#a random person posts in a random reddit thread and HAPPENS to get added by someone ELSE from their SAME TOWN

[inkskinned]

it is all chaos and entropy. the thing is that the chaos and entropy make it beautiful and lovely.

yes, it's true that nature and the universe are uncaring and unspecific, and that is terrifying. i have lived through some of the unfairness - i got born like this, with my body caving into itself, with this ironic love of dance when i sometimes can't stand up for longer than 15 minutes. i am a poet with hands that are slowly shutting down - i can't hold a pen some days. recently i found a dead bird on our front porch. she had no visible injuries. she had just died, the way things die sometimes.

it is also true that nature and the universe are uncaring and unspecific, and that is wonderful. the sheer happenstance that makes rain turn into a rainbow. the impossible coincidence of finding your best friend. i have made so many mistakes and i have let myself down and i have harmed other people by accident. nature moves anyway. on the worst day of my life she delivers me an orange juice sunset, as if she is saying try again tomorrow.

how vast and unknowing the universe! how small we are! isn't that lovely. the universe has given us flowers and harp strings and the shape of clouds. how massive our lives are in comparison to a grasshopper. the world so bright, still undiscovered. even after 30 years of being on this earth, i learned about a new type of animal today: the dhole.

chance echoing in my life like a harmony between two people talking. do you think you and i, living in different worlds but connected through the internet - do you think we've ever seen the same butterfly? they migrate thousands of miles. it's possible, right?

how beautiful the ways we fill the vastness of space. i love that when large amounts of people are applauding in a room, they all start clapping at the same time. i love that the ocean reminds us of our mother's heartbeat. i love that out of all the colors, chlorophyll chose green. i love the coincidences. i love the places where science says i don't know, but it just happens.

"the universe doesn't care about you!" oh, i know. that's okay. i care about the universe. i will put my big stupid heart out into it and watch the universe feast on it. it is not painful. it is strange - the more love you pour into the unfeeling world, the more it feels the world loves you in return. i know it's confirmation bias. i think i'm okay if my proof of kindness is just my own body and my own spirit.

i buried the bird from our porch deep in the woods. that same day, an old friend reaches out to me and says i miss you. wherever you go, no matter how bad it gets - you try to do good.

#writeblr #warm up #i can't write rn but i have SO much words in here bc im reading the chorus of dragons books #(just started book 4) #and this woman's writing is just LIVING in my brain. let me out!!! #(i read roughly like 2-4 books a week usually bc i go on long walks with my dog but when a book is REALLY good like. it eats my life. ) #anyway ...... so like here's a story that idk i've tried to explain to other people as being wild #but maybe im the only one who thinks it is wild??? #so i play pokemon go (i just started in jan) bc i love pokemon and as i have mentioned i walk goblin for like an hour in the morning #and i don't like a lot of fitness trackers due to the fact it makes me .sad. but i also wanted the little digital rewards. enter pokemon go #anyway so they make you make friends to complete quests. so i used a reddit thread. i do not usually use reddit. i don't have an acct #i lurked. i just googled like ''pokemon go reddit '' and randomly added a bunch of numbers #i was on that page for all of 15 minutes. there are THOUSANDS of responses on that page. #here's what's wild: in that group of people. even though i am not on reddit and it was one random event once #it turns out one of those people lives in the town i live in. or at least very close. i only know this because #when we send each other gifts. it's from the same freaking area. #i can't ask them to meet up bc pokemon go doesn't have a messaging app lol but like . what are the fucking chances that #a random person posts in a random reddit thread and HAPPENS to get added by someone ELSE from their SAME TOWN #who by pure fucking CHANCE is ALSO playing pokemon go and looking for friends #i googled it there's only 42000 people in my broad region. the .......... smallness ! of the world!!!

[januaryedgelordess]

I'd like to discuss a SnK theory with someone, it's on the possibility of a different (or expanded) AnR theory.

Disclaimer: Perhaps you should read this post with the lyrics for Akatsuki no Requiem by Linked Horizon in mind, but I also don't stand by the original reddit theory a 100%.

--

One of the questions that lingers around the fandom is: "who would've survived the Rumbling had it been done as originally implied by the themes and foreshadowing of the story?". Some believe only Eren and Historia would have had that chance, but they might be mistaken.

The first proof I have in order to back this claim is AnR's official art as drawn by WIT Studio during the production of season three of the anime:

(Note: these are originally four different images, the source of this collage is vaguely anitwt).

Just as shown in the original PV by Linked Horizon, each of these characters are standing by a gravestone while holding a bouquet and looking conflicted. Now, to counter the original AnR theorists, I propose that Eren —and by extension, Historia— weren't the only ones to live on with regret in their hearts, instead, Levi and Hanji survived as well.

Why did they survive? Is my conclusion solely based on these pictures? Well, just in part.

I believe Attack on Titan was never meant to be a one-sided story, and that one of the various themes that weren't thoroughly explored in the later chapters, a theme which was instead rushed and swiftly overlooked, is that of the conflict between "Nationalism" and "Internationalism". It's obvious and needless to point out that Yaegerists were the former, but the latter never take a name for themselves. However, we get a rough idea of who they might be, one of them is clearly Hanji Zoe:

Another internationalist is obviously Onyankopon:

Another one is Armin and so on, and so on.

Are they the only type on people on Earth? Of course not. Notably you also have those who have egotistical motivations, like Jean, who just wants to get married and live a peaceful life in the inner cities; or the Hizuru ambassador, Kiyomi, whose motivation is monetary gain. The world isn't black and white in AoT so, to clarify, it's unnecessary to classify every character in the dichotomy here presented.

Now, if Yams hadn't downplayed this interaction, we may have had a better thought out plan to stop the Rumbling and, possibly, a less moronically cringy way for "The Alliance" to be presented.

Why is that? It's because of various reasons. First, one of the most observant characters, Hanji, is notable for having spied on some of Eren and Historia's interactions (the "You look happy — that's because I am" scene for example) but by the end of the story the audience never got a reason as to why this observant behavior happened. If Hanji really is as cunning and observant as she is portrayed to be, she should've been the first character to suspect that Eren is the father and, therefore, that Historia's pregnancy's due date was off. Instead of the survey corps discussing this info, we get some random officers discussing irrelevant rumours about it. Isayama I mean, Kawakubo played Hanji Zoe dirty, in my opinion, in this scenario.

If Hanji had noticed that important information, and if that info had been shared with the Survey Corps, as was natural for her character to do, "the Alliance" may have had been able to act sooner against the AT.

Now, would more prep time save the world from devastation? No, I don't believe so. I believe it would, instead, make them have a slightly more realistic last fight by a) having them recruit actual soldiers and weapons for the final showdown, heck, if they have enough time even other countries would chime in, vs Hallu-chan and the Attach Titan; and, therefore, b) not having them rely on a Deus Ex Machina to defeat Eren.

That way, Hanji would live on with regret, knowing the Alliance did everything in their power to defeat the Attack Titan but failed miserably in the end. Instead of having her smile as her ghost-self at whatever the hell the canon battle achieved, she'd mourn the world that's been lost, and she'd feel regret for not being able to save it.

Now, for Levi I haven't done a thorough analysis yet, but I believe it's not difficult to see why humanity's strongest soldier would survive this ordain. I'd really like to hear someone else's thoughts on that matter.

Also, I'm in no way trying to imply LeviHan was supposed to be part of a kino ending, but I'm not too into that ship so I'd like to hear someone else's thoughts about it and on why they were the only two members of the alliance to survive according to WIT Studio's AnR official art.

Now, onto the second part of "who survived the Rumbling?". The next piece of information contradicts previous statements, and it also contradicts an AnR ending to some extent, but bare with me, please.

Exhibit A, Mikasa and Armin should have survived:

However, for Kruger's prophecy to succeed, I stand by my previous statement that "the Alliance" should've acted sooner, and that Armin is part of the Internationalist faction ready to "save humanity". Why do I believe that? It's easy, first, let's remember this quote from the moment Erwin died:

Note how, not only does Eren say Armin will save the humans, he also implies Mikasa will know it'll happen (so she'll be alive by the time the battle ends).

And, piggybacking on that moment as well, Armin would've been able to use his intellect to make a plan to divert the Rumbling titans. I'm adding this here to stress something that can't be stressed enough: Armin shouldn't have had to fistfight Eren twice, and he shouldn't have had to steal someone else's kill. Now onto that kill...

Should Mikasa have been the one to deal Eren's final blow? In the canon version of the story it's shown, in a rather cringy way, how she has to make up a whole different scenario inside her mind to get the mental strength to kill him. To me, Mikasa instead should've used the devastation caused by the Rumbling to completely break away from Eren's character and to be able to see past the "you're being brainwashed" narrative. Now, besides some of Isayama's interviews, there's other proof to back this up: the Historia-Mikasa parallels in Ending 4 and Ending 1:

Ending 1: https://youtu.be/O4wezNlsxB0

Ending 4: https://youtu.be/o05UK9lXtC0

We see some petty similarities in both: how both girls seem to be inside a pond or a lake, a snip of them running when they were young, etc.; but we also see some more important things for this theory: their growth as a person (how they survived whatever the past cast upon them), and them catching up to the people who they look up to and love.

Now, two things we know about Historia are that her beloved Ymir left her and she had to learn to accept it and move on; and that her sister, Frieda, died and she, without initially knowing even that she'd lost her, had to learn how to live on her own when she was young. Would Mikasa and Eren be able to have an end like that? I think it was implied that it was possible, but other than that, as part of any healthy development of her character, it is important for her to move on just as the Eldian Queen did: even if Eren chose to live a life apart from her (like Ymir did to Historia's early knowledge) or even if he were to die (like Frieda did).

Also, I have some doubts about Mikasa being the one who was supposed to kill Eren, since the one who was foreshadowed to be a Helos' parallel, and who'd fit the role just as well is Reiner, but I won't discuss that here.

