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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
65,041 | Turns out that the office never had a shredder due to noise concerns and we seldom have work documents that demand such treatment.
But one day the unexpected happened, and we had to literally burn the stuff up in the toilet (with care, of course).
How do others deal with such a situation? | 2016/04/11 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/65041",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | >
> Turns out that the office never had a shredder due to noise concerns
> and we seldom have work documents that demand such treatment.
>
>
>
**Noise is an excuse, not the actual reason.**
Shredders aren't all that noisy, and could easily be operated after hours or in a utility closet where nobody would be disturbed.
Most likely, they simply didn't want to spend the money. Perhaps they were just being frugal, or perhaps they were misguided.
>
> But one day the unexpected happened, and we had to literally burn the
> stuff up in the toilet (with care, of course).
>
>
>
Burning would work.
Of course, if you set off the smoke alarm it will be far more noisy than a shredder. And if you burn the building down you would have to work outside and listen to traffic going by - that could be noisy too.
>
> How do others deal with such a situation?
>
>
>
I worked at an 8-person startup. When we collected paper that needed to be shredded, the CEO took it home and shredded it there. You could take it anywhere a shredder is available (an office-services shop, home, whatever) and get it shredded pretty easily. | You're heard "buy a shredder". Buy one. Good ones are not as noisy as you think, I have one I blagged off ebay and while it would make a noise that would disturb someone if they were working, you'd have to really go shred a thousand pages, one at a time, before they set on you. Besides, you can put it out of the way or use it out of hours.
Bear in mind that burning can be not as reliable as you think: if you are not taking care to burn each page slowly, and try to burn a lot of pages at once in a metal can, you will find that much of the paper does not burn away - it will float away in the hot thermal draughts, it will leave behind half-burned pages.
But the best way to get rid of paper is water. Water will easily turn a book into a pulpy mass of fibres given a bit of time and some stirring. This is probably the best approach, particularly if you've shredded the pages first (or even just torn them into strips). Put them in a bucket and wait for them to fall apart. Bonus if you make new paper out of the mulch! |
178,377 | I was selecting a DAC for HART network and in the process I came across two terminology.
1. 12-/16-Bit, Serial Input, **4 mA to 20 mA**, Current Source DAC [AD5420](http://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/AD5410_5420.pdf) and
2. 16-Bit, Serial Input,**Loop-Powered, 4 mA to 20 mA** DAC [AD5421](http://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/AD5421.pdf)
As per my understanding, the difference between the two terminology is, the **Loop-Powered, 4 mA to 20 mA** DAC will be powered from the input signal itself whereas for **4 mA to 20 mA** need to provide supply as well as like other IC, correct me if i am wrong.
**My question here is what topology will make the Looped power devices to get the supply from the Input signal itself and what will be the behavior of these signals?** | 2015/07/02 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/178377",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/35350/"
] | You just have to read the data sheet and see the circuits they provide: -
It's not really a question of topology, some devices have built in regulators (note the REGin pin above) whereas some need a proper regulated supply but, that proper regulated supply can be derived from the "loop" making it loop-powered too. The only difference is the inbuilt voltage regulator. | The normal connection for the loop powered device is from the +24V loop supply to the device +ve connection, then from the device -ve connection to the Measurement input. The device steals a few volts (typically 4-7V) from the loop supply. Because the device is always passing at least 4mA, it has available some power (4mA at 4-7V) to power itself. |
178,377 | I was selecting a DAC for HART network and in the process I came across two terminology.
1. 12-/16-Bit, Serial Input, **4 mA to 20 mA**, Current Source DAC [AD5420](http://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/AD5410_5420.pdf) and
2. 16-Bit, Serial Input,**Loop-Powered, 4 mA to 20 mA** DAC [AD5421](http://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/AD5421.pdf)
As per my understanding, the difference between the two terminology is, the **Loop-Powered, 4 mA to 20 mA** DAC will be powered from the input signal itself whereas for **4 mA to 20 mA** need to provide supply as well as like other IC, correct me if i am wrong.
**My question here is what topology will make the Looped power devices to get the supply from the Input signal itself and what will be the behavior of these signals?** | 2015/07/02 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/178377",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/35350/"
] | The loop powered devices are powered by the *output* signal. A fixed loop supply is put in series with the device and whatever loads it is driving.
To make this work, the loop powered device drops a bit of voltage (minimum), at since there will always be some current there (usually a bit less than 4mA is okay for a minimum) there is power available for the transmitter. For example, 3.6mA at 7V drop is 25.2mW.
It's important that all the supply current (including that taken by the regulator itself) be measured so that the output current is accurate.
The power the device requires imposes a minimum *compliance* voltage (voltage drop across the transmitter). If all the circuitry can run from 3.6mA a linear regulator can be used, otherwise a SMPS converter (eg. buck) can be used to get more current (at the cost of higher voltage drop).
At some point (for example a sensor that requires several watts) it becomes impractical to use 4-20mA loop power. | The normal connection for the loop powered device is from the +24V loop supply to the device +ve connection, then from the device -ve connection to the Measurement input. The device steals a few volts (typically 4-7V) from the loop supply. Because the device is always passing at least 4mA, it has available some power (4mA at 4-7V) to power itself. |
178,377 | I was selecting a DAC for HART network and in the process I came across two terminology.
1. 12-/16-Bit, Serial Input, **4 mA to 20 mA**, Current Source DAC [AD5420](http://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/AD5410_5420.pdf) and
2. 16-Bit, Serial Input,**Loop-Powered, 4 mA to 20 mA** DAC [AD5421](http://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/AD5421.pdf)
As per my understanding, the difference between the two terminology is, the **Loop-Powered, 4 mA to 20 mA** DAC will be powered from the input signal itself whereas for **4 mA to 20 mA** need to provide supply as well as like other IC, correct me if i am wrong.
**My question here is what topology will make the Looped power devices to get the supply from the Input signal itself and what will be the behavior of these signals?** | 2015/07/02 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/178377",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/35350/"
] | The loop powered devices are powered by the *output* signal. A fixed loop supply is put in series with the device and whatever loads it is driving.
To make this work, the loop powered device drops a bit of voltage (minimum), at since there will always be some current there (usually a bit less than 4mA is okay for a minimum) there is power available for the transmitter. For example, 3.6mA at 7V drop is 25.2mW.
It's important that all the supply current (including that taken by the regulator itself) be measured so that the output current is accurate.
The power the device requires imposes a minimum *compliance* voltage (voltage drop across the transmitter). If all the circuitry can run from 3.6mA a linear regulator can be used, otherwise a SMPS converter (eg. buck) can be used to get more current (at the cost of higher voltage drop).
At some point (for example a sensor that requires several watts) it becomes impractical to use 4-20mA loop power. | You just have to read the data sheet and see the circuits they provide: -
It's not really a question of topology, some devices have built in regulators (note the REGin pin above) whereas some need a proper regulated supply but, that proper regulated supply can be derived from the "loop" making it loop-powered too. The only difference is the inbuilt voltage regulator. |
48,468,187 | I am looking at having a Hadoop cluster setup for Big Data analytics using the virtualized environment in Azure. As the data volume is very high, I am looking at having data stored in secondary storage like Azure Data Lake Store and Hadoop cluster storage will act as the primary storage.
I would like to know, how can this be configured so that when i create a Hive table and partition, part of the data can reside in Primary storage and the rest in the secondary storage?
Thanks
Regards,
Madhu | 2018/01/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/48468187",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/565340/"
] | You can't mix file systems with a Hive table by default. The Hive metastore only consists of one filesystem location for a database / table definition.
You might try to use [Waggle Dance](https://github.com/HotelsDotCom/waggle-dance) to setup a federated Hive solution, but it's probably too much work than simply allowing Hive data to exist in Azure | I don't know about Hadoop and Hive but you could combine Azure Data Lake Store (ADLS) and Azure SQL Data Warehouse (ADW), ie use Polybase in ADW to create an external table on the 'cold' data in ADLS and an internal table for your 'warm' data. ADW has the advantage that you can pause it.
Optionally create a view over the top to combine the external and internal table. |
281,332 | I had to move my laptop over to the study, and we have an old/spare monitor which we haven't used a while - the last setup that used it was a CLI only linux install - it didn't flicker much, and text was sharp.
I decided to use it with my laptop (thinkpad r61, running a plain vanilla install of windows 7 professional with none of the lenovo addons) as a secondary screen - it seems to almost imperceptibly flicker, and text looked kind of 'off' (images seemed ok).
I'm guessing part of the problem is cleartype which IIRC is being used on windows 7. The flickering on the other hand...
I only have one monitor frequency available to me - 50 hz - there's no mention of what res or frequencies the monitor supports, so i'm unsure if that's the problem. All LCDs i have run at that frequency fine tho.
It could alternately be old age - do CRTs tend to flicker when they get older? | 2011/05/10 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/281332",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/10165/"
] | 50 Hz is definitely slow enough for a wide range of people to notice flickering. CRTs always flicker, but at 72+ Hz few people notice it. | You need to set the Screen refresh rate to something higher than 60 for 15" monitors and higher. The larger the monitor the faster the better. It has to do with the time it takes to redraw the screen, and on 17" or better 60 times a second is just to slow and your eye will notice the changes in energy being refreshed. It could also be because a fluorescent lighting fixture is near with its odd/even ballast refreshing in sync to make things look weird. 85Hz is what it takes for me to be comfortable with a CRT. |
281,332 | I had to move my laptop over to the study, and we have an old/spare monitor which we haven't used a while - the last setup that used it was a CLI only linux install - it didn't flicker much, and text was sharp.
I decided to use it with my laptop (thinkpad r61, running a plain vanilla install of windows 7 professional with none of the lenovo addons) as a secondary screen - it seems to almost imperceptibly flicker, and text looked kind of 'off' (images seemed ok).
I'm guessing part of the problem is cleartype which IIRC is being used on windows 7. The flickering on the other hand...
I only have one monitor frequency available to me - 50 hz - there's no mention of what res or frequencies the monitor supports, so i'm unsure if that's the problem. All LCDs i have run at that frequency fine tho.
It could alternately be old age - do CRTs tend to flicker when they get older? | 2011/05/10 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/281332",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/10165/"
] | 50 Hz is definitely slow enough for a wide range of people to notice flickering. CRTs always flicker, but at 72+ Hz few people notice it. | While its not an acceptable solution, and Ignacio's answer is the most correct possible, apparently you can get around low refresh rates by lowering the resolution of the monitor - 800x600 works alright at 50 hz (the monitor in question goes up to 1280x1024). According to [pctechguide](http://www.pctechguide.com/crt-monitors/crt-monitor-resolution-and-refresh-rates-vsf), i need at least 82 hz vertical refresh for the monitor to not flicker at its maximum resolution. |
281,332 | I had to move my laptop over to the study, and we have an old/spare monitor which we haven't used a while - the last setup that used it was a CLI only linux install - it didn't flicker much, and text was sharp.
I decided to use it with my laptop (thinkpad r61, running a plain vanilla install of windows 7 professional with none of the lenovo addons) as a secondary screen - it seems to almost imperceptibly flicker, and text looked kind of 'off' (images seemed ok).
I'm guessing part of the problem is cleartype which IIRC is being used on windows 7. The flickering on the other hand...
I only have one monitor frequency available to me - 50 hz - there's no mention of what res or frequencies the monitor supports, so i'm unsure if that's the problem. All LCDs i have run at that frequency fine tho.
It could alternately be old age - do CRTs tend to flicker when they get older? | 2011/05/10 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/281332",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/10165/"
] | You need to set the Screen refresh rate to something higher than 60 for 15" monitors and higher. The larger the monitor the faster the better. It has to do with the time it takes to redraw the screen, and on 17" or better 60 times a second is just to slow and your eye will notice the changes in energy being refreshed. It could also be because a fluorescent lighting fixture is near with its odd/even ballast refreshing in sync to make things look weird. 85Hz is what it takes for me to be comfortable with a CRT. | While its not an acceptable solution, and Ignacio's answer is the most correct possible, apparently you can get around low refresh rates by lowering the resolution of the monitor - 800x600 works alright at 50 hz (the monitor in question goes up to 1280x1024). According to [pctechguide](http://www.pctechguide.com/crt-monitors/crt-monitor-resolution-and-refresh-rates-vsf), i need at least 82 hz vertical refresh for the monitor to not flicker at its maximum resolution. |
161,892 | My team is currently looking into hosting for RoR apps, and we're considering RailsPlayground, Linode and SliceHost.
We haven't found anyone recommending rails playground, and web of trust seems to caution against it - <http://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/railsplayground.com>
I like the fact that they give you a sourcerepo account for free to host and track git repos, etc.
The Questions:
* **Is there any reason not to go with RailsPlayground?**
* **Have you had any negative experiences with RailsPlayground? (Feel free to share positives as well)**
Thanks! | 2010/07/19 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/161892",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/15877/"
] | 1) Schema updates are not related to licensing in any way, so, yes, you can run a schema update from ANY Windows installation media (probably excluding SBS, but that's a completely different product).
2) No, SP2 is not a prerequisite for this schema update.
3) No, in order to fully restore AD from a backup, you only need to restart a single DC in DSRM and perform an **authoritative restore**; then standard AD replication will take care of overwriting all other DC's copies of the directory database with the one you restored (that's why it's called "authoritative"). | The procedure is explained here:
<http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc773360%28WS.10%29.aspx>
You simply use adprep from the Win2003R2 CD (disk 2) and run it in your existing environment. You need to do this before you promote your first Win2003R2 Domain Controller. |
198,860 | First, let me say that I saw on the "Welcome" window that this site is for professionals, which I am not. But I don't really want an answer from someone who's *not* a professional, I want a *good* answer. I also saw a note to post questions about this site on the meta site; but you can't post on the meta site if you don't have 5 posts here. So, **if** I could ask this...
As I've been instructed over and over again, I put what I believe is a strong password on my home pc. But lately I've started to wonder if that's really even important, as long as I have a strong password on my residential gateway. There is no one here except my wife, who couldn't break the weakest password even if she wanted to. If someone steals the pc, they'll just take out the HD and get my data that way.
Considering these things it seems that all I really need is a good gateway password and my poor wife can go back to using her cat's name as her pc password. Am I right about this? Thanks in advance. | 2018/12/01 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/198860",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/192602/"
] | You do need a strong PC password. The reason for this is that UAC, a security system on all Windows computers since Vista, can be configured to ask for a password whenever making important changes to a computer. Indeed, it *should* be configured to do so, as you should be running a non-admin account to avoid nasty security issues. If your password is weak, it could potentially allow malicious software to guess it and bypass the security controls. While Windows makes an attempt to prevent programs from tampering with UAC using a technique called UIPI, it does not always succeed.
You can safely enable auto-login without a password, however. | You should also use a secure password (on all accounts) if there is ever any possibility of somebody else getting physical access to the machine, unobserved, for a time. Guests, especially kids, may try to use the computer (with or without securing permission) and try to guess your password if they see a chance.
