qid int64 1 74.7M | question stringlengths 12 33.8k | date stringlengths 10 10 | metadata list | response_j stringlengths 0 115k | response_k stringlengths 2 98.3k |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2,533,577 | Anyone got some good references for targeting web content to the iPad web browser? i know its still very early days but I havent got any good indicator on how to setup CSS to fix iphone/ipod touch versus the larger screen of the iPad? or do I just consider it to be like safari on the bigger Macs | 2010/03/28 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2533577",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/10676/"
] | Safari for iPad is a hybrid between the desktop version of Safari and the Mobile iPhone version.
For example it supports inline video like the desktop, but scrollable div's are difficult for users to interact with just like the iPhone. (they require two fingers to scroll, which is not discoverable.
[Preparing your Content For iPad](https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/technotes/tn2010/tn2262/_index.html) is a good place to start, and the iPad Simulator is now a free download as part of the [iPhone SDK](https://developer.apple.com/iphone/). | If you can't get the SDK to play with, 9to5 Mac posted a video of Safari in the iPad simulator: [iPad Safari walthrough](http://9to5mac.com/ipad-safari-walkthru-video-4650470). They seem to think it's closer to Safari on a mac and Google doesn't look like it does on an iPhone. |
2,533,577 | Anyone got some good references for targeting web content to the iPad web browser? i know its still very early days but I havent got any good indicator on how to setup CSS to fix iphone/ipod touch versus the larger screen of the iPad? or do I just consider it to be like safari on the bigger Macs | 2010/03/28 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2533577",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/10676/"
] | If you can't get the SDK to play with, 9to5 Mac posted a video of Safari in the iPad simulator: [iPad Safari walthrough](http://9to5mac.com/ipad-safari-walkthru-video-4650470). They seem to think it's closer to Safari on a mac and Google doesn't look like it does on an iPhone. | check out this jQuery plugin that handles touch events on web apps such as scaling, rotation and wiping. Hope it will make your life a bit easier.
<http://desmondliang.com/content/touchme-jquery-plugin-ipad-web-apps> |
2,533,577 | Anyone got some good references for targeting web content to the iPad web browser? i know its still very early days but I havent got any good indicator on how to setup CSS to fix iphone/ipod touch versus the larger screen of the iPad? or do I just consider it to be like safari on the bigger Macs | 2010/03/28 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2533577",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/10676/"
] | Safari for iPad is a hybrid between the desktop version of Safari and the Mobile iPhone version.
For example it supports inline video like the desktop, but scrollable div's are difficult for users to interact with just like the iPhone. (they require two fingers to scroll, which is not discoverable.
[Preparing your Content For iPad](https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/technotes/tn2010/tn2262/_index.html) is a good place to start, and the iPad Simulator is now a free download as part of the [iPhone SDK](https://developer.apple.com/iphone/). | check out this jQuery plugin that handles touch events on web apps such as scaling, rotation and wiping. Hope it will make your life a bit easier.
<http://desmondliang.com/content/touchme-jquery-plugin-ipad-web-apps> |
6,842 | While looking looking for an efficient and simple algorithm for directed acyclic graph isomorphism, I stumbled upon this which points out the similarity between DAG isomorphism and unification. After learning a bit on the subject, I still have many questions about the relationships between the subjects.
1. Unification is said to be efficient on first order logic term. How efficient is it, exactly?
2. In my first analysis, it seems like DAG isomorphism should be reducible to unification, yet unification is efficient and DAG isomorphism is not. What am I missing? (I am of course assuming that every DAG can be transformed "efficiently" into a valid set of first order logic "expressions"... Is that correct?)
3. Is there a reference where the relationship between the subjects are explored?
4. How far can semantic unification go while staying efficient? Associations? Commutativity? Something else? Are there any papers on a real word application?
To give some context, the DAGs I am looking into are basic blocks DAGs from MIPS assembly language (or something close). I am working on the custom instruction selection problem where the goal is pretty much to identify subgraphs of the basic block DAG which should be implemented in hardware. I need to check for isomorphism to avoid having two separate hardware units performing the same operation.
Given my use-case, can someone point me in the direction of the best "isomorphism framework" (DAG isomorphism, unification, something else, etc...) to use? | 2011/06/02 | [
"https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/6842",
"https://cstheory.stackexchange.com",
"https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/users/5454/"
] | An excellent starting point for information on unification theory
with some information on unification of term dags is the survey
by Baader and Snyder.
<http://www.cs.bu.edu/~snyder/publications/UnifChapter.pdf> | Partial answer, addressing only point #2:
>
> 2 - in my first analysis, it's seems like DAG iso. should be reducible
> to unification, yet unification is efficient and DAG iso. is not. What
> am i missing ?
>
>
>
Are you sure DAG isomorphism is inefficient?
*Rooted* DAG isomorphism is linear, since it can be computed with a depth-first search. Using DFS for general DAG isomorphism, then, should only take O(n^2) (by fixing an arbitrary root in one graph, and trying all possible roots in the second).
>
> i am of course assuming that every DAG can be tranformed "efficently"
> into a valid set of first order logic "expression"...is that correct?
>
>
>
I'm pretty sure. For example: if we assign each node to a unique variable, then each edge can be expressed as a clause in a 2-CNF expression. The conversion should be linear in the number of edges. |
108,430 | Criminals have been a problem for as long as humanity has existed. In the year 2569, all people convicted of crimes are sent to the planet Zeautian, where they are put to hard labor mining precious metals and ore for 16 hours a day, or farming on large fields to support other planets populations. The planet houses 9 Billion prisoners, but it only has 500 million guards. The main point of the prison is to collect the resources of the planet, and secondly to rehabilitate the prisoners. So, what would be the most effective way to run the prison with both the aforementioned goals in mind?
The prison is supposed to be run like a Terran penitentiary, prisoners have 16 hour shifts, with three lunch breaks, one shower pre day, and 8 hours of sleep. All the prisoners are occasionally watched by camera-bots.
The prisoners are only able to access farming vehicles and tools, and mining equipment, and semi-decent sanitation, everything else is below medieval tech.
The guards, on the other hand, are well equipped with powerful equipment. The mostly refrain from contact with the prisoners, with most guards stationed on isolated islands in the middle of oceans that the prisoners can’t access, or near the arctic and Antarctic circles of the planet. They are equipped with advanced helicopters, powered armor suits, plasma rifles, and etc. To add another line of defense, the guards also placed the some of the most monsterous creatures in the galaxy around their stations, to eat up any prisoners straying to close. | 2018/04/02 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/108430",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49201/"
] | Simple: don't.
At the point civilization becomes spacefaring, it would be pretty easy to identify planets without any resources for use technologically. Drop prisoners in with only enough tools to establish primitive farming operations, and then monitor their activities from orbit. That's it. Even if they somehow figure out how to magically build a spaceship out of nothing, there's no way they could defend themselves against even the cheapest orbital defense systems. It would save money, time, and would eliminate *all* risk of escape.
Your only risks are prison break attempts from outer space, but you'd have that problem anyway, and with all the money you'd save this way, defense would be a trifling matter. | I hope that none of other the people answering this question ever get reach any positions of power in society!
In seriousness, since you want to rehabilitate the prisoners and not create a brutally oppressed and violent slave-state, those answers might not be suitable. Especially if the prisoners are intended to eventually return to the rest of society. **I think the best solution is to have the prisoners guard themselves.** Give people two paths they can walk on the prison planet---work in the mines/farms for the required amount of time in order to return home, or to progress up through heirarchies of supervisors/managers on the prison planet and stay. Those roles can be rewarded with money/goods just like regular capitalist society. After all, slaves rebel a lot more often than employees. It also creates a large group of prisoners with an incentive to maintain the status quo (and the regular prisoners, who buy food from markets and so on, also would suffer from any disruption). If there are leaders of a rebel movement, just end their prison terms early and whisk them off-planet.
The prison planet would probably even develop its own prisons. Of course, there's always the possibility of a Boston Tea party type situation, but there's a reason it was the Boston Tea party and not the Boston essential-food-items-and-manufactured-goods-that-are-unobtainable-on-this-planet party.
On a final note, think about the earth, and imagine if aliens were actually using earth to harvest heavy metals/cash/excess food. We're invested in maintaining our own social order here, we don't need 500 million alien guards (and in fact, their presence here would almost certainly make rebellion more likely). The best alien strategy might be to brainwash/blackmail the ruling (political/business) class and take 50% of grown food which we waste anyway, rather than vaporise people with alien weapons whenever the gold mines drop their production. |
108,430 | Criminals have been a problem for as long as humanity has existed. In the year 2569, all people convicted of crimes are sent to the planet Zeautian, where they are put to hard labor mining precious metals and ore for 16 hours a day, or farming on large fields to support other planets populations. The planet houses 9 Billion prisoners, but it only has 500 million guards. The main point of the prison is to collect the resources of the planet, and secondly to rehabilitate the prisoners. So, what would be the most effective way to run the prison with both the aforementioned goals in mind?
The prison is supposed to be run like a Terran penitentiary, prisoners have 16 hour shifts, with three lunch breaks, one shower pre day, and 8 hours of sleep. All the prisoners are occasionally watched by camera-bots.
The prisoners are only able to access farming vehicles and tools, and mining equipment, and semi-decent sanitation, everything else is below medieval tech.
The guards, on the other hand, are well equipped with powerful equipment. The mostly refrain from contact with the prisoners, with most guards stationed on isolated islands in the middle of oceans that the prisoners can’t access, or near the arctic and Antarctic circles of the planet. They are equipped with advanced helicopters, powered armor suits, plasma rifles, and etc. To add another line of defense, the guards also placed the some of the most monsterous creatures in the galaxy around their stations, to eat up any prisoners straying to close. | 2018/04/02 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/108430",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49201/"
] | Why waste that much money on so many guards?
The prisoners are on a planet that they can't get off. They aren't going anywhere.
Since you insist on exporting things off the planet then that creates a vulnerable point at the space port. Guard that.
Never allow the prisoners to come into direct contact with a guard. This prevents attempts to bribe, threaten or otherwise influence the guards. Put the guards in armored facilities and use sound filters to make all of the guards voices sound the same.
You also have an absolute tech advantage. Any guard outside the facility should be in powered armor (if that is a thing in your story) or in a tank or armored aircraft. There should only be one reason for guards to exit the facility; which brings me to the next important point.
Since you need the prisoners to mine or farm (I think that this is a bad plan, much better to have a dedicated prison planet) and bring the results to the space port, you have to enforce that behavior through quotas. This is a planet. People will likely find a way to support themselves by growing their own food and making items to use or trade among themselves. Instead of wasting time, manpower, and money trying to curtail this, make it irrelevant. In fact it will decrease the cost of your operation if they have to grow their own food and make their own tools.
Don't give the quotas to individual people, that's too hard to manage. Give the quota to the planet. If the quotas aren't met, send out the suitably armored troops to cull the prisoners. Missiles or unmanned drones would be even better. It doesn't matter who you kill just so long as every prisoner knows that they could be next if they get unlucky. The prisoners will, eventually, organize to make sure the quotas are fulfilled.
The quota should be based on the number of prisoners. That way the as the population grows and shrinks, they can meet the quotas. Otherwise, the prisoners would learn that it is useless to try to meet the quota.
If it is important to release prisoners after a certain period of time, have some way of announcing across the planet that prisoner XXXX needs to be at an access point within x number of days. I pick 10. If the prisoner (or the prisoner's body) has not reached one of the pickup points within that time period, send armored troops out to each access point. They are to approach the first person they see and ask if that person is Prisoner XXXX. If the answer is no, shoot them and move on to the next nearest person. Eventually, the prisoner population will learn to make sure the prisoner is at a designated location promptly.
This will also help with the prisoner census. It will be in the best interest of whoever is running the prisoners to show proof of death for every prisoner who has died. Not only will that prevent a slaughter if the prisoner is called out but it will decrease their total quota. | The same way 10000 Spartans controlled 100,000+ helots and others. Ruthlessly.
In this case you have the advantage of better numbers and weaponry. Whereas the Spartans had the same arms as the helots.
Assign roles and leaders and oversee them, put down any insurrections with massacre and ruthlessly enforce any rules.
You divide the 9 billion up and you will never have a wholesale insurrection, local ones your guards will outnumber and outgun. Many societies managed it for centuries, Romans spring to mind. Your huge advantage is in the armaments. A sword is a sword is a sword... but a pickaxe vrs a machine gun is a different story. |
108,430 | Criminals have been a problem for as long as humanity has existed. In the year 2569, all people convicted of crimes are sent to the planet Zeautian, where they are put to hard labor mining precious metals and ore for 16 hours a day, or farming on large fields to support other planets populations. The planet houses 9 Billion prisoners, but it only has 500 million guards. The main point of the prison is to collect the resources of the planet, and secondly to rehabilitate the prisoners. So, what would be the most effective way to run the prison with both the aforementioned goals in mind?
The prison is supposed to be run like a Terran penitentiary, prisoners have 16 hour shifts, with three lunch breaks, one shower pre day, and 8 hours of sleep. All the prisoners are occasionally watched by camera-bots.
The prisoners are only able to access farming vehicles and tools, and mining equipment, and semi-decent sanitation, everything else is below medieval tech.
The guards, on the other hand, are well equipped with powerful equipment. The mostly refrain from contact with the prisoners, with most guards stationed on isolated islands in the middle of oceans that the prisoners can’t access, or near the arctic and Antarctic circles of the planet. They are equipped with advanced helicopters, powered armor suits, plasma rifles, and etc. To add another line of defense, the guards also placed the some of the most monsterous creatures in the galaxy around their stations, to eat up any prisoners straying to close. | 2018/04/02 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/108430",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49201/"
] | **You Don't**
You do absolutely nothing. Inmates are dropped off by automated landers and left to fend for themselves. If exportation of harvested resources are important automated landers pick them up or drop off tools and supplies necessary to gathering this resource. Enforce a quota. When quotas aren't met automated landers drop off hunter killer drones with quotas of their own to fulfill. unlike the inmates, the hunter killer drones **ALWAYS** fill *their* quotas....
The automated landers do not posses any more fuel or life support than is absolutely the bare minimum necessary to make it to the surface and drop off inmates, cargo dropoff or pickup landers have zero life support what so ever. The Landers don't posses even an ounce of extra fuel beyond what is required to land or boost to an unpowered orbit where they are picked up by a manned ship that comes by to collect the planet's quota every several months. That's a long time to float in space without power, food, or life support. In addition unless specifically dropping off prisoners the landers reenter and blast off at higher G's than can be survived by a living passenger. Any attempt to stow away is suicide.
As long as the automated orbital security system is recording quotas are made then the inmates run their own affairs. The planet is given a deadline, if a century of quotas are met and the native born population reaches a certain point of stability, infrastructure development, and lawfulness the planet will be freed and allowed to join the rest of the intergalactic community. If quotas aren't met people die. Carrot and the stick. Someday freedom might be an option, which makes an excellent carrot, and if the population gets tired of chasing the carrot the hunter killer drones provide an excellent stick to beat them back into productivity again.
Excellent way to harvest resources and colonize difficult planets with a minimum expense of manpower..... well... not anybody you particularly care about anyhow. | The same way 10000 Spartans controlled 100,000+ helots and others. Ruthlessly.
In this case you have the advantage of better numbers and weaponry. Whereas the Spartans had the same arms as the helots.
Assign roles and leaders and oversee them, put down any insurrections with massacre and ruthlessly enforce any rules.
You divide the 9 billion up and you will never have a wholesale insurrection, local ones your guards will outnumber and outgun. Many societies managed it for centuries, Romans spring to mind. Your huge advantage is in the armaments. A sword is a sword is a sword... but a pickaxe vrs a machine gun is a different story. |
108,430 | Criminals have been a problem for as long as humanity has existed. In the year 2569, all people convicted of crimes are sent to the planet Zeautian, where they are put to hard labor mining precious metals and ore for 16 hours a day, or farming on large fields to support other planets populations. The planet houses 9 Billion prisoners, but it only has 500 million guards. The main point of the prison is to collect the resources of the planet, and secondly to rehabilitate the prisoners. So, what would be the most effective way to run the prison with both the aforementioned goals in mind?
The prison is supposed to be run like a Terran penitentiary, prisoners have 16 hour shifts, with three lunch breaks, one shower pre day, and 8 hours of sleep. All the prisoners are occasionally watched by camera-bots.
The prisoners are only able to access farming vehicles and tools, and mining equipment, and semi-decent sanitation, everything else is below medieval tech.
The guards, on the other hand, are well equipped with powerful equipment. The mostly refrain from contact with the prisoners, with most guards stationed on isolated islands in the middle of oceans that the prisoners can’t access, or near the arctic and Antarctic circles of the planet. They are equipped with advanced helicopters, powered armor suits, plasma rifles, and etc. To add another line of defense, the guards also placed the some of the most monsterous creatures in the galaxy around their stations, to eat up any prisoners straying to close. | 2018/04/02 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/108430",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49201/"
] | Why waste that much money on so many guards?
The prisoners are on a planet that they can't get off. They aren't going anywhere.
Since you insist on exporting things off the planet then that creates a vulnerable point at the space port. Guard that.
Never allow the prisoners to come into direct contact with a guard. This prevents attempts to bribe, threaten or otherwise influence the guards. Put the guards in armored facilities and use sound filters to make all of the guards voices sound the same.
You also have an absolute tech advantage. Any guard outside the facility should be in powered armor (if that is a thing in your story) or in a tank or armored aircraft. There should only be one reason for guards to exit the facility; which brings me to the next important point.
Since you need the prisoners to mine or farm (I think that this is a bad plan, much better to have a dedicated prison planet) and bring the results to the space port, you have to enforce that behavior through quotas. This is a planet. People will likely find a way to support themselves by growing their own food and making items to use or trade among themselves. Instead of wasting time, manpower, and money trying to curtail this, make it irrelevant. In fact it will decrease the cost of your operation if they have to grow their own food and make their own tools.
Don't give the quotas to individual people, that's too hard to manage. Give the quota to the planet. If the quotas aren't met, send out the suitably armored troops to cull the prisoners. Missiles or unmanned drones would be even better. It doesn't matter who you kill just so long as every prisoner knows that they could be next if they get unlucky. The prisoners will, eventually, organize to make sure the quotas are fulfilled.
The quota should be based on the number of prisoners. That way the as the population grows and shrinks, they can meet the quotas. Otherwise, the prisoners would learn that it is useless to try to meet the quota.
If it is important to release prisoners after a certain period of time, have some way of announcing across the planet that prisoner XXXX needs to be at an access point within x number of days. I pick 10. If the prisoner (or the prisoner's body) has not reached one of the pickup points within that time period, send armored troops out to each access point. They are to approach the first person they see and ask if that person is Prisoner XXXX. If the answer is no, shoot them and move on to the next nearest person. Eventually, the prisoner population will learn to make sure the prisoner is at a designated location promptly.
This will also help with the prisoner census. It will be in the best interest of whoever is running the prisoners to show proof of death for every prisoner who has died. Not only will that prevent a slaughter if the prisoner is called out but it will decrease their total quota. | **You Don't**
You do absolutely nothing. Inmates are dropped off by automated landers and left to fend for themselves. If exportation of harvested resources are important automated landers pick them up or drop off tools and supplies necessary to gathering this resource. Enforce a quota. When quotas aren't met automated landers drop off hunter killer drones with quotas of their own to fulfill. unlike the inmates, the hunter killer drones **ALWAYS** fill *their* quotas....
The automated landers do not posses any more fuel or life support than is absolutely the bare minimum necessary to make it to the surface and drop off inmates, cargo dropoff or pickup landers have zero life support what so ever. The Landers don't posses even an ounce of extra fuel beyond what is required to land or boost to an unpowered orbit where they are picked up by a manned ship that comes by to collect the planet's quota every several months. That's a long time to float in space without power, food, or life support. In addition unless specifically dropping off prisoners the landers reenter and blast off at higher G's than can be survived by a living passenger. Any attempt to stow away is suicide.
As long as the automated orbital security system is recording quotas are made then the inmates run their own affairs. The planet is given a deadline, if a century of quotas are met and the native born population reaches a certain point of stability, infrastructure development, and lawfulness the planet will be freed and allowed to join the rest of the intergalactic community. If quotas aren't met people die. Carrot and the stick. Someday freedom might be an option, which makes an excellent carrot, and if the population gets tired of chasing the carrot the hunter killer drones provide an excellent stick to beat them back into productivity again.
Excellent way to harvest resources and colonize difficult planets with a minimum expense of manpower..... well... not anybody you particularly care about anyhow. |
108,430 | Criminals have been a problem for as long as humanity has existed. In the year 2569, all people convicted of crimes are sent to the planet Zeautian, where they are put to hard labor mining precious metals and ore for 16 hours a day, or farming on large fields to support other planets populations. The planet houses 9 Billion prisoners, but it only has 500 million guards. The main point of the prison is to collect the resources of the planet, and secondly to rehabilitate the prisoners. So, what would be the most effective way to run the prison with both the aforementioned goals in mind?
The prison is supposed to be run like a Terran penitentiary, prisoners have 16 hour shifts, with three lunch breaks, one shower pre day, and 8 hours of sleep. All the prisoners are occasionally watched by camera-bots.
The prisoners are only able to access farming vehicles and tools, and mining equipment, and semi-decent sanitation, everything else is below medieval tech.
The guards, on the other hand, are well equipped with powerful equipment. The mostly refrain from contact with the prisoners, with most guards stationed on isolated islands in the middle of oceans that the prisoners can’t access, or near the arctic and Antarctic circles of the planet. They are equipped with advanced helicopters, powered armor suits, plasma rifles, and etc. To add another line of defense, the guards also placed the some of the most monsterous creatures in the galaxy around their stations, to eat up any prisoners straying to close. | 2018/04/02 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/108430",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49201/"
] | You only need to hold the space ports.
Trade food, medicine, netflix subscriptions, heavy machinery, or whatever for resources at big forts with heavy weapons. Let the inmates run wild on the rest of the planet. You wouldn't even need hundreds of millions of guards. Inmates with good behavior would make working infrastructure, and protect it from bad behaving inmates; the proof of being fit to return to society is running a society successfully.
If you want to control them more finely, send guards into their places with remote monitoring. If the guard dies you bomb the surrounding area flat.
---
18:1 inmates to guards is only about double current US standards, which might be achieved with better automated monitoring, better economies of scale, or with a disregard of inmates lives.
Especially given how limited the ability to escape a planet is and how little modern defenses have to worry about mobs of poorly armed people, if you have 500 million officers it should be no problem running mining, agriculture, or even industry on a planet. | The same way 10000 Spartans controlled 100,000+ helots and others. Ruthlessly.
In this case you have the advantage of better numbers and weaponry. Whereas the Spartans had the same arms as the helots.
Assign roles and leaders and oversee them, put down any insurrections with massacre and ruthlessly enforce any rules.
You divide the 9 billion up and you will never have a wholesale insurrection, local ones your guards will outnumber and outgun. Many societies managed it for centuries, Romans spring to mind. Your huge advantage is in the armaments. A sword is a sword is a sword... but a pickaxe vrs a machine gun is a different story. |
108,430 | Criminals have been a problem for as long as humanity has existed. In the year 2569, all people convicted of crimes are sent to the planet Zeautian, where they are put to hard labor mining precious metals and ore for 16 hours a day, or farming on large fields to support other planets populations. The planet houses 9 Billion prisoners, but it only has 500 million guards. The main point of the prison is to collect the resources of the planet, and secondly to rehabilitate the prisoners. So, what would be the most effective way to run the prison with both the aforementioned goals in mind?
The prison is supposed to be run like a Terran penitentiary, prisoners have 16 hour shifts, with three lunch breaks, one shower pre day, and 8 hours of sleep. All the prisoners are occasionally watched by camera-bots.
The prisoners are only able to access farming vehicles and tools, and mining equipment, and semi-decent sanitation, everything else is below medieval tech.
The guards, on the other hand, are well equipped with powerful equipment. The mostly refrain from contact with the prisoners, with most guards stationed on isolated islands in the middle of oceans that the prisoners can’t access, or near the arctic and Antarctic circles of the planet. They are equipped with advanced helicopters, powered armor suits, plasma rifles, and etc. To add another line of defense, the guards also placed the some of the most monsterous creatures in the galaxy around their stations, to eat up any prisoners straying to close. | 2018/04/02 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/108430",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49201/"
] | **You Don't**
You do absolutely nothing. Inmates are dropped off by automated landers and left to fend for themselves. If exportation of harvested resources are important automated landers pick them up or drop off tools and supplies necessary to gathering this resource. Enforce a quota. When quotas aren't met automated landers drop off hunter killer drones with quotas of their own to fulfill. unlike the inmates, the hunter killer drones **ALWAYS** fill *their* quotas....
The automated landers do not posses any more fuel or life support than is absolutely the bare minimum necessary to make it to the surface and drop off inmates, cargo dropoff or pickup landers have zero life support what so ever. The Landers don't posses even an ounce of extra fuel beyond what is required to land or boost to an unpowered orbit where they are picked up by a manned ship that comes by to collect the planet's quota every several months. That's a long time to float in space without power, food, or life support. In addition unless specifically dropping off prisoners the landers reenter and blast off at higher G's than can be survived by a living passenger. Any attempt to stow away is suicide.
As long as the automated orbital security system is recording quotas are made then the inmates run their own affairs. The planet is given a deadline, if a century of quotas are met and the native born population reaches a certain point of stability, infrastructure development, and lawfulness the planet will be freed and allowed to join the rest of the intergalactic community. If quotas aren't met people die. Carrot and the stick. Someday freedom might be an option, which makes an excellent carrot, and if the population gets tired of chasing the carrot the hunter killer drones provide an excellent stick to beat them back into productivity again.
Excellent way to harvest resources and colonize difficult planets with a minimum expense of manpower..... well... not anybody you particularly care about anyhow. | I hope that none of other the people answering this question ever get reach any positions of power in society!
In seriousness, since you want to rehabilitate the prisoners and not create a brutally oppressed and violent slave-state, those answers might not be suitable. Especially if the prisoners are intended to eventually return to the rest of society. **I think the best solution is to have the prisoners guard themselves.** Give people two paths they can walk on the prison planet---work in the mines/farms for the required amount of time in order to return home, or to progress up through heirarchies of supervisors/managers on the prison planet and stay. Those roles can be rewarded with money/goods just like regular capitalist society. After all, slaves rebel a lot more often than employees. It also creates a large group of prisoners with an incentive to maintain the status quo (and the regular prisoners, who buy food from markets and so on, also would suffer from any disruption). If there are leaders of a rebel movement, just end their prison terms early and whisk them off-planet.
The prison planet would probably even develop its own prisons. Of course, there's always the possibility of a Boston Tea party type situation, but there's a reason it was the Boston Tea party and not the Boston essential-food-items-and-manufactured-goods-that-are-unobtainable-on-this-planet party.
On a final note, think about the earth, and imagine if aliens were actually using earth to harvest heavy metals/cash/excess food. We're invested in maintaining our own social order here, we don't need 500 million alien guards (and in fact, their presence here would almost certainly make rebellion more likely). The best alien strategy might be to brainwash/blackmail the ruling (political/business) class and take 50% of grown food which we waste anyway, rather than vaporise people with alien weapons whenever the gold mines drop their production. |
108,430 | Criminals have been a problem for as long as humanity has existed. In the year 2569, all people convicted of crimes are sent to the planet Zeautian, where they are put to hard labor mining precious metals and ore for 16 hours a day, or farming on large fields to support other planets populations. The planet houses 9 Billion prisoners, but it only has 500 million guards. The main point of the prison is to collect the resources of the planet, and secondly to rehabilitate the prisoners. So, what would be the most effective way to run the prison with both the aforementioned goals in mind?
The prison is supposed to be run like a Terran penitentiary, prisoners have 16 hour shifts, with three lunch breaks, one shower pre day, and 8 hours of sleep. All the prisoners are occasionally watched by camera-bots.
The prisoners are only able to access farming vehicles and tools, and mining equipment, and semi-decent sanitation, everything else is below medieval tech.
The guards, on the other hand, are well equipped with powerful equipment. The mostly refrain from contact with the prisoners, with most guards stationed on isolated islands in the middle of oceans that the prisoners can’t access, or near the arctic and Antarctic circles of the planet. They are equipped with advanced helicopters, powered armor suits, plasma rifles, and etc. To add another line of defense, the guards also placed the some of the most monsterous creatures in the galaxy around their stations, to eat up any prisoners straying to close. | 2018/04/02 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/108430",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49201/"
] | The only problem is the scale of operation.
My understanding is that you want a mega-prison, not "prison-at-large" planet often depicted in science fiction. In modern prisons, inmate to guards ratio is about 9:1. For 9 billion to 500 million the ratio would be 18:1, which is high, but considering futuristic environment with lots of cameras and AI that should be perfectly doable.
So, the main problem would be maintenance: providing food, utilizing trash, treating ill, repairing buildings and machinery. Some of these tasks can be done by prisoners themselves, while others would require professional staff.
To minimize the risk of escapes and revolts, the planet has to be totally inhospitable, meaning that running away from prison is a certain death. Allowing the possibility of any prisoners living on their own outside the prison system will eventually turn the environment from fully controlled to a guerilla-infested territory, with high rick of insubordination and riots. That's Ok if you are willing to kill rioting or escaped inmates en masse, but it looks like this is not what you want for your prison planet.
So, to keep things in perfect order, every prisoner should be under control of a prison guard.
Potential weak points, like in modern prison system, will be guards' weapons and escape routes. You can address it accordingly - guards that go among the prisoners would never have lethal weapons on them, and every possible escape route has multiple checkpoints. | I hope that none of other the people answering this question ever get reach any positions of power in society!
In seriousness, since you want to rehabilitate the prisoners and not create a brutally oppressed and violent slave-state, those answers might not be suitable. Especially if the prisoners are intended to eventually return to the rest of society. **I think the best solution is to have the prisoners guard themselves.** Give people two paths they can walk on the prison planet---work in the mines/farms for the required amount of time in order to return home, or to progress up through heirarchies of supervisors/managers on the prison planet and stay. Those roles can be rewarded with money/goods just like regular capitalist society. After all, slaves rebel a lot more often than employees. It also creates a large group of prisoners with an incentive to maintain the status quo (and the regular prisoners, who buy food from markets and so on, also would suffer from any disruption). If there are leaders of a rebel movement, just end their prison terms early and whisk them off-planet.
