I repeat… 1,055!!!

Obviously, I can’t use the same login over and over. That would create potential security problems. It would also be unsafe to create so many different login combinations that I needed to write them all down somewhere. (Whoever found my cheatsheet would hit the jackpot. Well, ok. Not the jackpot. …the pathetically tiny amount of money that I usually have in my account.)

I finally settled on a spreadsheet that uses code words for 10 usernames and 10 passwords, which gives me 100 potential combinations. Of course, that means I have to memorize 40 pieces of data. (10 usernames + 10 passwords + 20 code words). And if I forget what a code word means, I’m screwed.

To deal with that possibility, I created a second spreadsheet that provides further clues to help me remember what everything means. Of course, I’m not writing down the actual data anywhere. I’m way too paranoid for that. My system seems to work pretty well, except that the sheer volumn of unnecessary logins makes the HTML version of the spreadsheet a pain to access on my iPod.

(Yes, I have an iPod Touch, not an iPhone. I hhhhhhate AT&T!)

My mother deals with her logins by writing everything down in a little book. Of course, if anyone finds the little book, she’s in big trouble, but that’s not really an issue, since she can never find it herself. That has led to the creation of more than one little book.

Some data is in one. Some is in another. And often, she’s not even sure where in the book each little piece of data was recorded. Is it under “B” for bank, or “W” for the first letter of the bank’s name? Or perhaps something more arcane? (Yes, she goes there.)

In the end, the ridiculous number of logins makes us less secure and wastes more of our time, making the whole concept of a customer logins pointless. Oh sure, we can log in to track our orders, but shouldn’t stores be sending an email when an item ships anyway? And we waste way more time keeping track of all those logins than we save should we ever return to the store and have to input our information again. (Which has probably changed in the interim.)

And why are these online stores insisting on saving our sensitive information anyway? If they’re really interested in our security, shouldn’t they wipe that data from their systems and all their backups after the return period has expired? And whatever happened to the concept of privacy?

Finally, after you’ve completed your order, does the store provide a “Logout” link? Not usually. So much for security. If you’re on a public or shared computer, and forget to empty your history and cache, the next person could order as much as they wanted on your dime.

So… are you ready for a world where online stores don’t require logins (but you can create one if you want)? Maybe I’ve missed something here. Feel free to educate me.

To Whom It May Concern:

AIG has claimed that bonuses are necessary to retain good employees. However, making employees dependent upon guaranteed bonuses provides no incentive for them to perform quality work.

Bonuses tied solely to revenue generation provide an incentive for corruption and/or a reliance on short-term thinking at the expense of long-term stability. This approach also devalues other important employee skills and contributions. All these things ultimately weaken a company.

Meanwhile, unemployment remains high. There are many educated, motivated individuals looking for work. Wouldn’t a better business model be to end bonuses and to spend some of that money on training new employees in case some current employees quit?

Sincerely,
Heidi Allen

Here’s what I wrote to them. If you feel the same way, please chime in.

I don’t have a problem with Focus on the Family exercising their right to free speech during the Super Bowl SO LONG AS that same courtesy is extended to other advocacy groups. Since CBS made a big issue of not running more moderate advocacy ads, you clearly have a bias. It’s this that I strongly object to.

If you open the flood gates to one group, you must open the flood gates to all. CBS may be powerful, but never forget that it’s the American people who own the airwaves, not you.

Like pretty much all of my heroes, Dr. King was driven by Love.. Love with a capital “L”. Love led him to active compassion. Compassion naturally extended into a committment to non-violence, social justice and human rights. His civil rights work, condemnation of the Vietnam War, of nuclear proliferation and of colonialism were just some of the ways in which Dr. King acted as a humble servant of Love.

The King Center, founded by his wife, Coretta Scott King, quotes him thus:

“Life’s most persistent and nagging question, he said, is `what are you doing for others?’.”

This is why they call MLK Day ‘A Day of Service’ and ‘A Day On, Not A Day Off‘. Put aside some time to serve others, even if it’s just for an hour or two. By honoring King’s legacy, you’ll also honor the best within yourself.

The watered down King tributes try to make Dr. King’s vision something small and non-threatening… some anachronism tied to a single, supposedly resolved issue and time. The real Martin Luther King, Jr presented us… all of us… with a challenge that is as critically important today as the day he uttered these quotes:

“The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.”

“True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring.”

“A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.”

“They are talking about peace as a distant goal, as an end we seek, but one day we must come to see that peace is not merely a distant goal we seek, but that it is a means by which we arrive at that goal. We must pursue peaceful ends through peaceful means. All of this is saying that, in the final analysis, means and ends must cohere because the end is preexistent in the means, and ultimately destructive means cannot bring about constructive ends.”

“Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Hate multiplies hate, violence multiplies violence, and toughness multiplies toughness in a descending spiral of destruction….The chain reaction of evil–hate begetting hate, wars producing more wars–must be broken, or we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation.”

“…we are challenged to achieve a world perspective. Anyone who feels that we can live in isolation today, anyone who feels that we can live without being concerned about other individuals and other nations is sleeping through a revolution. The world in which we live is geographically one. The great challenge now is to make it one in terms of brotherhood.”

“We must all learn to live together as brothers – or we will all perish together as fools. This is the great issue facing us today. No individual can live alone; no nation can live alone. We are tied together.”

“All I’m saying is simply this: that all mankind is tied together; all life is interrelated, and we are all caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. For some strange reason I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be. And you can never be what you ought to be until I am what I ought to be – this is the interrelated structure of reality.”

“We are now faced with the fact, my friends, that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history, there is such a thing as being too late.”

“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”

1. The opinions of high level managers trumped the advice from experts. No effort was made to weigh differing opinions against the facts.
2. Pre-existing contracts with fellow behemoth companies made upgrading to current technology legally impossible and/or financially prohibitive.
3. Employees comfortable with the existing technology were so fearful of change that they would impede or even sabotage attempts to bring software and hardware up to date.

This last phenomenon appeared to happen primarily on a subconscious, rather than conscious level. However, there were contractors whose continued lucrative employment depended on the ongoing use of outdated technology. On at least one occassion, a contractor bragged to me that he had so “personalized” his code that the company would have to continue renewing his contract forever if they wanted their technology to work.

Bottom line: The customers of these companies suffered, whether they were aware of it or not. Their data was harder to obtain. Customer Service reps had access to fewer tools, which slowed them down. Websites were designed by third parties with no understanding of specific customer needs and expectations. Lastly, updates rarely happened.

Surfing around the web, I see these problems played out repeatedly. Today, I came across the International Finance Corporation’s page, ‘How To Report Fraud and Corruption‘. The IFC is a member of the World Bank, and is the world’s largest lender for privately financed projects in “developing” nations. Billions of dollars and millions of lives ride of its ability to operate efficiently and effectively. Yet this short, but important webpage features not a form, but a clickable email address.

Why  is that a problem? First of all, users should have some sort of guidance as to the specific information they need to provide when it comes to something this important. Web forms are commonplace these days. A business entity of IFC’s size shouldn’t be using a method that’s at least a decade old.

Of greater concern, spammers have software that “crawls” the web, much like search engines do. This software looks for email addresses. Congratulations, IFC! You’ll receive so much spam that it will be nearly impossible to sort the junk from legitimate fraud complaints.

But my post isn’t intended to target the IFC. Rather, I’m presenting a problem in search of a solution. How do you change entrenched corporate culture? How do you get an elephant to move with the speed of a gazelle? Google does it, so clearly, such a thing is possible. Now the new paradigm needs to propagate… faster.