There's a difference between Björn (the name) and björn (the animal).
Capitalization gives additional context in this case, if it were in the beginning of the sentence though, then one would hope it contains other clues as well
I have `<firstname>.nu` as one of my domains, some company that resides on the same postal address as the owners of `<firstname>.se` reached out to buy the domain from me for I think it was €1000. I just told them no, I've had that name for 15 years, I've used it for my personal website ever since and have email and such set up.
I don't care if they printed out my domain on a car print or a card or something that they give out. That's not my problem.
The thing is, companies can (at least under some TLD's) claim domain names. But this claim has to be tested. And the test that I'm aware that exists is kinda if you have some kind of claim to it as well. It may that you own a business with that name, but it's also claim enough that you have that name as your name. Then your claim is valid and you had it first.
I'm not sure how it works with .com, but I wouldn't think they are very different.
Good. Antivirus software that insists on running in the background is horrible and largely unnecessary.
A very significant portion of my family tech support has been about Windows Defender grinding systems to a half by keeping disk IO constantly at 100% in laptops with HDDs.
Amen. People are amazed when I fire up SysInternals 'ProcMon' and show them how many hundreds of thousands of times their AV fires off in one single minute of monitoring. ()
I'll grant that kind of sustained checking is what you need to combat malware on Windows. But it damn well does have an effect on the overall system responsiveness.
() I did a q-n-d check; 1.3M events, and almost 300K were AV/Malware.
For casual users, modern implementation of Windows Defender has been pretty great. It has low overhead, doesn't tend to get in the way and does a good job of catching what is legitimately dangerous. It's not perfect, but for most people it's a great addon to common sense.
If it's grinding the system to a halt, there's something else already quite wrong.
Nothing except that the system has an HDD and not an SSD.
I've seen this numerous times with fresh Win 10 installs on hardware I had just serviced.
Just a couple of weeks ago I resolved this situation for my brother who has a fairly old desktop with a 6th gen i5 and a hard drive. The system was completely unusable because windows 10 had so much crap running in the backround polling the disk, keeping all his software waiting. Disk was completely healthy. Did a full reinstall, barely improved. Installed an SSD, and it was like new.
It's not rocket science. My mother is pretty tech illiterate but she's never gotten any viruses after I hosed the Win Defender off her laptop. She literally just checks her mail, streams netflix and visits a handful of news websites. Lots of users are like this. They can get by fine just with an adblocker and an occasional scan to be sure. Scanning the disk constantly is just ridiculous.
That's exactly how I got my only zero day virus in 20+ years of tech career. News sites have sources. Some news are rumors. It was very long ago and i pressed source link to 'semi accurate' tech news source in a news about CPUs.
Your best bet is to replace hdd with ssd or replace laptop and turn everything to 'recommended' or even 'security recommended'. Yes 8ms delays on some file opens will be there but people can live with that.
I would bet good money that people using an xtreme tuning OS like Atlas, are more likely to get their games from the pirate bay and their hacks from honest-bobs-totally-not-virii.com
For me, Atlas was just a way of installing my gaming windows install a little faster, because I didn't have to spend hours removing or disabling all the shitware, spyware etc. I was gonna do that anyway. I think it's just as likely that people using Atlas are just Linux/Mac daily drivers who consequently have a much lower tolerance for Windows' builtin malware, and so take efforts to make the little time they spend in Windows more bearable.
A properly implemented use of password_hash() would also allow them to use the same field and code for different algorithms over time.
What I mean is, the stored data contains which algorithms it is. So they can in their code or configuration change which algorithms to use and how many times it should hash. Then on login they can verify the password against the hash and also check if the stored hash needs to be rehashed against the current set settings, then it can create a new hash from the password the user entered on login and store that in the database.
Then you get automatic hash upgrades to match the current settings of the hashing of the passwords on the site with basically no user interaction (other than the act of logging in to have the password in plain text).
He's not really a programmer, so much as he is a scientist first and foremost. When I think of a "programmer", I think of John Carmack and Tim Sweeney. When I think of computer scientist, I think of Donald Knuth.
I would also argue that it's quite hard to determine from a Wikipedia article if a person were a good programmer at the time of creating a certain thing about 40 years ago.
If my memory serves me correctly, Leslie Lamport [1] created TeX because he wanted to write a book on math but there were no good systems to write math, so he made TeX. So to me, it sounds like he were a math teacher at that time, I have no idea if he actually knew programming when starting to work on TeX.
Your memory doesn't serve you correctly! Most parts of your post are factually incorrect...
Lamport didn't make TeX. It was Don Knuth. Lamport wrote the LaTeX macros for TeX to simplify typesetting books and articles.
> I would also argue that it's quite hard to determine from a Wikipedia article if a person were a good programmer at the time of creating a certain thing about 40 years ago.
Ironically, the informative and relevant article you linked does answer this:
Leslie Lamport was a computer scientist from 1970 to 1985. He released LaTex in 1984. So he was a full time computer scientist for more than 14 years before LaTeX. This (plus of course his subsequent career including winning the Turing Award) suggests he was a "good programmer" for most common usages of "good" and "programmer".
Lamport was only a math teacher (at Marlboro College) from 1965 to 1969, 15 years before LaTeX. He was a computer scientist for his entire post-PhD career.
Capitalization gives additional context in this case, if it were in the beginning of the sentence though, then one would hope it contains other clues as well