The prison planet would probably even develop its own prisons. Of course, there's always the possibility of a Boston Tea party type situation, but there's a reason it was the Boston Tea party and not the Boston essential-food-items-and-manufactured-goods-that-are-unobtainable-on-this-planet party.
On a final note, think about the earth, and imagine if aliens were actually using earth to harvest heavy metals/cash/excess food. We're invested in maintaining our own social order here, we don't need 500 million alien guards (and in fact, their presence here would almost certainly make rebellion more likely). The best alien strategy might be to brainwash/blackmail the ruling (political/business) class and take 50% of grown food which we waste anyway, rather than vaporise people with alien weapons whenever the gold mines drop their production. |
108,430 | Criminals have been a problem for as long as humanity has existed. In the year 2569, all people convicted of crimes are sent to the planet Zeautian, where they are put to hard labor mining precious metals and ore for 16 hours a day, or farming on large fields to support other planets populations. The planet houses 9 Billion prisoners, but it only has 500 million guards. The main point of the prison is to collect the resources of the planet, and secondly to rehabilitate the prisoners. So, what would be the most effective way to run the prison with both the aforementioned goals in mind?
The prison is supposed to be run like a Terran penitentiary, prisoners have 16 hour shifts, with three lunch breaks, one shower pre day, and 8 hours of sleep. All the prisoners are occasionally watched by camera-bots.
The prisoners are only able to access farming vehicles and tools, and mining equipment, and semi-decent sanitation, everything else is below medieval tech.
The guards, on the other hand, are well equipped with powerful equipment. The mostly refrain from contact with the prisoners, with most guards stationed on isolated islands in the middle of oceans that the prisoners can’t access, or near the arctic and Antarctic circles of the planet. They are equipped with advanced helicopters, powered armor suits, plasma rifles, and etc. To add another line of defense, the guards also placed the some of the most monsterous creatures in the galaxy around their stations, to eat up any prisoners straying to close. | 2018/04/02 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/108430",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49201/"
] | You only need to hold the space ports.
Trade food, medicine, netflix subscriptions, heavy machinery, or whatever for resources at big forts with heavy weapons. Let the inmates run wild on the rest of the planet. You wouldn't even need hundreds of millions of guards. Inmates with good behavior would make working infrastructure, and protect it from bad behaving inmates; the proof of being fit to return to society is running a society successfully.
If you want to control them more finely, send guards into their places with remote monitoring. If the guard dies you bomb the surrounding area flat.
---
18:1 inmates to guards is only about double current US standards, which might be achieved with better automated monitoring, better economies of scale, or with a disregard of inmates lives.
Especially given how limited the ability to escape a planet is and how little modern defenses have to worry about mobs of poorly armed people, if you have 500 million officers it should be no problem running mining, agriculture, or even industry on a planet. | I hope that none of other the people answering this question ever get reach any positions of power in society!
In seriousness, since you want to rehabilitate the prisoners and not create a brutally oppressed and violent slave-state, those answers might not be suitable. Especially if the prisoners are intended to eventually return to the rest of society. **I think the best solution is to have the prisoners guard themselves.** Give people two paths they can walk on the prison planet---work in the mines/farms for the required amount of time in order to return home, or to progress up through heirarchies of supervisors/managers on the prison planet and stay. Those roles can be rewarded with money/goods just like regular capitalist society. After all, slaves rebel a lot more often than employees. It also creates a large group of prisoners with an incentive to maintain the status quo (and the regular prisoners, who buy food from markets and so on, also would suffer from any disruption). If there are leaders of a rebel movement, just end their prison terms early and whisk them off-planet.
The prison planet would probably even develop its own prisons. Of course, there's always the possibility of a Boston Tea party type situation, but there's a reason it was the Boston Tea party and not the Boston essential-food-items-and-manufactured-goods-that-are-unobtainable-on-this-planet party.
On a final note, think about the earth, and imagine if aliens were actually using earth to harvest heavy metals/cash/excess food. We're invested in maintaining our own social order here, we don't need 500 million alien guards (and in fact, their presence here would almost certainly make rebellion more likely). The best alien strategy might be to brainwash/blackmail the ruling (political/business) class and take 50% of grown food which we waste anyway, rather than vaporise people with alien weapons whenever the gold mines drop their production. |
108,430 | Criminals have been a problem for as long as humanity has existed. In the year 2569, all people convicted of crimes are sent to the planet Zeautian, where they are put to hard labor mining precious metals and ore for 16 hours a day, or farming on large fields to support other planets populations. The planet houses 9 Billion prisoners, but it only has 500 million guards. The main point of the prison is to collect the resources of the planet, and secondly to rehabilitate the prisoners. So, what would be the most effective way to run the prison with both the aforementioned goals in mind?
The prison is supposed to be run like a Terran penitentiary, prisoners have 16 hour shifts, with three lunch breaks, one shower pre day, and 8 hours of sleep. All the prisoners are occasionally watched by camera-bots.
The prisoners are only able to access farming vehicles and tools, and mining equipment, and semi-decent sanitation, everything else is below medieval tech.
The guards, on the other hand, are well equipped with powerful equipment. The mostly refrain from contact with the prisoners, with most guards stationed on isolated islands in the middle of oceans that the prisoners can’t access, or near the arctic and Antarctic circles of the planet. They are equipped with advanced helicopters, powered armor suits, plasma rifles, and etc. To add another line of defense, the guards also placed the some of the most monsterous creatures in the galaxy around their stations, to eat up any prisoners straying to close. | 2018/04/02 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/108430",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49201/"
] | Why waste that much money on so many guards?
The prisoners are on a planet that they can't get off. They aren't going anywhere.
Since you insist on exporting things off the planet then that creates a vulnerable point at the space port. Guard that.
Never allow the prisoners to come into direct contact with a guard. This prevents attempts to bribe, threaten or otherwise influence the guards. Put the guards in armored facilities and use sound filters to make all of the guards voices sound the same.
You also have an absolute tech advantage. Any guard outside the facility should be in powered armor (if that is a thing in your story) or in a tank or armored aircraft. There should only be one reason for guards to exit the facility; which brings me to the next important point.
Since you need the prisoners to mine or farm (I think that this is a bad plan, much better to have a dedicated prison planet) and bring the results to the space port, you have to enforce that behavior through quotas. This is a planet. People will likely find a way to support themselves by growing their own food and making items to use or trade among themselves. Instead of wasting time, manpower, and money trying to curtail this, make it irrelevant. In fact it will decrease the cost of your operation if they have to grow their own food and make their own tools.
Don't give the quotas to individual people, that's too hard to manage. Give the quota to the planet. If the quotas aren't met, send out the suitably armored troops to cull the prisoners. Missiles or unmanned drones would be even better. It doesn't matter who you kill just so long as every prisoner knows that they could be next if they get unlucky. The prisoners will, eventually, organize to make sure the quotas are fulfilled.
The quota should be based on the number of prisoners. That way the as the population grows and shrinks, they can meet the quotas. Otherwise, the prisoners would learn that it is useless to try to meet the quota.
If it is important to release prisoners after a certain period of time, have some way of announcing across the planet that prisoner XXXX needs to be at an access point within x number of days. I pick 10. If the prisoner (or the prisoner's body) has not reached one of the pickup points within that time period, send armored troops out to each access point. They are to approach the first person they see and ask if that person is Prisoner XXXX. If the answer is no, shoot them and move on to the next nearest person. Eventually, the prisoner population will learn to make sure the prisoner is at a designated location promptly.
This will also help with the prisoner census. It will be in the best interest of whoever is running the prisoners to show proof of death for every prisoner who has died. Not only will that prevent a slaughter if the prisoner is called out but it will decrease their total quota. | Simple: don't.
At the point civilization becomes spacefaring, it would be pretty easy to identify planets without any resources for use technologically. Drop prisoners in with only enough tools to establish primitive farming operations, and then monitor their activities from orbit. That's it. Even if they somehow figure out how to magically build a spaceship out of nothing, there's no way they could defend themselves against even the cheapest orbital defense systems. It would save money, time, and would eliminate *all* risk of escape.
Your only risks are prison break attempts from outer space, but you'd have that problem anyway, and with all the money you'd save this way, defense would be a trifling matter. |
108,430 | Criminals have been a problem for as long as humanity has existed. In the year 2569, all people convicted of crimes are sent to the planet Zeautian, where they are put to hard labor mining precious metals and ore for 16 hours a day, or farming on large fields to support other planets populations. The planet houses 9 Billion prisoners, but it only has 500 million guards. The main point of the prison is to collect the resources of the planet, and secondly to rehabilitate the prisoners. So, what would be the most effective way to run the prison with both the aforementioned goals in mind?
The prison is supposed to be run like a Terran penitentiary, prisoners have 16 hour shifts, with three lunch breaks, one shower pre day, and 8 hours of sleep. All the prisoners are occasionally watched by camera-bots.
The prisoners are only able to access farming vehicles and tools, and mining equipment, and semi-decent sanitation, everything else is below medieval tech.
The guards, on the other hand, are well equipped with powerful equipment. The mostly refrain from contact with the prisoners, with most guards stationed on isolated islands in the middle of oceans that the prisoners can’t access, or near the arctic and Antarctic circles of the planet. They are equipped with advanced helicopters, powered armor suits, plasma rifles, and etc. To add another line of defense, the guards also placed the some of the most monsterous creatures in the galaxy around their stations, to eat up any prisoners straying to close. | 2018/04/02 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/108430",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49201/"
] | The only problem is the scale of operation.
My understanding is that you want a mega-prison, not "prison-at-large" planet often depicted in science fiction. In modern prisons, inmate to guards ratio is about 9:1. For 9 billion to 500 million the ratio would be 18:1, which is high, but considering futuristic environment with lots of cameras and AI that should be perfectly doable.
So, the main problem would be maintenance: providing food, utilizing trash, treating ill, repairing buildings and machinery. Some of these tasks can be done by prisoners themselves, while others would require professional staff.
To minimize the risk of escapes and revolts, the planet has to be totally inhospitable, meaning that running away from prison is a certain death. Allowing the possibility of any prisoners living on their own outside the prison system will eventually turn the environment from fully controlled to a guerilla-infested territory, with high rick of insubordination and riots. That's Ok if you are willing to kill rioting or escaped inmates en masse, but it looks like this is not what you want for your prison planet.
So, to keep things in perfect order, every prisoner should be under control of a prison guard.
Potential weak points, like in modern prison system, will be guards' weapons and escape routes. You can address it accordingly - guards that go among the prisoners would never have lethal weapons on them, and every possible escape route has multiple checkpoints. | The same way 10000 Spartans controlled 100,000+ helots and others. Ruthlessly.
In this case you have the advantage of better numbers and weaponry. Whereas the Spartans had the same arms as the helots.
Assign roles and leaders and oversee them, put down any insurrections with massacre and ruthlessly enforce any rules.
You divide the 9 billion up and you will never have a wholesale insurrection, local ones your guards will outnumber and outgun. Many societies managed it for centuries, Romans spring to mind. Your huge advantage is in the armaments. A sword is a sword is a sword... but a pickaxe vrs a machine gun is a different story. |
937 | While reading Somerset Maugham's *Cakes and Ale*, I came across this quote (emphasis mine):
>
> ...Charles Dickens in an after-dinner speech had stated that **genius was an infinite capacity for taking pains.**
>
>
>
[Emphasis mine]
Did he actually make this statement, or is it an example of an "unreliable narrator"? | 2017/01/25 | [
"https://literature.stackexchange.com/questions/937",
"https://literature.stackexchange.com",
"https://literature.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | The quotation **Genius is an infinite capacity for taking pains** is [proverbial](http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095847891) and dates to the late 19th century, more or less around Dickens's time. However, nothing like it is found in any of his novels or published letters. If he said it in an after-dinner speech, we have no records of the rest of the speech. Nor do we know when or to what audience he is supposed to have said it.
A close approximation turns up in the work of Dickens's contemporary, Thomas Carlyle. His *Life of Frederick the Great* (1858), [Book IV, Chapter 3](https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2104/2104.txt), has the following:
>
> The good plan itself, this comes not of its own accord; it
> is the fruit of **"genius" (which means transcendent capacity of taking
> trouble, first of all)**: given a huge stack of tumbled thrums, it is
> not in your sleep that you will find the vital centre of it, or get the
> first thrum by the end!
>
>
>
(emphasis added)
The earliest print source that I'm aware of where the quotation occurs exactly as stated in Maugham's 1930 novel is Arthur Conan Doyle's *A Study in Scarlet* (1887), [Part I, Chapter 3, "The Lauriston Gardens Mystery"](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/A_Study_in_Scarlet/Part_1/Chapter_3):
>
> "They say that genius is an infinite capacity for taking pains," he remarked with a smile. "It's a very bad definition, but it does apply to detective work."
>
>
>
Dickens died a scant seventeen years before this novel appeared in print. If the line is really from him, one would expect Holmes to say something like *Dickens said* rather than *They say*, I think. More likely it's just a pithy statement of a sentiment that comes from Carlyle and/or was in the air during the Victorian period. | [Fred R. Shapiro](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_R._Shapiro)'s [*The Yale Book of Quotations*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Yale_Book_of_Quotations) attributes "Genius . . . an infinite capacity for taking pains" to "[Jane Ellice Hopkins](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Hopkins,_Jane_Ellice_(DNB12)), English reformer, 1836–1904" in *Work Amongst Working Men* ch. 4 (1870). The 1884 fifth edition of that book (with the author's name given as Ellice Hopkins) is available at the [Internet Archive](https://archive.org/stream/workamongstworki00hopk_0#page/53/mode/1up), and the quotation can be found on p. 53 (emphasis added):
>
> It is a mistake to suppose that plain and suitable commonplaces will go down with working-men. Working-men emphatically want strong meat, thoughts as racy as their own expressions; they reject sweet pap fit for children. But if any one supposes that my power of speaking to them was a gift that came naturally to me, without any effort on my part, let them, once for all, dispossess themselves of any such idea. **Gift, like genius, I often think, only means an infinite capacity for taking pains.**
>
>
>
It seems to me that the writer is not coining the definition of genius as "an infinite capacity for taking pains" but rather alluding to it as a familiar saying. |
636,571 | Ideally i'm looking for a PCI wireless network adapter.
(In this instance I was trying to install drivers for the Asus PCE-N53 Wireless-N600 but the process requires me to install and compile a driver myself, and end in an several errors); I'm looking for a wireless that works out of the box and therefor doesn't require me to troubleshoot the problem as a terminal illiterate dork.
I'm currently looking at the cheaper
* TP-Link TL-WN751ND Wireless-N150
* AirLink AWLH5085 Wireless-N150
* TRENDnet TEW-726EC (Version v1.0R) N600
* TP-LINK TL-WDN4800
etc | 2015/06/15 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/636571",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/420195/"
] | These links should help you find the one you're seeking:
<https://help.ubuntu.com/community/WifiDocs/WirelessCardsSupported>
<http://www.linuxwireless.org/en/users/Devices/> | The problem that you never know which chip is used in which adapter.
These marketing names give no information. Vendors can switch from e.g. Atheros to Ralink without changing adapter model. Just change a revision.
But linux kernel supports not brand names but wireless physical hardware.
Best support is for Atheros adapters, except the very new ones that require ath10k module, that is not present in Ubuntu kernels yet.
So Atheros is preferred.
Ralink and Mediatek will cause problems in 99%.
Realtek will decently work with some drivers installed from ppa or github, but there is no guarantee.
In some cases compatibility with linux is declared by a vendor. It is better, but still there may be problems with kernel versions, etc. |
5,211 | [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") has two purposes right now:
* "this question is about the rules as written"
* "answer must obey special rules"
The latter makes it a meta tag. Meta tags are never, in the long run, a good idea. But tags are for describing what questions are about, and [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") doesn't *need* to have that second purpose.
There's a simple solution then: kill the special rules attached to [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") with fire, to save it from being a meta tag.
Putting pressure on answer content to suit the question is what **votes** are for, and we were foolish to try to legislate what is supposed to be already taken care of by the core mechanic of the site.
---
Before it's brought up — no, [game-recommendation](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation "show questions tagged 'game-recommendation'") is not a counter-example that shows that [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") can have special rules and work.
The special rules for game-rec don't attempt to replace voting and "this is off-topic" delete votes. It has special rules because otherwise those questions are *banned*. RAW questions aren't banned without their special rules, they don't need them to be permitted here. That lack of corresponding situations is why [game-recommendation](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation "show questions tagged 'game-recommendation'") is not a valid model to look to for how to handle the [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") tag.
---
[rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") is a meta tag. We normally burn meta tags with fire, but we can save it, by reversing what we did to it that made it into a meta-tag monster. A few minutes ago I was writing a proposal to burninate it, and I found myself writing that we would need to find a replacement because it's valid to ask questions *about* RAW, and *aboutness* is my sacred yardstick for measuring the non-meta-ness of a tag. And I realised that [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") is the very tag we would naturally want to replace *itself* with.
So [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") isn't a meta tag, but we've made it into one by turning it into a tag that dictates what answers should say. It's a good tag that doesn't deserve burninating; we have to save it from the inevitable death that comes to all meta tags.
**We should save it** because it's valuable to a huge community we serve.
**We should save it** because it legitimately describes many of our questions.
**We should save it** because people have shown that they want to use it and that's how our tag folksonomy is supposed to work.
**We should save it** because questions about RAW are on-topic and we need a tag for those.
**We should save it.**
It should not be a meta tag. We are undermining all its good work and value by making it a meta tag. We're grown-ups, we can handle people answering questions tagged [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") with answers that don't respect the tag. We can use our votes, including delete votes. We can use our words.
We don't need a site policy to make those answers go away. We really don't need a site policy that *doesn't even work* and wastes so much of our energy and time in divisive arguments about how to fix a problem we've inflicted on ourselves.
Vote with me to set [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") free from the special rules that are weighing it down. Let it do its job in tandem with the voting system. We're competent people here, we can handle telling people with votes and comments that they've made a mistake by ignoring the tag. And sometimes, we might find, that a question tagged [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") gets a really good answer that challenges the frame with a non-RAW solution. The way we expect the site to work.
We need [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'"). We don't need policy on how it's used or how its answered.
---
*Current discussion context that's obvious now but will be harder to find as this meta ages:*
* [Experiential audit of [rules-as-written], please?](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5189/experiential-audit-of-rules-as-written-please)
* [What, exactly, is the RAW tag for?](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5203/what-exactly-is-the-raw-tag-for) (and every meta *it* links to) | 2014/12/04 | [
"https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5211",
"https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/321/"
] | It doesn’t **have** special rules.
A question defines a topic. Answers are required to stay on that topic (or stray only after addressing the question on-topic). RAW questions are no different in this regard.
The only reason that RAW is perceived to have special rules is because a lot of people want to *ignore the topic* of RAW questions, and post non-RAW answers, and then are upset when those answers get down-voted or deleted. They are upset and feel that it must be because the RAW tag is special. They want to encode this perceived specialness in the tag wiki, because they feel “burned” because they didn’t understand the question in the first place.
But the tag isn’t special. Posting “Well, I don’t know the rules, but this has worked really well for my games in the past,” which would otherwise be an acceptable answer, is off-topic for such a question, and should be downvoted and/or deleted *exactly* the same way as “Well, I don’t know anything about 5e, but in 4e we did this and it was awesome,” in a question tagged 5e should be. Posting “the rule says this,” when it does not, in fact, say that, should be downvoted just as “5e does this,” when they’re actually describing a 4e concept should be downvoted. | To resolve this, I think two things need to happen:
1. Remove the special rules from the [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") tag that make it a meta-tag.
2. Don't flag or down-vote answers that don't have citations if they aren't asked for.
While I absolutely agree that the special rules need to be burned, I think this also necessitates a change to our culture to reflect this. If we remove the rules from the tag, but continue to down-vote answers that don't have citations, even when citations aren't asked for, the problem will remain, only worse because now it's even less likely that a new user will know about this invisible rule.
To me, this goes back to the heart of Stack Exchange policy: **Questions must be held to a high standard of quality and clarity in order to maintain a healthy group of experts that provide good answers.** Right now, we're putting the onus on the answerer to know to add citations if the question being asked is about rules-as-written.
Instead, I say that we should put the onus on the questioner; they should be required to ask for citations if they think citations are needed. If someone asks a question that you think requires citations, but doesn't stipulate that, then you should edit that question to include this.
I would also say that **not all RAW questions necessarily need citations.** No other type of question *universally requires* this kind of rigor. As long as the answer is clear and useful without citations, then down-voting or flagging that answer is not helpful. If an answer could be improved by citations, then by all means edit them in. I expect that most good RAW answers will include citations anyways, but this should be considered an improvement to the answer, not a requirement for it to be considered valid. |
5,211 | [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") has two purposes right now:
* "this question is about the rules as written"
* "answer must obey special rules"
The latter makes it a meta tag. Meta tags are never, in the long run, a good idea. But tags are for describing what questions are about, and [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") doesn't *need* to have that second purpose.
There's a simple solution then: kill the special rules attached to [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") with fire, to save it from being a meta tag.
Putting pressure on answer content to suit the question is what **votes** are for, and we were foolish to try to legislate what is supposed to be already taken care of by the core mechanic of the site.
---
Before it's brought up — no, [game-recommendation](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation "show questions tagged 'game-recommendation'") is not a counter-example that shows that [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") can have special rules and work.
The special rules for game-rec don't attempt to replace voting and "this is off-topic" delete votes. It has special rules because otherwise those questions are *banned*. RAW questions aren't banned without their special rules, they don't need them to be permitted here. That lack of corresponding situations is why [game-recommendation](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation "show questions tagged 'game-recommendation'") is not a valid model to look to for how to handle the [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") tag.
---
[rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") is a meta tag. We normally burn meta tags with fire, but we can save it, by reversing what we did to it that made it into a meta-tag monster. A few minutes ago I was writing a proposal to burninate it, and I found myself writing that we would need to find a replacement because it's valid to ask questions *about* RAW, and *aboutness* is my sacred yardstick for measuring the non-meta-ness of a tag. And I realised that [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") is the very tag we would naturally want to replace *itself* with.
So [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") isn't a meta tag, but we've made it into one by turning it into a tag that dictates what answers should say. It's a good tag that doesn't deserve burninating; we have to save it from the inevitable death that comes to all meta tags.
**We should save it** because it's valuable to a huge community we serve.
**We should save it** because it legitimately describes many of our questions.
**We should save it** because people have shown that they want to use it and that's how our tag folksonomy is supposed to work.
**We should save it** because questions about RAW are on-topic and we need a tag for those.
**We should save it.**
It should not be a meta tag. We are undermining all its good work and value by making it a meta tag. We're grown-ups, we can handle people answering questions tagged [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") with answers that don't respect the tag. We can use our votes, including delete votes. We can use our words.
We don't need a site policy to make those answers go away. We really don't need a site policy that *doesn't even work* and wastes so much of our energy and time in divisive arguments about how to fix a problem we've inflicted on ourselves.
Vote with me to set [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") free from the special rules that are weighing it down. Let it do its job in tandem with the voting system. We're competent people here, we can handle telling people with votes and comments that they've made a mistake by ignoring the tag. And sometimes, we might find, that a question tagged [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") gets a really good answer that challenges the frame with a non-RAW solution. The way we expect the site to work.
We need [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'"). We don't need policy on how it's used or how its answered.
---
*Current discussion context that's obvious now but will be harder to find as this meta ages:*
* [Experiential audit of [rules-as-written], please?](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5189/experiential-audit-of-rules-as-written-please)
* [What, exactly, is the RAW tag for?](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5203/what-exactly-is-the-raw-tag-for) (and every meta *it* links to) | 2014/12/04 | [
"https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5211",
"https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/321/"
] | It doesn’t **have** special rules.
A question defines a topic. Answers are required to stay on that topic (or stray only after addressing the question on-topic). RAW questions are no different in this regard.
The only reason that RAW is perceived to have special rules is because a lot of people want to *ignore the topic* of RAW questions, and post non-RAW answers, and then are upset when those answers get down-voted or deleted. They are upset and feel that it must be because the RAW tag is special. They want to encode this perceived specialness in the tag wiki, because they feel “burned” because they didn’t understand the question in the first place.
But the tag isn’t special. Posting “Well, I don’t know the rules, but this has worked really well for my games in the past,” which would otherwise be an acceptable answer, is off-topic for such a question, and should be downvoted and/or deleted *exactly* the same way as “Well, I don’t know anything about 5e, but in 4e we did this and it was awesome,” in a question tagged 5e should be. Posting “the rule says this,” when it does not, in fact, say that, should be downvoted just as “5e does this,” when they’re actually describing a 4e concept should be downvoted. | I'm all for healing it, but when we heal it, will there actually be a valuable tag left?
The [rules-as-written] tag evolved for classifying questions that:
* were asking about the rules, or how something would work inside the rules
* wanted answers to do some combination of: stick exclusively to the rules themselves, take the writing literally, make *nothing* up (no house rules or fiats), cite the rules, and so on.
At this point, the tag was fine, it was just describing the question.
However, at some point, a lot of people started using [rules-as-written] as a short-hand for their requirements, and *stopped writing* those requirements, which turned it into a meta-tag which implied rules on answers. To complicate the matter, we don't always agree on what those requirements *are*, and people stopped saying them explicitly.
So we have two options for dealing with this.
* Don't let [rules-as-written] become a *substitute* for explaining RAW requirements. Questions still need to explain those requirements clearly, leaving no need for [rules-as-written] to imply anything extra. *Then* the tag returns to just describing the content of the question, and categorising questions that do that.
* Make [rules-as-written] no longer be about the second bullet point. However, that will mean it's just for questions about the rules, which means it's the [rules] tag, which we don't need. |
5,211 | [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") has two purposes right now:
* "this question is about the rules as written"
* "answer must obey special rules"
The latter makes it a meta tag. Meta tags are never, in the long run, a good idea. But tags are for describing what questions are about, and [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") doesn't *need* to have that second purpose.
There's a simple solution then: kill the special rules attached to [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") with fire, to save it from being a meta tag.
Putting pressure on answer content to suit the question is what **votes** are for, and we were foolish to try to legislate what is supposed to be already taken care of by the core mechanic of the site.
---
Before it's brought up — no, [game-recommendation](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation "show questions tagged 'game-recommendation'") is not a counter-example that shows that [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") can have special rules and work.
The special rules for game-rec don't attempt to replace voting and "this is off-topic" delete votes. It has special rules because otherwise those questions are *banned*. RAW questions aren't banned without their special rules, they don't need them to be permitted here. That lack of corresponding situations is why [game-recommendation](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation "show questions tagged 'game-recommendation'") is not a valid model to look to for how to handle the [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") tag.
---
[rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") is a meta tag. We normally burn meta tags with fire, but we can save it, by reversing what we did to it that made it into a meta-tag monster. A few minutes ago I was writing a proposal to burninate it, and I found myself writing that we would need to find a replacement because it's valid to ask questions *about* RAW, and *aboutness* is my sacred yardstick for measuring the non-meta-ness of a tag. And I realised that [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") is the very tag we would naturally want to replace *itself* with.
So [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") isn't a meta tag, but we've made it into one by turning it into a tag that dictates what answers should say. It's a good tag that doesn't deserve burninating; we have to save it from the inevitable death that comes to all meta tags.
**We should save it** because it's valuable to a huge community we serve.
**We should save it** because it legitimately describes many of our questions.
**We should save it** because people have shown that they want to use it and that's how our tag folksonomy is supposed to work.
**We should save it** because questions about RAW are on-topic and we need a tag for those.
**We should save it.**
It should not be a meta tag. We are undermining all its good work and value by making it a meta tag. We're grown-ups, we can handle people answering questions tagged [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") with answers that don't respect the tag. We can use our votes, including delete votes. We can use our words.
We don't need a site policy to make those answers go away. We really don't need a site policy that *doesn't even work* and wastes so much of our energy and time in divisive arguments about how to fix a problem we've inflicted on ourselves.
Vote with me to set [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") free from the special rules that are weighing it down. Let it do its job in tandem with the voting system. We're competent people here, we can handle telling people with votes and comments that they've made a mistake by ignoring the tag. And sometimes, we might find, that a question tagged [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") gets a really good answer that challenges the frame with a non-RAW solution. The way we expect the site to work.
We need [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'"). We don't need policy on how it's used or how its answered.
---
*Current discussion context that's obvious now but will be harder to find as this meta ages:*
* [Experiential audit of [rules-as-written], please?](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5189/experiential-audit-of-rules-as-written-please)
* [What, exactly, is the RAW tag for?](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5203/what-exactly-is-the-raw-tag-for) (and every meta *it* links to) | 2014/12/04 | [
"https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5211",
"https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/321/"
] | It doesn’t **have** special rules.
A question defines a topic. Answers are required to stay on that topic (or stray only after addressing the question on-topic). RAW questions are no different in this regard.
The only reason that RAW is perceived to have special rules is because a lot of people want to *ignore the topic* of RAW questions, and post non-RAW answers, and then are upset when those answers get down-voted or deleted. They are upset and feel that it must be because the RAW tag is special. They want to encode this perceived specialness in the tag wiki, because they feel “burned” because they didn’t understand the question in the first place.
But the tag isn’t special. Posting “Well, I don’t know the rules, but this has worked really well for my games in the past,” which would otherwise be an acceptable answer, is off-topic for such a question, and should be downvoted and/or deleted *exactly* the same way as “Well, I don’t know anything about 5e, but in 4e we did this and it was awesome,” in a question tagged 5e should be. Posting “the rule says this,” when it does not, in fact, say that, should be downvoted just as “5e does this,” when they’re actually describing a 4e concept should be downvoted. | We should not try to rehabilitate the tag. Instead, we should more aggressively [enforce Good Subjective for home brew and house rules](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5154/8012). If people are discouraged from posting arbitrary, ad hoc rules then there is much less need for the RAW tag for any reason. We are only supposed to post RAW, RAI, and fully vetted house rules in the first place.
