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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
14,012 | I recently read somewhere that in the LDS observance of communion, water and leavened bread is used. The practice of communion comes from the Jewish Passover ceremony where wine and unleavened bread was used. Wine is the fruit of the vine and leaven, or yeast, represents sin, so the bread, which represents Christ's body today, was without leaven, or sinless.
Most Christian denominations still follow this pattern today, even though many use grape juice as a non-alcoholic substitute for "the fruit of the vine". So, I was quite surprised to learn that Mormons do not follow this pattern.
Is it true that LDS Churches use water instead of wine or grape juice and leavened bread instead of unleavened bread? If so, where does this practice come from and what is the theological basis for it? | 2013/02/05 | [
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/14012",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/users/207/"
] | The LDS church proscribes wine (or any alcoholic beverage, really), so water is used instead, although [it doesn't matter what is used for the symbols of the sacrament](http://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/27.2?lang=eng#1), according to Doctrine and Covenants in the LDS canon:
**D&C 27:2**
>
> 2 For, behold, I say unto you, that it mattereth not what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink when ye partake of the sacrament, if it so be that ye do it with an eye single to my glory—remembering unto the Father my body which was laid down for you, and my blood which was shed for the remission of your sins.
>
>
>
It just so happens that regular bread and water are more available and make for a simpler ceremony, especially considering that it's usually the young men in the church who prepare and administer that ordinance.
[There are accounts of Latter-day Saints using alternative emblems](https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1980/10/prepare-for-the-days-of-tribulation) for the sacrament. The citation I linked to, about halfway down, mentions French saints making use of potato peelings when that was all they had available.
Note: [The Word of Wisdom](http://www.lds.org/topics/word-of-wisdom), which is the revelation forbidding the consumption of alcoholic beverages, was not received until later. It could be that this revelation about the emblems was a precursor, in part, to that more general revelation. (Read D&C 27 in context for more information.) | During the persecution period of the early Church, the Lord directed Joseph Smith that evil men were seeking to poison the Sacramental wine. Therefore the Saints were to make their own grape juice. Since that became hard to do at they were being expelled from areas, the Church was directed to use water. And since the substance was symbolic anyway, crackers, any style of leavened bread, or in the case of war-torn areas where bread was unavailable, any substitute that would still symbolize the partaker's "doing this in rememberance of Him". |
344,616 | In computer vision, convolutions are so attractive for image processing tasks. What make it suitable for image processing? | 2018/05/05 | [
"https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/344616",
"https://stats.stackexchange.com",
"https://stats.stackexchange.com/users/206512/"
] | Convolution has proven to be useful in image processing for at least 40 years. That is why it is popular and also the reason to use convolutional layers in deep learning with images during the last 5 years or so.
A better answer to your question would require much more biology than is on this site. [But you can check this out if it interests you.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_system) | Image processing is now dominated by the application of convolutional neural networks. Introduction of convolutional and pooling units to our network structure allows us reduce the number of parameters in a large network and take advantage of data structure.
Pooling is a simple dimensionality reduction technique that is almost always used in combination with convolutional layers in CNNs. A pooling layer is defined by a size and a stride. |
344,616 | In computer vision, convolutions are so attractive for image processing tasks. What make it suitable for image processing? | 2018/05/05 | [
"https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/344616",
"https://stats.stackexchange.com",
"https://stats.stackexchange.com/users/206512/"
] | Why convolutions? First let's look at alternative, using standard (fully connected) layers.
**Drawbacks of using fully connected layers on image input**
* FC layers don't exploit local structure
* FC layer is not equivariant under translation (translated pattern can correspond to completely different feature)
* For big images FC layers have huge number of parameters (for example for 1000 hidden units, 1000 x 1000 x 3 image such layer has ~3 billion weights)
**In contrast to that, CNN layers:**
* Extract local features (conv layer outputs only depend on adjacent pixels of previous layer)
* Are equivariant to translation
* Have lot less parameters, since they share kernel over the patches of whole input image
In addition to that, CNN networks use pooling layers, which provide (some) translation invariance (pooling makes each feature more and more invariant to translation).
If you're unsure about equivariance/invariance, I'd recommmend reading these [Hinton's slides](http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~hinton/csc2535/notes/lec6a.pdf). They have pictorial explanation of what it means for features to be equivariant (and also more details on the other points I mentioned). | Image processing is now dominated by the application of convolutional neural networks. Introduction of convolutional and pooling units to our network structure allows us reduce the number of parameters in a large network and take advantage of data structure.
Pooling is a simple dimensionality reduction technique that is almost always used in combination with convolutional layers in CNNs. A pooling layer is defined by a size and a stride. |
344,616 | In computer vision, convolutions are so attractive for image processing tasks. What make it suitable for image processing? | 2018/05/05 | [
"https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/344616",
"https://stats.stackexchange.com",
"https://stats.stackexchange.com/users/206512/"
] | Why convolutions? First let's look at alternative, using standard (fully connected) layers.
**Drawbacks of using fully connected layers on image input**
* FC layers don't exploit local structure
* FC layer is not equivariant under translation (translated pattern can correspond to completely different feature)
* For big images FC layers have huge number of parameters (for example for 1000 hidden units, 1000 x 1000 x 3 image such layer has ~3 billion weights)
**In contrast to that, CNN layers:**
* Extract local features (conv layer outputs only depend on adjacent pixels of previous layer)
* Are equivariant to translation
* Have lot less parameters, since they share kernel over the patches of whole input image
In addition to that, CNN networks use pooling layers, which provide (some) translation invariance (pooling makes each feature more and more invariant to translation).
If you're unsure about equivariance/invariance, I'd recommmend reading these [Hinton's slides](http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~hinton/csc2535/notes/lec6a.pdf). They have pictorial explanation of what it means for features to be equivariant (and also more details on the other points I mentioned). | Convolution has proven to be useful in image processing for at least 40 years. That is why it is popular and also the reason to use convolutional layers in deep learning with images during the last 5 years or so.
A better answer to your question would require much more biology than is on this site. [But you can check this out if it interests you.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_system) |
130 | How to remove background from an image with Gimp? | 2011/01/05 | [
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/130",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/users/111/"
] | There are several ways, like always, like in Adobe Photoshop or the like. One that comes to mind that used to work: use magic wand to select the background (and interior parts if you want them to go away) , do whilst shift pressed to add more areas, hit ctrl+i to invert selection, and without deselecting (so it gets placed in same area) hit ctrl+v. Then in layers window right click on that strange new layer created, and in the context menu that pops, select "new layer", it will be only the pixels you want and the rest is transparent. Now you'd delete the background layer (your original scan) | Another possible way: Zoom the picture and use the free selection tool to select the parts you want to keep, then invert the selection and remove the selected background (if you have transparency on the layer, if not you first have to add an alpha layer to your current layer), I mostly use this method over the fuzzy select because most times I achieve better results.
I recently found another way to do this, a plugin called GML-Matter, in a few words: You select your parts to keep with a pencil-like tool, fill the area inside(or outside) the selection and then press "Matte" (I think it is called like that in english, I use another language for GIMP and I dont know if the GML-Matter has different language sets) and voila: It will give you the part you filled with transparency added to the rest (as for the first way you need transparency on the layer)
-Edit:
Sorry I just saw that this post is a few years old, but it showed up in my stream so I didnt look on the date |
227,580 | I have been looking for an answer for a while I am designing a adventure map but I need a command for it. Is there any way for people to skip from one point of the day to the other.
Ex 1: I have a command once someone performs this one task from sunrise to afternoon
Ex 2: The 2nd player tries to perform this task but at the middle of the day then it progresses to evening
Is there any way? | 2015/07/11 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/227580",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/118219/"
] | try ***/time set*** then morning is 0 and night is 18000 | try /time day or night it tells you in /help how to change the time of day but it does not really fast foward anything |
65,848 | When I first started using SO about 2 years ago, there were lots of questions, and lots of answers. Great answers even. It was wonderful because you were almost guaranteed to get some kind of answer.
Now it seems like getting even 1 answer is increasingly difficult. I find that many questions are by people who have question to answer ratio's of 10:1 or more (mine is 1:15).
Would it be possible to send a gentle reminder to people when their ratio goes above say 5? I don't think it would be productive to force them to answer more questions (who wants bad answers), but some kind of encouragement to share their knowledge.
Am I alone it seeing this disappointing trend? | 2010/09/27 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/65848",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/130598/"
] | Here are some rough stats:
* Jan 2009: approx 5 answers per question
* July 2009: approx 3 answers per question
* Jan 2010: approx 2.5 answers per question
* Now: approx 2 answers per question
So *yes* there is defiantly a trend that as the site got busier we started getting less answers on average for questions.
There are some other interesting stats ... prior to September 2009, people were barely accepting answers to questions (1/5) we are holding steady at the moment with an approximate 50% accept rate on questions.
As to how to solve this problem:
>
> Would it be possible to send a gentle
> reminder to people when their ratio
> goes above say 5?
>
>
>
I think this is a **really** bad idea. As others have said, there are already limits in place that stop people from asking a stream of poor questions. In fact when I look at the front page these days I notice very few (if any) extremely poor questions, this was not the case 2-3 months ago.
A Q&A site without great questions is useless, if somebody is asking tons of great questions we do not want to tell them: "hold on buddy, time to answer some questions", instead we would like to tell them: "wow, you are asking awesome questions ... keep it up"
If you look at tag pages, like [ruby](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/ruby) [sql](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/sql) or [css](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/css) you start seeing questions spanning a whole day on a single page, unlike the front page, that at peak times can only cover 20 minutes.
I agree that we want to make it easier for people to answer questions, I am not sure exactly what to do to make it so. Its a large combination of adjustments.
Our ultra-high rep users are super proficient at finding and answering [really interesting questions](https://stackoverflow.com/tags/c%23/hot) and they manage to do so regularly, daily.
When you filter down to a 5 hour time span in the [c# tag](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/c%23) you start noticing that the unanswered questions are actually pretty tough, they involve some sort of nitch technology and there are very few people who [can answer them.](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3807508/what-does-adding-name-and-namespace-to-datacontract-do) All the easy questions seem to get answered.
From personal experience, I tend to answer my [own](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/724148/is-there-a-faster-way-to-scan-through-a-directory-recursively-in-net) [questions](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/355019/automatically-terminating-non-essential-threads-in-c) if they do not get a satisfactory [answer](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3783648/is-there-a-setting-in-vs-2010-that-will-allow-it-to-recover-open-files-after-a-pr). I guess there are tons of cases where the OP has solved some really hairy problem but never bothered updating the site.
So what should we do:
1. Make it easier for people to find questions they can answer.
2. Encourage closing the loop, find better ways to remove [old unanswered](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/192998/sharepoint-site-definitions-not-showing-up-in-template-list-why) questions from the unanswered question list.
3. I personally think that a system that encourages collaboration (provide an incentive for improving questions and answers) will do wonders at clearing up a lot of the old unanswered list, quite often there is a great question hiding in a poorly worded one. | Other than the ways of dealing with problem users, there's little that one can do to affect how people choose to use the site. If you're having a problem getting answers to *your* questions, you *can* help yourself. If you can make even a weak case for putting one of the popular tags (e.g., C#) on your question, do it. That will get you enough initial views to get some good answers, even if the question is re-tagged later. |
65,848 | When I first started using SO about 2 years ago, there were lots of questions, and lots of answers. Great answers even. It was wonderful because you were almost guaranteed to get some kind of answer.
Now it seems like getting even 1 answer is increasingly difficult. I find that many questions are by people who have question to answer ratio's of 10:1 or more (mine is 1:15).
Would it be possible to send a gentle reminder to people when their ratio goes above say 5? I don't think it would be productive to force them to answer more questions (who wants bad answers), but some kind of encouragement to share their knowledge.
Am I alone it seeing this disappointing trend? | 2010/09/27 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/65848",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/130598/"
] | When SO was still shiny and new, the more experienced and serious programmers were asking every good question they could think of, drowning out all the "plz send teh codez" questions. Now we're mostly left with the latter.
I think SO has reached a certain plateau for mainstream programming questions. Basically, everything worth asking has been asked. As technology changes, we'll see spikes of new questions (imagine if MVC or LINQ were brand new today).
Further, since all the obvious questions are well covered, all we have left is obscure questions. This may be why you're having trouble getting answers. If no one has asked before, maybe your problem is unique to your situation. Don't let this stop you, though. It's always worth a try. (If you have any specific examples, we'll all be happy to take a look)
As Grace Note mentioned, there are limits in place that will throttle or even completely cut off users who ask too many [bad] questions. However, there certainly are plenty of these users to go around. | Here are some rough stats:
* Jan 2009: approx 5 answers per question
* July 2009: approx 3 answers per question
* Jan 2010: approx 2.5 answers per question
* Now: approx 2 answers per question
So *yes* there is defiantly a trend that as the site got busier we started getting less answers on average for questions.
There are some other interesting stats ... prior to September 2009, people were barely accepting answers to questions (1/5) we are holding steady at the moment with an approximate 50% accept rate on questions.
As to how to solve this problem:
>
> Would it be possible to send a gentle
> reminder to people when their ratio
> goes above say 5?
>
>
>
I think this is a **really** bad idea. As others have said, there are already limits in place that stop people from asking a stream of poor questions. In fact when I look at the front page these days I notice very few (if any) extremely poor questions, this was not the case 2-3 months ago.
A Q&A site without great questions is useless, if somebody is asking tons of great questions we do not want to tell them: "hold on buddy, time to answer some questions", instead we would like to tell them: "wow, you are asking awesome questions ... keep it up"
If you look at tag pages, like [ruby](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/ruby) [sql](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/sql) or [css](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/css) you start seeing questions spanning a whole day on a single page, unlike the front page, that at peak times can only cover 20 minutes.
I agree that we want to make it easier for people to answer questions, I am not sure exactly what to do to make it so. Its a large combination of adjustments.
Our ultra-high rep users are super proficient at finding and answering [really interesting questions](https://stackoverflow.com/tags/c%23/hot) and they manage to do so regularly, daily.
When you filter down to a 5 hour time span in the [c# tag](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/c%23) you start noticing that the unanswered questions are actually pretty tough, they involve some sort of nitch technology and there are very few people who [can answer them.](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3807508/what-does-adding-name-and-namespace-to-datacontract-do) All the easy questions seem to get answered.
From personal experience, I tend to answer my [own](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/724148/is-there-a-faster-way-to-scan-through-a-directory-recursively-in-net) [questions](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/355019/automatically-terminating-non-essential-threads-in-c) if they do not get a satisfactory [answer](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3783648/is-there-a-setting-in-vs-2010-that-will-allow-it-to-recover-open-files-after-a-pr). I guess there are tons of cases where the OP has solved some really hairy problem but never bothered updating the site.
So what should we do:
1. Make it easier for people to find questions they can answer.
2. Encourage closing the loop, find better ways to remove [old unanswered](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/192998/sharepoint-site-definitions-not-showing-up-in-template-list-why) questions from the unanswered question list.
3. I personally think that a system that encourages collaboration (provide an incentive for improving questions and answers) will do wonders at clearing up a lot of the old unanswered list, quite often there is a great question hiding in a poorly worded one. |
65,848 | When I first started using SO about 2 years ago, there were lots of questions, and lots of answers. Great answers even. It was wonderful because you were almost guaranteed to get some kind of answer.
Now it seems like getting even 1 answer is increasingly difficult. I find that many questions are by people who have question to answer ratio's of 10:1 or more (mine is 1:15).
Would it be possible to send a gentle reminder to people when their ratio goes above say 5? I don't think it would be productive to force them to answer more questions (who wants bad answers), but some kind of encouragement to share their knowledge.
Am I alone it seeing this disappointing trend? | 2010/09/27 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/65848",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/130598/"
] | Here are some rough stats:
* Jan 2009: approx 5 answers per question
* July 2009: approx 3 answers per question
* Jan 2010: approx 2.5 answers per question
* Now: approx 2 answers per question
So *yes* there is defiantly a trend that as the site got busier we started getting less answers on average for questions.
There are some other interesting stats ... prior to September 2009, people were barely accepting answers to questions (1/5) we are holding steady at the moment with an approximate 50% accept rate on questions.
As to how to solve this problem:
>
> Would it be possible to send a gentle
> reminder to people when their ratio
> goes above say 5?
>
>
>
I think this is a **really** bad idea. As others have said, there are already limits in place that stop people from asking a stream of poor questions. In fact when I look at the front page these days I notice very few (if any) extremely poor questions, this was not the case 2-3 months ago.
A Q&A site without great questions is useless, if somebody is asking tons of great questions we do not want to tell them: "hold on buddy, time to answer some questions", instead we would like to tell them: "wow, you are asking awesome questions ... keep it up"
If you look at tag pages, like [ruby](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/ruby) [sql](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/sql) or [css](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/css) you start seeing questions spanning a whole day on a single page, unlike the front page, that at peak times can only cover 20 minutes.
I agree that we want to make it easier for people to answer questions, I am not sure exactly what to do to make it so. Its a large combination of adjustments.
Our ultra-high rep users are super proficient at finding and answering [really interesting questions](https://stackoverflow.com/tags/c%23/hot) and they manage to do so regularly, daily.
When you filter down to a 5 hour time span in the [c# tag](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/c%23) you start noticing that the unanswered questions are actually pretty tough, they involve some sort of nitch technology and there are very few people who [can answer them.](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3807508/what-does-adding-name-and-namespace-to-datacontract-do) All the easy questions seem to get answered.
From personal experience, I tend to answer my [own](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/724148/is-there-a-faster-way-to-scan-through-a-directory-recursively-in-net) [questions](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/355019/automatically-terminating-non-essential-threads-in-c) if they do not get a satisfactory [answer](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3783648/is-there-a-setting-in-vs-2010-that-will-allow-it-to-recover-open-files-after-a-pr). I guess there are tons of cases where the OP has solved some really hairy problem but never bothered updating the site.
So what should we do:
1. Make it easier for people to find questions they can answer.
2. Encourage closing the loop, find better ways to remove [old unanswered](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/192998/sharepoint-site-definitions-not-showing-up-in-template-list-why) questions from the unanswered question list.
3. I personally think that a system that encourages collaboration (provide an incentive for improving questions and answers) will do wonders at clearing up a lot of the old unanswered list, quite often there is a great question hiding in a poorly worded one. | I only look at the front page for fun, bikeshed questions. The rest of the time, I use the tag for my programming language (ruby). Apart from one or two problem users, I haven't noticed things get better or worse. |
65,848 | When I first started using SO about 2 years ago, there were lots of questions, and lots of answers. Great answers even. It was wonderful because you were almost guaranteed to get some kind of answer.
Now it seems like getting even 1 answer is increasingly difficult. I find that many questions are by people who have question to answer ratio's of 10:1 or more (mine is 1:15).
Would it be possible to send a gentle reminder to people when their ratio goes above say 5? I don't think it would be productive to force them to answer more questions (who wants bad answers), but some kind of encouragement to share their knowledge.
Am I alone it seeing this disappointing trend? | 2010/09/27 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/65848",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/130598/"
] | While I agree that it's becoming a problem do you really want the guy that asks 5 questions a day to answer your question? =) | I only look at the front page for fun, bikeshed questions. The rest of the time, I use the tag for my programming language (ruby). Apart from one or two problem users, I haven't noticed things get better or worse. |
65,848 | When I first started using SO about 2 years ago, there were lots of questions, and lots of answers. Great answers even. It was wonderful because you were almost guaranteed to get some kind of answer.
Now it seems like getting even 1 answer is increasingly difficult. I find that many questions are by people who have question to answer ratio's of 10:1 or more (mine is 1:15).
Would it be possible to send a gentle reminder to people when their ratio goes above say 5? I don't think it would be productive to force them to answer more questions (who wants bad answers), but some kind of encouragement to share their knowledge.
Am I alone it seeing this disappointing trend? | 2010/09/27 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/65848",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/130598/"
] | When SO was still shiny and new, the more experienced and serious programmers were asking every good question they could think of, drowning out all the "plz send teh codez" questions. Now we're mostly left with the latter.
I think SO has reached a certain plateau for mainstream programming questions. Basically, everything worth asking has been asked. As technology changes, we'll see spikes of new questions (imagine if MVC or LINQ were brand new today).
Further, since all the obvious questions are well covered, all we have left is obscure questions. This may be why you're having trouble getting answers. If no one has asked before, maybe your problem is unique to your situation. Don't let this stop you, though. It's always worth a try. (If you have any specific examples, we'll all be happy to take a look)
As Grace Note mentioned, there are limits in place that will throttle or even completely cut off users who ask too many [bad] questions. However, there certainly are plenty of these users to go around. | I only look at the front page for fun, bikeshed questions. The rest of the time, I use the tag for my programming language (ruby). Apart from one or two problem users, I haven't noticed things get better or worse. |
65,848 | When I first started using SO about 2 years ago, there were lots of questions, and lots of answers. Great answers even. It was wonderful because you were almost guaranteed to get some kind of answer.
Now it seems like getting even 1 answer is increasingly difficult. I find that many questions are by people who have question to answer ratio's of 10:1 or more (mine is 1:15).
Would it be possible to send a gentle reminder to people when their ratio goes above say 5? I don't think it would be productive to force them to answer more questions (who wants bad answers), but some kind of encouragement to share their knowledge.
Am I alone it seeing this disappointing trend? | 2010/09/27 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/65848",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/130598/"
] | I only look at the front page for fun, bikeshed questions. The rest of the time, I use the tag for my programming language (ruby). Apart from one or two problem users, I haven't noticed things get better or worse. | Other than the ways of dealing with problem users, there's little that one can do to affect how people choose to use the site. If you're having a problem getting answers to *your* questions, you *can* help yourself. If you can make even a weak case for putting one of the popular tags (e.g., C#) on your question, do it. That will get you enough initial views to get some good answers, even if the question is re-tagged later. |
65,848 | When I first started using SO about 2 years ago, there were lots of questions, and lots of answers. Great answers even. It was wonderful because you were almost guaranteed to get some kind of answer.
Now it seems like getting even 1 answer is increasingly difficult. I find that many questions are by people who have question to answer ratio's of 10:1 or more (mine is 1:15).
Would it be possible to send a gentle reminder to people when their ratio goes above say 5? I don't think it would be productive to force them to answer more questions (who wants bad answers), but some kind of encouragement to share their knowledge.
Am I alone it seeing this disappointing trend? | 2010/09/27 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/65848",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/130598/"
] | When SO was still shiny and new, the more experienced and serious programmers were asking every good question they could think of, drowning out all the "plz send teh codez" questions. Now we're mostly left with the latter.
I think SO has reached a certain plateau for mainstream programming questions. Basically, everything worth asking has been asked. As technology changes, we'll see spikes of new questions (imagine if MVC or LINQ were brand new today).
Further, since all the obvious questions are well covered, all we have left is obscure questions. This may be why you're having trouble getting answers. If no one has asked before, maybe your problem is unique to your situation. Don't let this stop you, though. It's always worth a try. (If you have any specific examples, we'll all be happy to take a look)
As Grace Note mentioned, there are limits in place that will throttle or even completely cut off users who ask too many [bad] questions. However, there certainly are plenty of these users to go around. | While I agree that it's becoming a problem do you really want the guy that asks 5 questions a day to answer your question? =) |
52,756 | Is a priest permitted to resign from his position? By this I mean, can he voluntarily choose to stop serving as a priest, and no longer be under the restrictions of a priest (e.g. that they cannot marry)? | 2016/09/18 | [
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/52756",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/users/16688/"
] | The answer is both 'yes' and 'no'. A priest can resign from the priesthood and seek dispensation from his clerical obligations, yet the Church will always regard him as a 'laicised' priest, since ordination is regarded as irrevocable.
>
> Canon 1583: It is true that someone validly ordained can, for a just reason, be discharged from the obligations and functions linked to ordination, or can be forbidden to exercise them; but he cannot become a layman again in the strict sense, because the character imprinted by ordination is for ever. the vocation and mission received on the day of his ordination mark him permanently.
>
>
> Canon 291: Apart from the case mentioned in can. 290, n. 1, loss of the clerical state does not entail a dispensation from the obligation of celibacy, which only the Roman Pontiff grants.
>
>
> Canon 292: A cleric who loses the clerical state according to the norm of law loses with it the rights proper to the clerical state and is no longer bound by any obligations of the clerical state, without prejudice to the prescript of can. 291. He is prohibited from exercising the power of orders, without prejudice to the prescript of can. 976. By the loss of the clerical state, he is deprived of all offices, functions, and any delegated power.
>
>
> Canon 293: A cleric who loses the clerical state cannot be enrolled among clerics again except through a rescript of the Apostolic See.
>
>
>
GianPaolo Salvini, S.J. says, in '[Priests Who "Desert," Priests Who "Come Back"](https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=7803) ', Of the 1,076 priests who leave the ministry each year, 554 ask for a dispensation from the obligations imposed by the priestly state: celibacy, and the recitation of the breviary. Salvini estimates the number of former priests who became married as in the thousands, but concedes that no statistic is available.
This [Press Statement](http://www.religioustolerance.org/femclrg2.htm) was issued online by John Wijngaards in 1998, giving his reasons for resignation from ministry as "Catholic Priest Resigns Due To Conflict Of Conscience".
This [Letter of Resignation](https://www.facebook.com/ZimCatholicNews/posts/783947458329707) by Athanasio Dzadagu, giving his reason as the wish to marry, was reproduced by Zim Catholic news in its blog. The letter received both favourable and unfavourable comments. | Can a priest resign?
Simply desiring to add a few points of interest on this question, not mentioned in Dick Harfield's excellent answer.
The body of this question leaves me with a little confusion as to what is meant by the resignation of a priest!
First of all, according to the Code of Canon Law [(Can. 332 §2)](http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_P16.HTM) a pope may resign his office.
>
> If it happens that the Roman Pontiff resigns his office, it is required for validity that the resignation is made freely and properly manifested but not that it is accepted by anyone.
>
>
>
When a pope resigns his office as Supreme Pontiff of the Church, he no longer remains pope, but by virtue of his consecration as a bishop, remains a bishop forever.
Secondly bishops must resign their posts at the age of 75. However the pope may or may not accept the resignation in question.
>
> [Can. 401 §1](http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0017/_P1D.HTM) A diocesan Bishop who has completed his seventy-fifth year of age is requested to offer his resignation from office to the Supreme Pontiff, who, taking all the circumstances into account, will make provision accordingly.
>
>
> §2 A diocesan Bishop who, because of illness or some other grave reason, has become unsuited for the fulfillment of his office, is earnestly requested to offer his resignation from office.
>
>
> Can. 402 §1 A Bishop whose resignation from office has been accepted, acquires the title 'emeritus' of his diocese. If he so wishes, he may have a residence in the diocese unless, because of special circumstances in certain cases, the Apostolic See provides otherwise.
>
>
>
As for priests most dioceses have rules set up for the resignation for diocesan priests. here is an example taken from the [Diocese of San Diego](http://www.sdcatholic.org/portals/0/handbook/Handbook_PDFs/Priests5.pdf).
>
> The Code of Canon Law (Canon 538 §3) sets the age for retirement of pastors at seventyfive
> (75). When a pastor reaches seventy-five (75) years of age he is asked to submit his
> resignation to the bishop who, after considering all the circumstances of person and place,
> will decide whether to accept or defer the resignation.
>
>
> All priests who are able to do so are expected to continue in a diocesan assignment until age
> seventy-five (75).
>
>
> For good reason and with permission of the bishop, a priest may retire earlier.
>
>
> **Pastor Emeritus**: An honorary title awarded at the discretion of the bishop to a priest upon
> his resignation as pastor (cf. Canon 185). A Pastor Emeritus need not reside in the parish
> from which he retires.
>
>
>
By virtue of the sacrament of ordination, once ordained a priest one is always a priest! He may resign as a Pastor of a parish, but remains a priest forever. He must continue to say Mass in private and may not get married. If a priest desires to leave the priesthood altogether, please see Dick Harfield's answer to this question. |
52,756 | Is a priest permitted to resign from his position? By this I mean, can he voluntarily choose to stop serving as a priest, and no longer be under the restrictions of a priest (e.g. that they cannot marry)? | 2016/09/18 | [
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/52756",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/users/16688/"
] | The answer is both 'yes' and 'no'. A priest can resign from the priesthood and seek dispensation from his clerical obligations, yet the Church will always regard him as a 'laicised' priest, since ordination is regarded as irrevocable.
>
> Canon 1583: It is true that someone validly ordained can, for a just reason, be discharged from the obligations and functions linked to ordination, or can be forbidden to exercise them; but he cannot become a layman again in the strict sense, because the character imprinted by ordination is for ever. the vocation and mission received on the day of his ordination mark him permanently.
>
>
> Canon 291: Apart from the case mentioned in can. 290, n. 1, loss of the clerical state does not entail a dispensation from the obligation of celibacy, which only the Roman Pontiff grants.
>
>
> Canon 292: A cleric who loses the clerical state according to the norm of law loses with it the rights proper to the clerical state and is no longer bound by any obligations of the clerical state, without prejudice to the prescript of can. 291. He is prohibited from exercising the power of orders, without prejudice to the prescript of can. 976. By the loss of the clerical state, he is deprived of all offices, functions, and any delegated power.
>
>
> Canon 293: A cleric who loses the clerical state cannot be enrolled among clerics again except through a rescript of the Apostolic See.
>
>
>
GianPaolo Salvini, S.J. says, in '[Priests Who "Desert," Priests Who "Come Back"](https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=7803) ', Of the 1,076 priests who leave the ministry each year, 554 ask for a dispensation from the obligations imposed by the priestly state: celibacy, and the recitation of the breviary. Salvini estimates the number of former priests who became married as in the thousands, but concedes that no statistic is available.
This [Press Statement](http://www.religioustolerance.org/femclrg2.htm) was issued online by John Wijngaards in 1998, giving his reasons for resignation from ministry as "Catholic Priest Resigns Due To Conflict Of Conscience".
This [Letter of Resignation](https://www.facebook.com/ZimCatholicNews/posts/783947458329707) by Athanasio Dzadagu, giving his reason as the wish to marry, was reproduced by Zim Catholic news in its blog. The letter received both favourable and unfavourable comments. | I, Athanasio Dzadagu, whose decision and action likely provoked this topic, just recently came upon this Q&A.
Indeed once a priest, forever a priest, even if one no longer carries out the ministry. Nevertheless, denying the fact that priests can resign from priesthood, i.e. from the ministry, seems to come out of the notion that only somebody in higher office can render one to be no longer a priest, that is, to be no longer in active ministry.
Yet there is a difference between being expelled –or defrocked as they say in the Church of England– and leaving of one's own accord. From this perspective it would mean the priest can never take the initiative, and act proactively, always being at the mercy of a higher authority, almost like a slave. Indeed, it is no wonder that Gian Paolo Salvini refers to such priests as "Deserters".
One can leave and later be officially laicized, but that does not mean they cannot make a free decision to pursue a different life before that. It is as if to say a priest has resigned suggests leaving those "higher" authorities with no power, and hence the seeming insistence that a priest cannot resign.
Because to resign would mean he has freedom and power, to offer his services or not, which those who regard him as merely a possession of Church authorities cannot contemplate. If a priest cannot resign, then why does he not undertake priestly ministry while awaiting laicization?
Incidentally some might be interested to know that I went on to write a book covering this episode of my life, entitled "*[Recollections and Reflections: The British Journey of One Former African Priest](http://a.co/8polt9u)*" |
52,756 | Is a priest permitted to resign from his position? By this I mean, can he voluntarily choose to stop serving as a priest, and no longer be under the restrictions of a priest (e.g. that they cannot marry)? | 2016/09/18 | [
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/52756",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/users/16688/"
] | Can a priest resign?
Simply desiring to add a few points of interest on this question, not mentioned in Dick Harfield's excellent answer.
The body of this question leaves me with a little confusion as to what is meant by the resignation of a priest!
First of all, according to the Code of Canon Law [(Can. 332 §2)](http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_P16.HTM) a pope may resign his office.
>
> If it happens that the Roman Pontiff resigns his office, it is required for validity that the resignation is made freely and properly manifested but not that it is accepted by anyone.
