i should think you could grok from my comment that i&#x27;m on board for your two points<p>why explain away the comic as just being an example but then confront the comment as being unaware?<p>why did i use 4 word &#x27;slots&#x27; instead of diceware&#x27;s suggested 6 minimum? because the comic did and that was referenced in the gp<p>why did i use 1000 words instead of diceware&#x27;s 7776? because the number of words is arbitrary for an explanation, and, as i stated, i was playfully referencing, and intentionally promoting, more of randall&#x27;s work<p>your comment fails to negate anything in my explanation, which was meant as a means of explaining how to think about these things<p>what the effectiveness of the ga cracking repo shows is that people are using even less possible words than dice&#x27;s 7776 or randall&#x27;s 1000<p>and the concluding statements that more variety with less patterns equates to better security stands<p>&gt; The complete list contains 7776 short words, abbreviations and easy-to-remember character strings. The average length of each word is about 4.2 characters(o)<p>i&#x27;ll be kind and round that 4.2 up to 5<p>&gt; Diceware suggests using 6 words for minimum<p>so we are looking at 6 words of 5 characters.. 30 total characters<p>let&#x27;s compare diceware to individual characters:<p><pre><code>    ~220000000000000000000000+ = 7776**6 : diceware with 6 word minimum
    ~800000000000000000000000000000000000000000+ = 7776**10 : diceware with 10 words
    ~2800000000000000000000000000000000000000000000+ = 26**30 : english alphabet, 30 characters
</code></pre>
&gt;what this is showing you, is that anything that makes things easier for you also will make things easier for a cracker<p>(o) <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;world.std.com&#x2F;~reinhold&#x2F;diceware.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;world.std.com&#x2F;~reinhold&#x2F;diceware.html</a>