So, to me, Mikasa was never an Internationalist, but for the sake of her character, a break-away from Eren should've been a good conclusive act.

As to some other parallels between Mikasa and Historia we have this part:

In which it is implied that they share the same burden by birth, and the same destiny, possibly. Mikasa is shown to be embarrassed about it but Historia seems to be thoroughly delighted.

With this parallel I'd also like to recall two other threads left undone: the Azumabito clan and the Ackerman mystery.

First, the Azumabitos. It's implied that their land is to "the Orient", and we also get a small snip during the Rumbling which implies they have a coast (it's obvious their country is a direct reference to Japan, needless to say). All of which would imply that, as it does in the Real World ™️, Hizuru is almost the Eastern-most Nation of AoT's world as well, and therefore, it may be one of the last countries that the Rumbling would have reached. If you add that they were the first people to send an ambassador to Paradis, you get: Hizuru being the first nation to be included in a possible Internationalist "Alliance" (had it been done in the appropriate time) against the Attack Titan; and you also get that this would increase their possibilities of surviving, at least just in part, the Rumbling.

Why is this important? Because AnR's lyrics do not imply the world will be completely and absolutely obliterated. AnR's lyrics imply the world will live on but the power dynamic of the world will be reversed: Paradis will rule, while the rest will be forced inside the cage.

https://www.musixmatch.com/lyrics/Linked-Horizon/Akatsuki-no-Requiem-TV-Size

Now, the Ackermans. Just as Historia and Zeke posses a special particularity by virtue of birth (they are direct descendants of Ymir), which make them valuable assets to "breed" for whoever is using the Eldians (be it Marley, the Azumabitos, or the First King), I believe the outside world would be interested, at any part of the story, to have an Ackerman in their line of defense against the Eldians. In this case the Mikasa-Historia parallel is strengthened, simply because it would be interesting to see Levi or Mikasa confront that part of their destiny (to make the Ackerman clan continue for the sake of a plan, while acknowledging they're the only survivors). Perhaps Hizuru would've been the country to try and make use of that potential? This parallel was, of course, never used, but it would've been delightful to see it exploited at some point in the AoT timeline. However I acknowledge that continuity is impossible in a world without titans, unless one of the surviving countries on Earth are in serious need of Olympic competitors, of course, so perhaps it should've been mentioned before The Rumbling arc.

.

Well, this turned out to be more like a vent or a rant than a theory now, and I wish I could've had discussed it quietly with someone instead of just posting it here. There are some other nuances to this analysis that I would like to explore in the future (since this isn't thoroughly thought out) In the meantime what do you all think of a new AnR theory like this one? Does it make a little sense? At least a bit? I hope so. Thank you for reading and sorry about the grammar mistakes.

TLDR: I believe Armin, Mikasa, Eren, Historia, Hanji and Levi should have survived and also it's possible for Hizuru to have survived. Please feel free to point out any flaws.

#Eren #Attack on Titan #Armin #Mikasa #Levi #Hanji #AoT Theory #AnR Theory #just my personal thoughts #snk spoilers #aot spoilers #attack on titan spoilers #shingeki no kyojin spoilers #Historia Reiss #Ackerman clan #akatsuki no requiem #linked horizon #anr

[for-peace-war]

Long Post! Hit J if you want to skip!

My guild has recently had a lot of conversation on Jessica Price and Peter Fries who were recently fired from ArenaNet’s Guild Wars 2 development team.  I’m pretty sure that most everyone that could care has heard about it, but what is confusing me is why people are trying to die on hills for two people that really did not come across as anything other than gatekeeping assholes.

To be clear, if you disagree with this statement then that’s fantastic.  Because I am posting this on social media, I am expressing tacit approval for you to respond to it, dislike it, deconstruct it, or whatever you wish.  This doesn’t mean that I have to like what is being said, but the condition that “if I post this on the internet, then someone may reply to it” is a fairly sound one.

To cut through a lot of the fluff, I’ll summarize:

A developer, Jessica Price, was on her personal twitter discussing the problems with MMO development.

Per usual, a mob formed to express their opinions.  It’s the Internet, so that means saying a lot of crude, disgusting, sexist, and absurd things.

Within this mess, one person - Deroir - decided to voice his own opinion.  I wouldn’t say that he’s an expert (I wouldn’t say that she was either since Guild Wars 2 is a mess...) but I will indicate that among the throngs of the “laymen” (as Fries put it), he at least has some affiliation with the IP. 

Deroir Says: Really interesting thread to read! However, allow me to disagree *slightly*. I dont believe the issue lies in the MMORPG genre itself (as your wording seemingly suggest). I believe the issue lies in the contraints of the Living Story's narrative design; (1 of 3) When you want the outcome to be the same across the board for all players' experiences, then yes, by design you are extremely limited in how you can contruct the personality of the PC. (2 of 3) But, if instead players were given the option to meaningfully express *their* character through branching dialogue options (which also aren't just on the checklist for an achievement that forces you through all dialogue options), (3 of 4 cause I count seemingly...) then perhaps players would be more invested in the roleplaying aspect of that particular MMORPG. Nonetheless, I appreciate the insightful thread! (End)

To which Price replies: thanks for trying to tell me what we do internally, my dude 9_9

And Deroir replies: You getting mad at my obvious attempt at creating dialogue and discussion with you, instead of just replying that I am wrong or otherwise correct me in my false assumptions, is really just disheartening for me. You do you though. I'm sorry if it offended. I'll leave you to it.

The above is their initial discourse and honestly because I don’t feel like posting all of the tirade that follows, I’ll leave it at that for now.

The initial concern was: Should Jessica Price have been fired for ‘going off’ on Deroir? An example of things said:

“Like, the next rando asshat who attempts to explain the concept of branching dialogue to me — as if, you know, having worked in game narrative for a fucking DECADE, I have never heard of it — is getting instablocked. PSA I’m not on the clock here. I’m not your emotional courtesan just because I’m a dev. Don’t expect me to pretend to like you here.”

That is not acceptable, at all.  I would fire anyone that was interacting with my customers while being associated with me, on the basis of that alone.  It is true that she was on her own “private” account, but she was discussing work related information, using her work related title, and using her work related position to open a dialogue (or a monologue, as it seems) with those that were actively purchasing my product.

There have been arguments that he mansplained (read: explained something to her as if she were unaware despite her experience based on her gender) and then secondary calls that “she had dealt with a lot of harassment before so this wasn’t her fault,” but those are two faulty premises:

First, because she was the one that opened this discussion on social media.  If she wanted to avoid responses or only take on “educated information” then she could have either placed it in an article or circulated her complaint among her former co-workers. 

Second, if there was a sea of hateful people that had been harassing her, then this hardly seems like the right time to “take it out” on someone.  I do not know the struggles of women on the Internet, but I know what it’s like be a black person on the Internet so I can say only that while it is true that you will always assume a certain amount of hostility, just taking it out on the first person that speaks is absurd.  

If, for example, there really was a rabid mob crying for Price’s blood, then why wouldn’t she unload her ‘emotional courtesan’ spiel on them and not someone that as objectively as possible was being inoffensive if not a bit tone deaf to her mood? The self-fulfilling remedy that he “was mansplaining” as justification for her very rude tirade absolutely does not address that his only offense was again, speaking to a very neutral point.

What is worse, this has become a matter of someone being fired over her gender rather than the truth of the matter, which is that she was just an asshole.  People are canceled, rightly, from minority groups all the time.  If Kanye West flew off the handle on someone, I wouldn’t rush to defend the ‘slavery is a choice” dude even if it is good to have black men in the spotlight.  Cut the string and let them drown under the undertow of their own shit, as far as I am concerned.

Arguing that systemic oppression mandates random aggression is not appropriate.  Certainly it explains why it happens, but as we all have our own independent dignities then you cannot justify a random attack as one that was “deserved.” Let us remove from the discourse that Deroir was a person affiliated with GW2 and leave it simply at a person says something that a person at a public forum doesn’t like.  Because, private or not, twitter is public and social media...  And that person then starts shouting at them for being an asshole, in what way is that permissible or excusable?

It isn’t.  The company was right to fire her, not because of “capitalism” or “corporatism” but because she acted out of line.  If anything, many of us have learned there is a higher burden against us for the fact we are of a protected class, yet that is not an excuse not to aspire and to strive.  Female developers are pretty undervalued and underrepresented in the gaming industry, so why would she throw away her chance like that?

If you argue, “well she doesn’t have the responsibility of putting on for anyone else other than herself,” then you immediately invalidate the need to protect her.  Being a woman is not the same as being a representative of what women can do. Margaret Thatcher and Joan Rivers are not hailed as feminist icons for a reason.

Now the “gatekeeping asshole” part comes up when you get into the nitty gritty of what Fries, who was also fired (and as far as I know identifies as a male), added to the conversation:

“Here’s a bit of insight that I legitimately hope he reflects on: she never asked for his feedback. These are our private social media accounts — imagine you’re an astronomer and you start sharing some things you’ve learned in the last few months since you began a research project observing Saturn, only to have observation techniques explained to you by a layman ... Jessica is great at her job and deserves to be treated with respect.”

The sentiment doesn’t hold water for quite a few reasons, so let’s deconstruct those because that’s what this post is about.

First, we’ve already touched on “these are private social media accounts.”  Yes, we know they are “off the clock,” but they are discussing their job all the same.

The example of an astronomer also really sets the pace for what is to follow though. Is a game developer like an astronomer?  A person that more or less puts down the tracks that players work through? I don’t think the requirements between the two are remotely similar, but let’s move beyond that and say, an astro-physicist like Neil deGrasse Tyson decides to get into a conversation with some people at a local pub!

Neil is a little miffed about research on Saturn’s observation and one of the pub goers chimes in that maybe it’d help if they used some of the techniques learned in deep sea exploration to observe Saturn.  