>
>
>
When a pope resigns his office as Supreme Pontiff of the Church, he no longer remains pope, but by virtue of his consecration as a bishop, remains a bishop forever.
Secondly bishops must resign their posts at the age of 75. However the pope may or may not accept the resignation in question.
>
> [Can. 401 §1](http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0017/_P1D.HTM) A diocesan Bishop who has completed his seventy-fifth year of age is requested to offer his resignation from office to the Supreme Pontiff, who, taking all the circumstances into account, will make provision accordingly.
>
>
> §2 A diocesan Bishop who, because of illness or some other grave reason, has become unsuited for the fulfillment of his office, is earnestly requested to offer his resignation from office.
>
>
> Can. 402 §1 A Bishop whose resignation from office has been accepted, acquires the title 'emeritus' of his diocese. If he so wishes, he may have a residence in the diocese unless, because of special circumstances in certain cases, the Apostolic See provides otherwise.
>
>
>
As for priests most dioceses have rules set up for the resignation for diocesan priests. here is an example taken from the [Diocese of San Diego](http://www.sdcatholic.org/portals/0/handbook/Handbook_PDFs/Priests5.pdf).
>
> The Code of Canon Law (Canon 538 §3) sets the age for retirement of pastors at seventyfive
> (75). When a pastor reaches seventy-five (75) years of age he is asked to submit his
> resignation to the bishop who, after considering all the circumstances of person and place,
> will decide whether to accept or defer the resignation.
>
>
> All priests who are able to do so are expected to continue in a diocesan assignment until age
> seventy-five (75).
>
>
> For good reason and with permission of the bishop, a priest may retire earlier.
>
>
> **Pastor Emeritus**: An honorary title awarded at the discretion of the bishop to a priest upon
> his resignation as pastor (cf. Canon 185). A Pastor Emeritus need not reside in the parish
> from which he retires.
>
>
>
By virtue of the sacrament of ordination, once ordained a priest one is always a priest! He may resign as a Pastor of a parish, but remains a priest forever. He must continue to say Mass in private and may not get married. If a priest desires to leave the priesthood altogether, please see Dick Harfield's answer to this question. | I, Athanasio Dzadagu, whose decision and action likely provoked this topic, just recently came upon this Q&A.
Indeed once a priest, forever a priest, even if one no longer carries out the ministry. Nevertheless, denying the fact that priests can resign from priesthood, i.e. from the ministry, seems to come out of the notion that only somebody in higher office can render one to be no longer a priest, that is, to be no longer in active ministry.
Yet there is a difference between being expelled –or defrocked as they say in the Church of England– and leaving of one's own accord. From this perspective it would mean the priest can never take the initiative, and act proactively, always being at the mercy of a higher authority, almost like a slave. Indeed, it is no wonder that Gian Paolo Salvini refers to such priests as "Deserters".
One can leave and later be officially laicized, but that does not mean they cannot make a free decision to pursue a different life before that. It is as if to say a priest has resigned suggests leaving those "higher" authorities with no power, and hence the seeming insistence that a priest cannot resign.
Because to resign would mean he has freedom and power, to offer his services or not, which those who regard him as merely a possession of Church authorities cannot contemplate. If a priest cannot resign, then why does he not undertake priestly ministry while awaiting laicization?
Incidentally some might be interested to know that I went on to write a book covering this episode of my life, entitled "*[Recollections and Reflections: The British Journey of One Former African Priest](http://a.co/8polt9u)*" |
4,887 | So I bought new tires recently for my 2002 Nissan Sentra and wanted to make sure that my alignment would not eat them up. Even though effectively my entire suspension/axle system was overhauled recently, some of the specs are still off. Three different shops keep telling me that it's not a huge deal and won't make my tires wear improperly.
This is the report from the last place I went to, other reports show a similar story, though this one shows probably the most "extreme" deviations (though I have a feeling these sensors aren't very accurate)
Should I be worried? I am not sure why the front caster is out by a tad bit, seeing as that is a brand new shock there. The rear though, is not adjustable, it is a solid axle and the print outs all say "Manufacturer does not specify rear Toe/Camber adjustments". I've already had this axle placed with a new Nissan Part. | 2012/12/07 | [
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/questions/4887",
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com",
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/users/2487/"
] | The only thing I see of any real concern here would be the left rear toe - it's off enough to possibly cause some tire wear. However, since it can't be adjusted, your best bet is to just rotate the tires regularly (every other oil change is a good rule of thumb) and keep an eye out for wear. You didn't say which Nissan you're driving, but I'm assuming it's a Sentra/Versa or other smaller model, which means likely you won't see any severe tire wear on the left rear anyways. | The combination of that much camber plus that much toe will cause it to wear more quickly, but there's not much you can do about it without getting extreme in swapping parts. Keep rotating those tires so you don't burn out just the one and don't worry about it too much as I expect it would cost a lot more money to fix than you'll spend in extra tire costs. That's the factory rear toe setting for my RWD car that rides on real sticky performance tires that can't be rotated. I get around 20,000 miles out of them. I expect you'll do a LOT better AND you can rotate them... As far as the caster, that has minimal impact on wear in general, and yours just barely out of spec. |
4,887 | So I bought new tires recently for my 2002 Nissan Sentra and wanted to make sure that my alignment would not eat them up. Even though effectively my entire suspension/axle system was overhauled recently, some of the specs are still off. Three different shops keep telling me that it's not a huge deal and won't make my tires wear improperly.
This is the report from the last place I went to, other reports show a similar story, though this one shows probably the most "extreme" deviations (though I have a feeling these sensors aren't very accurate)
Should I be worried? I am not sure why the front caster is out by a tad bit, seeing as that is a brand new shock there. The rear though, is not adjustable, it is a solid axle and the print outs all say "Manufacturer does not specify rear Toe/Camber adjustments". I've already had this axle placed with a new Nissan Part. | 2012/12/07 | [
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/questions/4887",
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com",
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/users/2487/"
] | The only thing I see of any real concern here would be the left rear toe - it's off enough to possibly cause some tire wear. However, since it can't be adjusted, your best bet is to just rotate the tires regularly (every other oil change is a good rule of thumb) and keep an eye out for wear. You didn't say which Nissan you're driving, but I'm assuming it's a Sentra/Versa or other smaller model, which means likely you won't see any severe tire wear on the left rear anyways. | Found an interesting [thread](http://www.allsentra.com/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=6105) at [allsentra.com](http://allsentra.com). Some choice bits from one of the [posts](http://www.allsentra.com/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=6105#p99157):
>
> Many Nissan Sentra rear axles are mismanufactured with a huge toe in.
>
>
> Nissan actively discourages/forbids delearships to put in shims to
> correct the rear alignment.
>
>
> Specific Nissan Sentra calibrated shims can be obtained from rockauto
> or NAPA. Look under suspension parts. Shims are about $13 each.
>
>
> There is significant negative camber by specification on the rear so
> tires should be rotated.
>
>
> Changing the rear axle does not fix the problem and the dealer will
> refuse to do further work to fix the problem. It becomes the
> customer's problem.
>
>
> |
4,887 | So I bought new tires recently for my 2002 Nissan Sentra and wanted to make sure that my alignment would not eat them up. Even though effectively my entire suspension/axle system was overhauled recently, some of the specs are still off. Three different shops keep telling me that it's not a huge deal and won't make my tires wear improperly.
This is the report from the last place I went to, other reports show a similar story, though this one shows probably the most "extreme" deviations (though I have a feeling these sensors aren't very accurate)
Should I be worried? I am not sure why the front caster is out by a tad bit, seeing as that is a brand new shock there. The rear though, is not adjustable, it is a solid axle and the print outs all say "Manufacturer does not specify rear Toe/Camber adjustments". I've already had this axle placed with a new Nissan Part. | 2012/12/07 | [
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/questions/4887",
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com",
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/users/2487/"
] | The only thing I see of any real concern here would be the left rear toe - it's off enough to possibly cause some tire wear. However, since it can't be adjusted, your best bet is to just rotate the tires regularly (every other oil change is a good rule of thumb) and keep an eye out for wear. You didn't say which Nissan you're driving, but I'm assuming it's a Sentra/Versa or other smaller model, which means likely you won't see any severe tire wear on the left rear anyways. | both camber and toe can be adjusted using specialty products EZ SHIM JUST USED ONE ON A13 SENTRA CK IT OUT ON U-TUBE |
4,887 | So I bought new tires recently for my 2002 Nissan Sentra and wanted to make sure that my alignment would not eat them up. Even though effectively my entire suspension/axle system was overhauled recently, some of the specs are still off. Three different shops keep telling me that it's not a huge deal and won't make my tires wear improperly.
This is the report from the last place I went to, other reports show a similar story, though this one shows probably the most "extreme" deviations (though I have a feeling these sensors aren't very accurate)
Should I be worried? I am not sure why the front caster is out by a tad bit, seeing as that is a brand new shock there. The rear though, is not adjustable, it is a solid axle and the print outs all say "Manufacturer does not specify rear Toe/Camber adjustments". I've already had this axle placed with a new Nissan Part. | 2012/12/07 | [
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/questions/4887",
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com",
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/users/2487/"
] | The combination of that much camber plus that much toe will cause it to wear more quickly, but there's not much you can do about it without getting extreme in swapping parts. Keep rotating those tires so you don't burn out just the one and don't worry about it too much as I expect it would cost a lot more money to fix than you'll spend in extra tire costs. That's the factory rear toe setting for my RWD car that rides on real sticky performance tires that can't be rotated. I get around 20,000 miles out of them. I expect you'll do a LOT better AND you can rotate them... As far as the caster, that has minimal impact on wear in general, and yours just barely out of spec. | Found an interesting [thread](http://www.allsentra.com/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=6105) at [allsentra.com](http://allsentra.com). Some choice bits from one of the [posts](http://www.allsentra.com/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=6105#p99157):
>
> Many Nissan Sentra rear axles are mismanufactured with a huge toe in.
>
>
> Nissan actively discourages/forbids delearships to put in shims to
> correct the rear alignment.
>
>
> Specific Nissan Sentra calibrated shims can be obtained from rockauto
> or NAPA. Look under suspension parts. Shims are about $13 each.
>
>
> There is significant negative camber by specification on the rear so
> tires should be rotated.
>
>
> Changing the rear axle does not fix the problem and the dealer will
> refuse to do further work to fix the problem. It becomes the
> customer's problem.
>
>
> |
4,887 | So I bought new tires recently for my 2002 Nissan Sentra and wanted to make sure that my alignment would not eat them up. Even though effectively my entire suspension/axle system was overhauled recently, some of the specs are still off. Three different shops keep telling me that it's not a huge deal and won't make my tires wear improperly.
This is the report from the last place I went to, other reports show a similar story, though this one shows probably the most "extreme" deviations (though I have a feeling these sensors aren't very accurate)
Should I be worried? I am not sure why the front caster is out by a tad bit, seeing as that is a brand new shock there. The rear though, is not adjustable, it is a solid axle and the print outs all say "Manufacturer does not specify rear Toe/Camber adjustments". I've already had this axle placed with a new Nissan Part. | 2012/12/07 | [
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/questions/4887",
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com",
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/users/2487/"
] | The combination of that much camber plus that much toe will cause it to wear more quickly, but there's not much you can do about it without getting extreme in swapping parts. Keep rotating those tires so you don't burn out just the one and don't worry about it too much as I expect it would cost a lot more money to fix than you'll spend in extra tire costs. That's the factory rear toe setting for my RWD car that rides on real sticky performance tires that can't be rotated. I get around 20,000 miles out of them. I expect you'll do a LOT better AND you can rotate them... As far as the caster, that has minimal impact on wear in general, and yours just barely out of spec. | both camber and toe can be adjusted using specialty products EZ SHIM JUST USED ONE ON A13 SENTRA CK IT OUT ON U-TUBE |
4,887 | So I bought new tires recently for my 2002 Nissan Sentra and wanted to make sure that my alignment would not eat them up. Even though effectively my entire suspension/axle system was overhauled recently, some of the specs are still off. Three different shops keep telling me that it's not a huge deal and won't make my tires wear improperly.
This is the report from the last place I went to, other reports show a similar story, though this one shows probably the most "extreme" deviations (though I have a feeling these sensors aren't very accurate)
Should I be worried? I am not sure why the front caster is out by a tad bit, seeing as that is a brand new shock there. The rear though, is not adjustable, it is a solid axle and the print outs all say "Manufacturer does not specify rear Toe/Camber adjustments". I've already had this axle placed with a new Nissan Part. | 2012/12/07 | [
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/questions/4887",
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com",
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/users/2487/"
] | Found an interesting [thread](http://www.allsentra.com/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=6105) at [allsentra.com](http://allsentra.com). Some choice bits from one of the [posts](http://www.allsentra.com/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=6105#p99157):
>
> Many Nissan Sentra rear axles are mismanufactured with a huge toe in.
>
>
> Nissan actively discourages/forbids delearships to put in shims to
> correct the rear alignment.
>
>
> Specific Nissan Sentra calibrated shims can be obtained from rockauto
> or NAPA. Look under suspension parts. Shims are about $13 each.
>
>
> There is significant negative camber by specification on the rear so
> tires should be rotated.
>
>
> Changing the rear axle does not fix the problem and the dealer will
> refuse to do further work to fix the problem. It becomes the
> customer's problem.
>
>
> | both camber and toe can be adjusted using specialty products EZ SHIM JUST USED ONE ON A13 SENTRA CK IT OUT ON U-TUBE |
18,776 | I have access to a Linux server with a non-root user. What I need is to run a simple, HTTP server that will not listen to port 80, but to a different port.
I'm looking for the most easiest and quickest solution. Don't need any authentication or whatever.
Would be also nice to run it in a SCREEN.
Linux version is Red Hat 4.1.2-50 | 2011/08/15 | [
"https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/18776",
"https://unix.stackexchange.com",
"https://unix.stackexchange.com/users/7325/"
] | On higher ports you usually don't need any elevated permissions. Give [lighttp](http://www.lighttpd.net/) or [thttpd](http://acme.com/software/thttpd/) a try. Best point to start would be the [FAQ](http://redmine.lighttpd.net/wiki/lighttpd/FrequentlyAskedQuestions), the other Docs are linked from there. If your admin does not have installed any webservers you like, you can [dowload and build the source](http://www.lighttpd.net/download). | \*mini\_httpd\*\* is also a good, small HTTP server. You can configure port in mini\_httpd.conf file.
Check out more here:
[mini\_http homepage](http://www.acme.com/software/mini_httpd/) |
288,400 | My cousin and I were building on a server, and yes it was modded. It corrupted and now I have been able to get the player information into a new save, but the world file itself I also need, and I can't figure out which file that is.
Folders within the save folder:
* data
* DIM1
* DIM-1
* DIM-37
* DIM-38
* DIM-39
* DIM-42
* DIM-100
* DIM-112
* livSandStoneData
* playerdata [Which is the one I used to get the player info]
* region
* stats
Files within the Saves folder:
* forcedchunks.dat
* labyrinth.dat
* labyrinth.dat\_old
* level.dat
* level.cat\_mcr
* level.dat\_old
* session.lockl
* teams\_Mirror.cat
* teams\_Nether.dat
* teams\_Overworld.dat
* teams\_Spirit World.dat
* teams\_The End.dat
* teams\_The Last Millenium.dat
* teams\_The Outer Lands.dat
* teams\_Torment.dat
* teams\_Underdark.dat | 2016/10/17 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/288400",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/169175/"
] | I have a similar problem on my modded MC Server. The problem occurred because I started up the server twice and made /fml confirm (because level.dat was already in use). So the world was corrupted.
I fixed it by removing level.dat and then copied level.dat\_old and renamed to level.dat. So I have reset to the time before I did /fml confirm. Maybe this will help you too. (You also have this level.dat\_old file.) | I have had something similar to that and yes it did corrupt from what it sounds like. Theres no way to fix it you just have to rebuild it |
19,163,496 | It seems Azure does rolling platform updates on an average of every month or so. For HIPPA compliant apps, this may be an issue as changes to security, etc to the underlying infrastructure may entail recertifying the application. I know this is a long shot, but in a PAAS (web/worker roles), can the current platform configuration be frozen? I know in IAAS I have full control, but my thoughts are there is no way to lock the underlying infrastructure, am I correct? Is there any way to coordinate with MS? | 2013/10/03 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/19163496",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/780546/"
] | You can [specify](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windowsazure/ff729422.aspx) a GuestOS for PaaS and avoid patch Tuesday updates. However, since HIPAA is about operational processes I don't think anyone sees a need for Microsoft (or anyone else) to recertify everything following this type of update. | Compliance with HIPPA and HITECH won't be compromised by Microsoft's updates of the Azure platform as long as you have a way to log and capture the changes especially if they update or change the security model or policies. Here is a good lecture on HIPPA and HITECH compliance on the [Amazon Cloud](https://youtu.be/g4XI4IIYVrw) that would also hold true for Azure.
In a nutshell this is what you'll be doing to become HIPPA/HITECH compliant:
* Use the highest standard of security for all VPC system accounts your cloud provider offers (username and password is not enough)
* Encryption for all data while in transit
* Encryption for all data while at rest (encrypt the database)
* Encrypt all logs if they contain PHI (encrypt filesystem if needed)
* Get and use only a list of HIPPA/HITECH approved services from your cloud provider (ie. AWS MySQL is okay, MSSQL was not on the list at the time)
* Be sure that the transport protocol even between the load balancer and the application (inside the VPC) are approved (ie. terminating TCP was okay, named pipes was not - don't ask me why)
* Be sure you are running in a dedicated instance (seems obvious but don't use the VPC for anything else)
* **Log and retain all system updates (to answer your first question if do Azure updates invalidate HIPPA compliance ... not if you log and review them and state it in your ISO policy)**
* Log and retain all application access (when a user logs in)
* Log and retain all system access (when you and team update the app or settings)
* adopt an [ISO standard](http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=66240) when you develop your log retention standards and quality and process improvement. This will take the form of a few 'thou shall' mandates; for example thou shall keep all system logs for 365 days, thou shall encrypt and compress and archive logs older then 365 days, thou shall audit user access logs for intrusion detection every 30 days, thou shall audit all system access logs for intrusion detection every 30 days.
* Make sure your employees are aware that there is an ISO policy and where to find it. Believe it or not, this is part of most ISO policies that employees know there is an ISO policy in place and where to find it. |
37,092 | When Ryan Reynolds starred in *Green Lantern* (2011), I recall seeing jokes based on the fact that he'd recently appeared in another comic-book adaptation, *X-Men Origins: Wolverine* (2009). Even before that, *Scott Pilgrim vs. the World* (2010) included performances by several former superheroes, including Chris Evans, Brandon Routh, and Thomas Jane.
This got me wondering: Which actor has the most distinct roles in comic-book movies?
---
Clarification: By “distinct roles,” I mean the most characters, *not* the most movies. For example, Hugh Jackman has starred in six comic-book movies, but he has only played one character (Wolverine), whereas Chris Evans has played at least five (Human Torch, Casey Jones, Lucas Lee, Cpt. Jake Jensen, and Captain America). | 2013/06/19 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/37092",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/15065/"
] | Josh Brolin has 5 that I count:
2010 Jonah Hex Jonah Hex
2012 Men in Black 3 Young Agent K
2014 Guardians of the Galaxy Thanos (Uncredited cameo)
2015 Avengers: Age of Ultron Thanos, 2018 Avengers: Infinity War Thanos
2014 Sin City: A Dame to Kill For Dwight McCarthy
and now
**2018 Deadpool 2 Nathan Summers / Cable**
6 if you count:
* 2013 Oldboy Joe Doucett | That would be Josh Brolin. He was Dwight in Sin City 2, Jonah Hex, Young Agent K, Joe Doucett in OldBoy remake and Thanos. After him, Ryan Reynolds and Chris Evans. And I'd mention Ben Affleck as the only guy who played both Batman and Superman. |
37,092 | When Ryan Reynolds starred in *Green Lantern* (2011), I recall seeing jokes based on the fact that he'd recently appeared in another comic-book adaptation, *X-Men Origins: Wolverine* (2009). Even before that, *Scott Pilgrim vs. the World* (2010) included performances by several former superheroes, including Chris Evans, Brandon Routh, and Thomas Jane.
This got me wondering: Which actor has the most distinct roles in comic-book movies?
---
Clarification: By “distinct roles,” I mean the most characters, *not* the most movies. For example, Hugh Jackman has starred in six comic-book movies, but he has only played one character (Wolverine), whereas Chris Evans has played at least five (Human Torch, Casey Jones, Lucas Lee, Cpt. Jake Jensen, and Captain America). | 2013/06/19 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/37092",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/15065/"
] | Old mate Brucey
===============
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/36bev.jpg)
[img src](http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000246/mediaviewer/rm2221768704?ref_=nm_ov_ph)
With a total of **7** comic-based roles, another honourable mention is **[Bruce Willis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Willis)** for his roles in:
* [***Red***](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_(2010_film))
+ Based on the comic book series [*Red*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_(WildStorm))
* [***G.I. Joe: Retaliation***](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.I._Joe:_Retaliation)
+ Although it's based on the toy franchise, it borrows heavily and is inspired by the comic franchise of the same name
* [***Hammy's Boomerang Adventure***](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammy%27s_Boomerang_Adventure)
+ Based on the movie [*Over The Hedge*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Over_the_Hedge_(film)) - which was, you guessed it, based on a comic strip of the same name
* [***Surrogates***](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrogates)
+ Based on the comic book series [The Surrogates](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Surrogates)
* [***Sin City***](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin_City_(film))
+ Based on our mate Frank Miller's [*Sin City*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin_City) comics
* [***The Fifth Element***](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fifth_Element)
+ Parts of which were inspired by a comic:
>
> Comics writers Jean "Moebius" Giraud and Jean-Claude Mézières, whose comics provided inspiration for parts of the film, were hired for production design.
>
>
>
* Sort-of [***Unbreakable***](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unbreakable_(film))
+ Since the screenplay was written to match that of a comic book
>
> Shyamalan organized the narrative of Unbreakable to parallel a comic book's traditional three-part story structure.
>
>
>
+ Also, you can't deny that this movie is *very* comic-book based, even if it's not necessarily based on any single comic.
Also if you want to go the other way, [Die Hard](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Hard) (which has spawned its own comic series). | It looks like everybody forgets about **Idris Elba**.
1. **Heimdall** - *Thor*, *Avengers*, *Avengers: Age of Ultron*, *Thor: Dark World*, *Thor: Ragnarok*
2. **Stacker Pentecost** - *Pasific Rim*
3. **Moreau** - *Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance*
4. **Roque** - *The Losers*
5. **Janek** - *Prometheus*
6. **Vaughan Rice** - *Ultraviolet* (TV Mini-Series) |
37,092 | When Ryan Reynolds starred in *Green Lantern* (2011), I recall seeing jokes based on the fact that he'd recently appeared in another comic-book adaptation, *X-Men Origins: Wolverine* (2009). Even before that, *Scott Pilgrim vs. the World* (2010) included performances by several former superheroes, including Chris Evans, Brandon Routh, and Thomas Jane.
This got me wondering: Which actor has the most distinct roles in comic-book movies?
---
Clarification: By “distinct roles,” I mean the most characters, *not* the most movies. For example, Hugh Jackman has starred in six comic-book movies, but he has only played one character (Wolverine), whereas Chris Evans has played at least five (Human Torch, Casey Jones, Lucas Lee, Cpt. Jake Jensen, and Captain America). | 2013/06/19 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/37092",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/15065/"
] | Another honorable mention for [Rosario Dawson](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosario_Dawson):
1 - Josie and the Pussycats
2 - Men in Black 2
3 - Sin City
4-6 - Wonder Woman (voice plus two other Justice League movies
7 - Sin City: A Dame to Kill For
8 - Daredevil
9 - Jessica Jones
10 - Luke Cage
11 - LEGO Batman | If you are going off of count then Chris Evans beats Hugh Jackman(as well), because if you add up all the comic book movies he has been in then the total is actually 9(10 if you count his cameo in *Thor 2: Dark World*) which beats Jackman at only 7. |
37,092 | When Ryan Reynolds starred in *Green Lantern* (2011), I recall seeing jokes based on the fact that he'd recently appeared in another comic-book adaptation, *X-Men Origins: Wolverine* (2009). Even before that, *Scott Pilgrim vs. the World* (2010) included performances by several former superheroes, including Chris Evans, Brandon Routh, and Thomas Jane.
This got me wondering: Which actor has the most distinct roles in comic-book movies?
---
Clarification: By “distinct roles,” I mean the most characters, *not* the most movies. For example, Hugh Jackman has starred in six comic-book movies, but he has only played one character (Wolverine), whereas Chris Evans has played at least five (Human Torch, Casey Jones, Lucas Lee, Cpt. Jake Jensen, and Captain America). | 2013/06/19 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/37092",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/15065/"
] | You want an actor... or someone who has been in the largest amount of comic movies?
For a person... Stan Lee.
>
> In X-Men (2000), Lee appears as a hotdog stand vendor on the beach when Senator Kelly emerges naked onshore after escaping from Magneto.
>
>
> In Spider-Man (2002), he appeared during Spider-Man's first battle with the Green Goblin, pulling a little girl away from falling debris. In the DVD's deleted scenes, Lee plays a street vendor who tries to sell Peter Parker a pair of sunglasses "just like the X-Men wear."
>
>
> In Daredevil (2003), as a child, Matt Murdock stops Lee from crossing the street and getting hit by a bus.
>
>
> In Hulk (2003), he appears walking alongside former TV-series Hulk Lou Ferrigno in an early scene, both as security guards at Bruce Banner's lab. It was his first speaking role in a film based on one of his characters.
>
>
> In Spider-Man 2 (2004), Lee pulls an innocent person away from danger during Spider-Man's first battle with Doctor Octopus. In a deleted scene that appears as an extra on the film's DVD release, Lee has another cameo, saying, "Look, Spider-Man stole that child's sneakers."
>
>
> In Fantastic Four (2005), Lee appears for the first time as a character that he created for the comics, Willie Lumpkin, the mail carrier who greets the Fantastic Four as they enter the Baxter Building.
>
>
> In X-Men: The Last Stand (2006), Lee and Chris Claremont appear as two of Jean Grey's neighbors in the opening scenes set 20 years ago. Lee, credited as "Waterhose man," is watering the lawn when Jean telekinetically redirects the water from the hose into the air.
>
>
> In Spider-Man 3 (2007), Lee appears in a credited role as "Man in Times Square". He stands next to Peter Parker, both of them reading a news bulletin about Spider-Man, and commenting to Peter that, "You know, I guess one person can make a difference". He then says his catch phrase, "'Nuff said."
>
>
> In Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer (2007), Lee appears as himself at Reed Richards' and Susan Storm's first wedding, being turned away by a security guard for not being on the guest list. (In Fantastic Four Annual No.3 (1965), in which the couple married, Lee and Jack Kirby are similarly turned away.)
>
>
> In Iron Man (2008), Lee (credited as "Himself") appears at a gala cavorting with three blonds, where Tony Stark mistakes him for Hugh Hefner. In the theatrical release of the film, Stark simply greets Lee as "Hef" and moves on; another version of the scene was filmed where Stark realizes his mistake, but Lee graciously responds, "That's okay, I get this all the time."
>
>
> In The Incredible Hulk (2008), Lee appears as a hapless citizen who accidentally ingests a soft drink mixed with Bruce Banner's blood, leading to the discovery of Dr. Banner's location in a bottling plant in Brazil.
>
>
> In Iron Man 2 (2010), during the Stark Expo, Lee, wearing suspenders and a red shirt and black and purple tie, is greeted by Tony Stark as "Larry King".
>
>
> In Thor (2011), Lee appears among many people at the site where Thor's hammer Mjolnir lands on earth. He tears the bed off his pickup truck in an attempt to pull Mjolnir out of the ground with a chain and causes everyone to laugh by asking, "Did it work?".
>
>
> In Captain America: The First Avenger (2011), this time portraying a general in World War II, who mistakes another man for Captain America/Steve Rogers, commenting, "I thought he'd be taller."
>
>
> In The Avengers (2012), Lee makes a cameo appearance as a random citizen in the park asked about the Avengers saving Manhattan. Lee's character responds, "Superheroes in New York? Give me a break", and then returns to his game of chess. He also appears in a deleted scene, apparently as the same character: when a waitress flirts with Steve Rogers, he says to him, "Ask for her number, you moron!"
>
>
> In The Amazing Spider-Man (2012), Lee makes a cameo as a librarian at Midtown Science High School, oblivious to the fight between Spider-Man and the Lizard happening behind him.
>
>
> In Iron Man 3 (2013), Lee makes a cameo as a beauty pageant judge on TV.
>
>
>
In Big Hero 6(2014) Lee makes his first animated appearance as Fred's dad in the family portrait when they first enter his home. Later in an added scene after the credits he surprises Fred at the home and tells him holding a pair of undies; "Fred.Son. I wear them front, I wear them back.I wear then inside out.And then I go front and back.""We have a lot to talk about."
Also...
>
> Mallrats (1995), Lee appears as himself.
>
>
>
Shamelessly researched via Wikipedia | That would be Josh Brolin. He was Dwight in Sin City 2, Jonah Hex, Young Agent K, Joe Doucett in OldBoy remake and Thanos. After him, Ryan Reynolds and Chris Evans. And I'd mention Ben Affleck as the only guy who played both Batman and Superman. |
37,092 | When Ryan Reynolds starred in *Green Lantern* (2011), I recall seeing jokes based on the fact that he'd recently appeared in another comic-book adaptation, *X-Men Origins: Wolverine* (2009). Even before that, *Scott Pilgrim vs. the World* (2010) included performances by several former superheroes, including Chris Evans, Brandon Routh, and Thomas Jane.
This got me wondering: Which actor has the most distinct roles in comic-book movies?
---
Clarification: By “distinct roles,” I mean the most characters, *not* the most movies. For example, Hugh Jackman has starred in six comic-book movies, but he has only played one character (Wolverine), whereas Chris Evans has played at least five (Human Torch, Casey Jones, Lucas Lee, Cpt. Jake Jensen, and Captain America). | 2013/06/19 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/37092",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/15065/"
] | [Chris Evans](https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0262635/) has played seven comic-book characters in movies:
* Johnny Storm/Human Torch in *Fantastic Four* (2005) and *Rise of the Silver Surfer* (2007).
* Casey Jones in *TMNT* (2007).
* Cpt. Jake Jensen in *The Losers* (2010).
* Lucas Lee in *Scott Pilgrim vs. the World* (2010).
* Steve Rogers/Captain America in *The First Avenger* (2011), *The Avengers* (2012), *The Winter Soldier* (2014), and *Civil War* (2016).
* Loki (disguised as Cap) in *Thor: The Dark World* (2013).
* Curtis in *Snowpiercer* (2013). | If you are going off of count then Chris Evans beats Hugh Jackman(as well), because if you add up all the comic book movies he has been in then the total is actually 9(10 if you count his cameo in *Thor 2: Dark World*) which beats Jackman at only 7. |
37,092 | When Ryan Reynolds starred in *Green Lantern* (2011), I recall seeing jokes based on the fact that he'd recently appeared in another comic-book adaptation, *X-Men Origins: Wolverine* (2009). Even before that, *Scott Pilgrim vs. the World* (2010) included performances by several former superheroes, including Chris Evans, Brandon Routh, and Thomas Jane.
This got me wondering: Which actor has the most distinct roles in comic-book movies?
