Exporting video standards?

Engine codes and chassis codes make great non word passwords and easy for "US" to remember.

I treat FB and YouTube as two different things, with two completely different accounts. Upload a video to YouTube, then just add a link to it on Facebook. FB takes care of embedding. If you want a link to your Facebook account on YouTube, just put a link in the video description.

On a web page, just put that embed code in the HTML, just like you would an image link or a hyperlink. It'll display just fine. It'll work on a forum as well if that forum supports HTML code (as opposed to the square bracket BBCode) and the forum allows embedding. Some forums have their own way of embedding YouTube videos.

Since Google owns YouTube, a YouTube account IS a Google account. It opens up the possibility of a Gmail account, but it's not anything you have to use.

Toss a capital in there somewhere like.

b33rnotfEar

Keith wrote: I treat FB and YouTube as two different things, with two completely different accounts. Upload a video to YouTube, then just add a link to it on Facebook. FB takes care of embedding. If you want a link to your Facebook account on YouTube, just put a link in the video description. On a web page, just put that embed code in the HTML, just like you would an image link or a hyperlink. It'll display just fine. It'll work on a forum as well if that forum supports HTML code (as opposed to the square bracket BBCode) and the forum allows embedding. Some forums have their own way of embedding YouTube videos. Since Google owns YouTube, a YouTube account IS a Google account. It opens up the possibility of a Gmail account, but it's not anything you have to use.

Thanx for the info. I'll just manually put it in FB instead of setting up the sharing.

I'll try adding the embed code to the HTML on the webpage and see how that works.

I don't have to use it, but they made me get a gmail account before I could get a YT account.

It's the same thing, really. Gmail account = YouTube account.

e_pie wrote:

madmallard wrote: I still love XKCD's password theory comic. ;p

It's true though, brute forcing a password is an all or nothing affair, you can't just guess a portion of the password at a time, you have to do it all at once, so the more characters you have the better. Random characters really only stifle commonly used dictionary word based password attacks. It would have little to no effect on something that is brute forcing its way in by guessing every possible combination. If a site requires a certain number of capitalized letters, special characters, or numbers, just throw them in between the words. rubber1house2pepsi!FARTS@ is a much stronger password than some crazy unrememberable 8 character mess. I've really been meaning to get around to strengthening my passwords but I been lazy.

Brute forcing almost always IS a dictionary attack. At least they start with dictionaries, some will then try random combinations and some will just give up when the dictionary is exhausted. True brute forcing, with random characters, is incredibly slow to the point that it's useless for anyone in any kind of hurry (or against a system with any kind of brute-force protection), so if you use a password that won't be guessed in a dictionary attack you've got a very good password.

In reply to GameboyRMH:

actually, thats not true anymore. And thats partly why XKCD launched the password comic.

This is because brute force crackers have begun harnessing the power of graphics card stream processors, uniquely suited to this type of work. Of course you still start from the dictionary, but the speed with which you can now burn thru a dictionary attack and move thru a random character attack is really eye-opening.

Check out this test article...

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/password-recovery-gpu,2945-7.html

I was talking remote brute-force vs. brute-forcing a hash, although with so many sites getting pwned there's an equal possibility of your hash leaking out.