This next talk is going to be in English. But the next talk is going to have a French translation. So la prochaine présentation aura une traduction française. So especially if you're watching the livestream or the recording later on, feel free to switch the audio track to French. A couple of announcements before we start the actual talk is please don't steal the toilet brushes. They are needed on the toilets and nowhere else. Additionally, please don't smoke in any of the tents. Smoking is strictly prohibited in all of the tents. All right, since we're right on time to start this next talk, I'm going to keep this introduction short. I'm very happy to introduce to you Molly Wilson and Eileen Wagner, who are going to talk about Beyond the Pile of Knops redesigning NoScript UX. It's always very interesting to see these security tools evolve when it comes to usability and user experience. So I'm very happy to see this progress in that area. So I'm very much looking forward to see what Eileen and Molly are going to talk about. Please welcome them with a one round of applause. Thank you. Hi. Thank you so much for coming. We're really excited to present what we're calling Beyond the Pile of Knops, a design case study. We're going to talk about how we redesigned the UX of NoScript, a browser content blocking extension. But we're not just talking about NoScript. This is a case study that we hope points to design tools and processes that are useful for a lot of different open source projects and particularly projects that are really complex and are geared towards power users. So hi, I'm Molly. I'm Eileen. And this is our teammate, Lorraine. She can't be here with us. She's in Toronto. Hi, Lorraine. Hi, Lorraine. We, first question you may have when we redesigned NoScript is what about that logo? The NoScript logo is famous. It's an icon. It's been around for a while. Well, ladies and gentlemen, new NoScript logo. Hey, yeah. Same S, new facial expression. I don't know. This is how the NoScript UI used to look. Very small text, looks a little bit outdated. It's not super consistent. New UI, whoa, gray scale, consistency, rounded corners. You might call it clear, clean, kind of modern, right? Wow, it looks good. Yeah, we're very pleased with ourselves. This is the least important part. When we talk about design, making it look nicer is not what we are talking about. That's the icing on the cake. That's what you can do once you have done all of the other steps that we're going to talk about. We're not talking about the UI changes. We're talking about the deep methods and processes that you need to use before you can even embark on doing that. So we're going to show you really how we got there and present tools and methods that you too can use for designing open source projects. But before we do that, just a couple of words about why we're doing this. The fourth answer is NoScript is great. NoScript is awesome. NoScript today, it's been around for some time now. It was born in May 2005, so it's one of the older browser extensions out there. It currently has 1.5 million users on Firefox, 50k users on Chrome growing, plus, of course, all of the poor browser users, which last time I checked was around 2.5 million officially. Of course, a jamming key. Here we go. Can you help me out there? Thank you. It's not just used by what we think of privacy advocates, activists, researchers. It's actually used by governments and corporations alike. A lot of the people that we reached out to during our testing phase, for example, were working for governments. Of course, what also happens is the clicker doesn't work. Should we just do this instead? What also happens is NoScript has actually contributed to a lot of other security browser extensions, such as HTTPS everywhere. It was the first and is now, in fact, also the only protection, the client-side protection you have against cross-site scripting attacks. And the last thing I want to mention here is Douglas Crockford, who is a main contributor to JavaScript itself, who actually invented the JSON format, also recommends using NoScript. So NoScript is not something that people who, hey, JavaScript, use. NoScript is something that people who love JavaScript also use. The things that maybe not that, yeah, let's just. The challenges for NoScript that we see are not just challenges for NoScript. They're actually pretty common for a lot of projects we see in the free and open source software scene. NoScript is run by one developer and a whole community of enthusiastic users. So it's one person who built this at some point and then a lot of people start talking about it and giving feedback. It also is started by someone who mainly built it for himself. He says, I built it for myself and I will always make it work for me first. That's where a lot of the projects we work with actually come from. What they also think is, I want everyone to use these tools. Everyone deserves the privacy and security that I have. So a lot of fast projects want to be there. But of course, there is a tension. Because if you're always building for yourself first, then how can you make sure everyone else is using it when everybody else has very different needs and is not necessarily a developer? So what happened a lot is there were a lot of feedback and future requests. There's things that came in over the years that were really unstructured. And NoScript changed based on these unstructured feedback and was adapting to it very quickly. Over, again, 14 years, it has developed into a huge project that has many different aspects to it that don't necessarily connect as smoothly as you would want it to. So what it actually leads to is something that Molly called it. Yes, something I call McMansion design. I'm from the US. And in the US, we have this genre of house called a McMansion, which is basically a house with design feature creep. It's like, I want this feature. I want this one. I want this one too. And you end up putting all of these features on, making your house as big, ostentatious, and feature rich as possible. But the whole thing together doesn't look good, and maybe isn't even that usable. There's this great blog called McMansion Hell that points out how exactly this works in architecture. Here we got, pretty sure this window opens up to either nothing or a very short and tiny room. Hey, we have some space left over. Why don't we attach a smaller, yet uglier house? If you also are a fan of good and bad architecture, definitely check out McMansion Hell. So there's not an option not to design whatever you're working on. There is no such thing as no design. When you are building it, you are also designing it. So what we'd like to introduce is the process, the methodology, the method behind the madness that we use to make design make sense overall. Here's what our process looks like in four big steps. First, we research. We learn about the problem space. We learn about the existing tool, about the community, about the people who use it. What do they need? What's going on there? And then we synthesize that down to a statement that clarifies what is it we're actually gonna do, what are the core problems we're solving, and what is not so important to solve right now. This is also about prioritization. Then we prototype, and that prototyping is often rough, quick, dirty. We wanna do this as cheaply and quickly and iteratively as possible, and then usability testing, test with users. So it's really important that this goes fairly fast. It's important that this is not actually super expensive, and it's really important that this is centered on the community, it's centered on the users. So we focus on user needs by conducting user interviews at the beginning by doing usability tests as soon as we have a prototype to test, and getting rich qualitative feedback throughout. Our goal is that this tool makes sense to people. Why are we building it? Because we want people to be able to use it. We wanna know what do people want, what do people need, and what can people actually use. So for example, in our interview phase, we interviewed two novice users and four power users, our classification, not theirs, and we got rich qualitative feedback. For example, one of our novice users said, if I hadn't found the right thing to try to turn off after the second try, I am just going to turn NoScript off. One of our power users described how they rely on NoScript. NoScript is the last line of defense in my browser. I trust it to be working in my interest at all times. This is a lot more than we would have found out from asking people, do you like NoScript? Yes, no. Giving them a survey, collecting some kind of data, which NoScript doesn't do and will never do. We, this is why we chose to focus on this rich qualitative feedback with actual people. We then analyzed that by collecting these quotations and putting them on a virtual post-it note board. We organized them by theme. We figured out what we thought where we did some prioritization, talked more about that in a bit, and we built rough prototypes going from paper to wireframes to sort of a click through prototype that gives you an idea of the interaction. We tested this with four people in total at different stages. We gathered feedback, and that's how we did it. Now we wanna dive more into what we did and specifically how this looks for NoScript. If you're thinking, yeah, yeah, yeah, user-centered design process, I've heard that before, but it's not applicable to us. This is too complicated. This is too technical. This is for power users. This is exactly what NoScript is. So we're gonna show you how this works in that context. First, we're gonna talk about framing. So what does this tool do? And who does it do that for? First, it was important for us to understand what kind of content blocking actually exists already. The landscape of browser-based content blocking is pretty big, pretty crowded, which is a good thing. We think that should be the case. This would have looked very different 10 years ago. So we've got ad blockers where the goal is to deliver a cleaner end-user experience without ads. We've got privacy where the goal is to have less tracking of your personal web browsing behavior. We've got security where the goal of these tools is preventing malware. And we've got reducing cruft, which is sort of a more efficient experience, making, for example, just faster load times and eliminating loading unnecessary scripts. Something like Privacy Badger is in a very different space from NoScript. NoScript is kind of alone in this area of, it helps with security and also just helps make a more efficient browsing experience. Once we realized that was what it was doing, as opposed to a lot of the other things people might conflate it with if they didn't know too much about it, we put together three different personas. And these personas are like aggregates of people that we talk to. The reason we're not using actual people? Well, first of all, we promised them confidentiality. This lets us aggregate the data and protect the actual details of the folks we talk to. Some of them work in rather sensitive places. But also it gives us an idea of the kinds of people who might somehow be attracted to NoScript. We didn't include anything for NoScript, what's that? I don't even care. Everybody can see everything. Like that's just, that's not relevant here. So starting with Rose, the super user. Rose is somebody who uses NoScript because it makes her feel safe online and not using NoScript makes her feel exposed online. She's a security trainer as well and recommends NoScript selectively to people who can cope with having this much control. For many people, she says it's just too interactive, it's too much. Emil, the privacy advocate, what about his use of NoScript? He advocates tirelessly for NoScript. He tells everybody to use NoScript but he does not use it all the time himself. He does not use it if pages break too frequently. He turns it off and then leaves it off for a while and he really, really wishes it were easier to use because he's going around telling everybody else to use it. He knows it's the best, his words. Next, Chris the Curious. Chris the Curious is kind of generally paranoid, does not trust big tech, really does not like the idea that he's being tracked online, really does not like seeing ads. However, he tried NoScript once. He could not figure it out and he uninstalled it. He would love NoScript to decide which scripts are unsafe and block them automatically. He doesn't like having to make this decision every time a page loads. So, who do we prioritize? It might be important to know that NoScript is never, ever going to provide a block list. That's just not something this tool does. NoScript is absolutely not interested in collecting user data and really not interested in using any kind of machine learning on aggregated data to be smart. NoScript is going to be dumb. NoScript, that's part of its DNA and will always be the case. So, who is NoScript for? NoScript is for Rose the Super User. It's not for everybody and we made the decision fairly early on to de-prioritize these other users. Next. So, what is NoScript really doing for whom? It keeps you safe. Nah, not really, not if you don't know how to use it. What about NoScript makes safe browsing easy for everyone? For those other two personas, probably NoScript