---
Clarification: By “distinct roles,” I mean the most characters, *not* the most movies. For example, Hugh Jackman has starred in six comic-book movies, but he has only played one character (Wolverine), whereas Chris Evans has played at least five (Human Torch, Casey Jones, Lucas Lee, Cpt. Jake Jensen, and Captain America). | 2013/06/19 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/37092",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/15065/"
] | Old mate Brucey
===============
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/36bev.jpg)
[img src](http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000246/mediaviewer/rm2221768704?ref_=nm_ov_ph)
With a total of **7** comic-based roles, another honourable mention is **[Bruce Willis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Willis)** for his roles in:
* [***Red***](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_(2010_film))
+ Based on the comic book series [*Red*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_(WildStorm))
* [***G.I. Joe: Retaliation***](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.I._Joe:_Retaliation)
+ Although it's based on the toy franchise, it borrows heavily and is inspired by the comic franchise of the same name
* [***Hammy's Boomerang Adventure***](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammy%27s_Boomerang_Adventure)
+ Based on the movie [*Over The Hedge*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Over_the_Hedge_(film)) - which was, you guessed it, based on a comic strip of the same name
* [***Surrogates***](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrogates)
+ Based on the comic book series [The Surrogates](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Surrogates)
* [***Sin City***](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin_City_(film))
+ Based on our mate Frank Miller's [*Sin City*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin_City) comics
* [***The Fifth Element***](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fifth_Element)
+ Parts of which were inspired by a comic:
>
> Comics writers Jean "Moebius" Giraud and Jean-Claude Mézières, whose comics provided inspiration for parts of the film, were hired for production design.
>
>
>
* Sort-of [***Unbreakable***](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unbreakable_(film))
+ Since the screenplay was written to match that of a comic book
>
> Shyamalan organized the narrative of Unbreakable to parallel a comic book's traditional three-part story structure.
>
>
>
+ Also, you can't deny that this movie is *very* comic-book based, even if it's not necessarily based on any single comic.
Also if you want to go the other way, [Die Hard](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Hard) (which has spawned its own comic series). | Jeffrey Dean Morgan (5):
* The Comedian in *Watchmen*
* Negan in *The Walking Dead*
* Thomas Wayne in *Batman v Superman*
* Clay in *The Losers*
* JEB Turnbull in *Jonah Hex* |
37,092 | When Ryan Reynolds starred in *Green Lantern* (2011), I recall seeing jokes based on the fact that he'd recently appeared in another comic-book adaptation, *X-Men Origins: Wolverine* (2009). Even before that, *Scott Pilgrim vs. the World* (2010) included performances by several former superheroes, including Chris Evans, Brandon Routh, and Thomas Jane.
This got me wondering: Which actor has the most distinct roles in comic-book movies?
---
Clarification: By “distinct roles,” I mean the most characters, *not* the most movies. For example, Hugh Jackman has starred in six comic-book movies, but he has only played one character (Wolverine), whereas Chris Evans has played at least five (Human Torch, Casey Jones, Lucas Lee, Cpt. Jake Jensen, and Captain America). | 2013/06/19 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/37092",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/15065/"
] | It looks like everybody forgets about **Idris Elba**.
1. **Heimdall** - *Thor*, *Avengers*, *Avengers: Age of Ultron*, *Thor: Dark World*, *Thor: Ragnarok*
2. **Stacker Pentecost** - *Pasific Rim*
3. **Moreau** - *Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance*
4. **Roque** - *The Losers*
5. **Janek** - *Prometheus*
6. **Vaughan Rice** - *Ultraviolet* (TV Mini-Series) | Jeffrey Dean Morgan (5):
* The Comedian in *Watchmen*
* Negan in *The Walking Dead*
* Thomas Wayne in *Batman v Superman*
* Clay in *The Losers*
* JEB Turnbull in *Jonah Hex* |
37,092 | When Ryan Reynolds starred in *Green Lantern* (2011), I recall seeing jokes based on the fact that he'd recently appeared in another comic-book adaptation, *X-Men Origins: Wolverine* (2009). Even before that, *Scott Pilgrim vs. the World* (2010) included performances by several former superheroes, including Chris Evans, Brandon Routh, and Thomas Jane.
This got me wondering: Which actor has the most distinct roles in comic-book movies?
---
Clarification: By “distinct roles,” I mean the most characters, *not* the most movies. For example, Hugh Jackman has starred in six comic-book movies, but he has only played one character (Wolverine), whereas Chris Evans has played at least five (Human Torch, Casey Jones, Lucas Lee, Cpt. Jake Jensen, and Captain America). | 2013/06/19 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/37092",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/15065/"
] | It looks like everybody forgets about **Idris Elba**.
1. **Heimdall** - *Thor*, *Avengers*, *Avengers: Age of Ultron*, *Thor: Dark World*, *Thor: Ragnarok*
2. **Stacker Pentecost** - *Pasific Rim*
3. **Moreau** - *Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance*
4. **Roque** - *The Losers*
5. **Janek** - *Prometheus*
6. **Vaughan Rice** - *Ultraviolet* (TV Mini-Series) | Josh Brolin has 5 that I count:
2010 Jonah Hex Jonah Hex
2012 Men in Black 3 Young Agent K
2014 Guardians of the Galaxy Thanos (Uncredited cameo)
2015 Avengers: Age of Ultron Thanos, 2018 Avengers: Infinity War Thanos
2014 Sin City: A Dame to Kill For Dwight McCarthy
and now
**2018 Deadpool 2 Nathan Summers / Cable**
6 if you count:
* 2013 Oldboy Joe Doucett |
37,092 | When Ryan Reynolds starred in *Green Lantern* (2011), I recall seeing jokes based on the fact that he'd recently appeared in another comic-book adaptation, *X-Men Origins: Wolverine* (2009). Even before that, *Scott Pilgrim vs. the World* (2010) included performances by several former superheroes, including Chris Evans, Brandon Routh, and Thomas Jane.
This got me wondering: Which actor has the most distinct roles in comic-book movies?
---
Clarification: By “distinct roles,” I mean the most characters, *not* the most movies. For example, Hugh Jackman has starred in six comic-book movies, but he has only played one character (Wolverine), whereas Chris Evans has played at least five (Human Torch, Casey Jones, Lucas Lee, Cpt. Jake Jensen, and Captain America). | 2013/06/19 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/37092",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/15065/"
] | You want an actor... or someone who has been in the largest amount of comic movies?
For a person... Stan Lee.
>
> In X-Men (2000), Lee appears as a hotdog stand vendor on the beach when Senator Kelly emerges naked onshore after escaping from Magneto.
>
>
> In Spider-Man (2002), he appeared during Spider-Man's first battle with the Green Goblin, pulling a little girl away from falling debris. In the DVD's deleted scenes, Lee plays a street vendor who tries to sell Peter Parker a pair of sunglasses "just like the X-Men wear."
>
>
> In Daredevil (2003), as a child, Matt Murdock stops Lee from crossing the street and getting hit by a bus.
>
>
> In Hulk (2003), he appears walking alongside former TV-series Hulk Lou Ferrigno in an early scene, both as security guards at Bruce Banner's lab. It was his first speaking role in a film based on one of his characters.
>
>
> In Spider-Man 2 (2004), Lee pulls an innocent person away from danger during Spider-Man's first battle with Doctor Octopus. In a deleted scene that appears as an extra on the film's DVD release, Lee has another cameo, saying, "Look, Spider-Man stole that child's sneakers."
>
>
> In Fantastic Four (2005), Lee appears for the first time as a character that he created for the comics, Willie Lumpkin, the mail carrier who greets the Fantastic Four as they enter the Baxter Building.
>
>
> In X-Men: The Last Stand (2006), Lee and Chris Claremont appear as two of Jean Grey's neighbors in the opening scenes set 20 years ago. Lee, credited as "Waterhose man," is watering the lawn when Jean telekinetically redirects the water from the hose into the air.
>
>
> In Spider-Man 3 (2007), Lee appears in a credited role as "Man in Times Square". He stands next to Peter Parker, both of them reading a news bulletin about Spider-Man, and commenting to Peter that, "You know, I guess one person can make a difference". He then says his catch phrase, "'Nuff said."
>
>
> In Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer (2007), Lee appears as himself at Reed Richards' and Susan Storm's first wedding, being turned away by a security guard for not being on the guest list. (In Fantastic Four Annual No.3 (1965), in which the couple married, Lee and Jack Kirby are similarly turned away.)
>
>
> In Iron Man (2008), Lee (credited as "Himself") appears at a gala cavorting with three blonds, where Tony Stark mistakes him for Hugh Hefner. In the theatrical release of the film, Stark simply greets Lee as "Hef" and moves on; another version of the scene was filmed where Stark realizes his mistake, but Lee graciously responds, "That's okay, I get this all the time."
>
>
> In The Incredible Hulk (2008), Lee appears as a hapless citizen who accidentally ingests a soft drink mixed with Bruce Banner's blood, leading to the discovery of Dr. Banner's location in a bottling plant in Brazil.
>
>
> In Iron Man 2 (2010), during the Stark Expo, Lee, wearing suspenders and a red shirt and black and purple tie, is greeted by Tony Stark as "Larry King".
>
>
> In Thor (2011), Lee appears among many people at the site where Thor's hammer Mjolnir lands on earth. He tears the bed off his pickup truck in an attempt to pull Mjolnir out of the ground with a chain and causes everyone to laugh by asking, "Did it work?".
>
>
> In Captain America: The First Avenger (2011), this time portraying a general in World War II, who mistakes another man for Captain America/Steve Rogers, commenting, "I thought he'd be taller."
>
>
> In The Avengers (2012), Lee makes a cameo appearance as a random citizen in the park asked about the Avengers saving Manhattan. Lee's character responds, "Superheroes in New York? Give me a break", and then returns to his game of chess. He also appears in a deleted scene, apparently as the same character: when a waitress flirts with Steve Rogers, he says to him, "Ask for her number, you moron!"
>
>
> In The Amazing Spider-Man (2012), Lee makes a cameo as a librarian at Midtown Science High School, oblivious to the fight between Spider-Man and the Lizard happening behind him.
>
>
> In Iron Man 3 (2013), Lee makes a cameo as a beauty pageant judge on TV.
>
>
>
In Big Hero 6(2014) Lee makes his first animated appearance as Fred's dad in the family portrait when they first enter his home. Later in an added scene after the credits he surprises Fred at the home and tells him holding a pair of undies; "Fred.Son. I wear them front, I wear them back.I wear then inside out.And then I go front and back.""We have a lot to talk about."
Also...
>
> Mallrats (1995), Lee appears as himself.
>
>
>
Shamelessly researched via Wikipedia | Tommy Lee Jones throws his hat in ring with 5
---------------------------------------------
Two-Face in Batman Returns
MIB, MIB2, MIB3
Col. Philips in Captain America: The First Avenger
Plus he reprised Agent K in Will Smith’s 1997 MIB video and Pitbull’s 2013 Back in Time video for MIB3 |
37,092 | When Ryan Reynolds starred in *Green Lantern* (2011), I recall seeing jokes based on the fact that he'd recently appeared in another comic-book adaptation, *X-Men Origins: Wolverine* (2009). Even before that, *Scott Pilgrim vs. the World* (2010) included performances by several former superheroes, including Chris Evans, Brandon Routh, and Thomas Jane.
This got me wondering: Which actor has the most distinct roles in comic-book movies?
---
Clarification: By “distinct roles,” I mean the most characters, *not* the most movies. For example, Hugh Jackman has starred in six comic-book movies, but he has only played one character (Wolverine), whereas Chris Evans has played at least five (Human Torch, Casey Jones, Lucas Lee, Cpt. Jake Jensen, and Captain America). | 2013/06/19 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/37092",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/15065/"
] | Ryan Reynolds, Josh Brolin, and Chris Evans each have 5 separate, live-action comic-book movie characters:
* **Ryan Reynolds:**
+ Seth (Sabrina, the Teenage Witch);
+ Hannibal King (Blade: Trinity);
+ Weapon XI/Wade Wilson (X-Men Origins: Wolverine);
+ GL (Green Lantern);
+ Nick Walker (R.I.P.D.);
+ You might be able to count Deadpool separate from Weapon XI cause the two characters are portrayed completely differently.
* **Josh Brolin:**
+ Jonah Hex (Jonah Hex);
+ Young Agent K (Men in Black III);
+ Joe Doucett (Old Boy);
+ Thanos (MCU);
+ Dwight (Sin City 2).
* **Chris Evans:**
+ Human Torch (Fantastic Four);
+ Jake Jensen (The Losers);
+ Lucas Lee (Scott Pilgrim vs. the World);
+ Captain America (MCU);
+ Curtis Everett (Snowpiercer);
+ Chris Evans also portrayed Casey Jones in the animated TMNT movie. | If you are going off of count then Chris Evans beats Hugh Jackman(as well), because if you add up all the comic book movies he has been in then the total is actually 9(10 if you count his cameo in *Thor 2: Dark World*) which beats Jackman at only 7. |
12,709 | Are there any books that present theorems as problems? To be more specific, a book on elementary group theory might have written: "Theorem: Each group has exactly one identity" and then show a proof or leave it as an exercise. The type of book that I am imagining would have written "Problem: How many unit elements can a group have?" and similarly for all other theorems. | 2010/01/23 | [
"https://mathoverflow.net/questions/12709",
"https://mathoverflow.net",
"https://mathoverflow.net/users/3475/"
] | Joe Roberts, Elementary Number Theory, A Problem Oriented Approach. The 1st half of the book is all problems, the 2nd half is the solutions. This book is unusual for another reason; it's done entirely in calligraphy. | [Théorie des groupes](http://www.dunod.com/sciences-techniques/sciences-fondamentales/mathematiques/master-et-doctorat-capes-agreg/theorie-des-groupes "Théorie des groupes") is an undergraduate book in Group Theory answering the question... Unfortunally (or fortunatelly depending on who you are) written in French. A very good book on the topic, including many examples of groups,Sylow theorems, nilpotent groups... |
12,709 | Are there any books that present theorems as problems? To be more specific, a book on elementary group theory might have written: "Theorem: Each group has exactly one identity" and then show a proof or leave it as an exercise. The type of book that I am imagining would have written "Problem: How many unit elements can a group have?" and similarly for all other theorems. | 2010/01/23 | [
"https://mathoverflow.net/questions/12709",
"https://mathoverflow.net",
"https://mathoverflow.net/users/3475/"
] | "*Elements of the Theory of Representations*" by A. Kirillov. This is a concise introduction to the representation theory of both finite and Lie groups. It contains necessary background from other fields, e.g. analysis on manifolds. Many theorems are formulated as problems, often with hints. Originally the book was written in Russian, but there is also English translation published by Springer-Verlag in 1976. | I would like to mention about Serge Lang's Algebra. Many of the "standard" results/theorems appear as exercises: one particular example is the construction and properties of Witt ring as exercises in chapter XV; of course, there is "that famous" homological algebra problem too. |
12,709 | Are there any books that present theorems as problems? To be more specific, a book on elementary group theory might have written: "Theorem: Each group has exactly one identity" and then show a proof or leave it as an exercise. The type of book that I am imagining would have written "Problem: How many unit elements can a group have?" and similarly for all other theorems. | 2010/01/23 | [
"https://mathoverflow.net/questions/12709",
"https://mathoverflow.net",
"https://mathoverflow.net/users/3475/"
] | Some classical books that would probably fit the bill:
*Problems and Theorems in Analysis* by Polya and Szego
[*A Hilbert Space Problem Book*](http://books.google.com/books?id=S57XLkgbf0oC) by Halmos | There are several introductory problem texts by R.P. Burns:
* [Numbers and Functions: Steps To Analysis](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0521788366)
* [Groups: A Path to Geometry](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0521347939)
* [A Pathway into Number Theory](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0521575400)
A nice introduction (highly recommended!) to abstract algebra which is almost entirely presented in problem format is the following by Clark:
* [Elements of Abstract Algebra](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0486647250)
I recently found the following books (which I have no experience with):
* [Lie Groups: A Problem Oriented Introduction via Matrix Groups](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0883857596)
* [Algebraic Geometry: A Problem Solving Approach](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0821893963)
* [Complex Analysis Through Examples and Exercises](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0792357876) |
12,709 | Are there any books that present theorems as problems? To be more specific, a book on elementary group theory might have written: "Theorem: Each group has exactly one identity" and then show a proof or leave it as an exercise. The type of book that I am imagining would have written "Problem: How many unit elements can a group have?" and similarly for all other theorems. | 2010/01/23 | [
"https://mathoverflow.net/questions/12709",
"https://mathoverflow.net",
"https://mathoverflow.net/users/3475/"
] | Ian Adamson has 2 really nice books pitched at the upper level undergraduate/graduate level: *A General Topology Workbook* and *A Set Theory Workbook*. Set Theory and point set topology can mostly be developed directly from the definitions,so these are nice subjects to present in this manner,particularly to students just learning how to do rigorous proofs. Best of all,both books come with complete solutions in the back. | See these two good books :
*Combinatorics : a problem oriented approach* - Daniel A. Marcus
*Graph Theory : a problem oriented approach* - Daniel A. Marcus
The first one was **recommended for self-study by an AMS article** :
>
> Marcus’s *elementary Combinatorics: A Problem Oriented Approach* is
> appropriate for self- study; more advanced is Lovász’s *Combinatorial
> Problems and Exercises*.
>
>
>
See also :
* [The mathematics autodidact's aid.](http://www.ams.org/notices/200510/comm-fowler.pdf) (AMS) |
12,709 | Are there any books that present theorems as problems? To be more specific, a book on elementary group theory might have written: "Theorem: Each group has exactly one identity" and then show a proof or leave it as an exercise. The type of book that I am imagining would have written "Problem: How many unit elements can a group have?" and similarly for all other theorems. | 2010/01/23 | [
"https://mathoverflow.net/questions/12709",
"https://mathoverflow.net",
"https://mathoverflow.net/users/3475/"
] | *Fifty challenging problems in probability with solutions* by Frederick Mosteller. It deserves to be better known than it is. Some things I like about it:
1. It is elementary enough to be readable by high school students, but it introduces some serious ideas of probability.
2. It is entertaining!
3. It sells for $6.95. | See these two good books :
*Combinatorics : a problem oriented approach* - Daniel A. Marcus
*Graph Theory : a problem oriented approach* - Daniel A. Marcus
The first one was **recommended for self-study by an AMS article** :
>
> Marcus’s *elementary Combinatorics: A Problem Oriented Approach* is
> appropriate for self- study; more advanced is Lovász’s *Combinatorial
> Problems and Exercises*.
>
>
>
See also :
* [The mathematics autodidact's aid.](http://www.ams.org/notices/200510/comm-fowler.pdf) (AMS) |
12,709 | Are there any books that present theorems as problems? To be more specific, a book on elementary group theory might have written: "Theorem: Each group has exactly one identity" and then show a proof or leave it as an exercise. The type of book that I am imagining would have written "Problem: How many unit elements can a group have?" and similarly for all other theorems. | 2010/01/23 | [
"https://mathoverflow.net/questions/12709",
"https://mathoverflow.net",
"https://mathoverflow.net/users/3475/"
] | Lovasz's "Combinatorial Problems and Exercises" is a really good example. | See these two good books :
*Combinatorics : a problem oriented approach* - Daniel A. Marcus
*Graph Theory : a problem oriented approach* - Daniel A. Marcus
The first one was **recommended for self-study by an AMS article** :
>
> Marcus’s *elementary Combinatorics: A Problem Oriented Approach* is
> appropriate for self- study; more advanced is Lovász’s *Combinatorial
> Problems and Exercises*.
>
>
>
See also :
* [The mathematics autodidact's aid.](http://www.ams.org/notices/200510/comm-fowler.pdf) (AMS) |
12,709 | Are there any books that present theorems as problems? To be more specific, a book on elementary group theory might have written: "Theorem: Each group has exactly one identity" and then show a proof or leave it as an exercise. The type of book that I am imagining would have written "Problem: How many unit elements can a group have?" and similarly for all other theorems. | 2010/01/23 | [
"https://mathoverflow.net/questions/12709",
"https://mathoverflow.net",
"https://mathoverflow.net/users/3475/"
] | Onishchik and Vinberg's "Lie Groups and Algebraic Groups" (the translation, which is what I read, appeared in Springer's "Series in Soviet Mathematics") is ALL problems, and is very nice. Sadly, it is also out of print. | Convex Figures
I.M. Yaglom and V.G. Boltyanskii
Holt, Rinehart and Winston, NY, 1961
The first half of this book has definitions and results related to convexity to be proved by the reader and the solutions to these problems (theorems) is given in the second half of the book.
The topics treated include Helly's Theorem, isoperimetric results, Minkowski addition of sets and curves of constant width.
All of this material is clearly and well handled. |
12,709 | Are there any books that present theorems as problems? To be more specific, a book on elementary group theory might have written: "Theorem: Each group has exactly one identity" and then show a proof or leave it as an exercise. The type of book that I am imagining would have written "Problem: How many unit elements can a group have?" and similarly for all other theorems. | 2010/01/23 | [
"https://mathoverflow.net/questions/12709",
"https://mathoverflow.net",
"https://mathoverflow.net/users/3475/"
] | *Fifty challenging problems in probability with solutions* by Frederick Mosteller. It deserves to be better known than it is. Some things I like about it:
1. It is elementary enough to be readable by high school students, but it introduces some serious ideas of probability.
2. It is entertaining!
3. It sells for $6.95. | Pinter's ***A Book of Abstract Algebra*** is half problems, half text. Many important topics are covered as problems. For example, direct products of groups are introduced and their properties developed in a set of problems. Cauchy's Theorem and Sylow's Theorem are introduced as problems. I taught myself a good deal of abstract algebra from this book one summer. The high proportion of problems to exposition kept me stimulated, and his decomposition of proofs of theorems into bite-sized problem chunks was a confidence booster. I remember this book with great affection. |
12,709 | Are there any books that present theorems as problems? To be more specific, a book on elementary group theory might have written: "Theorem: Each group has exactly one identity" and then show a proof or leave it as an exercise. The type of book that I am imagining would have written "Problem: How many unit elements can a group have?" and similarly for all other theorems. | 2010/01/23 | [
"https://mathoverflow.net/questions/12709",
"https://mathoverflow.net",
"https://mathoverflow.net/users/3475/"
] | *Modern Classical Homotopy Theory* by Jeffrey Strom. | Not exactly a book, but my web page displays a [list of exercises](http://www.umpa.ens-lyon.fr/~serre/DPF/exobis.pdf) in Matrix theory. Among the 440 exercises, about a half can be viewed as proving theorems. |
12,709 | Are there any books that present theorems as problems? To be more specific, a book on elementary group theory might have written: "Theorem: Each group has exactly one identity" and then show a proof or leave it as an exercise. The type of book that I am imagining would have written "Problem: How many unit elements can a group have?" and similarly for all other theorems. | 2010/01/23 | [
"https://mathoverflow.net/questions/12709",
"https://mathoverflow.net",
"https://mathoverflow.net/users/3475/"
] | A number of books by Russian authors (cf. the one by Viro et al. from the Anton's answer) also come close to what you ask for. The two that came to my mind first are:
[Theorems and problems in functional analysis](http://books.google.com/books?id=XAApQAAACAAJ) by Kirillov and Gvishiani
[Abel's theorem in problems and solutions](http://books.google.com/books?id=GI_SmiYsh0UC) by Alekseev (based on [Arnol'd](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Arnold)'s lectures) | Learning mathematics by solving problems is part of the french tradition. You will find many problems in Bourbaki or Dieudonne's Elements d'Analyse. At a more elementary level there are several problems covering a large amount of material at the end of Colmez's Elements d'analyse et d'algebre (et de theorie des nombres). |
185,229 | >
> [Cardinal number](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_number_(linguistics))
>
>
> In linguistics, more precisely in traditional grammar, a cardinal number or cardinal numeral (or just cardinal) is a part of speech used to count, such as the English words one, two, three, but also compounds like three hundred and forty-two
>
>
>
>
> [cardinal (adj.)](http://etymonline.com/index.php?term=cardinal)
>
>
> "chief, pivotal," early 14c., from Latin cardinalis "principal, chief, essential," from cardo (genitive cardinis) "that on which something turns or depends; pole of the sky," originally "door hinge," of unknown origin.
>
>
>
What's the relation between the two? | 2014/07/15 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/185229",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/18670/"
] | Cardinals are quite simply the primary, most ‘basic’ form of numerals.
Different languages have different categories of numbers (English has cardinals, ordinals, and a few repetitionals or multiplicatives [*once*, *twice*]; Latin has these as well as distributives; Irish has animatives; etc.), but if a given language has numerals at all, it will almost certainly have at least cardinals.
The other types of numbers are given names for what they indicate *apart* from numeric values: ordinals indicate an ordering, etc.
Cardinals, being the primary type, indicates just the numeric value and nothing else. | So if cardinal meant "something on which everything depends", then a Cardinal in the Catholic church is an important person who makes decisions, etc. A cardinal number is the basic number on which other numbers are based. |
598 | The policy of "minor fixing" of posts is nebulous at best. It is on most SE sites. I'm fine with that. It's generally taken as "live and let live" by most users.
What I do have a problem with is when people that are new to this particular forum see fit to play Mrs Biddle the 4th grade grammar teacher and go correcting posts -- anyones, really, but mine especially (since they're the only edits I tend to see) -- *from 2 years ago*
My personal opinion is that the following should be refused:
* non-owner post-editing for any reason other than clarity (such as helping a non-native speaker)
* non-owner post-edits suggested by anyone with < 500pts or 3 weeks activity
*(Arbitrary numbers, to be sure . . . but it's basically to establish a minimum of activity.)*
Changing their/they're/there or then/than is clearly clarity. If the only reason you're editing is for changing to a capital "A" at the beginning of the sentence, then it's purely cosmetic and unnecessary.
[edit] here's the latest edits that got me all riled up: <https://parenting.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/2313>. | 2014/01/04 | [
"https://parenting.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/598",
"https://parenting.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://parenting.meta.stackexchange.com/users/1649/"
] | A couple of points:
>
> Edits like these require approval by people that are generally going to be aware of the policy. When they disallow the edit, it goes away. It's one of the few policies that land squarely in the hands of moderators.
>
>
>
Reviewing suggested edits is a privilege available to all users with [1000 reputation](https://parenting.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit) on public beta sites. That's far more than just the moderators. Additionally, suggested edits are reviewed by multiple people, so it is not just one person making the decision.
>
> What I do have a problem with is when people that are new to this particular forum see fit to play Mrs Biddle the 4th grade grammar teacher and go correcting posts -- anyones, really, but mine especially (since they're the only edits I tend to see) -- from 2 years ago
>
>
>
How old the post is is completely irrelevant (note that in this case, it was bumped to the front page because a new answer was added to the question). Who originally wrote the post is completely irrelevant (we're not going to have one policy for your posts, and another policy for everyone else's posts). How long the person suggesting the edit has been a member of our community is completely irrelevant.
The only thing that is relevant is: does the edit improve the question?
>
> My personal opinion is that the following should be refused:
>
>
> * non-owner post-editing for any reason other than clarity (such as helping a non-native speaker)
> * non-owner post-edits suggested by anyone with < 500pts or 3 weeks activity
>
>
>
The whole point of grammar and punctuation is to improve clarity. Spelling helps with clarity and search engine optimization. The reputation or duration of activity is irrelevant, so long as they edits the propose are improvements. It is folly to suggest that the user, rather than *the edits themselves* be considered the metric for whether an edit improves a post or not.
>
> Changing their/they're/there or then/than is clearly clarity. If the only reason you're editing is for changing to a capital "A" at the beginning of the sentence, then it's purely cosmetic and unnecessary.
>
>
>
Agreed. Edits for one or two minor things like capitalization are too trivial, may unnecessarily bump up old content, and should be rejected.
However, the edit you are complaining about is **not** just changing to a capital "A". That change was one of 8 different improvements made to your answer. While it might be arguable that 8 changes that were just capitalizing words might still be too trivial (I disagree), included in the edits were fixing a non-standard abbreviation ("mo" is not universally recognizable as "month"), and multiple misspellings (regardless of whether it was deliberate or not, "gettin" and "goin" are not the correct spellings, and "Benadryl" is correct, and "benedryl" is not).
As I mentioned above, proper spelling helps search engines properly index our content, and therefore helps our site to grow. It also helps individual users who are searching for particular content.
I know that anyone editing your posts upsets you, but as has been repeatedly mentioned: **this is part of the stackexchange model**, and it is a fact of life here. It is up to each user with >1000 reputation to decide on their own if they feel an edit improves a post or not, and even if we did agree here on meta that a policy like your suggestions makes sense for our site, there's no practical way for us to enforce it, short of rolling back edits that we felt were in contradiction to this policy (which would cause further disruption to the "active question" feed).
Finally, rolling back valid edits to your posts just because you don't like the idea of other people editing your content is not appropriate. Rolling back style changes is one thing. Rolling back spelling corrections is another, and is not appropriate. | I understand your point, Monsto, but I'm not sure I agree. To me, **the deciding factor when reviewing an edit is whether the overall quality of the post is improved.**
I'm sorry to be blunt but as soon as you hit that "Post" button, your contribution is no longer yours. It belongs to the community, and it's in the community's interest to make all posts as good as they can be.
Let's say a contributor didn't use the *shift* key, or is a native speaker and wrote in slang, or used texting abbreviations. To me, the net result of such a style would be poor. If another contributor came along and made inconsequential edits that just turn the post into proper writing, that's a positive change.
*Inconsequential edits* is subjective of course, but to me that includes grammar and wording. So on this point I disagree with you. "Cosmetic" does not equal "unnecessary" because of the *broken windows* syndrome: we want to have a consistently high quality, or else we're demonstrating that low quality is acceptable and before you know it, every third post is all-lowercase, Twitter-like, and full of texting shortcuts. We don't want that.
Finally, *editing is a way for low-rep users to gain rep!* The fact that they are low-rep means that their edits are reviewed to ensure that the editing policy is adhered to. Flat-out disallowing low-rep users to make inconsequential edits deprives them of this means to earn rep, and that's not a friendly thing to do on a site that is still working hard on building a solid audience. |
139,987 | I minted 3 NFTs on [www.cosmicpace.com](http://www.cosmicpace.com) because a guy dm'd me on IG asking to buy them there. That went fine, but when I tried o withdraw the funds, I received an email from internalrevenueserviceirs@my.com saying the following and with this pdf-
Can eth transfers be blocked???
Hello, your withdrawal from Cosmicpace trading platform was blocked. Kindly check on the details on the attached file. We await your reply.
IRS
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/C7Rzm.jpg) | 2022/11/24 | [
"https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/questions/139987",
"https://ethereum.stackexchange.com",
"https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/users/112591/"
] | That's an obvious scam. Sorry but i believe you're never gonna see your money again :/ And don't pay anything else they might ask you to. | That is an obvious scam.
Such intervention would not be sent by email but postal services, and through official avenues. I mean "dear Mr/Mrs. Crack3DFox" ... how can one fall for that ... |
139,987 | I minted 3 NFTs on [www.cosmicpace.com](http://www.cosmicpace.com) because a guy dm'd me on IG asking to buy them there. That went fine, but when I tried o withdraw the funds, I received an email from internalrevenueserviceirs@my.com saying the following and with this pdf-
Can eth transfers be blocked???
Hello, your withdrawal from Cosmicpace trading platform was blocked. Kindly check on the details on the attached file. We await your reply.
IRS
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/C7Rzm.jpg) | 2022/11/24 | [
"https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/questions/139987",
"https://ethereum.stackexchange.com",
"https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/users/112591/"
] | That's an obvious scam. Sorry but i believe you're never gonna see your money again :/ And don't pay anything else they might ask you to. | You can report the business to IC3.gov and your local law enforcement. Recovery of funds is unlikely. |
43,838 | In response to yet another frame materials question, I thought it might be useful to start with a more answerable question. One answer per material please, with an example of a bicycle frame using that material.
Please use the format I've used in my answer(s) to make it easy to compare materials.
I see no harm in having all 400+ steel alloys listed if someone wants to do that, but "steel" must specifically be low-grade mild steel rather than a specific alloy. Likewise for aluminium, titanium, magnesium and other metals.
For composites, including metal composites, I would again prefer specific examples with details (there's a big difference between steel reinforced concrete and kevlar/polyester composites). I would also love to see weird and wonderful bikes included.