Answers that focus on unvetted, ad hoc rules are Bad Subjective and should be treated as such. Regular users may downvote them or comment linking to the Good Subjective rules (either the general rules or Brian’s linked post). Simply following established SE policies here greatly reduces the need to demand RAW for rules clarification questions.
That narrows the scope for RAW questions to thought experiments and rants in disguise, the sorts of question where somebody points out an absurd or surprising implication of the rules as written, and asks if it’s really true. Such questions are popular but also a rough fit for SE. |
5,211 | [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") has two purposes right now:
* "this question is about the rules as written"
* "answer must obey special rules"
The latter makes it a meta tag. Meta tags are never, in the long run, a good idea. But tags are for describing what questions are about, and [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") doesn't *need* to have that second purpose.
There's a simple solution then: kill the special rules attached to [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") with fire, to save it from being a meta tag.
Putting pressure on answer content to suit the question is what **votes** are for, and we were foolish to try to legislate what is supposed to be already taken care of by the core mechanic of the site.
---
Before it's brought up — no, [game-recommendation](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation "show questions tagged 'game-recommendation'") is not a counter-example that shows that [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") can have special rules and work.
The special rules for game-rec don't attempt to replace voting and "this is off-topic" delete votes. It has special rules because otherwise those questions are *banned*. RAW questions aren't banned without their special rules, they don't need them to be permitted here. That lack of corresponding situations is why [game-recommendation](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation "show questions tagged 'game-recommendation'") is not a valid model to look to for how to handle the [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") tag.
---
[rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") is a meta tag. We normally burn meta tags with fire, but we can save it, by reversing what we did to it that made it into a meta-tag monster. A few minutes ago I was writing a proposal to burninate it, and I found myself writing that we would need to find a replacement because it's valid to ask questions *about* RAW, and *aboutness* is my sacred yardstick for measuring the non-meta-ness of a tag. And I realised that [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") is the very tag we would naturally want to replace *itself* with.
So [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") isn't a meta tag, but we've made it into one by turning it into a tag that dictates what answers should say. It's a good tag that doesn't deserve burninating; we have to save it from the inevitable death that comes to all meta tags.
**We should save it** because it's valuable to a huge community we serve.
**We should save it** because it legitimately describes many of our questions.
**We should save it** because people have shown that they want to use it and that's how our tag folksonomy is supposed to work.
**We should save it** because questions about RAW are on-topic and we need a tag for those.
**We should save it.**
It should not be a meta tag. We are undermining all its good work and value by making it a meta tag. We're grown-ups, we can handle people answering questions tagged [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") with answers that don't respect the tag. We can use our votes, including delete votes. We can use our words.
We don't need a site policy to make those answers go away. We really don't need a site policy that *doesn't even work* and wastes so much of our energy and time in divisive arguments about how to fix a problem we've inflicted on ourselves.
Vote with me to set [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") free from the special rules that are weighing it down. Let it do its job in tandem with the voting system. We're competent people here, we can handle telling people with votes and comments that they've made a mistake by ignoring the tag. And sometimes, we might find, that a question tagged [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") gets a really good answer that challenges the frame with a non-RAW solution. The way we expect the site to work.
We need [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'"). We don't need policy on how it's used or how its answered.
---
*Current discussion context that's obvious now but will be harder to find as this meta ages:*
* [Experiential audit of [rules-as-written], please?](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5189/experiential-audit-of-rules-as-written-please)
* [What, exactly, is the RAW tag for?](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5203/what-exactly-is-the-raw-tag-for) (and every meta *it* links to) | 2014/12/04 | [
"https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5211",
"https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/321/"
] | I'm all for healing it, but when we heal it, will there actually be a valuable tag left?
The [rules-as-written] tag evolved for classifying questions that:
* were asking about the rules, or how something would work inside the rules
* wanted answers to do some combination of: stick exclusively to the rules themselves, take the writing literally, make *nothing* up (no house rules or fiats), cite the rules, and so on.
At this point, the tag was fine, it was just describing the question.
However, at some point, a lot of people started using [rules-as-written] as a short-hand for their requirements, and *stopped writing* those requirements, which turned it into a meta-tag which implied rules on answers. To complicate the matter, we don't always agree on what those requirements *are*, and people stopped saying them explicitly.
So we have two options for dealing with this.
* Don't let [rules-as-written] become a *substitute* for explaining RAW requirements. Questions still need to explain those requirements clearly, leaving no need for [rules-as-written] to imply anything extra. *Then* the tag returns to just describing the content of the question, and categorising questions that do that.
* Make [rules-as-written] no longer be about the second bullet point. However, that will mean it's just for questions about the rules, which means it's the [rules] tag, which we don't need. | To resolve this, I think two things need to happen:
1. Remove the special rules from the [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") tag that make it a meta-tag.
2. Don't flag or down-vote answers that don't have citations if they aren't asked for.
While I absolutely agree that the special rules need to be burned, I think this also necessitates a change to our culture to reflect this. If we remove the rules from the tag, but continue to down-vote answers that don't have citations, even when citations aren't asked for, the problem will remain, only worse because now it's even less likely that a new user will know about this invisible rule.
To me, this goes back to the heart of Stack Exchange policy: **Questions must be held to a high standard of quality and clarity in order to maintain a healthy group of experts that provide good answers.** Right now, we're putting the onus on the answerer to know to add citations if the question being asked is about rules-as-written.
Instead, I say that we should put the onus on the questioner; they should be required to ask for citations if they think citations are needed. If someone asks a question that you think requires citations, but doesn't stipulate that, then you should edit that question to include this.
I would also say that **not all RAW questions necessarily need citations.** No other type of question *universally requires* this kind of rigor. As long as the answer is clear and useful without citations, then down-voting or flagging that answer is not helpful. If an answer could be improved by citations, then by all means edit them in. I expect that most good RAW answers will include citations anyways, but this should be considered an improvement to the answer, not a requirement for it to be considered valid. |
5,211 | [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") has two purposes right now:
* "this question is about the rules as written"
* "answer must obey special rules"
The latter makes it a meta tag. Meta tags are never, in the long run, a good idea. But tags are for describing what questions are about, and [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") doesn't *need* to have that second purpose.
There's a simple solution then: kill the special rules attached to [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") with fire, to save it from being a meta tag.
Putting pressure on answer content to suit the question is what **votes** are for, and we were foolish to try to legislate what is supposed to be already taken care of by the core mechanic of the site.
---
Before it's brought up — no, [game-recommendation](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation "show questions tagged 'game-recommendation'") is not a counter-example that shows that [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") can have special rules and work.
The special rules for game-rec don't attempt to replace voting and "this is off-topic" delete votes. It has special rules because otherwise those questions are *banned*. RAW questions aren't banned without their special rules, they don't need them to be permitted here. That lack of corresponding situations is why [game-recommendation](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation "show questions tagged 'game-recommendation'") is not a valid model to look to for how to handle the [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") tag.
---
[rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") is a meta tag. We normally burn meta tags with fire, but we can save it, by reversing what we did to it that made it into a meta-tag monster. A few minutes ago I was writing a proposal to burninate it, and I found myself writing that we would need to find a replacement because it's valid to ask questions *about* RAW, and *aboutness* is my sacred yardstick for measuring the non-meta-ness of a tag. And I realised that [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") is the very tag we would naturally want to replace *itself* with.
So [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") isn't a meta tag, but we've made it into one by turning it into a tag that dictates what answers should say. It's a good tag that doesn't deserve burninating; we have to save it from the inevitable death that comes to all meta tags.
**We should save it** because it's valuable to a huge community we serve.
**We should save it** because it legitimately describes many of our questions.
**We should save it** because people have shown that they want to use it and that's how our tag folksonomy is supposed to work.
**We should save it** because questions about RAW are on-topic and we need a tag for those.
**We should save it.**
It should not be a meta tag. We are undermining all its good work and value by making it a meta tag. We're grown-ups, we can handle people answering questions tagged [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") with answers that don't respect the tag. We can use our votes, including delete votes. We can use our words.
We don't need a site policy to make those answers go away. We really don't need a site policy that *doesn't even work* and wastes so much of our energy and time in divisive arguments about how to fix a problem we've inflicted on ourselves.
Vote with me to set [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") free from the special rules that are weighing it down. Let it do its job in tandem with the voting system. We're competent people here, we can handle telling people with votes and comments that they've made a mistake by ignoring the tag. And sometimes, we might find, that a question tagged [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") gets a really good answer that challenges the frame with a non-RAW solution. The way we expect the site to work.
We need [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'"). We don't need policy on how it's used or how its answered.
---
*Current discussion context that's obvious now but will be harder to find as this meta ages:*
* [Experiential audit of [rules-as-written], please?](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5189/experiential-audit-of-rules-as-written-please)
* [What, exactly, is the RAW tag for?](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5203/what-exactly-is-the-raw-tag-for) (and every meta *it* links to) | 2014/12/04 | [
"https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5211",
"https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/321/"
] | To resolve this, I think two things need to happen:
1. Remove the special rules from the [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") tag that make it a meta-tag.
2. Don't flag or down-vote answers that don't have citations if they aren't asked for.
While I absolutely agree that the special rules need to be burned, I think this also necessitates a change to our culture to reflect this. If we remove the rules from the tag, but continue to down-vote answers that don't have citations, even when citations aren't asked for, the problem will remain, only worse because now it's even less likely that a new user will know about this invisible rule.
To me, this goes back to the heart of Stack Exchange policy: **Questions must be held to a high standard of quality and clarity in order to maintain a healthy group of experts that provide good answers.** Right now, we're putting the onus on the answerer to know to add citations if the question being asked is about rules-as-written.
Instead, I say that we should put the onus on the questioner; they should be required to ask for citations if they think citations are needed. If someone asks a question that you think requires citations, but doesn't stipulate that, then you should edit that question to include this.
I would also say that **not all RAW questions necessarily need citations.** No other type of question *universally requires* this kind of rigor. As long as the answer is clear and useful without citations, then down-voting or flagging that answer is not helpful. If an answer could be improved by citations, then by all means edit them in. I expect that most good RAW answers will include citations anyways, but this should be considered an improvement to the answer, not a requirement for it to be considered valid. | We should not try to rehabilitate the tag. Instead, we should more aggressively [enforce Good Subjective for home brew and house rules](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5154/8012). If people are discouraged from posting arbitrary, ad hoc rules then there is much less need for the RAW tag for any reason. We are only supposed to post RAW, RAI, and fully vetted house rules in the first place.
Answers that focus on unvetted, ad hoc rules are Bad Subjective and should be treated as such. Regular users may downvote them or comment linking to the Good Subjective rules (either the general rules or Brian’s linked post). Simply following established SE policies here greatly reduces the need to demand RAW for rules clarification questions.
That narrows the scope for RAW questions to thought experiments and rants in disguise, the sorts of question where somebody points out an absurd or surprising implication of the rules as written, and asks if it’s really true. Such questions are popular but also a rough fit for SE. |
5,211 | [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") has two purposes right now:
* "this question is about the rules as written"
* "answer must obey special rules"
The latter makes it a meta tag. Meta tags are never, in the long run, a good idea. But tags are for describing what questions are about, and [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") doesn't *need* to have that second purpose.
There's a simple solution then: kill the special rules attached to [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") with fire, to save it from being a meta tag.
Putting pressure on answer content to suit the question is what **votes** are for, and we were foolish to try to legislate what is supposed to be already taken care of by the core mechanic of the site.
---
Before it's brought up — no, [game-recommendation](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation "show questions tagged 'game-recommendation'") is not a counter-example that shows that [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") can have special rules and work.
The special rules for game-rec don't attempt to replace voting and "this is off-topic" delete votes. It has special rules because otherwise those questions are *banned*. RAW questions aren't banned without their special rules, they don't need them to be permitted here. That lack of corresponding situations is why [game-recommendation](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/game-recommendation "show questions tagged 'game-recommendation'") is not a valid model to look to for how to handle the [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") tag.
---
[rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") is a meta tag. We normally burn meta tags with fire, but we can save it, by reversing what we did to it that made it into a meta-tag monster. A few minutes ago I was writing a proposal to burninate it, and I found myself writing that we would need to find a replacement because it's valid to ask questions *about* RAW, and *aboutness* is my sacred yardstick for measuring the non-meta-ness of a tag. And I realised that [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") is the very tag we would naturally want to replace *itself* with.
So [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") isn't a meta tag, but we've made it into one by turning it into a tag that dictates what answers should say. It's a good tag that doesn't deserve burninating; we have to save it from the inevitable death that comes to all meta tags.
**We should save it** because it's valuable to a huge community we serve.
**We should save it** because it legitimately describes many of our questions.
**We should save it** because people have shown that they want to use it and that's how our tag folksonomy is supposed to work.
**We should save it** because questions about RAW are on-topic and we need a tag for those.
**We should save it.**
It should not be a meta tag. We are undermining all its good work and value by making it a meta tag. We're grown-ups, we can handle people answering questions tagged [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") with answers that don't respect the tag. We can use our votes, including delete votes. We can use our words.
We don't need a site policy to make those answers go away. We really don't need a site policy that *doesn't even work* and wastes so much of our energy and time in divisive arguments about how to fix a problem we've inflicted on ourselves.
Vote with me to set [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") free from the special rules that are weighing it down. Let it do its job in tandem with the voting system. We're competent people here, we can handle telling people with votes and comments that they've made a mistake by ignoring the tag. And sometimes, we might find, that a question tagged [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'") gets a really good answer that challenges the frame with a non-RAW solution. The way we expect the site to work.
We need [rules-as-written](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rules-as-written "show questions tagged 'rules-as-written'"). We don't need policy on how it's used or how its answered.
---
*Current discussion context that's obvious now but will be harder to find as this meta ages:*
* [Experiential audit of [rules-as-written], please?](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5189/experiential-audit-of-rules-as-written-please)
* [What, exactly, is the RAW tag for?](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5203/what-exactly-is-the-raw-tag-for) (and every meta *it* links to) | 2014/12/04 | [
"https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5211",
"https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/users/321/"
] | I'm all for healing it, but when we heal it, will there actually be a valuable tag left?
The [rules-as-written] tag evolved for classifying questions that:
* were asking about the rules, or how something would work inside the rules
* wanted answers to do some combination of: stick exclusively to the rules themselves, take the writing literally, make *nothing* up (no house rules or fiats), cite the rules, and so on.
At this point, the tag was fine, it was just describing the question.
However, at some point, a lot of people started using [rules-as-written] as a short-hand for their requirements, and *stopped writing* those requirements, which turned it into a meta-tag which implied rules on answers. To complicate the matter, we don't always agree on what those requirements *are*, and people stopped saying them explicitly.
So we have two options for dealing with this.
* Don't let [rules-as-written] become a *substitute* for explaining RAW requirements. Questions still need to explain those requirements clearly, leaving no need for [rules-as-written] to imply anything extra. *Then* the tag returns to just describing the content of the question, and categorising questions that do that.
* Make [rules-as-written] no longer be about the second bullet point. However, that will mean it's just for questions about the rules, which means it's the [rules] tag, which we don't need. | We should not try to rehabilitate the tag. Instead, we should more aggressively [enforce Good Subjective for home brew and house rules](https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5154/8012). If people are discouraged from posting arbitrary, ad hoc rules then there is much less need for the RAW tag for any reason. We are only supposed to post RAW, RAI, and fully vetted house rules in the first place.
Answers that focus on unvetted, ad hoc rules are Bad Subjective and should be treated as such. Regular users may downvote them or comment linking to the Good Subjective rules (either the general rules or Brian’s linked post). Simply following established SE policies here greatly reduces the need to demand RAW for rules clarification questions.
That narrows the scope for RAW questions to thought experiments and rants in disguise, the sorts of question where somebody points out an absurd or surprising implication of the rules as written, and asks if it’s really true. Such questions are popular but also a rough fit for SE. |
7,298,094 | Does anyone know of any libraries or sdks for .Net that focus on decoding 3gp files into other media formats? | 2011/09/04 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/7298094",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/200015/"
] | You may try [FFLib.NET](http://www.intuitive.sk/fflib/) which is a wrapper for ffmpeg. | You might also want to look at Media Manager Pro:
<http://www.all4dotnet.com/Products.aspx> |
102,211 | I have to make recommendations to a team of engineers about which (IE) browsers to support and which to drop.
Analytics shows that over one year, IE6 is used in 0.0004% of unique pageviews (2/247K) and dropping that seems like a no-brainer.
* IE7 > 3.6K/247K (0.8%)
* IE8 > 15.1K/247K (3.5%)
* IE9 > 22.7K/247K (5.3%)
0.8%? Sure, drop that. But 5.3%?
Is there an objective, reasonable way to determine where the line should be drawn when it comes to supporting browser versions? | 2016/12/20 | [
"https://webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/102211",
"https://webmasters.stackexchange.com",
"https://webmasters.stackexchange.com/users/54567/"
] | The objective measure is in money: How much does it cost to maintain the browser support vs how much it costs to turn away users because of browser compatibility.
Costs of turning away users
---------------------------
* Immediate revenue lost from sales or advertising
* "Bad will" where users remember that your site doesn't work and are less likely to use it in the future
* Wasted customer acquisition costs
* Impacts on SEO from bad usability or "mobile friendly" scores
Costs of adding browser support
-------------------------------
* Developer time (which may be difficult to estimate ahead of time)
* Quality assurance time
* Equipment and access to browsers
* Opportunity cost (you could have been working on something else that makes more money)
* Not being able to use technology because it is unsupported by some specific browser. (This may make your site look or behave worse for everybody.)
Having evaluated these factors myself, I usually use a 2% threshold. If the browser has at least 2% market share, it is worth supporting.
For the last 10 years, old versions of IE have been the most costly to support. They typically require more workarounds and support fewer features than other browsers. They also tend to be used far longer than old versions of other browsers. The costs of supporting IE 8 (3%) could be twenty times the cost of adding support for Opera (1%). You sometimes have to take it on an individual case by case basis and see how badly your website is broken in that browser. | Looking at the data, I would only support IE8 and IE9. However, IE8 may be lacking some functionality which may be core to your site, so you have to weigh up the benefits versus the time spent to support it. |
454,382 | I've started working on a fairly complicated software. It is for a personal project, but nonetheless I'm putting a lot of effort into it.
Now, I'm used to work on other people's solutions / designs or on projects that grow in a very controllable way.
This time, I started twice to code the basics and I rapidly found myself stuck. So i took a rest and decided to write down the complete solution before coding a single line. What I've done (in order) is:
1. writing the use cases in the form of CLI commands (this is a command line application)
2. write some help
3. design the classes, the structure of the data files and the functional workflow for the various parts.
Now, I'm going really slow in this whole part. I've set up a personal wiki and I'm using it to write those specifications, but i clearly feel my lack of experience and a clear methodology.
I'm aware that software design is a very complex subject and that a pletora of books have been written about it, but I'd love you to share your experience / advices / methodology.
When working on personal, middle-sized projects, what do you specify before starting to code? How?
Thanks in advance | 2009/01/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/454382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/42636/"
] | >
> When working on personal, middle-sized projects, what do you specify before starting to code?
>
>
>
I specify the **functional** specification:
* I feared that it might be too easy, if I just started coding (which is the "how"), to forget "why" and "what" I wanted to code (for "fairly complicated" software, over the months or years that it might take to develop).
* I also wanted to understand, more or less, the "scope" of what I would be developing: in order to assess approximately (to an order of magnitude):
+ How big it will be
+ Whether I could finish it
+ Whether it was worth starting
+ What subset of it can be developed first
For the sake of **risk management** I'll add that some of what I wanted to develop implied using some software that I wasn't familiar with; to minimize the risk associated with that, I also did a little throw-away prototyping.
>
> How?
>
>
>
I outlined a **functional specification**, using pen a paper. Some of what I wrote was high-level (a business-level "vision" document), and some was lower-level, more like design (some of the UI details). Sometimes I stopped and puzzled about how to organize it, but then went on, reasoning that **each page** is more-or-less cohesive about each topic, and that I can puzzle later about how to organize the pages (much like your wiki, perhaps).
I both did and didn't specify the **software architecture** in advance:
* I start development with a basic architecture (a few small components) in mind, and then add code; and, as I add code, if any component gets too big and complicated then I subdivide it into several smaller components ... it's an evolutionary process ... as it says in *Systemantics*, **A COMPLEX SYSTEM THAT WORKS IS INVARIABLY FOUND TO HAVE EVOLVED FROM A SIMPLE SYSTEM THAT WORKED.**
* I'm not documenting the architecture; or, rather, the only documentation of the architecture is the code itself: for example, the way in which source code is arranged into source directories, namespaces, and DLLs.
I do have a theoretical justification for the architecture as it is now, but I haven't documented these reasons:
* I'm the sole developer
* The actual architecture is documented by the code
* The reasons for the architecture are in my head, and are [re]discoverable by things like the naming conventions in the source code, and the various components' dependencies
If (only if) I weren't the sole developer, then I might think it worth documenting the architecture and its rationale.
What I said above about the architecture of the software is also true of the **data** which the software processes.
As for **testing**, I code a bit and then test it; or write a test and then code the functionality which will pass that test. I'm not doing "big bang integration", i.e. months of writing without any testing.
One of the biggest weaknesses in (or thing missing from) my process is **estimating effort** in advance, and then tracking implementation against the estimate ... this is one of the differences between this 'personal' project process versus a paid project that I'd do for someone else commercially. I doubt whether this is good though: if estimation is a best practice commercially, then perhaps I 'should' be doing it too on a personal project. | 1. Draw the screens
2. Draw the data relations (rdbms or in-memory)
3. Start coding
4. Lather, Rinse, Repeat (or in programmer-lingo GOTO 1)
I would start with a minimal implementation and add more features in each iteration. |
454,382 | I've started working on a fairly complicated software. It is for a personal project, but nonetheless I'm putting a lot of effort into it.
Now, I'm used to work on other people's solutions / designs or on projects that grow in a very controllable way.
This time, I started twice to code the basics and I rapidly found myself stuck. So i took a rest and decided to write down the complete solution before coding a single line. What I've done (in order) is:
1. writing the use cases in the form of CLI commands (this is a command line application)
2. write some help
3. design the classes, the structure of the data files and the functional workflow for the various parts.
Now, I'm going really slow in this whole part. I've set up a personal wiki and I'm using it to write those specifications, but i clearly feel my lack of experience and a clear methodology.
I'm aware that software design is a very complex subject and that a pletora of books have been written about it, but I'd love you to share your experience / advices / methodology.
When working on personal, middle-sized projects, what do you specify before starting to code? How?
Thanks in advance | 2009/01/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/454382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/42636/"
] | Basically, the screens. They are the interface between the user and the software. So I try to identified every use case (the user will search for my product - the user will add a product to its caddy - the user will check out its caddy) and I create a chain of screens for each of them.
Best wishes. | 1. Draw the screens
2. Draw the data relations (rdbms or in-memory)
3. Start coding
4. Lather, Rinse, Repeat (or in programmer-lingo GOTO 1)
I would start with a minimal implementation and add more features in each iteration. |
454,382 | I've started working on a fairly complicated software. It is for a personal project, but nonetheless I'm putting a lot of effort into it.
Now, I'm used to work on other people's solutions / designs or on projects that grow in a very controllable way.
This time, I started twice to code the basics and I rapidly found myself stuck. So i took a rest and decided to write down the complete solution before coding a single line. What I've done (in order) is:
1. writing the use cases in the form of CLI commands (this is a command line application)
2. write some help
3. design the classes, the structure of the data files and the functional workflow for the various parts.
Now, I'm going really slow in this whole part. I've set up a personal wiki and I'm using it to write those specifications, but i clearly feel my lack of experience and a clear methodology.
I'm aware that software design is a very complex subject and that a pletora of books have been written about it, but I'd love you to share your experience / advices / methodology.
When working on personal, middle-sized projects, what do you specify before starting to code? How?
Thanks in advance | 2009/01/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/454382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/42636/"
] | There are many people with better experience than me to help you with specifics here, but I have one point I think is always worth bearing in mind.
You don't need to get it 100% perfect first time. In fact, if you aim for that you'll probably never even finish. The reality is you won't understand the design fully until you've built the system once.
Just start, keep pushing forwards, keep on-top of unit test coverage, and as you understand the system and its intricacies better then **incrementally refactor to improve it**. | 1. Draw the screens
2. Draw the data relations (rdbms or in-memory)
3. Start coding
4. Lather, Rinse, Repeat (or in programmer-lingo GOTO 1)
I would start with a minimal implementation and add more features in each iteration. |
454,382 | I've started working on a fairly complicated software. It is for a personal project, but nonetheless I'm putting a lot of effort into it.
Now, I'm used to work on other people's solutions / designs or on projects that grow in a very controllable way.
This time, I started twice to code the basics and I rapidly found myself stuck. So i took a rest and decided to write down the complete solution before coding a single line. What I've done (in order) is:
1. writing the use cases in the form of CLI commands (this is a command line application)
2. write some help
3. design the classes, the structure of the data files and the functional workflow for the various parts.
Now, I'm going really slow in this whole part. I've set up a personal wiki and I'm using it to write those specifications, but i clearly feel my lack of experience and a clear methodology.
I'm aware that software design is a very complex subject and that a pletora of books have been written about it, but I'd love you to share your experience / advices / methodology.
When working on personal, middle-sized projects, what do you specify before starting to code? How?
Thanks in advance | 2009/01/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/454382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/42636/"
] | >
> When working on personal, middle-sized projects, what do you specify before starting to code?
>
>
>
I specify the **functional** specification:
* I feared that it might be too easy, if I just started coding (which is the "how"), to forget "why" and "what" I wanted to code (for "fairly complicated" software, over the months or years that it might take to develop).
* I also wanted to understand, more or less, the "scope" of what I would be developing: in order to assess approximately (to an order of magnitude):
+ How big it will be
+ Whether I could finish it
+ Whether it was worth starting
+ What subset of it can be developed first
For the sake of **risk management** I'll add that some of what I wanted to develop implied using some software that I wasn't familiar with; to minimize the risk associated with that, I also did a little throw-away prototyping.
>
> How?
>
>
>
I outlined a **functional specification**, using pen a paper. Some of what I wrote was high-level (a business-level "vision" document), and some was lower-level, more like design (some of the UI details). Sometimes I stopped and puzzled about how to organize it, but then went on, reasoning that **each page** is more-or-less cohesive about each topic, and that I can puzzle later about how to organize the pages (much like your wiki, perhaps).
I both did and didn't specify the **software architecture** in advance:
* I start development with a basic architecture (a few small components) in mind, and then add code; and, as I add code, if any component gets too big and complicated then I subdivide it into several smaller components ... it's an evolutionary process ... as it says in *Systemantics*, **A COMPLEX SYSTEM THAT WORKS IS INVARIABLY FOUND TO HAVE EVOLVED FROM A SIMPLE SYSTEM THAT WORKED.**
* I'm not documenting the architecture; or, rather, the only documentation of the architecture is the code itself: for example, the way in which source code is arranged into source directories, namespaces, and DLLs.
I do have a theoretical justification for the architecture as it is now, but I haven't documented these reasons:
* I'm the sole developer
* The actual architecture is documented by the code
* The reasons for the architecture are in my head, and are [re]discoverable by things like the naming conventions in the source code, and the various components' dependencies
If (only if) I weren't the sole developer, then I might think it worth documenting the architecture and its rationale.
What I said above about the architecture of the software is also true of the **data** which the software processes.
As for **testing**, I code a bit and then test it; or write a test and then code the functionality which will pass that test. I'm not doing "big bang integration", i.e. months of writing without any testing.
One of the biggest weaknesses in (or thing missing from) my process is **estimating effort** in advance, and then tracking implementation against the estimate ... this is one of the differences between this 'personal' project process versus a paid project that I'd do for someone else commercially. I doubt whether this is good though: if estimation is a best practice commercially, then perhaps I 'should' be doing it too on a personal project. | I find a blank piece of paper and a pen is the best starting point:
* sketch a few rough diagrams
* jot down some ideas / notes
* write some pseudo-code
* think through main use-cases
* think of potential problems
Don't spend more than half an hour on this, and don't get bogged down in too much documentation or up-front design. Start coding as soon as you have a vague idea of how you want to do it. As you continue developing, you get a feel for whether the code is good enough or not. If you're not happy, think about what you don't like and start over with those lessons in mind. Refactor often and soon, the earlier the better. If something doesn't "feel right", it probably isn't. |
454,382 | I've started working on a fairly complicated software. It is for a personal project, but nonetheless I'm putting a lot of effort into it.
Now, I'm used to work on other people's solutions / designs or on projects that grow in a very controllable way.
This time, I started twice to code the basics and I rapidly found myself stuck. So i took a rest and decided to write down the complete solution before coding a single line. What I've done (in order) is:
1. writing the use cases in the form of CLI commands (this is a command line application)
2. write some help
3. design the classes, the structure of the data files and the functional workflow for the various parts.
Now, I'm going really slow in this whole part. I've set up a personal wiki and I'm using it to write those specifications, but i clearly feel my lack of experience and a clear methodology.
I'm aware that software design is a very complex subject and that a pletora of books have been written about it, but I'd love you to share your experience / advices / methodology.
When working on personal, middle-sized projects, what do you specify before starting to code? How?
Thanks in advance | 2009/01/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/454382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/42636/"
] | >
> When working on personal, middle-sized projects, what do you specify before starting to code?
>
>
>
I specify the **functional** specification:
* I feared that it might be too easy, if I just started coding (which is the "how"), to forget "why" and "what" I wanted to code (for "fairly complicated" software, over the months or years that it might take to develop).
* I also wanted to understand, more or less, the "scope" of what I would be developing: in order to assess approximately (to an order of magnitude):
+ How big it will be
+ Whether I could finish it
+ Whether it was worth starting
+ What subset of it can be developed first
For the sake of **risk management** I'll add that some of what I wanted to develop implied using some software that I wasn't familiar with; to minimize the risk associated with that, I also did a little throw-away prototyping.
