This isn't reddit. Everyone doesn't need to chime in on a subject.
If you're not a subject matter expert, I personally would prefer you not comment at all.
It's much more pleasant to read discussion from people that know what they're talking about rather than people offering their opinions because they think that other people want to read them.
This is primarily a technology site, so it's not surprising when you have popular articles in other subjects with few comments.
People can find something interesting without having the need to say something.
>If you're not a subject matter expert, I personally would prefer you not comment at all.
This is silly. Subject matter experts in adjacent or even irrelevant fields often have a lot to add to discussions. HN would be really boring if only only 'subject matter experts' chimed in discussions.
That may be true, but even models can have a closer or less close relationship to the thing they model and modeling 3D orbits around a central nucleus is quite hard in a rectangular mapping, the spiral (even if this one may be flawed) seems to show more clearly that the space in orbits further out will accommodate more electrons.
What do you mean by "modeling 3D orbits"? Because that's not what the periodic table is doing. It's telling you which quantum numbers are in use. The rectangle is extremely good at that (with a couple minor simplifications). The problem with the spiral is that it will have the same discontinuities as the rectangle, because each angular momentum number has two more magnetic quantum numbers than the previous.
Or, in other words, the disadvantage of putting more space farther out is that you lose the most important property of the periodic table, which is the groups.
2n^2, that the underlying reason for that equation is a quantum effect is not required for the basic understanding that 'further out' means 'more room'. That in the end the equations are about energy levels rather than space does not matter when you're trying to remember what the periodic table looks like, it's a useful mental construct, even if it is fundamentally in-accurate.
The intent is in the certificate. Superfish could create and sign any certificate, meaning it could impersonate websites. This certificate cannot sign other certificates, meaning it can't be used in the same way as superfish. Thus the logical intent seems to be bloatware, backdoors, etc.. not snooping on HTTPS connections.
This is the distinction the person you are replying to is trying to make, because although similar to superfish, it is not quite the same.
I think the problem is the private key is accessible AND machines were already setup to trust it (because of the cert). So what s_henry_paulson said is technically correct but it's conceptually wrong.
Once you get used to cmd+space. It's so much easier to hit the key combo, type the first letters of the program you want and hit enter than clicking through a bunch of folders and scrolling around.. but after reading this wikipedia article, I think I may have to find an alternative.
Check out Alfred. I use the free version myself, you can un-assign command space from Spotlight in OS X first, then assign Command Space to that. It does basically the same thing minus the Internet connected stuff like location searching and whatnot.
Alfred can be setup to index folders, contents of text files, pictures, etc. and harder things like System Prefs screens too.
I myself keep Spotlight on Command Shift Space for the rare occasions when I want to take advantage of the Internet connected stuff, but keep using Alfred for everything else (less to do with privacy, more because Alfred is just quicker.)
The twelve programs I use most frequently are all on my dock, or accessible from the command line, which I can access by pressing opt+space. Everything else I just use the app menu for.
Maybe too much whitespace isn't right; it's too much clutter. I don't know how to describe it; I'll attribute my indecision on being under the weather. Let's stick with "clean": I like Dokuwiki's layout, categorical hierarchy and linking system better than Confluence.
I agree that team members not adhering to doc standards is a human problem.
If you've worked on projects like this, I'm surprised you'd write such a comment to sabotage such efforts.
You're never going to solve the problem of verifying people's identity without some kind of elaborate system based on public information, or a new public national id number system, and even then you'd never be fully aware that the person is who they say they are.
The problem this solves is real.
I move a lot, and I've gone through exactly what is in the video more times than I remember, in fact, as soon as I saw the video, I sent it to several people because I thought it was such a good idea.
Your representatives don't have any way to know that any of the e-mails they receive or the submissions to their own personal web pages are strictly from their constituents.. so why do you think this is any different?
Or are you suggesting that members of the legislature will read zero e-mails and zero submissions to their website?
If you honestly believe that your legislators don't have the time to deal with the people they represent, then the problem is not a technical one, the problem is that you need more representatives.
If you're not a subject matter expert, I personally would prefer you not comment at all.
It's much more pleasant to read discussion from people that know what they're talking about rather than people offering their opinions because they think that other people want to read them.
This is primarily a technology site, so it's not surprising when you have popular articles in other subjects with few comments.
People can find something interesting without having the need to say something.