is not actually the way to keep them the safest because of their knowledge and behavior. Next. Does it make safe browsing easy for power users? No, I wouldn't say NoScript makes anything easy. What does NoScript do? It buys power users time to make informed decisions about who they trust. We really need to know this in order to do a good job designing it. So, NoScript is a tool for power users. It's a tool for creating friction rather than removing friction. It is strict by default and it is a tool that you have to interact with every time from the beginning. It's not a set and forget kind of tool. This makes it basically the Sven Markhart of content blocking. Mic is off. Switch mics. Should we switch mics? Use. We have another microphone already, I think. It's number two. Yes. Wonderful. Thank you so much. So, now that we know who NoScript is for, our next step in this process was saying, well, asking the question, what does Rose, the power user, actually need? And this part, it's kind of funny. People always think, oh, it's a power user. So, transparency, we need to know all the things. Information needs to be there and visible. Customizability, all the things need to be able to be changed, right? Because we have a power user here. Well, that may be true, but it's really no excuse for this, right? This is what our friend, Susan Farrell, would call a pile of knobs, right? I don't, when I am trying to configure something, I don't want to be confronted with a pile of knobs. And let's just take this idea of customizability kind of to the logical, you know, it's logical conclusion, which is offer everybody all the options. Well, let's think about what these options are. So, here's what a person needs to understand, a power user needs to understand, to use NoScript, right? Look at those red words. Those are the things, the elements of this tool. When you visit a site, you can load a script. These scripts can be from the site you visit or from a different source. We call these different sources, the script owner. That's number three. With NoScript, you can decide on what gets loaded into your browser. You can block or allow scripts. Deciding about what to block, how to block it, that requires a lot of knowledge about scripts and their owners. So, you have three kind of base elements and then you have two action verbs on top of that.  So, let's say we're visiting the New York Times. This is actually from the New York Times. I picked out seven scripts that you could actually load into your browser when you visit the New York Times. You can see there's NewYorkTimes.com, static01.NewYorkTimes.com. Could we just show, yeah, that's the first-party scripts, right? So, scripts actually owned by New York Times. Note that, you know, nyt.com is also owned by New York Times, but the URL is actually not exactly the same one, right? And then we have some Google products. We have news.google.com. We have googletagmanager.com. Again, not the same URL. And some people might know that DoubleClick is also owned by Google, right? So, that's all the Google infrastructure you see. But then there are also types of script. You know that the first three might probably be content. And then after that, we probably have some trackers. DoubleClick is definitely an ad-serving script and, optimistically, does A-B testing. Again, things you could know if you looked it all up, but you wouldn't actually know it if you're just looking at the interface. All right, that's the background knowledge we all need. But then there's also different ways of, like, thinking about scripts, right? No script itself comes with eight different types of script, right? It categorizes normal JavaScript, and then you have all the media contents, the video and audio files, object, frame, font, WebGL, fetch, other. These are all the different types of scripts you can actually load into your browser. Well, and not all of the script owners might have them, right? So, perhaps you want to say, oh, I kind of want to block scripts from news.google.com, and WebGL coming from New York Times.com, whatever. I have all the options. Now, if you think about these eight different types of scripts, and let's say you have n scripts on a site, you actually have eight n options, right? That's a matrix. That's a matrix of eight n options. And in fact, if you think about the possible combinations of those, again, taking block and unblock as like the two dimensions you can work in, you have two to the power of eight n. That's like all the different combinations you can have of blocking scripts. Again, New York Times doesn't have just seven scripts, it has 27, so you have 260 options, just going on a site. That's not what we want to be confronted with. Of course, some of these options are going to be more salient than the others. So, maybe I only want to block everything coming from news.google.com, maybe I only want to block frames, maybe I only want to block things that are not first party or affiliated, maybe I want to block or allow everything or nothing because I trust New York Times completely. Like, there are many different ways to carve out this logical space. And it's not clear at all, what are the most salient ways to do that. All right, on top of that, it's not just blocking and not blocking, right? We have, we can do blocking by location, we can have blocking for this tab, for this whole window, we can have blocking, time-based blocking, for this session only, for the next five minutes, for this week, forever. We can have other things, like it's on my work device, so I'm going to block, I'm going to be a little bit more careful about what I allow on my work device. Or perhaps I want to say only these sites get blocked with those scripts and those sites I don't care about. Possible too.  I don't know how many of you know the mathematical game, but it's like you're calculating five, six, seven different dimensions of blocking and really what you want is you just want to see the site. And that's not even fair to our power user. So, what we did here, instead of thinking about possible options, is we started thinking about scenarios, scenarios of using a tool like NoScript. So, we identified five different scenarios for when NoScript could come into play. One is normal browsing, so you're just, again, reading a new site. One we call quick browsing, so say you're making a payment online and things have to happen right this second and everything just has to work, you don't care about scripts or whatever. The other one being we call dirty browsing, you're visiting a streaming site and you know everything on that site is going to be really, really evil, so you just want to be most careful about everything. Social media use, right? So, there is a case where let's say you want to block Facebook on all the sites you visit, except for of course when you are visiting facebook.com where you need content from facebook.com, right? So, kind of like a site-based blocking scenario. And then the last one is visualization itself. This is also something we found out from user research, so a lot of people use NoScript just to see how many scripts are on a site. That's something we didn't know before and we realized that, oh, actually the visualization component is just as important as the blocking function. Now, based on those scenarios, you can kind of think about different task flows. So, this is how NoScript wants you to use the tool. You go to a site, does the site work? Yes, yay, awesome. No, it does not work. Okay, well, you have to enable individual scripts. You start with one, go with another, reload, see if it works, does it work, doesn't work, try it again. Of course what most people do is either they say, well, whatever, I really trust this site. Just load everything, yolo, it'll be fine. Or they go to the other extreme, which is I never wanted to see this site anyway, I'm just gonna close it. So, basically kind of a defeat position, right? Another thing we found out in our user research is that people actually have a shortcut, which is trust affiliated scripts and you hope it works. So when I say affiliated, I mean kind of everything that's first-party-ish, right? Can we just go back one? And I wanna say, nowhere in this process, right? Do you actually appreciate NoScript? Because when a site works, you say, yay, good site, no weird JavaScript stuff. And when it doesn't work, you say, NoScript is blocking everything, I can't. NoScript interaction is by default frustration, right? There's just no way around it.   There's always going to be that feeling and how can we design something that makes the feeling just a little bit less awful? Well, we tried. So if you look at the old UI, it has a bit, you know, you have the list of scripts and then you have the options to the left and then on the top right corner, we kind of have, like, quicker global options, but they're not very prominent because really, you know, NoScript doesn't want you to do all that. So what we did is, ta-da, new UI. It has a couple of things that we added. So first of all, we wanna appreciate the kind of quick and dirty scenarios, right? So we have the quick and dirty options. Allow affiliated scripts just means allow first-party scripts and if you have some affiliated scripts that you have saved before, you can do that. Fine-tuning happens in the second part, right? There are script settings. You can still see all of the scripts that are loaded here. You can configure the scope. This is something we wanted to do and wanted to make more visible. We have a new feature, per site settings. So that means you can save settings for a site that you're visiting. So the whole scenario we were talking about, about Facebook, that's possible now. You can save specific settings for a site that you visit, especially those sites you visit frequently. We wanted to keep the panic button, the power button on the bottom left because it felt like people sometimes just get too frustrated and wanted to quit everything. So panic button is there if you need it. So that's kind of the core of what we did. We really thought about what are the options? What are the tasks? And what are the things that people really needed to do? But then we also looked at the interface and realized that a lot of the confusion just came from the visuals and the words that were being used in the old interface. So first of all, I should say that's a very common problem. A lot of software has that, right? There's a lot of technical jargon, inconsistent use of language, super ambiguous icons. This is from a classic Apple design. You have a little bomb and then next to it you say, sorry, bomb, sorry. So what's the message here, right? It's very unclear. So these are all things that we see in a lot of projects and again, NoScript is no exception. But I wanna point to some specific and I find interesting issues that we came across with NoScript's interface language. The first one is colors. So here's a design question. Should blocking be green? Good, do that, go, right? Or should it be red, which we associate with bad? Don't do that, stop. Well, if you go with the intuitive gloss, it should be, let me go back one. It should be, go is green, right? So allow is green. Stop is red, block is red, right? Go, stop, allow, block. If you think about scripts though, well, good scripts you wanna allow. Bad scripts you wanna block. Okay, I guess block should be red maybe. But then NoScript also really wants to recommend usage. A good security practice means block everything. Don't allow anything. Bad security practice means, well, allowing everything. And now you're in the position where block is red for some people and green for other people. And that's just not a good place to be when you're trying to use colors here, right? It's only going to confuse people. No matter what you think the color means, people will always think it means something else. And so here's a situation where we said, okay, we don't want the red, green combination at all because that's only gonna confuse people. I should also say, of course, color shouldn't be the only indicator when you're designing things, right? We wanna make things accessible, so color is always going to be used with caution when you're designing things. Okay, the other thing that we found with the language is also really interesting. So a lot of interface language had double negatives in it. So something like disable restrictions globally. And that really, that's what I mean with the mental model, right? You're computing again. Disable restrictions globally. So there are restrictions first, which is already kind of a negation. And then you can enable or disable them. Okay, so you have to kind of do two logical operators there. Okay, well, that just requires some thinking. But then there's also technical and social concepts that kind of get conflated. I was talking up until now about blocking and allowing, but NoScript's interface actually uses trusted and untrusted. And again, this is the same issue, right? You're actually, there's the blocking and allowing on the technical level and the social thing is the trusting and not trusting something. And the question here is, well, if I'm allowing something, do I really mean that I trust it? Maybe, maybe not. But maybe I just need to allow it for now because I need to make an online payment. Why are you making me feel bad, right? So