>
> How?
>
>
>
I outlined a **functional specification**, using pen a paper. Some of what I wrote was high-level (a business-level "vision" document), and some was lower-level, more like design (some of the UI details). Sometimes I stopped and puzzled about how to organize it, but then went on, reasoning that **each page** is more-or-less cohesive about each topic, and that I can puzzle later about how to organize the pages (much like your wiki, perhaps).
I both did and didn't specify the **software architecture** in advance:
* I start development with a basic architecture (a few small components) in mind, and then add code; and, as I add code, if any component gets too big and complicated then I subdivide it into several smaller components ... it's an evolutionary process ... as it says in *Systemantics*, **A COMPLEX SYSTEM THAT WORKS IS INVARIABLY FOUND TO HAVE EVOLVED FROM A SIMPLE SYSTEM THAT WORKED.**
* I'm not documenting the architecture; or, rather, the only documentation of the architecture is the code itself: for example, the way in which source code is arranged into source directories, namespaces, and DLLs.
I do have a theoretical justification for the architecture as it is now, but I haven't documented these reasons:
* I'm the sole developer
* The actual architecture is documented by the code
* The reasons for the architecture are in my head, and are [re]discoverable by things like the naming conventions in the source code, and the various components' dependencies
If (only if) I weren't the sole developer, then I might think it worth documenting the architecture and its rationale.
What I said above about the architecture of the software is also true of the **data** which the software processes.
As for **testing**, I code a bit and then test it; or write a test and then code the functionality which will pass that test. I'm not doing "big bang integration", i.e. months of writing without any testing.
One of the biggest weaknesses in (or thing missing from) my process is **estimating effort** in advance, and then tracking implementation against the estimate ... this is one of the differences between this 'personal' project process versus a paid project that I'd do for someone else commercially. I doubt whether this is good though: if estimation is a best practice commercially, then perhaps I 'should' be doing it too on a personal project. | 1. Write the use cases like you did.
2. Pick 1 of the uses case and implement it completely, and implement nothing else. This includes unit tests, help and error handling -- everything. Call this version 1.
3. Implement the next use case. This may be just adding code, or may require a complete redesign. It's ok, you know what your doing now. Make a new release.
4. Repeat step 3. |
454,382 | I've started working on a fairly complicated software. It is for a personal project, but nonetheless I'm putting a lot of effort into it.
Now, I'm used to work on other people's solutions / designs or on projects that grow in a very controllable way.
This time, I started twice to code the basics and I rapidly found myself stuck. So i took a rest and decided to write down the complete solution before coding a single line. What I've done (in order) is:
1. writing the use cases in the form of CLI commands (this is a command line application)
2. write some help
3. design the classes, the structure of the data files and the functional workflow for the various parts.
Now, I'm going really slow in this whole part. I've set up a personal wiki and I'm using it to write those specifications, but i clearly feel my lack of experience and a clear methodology.
I'm aware that software design is a very complex subject and that a pletora of books have been written about it, but I'd love you to share your experience / advices / methodology.
When working on personal, middle-sized projects, what do you specify before starting to code? How?
Thanks in advance | 2009/01/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/454382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/42636/"
] | 1. Write the use cases like you did.
2. Pick 1 of the uses case and implement it completely, and implement nothing else. This includes unit tests, help and error handling -- everything. Call this version 1.
3. Implement the next use case. This may be just adding code, or may require a complete redesign. It's ok, you know what your doing now. Make a new release.
4. Repeat step 3. | 1. Draw the screens
2. Draw the data relations (rdbms or in-memory)
3. Start coding
4. Lather, Rinse, Repeat (or in programmer-lingo GOTO 1)
I would start with a minimal implementation and add more features in each iteration. |
454,382 | I've started working on a fairly complicated software. It is for a personal project, but nonetheless I'm putting a lot of effort into it.
Now, I'm used to work on other people's solutions / designs or on projects that grow in a very controllable way.
This time, I started twice to code the basics and I rapidly found myself stuck. So i took a rest and decided to write down the complete solution before coding a single line. What I've done (in order) is:
1. writing the use cases in the form of CLI commands (this is a command line application)
2. write some help
3. design the classes, the structure of the data files and the functional workflow for the various parts.
Now, I'm going really slow in this whole part. I've set up a personal wiki and I'm using it to write those specifications, but i clearly feel my lack of experience and a clear methodology.
I'm aware that software design is a very complex subject and that a pletora of books have been written about it, but I'd love you to share your experience / advices / methodology.
When working on personal, middle-sized projects, what do you specify before starting to code? How?
Thanks in advance | 2009/01/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/454382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/42636/"
] | I find a blank piece of paper and a pen is the best starting point:
* sketch a few rough diagrams
* jot down some ideas / notes
* write some pseudo-code
* think through main use-cases
* think of potential problems
Don't spend more than half an hour on this, and don't get bogged down in too much documentation or up-front design. Start coding as soon as you have a vague idea of how you want to do it. As you continue developing, you get a feel for whether the code is good enough or not. If you're not happy, think about what you don't like and start over with those lessons in mind. Refactor often and soon, the earlier the better. If something doesn't "feel right", it probably isn't. | 1. Draw the screens
2. Draw the data relations (rdbms or in-memory)
3. Start coding
4. Lather, Rinse, Repeat (or in programmer-lingo GOTO 1)
I would start with a minimal implementation and add more features in each iteration. |
454,382 | I've started working on a fairly complicated software. It is for a personal project, but nonetheless I'm putting a lot of effort into it.
Now, I'm used to work on other people's solutions / designs or on projects that grow in a very controllable way.
This time, I started twice to code the basics and I rapidly found myself stuck. So i took a rest and decided to write down the complete solution before coding a single line. What I've done (in order) is:
1. writing the use cases in the form of CLI commands (this is a command line application)
2. write some help
3. design the classes, the structure of the data files and the functional workflow for the various parts.
Now, I'm going really slow in this whole part. I've set up a personal wiki and I'm using it to write those specifications, but i clearly feel my lack of experience and a clear methodology.
I'm aware that software design is a very complex subject and that a pletora of books have been written about it, but I'd love you to share your experience / advices / methodology.
When working on personal, middle-sized projects, what do you specify before starting to code? How?
Thanks in advance | 2009/01/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/454382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/42636/"
] | >
> When working on personal, middle-sized projects, what do you specify before starting to code?
>
>
>
I specify the **functional** specification:
* I feared that it might be too easy, if I just started coding (which is the "how"), to forget "why" and "what" I wanted to code (for "fairly complicated" software, over the months or years that it might take to develop).
* I also wanted to understand, more or less, the "scope" of what I would be developing: in order to assess approximately (to an order of magnitude):
+ How big it will be
+ Whether I could finish it
+ Whether it was worth starting
+ What subset of it can be developed first
For the sake of **risk management** I'll add that some of what I wanted to develop implied using some software that I wasn't familiar with; to minimize the risk associated with that, I also did a little throw-away prototyping.
>
> How?
>
>
>
I outlined a **functional specification**, using pen a paper. Some of what I wrote was high-level (a business-level "vision" document), and some was lower-level, more like design (some of the UI details). Sometimes I stopped and puzzled about how to organize it, but then went on, reasoning that **each page** is more-or-less cohesive about each topic, and that I can puzzle later about how to organize the pages (much like your wiki, perhaps).
I both did and didn't specify the **software architecture** in advance:
* I start development with a basic architecture (a few small components) in mind, and then add code; and, as I add code, if any component gets too big and complicated then I subdivide it into several smaller components ... it's an evolutionary process ... as it says in *Systemantics*, **A COMPLEX SYSTEM THAT WORKS IS INVARIABLY FOUND TO HAVE EVOLVED FROM A SIMPLE SYSTEM THAT WORKED.**
* I'm not documenting the architecture; or, rather, the only documentation of the architecture is the code itself: for example, the way in which source code is arranged into source directories, namespaces, and DLLs.
I do have a theoretical justification for the architecture as it is now, but I haven't documented these reasons:
* I'm the sole developer
* The actual architecture is documented by the code
* The reasons for the architecture are in my head, and are [re]discoverable by things like the naming conventions in the source code, and the various components' dependencies
If (only if) I weren't the sole developer, then I might think it worth documenting the architecture and its rationale.
What I said above about the architecture of the software is also true of the **data** which the software processes.
As for **testing**, I code a bit and then test it; or write a test and then code the functionality which will pass that test. I'm not doing "big bang integration", i.e. months of writing without any testing.
One of the biggest weaknesses in (or thing missing from) my process is **estimating effort** in advance, and then tracking implementation against the estimate ... this is one of the differences between this 'personal' project process versus a paid project that I'd do for someone else commercially. I doubt whether this is good though: if estimation is a best practice commercially, then perhaps I 'should' be doing it too on a personal project. | Basically, the screens. They are the interface between the user and the software. So I try to identified every use case (the user will search for my product - the user will add a product to its caddy - the user will check out its caddy) and I create a chain of screens for each of them.
Best wishes. |
454,382 | I've started working on a fairly complicated software. It is for a personal project, but nonetheless I'm putting a lot of effort into it.
Now, I'm used to work on other people's solutions / designs or on projects that grow in a very controllable way.
This time, I started twice to code the basics and I rapidly found myself stuck. So i took a rest and decided to write down the complete solution before coding a single line. What I've done (in order) is:
1. writing the use cases in the form of CLI commands (this is a command line application)
2. write some help
3. design the classes, the structure of the data files and the functional workflow for the various parts.
Now, I'm going really slow in this whole part. I've set up a personal wiki and I'm using it to write those specifications, but i clearly feel my lack of experience and a clear methodology.
I'm aware that software design is a very complex subject and that a pletora of books have been written about it, but I'd love you to share your experience / advices / methodology.
When working on personal, middle-sized projects, what do you specify before starting to code? How?
Thanks in advance | 2009/01/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/454382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/42636/"
] | There are many people with better experience than me to help you with specifics here, but I have one point I think is always worth bearing in mind.
You don't need to get it 100% perfect first time. In fact, if you aim for that you'll probably never even finish. The reality is you won't understand the design fully until you've built the system once.
Just start, keep pushing forwards, keep on-top of unit test coverage, and as you understand the system and its intricacies better then **incrementally refactor to improve it**. | I find a blank piece of paper and a pen is the best starting point:
* sketch a few rough diagrams
* jot down some ideas / notes
* write some pseudo-code
* think through main use-cases
* think of potential problems
Don't spend more than half an hour on this, and don't get bogged down in too much documentation or up-front design. Start coding as soon as you have a vague idea of how you want to do it. As you continue developing, you get a feel for whether the code is good enough or not. If you're not happy, think about what you don't like and start over with those lessons in mind. Refactor often and soon, the earlier the better. If something doesn't "feel right", it probably isn't. |
454,382 | I've started working on a fairly complicated software. It is for a personal project, but nonetheless I'm putting a lot of effort into it.
Now, I'm used to work on other people's solutions / designs or on projects that grow in a very controllable way.
This time, I started twice to code the basics and I rapidly found myself stuck. So i took a rest and decided to write down the complete solution before coding a single line. What I've done (in order) is:
1. writing the use cases in the form of CLI commands (this is a command line application)
2. write some help
3. design the classes, the structure of the data files and the functional workflow for the various parts.
Now, I'm going really slow in this whole part. I've set up a personal wiki and I'm using it to write those specifications, but i clearly feel my lack of experience and a clear methodology.
I'm aware that software design is a very complex subject and that a pletora of books have been written about it, but I'd love you to share your experience / advices / methodology.
When working on personal, middle-sized projects, what do you specify before starting to code? How?
Thanks in advance | 2009/01/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/454382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/42636/"
] | There are many people with better experience than me to help you with specifics here, but I have one point I think is always worth bearing in mind.
You don't need to get it 100% perfect first time. In fact, if you aim for that you'll probably never even finish. The reality is you won't understand the design fully until you've built the system once.
Just start, keep pushing forwards, keep on-top of unit test coverage, and as you understand the system and its intricacies better then **incrementally refactor to improve it**. | 1. Write the use cases like you did.
2. Pick 1 of the uses case and implement it completely, and implement nothing else. This includes unit tests, help and error handling -- everything. Call this version 1.
3. Implement the next use case. This may be just adding code, or may require a complete redesign. It's ok, you know what your doing now. Make a new release.
4. Repeat step 3. |
485,455 | I hope you have the answer for my question. What is correct:
1) He was joking but I didn't know that he **was**.
2) He was joking but I didn't know that he **did**. | 2019/02/13 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/485455",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/336197/"
] | *Was*, to match the verb in the first half of the sentence. | As msh210 indicates, one of the words is elided and its presence is implied. The full sentence would be:
>
> He was joking but I didn't know that he was joking.
>
>
>
Saying
>
> He was joking but I didn't know that he did joking.
>
>
>
might be syntactically correct, but what it says that you never knew that this guy knew *how* to joke. |
74,166 | This is driving me insane... All of a sudden my mouse cursor starts jumping and clicking around by its own. It doesn't look like somebody is remote controlling it. It rather is jumping around randomly, executing clicks or context menu commands just without any obvious aim.
This usually happens while I am working a while with the MacBook sitting on my lap. My feeling is that battery level could play a role here since the problem occurs only when the battery got drained down to below 50%. But it is just an impression. Could also have something to do with temperature, although I do not do CPU heavy stuff (just browsing).
I could do nothing against it. I switched off WLAN and Bluetooth. No fancy touchpad driver is running (though I had one running some time ago, called magicprefs).
There are some similar cases around the web but I did not find any solution yet.
Any help would be WOW,
rainer
PS MacOS X, most recent Mountain Lion, MacBook Pro 13" | 2012/12/07 | [
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/74166",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/users/36186/"
] | I went to my local mac dealer and it seems that the trackpad needs to be exchanged.
Update: It was definitely a hardware problem. Since the trackpad got exchanged, everything went back to normal. Most probably liquids found their way into the pad (a drop would be enough to mess everything up). | Some time, it happen because of humidity. you should try to sunbathe your macbook for 15 minutes. if there is no sunlight in your country you can fix it with using hair dryer. Make sure your laptop is turned off before doing this job.
Note: Using of hair dryer must be 1 or 2 minute only on trackpad and keyboard.
Hope! it will solve your problem. |
74,166 | This is driving me insane... All of a sudden my mouse cursor starts jumping and clicking around by its own. It doesn't look like somebody is remote controlling it. It rather is jumping around randomly, executing clicks or context menu commands just without any obvious aim.
This usually happens while I am working a while with the MacBook sitting on my lap. My feeling is that battery level could play a role here since the problem occurs only when the battery got drained down to below 50%. But it is just an impression. Could also have something to do with temperature, although I do not do CPU heavy stuff (just browsing).
I could do nothing against it. I switched off WLAN and Bluetooth. No fancy touchpad driver is running (though I had one running some time ago, called magicprefs).
There are some similar cases around the web but I did not find any solution yet.
Any help would be WOW,
rainer
PS MacOS X, most recent Mountain Lion, MacBook Pro 13" | 2012/12/07 | [
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/74166",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/users/36186/"
] | unfortunately I´m experiencing the same thing since yesterday.
I don´t even touch the mouse but the mouse keeps moving in a 3 to 5 seconds interval.
Did you proceed with this problem?
What I found so far:
- It is not the mouse (Magic Mouse) nor Bluetooth. Switching off both doesn´t change anything.
- It´s not in my account. Switching to another account is not the cure.
**I´m really embarrassed, but I solved the problem here.**
Yesterday my mouse battery was empty and I connected an old microsoft mouse with a cord because I ran out of loaded batteries. After reloading batteries I continued using Magic Mouse. But I didn´t disconnect the cord mouse but put it into a box. And since than I had tis problem. Removing the cord mouse solved the problem. | Some time, it happen because of humidity. you should try to sunbathe your macbook for 15 minutes. if there is no sunlight in your country you can fix it with using hair dryer. Make sure your laptop is turned off before doing this job.
Note: Using of hair dryer must be 1 or 2 minute only on trackpad and keyboard.
Hope! it will solve your problem. |
14,201,930 | I need to develop application that send feed submissions via amazon mws. But I'm currently in trouble, because when you send new product to amazon you must specify product category. I found list of categories for different endpoints in the [Amazon Marketplace Web Service Products
API Section Reference](https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/G/01/mwsportal/doc/en_US/products/MWSProductsApiReference._V398148948_.pdf) but I believe this isn't the complete list of categories, because those main categories also have child categories that are not listed.
I searched all over the internet but I'm still stuck. Also looked in the api docs if I can send request to list all available categories but no luck yet. Any help will be welcome guys.
Sorry for my bad english :) | 2013/01/07 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/14201930",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1868830/"
] | For a list of product categories ( and the sub categories ) you will need to log into seller central, then help -> Manage inventory -> Reference -> Tree Guides.
Alternatively [here is the link](https://sellercentral.amazon.com/gp/help/help.html/ref=au_1661_cont_help?ie=UTF8&itemID=1661&language=en_US). Note, you will still need to authenticate for that link to work. | We know Country BTG files contain all categories, such as:
<https://d1c723f3ouvz7y.cloudfront.net/US_btg.xlsx>
You can now certainty deduct other countries BTG URL...
for example for canada, it would be:
<https://d1c723f3ouvz7y.cloudfront.net/CA_btg.xlsx> |
37,779 | Thanks to [user oerkelens](https://english.stackexchange.com/a/186179/50720), I now understand the meaning of my quote, so ask NOT about it here. Yet this construct still mystifies and sounds wrong to me, so I'd like to decompose it further to naturalise it. Also, I only realised now that a worsening factor is 'there is'; I can endure the first three rewrites here:
>
> [a man's gotta do (*something*)) -> What [a man's gotta do]
>
> [(*something*) needs to be said] -> What [needs to be said]
>
> [(*some*) vegetables were left] -> What [vegetables were left]
>
> 4. [there is evidence to believe (*something*)] **->** What [there is evidence to believe]
>
> 5. [there is a reason to do (*something*)] **->** What [there is a reason to do]
>
>
>
>
Please explain and show all steps, thought processes behind the arrows in 4 and 5? How does the left-hand side become the right-hand side? | 2014/10/27 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/37779",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | If reporting to the police has already happened, *had* is the correct form: there was a moment in the past when you were obliged to report to the police, but since you have already reported to them, the obligation no longer exists, so using a present tense would be confusing.
If the reporting to the police has **not** happened yet, the obligation exists at the moment of speaking, so a present tense would make that very clear.
**Note** that "if anyone *have*" is ungrammatical: *anyone* is third person, so it should be *if anyone **has***.
In short:
>
> Now I **had** to report to the police.
>
>
>
In the *past*, there **was** an obligation to report to the police. I have already reported to the police. For anyone confused about the use of *now* when referring to the past, have a look at [ODO](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/now) which has a nice example under #6: *now the trouble began*.
>
> Now I **have** to report to the police.
>
>
>
At *present*, there **is** an obligation to report to the police. I have not reported to the police yet.
Asking for information about the guy hints that the speaker *has not yet reported* to the police, as he probably wants to include any extra information in the report to file with the police. On the other hand, "if the report **has** been made just **a** few hours ago", then *has* is the correct form. It really depends on the fact of the situation, which we do not know — we get conflicting information! | If you've already reported him
>
> Now I have had to report him to the police
>
>
>
(Although the "now" makes it more of a colloquialism, the text appears to be from a forum or Facebook page, so it would be suitable)
Or
>
> I have reported him to the police
>
>
>
---
If you haven't yet reported him
>
> Now I have to report him to the police
>
>
> |
37,779 | Thanks to [user oerkelens](https://english.stackexchange.com/a/186179/50720), I now understand the meaning of my quote, so ask NOT about it here. Yet this construct still mystifies and sounds wrong to me, so I'd like to decompose it further to naturalise it. Also, I only realised now that a worsening factor is 'there is'; I can endure the first three rewrites here:
>
> [a man's gotta do (*something*)) -> What [a man's gotta do]
>
> [(*something*) needs to be said] -> What [needs to be said]
>
> [(*some*) vegetables were left] -> What [vegetables were left]
>
> 4. [there is evidence to believe (*something*)] **->** What [there is evidence to believe]
>
> 5. [there is a reason to do (*something*)] **->** What [there is a reason to do]
>
>
>
>
Please explain and show all steps, thought processes behind the arrows in 4 and 5? How does the left-hand side become the right-hand side? | 2014/10/27 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/37779",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | If reporting to the police has already happened, *had* is the correct form: there was a moment in the past when you were obliged to report to the police, but since you have already reported to them, the obligation no longer exists, so using a present tense would be confusing.
If the reporting to the police has **not** happened yet, the obligation exists at the moment of speaking, so a present tense would make that very clear.
**Note** that "if anyone *have*" is ungrammatical: *anyone* is third person, so it should be *if anyone **has***.
In short:
>
> Now I **had** to report to the police.
>
>
>
In the *past*, there **was** an obligation to report to the police. I have already reported to the police. For anyone confused about the use of *now* when referring to the past, have a look at [ODO](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/now) which has a nice example under #6: *now the trouble began*.
>
> Now I **have** to report to the police.
>
>
>
At *present*, there **is** an obligation to report to the police. I have not reported to the police yet.
Asking for information about the guy hints that the speaker *has not yet reported* to the police, as he probably wants to include any extra information in the report to file with the police. On the other hand, "if the report **has** been made just **a** few hours ago", then *has* is the correct form. It really depends on the fact of the situation, which we do not know — we get conflicting information! | "Had to" here is not a tense identifier but is being used with another meaning, "was forced to". ("Forced" here meaning forced by circumstances, not that someone put a gun to my head.) "I had reported it" is putting the act of reporting in the past perfect, that is "I reported" but in the past perfect. "I had to report it" is the simple past tense, meaning "I was forced to report it."
"Now" here does not mean "at the present time", but "because of this circumstance." For example you could write, "Caesar crossed the Rubicon. Now the Roman Senate was placed in a difficult position." The "now" here does not mean that the Roman Senate is in a difficult position in 2014, but rather that the event described in the previous sentence led to this result.
Technicality: The sentence should read, "Now I had to report IT to the police." The verb "report" without an object generally means "to present oneself" or "to be accountable to". Like if you say, "I must report to the army", that is usually understood to mean that you volunteered or were drafted and now you must show up. Sometimes we say, "Bob reported to the committee" meaning "he presented information to the committee", but this is relatively rare and I have never heard the word "report" used this way with respect to the police. When you want to say that someone called the police to tell them that a crime was committed, you say, "He reported THE CRIME to the police", "Bob called the police to report A MURDER", etc. |
34,981,157 | This is an issue people have had for a while, but I'm wondering if anybody has figured anything out recently - all the [discussion](https://forums.developer.apple.com/thread/8806) peters out around October 2015.
Basically, when I try to run a WatchKit app on the Watch (after running it succesfully on the simulator), it shows the loading daisy for a few minutes, then crashes.
I have tried:
* Building directly to iPhone with a paired Watch
* Exporting an ad-hoc .ipa and install on iPhone via iTunes
* Uploading a build to Testflight and installing on iPhone
* Every imaginable combination of restarting, unpairing/repairing, etc.
And I've tried all this with empty test projects, both Swift and Objective-C. Nothing has worked.
It's frustrating not to be able to test on the physical device. Has anybody figured out a workaround? | 2016/01/24 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/34981157",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/4138147/"
] | Here are a few options which might help resolve the issue:
* [File a bug report](https://bugreport.apple.com/) to bring this to the attention of the Apple Watch team. As you may know, the more reports an issue receives, the higher its internal priority.
* Submit an Apple [Technical Support Incident](https://developer.apple.com/support/technical/) and work with an Apple engineer to identify and resolve the issue. *Note that Developer Technical Support will only assist you if you are not using beta software. Don't test the beta, if you want assistance via this channel.*
* [Download watchOS](https://developer.apple.com/watchos/download/) 2.2 beta 2 (and Xcode 7.3 beta) to see if it resolves the issue. If not, file a bug report for the beta, as Apple will try to address as many beta issues as possible before general release.
*Naturally, you should only beta test new software if your watch, phone, and computer aren't a primary (business-critical) device.*
If you can't obtain a solution via other channels, opening a TSI would be your most expedient option. | A possible option is that you configured a Interface Controller wrong in your storyboard.
If you experience the symptoms you described, you can do the following:
1. Open your Interface Storyboards of the WatchKit App one by one
2. Go to each Interface Controller and open the Identity Inspector
3. Make sure the Module selected in the Identity Inspector is your WatchKit Extension target (or in whatever target you have created your Interface Controller implementation).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wcLuK.png) |
34,981,157 | This is an issue people have had for a while, but I'm wondering if anybody has figured anything out recently - all the [discussion](https://forums.developer.apple.com/thread/8806) peters out around October 2015.
Basically, when I try to run a WatchKit app on the Watch (after running it succesfully on the simulator), it shows the loading daisy for a few minutes, then crashes.
I have tried:
* Building directly to iPhone with a paired Watch
* Exporting an ad-hoc .ipa and install on iPhone via iTunes
* Uploading a build to Testflight and installing on iPhone
* Every imaginable combination of restarting, unpairing/repairing, etc.
And I've tried all this with empty test projects, both Swift and Objective-C. Nothing has worked.
It's frustrating not to be able to test on the physical device. Has anybody figured out a workaround? | 2016/01/24 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/34981157",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/4138147/"
] | My last ditch effort seems to have worked - I reformatted my computer and installed El Capitan and the production version of Xcode, and now I can build to the watch.
It's worth noting that I also upgraded to WatchOS 2.1 (from 2.0.1), which could be the actual reason it's working now, but I have no way of knowing. | A possible option is that you configured a Interface Controller wrong in your storyboard.
If you experience the symptoms you described, you can do the following:
1. Open your Interface Storyboards of the WatchKit App one by one
2. Go to each Interface Controller and open the Identity Inspector
3. Make sure the Module selected in the Identity Inspector is your WatchKit Extension target (or in whatever target you have created your Interface Controller implementation).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wcLuK.png) |
4,882,830 | Is it possible to obfuscate only one package in a Java app? I am working on converting a large free app to a licensed one. As part of that I have added a new licensing module. I want to obfuscate this code to make it harder for people to crack it. It is a relatively small module and should not be too tough to obfuscate. The entire app is however large and complex and obfuscating it will result in a lot of testing effort. | 2011/02/03 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4882830",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/341008/"
] | I modeled my database on feeds and entries also, and cross-mapped the fields for RSS, RDF and Atom, so I could capture the required data fields as a starting point. Then I added a few others for tagging and my own internal-summarizations of the feed, plus some housekeeping and maintenance fields.
If you move from Feedzirra I'd recommend temporarily storing the actual feed XML in a staging table so you can post-process it using [Nokogiri](http://nokogiri.org) at your leisure. That way your HTTP process isn't bogged down processing the text, it's just retrieving content and filing it away, and updating the records for the processing time so you know when to check again. The post process can extract the feed information you want from the stored XML to store in the database, then delete the record. That means there's one process pulling in feeds periodically as quickly as it can, and another that basically runs in the background chugging away.
Also, both [Typhoeus/Hydra](https://github.com/dbalatero/typhoeus) and [HTTPClient](http://dev.ctor.org/doc/httpclient/) can handle multiple HTTP requests nicely and are easy to set up. | Store the XML as a CLOB, most databases have XML processing extensions that allow you to include XPath type queries as part of a SELECT statement.
Otherwise if your DBMS does not support XML querying, use your languages XPath implementation to query the CLOB. You will probably need to extract certain elements into table columns for speedy querying. |
14,329 | Fighter pilots are always portrayed as young, fit men (and woman), in their 20s and 30s - and most of the F16 pilots I know are that age.
However, today someone, who is over 50 years old, mentioned that he was asked to be an F22 pilot. His background is astonishing, flying in multiple "wars," and he was even the commander of the Thunderbirds in F-16s for a while.
Even though this man clearly has the background of the stereotypical F22 pilot, would age be a problem? Wouldn't someone whose body could take more abuse be better suited for that type of assignment? | 2015/04/23 | [
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/14329",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/users/700/"
] | It depends on what you mean by "optimal".
For a dogfight, the optimal age is probably 30. At this age a person has lots of experience, but still maintains their full mental agility, ability to calculate and energy. In a dogfight your ability to think fast and calculate your next move is the critical factor.
For combat missions, however, 40-45 may be more optimal, because experience, judgement and knowledge becomes more important. Knowing when to attack, how to attack, how to make your approach, how to do your mission setup, and many other things become the product of long experience. For complicated missions in enemy territory, it is better to have someone with long experience, rather than a young hotshot.
Once a person hits about 60-65 years in age, their mental ability to calculate declines significantly. Nevertheless, experience can make up for it in some instances. For example, at age 63 [Vassily Smyslov](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasily_Smyslov) was a candidate for the world chess championship, an amazing accomplishment for a person of that age. Emanuel Lasker took 3rd place at Moscow 1935, a premier chess tournament, at the age of 66, which was practically a miracle. These are exceptions, however. In general, once a person gets into their 60s, their mental ability deteriorates. Therefore, the age 50-55 can be considered the maximum age at which experience and judgement can be used effectively in high speed combat situations.
**Complex Mission Role**
To investigate my basic assertion that optimal age for a combat mission (not air supremacy) pilot is 40-45 I investigated pilot astronauts. Since astronauts are selected from large numbers of candidates and have short careers typically, it is a safe assumption that their average age is what NASA considers to be ideal. According to [NASA Technical Report 1304](http://hdl.handle.net/2060/19930020135) the mean age for all selected pilot candidates is 39.90 years old. If we assume a pilot has a 5-year career, then my guess for optimal age matches perfectly with NASA's selection choices. This may be considered strong evidence that for a pilot executing complex missions, the optimal age range is, indeed, 40 to 45 years.