Also, if you are at all worried about the computer being stolen (which, if you stay logged into any accounts and the computer is at all portable, you should), I strongly recommend using disk encryption. The easiest way to do this on Windows is to enable BitLocker, and while BL can be configured to require a passphrase at bootup, by default (on compatible systems) it simply uses the TPM to ensure that the boot process hasn't been tampered with (for example, by somebody removing the hard disk and putting it in their own computer, or booting off a USB drive or Live CD). In that case, the login password on your account - on any of your accounts - is the primary line of defense against an attacker getting into your data. |
11,255 | I'm moving to a new town (a big city in Florida) where I don't know anyone for work. I'm over 23. My father wants me to give him the number and e-mail for my primary work boss because sometimes I don't respond for a few days and he worries and he would like a back up contact.
My problem is that I don't feel comfortable doing that at all. How would I get around this? We are currently in an argument because of this.
One of my suggestions was to let him have temporary access to my GPS information in which case, if I didn't respond, he could contact local authorities.
He's not much of a technical person so he didn't like that. I don't really know what else to do besides just letting this pass and after meeting some people in the new town, give him a contact name then. | 2018/03/01 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/11255",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | Welcome to adulthood, the wonderful magical age when it becomes completely appropriate to tell your parents:
>
> No.
>
>
>
This seems like one of those occasions where simply saying "no" is completely reasonable. Giving out your boss's contact information so that your parent can check up on you is not only odd, it's plainly unprofessional and I'm sure that your boss would agree.
Setting appropriate boundaries with your parents is a healthy normal thing to do at your age. You're an adult now and it's time that they started treating you like one. Daily check ups may have been appropriate when you lived at home, but that's no longer the case.
If you feel like being generous, call home on a regular basis and put the old man's mind at ease. It's a "nice" thing to do, but don't let it become a chore or an obligation. It's something you do to maintain the relationship with your family, not something you do because you "must." | Your father feels anxious. This is hard on you.
Is there anything you can do to help your father control his anxiety? For example, when a call or email comes in, can you send a quick text message or email message along these lines:
>
> Busy working, will call in a couple of days.
>
>
>
It would be reasonable to tell your father that you want to try out a new idea for a week, how to be more responsive.
You can also level the playing field quite a bit by taking the initiative from time to time to contact him before he's had a chance to contact you.
In other words, change the pattern. |
11,255 | I'm moving to a new town (a big city in Florida) where I don't know anyone for work. I'm over 23. My father wants me to give him the number and e-mail for my primary work boss because sometimes I don't respond for a few days and he worries and he would like a back up contact.
My problem is that I don't feel comfortable doing that at all. How would I get around this? We are currently in an argument because of this.
One of my suggestions was to let him have temporary access to my GPS information in which case, if I didn't respond, he could contact local authorities.
He's not much of a technical person so he didn't like that. I don't really know what else to do besides just letting this pass and after meeting some people in the new town, give him a contact name then. | 2018/03/01 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/11255",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | Welcome to adulthood, the wonderful magical age when it becomes completely appropriate to tell your parents:
>
> No.
>
>
>
This seems like one of those occasions where simply saying "no" is completely reasonable. Giving out your boss's contact information so that your parent can check up on you is not only odd, it's plainly unprofessional and I'm sure that your boss would agree.
Setting appropriate boundaries with your parents is a healthy normal thing to do at your age. You're an adult now and it's time that they started treating you like one. Daily check ups may have been appropriate when you lived at home, but that's no longer the case.
If you feel like being generous, call home on a regular basis and put the old man's mind at ease. It's a "nice" thing to do, but don't let it become a chore or an obligation. It's something you do to maintain the relationship with your family, not something you do because you "must." | First of all, having someone (mom, dad, partner, whoever else) who cares for you is a reason to be happy.
Enjoy the situation!
Now perhaps you already feel better (basically). Nevertheless you are right, giving your boss' contact out for the given reason is not a good idea.
* Tell your dad your boss may not like the idea of having his contact information spread around.
Think about how often your boss could be asked if you are still alive - stay with "no Dad, sorry".
* I'm even uncomfy telling others my work number. Private contacts can and have to wait until I can look at my mobile phone. There is no need to call me and maybe occupy colleagues when I'm not available.
* The GPS thing sounds funny. Until you are asked why you are at [place] at [time]. You don't want that. Better don't mention that your phone being somewhere doesn't imply you are ok or you are even there too.
* Your GPS idea doesn't take away the need to explain yourself. If not to your dad then to the authorities. It may sound more exciting but I suggest to spend your money elsewhere and directly talk to your dad.
* The last thing a son or daughter wants to hear on the phone is "oh you call me so rarely". Ironically exactly this could be a reason for sons and daughters to call not so often.
Explain to your dad that the situation need to stay acceptable for both of you.
* On the other hand it's your dad so why not respond from time to time? If only it's an email or sms, you don't have to compose your whole vita again and again.
* Make your dad aware that he shouldn't query your condition every hour. As apaul said, this must not be obligatory for you. Maybe your Dad just needs some time to get used to the situation, then he will become more relaxed with it?
* Is it a good idea to give friends' contact to your dad? Guess what happens when you don't respond to him. I think this is not a good start with new friends to be asked to look after you. You will tell your dad you are fine and he should stop bothering your friends. Then better only tell him you are fine.
Isn't it better to give them your dad's contact and tell him there are people in your life that take care of you and he will be informed if something has happened? |
11,255 | I'm moving to a new town (a big city in Florida) where I don't know anyone for work. I'm over 23. My father wants me to give him the number and e-mail for my primary work boss because sometimes I don't respond for a few days and he worries and he would like a back up contact.
My problem is that I don't feel comfortable doing that at all. How would I get around this? We are currently in an argument because of this.
One of my suggestions was to let him have temporary access to my GPS information in which case, if I didn't respond, he could contact local authorities.
He's not much of a technical person so he didn't like that. I don't really know what else to do besides just letting this pass and after meeting some people in the new town, give him a contact name then. | 2018/03/01 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/11255",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | Welcome to adulthood, the wonderful magical age when it becomes completely appropriate to tell your parents:
>
> No.
>
>
>
This seems like one of those occasions where simply saying "no" is completely reasonable. Giving out your boss's contact information so that your parent can check up on you is not only odd, it's plainly unprofessional and I'm sure that your boss would agree.
Setting appropriate boundaries with your parents is a healthy normal thing to do at your age. You're an adult now and it's time that they started treating you like one. Daily check ups may have been appropriate when you lived at home, but that's no longer the case.
If you feel like being generous, call home on a regular basis and put the old man's mind at ease. It's a "nice" thing to do, but don't let it become a chore or an obligation. It's something you do to maintain the relationship with your family, not something you do because you "must." | It can be scary for a parent to have his/her child go off to a new city, new job, new residence, where that child doesn't know anyone or have any contacts. Besides your phone, your work is the only other thing he has. However, his request is out of bounds. The problem seems to be related to his wanting to make sure you are ok, and getting a response in less than "a few days". So come up with a compromise solution of some sort. Perhaps agree to respond in the same day, or even with a four or six hour period, as long as he doesn't pester you with too many calls. Or agree to chat each day, every other day, whatever, at a certain time for a few minutes, just to check in and allay his concerns. Or perhaps give him some limited access to your social media, so he can see how recently you have posted (so he knows you are alive) if in fact you do post regularly. I have a feeling that once he sees you are ok, that you have found friends and established yourself, that he will back off and give you more space. |
11,255 | I'm moving to a new town (a big city in Florida) where I don't know anyone for work. I'm over 23. My father wants me to give him the number and e-mail for my primary work boss because sometimes I don't respond for a few days and he worries and he would like a back up contact.
My problem is that I don't feel comfortable doing that at all. How would I get around this? We are currently in an argument because of this.
One of my suggestions was to let him have temporary access to my GPS information in which case, if I didn't respond, he could contact local authorities.
He's not much of a technical person so he didn't like that. I don't really know what else to do besides just letting this pass and after meeting some people in the new town, give him a contact name then. | 2018/03/01 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/11255",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | Welcome to adulthood, the wonderful magical age when it becomes completely appropriate to tell your parents:
>
> No.
>
>
>
This seems like one of those occasions where simply saying "no" is completely reasonable. Giving out your boss's contact information so that your parent can check up on you is not only odd, it's plainly unprofessional and I'm sure that your boss would agree.
Setting appropriate boundaries with your parents is a healthy normal thing to do at your age. You're an adult now and it's time that they started treating you like one. Daily check ups may have been appropriate when you lived at home, but that's no longer the case.
If you feel like being generous, call home on a regular basis and put the old man's mind at ease. It's a "nice" thing to do, but don't let it become a chore or an obligation. It's something you do to maintain the relationship with your family, not something you do because you "must." | You could try to get him to text. I know a 78 year old that can text on his flip phone! If the issue is safety, Dad can text "OK?" and you can text "Yes"
Set that boundary, if Dad doesn't have a texting phone or can't text he has to learn it, and I've seen pay as you go deals pretty cheap for people that almost never use their phone, some come with a cheap phone.
If his problem is **really** separation anxiety and missing you, or if the problem is he wants to retain more control of you and your life ("helping you"), you will find that out when he rejects this simple solution, or when he starts texting like mad all the time or demanding more frequent and extensive communications. Just keep responding only to "OK?" with "Yes", or "Yes but in the middle of something," and so on.
Then he can't claim he is worried about whether you are alive and safe. As for the boss, I'd explain as gently as possible,
>
> Those are my relationships to deal with, I don't want you speaking to my boss or coworkers. I don't want them to ever see me as a child with a daddy.
>
>
> |
11,255 | I'm moving to a new town (a big city in Florida) where I don't know anyone for work. I'm over 23. My father wants me to give him the number and e-mail for my primary work boss because sometimes I don't respond for a few days and he worries and he would like a back up contact.
My problem is that I don't feel comfortable doing that at all. How would I get around this? We are currently in an argument because of this.
One of my suggestions was to let him have temporary access to my GPS information in which case, if I didn't respond, he could contact local authorities.
He's not much of a technical person so he didn't like that. I don't really know what else to do besides just letting this pass and after meeting some people in the new town, give him a contact name then. | 2018/03/01 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/11255",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | Your father feels anxious. This is hard on you.
Is there anything you can do to help your father control his anxiety? For example, when a call or email comes in, can you send a quick text message or email message along these lines:
>
> Busy working, will call in a couple of days.
>
>
>
It would be reasonable to tell your father that you want to try out a new idea for a week, how to be more responsive.
You can also level the playing field quite a bit by taking the initiative from time to time to contact him before he's had a chance to contact you.
In other words, change the pattern. | First of all, having someone (mom, dad, partner, whoever else) who cares for you is a reason to be happy.
Enjoy the situation!
Now perhaps you already feel better (basically). Nevertheless you are right, giving your boss' contact out for the given reason is not a good idea.
* Tell your dad your boss may not like the idea of having his contact information spread around.
Think about how often your boss could be asked if you are still alive - stay with "no Dad, sorry".
* I'm even uncomfy telling others my work number. Private contacts can and have to wait until I can look at my mobile phone. There is no need to call me and maybe occupy colleagues when I'm not available.
* The GPS thing sounds funny. Until you are asked why you are at [place] at [time]. You don't want that. Better don't mention that your phone being somewhere doesn't imply you are ok or you are even there too.
* Your GPS idea doesn't take away the need to explain yourself. If not to your dad then to the authorities. It may sound more exciting but I suggest to spend your money elsewhere and directly talk to your dad.
* The last thing a son or daughter wants to hear on the phone is "oh you call me so rarely". Ironically exactly this could be a reason for sons and daughters to call not so often.
Explain to your dad that the situation need to stay acceptable for both of you.
* On the other hand it's your dad so why not respond from time to time? If only it's an email or sms, you don't have to compose your whole vita again and again.
* Make your dad aware that he shouldn't query your condition every hour. As apaul said, this must not be obligatory for you. Maybe your Dad just needs some time to get used to the situation, then he will become more relaxed with it?
* Is it a good idea to give friends' contact to your dad? Guess what happens when you don't respond to him. I think this is not a good start with new friends to be asked to look after you. You will tell your dad you are fine and he should stop bothering your friends. Then better only tell him you are fine.
Isn't it better to give them your dad's contact and tell him there are people in your life that take care of you and he will be informed if something has happened? |
11,255 | I'm moving to a new town (a big city in Florida) where I don't know anyone for work. I'm over 23. My father wants me to give him the number and e-mail for my primary work boss because sometimes I don't respond for a few days and he worries and he would like a back up contact.
My problem is that I don't feel comfortable doing that at all. How would I get around this? We are currently in an argument because of this.
One of my suggestions was to let him have temporary access to my GPS information in which case, if I didn't respond, he could contact local authorities.
He's not much of a technical person so he didn't like that. I don't really know what else to do besides just letting this pass and after meeting some people in the new town, give him a contact name then. | 2018/03/01 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/11255",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | Your father feels anxious. This is hard on you.
Is there anything you can do to help your father control his anxiety? For example, when a call or email comes in, can you send a quick text message or email message along these lines:
>
> Busy working, will call in a couple of days.
>
>
>
It would be reasonable to tell your father that you want to try out a new idea for a week, how to be more responsive.
You can also level the playing field quite a bit by taking the initiative from time to time to contact him before he's had a chance to contact you.
In other words, change the pattern. | It can be scary for a parent to have his/her child go off to a new city, new job, new residence, where that child doesn't know anyone or have any contacts. Besides your phone, your work is the only other thing he has. However, his request is out of bounds. The problem seems to be related to his wanting to make sure you are ok, and getting a response in less than "a few days". So come up with a compromise solution of some sort. Perhaps agree to respond in the same day, or even with a four or six hour period, as long as he doesn't pester you with too many calls. Or agree to chat each day, every other day, whatever, at a certain time for a few minutes, just to check in and allay his concerns. Or perhaps give him some limited access to your social media, so he can see how recently you have posted (so he knows you are alive) if in fact you do post regularly. I have a feeling that once he sees you are ok, that you have found friends and established yourself, that he will back off and give you more space. |
11,255 | I'm moving to a new town (a big city in Florida) where I don't know anyone for work. I'm over 23. My father wants me to give him the number and e-mail for my primary work boss because sometimes I don't respond for a few days and he worries and he would like a back up contact.
My problem is that I don't feel comfortable doing that at all. How would I get around this? We are currently in an argument because of this.
One of my suggestions was to let him have temporary access to my GPS information in which case, if I didn't respond, he could contact local authorities.
He's not much of a technical person so he didn't like that. I don't really know what else to do besides just letting this pass and after meeting some people in the new town, give him a contact name then. | 2018/03/01 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/11255",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | Your father feels anxious. This is hard on you.
