. There is a group of people in India who, for the same amount of money we pay a team of professional athletes, built, launched and successfully steered a spacecraft to a foreign planet. To me, that’s mind-blowing. This all occurred over the past couple of years. It was launched in November of 2013 and, late last year, successfully achieved orbit around Mars. The probe contains instruments for detecting methane gas (which is typically attributed to living beings) in the relatively thin atmosphere of the red planet, special sensors to test the atmosphere, a camera and a special thermal detection apparatus to determine the presence and quantity of minerals on the planet. If they find definitive proof of life or any scientific advancement at all, it means the nation, which is the fourth body to reach Earth’s neighbouring planet (behind Russia, the United States and the European Space Agency), will have achieved this feat for less than the cost of the three most expensive residential properties in Toronto combined ($28.8 million, $25 million and $19.8 million as of February). I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out that India faces many problems feeding the people in the nation and that money could have been spent in far more humane ways and if that is the takeaway some people get from the story, I think that is a completely legitimate concern. That said, people spend far more money on far less important things than broadening humanity’s understanding of the universe. So while I won’t give India a pass on this, I will say I’m happier with that than, say, the millions of dollars spent on antique vehicles every year. Heck, Boeing 737 jets, one of the most popular commercial airline vehicles in the world, sell for between $51.5 and $87 million according to 2009 reports. That means there are commercial planes out there travelling (at most, according to several sources regarding the longest non-stop flights) 13,805 kilometres over a 17 hour flight from Dallas in the United States to Sydney, Australia. India’s spacecraft went 225,300,000 kilometres for $72 million. That means that plane could make that 17-hour flight every day for 40 years and still have travelled about 25 million kilometres less and the maintenance wouldn’t cost as much (plus I have to imagine the meals on a spaceship would be better than airline food, or at least in pill form). Of course, those planes usually make the return trip, so maybe that isn’t an apples- to-apples comparison. In all seriousness though, this kind of turned what I knew about space travel on its ear. If we can reach Mars for $72 million, why can’t we have some kind of permanent lunar colony? If we took even a portion of the defense budgets from around the world and focused them on extending humanity’s reach to the stars, we could reach the moon permanently in my lifetime. Maybe we could even start reaching beyond that if we employed the thrifty practices of the Indian Space Research Organisation. We could develop new technologies, visit strange new worlds and races and maybe, just maybe, find some of the cures that have eluded medical science somewhere in the galaxy. For once though, the staggering implications aren’t what is keeping my mind reeling, it’s just the sheer happiness that, for the first time in my life, I feel like reaching space is within my grasp. Maybe it will take a decade or two, but, if we’re currently at a pro sports team’s wages to get to Mars, it can’t be long until it’s a mere $100,000 to see the moon. I suppose I could criticize how much we pay these athletes, but bargain-basement space travel is really far more interesting. So why, then, did I point out that the Maple Leafs paid approximately $68 million in player salaries, bonus and benefits last year? Well, it’s a joke. For $72 million India can put a spacecraft in orbit around Mars. For nearly that same amount of money the Leafs couldn’t even land in the playoffs. Maybe folks in Toronto and Maple Leaf fans should start investing in space travel. Denny Scott Denny’s Den Taking a stand In school, you’re taught how to do a lot of things. Depending on your path, you’re also taught the un-doing of many things. There are too many examples to name where Class A teaches you Lesson X, but further on down the road in Class B, you need to learn Lesson Y, which requires you to forget everything you learned in Lesson X. Here are two quick examples from my life. In several years of secondary school, through various stages of English classes, I, like many others, was taught how to write the perfect essay – introduction paragraphs, subject paragraphs and a conclusion, all with a thesis and a lot of comparing and contrasting. When I went to college and began to learn the tools of the trade of journalism, the first thing I was told was to forget everything I learned about writing an essay, because writing a news story is essentially the exact opposite. Further into my college career came the second example. When you’re taught to write a news story, the first thing you’re told to strip from your writing is anything that could be considered your opinion. Every fact has to be attributed to someone and every quote has to come out of a mouth that isn’t yours. In short, a good news story should be about the facts and the information, not about who wrote it. Then, we had an opinion writing class that endeavoured to teach us to inject our opinion back into our writing for things like columns and editorials. As you can see, sometimes to know something, you need to unlearn something else. In February, I wrote a column entitled “No Straight Line” that essentially discussed the unenviable position in which the members of the Brussels Agricultural Society find themselves in regards to partnering the Brussels Fall Fair with the 2017 International Plowing Match (IPM). It’s a tough decision and there is no clear answer. There are many pros and just as many cons and on May 6, members will vote to determine the fate of that potential partnership. Well, just as I have been taught (and un- taught) to do, I’m going to give my opinion – I think it’s a good idea. After watching IPM Chair Jacquie Bishop’s presentation so many times that I no longer had to take notes (I ran the PowerPoint for her at one presentation), I have faith that the 2017 is going to be a huge event for this community and furthermore that it’s in the right hands. To be a part of that is something that I feel Agricultural Society members should jump at (as evidenced by the fact that a number of other fall fairs are eager to partner if Brussels decides it doesn’t want to). Sure, it’s going to cost a little more and it’s going to be a very different fair from those of years past, but those involved have a chance to do a few things very, very well to an audience they could only dream of. A number of society members have already spoken in favour of the partnership. To them, it only makes sense and you can count me in with that group for what my opinion’s worth. Compromises will have to be made, but at the end of the day, an opportunity like this for two events with such rich histories is too good to pass up. They always say that fortune favours the bold and perhaps there’s a reason it’s never been tried before. It won’t be easy, but in my mind, Brussels and Walton are just the two communities to pull this off. Other Views What would you do with $72m? Password? Try a little harder than that