**Air Supremacy Role ("dog fighting")**
To determine the optimal age for air supremacy ("dog fighting"), if we had access to the USAF's (or other country's) exercise data over time, we might get an idea since we could calculate an ELO rating for each combatant and identify to the top exercise fighters of all time. Unfortunately this kind of data is not released as far as I know, probably because the armed services do like naming or identifying particular soldiers. I do strongly suspect, though, that if such a study was done it would show the "best in the world" air supremacy pilots would be clustered around the age of 30. To check this, I tried summarizing statistics from WW2 German fighter pilots. Using birth data on 470 German aces I generated the following plot:
In this chart, the bar chart is the total number of aces grouped by date of birth. The blue dots are the average number of victories for that birth year group. What this chart seems to show is that performance is remarkably consistent between the ages of 18 and 32, with a slight advantage to the younger pilots, but then declines significantly. The 1922 group was significantly skewed by [Erich Hartmann](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Hartmann). If we eliminate him as an outlier, the top group is the class of 1920 which would have been between the ages of 19 and 25 during the war. This seems to show my original guess was wrong, and that dogfighting is dependent more on quick reflexes and fast thinking than on experience, which hands the edge to the young. | In addition of [Pondlife's excellent answer](https://aviation.stackexchange.com/a/14335/65), there are a few points I would like to mention.
* There is no specific age at which a person no longer remains a fighter pilot. It relates more to that individual's physical and mental capabilities.
* In air force/military, when a person reaches senior ranks, there are other responsibilities which are added.
* When a person is no longer a fighter pilot, it *does not* mean that they cannot fly an F-16, F-22, or any of the airplanes they used to fly. It just means that they are not combat ready anymore. They can still teach to fly or fly at air force demonstrations etc. In fact, the air chief marshal of a country (long retired from combat flying) leads the air force squadron on their annual ceremony.
From the numbers Pondlife mentioned, it does appear that the *optimal age* of about 95% of pilots is in fact in 25-44 range, but many are able to keep the abilities beyond that age range. |
14,329 | Fighter pilots are always portrayed as young, fit men (and woman), in their 20s and 30s - and most of the F16 pilots I know are that age.
However, today someone, who is over 50 years old, mentioned that he was asked to be an F22 pilot. His background is astonishing, flying in multiple "wars," and he was even the commander of the Thunderbirds in F-16s for a while.
Even though this man clearly has the background of the stereotypical F22 pilot, would age be a problem? Wouldn't someone whose body could take more abuse be better suited for that type of assignment? | 2015/04/23 | [
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/14329",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/users/700/"
] | It depends on what you mean by "optimal".
For a dogfight, the optimal age is probably 30. At this age a person has lots of experience, but still maintains their full mental agility, ability to calculate and energy. In a dogfight your ability to think fast and calculate your next move is the critical factor.
For combat missions, however, 40-45 may be more optimal, because experience, judgement and knowledge becomes more important. Knowing when to attack, how to attack, how to make your approach, how to do your mission setup, and many other things become the product of long experience. For complicated missions in enemy territory, it is better to have someone with long experience, rather than a young hotshot.
Once a person hits about 60-65 years in age, their mental ability to calculate declines significantly. Nevertheless, experience can make up for it in some instances. For example, at age 63 [Vassily Smyslov](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasily_Smyslov) was a candidate for the world chess championship, an amazing accomplishment for a person of that age. Emanuel Lasker took 3rd place at Moscow 1935, a premier chess tournament, at the age of 66, which was practically a miracle. These are exceptions, however. In general, once a person gets into their 60s, their mental ability deteriorates. Therefore, the age 50-55 can be considered the maximum age at which experience and judgement can be used effectively in high speed combat situations.
**Complex Mission Role**
To investigate my basic assertion that optimal age for a combat mission (not air supremacy) pilot is 40-45 I investigated pilot astronauts. Since astronauts are selected from large numbers of candidates and have short careers typically, it is a safe assumption that their average age is what NASA considers to be ideal. According to [NASA Technical Report 1304](http://hdl.handle.net/2060/19930020135) the mean age for all selected pilot candidates is 39.90 years old. If we assume a pilot has a 5-year career, then my guess for optimal age matches perfectly with NASA's selection choices. This may be considered strong evidence that for a pilot executing complex missions, the optimal age range is, indeed, 40 to 45 years.
**Air Supremacy Role ("dog fighting")**
To determine the optimal age for air supremacy ("dog fighting"), if we had access to the USAF's (or other country's) exercise data over time, we might get an idea since we could calculate an ELO rating for each combatant and identify to the top exercise fighters of all time. Unfortunately this kind of data is not released as far as I know, probably because the armed services do like naming or identifying particular soldiers. I do strongly suspect, though, that if such a study was done it would show the "best in the world" air supremacy pilots would be clustered around the age of 30. To check this, I tried summarizing statistics from WW2 German fighter pilots. Using birth data on 470 German aces I generated the following plot:
In this chart, the bar chart is the total number of aces grouped by date of birth. The blue dots are the average number of victories for that birth year group. What this chart seems to show is that performance is remarkably consistent between the ages of 18 and 32, with a slight advantage to the younger pilots, but then declines significantly. The 1922 group was significantly skewed by [Erich Hartmann](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Hartmann). If we eliminate him as an outlier, the top group is the class of 1920 which would have been between the ages of 19 and 25 during the war. This seems to show my original guess was wrong, and that dogfighting is dependent more on quick reflexes and fast thinking than on experience, which hands the edge to the young. | Interesting views and topic. I landed here by chance. I'm 46 now and a couple years ago I flew an F-22 into combat (I was older than 41 but younger than 45). They needed someone with special experience due to the delicacy of the operation. I say as long as you are healthy and pass the physicals etc, I can see a 53 year old combat pilot but by 55 you should hang up your combat hat. I consider myself an experienced combat pilot. Yeah I use combat vs. fighter. At 60 you should be flying your personally owned aircraft. |
14,329 | Fighter pilots are always portrayed as young, fit men (and woman), in their 20s and 30s - and most of the F16 pilots I know are that age.
However, today someone, who is over 50 years old, mentioned that he was asked to be an F22 pilot. His background is astonishing, flying in multiple "wars," and he was even the commander of the Thunderbirds in F-16s for a while.
Even though this man clearly has the background of the stereotypical F22 pilot, would age be a problem? Wouldn't someone whose body could take more abuse be better suited for that type of assignment? | 2015/04/23 | [
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/14329",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/users/700/"
] | In addition of [Pondlife's excellent answer](https://aviation.stackexchange.com/a/14335/65), there are a few points I would like to mention.
* There is no specific age at which a person no longer remains a fighter pilot. It relates more to that individual's physical and mental capabilities.
* In air force/military, when a person reaches senior ranks, there are other responsibilities which are added.
* When a person is no longer a fighter pilot, it *does not* mean that they cannot fly an F-16, F-22, or any of the airplanes they used to fly. It just means that they are not combat ready anymore. They can still teach to fly or fly at air force demonstrations etc. In fact, the air chief marshal of a country (long retired from combat flying) leads the air force squadron on their annual ceremony.
From the numbers Pondlife mentioned, it does appear that the *optimal age* of about 95% of pilots is in fact in 25-44 range, but many are able to keep the abilities beyond that age range. | Interesting views and topic. I landed here by chance. I'm 46 now and a couple years ago I flew an F-22 into combat (I was older than 41 but younger than 45). They needed someone with special experience due to the delicacy of the operation. I say as long as you are healthy and pass the physicals etc, I can see a 53 year old combat pilot but by 55 you should hang up your combat hat. I consider myself an experienced combat pilot. Yeah I use combat vs. fighter. At 60 you should be flying your personally owned aircraft. |
166,783 | Need to replace a receptacle closest to panel that has a light and another receptacle inline. All are aluminum. They have alumiconns on them (purple) pigtailed. Need to replace sink receptacle with GFI receptacle. The non-gfi receptacle has a white wire connected to the bottom left side and a black to the bottom right side. I think black goes to (line) top right gold on gfi and white to (load) bottom left silver screw. Is this correct? I live in florida, I am using a Leviton 15amp GFTRI-RKW gfi. | 2019/06/07 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/166783",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/102532/"
] | So long as you only need GFCI at the one outlet, and not the rest, you can install a GFCI here on the pigtails, connecting to the LINE terminals (only) White (neutral) to Silver and Black (hot) to Brass. LOAD are not used.
You cannot GFCI protect the rest of the outlets that follow without (inferring from what you have written about "closest to panel" yet only having one set of pigtails) having the aluminum wires that are evidently all joined to one copper pigtail separated and re-joined to two copper pigtails, where one set would come from the panel (line) and the others would go on to the devices that follow (load.) Given that pigtailing copper to aluminum in a listed manner may be expensive to have done, probably cheaper to leave as is and use an additional GFCI if needed, or use a GFCI breaker to protect the whole circuit at the panel. | Gfci should be placed at the point power comes in,that will be the line on the gfci. Black brass, white silver,ground to ground green screw. Then load out feeds light, and other outlet, load out. Black brass ,white to silver, and ground to green screw. In the box should be stickers that go on plate,to the other outlet add sticker . Now you have gfci that also gfcis other outlet and light. May want to edit your question, a bit . If you only need that one outlet gfci, then hook up to the line side and only that will be gfci protected. |
166,783 | Need to replace a receptacle closest to panel that has a light and another receptacle inline. All are aluminum. They have alumiconns on them (purple) pigtailed. Need to replace sink receptacle with GFI receptacle. The non-gfi receptacle has a white wire connected to the bottom left side and a black to the bottom right side. I think black goes to (line) top right gold on gfi and white to (load) bottom left silver screw. Is this correct? I live in florida, I am using a Leviton 15amp GFTRI-RKW gfi. | 2019/06/07 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/166783",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/102532/"
] | Almost everything in mains is done in hot-neutral pairs. GFCIs are no exception. LINE has 2 terminals, brass and silver, and is used by a hot/neutral pair - both black and white wires go to it. These would be your two pigtails.
LOAD is used not at all, unless you *intend* to use the particular feature it supports, and you know exactly what you're doing. That's why it has warning tape on it. You do not seem to know what that feature is, which is fine; simply don't use it.
Use an AFCI+GFCI breaker instead
--------------------------------
Some people say install a GFCI breaker which protects the whole circuit. It's true, it'll be cheaper than GFCI receptacles at every socket or 4 alumiconns for doing it in this box. **but think bigger**.
Arc Fault protection (AFCI) is absolutely perfect for protecting aluminum wiring. It detects the thing that is most worrisome. AFCI has to be installed at the breaker because it protects the wires.
They make combination AFCI+GFCI breakers that cost only $10 more than a GFCI breaker. That is the thing to use. | So long as you only need GFCI at the one outlet, and not the rest, you can install a GFCI here on the pigtails, connecting to the LINE terminals (only) White (neutral) to Silver and Black (hot) to Brass. LOAD are not used.
You cannot GFCI protect the rest of the outlets that follow without (inferring from what you have written about "closest to panel" yet only having one set of pigtails) having the aluminum wires that are evidently all joined to one copper pigtail separated and re-joined to two copper pigtails, where one set would come from the panel (line) and the others would go on to the devices that follow (load.) Given that pigtailing copper to aluminum in a listed manner may be expensive to have done, probably cheaper to leave as is and use an additional GFCI if needed, or use a GFCI breaker to protect the whole circuit at the panel. |
166,783 | Need to replace a receptacle closest to panel that has a light and another receptacle inline. All are aluminum. They have alumiconns on them (purple) pigtailed. Need to replace sink receptacle with GFI receptacle. The non-gfi receptacle has a white wire connected to the bottom left side and a black to the bottom right side. I think black goes to (line) top right gold on gfi and white to (load) bottom left silver screw. Is this correct? I live in florida, I am using a Leviton 15amp GFTRI-RKW gfi. | 2019/06/07 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/166783",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/102532/"
] | Almost everything in mains is done in hot-neutral pairs. GFCIs are no exception. LINE has 2 terminals, brass and silver, and is used by a hot/neutral pair - both black and white wires go to it. These would be your two pigtails.
LOAD is used not at all, unless you *intend* to use the particular feature it supports, and you know exactly what you're doing. That's why it has warning tape on it. You do not seem to know what that feature is, which is fine; simply don't use it.
Use an AFCI+GFCI breaker instead
--------------------------------
Some people say install a GFCI breaker which protects the whole circuit. It's true, it'll be cheaper than GFCI receptacles at every socket or 4 alumiconns for doing it in this box. **but think bigger**.
Arc Fault protection (AFCI) is absolutely perfect for protecting aluminum wiring. It detects the thing that is most worrisome. AFCI has to be installed at the breaker because it protects the wires.
They make combination AFCI+GFCI breakers that cost only $10 more than a GFCI breaker. That is the thing to use. | Gfci should be placed at the point power comes in,that will be the line on the gfci. Black brass, white silver,ground to ground green screw. Then load out feeds light, and other outlet, load out. Black brass ,white to silver, and ground to green screw. In the box should be stickers that go on plate,to the other outlet add sticker . Now you have gfci that also gfcis other outlet and light. May want to edit your question, a bit . If you only need that one outlet gfci, then hook up to the line side and only that will be gfci protected. |
392,764 | After using the word in an [answer to a question here](https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/392756/disambiguation-of-identify), I got to wondering about the etymology of the word ***hoosegow***. I picked it up from my father (perhaps surprisingly, given that he was an german immigrant) but that didn't tell me much about where the word came from.
A search of etymonline.com turned up this explanation:
>
> ***[hoosegow](http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=hoosegow)*** (n.)
>
> "jail," 1911, western U.S., probably from mispronunciation of Mexican Spanish *juzgao* "tribunal, court," from *juzgar* "to judge," used as a noun, from Latin *judicare* "to judge," which is related to *judicem* (see *judge* (n.)).
>
>
>
Oxford agrees, saying:
>
> ***[hoosegow](https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/hoosegow)***
>
>
> NOUN
>
>
> *North American*
>
> *informal*
>
> A prison.
>
>
> Origin
>
> Early 20th century: via Latin American Spanish from Spanish juzgado ‘tribunal’, from Latin judicatum ‘something judged’, neuter past participle of judicare.
>
>
>
I got curious about the 1911 date specified by etymonline and turned to [Google's ngrams](https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=hoosegow&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Choosegow%3B%2Cc0). Their results seemed to match and I started looking at the early uses, including:
***[A Miscellany of American Poetry](https://books.google.com/books?id=iONNAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA139&dq=%22hoosegow%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjq76KkhqrUAhXD5lQKHVA2DbwQ6AEIMDAC#v=onepage&q=%22hoosegow%22&f=false)***
1920
>
> *Aprons of Silence*
>
> Carl Sandburg
>
>
> I fixed up a padded cell and lugged it around.
>
> I locked myself in and nobody knew it.
>
> Only the keeper and the kept in the hoosegow
>
> Knew it -- on the streets, in the postoffice,
>
>
> [](https://books.google.com/books?id=iONNAQAAMAAJ&dq=%22hoosegow%22&pg=PA139&ci=102%2C753%2C723%2C172&source=bookclip)
>
>
>
and
***[Dialect Notes](https://books.google.com/books?id=lxwOAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA113&dq=%22hoosegow%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjq76KkhqrUAhXD5lQKHVA2DbwQ6AEIQzAG#v=onepage&q=%22hoosegow%22&f=false) - Volume 5 - Page 113***
1918
>
> CALIFORNIA WORD-LIST.
>
>
> WORDS IMPORTED FROM OTHER STATES OR OTHER COUNTRIES.
>
>
> *hoosegaw*, or *hoosegow*, n. (hods gaw).
>
> A jail, or a prison. Slang.
>
> *'They chucked him in the hoosegow.'*
>
> Sp. juzgado > husgado > husgao > hoosegaw. Spanish American, then army usage, then general. Reported common also in middle western states.
>
>
> [](https://books.google.com/books?id=lxwOAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22hoosegow%22&pg=PA113&ci=31%2C404%2C853%2C102&source=bookclip)
>
>
>
But then I found this one from 1922:
***[Everybody's Magazine](https://books.google.com/books?id=KQI8AQAAMAAJ&pg=RA3-PA44&dq=%22hoosegow%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwieu8z2_qnUAhUIw1QKHWTwAzMQ6AEIIjAA#v=onepage&q=%22hoosegow%22&f=false) - Volume 46 - Page 44***
1922
>
> ***Lizette***
>
> By Sampson Raphaelson
>
>
> "That's the old hoosegow -- a notorious place about five years ago. All sorts of booze parties."
>
> "Let's stop there, Chuck, and sit on the soda water stand and read poetry."
>
>
> [](https://books.google.com/books?id=KQI8AQAAMAAJ&dq=%22hoosegow%22&pg=RA3-PA44&ci=57%2C128%2C455%2C133&source=bookclip)
>
>
>
It seems to me that the usage here is implying a saloon or similar establishment, rather than a jail. Is there another meaning to hoosegow that has been lost to time? Or is this simply a one-off misuse of the word?
---
**UPDATE**
----------
There are some great (amazingly detailed and researched!) answers and comments and it was hard to pick one to accept -- I went with Sven's for finding the earliest usage, as well as pointing out that *juzgado* was used as well by English-speakers.
I think that MikeJRamsey56 and JEL have the best explanation -- an abandoned jail that was taken over and used for scandalous parties thereafter.
Thanks everyone! | 2017/06/06 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/392764",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/231036/"
] | According to [Vocabulario Vaquero/Cowboy Talk: A Dictionary of Spanish Terms..](https://books.google.it/books?id=MR4SY5n3_L8C&pg=PA103&lpg=PA103&dq=hoosegow%20meaning&source=bl&ots=oJ7FOcj5iI&sig=_f6yrz9PNDsvFJc536ob-eB6X14&hl=it&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwif-9CkjKrUAhWNI1AKHQLTB9s4FBDoAQgrMAY#v=onepage&q=hoosegow%20meaning&f=false) hoosegow has also the dialectal meaning of:
>
> ( Western Montana, Western Wyoming -1931) An outhouse, a restroom:
>
>
>
As explained in [World Wide Words](http://www.worldwidewords.org/weirdwords/ww-hoo1.htm) the Mexican term juzagao from which hoosegow derives meant tribunal, courthouse. It came to mean jail as the two places were often in the same building:
>
> * ***It’s a fine old American slang term for a jail, still widely known today. Most people would connect it with the nineteenth-century cowboys of the Wild West.***
> * It’s very likely that they knew the word, but it didn’t start to be written down until the early twentieth century. ***The first known example was penned by Harry Fisher, better known as Bud, in one of his early Mutt & Jeff cartoons, of 1908: “Mutt ... may be released from the hooze gow.”***
> * ***The word is from Mexican Spanish juzgao, a jail, which came from juzgado for a tribunal or courtroom.*** It shifted to mean a jail because the two were often in the same building (and the path from the one to the other was often swift and certain). In sense and language origin it’s a relative of calaboose, which is also a prison (from calabozo, a dungeon, via the French of Louisiana).
> * ***Hoosegow is now the standard spelling, though in its early days it was written half a dozen different ways.*** We link it in our minds with cowboys largely because so much of their lingo was taken from Spanish and then mangled to fit English ideas of the way to say it. That included buckaroo (Spanish vaquero), bronco (from a word that meant rough or rude), lasso (lazo), lariat (la reata), chaps (chaparreras), hackamore bridles (jáquima), mustang (mesteña), cinch (cincha), as well as the direct borrowings of corral and rodeo.
>
>
> | [Green's Dictionary of Slang](https://greensdictofslang.com/) gives three senses of HOOSEGOW -- 1. a prison (from 1908); 2. any form of institution to which inmates are sent rather than volunteer for entrance (from 1924); 3. an outhouse, a privy (from 1931).
The "saloon" sense would seem to be an outlier, and I'd be dubious that it had any extended currency. |
392,764 | After using the word in an [answer to a question here](https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/392756/disambiguation-of-identify), I got to wondering about the etymology of the word ***hoosegow***. I picked it up from my father (perhaps surprisingly, given that he was an german immigrant) but that didn't tell me much about where the word came from.
A search of etymonline.com turned up this explanation:
>
> ***[hoosegow](http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=hoosegow)*** (n.)
>
> "jail," 1911, western U.S., probably from mispronunciation of Mexican Spanish *juzgao* "tribunal, court," from *juzgar* "to judge," used as a noun, from Latin *judicare* "to judge," which is related to *judicem* (see *judge* (n.)).
>
>
>
Oxford agrees, saying:
>
> ***[hoosegow](https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/hoosegow)***
>
>
> NOUN
>
>
> *North American*
>
> *informal*
>
> A prison.
>
>
> Origin
>
> Early 20th century: via Latin American Spanish from Spanish juzgado ‘tribunal’, from Latin judicatum ‘something judged’, neuter past participle of judicare.
>
>
>
I got curious about the 1911 date specified by etymonline and turned to [Google's ngrams](https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=hoosegow&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Choosegow%3B%2Cc0). Their results seemed to match and I started looking at the early uses, including:
***[A Miscellany of American Poetry](https://books.google.com/books?id=iONNAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA139&dq=%22hoosegow%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjq76KkhqrUAhXD5lQKHVA2DbwQ6AEIMDAC#v=onepage&q=%22hoosegow%22&f=false)***
1920
>
> *Aprons of Silence*
>
> Carl Sandburg
>
>
> I fixed up a padded cell and lugged it around.
>
> I locked myself in and nobody knew it.
>
> Only the keeper and the kept in the hoosegow
>
> Knew it -- on the streets, in the postoffice,
>
>
> [](https://books.google.com/books?id=iONNAQAAMAAJ&dq=%22hoosegow%22&pg=PA139&ci=102%2C753%2C723%2C172&source=bookclip)
>
>
>
and
***[Dialect Notes](https://books.google.com/books?id=lxwOAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA113&dq=%22hoosegow%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjq76KkhqrUAhXD5lQKHVA2DbwQ6AEIQzAG#v=onepage&q=%22hoosegow%22&f=false) - Volume 5 - Page 113***
1918
>
> CALIFORNIA WORD-LIST.
>
>
> WORDS IMPORTED FROM OTHER STATES OR OTHER COUNTRIES.
>
>
> *hoosegaw*, or *hoosegow*, n. (hods gaw).
>
> A jail, or a prison. Slang.
>
> *'They chucked him in the hoosegow.'*
>
> Sp. juzgado > husgado > husgao > hoosegaw. Spanish American, then army usage, then general. Reported common also in middle western states.
>
>
> [](https://books.google.com/books?id=lxwOAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22hoosegow%22&pg=PA113&ci=31%2C404%2C853%2C102&source=bookclip)
>
>
>
But then I found this one from 1922:
***[Everybody's Magazine](https://books.google.com/books?id=KQI8AQAAMAAJ&pg=RA3-PA44&dq=%22hoosegow%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwieu8z2_qnUAhUIw1QKHWTwAzMQ6AEIIjAA#v=onepage&q=%22hoosegow%22&f=false) - Volume 46 - Page 44***
1922
>
> ***Lizette***
>
> By Sampson Raphaelson
>
>
> "That's the old hoosegow -- a notorious place about five years ago. All sorts of booze parties."
>
> "Let's stop there, Chuck, and sit on the soda water stand and read poetry."
>
>
> [](https://books.google.com/books?id=KQI8AQAAMAAJ&dq=%22hoosegow%22&pg=RA3-PA44&ci=57%2C128%2C455%2C133&source=bookclip)
>
>
>
It seems to me that the usage here is implying a saloon or similar establishment, rather than a jail. Is there another meaning to hoosegow that has been lost to time? Or is this simply a one-off misuse of the word?
---
**UPDATE**
----------
There are some great (amazingly detailed and researched!) answers and comments and it was hard to pick one to accept -- I went with Sven's for finding the earliest usage, as well as pointing out that *juzgado* was used as well by English-speakers.
I think that MikeJRamsey56 and JEL have the best explanation -- an abandoned jail that was taken over and used for scandalous parties thereafter.
Thanks everyone! | 2017/06/06 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/392764",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/231036/"
] | [Green's Dictionary of Slang](https://greensdictofslang.com/) gives three senses of HOOSEGOW -- 1. a prison (from 1908); 2. any form of institution to which inmates are sent rather than volunteer for entrance (from 1924); 3. an outhouse, a privy (from 1931).
The "saloon" sense would seem to be an outlier, and I'd be dubious that it had any extended currency. | When I was a child (now in my mid-fifties), I remember my father explaining that “hoosegow” was actually “whose cow”, as it was the place the sherif took the cattle thieves of the old western films, to determine who had legal ownership. In other words the courthouse/jail.
He had a way of knowing the answer to every question... |
392,764 | After using the word in an [answer to a question here](https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/392756/disambiguation-of-identify), I got to wondering about the etymology of the word ***hoosegow***. I picked it up from my father (perhaps surprisingly, given that he was an german immigrant) but that didn't tell me much about where the word came from.
A search of etymonline.com turned up this explanation:
>
> ***[hoosegow](http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=hoosegow)*** (n.)
>
> "jail," 1911, western U.S., probably from mispronunciation of Mexican Spanish *juzgao* "tribunal, court," from *juzgar* "to judge," used as a noun, from Latin *judicare* "to judge," which is related to *judicem* (see *judge* (n.)).
>
>
>
Oxford agrees, saying:
>
> ***[hoosegow](https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/hoosegow)***
>
>
> NOUN
>
>
> *North American*
>
> *informal*
>
> A prison.
>
>
> Origin
>
> Early 20th century: via Latin American Spanish from Spanish juzgado ‘tribunal’, from Latin judicatum ‘something judged’, neuter past participle of judicare.
>
>
>
I got curious about the 1911 date specified by etymonline and turned to [Google's ngrams](https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=hoosegow&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Choosegow%3B%2Cc0). Their results seemed to match and I started looking at the early uses, including:
***[A Miscellany of American Poetry](https://books.google.com/books?id=iONNAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA139&dq=%22hoosegow%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjq76KkhqrUAhXD5lQKHVA2DbwQ6AEIMDAC#v=onepage&q=%22hoosegow%22&f=false)***
1920
>
> *Aprons of Silence*
>
> Carl Sandburg
>
>
> I fixed up a padded cell and lugged it around.
>
> I locked myself in and nobody knew it.
>
> Only the keeper and the kept in the hoosegow
>
> Knew it -- on the streets, in the postoffice,
>
>
> [](https://books.google.com/books?id=iONNAQAAMAAJ&dq=%22hoosegow%22&pg=PA139&ci=102%2C753%2C723%2C172&source=bookclip)
>
>
>
and
***[Dialect Notes](https://books.google.com/books?id=lxwOAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA113&dq=%22hoosegow%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjq76KkhqrUAhXD5lQKHVA2DbwQ6AEIQzAG#v=onepage&q=%22hoosegow%22&f=false) - Volume 5 - Page 113***
1918
>
> CALIFORNIA WORD-LIST.
>
>
> WORDS IMPORTED FROM OTHER STATES OR OTHER COUNTRIES.
>
>
> *hoosegaw*, or *hoosegow*, n. (hods gaw).
>
> A jail, or a prison. Slang.
>
> *'They chucked him in the hoosegow.'*
>
> Sp. juzgado > husgado > husgao > hoosegaw. Spanish American, then army usage, then general. Reported common also in middle western states.
>
>
> [](https://books.google.com/books?id=lxwOAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22hoosegow%22&pg=PA113&ci=31%2C404%2C853%2C102&source=bookclip)
>
>
>
But then I found this one from 1922:
***[Everybody's Magazine](https://books.google.com/books?id=KQI8AQAAMAAJ&pg=RA3-PA44&dq=%22hoosegow%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwieu8z2_qnUAhUIw1QKHWTwAzMQ6AEIIjAA#v=onepage&q=%22hoosegow%22&f=false) - Volume 46 - Page 44***
1922
>
> ***Lizette***
>
> By Sampson Raphaelson
>
>
> "That's the old hoosegow -- a notorious place about five years ago. All sorts of booze parties."
>
> "Let's stop there, Chuck, and sit on the soda water stand and read poetry."
>
>
> [](https://books.google.com/books?id=KQI8AQAAMAAJ&dq=%22hoosegow%22&pg=RA3-PA44&ci=57%2C128%2C455%2C133&source=bookclip)
>
>
>
It seems to me that the usage here is implying a saloon or similar establishment, rather than a jail. Is there another meaning to hoosegow that has been lost to time? Or is this simply a one-off misuse of the word?
---
**UPDATE**
----------
There are some great (amazingly detailed and researched!) answers and comments and it was hard to pick one to accept -- I went with Sven's for finding the earliest usage, as well as pointing out that *juzgado* was used as well by English-speakers.
I think that MikeJRamsey56 and JEL have the best explanation -- an abandoned jail that was taken over and used for scandalous parties thereafter.
Thanks everyone! | 2017/06/06 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/392764",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/231036/"
] | According to [Vocabulario Vaquero/Cowboy Talk: A Dictionary of Spanish Terms..](https://books.google.it/books?id=MR4SY5n3_L8C&pg=PA103&lpg=PA103&dq=hoosegow%20meaning&source=bl&ots=oJ7FOcj5iI&sig=_f6yrz9PNDsvFJc536ob-eB6X14&hl=it&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwif-9CkjKrUAhWNI1AKHQLTB9s4FBDoAQgrMAY#v=onepage&q=hoosegow%20meaning&f=false) hoosegow has also the dialectal meaning of:
>
> ( Western Montana, Western Wyoming -1931) An outhouse, a restroom:
>
>
>
As explained in [World Wide Words](http://www.worldwidewords.org/weirdwords/ww-hoo1.htm) the Mexican term juzagao from which hoosegow derives meant tribunal, courthouse. It came to mean jail as the two places were often in the same building:
>
> * ***It’s a fine old American slang term for a jail, still widely known today. Most people would connect it with the nineteenth-century cowboys of the Wild West.***
> * It’s very likely that they knew the word, but it didn’t start to be written down until the early twentieth century. ***The first known example was penned by Harry Fisher, better known as Bud, in one of his early Mutt & Jeff cartoons, of 1908: “Mutt ... may be released from the hooze gow.”***
> * ***The word is from Mexican Spanish juzgao, a jail, which came from juzgado for a tribunal or courtroom.*** It shifted to mean a jail because the two were often in the same building (and the path from the one to the other was often swift and certain). In sense and language origin it’s a relative of calaboose, which is also a prison (from calabozo, a dungeon, via the French of Louisiana).