Immediately, Neil says “Thanks for the non-answer, my dude” and then returns to say “And by the way, you colonizing piece of shit, I work at the Rose Center of Earth and I know than you ever possibly could, so next time you open your mouth remember that I know more than you ever will because I’ve been doing this a lot longer than you, shithead. I’m not your emotional porchmonkey.”

I mean...

I assume you’re going to get a tap from someone about how that wasn’t okay to say? Now even if there were a lot of people getting boisterous, why pick that person out? Even if this is your “go in moment” why pick a person that’s inoffensive?  Because you have something to prove.  And well, the company has something to prove as well: it isn’t going to allow its image to be tarnished.

But at the heart of it, is this concept that the people she discussed this with are the knuckle dragging laymen incapable of understanding the Promethean wonder that is game development.  If that is the case, then why discuss it at all?  The questions continue to pile and the explanations became weaker.

In the end, I don’t like ArenaNet but I also think Reddit is a disgusting pit of scumbag racists, sexists, and shitlords.  That being said, it really sucks that both of these companies had an easy pass to drop two people that were clearly negative elements to their environments.  

This isn’t a hill worth dying on.  Hell, this isn’t even a hill worth stopping and getting a picture of.  Because at the end of the day?

Jessica Price isn’t right. 

#jessica price #big post #rambling rant

[eldritchsurveys]

875.

5k Survey III

101. What does happiness/joy feel like physically? >> I’m not sure. I haven’t collected enough data. I really like the “quiet” feeling that happens when I’m in better moods, though -- my body just feels still and expansive and just quiet. I think it’s the absence of bodily sensation that feels most like contentment to me, since all my other emotions are characterised by a lot of hectic sensations. 102. List five people you love starting with the one you love the absolute most. >> Bruh. 103. How many movies have you gone to see this month? >> Zero, thanks to Miss Rona. Probably would have seen Tenet, since that was supposed to be out in the early summer. I don’t remember what else was supposed to come out. 104. If you could have 3 wishes…but none of them could be for yourself, what would you wish for? >> No. The only thing worse than blithely making wishes for yourself as if that’s not going to backfire on you is trying to do it for other people (particularly without their consent). 105. In what ways do you relax and de-stress when you are really tense? >> I go Inworld when that happens. It’s the only way I’m going to be able to de-escalate enough to process and deal with whatever is going on.

106. How much money would it take to get you to drive to school naked in the springtime and get out of the car? >> --- 107. Have you ever killed an animal? >> I mean, I’ve killed my fair share of insects. Nothing more complex than that, though. 108. Have you ever lost someone close to you? >> Yeah. 109. What do you think of cloning? >> I’m fascinated by it. 110. Do you read or watch TV more often? >> Overall, I think I read more than I watch television. I might watch an hour or two of television in a day, but if you total all the reading I do over different media (articles, posts, books, Reddit threads, wiki pages...) in a day, it usually adds up to more than 2 hours. 111. With all this talk of terrorism going around are you willing to sacrifice rights and freedoms for increased safety? >> The problem with this concept is that it never seems to actually work out that way -- those sacrifices that we made post-9/11 did not result in increased safety. It resulted in a permissive culture of fear and bigotry and a neverending war. And a whole lot of hassled TSA workers who probably don’t get paid nearly enough. 112. What is the punishment you would come up with for Osama Bin Laden if you caught him alive? >> Dude. Fuck off. 113. Have you ever named an individual part of your body? >> Nope. 114. Have you ever been on the radio or on TV? >> Yeah. 115. Have you ever won a lottery, or sweepstakes? >> No. 116. Have you ever won a contest or competition? >> Casual ones. 117. Do you like to watch The Joy of Painting show with Bob Ross (check out this link if you don’t know who he is. Also please note me if you notice the link is broken) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Ross_(painter)? >> I’m really amused at the idea that Bob Ross’ wiki page needed to be linked here. Anyway, no, I don’t really care about it personally, but Sparrow likes it sometimes. I’ll watch it if it’s on, I guess, but it’s not something I’d seek out unless I was actually trying to learn how to paint. 118. Do you know what your grandparents and your great grand parents did for a living? >> --- 119. Is there anything really interesting in your family history? >> --- 120. Is there anyone you trust completely? >> No. Well, there’s Can Calah, I guess. 121. Have you ever lost someone without having the chance to say goodbye? >> Yeah. 122. How do you feel about women in politics? >> The same way I feel about men in politics -- it varies depending on the individual, but I’m also pretty sure that all politicians are full of shit. The exact amount of shit they’re full of is just variable. Like, sure, okay, AOC is probably full of less shit than Sarah Palin. It’s a spectrum. 123. Would you rather have an indoor Jacuzzi or an outdoor pool? >> I’d rather not have either. That’s a lot of money that could go to structural improvements, adding on a sunroom, rehabilitating the [former] lawn, upgrading appliances and plumbing... 124. What things are you interested in that you study or read about on your own? >> Everything that I’m interested in I study or read about on my own, so I’m not really sure what this question is asking. 125. Would you consider yourself to be intelligent? >> Intelligent enough, I suppose. 126. Would you consider yourself to be wise? >> I don’t really give it much thought. I figure it’s something that other people determine about you, not something I determine about myself. 127. Have you ever given or received a lap dance? >> I’ve received a couple. But like, jokingly. Not a real one from an exotic dancer or whatever. 128. Have you ever spoken to a homeless person? >> Of course... 129. Would you ever creep into the subway tunnels to go exploring? >> No, they’re too... wet. And dark. And full of vermin. I’m good. 130. If you could add 70 years to your life but only by making some random person die 70 years sooner would you? >> Bye. 131. Can you finish any of the following lyrics? A: Nothing to kill or die for… and no religion too. fuck this song. B: Late comings with the late comin’ stretcher… I don’t know this one. C: I could make a film and make you my star… I don’t know this one either. 132. Were you ever with someone while they died? >> No. I’d like to be one day. 133. Would you rather be a world political leader or a rock star? >> I’d rather not be either, thanks. 134. Have you ever given someone a love letter that you wrote? >> No. 135. Have you ever sent someone a surprise though the mail? >> I don’t think so. 136. Are you looking forward to any concerts right now? >> No, there aren’t any happening in the near future. 137. Of all animated movies, which is the best one you’ve ever seen? >> I’ve seen a lot of animated movies and I enjoyed most of them... 138. What are the best bands or songs to listen to while driving? >> I think outrun and other synth-y genres like that make good driving music. 139. What do you think is the most amazing thing that anyone has ever accomplished? >> *shrug* 140. What could a member of the opposite sex do to impress you? >> --- 141. About how many emails do you get a day? >> About five or so. How many of those emails are junk mail? >> I don’t know about spam, that get sent straight to the spam folder and I never see it (unless I go looking in there for some reason). How many of them are forwards? >> Zero. 142. What’s your favorite thing to do online besides write in your diary and hang out at this site? >> Oh, you know. Stuff. 143. Do you believe Kurt Cobain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Cobain) killed himself or was it a conspiracy? >> As far as I understand it, he killed himself. People do that, you know. Even celebrities. 144. Have you ever though about hitchhiking across the country? >> No. 145. Who would you bring with you on this kind of a road trip? >> I wouldn’t take a trip like that... 146. Of the following, which word best describes you: accurate, bold, charming, dependable? >> Bold, I guess. And maybe dependable, depending on who’s describing me. What the fuck does “accurate” mean when applied to a person? 147. If you are single, at about what age do you think you will be ready to settle down and get married? If you are married, how old were you at the time? >> I was 32. 148. Do you often wonder, when you say goodbye to people, if it is the last time you will ever see them? >> Sure. I mean, that kind of shit happens, I find it surprising that people don’t think about that more often. Awareness of [the randomness of, the suddenness of, the sheer indifference of] death is natural for a sapient creature that is knowledgeable of its own mortality, ain’t it...? 149. What movie are you most looking forward to seeing when it comes out? >> God, I’m just looking forward to having a cinematic experience again. I liked going to the movies, especially weekday matinees in empty or near-empty theaters... 150. What is your quest? >> ---

#surveys #survey #5000 question survey

[miranda724]

I love Reddit but it is slowly declining AMA!

WHAT happened to this sacred space and how did the incels get in?!?!

Reddit used to be my go-to social media channel back in high school when I was filled with opinions, passion and thought. I never posted, lurker ftw, but the engagement and prosperity evident in my activity on this app paralleled no other. Nowadays, there are so many people on it it does not feel as unique and special as it did in my youth....it just feels like people go on there and take advantage of the anonymity and are RUDE

^^literally Reddit in video format

The community on Reddit has changed and that has really affected my usual consumption of the app. I used to spend hours on hours reading threads and diving deep into the dark side of Reddit.....but it feels so different. It just feels like an anonymous source for uncultured people to conglomerate and hate rather than the random soul-sucking side of the internet I was raised on.

I admittedly still use the platform to stay connected to my reality tv subreddits and the various murder mystery subreddits I am subscribed to, but I just can’t shake the feeling that mainstream media caught on to this platform and jumped along with the bandwagon.

Perhaps, my sudden discomfort is the overwhelmingly male population that dominates the app.

About 71% of Reddit news users are men, 59% are between the ages of 18 and 29, and 47% identify as liberal, while only 13% are conservative (39% say they are moderate).

While this has never been an entirely female-friendly platform, the dominance of male-generated content has slowly created segregation amongst the platform as the content is typically generated for one specific demographic, which is definitely not equally female.

The mainstream use of the app is also heavily evident by the use of Reddit as a source for major publications such as Buzzfeed, which generates their content directly from stolen sourced material from Reddit.

In addition, the platform is moderated heavily for political purposes but with an overwhelmingly male consumer base, the data-driven content is biased and not accurately measured.