Materials
---------
(ie index to answers. Please update links as you add an answer):
### Metals
* **Aluminum Bikes**
+ **[Aluminum](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/58015/26330)**
+ **[Scandium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/43838/what-different-frame-materials-have-been-used/44545#44545)** - Aluminium alloy
* **Steel Bikes**
+ **Columbus Steel** (not written yet)
+ **ChromeMoly Steel** (not written yet)
+ **[Gaspipe Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/45078/19705)**
+ **Ishiwata Steel** (not written yet)
+ **Kaisei Steel** (not written yet)
+ **[Mild Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43839/8273)**
+ **[Reynolds Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/45082/19705)** (needs extension)
+ **Tange Steel** (not written yet)
+ **Vitus/Super Vitus Steel** (not written yet)
* **[Titanium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44493/19705)**
* **[Beryllium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/57625/26330)**
* **[Gold (pure)](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43845/19705)** (theoretical)
* **Magnesium** (not written yet)
### Organic
* **[Bamboo](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44989/31280)**
* **[Bones](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43849/19705)**
* **Wood Bikes**
+ **[Carved Wood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44550/19705)**
+ **[Plywood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43842/7044)** (composite)
+ **[Wood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43843/7044)** (complete frame and bicycle)
* **Cardboard** (not yet written)
(<https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44582/20060>)\*\*
### Composites and Polymers
* **[Carbon Fibre](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43854/13174)**
* **[Flax fiber (90% flax, 10% carbon)](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44582/26330)**
* **[Plastic](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/57627/35081)**
### Layout Specific
* **[Cables](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43847/19705)** aka Tensegrity or Tensional Integrity
* **[3D Printed](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43848/19705)** (not yet written) | 2016/11/15 | [
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/43838",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/users/7044/"
] | Carbon Fibre Reinforced Polymer
===============================
Density ranges from 1.75–2.0 g/cm3 and varies with type and layup.
Carbon fibre (CF) frames are made out of sheets of carbon fibres set in a polymer resin, usually epoxy.
In 1975 the first CF tubed bike appears, the Exxon Graftek, It had steel lugs and was prone to breaking. This was followed in 1986 by Kestrel and Trek releasing full CF-framed bikes.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/2LpTX.jpg)
A modern, top end example of a carbon fibre bike is a Pinarello Dogma F8 which is riden by Team Sky and also therefore by Team Bradley Wiggins.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/QGLaj.jpg)
Although Sheldon Brown and others are not very enthusiastic about CF, there's a large body of opinion that CF is the best material for racing and riding fast.
Advantages
----------
* Very high stiffness to weight ratio can lead to frames that are stiff
but very light.
* CF has directional strength meaning that depending on the
alignment of fibres it can be used to make frames that are stiff when transferring power but compliant when absorbing road vibrations.
* CF is able to form a wide range of shapes meaning aero profile tubes
can be created more easily than with metals.
* CF doesn't wear in the same way that metals do, meaning that it can
theoretically have an indefinite lifespan because it does not wear
under regular forces. CF is not prone to corrosion even without coating/paint.
* Although the lay-up process takes a lot of time, it does not require
high levels of skill. This means that less-skilled workers are able to
produce CF frames.
* Perhaps some people like the look and status of a CF bike. I remember
when I first got a CF bike how my non-cyclist friends would think
it's some sort of spaceship and wanted to lift it up just to feel
its weight.
Disadvantages
-------------
* CF frames are expensive due the long time it takes to hand lay all
the individual strips of CF.
* CF frames (or any parts) require more careful and qualified assembly. A special lubricant must be used to prevent parts from bonding together, and CF will not tolerate overtightening as well as metal.
* CF frames tend to become damaged easily. Because CF has directional
strength it means that it is less resistant to forces that it is not
designed to be exposed to, i.e. crashes. When forces are applied in a
way that the CF fibres are not taking the strain themselves, then it
is the polymer matrix that takes all the force and so is more easily
broken.
* At the same time, the damage is often unnoticeable. Where a metal frame will have a visible dent or bend, a CF frame may look undamaged, but may in fact delaminate internally, leading to a sudden unexpected failure later.
* CF is not easily repairable; in fact many people would say it can't be
repaired. In any case, if an expensive CF frame is broken you're
probably not going to want to race on it again in case there is a risk
of sudden failure of the repair job.
* CF bikes quickly lose their value. If you buy a CF bike it's probably
because you want to race on it or at least ride fast, therefore you
buy something that is at the forefront of technology for your price
point. however because CF bike technology has been improving very
quickly over the last two decades and is still improving now, it
means your purchase will quickly be outdated by newer bikes.
* Many people who buy CF bikes will end up with a bike that far
surpasses their ability. A learner driver won't go much faster in a
Porsche 911 than in a Nissan Micra. People fall for the marketing
claim of CF bikes as the only option for buying a good bike, or that
it is the best way to get faster rather than training more and losing
a few kilograms. | **Carved Wood**
While more expensive than plywood, bamboo or dimensional lumber, frames made from carved wooden tubes (or even monocoques) do exist.
**Advantages**
* directional strength (somewhat like CF) allows for stiff yet vibration-absorbing frames
* good strength to weight ratio
* potentially eco-friendly
* resistant to denting due to thicker walls
* looks and feels awesome (subjective)
**Disadvantages**
* needs thicker tubes
* very difficult to use well
* easily damaged by moisture unless specially treated
* very expensive due to labor (and sometimes exotic woods) |
43,838 | In response to yet another frame materials question, I thought it might be useful to start with a more answerable question. One answer per material please, with an example of a bicycle frame using that material.
Please use the format I've used in my answer(s) to make it easy to compare materials.
I see no harm in having all 400+ steel alloys listed if someone wants to do that, but "steel" must specifically be low-grade mild steel rather than a specific alloy. Likewise for aluminium, titanium, magnesium and other metals.
For composites, including metal composites, I would again prefer specific examples with details (there's a big difference between steel reinforced concrete and kevlar/polyester composites). I would also love to see weird and wonderful bikes included.
Materials
---------
(ie index to answers. Please update links as you add an answer):
### Metals
* **Aluminum Bikes**
+ **[Aluminum](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/58015/26330)**
+ **[Scandium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/43838/what-different-frame-materials-have-been-used/44545#44545)** - Aluminium alloy
* **Steel Bikes**
+ **Columbus Steel** (not written yet)
+ **ChromeMoly Steel** (not written yet)
+ **[Gaspipe Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/45078/19705)**
+ **Ishiwata Steel** (not written yet)
+ **Kaisei Steel** (not written yet)
+ **[Mild Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43839/8273)**
+ **[Reynolds Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/45082/19705)** (needs extension)
+ **Tange Steel** (not written yet)
+ **Vitus/Super Vitus Steel** (not written yet)
* **[Titanium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44493/19705)**
* **[Beryllium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/57625/26330)**
* **[Gold (pure)](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43845/19705)** (theoretical)
* **Magnesium** (not written yet)
### Organic
* **[Bamboo](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44989/31280)**
* **[Bones](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43849/19705)**
* **Wood Bikes**
+ **[Carved Wood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44550/19705)**
+ **[Plywood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43842/7044)** (composite)
+ **[Wood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43843/7044)** (complete frame and bicycle)
* **Cardboard** (not yet written)
(<https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44582/20060>)\*\*
### Composites and Polymers
* **[Carbon Fibre](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43854/13174)**
* **[Flax fiber (90% flax, 10% carbon)](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44582/26330)**
* **[Plastic](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/57627/35081)**
### Layout Specific
* **[Cables](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43847/19705)** aka Tensegrity or Tensional Integrity
* **[3D Printed](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43848/19705)** (not yet written) | 2016/11/15 | [
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/43838",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/users/7044/"
] | **Aluminum Alloy**
==================
### History
The first Aluminum bicycles were made around the turn of the century. That is: the 19th century. The earliest documentation of Aluminum being used as a bike frame material is three examples made for a Parisian trade show by Clement Cycles in 1893. This bicycle was not made of tubes, but was a solid single piece aluminum casting!
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/M3WwO.png)
This of course was quite impressive for its time as Aluminum was only first industrially produced in 1856. However, as you can imagine, these solid frames were very heavy and not very good.
Aluminum as a frame material remains a curiosity for the next 80 years while steel frames dominate the performance and utilitarian market. This doesn't change until TIG welding is developed and becomes common in the 70's. This advancement allows construction from extruded hollow tubes and the possibility of much better performance.
In 1974, the MIT mechanical engineering student Marc Rosenbaum decides to try building an aluminum bicycle for his senior thesis. He took advantage of the low density of Aluminum and built his bike with large diameter tubes and very thin walls. The result of his efforts was a track bike lighter than any other in the world at 12.3 lb!
Here's a great article on it. <https://www.sheldonbrown.com/AluminumBikeProject.html>
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qRCIV.png)
The industry followed soon after. Gary Klein patented the wide tube Aluminum bike frame in 1977 and started Klein bicycle company. Cannondale introduced the first model of the CAAD in 1983 and Al joined the pro peloton shortly after. Miguel Indurain won the first TdF on an Aluminum Pinarello Keral Lite in 1995 and they were the material of choice until replaced by carbon in 1999.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/4fE80.png)
Today, Aluminum bike frames are the majority of new production, having displaced steel as the lowest cost option. You can buy Aluminum framed bikes from every department store. Aluminum also lives on at the highest levels in the pro peloton, with Jonny Brown's Specialized Allez winning the 2018 US Road Championships.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/oiHPn.png)
### Material Properties
Most structural metals have similar maximum strength to weight ratios. This is due to the physics of metallic bonds. Aluminum alloys follow the same curve as steels and Titanium alloys, but have lower density and strength per unit volume. This has some implications:
Aluminum is not very good for high strength applications where size is limiting. Aluminum will never be very good for screws, bolts, or rivets because it will be a fraction the strength of steel.
However, for bike tubes, the case is opposite. Tubes with large diameter and thin walls are lighter for the same stiffness. This is because the stiffness (moment of inertia) of a tube under torsion scales with the cube of radius, maintaining the same total material. However, sufficiently thin tubes are vulnerable to local shell buckling. This effect limits the thinness that steel tubing can be made. Because Aluminum is much less dense, the same mass of it can be made into a tube that is both larger in diameter and wall thickness, and therefore stiffer. Alternatively, an equally stiff frame can be made lighter than steel. Most aluminum frames today have much wider tubes than steel bikes, but these tubes are actually less wide than the theoretical optimum. Some compromise is made for the sake of resisting handling loads and to improve aerodynamics.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/rWli6.png)
Aluminum is self-passivating in air, meaning the oxidized metal protects the underlying metal from corrosion. This means Aluminum does not rust in fresh water or air. However, aluminum is vulnerable to pitting corrosion by solutions that attack the passivating film, including salt water. This is a problem for marine environments and during winters where roads are salted, and you should cover any exposed aluminum.
Aluminum alloys melt at about 600C, and they are relatively easy to cast. However, high strength applications prefer forged aluminum because this can align the grains in a favorable direction. Aluminum is also much easier to machine than steel or titanium and it does not significantly harden with heat. Many high quality modern aluminum frames are made by hydroforming, in which very high pressure water forces the aluminum tubes into a female mold. This process allows for considerable design freedom, and Aluminum tubes can be made more freeform than steel, though to a lesser extent than carbon.
Aluminum alloys are often said to not have a fatigue limit. This means that at sufficiently high cycle counts, any load will eventually cause failure. Therefore, aluminum frames can be seen to possess a finite useful life. This is in contrast to materials such as steel which have a (practically) unbounded cycle limit at loads below the fatigue limit. This is not entirely true, and Aluminum alloys have specified fatigue strengths at the highest ranges of cycle count. However, Aluminum's fatigue strength is less well defined than for steel as its fatigue diagram does not inflect sharply at any point. In my experience, well designed Aluminum frames will last longer than most people keep them running. My daily driver is twenty years old. Most people (though maybe not the reader) don't own a bike that long.
6061T6 is the most common grade of Aluminum Alloy used in cycling. It is widely available, moderately strong and it's easy to weld by TIG. 7075 is about twice as strong, but cannot be welded and is susceptible to micro-cracking. Many bike manufacturers have their own trade names for the alloys they use, and these may or may not be the same as above. Many exotic alloys exist with elements such as Magnesium and Scandium.
Al 6061T6
* Density: 2700 kg/m^3
* Yield Strength: 276 MPa
* Ultimate Strength: 310 MPa
* Young's Modulus: 69 GPa
* Elongation at Yield: 0.4%
* Elongation at Break: 12%
* Fatigue Limit: 97 MPa
* Brinell Hardness:95
Al 7075T6
* Density: 2810 kg/m^3
* Yield Strength: 503 MPa
* Ultimate Strength: 572 MPa
* Young's Modulus: 72 GPa
* Elongation at Yield: 0.7%
* Elongation at Break: 11%
* Fatigue Limit: 159 MPa
* Brinell Hardness: 150
Just for comparison:
4130 Chromoly
* Density: 7850 kg/m^3
* Yield Strength: 435 MPa
* Ultimate Strength: 670 MPa
* Young's Modulus: 205 GPa
* Elongation at Yield: 0.2%
* Elongation at Break: 25.5%
* Fatigue Limit: 320 MPa
* Brinell Hardness: 195
Ti6Al4V
* Density: 4430 kg/m^3
* Yield Strength: 880 MPa
* Ultimate Strength: 950 MPa
* Young's Modulus: 114 GPa
* Elongation at Yield: 0.8%
* Elongation at Break: 14%
* Fatigue Limit: 510 MPa
* Brinell Hardness: 334
Toray T700S Carbon Fiber (UD)
* Density: 1800 kg/m^3
* Ultimate Strength: 2550 MPa
* Young's Modulus: 230 GPa
* Elongation at Break: 1.7% | **Reynolds Steel**
*this answer needs completion* its just notes at this point
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dHmSn.jpg)
Reynolds butted tubing was first patented in 1897.
There are many different grades of Reynolds steel. The most commonly known is 531 (pronounced "five, three, one") which was first produced in the 1935 but is no longer available outside of New Old Stock, or by Special Order. This steel was also used on Jaguar XKE car chassis, and assisted in 27 Tour de France victories. The replacements are 520 and 525, which are similar to 531 but can also be welded.
*list some other codes and their meanings and usages* 753 (required certification by Reynolds), 953, 725, 631, 853, 525.
*explain the numbers* 531 gets its name from the composition. Five parts manganese, three parts carbon, and one part molybdenum.
---
**Advantages**
* Classy steel tubing
* Considered as a "forgiving" material for building and daily use
**Disadvantages**
* Many different grades available
* Heat treating requirements vary across different grades
* Some grades do not permit cold-setting of frames
* Steel can suffer from corrosion issues
**References**
<http://bikeretrogrouch.blogspot.co.nz/2013/12/reynolds-tubing.html>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynolds_Cycle_Technology#Tubing_types> Big list of tubing codes here. |
43,838 | In response to yet another frame materials question, I thought it might be useful to start with a more answerable question. One answer per material please, with an example of a bicycle frame using that material.
Please use the format I've used in my answer(s) to make it easy to compare materials.
I see no harm in having all 400+ steel alloys listed if someone wants to do that, but "steel" must specifically be low-grade mild steel rather than a specific alloy. Likewise for aluminium, titanium, magnesium and other metals.
For composites, including metal composites, I would again prefer specific examples with details (there's a big difference between steel reinforced concrete and kevlar/polyester composites). I would also love to see weird and wonderful bikes included.
Materials
---------
(ie index to answers. Please update links as you add an answer):
### Metals
* **Aluminum Bikes**
+ **[Aluminum](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/58015/26330)**
+ **[Scandium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/43838/what-different-frame-materials-have-been-used/44545#44545)** - Aluminium alloy
* **Steel Bikes**
+ **Columbus Steel** (not written yet)
+ **ChromeMoly Steel** (not written yet)
+ **[Gaspipe Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/45078/19705)**
+ **Ishiwata Steel** (not written yet)
+ **Kaisei Steel** (not written yet)
+ **[Mild Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43839/8273)**
+ **[Reynolds Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/45082/19705)** (needs extension)
+ **Tange Steel** (not written yet)
+ **Vitus/Super Vitus Steel** (not written yet)
* **[Titanium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44493/19705)**
* **[Beryllium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/57625/26330)**
* **[Gold (pure)](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43845/19705)** (theoretical)
* **Magnesium** (not written yet)
### Organic
* **[Bamboo](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44989/31280)**
* **[Bones](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43849/19705)**
* **Wood Bikes**
+ **[Carved Wood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44550/19705)**
+ **[Plywood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43842/7044)** (composite)
+ **[Wood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43843/7044)** (complete frame and bicycle)
* **Cardboard** (not yet written)
(<https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44582/20060>)\*\*
### Composites and Polymers
* **[Carbon Fibre](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43854/13174)**
* **[Flax fiber (90% flax, 10% carbon)](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44582/26330)**
* **[Plastic](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/57627/35081)**
### Layout Specific
* **[Cables](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43847/19705)** aka Tensegrity or Tensional Integrity
* **[3D Printed](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43848/19705)** (not yet written) | 2016/11/15 | [
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/43838",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/users/7044/"
] | **Wood-only Bicycle**
This is more an example of what's technically possible, rather than a particularly practical material.
**Advantanges**
* rarity/shock value
**Disadvantages**
* difficult to make bearings from wood
* many compromises to performance required because of limitations of the material
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7mmQP.png)
[Pure wooden bicycle](http://www.buzzhunt.co.uk/2011/05/06/polish-guy-makes-100-wooden-bicycles/) by Slawomir Weremkowicz (via BuzzHunt) | **Carved Wood**
While more expensive than plywood, bamboo or dimensional lumber, frames made from carved wooden tubes (or even monocoques) do exist.
**Advantages**
* directional strength (somewhat like CF) allows for stiff yet vibration-absorbing frames
* good strength to weight ratio
* potentially eco-friendly
* resistant to denting due to thicker walls
* looks and feels awesome (subjective)
**Disadvantages**
* needs thicker tubes
* very difficult to use well
* easily damaged by moisture unless specially treated
* very expensive due to labor (and sometimes exotic woods) |
43,838 | In response to yet another frame materials question, I thought it might be useful to start with a more answerable question. One answer per material please, with an example of a bicycle frame using that material.
Please use the format I've used in my answer(s) to make it easy to compare materials.
I see no harm in having all 400+ steel alloys listed if someone wants to do that, but "steel" must specifically be low-grade mild steel rather than a specific alloy. Likewise for aluminium, titanium, magnesium and other metals.
For composites, including metal composites, I would again prefer specific examples with details (there's a big difference between steel reinforced concrete and kevlar/polyester composites). I would also love to see weird and wonderful bikes included.
Materials
---------
(ie index to answers. Please update links as you add an answer):
### Metals
* **Aluminum Bikes**
+ **[Aluminum](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/58015/26330)**
+ **[Scandium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/43838/what-different-frame-materials-have-been-used/44545#44545)** - Aluminium alloy
* **Steel Bikes**
+ **Columbus Steel** (not written yet)
+ **ChromeMoly Steel** (not written yet)
+ **[Gaspipe Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/45078/19705)**
+ **Ishiwata Steel** (not written yet)
+ **Kaisei Steel** (not written yet)
+ **[Mild Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43839/8273)**
+ **[Reynolds Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/45082/19705)** (needs extension)
+ **Tange Steel** (not written yet)
+ **Vitus/Super Vitus Steel** (not written yet)
* **[Titanium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44493/19705)**
* **[Beryllium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/57625/26330)**
* **[Gold (pure)](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43845/19705)** (theoretical)
* **Magnesium** (not written yet)
### Organic
* **[Bamboo](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44989/31280)**
* **[Bones](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43849/19705)**
* **Wood Bikes**
+ **[Carved Wood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44550/19705)**
+ **[Plywood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43842/7044)** (composite)
+ **[Wood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43843/7044)** (complete frame and bicycle)
* **Cardboard** (not yet written)
(<https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44582/20060>)\*\*
### Composites and Polymers
* **[Carbon Fibre](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43854/13174)**
* **[Flax fiber (90% flax, 10% carbon)](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44582/26330)**
* **[Plastic](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/57627/35081)**
### Layout Specific
* **[Cables](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43847/19705)** aka Tensegrity or Tensional Integrity
* **[3D Printed](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43848/19705)** (not yet written) | 2016/11/15 | [
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/43838",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/users/7044/"
] | **Plastic**
Density
>
> ~0.91 g/cm³ for Polypropylene (triangle #5)
>
> ~0.92 g/cm³ for low density Polyethylene (triangle #4)
>
> ~0.95 g/cm³ for high density Polyethylene (triangle #2)
>
> 1.03-1.06 g/cm³ for polystychrene (triangle #6)
>
> 1.35-1.38 g/cm³ for PETE like water bottles (triangle #1)
>
> 1.32-1.42 g/cm³ for PVC polyvinyl Chloride (triangle #3)
>
>
>
>
There have been a few attempts to build plastic bicycles since the 70's. Construction materials include Lexan and HDPE (high-density polyethelyne) but I can't find any evidence of commercial success in adult's bicycles. Plastic children's bikes are popular but they are usually in the form of balance bikes without pedals (still technically a bicycle?).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DcAlq.jpg)
<https://www.designboom.com/cms/images/user_submit/2011/07/frii5.jpg>
**Advantages
(For children's bikes)**
* Light-weight
* Cheap
* No sharp edges
**Disadvantages**
* Heavy
* Overly flexible
* Deteriorates when subjected to UV light
* Embarrassing | **Reynolds Steel**
*this answer needs completion* its just notes at this point
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dHmSn.jpg)
Reynolds butted tubing was first patented in 1897.
There are many different grades of Reynolds steel. The most commonly known is 531 (pronounced "five, three, one") which was first produced in the 1935 but is no longer available outside of New Old Stock, or by Special Order. This steel was also used on Jaguar XKE car chassis, and assisted in 27 Tour de France victories. The replacements are 520 and 525, which are similar to 531 but can also be welded.
*list some other codes and their meanings and usages* 753 (required certification by Reynolds), 953, 725, 631, 853, 525.
*explain the numbers* 531 gets its name from the composition. Five parts manganese, three parts carbon, and one part molybdenum.
---
**Advantages**
* Classy steel tubing
* Considered as a "forgiving" material for building and daily use
**Disadvantages**
* Many different grades available
* Heat treating requirements vary across different grades
* Some grades do not permit cold-setting of frames
* Steel can suffer from corrosion issues
**References**
<http://bikeretrogrouch.blogspot.co.nz/2013/12/reynolds-tubing.html>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynolds_Cycle_Technology#Tubing_types> Big list of tubing codes here. |
43,838 | In response to yet another frame materials question, I thought it might be useful to start with a more answerable question. One answer per material please, with an example of a bicycle frame using that material.
Please use the format I've used in my answer(s) to make it easy to compare materials.
I see no harm in having all 400+ steel alloys listed if someone wants to do that, but "steel" must specifically be low-grade mild steel rather than a specific alloy. Likewise for aluminium, titanium, magnesium and other metals.
For composites, including metal composites, I would again prefer specific examples with details (there's a big difference between steel reinforced concrete and kevlar/polyester composites). I would also love to see weird and wonderful bikes included.
Materials
---------
(ie index to answers. Please update links as you add an answer):
### Metals
* **Aluminum Bikes**
+ **[Aluminum](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/58015/26330)**
+ **[Scandium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/43838/what-different-frame-materials-have-been-used/44545#44545)** - Aluminium alloy
* **Steel Bikes**
+ **Columbus Steel** (not written yet)
+ **ChromeMoly Steel** (not written yet)
+ **[Gaspipe Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/45078/19705)**
+ **Ishiwata Steel** (not written yet)
+ **Kaisei Steel** (not written yet)
+ **[Mild Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43839/8273)**
+ **[Reynolds Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/45082/19705)** (needs extension)
+ **Tange Steel** (not written yet)
+ **Vitus/Super Vitus Steel** (not written yet)
* **[Titanium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44493/19705)**
* **[Beryllium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/57625/26330)**
* **[Gold (pure)](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43845/19705)** (theoretical)
* **Magnesium** (not written yet)
### Organic
* **[Bamboo](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44989/31280)**
* **[Bones](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43849/19705)**
* **Wood Bikes**
+ **[Carved Wood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44550/19705)**
+ **[Plywood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43842/7044)** (composite)
+ **[Wood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43843/7044)** (complete frame and bicycle)
* **Cardboard** (not yet written)
(<https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44582/20060>)\*\*
### Composites and Polymers
* **[Carbon Fibre](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43854/13174)**
* **[Flax fiber (90% flax, 10% carbon)](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44582/26330)**
* **[Plastic](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/57627/35081)**
### Layout Specific
* **[Cables](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43847/19705)** aka Tensegrity or Tensional Integrity
* **[3D Printed](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43848/19705)** (not yet written) | 2016/11/15 | [
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/43838",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/users/7044/"
] | **Wood-only Bicycle**
This is more an example of what's technically possible, rather than a particularly practical material.
**Advantanges**
* rarity/shock value
**Disadvantages**
* difficult to make bearings from wood
* many compromises to performance required because of limitations of the material
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7mmQP.png)
[Pure wooden bicycle](http://www.buzzhunt.co.uk/2011/05/06/polish-guy-makes-100-wooden-bicycles/) by Slawomir Weremkowicz (via BuzzHunt) | **Plastic**
Density
>
> ~0.91 g/cm³ for Polypropylene (triangle #5)
>
> ~0.92 g/cm³ for low density Polyethylene (triangle #4)
>
> ~0.95 g/cm³ for high density Polyethylene (triangle #2)
>
> 1.03-1.06 g/cm³ for polystychrene (triangle #6)
>
> 1.35-1.38 g/cm³ for PETE like water bottles (triangle #1)
>
> 1.32-1.42 g/cm³ for PVC polyvinyl Chloride (triangle #3)
>
>
>
>
There have been a few attempts to build plastic bicycles since the 70's. Construction materials include Lexan and HDPE (high-density polyethelyne) but I can't find any evidence of commercial success in adult's bicycles. Plastic children's bikes are popular but they are usually in the form of balance bikes without pedals (still technically a bicycle?).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DcAlq.jpg)
<https://www.designboom.com/cms/images/user_submit/2011/07/frii5.jpg>
**Advantages
(For children's bikes)**
* Light-weight
* Cheap
* No sharp edges
**Disadvantages**
* Heavy
* Overly flexible
* Deteriorates when subjected to UV light
* Embarrassing |
43,838 | In response to yet another frame materials question, I thought it might be useful to start with a more answerable question. One answer per material please, with an example of a bicycle frame using that material.
Please use the format I've used in my answer(s) to make it easy to compare materials.
I see no harm in having all 400+ steel alloys listed if someone wants to do that, but "steel" must specifically be low-grade mild steel rather than a specific alloy. Likewise for aluminium, titanium, magnesium and other metals.
For composites, including metal composites, I would again prefer specific examples with details (there's a big difference between steel reinforced concrete and kevlar/polyester composites). I would also love to see weird and wonderful bikes included.
Materials
---------
(ie index to answers. Please update links as you add an answer):
### Metals
* **Aluminum Bikes**
+ **[Aluminum](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/58015/26330)**
+ **[Scandium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/43838/what-different-frame-materials-have-been-used/44545#44545)** - Aluminium alloy
* **Steel Bikes**
+ **Columbus Steel** (not written yet)
+ **ChromeMoly Steel** (not written yet)
+ **[Gaspipe Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/45078/19705)**
+ **Ishiwata Steel** (not written yet)
+ **Kaisei Steel** (not written yet)
+ **[Mild Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43839/8273)**
+ **[Reynolds Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/45082/19705)** (needs extension)
+ **Tange Steel** (not written yet)
+ **Vitus/Super Vitus Steel** (not written yet)
* **[Titanium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44493/19705)**
* **[Beryllium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/57625/26330)**
* **[Gold (pure)](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43845/19705)** (theoretical)
* **Magnesium** (not written yet)
### Organic
* **[Bamboo](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44989/31280)**
* **[Bones](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43849/19705)**
* **Wood Bikes**
+ **[Carved Wood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44550/19705)**
+ **[Plywood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43842/7044)** (composite)
+ **[Wood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43843/7044)** (complete frame and bicycle)
* **Cardboard** (not yet written)
(<https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44582/20060>)\*\*
### Composites and Polymers
* **[Carbon Fibre](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43854/13174)**
* **[Flax fiber (90% flax, 10% carbon)](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44582/26330)**
* **[Plastic](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/57627/35081)**
### Layout Specific
* **[Cables](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43847/19705)** aka Tensegrity or Tensional Integrity
* **[3D Printed](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43848/19705)** (not yet written) | 2016/11/15 | [
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/43838",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/users/7044/"
] | **Flax Fibre/Fiber**
Schwinn Vestige was (is?) made of flax fiber (90 percent flax, 10 percent carbon).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/jFtJm.jpg)
<http://bicycletimesmag.com/review-schwinn-vestige-made-from-flax-fiber/>
**Advantages**
* Green - it looks ecologically conscietious.
**Disadvantages**
* Greenwashing - it's not as ecologically conscietious as it looks. | **Gaspipe Steel**
A derisive term for the "high tensile" or mild steel tubing used to build cheap bicycles. Since low-end bicycles are made of low-quality steel, the builders compensate by using heavy, thick tubes.
These tubes are often single-gauge or plain gauge, so they have a consistant wall thickness all the way along the tube whereas higher quality frames are made from butted tubes that may have two or three different thicknessess depending on the loads and distance from a weld.
**Difference to other Steel**
All steel has the same "Youngs Modulus" (measure of stiffness) What changes between gaspipe and higher tubes is the strength, so gaspipe steel drawn to a thickness of 0.4mm (the thinnest piece of Reynolds tubing) will bend under far less pressure.
**Advantages**
* Cost. This plain gauge tubing is cheaper.
* Efficiency. Butted tubes have to be made in the lengths required. Plain tube can be ordered in longer lengths and then cut to suit the requirements which reduces wasteage.
* Repairable. Steel can be fixed much easier than most other frame materials.
**Disadvantages**
* Weight. Approximate weights for a bare steel frame and its fork.
>
> **Tubing Weight**
>
> Reynolds 531 Superlight/531pro/753 5.5lbs to 5.75lbs or 2.5-2.6 kilograms
>
> Reynolds 531DB/531C 6lbs or 2.7 kilograms
>
> Reynolds 531ST (Standard Tube) 7lbs or 3.2 kilograms
>
> Good quality plain gauge tubing 7lbs to 9lbs, or 3.2-4.1 kilograms
>
> Inexpensive plain gauge tubing 9lbs to 13lbs, or 4.1-6 kilograms
>
>
>
>
Note: "531" denote different quality [tubing types](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynolds_Cycle_Technology#Tubing_types). See the Reynolds entry in this CW for further information.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VvgUF.jpg)
That's Scaffold tube, inch and eighth gas barrel, inch and eighth 531 tubing (⌀ ≈29 mm), inch gas barrel and inch 531 tubing. Where 'gas barrel' means the material that was actually used as conduits for gas.
Here's a gaspipe bike - an "olmo" You couldn't tell by looking that its heavy.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/CRz7u.jpg)
---
Note technically pipe is made from flat metal which has been rolled, and is joined with a seam weld. Tube is formed as a closed shape and does not have a seam.
See also Reynolds and Ishtawa steel entries elsewhere in this CW. |
43,838 | In response to yet another frame materials question, I thought it might be useful to start with a more answerable question. One answer per material please, with an example of a bicycle frame using that material.
Please use the format I've used in my answer(s) to make it easy to compare materials.
I see no harm in having all 400+ steel alloys listed if someone wants to do that, but "steel" must specifically be low-grade mild steel rather than a specific alloy. Likewise for aluminium, titanium, magnesium and other metals.
For composites, including metal composites, I would again prefer specific examples with details (there's a big difference between steel reinforced concrete and kevlar/polyester composites). I would also love to see weird and wonderful bikes included.
