This. If we want to find out how to encourage more women to join an open-source project, we might start by examining what makes them leave one.
Sure, but to do that we're going to need data, and as we all (should) know, anecdotes are not data.
But even then: if you don't understand how the encryption works, how do you know what method to use for encrypting the passwords on your website. Should you just take someone's word for it? (Answer: no. And yet that's how bcrypt became popular.)
As someone who works in the infosec industry, the fact this comment is rated +5 Informative fills me with panic. Yes, you should absolutely take someone else's word for it, specifically you should take NIST's word for it. Because unless you're one of a handful of the most knowledgeable people in the world, you don't know enough about cryptography to judge the merits of a cryptographic hash algorithm.
Banning enforcement of certain aspects of a contract may be useful. But it deprives the parties of the freedom to meaningfully enter into such contracts
You’re actually making the argument that the state declining to exert power over its citizens is actually a loss of freedom? That’s moronic.
Light behaves as both a particle and a wave—at the same time. Einstein taught us that, so we're all generally on board, but to actually understand what it means would require several Ph.D.s and a thorough understanding of quantum physics
Stop pretending physics is spooooky. It's not that difficult to understand, at least at a superficial level. And I don't have a degree, let a lone a Ph.D, but even I can explain it (again, superficially):
Time dilation means that the faster you go, the slower time goes. If you're travelling at the speed of light in a vacuum, then the speed at which you're travelling through time is slowed infinitely. This means a photon experiences no passing of time between the moment it is created, and the moment it collides with something.
But the speed of light is finite, so it has to travel through time to go between two points. But because from the photon's perspective it's travel is instantaneous, it can't experience that time. So a photon doesn't know where it's going to land, until it does. And so until it does land, it could have landed anywhere. So when a photon is created, it travels out in all directions, like a wave, until it lands somewhere and the wave collapses.
The part that's hard to understand is the why.
We cannot accept that rivers in India show higher concentrations of active antibiotic than the blood of someone undergoing treatment.
I'd have to see a source before I'd credit that as true, but damn, it's a frightening concept.
If you are a US citizen, I don't think you could get out of producing a document the court ordered you to supply by airmailing it to a confederate in another country.
IANAL but that would seem to be a different situation: If the court requests a document you have and then you mail it to your overseas confederate, then I think you'll be on the hook for something like obstruction of justice.
But if you mail your confederate a document, then later the court requests you to produce it, you can tell them "That's the property of Confederate, who are a different entity. You'll need to request it from them."
"The voters have spoken, the bastards..." -- unknown