Recently, I have begun seeing ads across Reddit which has greatly influenced my user-experience. They masquerade as posts and it infuriates me. Most obvious is when celebrities use the AMA subreddit conveniently when they have a new project to remote and tbh we all know they go through their PR person before replying to any of our comments

[nothingman]

For years, Reddit’s r/TheRedPill forum has been one of the worst corners of the internet. It’s the home of the pickup artist movement, it gave Milo Yiannapolis a fawning fanbase, and it’s the hub of the perceived “manosphere”–a community built around the “men’s rights” philosophy that feminism is a sham built to oppress men.

Reddit is deliberately designed to protect anonymity. But that doesn’t mean users don’t also have to work to protect themselves–something that someone probably should have told Robert Fisher of New Hampshire, who has just been outed by The Daily Beast, via a trail of usernames and custom URLs with ties to Fisher’s email address, as the creator of the misogynistic forum.

Fisher, by the way, also happens to be a member of the New Hampshire House of Representatives, not that the connection is very surprising. If I had to name the two communities most vocal in their loathing of women, I’d probably go with Red Pill dudes and the GOP.

In addition to Red Pill, Fisher’s reported aliases had also written and published a pickup artist site, a blog attempting to “Explain God,” and one site titled “Existential Vortex.” He also was or maybe still is a singer-songwriter and kazooist in an “indieelectronic” band. Basically, he sounds like exactly the sort of bro-ish college kid, straight off a few frat party rejections and his first philosophy class, whom you would expect to found a misogynistic Reddit forum with a name referencing The Matrix. (Except Fisher had, at the time of Red Pill’s creation, aged out of the follies of youth excuse. He’s 31 now.)

Fisher’s reported “Pk_atheist” alias started the subreddit in October 2012, just before he lost his first election—one he ran as a Democrat. He won his seat in November of 2014, by which time the subreddit had grown to 83,000 members. He had already stepped down as a moderator in early 2013, but continued to be active in the community.

The Daily Beast writes that “within hours of contacting Rep. Fisher, and after delivering by email a summary of his apparent connections to The Red Pill kingpin, his two primary Reddit usernames had been wiped, and four blogs connected to him were deleted or made private.”

[Update: His own colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, are already calling for his resignation. Fisher responded with a statement asserting he is “not disappearing,” adding, “I will continue to stand strong for men’s rights and the rights of all.”]

But the internet doesn’t let you hide from your awfulness that easily. Through archived posts and comment threads, we have way too clear a window into this man’s mind and his motivations for starting this giant sexism feeding ground. Here are just a few direct quotes.

Content warning for, well, for everything Red Pill is about. (Misogyny and rape denial abound.)

–If you want the short version of his views on women: “I find women’s personalities in general to be lackluster and boring, serving little purpose in my day to day life. So I usually only compare body types.”

–“Because when I told myself I thought they were smart, I really had the footnote in the back of my head … smart … for a woman.”

–“I don’t hate women. I just understand what use they are to me. Stimulating conversation is not one of them.”

–“Understand that in the old days, women were not brought up the way they are today. Before feminism, there was less freedom, and therefore it was not necessary to teach women consequence. Consequence was strictly a man’s game.”

–“Women are not oppressed- they’re literally free from a lot of the responsibilities men are- to the extent where women have no need for the functioning every-day knowledge that most men have by the age of 18 … If you took the conversation skills, the sub-par intelligence, the lack of curiosity and put it in a man’s body- would you hang out with that guy? No! Would he be successful? Hell no! Those things are useless without a woman’s body attached.”

–In a post with “seduction” advice, he proposes “There’s a good girl voice inside each woman telling her that she needs to make sure to be proper and avoid being a slut.” He follows up with a lot of tips on how to invade the “good girl’s” personal space and trick her into letting out the “slut.”

–In response to a question about the Free the Nipple movement: “Hot women are a cartel, and they will continue to keep prices as high as possible. Anybody “freeing” their nipples will either be low-quality, or they will have a smear campaign against them to make them seem low-quality, despite the equality implications supposedly working for the cartel.”

–He defended being sexually attracted to teenage girls. “15 year old girls have boobs. Puberty doesnt strike at 18 overnight. Secondly, not creepy- 15 year old girls and guys are commonly sexually active. Its just illegal.”

–In one of his many comments alleging women frequently falsely accuse men of rape, he says he has a video camera in his room, presumably to record his exploits for proof of innocence.

It’s bad enough that someone could hold all of these beliefs, let alone feel confident to enough to put them out in public (even if anonymously so). Add to that the fact that there are, as of now, nearly 200,000 subscribers to the subreddit.

But nothing is scarier than knowing that this is what at least some (and some is too many) of the men who make our country’s laws think about women. And if you think Fisher’s purported Reddit persona is all talk, it’s not. It’s clear that his misogyny infects his platform.

Taking a quick look at Fisher’s terrible, stock-photo-filled campaign website, you can see the threads. In the site’s “Family” section (complete with a stock picture of what I assume is a random family of strangers, so you know he really cares), he says he wants to “strengthen the family.” But all that seems to mean to him is something about the family court legal system. He writes, “It is long over-due to bring oversight and accountability to our family courts. Every parent deserves justice in our courts regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, or orientation.”

This obsession with family courts looks to date back to 2012, when his colleague and fellow men’s rights activist Joshua Youssef began publicly decrying the “feminist judicial tyranny” over a custody battle with his ex-wife. A reddit username the Daily Beast attributes to Youssef posted a lengthy rant about the “corruption, deception, greed, lawlessness, and feminist entitlement-mindedness, of the family court” to /theredpill, with Fisher in the comments defending him.

Remember that comment about “low quality” women exposing their nipples? Another one of New Hampshire’s Reps, Al Baldasaro, insulted the physical appearance of a female legislator who was fighting a bill, written by an all-male team, which would have outlawed breastfeeding in public.

Just four days after the 2014 election that put him in the New Hampshire House of Representatives, with only 100 subscribers, Pk_atheist wrote a manifesto of sorts, explaining the point of the, as of then, two-week-old forum.

“Our culture has become a feminist culture,” he wrote. “A president cannot be elected today without succumbing to the feminist narrative and paying them tribute. How many times has Obama given credit for his manhood to his wife? How many times has the debate hinged on women’s pay gap – which is a myth that gets lip service because if you don’t you’re a misogynist!”

Yet he maintained, “It’s too easy to blame feminism for our troubles.” He’s all for equal rights, he says, although he takes care to specify, “Equal rights are something I strongly am in support of. For men and women.” As opposed to unequal equality, I suppose.

His big message is that feminism has led not to equal rights, but to female domination. Women, as he puts it, control the conversation. “I am here to say, for better or for worse, the frame around public discourse is a feminist frame, and we’ve lost our identity because of it.”

Therefore men, he proclaims, need to take back this role of central dominance from women. The Red Pill is “men’s sexual strategy,” designed to counter feminism, which is, apparently, nothing more than a sexual strategy itself.

This, through the Daily Beast’s sleuthing, appears to be Robert Fisher’s worldview. This is a man who gave a space to hundreds of thousands of others looking to blame and conquer women, while simultaneously being elected into public office, where he has the ability to affect real policy.

Here’s the kicker, and keep this in mind the next time you think your vote doesn’t matter: In Fisher’s small New Hampshire district, he won his re-election by only 700 votes. He won his first election in 2014 by 276 votes. Squashing the internet’s rampant misogyny is a challenge too big for any one of us, but if you’re eligible to vote, you can do your part to keep immature, idiotic monsters like this one out of office.

  (via Daily Beast, image: Shutterstock)

Want more stories like this? Become a subscriber and support the site!

—The Mary Sue has a strict comment policy that forbids, but is not limited to, personal insults toward anyone, hate speech, and trolling.—

via The Mary Sue

#IFTTT #Feedly #Nothingman uses feedly

[articlesofnote]

hackernews and armchair social theorizing

So I read a lot of HackerNews, (a news aggregator reminiscent of early Reddit) because I’m a nerd and there’s a lot of good technical shit on there, AND there’s a pretty strong bias against “current event” type articles/stories so it’s nice to get some breathing room away from the facebook news feed from which I receive far too much of my information about the world.However, sometimes there’s academic material of a social bent because like any other group of engineers, the HN commentariat thinks that it’s smart enough to have a pretty good handle on any kind of problem - technical or otherwise.  Today there was a discussion of post entitled “Riots and Political Theory: A Reading List” ( link: https://www.southampton.ac.uk/politics/news/2020/06/11-riots-and-political-theory.page ) which irritated me enormously.  If I’m being honest, I was irritated mainly because I’m also of the engineering “every problem can be understood with sufficient kibitzing” mindset (one reason I feel so comfortable on HN, tbh) but I found that the discussion there (link: news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24142649 ) rubbed well against the grain of my own thinking.  So, in no particular order, some comments that I had opinions about:

> As with any destructive force, rioting is not a sustainable state of being. It is a blunt object to signal "Things are not okay" from societies whose frustration boils over in trying to achieve change through more articulate language. Rioting rarely affects change in the systems in the direction desired, as its methods are misaligned with desirable, sustainable values. Thus, it allows ruling classes to paint a harsh narrative of the rioters - leading in many cases to greater inequality and worse conditions. Riot theory seems like an interesting starting point to understand the socioeconomic climate in America today. A dialogue from which would naturally lend itself to survey the options that members of a community have in articulating opinions and criticisms of the systems they live within.