Materials
---------
(ie index to answers. Please update links as you add an answer):
### Metals
* **Aluminum Bikes**
+ **[Aluminum](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/58015/26330)**
+ **[Scandium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/43838/what-different-frame-materials-have-been-used/44545#44545)** - Aluminium alloy
* **Steel Bikes**
+ **Columbus Steel** (not written yet)
+ **ChromeMoly Steel** (not written yet)
+ **[Gaspipe Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/45078/19705)**
+ **Ishiwata Steel** (not written yet)
+ **Kaisei Steel** (not written yet)
+ **[Mild Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43839/8273)**
+ **[Reynolds Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/45082/19705)** (needs extension)
+ **Tange Steel** (not written yet)
+ **Vitus/Super Vitus Steel** (not written yet)
* **[Titanium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44493/19705)**
* **[Beryllium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/57625/26330)**
* **[Gold (pure)](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43845/19705)** (theoretical)
* **Magnesium** (not written yet)
### Organic
* **[Bamboo](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44989/31280)**
* **[Bones](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43849/19705)**
* **Wood Bikes**
+ **[Carved Wood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44550/19705)**
+ **[Plywood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43842/7044)** (composite)
+ **[Wood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43843/7044)** (complete frame and bicycle)
* **Cardboard** (not yet written)
(<https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44582/20060>)\*\*
### Composites and Polymers
* **[Carbon Fibre](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43854/13174)**
* **[Flax fiber (90% flax, 10% carbon)](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44582/26330)**
* **[Plastic](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/57627/35081)**
### Layout Specific
* **[Cables](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43847/19705)** aka Tensegrity or Tensional Integrity
* **[3D Printed](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43848/19705)** (not yet written) | 2016/11/15 | [
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/43838",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/users/7044/"
] | **Plywood**
Density
* 0.46-0.52 g/cm^3 for conifer plywood
* 0.62 g/cm^3 mixed plywood
* 0.68 g/cm^3 for birch plywood
Technically a composite material, plywood has been used in several different ways to make bike frames. The two most obvious are as a sheet material, and as a linear material.
**Advantages**
* wood is easy to work (tools are cheap and readily available)
* plywood is easy to find
**Disadvantages**
* even weaker than mild steel, making design difficult and frames heavy
* epoxy composite, so the expoxies (glue and sealant) need to be chosen carefully and may be toxic
* key parts of the frame will still be metal, or great effort must be put into making them from wood.
* durability is not great (years rather than decades)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/1SIZn.png)
[Sawyer bike](http://www.citylab.com/design/2013/03/heres-bicycle-you-assemble-one-big-sheet-plywood/5132/) by [Jurgen Kuipers](http://www.jurgenkuipers.com/home.html) via CityLab
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Y1Sl3.png)
[BONOBO PLYWOOD BICYCLE](http://www.cycleexif.com/bonobo-plywood-bicycle) via CycleExif
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/zFlpv.jpg)
(source: [coocan.jp](http://sanomagic.world.coocan.jp/bicycle/20160702/DSC_3727.JPG))
[SANOMAGIC Mahogany bikes](http://sanomagic.world.coocan.jp/Lineup/english_sanomagicbikelineup.htm) by Sueshiro Sano | **Gaspipe Steel**
A derisive term for the "high tensile" or mild steel tubing used to build cheap bicycles. Since low-end bicycles are made of low-quality steel, the builders compensate by using heavy, thick tubes.
These tubes are often single-gauge or plain gauge, so they have a consistant wall thickness all the way along the tube whereas higher quality frames are made from butted tubes that may have two or three different thicknessess depending on the loads and distance from a weld.
**Difference to other Steel**
All steel has the same "Youngs Modulus" (measure of stiffness) What changes between gaspipe and higher tubes is the strength, so gaspipe steel drawn to a thickness of 0.4mm (the thinnest piece of Reynolds tubing) will bend under far less pressure.
**Advantages**
* Cost. This plain gauge tubing is cheaper.
* Efficiency. Butted tubes have to be made in the lengths required. Plain tube can be ordered in longer lengths and then cut to suit the requirements which reduces wasteage.
* Repairable. Steel can be fixed much easier than most other frame materials.
**Disadvantages**
* Weight. Approximate weights for a bare steel frame and its fork.
>
> **Tubing Weight**
>
> Reynolds 531 Superlight/531pro/753 5.5lbs to 5.75lbs or 2.5-2.6 kilograms
>
> Reynolds 531DB/531C 6lbs or 2.7 kilograms
>
> Reynolds 531ST (Standard Tube) 7lbs or 3.2 kilograms
>
> Good quality plain gauge tubing 7lbs to 9lbs, or 3.2-4.1 kilograms
>
> Inexpensive plain gauge tubing 9lbs to 13lbs, or 4.1-6 kilograms
>
>
>
>
Note: "531" denote different quality [tubing types](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynolds_Cycle_Technology#Tubing_types). See the Reynolds entry in this CW for further information.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VvgUF.jpg)
That's Scaffold tube, inch and eighth gas barrel, inch and eighth 531 tubing (⌀ ≈29 mm), inch gas barrel and inch 531 tubing. Where 'gas barrel' means the material that was actually used as conduits for gas.
Here's a gaspipe bike - an "olmo" You couldn't tell by looking that its heavy.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/CRz7u.jpg)
---
Note technically pipe is made from flat metal which has been rolled, and is joined with a seam weld. Tube is formed as a closed shape and does not have a seam.
See also Reynolds and Ishtawa steel entries elsewhere in this CW. |
43,838 | In response to yet another frame materials question, I thought it might be useful to start with a more answerable question. One answer per material please, with an example of a bicycle frame using that material.
Please use the format I've used in my answer(s) to make it easy to compare materials.
I see no harm in having all 400+ steel alloys listed if someone wants to do that, but "steel" must specifically be low-grade mild steel rather than a specific alloy. Likewise for aluminium, titanium, magnesium and other metals.
For composites, including metal composites, I would again prefer specific examples with details (there's a big difference between steel reinforced concrete and kevlar/polyester composites). I would also love to see weird and wonderful bikes included.
Materials
---------
(ie index to answers. Please update links as you add an answer):
### Metals
* **Aluminum Bikes**
+ **[Aluminum](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/58015/26330)**
+ **[Scandium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/43838/what-different-frame-materials-have-been-used/44545#44545)** - Aluminium alloy
* **Steel Bikes**
+ **Columbus Steel** (not written yet)
+ **ChromeMoly Steel** (not written yet)
+ **[Gaspipe Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/45078/19705)**
+ **Ishiwata Steel** (not written yet)
+ **Kaisei Steel** (not written yet)
+ **[Mild Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43839/8273)**
+ **[Reynolds Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/45082/19705)** (needs extension)
+ **Tange Steel** (not written yet)
+ **Vitus/Super Vitus Steel** (not written yet)
* **[Titanium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44493/19705)**
* **[Beryllium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/57625/26330)**
* **[Gold (pure)](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43845/19705)** (theoretical)
* **Magnesium** (not written yet)
### Organic
* **[Bamboo](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44989/31280)**
* **[Bones](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43849/19705)**
* **Wood Bikes**
+ **[Carved Wood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44550/19705)**
+ **[Plywood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43842/7044)** (composite)
+ **[Wood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43843/7044)** (complete frame and bicycle)
* **Cardboard** (not yet written)
(<https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44582/20060>)\*\*
### Composites and Polymers
* **[Carbon Fibre](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43854/13174)**
* **[Flax fiber (90% flax, 10% carbon)](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44582/26330)**
* **[Plastic](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/57627/35081)**
### Layout Specific
* **[Cables](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43847/19705)** aka Tensegrity or Tensional Integrity
* **[3D Printed](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43848/19705)** (not yet written) | 2016/11/15 | [
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/43838",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/users/7044/"
] | **Plastic**
Density
>
> ~0.91 g/cm³ for Polypropylene (triangle #5)
>
> ~0.92 g/cm³ for low density Polyethylene (triangle #4)
>
> ~0.95 g/cm³ for high density Polyethylene (triangle #2)
>
> 1.03-1.06 g/cm³ for polystychrene (triangle #6)
>
> 1.35-1.38 g/cm³ for PETE like water bottles (triangle #1)
>
> 1.32-1.42 g/cm³ for PVC polyvinyl Chloride (triangle #3)
>
>
>
>
There have been a few attempts to build plastic bicycles since the 70's. Construction materials include Lexan and HDPE (high-density polyethelyne) but I can't find any evidence of commercial success in adult's bicycles. Plastic children's bikes are popular but they are usually in the form of balance bikes without pedals (still technically a bicycle?).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DcAlq.jpg)
<https://www.designboom.com/cms/images/user_submit/2011/07/frii5.jpg>
**Advantages
(For children's bikes)**
* Light-weight
* Cheap
* No sharp edges
**Disadvantages**
* Heavy
* Overly flexible
* Deteriorates when subjected to UV light
* Embarrassing | **Carved Wood**
While more expensive than plywood, bamboo or dimensional lumber, frames made from carved wooden tubes (or even monocoques) do exist.
**Advantages**
* directional strength (somewhat like CF) allows for stiff yet vibration-absorbing frames
* good strength to weight ratio
* potentially eco-friendly
* resistant to denting due to thicker walls
* looks and feels awesome (subjective)
**Disadvantages**
* needs thicker tubes
* very difficult to use well
* easily damaged by moisture unless specially treated
* very expensive due to labor (and sometimes exotic woods) |
43,838 | In response to yet another frame materials question, I thought it might be useful to start with a more answerable question. One answer per material please, with an example of a bicycle frame using that material.
Please use the format I've used in my answer(s) to make it easy to compare materials.
I see no harm in having all 400+ steel alloys listed if someone wants to do that, but "steel" must specifically be low-grade mild steel rather than a specific alloy. Likewise for aluminium, titanium, magnesium and other metals.
For composites, including metal composites, I would again prefer specific examples with details (there's a big difference between steel reinforced concrete and kevlar/polyester composites). I would also love to see weird and wonderful bikes included.
Materials
---------
(ie index to answers. Please update links as you add an answer):
### Metals
* **Aluminum Bikes**
+ **[Aluminum](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/58015/26330)**
+ **[Scandium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/43838/what-different-frame-materials-have-been-used/44545#44545)** - Aluminium alloy
* **Steel Bikes**
+ **Columbus Steel** (not written yet)
+ **ChromeMoly Steel** (not written yet)
+ **[Gaspipe Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/45078/19705)**
+ **Ishiwata Steel** (not written yet)
+ **Kaisei Steel** (not written yet)
+ **[Mild Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43839/8273)**
+ **[Reynolds Steel](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/45082/19705)** (needs extension)
+ **Tange Steel** (not written yet)
+ **Vitus/Super Vitus Steel** (not written yet)
* **[Titanium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44493/19705)**
* **[Beryllium](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/57625/26330)**
* **[Gold (pure)](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43845/19705)** (theoretical)
* **Magnesium** (not written yet)
### Organic
* **[Bamboo](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44989/31280)**
* **[Bones](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43849/19705)**
* **Wood Bikes**
+ **[Carved Wood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44550/19705)**
+ **[Plywood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43842/7044)** (composite)
+ **[Wood](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43843/7044)** (complete frame and bicycle)
* **Cardboard** (not yet written)
(<https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44582/20060>)\*\*
### Composites and Polymers
* **[Carbon Fibre](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43854/13174)**
* **[Flax fiber (90% flax, 10% carbon)](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/44582/26330)**
* **[Plastic](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/57627/35081)**
### Layout Specific
* **[Cables](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43847/19705)** aka Tensegrity or Tensional Integrity
* **[3D Printed](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/a/43848/19705)** (not yet written) | 2016/11/15 | [
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/43838",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com",
"https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/users/7044/"
] | **Bamboo & Bamboo Carbon-Fibre Composite**
Bamboo bikes have been about far longer than most people assume. First patents for bamboo bikes were issued in England and the US in 1894 and 1896, respectively.
With the advent of Green Thinking bamboo bikes are slowly edging back into fashion.
Bamboo Carbon-fibre composite frame. Courtesy of [Biotic Bikes](http://www.bioticbikes.com/):
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dcB44.png)
Bamboo-tubed frames with metal/composite joints can be home built more easily than many other frame materials
**Advantages**
* High strength-to-weight ratio, higher tensile strength than steel!
* Natural vibration control which makes for a more comfortable ride
* Sustainable
* Lightweight, bamboo has a density of 0.35 g/qcm
* In a lot of developing parts of the world bamboo bicycles stimulate the local industry
**Disadvantages**
* If no proper QC procedures are in place, raw materials may naturally be compromised
* Since bamboo is a natural material no consistent look can be guaranteed (this may be regarded as an advantage by some) | **Gaspipe Steel**
A derisive term for the "high tensile" or mild steel tubing used to build cheap bicycles. Since low-end bicycles are made of low-quality steel, the builders compensate by using heavy, thick tubes.
These tubes are often single-gauge or plain gauge, so they have a consistant wall thickness all the way along the tube whereas higher quality frames are made from butted tubes that may have two or three different thicknessess depending on the loads and distance from a weld.
**Difference to other Steel**
All steel has the same "Youngs Modulus" (measure of stiffness) What changes between gaspipe and higher tubes is the strength, so gaspipe steel drawn to a thickness of 0.4mm (the thinnest piece of Reynolds tubing) will bend under far less pressure.
**Advantages**
* Cost. This plain gauge tubing is cheaper.
* Efficiency. Butted tubes have to be made in the lengths required. Plain tube can be ordered in longer lengths and then cut to suit the requirements which reduces wasteage.
* Repairable. Steel can be fixed much easier than most other frame materials.
**Disadvantages**
* Weight. Approximate weights for a bare steel frame and its fork.
>
> **Tubing Weight**
>
> Reynolds 531 Superlight/531pro/753 5.5lbs to 5.75lbs or 2.5-2.6 kilograms
>
> Reynolds 531DB/531C 6lbs or 2.7 kilograms
>
> Reynolds 531ST (Standard Tube) 7lbs or 3.2 kilograms
>
> Good quality plain gauge tubing 7lbs to 9lbs, or 3.2-4.1 kilograms
>
> Inexpensive plain gauge tubing 9lbs to 13lbs, or 4.1-6 kilograms
>
>
>
>
Note: "531" denote different quality [tubing types](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynolds_Cycle_Technology#Tubing_types). See the Reynolds entry in this CW for further information.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VvgUF.jpg)
That's Scaffold tube, inch and eighth gas barrel, inch and eighth 531 tubing (⌀ ≈29 mm), inch gas barrel and inch 531 tubing. Where 'gas barrel' means the material that was actually used as conduits for gas.
Here's a gaspipe bike - an "olmo" You couldn't tell by looking that its heavy.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/CRz7u.jpg)
---
Note technically pipe is made from flat metal which has been rolled, and is joined with a seam weld. Tube is formed as a closed shape and does not have a seam.
See also Reynolds and Ishtawa steel entries elsewhere in this CW. |
47,458 | My word is for postfixes (they call them suffixes) forming adjectives, very often I face missing English counterparts speaking of rich in adjectives (they are formed easily with almost no snobbish overhead i.e. 'censorship') Bulgarian language.
One of my wishes is **to have all such postfixes** in order to ease getting the whole picture while offering some useful statistical 'guidance'. Thus the brevity (one word) would be more expressive as well, not to mention the ?ringiness?.
For example, very often I struggle to find the English counterparts (both noun and adjective ones) to 'zvutchen/zvutchnost' and I use non-established 'ringy/ringiness' after the notion of:
***have a ring to it*** - if a word or idea has a ring to it, it sounds interesting or attractive
Please, share with me/us a book or an Internet page dealing exhaustively with 'adjective forming'.
I found a good Internet resource (<http://www.grammar-quizzes.com/adj-forms.html>) on this theme, but it doesn't exhaust the matter, **I need as full as possible list of those postfixes**!
Good leads to good, one beautiful unknown to me word popped up there:
***Adjectivalization*** – in linguistics, the forming of words from other categories , nouns and verbs, by suffixation. (Huddleston 1706).
Shown forms:
**-AL** relating to
**-ARY** relating to quality or place
**-FUL** full of
**-IC** having the nature of; caused by
**-ICAL** having the nature of
**-ISH** origin, nature
**-LESS** without
**-LIKE** like
**-LY** like
**-OUS** quality, nature
**-Y** like
On a '-Y' note, in many TV series I hear marginal (almost invalid) coinages as 'sciency' (stands for science+Y) encountered in 'Stargate Atlantis', there the military guy said 'This guy doesn't look sciency to me.' referring to one who pretended to be from scientific community.
My add-on includes:
**-AN** e.g. BulgariAN, NewtoniAN
**-ESQUE** e.g. Hollywoodesque
**-ID** e.g. demonoID
**-AR** e.g. lineAR
**-ORY** e.g. derogatORY
-ESE e.g. tabloidESE - (neologism, chiefly literature) The writing style of tabloid
journalism.
**-ESE** e.g. DublinESE - The dialect spoken in Dublin.
For some reason Wiktionary omitted the adjectival usage, they define the above two as nouns only!?
We have 'NewtoniAN' while 'NewtonESQUE' is kinda marginal but still has its place.
Also we have 'HitleriAN' and 'HitlerESQUE', however it is difficult for me to discern, they appear fully interchangeable to me.
In Russian and Bulgarian '-ESQUE' counterpart is '-SKI', these forms are widely used, for above pair the second dominates, namely 'Гитлеровская/Хитлеристка'.
English Wiktionary says for first:
*Of, relating to, or resembling Hitler (the German chancellor) or his actions.*
English Wiktionary says for second:
"Reminiscent of Adolf Hitler."
Ha, one adjective eludes me, how to form a/the adjectival form of tweet/twitter?
First being the object second being the subject, what are the well coined variants!
**What else adjectivalizationAL forms are missing from above list?!**
Oh, just looked up for 'blackadder' adjective:
*"A striking vision of artistic compromise, personal sacrifice and political brutality, rendered in what is often a somewhat Blackadderish style."– Evening Standard*
*"In any case, the narrative of this novel blisters along with a Blackadderish cunning." /'Memoirs of a Gnostic Dwarf' book/*
*"It's recognisably Blackadderish in its approach to history, silly and inventive and with a good line in visual gags."– independent.co.uk*
*"Is Roland Emmerich's Blackadderish romp about the real author of Shakespeare's plays also a piece of post-structuralist genius?"– theguardian.com*
It turns out that British newspapers use it to/for a good measure.
Also, couldn't resist not to look into Google Books corpus (2013 edition) featuring 7,477,257 distinct words:
*[&blackadder&] 0,000,046 blackadder /Google\_Books\_corpus\_version\_20130501\_English\_All\_Nodes.txt.rip1gram.txt.sorted/
[&blackadder&] 0,000,008 blackadders /Google\_Books\_corpus\_version\_20130501\_English\_All\_Nodes.txt.rip1gram.txt.sorted/*
Confusing, such richness (3.5 million English books, 345 billion words corpus spanning a 200+ years period) and lacking the beautiful 'Blackadderish'.
To summarize, **which (grammar) books/resources explaining the suffixes to their fullest you can recommend?**
Add-on, 2018-Jun-25:
Scary, 3 years and 5 months passed already!
Yet, my obsession remains, glad to share my latest Suffixes-Showdown-Booklet in PDF, 2 pages long and **322 suffixes strong**:
<http://forum.thefreedictionary.com/postsm1048533_Etymology-of--dragon-.aspx#1048533>
Hope, the feedback (both destructive and constructive) from StackExchange community will help in refining it! | 2015/01/21 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/47458",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/15792/"
] | This isn't an exhaustive list, but let me give it the old college try. In english, the following suffixes are considered adjective-forming:
***Relational Family***
All the members of this family mean of or pertaining to. Some have a different scope than others.
* -al (Fungal, Cranial)
* -an/-ian/-n (Roman, American, Historian)
* -ar (Scalar, Modular)
* -ic (Acidic, Idyllic)
* -id (Perseid)
* -ese/-ish :: of or pertaining to characteristics of a location, its people, and the language they use (Japanese, Maltese, British, English, Irish)
* -ish/-y :: somewhat, about or approximately when used with numbers, typical or similar to (Sciencey, Girlish, Tennish, Twentyish)
* -ous/-ious/-atous (Bulbous, Courageous)
* -otic (Eukaryotic, Symbiotic)
***Of Similar Form To, But Not the Same As***
* -oid (Humanoid, Alkaloid)
* -like (Lifelike, Childlike)
***Others***
* -th :: ordinal (Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth) | *-ID e.g. demonoID* is wrong, and should be -OID. HumanOID, FelinOID, DemonOID. ...for that matter, it may need to be -nOID -- i.e., I can't think of a time to use -oid without an N-sound in the word before it (minus any silent E). Feline, felinoid. Human, humanoid. |
47,458 | My word is for postfixes (they call them suffixes) forming adjectives, very often I face missing English counterparts speaking of rich in adjectives (they are formed easily with almost no snobbish overhead i.e. 'censorship') Bulgarian language.
One of my wishes is **to have all such postfixes** in order to ease getting the whole picture while offering some useful statistical 'guidance'. Thus the brevity (one word) would be more expressive as well, not to mention the ?ringiness?.
For example, very often I struggle to find the English counterparts (both noun and adjective ones) to 'zvutchen/zvutchnost' and I use non-established 'ringy/ringiness' after the notion of:
***have a ring to it*** - if a word or idea has a ring to it, it sounds interesting or attractive
Please, share with me/us a book or an Internet page dealing exhaustively with 'adjective forming'.
I found a good Internet resource (<http://www.grammar-quizzes.com/adj-forms.html>) on this theme, but it doesn't exhaust the matter, **I need as full as possible list of those postfixes**!
Good leads to good, one beautiful unknown to me word popped up there:
***Adjectivalization*** – in linguistics, the forming of words from other categories , nouns and verbs, by suffixation. (Huddleston 1706).
Shown forms:
**-AL** relating to
**-ARY** relating to quality or place
**-FUL** full of
**-IC** having the nature of; caused by
**-ICAL** having the nature of
**-ISH** origin, nature
**-LESS** without
**-LIKE** like
**-LY** like
**-OUS** quality, nature
**-Y** like
On a '-Y' note, in many TV series I hear marginal (almost invalid) coinages as 'sciency' (stands for science+Y) encountered in 'Stargate Atlantis', there the military guy said 'This guy doesn't look sciency to me.' referring to one who pretended to be from scientific community.
My add-on includes:
**-AN** e.g. BulgariAN, NewtoniAN
**-ESQUE** e.g. Hollywoodesque
**-ID** e.g. demonoID
**-AR** e.g. lineAR
**-ORY** e.g. derogatORY
-ESE e.g. tabloidESE - (neologism, chiefly literature) The writing style of tabloid
journalism.
**-ESE** e.g. DublinESE - The dialect spoken in Dublin.
For some reason Wiktionary omitted the adjectival usage, they define the above two as nouns only!?
We have 'NewtoniAN' while 'NewtonESQUE' is kinda marginal but still has its place.
Also we have 'HitleriAN' and 'HitlerESQUE', however it is difficult for me to discern, they appear fully interchangeable to me.
In Russian and Bulgarian '-ESQUE' counterpart is '-SKI', these forms are widely used, for above pair the second dominates, namely 'Гитлеровская/Хитлеристка'.
English Wiktionary says for first:
*Of, relating to, or resembling Hitler (the German chancellor) or his actions.*
English Wiktionary says for second:
"Reminiscent of Adolf Hitler."
Ha, one adjective eludes me, how to form a/the adjectival form of tweet/twitter?
First being the object second being the subject, what are the well coined variants!
**What else adjectivalizationAL forms are missing from above list?!**
Oh, just looked up for 'blackadder' adjective:
*"A striking vision of artistic compromise, personal sacrifice and political brutality, rendered in what is often a somewhat Blackadderish style."– Evening Standard*
*"In any case, the narrative of this novel blisters along with a Blackadderish cunning." /'Memoirs of a Gnostic Dwarf' book/*
*"It's recognisably Blackadderish in its approach to history, silly and inventive and with a good line in visual gags."– independent.co.uk*
*"Is Roland Emmerich's Blackadderish romp about the real author of Shakespeare's plays also a piece of post-structuralist genius?"– theguardian.com*
It turns out that British newspapers use it to/for a good measure.
Also, couldn't resist not to look into Google Books corpus (2013 edition) featuring 7,477,257 distinct words:
*[&blackadder&] 0,000,046 blackadder /Google\_Books\_corpus\_version\_20130501\_English\_All\_Nodes.txt.rip1gram.txt.sorted/
[&blackadder&] 0,000,008 blackadders /Google\_Books\_corpus\_version\_20130501\_English\_All\_Nodes.txt.rip1gram.txt.sorted/*
Confusing, such richness (3.5 million English books, 345 billion words corpus spanning a 200+ years period) and lacking the beautiful 'Blackadderish'.
To summarize, **which (grammar) books/resources explaining the suffixes to their fullest you can recommend?**
Add-on, 2018-Jun-25:
Scary, 3 years and 5 months passed already!
Yet, my obsession remains, glad to share my latest Suffixes-Showdown-Booklet in PDF, 2 pages long and **322 suffixes strong**:
<http://forum.thefreedictionary.com/postsm1048533_Etymology-of--dragon-.aspx#1048533>
Hope, the feedback (both destructive and constructive) from StackExchange community will help in refining it! | 2015/01/21 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/47458",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/15792/"
] | * **-ed** (the past tense of a verb can usually be used as an adjective.)
* **-ible** (use with words that you can add -ion to.) For example: combustion -> combustible.
* **-able** (use with words that you cannot add -ion to, such as words that you can add -ation to.) For example: find -> findable, commiserate -> miserable.
* **-ile** (Only use with words that you can add -ion to.) For example: projection -> projectile.
* **-ive** (Only use with words that you can add -ion to.) For example: motion -> motive.
* **-ative** (Only use with words that you can add -ation to.) For example: formation -> formative. | *-ID e.g. demonoID* is wrong, and should be -OID. HumanOID, FelinOID, DemonOID. ...for that matter, it may need to be -nOID -- i.e., I can't think of a time to use -oid without an N-sound in the word before it (minus any silent E). Feline, felinoid. Human, humanoid. |
15,832 | The phrase, **"Only invest what you can afford to lose"**, when put in quotes, generates 167,000 Google hits and seems to me like one of the hoariest maxims in investing. But what does it mean?
Obviously, something like this is open for subjective interpretation--a no-no for SE sites. But is there any *reasonably objective understanding* of what "afford" means here? Such as common investing or personal finance conventions (bolstered by economic data or theory) about a specific value for how much "afford to lose" means?
For various toy examples...you could "afford to lose..."
* everything but a six month emergency fund--at any age.
* all but x% of your current wealth, where x is the answer to an age-based equation.
* no more than five years' worth of net earnings.
* etc...etc...
Also, most asset allocation prescriptions I see suggest a youngish person (say, 40) should be essentially invested 100% in *something* with risk, with very little guaranteed investments like CDs, other than that famous six month emergency fund. But if one is invested close to 100%, what happened to "only invest what you can afford to lose"?
My feeling is there is something incoherent about this maxim, and I'm hoping the forum can help shine objective light on it by referencing tested ideas or micro-economic theories about it. | 2012/07/02 | [
"https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/15832",
"https://money.stackexchange.com",
"https://money.stackexchange.com/users/4222/"
] | The way I approach "afford to lose", is that you need to sit down and figure out the amount of money you need at different stages of your life.
I can look at my current expenses and figure out what I will always roughly be paying - bills, groceries, rent/mortgage.
I can figure out when I want to retire and how much I want to live on - I generally group 401k and other retirement separately to what I want to invest. With these numbers I can figure out how much I need to save to achieve this goal.
Maybe you want to purchase a house in 5 years - figure out the rough down payment and include that in your savings plan. Continue for all capital purchases that you can think you would aim for.
Subtract your income from this and you have the amount of money you have greater discretion over. Subtracting current liabilities (4th of July holiday... christmas presents) and you have the amount you could "afford to lose".
As to the asset allocation you should look at, as others have mentioned that the younger you the greater your opportunity is to recoup losses. Personally I would disagree - you should have some plan for the investment and use that goal to drive your diversification. | The advice to "Only invest what you can afford to lose" is good advice. Most people should have several pots of money: Checking to pay your bills; short term savings; emergency fund; college fund; retirement.
When you think about investing that is the funds that have along lead time: college and retirement. It is never the money you need to pay your bills.
Now when somebody is young, the money they have decided to invest can be in riskier investments. You have time to recover. Over time the transition is made to less risky investments because the recovery time is now limited. For example putting all your college savings for your recent high school graduate into the stock market could have devastating consequences.
Your hear this advice "Only invest what you can afford to lose" because too many people ask about hove to maximize the return on the down payment for their house: [Example A](https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/14691/new-to-investing-i-have-20-000-cash-saved-what-should-i-do-with-it), [Example B](https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/6723/first-time-home-buyer-can-you-withdraw-funds-from-a-roth-401k-for-a-first-time). They want to use vehicles designed for long term investing, for short term purposes. Imagine a 10% correction while you are waiting for closing. |
15,832 | The phrase, **"Only invest what you can afford to lose"**, when put in quotes, generates 167,000 Google hits and seems to me like one of the hoariest maxims in investing. But what does it mean?
Obviously, something like this is open for subjective interpretation--a no-no for SE sites. But is there any *reasonably objective understanding* of what "afford" means here? Such as common investing or personal finance conventions (bolstered by economic data or theory) about a specific value for how much "afford to lose" means?
For various toy examples...you could "afford to lose..."
* everything but a six month emergency fund--at any age.
* all but x% of your current wealth, where x is the answer to an age-based equation.
* no more than five years' worth of net earnings.
* etc...etc...
Also, most asset allocation prescriptions I see suggest a youngish person (say, 40) should be essentially invested 100% in *something* with risk, with very little guaranteed investments like CDs, other than that famous six month emergency fund. But if one is invested close to 100%, what happened to "only invest what you can afford to lose"?
My feeling is there is something incoherent about this maxim, and I'm hoping the forum can help shine objective light on it by referencing tested ideas or micro-economic theories about it. | 2012/07/02 | [
"https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/15832",
"https://money.stackexchange.com",
"https://money.stackexchange.com/users/4222/"
] | Well....
If you have alllll your money invested, and then there's a financial crisis, *and* there's a personal crisis at the same time (e.g. you lose your job) then you're in big trouble. You might not have enough money to cover your bills while you find a new job. You could lose your house, ruin your credit, or something icky like that. Think 2008. Even if there's not a financial crisis, if the money is in a tax-sheltered retirement account then withdrawing it will incur ugly penalities.
Now, after you've got an emergency fund established, things are different. If you could probably ride out six to twelve months with your general-purpose savings, then with the money you are investing for the long term (retirement) there's no reason you shouldn't invest 100% of the money in stocks. The difference is that you're not going to come back for that money in 6 months, you're going to come back for it in 40 years.
As for retirement savings over the long term, though, I don't think it's a good idea to think of your money in those terms. If you ever lose 100% of your money on the stock market while you've invested in diversified instruments like S&P500 index funds, you're probably screwed one way or another because that represents the core industrial base of the US economy, and you'll have better things to worry about, like looking for a used shotgun. Myself, I prefer to give the suggestion "don't invest any money in stocks if you're going to need to take it out in the next 5 years or so" because you generally shouldn't be worried about a 100% loss of all the money in stocks your retirement accounts nearly so much as you should be worried about weathering large, medium-term setbacks, like the dot-com bubble crash and the 2008 financial crisis. I save the "don't invest money unless you can afford to lose it all" advice for highly speculative instruments like gold futures or social-media IPOs.
Remember also that while you might lose a lot of your money on the stock market, your savings accounts and bonds will earn you pathetic amounts by comparison, which you will slowly lose to inflation. If you've had your money invested for decades then even during a crash you may still be coming out ahead relative to bonds. | Keep in mind that it's a cliche statement used as non-controversial filler in articles, not some universal truth. When you were young, did you mom tell you to eat your vegetables because children are starving in Ethiopia? This is the personal finance article equivalent of that.
Generally speaking, the statement as an air of truth about it. If you're living hand to mouth, you probably shouldn't be thinking about the stock market. If you're a typical middle class individual investor, you probably shouldn't be messing around with very speculative investments.
That said, be careful about looking for some deeper meaning that just isn't there. If the secret of investment success is hidden in that statement, I have a bridge to sell you that has a great view of Brooklyn. |
15,832 | The phrase, **"Only invest what you can afford to lose"**, when put in quotes, generates 167,000 Google hits and seems to me like one of the hoariest maxims in investing. But what does it mean?
