Group data for subtotals with (technically) inconsistent categories

I found a tutorial online (link > german-tutorial) which explains how to group data in a table and most importantly how to make subtotals.

This is all fine when the data I have is equal to another, for example:

SampleData Clearly this can be grouped because there’s equal value’s that excel can detect.

But what about this?

ProblematicData As a human I can still group this to the categories Data A, B and C, but how do I tell excel that these cells correspond to a group, which I need to make subtotals of?

While writing this I had the idea that I might need to “trim away” some of the text and put the variants in the next cell of the row, which then again would make subtotals easier again because the first column contains the similar data again. I don’t know how to do this dynamically though. Here’s a handwritten example anyhow.

Trimming the variants into another column like that makes subtotals great again, but in that case I don’t know the formula to put in that cuts away the last 2 characters in column A and putting them in column B. I could only get the following result by manually deleting the -1 and -2 and putting it in column B.
trimmedData

I would like to know how I can achieve the above either by not having to alter the variants (“trimming”) or dynamically trimming away the variants and putting them in another column, since I don’t really know a formula that does this.

Are all SSL domain validation basically the same technically speaking? [duplicate]

This question already has an answer here:

  • Are there technical disadvantages in using free ssl certificates?

    5 answers

I’ve googled this and haven’t really been able to find a straight answer and this question which I have read is a bit different and is a bit outdated considering the landscape has changed a lot recently.

What I want to know, is if you aren’t planning to get a OV or EV certificate and just need the plain DV type certificate then we have offerings of varying types, such as:

  • Free Certificates from places such as Let’s Encrypt
  • Many hosts are giving away free certificates now with their hosting (not always by Let’s Encrypt)
  • AutoSSL from cPanel (Free)
  • $198 Standard SSL certs from DigiCert
  • $59 Standard Certs from RapidSSL

I could go on, but you get the point. Is there any technical difference between these certificates? From what I have read certificates from LE only last 3 months so you will have to renew them quite often – is that about it?

If there is no real difference then why not go with the free ones provided by cPanel? Why would one spend $198/year when they can get it for free?

The only other non-technical difference I can think of is that if you pay for one then you get the included insurance.

Are browsers more likely to have the ones you pay for in their CA trust store and free ones should be avoided because of this?

So I think I understand the non-technical differences, but am looking for an answer on if paying for one is going to be technically or a more “safer” option?

Are all SSL domain validation basically the same technically speaking?

I’ve googled this and haven’t really been able to find a straight answer and this question which I have read is a bit different and is a bit outdated considering the landscape has changed a lot recently.

What I want to know, is if you aren’t planning to get a OV or EV certificate and just need the plain DV type certificate then we have offerings of varying types, such as:

  • Free Certificates from places such as Let’s Encrypt
  • Many hosts are giving away free certificates now with their hosting (not always by Let’s Encrypt)
  • AutoSSL from cPanel (Free)
  • $198 Standard SSL certs from DigiCert
  • $59 Standard Certs from RapidSSL

I could go on, but you get the point. Is there any technical difference between these certificates? From what I have read certificates from LE only last 3 months so you will have to renew them quite often – is that about it?

If there is no real difference then why not go with the free ones provided by cPanel? Why would one spend $198/year when they can get it for free?

The only other non-technical difference I can think of is that if you pay for one then you get the included insurance.

Are browsers more likely to have the ones you pay for in their CA trust store and free ones should be avoided because of this?

So I think I understand the non-technical differences, but am looking for an answer on if paying for one is going to be technically or a more “safer” option?

Formally promoted staff members, technically the same as before – is this a good idea?

I’ve been part of a gaming community since its very beginning, and I’ve seen many decisions in these years. The most recent decision is quite confusing to me because it seems irrational to me.

Before the decision, the staff members were subdivided in supporters, moderators, and administrators. The sequence is obvious: supporters have the least technical power whereas administrators have the most. Moderators are in between. In the last years, the admins were mostly absence due to stress and other stuff and mainly managed the technical site of the community: keep the servers and the forum running, take care of urgent technical matters, etc. In game, however, moderators took the lead and took care of most matters: problems between users, small technical problems, organizing small events, etc.

You can say that moderators were the people where your problem went to first, and if it couldn’t be solved, it would be redirected to the admins (which basically happened in one of ten requests). The most recent discussion changed the system crucially: the rank moderator has been removed and all moderators have been promoted to administrators.

It actually seems like a good decision because the now promoted moderators are in game and help out even more so the workload on the “real” administrators become less. However, after some time, users suspected that the promoted moderators have been just promoted on a formal level, not on a technical level since some technical request just couldn’t be solved by the promoted ones.

Today, the staff announced that it is true. The promoted moderators have the same technical level as before, just their formal level has been increased. Their argument for their decision is that most new users request an admin for basically every inconvenience and just skip the moderators. On the other side, the project is relatively large (8000 monthly active users, 7000 are regular users, project is steadily growing) and it takes some time that the information is spread.

Right now, the users of the project are confused, some even demand to return to the old system. They complain that it’s not clear anymore who can do what, and they don’t know anymore who is best suited for their problem. I understand the complaint of these users. Who do you turn to if everyone is basically the same, but actually is not?

(Currently, there are 28 team members: 15 are supporters, 13 are admins, and 2 of them are the “real” ones.)

I’m quite confused. Is it a good idea to make it look like everyone can handle your problem, although there are technical differences between the staff members who seem to be the same?

Is it technically possible to solo mine bitcoin using cpu without a pool? How? Ubuntu

For development reasons I’d like to have a private “real” bitcoin mainnet network.
Bitcoin-core doesn’t support mining any more.

I have set up a network of 2 nodes (using connect conf command).
CPUminer is designed (as far as I know) to connect to a mining pool server.

Any idea how to directly do cpu solo mining with bitcoin?

Thanks.

Question: I often feel like the air im breathing isnt fully oxygen. I mean i know technically thats the case…

Basically even if I take a deep breath, my body only takes half of the air. Its different from oxygen hungry I think. This is different from when im short of breath or anything. This is like my lungs can be full of air, but they only make use of half the air. So when I breathe its kind of like when someone stops you mid yawn. It feels exactly like that every time I breathe. Like someone stopped me mid breath even though im breathing normally. Like when I breathe I feel it a lot in the bottom of my neck. Does this make sense? Whats going on?

Formally promoted staff members, technically the same as before – is this a good idea?

I’ve been part of a gaming community since its very beginning, and I’ve seen many decisions in these years. The most recent decision is quite confusing to me because it seems irrational to me.

Before the decision, the staff members were subdivided in supporters, moderators, and administrators. The sequence is obvious: supporters have the least technical power whereas administrators have the most. Moderators are in between. In the last years, the admins were mostly absence due to stress and other stuff and mainly managed the technical site of the community: keep the servers and the forum running, take care of urgent technical matters, etc. In game, however, moderators took the lead and took care of most matters: problems between users, small technical problems, organizing small events, etc.

You can say that moderators were the people where your problem went to first, and if it couldn’t be solved, it would be redirected to the admins (which basically happened in one of ten requests). The most recent discussion changed the system crucially: the rank moderator has been removed and all moderators have been promoted to administrators.

It actually seems like a good decision because the now promoted moderators are in game and help out even more so the workload on the “real” administrators become less. However, after some time, users suspected that the promoted moderators have been just promoted on a formal level, not on a technical level since some technical request just couldn’t be solved by the promoted ones.

Today, the staff announced that it is true. The promoted moderators have the same technical level as before, just their formal level has been increased. Their argument for their decision is that most new users request an admin for basically every inconvenience and just skip the moderators. On the other side, the project is relatively large (8000 monthly active users, 7000 are regular users, project is steadily growing) and it takes some time that the information is spread.

Right now, the users of the project are confused, some even demand to return to the old system. They complain that it’s not clear anymore who can do what, and they don’t know anymore who is best suited for their problem. I understand the complaint of these users. Who do you turn to if everyone is basically the same, but actually is not?

(Currently, there are 28 team members: 15 are supporters, 13 are admins, and 2 of them are the “real” ones.)

I’m quite confused. Is it a good idea to make it look like everyone can handle your problem, although there are technical differences between the staff members who seem to be the same?

Formally promoted staff members, technically the same as before – is this a good idea?

I’ve been part of a gaming community since its very beginning, and I’ve seen many decisions in these years. The most recent decision is quite confusing to me because it seems irrational to me.

Before the decision, the staff members were subdivided in supporters, moderators, and administrators. The sequence is obvious: supporters have the least technical power whereas administrators have the most. Moderators are in between. In the last years, the admins were mostly absence due to stress and other stuff and mainly managed the technical site of the community: keep the servers and the forum running, take care of urgent technical matters, etc. In game, however, moderators took the lead and took care of most matters: problems between users, small technical problems, organizing small events, etc.

You can say that moderators were the people where your problem went to first, and if it couldn’t be solved, it would be redirected to the admins (which basically happened in one of ten requests). The most recent discussion changed the system crucially: the rank moderator has been removed and all moderators have been promoted to administrators.

It actually seems like a good decision because the now promoted moderators are in game and help out even more so the workload on the “real” administrators become less. However, after some time, users suspected that the promoted moderators have been just promoted on a formal level, not on a technical level since some technical request just couldn’t be solved by the promoted ones.

Today, the staff announced that it is true. The promoted moderators have the same technical level as before, just their formal level has been increased. Their argument for their decision is that most new users request an admin for basically every inconvenience and just skip the moderators. On the other side, the project is relatively large (8000 monthly active users, 7000 are regular users, project is steadily growing) and it takes some time that the information is spread.

Right now, the users of the project are confused, some even demand to return to the old system. They complain that it’s not clear anymore who can do what, and they don’t know anymore who is best suited for their problem. I understand the complaint of these users. Who do you turn to if everyone is basically the same, but actually is not?

(Currently, there are 28 team members: 15 are supporters, 13 are admins, and 2 of them are the “real” ones.)

I’m quite confused. Is it a good idea to make it look like everyone can handle your problem, although there are technical differences between the staff members who seem to be the same?