there's a lot of technical and social things that may or may not overlap. And sometimes, especially when you're designing for power users, it's probably better to just stick to the technical concept. The last thing I wanna mention here is the tone. This is something we found out in the user research. So again, we're looking at disabled restrictions globally, parentheses, dangerous. Now, this novice user we had just installed NoScript and they looked at us and were like, well, five minutes ago I was browsing without it. Putting dangerous here makes it sound like it's life-threatening. Yeah. You want to be a parent sometimes, but sometimes you just gotta let people do their own thing. So what we did instead, we changed the tone. We wanted to keep this idea of NoScript is making security recommendation and is also sufficiently warning you when you are in a bad place. But we wanted to do it a little bit more tongue and cheeky, right? It was supposed to be, it's not, oh, don't do this, you're in a dangerous territory, but NoScript has turned off. Good luck. You're on your own here. So yeah, I think that concludes my heart about language. And Molly. Yeah, so if you would like to do any of these things for any project that you were working on, no matter how logically inconsistent or complex or power user driven that tool might be, we want to provide you tools so that you can also go through a design process and hopefully make that tool that you have poured so much energy into the community, the development actually makes sense to the people that you need it, that you not just want, but need it to make sense to. We have put together a lot of different templates, resources, methods that you can use and in the spirit of FOS, we want to put it online, make it available for free. So this is a persona template that we've developed that's particularly geared around privacy security and human rights protecting technology. That's on our website. There's also another template that is geared towards tech tools but not necessarily privacy and security. What you put in a persona does kind of depend on the sort of tool that you're designing so we have a few different templates. Another thing that we have that we've posted is a value proposition generator. I know the word value proposition sounds really businessy. Really what this means is what does your thing do and for whom does it do that? I can't do all of the things for all of the people that doesn't exist. What are you actually trying to do and who is it for? And this can help you focus, prioritize, and make sense of all the constant feedback, feature requests, whatever that you are, I'm sure getting. And you know what? There's a lot more, but we're not going to use the talk time to walk you through all of them because, first of all, you can ask us and also we hope some of it's self-explanatory. This is the website. Simplysecure.org slash UX minus starter minus pack. And we'll also be, I'm sure, adding to it in the next few days as well. Remember, there is no such thing as not doing design. You can't say, no, no, no, we don't do design. Whatever decisions you're making, our design decisions. So make them with some kind of system. Make them with some kind of method. We also wanted to be transparent about how much this costs. We really like the human-centered design process that we use because it can be really lightweight and really cheap and available to a lot of people. We don't think you should have to hire a fancy-esque design agency to do this. But this was not easy. This took some time. And here's what it took. About one month of full-time work for two people, Eileen and Lorraine. I helped two. So maybe month, month and a half. Lorraine is a visual designer. The UI and the icon that you saw, that was Lorraine's work. I'm not a designer. Eileen's not a designer. So don't you be saying, I'm not a designer. I can't do this. Additional costs. We use the tools we use. Sketch is a, we use that for making drawing wire frames. That's like a vector drawing software. Whimsical, we use for online collaborating on wire frames. Notion, we use, Whimsical was also for like collecting all of these sticky notes. We tried some open source tools. They did not have the features that we needed for this project. So hi, somebody please make an open source tool that has the features that Whimsical has. We would love it. We would use it. And we would talk about it all the time. Notion we use for our internal collaboration. Jitzi we use for remote user testing and also internal collaboration. And tons of paper sticky notes. Those are not cheap. There's also research compensation. We thought it was really important to at least offer compensation to everybody who helped us. A lot of people did choose to donate that given the nature of the project. But we, it's really important to us that we were able to offer that. Well I should also say this work was not possible without the support of the Open Technology Fund. But more than anybody else, we need to thank Giorgio for letting us play around with no script. Giorgio, it's really hard when you've been working on a tool for 14 years and it's your baby. And just to give it to someone else for like a month and a half to work on, that's really hard. And thank you so much for being open and letting us play around with it. This presentation is dedicated to you. Thank you Giorgio. And yeah, I think that's it. I think, so we're gonna be here the rest of the week. If you have any questions about design, about this work or about our work in general, just ping us, yeah. We will help you with design, whatever that means to you, whatever that means to your project. Yes. Yeah. All right. All right, thanks so much already Eileen and Molly. We have a couple of minutes left for questions. So if you have a question for either one or both of them, please come to one of the microphone angels at the front or in the back and ask your question. I think we will start with the lovely person in front. Thank you. Thank you so much for the presentation. I was just wondering like, because I feel like lots of people's first interactions with NoScript came through like using Tor. So I was like, at one point in the process, do you think about sort of how different tools interact with each other? And do you have to create like a special persona for that? Or how does that go? For control in general, or for Tor? No, for like tools that interact with each other, for example, NoScript and Tor. Right, because it's, yeah. So that was super important because we know that you might restate the question, right? Was it on the microphone? Was the question captured? Yeah, okay. Yeah, so Tor, that's a really good question because a lot of NoScript users are involuntary NoScript users because they're using Tor. We started the whole process by actually interviewing people on the Tor design team. Shout out to the Tor design team. Awesome work, by the way. Yes, exactly. So we interviewed them and we talked about some of the issues that might come up. There is a whole project that is integrating NoScript into Tor and they're actually thinking about not showcasing any of the UI at all, which I think is a totally reasonable solution to the thing. You're going into the background settings and changing very detailed things. Maybe things are gonna be different depending on the new UI and how it's implemented, but yeah, that's gonna be a real project. In general, you absolutely should find out what other tools fit in people's workflow, right? You wanna ask people what browser they are using, you wanna find out what OS they are using and if you find that there's a huge chunk of people who use Chrome, then you need to take that into account how it interacts with the other Chrome extensions they're likely to use it with. I would absolutely work that into a persona. All right, then let's just continue with the question from the front. So this is a technical question. In the UI, I saw allow affiliated sites button, how does that work without any lists? Because for example, the static01.New York Times isn't really connected to the New York Times domain. How does that work? Yes, that's a good question, nice catch. So what we're gonna do is by default, affiliated scripts are first-party scripts, so those things that you can definitely read based on the domain. And for the other ones, you can't do it automatically. So what we're gonna do is most likely offer some background. So when you install the next NoScript, it's gonna have the affiliated scripts of the 10 most visited sites so that people have less breakage on very basic browsing experiences. And for the rest of them, what we have imagined is actually people being able to import and export their own settings a lot. So when you actually do wanna mark something as an affiliated script, you can share that with a wider community of people. So there is that future built in. But the rest of it is all by hand. As we said, NoScript is not a smart tool, it just does what you tell it to do and it does it reliably. Yeah. Yeah, I was also interested what site-specific actually means. Probably the same, it's related to sub-domains and so on. Right, so sub-domains of the site, do you mean? Or, okay. Because I think there's also another question about the site-specific scripts that are block or not block, right? So another way of looking at affiliated scripts is also, this is the kind of profile of scripts that I wanna allow or block whenever I visit a site. So that's kind of a different but related feature. So another question. You actually had it on the list of related projects, U-matrix, I think it actually fits in a kinda similar niche as NoScript does. Have you evaluated like how their user interface is? I mean, it's probably the matrix of a thousand switches that you were mentioning. But to me it's actually the one I use and have you checked how you could integrate maybe something like that into NoScript? Yes, you're absolutely right. I think the matrix is what got me thinking about the matrix to begin with, right? Like the eight N options I was mentioning before. It is super interesting. There are totally similar extensions. I think NoScript does a couple more things than U-matrix, but in general, they're the same category of script blockers. To me, the takeaway for me was that, so our job wasn't to evaluate U-matrix, but to me the takeaway was that was actually a little bit too fine-grained for most people, even for power users. Sorry, I was very unspecific with my question. I meant the new feature that you added to save for the site, or what you called it? Per site settings. Per site settings, yeah, what it actually means in terms of a URL or something. Is it like a top-level domain, sub-level domain, or is it like the full path of the URL? I think right now it's a full path of the URL. So whenever I am on Facebook.com or any subdomain of Facebook.com, things are going to be implemented, yes. So yes for subdomains. But these are things that probably, like some of the default options were gonna like leave up to Giorgio to make the decision on that. But the idea, so the funny story behind that, if I can comment on this, is this whole feature is supported by the back end and has been for a long time. And the only reason it wasn't implemented was because Giorgio couldn't figure out what the UI should look like, given how complicated everything else already is. So this is something we were really excited that we were able to implement. Okay, I think if we hurry up, we have time for one more question in the back. Thanks. Yeah, you mentioned the color. And I was wondering, of course, there are colorblind people that have a disadvantage if you use color for your design, but then there's a whole bunch of people that greatly benefits from colors. And I was wondering if you have some sort of rule of thumb that you use. For example, I don't use colors at all. It's probably not what it is, but maybe there's something like, if I use colors, I also use Tool X or Y. You always want to be showing necessary information with color in one other dimension. That can be positioning, that can be words, that can be icons. You just need to make sure that the color is not doing all of the weight. You don't want, for example, to click on a red circle or click on a green circle because people don't have the like, in real life, we know that in a traffic light, if the top thing is lit up, it's probably red. If the bottom thing, it's probably green. The interface is new, they've not seen it before. They don't know that the left thing is gonna be okay and the right thing is gonna be canceled or the other way around. Oh my God, apps are always switching where okay is versus canceled, where yes is versus no. So just color is great. Do use color and usually green for yes, red for no. That didn't quite work in NoScript because the yes and the no, the bad and the good, the good and evil, the trust and block, like that just didn't, it didn't match up. So we actually didn't use this red, green pairing anywhere. You should feel free to use red, green pairings only when you're sure it makes sense and always use also text or an icon. All right, that concludes the talk. So thanks again, a bunch, Eileen and Molly for the super interesting talk and I'm sure a bunch of people are gonna give NoScript another try once they see the new UI. Thanks. Goodbye.