Obviously, something like this is open for subjective interpretation--a no-no for SE sites. But is there any *reasonably objective understanding* of what "afford" means here? Such as common investing or personal finance conventions (bolstered by economic data or theory) about a specific value for how much "afford to lose" means?
For various toy examples...you could "afford to lose..."
* everything but a six month emergency fund--at any age.
* all but x% of your current wealth, where x is the answer to an age-based equation.
* no more than five years' worth of net earnings.
* etc...etc...
Also, most asset allocation prescriptions I see suggest a youngish person (say, 40) should be essentially invested 100% in *something* with risk, with very little guaranteed investments like CDs, other than that famous six month emergency fund. But if one is invested close to 100%, what happened to "only invest what you can afford to lose"?
My feeling is there is something incoherent about this maxim, and I'm hoping the forum can help shine objective light on it by referencing tested ideas or micro-economic theories about it. | 2012/07/02 | [
"https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/15832",
"https://money.stackexchange.com",
"https://money.stackexchange.com/users/4222/"
] | Well....
If you have alllll your money invested, and then there's a financial crisis, *and* there's a personal crisis at the same time (e.g. you lose your job) then you're in big trouble. You might not have enough money to cover your bills while you find a new job. You could lose your house, ruin your credit, or something icky like that. Think 2008. Even if there's not a financial crisis, if the money is in a tax-sheltered retirement account then withdrawing it will incur ugly penalities.
Now, after you've got an emergency fund established, things are different. If you could probably ride out six to twelve months with your general-purpose savings, then with the money you are investing for the long term (retirement) there's no reason you shouldn't invest 100% of the money in stocks. The difference is that you're not going to come back for that money in 6 months, you're going to come back for it in 40 years.
As for retirement savings over the long term, though, I don't think it's a good idea to think of your money in those terms. If you ever lose 100% of your money on the stock market while you've invested in diversified instruments like S&P500 index funds, you're probably screwed one way or another because that represents the core industrial base of the US economy, and you'll have better things to worry about, like looking for a used shotgun. Myself, I prefer to give the suggestion "don't invest any money in stocks if you're going to need to take it out in the next 5 years or so" because you generally shouldn't be worried about a 100% loss of all the money in stocks your retirement accounts nearly so much as you should be worried about weathering large, medium-term setbacks, like the dot-com bubble crash and the 2008 financial crisis. I save the "don't invest money unless you can afford to lose it all" advice for highly speculative instruments like gold futures or social-media IPOs.
Remember also that while you might lose a lot of your money on the stock market, your savings accounts and bonds will earn you pathetic amounts by comparison, which you will slowly lose to inflation. If you've had your money invested for decades then even during a crash you may still be coming out ahead relative to bonds. | The way I approach "afford to lose", is that you need to sit down and figure out the amount of money you need at different stages of your life.
I can look at my current expenses and figure out what I will always roughly be paying - bills, groceries, rent/mortgage.
I can figure out when I want to retire and how much I want to live on - I generally group 401k and other retirement separately to what I want to invest. With these numbers I can figure out how much I need to save to achieve this goal.
Maybe you want to purchase a house in 5 years - figure out the rough down payment and include that in your savings plan. Continue for all capital purchases that you can think you would aim for.
Subtract your income from this and you have the amount of money you have greater discretion over. Subtracting current liabilities (4th of July holiday... christmas presents) and you have the amount you could "afford to lose".
As to the asset allocation you should look at, as others have mentioned that the younger you the greater your opportunity is to recoup losses. Personally I would disagree - you should have some plan for the investment and use that goal to drive your diversification. |
15,832 | The phrase, **"Only invest what you can afford to lose"**, when put in quotes, generates 167,000 Google hits and seems to me like one of the hoariest maxims in investing. But what does it mean?
Obviously, something like this is open for subjective interpretation--a no-no for SE sites. But is there any *reasonably objective understanding* of what "afford" means here? Such as common investing or personal finance conventions (bolstered by economic data or theory) about a specific value for how much "afford to lose" means?
For various toy examples...you could "afford to lose..."
* everything but a six month emergency fund--at any age.
* all but x% of your current wealth, where x is the answer to an age-based equation.
* no more than five years' worth of net earnings.
* etc...etc...
Also, most asset allocation prescriptions I see suggest a youngish person (say, 40) should be essentially invested 100% in *something* with risk, with very little guaranteed investments like CDs, other than that famous six month emergency fund. But if one is invested close to 100%, what happened to "only invest what you can afford to lose"?
My feeling is there is something incoherent about this maxim, and I'm hoping the forum can help shine objective light on it by referencing tested ideas or micro-economic theories about it. | 2012/07/02 | [
"https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/15832",
"https://money.stackexchange.com",
"https://money.stackexchange.com/users/4222/"
] | It's a phrase that has no meaning out of context.
When I go to Las Vegas (I don't go, but if I did) I would treat what I took as money I plan to lose.
When I trade stock options and buy puts or calls, I view it as a calculated risk, with a far greater than zero chance of having the trade show zero in time.
A single company has a chance of going bankrupt. A mix of stocks has risk, the S&P was at less than half its high in the 2008 crash. The money I had in the S&P was not money I could afford to lose, but I could afford to wait it out. There's a difference. We're not back at the highs, but we're close.
By the way, there are many people who would not sleep knowing that their statement shows a 50% loss from a prior high point. Those people should be in a mix more suited to their risk tolerance. | I think it's a silly statement. If you are prepared from the start that you might lose it then you shouldn't invest. You invest to earn not to lose. Most often losses are a result of fear. Remember you only lose when you sell lower than you bought for. So if you have the patience you will probably regain. I ask my clients many times how much do they want to earn and they all say "as much as possible". Last time I checked, that's not an objective and therefore a strategy can't be built for that. If there is a strategy then exiting a stock is easy, without a strategy you never know when to exit and then you are exposed to bottomless losses. I've successfully traded for many years with large amounts of money. I made money in the FC and in the bubble, both times it wasn't because I was prepared to lose but because I had an entry and exit strategy. If you have both the idea of investing what u are prepared to lose has little value. |
15,832 | The phrase, **"Only invest what you can afford to lose"**, when put in quotes, generates 167,000 Google hits and seems to me like one of the hoariest maxims in investing. But what does it mean?
Obviously, something like this is open for subjective interpretation--a no-no for SE sites. But is there any *reasonably objective understanding* of what "afford" means here? Such as common investing or personal finance conventions (bolstered by economic data or theory) about a specific value for how much "afford to lose" means?
For various toy examples...you could "afford to lose..."
* everything but a six month emergency fund--at any age.
* all but x% of your current wealth, where x is the answer to an age-based equation.
* no more than five years' worth of net earnings.
* etc...etc...
Also, most asset allocation prescriptions I see suggest a youngish person (say, 40) should be essentially invested 100% in *something* with risk, with very little guaranteed investments like CDs, other than that famous six month emergency fund. But if one is invested close to 100%, what happened to "only invest what you can afford to lose"?
My feeling is there is something incoherent about this maxim, and I'm hoping the forum can help shine objective light on it by referencing tested ideas or micro-economic theories about it. | 2012/07/02 | [
"https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/15832",
"https://money.stackexchange.com",
"https://money.stackexchange.com/users/4222/"
] | It's a phrase that has no meaning out of context.
When I go to Las Vegas (I don't go, but if I did) I would treat what I took as money I plan to lose.
When I trade stock options and buy puts or calls, I view it as a calculated risk, with a far greater than zero chance of having the trade show zero in time.
A single company has a chance of going bankrupt. A mix of stocks has risk, the S&P was at less than half its high in the 2008 crash. The money I had in the S&P was not money I could afford to lose, but I could afford to wait it out. There's a difference. We're not back at the highs, but we're close.
By the way, there are many people who would not sleep knowing that their statement shows a 50% loss from a prior high point. Those people should be in a mix more suited to their risk tolerance. | Keep in mind that it's a cliche statement used as non-controversial filler in articles, not some universal truth. When you were young, did you mom tell you to eat your vegetables because children are starving in Ethiopia? This is the personal finance article equivalent of that.
Generally speaking, the statement as an air of truth about it. If you're living hand to mouth, you probably shouldn't be thinking about the stock market. If you're a typical middle class individual investor, you probably shouldn't be messing around with very speculative investments.
That said, be careful about looking for some deeper meaning that just isn't there. If the secret of investment success is hidden in that statement, I have a bridge to sell you that has a great view of Brooklyn. |
15,832 | The phrase, **"Only invest what you can afford to lose"**, when put in quotes, generates 167,000 Google hits and seems to me like one of the hoariest maxims in investing. But what does it mean?
Obviously, something like this is open for subjective interpretation--a no-no for SE sites. But is there any *reasonably objective understanding* of what "afford" means here? Such as common investing or personal finance conventions (bolstered by economic data or theory) about a specific value for how much "afford to lose" means?
For various toy examples...you could "afford to lose..."
* everything but a six month emergency fund--at any age.
* all but x% of your current wealth, where x is the answer to an age-based equation.
* no more than five years' worth of net earnings.
* etc...etc...
Also, most asset allocation prescriptions I see suggest a youngish person (say, 40) should be essentially invested 100% in *something* with risk, with very little guaranteed investments like CDs, other than that famous six month emergency fund. But if one is invested close to 100%, what happened to "only invest what you can afford to lose"?
My feeling is there is something incoherent about this maxim, and I'm hoping the forum can help shine objective light on it by referencing tested ideas or micro-economic theories about it. | 2012/07/02 | [
"https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/15832",
"https://money.stackexchange.com",
"https://money.stackexchange.com/users/4222/"
] | The way I approach "afford to lose", is that you need to sit down and figure out the amount of money you need at different stages of your life.
I can look at my current expenses and figure out what I will always roughly be paying - bills, groceries, rent/mortgage.
I can figure out when I want to retire and how much I want to live on - I generally group 401k and other retirement separately to what I want to invest. With these numbers I can figure out how much I need to save to achieve this goal.
Maybe you want to purchase a house in 5 years - figure out the rough down payment and include that in your savings plan. Continue for all capital purchases that you can think you would aim for.
Subtract your income from this and you have the amount of money you have greater discretion over. Subtracting current liabilities (4th of July holiday... christmas presents) and you have the amount you could "afford to lose".
As to the asset allocation you should look at, as others have mentioned that the younger you the greater your opportunity is to recoup losses. Personally I would disagree - you should have some plan for the investment and use that goal to drive your diversification. | I think it's a silly statement. If you are prepared from the start that you might lose it then you shouldn't invest. You invest to earn not to lose. Most often losses are a result of fear. Remember you only lose when you sell lower than you bought for. So if you have the patience you will probably regain. I ask my clients many times how much do they want to earn and they all say "as much as possible". Last time I checked, that's not an objective and therefore a strategy can't be built for that. If there is a strategy then exiting a stock is easy, without a strategy you never know when to exit and then you are exposed to bottomless losses. I've successfully traded for many years with large amounts of money. I made money in the FC and in the bubble, both times it wasn't because I was prepared to lose but because I had an entry and exit strategy. If you have both the idea of investing what u are prepared to lose has little value. |
15,832 | The phrase, **"Only invest what you can afford to lose"**, when put in quotes, generates 167,000 Google hits and seems to me like one of the hoariest maxims in investing. But what does it mean?
Obviously, something like this is open for subjective interpretation--a no-no for SE sites. But is there any *reasonably objective understanding* of what "afford" means here? Such as common investing or personal finance conventions (bolstered by economic data or theory) about a specific value for how much "afford to lose" means?
For various toy examples...you could "afford to lose..."
* everything but a six month emergency fund--at any age.
* all but x% of your current wealth, where x is the answer to an age-based equation.
* no more than five years' worth of net earnings.
* etc...etc...
Also, most asset allocation prescriptions I see suggest a youngish person (say, 40) should be essentially invested 100% in *something* with risk, with very little guaranteed investments like CDs, other than that famous six month emergency fund. But if one is invested close to 100%, what happened to "only invest what you can afford to lose"?
My feeling is there is something incoherent about this maxim, and I'm hoping the forum can help shine objective light on it by referencing tested ideas or micro-economic theories about it. | 2012/07/02 | [
"https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/15832",
"https://money.stackexchange.com",
"https://money.stackexchange.com/users/4222/"
] | The way I approach "afford to lose", is that you need to sit down and figure out the amount of money you need at different stages of your life.
I can look at my current expenses and figure out what I will always roughly be paying - bills, groceries, rent/mortgage.
I can figure out when I want to retire and how much I want to live on - I generally group 401k and other retirement separately to what I want to invest. With these numbers I can figure out how much I need to save to achieve this goal.
Maybe you want to purchase a house in 5 years - figure out the rough down payment and include that in your savings plan. Continue for all capital purchases that you can think you would aim for.
Subtract your income from this and you have the amount of money you have greater discretion over. Subtracting current liabilities (4th of July holiday... christmas presents) and you have the amount you could "afford to lose".
As to the asset allocation you should look at, as others have mentioned that the younger you the greater your opportunity is to recoup losses. Personally I would disagree - you should have some plan for the investment and use that goal to drive your diversification. | Keep in mind that it's a cliche statement used as non-controversial filler in articles, not some universal truth. When you were young, did you mom tell you to eat your vegetables because children are starving in Ethiopia? This is the personal finance article equivalent of that.
Generally speaking, the statement as an air of truth about it. If you're living hand to mouth, you probably shouldn't be thinking about the stock market. If you're a typical middle class individual investor, you probably shouldn't be messing around with very speculative investments.
That said, be careful about looking for some deeper meaning that just isn't there. If the secret of investment success is hidden in that statement, I have a bridge to sell you that has a great view of Brooklyn. |
15,832 | The phrase, **"Only invest what you can afford to lose"**, when put in quotes, generates 167,000 Google hits and seems to me like one of the hoariest maxims in investing. But what does it mean?
Obviously, something like this is open for subjective interpretation--a no-no for SE sites. But is there any *reasonably objective understanding* of what "afford" means here? Such as common investing or personal finance conventions (bolstered by economic data or theory) about a specific value for how much "afford to lose" means?
For various toy examples...you could "afford to lose..."
* everything but a six month emergency fund--at any age.
* all but x% of your current wealth, where x is the answer to an age-based equation.
* no more than five years' worth of net earnings.
* etc...etc...
Also, most asset allocation prescriptions I see suggest a youngish person (say, 40) should be essentially invested 100% in *something* with risk, with very little guaranteed investments like CDs, other than that famous six month emergency fund. But if one is invested close to 100%, what happened to "only invest what you can afford to lose"?
My feeling is there is something incoherent about this maxim, and I'm hoping the forum can help shine objective light on it by referencing tested ideas or micro-economic theories about it. | 2012/07/02 | [
"https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/15832",
"https://money.stackexchange.com",
"https://money.stackexchange.com/users/4222/"
] | Well....
If you have alllll your money invested, and then there's a financial crisis, *and* there's a personal crisis at the same time (e.g. you lose your job) then you're in big trouble. You might not have enough money to cover your bills while you find a new job. You could lose your house, ruin your credit, or something icky like that. Think 2008. Even if there's not a financial crisis, if the money is in a tax-sheltered retirement account then withdrawing it will incur ugly penalities.
Now, after you've got an emergency fund established, things are different. If you could probably ride out six to twelve months with your general-purpose savings, then with the money you are investing for the long term (retirement) there's no reason you shouldn't invest 100% of the money in stocks. The difference is that you're not going to come back for that money in 6 months, you're going to come back for it in 40 years.
As for retirement savings over the long term, though, I don't think it's a good idea to think of your money in those terms. If you ever lose 100% of your money on the stock market while you've invested in diversified instruments like S&P500 index funds, you're probably screwed one way or another because that represents the core industrial base of the US economy, and you'll have better things to worry about, like looking for a used shotgun. Myself, I prefer to give the suggestion "don't invest any money in stocks if you're going to need to take it out in the next 5 years or so" because you generally shouldn't be worried about a 100% loss of all the money in stocks your retirement accounts nearly so much as you should be worried about weathering large, medium-term setbacks, like the dot-com bubble crash and the 2008 financial crisis. I save the "don't invest money unless you can afford to lose it all" advice for highly speculative instruments like gold futures or social-media IPOs.
Remember also that while you might lose a lot of your money on the stock market, your savings accounts and bonds will earn you pathetic amounts by comparison, which you will slowly lose to inflation. If you've had your money invested for decades then even during a crash you may still be coming out ahead relative to bonds. | The advice to "Only invest what you can afford to lose" is good advice. Most people should have several pots of money: Checking to pay your bills; short term savings; emergency fund; college fund; retirement.
When you think about investing that is the funds that have along lead time: college and retirement. It is never the money you need to pay your bills.
Now when somebody is young, the money they have decided to invest can be in riskier investments. You have time to recover. Over time the transition is made to less risky investments because the recovery time is now limited. For example putting all your college savings for your recent high school graduate into the stock market could have devastating consequences.
Your hear this advice "Only invest what you can afford to lose" because too many people ask about hove to maximize the return on the down payment for their house: [Example A](https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/14691/new-to-investing-i-have-20-000-cash-saved-what-should-i-do-with-it), [Example B](https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/6723/first-time-home-buyer-can-you-withdraw-funds-from-a-roth-401k-for-a-first-time). They want to use vehicles designed for long term investing, for short term purposes. Imagine a 10% correction while you are waiting for closing. |
704,216 | Can anyone confirm the best way to integrate the repository pattern with webservices.... Well actually i have my repository patter working now in c#. I have 3 projects, DataAccess, Services and my presentation layer.
Problem is my presentation layer is a number of things... I have a ASP.NET MVC site, I have an WPF application and we are about to create another site + an external company needs access to our repository also.
Currently i have just added the services layer as reference to each of the sites... But is not the normal way to provide data access via web services? (WCF) - if this is the case will this break the services layer? or should i convert the services layer to a web service?
Anybody know what the PROS and CONS are of this, speed?? | 2009/04/01 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/704216",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | I think I understand your dilemma. If I understand correctly then your services layer consists of pure fabrications. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GRASP_(Object_Oriented_Design)>.
If I assume correctly above, then your services layer should not be impacted at all by the introduction of WCF. WCF is essentially an additional presentation layer that provides interoperability, sitting between your UI presentation layer and any business logic layers. So your WCF services would then call your services layer, which may access repositories as needed.
WCF provides a high degree of interoperability so I think it is an excellent choice. I would use basicHttp bindings though, if you intend to interop with different programming languages as this is the most flexible. Don't worry about the speed. There are plenty of solutions out there to mitigate any bottlenecks that result due to WCF.
Good luck, and let me know if I can help in any other way. | Well first - not all callers have to use the same repository API; this is especially true of an external company.
WCF is interface based. This means that *if* you need to re-use some logic code, it is possible to use IoC/DI to inject WCF rather than a DAL (but using the same interface) - by using assembly sharing. It sounds like this is what you are doing. This works in many cases, but not all; fundamentally web-service based APIs often need to be designed differently in order to be optimal. It also isn't 100% pure from an SOA viewpoint, but it gets the job done, and allows more intelligent domain entities, so in an intranet (etc) scenario it is (IMO) perfectly reasonable.
An external caller would *typically* just use the wsdl/mex-based APIs (rather than assembly sharing), but anything is possible... |
704,216 | Can anyone confirm the best way to integrate the repository pattern with webservices.... Well actually i have my repository patter working now in c#. I have 3 projects, DataAccess, Services and my presentation layer.
Problem is my presentation layer is a number of things... I have a ASP.NET MVC site, I have an WPF application and we are about to create another site + an external company needs access to our repository also.
Currently i have just added the services layer as reference to each of the sites... But is not the normal way to provide data access via web services? (WCF) - if this is the case will this break the services layer? or should i convert the services layer to a web service?
Anybody know what the PROS and CONS are of this, speed?? | 2009/04/01 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/704216",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | I think I understand your dilemma. If I understand correctly then your services layer consists of pure fabrications. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GRASP_(Object_Oriented_Design)>.
If I assume correctly above, then your services layer should not be impacted at all by the introduction of WCF. WCF is essentially an additional presentation layer that provides interoperability, sitting between your UI presentation layer and any business logic layers. So your WCF services would then call your services layer, which may access repositories as needed.
WCF provides a high degree of interoperability so I think it is an excellent choice. I would use basicHttp bindings though, if you intend to interop with different programming languages as this is the most flexible. Don't worry about the speed. There are plenty of solutions out there to mitigate any bottlenecks that result due to WCF.
Good luck, and let me know if I can help in any other way. | Maybe webservices are not the best way, if i have full access to the service assembly then i suppose it always better to assembly share the services layer with my applications.
My applications do similar things, but they all need to access the service layer - well the business logic and get back information...
In this case - its always preferable to use assembly sharing with the service layer rather than provide a WCF Web service using HTTP protocol or using TCP on wcf - for example?
Thanks again |
704,216 | Can anyone confirm the best way to integrate the repository pattern with webservices.... Well actually i have my repository patter working now in c#. I have 3 projects, DataAccess, Services and my presentation layer.
Problem is my presentation layer is a number of things... I have a ASP.NET MVC site, I have an WPF application and we are about to create another site + an external company needs access to our repository also.
Currently i have just added the services layer as reference to each of the sites... But is not the normal way to provide data access via web services? (WCF) - if this is the case will this break the services layer? or should i convert the services layer to a web service?
Anybody know what the PROS and CONS are of this, speed?? | 2009/04/01 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/704216",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | I think I understand your dilemma. If I understand correctly then your services layer consists of pure fabrications. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GRASP_(Object_Oriented_Design)>.
If I assume correctly above, then your services layer should not be impacted at all by the introduction of WCF. WCF is essentially an additional presentation layer that provides interoperability, sitting between your UI presentation layer and any business logic layers. So your WCF services would then call your services layer, which may access repositories as needed.
WCF provides a high degree of interoperability so I think it is an excellent choice. I would use basicHttp bindings though, if you intend to interop with different programming languages as this is the most flexible. Don't worry about the speed. There are plenty of solutions out there to mitigate any bottlenecks that result due to WCF.
Good luck, and let me know if I can help in any other way. | Whether to share your Service/API assemblies with your client applications is fairly subjective. If you are a full Microsoft shop, and use .NET for your entire application stack, then I would say sharing the API is a great way to gain code reuse (you have to be careful how you design your API so you don't bleed domain concerns, like repositories, into your presentation.) If you don't have any plans to migrate your client applications to other platforms (i.e. you plan to stay on .NET for the foreseeable future), then I think its perfectly acceptable to share your Service/API assemblies (and even then, in a multi-platform client environment, sharing Service/API with .NET clients should still be acceptable.) There is always a trade off between the 'architecturally ideal' and the 'practical and achievable within budget'. You can spend a LOT of time, money, and effort trying to achieve the architecturally ideal, when the gap between that and the practical often isn't really that much. The choice NOT to share the API and essentially recreate it to maintain "correct" SOA, consuming only the contract, can actually increase work and introduce maintenance hassles that quite possibly are not worth it for your particular project at this particular time. Given that you are already generally 'service-oriented', if at a future point in time you need the benefit that contract-only consumption on the client can offer, then your already set to go there. But don't push too far too soon.
Given your needs, from what I have been able to glean from these posts so far, I think your on the right track from your services down too. A repository (a la Evans, DDD) is definitely a domain concern, and as such, you really shouldn't have to worry about it from the perspective of your presentation layer. You services are the gateway to your domain, which is the home of your business logic. Repositories are just a support facility that helps you achieve domain isolation from a data store (they are glorified collections really, and to be quite frank...they can be a bit of a pain in a dynamic and complex domain. Simple data mappers, (Fowler, PofEAA) are often a lot easier to deal with and less complex in the long run, and allow more adaptable behavior around your data retrieval logic to be centralized in your domain services.) Aside from heavy use of AJAX calls to REST Services, if you expose adequate Services/API around your domain, that is the only thing that your clients should have worry about. Wrap up all the rest of your business logic entirely within the confines of your domain, and keep your clients as light weight as possible and abstracted from concepts like 'Repository' or 'Data Mapper' and whatnot.
In my experience, the only non-service or API concept that needs to be shared across the Client-to-Domain boundary is Context...and it can be notoriously difficult to cross that boundary in a service-oriented application. |
50,802,729 | How can I insert a formula in a cell in Automation Anywhere?
When I set the cell only with the value it throws me the following error:
I have the following:
 | 2018/06/11 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/50802729",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/9841523/"
] | I don't think you can set the current active cell using Set value and insert a function. Pretty annoying. I have used something like an offset transaction counter and offload your set value to like Z$vCounter$, store the value, and reassign it back to whatever cell you wanted to originally set the value of.
This is a very brief example
<https://i.gyazo.com/de73a60d7f177a26c71cc2e01ed862a4.png> | I suspect the issue is the semi-colon (;) in the formula. If this raised an error then it would leave cell I2 in edit-mode preventing typing in cell I3. |
50,802,729 | How can I insert a formula in a cell in Automation Anywhere?
When I set the cell only with the value it throws me the following error:
I have the following:
 | 2018/06/11 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/50802729",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/9841523/"
] | I don't think you can set the current active cell using Set value and insert a function. Pretty annoying. I have used something like an offset transaction counter and offload your set value to like Z$vCounter$, store the value, and reassign it back to whatever cell you wanted to originally set the value of.
This is a very brief example
<https://i.gyazo.com/de73a60d7f177a26c71cc2e01ed862a4.png> | You can use the keystrokes + go to cell , you can do it into a loop in order to use the counter of the loop |
332,913 | I am trying to figure out how the Watts is calculated based on the Volts and Amps on power supply stickers.
I am told that the 12V rail is the most important, but I don't know how they calculated the 41A? I understand 41 \* 12 = 492 for the Watts, but how do they get 41A from the four 18A?
**Update** - Sometimes they don't specify the combine Amps number like in this power supply. I guess if the manufacturer doesn't provide the numbers there would be no way to tell the amount of watts the 12V rail provides?
 | 2011/09/07 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/332913",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/81114/"
] | 41A is probably the total possible amps available to the 12V rails. Each rail can go up to 18A, but not all at once. | If the combined amps is not reported, it's the sum of all the lines together. However, I would double-check that, at least so that you don't go above the rated maximum wattage.. |
42,932 | Incidentally I found an old copy from a book, with this claim: “Hence most ad hominem criticisms are really forms of the argument from analogy” (Douglas Walton, Ad Hominem Arguments, Tuscaloosa, The University of Alabama Pr., 1998, p. 196).
Walton is one of the greatest authorities on argumentation theory. From this text passage, the question arises whether we may find an example of an ad hominem argument, which is not also simultaneously an argument from analogy.
(This is a new, less broad version of the question posed on 10 June 2017; note that the comments until 12 June 2017 refer to the previous version.) | 2017/06/10 | [
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/42932",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | Ad hominem arguments are also often genetic fallacies. "Why should we consider the logic of a lesbian about family planning?" "Don't even bother to start mansplaining." "How could you know what is wrong with our two-party system? You aren't even an American!"
This can't really be an argument from analogy, because bigotry is resistant to previous experience and is often formed in the absence of evidence.
The assumption that two lesbians/men/foreigners will be alike in some way is, in some sense, an analogy, but it is not reasonable to assume that this is one of those ways. So the genetic fallacy kicks in before the analogy has any basis for application. | What about an argument that says: "He completed the first grade, and now he comes to us and tells us how to run our atomic supercollider. Absurd." In the case that we are speaking to an excellent Princeton physicist, i.e., the argument simply leaves out the rest of the educational attainment, but does not lie.
Any such distortion through selection of the facts seems to 'slander the speaker, rather than speak to his merits or those of his argument,' if that is what is meant by "ad hominem argument" in this question.
Maybe more accurate is simply to say: He has always been wrong about everything. Simply a fact about him.
Although, it is as though we make an analogy by suggesting that the way he has been up till now, is like, alike, the way he is now.
Perhaps, strict sense, the form of ad hominem is itself analogy, between past and present.
--
I would add in passing that "ad hominem" has, also, quite distinctly different senses. |
42,932 | Incidentally I found an old copy from a book, with this claim: “Hence most ad hominem criticisms are really forms of the argument from analogy” (Douglas Walton, Ad Hominem Arguments, Tuscaloosa, The University of Alabama Pr., 1998, p. 196).
Walton is one of the greatest authorities on argumentation theory. From this text passage, the question arises whether we may find an example of an ad hominem argument, which is not also simultaneously an argument from analogy.
(This is a new, less broad version of the question posed on 10 June 2017; note that the comments until 12 June 2017 refer to the previous version.) | 2017/06/10 | [
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/42932",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | It seems that most *ad hominem* arguments are analogies. Comparisons of people to Hitler and Stalin are among the most familiar. Often the comparison is inappropriate, but it is still an analogy.
However, I would say that the truly irrelevant *ad hominem* argument fails even as an analogy. Person A argues that two plus two equals four, and Person B disagrees, pointing out that Person A has been convicted of a crime. There is no comparison of Person A to anyone, only the allegation that a character defect can invalidate the answer to an arithmetic problem. | What about an argument that says: "He completed the first grade, and now he comes to us and tells us how to run our atomic supercollider. Absurd." In the case that we are speaking to an excellent Princeton physicist, i.e., the argument simply leaves out the rest of the educational attainment, but does not lie.
Any such distortion through selection of the facts seems to 'slander the speaker, rather than speak to his merits or those of his argument,' if that is what is meant by "ad hominem argument" in this question.
Maybe more accurate is simply to say: He has always been wrong about everything. Simply a fact about him.
Although, it is as though we make an analogy by suggesting that the way he has been up till now, is like, alike, the way he is now.
Perhaps, strict sense, the form of ad hominem is itself analogy, between past and present.
--
I would add in passing that "ad hominem" has, also, quite distinctly different senses. |
42,932 | Incidentally I found an old copy from a book, with this claim: “Hence most ad hominem criticisms are really forms of the argument from analogy” (Douglas Walton, Ad Hominem Arguments, Tuscaloosa, The University of Alabama Pr., 1998, p. 196).
Walton is one of the greatest authorities on argumentation theory. From this text passage, the question arises whether we may find an example of an ad hominem argument, which is not also simultaneously an argument from analogy.
(This is a new, less broad version of the question posed on 10 June 2017; note that the comments until 12 June 2017 refer to the previous version.) | 2017/06/10 | [
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/42932",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | It seems that most *ad hominem* arguments are analogies. Comparisons of people to Hitler and Stalin are among the most familiar. Often the comparison is inappropriate, but it is still an analogy.
However, I would say that the truly irrelevant *ad hominem* argument fails even as an analogy. Person A argues that two plus two equals four, and Person B disagrees, pointing out that Person A has been convicted of a crime. There is no comparison of Person A to anyone, only the allegation that a character defect can invalidate the answer to an arithmetic problem. | Ad hominem arguments are also often genetic fallacies. "Why should we consider the logic of a lesbian about family planning?" "Don't even bother to start mansplaining." "How could you know what is wrong with our two-party system? You aren't even an American!"
This can't really be an argument from analogy, because bigotry is resistant to previous experience and is often formed in the absence of evidence.
The assumption that two lesbians/men/foreigners will be alike in some way is, in some sense, an analogy, but it is not reasonable to assume that this is one of those ways. So the genetic fallacy kicks in before the analogy has any basis for application. |
115,364 | Okay, not literally Krypton style, but let's say some local astronomical event is going to render every rocky surface in our solar system totally uninhabitable. Details aren't terribly important, so let's just say every planet is going to fall into the sun for some reason.
We have... an amount of time before it's going to happen (let's say around ten years), and that before it happens, the earth (and everything else in our solar system) is going to be just as habitable as it currently is.
Also, we have recently received very convincing (and convenient) evidence that there is an earth-like world in a neighboring star system, with, shockingly, an oxygen rich atmosphere and a functioning biosphere (how we got this evidence is also irrelevant, so for fun we'll say an alien robotic probe told us about it before scooting out of the system).
So, the question is, can the human race build a ship capable of restarting the human species (if not the civilization) on that nearby planet?
Some other simplifications/freebies:
* Human society works out in such a way that at the very least our efforts aren't severely impeded.
* Only current or very near current technologies are allowed.