Is there anything you can do to help your father control his anxiety? For example, when a call or email comes in, can you send a quick text message or email message along these lines:
>
> Busy working, will call in a couple of days.
>
>
>
It would be reasonable to tell your father that you want to try out a new idea for a week, how to be more responsive.
You can also level the playing field quite a bit by taking the initiative from time to time to contact him before he's had a chance to contact you.
In other words, change the pattern. | You could try to get him to text. I know a 78 year old that can text on his flip phone! If the issue is safety, Dad can text "OK?" and you can text "Yes"
Set that boundary, if Dad doesn't have a texting phone or can't text he has to learn it, and I've seen pay as you go deals pretty cheap for people that almost never use their phone, some come with a cheap phone.
If his problem is **really** separation anxiety and missing you, or if the problem is he wants to retain more control of you and your life ("helping you"), you will find that out when he rejects this simple solution, or when he starts texting like mad all the time or demanding more frequent and extensive communications. Just keep responding only to "OK?" with "Yes", or "Yes but in the middle of something," and so on.
Then he can't claim he is worried about whether you are alive and safe. As for the boss, I'd explain as gently as possible,
>
> Those are my relationships to deal with, I don't want you speaking to my boss or coworkers. I don't want them to ever see me as a child with a daddy.
>
>
> |
11,255 | I'm moving to a new town (a big city in Florida) where I don't know anyone for work. I'm over 23. My father wants me to give him the number and e-mail for my primary work boss because sometimes I don't respond for a few days and he worries and he would like a back up contact.
My problem is that I don't feel comfortable doing that at all. How would I get around this? We are currently in an argument because of this.
One of my suggestions was to let him have temporary access to my GPS information in which case, if I didn't respond, he could contact local authorities.
He's not much of a technical person so he didn't like that. I don't really know what else to do besides just letting this pass and after meeting some people in the new town, give him a contact name then. | 2018/03/01 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/11255",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | It can be scary for a parent to have his/her child go off to a new city, new job, new residence, where that child doesn't know anyone or have any contacts. Besides your phone, your work is the only other thing he has. However, his request is out of bounds. The problem seems to be related to his wanting to make sure you are ok, and getting a response in less than "a few days". So come up with a compromise solution of some sort. Perhaps agree to respond in the same day, or even with a four or six hour period, as long as he doesn't pester you with too many calls. Or agree to chat each day, every other day, whatever, at a certain time for a few minutes, just to check in and allay his concerns. Or perhaps give him some limited access to your social media, so he can see how recently you have posted (so he knows you are alive) if in fact you do post regularly. I have a feeling that once he sees you are ok, that you have found friends and established yourself, that he will back off and give you more space. | First of all, having someone (mom, dad, partner, whoever else) who cares for you is a reason to be happy.
Enjoy the situation!
Now perhaps you already feel better (basically). Nevertheless you are right, giving your boss' contact out for the given reason is not a good idea.
* Tell your dad your boss may not like the idea of having his contact information spread around.
Think about how often your boss could be asked if you are still alive - stay with "no Dad, sorry".
* I'm even uncomfy telling others my work number. Private contacts can and have to wait until I can look at my mobile phone. There is no need to call me and maybe occupy colleagues when I'm not available.
* The GPS thing sounds funny. Until you are asked why you are at [place] at [time]. You don't want that. Better don't mention that your phone being somewhere doesn't imply you are ok or you are even there too.
* Your GPS idea doesn't take away the need to explain yourself. If not to your dad then to the authorities. It may sound more exciting but I suggest to spend your money elsewhere and directly talk to your dad.
* The last thing a son or daughter wants to hear on the phone is "oh you call me so rarely". Ironically exactly this could be a reason for sons and daughters to call not so often.
Explain to your dad that the situation need to stay acceptable for both of you.
* On the other hand it's your dad so why not respond from time to time? If only it's an email or sms, you don't have to compose your whole vita again and again.
* Make your dad aware that he shouldn't query your condition every hour. As apaul said, this must not be obligatory for you. Maybe your Dad just needs some time to get used to the situation, then he will become more relaxed with it?
* Is it a good idea to give friends' contact to your dad? Guess what happens when you don't respond to him. I think this is not a good start with new friends to be asked to look after you. You will tell your dad you are fine and he should stop bothering your friends. Then better only tell him you are fine.
Isn't it better to give them your dad's contact and tell him there are people in your life that take care of you and he will be informed if something has happened? |
11,255 | I'm moving to a new town (a big city in Florida) where I don't know anyone for work. I'm over 23. My father wants me to give him the number and e-mail for my primary work boss because sometimes I don't respond for a few days and he worries and he would like a back up contact.
My problem is that I don't feel comfortable doing that at all. How would I get around this? We are currently in an argument because of this.
One of my suggestions was to let him have temporary access to my GPS information in which case, if I didn't respond, he could contact local authorities.
He's not much of a technical person so he didn't like that. I don't really know what else to do besides just letting this pass and after meeting some people in the new town, give him a contact name then. | 2018/03/01 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/11255",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | It can be scary for a parent to have his/her child go off to a new city, new job, new residence, where that child doesn't know anyone or have any contacts. Besides your phone, your work is the only other thing he has. However, his request is out of bounds. The problem seems to be related to his wanting to make sure you are ok, and getting a response in less than "a few days". So come up with a compromise solution of some sort. Perhaps agree to respond in the same day, or even with a four or six hour period, as long as he doesn't pester you with too many calls. Or agree to chat each day, every other day, whatever, at a certain time for a few minutes, just to check in and allay his concerns. Or perhaps give him some limited access to your social media, so he can see how recently you have posted (so he knows you are alive) if in fact you do post regularly. I have a feeling that once he sees you are ok, that you have found friends and established yourself, that he will back off and give you more space. | You could try to get him to text. I know a 78 year old that can text on his flip phone! If the issue is safety, Dad can text "OK?" and you can text "Yes"
Set that boundary, if Dad doesn't have a texting phone or can't text he has to learn it, and I've seen pay as you go deals pretty cheap for people that almost never use their phone, some come with a cheap phone.
If his problem is **really** separation anxiety and missing you, or if the problem is he wants to retain more control of you and your life ("helping you"), you will find that out when he rejects this simple solution, or when he starts texting like mad all the time or demanding more frequent and extensive communications. Just keep responding only to "OK?" with "Yes", or "Yes but in the middle of something," and so on.
Then he can't claim he is worried about whether you are alive and safe. As for the boss, I'd explain as gently as possible,
>
> Those are my relationships to deal with, I don't want you speaking to my boss or coworkers. I don't want them to ever see me as a child with a daddy.
>
>
> |
8,562 | Where there is a group of people, there will be politics and organizational dynamics. This should be no different with the Sangha.
For example, monks trying to cause dissent or schism, monks who disobey instructions, monks trying to gain power over others, monks who are envious of others, monks trying to get the attention of the Buddha or their abbot etc.
How did the Buddha handle such situations in his time?
How are such situations handled within the Sangha today? | 2015/04/04 | [
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/8562",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/471/"
] | **How did the Buddha handle such situations in his time?**
There are two famous schisms in the time of the Buddha; the [Devadatta schism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devadatta#Devadatta_in_the_Therav.C4.81da_Vinaya) and the [Kosambi schism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosambi#The_schism_at_Kosambi).
In the former case, new, inexperienced monks were led astray by bogus teachings and the Buddha sent his two chief disciples to explain the truth to them.
In the latter case, the Buddha tried to invoke the seventh means of settling disputes (adhikaranasamatha), called "covering over with grass" - i.e. agreeing to leave the past transgressions behind and start fresh. The monks refused and the Buddha abandoned them.
To some extent, it's not very instructive to ask "how did the Buddha handle X", since he was fully enlightened and knew how to best deal with every specific situation. Better to ask is how the Buddha taught one should deal with sangha politics. In this instance, he left fairly specific procedural teachings on how to avoid and deal with such affairs.
Briefly, the seven adhkaranasamatha for dealing with disputes and legal cases are:
1. Settling in front of the transgressor
2. Settling based on a confirmation of enlightenment
3. Settling based on a confirmation of insanity
4. Settling based on an admission of guilt
5. Settling by a vote of the majority
6. Settling on punishment for evil-doers
7. Settling by covering over with grass
Beyond this, there is specific and lengthy instruction in the vinaya regarding schisms, and there are various teachings on dealing with power struggles, envy, disobedience, etc.
**How are such situations handled within the Sangha today?**
Rather poorly, for the most part. But "the sangha" is a huge and diverse conceptual body that for all intents and purposes doesn't exist as a single entity. Various sects, traditions, and even countries have their own sanghas now, and each sangha has its own means of dealing (or not) with such problems. For the most part, it is far more difficult to actually deal with monastic transgressions in modern times; without the stability of a large body of enlightened beings, it's much more "every monk for himself", unfortunately. | The nature of our present time is very different from Buddha's time: after the printing press "politics" really started taking on an industrial and corporate mission.
On the other hand, the ruling monastic order, the Vinaya in particular was passed on entirely orally. This should answer your first question. Any question on how Buddha handled X, can be answered in the Vinaya.
In my opinion, it is frequently contextual and oftentimes impractical for our times.
We live a different day today: a day of bodhisattvas and renaissance men.
As for specific cases of "politics" which didn't really exist on such an organized level for lack of printing press, there is the case of Devadatta taking over the initial political expression of Buddhism. (Osamu Tezuka's Buddha manga beautifully renders this story.)
Eventually Devadatta tried to kill Buddha, too, symbolizing the message from Buddhism about poltiics: "power corrupts."
Even more broadly, *contrived action* corrupts, especially socially contrived action tends to create backlashes within and without. We are one collective organism and when good is born, evil persistently tries to take over, day and night.
When there is no contrived good, there is no contrived evil.
This is why Buddhism and Taoism philosophy are often very close, with Taoism taking an even more non-interfering attitude towards things, having the overall expression of "let all karma go up and down, when everyone tires of controlling and contriving, they will rest within the natural order."
The Buddha himself didn't do much in terms of managing the Sangha, just like any of the Zen masters (who are even more strict, some forbidding writing or taking notes). Even when he passed on leadership to Mahakashyapa, all he did was raise a flower and smile (likely paranormal methods of transference involved).
How is politics active in Buddhism today?
Highly active! There is SGI international, Tibetan Buddhism affecting politics in China, and with the marriage of Buddhism and scientific brain analyses, an overall recognition of the importance of samatha and vipassana meditation for happiness and maturity.
I think we have reached an excellent point today and there are many different "politics" with simple rules in smaller meditation circles to clear echelons of managerial staff, teachers, web developers, etc. for mini Buddhist societies. It certainly doesn't seem like the Buddhadharma (whether in the form of Buddhism or other traditions which focus on Insight Meditation) is nearing any sort of Dharma Extinction Age (where it is said that people will be reading and studying but few will have any Realization). |
5,503 | Hi everyone,
I'm looking to buy a zeppelin for the microphone, but usually used in big productions I can not pay. I've looked at alternatives and found this, someone has tried and can compare it with other professionals?
<http://cgi.ebay.es/60cm-Blimp-Windscreen-Windjammer-Windshield-Fur-Cover-/140499923350?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item20b672b196#ht_5529wt_905>
Thanks!!! | 2011/01/12 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/5503",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/480/"
] | I think these are the ones being made in India. I have not used one myself but a guy I did some field recording with the other day had one and said t did the job well enough. Compared to a similar Rycote one I thought the plastic looked and felt quite brittle which would mean bits are more likely to snap on it. The guy said he also had to change the bands that came with it that hold the mic as they were not very good. You get what you pay for really and this will do the job but is not near the standards of a Rycote or even Rode wind shield. If you really have little money you can make your own windshield with very little trouble, they work well, the only downside is that if you turned up on a set with one you may receive a few funny looks. Here is an example of one method [link text](http://www.joelandkaren.com/mic-zeppelin/) This one seems fine but I would also recommend using old speaker cover fabric around the cage as this is essentially the same stuff used on the Rycote zeplins and will help with wind reduction whilst not effecting your recordings quality. | How about using a Rycote Softie, they still give a decent sound and are robust?
<http://www.rycote.com/products/softie_kit/> |
5,503 | Hi everyone,
I'm looking to buy a zeppelin for the microphone, but usually used in big productions I can not pay. I've looked at alternatives and found this, someone has tried and can compare it with other professionals?
<http://cgi.ebay.es/60cm-Blimp-Windscreen-Windjammer-Windshield-Fur-Cover-/140499923350?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item20b672b196#ht_5529wt_905>
Thanks!!! | 2011/01/12 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/5503",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/480/"
] | @Alvar, the best commercially-available low-cost zeppelin that I've found is the Røde Blimp. The one you linked to looks an awful lot like a Sennheiser MZW windscreen, which currently retails online for US$360. I still prefer the modularity, flexibility, and performance of Rycote, as most on this board probably do also, but really, for the price the Røde Blimp can do the job in many circumstances.
I am also aware of one or two Indian retailers on eBay who sell stuff on the cheap, sometimes major brands, sometimes their own, of pretty mixed quality...popular with the DV and no-budget/guerilla filmmaking scene, though.
As @Lenny said, if you have more time than money, you can make your own. Tutorials abound online! (I've always been an admirer of the DIY windscreens of nature recordists who use dual NT1a's for nature ambiences!) | How about using a Rycote Softie, they still give a decent sound and are robust?
<http://www.rycote.com/products/softie_kit/> |
5,503 | Hi everyone,
I'm looking to buy a zeppelin for the microphone, but usually used in big productions I can not pay. I've looked at alternatives and found this, someone has tried and can compare it with other professionals?
<http://cgi.ebay.es/60cm-Blimp-Windscreen-Windjammer-Windshield-Fur-Cover-/140499923350?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item20b672b196#ht_5529wt_905>
Thanks!!! | 2011/01/12 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/5503",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/480/"
] | Keep an eye on ebay and other local secondhand markets - two of the four rycotes I own I bought secondhand.... Remember Rycotes have been around for a long time so there are perfectly functional old models around - one of mine would be well over 20 years old, the suspension and cage are in perfect condition, will replace the fluffy sometime soon but still.... | How about using a Rycote Softie, they still give a decent sound and are robust?
<http://www.rycote.com/products/softie_kit/> |
296,604 | When i navigate to an ASP.NET page, the browser displays a "Page Not Found" message. The page exists and is in a virtual directory, I am able to browse it on the IIS on my local development machine. What could be causing this problem on the server?
When i replace one of the class libraries that iam using, with an older version it works. But the page works on my local machine with the new version of the component as well. I have the exact same files on both the server and my development machine.
I have turned custom errors "Off". Is there a way to have the error displayed rather than "Page Not Found".
The page is built using .NET 2.0. | 2008/11/17 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/296604",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | You have the ASP.NET extension installed and active? This is not installed by default in Windows Server 2003. When this is not active, you will get a 404 for any .aspx file. | Does the virtual directory on your server allow scripting? Having scripting off could make the page inaccessible. |
574,558 | I'm trying to understand how to operate an open-drain I/O port on an older PIC (PIC16F1718.) My goal is to use it for bit-banged bidirectional open-drain I2C communication.