Seems like a wordier variation on “riots are the language of the unheard.”  I was mostly annoyed by the second sentence - “rioting rarely...” - seems like a confident assertion of a trope without any actual analysis behind it.  “Rioting rarely affects [sic] change... in the direction desired” is one of those statements that seems plausible - but the converse (i.e. that riots often effect desirable change) also seems plausible.  I also wonder what OP thinks the “methods” of a riot are, that they are in conflict with “desirable, sustainable values” - also conveniently undefined.  I’m also really annoyed by the assertion that a harsh narrative ascribed to rioters leads to “greater inequality and worse conditions” - again without any actual analysis attached to it!  Maybe what bothers me is that OP isn’t actually adding any insight to the discussion?  And/or the implicit assumption that other people take these assumptions for granted?  I also see enough buzz-adjacent terms (”sustainable”, “inquality”, “dialogue”, “values”) that I suspect there’s not actually any depth to OP’s comment.  So another possible reason that I’m irritated is that... not quite sure how to articulate... kinda, I take this seriously enough that I want to get to the bottom of it and reading this wasted my time?  Or that I should have known better than to look to an HN comment for in-depth analysis?  Or that OP is stating opinions as fact?

> A lot of people in this thread seem to have some false dichotomy in their mind - either you are peacefully protesting or you are rioting by burning random cars and destroying uninvolved storefronts. There is another option: peacefully protest but try to occupy administrative buildings and only use violence as a response to police violence.

There’s a good amount of discussion about the difference between “riots” and “protests,” and it was fruitful for me insofar as I started to think about both of these terms as post-facto labels applied for political ends.  Particularly with the term “riot,” as some other commenters noted: 

> There are very few clear, unambiguous riots. What is a protest that has a few looters or arsonists operating within it? I've seen plenty of events here in the Pacific Northwest that police have labelled riots that I would in no way call a riot. I think that the legal definition very much plays into the discussion, because it gives the police the power to tell the media that a riot occurred.

> The American revolution, the February revolution, the Red River Rebellion, the fall of the Berlin Wall, the revolutions in Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, the Chech republic, Poland, do I need to keep going? All of them had violence inflicted on property, and most of them had violence inflicted on people. Were one of those events happen in your town, your police department, your mayor, your governor, and your president would without hesitation call them 'a violent riot'.

Another concept from the discussion that I found interesting was that, far from the riot being the “language of the unheard,” they can be thought of as yet another form of political theater:

> One reason thinkers usually place riots outside the discourse is because they are an artificial spectacle, and which are necessarily tolerated by a faction in the establishment who could easily suppress them with violence, but they don't because the effect of the riots supports their strategy for change in their institution. Situationism, and anarchist ideas like "the propaganda of the deed" covered rioting from a more earnest perspective, but in watching movements and protests for a couple of decades, there is always someone within the establishment in whose interest it is to tolerate rioting. This also explains the regular use of police provocateurs to break up peaceful protests by manufacturing riots, and instead of mere explanatory power, you can use it to predict how long an establishment will tolerate a spate of rioting. It's a ritualized performance and a spectacle.

I particularly like this comment because OP is willing to assert that this concept has some predictive power - i.e. that it is a testable, potentially falsifiable model.  An implicit openness to the idea that one might be wrong?  What an idea!

Another thread of thought relates to the role of media in (de)legitimizing protests/riots:

> Now riots and civil disorder are there to be exploited by the ruling class leading up to elections until the desired result is changed; they are in power.Just like the noise leading into 2008, complete with celebrity moms and widows, to protests and destruction of property, once the political goal was achieved the money behind these people are groups were removed along with any attention directed their way through the press. The press has sufficient numbers who operate strictly at the order of political influences, people vastly underestimate this influence.

Taken as a whole, the discussion thread puts out a lot of opinion on what constitutes rioting, how it contrasts with “protesting,” how both of those activities fit into the larger society, the relationship between rioting, police power, the media, and the ruling elites, and what constitutes legitimate vs. illegitimate public action.  It seems to be taken for granted that riots are characterized by looting and destruction of property:

> Many of the current rioters are rioting because it's fun and/or a way to get free stuff. No need to make it more complicated than that. > The rioters are destroying one of the last remaining pillars of the middle class - small businesses. Sure, Walmart and Amazon will be happy to take over the niche, with a private security force to replace the defunded police. But what it will mean for regular people is less meaningful jobs, more poverty, and even less security. > I'm referring to clear, unambiguous riots, where people run around looting stores or burning buildings down.

There’s also a lot of distinguishing between violent and non-violent actions:

> A lot of people in this thread seem to have some false dichotomy in their mind - either you are peacefully protesting or you are rioting by burning random cars and destroying uninvolved storefronts.

> The problem with riots is they often get co-opted by actors whose goals are not in alignment with the goal of the original rioters. Also, there isn't usually a singular person, group, or entity who will take responsibility of the riots and say "We are rioting for XYZ reasons". Contrast this with peaceful protests, where the reasons for and goals of the protests are laid bare by its leaders.

But enough of cataloging what other people think - what the heck do I think about all of this?  At this point, I’m conceiving of both protests and riots, along with other public actions - eg. Occupy Wall Street or CHAZ - as attempts on the part of the body politic (the commons, the polis, the average citizens) to carve out a space within the broader society where they have relatively more agency than otherwise.  The specific label that these actions get - protest v. riot seems to be the main dichotomy - seems to depend mainly on how the powers-that-be “feel” about the threat the actions pose to their continued authority and legitimacy.  If the actions represent little threat to their legitimacy, then it seems more likely that the action as a whole will be called a “protest” - a registration of support for a political opinion on the part of a motivated collective that nevertheless assumes the legitimacy of the system within which it acts.  I recall the Women’s March in 2017 as perhaps the most recent example of a public action that I assume* was almost universally described as a “protest:” a public rejection of (among other things) the recent election of Donald Trump.

A “riot,” on the other hand, seems to be characterized as such when, regardless of its other qualities, the participants assume the illegitimacy of the prevailing power structure.  Riots can be anarchic (eg. the Watts riots) or organized (Euromaidan, perhaps?), violent (Zoot Suit riots) or non-violent (Portland) in actual fact; regardless of their actual nature, they will be characterized as anarchic and violent by agents of the prevailing power structure because it is assumed that the desire of the actors is to weaken or destroy that structure, whatever their direct actions may be. If I demonstrate in Portland saying that the police should not exist, am I more likely to be called a protester or a rioter by agents of the state?  In this case I assume I would be called a “rioter” regardless of anything else I actually do, violent or otherwise.  The view of the state seems to be that my attitude itself is “violent” - the thought and the deed are one. In a more condensed form: My perspective seems to be that the collective gathering and action of people in public spaces is labeled based mainly on how that gathering is viewed by the powers-that-be, which may or may not have anything to do with what the collective actually does.  That which is viewed as an actual threat to the power structure (”law and order”) gets called a “riot” and that which isn’t is a “protest” or “demonstration” or something else.  This fits nicely with the idea that rang true above, that these sorts of collective actions are at least in part (and perhaps primarily) fostered by agents of the state insofar as they advance extant political agendas, eg. police infiltration of protests to ensure that they become “violent” and thus provide “proof” that more policing is necessary.  This specific idea cropped up in several comments: > It's not uncommon where I am from for plain clothes police to start riots. That delegitemizes the protestors and legitemizes violent action by the state.

> Additionally in the UK, the police often infiltrates protest organisations. They are often near the very top.

> Property destruction will be, by default, blamed on the protestors rather than police instigators. In this case the police were easily identified simply because they were sloppy and forgot to not wear police issue boots. So after clarifying my thinking, do I have any better answer for why I found the discussion so irritating?  Why did it get under my skin?  At this point, I think maybe because I saw my own ignorance and inchoate thinking reflected in the lack of nuance and outright vapidity of a lot of the comments.  At the same time, it sure seems like all the threads of my own thinking were collectively there, and finally I felt compelled to pull them together in some way - hence this post!  Certainly I was also turned off by the outright dismissive attitude of several of the commentators, as I apparently believe in the legitimacy of rioting as a form of political speech.  It’s not just “fun and/or a way to get free stuff!” I mean, what the fuck?  Truly violent rioting (eg. property destruction, direct action against police forces, etc) seems like it might be cathartic, but I don’t believe that it’s fun per se.  By way of clarifying my prior assumptions, I believe that in general (with rare, rare exceptions) people have to be driven to violence of any kind - the average person is not going to choose violence as a first resort and most people won’t even adopt it as a last resort.  If a “riot” is genuinely violent - if those participating in it are destroying property and/or lives** - then it likely became so because those participants had no other outlet.  I also distinguish between violence against property and violence against people: property is replaceable but people aren’t.  That is, I could not give less of a shit about broken windows or burned buildings, and frankly I think it shows remarkable restraint on the part of “rioters” to pretty much only damage property - buildings aren’t the ones making life worse for the proletariat, though they are certainly the tools of those that do.  I also suspect that the argument about rioters destroying small businesses - “one of the last remaining pillars of the middle class,” as one commentator had it above*** - is a stalking horse for larger capital interests.  A franchise Starbucks or a Target or an O’Reilly is not a “small business” and working for one is not a “middle class” profession; moreover, there’s evidence that genuinely community-member-owned businesses were left pretty much alone in the ongoing Black Lives Matter demonstrations sparked by George Floyd’s murder. Jeez, I’ve said a lot.  This is one of the reasons I haven’t done much writing - once I get started, I find I have a lot more to say than I can keep straight.  But you know what they say: practice makes perfect!  Guess I’ll keep at it.

#riots sociology hackernews rambling protests protesting state power violence

[andrewdburton]

A brief guide to cybersecurity basics

Last Monday, I got an email from Spotify saying that somebody in Brazil had logged into my account.

I checked. Sure enough: A stranger was using my Spotify to listen to Michael Jackson. I told Spotify to “sign me out everywhere” — but I didn't change my password.

On Wednesday, it happened again. At 2 a.m., I got another email from Spotify. This time, my sneaky Brazilian friend was listening to Prince. And they apparently liked the looks of one of my playlists (“Funk Is Its Own Reward”), because they'd been listening to that too.

I signed out everywhere again, and this time I changed my password. And I made a resolution.

You see, I've done a poor job of implementing modern online security measures. Yes, I have my critical financial accounts locked down with two-factor authentification, etc., but mostly I'm sloppy when it comes to cybersecurity.

For example, I re-use passwords. I still use passwords from thirty years ago for low-security situations (such as signing up for a wine club or a business loyalty program). And while I've begun creating strong (yet easy to remember) passwords for more important accounts, these passwords all follow a pattern and they're not randomized. Worst of all, I maintain a 20-year-old plain text document in which I store all of my sensitive personal information.

This is dumb. Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb.

I know it's dumb, but I've never bothered to make changes — until now. Now, for a variety of reasons, I feel like it's time for me to make my digital life a little more secure. I spent several hours over the weekend locking things down. Here's how.

A Brief Guide to Cybersecurity

Co-incidentally, the very same day that my Spotify account was being used to stream Prince's greatest hits in Brazil, a Reddit user named /u/ACheetoBandito posted a guide to cybersecurity in /r/fatFIRE. How convenient!

“Cybersecurity is a critical component of financial security, but rarely discussed in personal finance circles,” /u/ACheetoBandito wrote. “Note that cybersecurity practitioners disagree over best practices for personal cybersecurity. This is my perspective, as I have some expertise in the area.”

I won't reproduce the entire post here — you should definitely go read it, if this subject is important to you — but I will list the bullet-point summary along with some of my own thoughts. Our orange-fingered friend recommends that anyone concerned about cybersecurity take the following steps:

Get at least two hardware-based security keys. My pal Robert Farrington (from The College Investor) uses the YubiKey. Google offers its Titan Security Key. (I ordered the YubiKey 5c nano because of its minimal form factor.)

Set up a secret private email account. Your private email address should not be linked in any way to your public email, and the address should be given to no one. (I already have many public email accounts, but I didn't have a private address. I do now.)

Turn on Advanced Protection for both your public and private gmail accounts. Advanced Protection is a free security add-on from Google. Link this to the security keys you acquired in step one. (I haven't set this up because my security keys won't arrive until this afternoon.)

Set up a password manager. Which password manager you choose is up to you. The key is to pick one that you'll use. It's best if this app supports your new security keys for authentification. (I'll cover a few options in the next section of this article.)

Generate new passwords for all accounts. Manually create memorable passwords for your email addresses, your computers (and mobile devices), and for the password manager itself. All other passwords should be strong passwords generated randomly by the password manager.

Associate critical accounts with your new private email address. This will include financial accounts, such as your banks, brokerages, and credit cards. But it could include other accounts too. (I'll use my private email address for core services related to this website, for instance.)

Turn on added security measures for all accounts. Available features will vary from provider to provider, but generally speaking you should be able to activate two-factor authentification (with the security keys, whenever possible) and login alerts.

Turn on text/email alerts for financial accounts. You may also want to turn on alerts for changes to your credit score and/or credit report.

Activate security measures on your mobile devices. Your phone should be locked by a strong authorization measure. And each of your individual financial apps should be locked down with a password and any other possible security measures.

/u/ACheetoBandito recommends some additional, optional security measures. (And that entire Reddit discussion thread is filled with great security tips.)

You might want to freeze your credit (although, if you do, remember that you'll occasionally need to un-freeze your credit to make financial transactions). Some folks will want to encrypt their phones and hard drives. And if you're very concerned about security, purchase a cheap Chromebook and use this as the only device on which you perform financial transactions. (Believe it or not, I'm taking this last optional step. It makes sense to me — and it may be a chance for me to move beyond Quicken.)

Exploring the Best Password Managers

Okay, great! I've ordered a new $150 Chromebook and two hardware-based security keys. I've set up a brand-new, top-secret email address, which I'll connect to any account that needs added security. But I still haven't tackled the weakest point in the process: my text document filled with passwords.

Part of the problem is complacency. My system is simple and I like it. But another part of the problem is analysis paralysis. There are a lot of password managers out there, and I have no idea how to differentiate between them, to figure out which one is right for me and my needs.

For help, I asked my Facebook friends to list the best password managers. I downloaded and installed each of their suggestions, then I jotted down some initial impressions.

LastPass: 16 votes (2 from tech nerds) — LastPass was by far the most popular password manager among my Facebook friends. People love it. I installed it and poked around, and it seems…okay. The interface is a little clunky and the feature set seems adequate (but not robust). The app uses the easy-to-understand “vault” metaphor, which I like. LastPass is free (with premium options available for added cost).

1Password: 7 votes (4 from tech nerds) — This app has similar features to Bitwarden or LastPass. The interface is nice enough, and it seems to provide security alerts. 1Password costs $36/year.

Bitwarden: 4 votes (2 from tech nerds) — Bitwarden has a simple, easy-to-understand interface. It uses the same “vault” metaphor that products like LastPass and 1Password use. It's a strong contender to become the tool I use. Bitwarden is free. For $10 per year, you can add premium security features.

KeePass: 2 votes — KeePass is a free Open Source password manager. There are KeePass installs available for all major computer and mobile operating systems. If you're a Linux nut (or an Open Source advocate), this might be a good choice. I don't like its limited functionality and its terrible interface. KeePass is free.

Dashlane: 2 votes — Of all the password managers I looked at, Dashlane has the nicest interface and the most features. Like many of these tools, it uses the “vault” metaphor, but it allows you to store more things in this vault than other tools do. (You can store ID info — driver license, passport — for instance. There's also a spot to store receipts.) Dashlane has a free basic option but most folks will want the $60/year premium option. (There's also a $120/year option that includes credit monitoring and ID theft insurance.)

Blur: 1 vote — Blur is different than most password managers. It quite literally tries to blur your online identity. It prevents web browsers from tracking you, masks email addresses and credit cards and phone numbers, and (or course) manages passwords. I want some features that Blur doesn't have — and don't want some of the features it does have. Blur costs a minimum of $39/year but that price can become much higher.

Apple Keychain: 1 vote — Keychain has been Apple's built-in password manager since 1999. As such, it's freely available on Apple devices. Most Mac and iOS folks use Keychain without even realizing it. It's not really robust enough to do anything other than store passwords, so I didn't give it serious consideration. Keychain is free and comes installed on Apple products.

Let me be clear: I made only a cursory examination of these password managers. I didn't dive deep. If I tried to compare every feature of every password manager, I'd never choose. I'd get locked into analysis paralysis again. So, I gave each a quick once-over and made a decision based on gut and intuition.

Of these tools, two stood out: Bitwarden and Dashlane. Both sport nice interfaces and plenty of features. Both tools offer free versions, but I'd want to upgrade to a paid premium plan in order to gain access to two-factor authentification (using my new hardware security keys) and security monitoring. This is where Bitwarden has a big advantage. It's only $10 per year. To get the same features, Dashlane is $60/year.

But here's the thing.

I started actually using both of these tools at the same time, entering my website passwords one by one. I stopped after entering ten sites into each. It was clear that I vastly preferred using Dashlane to Bitwarden. It just works in a way that makes sense to me. (Your experience might be different.) So, for a little while at least, I'm going to use Dashlane as my password manager.

The Problem with Passwords

My primary motive for using a password manager is to get my sensitive information out of a plain text document and into something more secure. But I have a secondary motive: I want to improve the strength of my passwords.

When I started using the internet — back in the 1980s, before the advent of the World Wide Web — I didn't spare a thought for password strength. The first password I created (in 1989) was simply the name of my friend who let me use his computer to access the local Bulletin Board Systems. I used that password for years on everything from email accounts to bank sites. I still consider it my “low security” password for things that aren't critical.

I have maybe eight or ten passwords like this: short, simple passwords that I've used in dozens of locations. For the past five years, I've tried to move to unique passwords for each site, passwords that follow a pattern. While these are an improvement, they're still not great. Like I say, they follow a pattern. And while they contain letters, numbers, and symbols, they're all relatively short.

As you might expect, my sloppy password protocol has created something of a security nightmare. Here's a screenshot from the Google Password Checkup tool for one of my accounts.

I get similar results for all of my Google accounts. Yikes.

Plus, there's the problem of account sharing.

Kim and I share a Netflix account. And an Amazon account. And a Hulu account. And an iTunes account. In fact, we probably share twenty or thirty accounts. She and I use the same easy-to-remember password for all of these sign-ins. While none of these accounts are super sensitive, what we're doing is still a poor idea.

So, I want to begin moving toward more secure passwords — even for the accounts I share with Kim.

The good news is that most password managers — including Dashlane — will auto-generate randomized passwords for you. Or I could try something similar to the idea suggested in this XKCD comic:

The trouble, of course, is that each place has different requirements for passwords. Some require numbers. Some require symbols. Some say no symbols. And so on. I don't know of any sites that would let me use four random common words for a password!

For now, I'm going to take a three-pronged approach:

I'll manually create long (but memorable) passwords for my most critical accounts. This is the XKCD method.

For the accounts I share with Kim — Netflix, etcetera — I'll create new, memorable passwords that follow a pattern.

For everything else, I'll let my password manager generate random passwords.

This seems like a good balance between usability and security. Every password will be different. Only the ones I share with Kim will be short; all others will be long. And most of my new passwords will be random gibberish.

Final Thoughts on Cybersecurity

In this short video from Tech Insider, a former National Security Agency security expert shares his top five tips for protecting yourself online.

You'll note that these are similar to the Reddit cybersecurity guide I posted earlier in this article. Here are the steps he says to take to keep yourself safe:

Enable two-factor authentification whenever possible.

Don't use the same password everywhere.

Keep your operating system (and software) up to date.

Be careful with what you post to social media.

Do not share personal information unless you're certain you're dealing with a trusted company or person.

I won't pretend that the steps I'm taking will protect me completely. But my new system is certainly an upgrade from what I've been doing for the past 20+ years — which was, as I've mentioned, dumb dumb dumb.