* One "freebie" technology is permitted, with the caveat that it can only be something which theoretically we can probably make, but simply haven't put the effort into making (I have a few candidates in mind, but I don't want to bias your answer). | 2018/06/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/115364",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/50641/"
] | Elon Musk to the Rescue
=======================
If you asked this same question 10 years ago, I would be as pessimistic as many of the other answers. But this is 2018. The [Faclcon Heavy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_Heavy) is in production. The [BFR](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BFR_(rocket)) is on the way. Elon Musk has, many times, said that his goal is to establish an outpost on Mars **to save humanity**.
Sleepers
========
One "freebie" technology? That would have to be suspended animation (and I don't mean canceling the Flintstones). It is not as far away as you might think. I don't think it could make us live forever, but if we can sleep through the trip and wake up when we get there then we can save a **lot** of payload otherwise needed for food, water, medicine, etc. If this is a 100-year journey (using [Project Longshot](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Longshot) as a starting point) and we have sleeper technology that gives us 100:1 metabolic processing then the human bodies will have effectively aged only 1 year (so they are still "young" when they get to the destination) and the nutrients consumed would be equivalent to 1 year - not far off from what a BFR would need to take for a Mars trip. While sleepers would need extra equipment to keep them fed, healthy & safe, they would need essentially crowded bunk space but no common areas, exercise rooms, etc. and all the extra payload space & weight could be devoted to equipment needed on arrival. Unlike one book I read (can't remember the name at the moment), we need to make sure everyone sleeps through - if one person wakes up 1/2-way through and can't go back to sleep then he would eat (in 50 years) 1/2 the food intended to get all 100 people through the first year on the new planet.
How many can we save?
=====================
We can't save everyone. But we can easily save thousands. The key is using BFR to get things in orbit and assembling, in a minimalist fashion, in orbit. The main BFR is designed to be fast-reusable, which is a key. Something like:
* 19 BFR flights for a 3-level hexagonal ship - 1 in center, 6 in 2nd level, 12 in 3rd level. Inner 2 levels have 200 sleepers each = 1,400 people. Outer level filled with food for the first year at the destination and equipment to set up a small colony - water purification, seeds, medicines & medical equipment, computers, tools, solar panels, Teslas, etc. Outer level also provides radiation shielding for the inner levels.
* 8 BFR flights for a propulsion module. 1 in center to separate this from the main section (not sure this is needed but it is a common style of ship in many sci-fi novels), 7 in 2-level hexagon - center for propulsion (ion? fusion?) and 6 for fuel (reaction mass, not ordinary rocket fuel)
That is a total of 27 BFR flights per 1,400 people. SpaceX, with some BIG government help (remember, so far SpaceX has done the bulk of its development using some government funding but primarily funded by paid commercial, government and military flights and private investment) gets the BFR assembly line running at [Liberty Ship](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_ship) speed then we get BFR serial production within 2 years, with ship (sleeper, cargo, propulsion) design running simultaneously. Assuming BFRs can get a weekly refurbish rate and 100 (= 2 years) uses per BFR before retirement (while major overhaul might make sense, I'll assume some occasional damage-beyond-practical repair, plus the production line for new BFRs will make major overhaul less cost-effective), that would mean a total fleet of ~ 60 BFRs but won't have full launch cadence until ~ 30 have been produced. So early production will be key. On the other hand, the starship components will be needed at a steady 2 per day throughout the launch window. Start with the equipment & fuel modules. Sleeper modules would go up last to give those people maximum time on Earth - last 2 years would be almost all sleepers.
With 4 launch pads (2 Florida, 1 Texas, 1 California) running on an alternate-day basis (try for daily but there will always be some days you can't launch due to weather, delays in payload processing, etc.) that would be (2 per day \* 365 days \* 8 years) / 27 per ship \* 1,400 people per ship = 302,814 people. Figure 10% loss due to ships not completing the journey due to mechanical failures, 10% loss of sleepers due to problems "waking up" and you've still got 245,279 - a quarter million people is a nice large genetic pool to restart humanity. | 10 years is about the time it took to develop the American lunar program, which was far from "let a bunch of humans survive thousands of years in the hostile space and then finally colonize a planet".
The hurdles which will kill this project, requiring more than 10 years to be solved:
* **propulsion**: the delta v we can squeeze out of our rocket doesn't allow us to ship large masses into space. We could use gravitational assists from Jupiter and Saturn maybe, but at the price of further lengthening the travel.
* **survival in space**: as far as we know now, we are not suited for living in space. Radiation and lack of gravity are serious issues, and again we are mass limited.
* **colonization**: all the colonies we set up during our history were heavily reliant on the mother nation during their beginning. Being literally on your own in a hostile environment simply pumps up your chances of failure.
One could say "we can ship frozen embryos with automated life support and hope for the best". Well, aside from consideration on exposing an embryo to cosmic radiation, it is well known that human babies need human contact during their infancy for a proper development, and robotic assistance is way too far from supplying it. |
115,364 | Okay, not literally Krypton style, but let's say some local astronomical event is going to render every rocky surface in our solar system totally uninhabitable. Details aren't terribly important, so let's just say every planet is going to fall into the sun for some reason.
We have... an amount of time before it's going to happen (let's say around ten years), and that before it happens, the earth (and everything else in our solar system) is going to be just as habitable as it currently is.
Also, we have recently received very convincing (and convenient) evidence that there is an earth-like world in a neighboring star system, with, shockingly, an oxygen rich atmosphere and a functioning biosphere (how we got this evidence is also irrelevant, so for fun we'll say an alien robotic probe told us about it before scooting out of the system).
So, the question is, can the human race build a ship capable of restarting the human species (if not the civilization) on that nearby planet?
Some other simplifications/freebies:
* Human society works out in such a way that at the very least our efforts aren't severely impeded.
* Only current or very near current technologies are allowed.
* One "freebie" technology is permitted, with the caveat that it can only be something which theoretically we can probably make, but simply haven't put the effort into making (I have a few candidates in mind, but I don't want to bias your answer). | 2018/06/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/115364",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/50641/"
] | 10 years? Don't bother trying.
With near-future technology the best we can hope for is a fusion version of Orion. A reasonable estimate of the ISP of a fusion Orion is [about 7,500](http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/enginelist.php). That's roughly 15 times as good as the best chemical engines. Thus you're looking at roughly 15x the delta-v we have managed to put on a manned rocket--Apollo. It had about 18km/sec, so with the same mass ratio we are looking at 270km/sec. Figure 24km/sec from the surface to solar escape. Another 13km/sec for capture, thus leaving 233km/sec for the trip. That means you're cruising at 116km/sec. That's 116 centuries in flight to Alpha Centauri. | @TracyCramer's idea is a good start but with a ten year deadline, even an Artificial Super Intelligence would be hard pressed to save humanity. So the better solution is to NOT save humanity. Just save our genes.
Create Tracy's ASI and ask it to focus on creating a ship capable of carrying itself to the new world. It can take its time getting there and won't need a lot of oxygen or water to survive the trip, so getting it launched on time is reasonably doable. We might even get a few redundant copies of the ASI launched in separate ships just to increase their survival odds.
Then when one of the ships gets to the new world, have the ASI develop artificial womb technology and synthesize fertile human embryos out of spare bits of carbon found on the new world. It might take a billion years for it to get all the bugs worked out but eventually humans would walk on this new world. |
115,364 | Okay, not literally Krypton style, but let's say some local astronomical event is going to render every rocky surface in our solar system totally uninhabitable. Details aren't terribly important, so let's just say every planet is going to fall into the sun for some reason.
We have... an amount of time before it's going to happen (let's say around ten years), and that before it happens, the earth (and everything else in our solar system) is going to be just as habitable as it currently is.
Also, we have recently received very convincing (and convenient) evidence that there is an earth-like world in a neighboring star system, with, shockingly, an oxygen rich atmosphere and a functioning biosphere (how we got this evidence is also irrelevant, so for fun we'll say an alien robotic probe told us about it before scooting out of the system).
So, the question is, can the human race build a ship capable of restarting the human species (if not the civilization) on that nearby planet?
Some other simplifications/freebies:
* Human society works out in such a way that at the very least our efforts aren't severely impeded.
* Only current or very near current technologies are allowed.
* One "freebie" technology is permitted, with the caveat that it can only be something which theoretically we can probably make, but simply haven't put the effort into making (I have a few candidates in mind, but I don't want to bias your answer). | 2018/06/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/115364",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/50641/"
] | **There is a reasonable chance of success. Definitely not a sure thing.**
We need to use the most effective rocket propulsion that we know of and within our capabilities and resurrect [Project Orion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion))
Since your propulsion system is a large number of nuclear bombs, this is not generally considered an ideal propulsion system, but if it the only option, it is a dandy system - who cares about the environmental damage and political consequences. BTW, the actual damage from fallout is a lot less than most people would expect.
This system has been studied in surprising detail, and it turns out you need about 800 bombs to obtain earth orbit - mostly independent of the size of your spacecraft. For high speed interstellar flight (133 years to Alpha Centauri), you need quite a lot more bombs (on the order of millions). You can also launch a huge payload - such as a city. A number of different designs to meet different needs have been proposed.
We will need a lot more bombs, as well as the ship itself. But with everything in full-on rush mode, it is conceivable. The United States, and several other countries are already wealthy enough to build such a vehicle.
Given the large mass allotment, you can scale up to add the heavy shielding needed to protect from radiation in space, and possibly an ecosystem complete enough to survive the long trip. Dealing with long-term micro-gravity would also be a major issue, so spinning up your ship needs to be added to the design.
Compared to typical spacecraft, Orion is a simple design which bodes well for a crash program to succeed. There is a lot to do, and much we don't know, but a reasonable chance is better than certain death.
I fear that a reasonable chance in this case may be something like 10% or even 1% -- yeah that's lousy odds. But you should not wait until 10 years left before you start building your interstellar space ship.
Re: the free technology -- I would ask for the ecology package to get the in-flight environment stable and healthy -- we have had no success in doing this well yet.. | @TracyCramer's idea is a good start but with a ten year deadline, even an Artificial Super Intelligence would be hard pressed to save humanity. So the better solution is to NOT save humanity. Just save our genes.
Create Tracy's ASI and ask it to focus on creating a ship capable of carrying itself to the new world. It can take its time getting there and won't need a lot of oxygen or water to survive the trip, so getting it launched on time is reasonably doable. We might even get a few redundant copies of the ASI launched in separate ships just to increase their survival odds.
Then when one of the ships gets to the new world, have the ASI develop artificial womb technology and synthesize fertile human embryos out of spare bits of carbon found on the new world. It might take a billion years for it to get all the bugs worked out but eventually humans would walk on this new world. |
115,364 | Okay, not literally Krypton style, but let's say some local astronomical event is going to render every rocky surface in our solar system totally uninhabitable. Details aren't terribly important, so let's just say every planet is going to fall into the sun for some reason.
We have... an amount of time before it's going to happen (let's say around ten years), and that before it happens, the earth (and everything else in our solar system) is going to be just as habitable as it currently is.
Also, we have recently received very convincing (and convenient) evidence that there is an earth-like world in a neighboring star system, with, shockingly, an oxygen rich atmosphere and a functioning biosphere (how we got this evidence is also irrelevant, so for fun we'll say an alien robotic probe told us about it before scooting out of the system).
So, the question is, can the human race build a ship capable of restarting the human species (if not the civilization) on that nearby planet?
Some other simplifications/freebies:
* Human society works out in such a way that at the very least our efforts aren't severely impeded.
* Only current or very near current technologies are allowed.
* One "freebie" technology is permitted, with the caveat that it can only be something which theoretically we can probably make, but simply haven't put the effort into making (I have a few candidates in mind, but I don't want to bias your answer). | 2018/06/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/115364",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/50641/"
] | Maybe. In 10 years? Probably not.
Right, so first off there isn't a lot that can destroy every rocky world. You said don't worry about it but it'd probably affect the answer a bit. I'll do my best to ignore it.
Whatever it is, a catastrophe of this magnitude make humanity quite irrelevant. We for sure can't stop it. The only solution is to leave. This is maybe at the very edge of human possibility. Maybe.
First, we'd need to get people there. This is a lot easier with hibernation technology but I think that's kind of cheating and not as important as shields, so that's my freebie technology. Ion shield technology is in very early stages here on earth but it'll be essential for life.
So, we have a way to protect people from radiation in space. First part done. Next is the ship itself. It'll be *big*. It'll need to rotate in space to provide gravity; zero-g is too damaging to have people in it for such a long trip. However, to achieve 1g without motion sickness it needs to be a big ring. Inside it'll need hydroponic farms, living quarters, recreational areas, medical facilities, embryo storage, maintenance areas, water purification, power generation, shielding, armour, and a hundred other areas to make this just livable. A small crew raising the next generation of embryos to take over is the best option. Keeps genetic diversity and when they reach the planet, gives them an easy method of populating it again.
Propulsion is difficult. Best option is nuclear propulsion: put simply, you blow up an atomic bomb right behind the ship and it pushes it along. That we have within a reasonable time frame. Best though would be fusion rockets. The fuel is difficult to come by but the trip would be around 40 years. That'd simplify things quite a lot as it would be a single generation ship.
Most importantly of all though, you wouldn't send one ship. You'd send as many as you can, staggered as much as possible to prevent them from being destroyed. Shotgun it. Got nothing to lose.
The problem is the time frame. 10 years, in the scale of such an engineering project, is really really short. 100 I'd say we definitely attempt it a few times. 10? Hard to say. Maybe we get a few cobbled-together ships up there, but it won't be easy. | The only way I could see us being able to travel through space for thousands of years with current or near current 'human technology' is for us to turn all of our attention towards creating an [Artificial Super Intelligence (ASI)](https://harvardsciencereview.com/2015/12/04/artificial-superintelligence-the-coming-revolution-2/) and allow it to figure out and build a ship for us to travel on. Or it would figure out how to stop the impending doom about to befall us all.
As long as we could harness the ASI to do our bidding it would be able to essentially figure everything out (given enough time and computing power - all countries would have to bring their [supercomputers](https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2018/6/12/17453918/ibm-summit-worlds-fastest-supercomputer-america-department-of-energy) together to make it happen - a good way to ensure countries work together.)
It would devise propulsion, shields, food, water, power, etc. It would have to mine the world with robots it created. An ASI would basically be able to figure out and do anything that is physically possible.
Since we're all going to die from the 'event' anyway, the fears of an ASI destroying humanity would be worth the risk and would also make for great suspense. Perhaps the first few AIs were killed before they could get to the ASI state because they became [violent](https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/7/17437454/mit-ai-psychopathic-reddit-data-algorithmic-bias) or destructive.
The reader wouldn't know which way you're going to take the story. Will we live or die? If we die is it from the ASI or the 'event' because either we couldn't make the ASI in time, or we made it and it couldn't get the ships done in time. Would the ASI be able to come? Would it be too big and consume too much power to make the journey? Would it have a sympathetic personality that makes the audience feel sad that it got left behind after helping us get off the planet?
Other than that, or aliens, I don't see how it is possible to build a sustainable and pilotable biosphere for the thousands of years it would take to get to the new Earth. |
115,364 | Okay, not literally Krypton style, but let's say some local astronomical event is going to render every rocky surface in our solar system totally uninhabitable. Details aren't terribly important, so let's just say every planet is going to fall into the sun for some reason.
We have... an amount of time before it's going to happen (let's say around ten years), and that before it happens, the earth (and everything else in our solar system) is going to be just as habitable as it currently is.
Also, we have recently received very convincing (and convenient) evidence that there is an earth-like world in a neighboring star system, with, shockingly, an oxygen rich atmosphere and a functioning biosphere (how we got this evidence is also irrelevant, so for fun we'll say an alien robotic probe told us about it before scooting out of the system).
So, the question is, can the human race build a ship capable of restarting the human species (if not the civilization) on that nearby planet?
Some other simplifications/freebies:
* Human society works out in such a way that at the very least our efforts aren't severely impeded.
* Only current or very near current technologies are allowed.
* One "freebie" technology is permitted, with the caveat that it can only be something which theoretically we can probably make, but simply haven't put the effort into making (I have a few candidates in mind, but I don't want to bias your answer). | 2018/06/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/115364",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/50641/"
] | The National Geographic documentary *"Evacuate Earth"* gave us a doomsday scenario of a Neutron star on its course to hit Earth in 75 years. Even with such an advance to realize ONE generational ship, escapees made it at the last moment, what between riots, defections, suicides, increasing catastrophes, etc.
10 years? In an even more hurry. Orion cannot be built on Earth, you must do it into space. which means USA, Russia, China, EU, India, Japan, Australia, will have to launch and launch and launch materials, keep their austronauts working to an extremely stressful clock, letting them understand that perhaps not all of them or their families will leave Earth.
Riots and wars will spread to get a ticket to safety. Mass exterminations will occur. The candidates will have to be protected 24/7, that is, unless the very guards break down and take the candidates as hostages to get a ticket themselves.
Terrorists and religious zealots will have no trouble convincing hysterical masses to sabotage the efforts by cutting lines of resupplments to the project.
And not to mention plain accidents. You can't do all of this, even in the best conditions and not expect accidents to interfere with the schedule. Two Space Shuttles were destroyed because of...what? A tiny leak in the components, a crack here, and boom! you lose a crew of specialists and a reusable transportation. And you MUST reuse as long as possible since the industries in the world will be under catastrophic pressure to build components for the Ark.
Let's just take the weather: window launches for rockets requires certain meterological conditions, and you can't just come up with innuendo launch stations. Delays will be unavoidable even on that front.
And the more time passes, the more pressure is exerted on the staff and the crew. Medical staff will skip one simple routine procedure with their astronauts, sicknesses set in, more losses. The candidates will start panicking. They are essentially prisoners, they cannot leave the evacuation point's premises -in fact, it would be dangerous even to let them walk around unguarded. Many one candidates will get nervous brackdown or just commit suicide or refuse to leave in order to stay home as doubts creep in deeper and deeper.
Nah, 10 years is not enough.
**EDIT AS PER MISTAKEFULLY READING THE QUESTION:**
Since the Ark is a gigantic, untested prototype, and such a complex titan that is supposed to host human survivors, seeds, DNA from at least farm animals and enough human DNA to grant reproduction without inbreeding, is likely to suffer system crashes during its travel. Nuclear propulsion, the only more reliable propulsion technology (and energy generations for the ship's needs) at this point of the story, [would use 1,000 years only to reach Proxima Centauri B](https://www.astronomytrek.com/how-long-would-a-spacecraft-take-to-reach-proxima-centauri/).
My suggestion is that that convenient planet is located around that sun. It's difficult to imagine the survival of the species in such conditions beyond this limit. In fact, in 1,000 years, arriving to Proxima would be nothing short of a miracle | 10 years is about the time it took to develop the American lunar program, which was far from "let a bunch of humans survive thousands of years in the hostile space and then finally colonize a planet".
The hurdles which will kill this project, requiring more than 10 years to be solved:
* **propulsion**: the delta v we can squeeze out of our rocket doesn't allow us to ship large masses into space. We could use gravitational assists from Jupiter and Saturn maybe, but at the price of further lengthening the travel.
* **survival in space**: as far as we know now, we are not suited for living in space. Radiation and lack of gravity are serious issues, and again we are mass limited.
* **colonization**: all the colonies we set up during our history were heavily reliant on the mother nation during their beginning. Being literally on your own in a hostile environment simply pumps up your chances of failure.
One could say "we can ship frozen embryos with automated life support and hope for the best". Well, aside from consideration on exposing an embryo to cosmic radiation, it is well known that human babies need human contact during their infancy for a proper development, and robotic assistance is way too far from supplying it. |
115,364 | Okay, not literally Krypton style, but let's say some local astronomical event is going to render every rocky surface in our solar system totally uninhabitable. Details aren't terribly important, so let's just say every planet is going to fall into the sun for some reason.
We have... an amount of time before it's going to happen (let's say around ten years), and that before it happens, the earth (and everything else in our solar system) is going to be just as habitable as it currently is.
Also, we have recently received very convincing (and convenient) evidence that there is an earth-like world in a neighboring star system, with, shockingly, an oxygen rich atmosphere and a functioning biosphere (how we got this evidence is also irrelevant, so for fun we'll say an alien robotic probe told us about it before scooting out of the system).
So, the question is, can the human race build a ship capable of restarting the human species (if not the civilization) on that nearby planet?
Some other simplifications/freebies:
* Human society works out in such a way that at the very least our efforts aren't severely impeded.
* Only current or very near current technologies are allowed.
* One "freebie" technology is permitted, with the caveat that it can only be something which theoretically we can probably make, but simply haven't put the effort into making (I have a few candidates in mind, but I don't want to bias your answer). | 2018/06/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/115364",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/50641/"
] | Elon Musk to the Rescue
=======================
If you asked this same question 10 years ago, I would be as pessimistic as many of the other answers. But this is 2018. The [Faclcon Heavy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_Heavy) is in production. The [BFR](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BFR_(rocket)) is on the way. Elon Musk has, many times, said that his goal is to establish an outpost on Mars **to save humanity**.
Sleepers
========
One "freebie" technology? That would have to be suspended animation (and I don't mean canceling the Flintstones). It is not as far away as you might think. I don't think it could make us live forever, but if we can sleep through the trip and wake up when we get there then we can save a **lot** of payload otherwise needed for food, water, medicine, etc. If this is a 100-year journey (using [Project Longshot](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Longshot) as a starting point) and we have sleeper technology that gives us 100:1 metabolic processing then the human bodies will have effectively aged only 1 year (so they are still "young" when they get to the destination) and the nutrients consumed would be equivalent to 1 year - not far off from what a BFR would need to take for a Mars trip. While sleepers would need extra equipment to keep them fed, healthy & safe, they would need essentially crowded bunk space but no common areas, exercise rooms, etc. and all the extra payload space & weight could be devoted to equipment needed on arrival. Unlike one book I read (can't remember the name at the moment), we need to make sure everyone sleeps through - if one person wakes up 1/2-way through and can't go back to sleep then he would eat (in 50 years) 1/2 the food intended to get all 100 people through the first year on the new planet.
How many can we save?
=====================
We can't save everyone. But we can easily save thousands. The key is using BFR to get things in orbit and assembling, in a minimalist fashion, in orbit. The main BFR is designed to be fast-reusable, which is a key. Something like:
* 19 BFR flights for a 3-level hexagonal ship - 1 in center, 6 in 2nd level, 12 in 3rd level. Inner 2 levels have 200 sleepers each = 1,400 people. Outer level filled with food for the first year at the destination and equipment to set up a small colony - water purification, seeds, medicines & medical equipment, computers, tools, solar panels, Teslas, etc. Outer level also provides radiation shielding for the inner levels.
* 8 BFR flights for a propulsion module. 1 in center to separate this from the main section (not sure this is needed but it is a common style of ship in many sci-fi novels), 7 in 2-level hexagon - center for propulsion (ion? fusion?) and 6 for fuel (reaction mass, not ordinary rocket fuel)
That is a total of 27 BFR flights per 1,400 people. SpaceX, with some BIG government help (remember, so far SpaceX has done the bulk of its development using some government funding but primarily funded by paid commercial, government and military flights and private investment) gets the BFR assembly line running at [Liberty Ship](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_ship) speed then we get BFR serial production within 2 years, with ship (sleeper, cargo, propulsion) design running simultaneously. Assuming BFRs can get a weekly refurbish rate and 100 (= 2 years) uses per BFR before retirement (while major overhaul might make sense, I'll assume some occasional damage-beyond-practical repair, plus the production line for new BFRs will make major overhaul less cost-effective), that would mean a total fleet of ~ 60 BFRs but won't have full launch cadence until ~ 30 have been produced. So early production will be key. On the other hand, the starship components will be needed at a steady 2 per day throughout the launch window. Start with the equipment & fuel modules. Sleeper modules would go up last to give those people maximum time on Earth - last 2 years would be almost all sleepers.
With 4 launch pads (2 Florida, 1 Texas, 1 California) running on an alternate-day basis (try for daily but there will always be some days you can't launch due to weather, delays in payload processing, etc.) that would be (2 per day \* 365 days \* 8 years) / 27 per ship \* 1,400 people per ship = 302,814 people. Figure 10% loss due to ships not completing the journey due to mechanical failures, 10% loss of sleepers due to problems "waking up" and you've still got 245,279 - a quarter million people is a nice large genetic pool to restart humanity. | **There is a reasonable chance of success. Definitely not a sure thing.**
We need to use the most effective rocket propulsion that we know of and within our capabilities and resurrect [Project Orion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion))
Since your propulsion system is a large number of nuclear bombs, this is not generally considered an ideal propulsion system, but if it the only option, it is a dandy system - who cares about the environmental damage and political consequences. BTW, the actual damage from fallout is a lot less than most people would expect.
This system has been studied in surprising detail, and it turns out you need about 800 bombs to obtain earth orbit - mostly independent of the size of your spacecraft. For high speed interstellar flight (133 years to Alpha Centauri), you need quite a lot more bombs (on the order of millions). You can also launch a huge payload - such as a city. A number of different designs to meet different needs have been proposed.
We will need a lot more bombs, as well as the ship itself. But with everything in full-on rush mode, it is conceivable. The United States, and several other countries are already wealthy enough to build such a vehicle.
Given the large mass allotment, you can scale up to add the heavy shielding needed to protect from radiation in space, and possibly an ecosystem complete enough to survive the long trip. Dealing with long-term micro-gravity would also be a major issue, so spinning up your ship needs to be added to the design.
Compared to typical spacecraft, Orion is a simple design which bodes well for a crash program to succeed. There is a lot to do, and much we don't know, but a reasonable chance is better than certain death.
I fear that a reasonable chance in this case may be something like 10% or even 1% -- yeah that's lousy odds. But you should not wait until 10 years left before you start building your interstellar space ship.
Re: the free technology -- I would ask for the ecology package to get the in-flight environment stable and healthy -- we have had no success in doing this well yet.. |
115,364 | Okay, not literally Krypton style, but let's say some local astronomical event is going to render every rocky surface in our solar system totally uninhabitable. Details aren't terribly important, so let's just say every planet is going to fall into the sun for some reason.
We have... an amount of time before it's going to happen (let's say around ten years), and that before it happens, the earth (and everything else in our solar system) is going to be just as habitable as it currently is.
Also, we have recently received very convincing (and convenient) evidence that there is an earth-like world in a neighboring star system, with, shockingly, an oxygen rich atmosphere and a functioning biosphere (how we got this evidence is also irrelevant, so for fun we'll say an alien robotic probe told us about it before scooting out of the system).
So, the question is, can the human race build a ship capable of restarting the human species (if not the civilization) on that nearby planet?
Some other simplifications/freebies:
* Human society works out in such a way that at the very least our efforts aren't severely impeded.
* Only current or very near current technologies are allowed.
* One "freebie" technology is permitted, with the caveat that it can only be something which theoretically we can probably make, but simply haven't put the effort into making (I have a few candidates in mind, but I don't want to bias your answer). | 2018/06/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/115364",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/50641/"
] | @TracyCramer's idea is a good start but with a ten year deadline, even an Artificial Super Intelligence would be hard pressed to save humanity. So the better solution is to NOT save humanity. Just save our genes.
Create Tracy's ASI and ask it to focus on creating a ship capable of carrying itself to the new world. It can take its time getting there and won't need a lot of oxygen or water to survive the trip, so getting it launched on time is reasonably doable. We might even get a few redundant copies of the ASI launched in separate ships just to increase their survival odds.
Then when one of the ships gets to the new world, have the ASI develop artificial womb technology and synthesize fertile human embryos out of spare bits of carbon found on the new world. It might take a billion years for it to get all the bugs worked out but eventually humans would walk on this new world. | 10 years is about the time it took to develop the American lunar program, which was far from "let a bunch of humans survive thousands of years in the hostile space and then finally colonize a planet".
The hurdles which will kill this project, requiring more than 10 years to be solved:
* **propulsion**: the delta v we can squeeze out of our rocket doesn't allow us to ship large masses into space. We could use gravitational assists from Jupiter and Saturn maybe, but at the price of further lengthening the travel.
* **survival in space**: as far as we know now, we are not suited for living in space. Radiation and lack of gravity are serious issues, and again we are mass limited.
* **colonization**: all the colonies we set up during our history were heavily reliant on the mother nation during their beginning. Being literally on your own in a hostile environment simply pumps up your chances of failure.
One could say "we can ship frozen embryos with automated life support and hope for the best". Well, aside from consideration on exposing an embryo to cosmic radiation, it is well known that human babies need human contact during their infancy for a proper development, and robotic assistance is way too far from supplying it. |
115,364 | Okay, not literally Krypton style, but let's say some local astronomical event is going to render every rocky surface in our solar system totally uninhabitable. Details aren't terribly important, so let's just say every planet is going to fall into the sun for some reason.
We have... an amount of time before it's going to happen (let's say around ten years), and that before it happens, the earth (and everything else in our solar system) is going to be just as habitable as it currently is.
Also, we have recently received very convincing (and convenient) evidence that there is an earth-like world in a neighboring star system, with, shockingly, an oxygen rich atmosphere and a functioning biosphere (how we got this evidence is also irrelevant, so for fun we'll say an alien robotic probe told us about it before scooting out of the system).
So, the question is, can the human race build a ship capable of restarting the human species (if not the civilization) on that nearby planet?
Some other simplifications/freebies:
* Human society works out in such a way that at the very least our efforts aren't severely impeded.
* Only current or very near current technologies are allowed.
* One "freebie" technology is permitted, with the caveat that it can only be something which theoretically we can probably make, but simply haven't put the effort into making (I have a few candidates in mind, but I don't want to bias your answer). | 2018/06/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/115364",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/50641/"
] | Maybe. In 10 years? Probably not.
Right, so first off there isn't a lot that can destroy every rocky world. You said don't worry about it but it'd probably affect the answer a bit. I'll do my best to ignore it.
Whatever it is, a catastrophe of this magnitude make humanity quite irrelevant. We for sure can't stop it. The only solution is to leave. This is maybe at the very edge of human possibility. Maybe.
First, we'd need to get people there. This is a lot easier with hibernation technology but I think that's kind of cheating and not as important as shields, so that's my freebie technology. Ion shield technology is in very early stages here on earth but it'll be essential for life.
So, we have a way to protect people from radiation in space. First part done. Next is the ship itself. It'll be *big*. It'll need to rotate in space to provide gravity; zero-g is too damaging to have people in it for such a long trip. However, to achieve 1g without motion sickness it needs to be a big ring. Inside it'll need hydroponic farms, living quarters, recreational areas, medical facilities, embryo storage, maintenance areas, water purification, power generation, shielding, armour, and a hundred other areas to make this just livable. A small crew raising the next generation of embryos to take over is the best option. Keeps genetic diversity and when they reach the planet, gives them an easy method of populating it again.
Propulsion is difficult. Best option is nuclear propulsion: put simply, you blow up an atomic bomb right behind the ship and it pushes it along. That we have within a reasonable time frame. Best though would be fusion rockets. The fuel is difficult to come by but the trip would be around 40 years. That'd simplify things quite a lot as it would be a single generation ship.
Most importantly of all though, you wouldn't send one ship. You'd send as many as you can, staggered as much as possible to prevent them from being destroyed. Shotgun it. Got nothing to lose.
The problem is the time frame. 10 years, in the scale of such an engineering project, is really really short. 100 I'd say we definitely attempt it a few times. 10? Hard to say. Maybe we get a few cobbled-together ships up there, but it won't be easy. | 10 years is about the time it took to develop the American lunar program, which was far from "let a bunch of humans survive thousands of years in the hostile space and then finally colonize a planet".
The hurdles which will kill this project, requiring more than 10 years to be solved:
* **propulsion**: the delta v we can squeeze out of our rocket doesn't allow us to ship large masses into space. We could use gravitational assists from Jupiter and Saturn maybe, but at the price of further lengthening the travel.
* **survival in space**: as far as we know now, we are not suited for living in space. Radiation and lack of gravity are serious issues, and again we are mass limited.
* **colonization**: all the colonies we set up during our history were heavily reliant on the mother nation during their beginning. Being literally on your own in a hostile environment simply pumps up your chances of failure.