> * ***Hoosegow is now the standard spelling, though in its early days it was written half a dozen different ways.*** We link it in our minds with cowboys largely because so much of their lingo was taken from Spanish and then mangled to fit English ideas of the way to say it. That included buckaroo (Spanish vaquero), bronco (from a word that meant rough or rude), lasso (lazo), lariat (la reata), chaps (chaparreras), hackamore bridles (jáquima), mustang (mesteña), cinch (cincha), as well as the direct borrowings of corral and rodeo.
>
>
> | When I was a child (now in my mid-fifties), I remember my father explaining that “hoosegow” was actually “whose cow”, as it was the place the sherif took the cattle thieves of the old western films, to determine who had legal ownership. In other words the courthouse/jail.
He had a way of knowing the answer to every question... |
494,806 | I've recently gotten into electrodynamics, I've studied electrostatics & magnetostatics, so far I know these facts:
Electrostatic fields are produced by static charge configurations
Magnetic fields are produced by moving charge configurations (currents)
Now there is something that I cannot understand, for example, a wire carrying current that is supposed to be neutral, but according to this statement:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Plpy0.jpg)
There is an electric field inside the wire, which I know there must be, to actually drive current through the wire, but the wire is neutral, meaning it is not charged, so where does that electric field come from? Does it come from the source (battery)? And is at an electrostatic one, or does it come from a somehow induced charge within the wire, it could be the battery and that would easily answer the question. But what about the electric field outside the wire? Is it also due to the battery? | 2019/08/02 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/494806",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/158583/"
] | It depends on your definition of moving. It seems like you aren't picking one, so you are confused.
If you define moving to be any part of the object has motion relative to you, and so then stationary means no part of the object is in motion relative to you, then you would say a rotating object is moving and is not stationary.
If you define moving to be the center of mass has motion relative to you, and so stationary means the center of mass has no motion relative to you, then an object that is purely rotating about it's center of mass would be considered stationary.
I can think of instances where either definition could be useful, so pick your favorite. | As you pointed out, if an object is rotating around an axis through its centre of mass, then the centre of mass is stationary. Nonetheless, you will not find an inertial frame of reference where all particles of the extended object are at rest to each other.
All the particles of the rigid body that are not located on the axis of rotation would move even if the centre of mass remained stationary. This is also the reason why one often divides the motion of a body into its translational and rotational modes. For the translation of a rigid body it is sufficient to look at the centre of mass only, this is not the case for rotations. |
494,806 | I've recently gotten into electrodynamics, I've studied electrostatics & magnetostatics, so far I know these facts:
Electrostatic fields are produced by static charge configurations
Magnetic fields are produced by moving charge configurations (currents)
Now there is something that I cannot understand, for example, a wire carrying current that is supposed to be neutral, but according to this statement:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Plpy0.jpg)
There is an electric field inside the wire, which I know there must be, to actually drive current through the wire, but the wire is neutral, meaning it is not charged, so where does that electric field come from? Does it come from the source (battery)? And is at an electrostatic one, or does it come from a somehow induced charge within the wire, it could be the battery and that would easily answer the question. But what about the electric field outside the wire? Is it also due to the battery? | 2019/08/02 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/494806",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/158583/"
] | It depends on your definition of moving. It seems like you aren't picking one, so you are confused.
If you define moving to be any part of the object has motion relative to you, and so then stationary means no part of the object is in motion relative to you, then you would say a rotating object is moving and is not stationary.
If you define moving to be the center of mass has motion relative to you, and so stationary means the center of mass has no motion relative to you, then an object that is purely rotating about it's center of mass would be considered stationary.
I can think of instances where either definition could be useful, so pick your favorite. | It is moving, as it has kinetic energy. The center of mass is a point, not an actual measurable piece of mass. Think of a donut spinning like a wheel, you would see the entire donut rotating, and there would be nothing of the donut in it's center of mass, the middle of the donut hole. |
494,806 | I've recently gotten into electrodynamics, I've studied electrostatics & magnetostatics, so far I know these facts:
Electrostatic fields are produced by static charge configurations
Magnetic fields are produced by moving charge configurations (currents)
Now there is something that I cannot understand, for example, a wire carrying current that is supposed to be neutral, but according to this statement:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Plpy0.jpg)
There is an electric field inside the wire, which I know there must be, to actually drive current through the wire, but the wire is neutral, meaning it is not charged, so where does that electric field come from? Does it come from the source (battery)? And is at an electrostatic one, or does it come from a somehow induced charge within the wire, it could be the battery and that would easily answer the question. But what about the electric field outside the wire? Is it also due to the battery? | 2019/08/02 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/494806",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/158583/"
] | As you pointed out, if an object is rotating around an axis through its centre of mass, then the centre of mass is stationary. Nonetheless, you will not find an inertial frame of reference where all particles of the extended object are at rest to each other.
All the particles of the rigid body that are not located on the axis of rotation would move even if the centre of mass remained stationary. This is also the reason why one often divides the motion of a body into its translational and rotational modes. For the translation of a rigid body it is sufficient to look at the centre of mass only, this is not the case for rotations. | It is moving, as it has kinetic energy. The center of mass is a point, not an actual measurable piece of mass. Think of a donut spinning like a wheel, you would see the entire donut rotating, and there would be nothing of the donut in it's center of mass, the middle of the donut hole. |
11,151,179 | Is there any tool which copies the structure(all ou's, all cn's) from Novell LDAP to Active Directory? | 2012/06/22 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/11151179",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1473991/"
] | * export all data from the source directory server into an [LDIF](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2849) file and then import that the resulting LDIF file into the destination directory
or
* use the [ldapsearch](http://ff1959.wordpress.com/2011/07/27/mastering-ldapsearch/) tool to retrieve the desired entries from the source directory server and deposit those into an LDIF file, then import the resulting LDIF file into the destination server
or
* use the ldapsearch tool to retrieve the desired entries from the source directory server and input the results directly in the [ldapmodify](http://ff1959.wordpress.com/2011/07/25/master-the-ldapmodify-command-line-tool/) tool
or
* write a tool using the [UnboundID LDAP SDK](http://www.unboundid.com/products/ldapsdk/docs/javadoc/index.html?com/unboundid/ldap/sdk/package-summary.html) to retrieve the desired entries from the source and then add them to the destination
or
* use a commercial LDAP synchronization tool | Novell has a product (now under the NetIQ Product line) called Identity Manager, which can synchronize objects (any object allowed in schema) from eDirectory to many other systems, Active Directory included. If you have Universal Passwords enabled in eDirectory you can even send the passwords.
This is meant to be used as an Identity Management system, where you can have HR provision users into a central eDirectory instance (as a hub) and then push that data out to all connected systems that meet the criteria you define.
It supports Roles Based Access Control, so that perhaps only people who fall into certain roles get provisioned into certain systems and the like.
Very powerful, and reasonably easy to set up. There is a free bundle edition included with many of the Novell/NetIQ products if you own them. |
11,151,179 | Is there any tool which copies the structure(all ou's, all cn's) from Novell LDAP to Active Directory? | 2012/06/22 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/11151179",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1473991/"
] | * export all data from the source directory server into an [LDIF](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2849) file and then import that the resulting LDIF file into the destination directory
or
* use the [ldapsearch](http://ff1959.wordpress.com/2011/07/27/mastering-ldapsearch/) tool to retrieve the desired entries from the source directory server and deposit those into an LDIF file, then import the resulting LDIF file into the destination server
or
* use the ldapsearch tool to retrieve the desired entries from the source directory server and input the results directly in the [ldapmodify](http://ff1959.wordpress.com/2011/07/25/master-the-ldapmodify-command-line-tool/) tool
or
* write a tool using the [UnboundID LDAP SDK](http://www.unboundid.com/products/ldapsdk/docs/javadoc/index.html?com/unboundid/ldap/sdk/package-summary.html) to retrieve the desired entries from the source and then add them to the destination
or
* use a commercial LDAP synchronization tool | If this is a one time LDIF export and import of the OU structure using Apache Directory Studio would be way easier than Identity Management (IDM). IDM is not easy to setup. Also the IDM Active Directory driver out of the box is not designed to sync OUs. You would have to create a custom IDM LDAP driver. This is a lot of work and doesn't make sence unless the OU tree you are importing is changing constantly. |
11,151,179 | Is there any tool which copies the structure(all ou's, all cn's) from Novell LDAP to Active Directory? | 2012/06/22 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/11151179",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1473991/"
] | * export all data from the source directory server into an [LDIF](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2849) file and then import that the resulting LDIF file into the destination directory
or
* use the [ldapsearch](http://ff1959.wordpress.com/2011/07/27/mastering-ldapsearch/) tool to retrieve the desired entries from the source directory server and deposit those into an LDIF file, then import the resulting LDIF file into the destination server
or
* use the ldapsearch tool to retrieve the desired entries from the source directory server and input the results directly in the [ldapmodify](http://ff1959.wordpress.com/2011/07/25/master-the-ldapmodify-command-line-tool/) tool
or
* write a tool using the [UnboundID LDAP SDK](http://www.unboundid.com/products/ldapsdk/docs/javadoc/index.html?com/unboundid/ldap/sdk/package-summary.html) to retrieve the desired entries from the source and then add them to the destination
or
* use a commercial LDAP synchronization tool | There are few key tools that one can use:
1. **Import Conversion Export Utility (ICE) from Novell iManager** - this is a web based tool that will allow you to export entire structure in a ldif format with very little fuss. The following link will give more details on it. <http://www.novell.com/documentation/edir873/?page=/documentation/edir873/edir873/data/a5hgmnu.html>
2. The other way is to **use the command line ICE tool** as well - you can use if you more comfortable with using BASH.
<http://www.novell.com/documentation/edir873/edir873/data/a5hgmnu.html#a5hgn0b>
3. **Using command line utility like ldapsearch** - i have found it to be very effective so will rate this very highly if you want to automate your LDAP extraction process. Bear in mind that the ldapsearch utility differs on each flavour of UNIX so some of command line options (e.g. ldapsearch -H or -y flag) will not work on Linux (e.g. RHEL) but may work on SUSE / Solaris / Aix. I have experienced this myself so just thought of warning you for the same (i tried moving from Suse to RHEL but got stuck in this trap).
4. **Using command line utility (windows) called ldp.exe** - this is another open source windows command line utility that allows one to write simple powershell script to perform LDAP search - useful if you have windows based workstation (i ran on my own pc). See below link for more details <https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc771022%28v=ws.11%29.aspx>
5. **Use open source LDAP browser** such as **Apache Directory Studio / Gawor's LDAP Browser** which will help export data into CSV / Excel format. The only drawback with this tool is that heavy duty searches sometimes can lead to system being slowed down; for that the other alternative is using Light weight LDAP browser like Jerek Gawor's LDAP utility. <http://www.novell.com/coolsolutions/tools/13765.html> will give more details. i have used this tool (Gawor's ldap tool) for large queries as well and its been giving results very quickly.
Having used each of the options over last 5 years, I will recommend using either ldapsearch (for UNIX) or ldp.exe (for windows commnand line) if you are looking to automate this; or Gawor's ldap browser / Apache Directory Studio as potential alternatives if you want to generate standalone extracts. |
11,151,179 | Is there any tool which copies the structure(all ou's, all cn's) from Novell LDAP to Active Directory? | 2012/06/22 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/11151179",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1473991/"
] | If this is a one time LDIF export and import of the OU structure using Apache Directory Studio would be way easier than Identity Management (IDM). IDM is not easy to setup. Also the IDM Active Directory driver out of the box is not designed to sync OUs. You would have to create a custom IDM LDAP driver. This is a lot of work and doesn't make sence unless the OU tree you are importing is changing constantly. | Novell has a product (now under the NetIQ Product line) called Identity Manager, which can synchronize objects (any object allowed in schema) from eDirectory to many other systems, Active Directory included. If you have Universal Passwords enabled in eDirectory you can even send the passwords.
This is meant to be used as an Identity Management system, where you can have HR provision users into a central eDirectory instance (as a hub) and then push that data out to all connected systems that meet the criteria you define.
It supports Roles Based Access Control, so that perhaps only people who fall into certain roles get provisioned into certain systems and the like.
Very powerful, and reasonably easy to set up. There is a free bundle edition included with many of the Novell/NetIQ products if you own them. |
11,151,179 | Is there any tool which copies the structure(all ou's, all cn's) from Novell LDAP to Active Directory? | 2012/06/22 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/11151179",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1473991/"
] | There are few key tools that one can use:
1. **Import Conversion Export Utility (ICE) from Novell iManager** - this is a web based tool that will allow you to export entire structure in a ldif format with very little fuss. The following link will give more details on it. <http://www.novell.com/documentation/edir873/?page=/documentation/edir873/edir873/data/a5hgmnu.html>
2. The other way is to **use the command line ICE tool** as well - you can use if you more comfortable with using BASH.
<http://www.novell.com/documentation/edir873/edir873/data/a5hgmnu.html#a5hgn0b>
3. **Using command line utility like ldapsearch** - i have found it to be very effective so will rate this very highly if you want to automate your LDAP extraction process. Bear in mind that the ldapsearch utility differs on each flavour of UNIX so some of command line options (e.g. ldapsearch -H or -y flag) will not work on Linux (e.g. RHEL) but may work on SUSE / Solaris / Aix. I have experienced this myself so just thought of warning you for the same (i tried moving from Suse to RHEL but got stuck in this trap).
4. **Using command line utility (windows) called ldp.exe** - this is another open source windows command line utility that allows one to write simple powershell script to perform LDAP search - useful if you have windows based workstation (i ran on my own pc). See below link for more details <https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc771022%28v=ws.11%29.aspx>
5. **Use open source LDAP browser** such as **Apache Directory Studio / Gawor's LDAP Browser** which will help export data into CSV / Excel format. The only drawback with this tool is that heavy duty searches sometimes can lead to system being slowed down; for that the other alternative is using Light weight LDAP browser like Jerek Gawor's LDAP utility. <http://www.novell.com/coolsolutions/tools/13765.html> will give more details. i have used this tool (Gawor's ldap tool) for large queries as well and its been giving results very quickly.
Having used each of the options over last 5 years, I will recommend using either ldapsearch (for UNIX) or ldp.exe (for windows commnand line) if you are looking to automate this; or Gawor's ldap browser / Apache Directory Studio as potential alternatives if you want to generate standalone extracts. | Novell has a product (now under the NetIQ Product line) called Identity Manager, which can synchronize objects (any object allowed in schema) from eDirectory to many other systems, Active Directory included. If you have Universal Passwords enabled in eDirectory you can even send the passwords.
This is meant to be used as an Identity Management system, where you can have HR provision users into a central eDirectory instance (as a hub) and then push that data out to all connected systems that meet the criteria you define.
It supports Roles Based Access Control, so that perhaps only people who fall into certain roles get provisioned into certain systems and the like.
Very powerful, and reasonably easy to set up. There is a free bundle edition included with many of the Novell/NetIQ products if you own them. |
36,266 | I now own a Brompton folding bike. (Fortunately, I bought my plane tickets first, as I am also now broke!)
Anyone here ever checked one into baggage in a B-bag, and suffer damage? If so, what parts were damaged? I want to protect those parts, and I don't want to disassemble/reassemble. I suspect the bag itself is more likely to be damaged than the bike, but would like to learn from the experience of others.
Anyone here ever carried one on? I've read that this can be done, but after seeing it in the bag, I don't believe it. In fact, I think they're going to charge me extra for the size. (See update below.) Which reminds me of another related question:
Has anyone ever been charged extra on the grounds that the picture of a bike on each side of the bag makes it "sports equipment"?
UPDATE: Checked from IQT to LIM on Star-Peru. Completely unusable on arrival. Repairs very expensive. Also, it does **NOT** fit in most airline overheads and is significantly larger than the explicit limits for carry-ons at many airlines. Perhaps (as I've been told) it can be done on Southwest, but Southwest doesn't go anywhere that requires an airline.
UPDATE TWO: Every trip with the B-bag, there has been minor damage, but not nearly the disaster of Star-Peru. I finally went and got a [Chubby](https://www.radicaldesign.com/cyclone-iv-chubby.html) which protects it much better and carries all my other stuff between flights. At the airport, fold the Brompton, empty the Chubby, put the Brompton in it, pack some of my things around it, and carry on the rest. Have to pay an oversize fee, or a bike fee, depending on the airline. [Sometimes it's hard to predict which.](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/51562/cost-of-brompton-on-iberia-flight) Some airlines will treat it more gently if they know it's a bike; some the opposite. Also hard to predict. | 2015/12/29 | [
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/36266",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/users/13605/"
] | Flying with a Brompton [as a carryon] is typically dependent on the airport staff and flight crew, rather than airline policies and procedures. I've had success getting the bike on larger planes no problem, mostly because overhead compartments were very large, or because there was sufficient space to store the folded bike (with seat and pedals removed) with strollers and folded wheelchairs. I'll even refer to it as a "mobility device", which will sometimes spook TSA into thinking that they're denying me accessibility or civil rights.
Again, this is mostly dependent on the gate/flight crew's level of tolerance/patience. The easier you make the process for them, the more likely they are to let you take the bike on the plane.
[Here is a good blog post about the process itself.](http://www.ourlifeunfolded.com/how-to-take-a-brompton-on-a-plane-as-carry-on-luggage/)
[A second, great blog post with tips as well.](http://www.bikabout.com/blog/2015/2/2/why-this-folding-bike-is-worth-1255-hint-it-fits-in-an-airplanes-overhead-storage)
Technically speaking, here are a few tips:
1. I use ["Superior" MKS](http://harriscyclery.net/product/mks-lambda-superior-ezy-quick-release-pedal-9-16-3065.htm) pedals that are completely removable. Nothing sticking out of the bike; they go into a separate bag in luggage.
2. I'll typically put a small bungee cord around the bike (inside the bag) to keep the bike from rattling/moving too much. It's also much more stable when being handled by flight crew/TSA.
3. Remove the seat; put it in your luggage/carry-on.
4. I also deflate the tires a little. This helps when the luggage compartment is a tight fit, and let's the tire sticking out give a little when the latch is shut.
Generally, the bike has suffered no real damage when I've carried it on or gate-checked it. | I've traveled a lot with a Brompton, but I'm not a fan of having to travel with a box for the Brompton (ie I don't want to carry it on a bicycle tour). So I make a box whenever I need one, and the only things I travel-with to make this box are:
1. About 10 meters of paracord
2. A knife
3. A permanent marker
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/vmQsY.jpg)
Some days before I fly, I'll also get the following:
1. A roll of plastic packaging tape
2. 3-4 medium-sized boxes of cardboard (or big, if possible)
#### Luggage Fees
First, you do want to select your airline carefully. The Brompton is small enough to pack-up under the oversize luggage fees charged when shipping normal/big bikes on a plane, but weight may be an issue.
Brompton says their bike weighs 9-13 kg. With my upgrades, accessories, and added padding for shipping, my Brompton usually comes-to 20 kg. YMMV, but -- personally -- I **avoid airlines that limit checked bags to max 18 kg** (though 23 kg or 30 kg is a more common limit).
### Obtaining Materials
I buy a whole new roll of packaging tape. I use about half of the roll, and I always travel with the last half, just in-case it the box needs to be opened/re-sealed.
I've never bought cardboard. I've packed my brompton for flying in North America, South America, Asia, and Europe. In every country **I found cardboard for free** and recycled it.
### Preparing Brompton
The first thing I do is prepare the Brompton, so it's well protected.
The Brompton is a pretty rugged beast, and it's protects itself pretty well when folded, but I'm particularly interested in **protecting the following vulnerable/expensive-to-replace parts**:
1. **The hinges**
2. **The front mounting block**
3. **The wheel spokes**
4. **The pedals**
First, I unscrew the bolts and clamps from the hinges. I put these in a ziplock baggie and I either check it with my other luggage or wrap it in cardboard and tape it inside the folded brompton's triangle or something.
Second, I rip/cut pieces cardboard from the smallest box I have, and I bend the strips around the above-listed parts to add padding to protect them (this will, of course, be redundant padding in-addition to the box you'll put it in).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Jhe6Y.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/XcHTb.jpg)
Don't be afraid to **use a lot of cardboard and tape**! You'll be making your Brompton wider, longer, and taller in dimensions, but the Brompton is so small that you're very unlikely to pad the brompton so much that you get slapped with a oversize luggage fee (generally max 158 cm).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DZr0T.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/exK9U.jpg)
Finally, when I'm satisfied Brompton's vulnerable components are well-covered in cardboard, I wrap it in a sleeping pad. And if I'm traveling with a big (synthetic) winter jacket, I'll cover it with that too
### Making the Box
When the Brompton is sufficiently covered in padding, it probably won't fit in any of the cardboard boxes. So I usually open one side of the biggest box until the Brompton fits in it, and then bend a new edge into the cardboard so it fits perfectly.
I may re-bend other walls of this big box so that the box fits the Brompton perfectly.
Then I'll use the remnants of the other couple boxes to build-out a top of the box and reinforce any sides where one sheet of cardboard meets the other. Use just a small bit of tape as you go.
When the box is completed around the Brompton, I **write my name and every airport code** the box should travel to/through on literally every side of the box. Maybe this is paranoid, but I did arrive to an airport one time and my Brompton did not. Fortunately, it arrived within a couple days. I'm glad it was clearly marked and not lost; checked luggage with this airline was only insured up to $3,000.
After clearly writing your info on the box, tape it up really, really, really well (you want to write the info before this because you can't write on plastic tape). If you built a box by combining multiple boxes together, I can't stress how important it is to **use a lot of tape**.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/tJWd8.jpg)
### Tie it up
The resulting ~20kg box should offer great protection of your precious Brompton, but it'll be large, heavy, and clumsy to carry.
To make this easier, I usually just wrap & tie about 10 meters of paracord around the box, so it's **easier for me and the airline workers handle it**.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/uoNWs.jpg)
Bonus: The result doesn't look like the contents are very valuable, and I've never had an airline ask me what's inside; the last thing they'd expect is an expensive bicycle.
Alternatively: Suitcase
=======================
The first time I shipped a Brompton, I bought a secondhand Samsonite suitcase that was 158 cm (L+W+H).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bMj0D.jpg)
I still prepared it with the cardboard on the vulnerable parts and it just barely fit inside the suitcase.
This was the last time I shipped the brompton this way, because I didn't want to carry a suitcase with me on a bicycle tour through the desert. But it could be a good option if you're not cycle touring. |
36,266 | I now own a Brompton folding bike. (Fortunately, I bought my plane tickets first, as I am also now broke!)
Anyone here ever checked one into baggage in a B-bag, and suffer damage? If so, what parts were damaged? I want to protect those parts, and I don't want to disassemble/reassemble. I suspect the bag itself is more likely to be damaged than the bike, but would like to learn from the experience of others.
Anyone here ever carried one on? I've read that this can be done, but after seeing it in the bag, I don't believe it. In fact, I think they're going to charge me extra for the size. (See update below.) Which reminds me of another related question:
Has anyone ever been charged extra on the grounds that the picture of a bike on each side of the bag makes it "sports equipment"?
UPDATE: Checked from IQT to LIM on Star-Peru. Completely unusable on arrival. Repairs very expensive. Also, it does **NOT** fit in most airline overheads and is significantly larger than the explicit limits for carry-ons at many airlines. Perhaps (as I've been told) it can be done on Southwest, but Southwest doesn't go anywhere that requires an airline.
UPDATE TWO: Every trip with the B-bag, there has been minor damage, but not nearly the disaster of Star-Peru. I finally went and got a [Chubby](https://www.radicaldesign.com/cyclone-iv-chubby.html) which protects it much better and carries all my other stuff between flights. At the airport, fold the Brompton, empty the Chubby, put the Brompton in it, pack some of my things around it, and carry on the rest. Have to pay an oversize fee, or a bike fee, depending on the airline. [Sometimes it's hard to predict which.](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/51562/cost-of-brompton-on-iberia-flight) Some airlines will treat it more gently if they know it's a bike; some the opposite. Also hard to predict. | 2015/12/29 | [
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/36266",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/users/13605/"
] | I check in my Brompton when I fly. I built a special case for it in my workshop using 2020 extrusion and coroplast that is 24x24x11.5 inches and exactly fits the Brompton.
They also sell hard cases but I didn't want to spend $300 for one of them.
It doesn't look like a bike case so I don't get charged the bike surcharge. When asked what's in it, I say "circus equipment" which is appropriate as one of the sides was made with coroflex from a circus sign. 24x24x11.5 is exactly under the maximum size specification for luggage and so I don't get an oversize surcharge -- however, it still get put in the oversized luggage area, most notably because it doesn't have handles.
Works well. It's not collapsible so I have to store it at my destination. I think the next iteration of it will be to put wheels on it so it can turn into a bike trailer at the destination.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/l0UN1.jpg)
With your soft bag, I'd put duct tape over any bicycle logos. Not just to avoid the surcharge but to avoid theft. Baggage handlers ignore any fragile labels so that won't work.
>
> **The fragile bits:** The parts most likely to break are the hinge clamps and the pedals. Be sure to take off the folding clamps and bolts completely as they are known to snap when exposed. Carry a small pedal wrench or hex wrench (depending on your pedals) so you can take off your pedals. Taking the seat off and tucking between the frame is also a known tip to prevent damage.
>
>
> I'd also put pipe foam over any exposed tubing (especially the handlebars) and maybe a sweatshirt or other clothing on the rims to protect them and the spokes. You can also unloosen and rotate the handlebars with a hex wrench so that the controls aren't as exposed.
>
>
>
Finally, you asked in comments about convertible trailer / cases. The [Cyclone IV Chubby](https://www.radicaldesign.com/cyclone-iv-chubby.html) is one of them: | I've traveled a lot with a Brompton, but I'm not a fan of having to travel with a box for the Brompton (ie I don't want to carry it on a bicycle tour). So I make a box whenever I need one, and the only things I travel-with to make this box are:
1. About 10 meters of paracord
2. A knife
3. A permanent marker
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/vmQsY.jpg)
Some days before I fly, I'll also get the following:
1. A roll of plastic packaging tape
2. 3-4 medium-sized boxes of cardboard (or big, if possible)
#### Luggage Fees
First, you do want to select your airline carefully. The Brompton is small enough to pack-up under the oversize luggage fees charged when shipping normal/big bikes on a plane, but weight may be an issue.
Brompton says their bike weighs 9-13 kg. With my upgrades, accessories, and added padding for shipping, my Brompton usually comes-to 20 kg. YMMV, but -- personally -- I **avoid airlines that limit checked bags to max 18 kg** (though 23 kg or 30 kg is a more common limit).
### Obtaining Materials
I buy a whole new roll of packaging tape. I use about half of the roll, and I always travel with the last half, just in-case it the box needs to be opened/re-sealed.
I've never bought cardboard. I've packed my brompton for flying in North America, South America, Asia, and Europe. In every country **I found cardboard for free** and recycled it.
### Preparing Brompton
The first thing I do is prepare the Brompton, so it's well protected.
The Brompton is a pretty rugged beast, and it's protects itself pretty well when folded, but I'm particularly interested in **protecting the following vulnerable/expensive-to-replace parts**:
1. **The hinges**
2. **The front mounting block**
3. **The wheel spokes**
4. **The pedals**
First, I unscrew the bolts and clamps from the hinges. I put these in a ziplock baggie and I either check it with my other luggage or wrap it in cardboard and tape it inside the folded brompton's triangle or something.
Second, I rip/cut pieces cardboard from the smallest box I have, and I bend the strips around the above-listed parts to add padding to protect them (this will, of course, be redundant padding in-addition to the box you'll put it in).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Jhe6Y.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/XcHTb.jpg)
Don't be afraid to **use a lot of cardboard and tape**! You'll be making your Brompton wider, longer, and taller in dimensions, but the Brompton is so small that you're very unlikely to pad the brompton so much that you get slapped with a oversize luggage fee (generally max 158 cm).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DZr0T.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/exK9U.jpg)
Finally, when I'm satisfied Brompton's vulnerable components are well-covered in cardboard, I wrap it in a sleeping pad. And if I'm traveling with a big (synthetic) winter jacket, I'll cover it with that too
### Making the Box
When the Brompton is sufficiently covered in padding, it probably won't fit in any of the cardboard boxes. So I usually open one side of the biggest box until the Brompton fits in it, and then bend a new edge into the cardboard so it fits perfectly.
I may re-bend other walls of this big box so that the box fits the Brompton perfectly.
Then I'll use the remnants of the other couple boxes to build-out a top of the box and reinforce any sides where one sheet of cardboard meets the other. Use just a small bit of tape as you go.
When the box is completed around the Brompton, I **write my name and every airport code** the box should travel to/through on literally every side of the box. Maybe this is paranoid, but I did arrive to an airport one time and my Brompton did not. Fortunately, it arrived within a couple days. I'm glad it was clearly marked and not lost; checked luggage with this airline was only insured up to $3,000.
After clearly writing your info on the box, tape it up really, really, really well (you want to write the info before this because you can't write on plastic tape). If you built a box by combining multiple boxes together, I can't stress how important it is to **use a lot of tape**.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/tJWd8.jpg)
### Tie it up
The resulting ~20kg box should offer great protection of your precious Brompton, but it'll be large, heavy, and clumsy to carry.
To make this easier, I usually just wrap & tie about 10 meters of paracord around the box, so it's **easier for me and the airline workers handle it**.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/uoNWs.jpg)
Bonus: The result doesn't look like the contents are very valuable, and I've never had an airline ask me what's inside; the last thing they'd expect is an expensive bicycle.
Alternatively: Suitcase
=======================
The first time I shipped a Brompton, I bought a secondhand Samsonite suitcase that was 158 cm (L+W+H).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bMj0D.jpg)
I still prepared it with the cardboard on the vulnerable parts and it just barely fit inside the suitcase.
This was the last time I shipped the brompton this way, because I didn't want to carry a suitcase with me on a bicycle tour through the desert. But it could be a good option if you're not cycle touring. |
49,077 | What does due mean in *when my second child was due*?
I would interpret it in three ways:
1. just born.
2. about to be born soon.