And I have to confess: I like the idea of restricting my online financial life to one computer — the new $150 Chromebook. I'm not sure if this is actually doable, but I'm going to give it a go. If this works, then I may see if I can find a money-management tool that I like for the machine. Maybe then I can finally leave Quicken 2007 for Mac behind!

What have I missed? What steps have you taken to protect your online accounts? Which do you feel is the best password manager? How do you create memorable, secure passwords? How do you handle shared accounts? Help other GRS readers — and me! — develop better online security practices.

from Finance https://www.getrichslowly.org/cybersecurity-basics/ via http://www.rssmix.com/

[topicprinter]

Join here:https://discord.gg/BCYK4gK​Why Join the Discord? Why Do We Have a Discord?We wanted to give our wonderful community more dynamic ways to interact with one another and support each other.​Easier Ways to Find What You Need:Discord offers us the ability to create content channels to better organize the community and direct people to where they should go for the most relevant assistance or connections.We have some great channels set up to help you with How to Get Started, Marketing & Sales, Design, Hardware and Physical Products, Software Development, Team Building and Culture, Fundraising, and more.We of course have channels dedicated to Feedback and sharing special promotions with the community.​Regional ChannelsWe set up 20 key regional channels to allow you to easily find others that are near you or located in a place you will be visiting or are simply curious about. This may be one of the most fun benefits of the server.Now, you can easily share and discover local events, find people to collaborate with, learn who are the local investors or community influencers in your area, and more. We already have a few members working together to start their own meetups to better than local community.When you first join the Discord you will be brought to our #welcome channel. While in that channel you can simply click on a emoticon to join a regional channel.Right now, this works best on a computer where you can utilize the mouse over effect to see the region name for each emoticon.If you are stuck on mobile, just message a moderator on the Discord and tell them what regions you want to join:#africa#asia#canada#central-america#central-usa#china#eastern-europe#east-coast-usa#india#mexico#middle-east#nyc-area#oceania#russia#silicon-valley#south-america#southern-california#the-united-kingdom#west-coast-usa#western-europe​Real Time Text Chat:You get to interact with each other in real time. It's a more natural discussion and often leads to a deeper connection between community members.​Voice Chat:Voice chat takes that previous sentiment one step further. The ability to engage in voice chat allows for a more personal and real connection that text alone can not do. This is important to us, we want to drive authentic relationships. It is what makes a community strong and more supportive.We have already begun to test new ways to utilize the voice chat to benefit you. Such as voice chat AMAs and voice chat events, like "Pitch to Your Peers" where you can practice pitching to each other for constructive feedback.If you have suggestions or ideas of how to make the most of voice chat, please share them to the #administrivia channel on the Discord server.​More Support For Staying Focused and Finding More Happiness While on Your JourneyWe set up a few special channels to help you get peer support while dealing with the overwhelming pressures of starting your own startup, trying to build your career, and whatever other activity is throwing mental hurdles at you.We really want to help you each grow and be inspired by one another.You can find channels for Emotional Support, Celebrating Your Successes, and Goal Setting & Management are dedicated to this.These channels really do the best job at reflecting the culture we have been striving to cultivate throughout this sub and it makes us proud to see people using them already in such positive manners to support each other.​Easier To Share Your Feedback and Suggestions With the Moderators as a Whole CommunityWe set up the #administrivia channel so we can have an ongoing discussion with you and the rest of your community about how to improve the sub and the Discord.This has been working really well so far and it is less contentious than over here on the sub, because it takes the form of an actual discussion.Here on the sub is it almost an endless stream of random users launching into attacks against the mods. Usually, tied to them not feeling the need to read and follow our posted rules--even after being asked to do so (sometimes multiple times). The tools Reddit gives us makes it kinda hard for the mod team to really engage with you all in productive ways.Over there, so far, it has been a fun experience where members of the community share their feedback and suggestions in really constructive and respectful ways. We get to have a real discussion about it, not just with that single person, but the rest of the community can join the discussion too. We have adopted some ideas as they were presented or used what was shared for inspiration to make other beneficial changes to the community.If you have ideas, feedback, and suggestions for the sub, the Discord, or the community as a whole: come share them (in a polite and constructive manner).​Verified MentorsIf you would like to be recognized on the Discord as an expert and mentor in a given field you can make sure a request. Mentors will be highlighted and we are working on fun events and special privileges tied to being a mentor.Make your request in the #administrivia channel.Other Sub NotesI know I have been saying we have plans in the works to improve the sub for a little while now. That has not changed.We want to restructure how we do things over here on the sub to raise the volume of content and engagement on the sub.I want to take a quick moment to remind everyone that moderators are volunteers.We do not get paid to be moderators. We have real jobs, we are building real startups, or we are doing both at the same time.We have bills to pay and people that depend on us to do so. We do our very best to carve out time to manage this community, build it, and ensure it represents a culture of of inspiring and educating people while building authentic relationships across the community. But, this is not our first priority in our lives. It can not be. But, it is still a priority and we do our very best.So, please keep that in mind as you manage your expectations for timelines and the amount of effort you can get out of the mod team.​Easing Up On Some RulesWe have been exploring a variety of ways to ease up on some of the rules. The core concern is maintaining a high level of quality over the content on the sub. We do not want to be another business focused sub that is overrun with shitty blog posts, self promotion, or other content that is reposted endlessly across that network of business related subs.We want to feature content that is really focused around community engagement and driving interesting and beneficial discussions among you in the open with the rest of the community.That said, we went really hard and really strict to set a clear precedent of what matters most here. To the extreme.We recognize that certain exceptions to rules should be made when they show probative value to the community as a whole.For Example: Sharing certain links and resources (articles) as part of a larger insightful comment that explains the relevance of what is being shared to another would be an exception. Simply posting a link would not.We are discussing how to change the rules to best reflect this slightly more lenient attitude towards specific behavior.The main thing is that before we instituted the much stricter rules EVERYONE was looking for a way to offer an insincere comment in order to push a link to their own shit. So, do not want to invite that behavior to run rampant again (it is still an issue, but not nearly as much).If you have suggestions or ideas, you can share them here. Just remember to be respectful and try to remember that we have very clear and specific goals for the culture of this community: Inspire, educate, build authentic relationships--quality over quantity.​Verified Flair on the SubIf you would like to get special flair to highlight that you are an industry expert, investor, or something else we would like to grant you such flair.We want to help the community better understand who they are talking with and who they should trust/listen to regarding specific topics.You can make your request using the Message the Moderator feature in the side bar/about section.​New Weekly Themed EventsWe are discussing adding new themed events to the sub throughout the week. The Weekly Feedback and Support thread is great, but we would like more happening to encourage you all to spend more time sharing and getting to know one another.We were thinking about some ideas that focus around things like "How to Get Started", "Share Your Week's Goals", "Marketing and Sales Brainstorming", "Ideation"What ideas do you have? What think tanks and discussions would you like to have each week with your community? What do you need most to help you stay focused, find inspiration, overcome hurdles, find your way, and simply grow as a person and grow your business? You can share your ideas here in a comment. No dumb suggestions. It all has great value and will inspire us.​On Going AMA ScheduleAs mentioned above in the Voice Chat overview, we have tested running an AMA on Discord using the Voice Chat. It went very well. We are going to leverage this additional channel of engagement to recruit AMA subjects for you to gain access to.When we schedule an AMA it will take place on both the sub and the Discord. It will begin with time spent on the sub and conclude with time on the Discord running a voice chat with you.It will result in giving you and the subject two fun ways to interact and give the community two different ways to digest great content to support growth.If you have suggestions for people we should reach out to, share them here: https://goo.gl/forms/gDwtn6kPjcvMk2Jj1Larger Restructuring of the Sub Linked to the RedesignThe Redesign is starting to offer the moderators across Reddit some new tools. They are still a far cry from what mod truly need.Most of this is linked to how Reddit is struggling to accept that it is no longer an aggregator platform and has evolved into a community platform.But, they have started to add some new stuff to help us have more control over our communities and bring you more benefits.As these new tools are released and we learn how to appropriately use them you will see some more obvious changes to the sub. We will make more formal announcements as necessary as that happens. Again, we are still discovering the new stuff that was just pushed out and working with Admin to understand and help influence the roadmap of what is coming next so we can better support you.In fact, everyone should be using the Redesign for viewing our sub. It has the most recent and updated set of rules and other relevant changes.​That is it for now. Remember, if you have feedback or criticism to share here you must do so in a polite and productive manner. Be kind to one another and the mod team.

#/r/startups #reddit

[andrewdburton]

A brief guide to cybersecurity basics

Last Monday, I got an email from Spotify saying that somebody in Brazil had logged into my account.

I checked. Sure enough: A stranger was using my Spotify to listen to Michael Jackson. I told Spotify to “sign me out everywhere” — but I didn't change my password.

On Wednesday, it happened again. At 2 a.m., I got another email from Spotify. This time, my sneaky Brazilian friend was listening to Prince. And they apparently liked the looks of one of my playlists (“Funk Is Its Own Reward”), because they'd been listening to that too.

I signed out everywhere again, and this time I changed my password. And I made a resolution.

You see, I've done a poor job of implementing modern online security measures. Yes, I have my critical financial accounts locked down with two-factor authentification, etc., but mostly I'm sloppy when it comes to cybersecurity.

For example, I re-use passwords. I still use passwords from thirty years ago for low-security situations (such as signing up for a wine club or a business loyalty program). And while I've begun creating strong (yet easy to remember) passwords for more important accounts, these passwords all follow a pattern and they're not randomized. Worst of all, I maintain a 20-year-old plain text document in which I store all of my sensitive personal information.

This is dumb. Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb.

I know it's dumb, but I've never bothered to make changes — until now. Now, for a variety of reasons, I feel like it's time for me to make my digital life a little more secure. I spent several hours over the weekend locking things down. Here's how.