Body-centered cubic is just like simple cubic. But there's a sphere in the center, too. So since these count for one, and this is one, and there's two, so body-centered cubic, for example, is uranium. Metal forms that structure. And then this one is kind of harder to see, but it's face-centered cubic. There's nothing in the center, like in this one. But there's ones on each of the six faces of the cube, as well. So there's one here, here, here, here, here, and so forth. And then there's the eight original ones. And if we fill it in, it looks like this. This is closest-packed structure. This is as many as you can jam in there. And therefore, usually, metals that have a face-centered cubic structure are very dense. And gold is an example. Gold is extremely dense material of 19 grams per cubic centimeter. Much denser than water, for example. Each kind has a certain number of atoms per unit cell. And the way you count them is you count one-eighth if it's on a corner. You count one-quarter if it's on an edge. And you count one-half if it's on a face. And any atom that's entirely inside the unit cell is one, because it's on the inside. Every time you copy the unit cell, you're going to copy that whole atom. If it's on the corner, you're going to have to copy it eight times there, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, before you get the whole thing. And so for any one of them, you count one-eighth. Body-centered, there's one in the middle, plus the eight times one-eighth. So there are two atoms per unit cell for body-centered cubic. And face-centered cubic has the same eight times one-eighth on the corners. They're always there. Corners are always there. And then we have six times a half because when they're in the middle of the face, they're only shared by two unit cells, so we count each one-half. We put together two cells, we get one atom. And since there are six times a half, that's three. Three and one is four. We have four atoms per unit cell. This should influence the density. And therefore, if you know the density of a material, you can kind of guess what kind of unit cell it might have. If the density is low, it's probably not face-centered cubic. And here's a picture again just reiterating what I said earlier. You can see that in order to get the entire purple sphere, I've got to have eight boxes. So therefore, for any particular box, I should count one-eighth. And for here, on the corner here, I have to share it by four. And on a face in the center, I have to share it by two. This one's right in the middle here on the corner, so it's shared between all those. Four. Okay, let's have a practice problem. Sodium, very reactive metal, easy to melt. Sodium has a density of 0.987 grams per cubic centimeter and a cubic unit cell that has an edge length of 0.429 nanometers or 429 cubic meters. How many atoms are in the unit cell? This is kind of a reverse engineering problem. We can give you the unit cell and ask what element. We can give you the element and ask what unit cell and so on. You have to be able to go either way. And I will show you how to do this almost without thinking. It's dangerous to do things without thinking, but sometimes it's better if you're playing tennis and you start thinking about what you're doing with your left hand as you toss the ball up to serve, you'll probably double fault. In fact, in the good old days, that was a way of throwing your opponent off. That's called gamesmanship. Say, have you changed your toss and then you put their mind there and they start thinking, what do I do here which they never paid attention to and then they get it wrong. And you can over concentrate on things and get them wrong. But if you're going to do things by remote control, as it were, you've got to have a system that checks. And the system that checks is to always check that the units work. In chemistry, the units are your friends because they guide you right to the answer. You don't need to actually know too much more than how to cancel units like fractions. Okay, first of all, the first physical principle is the density of the unit cell is the same as the density of sodium because sodium is just made up of an infinite number of copies of unit cells that all have the same number of atoms and the same volume. So therefore, if we use the density and the molar mass, we can find the number of atoms per unit cell. We have to look up the molar mass. We probably wouldn't know that. There's the molar mass. And look how I just love canceling those units out. I start with the density. Okay? If I happen to start with something upside down, I wait till I get to the end and then I turn both sides over. I don't just clear the deck and start over. I may start, if I don't know exactly how to do the problem or I'm a beginner, I may start wrong. But the units are still going to lead me to the answer. I start with 0.987 grams per cubic centimeter. I want to know how many moles there are per gram. So I convert to moles by using the molar mass. And then I want to know how many atoms I use Avogadro's number and I convert to atoms. And then I want to convert to nanometers. So I know how many atoms there are in a nanometer. So I don't, if I don't recall what the conversion is from centimeters to nanometers, I convert first centimeters to meters. And then I convert meters to nanometers. Now I've got atoms per cubic nanometer. But I know how many cubic nanometers are in a unit cell. Now I've got atoms per unit cell. It better come out to be an integer. Well, the numbers aren't all perfect. I didn't use Avogadro's number to six or seven digits. There are limits to how well you can weigh things after all 0.987. How are you going to get four digits on density? You have to be very, very careful to get four digits on anything, usually only voltage. And so we find about two atoms per unit cell. Knowing that and knowing that it's cubic, it's probably body centered cubic because that's the only one I know that has two. But the thing is if I write out and cancel all the units in problems of this type, you can just check you haven't made an error because if you end up with some funny units here that don't cancel or not what you want, you just say, hey, I need to know how many foot pounds is this or something. Yes. Oh, because I don't even believe the four. That's the fourth digit and I started with three. Okay. I don't really believe the four is significant. But it came out in the calculation. Of the three types of cubic unit cells then that we have, body centered cubic has two atoms. And so we would guess that sodium metal crystallizes into a body centered cubic lattice. And if you guessed that, you'd be right. And in fact, all the alkali metals prefer body centered cubic lattices. And therefore it probably has something to do with the structure of the valence electrons in those materials that they prefer that crystal structure. And here's one drawn smaller so that you can see the interior one and then the eight on the edges. This big one's kind of more realistic but a little harder to see sometimes what the unit cell is. And that's how it often transpires is that if you draw the molecule with the atoms the correct size, it's really hard to see what anything is because they all cover each other up. And if you make them translucent, it's still hard to see because there's too many of them going through each other. And so usually we draw the structure where we shrink them down for clarity. But don't get the idea that it's like that. They're really quite close and everybody's packed in there and there's hardly any wiggle room in most of these structures. Okay. Here's another one then. Let's go the other way. Now we have a soft reactive metal that has a face centered cubic crystal structure with a density of 1.54 grams per cubic centimeter. Boy that's a lot of clues right there. If the radius of the atom is 0.197 nanometers what is the metal? Okay the most important thing in a problem like this is to decide which breadcrumbs you have this time. We're going to have to try to identify the metal. The only way I know to identify the metal is to identify its molar mass and then look on the periodic table, cross my fingers and hope I find it there and hope that it is a metal and hope that it's soft and reactive because those were clues. If the metal turns out to be titanium I think probably not it. And therefore I need to figure out how I'm going to get the molar mass out of this gobbledygook. Well I have the density and I know the density of the unit cell is the same as the density of the entire material. Therefore if I knew the volume of the unit cell and I knew how many atoms were in the unit cell I'd know how many atoms there are per little volume. I could convert that to moles per bigger volume and then I could compare that with 1.54 grams and then I'd know how many grams was how many moles and that's the molar mass. And if I do that carefully I can find the molar mass and figure out what the element is. Let's see how we can go about it. Well the other little bit of information here is that it's face centered cubic crystal and the radius is 0.197 nanometers. Therefore I have to be able to take, I have to remember what face centered cubic crystal is and I have to take these spheres in my head and I have to figure out if this has a radius of 0.197 then what is this edge length of the cube? And if you do that incorrectly you just get completely cut off because it's very hard for example if you take three spheres and then you put the fourth sphere on top in the divot and then you ask okay how far down does it actually go compared to the plane of the top three? That problem's too hard for most people. They can't get it. I'm sure you can but you'd have to think about it. How far down as a percentage does that one tuck down? And you have to kind of have some geometric intuition about how to set up extra things where you can measure things. Okay? And I'll show you one way to do that right now. Okay. The density of the unit cell is the same as the density of the material so we need to identify how many atoms are in the unit cell and how large its volume will be. Well, we know how many atoms are in it. It's four because it's face centered cubic and we've had a course in chemistry. We have 8 times 1 eighth plus 6 times 1 half is 1 plus 3 and there it is that's the polonium one again. If you look this way and you say gee this one's jammed against this one and then there's a hole here and then this one's jammed, that way madness lies. You're never going to get the volume of the cube very quickly that way. It's very, very difficult to figure out how these things are going in because it's essentially the problem I told you about, the three and then one on top, how does it go in? Therefore, we don't focus on that. We only focus where the spheres touch. Where they just kiss against each other and then we say look, this is R, this is R, this is R, this is R, uh-huh, I have the diagonal of the face. But if you don't happen to think of doing it that way, you never get this problem solved. You just go around in circles. Well, it's not that hard to think of that and I drew it now as 2D and I only care about the length of the unit cell. I know these continue on out but I don't care. I have R, R, R, R, 4R and then I have L for this side and L for that side and I happen to believe the Pythagorean theorem interestingly enough in the dark ages, they apparently forgot the 3, 4, 5 right triangle. The Greeks knew it, the library at Alexandria burns down, people forget, they can't even make a right angle anymore because that's how they used to do surveying. You make a string of length 3, string of length 4, string of length 5, stretch them out, you got a right angle. Now you've got North, South, East, West, you can survey land. You can't make a right angle, your property lines are all crooked, then you have a lot of war. This is my land, oh no it isn't, my land. And that's a famous example in which we went backwards for a long time and it can happen again. Knowledge is like a flame. When I die it's going to extinguish with me unless I've lit it up