Sorry, didn’t want this to look like an attack or disagreement. Just wanted to highlight that point, because arbitrary maximum sizes for passwords are a pet peeve of mine.
Sorry, didn’t want this to look like an attack or disagreement. Just wanted to highlight that point, because arbitrary maximum sizes for passwords are a pet peeve of mine.
At least the character limit had a technical reason behind it: having a set size for fields means your database can be more efficient.
If that is the actual technical reason behind it, that is a huge red flag. When you hash a password, the hash is a fixed size. The size of the original password does not matter, because it should not be stored anyway.
Conserve what? Certainly not the environment, human rights, common decency or democratic traditions. So, what else?
So his “crime” that you want to punish him for is that he improved things in a way that made sense in the context of his time instead of looking decades into the future and forcing a drastic change immediately long before society was anywhere near ready for it? Seriously?
I drew better trucks in crayon when I was 5.
I like to describe it as “a five year old’s idea of a cool car”. I guess you had better taste than most at that age.
You can buy gold (and other precious metals) as exchange traded commodities, no reason to have them physically delivered to your home and risk damaging your floor.
A typical project manager will get a range, take the lower bound and communicate it as the only relevant number to every other stakeholder. When that inevitably does not work out, all the blame will be passed on to you unfiltered.
Depending on where you work it may or may not be worth giving someone new the benefit of the doubt, but in general it is safer to only ever talk about the upper bound and add some padding.