3. just got pregnant.
Which is correct? | 2011/11/21 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/49077",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/13711/"
] | *When my child is due* refers to the time the baby is expected to be born. | It means "about to born."
One of the meaning of *due* is "under engagement as to time; expected to be ready, be present, or arrive; scheduled." |
46,214 | >
> In my enemy is my friend
>
> In my friend is my enemy
>
> I exist because he does
>
> But he exists from where I don't
>
> Round and round we go again
>
> Each placed in the other's domain
>
> But most places we are seen
>
> We are seen as part of the same dream
>
> Where 1 is 2 and in that 2 are 2 more
>
> My purpose is to show
>
> You can't have one without the other, forever more!
>
>
>
What am I? | 2016/11/29 | [
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/46214",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/users/26329/"
] | Is it
>
> Fire and water
>
>
>
In my enemy is my friend
In my friend is my enemy
>
> In fire and water is oxygen.
>
>
>
I exist because he does
But he exists from where I don't
>
> They both exist because of oxygen and water exists in the sea where fire can't.
>
>
>
Round and round we go again
Each placed in the other's domain
>
> Water puts out fire, but fire evaporates water.
>
>
>
But most places we are seen
We are seen as part of the same dream
>
> They are both part of the 4 elements - water, air, fire and earth.
>
>
>
Where 1 is 2 and in that 2 are 2 more
My purpose is to show
>
> Not sure, but fire is to show light. @yitzih suggested H20?
>
>
>
You can't have one without the other, forever more!
>
> You can't have water and fire without oxygen.
>
>
> | As an addition to @Beastly Gerbil's answer:
Where 1 is 2 and in that 2 are 2 more:
>
> In Water(H2O) there are 2 elements (Hydrogen and Oxygen) and the are 2 of the Hydrogen atom.
>
>
> |
46,214 | >
> In my enemy is my friend
>
> In my friend is my enemy
>
> I exist because he does
>
> But he exists from where I don't
>
> Round and round we go again
>
> Each placed in the other's domain
>
> But most places we are seen
>
> We are seen as part of the same dream
>
> Where 1 is 2 and in that 2 are 2 more
>
> My purpose is to show
>
> You can't have one without the other, forever more!
>
>
>
What am I? | 2016/11/29 | [
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/46214",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/users/26329/"
] | I think you are
>
> yin and yang: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HzwS9.png)
>
>
>
*In my enemy is my friend
In my friend is my enemy*
>
> Seemingly contrary forces can be interlinked, such as good and bad or light and dark.
>
>
>
*I exist because he does
But he exists from where I don't*
>
> The concept of *bad* can only exist if *good* does, and vice-versa, and where there is not *bad*, there can be *good*. (Same applies to other apparently opposite forces.)
>
>
>
*Round and round we go again
Each placed in the other's domain*
>
> As on the traditional symbol, the swirls follow each other.
>
>
>
*But most places we are seen
We are seen as part of the same dream*
>
> Sometimes there's a fine line between the two, or none at all.
>
>
>
*Where 1 is 2 and in that 2 are 2 more*
>
> The one symbol has two swirly shapes in, each containing one small circle.
>
>
>
*My purpose is to show
You can't have one without the other, forever more!*
>
> The symbol represents the concept of [duality](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yin_and_yang), which could be called *timeless*.
>
>
> | Is it
>
> Fire and water
>
>
>
In my enemy is my friend
In my friend is my enemy
>
> In fire and water is oxygen.
>
>
>
I exist because he does
But he exists from where I don't
>
> They both exist because of oxygen and water exists in the sea where fire can't.
>
>
>
Round and round we go again
Each placed in the other's domain
>
> Water puts out fire, but fire evaporates water.
>
>
>
But most places we are seen
We are seen as part of the same dream
>
> They are both part of the 4 elements - water, air, fire and earth.
>
>
>
Where 1 is 2 and in that 2 are 2 more
My purpose is to show
>
> Not sure, but fire is to show light. @yitzih suggested H20?
>
>
>
You can't have one without the other, forever more!
>
> You can't have water and fire without oxygen.
>
>
> |
46,214 | >
> In my enemy is my friend
>
> In my friend is my enemy
>
> I exist because he does
>
> But he exists from where I don't
>
> Round and round we go again
>
> Each placed in the other's domain
>
> But most places we are seen
>
> We are seen as part of the same dream
>
> Where 1 is 2 and in that 2 are 2 more
>
> My purpose is to show
>
> You can't have one without the other, forever more!
>
>
>
What am I? | 2016/11/29 | [
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/46214",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/users/26329/"
] | I think you are
>
> yin and yang: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HzwS9.png)
>
>
>
*In my enemy is my friend
In my friend is my enemy*
>
> Seemingly contrary forces can be interlinked, such as good and bad or light and dark.
>
>
>
*I exist because he does
But he exists from where I don't*
>
> The concept of *bad* can only exist if *good* does, and vice-versa, and where there is not *bad*, there can be *good*. (Same applies to other apparently opposite forces.)
>
>
>
*Round and round we go again
Each placed in the other's domain*
>
> As on the traditional symbol, the swirls follow each other.
>
>
>
*But most places we are seen
We are seen as part of the same dream*
>
> Sometimes there's a fine line between the two, or none at all.
>
>
>
*Where 1 is 2 and in that 2 are 2 more*
>
> The one symbol has two swirly shapes in, each containing one small circle.
>
>
>
*My purpose is to show
You can't have one without the other, forever more!*
>
> The symbol represents the concept of [duality](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yin_and_yang), which could be called *timeless*.
>
>
> | As an addition to @Beastly Gerbil's answer:
Where 1 is 2 and in that 2 are 2 more:
>
> In Water(H2O) there are 2 elements (Hydrogen and Oxygen) and the are 2 of the Hydrogen atom.
>
>
> |
359,069 | Is it mandatory to check for Multicollinearity and Normality in the independent variables for all types of Machine Learning Algorithms ? | 2018/07/26 | [
"https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/359069",
"https://stats.stackexchange.com",
"https://stats.stackexchange.com/users/210779/"
] | No statistical or ML method requires IVs to be normally distributed.
(What is often important is that certain *test statistics*, like the sample mean, be asymptotically normally distributed. A sufficient but not necessary condition for this is that residuals be normal. This is often confused.)
If a "data scientist" believes that IVs should be normally distributed, I would recommend you probe more deeply. Either he has a reason in a particular application that I have never come across, or he is propagating a misunderstanding.
[multicollinearity](/questions/tagged/multicollinearity "show questions tagged 'multicollinearity'") [increases the variance of a parameter estimate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multicollinearity). In extreme cases, the estimate can be totally meaningless. It is often good practice to check for multicollinearity. It is even better to first understand your data and think about which IVs might be multicollinear. | No. I never did that on decision trees. |
129,995 | The textbook says:
>
> What's the order quantity?
>
> What's the price?
>
>
>
Is it also OK to say as follows:
>
> How much is the order quantity?
>
> How much is the price?
>
>
> | 2017/05/20 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/129995",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | The original poster's proposed two examples are understandable, but they do not sound natural to my (educated American) ear. They are literal translations of Spanish sentences, so I would not be surprised to hear someone who is fluent in Spanish use these phrases when they are speaking in English.
Here are two similar sentences that sound natural to me:
>
> How many items are in the order?
>
>
> How much does each item cost?
>
>
>
The word "item" can be replaced by a more specific noun, or by a pronoun. | When asking about quantity or price
>
> how much
>
>
>
is already implied since the answer will be a quantity.
There are any languages which will ask quantity and you would get your second set of questions as a literal translation, but consider
>
> What's the order quantity?
>
> How much is the order?
>
> How big is the order?
>
>
>
are all equivalent, |
279,803 | I'm sitting in a room next to some *totally* unopened cans of carbonated soft drinks (if it matters — the two affected cans are Coke Zero and Diet Coke). These cans were unboxed approximately two days ago and were full, but now are seemingly mostly empty!
There is no puncture in either can, and compressing them results in the dent being counteracted by pressure inside the can. Shaking and weighing the can (by hand; I don't have a scale anywhere near) reveals that a good majority (75%) of the can is now effectively empty.
The cans spent the whole time stored inside a normal room with a temperature of ±22ºC and automatic fluorescent lighting which is on for 16 hours a day.
Finally, there is no condensed drink on the outside wall of the can, and the cans themselves are externally room temperature, so I'm really puzzled about what process could do this.
I'm hesitant to open the cans because I'm not sure what the result of that could be, however if it's deemed here that there's little or no risk, I'll do that and update the question.
What possible reason could there be for these cans becoming empty? | 2016/09/12 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/279803",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/12599/"
] | Count\_to\_10's explanation is good but it does not seem to fit with all of the circumstances which you have described.
It seems strange that the 2 cans were "full" after being stored 20 months beyond their sell-by date, and then "mostly empty" only 2 days later. The only thing which has happened in between is that they were "unboxed." It seems to me unlikely that unpacking could have triggered a leak - a leak is much more likely to be triggered by rough handling during delivery to or handling by the retailer.
The fact that the cans are still under pressure seems incompatible with a leak. Gas (with smaller molecules) will leak more easily than sugary liquid. The internal pressure will enhance the leak, and the can will gradually lose pressure. However, you say that the cans can be "compressed" and "dented" so I think the internal pressure might in fact be quite low.
It also seems strange that there is no sign of any sticky liquid outside the can. The sugar and coloring will not evaporate, so there should be a sticky brown ring around the bottom of the can, as there was [here](http://ask.metafilter.com/27765/How-could-a-Coke-can-leak-its-contents-without-any-apparent-holes) and [here](http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=738792). (There is a very detailed post at the end of the latter thread, including results of a home experiment and some research on the corrosion of aluminium.)
Did you check the packaging for signs (rings) of leaked-out cola?
A faulty seam at the top of the can could explain a leak of gas and water vapour and the absence of a brown residue. But it cannot explain how so much liquid has evaporated through a microscopic hole in only 2 days. So much liquid would not evaporate in 2 days at 22$^{\circ}$C even if the can were open.
I think more likely explanations are that either (a) the cans which leaked did so slowly over months or years, and were not the ones you tested and found to be "full" when you opened the box 2 days ago, or (b) there was a filling fault at the factory, and the cans were only partly filled, but there was no leak.
A filling fault is very unlikely for Coca Cola or Pepsi, for which the Quality Assurance will be very high, but for a cheaper imitation brand it is possible. Bottling workers LAD and Mikeincharleston and canning manager HeadyCanner give answers [in this thread](https://www.beeradvocate.com/community/threads/leaking-cans.93055/) regarding the likelihood of faulty seams causing leaks. They do not mention the possibility of under-filling, so I guess this is rare. It is also very unlikely that 2 cans from different "lines" would be underfilled.
Before opening you could submerge the cans in warm water and look for bubbles, which will confirm the leak theory - but will not tell you how long ago it started. If that doesn't work chill in the 'fridge for a few hours then submerge in hot water, again looking for bubbles.
Opening the can should give you more clues. If the liquid inside is thick and sticky and flat, this would confirm the leak theory - and indicate that it started long ago. If the liquid is normal fizzy coke, this confirms the filling-fault theory. | First, get someone else to open them :)
Based on [Soda Cans](https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130421205814AAfoyOB)
Check the use by date first, soda cans do not need to be absolutely leak-proof, they only have to be leakproof until the use-by date.
Look at the top of the can, which is just a thin shell that the walls are crimped around. That's the only seal other than the ringpull, over a long time span the carbonation can escape, a few molecules at a time. And with temperature changes water vapor inside the can will also escape.
Coca Cola types drinks contain phosphoric acid, citric acid, and the carbonation is carbonic acid. These all attack metal, the walls and bottom of the metal containers are plastic lined to reduce the action of the acids on the metal, but it's not totally impervious.
The only seals that are impervious to leaks are called hermetic seals, and these are not used for containers that contain beverages or most foods. |
272,123 | *He's our cleaning man.*
Is "cleaning man" the natural term? What else is used? Cleaner?
Can "janitor" be used about someone who cleans an office building? | 2021/01/14 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/272123",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/127744/"
] | Stereotypically, we'd say "cleaning lady" in the US to refer to a female housekeeper, or to be humorously condescending to a male in that role (such as [this clip from the movie Super Troopers](https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/044e05b0-4486-4171-857b-d78e8b81a082), where the Chief makes Trooper Farva do cleaning work as a punishment). But we usually don't say "cleaning man", and a "cleaner" is often a euphemism for an assassin or hitman, but as an American, I would interpret *a* cleaner as someone working at *the* cleaners, as in a dry cleaning shop for laundry.
For a person of either sex who cleans an office building, [janitor](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/janitor) would be the best word choice. Building custodian (or just [custodian](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/custodian)) is another term sometimes used for janitors at schools. Or if you want to be funny in a friendly way, you could call him a "sanitation engineer". | Yes, either “cleaning man” if they are male,
“cleaner” or “janitor” works in your sentence.
From Wikipedia
>
> A janitor (American English, Scottish English), custodian, porter, cleaner or caretaker is a person who cleans and maintains buildings such as hospitals, schools, and residential accommodation. Janitors' primary responsibility is as a cleaner.
>
>
> |
272,123 | *He's our cleaning man.*
Is "cleaning man" the natural term? What else is used? Cleaner?
Can "janitor" be used about someone who cleans an office building? | 2021/01/14 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/272123",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/127744/"
] | In British English we would say "cleaner". If it was absolutely necessary to specify the gender, we'd be more likely to say "male cleaner" than "cleaning man" (which sounds odd, even though the term "cleaning lady" is well established and still fairly often used).
(Tim's answer may be a very good answer for American English. But I would certainly not equate a "cleaner" with someone working in a dry cleaning shop. I worked in an office until recently and we called the cleaner "the cleaner". Certainly, one could say "office cleaner", but I would suspect that "cleaner" is the more common term.)
For a school and some institutions, "caretaker" may be used, although it is not quite the same thing. It may be that some such institutions have only one caretaker but multiple cleaners, and that the caretaker's duties are more varied than just cleaning. The term "janitor" is not used in England or Wales; it may have some currency in Scotland. | Yes, either “cleaning man” if they are male,
“cleaner” or “janitor” works in your sentence.
From Wikipedia
>
> A janitor (American English, Scottish English), custodian, porter, cleaner or caretaker is a person who cleans and maintains buildings such as hospitals, schools, and residential accommodation. Janitors' primary responsibility is as a cleaner.
>
>
> |
37,376 | Can a low flying but super fast jet spray water from the surface of the ocean?
I've seen this visual effect done many times in movies. It's often done to highlight supersonic speed just a few feet above the water.
Do the laws of physics even come close to this being plausible?
**Bonus**: Can you provide photograph evidence of this happening?
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/rspHn.jpg) | 2017/04/24 | [
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/37376",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/users/21374/"
] | The visual effect in the picture you found seems to suck water out of the sea, in this real footage the f-18 air shockwave tends to push water down, and makes a trail. | And this [video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWGLAAYdbbc) gives quite the explanation on how this happens...
The way it works:
**condensation effects:**
* the air speed increases as the air flows around the aircraft
* this can mean, that the air may travel faster than the speed of sound
* air pressure and temperature drop, when the airspeed increases
* this leads to condensation, because the cold air cannot hold the amount of water anymore
* the cloud the aircraft is seemingly dragging along are condensation effects
* the cloud is a local effect, it is not dragged along
**shock waves:**
* they are created, when the air cannot get out of the way of the aircraft fast enough
* this way, they form a pressure wave
* that is the sound the aircraft makes
* generally two waves, one bow and one tail
**the rocket at the end**:
* the air is cold
* there are tiny ice crystals in the clouds
* they make the two pressure waves of the rocket visible |
37,376 | Can a low flying but super fast jet spray water from the surface of the ocean?
I've seen this visual effect done many times in movies. It's often done to highlight supersonic speed just a few feet above the water.
Do the laws of physics even come close to this being plausible?
**Bonus**: Can you provide photograph evidence of this happening?
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/rspHn.jpg) | 2017/04/24 | [
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/37376",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/users/21374/"
] | The visual effect in the picture you found seems to suck water out of the sea, in this real footage the f-18 air shockwave tends to push water down, and makes a trail. | I've wondered about this, too. From what I've discovered looking around online (and I am NOT a pilot or physicist) is that it's something of a myth -- at least in terms of the dramatic waterspout-effect like in the painting above and countless movies.
A fast, low-flying jet may create some shockwaves (not to be confused with the "vapor cone") that would disturb the surface of water, or some updraft that sucks up spray, but nowhere near the massive amount of water depicted.
The idea may have started because of images like below, where a Blue Angle flies low over water then, as it pulls up, the jet engines directly angled toward the water do indeed blast a huge spray -- but that's very different than sucking up water in level flight.
So, the answer is: yes, a low-flying jet can disturb the surface of water, but not quite in the way it's depicted in the movies.
<https://www.military.com/video/aircraft/jet-fighters/blue-angels-low-pass-over-water/1090049790001> |
37,376 | Can a low flying but super fast jet spray water from the surface of the ocean?
I've seen this visual effect done many times in movies. It's often done to highlight supersonic speed just a few feet above the water.
Do the laws of physics even come close to this being plausible?
**Bonus**: Can you provide photograph evidence of this happening?
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/rspHn.jpg) | 2017/04/24 | [
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/37376",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/users/21374/"
] | And this [video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWGLAAYdbbc) gives quite the explanation on how this happens...
The way it works:
**condensation effects:**
* the air speed increases as the air flows around the aircraft
* this can mean, that the air may travel faster than the speed of sound
* air pressure and temperature drop, when the airspeed increases
* this leads to condensation, because the cold air cannot hold the amount of water anymore
* the cloud the aircraft is seemingly dragging along are condensation effects
* the cloud is a local effect, it is not dragged along
**shock waves:**
* they are created, when the air cannot get out of the way of the aircraft fast enough
* this way, they form a pressure wave
* that is the sound the aircraft makes
* generally two waves, one bow and one tail
**the rocket at the end**:
* the air is cold
* there are tiny ice crystals in the clouds
* they make the two pressure waves of the rocket visible | I've wondered about this, too. From what I've discovered looking around online (and I am NOT a pilot or physicist) is that it's something of a myth -- at least in terms of the dramatic waterspout-effect like in the painting above and countless movies.
A fast, low-flying jet may create some shockwaves (not to be confused with the "vapor cone") that would disturb the surface of water, or some updraft that sucks up spray, but nowhere near the massive amount of water depicted.
The idea may have started because of images like below, where a Blue Angle flies low over water then, as it pulls up, the jet engines directly angled toward the water do indeed blast a huge spray -- but that's very different than sucking up water in level flight.
So, the answer is: yes, a low-flying jet can disturb the surface of water, but not quite in the way it's depicted in the movies.
<https://www.military.com/video/aircraft/jet-fighters/blue-angels-low-pass-over-water/1090049790001> |
161,720 | Can you have multiple domain registrars? for example, register.com and dnsmadeeasy.com both hosting your A and Cname records simultaneously?? | 2010/07/19 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/161720",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/-1/"
] | You can have as many DNS providers as you like, but the domain name itself can only be registered with a single organization. | You can only have one *registrar* per domain name.
That is the company that will have the contract with the relevant TLD *registry* for the provision of your domain name.
You *could* have multiple independent *domain hosters* for your domain, but you had better be damned sure they always have the same information in their copy of the domain, or things will break.
Usual practise is to have *one* primary hoster, and then use *secondary hosting* too. The secondary hoster would need to be able to "zone transfer" the zone from the primary hoster. |
45,764 | My Question is there any way we can track the node changes on Staging Server and Push the same to the Production Server. Best use case will be,
* Customer does not want to change the content on Production server.
* He wants to first change on Staging server get it tested and push the content to live server.
* Have revisions for changes so that he can revert back any time using node re- visioning system !
Can we do this maintaining the node id's same across staging and live servers ? Is there any out of the box solution for this like feature module does for configuration changes tracked using modules? | 2012/10/05 | [
"https://drupal.stackexchange.com/questions/45764",
"https://drupal.stackexchange.com",
"https://drupal.stackexchange.com/users/7372/"
] | For Node changes, you can use [node export](http://drupal.org/project/node_export) module to migrate node between drupal installations. for Tracking Configurations changes there is another module [configurations](http://drupal.org/project/configuration) , i haven't tried yet. Be sure cos the module release is still in dev | Helpful conversation [here](https://drupal.stackexchange.com/questions/1335/deploying-content-updates-from-staging-server-to-live-server "this post").
You could also check the [Deploy module](http://drupal.org/project/deploy)
>
> The Deploy module is designed to allow developers to easily stage Drupal content from one site to another. Deploy automatically manages dependencies between objects (like node references). It is designed to have a rich API which can be easily extended to be used in a variety of situations.
>
>
> |
23,466 | My sibling needs me to repair their eyeglasses for them because the repairs they've tried in the past aren't holding. The eyeglasses have both plastic frames and plastic lenses and the break is a very small and inconvenient area that doesn't have enough surface to tape together. The location and size of the breaks also makes it difficult to gorilla glue them back together. When successful it doesn't hold very long. Just replacing them isn't an option, so what better ways are there to fix them and are there any quick and cheap ways to repair them more permanently?
The following image is a diagram of roughly where the breaks in the eyeglass frames are, indicated by the red circles.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Ewjbt.png) | 2020/04/12 | [
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/questions/23466",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/users/30935/"
] | If the broken edges fit very well together, I would use cyanoacrylate (super glue) to mate them. Since CA sticks poorly to polyolefins and acetal, you may want to make sure your glasses are the right material by gluing something small like a piece of wood to a spot near the back and seeing how much effort it takes to break it off. This test will also help you verify the glue is good, not a bad brand or a bad batch. Better brands do tend to have fewer quality issues, but the core ingredient of every CA glue is pretty much the same. For both the test and the break, it will be beneficial to wipe away oils with rubbing alcohol or lighter fluid.
If the glue is a water-thin type, set up the glasses and optionally use tape to hold everything in place. Put less than a drop of glue onto each crack so it wicks into the space.
If the glue is thickened, you'll need to apply as little as you can to each break, perhaps using a toothpick. Wear gloves, put it together and hold it for 30 seconds. It you stick yourself to the glasses, use vegetable oil and a screwdriver to slowly pry yourself off. Don't get acetone on the glasses.
The glasses will be strong enough to wear within an hour. You still need to treat them gently, since they could break at the same place. If you already contaminated the joint with gorilla glue (horrible stuff), this repair may still work since CA sticks to damn near anything, but it will always be a weak joint since the gorilla glue can tear. | The fastest and cheapest kind of repairs to plastic glasses that have broken frames is called Bondic™.
It is a UV cured epoxy. Happily, the UV curing light is included in the kit which is available at well-stocked hardware stores and online. My kit was about $25.
The process takes about 10 seconds. There is an online repair demonstration video of frames broken across the bridge which is very impressive.
It may not work if there has been other kinds of repairs attempted with other materials and adhesives at the break location. With the cost of frames to replace, it might be worth a try.
Good Luck. |
23,466 | My sibling needs me to repair their eyeglasses for them because the repairs they've tried in the past aren't holding. The eyeglasses have both plastic frames and plastic lenses and the break is a very small and inconvenient area that doesn't have enough surface to tape together. The location and size of the breaks also makes it difficult to gorilla glue them back together. When successful it doesn't hold very long. Just replacing them isn't an option, so what better ways are there to fix them and are there any quick and cheap ways to repair them more permanently?
The following image is a diagram of roughly where the breaks in the eyeglass frames are, indicated by the red circles.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Ewjbt.png) | 2020/04/12 | [
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/questions/23466",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/users/30935/"
] | If the broken edges fit very well together, I would use cyanoacrylate (super glue) to mate them. Since CA sticks poorly to polyolefins and acetal, you may want to make sure your glasses are the right material by gluing something small like a piece of wood to a spot near the back and seeing how much effort it takes to break it off. This test will also help you verify the glue is good, not a bad brand or a bad batch. Better brands do tend to have fewer quality issues, but the core ingredient of every CA glue is pretty much the same. For both the test and the break, it will be beneficial to wipe away oils with rubbing alcohol or lighter fluid.
If the glue is a water-thin type, set up the glasses and optionally use tape to hold everything in place. Put less than a drop of glue onto each crack so it wicks into the space.
If the glue is thickened, you'll need to apply as little as you can to each break, perhaps using a toothpick. Wear gloves, put it together and hold it for 30 seconds. It you stick yourself to the glasses, use vegetable oil and a screwdriver to slowly pry yourself off. Don't get acetone on the glasses.
The glasses will be strong enough to wear within an hour. You still need to treat them gently, since they could break at the same place. If you already contaminated the joint with gorilla glue (horrible stuff), this repair may still work since CA sticks to damn near anything, but it will always be a weak joint since the gorilla glue can tear. | A hacky repair that might hold better but might look terrible is hot glue. It bonds to most smooth surfaces and stays flexible after hardening, so the chances of the repair breaking are slim. Another advantage is that you can probably peel the glue away from the frame and lens if you find a better solution. My dad repaired his reading glasses that way. It looks stupid, but still holds today.
Another idea that might look just as bad but might hold even better is clear construction silicone. That sticks to almost everything and stays flexible after curing as well, but it might be very hard or impossible to remove it once it's cured.
First clean the frame thoroughly and let it dry completely. Then dip your fingers in a solution of water and dishwashing liquid (Silicone won't stick to that solution). Dab a tiny amount of silicone onto the break and smooth it out with your wet finger. Remove any smears immediately and completely. Let the silicone cure for several hours. |
23,466 | My sibling needs me to repair their eyeglasses for them because the repairs they've tried in the past aren't holding. The eyeglasses have both plastic frames and plastic lenses and the break is a very small and inconvenient area that doesn't have enough surface to tape together. The location and size of the breaks also makes it difficult to gorilla glue them back together. When successful it doesn't hold very long. Just replacing them isn't an option, so what better ways are there to fix them and are there any quick and cheap ways to repair them more permanently?
The following image is a diagram of roughly where the breaks in the eyeglass frames are, indicated by the red circles.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Ewjbt.png) | 2020/04/12 | [
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/questions/23466",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/users/30935/"
] | If the broken edges fit very well together, I would use cyanoacrylate (super glue) to mate them. Since CA sticks poorly to polyolefins and acetal, you may want to make sure your glasses are the right material by gluing something small like a piece of wood to a spot near the back and seeing how much effort it takes to break it off. This test will also help you verify the glue is good, not a bad brand or a bad batch. Better brands do tend to have fewer quality issues, but the core ingredient of every CA glue is pretty much the same. For both the test and the break, it will be beneficial to wipe away oils with rubbing alcohol or lighter fluid.
If the glue is a water-thin type, set up the glasses and optionally use tape to hold everything in place. Put less than a drop of glue onto each crack so it wicks into the space.
If the glue is thickened, you'll need to apply as little as you can to each break, perhaps using a toothpick. Wear gloves, put it together and hold it for 30 seconds. It you stick yourself to the glasses, use vegetable oil and a screwdriver to slowly pry yourself off. Don't get acetone on the glasses.
The glasses will be strong enough to wear within an hour. You still need to treat them gently, since they could break at the same place. If you already contaminated the joint with gorilla glue (horrible stuff), this repair may still work since CA sticks to damn near anything, but it will always be a weak joint since the gorilla glue can tear. | SUPER GLUE & BAKING SODA.... Yes, this little hack comes from the tech world and has been one of my best plastic repair hacks...i have repaired many of my glasses frames and my husband's sunglass frames due to dropping them on my tile floor.....I happened across a youtube video by accident and has been the best accident in my world.... Search YouTube for the words above! |
1,485,600 | Customer dropped a Win7 laptop off that they showed conclusively that they own...but they don't remember the password for the only account. Machine has not been in regular use for 4+ years, and reformatting and reinstall of the operating system can't be done until the data is safely duplicated to another drive.
How should I proceed? | 2019/09/24 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/1485600",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/414280/"
] | If the drive is functioning and there is no FDE (Full Disk Encryption), just plug the drive into another computer and find and copy the files you wish to recover.
Alternatively you could use a bootable USB stick to 'bring the other OS to this computer', as it were. | You must be having one of these: [External Enclosure](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/B06Y5CJSVW)
So, if the laptop does indeed belong to that person, then take out the HDD & plug it into this enclosure and duplicate all the data from the drive.
After copying all the data present on the HDD, put the HDD back into the laptop and then do a clean install of windows (7 or 8.1 or 10 whichever the user will prefer) |
1,485,600 | Customer dropped a Win7 laptop off that they showed conclusively that they own...but they don't remember the password for the only account. Machine has not been in regular use for 4+ years, and reformatting and reinstall of the operating system can't be done until the data is safely duplicated to another drive.
How should I proceed? | 2019/09/24 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/1485600",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/414280/"
] | If the drive is functioning and there is no FDE (Full Disk Encryption), just plug the drive into another computer and find and copy the files you wish to recover.
Alternatively you could use a bootable USB stick to 'bring the other OS to this computer', as it were. | @music2myear has a good comment, and should have posted it as an answer.
>
> Plug the drive into another computer, copy the files off.
>
>
>
If you don't want to pull the drive for some reason, then you can boot from a live Linux CD or USB stick and get at the files that way (copy to an external or network drive).
However, the simplest way off all is probably just to reset the Windows password to a known value (even easier than trying to recover it):
* [How to Reset Your Forgotten Windows Password the Easy Way](https://www.howtogeek.com/96630/how-to-reset-your-forgotten-windows-password-the-easy-way/)
* [6 Free Windows Password Recovery Tools](https://www.lifewire.com/free-windows-password-recovery-tools-2626179)
* [Change or Reset Windows Password from a Ubuntu Live CD](https://www.howtogeek.com/howto/14369/change-or-reset-windows-password-from-a-ubuntu-live-cd/)
* [Forgot Windows 7 Password? How to Reset Windows 7 Password](https://www.androidphonesoft.com/resources/reset-windows-7-password.html)
* [4 Best Ways to Reset Windows 7 Password with Ease](https://www.top-password.com/knowledge/reset-windows-7-password.html)
* [Password reset disk for Windows 7](https://www.bullguard.com/blog/2015/10/how-to-access-your-pc-if-you-forgot-your-windows-password)
* G.I.Y.F for more ;-) Hope this helps |
1,485,600 | Customer dropped a Win7 laptop off that they showed conclusively that they own...but they don't remember the password for the only account. Machine has not been in regular use for 4+ years, and reformatting and reinstall of the operating system can't be done until the data is safely duplicated to another drive.