in you, it's gone. Everything I knew is gone. Nobody else will necessarily know it but I hope that won't happen. Well okay, back to this, 2L squared Pythagoras is 4R squared and boy do I like putting parentheses because I always put parentheses. Before I square things, boy I square everything in there because I've made that mistake too many times. Instead of 4 quantity R squared, I write 4R squared, I get it wrong and then I get a zero on the exam because it's totally and miserably wrong. It's not right, it's not part right. It's completely wrong and that's how I will grade it. I'm careful, I square that, I get 2L squared is 16R squared or L is the square root of 8R. Now I have L, the volume of the face center cubic cell is L cubed obviously since it's a cube and that's 8 root 8 and that's 22.6274 roundabout and then as we know what the radius of the atom is, the volume turns out to be 0.173 cubic nanometers. That's the volume of the unit cell. I know it has four of these soft reactive atoms in it because it's face center cubic. Therefore, I know how many moles there are per cubic nanometer because I have four atoms, that's a certain number of moles. It's very tiny but I'm going to convert that. Okay, four atoms in 0.173 cubic nanometers, convert to centimeters cubed and then to moles and we know how many moles are in a cubic centimeter. Okay, I start with four atoms per 0.173 cubic nanometers. I convert nanometers to meters because I'm more comfortable doing that. Fine if you want to, you know, take a shorthand and convert straight to centimeters but be careful. Sometimes people put 10 to the 11 instead of 10 to the 7 or something funny and they get it wrong. It doesn't take too long, 10 to the 9 cubed, 1 meter per 100 centimeters, total cubed, 1 mole per 6 times 10 to the 23 atoms, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, I find my units left over are 0.0384 moles per cubic centimeter but I know how many grams there are per cubic centimeter because they told me. Therefore, I know how many grams there are in a mole. All I need to do is divide the number of grams by the number of moles and I get grams per mole. Well, that's pretty easy to do. I take 1.54 grams and I divide it by 0.0384 moles and I get 40.1 grams per mole and 40.1 I look on the periodic table and I just say yes, calcium, soft reactive metal. Of course, the calcium you take in food is not a soft reactive metal because it's the calcium 2 plus ion, of course, that you take in food and that is used to make your teeth and your bones. You can take extra calcium if you think you don't have enough but unless you've actually figured out how much calcium you've got and how much you need, it's a very bad idea to just chuck in extra chemicals just in case. Vitamins and things like that are not an insurance policy unless you actually know what you're doing, I wouldn't do that. All your ancestors just ate food and you're here. That means they survived and they reproduced. You're the end stage survivor of a huge long chain of people who didn't screw anything up. If you do what they did, you'll probably be a survivor. If you do something different than what they did, you're conducting a new experiment on yourself. It might be great or it might backfire and if it backfires and something happens to you, that's the end of that chain. Eventually, the only people left will be people who don't take vitamins if they turn out to be very bad for your health. Okay, let's do a problem now about inferring stoichiometry. If we have a clear enough picture of the unit cell and boy, do I mean clear enough, it really helps to have software that'll rotate it for you in this case. If we have a clear enough picture, we can infer the molecular formula for the compound. You just have to be careful to count the spheres on the faces and corners with the right fractional weight. Usually the only kind of problem you're given like this has two different atoms and they want to know, is it NaCl or is it NaCl2 or NaCl3, something like that. It's usually not more complex than that because if you have three different atoms and they're all colored in different sizes, it's extremely hard to see. So even if you know how to do it, it's very hard to actually do it. It's just very hard. Now let's try a practice problem. The unit cell for niobium oxide, I'm deliberately leaving off the oxidation state of the niobium which can have several oxidation states because if I gave you the oxidation state of the niobium, I'd be giving you the answer to the problem. Therefore, this nomenclature is not right. I should give the oxidation state. I should say niobium-3 oxide, for example, if that's what it is. Based on the picture of the unit cell, what's the molecular formula for niobium oxide? Well, let's look at the unit cell. Okay, this one's more interesting. The niobium atoms are blue and the oxygen atoms are red. Anybody want to venture a guess by looking? I want to know how many niobium and how many oxygen make up the molecular formula. People are saying three and three. Anybody else? Here's how I would look at it. These are clearly cut in half, the big blue ones. They're on the face. They're cut in half. They're six of them. Again, you see it's hard to see. One, two, three, four, five, six, but there's six of them. Therefore, six halves is three. Good. Then we have to count these. These are not on the corners, but they're on the middle here and they're cut into fourths. They've got four there. One, two, three, four there. And then I can see this one. Boy, that's just peeking out there. But by symmetry, I know there's four there. Not fair to have one missing on the corner that you can't see. And therefore, it would be three and three, but then I would write the empirical formula as niobium, one, not three, oxygen, one. And when it's one, we leave it off. So I just write niobium and oxygen, okay? That would be the formula, then, that I would get. And I've just written this out so that you'll have a record of it if you aren't here right now in the room or if you forget. Here it is again. And there are beautiful, one advantage of the web is that there are beautiful things that are rendered with software that is tough on purpose and sometimes very expensive or you just don't have it. And you can see these beautiful pictures of crystal structures. And you can really appreciate how beautiful things are by going to some of these websites. And here I went through it. I said it appears to be, I put nickel here that I made a mistake, niobium. I'll switch that. On niobium three, oxygen three which we just write niobium oxide. And in fact, there are several other oxidation states of niobium. This would be niobium two oxide. There's also NB02 that would have a completely different crystal structure. And NB205, that would be probably more complex because when I have even an odd, then it usually gets, the cell gets bigger before it starts repeating. And sometimes the problem is the unit cell is this enormous thing and then it repeats. And for protein crystallography, the unit cell usually has one or two copies of the whole protein in it somehow. And it's very, very complex to figure out where all the atoms are. And the way they do that is by x-ray diffraction.  Well, you don't, that is the empirical formula. But in a crystal it's very hard to tell if, put it this way, if you actually did have three niobiums, let's say in a triangle, and then these oxygens hanging off in the wings, then I would say for sure, okay, that's niobium three, oxygen three. If it were like that, if I looked at it, if it's like this and they're just all packed in there, then I see no reason to pick niobium three, oxygen three rather than niobium seven, oxygen seven. And so in that case, I just reduce it down to one. But it is a little bit of a subtlety depending on how it looks. Usually, in a solid, it can be difficult to tell who is bonded to whom if they're all ions because they tend to just assort and pack. Okay, what I was going to say is that you know from your own experience, if you had a mishap as a kid, that x-rays scatter off regions of high electron density. And that's why you can see your bones with x-ray film because the x-rays get scattered by the calcium in your bones, among other things. And if they take x-rays at two different energies or wavelengths, they can figure out how much calcium is in your bones. They can give you a dexa scan and they can say you've got osteopenia, which will progress if you let it go to osteoporosis, and then you will look like a giant question mark. And finally, you'll be staring at your shoes all day long because you'll have lost all the integrity in your bones. If you want to keep the integrity of your bones strong, then lift weights and do explosive things like jump. The reason why men tend not to get osteoporosis quite as often is because men tend to carry the groceries to the car still. Women do less of that, especially with their arms and so your neck can get to be very, very thin and weak and your forearms and then you slip and they just snap like that. In fact, in some cases, you step off the curve, your femur breaks right at the ball as you step off because it's so weak and then you fall after that. You don't fall first, you fall after. If you doubt what I say, look at what happens to people who go into space.  It's easy to move around up here and just off loads everything. You have to force your body and your mind to improve. They won't do it on their own. On their own, they both go down the tube. Okay. Therefore, X-rays will scatter off electron density in a periodic lattice. Now, this is different than just making like what a radiologist does to look at your bones. They aren't looking at the crystal structure of your bones. They're looking at how much calcium is in there or something like that. But if we have a periodic lattice, then we can get diffractions. We can get diffraction spots and we can measure the periodicity of the lattice. You might say, why can't we do that with visible light? And the answer is visible light just has too long a wavelength, much, much too long.  It's the wrong size. X-rays are the right wavelength to have atomic dimensions. And the father-son team of the Braggs are known for the particular equation relating the scattering angle, which is conventionally called theta to the distance d between the crystal planes. Here's a kind of a cryptic thing you'll see. And I'll admit to you, when I was a student, this thing was never convincing to me. I accepted it because I wanted to pass the course. But it was never convincing to me and I was never given a proper argument as to what this had to do with anything. But let me give you the correct argument. First of all, this is at right angles to this vector here. And therefore the difference in the path length between just ricocheting off here and going down here is just this extra distance here. Because we measure at right angles to where we are. You have a fault starting a race if when I look at right angles, you're sneaking over the starting line. These are going to go the same distance back here. So therefore, once they're like this, if they're going together, they're all going to be going together like that because they'll go over the same distance. Now they aren't at the same place in space, but we'll get to that. And then we have another piece down here, which is this same distance. And the difference in path length is those two pieces. I have to figure out how those two pieces relate to the spacing between the periodicity and the electron density, which is just centered around each atom. Because each atom has a lot of electrons sitting there on it. The x-rays bounce off that. Now, why doesn't it matter that these are not actually on top of each other? The answer is that the kind of detector I use is not of angstrom scale. It's a detector that's bigger than that. And therefore, if all the x-rays coming into the detector are all on a line like this and they come in like a big wave breaking across the whole shore, then I get a lot of energy coming in at once and I get an event. The film develops, the