One could say "we can ship frozen embryos with automated life support and hope for the best". Well, aside from consideration on exposing an embryo to cosmic radiation, it is well known that human babies need human contact during their infancy for a proper development, and robotic assistance is way too far from supplying it. |
115,364 | Okay, not literally Krypton style, but let's say some local astronomical event is going to render every rocky surface in our solar system totally uninhabitable. Details aren't terribly important, so let's just say every planet is going to fall into the sun for some reason.
We have... an amount of time before it's going to happen (let's say around ten years), and that before it happens, the earth (and everything else in our solar system) is going to be just as habitable as it currently is.
Also, we have recently received very convincing (and convenient) evidence that there is an earth-like world in a neighboring star system, with, shockingly, an oxygen rich atmosphere and a functioning biosphere (how we got this evidence is also irrelevant, so for fun we'll say an alien robotic probe told us about it before scooting out of the system).
So, the question is, can the human race build a ship capable of restarting the human species (if not the civilization) on that nearby planet?
Some other simplifications/freebies:
* Human society works out in such a way that at the very least our efforts aren't severely impeded.
* Only current or very near current technologies are allowed.
* One "freebie" technology is permitted, with the caveat that it can only be something which theoretically we can probably make, but simply haven't put the effort into making (I have a few candidates in mind, but I don't want to bias your answer). | 2018/06/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/115364",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/50641/"
] | **There is a reasonable chance of success. Definitely not a sure thing.**
We need to use the most effective rocket propulsion that we know of and within our capabilities and resurrect [Project Orion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion))
Since your propulsion system is a large number of nuclear bombs, this is not generally considered an ideal propulsion system, but if it the only option, it is a dandy system - who cares about the environmental damage and political consequences. BTW, the actual damage from fallout is a lot less than most people would expect.
This system has been studied in surprising detail, and it turns out you need about 800 bombs to obtain earth orbit - mostly independent of the size of your spacecraft. For high speed interstellar flight (133 years to Alpha Centauri), you need quite a lot more bombs (on the order of millions). You can also launch a huge payload - such as a city. A number of different designs to meet different needs have been proposed.
We will need a lot more bombs, as well as the ship itself. But with everything in full-on rush mode, it is conceivable. The United States, and several other countries are already wealthy enough to build such a vehicle.
Given the large mass allotment, you can scale up to add the heavy shielding needed to protect from radiation in space, and possibly an ecosystem complete enough to survive the long trip. Dealing with long-term micro-gravity would also be a major issue, so spinning up your ship needs to be added to the design.
Compared to typical spacecraft, Orion is a simple design which bodes well for a crash program to succeed. There is a lot to do, and much we don't know, but a reasonable chance is better than certain death.
I fear that a reasonable chance in this case may be something like 10% or even 1% -- yeah that's lousy odds. But you should not wait until 10 years left before you start building your interstellar space ship.
Re: the free technology -- I would ask for the ecology package to get the in-flight environment stable and healthy -- we have had no success in doing this well yet.. | The only way I could see us being able to travel through space for thousands of years with current or near current 'human technology' is for us to turn all of our attention towards creating an [Artificial Super Intelligence (ASI)](https://harvardsciencereview.com/2015/12/04/artificial-superintelligence-the-coming-revolution-2/) and allow it to figure out and build a ship for us to travel on. Or it would figure out how to stop the impending doom about to befall us all.
As long as we could harness the ASI to do our bidding it would be able to essentially figure everything out (given enough time and computing power - all countries would have to bring their [supercomputers](https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2018/6/12/17453918/ibm-summit-worlds-fastest-supercomputer-america-department-of-energy) together to make it happen - a good way to ensure countries work together.)
It would devise propulsion, shields, food, water, power, etc. It would have to mine the world with robots it created. An ASI would basically be able to figure out and do anything that is physically possible.
Since we're all going to die from the 'event' anyway, the fears of an ASI destroying humanity would be worth the risk and would also make for great suspense. Perhaps the first few AIs were killed before they could get to the ASI state because they became [violent](https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/7/17437454/mit-ai-psychopathic-reddit-data-algorithmic-bias) or destructive.
The reader wouldn't know which way you're going to take the story. Will we live or die? If we die is it from the ASI or the 'event' because either we couldn't make the ASI in time, or we made it and it couldn't get the ships done in time. Would the ASI be able to come? Would it be too big and consume too much power to make the journey? Would it have a sympathetic personality that makes the audience feel sad that it got left behind after helping us get off the planet?
Other than that, or aliens, I don't see how it is possible to build a sustainable and pilotable biosphere for the thousands of years it would take to get to the new Earth. |
115,364 | Okay, not literally Krypton style, but let's say some local astronomical event is going to render every rocky surface in our solar system totally uninhabitable. Details aren't terribly important, so let's just say every planet is going to fall into the sun for some reason.
We have... an amount of time before it's going to happen (let's say around ten years), and that before it happens, the earth (and everything else in our solar system) is going to be just as habitable as it currently is.
Also, we have recently received very convincing (and convenient) evidence that there is an earth-like world in a neighboring star system, with, shockingly, an oxygen rich atmosphere and a functioning biosphere (how we got this evidence is also irrelevant, so for fun we'll say an alien robotic probe told us about it before scooting out of the system).
So, the question is, can the human race build a ship capable of restarting the human species (if not the civilization) on that nearby planet?
Some other simplifications/freebies:
* Human society works out in such a way that at the very least our efforts aren't severely impeded.
* Only current or very near current technologies are allowed.
* One "freebie" technology is permitted, with the caveat that it can only be something which theoretically we can probably make, but simply haven't put the effort into making (I have a few candidates in mind, but I don't want to bias your answer). | 2018/06/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/115364",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/50641/"
] | Elon Musk to the Rescue
=======================
If you asked this same question 10 years ago, I would be as pessimistic as many of the other answers. But this is 2018. The [Faclcon Heavy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_Heavy) is in production. The [BFR](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BFR_(rocket)) is on the way. Elon Musk has, many times, said that his goal is to establish an outpost on Mars **to save humanity**.
Sleepers
========
One "freebie" technology? That would have to be suspended animation (and I don't mean canceling the Flintstones). It is not as far away as you might think. I don't think it could make us live forever, but if we can sleep through the trip and wake up when we get there then we can save a **lot** of payload otherwise needed for food, water, medicine, etc. If this is a 100-year journey (using [Project Longshot](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Longshot) as a starting point) and we have sleeper technology that gives us 100:1 metabolic processing then the human bodies will have effectively aged only 1 year (so they are still "young" when they get to the destination) and the nutrients consumed would be equivalent to 1 year - not far off from what a BFR would need to take for a Mars trip. While sleepers would need extra equipment to keep them fed, healthy & safe, they would need essentially crowded bunk space but no common areas, exercise rooms, etc. and all the extra payload space & weight could be devoted to equipment needed on arrival. Unlike one book I read (can't remember the name at the moment), we need to make sure everyone sleeps through - if one person wakes up 1/2-way through and can't go back to sleep then he would eat (in 50 years) 1/2 the food intended to get all 100 people through the first year on the new planet.
How many can we save?
=====================
We can't save everyone. But we can easily save thousands. The key is using BFR to get things in orbit and assembling, in a minimalist fashion, in orbit. The main BFR is designed to be fast-reusable, which is a key. Something like:
* 19 BFR flights for a 3-level hexagonal ship - 1 in center, 6 in 2nd level, 12 in 3rd level. Inner 2 levels have 200 sleepers each = 1,400 people. Outer level filled with food for the first year at the destination and equipment to set up a small colony - water purification, seeds, medicines & medical equipment, computers, tools, solar panels, Teslas, etc. Outer level also provides radiation shielding for the inner levels.
* 8 BFR flights for a propulsion module. 1 in center to separate this from the main section (not sure this is needed but it is a common style of ship in many sci-fi novels), 7 in 2-level hexagon - center for propulsion (ion? fusion?) and 6 for fuel (reaction mass, not ordinary rocket fuel)
That is a total of 27 BFR flights per 1,400 people. SpaceX, with some BIG government help (remember, so far SpaceX has done the bulk of its development using some government funding but primarily funded by paid commercial, government and military flights and private investment) gets the BFR assembly line running at [Liberty Ship](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_ship) speed then we get BFR serial production within 2 years, with ship (sleeper, cargo, propulsion) design running simultaneously. Assuming BFRs can get a weekly refurbish rate and 100 (= 2 years) uses per BFR before retirement (while major overhaul might make sense, I'll assume some occasional damage-beyond-practical repair, plus the production line for new BFRs will make major overhaul less cost-effective), that would mean a total fleet of ~ 60 BFRs but won't have full launch cadence until ~ 30 have been produced. So early production will be key. On the other hand, the starship components will be needed at a steady 2 per day throughout the launch window. Start with the equipment & fuel modules. Sleeper modules would go up last to give those people maximum time on Earth - last 2 years would be almost all sleepers.
With 4 launch pads (2 Florida, 1 Texas, 1 California) running on an alternate-day basis (try for daily but there will always be some days you can't launch due to weather, delays in payload processing, etc.) that would be (2 per day \* 365 days \* 8 years) / 27 per ship \* 1,400 people per ship = 302,814 people. Figure 10% loss due to ships not completing the journey due to mechanical failures, 10% loss of sleepers due to problems "waking up" and you've still got 245,279 - a quarter million people is a nice large genetic pool to restart humanity. | Maybe. In 10 years? Probably not.
Right, so first off there isn't a lot that can destroy every rocky world. You said don't worry about it but it'd probably affect the answer a bit. I'll do my best to ignore it.
Whatever it is, a catastrophe of this magnitude make humanity quite irrelevant. We for sure can't stop it. The only solution is to leave. This is maybe at the very edge of human possibility. Maybe.
First, we'd need to get people there. This is a lot easier with hibernation technology but I think that's kind of cheating and not as important as shields, so that's my freebie technology. Ion shield technology is in very early stages here on earth but it'll be essential for life.
So, we have a way to protect people from radiation in space. First part done. Next is the ship itself. It'll be *big*. It'll need to rotate in space to provide gravity; zero-g is too damaging to have people in it for such a long trip. However, to achieve 1g without motion sickness it needs to be a big ring. Inside it'll need hydroponic farms, living quarters, recreational areas, medical facilities, embryo storage, maintenance areas, water purification, power generation, shielding, armour, and a hundred other areas to make this just livable. A small crew raising the next generation of embryos to take over is the best option. Keeps genetic diversity and when they reach the planet, gives them an easy method of populating it again.
Propulsion is difficult. Best option is nuclear propulsion: put simply, you blow up an atomic bomb right behind the ship and it pushes it along. That we have within a reasonable time frame. Best though would be fusion rockets. The fuel is difficult to come by but the trip would be around 40 years. That'd simplify things quite a lot as it would be a single generation ship.
Most importantly of all though, you wouldn't send one ship. You'd send as many as you can, staggered as much as possible to prevent them from being destroyed. Shotgun it. Got nothing to lose.
The problem is the time frame. 10 years, in the scale of such an engineering project, is really really short. 100 I'd say we definitely attempt it a few times. 10? Hard to say. Maybe we get a few cobbled-together ships up there, but it won't be easy. |
100,659 | I'm in need of a replacement for the CA3080 for my VCO that I would like to build. I have come across the LM13600 and was wondering if anyone knew if I could just use half of it and operate it without connecting to the buffer pins (9,10). | 2014/02/23 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/100659",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/36338/"
] | It looks pretty similar, provided you don't get too close to the supply rails (the LM13600 typically has a bit less input common mode range, and a bit less typical swing (both near the negative rail), but the guarantees are similar.
Why wouldn't you use the [LM13700](http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/lm13700.pdf)? It still seems to be in production, unlike the LM13600 (discontinued 1997) and CA3080 (discontinued 2005). | ABSOLUTELY!
The LM13600 and LM13700 started out life as a practice piece for a new mask designer. They were thinking about second-sourcing the CA3080, and the new 16-pin package made a dual CA3080 an easy exercise (just flip the layout to do the other side). They had a few pins left over, so they added the Darlington buffers and the predistortion diodes.
The key takeaway is that the LM13600 and the LM13700 are both dual CA3080s with a little something extra added, that you don't have to use if you don't want to.
Details [here](http://www.idea2ic.com/LM13600/LM13700.html). |
100,659 | I'm in need of a replacement for the CA3080 for my VCO that I would like to build. I have come across the LM13600 and was wondering if anyone knew if I could just use half of it and operate it without connecting to the buffer pins (9,10). | 2014/02/23 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/100659",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/36338/"
] | It looks pretty similar, provided you don't get too close to the supply rails (the LM13600 typically has a bit less input common mode range, and a bit less typical swing (both near the negative rail), but the guarantees are similar.
Why wouldn't you use the [LM13700](http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/lm13700.pdf)? It still seems to be in production, unlike the LM13600 (discontinued 1997) and CA3080 (discontinued 2005). | Yes, just tie the unused Non inverted / inverted pin to the negative power power rail.
the iABC pin via 1 Mega Ohm resistor to the negative power rail,
the output of the buffer back the input of the buffer or leave it. |
100,659 | I'm in need of a replacement for the CA3080 for my VCO that I would like to build. I have come across the LM13600 and was wondering if anyone knew if I could just use half of it and operate it without connecting to the buffer pins (9,10). | 2014/02/23 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/100659",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/36338/"
] | ABSOLUTELY!
The LM13600 and LM13700 started out life as a practice piece for a new mask designer. They were thinking about second-sourcing the CA3080, and the new 16-pin package made a dual CA3080 an easy exercise (just flip the layout to do the other side). They had a few pins left over, so they added the Darlington buffers and the predistortion diodes.
The key takeaway is that the LM13600 and the LM13700 are both dual CA3080s with a little something extra added, that you don't have to use if you don't want to.
Details [here](http://www.idea2ic.com/LM13600/LM13700.html). | Yes, just tie the unused Non inverted / inverted pin to the negative power power rail.
the iABC pin via 1 Mega Ohm resistor to the negative power rail,
the output of the buffer back the input of the buffer or leave it. |
855 | The tag [mechanical](https://retrocomputing.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanical "show questions tagged 'mechanical'") is not entirely obvious. I suggest we rename it to [mechanical-computing](https://retrocomputing.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanical-computing "show questions tagged 'mechanical-computing'").
One of the reasons for my suggested replacement is to use terminology more consistent with the world outside of RC.SE. I offer as [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconventional_computing#Mechanical_computing) as evidence that "mechanical-computing" is more consistent with the rest of the world than "mechanical." | 2020/03/07 | [
"https://retrocomputing.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/855",
"https://retrocomputing.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://retrocomputing.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7208/"
] | I would favor the change. However, do note that [mechanical-computing](https://retrocomputing.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanical-computing "show questions tagged 'mechanical-computing'") is a subset of [mechanical](https://retrocomputing.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanical "show questions tagged 'mechanical'"). Asking about how a daisy-wheel printer worked would be an example of [mechanical](https://retrocomputing.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanical "show questions tagged 'mechanical'"), but not [mechanical-computing](https://retrocomputing.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/mechanical-computing "show questions tagged 'mechanical-computing'"). | **No** - it is redundant and serves no purpose.
Retro*Computing* is, as the name states, already about computing. That's the all covering base. So any tag is by default meant as a subset of computing. Thus there is not only no need to add it explicite a second time, but doing so defies structure and logic. |
8,001,991 | I have a static library of C files, compiled with g++ on Cygwin. I wish to unit test one function that is defined in the library. That function calls another function defined in that library and I wish to override the dependency to replace it with my own version of that function. I can't modify what's in the static library, so this solution [ [Override a function call in C](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/617554/override-a-function-call-in-c) ] doesn't apply.
Usually, I can write a .cpp file and include the .c file containing the function I want to unit test, which essentially extends that file with the code I add. It's a dirty trick I'd never use for production code but it's handy for unit testing C files, because it gives my test code access to static things in that C file. Then, I can write in my fake version of the dependency, and my unit test function that calls the function I'm testing. I compile my.cpp to get my.o, then link it with the static library. In theory, since the linker has found a definition for the dependency already (the one I provide) it won't look in the library and there will be no conflict. Usually this works, but now I'm getting a "multiple definition" error where the linker first finds my fake and then finds the real one. I don't know what might cause this and don't know what to look for. I also can't boil this down to a simple example because my simple examples don't have this problem.
Ideas please? | 2011/11/03 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/8001991",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/450693/"
] | One *possibility* (admittedly, and ugly one, but...) is to extract the individual object files from the static library. If the function you're calling and the function *it's* calling are in separate object files, you can link against the object file containing the function you need to call, but not against the one containing the function it calls.
This only gives you granularity on the level of complete object files though, so if the two functions involved are both in the same object file, it won't work. If you *really* need to get things to work, and don't mind making a really *minor* modification to the object file in question, you *may* be able to use a binary editor to mark the second function as a weak external, which means it'll be used in the absence of any other external with the same name, but if another is provided, that will be used instead.
Whether that latter qualifies as "modifying the library" or not depends a bit on your viewpoint. It's not modifying the *code* in the library, but is modifying a bit of the object file wrapper around that code. My guess is that you'd rather not do it, but it may still be the cleanest way out of an otherwise untenable situation. | It turns out the reason the linker found both defintions of the function is that the faked function's source file defined a variable which is extern'ed in its header file. That unresolved external in the header file caused the linker to link the faked function's object file (the whole thing) to the tested function's file inside the library. So, it's impossible to extract the definition of the tested function without the definition for the dependency.
What I ended up doing was similar to [Override a function call in C](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/617554/override-a-function-call-in-c) where I used a different function name instead of the same one, and a preprocessor directive to swap the two. I put the preprocessor directive and the fake function in a separate file which can be included in a unit test, so the production code in the library does not have to be touched. Plus, if I want to fake that same function for another unit test somewhere else, I can re-use the new file. |
8,001,991 | I have a static library of C files, compiled with g++ on Cygwin. I wish to unit test one function that is defined in the library. That function calls another function defined in that library and I wish to override the dependency to replace it with my own version of that function. I can't modify what's in the static library, so this solution [ [Override a function call in C](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/617554/override-a-function-call-in-c) ] doesn't apply.
Usually, I can write a .cpp file and include the .c file containing the function I want to unit test, which essentially extends that file with the code I add. It's a dirty trick I'd never use for production code but it's handy for unit testing C files, because it gives my test code access to static things in that C file. Then, I can write in my fake version of the dependency, and my unit test function that calls the function I'm testing. I compile my.cpp to get my.o, then link it with the static library. In theory, since the linker has found a definition for the dependency already (the one I provide) it won't look in the library and there will be no conflict. Usually this works, but now I'm getting a "multiple definition" error where the linker first finds my fake and then finds the real one. I don't know what might cause this and don't know what to look for. I also can't boil this down to a simple example because my simple examples don't have this problem.
Ideas please? | 2011/11/03 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/8001991",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/450693/"
] | One *possibility* (admittedly, and ugly one, but...) is to extract the individual object files from the static library. If the function you're calling and the function *it's* calling are in separate object files, you can link against the object file containing the function you need to call, but not against the one containing the function it calls.
This only gives you granularity on the level of complete object files though, so if the two functions involved are both in the same object file, it won't work. If you *really* need to get things to work, and don't mind making a really *minor* modification to the object file in question, you *may* be able to use a binary editor to mark the second function as a weak external, which means it'll be used in the absence of any other external with the same name, but if another is provided, that will be used instead.
Whether that latter qualifies as "modifying the library" or not depends a bit on your viewpoint. It's not modifying the *code* in the library, but is modifying a bit of the object file wrapper around that code. My guess is that you'd rather not do it, but it may still be the cleanest way out of an otherwise untenable situation. | Depending on your platform and performance requirements, you might be able to use [pin](http://pintool.org) to dynamically modify the application and replace one function with another at runtime.
There's no direct example in the manual, but you could easily modify one of the sample pin tools to do this. |
302,879 | I know someone who barely moves his arms when he walks, a bit like Frankenstein's monster.
There is a Seinfeld episode ("[The Summer of George](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Summer_of_George)") in which someone with the same behaviour is made fun of by Elaine who describes it as if "she's carrying invisible suitcases".
Is there a term for people like that? | 2016/01/28 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/302879",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/37374/"
] | This question brought to mind a toy we had when I was a kid. It was made popular on the TV show "Romper Room" Plastic cylinders (like small coffee cans) with loops of cord attached - and you'd stand on them, hold the cords taut, and clomp around with your arms at your sides.
If you called this person a ***Romper Stomper*** I'm pretty sure folks of my generation would understand. (Sorry about you young'uns - you have so few amusements that don't involve electronics) (US) | He is perhaps walking **with dangling arms**.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/MyaAl.jpg)
>
> I like to believe that Junho really does harbor otherworldly hypnotic
> power over the 2PM boys and can "conduct" them in their zombie form at
> his free will, to cater to his every whim with their limp dangling
> arms and stumbling zombie feet.
>
>
> |
47,428 | Inspired by [this](https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/47267/a-rude-security-guard) question, I created this puzzle.
---
I was walking down a street, I see a star club with a security guarding the entrance door.
A man approaches him, and the guard flips a middle and a thumb on him.
The man replied by showing his fore finger.
The guard allowed him to pass.
Another man approaches, the guard flips his middle and fore finger on him.
The second man replied by showing his pinkie.
The guard allowed the second man to pass.
Another man approaches, the guard flips his ring and middle finger on him.
The third man replied by showing his thumb.
The guard allowed the third man to pass.
You decide to approach the guard. He looks at you, he stick his ring and pinkie.
What do you show? | 2017/01/02 | [
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/47428",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/users/28756/"
] | You should show your:
>
> Forefinger.
> Take the fingers to be the values 0 to 4 mod 5 (any direction and transposition will work, actually, but for simplicity, let the thumb be 0 and pinky be 4) and take their integer average mod 5.
>
>
> | >
> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VTOJL.png)
>
>
>
The star club is using star for their password
>
> You have to show the finger exactly in the middle of the two fingers
>
> thumb + fore -> ring
>
> thumb + middle -> fore
>
> thumb + ring -> pinkie
>
> thumb + pinkie -> middle
>
> fore + middle -> pinkie
>
> fore + ring -> middle
>
> fore + pinkie -> thumb
>
> middle + ring -> thumb
>
> middle + pinkie -> ring
>
> ring + pinkie -> fore
>
>
>
> |
100,074 | I have my Ubuntu 11.10 PC plugged into a TV using an HDMI input. The edges of the screen get cut off, and I can't adjust the television's settings for HDMI. I can adujust the "position and size" on the TV for all other inputs, but not HDMI for some reason, I guess it's just a limitation of the tv itself.
Ubuntu detects my TV and only offers one display resolution, 1280x720 (16:9)
Is there a way to scale down the display so that the edges won't get cut off? | 2012/01/31 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/100074",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/44325/"
] | This problem is called "Overscan". Some graphics card providers (e.g. NVidia) allow you to compensate for this by reducing the size of the display area, through configuration software that comes with the drivers. | I have a similar question with 16.04 with nvidia based graphic card to a Panasonic 26" TV,detected as an 32" if connected HDMI.
I could solve the Output Problem, i can see the hole screen with the "underscan" Option, but this doesn't solve the reason for this Fault.
The output of "xrandr" is stillgiving the worngphysicalMonitor size and i can't find the correct "xrandr" semantic to change the Monitor size to its correct values.
This is the "xrandr --query" output:
---
Screen 0: minimum 320 x 200, current 1920 x 1080, maximum 8192 x 8192
DVI-I-1 disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis)
HDMI-1 connected primary 1920x1080+0+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 697mm x 392mm
1280x720 50.00 + 60.00 59.94
1920x1080 60.00 50.00 50.00 59.94\*
1920x1080i 60.00 50.00 59.94
720x576 50.00
720x480 60.00 59.94
640x480 60.00 59.94
VGA-1 disconnected (normal left inverted right x axis y axis)
---
The values "697mm x 392mm" should be changed to 575mm x 325mm.
I guess this would do the job the "right" way. |
93,115 | I need a better resource than [this](http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/securing-debian-howto/ap-chroot-apache-env.en.html) or [this](http://www.linux.com/archive/articles/36331) on how to secure Apache2 using chroot on a Debian system. It seems most articles deal with Apache1. I tried to follow them and adapt to Apache2, but it only had bad results. | 2009/12/10 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/93115",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/22636/"
] | Since you are running Debian, my advice would be to just use makejail, which creates old-style (external) jails with ease. I've used it many times without any trouble. I originally came up with the internal chroot idea implemented in ModSecurity (I am the author), which was subsequently implemented by mod\_chroot and is now available in Apache itself. Had I known about makejail at the time, I would have never bothered with anything else. Having said that, the internal chroot facility is generally *very* easy to use if your requirements are not complex. It is very important to choose the correct directory structure. For example, put your jail in /chroot/opt/apache, then create a symlink /opt/apache to /chroot/opt/apache. (It's been a while since I chrooted the stock Debian Apache and I don't remember where exactly the Apache is installed at.) That would make the paths inside and outside the jail identical, which is critical.
Also, Chapter 2 of Apache Security (which I wrote) is available online from <http://www.apachesecurity.net>. It contains a detailed discussion about chroot and step-by-step instructions. It starts on page 40.
--
Ivan Ristić
[ModSecurity Handbook](https://www.feistyduck.com) & [SSL Labs](https://www.ssllabs.com) | [This](http://www.howtoforge.com/chrooting-apache2-mod-chroot-debian-etch) seems like an easy way, but is it really secure? |
82,979 | I read an article recently which said that mock objects are often misunderstood and misused. Are there any clear mocking anti-patterns which I can look out for? | 2011/06/10 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/82979",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/5402/"
] | In my opinion it's the excessive method invocation check on mocks. I feel that this is a practice enforced by a few mocking frameworks like EasyMock, where the default mock behavior is to fail whenever there is an additional method invocation that what wasn't exactly specified before.
This kind of strict mock method checking can lead to brittle designs where the tiniest change to the code can lead to a whole suite of tests failing, even though the core functionality is still the same.
A solution to this is starting to use stubs instead of mocks. An article I've found particularly enlightening about the subject was one found in Mockito's Javadoc: <http://docs.mockito.googlecode.com/hg/org/mockito/Mockito.html> (see "2. How about some stubbing?"), linking to:
<http://monkeyisland.pl/2008/07/12/should-i-worry-about-the-unexpected/>.
I've enjoyed working with Mockito so far because it does not enforce this strict mocking behavior but the use of stubs instead. It also enforces method checking on specific ones instead of the whole mock object; so you end up checking only methods that really matter in your test scenario.
There are a few books here and there I can recommend that touch this subject and mocking and general:
**xUnit Patterns**
**The Art of Unit Testing: With Examples in .Net**
**Next Generation Java Testing: TestNG and Advanced Concepts** (this book is mostly about testNG but there's a nice chapter about mocking) | I find that tests which utilise mocks across multiple layers of an application particularly difficult to decipher and change. However I think this has been mitigated in recent years by improved mock framework API's (I use JMock where convenient).
5 or 6 years ago API's like EasyMock were powerful but very cumbersome. Often the test code that made use of it was orders of magnitude more complicated than code it was testing. Back then I tried to influence teams I was in to use it very sparingly and make do with simple handcrafted mocks that were simply alternate implementations of interfaces specifically for testing.
Recently my strong opinions on this have become softer as the mocking API's have made tests that utilise them more readable. Essentially I want my code (including tests) to be changeable by other developers without making them feel like they're sifting through a mire of obscure API calls. |
82,979 | I read an article recently which said that mock objects are often misunderstood and misused. Are there any clear mocking anti-patterns which I can look out for? | 2011/06/10 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/82979",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/5402/"
] | In my opinion it's the excessive method invocation check on mocks. I feel that this is a practice enforced by a few mocking frameworks like EasyMock, where the default mock behavior is to fail whenever there is an additional method invocation that what wasn't exactly specified before.
This kind of strict mock method checking can lead to brittle designs where the tiniest change to the code can lead to a whole suite of tests failing, even though the core functionality is still the same.
A solution to this is starting to use stubs instead of mocks. An article I've found particularly enlightening about the subject was one found in Mockito's Javadoc: <http://docs.mockito.googlecode.com/hg/org/mockito/Mockito.html> (see "2. How about some stubbing?"), linking to:
<http://monkeyisland.pl/2008/07/12/should-i-worry-about-the-unexpected/>.
I've enjoyed working with Mockito so far because it does not enforce this strict mocking behavior but the use of stubs instead. It also enforces method checking on specific ones instead of the whole mock object; so you end up checking only methods that really matter in your test scenario.
There are a few books here and there I can recommend that touch this subject and mocking and general:
**xUnit Patterns**
**The Art of Unit Testing: With Examples in .Net**
**Next Generation Java Testing: TestNG and Advanced Concepts** (this book is mostly about testNG but there's a nice chapter about mocking) | I have observed few anti-patterns in my experience.
* Domain classes being mocked/stubbed where a state change may occur and that needs to be verified.
* Integration tests interacting with a mix of mocks and concrete classes which defeats the purpose of integration tests.
* Inadvertent use of mocks in production code (This should never happen)
Otherwise my experience with mocks especially Mockito has been a breeze. They have made tests very easy to write and maintain. GWT view/presenter interaction testing is much more easy with mocks than the GWTTestCase. |
255,624 | While using Vim (at home and at work), I often find myself doing similar things repeatedly. For example, I may turn a bunch of CSV text into a series of SQL inserts. I've been using Vim for years, but only recently have I tried to seriously think about how I could improve my productivity while using it.
My question is.. Is there a good way (or right way) to store commonly used commands or command sequences? And how is the best way to execute them? It would be nice to be able to use the same script on a live session and also over the command line against some file.
I'm hoping that I can store them in a .vim file so that I can hand them to coworkers (who are not as proficient with vim) for them to use. | 2008/11/01 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/255624",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/18866/"
] | You can store your common task macros in .vim files, like [this](http://www.vanhemert.co.uk/vim/vimacros/html2.vim) for example, and then you can load them with the command *:so file.vim*
[Here](http://www.vanhemert.co.uk/vim/) you can find a bunch of useful macros, also I recommend you to learn well the useful *q* [macro recording](http://julipedia.blogspot.com/2005/12/vim-macros.html) command, it's very very powerful...
The macros created with the *q* command are stored in a register, qq stores the macro in the q register, so when you end the recording you can simply paste the macro, with *"qp* and save it, later you can load it by simply yanking the macro into a register i.e.: *"qY*, the macros are only text and remember you can use any register instead of q. There is a Vim Script for storing *q* macros:
[marvim : Macro Persistent Storage and Shareable Repository for VIM](http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=2154)
Also take a look to the [Vim Scripting Language](http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Learning_the_vi_editor/Vim/Exim_Script_language). | Personally, and maybe in part because I was using Unix long before vim existed (heck, the first version of Unix I used didn't have "vi" either - but that's another story), I would normally use a 'shell script' (or, more likely, a Perl script) to do the transform. For converting CSV data to INSERT, dealing with quotes/non-quotes and embedded commas in full generality is messy -- I'd probably aim to use a Perl script with Text::CSV\_XS to guarantee correct parsing. I'd then run that script on the range of text that needed converting.
One advantage of this is the focussed tool approach - one tool does one job right. My private bin directory has 300 or more scripts and programs in it; the RCS directory has over 500 scripts in it.
This is not to say that scripting in vim is bad. I use (more or less) complex map commands to write complex manipulations, often when I'm about to have to do the same change across a suite of files, and when I don't think it will be worth creating a script for the job. However, if I think I might need the changes more than once, then I'll script it. For example, GCC started to get uppity (circa 2005) about not embedding unused static strings in object files - which meant my version control information wasn't visible. So, over a period of years, as I edit the source files, I've converted from a static (fixed) name to a public name - reluctantly, but necessarily AFAIAC. I have a script that does that edit for me, so when I need to make the change in a file, I run that script to do so. I have another script that updates the copyright information; I need that each time I first modify a file in a given year. Yeah, I could probably stash it away as something in vim -- I grew up thinking that the separate script is better, not least because if I switch to any other editor, I can still use the script. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.