A Brief Guide to Cybersecurity

Co-incidentally, the very same day that my Spotify account was being used to stream Prince's greatest hits in Brazil, a Reddit user named /u/ACheetoBandito posted a guide to cybersecurity in /r/fatFIRE. How convenient!

“Cybersecurity is a critical component of financial security, but rarely discussed in personal finance circles,” /u/ACheetoBandito wrote. “Note that cybersecurity practitioners disagree over best practices for personal cybersecurity. This is my perspective, as I have some expertise in the area.”

I won't reproduce the entire post here — you should definitely go read it, if this subject is important to you — but I will list the bullet-point summary along with some of my own thoughts. Our orange-fingered friend recommends that anyone concerned about cybersecurity take the following steps:

Get at least two hardware-based security keys. My pal Robert Farrington (from The College Investor) uses the YubiKey. Google offers its Titan Security Key. (I ordered the YubiKey 5c nano because of its minimal form factor.)

Set up a secret private email account. Your private email address should not be linked in any way to your public email, and the address should be given to no one. (I already have many public email accounts, but I didn't have a private address. I do now.)

Turn on Advanced Protection for both your public and private gmail accounts. Advanced Protection is a free security add-on from Google. Link this to the security keys you acquired in step one. (I haven't set this up because my security keys won't arrive until this afternoon.)

Set up a password manager. Which password manager you choose is up to you. The key is to pick one that you'll use. It's best if this app supports your new security keys for authentification. (I'll cover a few options in the next section of this article.)

Generate new passwords for all accounts. Manually create memorable passwords for your email addresses, your computers (and mobile devices), and for the password manager itself. All other passwords should be strong passwords generated randomly by the password manager.

Associate critical accounts with your new private email address. This will include financial accounts, such as your banks, brokerages, and credit cards. But it could include other accounts too. (I'll use my private email address for core services related to this website, for instance.)

Turn on added security measures for all accounts. Available features will vary from provider to provider, but generally speaking you should be able to activate two-factor authentification (with the security keys, whenever possible) and login alerts.

Turn on text/email alerts for financial accounts. You may also want to turn on alerts for changes to your credit score and/or credit report.

Activate security measures on your mobile devices. Your phone should be locked by a strong authorization measure. And each of your individual financial apps should be locked down with a password and any other possible security measures.

/u/ACheetoBandito recommends some additional, optional security measures. (And that entire Reddit discussion thread is filled with great security tips.)

You might want to freeze your credit (although, if you do, remember that you'll occasionally need to un-freeze your credit to make financial transactions). Some folks will want to encrypt their phones and hard drives. And if you're very concerned about security, purchase a cheap Chromebook and use this as the only device on which you perform financial transactions. (Believe it or not, I'm taking this last optional step. It makes sense to me — and it may be a chance for me to move beyond Quicken.)

Exploring the Best Password Managers

Okay, great! I've ordered a new $150 Chromebook and two hardware-based security keys. I've set up a brand-new, top-secret email address, which I'll connect to any account that needs added security. But I still haven't tackled the weakest point in the process: my text document filled with passwords.

Part of the problem is complacency. My system is simple and I like it. But another part of the problem is analysis paralysis. There are a lot of password managers out there, and I have no idea how to differentiate between them, to figure out which one is right for me and my needs.

For help, I asked my Facebook friends to list the best password managers. I downloaded and installed each of their suggestions, then I jotted down some initial impressions.

LastPass: 16 votes (2 from tech nerds) — LastPass was by far the most popular password manager among my Facebook friends. People love it. I installed it and poked around, and it seems…okay. The interface is a little clunky and the feature set seems adequate (but not robust). The app uses the easy-to-understand “vault” metaphor, which I like. LastPass is free (with premium options available for added cost).

1Password: 7 votes (4 from tech nerds) — This app has similar features to Bitwarden or LastPass. The interface is nice enough, and it seems to provide security alerts. 1Password costs $36/year.

Bitwarden: 4 votes (2 from tech nerds) — Bitwarden has a simple, easy-to-understand interface. It uses the same “vault” metaphor that products like LastPass and 1Password use. It's a strong contender to become the tool I use. Bitwarden is free. For $10 per year, you can add premium security features.

KeePass: 2 votes — KeePass is a free Open Source password manager. There are KeePass installs available for all major computer and mobile operating systems. If you're a Linux nut (or an Open Source advocate), this might be a good choice. I don't like its limited functionality and its terrible interface. KeePass is free.

Dashlane: 2 votes — Of all the password managers I looked at, Dashlane has the nicest interface and the most features. Like many of these tools, it uses the “vault” metaphor, but it allows you to store more things in this vault than other tools do. (You can store ID info — driver license, passport — for instance. There's also a spot to store receipts.) Dashlane has a free basic option but most folks will want the $60/year premium option. (There's also a $120/year option that includes credit monitoring and ID theft insurance.)

Blur: 1 vote — Blur is different than most password managers. It quite literally tries to blur your online identity. It prevents web browsers from tracking you, masks email addresses and credit cards and phone numbers, and (or course) manages passwords. I want some features that Blur doesn't have — and don't want some of the features it does have. Blur costs a minimum of $39/year but that price can become much higher.

Apple Keychain: 1 vote — Keychain has been Apple's built-in password manager since 1999. As such, it's freely available on Apple devices. Most Mac and iOS folks use Keychain without even realizing it. It's not really robust enough to do anything other than store passwords, so I didn't give it serious consideration. Keychain is free and comes installed on Apple products.

Let me be clear: I made only a cursory examination of these password managers. I didn't dive deep. If I tried to compare every feature of every password manager, I'd never choose. I'd get locked into analysis paralysis again. So, I gave each a quick once-over and made a decision based on gut and intuition.

Of these tools, two stood out: Bitwarden and Dashlane. Both sport nice interfaces and plenty of features. Both tools offer free versions, but I'd want to upgrade to a paid premium plan in order to gain access to two-factor authentification (using my new hardware security keys) and security monitoring. This is where Bitwarden has a big advantage. It's only $10 per year. To get the same features, Dashlane is $60/year.

But here's the thing.

I started actually using both of these tools at the same time, entering my website passwords one by one. I stopped after entering ten sites into each. It was clear that I vastly preferred using Dashlane to Bitwarden. It just works in a way that makes sense to me. (Your experience might be different.) So, for a little while at least, I'm going to use Dashlane as my password manager.

The Problem with Passwords

My primary motive for using a password manager is to get my sensitive information out of a plain text document and into something more secure. But I have a secondary motive: I want to improve the strength of my passwords.

When I started using the internet — back in the 1980s, before the advent of the World Wide Web — I didn't spare a thought for password strength. The first password I created (in 1989) was simply the name of my friend who let me use his computer to access the local Bulletin Board Systems. I used that password for years on everything from email accounts to bank sites. I still consider it my “low security” password for things that aren't critical.

I have maybe eight or ten passwords like this: short, simple passwords that I've used in dozens of locations. For the past five years, I've tried to move to unique passwords for each site, passwords that follow a pattern. While these are an improvement, they're still not great. Like I say, they follow a pattern. And while they contain letters, numbers, and symbols, they're all relatively short.

As you might expect, my sloppy password protocol has created something of a security nightmare. Here's a screenshot from the Google Password Checkup tool for one of my accounts.

I get similar results for all of my Google accounts. Yikes.

Plus, there's the problem of account sharing.

Kim and I share a Netflix account. And an Amazon account. And a Hulu account. And an iTunes account. In fact, we probably share twenty or thirty accounts. She and I use the same easy-to-remember password for all of these sign-ins. While none of these accounts are super sensitive, what we're doing is still a poor idea.

So, I want to begin moving toward more secure passwords — even for the accounts I share with Kim.

The good news is that most password managers — including Dashlane — will auto-generate randomized passwords for you. Or I could try something similar to the idea suggested in this XKCD comic:

The trouble, of course, is that each place has different requirements for passwords. Some require numbers. Some require symbols. Some say no symbols. And so on. I don't know of any sites that would let me use four random common words for a password!

For now, I'm going to take a three-pronged approach:

I'll manually create long (but memorable) passwords for my most critical accounts. This is the XKCD method.

For the accounts I share with Kim — Netflix, etcetera — I'll create new, memorable passwords that follow a pattern.

For everything else, I'll let my password manager generate random passwords.

This seems like a good balance between usability and security. Every password will be different. Only the ones I share with Kim will be short; all others will be long. And most of my new passwords will be random gibberish.

Final Thoughts on Cybersecurity

In this short video from Tech Insider, a former National Security Agency security expert shares his top five tips for protecting yourself online.

You'll note that these are similar to the Reddit cybersecurity guide I posted earlier in this article. Here are the steps he says to take to keep yourself safe:

Enable two-factor authentification whenever possible.

Don't use the same password everywhere.

Keep your operating system (and software) up to date.

Be careful with what you post to social media.

Do not share personal information unless you're certain you're dealing with a trusted company or person.

I won't pretend that the steps I'm taking will protect me completely. But my new system is certainly an upgrade from what I've been doing for the past 20+ years — which was, as I've mentioned, dumb dumb dumb.

And I have to confess: I like the idea of restricting my online financial life to one computer — the new $150 Chromebook. I'm not sure if this is actually doable, but I'm going to give it a go. If this works, then I may see if I can find a money-management tool that I like for the machine. Maybe then I can finally leave Quicken 2007 for Mac behind!

What have I missed? What steps have you taken to protect your online accounts? Which do you feel is the best password manager? How do you create memorable, secure passwords? How do you handle shared accounts? Help other GRS readers — and me! — develop better online security practices.

The post A brief guide to cybersecurity basics appeared first on Get Rich Slowly.

from Finance https://www.getrichslowly.org/cybersecurity-basics/ via http://www.rssmix.com/