I want to know if the page is being accessed via http or https using JavaScript.  Is there some sort of isSecure() method, or should I just parse it out of the URL somehow?
Is it possible to detect, on the client side, whether the user is using an encrypted page or not?  Put another way -- I want to know if the URL of the current page starts with http or https.
Was unable to find rationale for separate tags accros SE sites.   Tag function According general definition in information systems, a  (such as an Internet bookmark, digital image, database record, or computer file). This kind of metadata helps describe an item and allows it to be found again by browsing or searching. Tags are generally chosen informally and personally by the item's creator or by its viewer, depending on the system, although they may also be chosen from a controlled vocabulary.  On SE - the same:  is a () word or phrase that describes the topic of the question help you identify  or relevant to you.  tag origin and quality  Where from tags are originated and what are tag quality parametres?  problems and contradictions examples related with SE tags  Humanity is facing information overload.  are created for collecting and sharing personal knowledge on questions or problem solving. But tag's descriptions are not matter of personal knowledge - it's just matter of , i.e. vocabulary/dictionary, or taxonomy/ontology or, speaking in general, human lexic conceptual apparatus / framework. So why time has to be spent on fact's duplicating and sharing?  At the same time We are living at the linked data times. IMHO it's the biggest blunder having same tags with different descriptions in different SE sites unlinked. Tags (and so - descriptions) should be unified.  So I'm calling to unify all tags across SE sites as feature request. Maybe automatic linking to Wikipedia and/or some other decent dictionary would be reasonable.  solution examples  This is not a duplicate of Showing that $e^z=z$ has infinitely many solutions One of our review problems for my complex analysis final is the following:     Show that $e^z=z$ has infinitely many solutions in $\mathbb{C}$.   I've seen a few solutions online, but none of them have used material that was covered in our introductory complex analysis course. Would anyone be able to provide a simple solution?  I'm trying to think of ways to invoke bounding in some way but I can't seem to come up with anything. I have been there first time.   The reason why I think this might not be natural is that the expression "first time" seems to describe "past". You do not use the present perfect with an adverb indicating "past", in my understanding.  However, I feel the phrase below is not that funny.     This is the first time that I have been there.   I am wondering about the relationship between "the first time" and "I have been there". "That" could behave like a relative adverb. If that is the case, the antecedent of "that"—"the first time"—is shared with the following clause: "I have been there". Then, is it OK to say "I have been there first time"?  By the way, Google searches for "" and " in the UK domain show just 33 hits for the first phrase and 10 hits for the second. Proving that $(3n)!$ is divisible by $n! \times (n + 1)! \times (n + 2)!$ if $n$ is greater than 2 Can you play a Progress Card even when you get nothing from it? If I have a Progress Card for which initial preconditions do not hold, will I still be able to use it in order to discard it back to the pile? The goal is to prevent a spy from stealing it.  A few examples:   I am leading in victory points but I want to use Wedding card. I have Irrigation but I don't have any wheat hexagons. I have Blacksmith but I don't have any ore hexagons. How is it the Voyagers are a few seconds closer to Earth than earlier? The  of March 01, 2013 put it's distance at 14 hrs 04 mins 23 secs of light-travel time from Earth. A  (earlier today) tweet says it is 14 hrs 04 mins 22 secs of light-travel time from Earth. An  tweet put it still further out at 14 hrs 04 mins 25 secs of light-travel time.  The Voyager 2 tweets on Voyager 1's proximity to Earth too has reduced similarly to  earlier today from  reported on Feb 28 2013  It could quite simply be a typo ... If not a typo then my curiosity is piqued; I was under the impression the Voyagers are outbound from the Solar System now without any major in-system activities now.   How is it the Voyagers are closer to Earth than before? Incompatible Software for next OSX? I understand the move past Snow Leopard meant losing Rosetta, and compatibility with any PPC apps.   Since there are some apps that can't be replaced (for example, old years of TurboTax that I might need to reference) I have a drive to boot Snow Leopard, and one for Yosemite. I was considering the jump to El Capitan, when I saw the question  which got me wondering the question -     Before installing a next generation OS, is there any way to find, in   advance, which apps I have that would be orphaned by the move?   Edit, the answer below from Jean Valjean was what I needed. One app concerning me appeared as follows:    It might be tedious to search many apps, but at least this gives me a chance to view the top ones that will cause me grief. Proving Invertibility and Eigenvalues If matrix $A$ is an $n\times n$ matrix such that $A^2 -A -2I=0$.  How can I show that $A$ is invertible and that $A^{-1} = \frac12(A-I)$? Also, how do I show that one of the eigenvalues of $A$ is $2$ or $ -1$? I appreciate any help on this question. For $n$ a positive integer, let us write $\zeta_n = e^\frac{2 \pi i}{n}$, a primitive $n$th root of unity. It is clear that, if $m$ divides $n$, then we have an inclusion of cyclotomic fields $$ \mathbb{Q}(\zeta_m) \subseteq \mathbb{Q}(\zeta_n).$$ On the other hand, these inclusions are not always strict. For example, since $\zeta_3  = \frac{1+i \sqrt{3}}{2}$ and $\zeta_6 = \frac{-1 + i \sqrt{3}}{2}$, we have $$\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_3) = \mathbb{Q}(\zeta_6) = \mathbb{Q}(i\sqrt{3}).