I know how to enable and disable open drain mode, but from there I'm not sure how to control it. To control the output, do I change the output value (PORTx or LATx) or do I change the pin mode (TRISx)? How do I set the registers if I want to read in a value?
I figured these questions would be straightforward to answer from the datasheet, but it doesn't show the open-drain register (ODCONx) on its I/O port logic diagram, and all it says about open-drain control is how to enable the mode.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/2yz8t.png)
Datasheet Page 123:
<https://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/PIC16F-LF-1717-8-9-Data-Sheet-DS40001740D.pdf> | 2021/07/08 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/574558",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/127133/"
] | Look at the description of the OPEN-DRAIN CONTROL register (on page 123 of the datasheet):
>
> The ODCONA register (Register 11-6) controls the open-drain feature of
> the port. Open-drain operation is independently selected for each pin.
> When an ODCONA bit is set, the corresponding port output becomes an
> open-drain driver capable of sinking current only. When an ODCONA bit
> is cleared, the corresponding port output pin is the standard
> push-pull drive capable of sourcing and sinking current.
>
>
>
Since all this register does is change the output from push-pull to open-drain, you would use the PORTA register in both cases: writing a zero to PORTA sets the output pin low; writing a one sets the output high (for push-pull) or high-Z (for open-drain). This all assumes the direction control is set to output. | It’s been a long time since I’ve looked at a PIC16, so my memory might be a little hazy, nevertheless the ‘usual’ method of open drain is to set the port bit to 0 and manipulate the tris bit. So to output a logic 0, the port bit has already been set to 0 then tris = 0 to enable the output. For a logic 1 we rely on external pullup resistors and set the port to be an input by tris = 1. |
73,866 | My question is about absolute phrases.
>
> The weather being nice, we decided to have a picnic.
>
>
>
Can we add "with" in front of the absolute phrase?
>
> With the weather being nice, we decided to have a picnic.
>
>
> | 2015/11/23 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/73866",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/13933/"
] | Yes, you can add "with" to the beginning of the sentence.
"the weather being nice" is a *gerund* - a present participle form of a verb, being used as a noun.
In spoken American English, it will also appear as: "We decided to have a picnic, what with the weather being nice and all". | **"With the weather being nice, we decided to have a picnic"** **is perfectly acceptable English usage** and, at least to my ear, ***preferable*** to "The weather being nice, we decided to have a picnic," which sounds a bit flat and lifeless. Where I grew up in the suburbs of Los Angeles, California, we would say, "With the weather being nice, we decided to ***go on*** a picnic." Looking at it now, I see that "go on a picnic" might be idiomatic, perhaps mid-western (as my parents were raised and university-educated in Oklahoma before moving to Los Angeles).
Examples: "Let's go on a picnic!" "We went on a nice picnic last weekend." "Isn't it fun to go on a picnic? "After getting sick on our way home, I was sorry we had gone to that group picnic." "Going on a picnic is one of my favorite things to do." And so forth.
Driving out to the country and going on a picnic with my parents and sister created some of my best and happiest memories from childhood. Picnics are special, **and your use of "with" is correct**. |
1,449,840 | I'd like to learn what various code libraries, which I think are all Microsoft's, do. Example libraries include atls.lib, atlsd.lib, libcmtd.lib, libcpmtd.lib. Would you point me to a good online reference or other way to learn about these libraries?
Clarification: I'm hoping to find an index of sorts for learning about Microsoft libraries in general. Sadly, when I search the web for something like "libcmtd", I just get posts on forums from people having problems with their code. Since Google doesn't report anything promising looking within the first few pages, there might not be anything, but it's worth asking. | 2009/09/19 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1449840",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/56015/"
] | ATLS.LIB is the static version of ATL. (ATLSD.LIB is the debug version of that.) ATL documentation starts here: <http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/t9adwcde.aspx>
LIBCMTD.LIB and LIBCPMTD.LIB are the debug versions of the C and C++ runtime libraries. They're pretty standard implementations, so any C and C++ library reference will do. Microsoft has them documented on MSDN.
By "debug versions", I mean that these versions of the libraries have extra checking in them to help uncover bugs at run-time. These are generally appropriate for your debug builds. When building your release build, you probably want the regular versions which drop the final 'd' from the file names. | in addition msvcrt.lib and msvcrtd.lib are c runtime lib if you use MFs Microsoft foundation classes.
And there are unicode versions of all these libraries as well.
See afx.h and look for a set of #ifdef's that select which libraries to
"use" by default, puts a pragma lib comment in the output.
In many cases, it is literally impossible to link because of this, if you get libraries (shared or not) from different sources, or the same source from different versions.
Basically, MS painted themselves into a corner by doing lots of compile time decisions that really can't be made at compile time, like deciding what your library will ever link with, or deciding all programs only speak unicode or non unicode.
You cant link modules compiled for debug with modules that are not compiled for debug.
Why would you want to? Because you got a library from somewhere to link with. If that libary does anything with windows, it forces you to use all non-debug compiles to use it, if it s a no-debug library. (The exception is if the library does not depend on the c runtime libary, ATL or MFC. Ironic that C / C++ work better with libraries NOT written in C++, and ironic that Windows works better with libraries that don't use, well, a Window (mfc or atl).)
Notice there are no longer software libraries to buy to help do this or that in Windows?
MS made it impossible. You would have to make 32, yes 32 versions to cover all the MFC/ATL/Cruntime possibilities there are, and even then it would not work, because
many of the MS libraries just wont link or will link and wont work together in
combinations that appear to link ok. |
6,625,768 | Say I wanted to downsample an image in realtime (1280x720) to a very small scale (16x16) and not suffer from "dancing" pixels when the image moves, which technique would I use?
This would be using XBox360/PS3 GPUs.
Note that the 16x16 image only needs to contain a very "generalised" representation of the original image - almost like a rough-estimate of colour.
Doing a direct downsample results in pixels coming in/out of the sampling so you get a dancing/disco effect when the image moves.
Thanks for any help. | 2011/07/08 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/6625768",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/835531/"
] | You'll want to use averaging instead of downsampling. For instance, setting each pixel to the average value of an 80x45 pixel block will give you a 16x16 image from a 1280x720 image. Note that that would alter the aspect ratio though...
I should clarify that you don't necessarily have to average the entire block -- you could average every other pixel in it or whatever you want. But the more pixels you account for, the more accurate the value would be. You could also use other statistical measures -- the mode or median values across channels could also work. | The downsampling filter that will give the best quality is to do a 2D Fourier transform, select only the low frequencies and do an inverse Fourier transform into the low resolution image.
Obviously this won't be the fastest method and there may be minor issues with scaling and handling the color channels. |
218,671 | I tried looking this question up on google and didn't find material that answered my question. But my questions are:
(1) Is there a method to determine how long it takes a leading indicator to affect a variable ? So if we are looking at the affects of oil production on sales, when oil drops how long does it take to affect sales.
Could I use survival analysis for this? [This](https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/30061/identifying-the-time-lag-between-cause-and-effect?rq=1) seems related but in a biological context
(2) Can we measure the degree to which oil production affects sales? If oil production drops by 10% it affects sales by 17%.
(3) What's the best way to determine the most important leading indicator? Univariate regression and compare models?
(4) Is there a package in R that could be used for this? | 2016/06/13 | [
"https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/218671",
"https://stats.stackexchange.com",
"https://stats.stackexchange.com/users/35463/"
] | Did you try using both predictors without the interaction? So it would be:
y ~ x + Loc
The AIC might be better in the first model because location is important. But the interaction is not important, which is why the P-values are not significant. You would then interpret it as the effect of x after controlling for Loc. | You must report both groups separately (or perhaps consider multi-level modelling). To simply combine the groups violates one of the basic assumptions of regression (and most other inferential statistical techiques), independence of observations. Or to put it another way, the grouping variable (location) is a hidden variable unless it is taken into account in your analysis.
In an extreme case, ignoring a grouping variable can lead to Simpson's paradox. In this paradox, you can have two groups in both of which there is a positive correlation, but if you combine them you have a (false, incorrect) negative correlation. (Or vice versa, of course.) See <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/05/28/theorums_3_simpson/>. |
22,838 | I have been seeing all these "hoaxes" on the internet about Planet X and how it would destroy Earth, on September 23rd 2017. It didn't happen.
I started to wonder if it's possible - with our current technology - to map the path of an asteroid with calculations of how an asteroid will pass near or collide with Earth. [I've heard one is going to "safely" pass Earth on January 13th 2019.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/(89959)_2002_NT7) | 2017/09/24 | [
"https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/22838",
"https://astronomy.stackexchange.com",
"https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/users/18736/"
] | There's a wide variety of answers for how much warning. Most of what the [Near Earth Asteroid Program](https://www.nasa.gov/audience/foreducators/postsecondary/features/F_Near_Earth_Program.html) or focuses on is [Earth Crossing Objects](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Earth-crossing_minor_planets) or [Near Earth Objects](https://cneos.jpl.nasa.gov/about/neo_groups.html). Those pose the greatest risk of impact and they are also, somewhat conveniently, the easiest to track.
The hardest to track is a high eccentricity long period orbit that approaches from the sun side of the planet. [Chelyabinsk](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelyabinsk_meteor) was a sun side asteroid (an asteroid that hits during the day generally approaches from the sun side. Those are the hardest to see, and even though Chelyabinsk was too small to worry about (20 meters diameter estimate). It's possible that it would have been observed by the luck of having a telescope pointed in the right direction had it approached from the night side of the planet. Still, an object that size, it's unlikely that they'd have had more than a few hours warming.
The larger the object, the easier it is to see and once an object is observed for some time and it's trajectory has been studied, it's path can be predicted years, even decades ahead of time. The warning time drops sharply for an object not yet observed.
[Potentially Hazardous Objects](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potentially_hazardous_object) are at least 100 meters across, sometimes 150 meters is used as a minimum. 25-50 times the reflective surface of Chelyabinsk, so an object that size could be seen a fair bit further ahead of time.
Finally, Planet X doesn't exist and if it did exist, it would have cleared it's orbital path by now and it wouldn't be sending asteroids and/or comets towards Earth once every orbit and predicting an exact date (Sept 23rd) from an unobserved planet X. That's just silly.
There is stuff out there in our solar system that we haven't seen. Lots of stuff, maybe even a hundred or more unidentified dwarf planets, possibly another planet or two. ([Click here for cool diagram](https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1633:_Possible_Undiscovered_Planets))
The thing is, orbits tend to clear out over time and our solar-system is over 4 billion years old. Most of the stuff that had an orbit that was going to crash into the Earth did so long ago and Planet Nine, assuming it exists, has cleared out it's orbit and it rarely sends stuff flying towards Earth.
Space is also so big that Earth is, by comparison, a very tiny target, so an asteroid coming from the outer reaches of the solar system and hitting Earth is like shooting a hole in one from the space shutting. Stuff is far more likely to miss than hit the Earth.
But to answer your question on an object coming from a distant orbit, sent our way by a theoretical planet, it's hard to say when we'd see it in that scenario if it's a brand new observation and it would also depend on whether it came towards the Earth on the sun side or the night side. (Objects can hit the Earth from any direction), but sun side observations are the hardest to see.
The good news is, high eccentricity impacts of objects large enough to be considered potentially hazardous are rare enough that you are unlikely to be affected by an Asteroid Impact in your lifetime. It's somewhere around 140 on the list of things you should worry about. And low eccentricity orbits that could hit Earth, or NEOs, those are being carefully tracked.
The other good news is that Planet X (if it even exists) doesn't threaten Earth. No object in distant orbit around our sun would be a threat. In fact, having a planet out there would actually send more asteroids away than it would cause to fly in towards the inner solar system. They would reduce, not increase the number of impacts, similar to Jupiter.
But a large object passing through might post an asteroid/comet impact threat. [Gilese 710](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gliese_710#Computing_and_details_of_the_closest_approach) could do that, but it won't pass close enough to have that effect for about 1.36 million years.
I don't want to make light of this. Asteroid impacts do happen and Earth may have been hit by a very destructive asteroid or comet about 12,900 years ago (the [Younger Dryas impact hypothesis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas_impact_hypothesis)) and a global changing event like that might happen every, 50,000 or 100,000 years or so, which means it's 100%, absolutely worth looking out and seeing as much as possible, because Earth will get hit by a large object again. But such impacts are very rare on a human lifetime scale.
But I'm not sure I ever answered your question. How much warning for a large object, say 150-250 meters? If the trajectory makes it tough to see, maybe only a few hours. If it approaches from the night side, maybe a few days or a few weeks. Longer if someone gets lucky and has a big telescope pointed in the right place, but I'm kinda guessing. As our technology improves, the warning period will increase. (I invite correction, especially on this last paragraph). | **Yes** it is possible to predict the path of an asteroid, and if it will strike the Earth. In the first instance the accuracy of the predicted path depends upon the quality and spacing of the positional. The better the position measurements (minimum 3) the better the prediction. If the position measurements are spread around the asteroids orbit, the predicted orbit is more accurate.
The second factor is more subtle. Because the solar system has many planets, there are many forces on an asteroid. These cannot all be put into an exact solution but need to be calculated step by step. The uncertainty in the predicted path accumulates the further into the future you push the predictions. When an asteroid makes a close pass to a planet a slight difference in the approach can make a large difference in the path after approach.
Jupiter being the most massive planet alters the orbits of a lot of asteroids and comets.
There are projects to find and measure the positions of asteroids that could strike Earth. Look up SpaceGaurd.
It is because of these uncertainties that NASA etc give a probability of an asteroid hitting Earth on it's next close approach.
Comets are more difficult, because as gas/dust leave the comet it acts like a rocket engine and so moves the comet off its predictable path. The effect is small but noticeable.
Classically, the positions of asteroids is measured by taking an image and measuring where the asteroid is on the image relative to stars with accurately known positions. Sounds simple, but needs skill to do well, and the help of good software to take into account like distorts caused by the telescope/camera optics ... The calculations also involve knowing the location of the Earth and camera, relative to the stars. |
78,445 | The other day I stumbled upon a youtube video from Bad Internet series: [Which of The “Friends” Are You?](https://youtu.be/2QyzjYqkj2U) and it made me remember a previous occurrence of an idea that people are sorted into their roles by some algorithm:
The second one refers to the [Futurama](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurama) series, where people appear to be forced into their jobs.
**The problem: Both worlds are a joke. I would like the same, but serious.**
Is there a way to get to a situation where *everybody* (i.e. more than 65% of the population) is selected to do their job, while there is no magic?
* The sorting algorithm should be explainable to some extent and it should be non-magical. (No [sorting hat](http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Sorting_Hat) please.)
