> one of the most frustrating experiences
I understand this frustration as a mismatch between the user's non-expectation of security and the service's obeyance to industry security best practices.
Placing a cognitive burden of memorizing a new password just to try out your product strikes me as cruel.
Maybe only enforce password rules as progressive enhancement once sensitive information comes into play? After all, what's the point of protecting junk?
Also you're not supposed to be memorizing anything for logins. At the very least you should be letting your browser use the randomly generated password and save it to the browser password store if you're not using a full blown password manager.
For me I just see it as a sign of pretentiousness when you expect me to come up with a 20 character password. Luckily Firefox has a built in password generator now.
It depends on the forum and the hacker. Most hacks won't have a practical implication, but a targeted attack by somebody unhappy with your comments might abuse your identity or information the account reveals.
Or a forum can reveal information you don't want to have revealed (medical help forums, sexual stuff, ...)
And sometimes you are really to leave "child times" behind you, which might reach surface again later. (Say when you get into a political career ten years later and somebody finds your mail address and searches through dumps of leaked data etc.)
I've worked at least a dozen jobs. Received exactly 2 raises: one for $0.25, the other $0.33.
> In order to be stuck at minimum you have to additionally have stability issues
Or just not be able to afford a bachelor's degree
Vs. 4.6M dead worldwide, discounting 2nd order excess deaths.
How can you be so blithe?
Also, the intransigent moderates you mentioned create inertia biased toward status quo and inhibits appropriate policy action and change (see e.g. the slow-moving trainwreck of climate destabilization).
To be precise, there isn't a specific "Abstain" option on the ballot paper, but it is perfectly legal to leave the ballot blank. After all, if they could trace blank ballots back to the voter to punish them, it wouldn't be a secret ballot.
For context, "informal votes" (i.e. those votes which are rejected at the counting stage) have typically accounted for less than 5% of votes cast, and blank votes were about 20% of the votes cast in the 2001 federal election. That suggests that about 1% of the population is "abstaining" in this way.
Strongmen love compulsory voting, it creates a false perception of legitimacy, because corruption or no corruption, if only 30% of a population is engaged in the issues and the other 70% could give two shits, that is a slamdunk for incumbents.
Parent's assertion that "Voting at all in an unegaged populace is bad." still rubs me the wrong way.
Why discount the votes of engaged individuals just because the masses aren't? Baby, bath water, etc.
> Pricing information is then sent to our national office, where specialists who have detailed knowledge about the particular goods or services review the data. These specialists check the data for accuracy and consistency, and make any necessary corrections or adjustments. Adjustments can range from an adjustment for a change in the size or quantity of a packaged item, to more complex adjustments based upon statistical analysis of the value of an item's features or quality. Thus, commodity specialists strive to prevent changes in the quality of items from affecting the CPI's measurement of price change.
> Hedonic quality adjustment is one of the techniques the CPI uses to account for changing product quality within some CPI item samples. Hedonic quality adjustment refers to a method of adjusting prices whenever the characteristics of the products included in the CPI change due to innovation or the introduction of completely new products.