$$ Does this sort of thing happen infinitely often, or are there just some coincidences among small numbers? If this continues, is there some way to know when a particular inclusion of cyclotomic fields is strict? How to show $u \in R^{x} \implies u \in R[X]^{x}$ for integral domain $(R,+, \times)$ So I have a Palm Pre (original P100EWW) model that I enabled developer mode on, and installed a Debian Squeeze chroot.  Works great.  I have plans to use this for ANYTHING (bittorrent peer, web server) but a phone.  I noticed if I do a cat /dev/urandom &gt; /dev/fb0 it actually writes random pixels to the screen until a No space left on device error is generated.  Awesome, now I can use the display.  So what kind of utilites are there that will either A) let me use /dev/fb0 as a console I can output text to or B) render text on /dev/fb0 from the command line.  I don't know about recompiling the kernel for this yet (I'd love to eventually strip WebOS off entirely and turn this into a minimal ARM server) so userspace tools if they exist is what I'm asking about.  Also would prefer to render directly to /dev/fb0 and not use X. Literature: 'Why' at the beginning of sentences I’m currently reading George Martin’s A Song Of Ice And Fire novels in English. As a non-native speaker (I’m German), I stumbled upon some grammatical constructs that I’ve never seen before, one of them being the Why at beginning of sentences.  Examples:   Tyrion gave the rotting head a second look. Why, it almost looks as if those lips are smiling. Did he use that word? Why, the boy has a singer's soul . . . though if you believe that song, you may well be dimmer than the first Reek.   These kind of sentences are obviously different from sentences like Why is the sky blue?  I’d like to know if that construct is archaic, or could be used in everyday language, and how one could rephrase that kind of sentences. Can it be rephrased at all? To me it seems like the Why is just used to give the sentence a kind of “cynical” taste. Chromatic Number The smallest number of colors needed to color a graph $G$ is called its chromatic number, and is often denoted $\chi(G)$.  Show that if graph $G$ is simple, then $$ \chi \ge \frac{V^2}{V^2 - 2E}. $$ Aborting a shell script if any command returns a non-zero value Java Server Socket not connecting How to see what's going on during Windows shutdown/logging off process? Windows 7 msconfig lets users select the options No GUI boot and OS boot information to have a list of drivers being loaded during boot. Is it possible to have similar detailed messages during shutting down/restarting/logging off? Here's the screen I want disable or give me more details: Canonical copies of sets Sometimes one needs two disjoint copies of a given set $X$. This can be canonically done by taking $\{0\} × X$ and $\{1\} × X$. Sometimes we want to identify one of the copies with the original set $X$. So I wonder, is it possible to take a disjoint copy of $X$ straight ahead? And can this be done canonically? More precisely, are the following claims true? $ \def\dom{\operatorname{dom}} \def\rng{\operatorname{rng}} \def\On{\mathbf{On}} $   For every $X$ there is a one-to-one function $f$ such that $\dom(f) = X$ and $\rng(X) ∩ X = ∅$. There is an explicit formula $φ(X, f)$ such that for every $X$ there is exactly one $f$ satisfying $φ(X, f)$ and this $f$ satisfies 1. for $X$.   Since such construction of a disjoint copy is intuitively trivial, I'm interested in proofs of 1. and 2. without using regularity, choice, or infinity.   Some ideas:   We may simply put $f(x) := (x, X)$, but we need regularity to show that $(x, X) ∉ X$. We may consider $α = \sup(X ∩ \On)$ and pair members of $X$ with some ordinals above $α$, but we need AC to well-order $X$, and we need global choice to obtain 2. Let $&lt;$ be the transitive hull of $∈$. If the relation $&lt;$ is narrow, i.e. $\{y: y &lt; x\}$ is a set for every $x$, then we may choose $z ∉ ⋃\{(\leftarrow, x)_&lt;: x ∈ X\}$ and put $f(x) := (x, z)$ since $(x, z) = y ∈ X$ would imply $z &lt; y$. Note that we don't need the axiom of infinity to define $&lt;$, but I don't know how to prove its narrowness without infinity. What's the easiest way to install a missing Perl module? Was the chip real or fake? I'm talking about the movie  Spoilers ahead.  Walter (Daniel Radcliffe) gave the task or blackmailed the Four Horsemen to steal a chip from a lab which can access any digital device. So they did steal the chip. And when they rescue Dylan Rhodes (Mark Ruffalo) from drowning in the water, Jack Wilder said that the chip is fake.     Jack: Wait something is not right.      Atlas: What's wrong?      Jack: It's fake.   Then they assumed that Walter did not know that the chip is fake. So they came with a plan to bluff. They pretended that they had the real chip. After they got caught by Walter, they gave the fake chip to Walter. Walter checked the chip and declared it as real. The Four Horsemen were surprised.     Walter: I'm sorry to interrupt. But I have to say congratulations and   thank you. It's real.      Lula: What? It's real!!!!!      Atlas: What? Is it real?      Jake: What is he talking about?   What happened? I didn't get it. What did I miss? Was the chip real? Was Walter pretending it to be real? If so, then why? If not, who switched the real chip with the fake one? Who had the real chip before? How should duplicate questions be handled? What should I do when I see a question that is a duplicate of another one?   Should I answer it? Should I downvote it? Should I comment? Should I edit the question to indicate it's a duplicate? If I can, should I (vote to) close the question? What happens when I vote to close as duplicate? Or: Why did a comment with my name on it just appear? Should I flag it for moderator attention? What about similar or related questions?