> And I am sure it had nothing to do with her getting alcohol delivered to her while at work [archive.is] or bragging about making sexual jokes to the companies twitter account [imgur.com]. It's either quite a coincidence or she knew she was in trouble and wrote the letter to try and make the company look worse.

I will say, as someone who drinks that brand of Bourbon quite regularly-the act causes me to ask if she's spending her money wisely living in one of the most expensive cities in America if she's having such a hard time making a livable wage that she's also having to eat at work constantly.

Maybe buying mid-tier bourbon that can run anywhere from $28-$40 (depending on the size) on liquor isn't the best way to behave financially. I wont comment on what this means as far as her relationship with Yelp, since I don't know their policies on drinking at the office.

I suppose then, if there is an issue, it's one of the credibility of the source.

That's not the story here.

I'm just evaluating various externalizes of her situation and how she responded to them and considering how they may ostensibly contribute to that situation improving, or failing to improve accordingly.

So yeah you're right, it's not the story here...it's just something ancillary. I suppose it's a good thing I was only answering tangentially hypothetical question.

We don't have 100% of the background facts of this situation, so that question isn't meant to suggest or imply completely that Ms. Jane is at fault completely for everything that took place here. It's just something I've often wondered when contrasting claims of "blaming the victim" and looking at the information being sold to me by the agent of dissemination.

> Our CA, DigiCert, does the final checks before issuing your certificate, so you should speak to them directly.

What exactly are you offering here other than reselling DigiCert?

1. We check your company registration, status, and DNS/whois and CSR while you apply - and before you pay.

2. Better CSR creation. There is no software to install, and no command line Q and A or clicking. You just paste a command onto your server, in either bash or pwoershell, then paste back the results.

3. We're massively faster than standard CAs. CertSimple deliver EV certificates in an average of 5 hours. The standard time for an EV cert is 7-10 days.

And a bunch more. See https://certsimple.com/about

In your position I would fear that my business/model/product could be easily replaced by any other partner/reseller of a CA, or the CA themselves. Unless your intention is to build volume then either be acquired by a CA or become a CA yourself under somebody elses root?

No probs: I understand the cynicism: the SSL industry is dominated by sales and marketing giants that market snake oil like SGC and seal in search, I wouldn't trust any of them either.

There's not a lot of people who get UX and get crypto: I've got my name in RHEL and I've also built consumer facing web apps for Google and Microsoft. That's 17 years of pretty unique experience, and we launch new features every couple of weeks. If a CA tries to follow - and they will - bring it, we'll smoke them.

Your final point is accurate.

It's easy for me to forget especially when commenting here (HN) that not everybody knows what they are doing and I often undervalue services which bridge a knowledge gap when I have that knowledge.

Thinking again, yes I can see the "doing one/few things very well" working during what is going to be a major shift in the market, especially with the intended end goal.

> I've already ordered - who can I talk to about getting my company validated?

I'd propose the answer to that FAQ needs some sort of improvement, to appear less standoffish.

http://i.imgur.com/Zmj6z7J.png Way better in just black.

False marketing of the month!

You could got for a LEO (upward of 500m) but they need much more power to stay up and you need so many more satellites. It's not impossible but I would have thought it to be prohibitively expensive for an ISP (or a cruise liner full of oldies).

Not to mention that this thing is going to connect to a base station and you're then your connection is in the hands of the actual fibre gods.

Compare that to a real connection: I have ADSL in the UK. I ping a server of mine in California. ~5000miles in 130ms. You could spend billions on a peering satellite network and your first hop (past any boat-board proxy) will still be longer than a DSL equivalent's whole TCP connection.

Unless, that is, they're using unicorns to beam the data with fairy dust neutrinos. That probably would be faster.

Note: I'm not saying annything about bandwidth. You can get crazy-high bandwidth through a P2P dish, but latency has always been an issue when you're dealing with orbits and the atmosphere.

1) Your antenna need not "track" the satellite to hold a signal

2) There is no gap in connectivity required to track to another satellite when one goes out of range/view

A geostationary orbit, as Oli pointed out, is way up there. At that distance, there are some physics that limit the minimum latency.

RTT between the satellite to the ground is around 250 ms, but that's only for one leg. RTT for any other endpoint on earth is going to have a minimum travel time of 500 ms. Return communications must use the same link, which adds in another 500 ms of latency. All of this adds up to a minimum of around 1 second latency on a good day. The physics of the matter dictate that satellite can never match fiber at the physical layer.

I have a feeling that they're using some sort of caching strategy to meet that fiber latency claim. That works fine for people who want to browse the news or catch up on a blog, but for things like webmail and Facebook, it's going to be painfully slow.

If there was a HN post every time a provider launched a new PoP we'd be swamped.

Disclosure: I work in the hosting industry.

I would like to add that it's pathetic that you got down-voted; it's further proof of how flawed HN moderation system really is.