* However, [deep learning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_learning) algorithms or quantum computers are allowed.
* Society itself should be believable and be able to deal with common problems of a country (including military defense).
Other than this, I set your arms free.
I already have a guess that such a society has to start with an apocalypse and/or long war. I also guess that such a society will be a form of dictatorship. You cannot have democracy in this setup.
I even play with the idea of a theocracy, where such a system will appear to be magical on the outside (*You have been selected by God!*), but will have some strong computer running somewhere in the background. | 2017/04/18 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/78445",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/2071/"
] | I am outright shocked that no one has mentioned the Chinese in history with their [Imperial examinations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_examination) and their [Rank system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine-rank_system) that formed the basis for the [Chinese Meritocracy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meritocracy#Ancient_times:_China) that roughly lasted for about 2200 years or so.
So yeah, it has been done and can easily be considered to be one of the most successful systems that humanity has tried. Having it be done in an algorithmic fashion with a computer and being even more all encompassing (if that is even possible) than what the Chinese used to do could go a long way in preventing some amount of corruption and having a better functioning system. | The main thing you'll need for such a society is for there to be nowhere else that disaffected citizens can realistically go if they don't like their assigned role. It needs to be a closed society. Otherwise, it will fall apart. |
78,445 | The other day I stumbled upon a youtube video from Bad Internet series: [Which of The “Friends” Are You?](https://youtu.be/2QyzjYqkj2U) and it made me remember a previous occurrence of an idea that people are sorted into their roles by some algorithm:
The second one refers to the [Futurama](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurama) series, where people appear to be forced into their jobs.
**The problem: Both worlds are a joke. I would like the same, but serious.**
Is there a way to get to a situation where *everybody* (i.e. more than 65% of the population) is selected to do their job, while there is no magic?
* The sorting algorithm should be explainable to some extent and it should be non-magical. (No [sorting hat](http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Sorting_Hat) please.)
* However, [deep learning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_learning) algorithms or quantum computers are allowed.
* Society itself should be believable and be able to deal with common problems of a country (including military defense).
Other than this, I set your arms free.
I already have a guess that such a society has to start with an apocalypse and/or long war. I also guess that such a society will be a form of dictatorship. You cannot have democracy in this setup.
I even play with the idea of a theocracy, where such a system will appear to be magical on the outside (*You have been selected by God!*), but will have some strong computer running somewhere in the background. | 2017/04/18 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/78445",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/2071/"
] | The society where each person should work according its role is called the [**caste system**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_in_India). This worked in India for ages (from 1,000 BCE until the modern era). Most people accepted this system. Although today this is redundant, but it happens especially in villages. I suppose it works mainly because of religious reasons.
It's real, although the role of the people is defined by their birth, not by their personal characteristics.
---
In the fantasty genre there are many worlds where the system defines which people are the best and assigns their work/role/social rank according to it. One of them is [Gattaca](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gattaca) with a
>
> society that is driven by eugenics.
>
>
>
---
What the society needs to establish `sorting` is just some kind of danger, possibly in the past. *We should act in this manner, because if we don't we'll die.* This works with **any** idea. | It is actually fairly likely. Professional mobility allows the economy and society to deal with economic and technological disruptions by reallocating "human resources" dynamically. A strong future government might simply avoid such disruptions thru other means.
The first thought for most is probably some sort of centralized planned economy, but a free market economy that is large and diverse enough with strong regulations keeping the markets free and fair could be quite stable. Economies do tend to be self-stabilizing over time, the issues tend to come as consequences of technological disruptions or external factors such as epidemics or colonialism.
If we assume that your empire has reached some sort of technological plateau where disruptions from technology are manageable (and upgrading the skills of employees to keep up with progress is already normal) and the empire is secure otherwise and only expands organically (no colonialism or crusades), we could reasonably assume an economy and society that would be stable, even stagnant from our own viewpoint.
In such society there would be no particular need for people to ever change jobs. You could simply assign jobs by lottery or profession of parent at birth and then reassign if the person turns out unsuited for the job or shows particular talent or interest for something else. Since your people would all be trained for their assigned job from birth, they would be well qualified for it, familiar with it, comfortable with it, and predisposed to find it valuable and rewarding (unless the training is incompetent due to corruption or decadence, if you want a falling empire story).
This should easily keep more than 65% percent in their assigned jobs, even without particular legal or social pressure. People with the drive to start their own business or with special talents that make reassigning them necessary do not make up 35% of population. Similarly, normal jobs for normal people do not have stringent requirements that would make large portion of population unsuited for them. And with future science most such issues could and probably would be fixed.
This obviously assumes that the system works properly. Even without external disruptions from technology or expansion the system will fail eventually if quality of training and education collapses, if the assigned jobs cease to be meaningful and rewarding, or if the system becomes too strict to allow the amount of social mobility that is actually necessary. These will eventually lead to increasing inefficiency and collapse. But the failure would have to start from the political side of the society becoming too corrupt to upkeep the system. |
78,445 | The other day I stumbled upon a youtube video from Bad Internet series: [Which of The “Friends” Are You?](https://youtu.be/2QyzjYqkj2U) and it made me remember a previous occurrence of an idea that people are sorted into their roles by some algorithm:
The second one refers to the [Futurama](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurama) series, where people appear to be forced into their jobs.
**The problem: Both worlds are a joke. I would like the same, but serious.**
Is there a way to get to a situation where *everybody* (i.e. more than 65% of the population) is selected to do their job, while there is no magic?
* The sorting algorithm should be explainable to some extent and it should be non-magical. (No [sorting hat](http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Sorting_Hat) please.)
* However, [deep learning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_learning) algorithms or quantum computers are allowed.
* Society itself should be believable and be able to deal with common problems of a country (including military defense).
Other than this, I set your arms free.
I already have a guess that such a society has to start with an apocalypse and/or long war. I also guess that such a society will be a form of dictatorship. You cannot have democracy in this setup.
I even play with the idea of a theocracy, where such a system will appear to be magical on the outside (*You have been selected by God!*), but will have some strong computer running somewhere in the background. | 2017/04/18 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/78445",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/2071/"
] | There are plenty of ways to do this. As AlexP mentions in his answer under [Emperor Constantine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_the_Great) **fathers had to be succeeded by their sons under harsh punishment.** Of course such a sorting is at best ineffective. While there is some hereditary favor for certain professions it's small. For example families with surgeons also tend to have a history of butchers. But not the majority, just enough to make an anomaly.
Regardless, it's a poor way of sorting your people for professions. It's much better to take a individual approach. **The most basic way would be (personality) tests. Capacity tests could show strength and weaknesses.** This could be manditory in highschool. An easy compulsive filter.
If you want to take it further you get to genetic testing or even engineering. **With the right tests you can see who's physically adept to what.** Olympic athletes tend to deviate from the average human in a way that allows them to excel in their sport. A similar approach could work on a genetic level for professions.
Filter on things like short term memory, eye sight, upper body strength and spatial awareness. Combine that with required roles in your state controlled economy and you should have an idea of what to do.
**If you want to go even further you could add another step of genetic engineering**. When pregnant the system determines what's needed and will edit the baby's genome where required to be the [perfect fit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gattaca). This is, of course, completely dystopian. | Like ADS stated earlier, the caste system sounds like it would be a good fit for your requirements.
You could also throw in some deep sense of dedication to a greater cause among the population to make it more believable and/or give a reason why individuals accept that system.
Plus, if your setup takes place on extended periods of time, members from different castes could have particular physical attributes due to a possible inter-caste breeding restriction.
I'd advise you to check out the Tau caste system from the Warhammer 40.000 series. Maybe you'll find interesting leads for your setup. |
78,445 | The other day I stumbled upon a youtube video from Bad Internet series: [Which of The “Friends” Are You?](https://youtu.be/2QyzjYqkj2U) and it made me remember a previous occurrence of an idea that people are sorted into their roles by some algorithm:
The second one refers to the [Futurama](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurama) series, where people appear to be forced into their jobs.
**The problem: Both worlds are a joke. I would like the same, but serious.**
Is there a way to get to a situation where *everybody* (i.e. more than 65% of the population) is selected to do their job, while there is no magic?
* The sorting algorithm should be explainable to some extent and it should be non-magical. (No [sorting hat](http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Sorting_Hat) please.)
* However, [deep learning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_learning) algorithms or quantum computers are allowed.
* Society itself should be believable and be able to deal with common problems of a country (including military defense).
Other than this, I set your arms free.
I already have a guess that such a society has to start with an apocalypse and/or long war. I also guess that such a society will be a form of dictatorship. You cannot have democracy in this setup.
I even play with the idea of a theocracy, where such a system will appear to be magical on the outside (*You have been selected by God!*), but will have some strong computer running somewhere in the background. | 2017/04/18 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/78445",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/2071/"
] | Coming from Anime SE, my answer would be, have a supercomputer that can identify your strength and weaknesses and the assign you or at least give you some options on what career you should have.
Your world would need to have the system start with a small population and then prove and publish the result, that the system can correctly assign people to jobs they do best based on their personality and abilites.
After continuous publicity on the system's ability to correctly do such a thing, people would start to accept the system more. Then, after the majority of the society accepts and believe in the system, start enforcing the system so that it has more power over the society by doing propaganda, i.e. people that ain't using the system are hardly successful, that they would only bring trouble to companies, etc.
After several decades, the system would have grown into the de facto and de yure guide for people's lifelong career path.
See Psycho Pass anime for an example of how such a system can work. | The easiest way would be with tests e.g. a personality test to see whether someone is right brain or left brain or type A etc. and an IQ test to see whether they should be a scientist or something like a taxi driver. |
78,445 | The other day I stumbled upon a youtube video from Bad Internet series: [Which of The “Friends” Are You?](https://youtu.be/2QyzjYqkj2U) and it made me remember a previous occurrence of an idea that people are sorted into their roles by some algorithm:
The second one refers to the [Futurama](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurama) series, where people appear to be forced into their jobs.
**The problem: Both worlds are a joke. I would like the same, but serious.**
Is there a way to get to a situation where *everybody* (i.e. more than 65% of the population) is selected to do their job, while there is no magic?
* The sorting algorithm should be explainable to some extent and it should be non-magical. (No [sorting hat](http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Sorting_Hat) please.)
* However, [deep learning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_learning) algorithms or quantum computers are allowed.
* Society itself should be believable and be able to deal with common problems of a country (including military defense).
Other than this, I set your arms free.
I already have a guess that such a society has to start with an apocalypse and/or long war. I also guess that such a society will be a form of dictatorship. You cannot have democracy in this setup.
I even play with the idea of a theocracy, where such a system will appear to be magical on the outside (*You have been selected by God!*), but will have some strong computer running somewhere in the background. | 2017/04/18 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/78445",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/2071/"
] | There are plenty of ways to do this. As AlexP mentions in his answer under [Emperor Constantine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_the_Great) **fathers had to be succeeded by their sons under harsh punishment.** Of course such a sorting is at best ineffective. While there is some hereditary favor for certain professions it's small. For example families with surgeons also tend to have a history of butchers. But not the majority, just enough to make an anomaly.
Regardless, it's a poor way of sorting your people for professions. It's much better to take a individual approach. **The most basic way would be (personality) tests. Capacity tests could show strength and weaknesses.** This could be manditory in highschool. An easy compulsive filter.
If you want to take it further you get to genetic testing or even engineering. **With the right tests you can see who's physically adept to what.** Olympic athletes tend to deviate from the average human in a way that allows them to excel in their sport. A similar approach could work on a genetic level for professions.
Filter on things like short term memory, eye sight, upper body strength and spatial awareness. Combine that with required roles in your state controlled economy and you should have an idea of what to do.
**If you want to go even further you could add another step of genetic engineering**. When pregnant the system determines what's needed and will edit the baby's genome where required to be the [perfect fit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gattaca). This is, of course, completely dystopian. | Taking inspiration from the Qunari of *Dragon Age*, you could have all the children raised in one big community. The community then chooses their role when they come of age. There would probably be people with the specific job of choosing jobs for others, and through this big community, you could be sure to keep tabs on each child and their unique skills & talents. |
78,445 | The other day I stumbled upon a youtube video from Bad Internet series: [Which of The “Friends” Are You?](https://youtu.be/2QyzjYqkj2U) and it made me remember a previous occurrence of an idea that people are sorted into their roles by some algorithm:
The second one refers to the [Futurama](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurama) series, where people appear to be forced into their jobs.
**The problem: Both worlds are a joke. I would like the same, but serious.**
Is there a way to get to a situation where *everybody* (i.e. more than 65% of the population) is selected to do their job, while there is no magic?
* The sorting algorithm should be explainable to some extent and it should be non-magical. (No [sorting hat](http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Sorting_Hat) please.)
* However, [deep learning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_learning) algorithms or quantum computers are allowed.
* Society itself should be believable and be able to deal with common problems of a country (including military defense).
Other than this, I set your arms free.
I already have a guess that such a society has to start with an apocalypse and/or long war. I also guess that such a society will be a form of dictatorship. You cannot have democracy in this setup.
I even play with the idea of a theocracy, where such a system will appear to be magical on the outside (*You have been selected by God!*), but will have some strong computer running somewhere in the background. | 2017/04/18 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/78445",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/2071/"
] | **TLDR: Track information of generations who had any choice, see where the indicators were that someone would be good at their job. Then apply those rules to new generations, offering incentives to take the job they're predicted to be best at.**
In a way I think we do have something like this (though perhaps in a more general way and with the impression that we do have choices). Education pushes people along certain paths and if you choose one path rather than another the general impression is that the other careers are shut off to you now (enough that more than 65% of people stick to the career path their education indicated).
Now I suppose **it depends on at what age you want to make the choice of which job someone gets**.
* **Do you want to decide from birth?** You could send someone to a school that promotes that job type, introduce them to hobbies which compliment it etc.
* **Do you want to decide after schooling?** You could measure their performance in different areas and, using past experience, predict where they would work best. It could even be incentivised but not forced. You finish your education and for a larger salary you could take an automatic offer from the one where you're predicted to be more successful...or go and search for another without the salary boost. (I think this would be enough to make 65% or more take the route they were predicted to be best suited to)
* **Maybe you want them to start later:** You could have a period of a few years where they try out different jobs and then, based on their performance, they get offered a larger salary at a job they are deemed suited for.
You don't want to take away the choice...but you want it to be much easier for them to follow that path. I think people are less likely to choose differently if they think there is an option than if they're told they don't.
I'm not 100% sure what the algorithm would measure...performance in school subjects, attention span, activity, hobbies. It really depends on what information you have on them. Maybe the population is chipped and their vitals are monitored (for health reasons, obviously), we can then track that maybe they're happier doing math than their grades would suggest and, comparing to generations before, we find that actually those people are a lot more efficient workers than those who breeze through exams but couldn't care less for the actual subject. | Coming from Anime SE, my answer would be, have a supercomputer that can identify your strength and weaknesses and the assign you or at least give you some options on what career you should have.
