When forced distribution is used to reduce leniency bias, this can cause <decreased trust> between employees if a pfp system is in place.
Answer:
Her performance over the course of a season.
Explanation:
An athlete is signed for a season. These days each aspect of an athlete is noted through the effective use of the best technology. However, for detailed study, one or several plays, and certainly not the second half of a game is enough. It's required to collect the details for a complete season. And that is possible, as an athlete is hired for a season. And through such a detailed data set of a complete season, we can now train a machine as well, and it will let the athlete know where she is going wrong. And thus she can improve and remove those faults from her game, and become a better athlete. And even for a coach, one complete season is required, though when he has not seen her playing before that season. It's assumed that this is her first season. All the options mentioned are good, but the best is certainly the one with complete details, and that is a complete season. The rest is good but not the best.
have you tried www.khanacademy.org
Answer:
Sandboxing.
Explanation:
SDLC or software development life cycle is a systematic approach to software development. It marks the birth and death of an application.
The application development starts from the research of the properties of the application to the design and development or implementation of the application.
After the implementation of the software, it is tested, comparing the design and the codes in the development process. The sandboxing testing process helps to isolate and test new lines of code added during the testing phase.
Answer:
The fundamental limitation of symmetric (secret key) encryption is ... how do two parties (we may as well assume they are Alice and Bob) agree on a key? In order for Alice and Bob to communicate securely they need to agree on a secret key. In order to agree on a secret key, they need to be able to communicate securely. In terms of the pillars of IA, To provide CONFIDENTIALITY, a secret key must first be shared. But to initially share the key, you must already have CONFIDENTIALITY. It's a whole chicken-and-egg problem.
This problem is especially common in the digital age. We constantly end up at websites with whom we decide we want to communicate securely (like online stores) but with whom we there is not really an option to communicate "offline" to agree on some kind of secret key. In fact, it's usually all done automatically browser-to-server, and for the browser and server there's not even a concept of "offline" — they only exist online. We need to be able to establish secure communications over an insecure channel. Symmetric (secret key) encryption can't do this for us.
Asymmetric (Public-key) Encryption
Yet one more reason I'm barred from speaking at crypto conferences.
xkcd.com/177/In asymmetric (public key) cryptography, both communicating parties (i.e. both Alice and Bob) have two keys of their own — just to be clear, that's four keys total. Each party has their own public key, which they share with the world, and their own private key which they ... well, which they keep private, of course but, more than that, which they keep as a closely guarded secret. The magic of public key cryptography is that a message encrypted with the public key can only be decrypted with the private key. Alice will encrypt her message with Bob's public key, and even though Eve knows she used Bob's public key, and even though Eve knows Bob's public key herself, she is unable to decrypt the message. Only Bob, using his secret key, can decrypt the message ... assuming he's kept it secret, of course.
Explanation:
