Silenus

Yes! Especially if you use the same email as you did to register connected devices, and even more so if you use the same password. When you create a password field on a Web page, there is absolutely no guarantee that the passwords are encrypted on the server you are logging into, nor that the client side application (that is, the application running on your computer) is not sending your login information in the clear if the server isn't using secure http. If an application is sending your login information in the clear, it is visible to any computer system your computer uses to connect to the server. For example, let's say you are logging into a website (let's call it A) from your computer (we'll call it . For simplicity, both you and this website use the same isp. So to connect to site B, you have to go through the computers at isp C. In logging in, A sends a request to C, which then sends that request to B. Now, the ISP has a shady employee who routinely snoops through the access logs, searching for things that look like usernames and passwords. Since website B does not use https for login, nor does it encrypt your login information before sending it, that shady employee can see your username and password in the logs. Now, how many times do you use the same email address and password when signing up on sites? Do you use the same password for your banking site as you do for this one? Let's say the person who set up the site itself is shady (or just lazy) , and they don't encrypt the passwords. One of the admins is shady and they try to use your email and password (that they have ready access to because they aren't encrypted on the server) on other sites. Even if the site operators aren't shady, your login information is all the easier to get if the site were to be hacked. At least with encrypted passwords, a hacker would also need to Crack the password hashes. If you use a unique password (and even better, a separate email for "junk") you are better off. However even then, I'm not sure I would want to log into that site from home. Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

That is correct. It's just personal preference for the most part. They claim the push in style are reusable when used with solid wire, but I question how much this reduces the clamping force of the connector when you do it. Plus, if you are working with stranded wire, and a wire doesn't seat properly/stripped too much insulation so the conductor is exposed, you've just wasted a wall nut. If you follow the instructions and don't need to redo work, they're probably fine. The fact that they aren't much bigger than conventional wire nuts is definitely nice, especially for the 4 and six wire models (I always dread connecting more than 3 wires with a wire nut). But at the same time, I personally prefer the actual release of the lever style nuts. Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

Personally, I'd be a little wary of the "push in" connectors, though I have used them when they came with light fixtures in the past. While they are more expensive than pain wire nuts, the lever or spring terminals do work quite nicely, especially when dealing with smaller wire. They are also handy for making temporary connections. I have an appliance cord with 5 slot lever nuts attached for making it easy to preprogram in-box hardware like the Insteon micro modules and fan lincs. Professionally, my company (industrial automation and data acquisition) uses wago products for almost all electrical connections. Though most of these are din rail terminal strips, not something you'd see in most homes. The only time we've ever had problems with them has been when an installer clamps a wire that hasn't been stripped to cut the wire to length, and then leave it connected. Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk