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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
16,472 | There is a technique to check if something visually not broken in HTML and CSS markup - [visual regression testing](https://css-tricks.com/visual-regression-testing-with-phantomcss/).
We do following steps:
1. Check everything is ok.
2. Create a test "reference" (creating \*.png files).
3. Change something.
4. Run test and check what changed.
What is better practice - all these "references" should be stored localy or should be commited to repository after check if everything is OK?
Maybe the first case more simple and suitable for single development, but second can be useful if I have team and person with QA role - he can check and create references?
Do you have some experience or thoughts about how this will be on practice? | 2016/01/12 | [
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com/questions/16472",
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com",
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com/users/16013/"
] | Define a [definition of done](https://www.scrumalliance.org/community/articles/2008/september/what-is-definition-of-done-(dod)) that includes testing. Define which testing effort is minimal needed to get the work done.
* Time boxed exploratory testing session for each story, just after coding is done or even during the coding sessions, pair with developers to test their work
* Good balance of UI-, Service- and unit-tests, read about the [test pyramid](http://martinfowler.com/bliki/TestPyramid.html)
* [Continuous integration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_integration) is important so that to full product is build on each check-in. So you can test, because the product works. Since [Working software is the primary measure of progress](http://www.agilemanifesto.org/principles.html).
* Start each PBI with a [Three Amigo's session](https://www.agilealliance.org/glossary/three-amigos/), think about how you can start testing work in parallel with coding.
Focus on automating most if not all of the test-cases, since you wont have time todo a manual test regression each iteration. Quality should be [build in](http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/) the product and cycle.
Keep in mind that Agile does not have an official method as it goes for testing. Being Agile means doing what is needed to get the work done, iteration after iteration. If it works keep doing it, if you fail adapt. The [XP practises](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_programming#Practices) are the closest as a best practise for Agile teams, which includes testing.
Suggested read is the [Agile Testing](http://agiletester.ca/) book. | My idea is preety simple. Prepare regression automation suite and setup in CI & CD pipeline and add this as a post build action.
So for the new deployment it will run can help to do the regression and sanity of the application.
Your focus during the Sprint should be starting automation of repeatative tasks and push this in CI CD pipeline daily.
If automation taking time for some test cases it is better to done Manual as first round and priorities as per need. |
16,472 | There is a technique to check if something visually not broken in HTML and CSS markup - [visual regression testing](https://css-tricks.com/visual-regression-testing-with-phantomcss/).
We do following steps:
1. Check everything is ok.
2. Create a test "reference" (creating \*.png files).
3. Change something.
4. Run test and check what changed.
What is better practice - all these "references" should be stored localy or should be commited to repository after check if everything is OK?
Maybe the first case more simple and suitable for single development, but second can be useful if I have team and person with QA role - he can check and create references?
Do you have some experience or thoughts about how this will be on practice? | 2016/01/12 | [
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com/questions/16472",
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com",
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com/users/16013/"
] | As shown in the other answers and comments this is a common issue that I've seen in several companies that I've worked in. Thinking it through, I suspect most companies struggle with the generic issue of allowing enough time for QA, testing, and automation once the feature is complete.
Generally, people may feel there is no clear guidance in Agile as to how to address this.
I would address this in two ways:
1) Testing happens *before, during and after* dev work. For example, if you practice BDD and write a failing test *before* the app code then you will be one step closer to your goal of keeping up.
2) A little discipline may be desired to allow more time for QA. For example, it's easy to say 'we will change to a process whereby dev works for a week and then QA has a week to test'. In reality, the work is usually not done in the first week and overflows into the second week leading to the same situation again. Try to address this with formal scheduled turnover and mileposts. For instance a calendar reminder "it's Friday, 3 pm. Is your code ready for testing?" You will also need to consider what would dev do for a week if no changes are allowed? Sitting idle for a week isn't going to work. This is a hard problem that is helped by a lot of exploring the issue and factors and by help from more senior folks who have experience in seeing the bigger picture and what would work best for the situation at hand.
In conclusion: You need to have detailed and difficult conversations with all the stakeholders in the development process in an open and caring environment that encourages all points of view in a non-threatening fun workplace where mistakes are just how people learn to do the right thing. In other words, A Good Culture. | Keep it simple!
Test throughout the sprint!
Yes, this means deployment throughout the sprint!
But how!
Developers should work ahead.
They will only be able to work ahead if the most ignored Agile rule of under-estimating and taking on less than can be done in sprint cycle days per developer, is properly implemented.
Here is a full article I wrote out of my own struggle and how I triumphed!
[I solved Agile testing bottleneck problem!](https://medium.com/@salibsamer/i-solved-scrum-sprint-end-testing-bottleneck-problem-bfd6222284a1)
<https://medium.com/@salibsamer/i-solved-scrum-sprint-end-testing-bottleneck-problem-bfd6222284a1> |
16,472 | There is a technique to check if something visually not broken in HTML and CSS markup - [visual regression testing](https://css-tricks.com/visual-regression-testing-with-phantomcss/).
We do following steps:
1. Check everything is ok.
2. Create a test "reference" (creating \*.png files).
3. Change something.
4. Run test and check what changed.
What is better practice - all these "references" should be stored localy or should be commited to repository after check if everything is OK?
Maybe the first case more simple and suitable for single development, but second can be useful if I have team and person with QA role - he can check and create references?
Do you have some experience or thoughts about how this will be on practice? | 2016/01/12 | [
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com/questions/16472",
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com",
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com/users/16013/"
] | Testing of a particular feature that is being created in the sprint can be done, only if the developer has developed the feature up to some extent. Meanwhile, when the developer is busy developing the feature, a QA should start working on the test plan/test cases on the basis of the feature specification document or the user stories. If the QA team is automating the test cases and using BDD tools like Cucumber, then he must start writing the Cucumber for the test cases to save time. A QA should be in continuous touch with the developers so that he receives at least a piece of the feature which has been developed.
Once the developed module is received, now a QA has an ample amount of work. He should first do a sanity check of the module received, and quickly log the issues identified in a bug tracking tool. Also, communicate the developer regarding the issue. Side by side he should also automate the test case. This cycle needs to be processed quickly so that each module is tested and delivered without any bug on or before the sprint end date. Thus, in other words, the work of a QA starts as soon as feature specs or user story is received in the sprint and the actual testing can be started as soon as the developer develops some module of the feature. | Keep it simple!
Test throughout the sprint!
Yes, this means deployment throughout the sprint!
But how!
Developers should work ahead.
They will only be able to work ahead if the most ignored Agile rule of under-estimating and taking on less than can be done in sprint cycle days per developer, is properly implemented.
Here is a full article I wrote out of my own struggle and how I triumphed!
[I solved Agile testing bottleneck problem!](https://medium.com/@salibsamer/i-solved-scrum-sprint-end-testing-bottleneck-problem-bfd6222284a1)
<https://medium.com/@salibsamer/i-solved-scrum-sprint-end-testing-bottleneck-problem-bfd6222284a1> |
16,472 | There is a technique to check if something visually not broken in HTML and CSS markup - [visual regression testing](https://css-tricks.com/visual-regression-testing-with-phantomcss/).
We do following steps:
1. Check everything is ok.
2. Create a test "reference" (creating \*.png files).
3. Change something.
4. Run test and check what changed.
What is better practice - all these "references" should be stored localy or should be commited to repository after check if everything is OK?
Maybe the first case more simple and suitable for single development, but second can be useful if I have team and person with QA role - he can check and create references?
Do you have some experience or thoughts about how this will be on practice? | 2016/01/12 | [
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com/questions/16472",
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com",
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com/users/16013/"
] | My team struggles with a similar issue having multiple input streams, that are running on different iteration/sprint cycles into a common product.
We tried testing in the dev int area for each team for a while and then marking items done at that point, but we quickly discovered that was too early in the process. We could verify that new functionality was working, but we couldn't test at the integration level which was where most of our defects actually occur. So we basically moved our definition of 'done' to be later in the next cycle, I guess you could call that a hardening sprint since it comes after the initial sprint where the dev work occurred or we call it the 'QA Offset'. Our management team really wanted 'testing' to be 'done' during the same section of time as dev, but this just wasn't practical based on the type of system we are testing. We have been attempting to add different layers of automation, to help us get to done earlier, but on a legacy product that can be challenging.
So to answer your original question, we generally monitor the build and whenever there is a large enough quantity of items in it, we will grab them and start testing. Since we build daily it is about every other day that we will restart testing, which includes the new functionality and a mini-smoke to verify that the older items continue to work. | Keep it simple!
Test throughout the sprint!
Yes, this means deployment throughout the sprint!
But how!
Developers should work ahead.
They will only be able to work ahead if the most ignored Agile rule of under-estimating and taking on less than can be done in sprint cycle days per developer, is properly implemented.
Here is a full article I wrote out of my own struggle and how I triumphed!
[I solved Agile testing bottleneck problem!](https://medium.com/@salibsamer/i-solved-scrum-sprint-end-testing-bottleneck-problem-bfd6222284a1)
<https://medium.com/@salibsamer/i-solved-scrum-sprint-end-testing-bottleneck-problem-bfd6222284a1> |
16,472 | There is a technique to check if something visually not broken in HTML and CSS markup - [visual regression testing](https://css-tricks.com/visual-regression-testing-with-phantomcss/).
We do following steps:
1. Check everything is ok.
2. Create a test "reference" (creating \*.png files).
3. Change something.
4. Run test and check what changed.
What is better practice - all these "references" should be stored localy or should be commited to repository after check if everything is OK?
Maybe the first case more simple and suitable for single development, but second can be useful if I have team and person with QA role - he can check and create references?
Do you have some experience or thoughts about how this will be on practice? | 2016/01/12 | [
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com/questions/16472",
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com",
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com/users/16013/"
] | Define a [definition of done](https://www.scrumalliance.org/community/articles/2008/september/what-is-definition-of-done-(dod)) that includes testing. Define which testing effort is minimal needed to get the work done.
* Time boxed exploratory testing session for each story, just after coding is done or even during the coding sessions, pair with developers to test their work
* Good balance of UI-, Service- and unit-tests, read about the [test pyramid](http://martinfowler.com/bliki/TestPyramid.html)
* [Continuous integration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_integration) is important so that to full product is build on each check-in. So you can test, because the product works. Since [Working software is the primary measure of progress](http://www.agilemanifesto.org/principles.html).
* Start each PBI with a [Three Amigo's session](https://www.agilealliance.org/glossary/three-amigos/), think about how you can start testing work in parallel with coding.
Focus on automating most if not all of the test-cases, since you wont have time todo a manual test regression each iteration. Quality should be [build in](http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/) the product and cycle.
Keep in mind that Agile does not have an official method as it goes for testing. Being Agile means doing what is needed to get the work done, iteration after iteration. If it works keep doing it, if you fail adapt. The [XP practises](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_programming#Practices) are the closest as a best practise for Agile teams, which includes testing.
Suggested read is the [Agile Testing](http://agiletester.ca/) book. | Testing of a particular feature that is being created in the sprint can be done, only if the developer has developed the feature up to some extent. Meanwhile, when the developer is busy developing the feature, a QA should start working on the test plan/test cases on the basis of the feature specification document or the user stories. If the QA team is automating the test cases and using BDD tools like Cucumber, then he must start writing the Cucumber for the test cases to save time. A QA should be in continuous touch with the developers so that he receives at least a piece of the feature which has been developed.
Once the developed module is received, now a QA has an ample amount of work. He should first do a sanity check of the module received, and quickly log the issues identified in a bug tracking tool. Also, communicate the developer regarding the issue. Side by side he should also automate the test case. This cycle needs to be processed quickly so that each module is tested and delivered without any bug on or before the sprint end date. Thus, in other words, the work of a QA starts as soon as feature specs or user story is received in the sprint and the actual testing can be started as soon as the developer develops some module of the feature. |
16,472 | There is a technique to check if something visually not broken in HTML and CSS markup - [visual regression testing](https://css-tricks.com/visual-regression-testing-with-phantomcss/).
We do following steps:
1. Check everything is ok.
2. Create a test "reference" (creating \*.png files).
3. Change something.
4. Run test and check what changed.
What is better practice - all these "references" should be stored localy or should be commited to repository after check if everything is OK?
Maybe the first case more simple and suitable for single development, but second can be useful if I have team and person with QA role - he can check and create references?
Do you have some experience or thoughts about how this will be on practice? | 2016/01/12 | [
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com/questions/16472",
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com",
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com/users/16013/"
] | My team struggles with a similar issue having multiple input streams, that are running on different iteration/sprint cycles into a common product.
We tried testing in the dev int area for each team for a while and then marking items done at that point, but we quickly discovered that was too early in the process. We could verify that new functionality was working, but we couldn't test at the integration level which was where most of our defects actually occur. So we basically moved our definition of 'done' to be later in the next cycle, I guess you could call that a hardening sprint since it comes after the initial sprint where the dev work occurred or we call it the 'QA Offset'. Our management team really wanted 'testing' to be 'done' during the same section of time as dev, but this just wasn't practical based on the type of system we are testing. We have been attempting to add different layers of automation, to help us get to done earlier, but on a legacy product that can be challenging.
So to answer your original question, we generally monitor the build and whenever there is a large enough quantity of items in it, we will grab them and start testing. Since we build daily it is about every other day that we will restart testing, which includes the new functionality and a mini-smoke to verify that the older items continue to work. | Testing of a particular feature that is being created in the sprint can be done, only if the developer has developed the feature up to some extent. Meanwhile, when the developer is busy developing the feature, a QA should start working on the test plan/test cases on the basis of the feature specification document or the user stories. If the QA team is automating the test cases and using BDD tools like Cucumber, then he must start writing the Cucumber for the test cases to save time. A QA should be in continuous touch with the developers so that he receives at least a piece of the feature which has been developed.
Once the developed module is received, now a QA has an ample amount of work. He should first do a sanity check of the module received, and quickly log the issues identified in a bug tracking tool. Also, communicate the developer regarding the issue. Side by side he should also automate the test case. This cycle needs to be processed quickly so that each module is tested and delivered without any bug on or before the sprint end date. Thus, in other words, the work of a QA starts as soon as feature specs or user story is received in the sprint and the actual testing can be started as soon as the developer develops some module of the feature. |
16,472 | There is a technique to check if something visually not broken in HTML and CSS markup - [visual regression testing](https://css-tricks.com/visual-regression-testing-with-phantomcss/).
We do following steps:
1. Check everything is ok.
2. Create a test "reference" (creating \*.png files).
3. Change something.
4. Run test and check what changed.
What is better practice - all these "references" should be stored localy or should be commited to repository after check if everything is OK?
Maybe the first case more simple and suitable for single development, but second can be useful if I have team and person with QA role - he can check and create references?
Do you have some experience or thoughts about how this will be on practice? | 2016/01/12 | [
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com/questions/16472",
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com",
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com/users/16013/"
] | My idea is preety simple. Prepare regression automation suite and setup in CI & CD pipeline and add this as a post build action.
So for the new deployment it will run can help to do the regression and sanity of the application.
Your focus during the Sprint should be starting automation of repeatative tasks and push this in CI CD pipeline daily.
If automation taking time for some test cases it is better to done Manual as first round and priorities as per need. | Keep it simple!
Test throughout the sprint!
Yes, this means deployment throughout the sprint!
But how!
Developers should work ahead.
They will only be able to work ahead if the most ignored Agile rule of under-estimating and taking on less than can be done in sprint cycle days per developer, is properly implemented.
Here is a full article I wrote out of my own struggle and how I triumphed!
[I solved Agile testing bottleneck problem!](https://medium.com/@salibsamer/i-solved-scrum-sprint-end-testing-bottleneck-problem-bfd6222284a1)
<https://medium.com/@salibsamer/i-solved-scrum-sprint-end-testing-bottleneck-problem-bfd6222284a1> |
16,472 | There is a technique to check if something visually not broken in HTML and CSS markup - [visual regression testing](https://css-tricks.com/visual-regression-testing-with-phantomcss/).
We do following steps:
1. Check everything is ok.
2. Create a test "reference" (creating \*.png files).
3. Change something.
4. Run test and check what changed.
What is better practice - all these "references" should be stored localy or should be commited to repository after check if everything is OK?
Maybe the first case more simple and suitable for single development, but second can be useful if I have team and person with QA role - he can check and create references?
Do you have some experience or thoughts about how this will be on practice? | 2016/01/12 | [
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com/questions/16472",
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com",
"https://sqa.stackexchange.com/users/16013/"
] | Define a [definition of done](https://www.scrumalliance.org/community/articles/2008/september/what-is-definition-of-done-(dod)) that includes testing. Define which testing effort is minimal needed to get the work done.
* Time boxed exploratory testing session for each story, just after coding is done or even during the coding sessions, pair with developers to test their work
* Good balance of UI-, Service- and unit-tests, read about the [test pyramid](http://martinfowler.com/bliki/TestPyramid.html)
* [Continuous integration](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_integration) is important so that to full product is build on each check-in. So you can test, because the product works. Since [Working software is the primary measure of progress](http://www.agilemanifesto.org/principles.html).
* Start each PBI with a [Three Amigo's session](https://www.agilealliance.org/glossary/three-amigos/), think about how you can start testing work in parallel with coding.
Focus on automating most if not all of the test-cases, since you wont have time todo a manual test regression each iteration. Quality should be [build in](http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/) the product and cycle.
Keep in mind that Agile does not have an official method as it goes for testing. Being Agile means doing what is needed to get the work done, iteration after iteration. If it works keep doing it, if you fail adapt. The [XP practises](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_programming#Practices) are the closest as a best practise for Agile teams, which includes testing.
Suggested read is the [Agile Testing](http://agiletester.ca/) book. | As shown in the other answers and comments this is a common issue that I've seen in several companies that I've worked in. Thinking it through, I suspect most companies struggle with the generic issue of allowing enough time for QA, testing, and automation once the feature is complete.
Generally, people may feel there is no clear guidance in Agile as to how to address this.
I would address this in two ways:
1) Testing happens *before, during and after* dev work. For example, if you practice BDD and write a failing test *before* the app code then you will be one step closer to your goal of keeping up.
2) A little discipline may be desired to allow more time for QA. For example, it's easy to say 'we will change to a process whereby dev works for a week and then QA has a week to test'. In reality, the work is usually not done in the first week and overflows into the second week leading to the same situation again. Try to address this with formal scheduled turnover and mileposts. For instance a calendar reminder "it's Friday, 3 pm. Is your code ready for testing?" You will also need to consider what would dev do for a week if no changes are allowed? Sitting idle for a week isn't going to work. This is a hard problem that is helped by a lot of exploring the issue and factors and by help from more senior folks who have experience in seeing the bigger picture and what would work best for the situation at hand.
In conclusion: You need to have detailed and difficult conversations with all the stakeholders in the development process in an open and caring environment that encourages all points of view in a non-threatening fun workplace where mistakes are just how people learn to do the right thing. In other words, A Good Culture. |
1,596,462 | It is necessary to disconnect from the database after the job is done in Java? If it is not disconnected, will it lead to memory leaks? | 2009/10/20 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1596462",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/193304/"
] | You must always close all your Connections, Statements and ResultSets.
If not, is more probable you can't obtain new connections from the pool than a memory leak. | I don't have a source, but I believe (if I remember right, it's been a while since I've touched JDBC) that it depends on the JDBC driver implementation. You should always close your connections and clean up after yourself as not all JDBC drivers do it for you (although some might).
This goes back to a rule that I like to follow - If I create or open something, I'm responsible for deleting or closing it. |
1,596,462 | It is necessary to disconnect from the database after the job is done in Java? If it is not disconnected, will it lead to memory leaks? | 2009/10/20 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1596462",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/193304/"
] | You must always close all your Connections, Statements and ResultSets.
If not, is more probable you can't obtain new connections from the pool than a memory leak. | Assuming you are using JDBC, the answer is yes. If you don't close the connection, then the JDBC driver might try to close it in a finallizer, but that could hold the connection open for a very long time, causing resource issues (the amount of database connections allowed to be open at one time is finite). Typically JDBC programming is done with a database pool, and not closing the connection will mean that the pool will run out of available connections very quickly.
Some application servers (e.g. JBoss) will detect when a connection wasn't closed and close it for you if it is managing the transactions, but you should not rely on that.
Of course some JDBC drivers are not pure java drivers, at which point memory leaks become a very real possibility. |
1,596,462 | It is necessary to disconnect from the database after the job is done in Java? If it is not disconnected, will it lead to memory leaks? | 2009/10/20 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1596462",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/193304/"
] | You must always close all your Connections, Statements and ResultSets.
If not, is more probable you can't obtain new connections from the pool than a memory leak. | yes and yes |
1,596,462 | It is necessary to disconnect from the database after the job is done in Java? If it is not disconnected, will it lead to memory leaks? | 2009/10/20 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1596462",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/193304/"
] | You should provide more details like which framework you are using or something.
Anyway, are you using JDBC? If so you should close the following objects by using their respective `close()` methods: Statement, ResultSet and Connection. | I don't have a source, but I believe (if I remember right, it's been a while since I've touched JDBC) that it depends on the JDBC driver implementation. You should always close your connections and clean up after yourself as not all JDBC drivers do it for you (although some might).
This goes back to a rule that I like to follow - If I create or open something, I'm responsible for deleting or closing it. |
1,596,462 | It is necessary to disconnect from the database after the job is done in Java? If it is not disconnected, will it lead to memory leaks? | 2009/10/20 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1596462",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/193304/"
] | Assuming you are using JDBC, the answer is yes. If you don't close the connection, then the JDBC driver might try to close it in a finallizer, but that could hold the connection open for a very long time, causing resource issues (the amount of database connections allowed to be open at one time is finite). Typically JDBC programming is done with a database pool, and not closing the connection will mean that the pool will run out of available connections very quickly.
Some application servers (e.g. JBoss) will detect when a connection wasn't closed and close it for you if it is managing the transactions, but you should not rely on that.
Of course some JDBC drivers are not pure java drivers, at which point memory leaks become a very real possibility. | I don't have a source, but I believe (if I remember right, it's been a while since I've touched JDBC) that it depends on the JDBC driver implementation. You should always close your connections and clean up after yourself as not all JDBC drivers do it for you (although some might).
This goes back to a rule that I like to follow - If I create or open something, I'm responsible for deleting or closing it. |
1,596,462 | It is necessary to disconnect from the database after the job is done in Java? If it is not disconnected, will it lead to memory leaks? | 2009/10/20 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1596462",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/193304/"
] | I don't have a source, but I believe (if I remember right, it's been a while since I've touched JDBC) that it depends on the JDBC driver implementation. You should always close your connections and clean up after yourself as not all JDBC drivers do it for you (although some might).
This goes back to a rule that I like to follow - If I create or open something, I'm responsible for deleting or closing it. | yes and yes |
1,596,462 | It is necessary to disconnect from the database after the job is done in Java? If it is not disconnected, will it lead to memory leaks? | 2009/10/20 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1596462",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/193304/"
] | You should provide more details like which framework you are using or something.
Anyway, are you using JDBC? If so you should close the following objects by using their respective `close()` methods: Statement, ResultSet and Connection. | Assuming you are using JDBC, the answer is yes. If you don't close the connection, then the JDBC driver might try to close it in a finallizer, but that could hold the connection open for a very long time, causing resource issues (the amount of database connections allowed to be open at one time is finite). Typically JDBC programming is done with a database pool, and not closing the connection will mean that the pool will run out of available connections very quickly.
Some application servers (e.g. JBoss) will detect when a connection wasn't closed and close it for you if it is managing the transactions, but you should not rely on that.
Of course some JDBC drivers are not pure java drivers, at which point memory leaks become a very real possibility. |
1,596,462 | It is necessary to disconnect from the database after the job is done in Java? If it is not disconnected, will it lead to memory leaks? | 2009/10/20 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1596462",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/193304/"
] | You should provide more details like which framework you are using or something.
Anyway, are you using JDBC? If so you should close the following objects by using their respective `close()` methods: Statement, ResultSet and Connection. | yes and yes |
1,596,462 | It is necessary to disconnect from the database after the job is done in Java? If it is not disconnected, will it lead to memory leaks? | 2009/10/20 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1596462",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/193304/"
] | Assuming you are using JDBC, the answer is yes. If you don't close the connection, then the JDBC driver might try to close it in a finallizer, but that could hold the connection open for a very long time, causing resource issues (the amount of database connections allowed to be open at one time is finite). Typically JDBC programming is done with a database pool, and not closing the connection will mean that the pool will run out of available connections very quickly.
Some application servers (e.g. JBoss) will detect when a connection wasn't closed and close it for you if it is managing the transactions, but you should not rely on that.
Of course some JDBC drivers are not pure java drivers, at which point memory leaks become a very real possibility. | yes and yes |
130,991 | Is there any difference between these two statements. If yes could you tell me when to use them.
1. I have to do that
2. I will have to do that | 2013/10/10 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/130991",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/48746/"
] | The difference is in the [verb tense](http://www.englishpage.com/verbpage/verbtenseintro.html) of the sentence. I think the difference will be more apparent if I modify your example slightly.
"I need to purchase gasoline."
"I will need to purchase gasoline."
The first statement indicates that this need is occurring at this moment in time. The second statement indicates that this need will occur at a time in the future.
The second sentence is an example of [simple future tense](http://www.englishpage.com/verbpage/simplefuture.html), whereas the first sentence is an example of the [simple present tense.](http://www.englishpage.com/verbpage/simplepresent.html) | The difference is that the idiom *have to* (always pronounced /hæftə/, never /hævtə/)
is in the present tense in sentence (1),
but is an infinitive in sentence (2).
You can't tell this from the sentences,
because both are spelled -- and pronounced -- the same way,
but you **can** tell if you change the subject from *I* to *Bill*,
because the present verb changes to *has*, but not the infinitive:
* *Bill **has** to do that.*
* *Bill will **have** to do that.*
Now some will tell you that this is the "Future Tense" in English.
They're wrong. It's just a normal use of the [modal auxiliary verb](http://www.umich.edu/%7Ejlawler/aue/modals.html) *will*,
which must be followed, like all other modal auxiliary verbs
(i.e, *can, may, must, shall, should, might, could, would*),
by the infinitive form of the next verb,
which in this case is the idiomatic modal paraphrase *hafta*
(or spell it *have to*, if you prefer).
It's not any more "Future" than sentence (1),
which is after all, about the future,
nor is it any more "Future" than
* *I'm gonna hafta do that* (pronounced [ãmə̃nə̃'hæftə'duðæt],
-- or spell it *I'm going to have to do that*, if you prefer)
All mean the same, and all are acceptable. |
129,922 | Having watched *The Dark Crystal* at a young age, I grew up thinking that the Mystics had three arms. However [this source](http://www.darkcrystal.com/encyclopedia_urru.php) says that they have four.
I know they used puppetry for all of the creatures in *The Dark Crystal*, so that created some limitations in what they were able to depict. Were there any shots in the film that clearly depicted the Mystics as having four arms? | 2016/06/03 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/129922",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/46330/"
] | You can see a Mystic's **four** hands in the sequence below, at timestamp 0:12
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/6PcgQ.png)
and within the first few seconds of the film starting, just after the opening scene with the Skeksis
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/0cKoP.gif)
and again in the sequence, just before they send the gelfling off on his quest
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/6iHuG.gif) | Following up on my comment above about [urSol the Chanter being at the Children's Museum of Pittsburgh](https://pittsburgh.verylocal.com/jim-hensons-mysterious-gift-to-pittsburgh-ursol-the-chanter/55698/), we were visiting the museum today. The puppet was not on public display, but one of the workers brought us down to view it. Behold, four hands:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Cdgh9.jpg) [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/g8Wws.jpg) |
102,363 | Excluding the pilot episode 'The Cage', *The Original Series* opening credits used a decorative, emboldened and narrowed, high contrast font. Seen below are samples from the episodes Man Trap and Day of the Dove, respectively:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/D6EHb.png)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/P9UEk.png)
I suspect the wordtype font was purpose-built, but I can't find any specific references to the origin of the font. I can find plenty of references ([1](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Star_Trek_fonts), [2](http://www.st-minutiae.com/misc/fonts.html), [3](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Talk:Star_Trek_fonts)) to modern reproductions of these fonts, but again nothing on the original font's genesis.
So: did [Matt Jefferies](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Jefferies) and his team create this font, or was the font available and just licensed and used? | 2015/09/09 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/102363",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/28973/"
] | The font was almost certainly purpose-built.
============================================
The font you are referring to was called **"Final Frontier"**, later renamed to **"Final Frontier Old Style"** (as the font for *Star Trek: Voyager* had also been christened "Final Frontier") and then renamed yet again to **"Horizon"** more recently for the reboot films.
Given that the title of the font was "Final Frontier", it almost certainly was purpose-built for the show.
Who designed the font originally seems to be a bit of a mystery. It has been associated to type-designer [Allen R. Walden](http://luc.devroye.org/fonts-27621.html), but he seems to have simply made an updated version of it.
It may very well have been Matt Jeffries, but if so, it seems he didn't care enough to take formal credit for it — probably having credit for the original Enterprise design was more important to him! | According to Daren Dochterman (who worked on Star Trek Voyager as well as the Director's Cut of Star Trek the Motion Picture), the original Star Trek titles were hand drawn by Richard Edlund who worked at the Anderson Company (the company that did the special effects for the original series).
<http://disq.us/p/1hmspco>
Final Frontier is NOT the font used in the Original Series. It is a font that is based off the logo for the first Star Trek Motion Picture. Therefore, it did not exist prior to 1979, and certainly not in the mid-1960s when the Original Series aired.
There are a wide variety of clones and fonts inspired by the Original Series Star Trek font. But the hand-drawn nature of the logo is apparent upon close examination. Simply compare the two Rs in the Star Trek logo. They are not identical. The left one (in the word STAR) is wider than the right one (in the word TREK). It is also important to notice that the characters used in the episode title cards also varied from the six unique characters in the Star Trek logo. Most specifically the E character's upper left corner is rounded in the the main credits (in the "Star Trek" title and also "William Shatner" & "Leonard Nimoy" credits) but not in the rest of the production credits (or even in the "DeForest Kelley" credit). So while the production crew must have created a font for use in the credits, it didn't exactly match the "Star Trek" logo's characters.
Linotype sells a font named "Horizon" that is clearly inspired by the Original Series logo & credits font, but it has characters that are clearly different. It is one of the few Trek-inspired fonts that has the correct V character, but the B and to some extent K & Y characters do not match exactly. And none of them have the E character with the single rounded corner. |
11,296 | I am an amateur observer and Olympus 10x50 binocular is my tool. As I keep locating celestial objects (Planets, Stars etc), I would like to maintain a log of the observed objects. The purpose of the log is to list down the number of celestial objects I have observed/located. I need suggestion on what data points should I capture which helps in making some sense out of it and also encourage my friends to get into star gazing. | 2015/07/16 | [
"https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/11296",
"https://astronomy.stackexchange.com",
"https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/users/7698/"
] | I suggest you to take a look at the [Amateur Astronomy Observers Log Web Site](http://www.lies.com/aaol/), where everybody can share their astronomical logs.
The logs contain:
* Instrumentation used
* Sky condition (seeing, light pollution, ...)
* Accurate date and time of the observation
Specific informations that you could add depend by the kind of object that you are watching. For example you could try to estimate the magnitude of a variable star, or you could describe colour variation of Jupiter bands.
Some software can give you more support. There are specific astronomical log software for smartphone (for example *Stargazing Log* for Android).
Morover in the Linux planetarium software *KStars* when you open the detail of an object you have a specific tab where you can register logs in form of simple text. | I'm using my own web app for this: <https://deep-skies.com> . You can manually create an observation log or import one saved in a .skylist file (default format in SkySafari app 4 & 5 versions). You also have a nice overview of all of your observing sessions. |
79,294 | Does the Korg d1600 have mic preamp or d/a converters inside that would allow me to use this piece of equipment as an audio/midi interface? I believe It has all the appropriate inputs and outputs? | 2019/01/27 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/79294",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/57156/"
] | The Korg D1600 has a comprehensive list of inputs, including mic preamps with phantom power. But I see no mention in the manual (linked below) of being able to use it as a computer interface. The words 'USB' or even 'Firewire' do not appear in the manual. So I'm afraid your answer is no. It is essentially a self-contained recorder.
<https://www.zikinf.com/manuels/korg-d1600-manuel-utilisateur-en-38857.pdf> | You can use it as an input for all your devices (mics, synths, guitars) and then plug thru the S/PDIF optical output. But you have to have a bacic sound card with optical S/PDIF. If you have an old computer you can use M-Audio Firewire 410 (drivers are only available for older operating systems like Win 7 etc). You can record only 2 tracks in real time. But you don't need to plug and uplug your devices again and again if you use the Korg as an input. Korg also has great effects which you can apply during recording process. |
11,124,133 | I have some problemas with Datastore.
when i restart googleappengine all my data is deleted.
i don't know Why my data is deleted when restart AppEngine ?
what can't i do? | 2012/06/20 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/11124133",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1469918/"
] | Paypal/mts confirms that their documentation is incorrect. Chained payments require confirmed paypal accounts and not just an email ID. They said they will update the documentation. | I can confirm this also, Paypal Adaptive Payments with Chained Delayed payments does require the secondary receiver and the primary one to be verified, but there seems to be some confusion about 'confirmed' and 'verified'. When pressing PayPal on this we discovered the criteria differs (or so they told us at Eco Market) and that users sometimes have to have confirmed their email address (simply clicking the verification email they get sent), but sometimes also have to go a step further and verify their account (going through the other steps like bank account confirm). They told us is varies based on country sometimes but for security reasons didn't tell us much more on how they do this (not overly helpful).
What we do to handle this is catch the error and as a marketplace we automatically contact the customer/seller to inform them the order cannot be processed due to the sellers account not being verified.
Going a step further, you could also validate sellers (again in a marketplace model) accounts by using the exact same API to take a small payment from them (which could be refunded using the API), which would allow you to validate sellers to make sure that they had a verified account before signing up.
Hope it helps if anyone else has any experiences of this and how they handle it I'd love to hear.
Jason Dainter
Eco Market |
11,124,133 | I have some problemas with Datastore.
when i restart googleappengine all my data is deleted.
i don't know Why my data is deleted when restart AppEngine ?
what can't i do? | 2012/06/20 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/11124133",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1469918/"
] | Paypal/mts confirms that their documentation is incorrect. Chained payments require confirmed paypal accounts and not just an email ID. They said they will update the documentation. | In my experience, in adaptive payments, (in particular chained payments) you need this environment:
a) the app holder/developer must have a registered and verified paypal business account (the premium account is ok too but not the personal)
b) the recipients must have a business account
if the amount doesn't exceed the limits it is ok if it is not verified too but if the amount exceeds the limit you'll have a problem in the chain.
c) the sender must have a paypal account, a simple personal account will fit.
Sometimes (rarely) happens that one payment fails due to restrictions on the sender email. The most frequent case I saw this happens was when the sender made a preapproval with one e-mail and then, before the preapproval was payed, he/she changed the e-mail in his/her paypal account. Silly but paypal has no control on this environment.
Hope this is helpful for you.
Cheers, Fil.
Genoa, Italy |
55,459 | Let's say I am in a house with two entrances, one in the back, one in front. I need to ask someone which one they took
Should I say
>
> I did not see you come in. Did you **come in front/back**?
>
>
>
or
>
> I did not see you come in. Did you **come from front/back**?
>
>
>
Are they both idiomatic? If yes, Which of these two expression a native speaker is more likely to use? | 2015/04/24 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/55459",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/893/"
] | It is a bit different between where you came into the house, and where you came from.
>
> I did not see you come in. Did you come **in** the *front/back door*?
>
>
>
and
>
> I did not see you come in. Did you come **in from** the *front porch/backyard*?
>
>
> | You are talking about the **source** which is *unknown* to you.
When you talk about the *source*, it is *generally* with the preposition 'from'.
>
> I did not notice you. Did you come ***from*** the backdoor?
>
>
>
People come **from** somewhere ***as a source*** which is the case here.
>
> You come ***from*** America
> She came ***from*** the top
> He came ***from*** the washroom. And so on...
>
>
> |
15,775,295 | I am doing my first steps with Cython, and I am wondering how to improve performance even more.
Until now I got to half the usual (python only) execution time, but I think there must be more!
I know `cython -a` and I already typed my variables. But there is still a lot in yellow in my function. Is this because cython does not recognise numpy or is there something else I am missing? | 2013/04/02 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/15775295",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2238028/"
] | I believe you can benefit by using math functions from libc as you are calling np.sqrt and np.floor on scalars. This has not only the Python call overhead but there are different code paths in the numpy ufuncs for scalars and arrays. So that involves at least a type switch. | I think it's not a problem, as I've tested with the [official tutorial](http://wiki.cython.org/tutorials/numpy), it's also reported as yellow on every np.\* lines, and involves python just the same as your code.
Point 3 at the end of that page should have explained this:
>
> Calling NumPy/SciPy functions currently has a Python call overhead; it would be possible to take a short-cut from Cython directly to C. (This does however require some isolated and incremental changes to those libraries; mail the Cython mailing list for details).
>
>
> |
82,476 | I have a LTD ESP Snakebyte and the bridge volume knob is overturning and I think it took one of the wires out when I turned it too much. I checked the wires that go to the input and both of them are in the right spot. However theres a red wire that splits off into three different sections and it's not connected to anything. | 2019/04/07 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/82476",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/58968/"
] | This is a common problem I see come through the repair shop. The nut holding the pot loosens, allowing the pot to rotate out of position from where it was mounted which can break off the wires at the solder joint.
As Todd answered in the comments, unless you know how to solder and follow a wiring diagram, the best thing to do is to take the guitar to a technician and have the pot reconnected and tightened. | Some pickups have wires that aren't used, except for certain applications. If the guitar was working prior to the Pot being banjo'd then the problem lies with the pot. change it out. they are inexpensive and easy to swap out. |
344,080 | I have posted a question which was later flagged as duplicate. This is fine with me, as the linked answer completely covered my issue. Later, I was given criticism due to the question title, and I decided to modify it in order to address such criticism.
Was I right in modifying my question regardless of its duplicate flag? | 2017/02/17 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/344080",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/930287/"
] | Yes, editing a duplicate question can be useful.
Suppose that a question that has been closed as duplicate is titled "How can I get rid of this error?" Surely a more descriptive title can be provided! Generally improving the terminology used is a good thing. The reason duplicates are subject to different deletion rules than other questions that are closed is that they can serve as sign posts to the questions they point to. **The better written a duplicate is, the better it can serve its purpose as a sign post.** | **Yes!**
Duplicates - if not *truly bad* - remain on this site to guide the users to the correct answer, without having the same Q&A ten times.
So, since your question is here to stay, improving its quality is **never a bad thing**. |
344,080 | I have posted a question which was later flagged as duplicate. This is fine with me, as the linked answer completely covered my issue. Later, I was given criticism due to the question title, and I decided to modify it in order to address such criticism.
Was I right in modifying my question regardless of its duplicate flag? | 2017/02/17 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/344080",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/930287/"
] | **Yes!**
Duplicates - if not *truly bad* - remain on this site to guide the users to the correct answer, without having the same Q&A ten times.
So, since your question is here to stay, improving its quality is **never a bad thing**. | The other answers say yes but I'd like to suggest 'maybe'. I like duplicate questions because their titles are often different enough for me to find them using google when the original question doesn't appear in my search results e.g. because the problem is different than I think it is.
If you had a title that was different from that of the 'original' question, it might have been helping point people toward the 'original' when they couldn't by themselves find the 'original'. I haven't looked at your question but if you edited the title to reflect a more complete understanding of the problem gained by finding the 'original', I think you should consider reverting your edit. |
344,080 | I have posted a question which was later flagged as duplicate. This is fine with me, as the linked answer completely covered my issue. Later, I was given criticism due to the question title, and I decided to modify it in order to address such criticism.
Was I right in modifying my question regardless of its duplicate flag? | 2017/02/17 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/344080",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/930287/"
] | Yes, editing a duplicate question can be useful.
Suppose that a question that has been closed as duplicate is titled "How can I get rid of this error?" Surely a more descriptive title can be provided! Generally improving the terminology used is a good thing. The reason duplicates are subject to different deletion rules than other questions that are closed is that they can serve as sign posts to the questions they point to. **The better written a duplicate is, the better it can serve its purpose as a sign post.** | The other answers say yes but I'd like to suggest 'maybe'. I like duplicate questions because their titles are often different enough for me to find them using google when the original question doesn't appear in my search results e.g. because the problem is different than I think it is.
If you had a title that was different from that of the 'original' question, it might have been helping point people toward the 'original' when they couldn't by themselves find the 'original'. I haven't looked at your question but if you edited the title to reflect a more complete understanding of the problem gained by finding the 'original', I think you should consider reverting your edit. |
48,374 | Is it ever acceptable to use an exclamation mark following a question mark?
I am proofreading a novel and have been instructed to make no stylistic changes, only errors that impede sense/clarity. The copy-editing phase is complete, so if something is acceptable, I must leave it be.
At one point in the novel, one of the characters responds in an incredulous manner to a piece of information:
"Really?!" was her friend's reaction.
I'm not sure how much leeway to give to 'poetic licence'.
The style of the novel is very traditional and the use of punctuation is conventional throughout i.e. not attempting any innovative or idiosyncratic use of language.
I know that most style/usage commentators would frown on the use of "?!' in formal contexts, but is it something a writer of fiction can get away with?
Advice from any experienced proofreaders would be much appreciated. | 2019/10/04 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/48374",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/41503/"
] | It's totally fine. It expresses a combination of query and astonishment. There was even an attempt to combine the marks into one, called an [interrobang](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrobang), but it never caught on. Using "?!" is neither innovative nor idiosyncratic. | >
> I am proofreading a novel and have been instructed to make no
> stylistic changes
>
>
>
Much like the Oxford comma, frequency of semi-colons, and gendered pronouns, this is a stylistic minefield. But since you are explicitly told not to make stylistic choices, you should just leave "?!" be.
You are absolutely correct that this is jarring to see in text. If your friend ever solicits style advice from you, you should absolutely bring up this possible issue. |
48,374 | Is it ever acceptable to use an exclamation mark following a question mark?
I am proofreading a novel and have been instructed to make no stylistic changes, only errors that impede sense/clarity. The copy-editing phase is complete, so if something is acceptable, I must leave it be.
At one point in the novel, one of the characters responds in an incredulous manner to a piece of information:
"Really?!" was her friend's reaction.
I'm not sure how much leeway to give to 'poetic licence'.
The style of the novel is very traditional and the use of punctuation is conventional throughout i.e. not attempting any innovative or idiosyncratic use of language.
I know that most style/usage commentators would frown on the use of "?!' in formal contexts, but is it something a writer of fiction can get away with?
Advice from any experienced proofreaders would be much appreciated. | 2019/10/04 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/48374",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/41503/"
] | It's totally fine. It expresses a combination of query and astonishment. There was even an attempt to combine the marks into one, called an [interrobang](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrobang), but it never caught on. Using "?!" is neither innovative nor idiosyncratic. | I agree with others here that if you've been told not to make changes in style, it's likely that the writer's interpretation was that you should leave things like this alone.
But you're the proof reader in this case, so I wanted to give you an "out" in case you hated the sight of it.
If "The style of the novel is very traditional and the use of punctuation is conventional throughout", you could argue that leaving it there would change (or challenge) the style of the rest of the novel.
That's more lawyering than writing, though, and there's plenty of evidence that writers of fiction can use - and have used - punctuation like this. |
48,374 | Is it ever acceptable to use an exclamation mark following a question mark?
I am proofreading a novel and have been instructed to make no stylistic changes, only errors that impede sense/clarity. The copy-editing phase is complete, so if something is acceptable, I must leave it be.
At one point in the novel, one of the characters responds in an incredulous manner to a piece of information:
"Really?!" was her friend's reaction.
I'm not sure how much leeway to give to 'poetic licence'.
The style of the novel is very traditional and the use of punctuation is conventional throughout i.e. not attempting any innovative or idiosyncratic use of language.
I know that most style/usage commentators would frown on the use of "?!' in formal contexts, but is it something a writer of fiction can get away with?
Advice from any experienced proofreaders would be much appreciated. | 2019/10/04 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/48374",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/41503/"
] | It's totally fine. It expresses a combination of query and astonishment. There was even an attempt to combine the marks into one, called an [interrobang](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrobang), but it never caught on. Using "?!" is neither innovative nor idiosyncratic. | You have been given a precise task: To correct grammar, not style.
A combination of question and exclamation mark is not a possible stylistic choice but – from the perspective of normative linguistics – an orthographic mistake. In English, a sentence must be terminated by a single punctuation mark.
So if you are asked to correct grammar, you must necessarily mark up this error. As the author, I would expect you to point out to me that this is not correct in standard English and explain to me, when and by whom it is used regardless, empowering me to consciously make an informed decision to either keep the mistake or correct it.
### You do not know what the author wants – correct English or creative use of punctuation – so do not make their decision for them! |
48,374 | Is it ever acceptable to use an exclamation mark following a question mark?
I am proofreading a novel and have been instructed to make no stylistic changes, only errors that impede sense/clarity. The copy-editing phase is complete, so if something is acceptable, I must leave it be.
At one point in the novel, one of the characters responds in an incredulous manner to a piece of information:
"Really?!" was her friend's reaction.
I'm not sure how much leeway to give to 'poetic licence'.
The style of the novel is very traditional and the use of punctuation is conventional throughout i.e. not attempting any innovative or idiosyncratic use of language.
I know that most style/usage commentators would frown on the use of "?!' in formal contexts, but is it something a writer of fiction can get away with?
Advice from any experienced proofreaders would be much appreciated. | 2019/10/04 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/48374",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/41503/"
] | >
> I am proofreading a novel and have been instructed to make no
> stylistic changes
>
>
>
Much like the Oxford comma, frequency of semi-colons, and gendered pronouns, this is a stylistic minefield. But since you are explicitly told not to make stylistic choices, you should just leave "?!" be.
You are absolutely correct that this is jarring to see in text. If your friend ever solicits style advice from you, you should absolutely bring up this possible issue. | I agree with others here that if you've been told not to make changes in style, it's likely that the writer's interpretation was that you should leave things like this alone.
But you're the proof reader in this case, so I wanted to give you an "out" in case you hated the sight of it.
If "The style of the novel is very traditional and the use of punctuation is conventional throughout", you could argue that leaving it there would change (or challenge) the style of the rest of the novel.
That's more lawyering than writing, though, and there's plenty of evidence that writers of fiction can use - and have used - punctuation like this. |
48,374 | Is it ever acceptable to use an exclamation mark following a question mark?
I am proofreading a novel and have been instructed to make no stylistic changes, only errors that impede sense/clarity. The copy-editing phase is complete, so if something is acceptable, I must leave it be.
At one point in the novel, one of the characters responds in an incredulous manner to a piece of information:
"Really?!" was her friend's reaction.
I'm not sure how much leeway to give to 'poetic licence'.
The style of the novel is very traditional and the use of punctuation is conventional throughout i.e. not attempting any innovative or idiosyncratic use of language.
I know that most style/usage commentators would frown on the use of "?!' in formal contexts, but is it something a writer of fiction can get away with?
Advice from any experienced proofreaders would be much appreciated. | 2019/10/04 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/48374",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/41503/"
] | You have been given a precise task: To correct grammar, not style.
A combination of question and exclamation mark is not a possible stylistic choice but – from the perspective of normative linguistics – an orthographic mistake. In English, a sentence must be terminated by a single punctuation mark.
So if you are asked to correct grammar, you must necessarily mark up this error. As the author, I would expect you to point out to me that this is not correct in standard English and explain to me, when and by whom it is used regardless, empowering me to consciously make an informed decision to either keep the mistake or correct it.
### You do not know what the author wants – correct English or creative use of punctuation – so do not make their decision for them! | I agree with others here that if you've been told not to make changes in style, it's likely that the writer's interpretation was that you should leave things like this alone.
But you're the proof reader in this case, so I wanted to give you an "out" in case you hated the sight of it.
If "The style of the novel is very traditional and the use of punctuation is conventional throughout", you could argue that leaving it there would change (or challenge) the style of the rest of the novel.
That's more lawyering than writing, though, and there's plenty of evidence that writers of fiction can use - and have used - punctuation like this. |
78,653 | I need to ground my switches by connecting the grounding wires from switches onto an electrical twist nut and pig tailing it it to the box. Does Home Depot or other stores sell little pieces of copper to complete the pig tail or do I need to buy a big roll of copper? Does the gauge of the copper matter? | 2015/11/24 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/78653",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/45817/"
] | [Grounding tails](http://www.idealind.com/prodDetail.do?prodId=solid-wire-grounding-tails) are available (thanks @batsplatsterson), but you could also buy some copper wire; either on a reel or by the foot, and make your own.
As a quick rule of thumb, you should use the same size grounding conductor, as the largest ungrounded (hot) conductor used in that circuit. So you're probably looking at using 14, or 12 AWG wire for switches.
You'll want to use either bare copper, or green insulated wire. Solid or stranded makes no difference, as long as it's the proper size. Some will argue one way or the other about connecting solid to stranded, stranded to stranded, solid to solid, stranded to screw terminals, solid to screw terminals, etc. In reality, if done properly, it really makes no difference. Follow the manufacturer's documentation on all the equipment you're using, and you should have no problems.
As for the actual procedure of grounding the switches and box.
1. Connect a short length of grounding wire to the ground terminal of each switch/device in the box.
2. Connect a short length of grounding wire to the metal box, using a screw in the threaded hole in the back of the box.
3. Using an adequate connector, connect together the grounding wire from the box, the switches/devices, and all other grounding conductors in the box. | You *may* need to use what is called a "greenie". It is a wire nut with a hole in the normally closed end to allow for a single wire to pass through for connecting to the ground screw. These are sold at Lowes and HD.  |
78,653 | I need to ground my switches by connecting the grounding wires from switches onto an electrical twist nut and pig tailing it it to the box. Does Home Depot or other stores sell little pieces of copper to complete the pig tail or do I need to buy a big roll of copper? Does the gauge of the copper matter? | 2015/11/24 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/78653",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/45817/"
] | You *may* need to use what is called a "greenie". It is a wire nut with a hole in the normally closed end to allow for a single wire to pass through for connecting to the ground screw. These are sold at Lowes and HD.  | Some devices, like [Leviton M52-RS115-2WM](http://www.homedepot.com/p/Leviton-15-Amp-Preferred-Switch-White-10-Pack-M52-RS115-2WM/100684036?keyword=M52-RS115-2WM) (found through Home Depot web site a moment ago), have a little brass springy piece connecting the device yoke to the mounting screw at one end. When this brass bit is present the ground can be terminated just to the conductive junction box. The brass piece ensures good-enough contact from the box, through the mounting screw, to the device. The usual ground screw is also present on the yoke and would be used in case a non-conductive box is used, the brass piece is damaged, installer preference, etc. |
78,653 | I need to ground my switches by connecting the grounding wires from switches onto an electrical twist nut and pig tailing it it to the box. Does Home Depot or other stores sell little pieces of copper to complete the pig tail or do I need to buy a big roll of copper? Does the gauge of the copper matter? | 2015/11/24 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/78653",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/45817/"
] | [Grounding tails](http://www.idealind.com/prodDetail.do?prodId=solid-wire-grounding-tails) are available (thanks @batsplatsterson), but you could also buy some copper wire; either on a reel or by the foot, and make your own.
As a quick rule of thumb, you should use the same size grounding conductor, as the largest ungrounded (hot) conductor used in that circuit. So you're probably looking at using 14, or 12 AWG wire for switches.
You'll want to use either bare copper, or green insulated wire. Solid or stranded makes no difference, as long as it's the proper size. Some will argue one way or the other about connecting solid to stranded, stranded to stranded, solid to solid, stranded to screw terminals, solid to screw terminals, etc. In reality, if done properly, it really makes no difference. Follow the manufacturer's documentation on all the equipment you're using, and you should have no problems.
As for the actual procedure of grounding the switches and box.
1. Connect a short length of grounding wire to the ground terminal of each switch/device in the box.
2. Connect a short length of grounding wire to the metal box, using a screw in the threaded hole in the back of the box.
3. Using an adequate connector, connect together the grounding wire from the box, the switches/devices, and all other grounding conductors in the box. | You should match the gauge of the ground to the wires you are pigtailing. Your local home improvement store will carry single stranded THHN wire which you can use to make pigtails with.
Find out what gauge wire you are working with and buy some green THHN wire of the same gauge. Green wire is coded as ground in the US. It is usually available both by the foot, and in different sized spools.
They probably also sell premade pigtails which are made out of THHN wire that have crimped on terminals. In your case, it is probably better to just buy it in bulk and make your own. |
78,653 | I need to ground my switches by connecting the grounding wires from switches onto an electrical twist nut and pig tailing it it to the box. Does Home Depot or other stores sell little pieces of copper to complete the pig tail or do I need to buy a big roll of copper? Does the gauge of the copper matter? | 2015/11/24 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/78653",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/45817/"
] | [Grounding tails](http://www.idealind.com/prodDetail.do?prodId=solid-wire-grounding-tails) are available (thanks @batsplatsterson), but you could also buy some copper wire; either on a reel or by the foot, and make your own.
As a quick rule of thumb, you should use the same size grounding conductor, as the largest ungrounded (hot) conductor used in that circuit. So you're probably looking at using 14, or 12 AWG wire for switches.
You'll want to use either bare copper, or green insulated wire. Solid or stranded makes no difference, as long as it's the proper size. Some will argue one way or the other about connecting solid to stranded, stranded to stranded, solid to solid, stranded to screw terminals, solid to screw terminals, etc. In reality, if done properly, it really makes no difference. Follow the manufacturer's documentation on all the equipment you're using, and you should have no problems.
As for the actual procedure of grounding the switches and box.
1. Connect a short length of grounding wire to the ground terminal of each switch/device in the box.
2. Connect a short length of grounding wire to the metal box, using a screw in the threaded hole in the back of the box.
3. Using an adequate connector, connect together the grounding wire from the box, the switches/devices, and all other grounding conductors in the box. | Is the pigtail the easiest way to ground the switch? I'd say so, **if there's a threaded hole available, and it's a properly grounded metal box**. These pigtails from Ideal Industries: [pigtails](http://www.idealind.com/prodDetail.do?prodId=solid-wire-grounding-tailsdf "pigtals")
bond your box to whatever you terminate that stripped end on.
If you attach the pigtail with its ground screw into a threaded hole in a metal box,
and terminate the stripped end of the pigtail on the ground terminal on your switch,
**AND the box is grounded**, then you've grounded the switch. (If it's not a metal box, you can't ground the switch this way.)
How can you tell if the box is grounded? If you see a ground wire from one of the incoming wires attached with a ground screw or ground clip, it's probably OK - it depends on that ground wire being properly connected back to the panel.
If it's a plastic box, or there's no hole available for the ground screw, or etc., you will need a plan B. Maybe there are other ground wires in the box bound up in a wire nut. You could add your pigtail to the switch ground terminal to that bunch. Wirenuts are fine, but the [push in connectors](http://www.idealindustries.ca/products/wire_termination/push-in/in-sure.php "Ideal push in connectors")
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/I86bI.jpg)
are more straightforward to use.
Beyond that - as long as there is some ground wire in there, there's a way to get everything grounded, but it's hard to say what's the way to go without seeing it. |
78,653 | I need to ground my switches by connecting the grounding wires from switches onto an electrical twist nut and pig tailing it it to the box. Does Home Depot or other stores sell little pieces of copper to complete the pig tail or do I need to buy a big roll of copper? Does the gauge of the copper matter? | 2015/11/24 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/78653",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/45817/"
] | [Grounding tails](http://www.idealind.com/prodDetail.do?prodId=solid-wire-grounding-tails) are available (thanks @batsplatsterson), but you could also buy some copper wire; either on a reel or by the foot, and make your own.
As a quick rule of thumb, you should use the same size grounding conductor, as the largest ungrounded (hot) conductor used in that circuit. So you're probably looking at using 14, or 12 AWG wire for switches.
You'll want to use either bare copper, or green insulated wire. Solid or stranded makes no difference, as long as it's the proper size. Some will argue one way or the other about connecting solid to stranded, stranded to stranded, solid to solid, stranded to screw terminals, solid to screw terminals, etc. In reality, if done properly, it really makes no difference. Follow the manufacturer's documentation on all the equipment you're using, and you should have no problems.
As for the actual procedure of grounding the switches and box.
1. Connect a short length of grounding wire to the ground terminal of each switch/device in the box.
2. Connect a short length of grounding wire to the metal box, using a screw in the threaded hole in the back of the box.
3. Using an adequate connector, connect together the grounding wire from the box, the switches/devices, and all other grounding conductors in the box. | Some devices, like [Leviton M52-RS115-2WM](http://www.homedepot.com/p/Leviton-15-Amp-Preferred-Switch-White-10-Pack-M52-RS115-2WM/100684036?keyword=M52-RS115-2WM) (found through Home Depot web site a moment ago), have a little brass springy piece connecting the device yoke to the mounting screw at one end. When this brass bit is present the ground can be terminated just to the conductive junction box. The brass piece ensures good-enough contact from the box, through the mounting screw, to the device. The usual ground screw is also present on the yoke and would be used in case a non-conductive box is used, the brass piece is damaged, installer preference, etc. |
78,653 | I need to ground my switches by connecting the grounding wires from switches onto an electrical twist nut and pig tailing it it to the box. Does Home Depot or other stores sell little pieces of copper to complete the pig tail or do I need to buy a big roll of copper? Does the gauge of the copper matter? | 2015/11/24 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/78653",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/45817/"
] | You should match the gauge of the ground to the wires you are pigtailing. Your local home improvement store will carry single stranded THHN wire which you can use to make pigtails with.
Find out what gauge wire you are working with and buy some green THHN wire of the same gauge. Green wire is coded as ground in the US. It is usually available both by the foot, and in different sized spools.
They probably also sell premade pigtails which are made out of THHN wire that have crimped on terminals. In your case, it is probably better to just buy it in bulk and make your own. | Some devices, like [Leviton M52-RS115-2WM](http://www.homedepot.com/p/Leviton-15-Amp-Preferred-Switch-White-10-Pack-M52-RS115-2WM/100684036?keyword=M52-RS115-2WM) (found through Home Depot web site a moment ago), have a little brass springy piece connecting the device yoke to the mounting screw at one end. When this brass bit is present the ground can be terminated just to the conductive junction box. The brass piece ensures good-enough contact from the box, through the mounting screw, to the device. The usual ground screw is also present on the yoke and would be used in case a non-conductive box is used, the brass piece is damaged, installer preference, etc. |
78,653 | I need to ground my switches by connecting the grounding wires from switches onto an electrical twist nut and pig tailing it it to the box. Does Home Depot or other stores sell little pieces of copper to complete the pig tail or do I need to buy a big roll of copper? Does the gauge of the copper matter? | 2015/11/24 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/78653",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/45817/"
] | Is the pigtail the easiest way to ground the switch? I'd say so, **if there's a threaded hole available, and it's a properly grounded metal box**. These pigtails from Ideal Industries: [pigtails](http://www.idealind.com/prodDetail.do?prodId=solid-wire-grounding-tailsdf "pigtals")
bond your box to whatever you terminate that stripped end on.
If you attach the pigtail with its ground screw into a threaded hole in a metal box,
and terminate the stripped end of the pigtail on the ground terminal on your switch,
**AND the box is grounded**, then you've grounded the switch. (If it's not a metal box, you can't ground the switch this way.)
How can you tell if the box is grounded? If you see a ground wire from one of the incoming wires attached with a ground screw or ground clip, it's probably OK - it depends on that ground wire being properly connected back to the panel.
If it's a plastic box, or there's no hole available for the ground screw, or etc., you will need a plan B. Maybe there are other ground wires in the box bound up in a wire nut. You could add your pigtail to the switch ground terminal to that bunch. Wirenuts are fine, but the [push in connectors](http://www.idealindustries.ca/products/wire_termination/push-in/in-sure.php "Ideal push in connectors")
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/I86bI.jpg)
are more straightforward to use.
Beyond that - as long as there is some ground wire in there, there's a way to get everything grounded, but it's hard to say what's the way to go without seeing it. | Some devices, like [Leviton M52-RS115-2WM](http://www.homedepot.com/p/Leviton-15-Amp-Preferred-Switch-White-10-Pack-M52-RS115-2WM/100684036?keyword=M52-RS115-2WM) (found through Home Depot web site a moment ago), have a little brass springy piece connecting the device yoke to the mounting screw at one end. When this brass bit is present the ground can be terminated just to the conductive junction box. The brass piece ensures good-enough contact from the box, through the mounting screw, to the device. The usual ground screw is also present on the yoke and would be used in case a non-conductive box is used, the brass piece is damaged, installer preference, etc. |
47,302 | In my IB Computer Science class I am routinely asked by... pretty much everyone how to do X or implement Y. I'm the only person with any significant programming experience in the class and I do not necessaries mind teaching people about programming but so many of the questions could be simply solved by doing a little investigating.
What are some ways I could try to teach my fellow students how to be self-reliant programmers?
All I can really think of is being a Google ninja & learning how to use an API. | 2011/02/13 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/47302",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | Firstly, if you're showing them software patterns, stop doing that.
Seriously. For awhile, anyway.
Software patterns, plugins and libraries give students the impression that all programming is about is stitching together bits of code, and makes them lazy, because they don't think for themselves.
Anyway, the single bit of advice I can give you is this: You can tell them how to do it, you can show them how to do it, or you can tell and show them how to do it and then *make them do it while you watch.* The third approach is by far the best. If that means making them perform a Google search, do that.
The one thing you shouldn't do is just tell them the answer. | The problem is not that they are asking you, the problem is your inability to say NO to them.
We all need to learn to say no to other people even if it sometimes feels hard but as the old saying goes: saying no to others is saying yes to yourself. |
47,302 | In my IB Computer Science class I am routinely asked by... pretty much everyone how to do X or implement Y. I'm the only person with any significant programming experience in the class and I do not necessaries mind teaching people about programming but so many of the questions could be simply solved by doing a little investigating.
What are some ways I could try to teach my fellow students how to be self-reliant programmers?
All I can really think of is being a Google ninja & learning how to use an API. | 2011/02/13 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/47302",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | >
> Build a fire for a man and he will be
> warm for a night, set a man on fire
> and he will be warm for the rest of
> his life.
>
>
>
As a development manager I encounter this issue a lot with the more novice programmers. It is very frustrating when you help them with an issue and they seem to keep coming back to you for the next step instead of running with it.
The best advice I can give, and that has worked well for me, is to stop giving them answers and start giving them directions. That is, tell them where to find the answer or give them hints that should be enough to get them pointed in the right direction of the solution. People have no incentive to abandon a method that is working, and right now that method for them is going to you for answers. | Firstly, if you're showing them software patterns, stop doing that.
Seriously. For awhile, anyway.
Software patterns, plugins and libraries give students the impression that all programming is about is stitching together bits of code, and makes them lazy, because they don't think for themselves.
Anyway, the single bit of advice I can give you is this: You can tell them how to do it, you can show them how to do it, or you can tell and show them how to do it and then *make them do it while you watch.* The third approach is by far the best. If that means making them perform a Google search, do that.
The one thing you shouldn't do is just tell them the answer. |
47,302 | In my IB Computer Science class I am routinely asked by... pretty much everyone how to do X or implement Y. I'm the only person with any significant programming experience in the class and I do not necessaries mind teaching people about programming but so many of the questions could be simply solved by doing a little investigating.
What are some ways I could try to teach my fellow students how to be self-reliant programmers?
All I can really think of is being a Google ninja & learning how to use an API. | 2011/02/13 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/47302",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | >
> Build a fire for a man and he will be
> warm for a night, set a man on fire
> and he will be warm for the rest of
> his life.
>
>
>
As a development manager I encounter this issue a lot with the more novice programmers. It is very frustrating when you help them with an issue and they seem to keep coming back to you for the next step instead of running with it.
The best advice I can give, and that has worked well for me, is to stop giving them answers and start giving them directions. That is, tell them where to find the answer or give them hints that should be enough to get them pointed in the right direction of the solution. People have no incentive to abandon a method that is working, and right now that method for them is going to you for answers. | The problem is not that they are asking you, the problem is your inability to say NO to them.
We all need to learn to say no to other people even if it sometimes feels hard but as the old saying goes: saying no to others is saying yes to yourself. |
73,472 | There are various sizes and shapes of (pedalled as opposed to electric) unicycles.
It is possible to buy them with large wheels, supposedly for road use.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/myAY1.jpg)
Image still sourced from
**Question**
I imagine that the lack of a freewheel mechanism, having to brake by back pressure and the effort of balancing mean that they are inefficient and require constant effort. Also there are no gears for going up or down hills.
Does travelling by unicycle have any advantages over walking as a mode of transport? Would level city roads be most suitable? Does it ever become easy and/or completely subconscious with practice? | 2020/11/20 | [
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/73472",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/users/20350/"
] | Unicycling has so many obvious disadvantages over walking. Unicycles require lots of practice and they cannot easily traverse uneven ground like stairs or sand. Additionally, the "having to brake by back pressure" effect means that unicycling down a slope is approximately just as tiring as unicycling up the same slope. However, a unicyclist on flat solid ground is generally faster and more energy efficient than walking. The large wheel primarily aims to increase the max-speed of the unicycle.
However unicycles (and unicyclists) come in a variety of different shapes and sizes so there are many exceptions. For example giraffe unicycles may be less efficient because of the resistance in the chain and the energy spent mounting and unmounting it. Some unicycles have gearing systems (like the "Schlumpf") which are known to increase the max-speed of a unicycle, can be less energy efficient due to all the moving parts. Some particularly talented unicyclists are able to lift both their feet from the pedals as they ride down a hill - letting the pedals spin freely underneath them as they freewheel down the slope. This technique is more efficient and faster than normal unicycling because the speed is no longer limited by the cadence of the unicyclist.
Another advantage that unicycling has a form of transportation is safety. Pedestrians and motor vehicles naturally give me significantly more space when I am riding my unicycle. Presumably this is because unicyclists look very unstable and unpredictable to anyone unfamiliar with the way unicycles move. | In my experience a unicycle is not as efficient as walking.
On a bicycle you keep balance by leaning a bit to the left/right or by making small steering adjustments left/right to keep from tipping over. These are typically tiny adjustments don't slow you down much.
To keep balance on a unicycle you make the same left/right adjustments but on top of that you have keep from falling forward or backward. Keeping balance in that new axis means constantly accelerating/decelerating. This is the main difference. If you have excellent balance you do this mostly through leaning your body forward/backward but there will always be some extra effort put into acceleration/deceleration that has nothing to do with maintaining speed but everything to do with maintaining balance.
I don't think I could ever relax my legs for more than 2 seconds before having to correct my balance.
Even at "rest" you still have to constantly rock the unicycle back and forth a few inches to keep from falling over. Your legs are always working when riding a unicycle and there is no way to go idle or rest until you dismount.
I learned to ride on a small unicycle as a child and maybe things would be different if I had a better sized unicycle or a superior sense of balance. But in my experience my legs would always get fatigued after 20 or so minutes of riding a unicycle.
Maintaining a slow or fast speed had no impact. It was the constant acceleration and deceleration needed to keep myself upright that took the most out of me.
Going down even the slightest hill meant I had to work harder because I was constantly trying to slow myself down by backpedaling at just the right amount.
The answer might be different from someone with better balance but I don't know anyone else who has a unicycle much less rides one. |
73,472 | There are various sizes and shapes of (pedalled as opposed to electric) unicycles.
It is possible to buy them with large wheels, supposedly for road use.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/myAY1.jpg)
Image still sourced from
**Question**
I imagine that the lack of a freewheel mechanism, having to brake by back pressure and the effort of balancing mean that they are inefficient and require constant effort. Also there are no gears for going up or down hills.
Does travelling by unicycle have any advantages over walking as a mode of transport? Would level city roads be most suitable? Does it ever become easy and/or completely subconscious with practice? | 2020/11/20 | [
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/73472",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/users/20350/"
] | With a competent rider, a unicycle is far more efficient than walking. As evidence of that consider for example:
* [World 24 hour distance record on a unicycle](https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/farthest-distance-travelled-on-a-unicycle-in-24-hours#:%7E:text=Sam%20Wakeling%20(United%20Kingdom)%20covered,29%20to%2030%20September%202007.) : 453.6 km
* [One hour unicycle record](https://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2009/08/19/2660361.htm) : ~30 km
* [Record unicycle time on Karapoti Classic race](http://www.karapoti.co.nz/files/6314/0988/8587/Race_Records_17.3.2014.pdf) : 4:11:43 (50 km off-road MTB ride with ~1500 m of climb)
These feats are all well beyond anything anyone could complete on foot.
---
For comparison
* 24 hour walk (on a track) 216.621km by Claudio Sterpin (Italy) on 19 Oct 1986 in Milan
* 24 hours walk (on the road) 228.930km by Jesse Casteneda (USA) 19 Sep 1976 in Albuquerque
* 1 hour walk 15,577 metres by Bernardo Segura (Mexico) 7 May 1994 in Fana
---
* 24 hour ride (indoor track) 941.872 km by Christoph Strasser (Austria) 14–15 October 2017 in Switzerland
* 24 hour ride (road) 915.39 km by Ralph Diseviscourt (Luxembourg) 11 July 2020 in Luxembourg
* 1 hour ride (track) 55.089 km by Victor Campenaerts (Belgium) 16 April 2019 in Mexico
* Record time in Karopoti MTB 2:07:57 by Anton Cooper from Woodend, New Zealand in 2014.
from <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cycling_records#24_Hours_record> and <http://www.karapoti.co.nz/files/3915/8322/1936/20_Fastest_Karapotis_03.03.20.pdf> no times found for walking the route.
It appears that in terms of distance-covered-in-time, or time-to-cover-distance, unicycling is very approximately **twice** as efficient as walking and **half** as efficient as bicycling. | In my experience a unicycle is not as efficient as walking.
On a bicycle you keep balance by leaning a bit to the left/right or by making small steering adjustments left/right to keep from tipping over. These are typically tiny adjustments don't slow you down much.
To keep balance on a unicycle you make the same left/right adjustments but on top of that you have keep from falling forward or backward. Keeping balance in that new axis means constantly accelerating/decelerating. This is the main difference. If you have excellent balance you do this mostly through leaning your body forward/backward but there will always be some extra effort put into acceleration/deceleration that has nothing to do with maintaining speed but everything to do with maintaining balance.
I don't think I could ever relax my legs for more than 2 seconds before having to correct my balance.
Even at "rest" you still have to constantly rock the unicycle back and forth a few inches to keep from falling over. Your legs are always working when riding a unicycle and there is no way to go idle or rest until you dismount.
I learned to ride on a small unicycle as a child and maybe things would be different if I had a better sized unicycle or a superior sense of balance. But in my experience my legs would always get fatigued after 20 or so minutes of riding a unicycle.
Maintaining a slow or fast speed had no impact. It was the constant acceleration and deceleration needed to keep myself upright that took the most out of me.
Going down even the slightest hill meant I had to work harder because I was constantly trying to slow myself down by backpedaling at just the right amount.
The answer might be different from someone with better balance but I don't know anyone else who has a unicycle much less rides one. |
73,472 | There are various sizes and shapes of (pedalled as opposed to electric) unicycles.
It is possible to buy them with large wheels, supposedly for road use.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/myAY1.jpg)
Image still sourced from
**Question**
I imagine that the lack of a freewheel mechanism, having to brake by back pressure and the effort of balancing mean that they are inefficient and require constant effort. Also there are no gears for going up or down hills.
Does travelling by unicycle have any advantages over walking as a mode of transport? Would level city roads be most suitable? Does it ever become easy and/or completely subconscious with practice? | 2020/11/20 | [
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/73472",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/users/20350/"
] | For a skilled rider in reasonable terrain, the efficiency of a unicyle is not that different from a bike, and drastically higher than walking.
The bicycle is popularly regarded as the most efficient means of human powered transit. Basically you sit there, use a smooth rotational movement, and mechanical advantage sends you sailing easily along, wasting no effort in vertical movement or pavement impact. As speeds increase, the largest energy expenditure on a bike rapidly becomes fighting air resistance, which is why drafting is a thing.
For a skilled rider, a large wheel unicycle is not very different from riding a bike. Yes, there is a foward and backward component to balance, but just as in the skill of walking, this is not done by loosing control and then recovering it, but rather by adaptively putting just a tiny bit more or less effort into the pedals - effort that all contributes to useful progress over the ground anyway. In fact, if a unicyclist does actually start to fall over (essentially always falling forward) the "save" is a mad burst of pedaling - effort expended at an inefficient rate, but still ultimately going towards covering ground.
Typical cruising speed when riding the largest current production pneumatic tire (36 inch) direct drive is around 16-20 km/hr. If one were to equip a cruiser bike with the same low gearing and short cranks, the efficiency would be effectively the same. Put the ordinary sprockets back on the bike, and now a bicyclist riding alongside the unicyclist at the same pace can pedal more slowly and gain a small advantage there, but the actual power output to roll the same speed will be about the same. The thing is, a bicyclist of comparable enthusiasm to someone able to ride a unicycle smoothly is *probably not going to be content to roll along at 20 km/hr*, but rather will go a bit faster. However, this does not make them more efficient - actually the opposite. Because energy expended fighting air resistance increases rapidly with speed and overwhelmingly dominates at higher cycling speeds, the reality is that someone rolling along at an easy pace on a unicycle is actually moving *more efficiently* than the person who passes them going twice as fast on a road bike. A bicyclist going just a little bit faster could be more efficient that the best unicyclist, but the bicyclist would have to chose to actually ride at their most efficient speed, rather than be guided by more typical desires to get somewhere or get in a workout before they get tired of the saddle.
To look at some specific situations:
* What about coasting? While exceptions exist, unicycles are conventionally fixed gear. However, "following through" while the wheel moves the rider's legs requires little effort. There's probably a small loss of efficiency compared to a bike in terrain of gradual 1% up and down. Really though the main issue with being unable to coast is being unable to simply stand out of the saddle to get a break from its pressure - it is possible to stand for a half minute while pedaling (much easier if a narrow handlebar is fitted) but it requires quite a bit more work than to stand while coasting.
* What about climbing? To some extent, the "gearing" of a unicycle is already optimized for gentle climbs, so that's a place we often pass casual bicyclists. Steeper hills can become a challenge leading to a decision to walk instead. It's not that the unicycle is less efficient than walking, but rather that one may simply not have the power output available to climb at the roughly 9 km/hr below which it becomes a challenge to keep a unicycle stable, but be quite able to hike up the incline at 3-4 km/hr on foot.
* Descending hills. For moderate descents work can be done to resist the wheel, but a brake can also be fitted. I had an extended descent the other day where I actually had to take a rest break - not for my legs, but because my *brake hand* was getting tired.
* What about obstacles? Reasonable dirt and gravel surfaces, etc are readily covered on a unicycle, and there is a whole discipline of mountain unicycling devoted to tackling technical mountain bike trails, "trials" involving vertical bunny hops onto stack of shipping pallets or stair railings, etc. Often the appeal here is the challenge not the efficiency, though for things not beyond the unicyclist's capability something like a fire road would be more efficiently ridden than hiked. And switching between riding and walking can be a great way to cover ground as each provides some break from the particular fatigues of the other.
* Stop and go traffic, tight turns. To someone who can idle (trackstand) on a unicycle, this may not be a big deal; to others, constantly stopping and remounting could indeed be an efficiency loss. I might chose to walk rather than ride a neighborhood trip if I knew I'd have to stop three times in a mile, but the reality is every time I do, the first time someone passes on a bike I realize that even with this annoyance, it would have been faster and more efficient to ride my unicycle.
* Carrying things. I've done meaningful grocery shopping 8 km away using a backpack and a unicycle, but realistically for short distances one can carry more on foot, and for long ones bicycle panniers or even a trailer are going to have more capacity and exert less toll on the body.
One should be careful of mistaking things like *endurance* or *range* for *efficiency*, but there are of course some relationships. A bicyclist may often be able to readily access their entire ability to output energy over a day. In contrast, someone hiking may experience fatigue, but may find their range more limited by things like impact stress. Riding a unicycle tends to fall somewhere in between. Riding smoothly presents almost no impact stress, though jumping on and off frequently definitely can. Saddles tend to be larger than those on a bike, and out of saddle breaks more limited, so saddle-related fatigue can be more of an issue, particularly for a developing rider (a chamois and anti-friction cream are definitely recommended, along with a handlebar with permits a more bike-like limitation of saddle contact to sit bone pressure and not thigh control).
Ultimately an only moderately-active individual who invests effort in learning to ride smoothly, remount without support, and climb moderate hills can probably do dawn-to-dusk "Century" (100 mile or 160 km) rides, while likely challenged to hike even a third that far. Experience doing these confirms that rolling along spinning high cadence into negligible resistance is a moderately low effort way to spend an "active" day. Someone on a bike might get it done in half the time, but at the actual expenditure of more energy. | In my experience a unicycle is not as efficient as walking.
On a bicycle you keep balance by leaning a bit to the left/right or by making small steering adjustments left/right to keep from tipping over. These are typically tiny adjustments don't slow you down much.
To keep balance on a unicycle you make the same left/right adjustments but on top of that you have keep from falling forward or backward. Keeping balance in that new axis means constantly accelerating/decelerating. This is the main difference. If you have excellent balance you do this mostly through leaning your body forward/backward but there will always be some extra effort put into acceleration/deceleration that has nothing to do with maintaining speed but everything to do with maintaining balance.
I don't think I could ever relax my legs for more than 2 seconds before having to correct my balance.
Even at "rest" you still have to constantly rock the unicycle back and forth a few inches to keep from falling over. Your legs are always working when riding a unicycle and there is no way to go idle or rest until you dismount.
I learned to ride on a small unicycle as a child and maybe things would be different if I had a better sized unicycle or a superior sense of balance. But in my experience my legs would always get fatigued after 20 or so minutes of riding a unicycle.
Maintaining a slow or fast speed had no impact. It was the constant acceleration and deceleration needed to keep myself upright that took the most out of me.
Going down even the slightest hill meant I had to work harder because I was constantly trying to slow myself down by backpedaling at just the right amount.
The answer might be different from someone with better balance but I don't know anyone else who has a unicycle much less rides one. |
6,820 | There are quite a few questions here about suitable foods for different excursions / types of food to take etc. Inspired by questions like [this](https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/q/3524/3313) and [this](https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/q/4647/3313) I decided to finally ask this one.
I happen to have Acid Reflux which, for those who don't know what it's like, is like a permanent heartburn / indigestion feeling at its best, at it's worst there are chest pains, constant burping, and the oh so attractive 'sicky burp'. There are a number of foods which are supposedly good for Acid Reflux, but I'm not sure which would be good for trekking and I am unable to go too long without meat before needing some. For example on a bad AR day or a few days meat free a burger settles my stomach best, and this has been talked over with my doctor.
What foods are good for trekking, but also won't upset to stomach / Acid Reflux? | 2014/09/24 | [
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/questions/6820",
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com",
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/users/3313/"
] | Its an answer which you *may* not find specifically good for you, but rather more of a generic approach towards a person suffering from Acid Reflux.
Narrowing down the scope up to foods/meals over a trek, I'd suggest:
* Yogurt. You can try [Trail Yogurt Recipe](http://backpackerrecipes.wordpress.com/2009/06/17/fresh-yogurt-on-the-trail-%E2%80%94-is-it-really-possible/)
* Peanut butter as against eating Walnuts, Almond, etc.
* Whatever that is rich with Fiber: Oatmeal, Blackberries, whole grain products, You can find bran cereals, digestive biscuits and fiber bars nearly everywhere.
* Have a tea, with Ginger. Ginger helps.
* Eat Salads, though without Tomatoes and Onions. Let the Salad be green with Celery, Parsley, Cauliflower and other Green vegetables.
* Trekking diet should contain fruits, but you can only afford to have Bananas, Melons.
* Chicken and Fish are good to have, but remove the skin as its high with fats. You can have it boiled, baked, do not fry it though.
You didn't ask for it, but I'll suggest what you should avoid eating:
* Citrus fruits: Lime, Grapefruit, Orange
* Curd and allied food that contains Lactic acid.
* Lactose rich diet: Milk and allied products. The Lactose Intolerance can vary person to person.
* Avoid fried meat, Pork, Beef.
* Avoid Potato chips, Fries and Onion rings.
Enzymes and Acids play a huge role in Digestion. The more heavy you eat, the more enzymes and acids are needed and hence secreted. High-Fat foods are hard to digest, that can really cause you a trouble. | If I had to bring one thing for acid reflux, it'd be a bottle of citric acid powder.
Hopefully this doesn't come off as crackpot-ish, but it's solved the bulk of my acid reflux problem.
Any evening I ate pizza or legumes, like clockwork I'd be lying awake half the night from extreme acid reflux, the kind you have to swallow. If I wanted to get up early, then I couldn't eat my favorite meals. It was terrible. Antacids seemed to do nothing (i.e. stomach seemed to compensate with *more* acid).
Dad always drank soda (carbonic acid) with his meat to help digestion, and I wondered if there was anything to this. Some websites say [there is](http://healthwyze.org/index.php/component/content/article/221-why-you-should-use-apple-cider-vinegar-instead-of-antacids-and-baking-soda-for-indigestion.html). The theory is that acid reflux is **a result of excessive stomach churning from indigestion**, and that supplementing your HCl with some extra acid can actually *aid* digestion and calm the stomach contractions that are pushing acid up your throat. So I started drinking dilute lemon juice with the acid-causing meals. *It turns out I can actually sleep at night after a problem-meal.* So I drink lemon juice with almost all my meals now.
Could the effect be psychological/placebic? Could be.
Will it work for everyone? **Maybe not.**
But the acid I still get with any meal now is manageable/ignorable.
So, *PERSONALLY*, on a trek I'd bring a bottle of citric acid powder. |
512,878 | I have two Linux machines that I wish to connect via a bonded link.
One machine has two UMTS modems (DN:5mbit UL:1.2mbit) as its gateways, and the other machine has optical fiber (DL:100Mbit UL: 20mbit) as its gateway.
I can successfully create 2 OpenVPN channels (one per UMTS modem, using iptables rules) and have applied the Linux bonding driver (mode 0, round robin distribution) to these channels.
So far, so good. The bonded interface connects the two Linux machines via two aggregated VPN channels, where I can ping each machine, transfer files, etc, etc.
My problem is the bandwidth of the bond. Theoretically the bandwidth should double, but in fact, it is the same, independent of the number of VPN connections inside the bond.
In the machine with two UMTS modems, when I use only one VPN, I can reach the other machine with bandwidth near DN:5mbit UL:1.2mbit. Using 2 VPNs inside the bond interface the bandwidth per channel is near DN:2.5mbit UL:0.6mbit, so the overall bandwidth is the same, whether I use one or both VPN channels.
This behavior happens when I transfer data using either TCP or UDP, so it isn't a protocol issue.
Has anyone else experienced this too?
Thanks in advance. | 2013/06/03 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/512878",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/176339/"
] | Finally i found the (obvious) cause of the problem.
"If you have a network link with low bandwidth then it's an easy matter of putting several in parallel to make a combined link with higher bandwidth, but if you have a network link with bad latency then no amount of money can turn any number of them into a link with good latency." @ It's the Latency, Stupid, Stuart Cheshire, May 1996.
Since the VPN latency is around 110ms, the max bandwidth of the link would be around 4.8mbps (acording to <http://bradhedlund.com/2008/12/19/how-to-calculate-tcp-throughput-for-long-distance-links/>)
To check this i put in practice a test, i lowered each UMTS modems bandwidth to 2mbps DL and 1.2mbps UL (shaping traffic with wondershaper), resulting 3.65mbps DL and 2mbps UL of aggregated bandwidth.
Resuming, i can use VPN bonding if the aggregated bandwidth don't exceed the maximum bandwidth imposed by the latency, otherwise it will be waste of resources. | Why don't you just increase the TCP window size, like your link says?
If you double the size, you should be able to reach the desired bandwidth. |
512,878 | I have two Linux machines that I wish to connect via a bonded link.
One machine has two UMTS modems (DN:5mbit UL:1.2mbit) as its gateways, and the other machine has optical fiber (DL:100Mbit UL: 20mbit) as its gateway.
I can successfully create 2 OpenVPN channels (one per UMTS modem, using iptables rules) and have applied the Linux bonding driver (mode 0, round robin distribution) to these channels.
So far, so good. The bonded interface connects the two Linux machines via two aggregated VPN channels, where I can ping each machine, transfer files, etc, etc.
My problem is the bandwidth of the bond. Theoretically the bandwidth should double, but in fact, it is the same, independent of the number of VPN connections inside the bond.
In the machine with two UMTS modems, when I use only one VPN, I can reach the other machine with bandwidth near DN:5mbit UL:1.2mbit. Using 2 VPNs inside the bond interface the bandwidth per channel is near DN:2.5mbit UL:0.6mbit, so the overall bandwidth is the same, whether I use one or both VPN channels.
This behavior happens when I transfer data using either TCP or UDP, so it isn't a protocol issue.
Has anyone else experienced this too?
Thanks in advance. | 2013/06/03 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/512878",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/176339/"
] | Finally i found the (obvious) cause of the problem.
"If you have a network link with low bandwidth then it's an easy matter of putting several in parallel to make a combined link with higher bandwidth, but if you have a network link with bad latency then no amount of money can turn any number of them into a link with good latency." @ It's the Latency, Stupid, Stuart Cheshire, May 1996.
Since the VPN latency is around 110ms, the max bandwidth of the link would be around 4.8mbps (acording to <http://bradhedlund.com/2008/12/19/how-to-calculate-tcp-throughput-for-long-distance-links/>)
To check this i put in practice a test, i lowered each UMTS modems bandwidth to 2mbps DL and 1.2mbps UL (shaping traffic with wondershaper), resulting 3.65mbps DL and 2mbps UL of aggregated bandwidth.
Resuming, i can use VPN bonding if the aggregated bandwidth don't exceed the maximum bandwidth imposed by the latency, otherwise it will be waste of resources. | I doubt return traffic with data is coming balanced between links, so would recommend to test an uplink speed on bonded interface first. |
512,878 | I have two Linux machines that I wish to connect via a bonded link.
One machine has two UMTS modems (DN:5mbit UL:1.2mbit) as its gateways, and the other machine has optical fiber (DL:100Mbit UL: 20mbit) as its gateway.
I can successfully create 2 OpenVPN channels (one per UMTS modem, using iptables rules) and have applied the Linux bonding driver (mode 0, round robin distribution) to these channels.
So far, so good. The bonded interface connects the two Linux machines via two aggregated VPN channels, where I can ping each machine, transfer files, etc, etc.
My problem is the bandwidth of the bond. Theoretically the bandwidth should double, but in fact, it is the same, independent of the number of VPN connections inside the bond.
In the machine with two UMTS modems, when I use only one VPN, I can reach the other machine with bandwidth near DN:5mbit UL:1.2mbit. Using 2 VPNs inside the bond interface the bandwidth per channel is near DN:2.5mbit UL:0.6mbit, so the overall bandwidth is the same, whether I use one or both VPN channels.
This behavior happens when I transfer data using either TCP or UDP, so it isn't a protocol issue.
Has anyone else experienced this too?
Thanks in advance. | 2013/06/03 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/512878",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/176339/"
] | I doubt return traffic with data is coming balanced between links, so would recommend to test an uplink speed on bonded interface first. | Why don't you just increase the TCP window size, like your link says?
If you double the size, you should be able to reach the desired bandwidth. |
19,044 | Since, given enough compaction, salt is able to behave like a fluid & buoyant too if it's overlain by a higher density rock (it could be fine grained clay or a sandy sequence). But in another case, when a layered sandstone is inter bedded with shale, & given enough pressure and temperature, the shale becomes mobile & flows while the sandstone shows brittle properties. Do the above two situations work on different principles or same, or are these two completely different processes? | 2020/01/21 | [
"https://earthscience.stackexchange.com/questions/19044",
"https://earthscience.stackexchange.com",
"https://earthscience.stackexchange.com/users/18747/"
] | You are referring to shale "boudins": sausage-like structures that form when rock layers are compacted, break apart, and are pinched at the ends by differential compaction stresses:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pg5fg.jpg)
Their formation has nothing in common with how salt is deformed by stress. Salt is deformed by stress induced erosion and re-mineralization at grain boundary edges. It has more in common with the formation of marble and quartzite (though at far lower PT conditions). | In your question I think you are mixing up metamorphic conditions such as the conditions that gneiss forms from sedimentary rock with the formation of diapirs. Diapirs occur where a less dense layer of a relatively plastic rock has denser overlying formations create sufficient pressure so that the less dense substance deforms and rises over time.
Diapirs of salt occur where thick salt deposits over overlain by dense sedimentary shales and sandstones. Because of the slowness with which salt deforms the sedimentary deposits will be buried sufficiently deeply that they will have lithified, turning to rock and becoming more dense. The salt layer will have some trapped water in it that helps the salt to recrystallize as a response to a pressure gradient.
Diapirs can also occur where water saturated sands are overlain by muds (sand volcanoes) or where water saturated clay layers are overlain by dense silts (mud lump islands). In these cases the layers are relatively shallow and the sands and clays are not lithified.
In conditions of deep burial and high pressure differentials the sedimentary rocks will recrystallize into denser rocks and will deform, producing folds in some lithologies and faults in other rock types. The slow speed of the deformations and high pressures and temperatures (mostly due to deep burial) give the mineral grains the rocks are made of time to recrystallize and move around each other. Only if this sub-microscopic recrystallization is not happening fast enough will there be faulting in a layer. |
21,294 | Could someone explain when or why I would want to generate a new managed path in a SharePoint Web Application?
Bismarck | 2011/10/13 | [
"https://sharepoint.stackexchange.com/questions/21294",
"https://sharepoint.stackexchange.com",
"https://sharepoint.stackexchange.com/users/3113/"
] | The advantage of multiple managed paths is it's a first piece of metadata you can have in your farm. It helps break sites out into logical trees even thought they all reside in the same farm. This becomes very beneficial if you organize your structure very flat (many site collection)
Based on the managed paths, you can have different SLAs for things like retention and such.
We have several managed paths
* ourdomain.com/calendars (for public folder migration)
* ourdomain.com/sites (team sites)
* ourdomain.com/cmte (committees)
* ourdomain.com/research (research sites)
* ourdomain.com/projects (projects)
* ourdomain.com/personal (My Sites) | As an extension to the meta-data reason mentioned by @pirateeric, I also find it very useful for being able to optimize content sources and search scopes within the search system. |
21,294 | Could someone explain when or why I would want to generate a new managed path in a SharePoint Web Application?
Bismarck | 2011/10/13 | [
"https://sharepoint.stackexchange.com/questions/21294",
"https://sharepoint.stackexchange.com",
"https://sharepoint.stackexchange.com/users/3113/"
] | The advantage of multiple managed paths is it's a first piece of metadata you can have in your farm. It helps break sites out into logical trees even thought they all reside in the same farm. This becomes very beneficial if you organize your structure very flat (many site collection)
Based on the managed paths, you can have different SLAs for things like retention and such.
We have several managed paths
* ourdomain.com/calendars (for public folder migration)
* ourdomain.com/sites (team sites)
* ourdomain.com/cmte (committees)
* ourdomain.com/research (research sites)
* ourdomain.com/projects (projects)
* ourdomain.com/personal (My Sites) | Nice post. Here is the one more post explaining Managed path in Sharepoint
<http://sureshpydi.blogspot.in/2013/03/share-point-managed-paths.html> |
21,294 | Could someone explain when or why I would want to generate a new managed path in a SharePoint Web Application?
Bismarck | 2011/10/13 | [
"https://sharepoint.stackexchange.com/questions/21294",
"https://sharepoint.stackexchange.com",
"https://sharepoint.stackexchange.com/users/3113/"
] | As an extension to the meta-data reason mentioned by @pirateeric, I also find it very useful for being able to optimize content sources and search scopes within the search system. | Nice post. Here is the one more post explaining Managed path in Sharepoint
<http://sureshpydi.blogspot.in/2013/03/share-point-managed-paths.html> |
94,826 | I can see that anyone can see other peoples' bookmarks.
I don't care much about this, but I was thinking: is this a privacy issue?
For example, someone downvoted some questions or wrote negative comments on it and later when a question gained popularity, that person marked it as a bookmark.
Although it's not a big issue, I just want to know what is the point of seeing other people's bookmarks? | 2011/06/12 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/94826",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/139273/"
] | A setting to make them private would be good and leave the default setting as public.
Or since SE apparently hates "settings", how about adding a way per question to get updated on changes to the question. Similar to the tag email alerts or how you can get alerted on new answers if you are the person who wrote the question. | I don't see how seeing a user's bookmarks is a privacy issue.
There is no way to tell from the user's bookmarking behaviour alone how they have voted, or commented. (Plus, all comments from a user are publicly visible anyway.) |
94,826 | I can see that anyone can see other peoples' bookmarks.
I don't care much about this, but I was thinking: is this a privacy issue?
For example, someone downvoted some questions or wrote negative comments on it and later when a question gained popularity, that person marked it as a bookmark.
Although it's not a big issue, I just want to know what is the point of seeing other people's bookmarks? | 2011/06/12 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/94826",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/139273/"
] | The point to being able to see a person's bookmarks is to see the topics they find interesting. Keep in mind that I, for instance, may want to bookmark something to see what further answers are submitted (like on older questions) or it may be a topic I want to come back to and find in the future (easier to sort through a small list than a large one).
That is the point of making that list public. I hope this addresses one of your concerns.
As for "what if I bookmark a particular question that could possibly paint me in a dim light in the future?" ... so what? Are you really so afraid of criticism that you worry when anyone might make fun of you? I mean honestly, if that's the sort of peer group you roll with on a regular basis, that they only want to find ways to make fun of you, then you need new peers. And if you're worried about it for a job-placement purpose, consider this: "I thought that was an interesting problem that I had never heard of and wanted to followup on it later". It's hard for people to say "oh no that's so commonplace" because then it puts them in the same place you were worried about being in.
Additionally, this is a site/network for *professionals*, so I would *hope* that all members would act like adults and like professionals, so if you see someone not doing that, say something immediately. You can do this by flagging any such content.
Lastly: EVERYTHING YOU DO ON THE SE NETWORKS IS PUBLIC1
1:(with small and notable examples. Moderators have access to a limited facility of features that are not public. The use of those things are generally for noting the behaviors of the sort of people who we probably do not want on the network in the future. If you find yourself the target of those features, you will know it. Likely you will never find yourself the target of those features.) caveats noted tyvm | I don't see how seeing a user's bookmarks is a privacy issue.
There is no way to tell from the user's bookmarking behaviour alone how they have voted, or commented. (Plus, all comments from a user are publicly visible anyway.) |
94,826 | I can see that anyone can see other peoples' bookmarks.
I don't care much about this, but I was thinking: is this a privacy issue?
For example, someone downvoted some questions or wrote negative comments on it and later when a question gained popularity, that person marked it as a bookmark.
Although it's not a big issue, I just want to know what is the point of seeing other people's bookmarks? | 2011/06/12 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/94826",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/139273/"
] | Being able to see anyone's bookmarks **is** a symptom of a privacy issue - that users are not given the choice of what, when, or how to share some parts of their personal information. Several proposed answers ridicule you for bringing this up, or claim that being able to hide your bookmarks has no value. These answers miss the point - that privacy is a complex issue and different aspects of it have different amounts of value to different people.
The problem with making a list of bookmarks public is that a decision is being made to share data without explicitly asking the user whether it should be shared, nor giving them the opportunity to correct it.
**Publishing bookmarks is fundamentally different from publishing other pieces of user information such as questions and answers.** Questions and answers are created and submitted with the primary intent of sharing information. When I ask a question or write an answer, I am making a choice to publicly post that information. Importantly, I am also taking an explicit *action* - I type text into a textbox and click 'submit'. As a user I understand that clicking 'submit' will publish the text I have typed for all the world to see.
Contrarily, the bookmarks feature does not have the primary goal of sharing the information that it generates. Users mark questions as bookmarks mainly so they can more easily track them and refer to them later{1} (cf. the faq - ["This lets you find it easily when the question may get lost"](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/53585/)). Publicly sharing that bookmarking is a *side effect* of the user's action, and not something they specifically approved when they clicked on the star. And importantly, this side effect is not immediately obvious the way it is for submitting questions and answers - many users do not realize their list of bookmarks is being made public.
The issue here is that users are never given the opportunity to decide or control whether this piece of information - their list of bookmarks - is published. This issue is compounded and confused by the fact that different people who use Stack Exchange sites have different assumptions about what *should* happen with that information. Some people believe that bookmarks should be public, and so there is no problem. Some believe that bookmarks should be private, and are surprised or concerned that a) they weren't asked or told about the decision to publish their bookmarks, and b) that they cannot take any action to correct that decision for the future. Still other people *never think about it*, and so we don't know what their preference might be.
If you are in the second group and feel that bookmarks should be private, it may seem like a poor user interface, unfair practise, or just plain deception that the decision to publish that data is being made without your consent. That is a problem, and thus I believe the issue of whether to publish bookmarks should be addressed.
--
To further advocate that the issue of whether to publish bookmarks should be addressed, let's look at some popular counter-arguments.
>
> 1. "Bookmarks are made public so anyone can see the topics a user finds interesting".
>
>
>
This is certainly a valid and beneficial feature. But shouldn't each person be able to control whether their bookmarks can be used that way? Shouldn't they be given the choice?
>
> 2. "Everything you do on the Stack Exchange network is already public"
>
>
>
Maybe it is right now, but does that mean it should be? Several users have commented on or answered this question stating they would like to be able to keep their bookmarks private. The very fact that this question is being asked means the feature has value to some people. Evaluating the possibilities and then making a decision is a better course of action than saying "we can't do that because we've never done it before".
>
> 3. "Publishing a user's bookmarking behaviour doesn't reveal that much"
>
>
>
It does reveal *something*, and that revelation is obviously worth different amounts to different people. Some people don't care if their bookmarks are published. Some probably *want* them published. And some don't. Shouldn't Stack Exchange accommodate all groups?
>
> 4. "You shouldn't post information on the public internet that you don't want people to know"
>
>
>
The issue is that when someone clicks the star to bookmark a question they *aren't* posting information to the internet. Or at least, they're not consciously choosing to post information, nor asking Stack Exchange to post information. They're mainly just trying to bookmark the question, and a decision to publish information is being made for them. See the explanation above on side effects.
>
> 5."Why do you care if your bookmarks are public?"
>
>
>
and
>
> 6."Can't you stand a little criticism?"
>
>
>
Behind statements like these is the incorrect argument "if you're not doing anything wrong then you've got nothing to hide". Not only is this not true, it insidiously sidesteps the issue and often leads to heated debates.
To quote [Daniel Solove](https://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127461/): "The problem with the nothing-to-hide argument is the underlying assumption that privacy is about hiding bad things. .. [it also] myopically views privacy as a form of secrecy". "Privacy" is a complex set of issues. "[It] involves so many things that it is impossible to reduce them all to one simple idea. And we need not do so."
There is at least one important issue here: a decision is being made about what to do with some user information without asking their consent nor giving them the opportunity to change it. The issue is affecting how and whether some people contribute to Stack Exchange. Let's not hide the issue by saying it doesn't matter or criticizing people who discuss it. Let's evaluate the options and solve it. To quote Solove again: "People don't acknowledge certain problems, because those problems don't fit into a particular one-size-fits-all conception of privacy. Regardless of whether we call something a 'privacy' problem, it still remains a problem, and problems shouldn't be ignored."
--
Finally, an argument for implementing private bookmark: **leaving this problem unsolved hurts Stack Exchange because it discourages some users from contributing.**
I would hate for someone to avoid contributing to Stack Overflow because they didn't want their bookmarks made public. Far better to give them the option of sharing what they wish, and then contributing how they wish. We Stack Exchange users want to make the internet a better place. Letting people decide exactly how they assist with that goal can only lead to more positive contributions.
The [Stack Exchange Privacy Policy](https://stackexchange.com/legal/privacy-policy) says "We take the private nature of your personal information very seriously, and are committed to protecting it." I'm glad they feel this way. Giving people the choice of whether to make their bookmarks public is a good step towards helping protect personal information.
--
Footnote:
{1} Sure, some users may mark bookmark specifically so they can show off what topics interest them, but this is an emergent behaviour. | I don't see how seeing a user's bookmarks is a privacy issue.
There is no way to tell from the user's bookmarking behaviour alone how they have voted, or commented. (Plus, all comments from a user are publicly visible anyway.) |
94,826 | I can see that anyone can see other peoples' bookmarks.
I don't care much about this, but I was thinking: is this a privacy issue?
For example, someone downvoted some questions or wrote negative comments on it and later when a question gained popularity, that person marked it as a bookmark.
Although it's not a big issue, I just want to know what is the point of seeing other people's bookmarks? | 2011/06/12 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/94826",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/139273/"
] | I will explain how seeing a user's bookmarks is a privacy issue.
You know that some guy works in a competing company. You monitor his SO activity. When a new field of interest appears, you see that the competing company is doing something in this area. In the best case, you can guess the features of their product before it is released. Or compose a list of encountered problems and attempted solutions, a valuable information for making a me-too.
But back to the guy. He has signed a non-disclosure agreement and if his employer finds out how the leak happened... | I don't see how seeing a user's bookmarks is a privacy issue.
There is no way to tell from the user's bookmarking behaviour alone how they have voted, or commented. (Plus, all comments from a user are publicly visible anyway.) |
94,826 | I can see that anyone can see other peoples' bookmarks.
I don't care much about this, but I was thinking: is this a privacy issue?
For example, someone downvoted some questions or wrote negative comments on it and later when a question gained popularity, that person marked it as a bookmark.
Although it's not a big issue, I just want to know what is the point of seeing other people's bookmarks? | 2011/06/12 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/94826",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/139273/"
] | Being able to see anyone's bookmarks **is** a symptom of a privacy issue - that users are not given the choice of what, when, or how to share some parts of their personal information. Several proposed answers ridicule you for bringing this up, or claim that being able to hide your bookmarks has no value. These answers miss the point - that privacy is a complex issue and different aspects of it have different amounts of value to different people.
The problem with making a list of bookmarks public is that a decision is being made to share data without explicitly asking the user whether it should be shared, nor giving them the opportunity to correct it.
**Publishing bookmarks is fundamentally different from publishing other pieces of user information such as questions and answers.** Questions and answers are created and submitted with the primary intent of sharing information. When I ask a question or write an answer, I am making a choice to publicly post that information. Importantly, I am also taking an explicit *action* - I type text into a textbox and click 'submit'. As a user I understand that clicking 'submit' will publish the text I have typed for all the world to see.
Contrarily, the bookmarks feature does not have the primary goal of sharing the information that it generates. Users mark questions as bookmarks mainly so they can more easily track them and refer to them later{1} (cf. the faq - ["This lets you find it easily when the question may get lost"](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/53585/)). Publicly sharing that bookmarking is a *side effect* of the user's action, and not something they specifically approved when they clicked on the star. And importantly, this side effect is not immediately obvious the way it is for submitting questions and answers - many users do not realize their list of bookmarks is being made public.
The issue here is that users are never given the opportunity to decide or control whether this piece of information - their list of bookmarks - is published. This issue is compounded and confused by the fact that different people who use Stack Exchange sites have different assumptions about what *should* happen with that information. Some people believe that bookmarks should be public, and so there is no problem. Some believe that bookmarks should be private, and are surprised or concerned that a) they weren't asked or told about the decision to publish their bookmarks, and b) that they cannot take any action to correct that decision for the future. Still other people *never think about it*, and so we don't know what their preference might be.
If you are in the second group and feel that bookmarks should be private, it may seem like a poor user interface, unfair practise, or just plain deception that the decision to publish that data is being made without your consent. That is a problem, and thus I believe the issue of whether to publish bookmarks should be addressed.
--
To further advocate that the issue of whether to publish bookmarks should be addressed, let's look at some popular counter-arguments.
>
> 1. "Bookmarks are made public so anyone can see the topics a user finds interesting".
>
>
>
This is certainly a valid and beneficial feature. But shouldn't each person be able to control whether their bookmarks can be used that way? Shouldn't they be given the choice?
>
> 2. "Everything you do on the Stack Exchange network is already public"
>
>
>
Maybe it is right now, but does that mean it should be? Several users have commented on or answered this question stating they would like to be able to keep their bookmarks private. The very fact that this question is being asked means the feature has value to some people. Evaluating the possibilities and then making a decision is a better course of action than saying "we can't do that because we've never done it before".
>
> 3. "Publishing a user's bookmarking behaviour doesn't reveal that much"
>
>
>
It does reveal *something*, and that revelation is obviously worth different amounts to different people. Some people don't care if their bookmarks are published. Some probably *want* them published. And some don't. Shouldn't Stack Exchange accommodate all groups?
>
> 4. "You shouldn't post information on the public internet that you don't want people to know"
>
>
>
The issue is that when someone clicks the star to bookmark a question they *aren't* posting information to the internet. Or at least, they're not consciously choosing to post information, nor asking Stack Exchange to post information. They're mainly just trying to bookmark the question, and a decision to publish information is being made for them. See the explanation above on side effects.
>
> 5."Why do you care if your bookmarks are public?"
>
>
>
and
>
> 6."Can't you stand a little criticism?"
>
>
>
Behind statements like these is the incorrect argument "if you're not doing anything wrong then you've got nothing to hide". Not only is this not true, it insidiously sidesteps the issue and often leads to heated debates.
To quote [Daniel Solove](https://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127461/): "The problem with the nothing-to-hide argument is the underlying assumption that privacy is about hiding bad things. .. [it also] myopically views privacy as a form of secrecy". "Privacy" is a complex set of issues. "[It] involves so many things that it is impossible to reduce them all to one simple idea. And we need not do so."
There is at least one important issue here: a decision is being made about what to do with some user information without asking their consent nor giving them the opportunity to change it. The issue is affecting how and whether some people contribute to Stack Exchange. Let's not hide the issue by saying it doesn't matter or criticizing people who discuss it. Let's evaluate the options and solve it. To quote Solove again: "People don't acknowledge certain problems, because those problems don't fit into a particular one-size-fits-all conception of privacy. Regardless of whether we call something a 'privacy' problem, it still remains a problem, and problems shouldn't be ignored."
--
Finally, an argument for implementing private bookmark: **leaving this problem unsolved hurts Stack Exchange because it discourages some users from contributing.**
I would hate for someone to avoid contributing to Stack Overflow because they didn't want their bookmarks made public. Far better to give them the option of sharing what they wish, and then contributing how they wish. We Stack Exchange users want to make the internet a better place. Letting people decide exactly how they assist with that goal can only lead to more positive contributions.
The [Stack Exchange Privacy Policy](https://stackexchange.com/legal/privacy-policy) says "We take the private nature of your personal information very seriously, and are committed to protecting it." I'm glad they feel this way. Giving people the choice of whether to make their bookmarks public is a good step towards helping protect personal information.
--
Footnote:
{1} Sure, some users may mark bookmark specifically so they can show off what topics interest them, but this is an emergent behaviour. | A setting to make them private would be good and leave the default setting as public.
Or since SE apparently hates "settings", how about adding a way per question to get updated on changes to the question. Similar to the tag email alerts or how you can get alerted on new answers if you are the person who wrote the question. |
94,826 | I can see that anyone can see other peoples' bookmarks.
I don't care much about this, but I was thinking: is this a privacy issue?
For example, someone downvoted some questions or wrote negative comments on it and later when a question gained popularity, that person marked it as a bookmark.
Although it's not a big issue, I just want to know what is the point of seeing other people's bookmarks? | 2011/06/12 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/94826",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/139273/"
] | I will explain how seeing a user's bookmarks is a privacy issue.
You know that some guy works in a competing company. You monitor his SO activity. When a new field of interest appears, you see that the competing company is doing something in this area. In the best case, you can guess the features of their product before it is released. Or compose a list of encountered problems and attempted solutions, a valuable information for making a me-too.
But back to the guy. He has signed a non-disclosure agreement and if his employer finds out how the leak happened... | A setting to make them private would be good and leave the default setting as public.
Or since SE apparently hates "settings", how about adding a way per question to get updated on changes to the question. Similar to the tag email alerts or how you can get alerted on new answers if you are the person who wrote the question. |
94,826 | I can see that anyone can see other peoples' bookmarks.
I don't care much about this, but I was thinking: is this a privacy issue?
For example, someone downvoted some questions or wrote negative comments on it and later when a question gained popularity, that person marked it as a bookmark.
Although it's not a big issue, I just want to know what is the point of seeing other people's bookmarks? | 2011/06/12 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/94826",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/139273/"
] | Being able to see anyone's bookmarks **is** a symptom of a privacy issue - that users are not given the choice of what, when, or how to share some parts of their personal information. Several proposed answers ridicule you for bringing this up, or claim that being able to hide your bookmarks has no value. These answers miss the point - that privacy is a complex issue and different aspects of it have different amounts of value to different people.
The problem with making a list of bookmarks public is that a decision is being made to share data without explicitly asking the user whether it should be shared, nor giving them the opportunity to correct it.
**Publishing bookmarks is fundamentally different from publishing other pieces of user information such as questions and answers.** Questions and answers are created and submitted with the primary intent of sharing information. When I ask a question or write an answer, I am making a choice to publicly post that information. Importantly, I am also taking an explicit *action* - I type text into a textbox and click 'submit'. As a user I understand that clicking 'submit' will publish the text I have typed for all the world to see.
Contrarily, the bookmarks feature does not have the primary goal of sharing the information that it generates. Users mark questions as bookmarks mainly so they can more easily track them and refer to them later{1} (cf. the faq - ["This lets you find it easily when the question may get lost"](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/53585/)). Publicly sharing that bookmarking is a *side effect* of the user's action, and not something they specifically approved when they clicked on the star. And importantly, this side effect is not immediately obvious the way it is for submitting questions and answers - many users do not realize their list of bookmarks is being made public.
The issue here is that users are never given the opportunity to decide or control whether this piece of information - their list of bookmarks - is published. This issue is compounded and confused by the fact that different people who use Stack Exchange sites have different assumptions about what *should* happen with that information. Some people believe that bookmarks should be public, and so there is no problem. Some believe that bookmarks should be private, and are surprised or concerned that a) they weren't asked or told about the decision to publish their bookmarks, and b) that they cannot take any action to correct that decision for the future. Still other people *never think about it*, and so we don't know what their preference might be.
If you are in the second group and feel that bookmarks should be private, it may seem like a poor user interface, unfair practise, or just plain deception that the decision to publish that data is being made without your consent. That is a problem, and thus I believe the issue of whether to publish bookmarks should be addressed.
--
To further advocate that the issue of whether to publish bookmarks should be addressed, let's look at some popular counter-arguments.
>
> 1. "Bookmarks are made public so anyone can see the topics a user finds interesting".
>
>
>
This is certainly a valid and beneficial feature. But shouldn't each person be able to control whether their bookmarks can be used that way? Shouldn't they be given the choice?
>
> 2. "Everything you do on the Stack Exchange network is already public"
>
>
>
Maybe it is right now, but does that mean it should be? Several users have commented on or answered this question stating they would like to be able to keep their bookmarks private. The very fact that this question is being asked means the feature has value to some people. Evaluating the possibilities and then making a decision is a better course of action than saying "we can't do that because we've never done it before".
>
> 3. "Publishing a user's bookmarking behaviour doesn't reveal that much"
>
>
>
It does reveal *something*, and that revelation is obviously worth different amounts to different people. Some people don't care if their bookmarks are published. Some probably *want* them published. And some don't. Shouldn't Stack Exchange accommodate all groups?
>
> 4. "You shouldn't post information on the public internet that you don't want people to know"
>
>
>
The issue is that when someone clicks the star to bookmark a question they *aren't* posting information to the internet. Or at least, they're not consciously choosing to post information, nor asking Stack Exchange to post information. They're mainly just trying to bookmark the question, and a decision to publish information is being made for them. See the explanation above on side effects.
>
> 5."Why do you care if your bookmarks are public?"
>
>
>
and
>
> 6."Can't you stand a little criticism?"
>
>
>
Behind statements like these is the incorrect argument "if you're not doing anything wrong then you've got nothing to hide". Not only is this not true, it insidiously sidesteps the issue and often leads to heated debates.
To quote [Daniel Solove](https://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127461/): "The problem with the nothing-to-hide argument is the underlying assumption that privacy is about hiding bad things. .. [it also] myopically views privacy as a form of secrecy". "Privacy" is a complex set of issues. "[It] involves so many things that it is impossible to reduce them all to one simple idea. And we need not do so."
There is at least one important issue here: a decision is being made about what to do with some user information without asking their consent nor giving them the opportunity to change it. The issue is affecting how and whether some people contribute to Stack Exchange. Let's not hide the issue by saying it doesn't matter or criticizing people who discuss it. Let's evaluate the options and solve it. To quote Solove again: "People don't acknowledge certain problems, because those problems don't fit into a particular one-size-fits-all conception of privacy. Regardless of whether we call something a 'privacy' problem, it still remains a problem, and problems shouldn't be ignored."
--
Finally, an argument for implementing private bookmark: **leaving this problem unsolved hurts Stack Exchange because it discourages some users from contributing.**
I would hate for someone to avoid contributing to Stack Overflow because they didn't want their bookmarks made public. Far better to give them the option of sharing what they wish, and then contributing how they wish. We Stack Exchange users want to make the internet a better place. Letting people decide exactly how they assist with that goal can only lead to more positive contributions.
The [Stack Exchange Privacy Policy](https://stackexchange.com/legal/privacy-policy) says "We take the private nature of your personal information very seriously, and are committed to protecting it." I'm glad they feel this way. Giving people the choice of whether to make their bookmarks public is a good step towards helping protect personal information.
--
Footnote:
{1} Sure, some users may mark bookmark specifically so they can show off what topics interest them, but this is an emergent behaviour. | The point to being able to see a person's bookmarks is to see the topics they find interesting. Keep in mind that I, for instance, may want to bookmark something to see what further answers are submitted (like on older questions) or it may be a topic I want to come back to and find in the future (easier to sort through a small list than a large one).
That is the point of making that list public. I hope this addresses one of your concerns.
As for "what if I bookmark a particular question that could possibly paint me in a dim light in the future?" ... so what? Are you really so afraid of criticism that you worry when anyone might make fun of you? I mean honestly, if that's the sort of peer group you roll with on a regular basis, that they only want to find ways to make fun of you, then you need new peers. And if you're worried about it for a job-placement purpose, consider this: "I thought that was an interesting problem that I had never heard of and wanted to followup on it later". It's hard for people to say "oh no that's so commonplace" because then it puts them in the same place you were worried about being in.
Additionally, this is a site/network for *professionals*, so I would *hope* that all members would act like adults and like professionals, so if you see someone not doing that, say something immediately. You can do this by flagging any such content.
Lastly: EVERYTHING YOU DO ON THE SE NETWORKS IS PUBLIC1
1:(with small and notable examples. Moderators have access to a limited facility of features that are not public. The use of those things are generally for noting the behaviors of the sort of people who we probably do not want on the network in the future. If you find yourself the target of those features, you will know it. Likely you will never find yourself the target of those features.) caveats noted tyvm |
94,826 | I can see that anyone can see other peoples' bookmarks.
I don't care much about this, but I was thinking: is this a privacy issue?
For example, someone downvoted some questions or wrote negative comments on it and later when a question gained popularity, that person marked it as a bookmark.
Although it's not a big issue, I just want to know what is the point of seeing other people's bookmarks? | 2011/06/12 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/94826",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/139273/"
] | I will explain how seeing a user's bookmarks is a privacy issue.
You know that some guy works in a competing company. You monitor his SO activity. When a new field of interest appears, you see that the competing company is doing something in this area. In the best case, you can guess the features of their product before it is released. Or compose a list of encountered problems and attempted solutions, a valuable information for making a me-too.
But back to the guy. He has signed a non-disclosure agreement and if his employer finds out how the leak happened... | The point to being able to see a person's bookmarks is to see the topics they find interesting. Keep in mind that I, for instance, may want to bookmark something to see what further answers are submitted (like on older questions) or it may be a topic I want to come back to and find in the future (easier to sort through a small list than a large one).
That is the point of making that list public. I hope this addresses one of your concerns.
As for "what if I bookmark a particular question that could possibly paint me in a dim light in the future?" ... so what? Are you really so afraid of criticism that you worry when anyone might make fun of you? I mean honestly, if that's the sort of peer group you roll with on a regular basis, that they only want to find ways to make fun of you, then you need new peers. And if you're worried about it for a job-placement purpose, consider this: "I thought that was an interesting problem that I had never heard of and wanted to followup on it later". It's hard for people to say "oh no that's so commonplace" because then it puts them in the same place you were worried about being in.
Additionally, this is a site/network for *professionals*, so I would *hope* that all members would act like adults and like professionals, so if you see someone not doing that, say something immediately. You can do this by flagging any such content.
Lastly: EVERYTHING YOU DO ON THE SE NETWORKS IS PUBLIC1
1:(with small and notable examples. Moderators have access to a limited facility of features that are not public. The use of those things are generally for noting the behaviors of the sort of people who we probably do not want on the network in the future. If you find yourself the target of those features, you will know it. Likely you will never find yourself the target of those features.) caveats noted tyvm |
94,826 | I can see that anyone can see other peoples' bookmarks.
I don't care much about this, but I was thinking: is this a privacy issue?
For example, someone downvoted some questions or wrote negative comments on it and later when a question gained popularity, that person marked it as a bookmark.
Although it's not a big issue, I just want to know what is the point of seeing other people's bookmarks? | 2011/06/12 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/94826",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/139273/"
] | Being able to see anyone's bookmarks **is** a symptom of a privacy issue - that users are not given the choice of what, when, or how to share some parts of their personal information. Several proposed answers ridicule you for bringing this up, or claim that being able to hide your bookmarks has no value. These answers miss the point - that privacy is a complex issue and different aspects of it have different amounts of value to different people.
The problem with making a list of bookmarks public is that a decision is being made to share data without explicitly asking the user whether it should be shared, nor giving them the opportunity to correct it.
**Publishing bookmarks is fundamentally different from publishing other pieces of user information such as questions and answers.** Questions and answers are created and submitted with the primary intent of sharing information. When I ask a question or write an answer, I am making a choice to publicly post that information. Importantly, I am also taking an explicit *action* - I type text into a textbox and click 'submit'. As a user I understand that clicking 'submit' will publish the text I have typed for all the world to see.
Contrarily, the bookmarks feature does not have the primary goal of sharing the information that it generates. Users mark questions as bookmarks mainly so they can more easily track them and refer to them later{1} (cf. the faq - ["This lets you find it easily when the question may get lost"](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/53585/)). Publicly sharing that bookmarking is a *side effect* of the user's action, and not something they specifically approved when they clicked on the star. And importantly, this side effect is not immediately obvious the way it is for submitting questions and answers - many users do not realize their list of bookmarks is being made public.
The issue here is that users are never given the opportunity to decide or control whether this piece of information - their list of bookmarks - is published. This issue is compounded and confused by the fact that different people who use Stack Exchange sites have different assumptions about what *should* happen with that information. Some people believe that bookmarks should be public, and so there is no problem. Some believe that bookmarks should be private, and are surprised or concerned that a) they weren't asked or told about the decision to publish their bookmarks, and b) that they cannot take any action to correct that decision for the future. Still other people *never think about it*, and so we don't know what their preference might be.
If you are in the second group and feel that bookmarks should be private, it may seem like a poor user interface, unfair practise, or just plain deception that the decision to publish that data is being made without your consent. That is a problem, and thus I believe the issue of whether to publish bookmarks should be addressed.
--
To further advocate that the issue of whether to publish bookmarks should be addressed, let's look at some popular counter-arguments.
>
> 1. "Bookmarks are made public so anyone can see the topics a user finds interesting".
>
>
>
This is certainly a valid and beneficial feature. But shouldn't each person be able to control whether their bookmarks can be used that way? Shouldn't they be given the choice?
>
> 2. "Everything you do on the Stack Exchange network is already public"
>
>
>
Maybe it is right now, but does that mean it should be? Several users have commented on or answered this question stating they would like to be able to keep their bookmarks private. The very fact that this question is being asked means the feature has value to some people. Evaluating the possibilities and then making a decision is a better course of action than saying "we can't do that because we've never done it before".
>
> 3. "Publishing a user's bookmarking behaviour doesn't reveal that much"
>
>
>
It does reveal *something*, and that revelation is obviously worth different amounts to different people. Some people don't care if their bookmarks are published. Some probably *want* them published. And some don't. Shouldn't Stack Exchange accommodate all groups?
>
> 4. "You shouldn't post information on the public internet that you don't want people to know"
>
>
>
The issue is that when someone clicks the star to bookmark a question they *aren't* posting information to the internet. Or at least, they're not consciously choosing to post information, nor asking Stack Exchange to post information. They're mainly just trying to bookmark the question, and a decision to publish information is being made for them. See the explanation above on side effects.
>
> 5."Why do you care if your bookmarks are public?"
>
>
>
and
>
> 6."Can't you stand a little criticism?"
>
>
>
Behind statements like these is the incorrect argument "if you're not doing anything wrong then you've got nothing to hide". Not only is this not true, it insidiously sidesteps the issue and often leads to heated debates.
To quote [Daniel Solove](https://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127461/): "The problem with the nothing-to-hide argument is the underlying assumption that privacy is about hiding bad things. .. [it also] myopically views privacy as a form of secrecy". "Privacy" is a complex set of issues. "[It] involves so many things that it is impossible to reduce them all to one simple idea. And we need not do so."
There is at least one important issue here: a decision is being made about what to do with some user information without asking their consent nor giving them the opportunity to change it. The issue is affecting how and whether some people contribute to Stack Exchange. Let's not hide the issue by saying it doesn't matter or criticizing people who discuss it. Let's evaluate the options and solve it. To quote Solove again: "People don't acknowledge certain problems, because those problems don't fit into a particular one-size-fits-all conception of privacy. Regardless of whether we call something a 'privacy' problem, it still remains a problem, and problems shouldn't be ignored."
--
Finally, an argument for implementing private bookmark: **leaving this problem unsolved hurts Stack Exchange because it discourages some users from contributing.**
I would hate for someone to avoid contributing to Stack Overflow because they didn't want their bookmarks made public. Far better to give them the option of sharing what they wish, and then contributing how they wish. We Stack Exchange users want to make the internet a better place. Letting people decide exactly how they assist with that goal can only lead to more positive contributions.
The [Stack Exchange Privacy Policy](https://stackexchange.com/legal/privacy-policy) says "We take the private nature of your personal information very seriously, and are committed to protecting it." I'm glad they feel this way. Giving people the choice of whether to make their bookmarks public is a good step towards helping protect personal information.
--
Footnote:
{1} Sure, some users may mark bookmark specifically so they can show off what topics interest them, but this is an emergent behaviour. | I will explain how seeing a user's bookmarks is a privacy issue.
You know that some guy works in a competing company. You monitor his SO activity. When a new field of interest appears, you see that the competing company is doing something in this area. In the best case, you can guess the features of their product before it is released. Or compose a list of encountered problems and attempted solutions, a valuable information for making a me-too.
But back to the guy. He has signed a non-disclosure agreement and if his employer finds out how the leak happened... |
14,812 | I've been considering getting an L-series zoom lens, and the two that I am looking at are the Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, and the 24-70mm f/2.8L.
Aside from the extra reach of the 24-105, the main difference is obviously the f/2.8 aperture versus the active Image Stabilisation.
Canon state that the IS on this lens "permits the use of shutter speeds up to three stops slower than normal". It's the "up to" in this statement that got me thinking about how image stabilisation is rated.
There is a general rule of thumb that your shots should be good (with a steady hand) at shutter speeds of up to 1/focal length, so clearly the focal length is a factor of image stability. Now, I can't imagine that Canon would publish anything but the best numbers for their spec sheets, so this leads me to assume that the "three stops" of IS they quote are at a focal length of 24mm. So my next question is, what does this mean at the 105mm end? I've done a few calculations, and I invite you to check my workings.
3 stops is a linear factor of 8 (2^3). I think this equates to a linear IS factor of 1.83 **@105mm** (8\*24/105). Or, **0.87 stops**. Less than 1 stop!
Using the same calculation but for a focal length of **70mm**, the IS of the 24-105mm comes out at **1.46 stops**.
Do I have my calculations correct?
PS: I know that the increased aperture of the f/2.8 will give greater background blur, better capture of moving subjects, blah, blah... so please don't feel that you have to lecture me on that. All I'm asking about is IS. | 2011/08/11 | [
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/14812",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/users/2131/"
] | From first-hand experience, I can shoot my 24-105L at 105mm at 1/10 second on a full frame camera and expect reliably sharp shots. (If the image is blurry, it is because I yanked the shutter button or did something similarly stupid!)
1/10 is just about where a three-stop IS ought to be (1/100-1/50-1/25-1/12.5 sec) according to the 1/focal length rule of thumb. Which is only a rule of thumb of course, your shooting technique will affect the results, as will your caffeine intake, but that has nothing to do with the IS as such :)
I am more sceptical about IS being quite as effective on very short focal lenghts actually. If you can handhold at 1/25 second at 25mm without IS, a three-stop IS ought to give you about one third of a second shutter speed. At this point body sway starts to come into play, both up-down and left-right... a different, slower, larger kind of movement than the fast hand-shake vibration that IS normally handles. | Three stops should be three stops regardless of the focal length. If you can do 1/100 @ 105mm, then with IS it would be 1/15 or so.
\* However, keep in mind that this will only compensate for **camera shake** and not for subject motion. If your main interest is people or dynamic scenery, then the f/2.8 may be more handy. This subject is discussed [in this question](https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/14780/what-are-the-benefits-and-costs-of-an-image-stabilized-slower-lens-vs-a-non-is-f).
UPDATE: OK, I think I have found a supporting evidence at the dpreview review of the EF70-200/2.8LIS [here](http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon_70-200_2p8_is_usm_ii_c16/page5.asp). Looking at the results achieved at 70 mm and at 200mm, it seems that at 200mm the IS keeps up with the stated 4 stops of compensation. |
14,812 | I've been considering getting an L-series zoom lens, and the two that I am looking at are the Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, and the 24-70mm f/2.8L.
Aside from the extra reach of the 24-105, the main difference is obviously the f/2.8 aperture versus the active Image Stabilisation.
Canon state that the IS on this lens "permits the use of shutter speeds up to three stops slower than normal". It's the "up to" in this statement that got me thinking about how image stabilisation is rated.
There is a general rule of thumb that your shots should be good (with a steady hand) at shutter speeds of up to 1/focal length, so clearly the focal length is a factor of image stability. Now, I can't imagine that Canon would publish anything but the best numbers for their spec sheets, so this leads me to assume that the "three stops" of IS they quote are at a focal length of 24mm. So my next question is, what does this mean at the 105mm end? I've done a few calculations, and I invite you to check my workings.
3 stops is a linear factor of 8 (2^3). I think this equates to a linear IS factor of 1.83 **@105mm** (8\*24/105). Or, **0.87 stops**. Less than 1 stop!
Using the same calculation but for a focal length of **70mm**, the IS of the 24-105mm comes out at **1.46 stops**.
Do I have my calculations correct?
PS: I know that the increased aperture of the f/2.8 will give greater background blur, better capture of moving subjects, blah, blah... so please don't feel that you have to lecture me on that. All I'm asking about is IS. | 2011/08/11 | [
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/14812",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/users/2131/"
] | Reverting to some empirical data, the 70-200 f/2.8L II lens has a supposed 4 stops of IS at all focal length. DPreview tested it at 70mm and at 200mm and revealed it had just under 4 stops and 70mm and *over 4 stops* at 200mm!
<http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon_70-200_2p8_is_usm_ii_c16/page5.asp>
From the review:
>
> We're used to seeing Canon's latest IS systems do well in our tests, and the 70-200mm F2.8 II doesn't buck that trend. Under these controlled conditions, the IS system is delivering something pretty close to the claimed 4 stops of stabilization (for example, at 70mm we get similar results at 1/5 sec with IS on as at 1/80 sec with it turned off), which is about as good as things get at the time of writing.
>
>
>
Unfortunately they haven't tested the 24-104 IS yet. But both their review and my experience with the 100 f/2.8L macro indicates the actual performance is pretty much in line with the official specs (again, four stops). So I'd be inclined to believe them and expect about three stops throughout the range on the 24-105. | Three stops should be three stops regardless of the focal length. If you can do 1/100 @ 105mm, then with IS it would be 1/15 or so.
\* However, keep in mind that this will only compensate for **camera shake** and not for subject motion. If your main interest is people or dynamic scenery, then the f/2.8 may be more handy. This subject is discussed [in this question](https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/14780/what-are-the-benefits-and-costs-of-an-image-stabilized-slower-lens-vs-a-non-is-f).
UPDATE: OK, I think I have found a supporting evidence at the dpreview review of the EF70-200/2.8LIS [here](http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon_70-200_2p8_is_usm_ii_c16/page5.asp). Looking at the results achieved at 70 mm and at 200mm, it seems that at 200mm the IS keeps up with the stated 4 stops of compensation. |
14,812 | I've been considering getting an L-series zoom lens, and the two that I am looking at are the Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, and the 24-70mm f/2.8L.
Aside from the extra reach of the 24-105, the main difference is obviously the f/2.8 aperture versus the active Image Stabilisation.
Canon state that the IS on this lens "permits the use of shutter speeds up to three stops slower than normal". It's the "up to" in this statement that got me thinking about how image stabilisation is rated.
There is a general rule of thumb that your shots should be good (with a steady hand) at shutter speeds of up to 1/focal length, so clearly the focal length is a factor of image stability. Now, I can't imagine that Canon would publish anything but the best numbers for their spec sheets, so this leads me to assume that the "three stops" of IS they quote are at a focal length of 24mm. So my next question is, what does this mean at the 105mm end? I've done a few calculations, and I invite you to check my workings.
3 stops is a linear factor of 8 (2^3). I think this equates to a linear IS factor of 1.83 **@105mm** (8\*24/105). Or, **0.87 stops**. Less than 1 stop!
Using the same calculation but for a focal length of **70mm**, the IS of the 24-105mm comes out at **1.46 stops**.
Do I have my calculations correct?
PS: I know that the increased aperture of the f/2.8 will give greater background blur, better capture of moving subjects, blah, blah... so please don't feel that you have to lecture me on that. All I'm asking about is IS. | 2011/08/11 | [
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/14812",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/users/2131/"
] | Three stops should be three stops regardless of the focal length. If you can do 1/100 @ 105mm, then with IS it would be 1/15 or so.
\* However, keep in mind that this will only compensate for **camera shake** and not for subject motion. If your main interest is people or dynamic scenery, then the f/2.8 may be more handy. This subject is discussed [in this question](https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/14780/what-are-the-benefits-and-costs-of-an-image-stabilized-slower-lens-vs-a-non-is-f).
UPDATE: OK, I think I have found a supporting evidence at the dpreview review of the EF70-200/2.8LIS [here](http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon_70-200_2p8_is_usm_ii_c16/page5.asp). Looking at the results achieved at 70 mm and at 200mm, it seems that at 200mm the IS keeps up with the stated 4 stops of compensation. | >
> Do I have my calculations correct?
>
>
>
Your math is totally flawed. At 105mm, the 1/FL rule of thumb is 1/100. At 70mm, 1/FL=1/60 or 1/80. At 24mm, 1/FL = 1/25. Three stops slower than 1/25 is a lot longer exposure than three stops slower than 1/100!
**You are still expecting three stops slower than 1/25 at 100mm instead of three stops slower than 1/100!** |
14,812 | I've been considering getting an L-series zoom lens, and the two that I am looking at are the Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, and the 24-70mm f/2.8L.
Aside from the extra reach of the 24-105, the main difference is obviously the f/2.8 aperture versus the active Image Stabilisation.
Canon state that the IS on this lens "permits the use of shutter speeds up to three stops slower than normal". It's the "up to" in this statement that got me thinking about how image stabilisation is rated.
There is a general rule of thumb that your shots should be good (with a steady hand) at shutter speeds of up to 1/focal length, so clearly the focal length is a factor of image stability. Now, I can't imagine that Canon would publish anything but the best numbers for their spec sheets, so this leads me to assume that the "three stops" of IS they quote are at a focal length of 24mm. So my next question is, what does this mean at the 105mm end? I've done a few calculations, and I invite you to check my workings.
3 stops is a linear factor of 8 (2^3). I think this equates to a linear IS factor of 1.83 **@105mm** (8\*24/105). Or, **0.87 stops**. Less than 1 stop!
Using the same calculation but for a focal length of **70mm**, the IS of the 24-105mm comes out at **1.46 stops**.
Do I have my calculations correct?
PS: I know that the increased aperture of the f/2.8 will give greater background blur, better capture of moving subjects, blah, blah... so please don't feel that you have to lecture me on that. All I'm asking about is IS. | 2011/08/11 | [
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/14812",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/users/2131/"
] | Reverting to some empirical data, the 70-200 f/2.8L II lens has a supposed 4 stops of IS at all focal length. DPreview tested it at 70mm and at 200mm and revealed it had just under 4 stops and 70mm and *over 4 stops* at 200mm!
<http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon_70-200_2p8_is_usm_ii_c16/page5.asp>
From the review:
>
> We're used to seeing Canon's latest IS systems do well in our tests, and the 70-200mm F2.8 II doesn't buck that trend. Under these controlled conditions, the IS system is delivering something pretty close to the claimed 4 stops of stabilization (for example, at 70mm we get similar results at 1/5 sec with IS on as at 1/80 sec with it turned off), which is about as good as things get at the time of writing.
>
>
>
Unfortunately they haven't tested the 24-104 IS yet. But both their review and my experience with the 100 f/2.8L macro indicates the actual performance is pretty much in line with the official specs (again, four stops). So I'd be inclined to believe them and expect about three stops throughout the range on the 24-105. | From first-hand experience, I can shoot my 24-105L at 105mm at 1/10 second on a full frame camera and expect reliably sharp shots. (If the image is blurry, it is because I yanked the shutter button or did something similarly stupid!)
1/10 is just about where a three-stop IS ought to be (1/100-1/50-1/25-1/12.5 sec) according to the 1/focal length rule of thumb. Which is only a rule of thumb of course, your shooting technique will affect the results, as will your caffeine intake, but that has nothing to do with the IS as such :)
I am more sceptical about IS being quite as effective on very short focal lenghts actually. If you can handhold at 1/25 second at 25mm without IS, a three-stop IS ought to give you about one third of a second shutter speed. At this point body sway starts to come into play, both up-down and left-right... a different, slower, larger kind of movement than the fast hand-shake vibration that IS normally handles. |
14,812 | I've been considering getting an L-series zoom lens, and the two that I am looking at are the Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, and the 24-70mm f/2.8L.
Aside from the extra reach of the 24-105, the main difference is obviously the f/2.8 aperture versus the active Image Stabilisation.
Canon state that the IS on this lens "permits the use of shutter speeds up to three stops slower than normal". It's the "up to" in this statement that got me thinking about how image stabilisation is rated.
There is a general rule of thumb that your shots should be good (with a steady hand) at shutter speeds of up to 1/focal length, so clearly the focal length is a factor of image stability. Now, I can't imagine that Canon would publish anything but the best numbers for their spec sheets, so this leads me to assume that the "three stops" of IS they quote are at a focal length of 24mm. So my next question is, what does this mean at the 105mm end? I've done a few calculations, and I invite you to check my workings.
3 stops is a linear factor of 8 (2^3). I think this equates to a linear IS factor of 1.83 **@105mm** (8\*24/105). Or, **0.87 stops**. Less than 1 stop!
Using the same calculation but for a focal length of **70mm**, the IS of the 24-105mm comes out at **1.46 stops**.
Do I have my calculations correct?
PS: I know that the increased aperture of the f/2.8 will give greater background blur, better capture of moving subjects, blah, blah... so please don't feel that you have to lecture me on that. All I'm asking about is IS. | 2011/08/11 | [
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/14812",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/users/2131/"
] | From first-hand experience, I can shoot my 24-105L at 105mm at 1/10 second on a full frame camera and expect reliably sharp shots. (If the image is blurry, it is because I yanked the shutter button or did something similarly stupid!)
1/10 is just about where a three-stop IS ought to be (1/100-1/50-1/25-1/12.5 sec) according to the 1/focal length rule of thumb. Which is only a rule of thumb of course, your shooting technique will affect the results, as will your caffeine intake, but that has nothing to do with the IS as such :)
I am more sceptical about IS being quite as effective on very short focal lenghts actually. If you can handhold at 1/25 second at 25mm without IS, a three-stop IS ought to give you about one third of a second shutter speed. At this point body sway starts to come into play, both up-down and left-right... a different, slower, larger kind of movement than the fast hand-shake vibration that IS normally handles. | >
> Do I have my calculations correct?
>
>
>
Your math is totally flawed. At 105mm, the 1/FL rule of thumb is 1/100. At 70mm, 1/FL=1/60 or 1/80. At 24mm, 1/FL = 1/25. Three stops slower than 1/25 is a lot longer exposure than three stops slower than 1/100!
**You are still expecting three stops slower than 1/25 at 100mm instead of three stops slower than 1/100!** |
14,812 | I've been considering getting an L-series zoom lens, and the two that I am looking at are the Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, and the 24-70mm f/2.8L.
Aside from the extra reach of the 24-105, the main difference is obviously the f/2.8 aperture versus the active Image Stabilisation.
Canon state that the IS on this lens "permits the use of shutter speeds up to three stops slower than normal". It's the "up to" in this statement that got me thinking about how image stabilisation is rated.
There is a general rule of thumb that your shots should be good (with a steady hand) at shutter speeds of up to 1/focal length, so clearly the focal length is a factor of image stability. Now, I can't imagine that Canon would publish anything but the best numbers for their spec sheets, so this leads me to assume that the "three stops" of IS they quote are at a focal length of 24mm. So my next question is, what does this mean at the 105mm end? I've done a few calculations, and I invite you to check my workings.
3 stops is a linear factor of 8 (2^3). I think this equates to a linear IS factor of 1.83 **@105mm** (8\*24/105). Or, **0.87 stops**. Less than 1 stop!
Using the same calculation but for a focal length of **70mm**, the IS of the 24-105mm comes out at **1.46 stops**.
Do I have my calculations correct?
PS: I know that the increased aperture of the f/2.8 will give greater background blur, better capture of moving subjects, blah, blah... so please don't feel that you have to lecture me on that. All I'm asking about is IS. | 2011/08/11 | [
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/14812",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/users/2131/"
] | Reverting to some empirical data, the 70-200 f/2.8L II lens has a supposed 4 stops of IS at all focal length. DPreview tested it at 70mm and at 200mm and revealed it had just under 4 stops and 70mm and *over 4 stops* at 200mm!
<http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon_70-200_2p8_is_usm_ii_c16/page5.asp>
From the review:
>
> We're used to seeing Canon's latest IS systems do well in our tests, and the 70-200mm F2.8 II doesn't buck that trend. Under these controlled conditions, the IS system is delivering something pretty close to the claimed 4 stops of stabilization (for example, at 70mm we get similar results at 1/5 sec with IS on as at 1/80 sec with it turned off), which is about as good as things get at the time of writing.
>
>
>
Unfortunately they haven't tested the 24-104 IS yet. But both their review and my experience with the 100 f/2.8L macro indicates the actual performance is pretty much in line with the official specs (again, four stops). So I'd be inclined to believe them and expect about three stops throughout the range on the 24-105. | >
> Do I have my calculations correct?
>
>
>
Your math is totally flawed. At 105mm, the 1/FL rule of thumb is 1/100. At 70mm, 1/FL=1/60 or 1/80. At 24mm, 1/FL = 1/25. Three stops slower than 1/25 is a lot longer exposure than three stops slower than 1/100!
**You are still expecting three stops slower than 1/25 at 100mm instead of three stops slower than 1/100!** |
143,910 | Even if the question may go into the technical details of a laptop computer specifications, I would like to know general experience of travellers concerning that topic.
Some airlines offer power sockets at their seats where it is possible to plug a computer. So far, I have not been able to know limitations of the supplied power, such as maximum power output.
In my current case, I have an Acer Predator Helios 300 as my main laptop. It is a gaming-grade machine, meaning it should suck a little more power than the average MacBook. I do not find a clear power rating indication in watts, and intelligent power management of nowadays should modulate the actual power drawn according to the current usage. Let's say that typing documents requires less power than playing a top-tier 3D game.
Each time I plug it in, the green light on the airplane socket goes off. It means that the breaker has tripped, likely because I am trying to draw too much power. Surprisingly, it also happens when I plug the charger alone without the laptop at the other end.
This was my experience so far on Delta and United.
I usually ride trains quite a lot in Europe. Rail cars are equipped with sockets nowadays and my laptop was powered by them without issues in all situations. In France, for instance, the train sockets are labeled 100 watts max, therefore my laptop should be drawing less. So, why is is a problem when done in airplanes? | 2019/08/15 | [
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/143910",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/users/75/"
] | >
> Surprisingly, [the green light on the airplane socket goes off] when I plug the charger alone without the laptop at the other end.
>
>
>
This means the actual power consumption has nothing to do with it, it's purely the inrush current phenomenon. Your laptop has a beefy capacitor near the input which is supposed to store enough energy for the laptop to stay powered while the AC voltage goes through the [zero-crossing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_crossing). The capacitor is big enough to produce the initial current high enough to trip the protection circuit on connection.
Power supplies rated for less power have smaller capacitors and thus less inrush current, so if you can find one that works with your laptop, it's worth a try. Capacitors also hold their charge for about half a minute, so if you have two sockets available, plugging the supply into one (tripping it), then immediately unplugging it and plugging to the second socket may help. In any case, airplane sockets are typically rated for 60W, so even if the protection doesn't trip at initial connection, it may trip later on when the laptop will start consuming power, so anything above 60W will be trial and error.
Even if you don't do anything intensive on the laptop, it will typically consume full power from the mains to charge the battery. Some laptops can be set up not to charge the battery when it's above 50..90%, which may help with a power supply rated for more than 60W. | There is actually a technical solution, but you may not be able to apply it. I include it for completeness anyway.
[Negative Temperature Coefficient resisitors](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inrush_current_limiter) are used to limit inrush current. However fitting one would mean customising mains-powered equipment, which you probably aren't qualified to do: either modifying the power supply or building a short extension lead with the NTC resistor in it. I'd probably do the latter, but I've had some training in designing mains-powered kit. In some jurisdictions it's probably even illegal, and strange-looking custom electronics don't tend to go down too well with aviation security. |
143,910 | Even if the question may go into the technical details of a laptop computer specifications, I would like to know general experience of travellers concerning that topic.
Some airlines offer power sockets at their seats where it is possible to plug a computer. So far, I have not been able to know limitations of the supplied power, such as maximum power output.
In my current case, I have an Acer Predator Helios 300 as my main laptop. It is a gaming-grade machine, meaning it should suck a little more power than the average MacBook. I do not find a clear power rating indication in watts, and intelligent power management of nowadays should modulate the actual power drawn according to the current usage. Let's say that typing documents requires less power than playing a top-tier 3D game.
Each time I plug it in, the green light on the airplane socket goes off. It means that the breaker has tripped, likely because I am trying to draw too much power. Surprisingly, it also happens when I plug the charger alone without the laptop at the other end.
This was my experience so far on Delta and United.
I usually ride trains quite a lot in Europe. Rail cars are equipped with sockets nowadays and my laptop was powered by them without issues in all situations. In France, for instance, the train sockets are labeled 100 watts max, therefore my laptop should be drawing less. So, why is is a problem when done in airplanes? | 2019/08/15 | [
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/143910",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/users/75/"
] | When you power your laptop on, you're likely drawing the peak 180W. That may be causing issues with not just the circuit breaker, but any surge suppression or arc-fault detectors as well. While [this is for Virgin Atlantic circa 2010](https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/10/really-nerds-only-final-words-on-ac-power-on-airliners/65134/), I can't see them being too terribly different from other airlines flying planes today
>
> Each pair of outlets at every row of three can support a maximum total of 225 watts per this certification, but there is "enough power" onboard for every outlet on average to deliver 82 watts to every outlet in the aircraft at any given time.
>
>
>
and
>
> The issue we believe Mr. Rosen unfortunately encountered relates to usage/surge protection and can affect some laptop users, (per what the second post notes. Newer laptops and certain types of AC charger/adaptors in particular have been more closely linked to this occurrence. Seat guru, an airline blog has a good overview of this too here. Unfortunately some computer power supplies may present a request for power with a momentary amperage spike that is interpreted by the in-seat power system as a surge.
>
>
> | I had this problem a few years ago with my MacbookPro. This was using a grounded Australian plug. Strangely, when I connected a European (or maybe it was US) plug adapter (*not* a transformer), it worked OK. My guess was either the Australian plugs were not making good contact, or it was some sort of ground protection kicking in, which the non-grounded international adapter did not have (which is a slight worry to be honest).
I did sometimes get a tickle from the aluminium cover of my older Mac laptops.... |
143,910 | Even if the question may go into the technical details of a laptop computer specifications, I would like to know general experience of travellers concerning that topic.
Some airlines offer power sockets at their seats where it is possible to plug a computer. So far, I have not been able to know limitations of the supplied power, such as maximum power output.
In my current case, I have an Acer Predator Helios 300 as my main laptop. It is a gaming-grade machine, meaning it should suck a little more power than the average MacBook. I do not find a clear power rating indication in watts, and intelligent power management of nowadays should modulate the actual power drawn according to the current usage. Let's say that typing documents requires less power than playing a top-tier 3D game.
Each time I plug it in, the green light on the airplane socket goes off. It means that the breaker has tripped, likely because I am trying to draw too much power. Surprisingly, it also happens when I plug the charger alone without the laptop at the other end.
This was my experience so far on Delta and United.
I usually ride trains quite a lot in Europe. Rail cars are equipped with sockets nowadays and my laptop was powered by them without issues in all situations. In France, for instance, the train sockets are labeled 100 watts max, therefore my laptop should be drawing less. So, why is is a problem when done in airplanes? | 2019/08/15 | [
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/143910",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/users/75/"
] | You can try finding a compatible charger that supplies fewer watts, say 60 or 80 watts.
The effect would be that your battery might discharge slowly while you use your computer (much slower than if you are not using any charger) and it recharges more slowly when the laptop gets turned off, but hopefully it gets you round the problem you have. If you do this, turn the screen brightness down as low as possible. Turn WiFi and Bluetooth off as well, assuming they are no use on an airplane anyway. | From personal experience on many flights: it's probably an inrush current issue, but repeatedly unplugging and replugging often keeps the mysterious green light on. Plugging in with the lid closed, then opening the lid often helps. |
143,910 | Even if the question may go into the technical details of a laptop computer specifications, I would like to know general experience of travellers concerning that topic.
Some airlines offer power sockets at their seats where it is possible to plug a computer. So far, I have not been able to know limitations of the supplied power, such as maximum power output.
In my current case, I have an Acer Predator Helios 300 as my main laptop. It is a gaming-grade machine, meaning it should suck a little more power than the average MacBook. I do not find a clear power rating indication in watts, and intelligent power management of nowadays should modulate the actual power drawn according to the current usage. Let's say that typing documents requires less power than playing a top-tier 3D game.
Each time I plug it in, the green light on the airplane socket goes off. It means that the breaker has tripped, likely because I am trying to draw too much power. Surprisingly, it also happens when I plug the charger alone without the laptop at the other end.
This was my experience so far on Delta and United.
I usually ride trains quite a lot in Europe. Rail cars are equipped with sockets nowadays and my laptop was powered by them without issues in all situations. In France, for instance, the train sockets are labeled 100 watts max, therefore my laptop should be drawing less. So, why is is a problem when done in airplanes? | 2019/08/15 | [
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/143910",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/users/75/"
] | I had a laptop that drew too much power for the socket. So I didn't plug it in and use it at the same time. I used it on battery, then when I wasn't using it (eg during meals) I closed the lid and plugged it in. This reduced the draw enough to keep the breaker from flipping. This may not make any and all laptops work with finicky power supplies on planes, but it increases your chances of success. | From personal experience on many flights: it's probably an inrush current issue, but repeatedly unplugging and replugging often keeps the mysterious green light on. Plugging in with the lid closed, then opening the lid often helps. |
143,910 | Even if the question may go into the technical details of a laptop computer specifications, I would like to know general experience of travellers concerning that topic.
Some airlines offer power sockets at their seats where it is possible to plug a computer. So far, I have not been able to know limitations of the supplied power, such as maximum power output.
In my current case, I have an Acer Predator Helios 300 as my main laptop. It is a gaming-grade machine, meaning it should suck a little more power than the average MacBook. I do not find a clear power rating indication in watts, and intelligent power management of nowadays should modulate the actual power drawn according to the current usage. Let's say that typing documents requires less power than playing a top-tier 3D game.
Each time I plug it in, the green light on the airplane socket goes off. It means that the breaker has tripped, likely because I am trying to draw too much power. Surprisingly, it also happens when I plug the charger alone without the laptop at the other end.
This was my experience so far on Delta and United.
I usually ride trains quite a lot in Europe. Rail cars are equipped with sockets nowadays and my laptop was powered by them without issues in all situations. In France, for instance, the train sockets are labeled 100 watts max, therefore my laptop should be drawing less. So, why is is a problem when done in airplanes? | 2019/08/15 | [
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/143910",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/users/75/"
] | *Overcurrent* isn't the only reason for an airline circuit to trip. It might also be looking for ground faults/residual current (GFCI/RCD) or listening for arc faults (AFCI). Any appliance can have either problem.
Trains are electric beasts - even a diesel train has the diesel engine driving a giant electric generator on the order of **3 million watts** (with electric, a lot more; with no hard upper limit since it is part of mains distribution and can cheerfully surge 10x or more). This electricity is divvied up between electric drive motors and hotel loads (galley, HVAC, your laptop). Power distribution is just like to your house: transformers, *commercial off-the-shelf* (COTS) Siemens panelboards with normal trip curves (tolerant of surges) and receptacles handling mains 230V power. In fact, cleaners use it for their vacuum cleaners. The labeling is *statutory*: so the conductor can prohibit people from cooking or running heaters, and because the whole car must share 1 or 2 3680W circuits.
Whereas on an airline, power is at a high premium. A 737 has two 90,000 watt generators, which together couldn't even power an Amtrak dining car... This must power all the galley, lighting and avionics loads. Further, this power is not 120/230V mains; for that it must go through exotic converters, where wattage costs money, and surges are absolutely intolerable. Further, **fire** is the worst nightmare in aviation, and electrical fires are the #1 cause, so extraordinary circuit protection is installed and all this equipment must be aerospace grade not COTS like the train. So provisioning power to passengers is a big deal, and it is tightly controlled.
Your gaming laptop is custom enough that there hasn't been a huge amount of engineering to reduce things like *inrush current*, which is caused by lazy power supply design.
I agree that the laptop isn't pulling *that* much power if you're not crunching/gaming, so it may be possible. Your best bet is push back on your manufacturer to give you a better power block, or go onto the aftermarket and get one.
You can test it by sticking it on a Kill-a-Watt or logging ammeter and plugging the power supply in. The Kill-a-Watt will tell you power draw second by second, or the logging ammeter wil tell you about inrush-current spikes. | There is actually a technical solution, but you may not be able to apply it. I include it for completeness anyway.
[Negative Temperature Coefficient resisitors](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inrush_current_limiter) are used to limit inrush current. However fitting one would mean customising mains-powered equipment, which you probably aren't qualified to do: either modifying the power supply or building a short extension lead with the NTC resistor in it. I'd probably do the latter, but I've had some training in designing mains-powered kit. In some jurisdictions it's probably even illegal, and strange-looking custom electronics don't tend to go down too well with aviation security. |
143,910 | Even if the question may go into the technical details of a laptop computer specifications, I would like to know general experience of travellers concerning that topic.
Some airlines offer power sockets at their seats where it is possible to plug a computer. So far, I have not been able to know limitations of the supplied power, such as maximum power output.
In my current case, I have an Acer Predator Helios 300 as my main laptop. It is a gaming-grade machine, meaning it should suck a little more power than the average MacBook. I do not find a clear power rating indication in watts, and intelligent power management of nowadays should modulate the actual power drawn according to the current usage. Let's say that typing documents requires less power than playing a top-tier 3D game.
Each time I plug it in, the green light on the airplane socket goes off. It means that the breaker has tripped, likely because I am trying to draw too much power. Surprisingly, it also happens when I plug the charger alone without the laptop at the other end.
This was my experience so far on Delta and United.
I usually ride trains quite a lot in Europe. Rail cars are equipped with sockets nowadays and my laptop was powered by them without issues in all situations. In France, for instance, the train sockets are labeled 100 watts max, therefore my laptop should be drawing less. So, why is is a problem when done in airplanes? | 2019/08/15 | [
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/143910",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/users/75/"
] | This alone explains it all:
>
> it also happens when I plug the charger alone without the laptop at the other end.
>
>
>
Because of the way power supplies are constructed, they draw extremely short, but very large "inrush" current. This can sometimes even visually manifest itself as a tiny spark when plugging it in. The PSU doesn't even need to be turned on, it's about charging it's input capacitors that always stay connected to mains.
It doesn't trip the breakers in your home or a train, because regular breakers work with a delay. It means you can draw much more than breaker rated current, as long as it's ultra-short. Simply, the grid is so big and inert that such spike isn't harmful. Unfortunately, plane's grid is neither big nor strong - so airplane makers install faster breakers that are successfully tripped by your big PSU.
What can you do about it? Find a PSU with smaller input caps. It's more of hit and miss without knowing their insides. Statistically, smaller (in terms of both power and physical dimensions) PSUs have smaller input caps.
**Try getting other PSU** that still works with your laptop. Possibly a smaller one - many laptops can work with smaller PSUs. It won't supply enough power for 100% load and charging the battery at the same time, but it can provide just enough power to extend battery life for few hours, hopefully to get you through the flight. Ask on [the Electrical Engineering StackExchange](https://electronics.stackexchange.com) how can you test the inrush current at home without even boarding the plane. | From personal experience on many flights: it's probably an inrush current issue, but repeatedly unplugging and replugging often keeps the mysterious green light on. Plugging in with the lid closed, then opening the lid often helps. |
143,910 | Even if the question may go into the technical details of a laptop computer specifications, I would like to know general experience of travellers concerning that topic.
Some airlines offer power sockets at their seats where it is possible to plug a computer. So far, I have not been able to know limitations of the supplied power, such as maximum power output.
In my current case, I have an Acer Predator Helios 300 as my main laptop. It is a gaming-grade machine, meaning it should suck a little more power than the average MacBook. I do not find a clear power rating indication in watts, and intelligent power management of nowadays should modulate the actual power drawn according to the current usage. Let's say that typing documents requires less power than playing a top-tier 3D game.
Each time I plug it in, the green light on the airplane socket goes off. It means that the breaker has tripped, likely because I am trying to draw too much power. Surprisingly, it also happens when I plug the charger alone without the laptop at the other end.
This was my experience so far on Delta and United.
I usually ride trains quite a lot in Europe. Rail cars are equipped with sockets nowadays and my laptop was powered by them without issues in all situations. In France, for instance, the train sockets are labeled 100 watts max, therefore my laptop should be drawing less. So, why is is a problem when done in airplanes? | 2019/08/15 | [
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/143910",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/users/75/"
] | You can try finding a compatible charger that supplies fewer watts, say 60 or 80 watts.
The effect would be that your battery might discharge slowly while you use your computer (much slower than if you are not using any charger) and it recharges more slowly when the laptop gets turned off, but hopefully it gets you round the problem you have. If you do this, turn the screen brightness down as low as possible. Turn WiFi and Bluetooth off as well, assuming they are no use on an airplane anyway. | You are most likely drawing more than 100 watts of power. According to Acer, the Predator Helios 300 comes with either a 135 watt or 180 watt power supply, depending on model. The airplane outlet is likely correct in detecting a current overdraw and shutting down. In my experience, the outlet limiters on planes are overzealous and will shut down draws as low as 80 watts, despite a listed 100 watt limit. The circuitry controlling outlets on trains may be more permissive, and allow your overdrawing device.
The solution is to use a lower-draw power supply for your laptop. Some laptops, such as Apple's MacBooks or Microsoft's Surface line, are designed to accept power supplies with varying capability. You can find small power adapters that will draw only 35 or 40 watts and are ideal for travel. Most laptops when idle or performing light tasks will draw fewer than 20 watts. If more power is required than the adapter can provide, for example while running 3D accelerated games, the laptop will draw from its battery to cover the energy gap. When the battery is exhausted, it may downclock or shut down.
Unfortunately, your Predator Helios laptop does not appear to have sophisticated power management circuitry to allow for the safe use of lower-wattage power supplies. Acer sells only one model of power supply per laptop. [A recent post at the LinusTechTips forum](https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/1011167-safe-to-use-lower-watt-psu-laptop/) describes a user's experience powering an Acer Predator G3-571 with a 90 watt supply, when a 180 watt supply is recommended. They report their machine switching from plug to battery power, depending on the workload. They also report symptoms of poor voltage stability from the power supply (flickering keyboard lights), likely as the laptop is drawing more current than the supply was designed to handle.
It's my opinion that this is unsafe for both the laptop, which may become unstable, and for the power supply, which could overheat and become damaged. I do not recommend trying this.
One final option is to shut down your laptop before connecting the power supply. When shut off, the power draw to charge the battery alone might be less than 100 watts. You may not be able to use your laptop while plugged in, but you might be able to get away with closing the lid and charging its battery. |
143,910 | Even if the question may go into the technical details of a laptop computer specifications, I would like to know general experience of travellers concerning that topic.
Some airlines offer power sockets at their seats where it is possible to plug a computer. So far, I have not been able to know limitations of the supplied power, such as maximum power output.
In my current case, I have an Acer Predator Helios 300 as my main laptop. It is a gaming-grade machine, meaning it should suck a little more power than the average MacBook. I do not find a clear power rating indication in watts, and intelligent power management of nowadays should modulate the actual power drawn according to the current usage. Let's say that typing documents requires less power than playing a top-tier 3D game.
Each time I plug it in, the green light on the airplane socket goes off. It means that the breaker has tripped, likely because I am trying to draw too much power. Surprisingly, it also happens when I plug the charger alone without the laptop at the other end.
This was my experience so far on Delta and United.
I usually ride trains quite a lot in Europe. Rail cars are equipped with sockets nowadays and my laptop was powered by them without issues in all situations. In France, for instance, the train sockets are labeled 100 watts max, therefore my laptop should be drawing less. So, why is is a problem when done in airplanes? | 2019/08/15 | [
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/143910",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/users/75/"
] | *Overcurrent* isn't the only reason for an airline circuit to trip. It might also be looking for ground faults/residual current (GFCI/RCD) or listening for arc faults (AFCI). Any appliance can have either problem.
Trains are electric beasts - even a diesel train has the diesel engine driving a giant electric generator on the order of **3 million watts** (with electric, a lot more; with no hard upper limit since it is part of mains distribution and can cheerfully surge 10x or more). This electricity is divvied up between electric drive motors and hotel loads (galley, HVAC, your laptop). Power distribution is just like to your house: transformers, *commercial off-the-shelf* (COTS) Siemens panelboards with normal trip curves (tolerant of surges) and receptacles handling mains 230V power. In fact, cleaners use it for their vacuum cleaners. The labeling is *statutory*: so the conductor can prohibit people from cooking or running heaters, and because the whole car must share 1 or 2 3680W circuits.
Whereas on an airline, power is at a high premium. A 737 has two 90,000 watt generators, which together couldn't even power an Amtrak dining car... This must power all the galley, lighting and avionics loads. Further, this power is not 120/230V mains; for that it must go through exotic converters, where wattage costs money, and surges are absolutely intolerable. Further, **fire** is the worst nightmare in aviation, and electrical fires are the #1 cause, so extraordinary circuit protection is installed and all this equipment must be aerospace grade not COTS like the train. So provisioning power to passengers is a big deal, and it is tightly controlled.
Your gaming laptop is custom enough that there hasn't been a huge amount of engineering to reduce things like *inrush current*, which is caused by lazy power supply design.
I agree that the laptop isn't pulling *that* much power if you're not crunching/gaming, so it may be possible. Your best bet is push back on your manufacturer to give you a better power block, or go onto the aftermarket and get one.
You can test it by sticking it on a Kill-a-Watt or logging ammeter and plugging the power supply in. The Kill-a-Watt will tell you power draw second by second, or the logging ammeter wil tell you about inrush-current spikes. | You are most likely drawing more than 100 watts of power. According to Acer, the Predator Helios 300 comes with either a 135 watt or 180 watt power supply, depending on model. The airplane outlet is likely correct in detecting a current overdraw and shutting down. In my experience, the outlet limiters on planes are overzealous and will shut down draws as low as 80 watts, despite a listed 100 watt limit. The circuitry controlling outlets on trains may be more permissive, and allow your overdrawing device.
The solution is to use a lower-draw power supply for your laptop. Some laptops, such as Apple's MacBooks or Microsoft's Surface line, are designed to accept power supplies with varying capability. You can find small power adapters that will draw only 35 or 40 watts and are ideal for travel. Most laptops when idle or performing light tasks will draw fewer than 20 watts. If more power is required than the adapter can provide, for example while running 3D accelerated games, the laptop will draw from its battery to cover the energy gap. When the battery is exhausted, it may downclock or shut down.
Unfortunately, your Predator Helios laptop does not appear to have sophisticated power management circuitry to allow for the safe use of lower-wattage power supplies. Acer sells only one model of power supply per laptop. [A recent post at the LinusTechTips forum](https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/1011167-safe-to-use-lower-watt-psu-laptop/) describes a user's experience powering an Acer Predator G3-571 with a 90 watt supply, when a 180 watt supply is recommended. They report their machine switching from plug to battery power, depending on the workload. They also report symptoms of poor voltage stability from the power supply (flickering keyboard lights), likely as the laptop is drawing more current than the supply was designed to handle.
It's my opinion that this is unsafe for both the laptop, which may become unstable, and for the power supply, which could overheat and become damaged. I do not recommend trying this.
One final option is to shut down your laptop before connecting the power supply. When shut off, the power draw to charge the battery alone might be less than 100 watts. You may not be able to use your laptop while plugged in, but you might be able to get away with closing the lid and charging its battery. |
143,910 | Even if the question may go into the technical details of a laptop computer specifications, I would like to know general experience of travellers concerning that topic.
Some airlines offer power sockets at their seats where it is possible to plug a computer. So far, I have not been able to know limitations of the supplied power, such as maximum power output.
In my current case, I have an Acer Predator Helios 300 as my main laptop. It is a gaming-grade machine, meaning it should suck a little more power than the average MacBook. I do not find a clear power rating indication in watts, and intelligent power management of nowadays should modulate the actual power drawn according to the current usage. Let's say that typing documents requires less power than playing a top-tier 3D game.
Each time I plug it in, the green light on the airplane socket goes off. It means that the breaker has tripped, likely because I am trying to draw too much power. Surprisingly, it also happens when I plug the charger alone without the laptop at the other end.
This was my experience so far on Delta and United.
I usually ride trains quite a lot in Europe. Rail cars are equipped with sockets nowadays and my laptop was powered by them without issues in all situations. In France, for instance, the train sockets are labeled 100 watts max, therefore my laptop should be drawing less. So, why is is a problem when done in airplanes? | 2019/08/15 | [
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/143910",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/users/75/"
] | When you power your laptop on, you're likely drawing the peak 180W. That may be causing issues with not just the circuit breaker, but any surge suppression or arc-fault detectors as well. While [this is for Virgin Atlantic circa 2010](https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/10/really-nerds-only-final-words-on-ac-power-on-airliners/65134/), I can't see them being too terribly different from other airlines flying planes today
>
> Each pair of outlets at every row of three can support a maximum total of 225 watts per this certification, but there is "enough power" onboard for every outlet on average to deliver 82 watts to every outlet in the aircraft at any given time.
>
>
>
and
>
> The issue we believe Mr. Rosen unfortunately encountered relates to usage/surge protection and can affect some laptop users, (per what the second post notes. Newer laptops and certain types of AC charger/adaptors in particular have been more closely linked to this occurrence. Seat guru, an airline blog has a good overview of this too here. Unfortunately some computer power supplies may present a request for power with a momentary amperage spike that is interpreted by the in-seat power system as a surge.
>
>
> | From personal experience on many flights: it's probably an inrush current issue, but repeatedly unplugging and replugging often keeps the mysterious green light on. Plugging in with the lid closed, then opening the lid often helps. |
143,910 | Even if the question may go into the technical details of a laptop computer specifications, I would like to know general experience of travellers concerning that topic.
Some airlines offer power sockets at their seats where it is possible to plug a computer. So far, I have not been able to know limitations of the supplied power, such as maximum power output.
In my current case, I have an Acer Predator Helios 300 as my main laptop. It is a gaming-grade machine, meaning it should suck a little more power than the average MacBook. I do not find a clear power rating indication in watts, and intelligent power management of nowadays should modulate the actual power drawn according to the current usage. Let's say that typing documents requires less power than playing a top-tier 3D game.
Each time I plug it in, the green light on the airplane socket goes off. It means that the breaker has tripped, likely because I am trying to draw too much power. Surprisingly, it also happens when I plug the charger alone without the laptop at the other end.
This was my experience so far on Delta and United.
I usually ride trains quite a lot in Europe. Rail cars are equipped with sockets nowadays and my laptop was powered by them without issues in all situations. In France, for instance, the train sockets are labeled 100 watts max, therefore my laptop should be drawing less. So, why is is a problem when done in airplanes? | 2019/08/15 | [
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/143910",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/users/75/"
] | You can try finding a compatible charger that supplies fewer watts, say 60 or 80 watts.
The effect would be that your battery might discharge slowly while you use your computer (much slower than if you are not using any charger) and it recharges more slowly when the laptop gets turned off, but hopefully it gets you round the problem you have. If you do this, turn the screen brightness down as low as possible. Turn WiFi and Bluetooth off as well, assuming they are no use on an airplane anyway. | There is actually a technical solution, but you may not be able to apply it. I include it for completeness anyway.
[Negative Temperature Coefficient resisitors](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inrush_current_limiter) are used to limit inrush current. However fitting one would mean customising mains-powered equipment, which you probably aren't qualified to do: either modifying the power supply or building a short extension lead with the NTC resistor in it. I'd probably do the latter, but I've had some training in designing mains-powered kit. In some jurisdictions it's probably even illegal, and strange-looking custom electronics don't tend to go down too well with aviation security. |
9,868,428 | I want to encrypt small serialized data structures (~256 bytes) so I can pass them around (especially in URLs) safely. My current approach is to use a symmetric block cipher, and then to base 64 encode, then URL encode the cipher text. This yields an encoded cipher text that is (unsurprisingly) quite a bit longer than the original data structure. The length of these encoded ciphers is a bit of a usability problem; ideally I'd like the cipher text to be around the same length as the input text.
Is there a block cipher that can be configured to constrain the values of the output bytes to be in the URL-safe range? I assume there would be a security trade-off involved if there is. | 2012/03/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/9868428",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/175469/"
] | For a given key K, a cipher has to produce a different ciphertext for each plaintext. If your message space is 256 bytes, the cipher has to be able to produce at least 256^256 different messages. This will require at least 256 bytes, and any reduction in the size of the output alphabet requires longer messages.
As you've seen, you can do some encoding afterward to avoid certain output symbols, at the cost of increased length. Furthermore, you would pay the same cost if the encoding were part of the encryption algorithm proper. That's why this isn't a feature of any encryption algorithm.
As others have mentioned, the only real answer is to reduce the size of the data you are encrypting so that you need to encode less data. (Either that or don't put the data in url's in the first place e.g. store the data in a database and put a unique id in the url). So compress > encrypt > encode. | URL encoding will not significantly expand a base64 encoded string, since 62 of the 64 characters do not need to be modified. However, you can use [modified base64 encoding](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base64#URL_applications) to do a little better. This encoding uses the '-' and '\_' characters in place of the '+' and '/' characters to yield a slight efficiency improvement.
The cipher itself is not causing any significant data expansion. It will pad the data to be a multiple of the block length, but that is insignificant in your case. You might try compressing the input prior to encryption. 256 bytes is not much but you might see some improvement. |
9,868,428 | I want to encrypt small serialized data structures (~256 bytes) so I can pass them around (especially in URLs) safely. My current approach is to use a symmetric block cipher, and then to base 64 encode, then URL encode the cipher text. This yields an encoded cipher text that is (unsurprisingly) quite a bit longer than the original data structure. The length of these encoded ciphers is a bit of a usability problem; ideally I'd like the cipher text to be around the same length as the input text.
Is there a block cipher that can be configured to constrain the values of the output bytes to be in the URL-safe range? I assume there would be a security trade-off involved if there is. | 2012/03/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/9868428",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/175469/"
] | For a given key K, a cipher has to produce a different ciphertext for each plaintext. If your message space is 256 bytes, the cipher has to be able to produce at least 256^256 different messages. This will require at least 256 bytes, and any reduction in the size of the output alphabet requires longer messages.
As you've seen, you can do some encoding afterward to avoid certain output symbols, at the cost of increased length. Furthermore, you would pay the same cost if the encoding were part of the encryption algorithm proper. That's why this isn't a feature of any encryption algorithm.
As others have mentioned, the only real answer is to reduce the size of the data you are encrypting so that you need to encode less data. (Either that or don't put the data in url's in the first place e.g. store the data in a database and put a unique id in the url). So compress > encrypt > encode. | If your data structure is 256 bytes long encrypting it with a block cipher of 8 bytes increases it up to 8 bytes (depending of the concrete input length).
Therefore before applying base64 you have up to 264 bytes which are increased by the base64 encoding up to 352 bytes.
Therefore as you can see the most overhead is created by the base64 encoding. There are some slightly more effective encodings available like base91 - but they are very uncommon.
If size matters I would recommend to compress the data before encrypting it. |
55,409 | I have 2 store views sharing the same root category.
Is it possible to change the category structure based on store view?
If I drag the category on a store view it makes the change in the other store view.
Maybe there is a setting that I don't know.
To be clearer, I need a sub-category to have different parents based on store view, without duplicating it. | 2015/02/11 | [
"https://magento.stackexchange.com/questions/55409",
"https://magento.stackexchange.com",
"https://magento.stackexchange.com/users/21070/"
] | This is not possible by default without duplicating the sub category and setting it to display only on the Store View that you want it to display on. Note this will also effect the URL path to the products in the sub categories. | I don't think that's possible without customization. I think you just need to maintain two trees. There are extensions out there to duplicate categories, so that could make it a little easier.
Also you could use some separate menu extension altogether that let's you arrange by category ids per store view. Many mega menu extensions have their own organization UI like this |
55,409 | I have 2 store views sharing the same root category.
Is it possible to change the category structure based on store view?
If I drag the category on a store view it makes the change in the other store view.
Maybe there is a setting that I don't know.
To be clearer, I need a sub-category to have different parents based on store view, without duplicating it. | 2015/02/11 | [
"https://magento.stackexchange.com/questions/55409",
"https://magento.stackexchange.com",
"https://magento.stackexchange.com/users/21070/"
] | This is not possible by default without duplicating the sub category and setting it to display only on the Store View that you want it to display on. Note this will also effect the URL path to the products in the sub categories. | Magento doesn't allow to change the categories at store view at the same level as products.
The product-category relation is not on storeview level. |
55,409 | I have 2 store views sharing the same root category.
Is it possible to change the category structure based on store view?
If I drag the category on a store view it makes the change in the other store view.
Maybe there is a setting that I don't know.
To be clearer, I need a sub-category to have different parents based on store view, without duplicating it. | 2015/02/11 | [
"https://magento.stackexchange.com/questions/55409",
"https://magento.stackexchange.com",
"https://magento.stackexchange.com/users/21070/"
] | I don't think that's possible without customization. I think you just need to maintain two trees. There are extensions out there to duplicate categories, so that could make it a little easier.
Also you could use some separate menu extension altogether that let's you arrange by category ids per store view. Many mega menu extensions have their own organization UI like this | Magento doesn't allow to change the categories at store view at the same level as products.
The product-category relation is not on storeview level. |
88,229 | I'd like to ask if there is any difference between
>
> In **such environment**, we...
>
>
>
and
>
> In **such an environment**, we...
>
>
>
If yes, then what does each phrase mean?
If anyone happens to know the grammatical term/topic to describe this difference so that I can read more about it, please let me know. | 2016/04/23 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/88229",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/128222/"
] | >
> Would you speak louder?
>
>
>
Is a polite request.
>
> I wish that you would speak louder.
>
>
>
Is a slightly tetchier version of the same request. It suggests that there is no reason to speak so quietly, other than to irritate you.
>
> I wish that you spoke louder
>
>
>
is a hypothetical wish- as though there is some insurmountable problem that prevents him or her from speaking louder. | "I wish you would speak louder as I can't hear what you say?" -is correct because it means you did not speak louder but you should have.
On the other hand, "I wish you spoke louder as I can't hear what you say?" Does not make a clear sense. Somehow it is similar in meaning that, I wish and you really fulfilled my wish by speaking louder. But in the sentence according to the later clause, "I can't hear what you say" means he actually did not speak louder. So it is incorrect. |
88,229 | I'd like to ask if there is any difference between
>
> In **such environment**, we...
>
>
>
and
>
> In **such an environment**, we...
>
>
>
If yes, then what does each phrase mean?
If anyone happens to know the grammatical term/topic to describe this difference so that I can read more about it, please let me know. | 2016/04/23 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/88229",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/128222/"
] | >
> Would you speak louder?
>
>
>
Is a polite request.
>
> I wish that you would speak louder.
>
>
>
Is a slightly tetchier version of the same request. It suggests that there is no reason to speak so quietly, other than to irritate you.
>
> I wish that you spoke louder
>
>
>
is a hypothetical wish- as though there is some insurmountable problem that prevents him or her from speaking louder. | Context free both:
>
> I wish you would speak louder.
>
>
>
and
>
> I wish you spoke louder.
>
>
>
are grammatically correct with a nuance:
>
> I wish you would speak louder.
>
>
>
shows the irritation of the speaker to what they feel is an unpleasant situation.
To my mind adding the subordinate clause "as I can't hear what you say" does not modify this difference and both the sentences you give are correct.
Why would they be considered incorrect?
Specifying "as I can't hear what you say" definitely expresses the wish for the present situation to change. I expect some could say "would" is used to express a wish about the future, and simple past only used for the present.
Another reason I can think about for the choice of simple past is that showing irritation is impolite in certain situations but if context is not specified I can't see a reason why one sentence should be preferred over the other. |
88,229 | I'd like to ask if there is any difference between
>
> In **such environment**, we...
>
>
>
and
>
> In **such an environment**, we...
>
>
>
If yes, then what does each phrase mean?
If anyone happens to know the grammatical term/topic to describe this difference so that I can read more about it, please let me know. | 2016/04/23 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/88229",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/128222/"
] | >
> Would you speak louder?
>
>
>
Is a polite request.
>
> I wish that you would speak louder.
>
>
>
Is a slightly tetchier version of the same request. It suggests that there is no reason to speak so quietly, other than to irritate you.
>
> I wish that you spoke louder
>
>
>
is a hypothetical wish- as though there is some insurmountable problem that prevents him or her from speaking louder. | from Cambridge Dictionary
>
> **used to express anger at someone's behaviour:**
> I wish you would speak louder as I can't hear you. The other
> party complains that your voice was too low.
>
>
>
>
> **used with the past simple to express that you feel sorry or sad about
> a state or situation that exists at the moment:**
> I wish you spoke louder as I can't hear you. You made a good speech,
> but the other party didn't hear it because your voice was too low.
>
>
> |
42,596,518 | I have a project using yii2 framework. I want to make the project become a real time application, maybe it will have realtime notification. But I don't know how to make it. If I use another framework, like laravel, I have gotten some tutorials and it will use vuejs. So, how about yii2? Where I can get the tutorial how to make real time application using yii2? | 2017/03/04 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/42596518",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/5865411/"
] | You can use SSE to make your application real time. Here is a repository that might help achieving SSE in `Yii2` easier: [Yii2-Sse](https://github.com/odannyc/yii2-sse) | @RiefSapthana If you meaning 'real time' like air traffic control, aerospace, utility control systems; my recommendation is to not use PHP.
[Real Time Computing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real-time_computing)
If you are asking how to have the browser and server talk back and forth without the need to reload the browser, application like that are typically called '[single page applications](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-page_application)' (SPA for short) and the server would be a API service.
The browser application can be written in many ways: pure HTML/CSS/JS, [VueJS](https://vuejs.org/), [React](https://facebook.github.io/react/), [jQuery](https://jquery.com/), etc. IMO the majority of the right solutions are [Javascript](https://www.javascript.com/) heavy.
[Yii2 has an scaffolding API module](http://www.yiiframework.com/doc-2.0/guide-rest-quick-start.html) to help get you started on the server. This type of service is often a 'RESTful' type. |
95,434 | I can see the purchases vs. returns on the Performance tab in Vanguard but that is for my retirement and brokerage accounts. I'd like to see that breakdown for just my brokerage account. Does anyone know how to do that? | 2018/05/14 | [
"https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/95434",
"https://money.stackexchange.com",
"https://money.stackexchange.com/users/68308/"
] | You can use the 'My Accounts'->'Cost Basis' link to see the total cost and profit/loss on a per investment, per account basis. | If you click through to the "Personal Performance" tab ([this url or a similar one](https://personal.vanguard.com/us/myaccounts/personalperformance)), you see that same chart as before; but you now have a section that can either select accounts, or holdings, and allows you to click checkboxes for whichever you want to see on the chart, then 'update chart' to get the chart for just that account/holding. |
252,312 | If you start the title of a question with a construction like "[tag]", you get a red box telling you that:
>
> Title contains a [tag] prefix; please use the tag field to enter tags instead.
>
>
>
And so, I can't title this post "[tag] prohibition in titles on meta sites is inappropriate". A travesty!
This blocking dialog is certainly appropriate on all main sites, but is not appropriate on meta sites (child and Meta.SE alike), where "[tag]" may legitimately be used at the beginning of a post title to refer to the main-site tag "[tag]". Enclosing tag names in square brackets is a somewhat-established convention (I guess because that's how you search for them), which is why I tried to do that.
Yes, I know I can work around this by rephrasing my title so that the tag name is not at the beginning of the title, or by not enclosing the tag name in brackets. Still should be changed, in my opinion. | 2015/03/30 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/252312",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/224428/"
] | Special-casing rules on meta sites is a pain. Sometimes, it's necessary; I don't see that's the case here.
Keep in mind, even on main sites folks are encouraged to put tags in their titles when the tag-name is relevant somehow - it's *prefixing* that's discouraged. So you'd write, "How can I get the current location using Android?" instead of "[android] [location] HOWTO: get current?"
Do the same thing here. And leave off the square-brackets. "The identification-request tag is being applied inappropriately" works just fine. | What's wrong with:
>
> The "identification-request" tag is being inappropriately applied in a
> number of cases
>
>
>
?
Given that stopping people using tags in titles is a really good thing, not being able to use them *legitimately* "now and then" is surely acceptable?
How would they identify what is legit and what isn't?
Too much complications for very little return IMO |
516,727 | I have seen the sentence 'This outfit would be the underdog to a stiff breeze.' in a quote of the newspaper 'TIMES'.
I was looking for 'breeze' in the collins online dictionary and this phrase appears as an example, but without context.
If you look 'underdog' in the dictionary, you get: 'The underdog in a competition or situation is the person who seems least likely to succeed or win'. But I don't know how to apply this definition to the clothes. I can't understand what's the meaning of 'the underdog' in the sentence. | 2019/10/28 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/516727",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/365510/"
] | Here is extended context from [Geoff Shackleford](http://geoffdshackelford.squarespace.com/homepage/2006/8/22/reilly-the-single-worst-squad-weve-ever-taken-to-a-ryder-cup.html), quoting Sports Illustrated contributor Rick Reilly:
>
> **This outfit would be the underdog to a stiff breeze**. Or do Brett Wetterich, Zach Johnson, J.J. Henry and Vaughn Taylor make your timbers shiver? It sounds like somebody's Webelos troop. None of those four have ever played in a Ryder Cup before. Three of them missed the cut at last week's PGA, and Henry finished 41st.
>
>
>
An **underdog** is one who is not favored to win in a contest - [Merriam-Webster](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/underdog) calls them a "predicted loser." The [Ryder Cup](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryder_Cup) is in golf. So the writer is saying - rather colorfully - that a stiff breeze (a wind that is a bit more than mild) would outcompete these professional golfers. It's an exaggeration, like a pro soccer team being underdogs to an age-10 team. | Your issue in this particular case, seems to be that *outfit* doesn't mean *clothes*, but rather the second definition:
>
> a group of people undertaking a particular activity together, as a
> group of musicians, a military unit, or a business concern.
>
>
>
Combined with TaliesinMerlin's answer above, that should resolve your confusion. |
42,246,669 | I've installed Tomcat 9 and Netbeans 8.2 in Ubuntu 16.04. I've tried to add Tomcat in Netbeans as a server but says: **The specified Server Location (Catalina Home) folder is not valid**.
I've looking for the solution but nothing worked.
I've installed tomcat in folder: /opt/tomcat.
I've tried to create symbolic links such as:
sudo ln -s /opt/tomcat/ /usr/share/tomcat/conf
sudo ln -sf /opt/tomcat/lib /opt/tomcat/common/lib
But as I said nothing worked.
Could you help me please?
Thanks,
Roberto | 2017/02/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/42246669",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/6631562/"
] | hi roberto i dont know if you solve this problem but for another people i solved this problem in ubuntu 18.04 with
chmod -R 777 apache-tomcat-9.0.14/
working perfectly
perfectly,
Sorry for my english not is my primary language | In my Ubuntu 20.04.1 LTS I have installed Tomcat from this link [Tomcat installation guide](https://linuxize.com/post/how-to-install-tomcat-9-on-ubuntu-20-04/) in /opt/tomcat folder .
When I installed Netbeans I was facing the similar issue so I just change the permission of /opt/tomcat/ with **sudo chmod -R 777 /opt/tomcat/apache-tomcat/** command and it worked for me. |
3,203,921 | I have a C# project, built using VS2008. It has a number of third party dependencies. However, when I create a set-up project for it, the “Detected Dependencies” folder is empty. How do I either force it to detect these dependencies, or manually add them? | 2010/07/08 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3203921",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/166556/"
] | You have to add the output from another project, or some other assembly (could be an executable), and then the setup project will automatically detect the dependencies and will add the corresponding assemblies. | * Within the Solution Explorer right click on the setup project and select **Add - Project Output**.
* Now select your other project within the solution.
* The Detected Dependencies should be filled up. |
116,918 | This question is going to seem weird, so I will do my best to describe the problem. Are musicians able to jump to any arbitrary note without giving it much thought and not go out of key?
Assume for this entire post that we stay in one key.
My problem is this: I've played the guitar for so long that I can rifle up and down any scale, arpeggio, exotic weird shape, you name it, and it always sounds fine. I see in patterns and shapes, and I know how every pattern stitches itself together. This means when I'm coming down a major arpeggio and want to transition into a scale, I know the shape that I want to play based on the melody in my head. I'm also at the point where I can map the melody in my head onto the nearby notes without any problems. This is very nice, but I can only do this in the current region of where I am.
However, the patterns thing is a bit painful in one area. If I'm going down some scale and need to do a large note shift (like dropping down at least an octave and then some), unless it's exactly a full octave or something with a tangible marker, there's a chance I will screw up and land on the wrong note. This is not a technical problem, it's a "oh crap I don't know what note to play" and since it's done while I'm letting the melody play out in my head, I have to make a split second decision. Mostly it works well, but this is unacceptable if I were to improvise live because a wrong note is bad.
Things I've done to work around this are to bend if out of tune, or vibrato if landing on the note correctly (like a preemptive bend just in case, but vibrato if it's correct). This is only masking the problem.
While I can figure out what any note I'm on within a few seconds due to various reference points, I really need it to be much faster.
This made me think "properly learn all the notes this time instead of only knowing a few strings off by heart" because then I would go to a note I require to land in key... however this doesn't solve the problem either. I would need to know all the notes ahead of time, since knowing every note on the fretboard, while useful, does not solve the problem entirely.
Suppose I'm playing C minor, and I know the place I want to shift to because after decades of playing my instrument, the sound I want is within an area of 3 notes. By three notes, I mean I have my "target note" that I feel it is, and then the notes that are immediately beside it. For example, I'm about to shift down to an F. Next to it are E and F#.
Problem is... which of the three are in C minor? I feel like it's F based on many years of experience, and I could figure this out if needed given a few seconds, but I cannot solve this in the 200 milliseconds or so that I have. It feels like it almost has to be reflexive that I know which of those three notes it is. I would need to instantly know on the fly that F is the note that I want, and to not touch the other two adjacent notes or else it will sound quite bad. Sure, in this instance I guessed the right note, but I could just have easily shifted down one too far and end up on the wrong one, and this happens.
As such, this problem can be stated with: How can I learn to pick a random set of three contiguous notes on the fretboard, and select the proper one in key?
The only way I could see this being done is to know every single note instantly, know every single note in the target scale instantly, and then use this information to pick the right note, all in the span of a few hundred milliseconds at most.
Is this how musicians do this? Or what is the best way of doing this? Or is this not possible? How would you do it?
I want to be able to say "I'm going to freestyle in C minor today" and never hit the wrong note. When I stay in my local area, this is no problem and I will stay in key all the time without question. However, when I do a large shift like, say, 17 "notes" down, that is when I run into problems. | 2021/08/29 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/116918",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/63216/"
] | It sounds to me like you can instinctively find the notes you need within certain small intervals, but once you go beyond an octave or so you start guessing at speed which may or may not work.
You could possibly improve this by improvising **with a metronome** at a **slow** tempo, ideally with some kind of a looping backing track with possible. Choose a scale, like C minor, to improvise over, with an emphasis on big jumps every phrase or couple of phrases. The point of the metronome is to force you to play in time and therefore think in real time, rather than pausing and going "uhhhh where's E again?" If you can't make a jump in time with the metronome, slow down the metronome and try again. Find the first BPM at which you can improvise like this comfortably for a couple of minutes, and don't worry about sounding good. Focus on nailing those jumps in time with the metronome.
Then, when you get more confident with your jumps (this might take a while but it's worth the sweat), try and increase the BPM a little bit more each time. And make sure you cover all the different keys/scales, don't get too comfortable in just a couple of them. The hope would be that over time you would develop the instinct to make the jumps at normal playing speed without having to think. | I had a few thoughts that might be useful while I was busy misunderstanding your problem. As a player of a fretless instrument, I'm always dealing with the need for physical hyper-precision in shifts. Sure, I can do an arpeggio, but a piece with huge unprepared leaps is challenging. For this, I'd encourage you to think of the physicality rather than the note theory. If I think, "I have to memorize what it feels like to go from a low B to a G 3 octaves above," then I also have to separately memorize a C to an A, and have a slot in my memory for every single combination of the 12 chromatic tones times four octaves of my instrument's range.
Instead, I find it more helpful to describe how my hand and fingers are actually moving in physical space. I say "I'm shifting up four positions, going over three strings, changing from my second finger to my third, and extending that third finger." Then a shift between different notes might still be the same distance for my arm, even if different fingers are involved or the extension doesn't happen.
The main point of your question seems to be "how do you know which note to play when improvising," which is a common question here. I would answer your question "Are musicians able to jump to any arbitrary note" by saying "Well, maybe it's not all that arbitrary." Outside of true free improv, in which absolutely anything goes... then, as you've noted, there's a reason you're looking for a certain note and not another. It might be a "surprise" note, a non-chordal note, a pivot note, a note that subverts the obvious expectation—but it does it for a reason. Yes, studying theory will help (Oh, guess what, it's just part of a diminished 7th), but ultimately time will help, as these patterns continue to become engrained. You already point out that you're fluent in lots of chordal and scalar patterns; you're just looking to extrapolate those skills across octaves.
I'll also make the somewhat obvious suggestion: Ease into a new skill. If it's improv, why do you *have* to make a big jump? Start out getting used to jumps of about one octave, then two, then three. Take what you already know and build on it, then build on what you've built. |
116,918 | This question is going to seem weird, so I will do my best to describe the problem. Are musicians able to jump to any arbitrary note without giving it much thought and not go out of key?
Assume for this entire post that we stay in one key.
My problem is this: I've played the guitar for so long that I can rifle up and down any scale, arpeggio, exotic weird shape, you name it, and it always sounds fine. I see in patterns and shapes, and I know how every pattern stitches itself together. This means when I'm coming down a major arpeggio and want to transition into a scale, I know the shape that I want to play based on the melody in my head. I'm also at the point where I can map the melody in my head onto the nearby notes without any problems. This is very nice, but I can only do this in the current region of where I am.
However, the patterns thing is a bit painful in one area. If I'm going down some scale and need to do a large note shift (like dropping down at least an octave and then some), unless it's exactly a full octave or something with a tangible marker, there's a chance I will screw up and land on the wrong note. This is not a technical problem, it's a "oh crap I don't know what note to play" and since it's done while I'm letting the melody play out in my head, I have to make a split second decision. Mostly it works well, but this is unacceptable if I were to improvise live because a wrong note is bad.
Things I've done to work around this are to bend if out of tune, or vibrato if landing on the note correctly (like a preemptive bend just in case, but vibrato if it's correct). This is only masking the problem.
While I can figure out what any note I'm on within a few seconds due to various reference points, I really need it to be much faster.
This made me think "properly learn all the notes this time instead of only knowing a few strings off by heart" because then I would go to a note I require to land in key... however this doesn't solve the problem either. I would need to know all the notes ahead of time, since knowing every note on the fretboard, while useful, does not solve the problem entirely.
Suppose I'm playing C minor, and I know the place I want to shift to because after decades of playing my instrument, the sound I want is within an area of 3 notes. By three notes, I mean I have my "target note" that I feel it is, and then the notes that are immediately beside it. For example, I'm about to shift down to an F. Next to it are E and F#.
Problem is... which of the three are in C minor? I feel like it's F based on many years of experience, and I could figure this out if needed given a few seconds, but I cannot solve this in the 200 milliseconds or so that I have. It feels like it almost has to be reflexive that I know which of those three notes it is. I would need to instantly know on the fly that F is the note that I want, and to not touch the other two adjacent notes or else it will sound quite bad. Sure, in this instance I guessed the right note, but I could just have easily shifted down one too far and end up on the wrong one, and this happens.
As such, this problem can be stated with: How can I learn to pick a random set of three contiguous notes on the fretboard, and select the proper one in key?
The only way I could see this being done is to know every single note instantly, know every single note in the target scale instantly, and then use this information to pick the right note, all in the span of a few hundred milliseconds at most.
Is this how musicians do this? Or what is the best way of doing this? Or is this not possible? How would you do it?
I want to be able to say "I'm going to freestyle in C minor today" and never hit the wrong note. When I stay in my local area, this is no problem and I will stay in key all the time without question. However, when I do a large shift like, say, 17 "notes" down, that is when I run into problems. | 2021/08/29 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/116918",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/63216/"
] | You say you can go up and down scales/arpeggios etc with alacrity. So you know the shapes. If that was true, you'd know that in C minor, there's no E or F♯. The target would have to be E♭ to stay in key. In the patterns you know and play, you'll never be fretting an E or an F♯ while playing scales and notes in C minor. All that if I read the question right.
So, if that's true, you need to brush up more on notes in scales, and if it helps (it should), say the note names out loud as they're played. | If you are, like me, at ease with patterns and shapes (like you seem to tell in the question), my advice is to start with the local before you extend to a broader dimension.
For example, if you know the position of the note you want to play in your current position, start by that, then extend to the octave. You'll know on a bass that for example on the upper string it will be 7 frets in direction of the neck. (I take example of the bass because it has the same interval between each string, on a guitar you'll adapt for the special case of the B string)
Practice this slowly, and with time, this will get more and more natural for you to see all octaves of the same note on the neck so when you think of the next note you want to play, you instantly know all the positions on the neck where you can reach it, being an octave upper, lower, or the same on a different string.. |
116,918 | This question is going to seem weird, so I will do my best to describe the problem. Are musicians able to jump to any arbitrary note without giving it much thought and not go out of key?
Assume for this entire post that we stay in one key.
My problem is this: I've played the guitar for so long that I can rifle up and down any scale, arpeggio, exotic weird shape, you name it, and it always sounds fine. I see in patterns and shapes, and I know how every pattern stitches itself together. This means when I'm coming down a major arpeggio and want to transition into a scale, I know the shape that I want to play based on the melody in my head. I'm also at the point where I can map the melody in my head onto the nearby notes without any problems. This is very nice, but I can only do this in the current region of where I am.
However, the patterns thing is a bit painful in one area. If I'm going down some scale and need to do a large note shift (like dropping down at least an octave and then some), unless it's exactly a full octave or something with a tangible marker, there's a chance I will screw up and land on the wrong note. This is not a technical problem, it's a "oh crap I don't know what note to play" and since it's done while I'm letting the melody play out in my head, I have to make a split second decision. Mostly it works well, but this is unacceptable if I were to improvise live because a wrong note is bad.
Things I've done to work around this are to bend if out of tune, or vibrato if landing on the note correctly (like a preemptive bend just in case, but vibrato if it's correct). This is only masking the problem.
While I can figure out what any note I'm on within a few seconds due to various reference points, I really need it to be much faster.
This made me think "properly learn all the notes this time instead of only knowing a few strings off by heart" because then I would go to a note I require to land in key... however this doesn't solve the problem either. I would need to know all the notes ahead of time, since knowing every note on the fretboard, while useful, does not solve the problem entirely.
Suppose I'm playing C minor, and I know the place I want to shift to because after decades of playing my instrument, the sound I want is within an area of 3 notes. By three notes, I mean I have my "target note" that I feel it is, and then the notes that are immediately beside it. For example, I'm about to shift down to an F. Next to it are E and F#.
Problem is... which of the three are in C minor? I feel like it's F based on many years of experience, and I could figure this out if needed given a few seconds, but I cannot solve this in the 200 milliseconds or so that I have. It feels like it almost has to be reflexive that I know which of those three notes it is. I would need to instantly know on the fly that F is the note that I want, and to not touch the other two adjacent notes or else it will sound quite bad. Sure, in this instance I guessed the right note, but I could just have easily shifted down one too far and end up on the wrong one, and this happens.
As such, this problem can be stated with: How can I learn to pick a random set of three contiguous notes on the fretboard, and select the proper one in key?
The only way I could see this being done is to know every single note instantly, know every single note in the target scale instantly, and then use this information to pick the right note, all in the span of a few hundred milliseconds at most.
Is this how musicians do this? Or what is the best way of doing this? Or is this not possible? How would you do it?
I want to be able to say "I'm going to freestyle in C minor today" and never hit the wrong note. When I stay in my local area, this is no problem and I will stay in key all the time without question. However, when I do a large shift like, say, 17 "notes" down, that is when I run into problems. | 2021/08/29 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/116918",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/63216/"
] | You say you can go up and down scales/arpeggios etc with alacrity. So you know the shapes. If that was true, you'd know that in C minor, there's no E or F♯. The target would have to be E♭ to stay in key. In the patterns you know and play, you'll never be fretting an E or an F♯ while playing scales and notes in C minor. All that if I read the question right.
So, if that's true, you need to brush up more on notes in scales, and if it helps (it should), say the note names out loud as they're played. | I had a few thoughts that might be useful while I was busy misunderstanding your problem. As a player of a fretless instrument, I'm always dealing with the need for physical hyper-precision in shifts. Sure, I can do an arpeggio, but a piece with huge unprepared leaps is challenging. For this, I'd encourage you to think of the physicality rather than the note theory. If I think, "I have to memorize what it feels like to go from a low B to a G 3 octaves above," then I also have to separately memorize a C to an A, and have a slot in my memory for every single combination of the 12 chromatic tones times four octaves of my instrument's range.
Instead, I find it more helpful to describe how my hand and fingers are actually moving in physical space. I say "I'm shifting up four positions, going over three strings, changing from my second finger to my third, and extending that third finger." Then a shift between different notes might still be the same distance for my arm, even if different fingers are involved or the extension doesn't happen.
The main point of your question seems to be "how do you know which note to play when improvising," which is a common question here. I would answer your question "Are musicians able to jump to any arbitrary note" by saying "Well, maybe it's not all that arbitrary." Outside of true free improv, in which absolutely anything goes... then, as you've noted, there's a reason you're looking for a certain note and not another. It might be a "surprise" note, a non-chordal note, a pivot note, a note that subverts the obvious expectation—but it does it for a reason. Yes, studying theory will help (Oh, guess what, it's just part of a diminished 7th), but ultimately time will help, as these patterns continue to become engrained. You already point out that you're fluent in lots of chordal and scalar patterns; you're just looking to extrapolate those skills across octaves.
I'll also make the somewhat obvious suggestion: Ease into a new skill. If it's improv, why do you *have* to make a big jump? Start out getting used to jumps of about one octave, then two, then three. Take what you already know and build on it, then build on what you've built. |
116,918 | This question is going to seem weird, so I will do my best to describe the problem. Are musicians able to jump to any arbitrary note without giving it much thought and not go out of key?
Assume for this entire post that we stay in one key.
My problem is this: I've played the guitar for so long that I can rifle up and down any scale, arpeggio, exotic weird shape, you name it, and it always sounds fine. I see in patterns and shapes, and I know how every pattern stitches itself together. This means when I'm coming down a major arpeggio and want to transition into a scale, I know the shape that I want to play based on the melody in my head. I'm also at the point where I can map the melody in my head onto the nearby notes without any problems. This is very nice, but I can only do this in the current region of where I am.
However, the patterns thing is a bit painful in one area. If I'm going down some scale and need to do a large note shift (like dropping down at least an octave and then some), unless it's exactly a full octave or something with a tangible marker, there's a chance I will screw up and land on the wrong note. This is not a technical problem, it's a "oh crap I don't know what note to play" and since it's done while I'm letting the melody play out in my head, I have to make a split second decision. Mostly it works well, but this is unacceptable if I were to improvise live because a wrong note is bad.
Things I've done to work around this are to bend if out of tune, or vibrato if landing on the note correctly (like a preemptive bend just in case, but vibrato if it's correct). This is only masking the problem.
While I can figure out what any note I'm on within a few seconds due to various reference points, I really need it to be much faster.
This made me think "properly learn all the notes this time instead of only knowing a few strings off by heart" because then I would go to a note I require to land in key... however this doesn't solve the problem either. I would need to know all the notes ahead of time, since knowing every note on the fretboard, while useful, does not solve the problem entirely.
Suppose I'm playing C minor, and I know the place I want to shift to because after decades of playing my instrument, the sound I want is within an area of 3 notes. By three notes, I mean I have my "target note" that I feel it is, and then the notes that are immediately beside it. For example, I'm about to shift down to an F. Next to it are E and F#.
Problem is... which of the three are in C minor? I feel like it's F based on many years of experience, and I could figure this out if needed given a few seconds, but I cannot solve this in the 200 milliseconds or so that I have. It feels like it almost has to be reflexive that I know which of those three notes it is. I would need to instantly know on the fly that F is the note that I want, and to not touch the other two adjacent notes or else it will sound quite bad. Sure, in this instance I guessed the right note, but I could just have easily shifted down one too far and end up on the wrong one, and this happens.
As such, this problem can be stated with: How can I learn to pick a random set of three contiguous notes on the fretboard, and select the proper one in key?
The only way I could see this being done is to know every single note instantly, know every single note in the target scale instantly, and then use this information to pick the right note, all in the span of a few hundred milliseconds at most.
Is this how musicians do this? Or what is the best way of doing this? Or is this not possible? How would you do it?
I want to be able to say "I'm going to freestyle in C minor today" and never hit the wrong note. When I stay in my local area, this is no problem and I will stay in key all the time without question. However, when I do a large shift like, say, 17 "notes" down, that is when I run into problems. | 2021/08/29 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/116918",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/63216/"
] | It sounds to me like you can instinctively find the notes you need within certain small intervals, but once you go beyond an octave or so you start guessing at speed which may or may not work.
You could possibly improve this by improvising **with a metronome** at a **slow** tempo, ideally with some kind of a looping backing track with possible. Choose a scale, like C minor, to improvise over, with an emphasis on big jumps every phrase or couple of phrases. The point of the metronome is to force you to play in time and therefore think in real time, rather than pausing and going "uhhhh where's E again?" If you can't make a jump in time with the metronome, slow down the metronome and try again. Find the first BPM at which you can improvise like this comfortably for a couple of minutes, and don't worry about sounding good. Focus on nailing those jumps in time with the metronome.
Then, when you get more confident with your jumps (this might take a while but it's worth the sweat), try and increase the BPM a little bit more each time. And make sure you cover all the different keys/scales, don't get too comfortable in just a couple of them. The hope would be that over time you would develop the instinct to make the jumps at normal playing speed without having to think. | You say you can go up and down scales/arpeggios etc with alacrity. So you know the shapes. If that was true, you'd know that in C minor, there's no E or F♯. The target would have to be E♭ to stay in key. In the patterns you know and play, you'll never be fretting an E or an F♯ while playing scales and notes in C minor. All that if I read the question right.
So, if that's true, you need to brush up more on notes in scales, and if it helps (it should), say the note names out loud as they're played. |
116,918 | This question is going to seem weird, so I will do my best to describe the problem. Are musicians able to jump to any arbitrary note without giving it much thought and not go out of key?
Assume for this entire post that we stay in one key.
My problem is this: I've played the guitar for so long that I can rifle up and down any scale, arpeggio, exotic weird shape, you name it, and it always sounds fine. I see in patterns and shapes, and I know how every pattern stitches itself together. This means when I'm coming down a major arpeggio and want to transition into a scale, I know the shape that I want to play based on the melody in my head. I'm also at the point where I can map the melody in my head onto the nearby notes without any problems. This is very nice, but I can only do this in the current region of where I am.
However, the patterns thing is a bit painful in one area. If I'm going down some scale and need to do a large note shift (like dropping down at least an octave and then some), unless it's exactly a full octave or something with a tangible marker, there's a chance I will screw up and land on the wrong note. This is not a technical problem, it's a "oh crap I don't know what note to play" and since it's done while I'm letting the melody play out in my head, I have to make a split second decision. Mostly it works well, but this is unacceptable if I were to improvise live because a wrong note is bad.
Things I've done to work around this are to bend if out of tune, or vibrato if landing on the note correctly (like a preemptive bend just in case, but vibrato if it's correct). This is only masking the problem.
While I can figure out what any note I'm on within a few seconds due to various reference points, I really need it to be much faster.
This made me think "properly learn all the notes this time instead of only knowing a few strings off by heart" because then I would go to a note I require to land in key... however this doesn't solve the problem either. I would need to know all the notes ahead of time, since knowing every note on the fretboard, while useful, does not solve the problem entirely.
Suppose I'm playing C minor, and I know the place I want to shift to because after decades of playing my instrument, the sound I want is within an area of 3 notes. By three notes, I mean I have my "target note" that I feel it is, and then the notes that are immediately beside it. For example, I'm about to shift down to an F. Next to it are E and F#.
Problem is... which of the three are in C minor? I feel like it's F based on many years of experience, and I could figure this out if needed given a few seconds, but I cannot solve this in the 200 milliseconds or so that I have. It feels like it almost has to be reflexive that I know which of those three notes it is. I would need to instantly know on the fly that F is the note that I want, and to not touch the other two adjacent notes or else it will sound quite bad. Sure, in this instance I guessed the right note, but I could just have easily shifted down one too far and end up on the wrong one, and this happens.
As such, this problem can be stated with: How can I learn to pick a random set of three contiguous notes on the fretboard, and select the proper one in key?
The only way I could see this being done is to know every single note instantly, know every single note in the target scale instantly, and then use this information to pick the right note, all in the span of a few hundred milliseconds at most.
Is this how musicians do this? Or what is the best way of doing this? Or is this not possible? How would you do it?
I want to be able to say "I'm going to freestyle in C minor today" and never hit the wrong note. When I stay in my local area, this is no problem and I will stay in key all the time without question. However, when I do a large shift like, say, 17 "notes" down, that is when I run into problems. | 2021/08/29 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/116918",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/63216/"
] | It sounds to me like you can instinctively find the notes you need within certain small intervals, but once you go beyond an octave or so you start guessing at speed which may or may not work.
You could possibly improve this by improvising **with a metronome** at a **slow** tempo, ideally with some kind of a looping backing track with possible. Choose a scale, like C minor, to improvise over, with an emphasis on big jumps every phrase or couple of phrases. The point of the metronome is to force you to play in time and therefore think in real time, rather than pausing and going "uhhhh where's E again?" If you can't make a jump in time with the metronome, slow down the metronome and try again. Find the first BPM at which you can improvise like this comfortably for a couple of minutes, and don't worry about sounding good. Focus on nailing those jumps in time with the metronome.
Then, when you get more confident with your jumps (this might take a while but it's worth the sweat), try and increase the BPM a little bit more each time. And make sure you cover all the different keys/scales, don't get too comfortable in just a couple of them. The hope would be that over time you would develop the instinct to make the jumps at normal playing speed without having to think. | If you are, like me, at ease with patterns and shapes (like you seem to tell in the question), my advice is to start with the local before you extend to a broader dimension.
For example, if you know the position of the note you want to play in your current position, start by that, then extend to the octave. You'll know on a bass that for example on the upper string it will be 7 frets in direction of the neck. (I take example of the bass because it has the same interval between each string, on a guitar you'll adapt for the special case of the B string)
Practice this slowly, and with time, this will get more and more natural for you to see all octaves of the same note on the neck so when you think of the next note you want to play, you instantly know all the positions on the neck where you can reach it, being an octave upper, lower, or the same on a different string.. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.