Your world would need to have the system start with a small population and then prove and publish the result, that the system can correctly assign people to jobs they do best based on their personality and abilites.
After continuous publicity on the system's ability to correctly do such a thing, people would start to accept the system more. Then, after the majority of the society accepts and believe in the system, start enforcing the system so that it has more power over the society by doing propaganda, i.e. people that ain't using the system are hardly successful, that they would only bring trouble to companies, etc.
After several decades, the system would have grown into the de facto and de yure guide for people's lifelong career path.
See Psycho Pass anime for an example of how such a system can work. |
78,445 | The other day I stumbled upon a youtube video from Bad Internet series: [Which of The “Friends” Are You?](https://youtu.be/2QyzjYqkj2U) and it made me remember a previous occurrence of an idea that people are sorted into their roles by some algorithm:
The second one refers to the [Futurama](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurama) series, where people appear to be forced into their jobs.
**The problem: Both worlds are a joke. I would like the same, but serious.**
Is there a way to get to a situation where *everybody* (i.e. more than 65% of the population) is selected to do their job, while there is no magic?
* The sorting algorithm should be explainable to some extent and it should be non-magical. (No [sorting hat](http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Sorting_Hat) please.)
* However, [deep learning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_learning) algorithms or quantum computers are allowed.
* Society itself should be believable and be able to deal with common problems of a country (including military defense).
Other than this, I set your arms free.
I already have a guess that such a society has to start with an apocalypse and/or long war. I also guess that such a society will be a form of dictatorship. You cannot have democracy in this setup.
I even play with the idea of a theocracy, where such a system will appear to be magical on the outside (*You have been selected by God!*), but will have some strong computer running somewhere in the background. | 2017/04/18 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/78445",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/2071/"
] | The main thing you'll need for such a society is for there to be nowhere else that disaffected citizens can realistically go if they don't like their assigned role. It needs to be a closed society. Otherwise, it will fall apart. | The easiest way would be with tests e.g. a personality test to see whether someone is right brain or left brain or type A etc. and an IQ test to see whether they should be a scientist or something like a taxi driver. |
78,445 | The other day I stumbled upon a youtube video from Bad Internet series: [Which of The “Friends” Are You?](https://youtu.be/2QyzjYqkj2U) and it made me remember a previous occurrence of an idea that people are sorted into their roles by some algorithm:
The second one refers to the [Futurama](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurama) series, where people appear to be forced into their jobs.
**The problem: Both worlds are a joke. I would like the same, but serious.**
Is there a way to get to a situation where *everybody* (i.e. more than 65% of the population) is selected to do their job, while there is no magic?
* The sorting algorithm should be explainable to some extent and it should be non-magical. (No [sorting hat](http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Sorting_Hat) please.)
* However, [deep learning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_learning) algorithms or quantum computers are allowed.
* Society itself should be believable and be able to deal with common problems of a country (including military defense).
Other than this, I set your arms free.
I already have a guess that such a society has to start with an apocalypse and/or long war. I also guess that such a society will be a form of dictatorship. You cannot have democracy in this setup.
I even play with the idea of a theocracy, where such a system will appear to be magical on the outside (*You have been selected by God!*), but will have some strong computer running somewhere in the background. | 2017/04/18 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/78445",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/2071/"
] | The teens of your world will get a general recommendation for their future after their 10th year of education. Afterwards they will rotate apprenticeship in 12 different jobs in their recommended field for a year (one job per month). Should society have a heightened need in certain field, the bias to get sorted into that field will (surprise!) rise accordingly.
The masters (if thinking medieval) will then select between them, who they will take on as a real apprentice for training. In more modern times your bosses will give recommendations which will decide your future (training on the job, university education, ... in the given field).
You cannot study something if you were not pre-selected for eligibility. You could still try something in an entirely self-taught way, but the majority won't take this risk. Especially, since you cannot prove your worth in the given field without the papers you received after proper training/education. Who would trust you except some risk-takers or people with dire need?
=> More than 65% would stay in their chosen job.
The way to be sorted into your general field would be part educated guessing by your teachers, supported by (if modern times) some kind of artificial intelligence working in the big data field. I don't necessarily mean a self-aware AI, the contemporary AIs of Google, IBM, Wolfram, ... should already be enough if trained properly.
---
The initial part of this answer was in part inspired by the [Riftwar Saga](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Riftwar_Cycle) by Raymond E. Feist. | Like ADS stated earlier, the caste system sounds like it would be a good fit for your requirements.
You could also throw in some deep sense of dedication to a greater cause among the population to make it more believable and/or give a reason why individuals accept that system.
Plus, if your setup takes place on extended periods of time, members from different castes could have particular physical attributes due to a possible inter-caste breeding restriction.
I'd advise you to check out the Tau caste system from the Warhammer 40.000 series. Maybe you'll find interesting leads for your setup. |
78,445 | The other day I stumbled upon a youtube video from Bad Internet series: [Which of The “Friends” Are You?](https://youtu.be/2QyzjYqkj2U) and it made me remember a previous occurrence of an idea that people are sorted into their roles by some algorithm:
The second one refers to the [Futurama](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurama) series, where people appear to be forced into their jobs.
**The problem: Both worlds are a joke. I would like the same, but serious.**
Is there a way to get to a situation where *everybody* (i.e. more than 65% of the population) is selected to do their job, while there is no magic?
* The sorting algorithm should be explainable to some extent and it should be non-magical. (No [sorting hat](http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Sorting_Hat) please.)
* However, [deep learning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_learning) algorithms or quantum computers are allowed.
* Society itself should be believable and be able to deal with common problems of a country (including military defense).
Other than this, I set your arms free.
I already have a guess that such a society has to start with an apocalypse and/or long war. I also guess that such a society will be a form of dictatorship. You cannot have democracy in this setup.
I even play with the idea of a theocracy, where such a system will appear to be magical on the outside (*You have been selected by God!*), but will have some strong computer running somewhere in the background. | 2017/04/18 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/78445",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/2071/"
] | The main thing you'll need for such a society is for there to be nowhere else that disaffected citizens can realistically go if they don't like their assigned role. It needs to be a closed society. Otherwise, it will fall apart. | Like ADS stated earlier, the caste system sounds like it would be a good fit for your requirements.
You could also throw in some deep sense of dedication to a greater cause among the population to make it more believable and/or give a reason why individuals accept that system.
Plus, if your setup takes place on extended periods of time, members from different castes could have particular physical attributes due to a possible inter-caste breeding restriction.
I'd advise you to check out the Tau caste system from the Warhammer 40.000 series. Maybe you'll find interesting leads for your setup. |
78,445 | The other day I stumbled upon a youtube video from Bad Internet series: [Which of The “Friends” Are You?](https://youtu.be/2QyzjYqkj2U) and it made me remember a previous occurrence of an idea that people are sorted into their roles by some algorithm:
The second one refers to the [Futurama](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurama) series, where people appear to be forced into their jobs.
**The problem: Both worlds are a joke. I would like the same, but serious.**
Is there a way to get to a situation where *everybody* (i.e. more than 65% of the population) is selected to do their job, while there is no magic?
* The sorting algorithm should be explainable to some extent and it should be non-magical. (No [sorting hat](http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Sorting_Hat) please.)
* However, [deep learning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_learning) algorithms or quantum computers are allowed.
* Society itself should be believable and be able to deal with common problems of a country (including military defense).
Other than this, I set your arms free.
I already have a guess that such a society has to start with an apocalypse and/or long war. I also guess that such a society will be a form of dictatorship. You cannot have democracy in this setup.
I even play with the idea of a theocracy, where such a system will appear to be magical on the outside (*You have been selected by God!*), but will have some strong computer running somewhere in the background. | 2017/04/18 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/78445",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/2071/"
] | It is actually fairly likely. Professional mobility allows the economy and society to deal with economic and technological disruptions by reallocating "human resources" dynamically. A strong future government might simply avoid such disruptions thru other means.
The first thought for most is probably some sort of centralized planned economy, but a free market economy that is large and diverse enough with strong regulations keeping the markets free and fair could be quite stable. Economies do tend to be self-stabilizing over time, the issues tend to come as consequences of technological disruptions or external factors such as epidemics or colonialism.
If we assume that your empire has reached some sort of technological plateau where disruptions from technology are manageable (and upgrading the skills of employees to keep up with progress is already normal) and the empire is secure otherwise and only expands organically (no colonialism or crusades), we could reasonably assume an economy and society that would be stable, even stagnant from our own viewpoint.
In such society there would be no particular need for people to ever change jobs. You could simply assign jobs by lottery or profession of parent at birth and then reassign if the person turns out unsuited for the job or shows particular talent or interest for something else. Since your people would all be trained for their assigned job from birth, they would be well qualified for it, familiar with it, comfortable with it, and predisposed to find it valuable and rewarding (unless the training is incompetent due to corruption or decadence, if you want a falling empire story).
This should easily keep more than 65% percent in their assigned jobs, even without particular legal or social pressure. People with the drive to start their own business or with special talents that make reassigning them necessary do not make up 35% of population. Similarly, normal jobs for normal people do not have stringent requirements that would make large portion of population unsuited for them. And with future science most such issues could and probably would be fixed.
This obviously assumes that the system works properly. Even without external disruptions from technology or expansion the system will fail eventually if quality of training and education collapses, if the assigned jobs cease to be meaningful and rewarding, or if the system becomes too strict to allow the amount of social mobility that is actually necessary. These will eventually lead to increasing inefficiency and collapse. But the failure would have to start from the political side of the society becoming too corrupt to upkeep the system. | **Expanding the Myers-Briggs Personality Test**
>
> The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is an assessment that is
> believed to measure psychological preferences in how people perceive
> the world and make decisions. According to the Myers-Briggs test,
> there are 16 different types of personalities. The test consists of a
> series of questions, and your answers determine what type of
> personality you have and provides general assumptions about how your
> personality type is best suited for success in terms of careers,
> communication, etc.
>
>
>
So, in MBTI, each personality usually have a few careers choice
Maybe in the future there would be a great Psychologist which expanding these 16 personalities into say, 132, maybe. And then some another great Psychologist expanding these 132 personalities into much more. And from those personalities, each one only have one career choice.
All kids at 10th or so grades would take this test to determine what their future job/role would be. From that time forward, all they study in school would be about the future job/role. |
20,184 | I have a question regarding PCI compliance. There seems to be a valid business need in our company to keep some card holder data, for unsuccessful transaction. An example would be a customer makes a hotel booking but the payment fails then a support agent can retry the payment using the card holder data, this forms part of our service. But we do not want to store any cardholder data digitally. In this case we want to print the card holder data for later use and destroy the paper safely within 3 days. There will be no storing digitally of the card data on their systems. Making it more easy for us to comply with the PCI requirements.
Is the above allowed under PCI regulation? I believe you can do that so long as the physical security is in place and only users with a legitimate business need has access. What would be the correct why to do this? | 2012/09/14 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/20184",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/11619/"
] | It would only be allowed if you are compliant in other areas.
PCI DSS doesn't just cover digital storage of data, but also the transmission, physical storage and destruction of data.
1. How does the agent get the card holder data?
2. How is the data go to your printer?
3. How and where is the data stored for three days?
4. How is the data destroyed? | If you print full cardholder data, you must adhere to the PCI-DSS for those printouts, including physical protection. From the [PCI Compliance Guide FAQs](http://www.pcicomplianceguide.org/pcifaqs.php#19):
>
> PCI DSS requirement 3.3 states "Mask PAN when displayed (the first six and last four digits are the maximum number of digits to be displayed).” **While the requirement does not prohibit printing of the full card number or expiry date on receipts (either the merchant copy or the consumer copy), please note that PCI DSS does not override any other laws that legislate what can be printed on receipts** (such as the U.S. Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACTA) or any other applicable laws). See the italicized note under PCI DSS requirement 3.3 “Note: This requirement does not apply to employees and other parties with a specific need to see the full PAN, nor does the requirement supersede stricter requirements in place for displays of cardholder data (for example, for point of sale (POS) receipts).” **Any paper receipts stored by merchants must adhere to the PCI DSS, especially requirement 9 regarding physical security.**
>
>
>
Keep in mind that you're pretty much never allowed to store the CVV, so don't even think about printing that.
If I were you I would be concerned about the proper destruction of printed data. It's hard to do right, and it's really hard to do right over a long period of time.
A more technical solution would be to encrypt the data using a public key, and escrow the private key half of the pair on a separate system (airgapped if possible). The nice thing about encryption is that it means your data is already "shredded" if someone gets a hold of it. Yes, it'll cost you more up front for development costs. You'll probably earn it back in a year of printing and shredding bills, though. |
115,014 | I want to develop my Ilford HP5 plus shot at 800 with a delution of 1:100.
After consulting the massiv dev chart I found the values for film shoot at 400 and 1600 what about 800. | 2020/03/08 | [
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/115014",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/users/87260/"
] | In my experience with stand developing, anything after an hour is generally just wasting time.
You are developing to chemical exhaustion...once the developer is, in fact, exhausted...nothing is happening.
If the developer exhausts in 60 minutes, then spending another 30 in the soup does nothing. If you're worried about it, go for 90-120 and call it a day. Keep in mind that, with stand development, you **do not** modify the amount of development by modifying the time in the developer! Keep the same, long, time for all ISO's.
If your film comes out overdeveloped, then decrease the total volume of developer you use. If it's underdeveloped, then increase the volume of developer that you use.
It's recommended that you start by using 5mL of Rodinal at 1+100. I add 1mL for every stop that I'm pushing the film. But, generally, I'll overexpose film by 1/3 to 2/3 and use 5mL per roll at 1+100. Soup for an hour.
Again, the timing doesn't matter as long as exhaustion has been reached...The fact that massive dev chart uses differing times for any particular ISO leads me to believe that whoever put it together doesn't understand Stand Dev technique. | As with all "new to you" developing procedures you should do a test first.
Save the roll you already have shot, until you do some tests.
Shoot a roll of the same film at the same ASA, clip off 4 or 5 frames in the darkroom and develop at a time close to the middle of the times on either side of your ASA ( 400 - 1600 ) that are listed on the MDC. ( *I.E. 4OO ASA for 80 min - 1600 ASA for 120 min, would be 100 min* )
If that does not give you the density you are aiming for then clip off 4 or 5 frames again and dev for different times. *Wash, rinse, repeat as needed*.
**The Massive dev chart is great but you may need to adjust based on your own experience, darkroom procedures, temps and preferences ETC.**
*From the MDC*.
Ilford HP5+ Rodinal 1+100 1600 - 120
Ilford HP5+ Rodinal 1+100 400 - 80 |
138 | I have a small craft knife (almost like a scalpel, really) that's become rather blunt over the years. It's no longer safe to use because it's so blunt, so I need to sharpen it.
What are the safest ways to do this, considering its small size?