How should I proceed? | 2019/09/24 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/1485600",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/414280/"
] | You must be having one of these: [External Enclosure](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/B06Y5CJSVW)
So, if the laptop does indeed belong to that person, then take out the HDD & plug it into this enclosure and duplicate all the data from the drive.
After copying all the data present on the HDD, put the HDD back into the laptop and then do a clean install of windows (7 or 8.1 or 10 whichever the user will prefer) | @music2myear has a good comment, and should have posted it as an answer.
>
> Plug the drive into another computer, copy the files off.
>
>
>
If you don't want to pull the drive for some reason, then you can boot from a live Linux CD or USB stick and get at the files that way (copy to an external or network drive).
However, the simplest way off all is probably just to reset the Windows password to a known value (even easier than trying to recover it):
* [How to Reset Your Forgotten Windows Password the Easy Way](https://www.howtogeek.com/96630/how-to-reset-your-forgotten-windows-password-the-easy-way/)
* [6 Free Windows Password Recovery Tools](https://www.lifewire.com/free-windows-password-recovery-tools-2626179)
* [Change or Reset Windows Password from a Ubuntu Live CD](https://www.howtogeek.com/howto/14369/change-or-reset-windows-password-from-a-ubuntu-live-cd/)
* [Forgot Windows 7 Password? How to Reset Windows 7 Password](https://www.androidphonesoft.com/resources/reset-windows-7-password.html)
* [4 Best Ways to Reset Windows 7 Password with Ease](https://www.top-password.com/knowledge/reset-windows-7-password.html)
* [Password reset disk for Windows 7](https://www.bullguard.com/blog/2015/10/how-to-access-your-pc-if-you-forgot-your-windows-password)
* G.I.Y.F for more ;-) Hope this helps |
276,535 | Just going through my usual [SO Hitlist](https://stackoverflow.com/search?q=score%3A-5..-2%20answers%3A..1%20is%3Aquestion%20hasaccepted%3Ano%20closed%3Ano%20duplicate%3Ano%20migrated%3Ano%20wiki%3Ano) until I saw [this massive debate](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7065252/why-do-try-blocks-reduce-speed-of-my-program/7065409#7065409) in the comments:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/cLUwl.png)
20 comments, of which maybe 2 are on-topic, are arguing about the ethics of voting to balance or the validity of the answer.
So far, I've [flagged](https://stackoverflow.com/users/flag-summary/4272600) 2 of comments as "not constructive", but it would be *extremely tedious* to flag every single one of them (including the 5-second cooldown).
**Question:** As a <1k user, what should/can I do about extended discussions in comments? | 2016/03/06 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/276535",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/276705/"
] | You may not realize it but creating new accounts just to be able to keep asking questions is not just tiresome but is also likely to result in being banned from the site.
It is far easier to learn from the downvotes and to quickly address any issues in questions which begin to accrue them.
I see no need to develop an appeals process for unwarranted downvotes because it would be a heavy workload on moderators (who are volunteers) and I suspect would almost always result in a verdict of the downvotes seeming reasonable.
I am yet to see a good or just OK question here that was heavily downvoted. | No, there is no way to appeal. See it as a democracy, we all judge what a good question is, and how could you say one's opinion is wrong? You can't. That's why there is no way to appeal to votes. In the case of serial voting, there are systems, not users in place to fix the injustice.
That said: there is probably a reason you got downvoted multiple times. You should work on the quality of your questions. If you follow the rules, follow the example of good questions, then you will be set for upvotes. |
743,876 | Would the metric outside the spherical region be related mathematically to the schwarzschild metric? | 2023/01/04 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/743876",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | In terms of analytical solutions, only an instantaneous, time-symmetry moment field configuration for of a system of many black holes can be found and given.
These are exact solutions of the initial value problem of GR, but they do not describe the whole time evolution of such a system. For this, a numerical simulation has to be performed.
N-black hole initial data problem's solutions are called Brill-Lindquist initial data and Misner initial data.
<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5660886/> | Your question specifically asks for the metric outside of the spherical region. This is presumably a vacuum, and so by [Birkhoff's theorem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birkhoff%27s_theorem_(relativity)) it would indeed by the Schwarzschild metric, assuming that the black holes are considered stationary (e.g. if their relative motions are relatively insignificant). |
473,613 | 
The problem was to solve for the capacitance of this system if initial capacitance was C.
I solved it using the method which has been given as wrong.My question is that why is potential difference across dielectrics 2 and 4 not same? Since the dielectrics 2 and 4 are between a metal plate and dilectric slab (k=6) covering entire width of the capacitor shouldn't the potential difference across them be the same(if the capacitor is disconnected)? Also does the answer depend on whether the capacitor is disconnected or not? Any hints would be appreciated, Thanks.
Edit: I think my assumption that charges won't redistribute if capacitor is disconnected is wrong, please correct me if I'm wrong. | 2019/04/18 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/473613",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/225456/"
] | Energy is always conserved but in problems such as this kinetic energy may not be conserved.
If there are no external forces/torques acting on the ball & rod system then linear/angular momentum will always be conserved.
These two conservation laws give two equations which link the final linear velocity of the centre of mass of the rod (and ball if the ball sticks to the rod), the final linear velocity of the ball and the final angular velocity of the rod (and ball if the ball sticks to the rod) to the initial velocity of the ball.
So in general you have three unknowns and 2 equations linking them and thus cannot solve the problem.
If the ball sticks to the rod then the three unknown become two unknowns and the problem can be solved however the collision will be inelastic and kinetic energy will not be conserved.
In general to get a third equation linking the three unknowns you must add a constraint on the system which, for example, might be that the collision between the ball and the rod is elastic ie kinetic energy is conserved. | In such collisions, net linear and angular momenta are conserved, since the force of interaction is purely internal and cannot cause an impulse. However, this force of interaction can cause some change in elastic potential energy, which results in the supposed discrepancy with the law of conservation of energy. Whether net kinetic energy will be conserved or not depends on the nature of the collision, in which case the coefficient of restitution comes in handy for solving problems. |
134,722 | About three months ago, auto save in Blender 2.8 stopped working
Since then, I downloaded 10 new builds and nothing has changed.
Blender 2.79 makes autosave fine, but 2.8 doesn’t
I checked on other computers, everything works, but on mine it doesn't, and I do not know how to fix it.
What is the problem? | 2019/03/19 | [
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/134722",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/users/70771/"
] | In **Preferences** > **Save and Load** > **Auto Save**, do you have the **Auto Save** **Temporary Files** option checked ?
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/w6hba.png)
Next check in **Preferences** > **File Paths** > **Data** > **Temporary Files**, left click the **folder icon** to see if you have any .blender files saved at this location.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HVsf2.png)
This is what i have in my Temp folder:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/WM69m.png)
Note that holding down the **Alt** key and **left clicking** that little folder icon will take you directly to the location on your hard drive from where you can drag one of the saved .bland files onto your desktop and then open it again in Blender.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/p3hpc.png) | I'm posting this as an answer since this was added as a [comment](https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/134722/autosave-don-t-work-in-2-8#comment254661_134741) and it solved my problem.
If a modal operator is running, the autosave feature won't work.
Make sure to disable all add-ons and selectively re-enable them until the autosave feature stops working to know which one is the culprit.
I didn't get a warning about it in the console though, so it's a bit troublesome if you use a large number of addons which could potentially be full-time running a modal operator in the background. |
95,942 | I am working at consulting company which provides project help to customers in different domains. I was assigned to a supply chain project as a management liaison.
Originally the manager of my company was assigned as the project lead, and he assigned certain tasks to me. Now the customer has reassigned the project lead position to their company employee, because of strategic changes.
I no longer have those tasks assigned, and I feel more or less useless. I am still helping out organizing meetings, but that is pretty much it. I want to get more work and utilize my technical skills for the customer's team and projects.
How do I ask my manager for additional work without sounding being useless to the team? | 2017/07/26 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/95942",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/74649/"
] | Just tell your manager that you have noticed that your workload has decreased and that you can handle more work.
There is no need of feeling useless. If you don't have enough work, just speak up and tell your boss that you are capable of doing more work. It is probably a simple oversight on their part. There is usually more than enough work to go around.
If you ask and they don't assign more work to you, then they are satisfied with the amount of work you are producing and do not expect any more you. | Because you are a consultant, I would first reach out to my contact at your consulting company and let them know about your situation and that you have time to take on more work than you are being assigned. They may direct you to do the best you can with out creating waves. Reorganizations are dangerous times for consultants. Some times different managers get assigned that want to reduce the consultant load for no reason other than that its a quick cost reduction. Hopefully your account manager has been in contact with your manager and has a feel for climate with regards to the management at your company. They should be able to provide you direction even if it is just keep your head down and look busy all the time.
If your company doesn't have any direction for you, or simply directs you to ask for more I would start by trying to offer help with existing tasks for your projects. You can also approach your customer contact and let them know you have your current tasks managed well and have room on your plate if they can use you. The further out from the reorganization you get the easier it should be to get more tasks assigned, or you should know if they are trying to eliminate your position. |
95,942 | I am working at consulting company which provides project help to customers in different domains. I was assigned to a supply chain project as a management liaison.
Originally the manager of my company was assigned as the project lead, and he assigned certain tasks to me. Now the customer has reassigned the project lead position to their company employee, because of strategic changes.
I no longer have those tasks assigned, and I feel more or less useless. I am still helping out organizing meetings, but that is pretty much it. I want to get more work and utilize my technical skills for the customer's team and projects.
How do I ask my manager for additional work without sounding being useless to the team? | 2017/07/26 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/95942",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/74649/"
] | Just tell your manager that you have noticed that your workload has decreased and that you can handle more work.
There is no need of feeling useless. If you don't have enough work, just speak up and tell your boss that you are capable of doing more work. It is probably a simple oversight on their part. There is usually more than enough work to go around.
If you ask and they don't assign more work to you, then they are satisfied with the amount of work you are producing and do not expect any more you. | Not mentioning you have enough work to do is going to backfire eventually.
I would go with something that makes it sound as if you are willing to take on more work, instead of you not having enough work. Focus on the fact that you would like to do more and have skills that are currently unused but valuable to the company. Go for something like:
>
> 'Hi Mr X, I took a look at my weekly planning and now that Person Y
> has taken over some of my tasks, I'm ready for a new challenge. I am looking for a new project to take on, perhaps one where I can utilize my technical skills. Do you have any suggestions?'
>
>
> |
95,942 | I am working at consulting company which provides project help to customers in different domains. I was assigned to a supply chain project as a management liaison.
Originally the manager of my company was assigned as the project lead, and he assigned certain tasks to me. Now the customer has reassigned the project lead position to their company employee, because of strategic changes.
I no longer have those tasks assigned, and I feel more or less useless. I am still helping out organizing meetings, but that is pretty much it. I want to get more work and utilize my technical skills for the customer's team and projects.
How do I ask my manager for additional work without sounding being useless to the team? | 2017/07/26 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/95942",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/74649/"
] | Because you are a consultant, I would first reach out to my contact at your consulting company and let them know about your situation and that you have time to take on more work than you are being assigned. They may direct you to do the best you can with out creating waves. Reorganizations are dangerous times for consultants. Some times different managers get assigned that want to reduce the consultant load for no reason other than that its a quick cost reduction. Hopefully your account manager has been in contact with your manager and has a feel for climate with regards to the management at your company. They should be able to provide you direction even if it is just keep your head down and look busy all the time.
If your company doesn't have any direction for you, or simply directs you to ask for more I would start by trying to offer help with existing tasks for your projects. You can also approach your customer contact and let them know you have your current tasks managed well and have room on your plate if they can use you. The further out from the reorganization you get the easier it should be to get more tasks assigned, or you should know if they are trying to eliminate your position. | Not mentioning you have enough work to do is going to backfire eventually.
I would go with something that makes it sound as if you are willing to take on more work, instead of you not having enough work. Focus on the fact that you would like to do more and have skills that are currently unused but valuable to the company. Go for something like:
>
> 'Hi Mr X, I took a look at my weekly planning and now that Person Y
> has taken over some of my tasks, I'm ready for a new challenge. I am looking for a new project to take on, perhaps one where I can utilize my technical skills. Do you have any suggestions?'
>
>
> |
6,295 | I am from India and we speak English there as well, albeit not as culturally refined as I see in the US. In India, and perhaps in the UK, English is spoken in a straight and 'as it is' manner. For example, I found in the US, people would say "You might want to do this..." when they actually mean "You should/have to do this." For once, this kind of sentence with its tacit meaning in American culture has got me into a problem.
Can you give more examples here which would help me to understand more of these cultural connotations in American English? | 2010/12/06 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6295",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | This is a really interesting question. It's hard to give you a really concrete example, but it sounds like you've had issues when someone was trying to be polite, so I will address that. As others have mentioned, people in America sometimes have trouble being told what to do. It sounds like whoever was speaking to you was trying to politely suggest that you should do something other than what you had been doing. Along the same lines, people often ask questions to lead the other person to make the right decision, rather than simply telling them what they are about to do is wrong.
Take for example two people driving in a car — we'll say Mike is the driver and Cindy is the passenger. Mike is about to miss a turn and Cindy knows it, but rather than simply tell him she might ask, "Is this our turn here?". Similarly, oftentimes someone will preface a fact with, "I think..." rather than just state the fact. For example, Bob is editing a sentence Violet has written. Violet wrote, "We did not receive the package until Friday." Bob *knows* that "receive" has been spelled incorrectly, but rather than just tell Violet she is wrong he will soften it by saying, "I think the i and e need to switched in the word receive." | I've thought about your question for a while, and it seems a bit open-ended. If it were more narrowly defined, it would be easier to answer. What I *can* do, however, is explain why someone might use *might* in place of *should*.
People use the "you might want to" construction when they are trying to be polite. Telling people — especially strangers — they "should" or "have to" do something sounds too direct and harsh. It's like giving someone orders, as if they were your subordinate. Use of *might* softens the suggestion, leaving it up to the listener to determine for himself or herself whether your idea is worthy of merit.
If you were to write out the long version of what is actually being conveyed, it might go something like this:
>
> You are an adult who is capable of
> making your own choices in life, and I
> fully respect that, but in this
> situation you might want to think
> about a different approach from
> the one you're currently using. Ultimately it
> is, of course, your decision and I'm
> just trying to help.
>
>
> |
6,295 | I am from India and we speak English there as well, albeit not as culturally refined as I see in the US. In India, and perhaps in the UK, English is spoken in a straight and 'as it is' manner. For example, I found in the US, people would say "You might want to do this..." when they actually mean "You should/have to do this." For once, this kind of sentence with its tacit meaning in American culture has got me into a problem.
Can you give more examples here which would help me to understand more of these cultural connotations in American English? | 2010/12/06 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6295",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | I've thought about your question for a while, and it seems a bit open-ended. If it were more narrowly defined, it would be easier to answer. What I *can* do, however, is explain why someone might use *might* in place of *should*.
People use the "you might want to" construction when they are trying to be polite. Telling people — especially strangers — they "should" or "have to" do something sounds too direct and harsh. It's like giving someone orders, as if they were your subordinate. Use of *might* softens the suggestion, leaving it up to the listener to determine for himself or herself whether your idea is worthy of merit.
If you were to write out the long version of what is actually being conveyed, it might go something like this:
>
> You are an adult who is capable of
> making your own choices in life, and I
> fully respect that, but in this
> situation you might want to think
> about a different approach from
> the one you're currently using. Ultimately it
> is, of course, your decision and I'm
> just trying to help.
>
>
> | A scenario I experienced is when I was invited to a party and my neighbor was not. I then met him and asked if we could go together (I didn't know if he was invited). He would tend to say that "*I don't think* I am invited" instead of "they didn't invite me" or "I am not invited". I don't know if this way contains sarcasm but I guess many American would reply in the same fashion in such similar situations. |
6,295 | I am from India and we speak English there as well, albeit not as culturally refined as I see in the US. In India, and perhaps in the UK, English is spoken in a straight and 'as it is' manner. For example, I found in the US, people would say "You might want to do this..." when they actually mean "You should/have to do this." For once, this kind of sentence with its tacit meaning in American culture has got me into a problem.
Can you give more examples here which would help me to understand more of these cultural connotations in American English? | 2010/12/06 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6295",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | This is a really interesting question. It's hard to give you a really concrete example, but it sounds like you've had issues when someone was trying to be polite, so I will address that. As others have mentioned, people in America sometimes have trouble being told what to do. It sounds like whoever was speaking to you was trying to politely suggest that you should do something other than what you had been doing. Along the same lines, people often ask questions to lead the other person to make the right decision, rather than simply telling them what they are about to do is wrong.
Take for example two people driving in a car — we'll say Mike is the driver and Cindy is the passenger. Mike is about to miss a turn and Cindy knows it, but rather than simply tell him she might ask, "Is this our turn here?". Similarly, oftentimes someone will preface a fact with, "I think..." rather than just state the fact. For example, Bob is editing a sentence Violet has written. Violet wrote, "We did not receive the package until Friday." Bob *knows* that "receive" has been spelled incorrectly, but rather than just tell Violet she is wrong he will soften it by saying, "I think the i and e need to switched in the word receive." | It is difficult to answer the general version of this question because often neither side is aware that there can be any misinterpretation until it has happened. I'm a Briton living in the USA, but working a lot of the time with a team in India. I am aware that there are occasionally problems, but I gave up making a list of specific examples a (long) while ago. Maybe that was a mistake.
One difference to take into account is that in England, English is the mother tongue; in America, English is likewise usually the mother tongue - Spanish is the main alternative contender. Unless I misunderstand something though, in India, English is often (normally?) the second language - learned from an early age, but after previously learning one of the many local languages first. Across India as a whole, English is the lingua franca; but within a region, there is often a local language that is used as well, or instead. Consequently, the Indian dialect of English is affected by nuances from the local languages. I notice that articles (the, a, an) are frequently omitted, as are some prepositions and other words. It isn't quite telegraphic English, but sometimes has some of the same qualities.
There are words used in America that are not used as much in England; there are words used innocuously in England that are terms of abuse in America. Euphemisms are constantly evolving. Slang and regional dialectal terms don't always transfer to other parts of the USA, let alone outside - similar problems occur in England, and I'm sure it happens in India too.
Even so, the core of English is strongly the same in all three countries. The key to clear communication is to avoid using much in the way of slang, to use clear, concise, precise terms.
The other trick is to become attuned to when there is a problem - when something isn't being understood. I regret to report that it can be difficult to spot blank faces over a telephone. Sometimes, I manage to spot the stupefied silence, but not always. However, being aware that the issue can arise is an important first step. |
6,295 | I am from India and we speak English there as well, albeit not as culturally refined as I see in the US. In India, and perhaps in the UK, English is spoken in a straight and 'as it is' manner. For example, I found in the US, people would say "You might want to do this..." when they actually mean "You should/have to do this." For once, this kind of sentence with its tacit meaning in American culture has got me into a problem.
Can you give more examples here which would help me to understand more of these cultural connotations in American English? | 2010/12/06 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6295",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | It is difficult to answer the general version of this question because often neither side is aware that there can be any misinterpretation until it has happened. I'm a Briton living in the USA, but working a lot of the time with a team in India. I am aware that there are occasionally problems, but I gave up making a list of specific examples a (long) while ago. Maybe that was a mistake.
One difference to take into account is that in England, English is the mother tongue; in America, English is likewise usually the mother tongue - Spanish is the main alternative contender. Unless I misunderstand something though, in India, English is often (normally?) the second language - learned from an early age, but after previously learning one of the many local languages first. Across India as a whole, English is the lingua franca; but within a region, there is often a local language that is used as well, or instead. Consequently, the Indian dialect of English is affected by nuances from the local languages. I notice that articles (the, a, an) are frequently omitted, as are some prepositions and other words. It isn't quite telegraphic English, but sometimes has some of the same qualities.
There are words used in America that are not used as much in England; there are words used innocuously in England that are terms of abuse in America. Euphemisms are constantly evolving. Slang and regional dialectal terms don't always transfer to other parts of the USA, let alone outside - similar problems occur in England, and I'm sure it happens in India too.
Even so, the core of English is strongly the same in all three countries. The key to clear communication is to avoid using much in the way of slang, to use clear, concise, precise terms.
The other trick is to become attuned to when there is a problem - when something isn't being understood. I regret to report that it can be difficult to spot blank faces over a telephone. Sometimes, I manage to spot the stupefied silence, but not always. However, being aware that the issue can arise is an important first step. | A scenario I experienced is when I was invited to a party and my neighbor was not. I then met him and asked if we could go together (I didn't know if he was invited). He would tend to say that "*I don't think* I am invited" instead of "they didn't invite me" or "I am not invited". I don't know if this way contains sarcasm but I guess many American would reply in the same fashion in such similar situations. |
6,295 | I am from India and we speak English there as well, albeit not as culturally refined as I see in the US. In India, and perhaps in the UK, English is spoken in a straight and 'as it is' manner. For example, I found in the US, people would say "You might want to do this..." when they actually mean "You should/have to do this." For once, this kind of sentence with its tacit meaning in American culture has got me into a problem.
Can you give more examples here which would help me to understand more of these cultural connotations in American English? | 2010/12/06 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6295",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | This is a really interesting question. It's hard to give you a really concrete example, but it sounds like you've had issues when someone was trying to be polite, so I will address that. As others have mentioned, people in America sometimes have trouble being told what to do. It sounds like whoever was speaking to you was trying to politely suggest that you should do something other than what you had been doing. Along the same lines, people often ask questions to lead the other person to make the right decision, rather than simply telling them what they are about to do is wrong.
Take for example two people driving in a car — we'll say Mike is the driver and Cindy is the passenger. Mike is about to miss a turn and Cindy knows it, but rather than simply tell him she might ask, "Is this our turn here?". Similarly, oftentimes someone will preface a fact with, "I think..." rather than just state the fact. For example, Bob is editing a sentence Violet has written. Violet wrote, "We did not receive the package until Friday." Bob *knows* that "receive" has been spelled incorrectly, but rather than just tell Violet she is wrong he will soften it by saying, "I think the i and e need to switched in the word receive." | This sounds more like a cultural difference that is reflected in the usage of the language. You have probably noticed that the US culture is overall very individualistic. Americans typically do not like to be told what to do, and they also tend to respect the other person's right to different views or opinions. That is one reason why instead of "You should do this," an American is more likely to say "You might want to do this" or "Here's what I would do, if I were you".
Another reason is that Americans generally tend to be very polite. I was born in the former USSR and I came to the US as a teenager, and I can see noticeable differences between the two cultures. In fact, many people who have come to the US from the USSR as adults tend to sound rude when they speak English, even if they do not mean to offend anyone. Even if they know the language well, they often miss the various nuances that are natural to a native speaker of American English, such as saying "please" all the time, or avoiding direct imperatives by saying "would you..." or "could you..." instead of "Give me that!", or even smiling for no obvious reason. |
6,295 | I am from India and we speak English there as well, albeit not as culturally refined as I see in the US. In India, and perhaps in the UK, English is spoken in a straight and 'as it is' manner. For example, I found in the US, people would say "You might want to do this..." when they actually mean "You should/have to do this." For once, this kind of sentence with its tacit meaning in American culture has got me into a problem.
Can you give more examples here which would help me to understand more of these cultural connotations in American English? | 2010/12/06 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6295",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | This sounds more like a cultural difference that is reflected in the usage of the language. You have probably noticed that the US culture is overall very individualistic. Americans typically do not like to be told what to do, and they also tend to respect the other person's right to different views or opinions. That is one reason why instead of "You should do this," an American is more likely to say "You might want to do this" or "Here's what I would do, if I were you".
Another reason is that Americans generally tend to be very polite. I was born in the former USSR and I came to the US as a teenager, and I can see noticeable differences between the two cultures. In fact, many people who have come to the US from the USSR as adults tend to sound rude when they speak English, even if they do not mean to offend anyone. Even if they know the language well, they often miss the various nuances that are natural to a native speaker of American English, such as saying "please" all the time, or avoiding direct imperatives by saying "would you..." or "could you..." instead of "Give me that!", or even smiling for no obvious reason. | A scenario I experienced is when I was invited to a party and my neighbor was not. I then met him and asked if we could go together (I didn't know if he was invited). He would tend to say that "*I don't think* I am invited" instead of "they didn't invite me" or "I am not invited". I don't know if this way contains sarcasm but I guess many American would reply in the same fashion in such similar situations. |
6,295 | I am from India and we speak English there as well, albeit not as culturally refined as I see in the US. In India, and perhaps in the UK, English is spoken in a straight and 'as it is' manner. For example, I found in the US, people would say "You might want to do this..." when they actually mean "You should/have to do this." For once, this kind of sentence with its tacit meaning in American culture has got me into a problem.
Can you give more examples here which would help me to understand more of these cultural connotations in American English? | 2010/12/06 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6295",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | This is a really interesting question. It's hard to give you a really concrete example, but it sounds like you've had issues when someone was trying to be polite, so I will address that. As others have mentioned, people in America sometimes have trouble being told what to do. It sounds like whoever was speaking to you was trying to politely suggest that you should do something other than what you had been doing. Along the same lines, people often ask questions to lead the other person to make the right decision, rather than simply telling them what they are about to do is wrong.
Take for example two people driving in a car — we'll say Mike is the driver and Cindy is the passenger. Mike is about to miss a turn and Cindy knows it, but rather than simply tell him she might ask, "Is this our turn here?". Similarly, oftentimes someone will preface a fact with, "I think..." rather than just state the fact. For example, Bob is editing a sentence Violet has written. Violet wrote, "We did not receive the package until Friday." Bob *knows* that "receive" has been spelled incorrectly, but rather than just tell Violet she is wrong he will soften it by saying, "I think the i and e need to switched in the word receive." | A scenario I experienced is when I was invited to a party and my neighbor was not. I then met him and asked if we could go together (I didn't know if he was invited). He would tend to say that "*I don't think* I am invited" instead of "they didn't invite me" or "I am not invited". I don't know if this way contains sarcasm but I guess many American would reply in the same fashion in such similar situations. |
35,191 | When Craster gives away the baby boys to the White Walkers, what happens? Do the baby boys become snacks at a White Walker party? Made into something else with magic? | 2013/05/06 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/35191",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/14328/"
] | I take it quite a few people forgot about the little girl on the show? So I'm sure there are female white walkers. It doesn't seem that the females go to war though, or at least I've yet to see any. So maybe they babies like Craster's sons to the women and they raise the living as their own or something.
 | My theory on the last scene and what happens with the babies.. I haven't read the books, so I'm just purely using my imagination.
The babies allow the white walkers (or whatever they are) turn into a human, in effect bringing someone back to life. Now my imagination really gets working - one person that will comeback to life again is Eddard Stark.
Yes I'm nuts and really have no basis for these thoughts, but I have still had fun thinking about it. |
35,191 | When Craster gives away the baby boys to the White Walkers, what happens? Do the baby boys become snacks at a White Walker party? Made into something else with magic? | 2013/05/06 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/35191",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/14328/"
] | Based on the metaphysics of the story one could deduce that:
* The lives and actions of White Walkers mimic the tides; they are cyclical as they are seasonal.
* The red comet passes the planet during the same time dragons and White Walkers exist.
* All life must procreate.
* White Walkers are living.
* White Walkers take children.
* There are no White Walkers that are child-sized, thus they must be adults.
Therefore..
* The children should be White Walkers during the next cycle. | I believe the walkers feed the babies' flesh to the zombies or wights. They don't become white walkers but the wights' food. The white walkers take the children and kill the rest. |
35,191 | When Craster gives away the baby boys to the White Walkers, what happens? Do the baby boys become snacks at a White Walker party? Made into something else with magic? | 2013/05/06 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/35191",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/14328/"
] | I don't know that we know the answer to that yet. My money is on them showing up at some point in the future - tiny, horrifying, baby wights. This is something the watchers on the Wall won't really be prepared for, I think. Who's going to expect a *baby* to be that dangerous? | I have to agree with the theory that they become White Walkers. There is no evidence for it, bu there is counter evidence for its counter evidence.
The Night King. A thousand years ago - the description could slowly have changed of his bride. His bride might even have been a Child of the Forest - give enough time, and people will change the details. See it like natural selection. Each re-telling changes a detail. If the change captivates the audience, it gets passed on.
And there are no female White Walkers shown so far. I suspect that, yes, they sometimes take living prisoners (Craster's sacrifices) to become them. |
35,191 | When Craster gives away the baby boys to the White Walkers, what happens? Do the baby boys become snacks at a White Walker party? Made into something else with magic? | 2013/05/06 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/35191",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/14328/"
] | The origin and nature of the White Walkers is perhaps the greatest mysteries in the series. Those things give me the shivers.
Anyway, Gilly and her sisterwives believe their sacrificed baby boys become White Walkers.
>
> Gilly was crying. “Me and the babe. Please. I’ll be your wife, like I was Craster’s. Please, ser crow. He’s a boy, just like Nella said he’d be. If you don’t take him, they will.”
>
>
> “They?” said Sam, and the raven cocked its black head and echoed, “They They They”
>
>
> “The boy’s brothers,” said the old woman on the left. “Craster’s sons. The white cold’s rising out there, crow. I can feel it in my bones. These poor old bones don’t lie. They’ll be here soon, the sons.”
>
>
>
However, all the White Walkers seen so far have been tall. So the boys must be taken somewhere far or hidden.
Regardless, this doesn't explain the ancient origin of the White Walkers, how they animate the dead into wights or their recent resurgence.
>
> “Yes,” said Sam, “but is it the cold that brings the wights, or the wights that bring the cold?”
>
>
> | I believe the walkers feed the babies' flesh to the zombies or wights. They don't become white walkers but the wights' food. The white walkers take the children and kill the rest. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.