CCD triggers, I get a count. But if the x-rays come in and one's going up and one's going down, then they tend to cancel out. They just cancel each other out. And the difference between waves and particles is that particles can never be negative. If I shoot cannonballs, I can't cancel one cannonball with another. But if I take waves, if I take a string and you can try this and one guy goes like this, the other guy on the other end goes like that and you make two traveling waves when they get to each other, they just disappear for a second and then they come out on the other side. Waves can and often do cancel each other because they can be plus or minus. But therefore, if they don't all add up when they get to the detector, I'm not going to be able to get a big signal and therefore I won't get a spot on the film. I don't think anybody uses film anymore. And the condition then is that the path difference should be an integral number of the wavelengths. That means I have to use x-rays that have the same wavelength. They can't be just random x-rays like white light. They've got to be like this laser pointer. It's got a specific color. And I use that specific color to shine in. Often it might be something like copper K alpha. Here's what I think is a little bit clearer drawing. I redid it. Here's the thing, the angle of incidence, the angle of reflection, those are theta. And how can I show that this little angle in here, how can I show that it is theta? Well, these are at 90 degrees, this thing that I drew because I said that's how you measure the race, the distance. And they're at 90 degrees. If they're at 90 degrees and this parts theta and this on the other side then it's 90 minus theta because this is 90 degrees. Ah-ha, but if this is 90 minus theta then this is obviously 90 degrees between horizontal and vertical. If this is 90 minus theta then this guy is theta. And then I have a right triangle, this is 90, so this is 90 minus theta as well. So I can label them all, just go through and label them all without knowing anything. And then I do need to know one thing. If this angles theta and this is the hypotenuse, kind of turn this triangle on its side like this, I have the hypotenuse, then the opposite side over the hypotenuse, that's the definition of the sine function, the sine of theta is the opposite over the hypotenuse, therefore X upon D is equal to sine theta, multiply by D, X is D sine theta. The path length I'm after is 2X and therefore 2X is 2D sine theta and that should be an integral number of wavelengths so that when one comes down the other comes down, they come back and then they are going up together so that they're going to build up into the detector and that's our condition then, Bragg's law, n lambda is 2D sine theta. And in freshman chemistry in my experience n is always 1 but in real life you have to know what you're doing because you get all kinds of reflections sort of like looking into a kaleidoscope. You get just all kinds of things and you have to sort them out, you have to figure out what's going on, it doesn't necessarily reveal itself to you. Okay, let's talk about three different types of solids. An atomic solid is interconnected identical atoms and here I've drawn a, I didn't draw it but I mugged it up, a piece of diamond in which you can see that each atom has this beautiful tetrahedral coordination of four other carbon atoms. Very, very, very hard material but there are materials nearly as hard as diamond. Why do you think the dentist uses a diamond drill instead of titanium carbide or something? Anybody know?  I mean, you'll never see a big drill bit like that because that's too big to do a drill of 2,000. No, it's because diamond conducts heat very effectively. If you ever wonder if you've been given a phony ring, I might get in trouble.  You can use your lips too.  I've seen people debug computer boards by pulling out the computer board and then going on his face and he says that's the bad chip. That's the one that's hot, pulls it out, puts it in. It's amazing. Sergeant, you're $5,000. Okay, sometimes knowledge is power or money and the diamond will conduct heat like crazy and sadly cubic zirconia is an insulator and so it won't conduct anything, so you could tell.  It's your enamel burns and that's why they use diamond. Sodium chloride is an ionic solid. It has the so-called rock salt structure. That's where the name came from. And then here's a molecular solid, ice, in which we have discrete molecules that are then locked into place and molecular solids have structures that depend a lot on the molecular geometry because these things are no longer spheres at all. These are funny shapes like boomerangs that have to pack together and they could pack together in all kinds of shapes. Metals have atoms on lattice points but then the atoms seem to have lost their identity when it comes to the valence electron. The valence electrons literally find themselves in an orbital that extends over the entire material. They're all in there together moving around but they aren't associated with any particular atom anymore like they would be in a vapor phase of the same material. The big positive charges stay put because they're the big heavy atomic nuclei and they have some inner core shell of electrons that usually makes them partially positively charged. Metals never like to be negatively charged. And then the rest of the electrons kind of go around in the spaces between the lattice and they can go through and electrons have a wave character to them and they can go right through and that's why most metals will conduct electricity well because if I inject electrons on this side that can go all the way through to the other side. Things where the electrons are stuck on each atom like plastic won't conduct electricity and therefore I use copper in the wire and then I use some kind of plastic around the wire to keep it from shortening to ground. Okay? Or having something happen to it. Okay. Let's talk about phases. A phase is a state of matter that is uniform in chemical composition and physical state. For example, liquid water is a phase. Solid water is a different phase. Solid water and liquid water don't have the same properties at all with respect to very important things. Same molecule but different physical state. Same chemical composition, different physical state equals different phase. And then I could have a solution of sodium chloride in water and that would be uniform throughout salt water. That's again one phase, a solution phase. You have to be a little bit careful because the question is how close do you look? And the answer is don't look too close. Don't get inside the sodium nucleus. That's getting too close. Now it doesn't look uniform.  Doesn't look uniform. Take a small representative chunk like a cubic nanometer and look at it. If they all look about the same, it's one phase. If they look radically different, they are not one phase. For example, if I put oil and water like salad dressing, then I can see a phase boundary. I can see a region where the oil is floating on the water because it's less dense. Therefore the oil is one phase. If I take a little dropper, a little pipetman, I take part of that and I analyze it and then I go down into the water and do the same thing. They come out totally different. That's the key that there's two phase. I see a phase boundary. If I have ice cubes floating in water, I see where the solid ice is and the liquid water is. No question that they're different. Likewise with oil and water, that's a two phase system that we could find a blob of pure oil or a blob of pure water. Allotropes is the fancy name for different phases of the same material. For example, carbon is graphite or carbon as diamond. Graphite is the more stable form at atmospheric temperature and pressure. Therefore, thermodynamically, diamonds are not forever. They'll eventually degrade into graphite. However, it would take an awful lot of energy to take all those tetrahedral carbons locked in that big giant network and then suddenly change them into these hexagonal things like honey bee comb and at room temperature, there isn't that much energy. There certainly isn't enough energy to break bonds and therefore diamonds are metastable. They aren't strictly thermodynamically stable. They're doomed eventually but eventually is a very, very long time in this case and so there's still a reasonable investment from that standpoint.  Okay, let's talk about phase diagrams. A phase diagram shows the thermodynamically most stable phase as a function of temperature and pressure or if there's more than one kind of chemical present, sometimes as a function of temperature and composition and it just depends or pressure and composition sometimes. We'll tend to focus on phase diagrams that just have a single pure material. Once we know the phase diagram, we can predict what we will eventually find in a container at the given temperature and pressure and keep in mind, we've got an imaginary container. I always imagine a cylinder and a piston and I can push on the piston and I can increase the pressure and I could put them flames from below and I can increase the temperature. But here's the thing, there's nothing else in there. If it's water, there's only water in there it's not a pot of water boiling on a stove in air. That's not the picture. It's just the pure material locked inside this thing. That's what you think about when you look at a phase diagram. Once you have water and air and stuff, that's more than one phase, more than one chemical in the soup although oftentimes the behavior is similar so it may not matter but it's important conceptually to keep them clear. There can be many phases, almost an endless number of them, especially once you get into solids or liquid crystals, you get many phases. All the displays you see for TV, they say LCD TV, liquid crystal, you have to first discover liquid crystal phases. Some guy was doing that, they said, what are you doing? I'm studying liquid crystal phases. That is so useless, man. Why don't you do something useful? Well, I'm interested in the properties of these smectic and cholesteric phases. What? That is totally useless. And then 30, 40 years later, every single device is using those molecules that change refractive index and so forth with an electric field. So you never know, it's important just to know what is the case in science. What's the truth? Don't worry yet if it's useful, if it's interesting. It will be useful, believe me. Here's the phase diagram for water and water is unique because this line goes backwards to the left if you plot pressure. Conventionally plot pressure on the Y and temperature on the X but not always and especially if you get some funky data off the web, you look closely at what the axes are and if the axes aren't labeled, that's very bad practice. Never give a graph where the axes aren't labeled with units. Here's a solid. What this says is if I start here and I put pressure on the solid, it turns into a liquid. Usually that's not how things work. That means the liquid is denser than the solid. Well, that's what we know to be true. That's why the ice cubes float. If you make an ice cube out of B2O as a joke, you can put it in a glass of water in the sink. People stare at it. It's just a nice soap. And if I start here and I heat it, the solid will melt and then the liquid will boil but if the pressure is very low, look what happens. The solid just sublines. It never becomes a liquid. And therefore I can purify things by distilling them under low pressure rather than just heating the stuff up and then it may actually have a side reaction that does something. Instead what I do is reduce the pressure and I can get it to boil or if I increase the pressure then I can keep it as a liquid well into the very high temperature range. And here it then is a so-called log lint. Engineers like to use log plots. Pressure here is in bar and temperature is in Kelvin. There's the triple point and look at all these different phases of solids way up high. They all have different crystal structures. Okay, we'll quit there.


What's up everybody, JC over jazzy's case breaks.com so as a 1920 panini Spectre basketball four box half case break pick a team number eight just sold out And there you go Cover random number block randomize as we had to do here for these teams here There's one Here's a customer names are in the break straight up and here's the customers in this random block with the bucks And then here are the four boxes remaining out of the case guys Good luck, and Derek Culver image radiation It's Minnesota T with every part of the random number block and again We'll randomize customer names to see who wins the base cards in a lot and we got Andre drumming for the Cavaliers going to John straight up to 99 and we got Eric Pashaal to 99 for the Golden State Warriors That is 96 Golden State Warriors Sixth winner Brandon, and we got here Kenny Skywalker to 75 for the Knicks When a Jeremy Tumman and Montress Harold to 99 the Clippers Charles our next back Our job around for the Grizzlies. I was about straight up by Carlos Very nice And you got Joel Embiid Our Mark and in and Tyler hero for the Mets For the Mets for the heats are a Miami Heat That was also brought straight up by Steven and Goren drogic to 49 for the Miami Heats and We got a camera's silver for the Atlanta Hawks going to Jeremy Tumman. All right. Good luck guys We got Romeo Langford to 99 Boston and Celtics random number block That is 96 out of 99 Boston six going to Brandon and we got here a Jerry West and it's two out of five for the Lakers Matthew bought this straight up Two out of five the logo There you go Actually, I didn't mean to do that, but I guess it's appropriate top loaders fell on the little bell There you go. Very nice Next one. Next one. Next one Yondra Aiden Kendrick Nunn Ronan Clark and a Kyrie Irving image variation Brooklyn Nets, that's Matthew Sabonis to 25 Indiana Pacers as R&B 14 out of 25 Four going to Brandon and Bama DeBio and Alvin Adams To ten and that one's a little coming up guys are there little damage You go two out of ten though For these Suns R&B Suns too That's Brandon and we got a three out of five Theo Ratliff for the Sixers 76 is R&B nice Three going to Brown Tatum Carson Edwards, and we got Terence Mann for the Clippers So 49 and a silver Tyler hero and a Chauncey billips to 99 for the Detroit Pistons When a towel and Dennis Rodman to ten Spurs edition San Antonio Spurs Steve Locke that is four out of ten half way through guys and their weather spoon Marquise Morris Clippers 99 and a Jared Allen will silver for the Brooklyn Nets All right. Good luck guys Colin Sexton the 75 for the Cavs Cleveland Cavaliers going to John straight up. What do we got here? What do we got here? another Jerry West Another one for the Lakers going to Matthew you got two local autographs this time. It's 49 out of 49 All right, you're gonna get radiant autograph this one.  It's a redemption right there Anyways Drogic mobile And it's for the pelicans It's Lonzo ball and it's jersey number two out of eight That should sell much better as well little eBay one-of-one Daikon, that's one of the pelicans as well I don't know of dad Jerry West with the local man Nikolai joking for the nuggets. I would be a cool card all right and Mark Aguirre to 25 NBA champions for the Detroit Pistons When a towel is a cool photo right there I had a 25 and the redemption aspiring autographs meta car number 19 B Bru Bruno Fernando. It is Bruno Fernando.  Good luck All righty guys last box last four packs You guys after this mosaic cello pack and then Noir and then that might be a guess that might be it 49 Russell Westbrook Houston Rock is going to serenity and Gorin Drogic for the Miami heat and Larry Hughes to 49 for the Cavaliers What a John and Dave Cohen's tonight and I Boston Celtics RnB Two out of 99 Boston two is going to Brandon last Box Jerry Culver mark of Moors, so I could don't boy Tray on tonight and I Got a lot guys last two hits Byron Russell to 75 The Utah Jazz going to Douglas aspiring autographs card number three Carson Edwards That's Boston Celtics.  That was the break We got to do a couple randomizes for the unnumbered lots for both random number blocks So let's quickly do that So again, we're going to copy the customer names for this random number block, which will be for the Chicago one Customer number one gets the unnumbered lot and then This one for the meet Milwaukee Bucks random number block customer at the top gets The lot there and we use the same dice roll Three and a five eight times. Good luck one two three four five six seven and eight eight times Matthew That's at the top. You're gonna get the unnumbered lot. All right and eight times here one two three four five six seven and eight Brandon there you go man.


Here's today's question. I feel guilty charging too much money With my clients that I have we're gonna dig into this here in a second Welcome to the build my sports biz show where we talk about how to create build and scale your own local sports training business It's time to get started with your host Ben neighbors. The show starts right now I've seen this question a lot over the past couple years and this is also something I felt when I started raising my pricing back in the day, I remember I went from It's kind of embarrassing to talk about I remember I went from $15 per session to $30 per session And I had this like sense of guilt of like gosh I don't know if it's worth it this much for for parents to pay me To do the same service that I was doing for $15 And here's the deal. I've noticed this with a lot of coaches is you know all of us we like to serve our clients and we're here to help and A lot of coaches have a bad association with sales. They have a bad association with money They think well, you know, I shouldn't charge too much because if I do you know, I don't know if my clients will do it and I might feel guilty if I'm charging too much and Here's the thing that I would tell you if you're struggling with this is The service that you provide Like you should be able to go to sleep at night knowing that Whatever the amount that parents or your clients are investing in into your business, let's say they pay you $200 month, right? You should make them feel Like they are getting something that is worth $2,000 per month. Now if you do that, you can go to sleep very easy at night And you have a lot of confidence when your business when you know that the product that you're selling You feel like it's worth 10 times the amount and so this way you feel like the clients that are working with you Like they're getting a great deal now The only way you can have that feeling is if you make your program better, right? And I know it sounds like rocket science will make your program better. Well, you know with that There's a lot of moving pieces Right, you can't just say well, I'm gonna make my program better because of this like it has to make sense to your clients Otherwise like, you know that sense of guilt that you have if you feel like you're charging too much that will never go away Right and what you have to do is you have to sell your program to yourself first and You have to believe that yes, this is so worth it And if I charge this amount like absolutely if I was a parent I would buy it I would pay way more than this amount if I had a child who's gonna be in a program like this and Again, this comes down to a quality of your program and I have seen over the past Six years now all right six years six years was a very long time of doing something especially on YouTube, but I have seen over the last six years So many mediocre coaches reach out to me and be like hey Ben like, you know, I don't know if I can charge this much because of this and I always ask will tell me about the quality of your program and They haven't like that when I asked that question. They're like well, you know, I do one session a week I do this. I'm like, all right, cool. Like what do your clients get outside of the session? How are you keeping them accountable? Like what are they doing when they're not with you? Like how are you helping them with our confidence with their mindset? I'll ask simple questions that I would feel like coaches that are experts would be able to respond but because there's a lack of Like wanting to improve the programs that guilt never goes away All right. So when you strive for greatness, right? Take a King James quote here All right strive for greatness. Your program gets better Right the price of your programs goes up the confidence that you have with your price goes up and that feeling of guilt goes away Right the feeling of guilt of oh, I'm charging $200 a month I just you know, I feel like that's taking advantage of the clients. Well, I promise you if you have that feeling It's because you don't feel like your program is that good and The only way to change that is by making your program better right Gotta do that and I know this is a common problem with coaches. I've seen the question enough at this point All right, so I hope hopefully this helps got to make your program better You got to sell it to yourself like you have to be The most firm person on the planet that your program is priced out the way It is because of the value that you provide and the problem that you're solving if you don't believe that if you don't fully believe that that guilt that you have is going to get bigger and bigger and bigger and Ultimately what that will do is that will cause you to go out of business in the future because you're not able to charge a certain amount and At the end of the day like that's I something I talk about all the time on our group coaching calls When your price is at a premium and you truly do feel like you're getting paid what you're worth Your business becomes more fun. You attract the right clients You make way more money at the end of the day and you go to sleep at night with a sense of peace knowing that you know what This is worth it for parents parents should be paying even more than what I'm commanding because of the value that we provide All right, that's it for today's video if you want to chat with me about how to make your program better Right and you want to ramp up your pricing and you want that self-belief that I'm projecting to you right now, right? If you want that then reach out to me. All right, what I'm gonna do is I'm gonna pull my number up here on the screen Send me a text here. All right, and I'm begging you if you if you reach out to me, don't call me All right, I don't pick my phone up All right, I don't pick my phone up. I don't ever do that. So text me That's very specific or shooting a text at that number. If it's during the week I will respond if it's not if it's on the weekend. I am a ghost All right, no one ever talks to me on the weekend except for my wife So can't reach me on the weekends, but you can still text me on the weekend Just expect me to get back to you on Monday sometime during the day But reach out to me there I will set up a 10 to 15 minute call with you on zoom where we can connect with each other And you can ask me questions I can ask you questions about your business and see for a good fit to work together. So that's it for today's video, hopefully this helps and a Good way you can help me grow here because like all I care about is helping more kids That's that's the whole point of build my sports biz comms the whole point of this YouTube channel To help me grow Send today's episode to one coach that you know that you feel like can resonate with today's message By doing that ultimately what you can do is we can help more coaches have more self-belief in their service They can help more kids period. All right, that's my intention So please share this with another coach that mean a lot to me and this way I can keep shooting These YouTube videos. All right, catch you later