* The blade itself is about 2.5cm / 1in long
* The knife is made of stainless steel | 2016/04/27 | [
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com/questions/138",
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com",
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com/users/79/"
] | If the knife is really that blunt, I recommend taking it to be professionally sharpened. Many craft stores offer this service either as part of their regular services or on a part-time basis (once or twice a month). Otherwise, you may have a knife sharpener in your city who would be able to do it. The cost is generally based on the length of the blade, so should not be very high for your knife.
Unless you have a good-quality mechanical sharpener at home and know how to use it well - or have learned how to use a whetstone and steel, it will be difficult for you to return the knife to the necessary level of sharpness for crafting.
Honers can only realign the blade slightly and are for daily knife maintenance, they can not actually sharpen a knife. | With a so small blade the best is to use a grinding stone. If it is very blunt you will have to start with a coarse grain and finish with a fine one. It will take a long time...
Blades generally have a 15° angle on each side.
V shapeners are quicker but use it with care. Some cuts a lot of steel at once if you push too much. Also it maybe not the easiest to use with a tiny blade. |
138 | I have a small craft knife (almost like a scalpel, really) that's become rather blunt over the years. It's no longer safe to use because it's so blunt, so I need to sharpen it.
What are the safest ways to do this, considering its small size?
* The blade itself is about 2.5cm / 1in long
* The knife is made of stainless steel | 2016/04/27 | [
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com/questions/138",
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com",
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com/users/79/"
] | If the knife is really that blunt, I recommend taking it to be professionally sharpened. Many craft stores offer this service either as part of their regular services or on a part-time basis (once or twice a month). Otherwise, you may have a knife sharpener in your city who would be able to do it. The cost is generally based on the length of the blade, so should not be very high for your knife.
Unless you have a good-quality mechanical sharpener at home and know how to use it well - or have learned how to use a whetstone and steel, it will be difficult for you to return the knife to the necessary level of sharpness for crafting.
Honers can only realign the blade slightly and are for daily knife maintenance, they can not actually sharpen a knife. | Note that craft knifes of this size are generally reckoned to be disposable, and new are really sharp, but don't hold their edge well. I prefer a proper scalpel (or second best an X-Acto type) where only the blade is replaced but I've had a few where a scalpel blade was permanently moulded into a plastic handle, and it does seem rather wasteful to go chucking them out.
This would be a good opportunity to practice with a stone, which is quite easy on a straight blade. There are a few options, but I'd choose a double-sided (coarse/fine) oilstone, just a cheap one to start with.
The hardest part is getting the tip really really sharp, which is an issue if you're using the tip to cut out stencils (just as an example) but completely unimportant for sharpening pencils (extreme example in the other direction). |
138 | I have a small craft knife (almost like a scalpel, really) that's become rather blunt over the years. It's no longer safe to use because it's so blunt, so I need to sharpen it.
What are the safest ways to do this, considering its small size?
* The blade itself is about 2.5cm / 1in long
* The knife is made of stainless steel | 2016/04/27 | [
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com/questions/138",
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com",
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com/users/79/"
] | With a so small blade the best is to use a grinding stone. If it is very blunt you will have to start with a coarse grain and finish with a fine one. It will take a long time...
Blades generally have a 15° angle on each side.
V shapeners are quicker but use it with care. Some cuts a lot of steel at once if you push too much. Also it maybe not the easiest to use with a tiny blade. | Note that craft knifes of this size are generally reckoned to be disposable, and new are really sharp, but don't hold their edge well. I prefer a proper scalpel (or second best an X-Acto type) where only the blade is replaced but I've had a few where a scalpel blade was permanently moulded into a plastic handle, and it does seem rather wasteful to go chucking them out.
This would be a good opportunity to practice with a stone, which is quite easy on a straight blade. There are a few options, but I'd choose a double-sided (coarse/fine) oilstone, just a cheap one to start with.
The hardest part is getting the tip really really sharp, which is an issue if you're using the tip to cut out stencils (just as an example) but completely unimportant for sharpening pencils (extreme example in the other direction). |
39,116 | Do you know of any cloud software (website), that can act as a POP/SMTP email client?
I mean some tool like Outlook/Thunderbird/… that is entirely cloud/web based.
Gmail/Yahoo/… work with their own servers. I am looking for a cloud e-mail client that works with foreign POP/SMTP accounts. | 2017/01/30 | [
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/39116",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/users/27050/"
] | The full-featured [IDE](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_development_environment)s may run in that memory range:
* [JetBrains IntelliJ](https://www.jetbrains.com/idea/)
* [Apache NetBeans](https://netbeans.org/features/index.html)
* [Eclipse IDE](http://www.eclipse.org/)
Atom
====
**Update:** [Atom will retire](https://www.ghacks.net/2022/06/09/githubs-atom-text-editor-will-be-retired-in-december/) near the end of this year, 2022-12-15.
For simpler text editor apps, [Atom](http://www.Atom.io/) is all the rage now. See [Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atom_(text_editor)).
A local desktop app but interestingly built of JavaScript and web technologies. Full-featured, right out of the box, but also quite hackable if you so desire.
jEdit
=====
This Java-based editor was once my workhorse favorite, [jEdit](http://www.jedit.org/).
Supports a couple hundred languages including Django. | I'd take a look at Geany - open source, cross platform (Linux, OS X, Windows). Supports all of the languages you mention, syntax hilighting, a console window to work in, and compile/build buttons that can be customized to use your build chain. It is more of a super light and configurable IDE than plain text editor... |
39,116 | Do you know of any cloud software (website), that can act as a POP/SMTP email client?
I mean some tool like Outlook/Thunderbird/… that is entirely cloud/web based.
Gmail/Yahoo/… work with their own servers. I am looking for a cloud e-mail client that works with foreign POP/SMTP accounts. | 2017/01/30 | [
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/39116",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/users/27050/"
] | [Visual Studio Code](https://code.visualstudio.com/) runs on multiple [platforms](https://code.visualstudio.com/Download) including Ubuntu. It’s lightweight and meant to be an editor, not, a full blown IDE.
**Features**:
* IntelliSense
* Debugging
* Built-in Git
* Many 3rd party [extensions](https://code.visualstudio.com/#hundreds-of-extensions)
It’s free and can be customized with themes. | I'd take a look at Geany - open source, cross platform (Linux, OS X, Windows). Supports all of the languages you mention, syntax hilighting, a console window to work in, and compile/build buttons that can be customized to use your build chain. It is more of a super light and configurable IDE than plain text editor... |
39,116 | Do you know of any cloud software (website), that can act as a POP/SMTP email client?
I mean some tool like Outlook/Thunderbird/… that is entirely cloud/web based.
Gmail/Yahoo/… work with their own servers. I am looking for a cloud e-mail client that works with foreign POP/SMTP accounts. | 2017/01/30 | [
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/39116",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/users/27050/"
] | I'd take a look at Geany - open source, cross platform (Linux, OS X, Windows). Supports all of the languages you mention, syntax hilighting, a console window to work in, and compile/build buttons that can be customized to use your build chain. It is more of a super light and configurable IDE than plain text editor... | Give **CudaText** a try. It is open source, free. All items are done in it, except one item:
"Also it must auto-complete for functions, modules names and variables for the standard library"-- this is syntax dependant. For Python it's supported via plugin "Python Intel". For other syntaxes not supported.
Many features - in plugins (Addon Manager).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Y8HCF.png) |
39,116 | Do you know of any cloud software (website), that can act as a POP/SMTP email client?
I mean some tool like Outlook/Thunderbird/… that is entirely cloud/web based.
Gmail/Yahoo/… work with their own servers. I am looking for a cloud e-mail client that works with foreign POP/SMTP accounts. | 2017/01/30 | [
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/39116",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/users/27050/"
] | The full-featured [IDE](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_development_environment)s may run in that memory range:
* [JetBrains IntelliJ](https://www.jetbrains.com/idea/)
* [Apache NetBeans](https://netbeans.org/features/index.html)
* [Eclipse IDE](http://www.eclipse.org/)
Atom
====
**Update:** [Atom will retire](https://www.ghacks.net/2022/06/09/githubs-atom-text-editor-will-be-retired-in-december/) near the end of this year, 2022-12-15.
For simpler text editor apps, [Atom](http://www.Atom.io/) is all the rage now. See [Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atom_(text_editor)).
A local desktop app but interestingly built of JavaScript and web technologies. Full-featured, right out of the box, but also quite hackable if you so desire.
jEdit
=====
This Java-based editor was once my workhorse favorite, [jEdit](http://www.jedit.org/).
Supports a couple hundred languages including Django. | Give **CudaText** a try. It is open source, free. All items are done in it, except one item:
"Also it must auto-complete for functions, modules names and variables for the standard library"-- this is syntax dependant. For Python it's supported via plugin "Python Intel". For other syntaxes not supported.
Many features - in plugins (Addon Manager).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Y8HCF.png) |
39,116 | Do you know of any cloud software (website), that can act as a POP/SMTP email client?
I mean some tool like Outlook/Thunderbird/… that is entirely cloud/web based.
Gmail/Yahoo/… work with their own servers. I am looking for a cloud e-mail client that works with foreign POP/SMTP accounts. | 2017/01/30 | [
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/39116",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/users/27050/"
] | [Visual Studio Code](https://code.visualstudio.com/) runs on multiple [platforms](https://code.visualstudio.com/Download) including Ubuntu. It’s lightweight and meant to be an editor, not, a full blown IDE.
**Features**:
* IntelliSense
* Debugging
* Built-in Git
* Many 3rd party [extensions](https://code.visualstudio.com/#hundreds-of-extensions)
It’s free and can be customized with themes. | Give **CudaText** a try. It is open source, free. All items are done in it, except one item:
"Also it must auto-complete for functions, modules names and variables for the standard library"-- this is syntax dependant. For Python it's supported via plugin "Python Intel". For other syntaxes not supported.
Many features - in plugins (Addon Manager).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Y8HCF.png) |
61,375 | How would you justify hidden aliens on Mars, which no one on Earth has discovered yet?
I was thinking over it, and having them be primitive or highly advanced seems a necessity. The latter gives access to unknown stealth tech and advanced concealment methods, the former means we can't pick up their radiowaves as there are none.
Secondly, it would seem they'd have to not do much on the surface. Maybe the rocks we keep mistaking for faces would be their monuments. Most of their time would be spent underground, and some kind of underground ecosystem may be necessary for Mars?
The aliens in their culture should probably be aware of Earthlings, and not like the Earthlings watching them, and so avoid being seen. Using telescopes beyond their technological expectations. If they watch Earth closely, and pay attention to incoming satellites, they might be able to have a culture focused on avoiding being seen by such. Assuming the humans would kill them all, if they were found out.
Note that I'm not concerned about the aliens evolving on Mars. Just that they can live there and hide. | 2016/11/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/61375",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/28540/"
] | We have [high resolution images](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Reconnaissance_Orbiter#HiRISE_.28camera.29) of the entire surface, with a pixel resolution of 1 foot (that’s higher than what you get on Google Earth, for comparison).
So they can’t leave anything laying around, and can’t interact with the surface or outside resources in any large scale or we’d see something happening even if camouflaged. Even if dug in and using internal power, if there was substantial activity it would show up as a heat signature.
So, they would have to be a very small presence. A single base, for example, could take care to camouflage and disguise itself, especially if they know the particulars of our instruments.
There *are* phenomena that we have seen that are not fully explained, or are presumed to be some geologic process. You might find something interesting there to explain in your story as actually being artificial. | What We Know
------------
Right off the bat, it's necessary to list everything we know so far. This will help us decide what aliens need to do to hide.
>
> * True color pictures of the surface
> * Atmospheric composition data (we'd know if they were breathing, etc)
> * Ground / soil composition data (mostly iron oxide and igneous rock)
> * [Data on underground structures up to 1 kilometer deep](http://mars.nasa.gov/mro/mission/instruments/sharad/)
> * Lack of abundant radio waves, etc (communications)
>
>
>
More importantly, we don't have information on
>
> * Underground structures deeper than 1 kilometer
> * Surface microbiology (we haven't looked for bacteria)
>
>
>
Therefore, life on Mars, unless it burrows in tunnels that look like [lava tubes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martian_lava_tube), probably fits in your categories of "primitive" (surface microorganisms) or "advanced" (living deeper than 1 km).
Analyzing the Question
----------------------
* Unquoted parts of the question are things that I agree with 100%
>
> The latter gives access to unknown stealth tech and advanced
> concealment methods
>
>
>
Technically yes that is possible, but necessary? Not necessarily. If we only see up to 1 km below the Martian surface, but humans can bore holes [12 km](http://www.iflscience.com/environment/deepest-hole-world/) deep, your aliens may be at the same place as we are technologically - just not spacefaring, because we'd probably know about that.
>
> Maybe the rocks we keep mistaking for faces would be their monuments.
>
>
>
Scientists have repeatedly disproved these "faces", and we can see the entire surface, so if there are any monuments, they're buried deep under some iron oxide. \* Deeper than 1 km, because we would detect them if they were close to the surface.
>
> The aliens in their culture should probably be aware of Earthlings,
>
>
>
Debatable. If these aliens buried themselves when they knew Mars was losing its atmosphere (assuming they evolved there) and we don't see any Martian satellites, chances are they aren't aware of us. Unless they hid their satellites in asteroids, etc.
>
> not like the Earthlings watching them, and so avoid being seen.
>
>
>
This is actually spot on! A barren planet on which the only culture lives underground may not be equipped to handle invasion or threats. Therefore, being seen is incredibly dangerous.
>
> If they watch Earth closely, and pay attention to incoming satellites,
> they might be able to have a culture focused on avoiding being seen by
> such.
>
>
>
If we can see isolated asteroids and small objects in space, we can probably see whatever these creatures watch with; it's not very easy to hide in space. Still, avoiding being seen is accurate - it just might involve staying underground instead of active avoidance.
>
> Note that I'm not concerned about the aliens evolving on Mars. Just
> that they can live there and hide.
>
>
>
Hiding is reasonable, [but so too is evolving](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_on_Mars#Habitability_assessment). |
61,375 | How would you justify hidden aliens on Mars, which no one on Earth has discovered yet?
I was thinking over it, and having them be primitive or highly advanced seems a necessity. The latter gives access to unknown stealth tech and advanced concealment methods, the former means we can't pick up their radiowaves as there are none.
Secondly, it would seem they'd have to not do much on the surface. Maybe the rocks we keep mistaking for faces would be their monuments. Most of their time would be spent underground, and some kind of underground ecosystem may be necessary for Mars?
The aliens in their culture should probably be aware of Earthlings, and not like the Earthlings watching them, and so avoid being seen. Using telescopes beyond their technological expectations. If they watch Earth closely, and pay attention to incoming satellites, they might be able to have a culture focused on avoiding being seen by such. Assuming the humans would kill them all, if they were found out.