What's good Josh? Well, Ross back again with another video. So we're gonna check out worse WWE injuries of 2022 I always say this I always want to be able to show respect and appreciation For any wrestler out there that's willing to put their bodies on the line man. These injuries, you know, they happen This is just a part of the business and for them to be willing to a lot of times wrestle with a major or serious Injury shows the testament shows there there I guess you say they're strengthening their testament to the business and just being able to still try to put on the best performance Possible, I think the most noticeable one we can all kind of go back and remember from this year And probably was the most gruesome looking one was Cody Rose tan his peck and still wrestling in a Hell in a Cell match And putting on a great performance to me. That's That's championship worthy right there That's that's something you put the championship on that person whenever they come back. Hopefully that is the case So we're gonna check out some of these some of these injuries and appreciate all the love and support you guys have shown on the channel Let's do the damn thing is one of the most dangerous things you can do and every year numerous WWE wrestlers get injured Oh my god Over the years Was no different the idea of wrestling is that you don't actually hit each other But sometimes mistakes happen and they can be quite bloody on smackdown Italy took on Shayna Baszler in a one-on-one match, but Rhonda Rousey was in Baszler's corner Baszler didn't need any help though as she's able to beat her opponent on her own after the match though Rousey told Shayna the job wasn't finished yet leading to the Queen of Spades nailing Natalia with a knee to the face The move actually did connect. Oh, and it knows was broken and bleeding Unfortunately, the accident actually dislocated Natalia's nose SummerSlam 2022 kicked off with Becky Brutal and then this situation with Becky Lynch I believe she end up dislocating her shoulder or I believe it was her shoulder And she challenging Bianca Belair for the Raw Women's Championship Which was a rematch in WrestleMania 38, which was a rematch for the previous year SummerSlam Yeah, however, only about three minutes into it Becky fell on the right shoulder the landing caused Lynch's shoulder to pop out of it's socket And it was clear Becky was in pain and she kept checking on it throughout the match The injury became more and more visible as the match progressed But Lynch didn't let it stop her and she got the job done Finish the entire match Our truth wrestlers first match on NXT since 2011, but it turned out to be a bad decision During the match, Truth performed a somersault to his opponent on the outside Truth clipped the top rope though and didn't jump far enough causing him to crash hard onto the floor The former 24-7 champion grabbed his left leg and the referee soon called off the match and our truth was health backstage It was later found out that the accident tore Truth's quad and he needed to undergo surgery One of the defining Hey man, wishing our truth a speedy recovery. I can only imagine how painful that was And then of course the Cody Rose torn peck God, uh, this has to be in this list, obviously She's up to 2022 was Cody Rhodes gruesome torn pectoral muscle Oh, but how did he actually get injured on the raw before Cody's held a cell match with Seth Rollins? Rhodes and Rollins got into a brawl during the fight Cody tore his right pectoral tendon That was bad enough, but a few days later while weight training Rhodes tore the tendon completely off the bone That's why the injury looks so bad Saw it on the cell Additionally, the reason to be allowed Cody Rhodes to wrestle was that he couldn't do any more damage Nevertheless, the injury sideline Cody Rhodes for the rest of the year. This injury was pretty June 2022 Alexa Bliss live Morgan Rhea Ripley and Dewdrop fought in a fatal or a match The winner got to face Bianca Belair at money in the bank for the raw women's championship at one point in the match Morgan gave bliss a kick to the gut which caused Alexa to DDT Ripley What actually hurt Rhea though was her own knee Ripley's boot got caught on the rope which caused her face It didn't seem so bad Until Rhea Ripley shared a picture of the damage the accident caused to her mouth The injury also gave Ripley a concussion Thankfully after about a month on the sidelines Rhea was back in action. Not all WWE Okay, and that's that's why she was kind of sideline because obviously Your knee hitting your face at that speed could definitely give you concussion This is why people don't realize how tight those ropes are bro You can get a concussion just from hitting the ropes if you hit it at enough speed if you guys remember the inzo more a Uh situation where he tried to slide under the the bottom rope But instead his head ended up hitting the rope and the canvas and he was pretty much out It's a possibility man. This is it's a dangerous sport injuries happened on tv During a triple threat match at a non televised WWE show Carmella, Asuka and Bianca Belair all faced off for the raw women's title As the match was starting to come to the end Carmella tried to ball fast one on Belair by attacking her from behind Bianca got out of harm's way with a backflip But Carmella immediately crumbled to the mat and went outside of the ring It appears their timing was off and Belair's tailbone smacked Carmella's head An image was later shared on social media showing exactly the damage the botch move did to Melah Whenever weapons get involved Damn easy for a wrestler to get hurt and we witnessed this on Smackdown in august 2022 In the lead up to his match against roman reigns at clash at the castle McIntyre took on honoree ooze sammy zane McIntyre won the match, but he didn't end the night on a high note Roman and the oozos came in and attacked the scottish warrior They battered McIntyre with chairs and threw his body all around the ring side area I could already see marks form on drew's body But of course pictures taken backstage showed just how much damage the beatdown did to McIntyre You know an injury is bad when the match is immediately stopped and the referee throws up the X sign Unfortunately, that's what happened in the main event of nxt uk in february 2022 Blair Davenport and Mako Sadamura fought in a japanese street fight Despite the match type the injury was not caused by any weapon Davenport jumped from the top turnbuckle and hit Sadamura with a stomp to the back Blair landed awkwardly on her left foot and showed him pain Within seconds the referee called for the bell and gave the X sign Signaling that this injury was real. The landing hurt Blair's left ankle But thankfully after being out of action for about four months Blair was able to return to the ring Ladder matches are some of those brutal matches WWE puts on for sure and the 2022 women's money in the bank was no exception One of the participants was Shotzi who had a rough night. She had a yeah this See she was involved in quite Quite a bit of botches You know, hey, she got a lot of heat for criticism on social media But you know saying you live and you learn and it's just a part of wrestling, you know All you can do is hopefully, you know, hopefully, you know, if she is in another Money in the bank match or a ladder match. Maybe it'll be a little bit better for her So you mistakes during the match but the worst is when she went for a senton Shotzi performed the move from the top rope, but ended up hitting the ladder below God And or head got clicked by the ladder on the way down In any case the move did bust Shotzi open as evident by the blood on her face That's the worst injury of 2022 was when Biggie broke his neck Oh, yeah To see what happened watch the yeah, that was actually I Man, time is going by so quick that was that did happen this year Hopefully uh, Biggie has a speedy speedy recovery as well, man It's just one of those type of things where when you gotta Sometimes you've got to expect that accidents will happen You can try to be as safe as possible But sometimes timing is often you end up with injuring someone or injuring yourself unintentionally, you know The only time it becomes an issue is if it's a common occurrence with you and you're constantly injuring people Constantly hurting people and it may be a situation when you might may not be as safe As you're supposed to be and you may have to switch up your move set or something But comment down below. Let me know which injury for you Was the most cringe worthy that you've seen in wwe this year for me is out of the torn peck by By cody rose and wrestling that match with a torn peck or Biggie's because obviously that's dealing with the neck and head reason and when I saw the clip because I don't think I watched that Smackdown live, but I saw the clip and it just Instantly made me cringe because he landed literally on the top of his head And it's just you know, that's that's a scary situation So that those are the top two I can think of that just instantly when I I think about it or see it I just instantly cringe man, but respect to all the wrestlers out there that show us Entertainment throughout the year putting their bodies on the line. We appreciate it And uh, you know, we appreciate what you guys do for us, man But I appreciate all the love and support you guys have shown road to 150k. Appreciate you. I'll see you next week. Peace


If you're new to the world of sports betting, it may be a bit intimidating the first time you head to the Fandals Sportsbook. However, my name is Sinaya and I'm here to eliminate the stress and the mess so that you can focus on placing your best bets. The first time I want to go over something you can actually find right on the homepage and that is the money line. Placing a bet on the money line is basically a wager on who you think is going to win. The lower the odds, the higher the probability of winning. So the pirates are minus 325 and they are considered the favorites and the Cincinnati Reds are plus 245 and they are considered the underdog. You'll find the money line located in the same column for football as well as basketball. If you're interested in placing bets on soccer, you can bet for either team to win or for a tie. If you bet UFC Boxing or Tennis, you'll notice the opponent name on the left and the odds on the right. If we bet $100 on Purcell as the favorite, we could potentially win $72 and if we did that same bet for Kruger, we could potentially win 104.