Note that I'm not concerned about the aliens evolving on Mars. Just that they can live there and hide. | 2016/11/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/61375",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/28540/"
] | We have [high resolution images](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Reconnaissance_Orbiter#HiRISE_.28camera.29) of the entire surface, with a pixel resolution of 1 foot (that’s higher than what you get on Google Earth, for comparison).
So they can’t leave anything laying around, and can’t interact with the surface or outside resources in any large scale or we’d see something happening even if camouflaged. Even if dug in and using internal power, if there was substantial activity it would show up as a heat signature.
So, they would have to be a very small presence. A single base, for example, could take care to camouflage and disguise itself, especially if they know the particulars of our instruments.
There *are* phenomena that we have seen that are not fully explained, or are presumed to be some geologic process. You might find something interesting there to explain in your story as actually being artificial. | For the reasons mentioned by the other posters, we would have detected a surface settlement and we would *probably* have detected a solitary lander. (If it was covered by dust, there is the possiblity that we haven't examined out pics closely enough to notice.) So it must be a deliberate effort to avoid detection.
### So why are the aliens hiding?
Take all the reasons why they might hide on Earth. A [Prime Directive](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AlienNonInterferenceClause). Or more [sinister purposes](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MarsNeedsWomen).
Depends on how silly you want to get -- there is nothing on Earth that would pay the transport costs in a [hard-science](/questions/tagged/hard-science "show questions tagged 'hard-science'") setting, with the possible exception of information (arts, genetic data, and so on). So assume that there is FTL, and that they can get something from Earth. Getting it is easier if mankind doesn't know they are here.
### Why go to Mars instead of Earth?
Perhaps the aliens were involved in that little incident in [Roswell](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RoswellThatEndsWell). Afterwards they decided that Utopia Planitia is a better basecamp than New Mexico. Mars offers many advantages:
* Not many random visitors. If a probe lands too close, zap it.
* More friendly than Venus or Mercury, higher gravity than Luna. |
61,375 | How would you justify hidden aliens on Mars, which no one on Earth has discovered yet?
I was thinking over it, and having them be primitive or highly advanced seems a necessity. The latter gives access to unknown stealth tech and advanced concealment methods, the former means we can't pick up their radiowaves as there are none.
Secondly, it would seem they'd have to not do much on the surface. Maybe the rocks we keep mistaking for faces would be their monuments. Most of their time would be spent underground, and some kind of underground ecosystem may be necessary for Mars?
The aliens in their culture should probably be aware of Earthlings, and not like the Earthlings watching them, and so avoid being seen. Using telescopes beyond their technological expectations. If they watch Earth closely, and pay attention to incoming satellites, they might be able to have a culture focused on avoiding being seen by such. Assuming the humans would kill them all, if they were found out.
Note that I'm not concerned about the aliens evolving on Mars. Just that they can live there and hide. | 2016/11/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/61375",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/28540/"
] | We have [high resolution images](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Reconnaissance_Orbiter#HiRISE_.28camera.29) of the entire surface, with a pixel resolution of 1 foot (that’s higher than what you get on Google Earth, for comparison).
So they can’t leave anything laying around, and can’t interact with the surface or outside resources in any large scale or we’d see something happening even if camouflaged. Even if dug in and using internal power, if there was substantial activity it would show up as a heat signature.
So, they would have to be a very small presence. A single base, for example, could take care to camouflage and disguise itself, especially if they know the particulars of our instruments.
There *are* phenomena that we have seen that are not fully explained, or are presumed to be some geologic process. You might find something interesting there to explain in your story as actually being artificial. | The most probable scenario for hidden alien life on the planet Mars is submartian colonies of microbiota. These organisms may be similar to the deep subterranean micro-organisms discovered in mines on Earth. Since they live out of sight and have so far been not detected by Mars missions to date. The presence of methane is a possible signature for biological activity. Where "possible' means that non-biological sources of methane cannot be ruled out.
Now considering the possibility of technologically advanced hidden aliens on planet Mars, there are two possible scenarios.
Firstly, a native Martian technological civilization. This may be the least likely scenario. However, it would have to have the following characteristics. If the Martians lived on the surface of their planet they must have done so in the ancient past. No longer able to survive on the surface of Mars they have constructed deep submartian habitats and live down below. Interestingly the interior volume of a planet is extremely large. if any technological civilization could develop the machinery to excavate habitats underground. create life support, and food production facilities they would have access to a volume of living space comparable to a small dyson sphere. If our hypothetical hidden Martians had pursued this developmental path, they would have remarkably little interest in what goes on outside the surface of their planet.
Secondly, the hidden aliens on Mars aren't native lifeforms. They didn't evolve in our solar system, and have come from elsewhere in the galaxy. Considering it is highly probable that sapient life is rare in the cosmos, any spacefaring species that discovered another sapient species would want to keep it under observation.
Not just because it would be interesting to observe a sapient species, but it is very probable that sapient species will spend a long time before they develop a technological civilization. It took our species of the order of a million years to go from having evolved to sending probes into space. It can be expected there will be a long technological plateau once our science and engineering have attained maturity. Bigger, better, faster, more and more of it, like, well, Moore's Law, isn't necessarily justified. Sooner or later we will hit a limit to what we can understand or manipulate in the physical world, this technological plateau could last for many megayears.
This suggests finding a sapient species on the cusp of transitioning from the long paleaolithic plateau to a possibly even longer astrotechnical plateau will be exceptionally rare. Galactic scientists would want to observe such a civilization in its transition phase.
For this reason, they could establish a concealed base on Mars as their main base of operations. Surveillance craft could dispatched on a regular basis to observe and record developments on Earth.
Why Mars and not the Moon? Well, galactic observers have probably used the Moon, but they will have disassembled any lunar outposts, knowing humans are going to explore our satellite at some time in the near future. Not disturbing our development will be an imperative of their observation and research program. If humans discovered the presence of aliens this would send our developmental path down some unexpected trajectory. However, Mars has better gravity for sapient organisms than the Moon. In fact, the aliens may have come from a planet with gravity closer to that of Mars than the Moon's.
If their base is concealed deep underground the aliens could have factories and food production facilities. There they can build everything they need for their research. On Earth 3D printing is a new technology, but for an ancient spacefaring species 3D fabrication will be advanced to the nth degree.
This model of alien living and hiding on Mars fulfills the requirement that they just live there and conceal themselves. They're not Martians coming from elsewhere and are there to conduct high-level xenological research into the civilizational development of the sapient species living on the third planet of our solar system. Also, they possess the technology to easily conceal themselves. |
483,829 | I have completed my answer to the [question about the Widlar's limiting circuit](https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/483339/what-is-the-idea-behind-the-ingenious-widlar-current-limiter) but there is something unclear to me - how the transistor Q22 manages to limit the load current when the output is short-connected (in blue) to V+ or ground.
The usual explanation is that Q20 base current, entering Q17 and flowing through R11, increases sharply. As a result, the voltage drop across R11 increases as well, Q22 begins conducting and fixes Q16 base voltage.
But how is it possible somehow to change Q17 collector current while its base voltage is kept constant? Q17, like any BJT, behaves as a constant current source (sink here); so its collector current cannot be changed from the side of the collector... the voltage drop across R11 cannot be changed as well...
I have some explanation... but if it is true, I will not like this circuit solution so much... because it would not be valid in any case...
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bzfpP.png) | 2020/02/29 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/483829",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/61398/"
] | An essential point in understanding the behavior of this circuit is the low performance of Q20. The lateral PNPs of this era had a beta that dropped below ten at current levels of a few miliamps. So limiting current in Q17 will also limit current in Q20 to a reasonable amount. Later versions of the circuit used two diodes in series from the collector of Q17 to the output. | With output shorted to + supply, all the current from first stage Q8 current source flows towards the base of Q16 in a desperate attempt to pull the output down. Enough of this current flows into Q16's base to cause a big enough voltage drop across R11 sufficient to turn on Q22 which then diverts the rest of the current coming from the first stage to ground which limits Q20's collector current. |
483,829 | I have completed my answer to the [question about the Widlar's limiting circuit](https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/483339/what-is-the-idea-behind-the-ingenious-widlar-current-limiter) but there is something unclear to me - how the transistor Q22 manages to limit the load current when the output is short-connected (in blue) to V+ or ground.
The usual explanation is that Q20 base current, entering Q17 and flowing through R11, increases sharply. As a result, the voltage drop across R11 increases as well, Q22 begins conducting and fixes Q16 base voltage.
But how is it possible somehow to change Q17 collector current while its base voltage is kept constant? Q17, like any BJT, behaves as a constant current source (sink here); so its collector current cannot be changed from the side of the collector... the voltage drop across R11 cannot be changed as well...
I have some explanation... but if it is true, I will not like this circuit solution so much... because it would not be valid in any case...
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bzfpP.png) | 2020/02/29 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/483829",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/61398/"
] | I think I finally managed to unravel the mystery of the 741 sink (low-side) limiter... I will expose my guesses in the form of an imaginary story of how they were thinking when designing the circuit.
Original asymmetrical circuit solution
--------------------------------------
**Sensing and limiting through the previous stage.** In the initial 741 internal circuit diagram (Fig. 1), the Widlar's trick is applied only to the push transistor Q14 by Q15 and R9. For some reason (I will consider it below), it was unacceptable for it to be also applied to the pull transistor Q20. That is why they assigned the previous stage (the intermediate voltage amplifier Q16,Q17 and limiting transistor Q22) both to *sense* and *limit* the overcurrent.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DB3Yn.png)
Fig. 1. In the initial 741 op-amp circuit solution, the previous stage both senses and limits the overcurrent
**"Moving" the overload to the previous stage.** The sensing is based on the properties of the BJT emitter follower. Let me clarify what this is about. In an emitter follower, the base-emitter junction makes a direct connection between the input and output. It is a one-way "diode" connection (from input to output). Under normal operating conditions, the transistor "lifts" its emitter voltage almost to the input base voltage level so that this direct connection does not work... and the base current is low (bootstrapping). When the output is grounded (short circuit), this phenomenon ceases to operate and the input is also grounded through the base-emitter junction... i.e., the overload is also applied to it. It would be not the case if the follower had been implemented with FET (source follower); so it is only valid for BJT.
**No sensing the overload (ideal transistor).** OK, the low load resistance is applied (through the Q20 base-emitter junction and 50 ohms R10) to the Q17 collector. And now the riddle comes into the picture, "How is it possible the load to change the Q17 collector current while its base voltage is kept constant? Q17, like any BJT, behaves as a constant current source (sink here); so its collector current cannot be changed from the side of the collector... the voltage drop across R11 cannot be changed as well.
*(Practically, we have implemented this experiment as follows. In the beginning, we have set some constant input voltage so that Q17 base voltage is constant. Then we connect a variable load resistor (rheostat) between the output and V+. There is some (small) Q20 base current that, together with Q13 quiescent collector current, enters Q17 collector. Both they flow through R11 and create a voltage drop that is unsufficient to turn on Q22. Then we begin decreasing RL up to zero (short to V+). Q20 base current increases... but Q17 (behaving as a current sink) should not let it do that. So the voltage drop should not change.)*
And this would indeed be the case if Q17 was an "ideal" transistor (without any Early effect) having an almost horizontal output IV curve - Fig. 2. When the resistance applied to the collector changes from RL + R10 to only R10, the load line rotates clockwise... the intersection (operating) point moves from 1 to 2 position... but the collector current does not change - I1 = I2, dI = 0. So the voltage drop across R11 does not change as well... and Q22 does not sense the overload.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/q7sxG.jpg)
Fig. 2. Graphical solution of the circuit in the case of an "ideal" transistor (without Early effect)
There is even something else "harmful" here - the resistor R11 in the Q17 emitter introduces a negative feedback that tries to keep the current constant (emitter degeneration)... but, for the purposes of the overcurrent sensing, we want just the opposite...
**Sensing the overload (real transistor).** But Q17 is a real transistor with Early effect and its output IV curve has some slope - Fig. 3. So when the operating point moves from 1 to 2 position, the collector current will (slightly) change from I1 to I2... the voltage drop across R11 will also (slightly) change... and Q22 should sense this change.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qA5Nx.jpg)
Fig. 3. Graphical solution of the circuit in the case of a real transistor (with some Early effect)
**The paradox** of this idea is that, in order for this circuit to work well, the transistor Q17 should be poor... the poorer it is, the better Q22 will sense the overload. If Q17 is too perfect, Q22 may not sense it...
Never implemented symmetrical solution
--------------------------------------
However, the idea of a symmetrical current limiter in both output parts remains attractive. It can be found, for example, in the output stages of powerful amplifiers implemented by discrete elements - [Fig. 4](https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/worksheets/class-b-bjt-amplifiers/).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7aDlr.png)
Fig. 4. Power amplifier with identical current limiters in both push and pull part
So why did not Widlar and designers at Fairchild do it in 741 op-amp? One possible explanation is that it cannot be done as @Jonk has said in the [related question](https://electronics.stackexchange.com/q/483339/61398):
>
> A symmetrically equivalent low-side isn't possible...
>
>
>
I made a lot of effort to figure out what the problem with this circuit was that it did not work. I turned my imagination into top gear (Fig. 5)... I even dug up old books from my student years... and still I have not found the reason... maybe simply because there was no principal reason for it not to work...
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HJbEC.jpg)
Fig. 5. Can the symmetrical current limiter work?
Apparently the circuit can work properly... but it works poorly... So I am more inclined to rely on @EinarA explanation above about the low performance of p-n-p transistors...
Improved symmetrical circuit solution
-------------------------------------
Maybe that was the reason that, in the next 741 version, the Widlar's followers from Fairchild separated the two functions so that the pull output stage *senses* while the previous stage *limits* the overcurrent (Fig. 6).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/iYoCl.png)
Fig. 6. In the improved 741 op-amp, functions are separated - the pull output stage *senses* while the previous stage *limits* the overcurrent
It is done in the typical Widlar manner by connecting the low-side sensing circuit (Q21, R7) with the limiting transistor Q22 via a current mirror (Q22,Q24)... as though Q21 is moved at the place of Q22. The current mirror serves as a kind of "current transmission" connecting Q21 and Q22.
What is the benefit of all this? I think that thanks to the higher gain of the n-p-n Q22 and Q18, the current protection is triggered more sharply... and thus it is more efficient...
Is there a paradox here? No, now the transistor Q17 can be perfect as much as we want... | With output shorted to + supply, all the current from first stage Q8 current source flows towards the base of Q16 in a desperate attempt to pull the output down. Enough of this current flows into Q16's base to cause a big enough voltage drop across R11 sufficient to turn on Q22 which then diverts the rest of the current coming from the first stage to ground which limits Q20's collector current. |
483,829 | I have completed my answer to the [question about the Widlar's limiting circuit](https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/483339/what-is-the-idea-behind-the-ingenious-widlar-current-limiter) but there is something unclear to me - how the transistor Q22 manages to limit the load current when the output is short-connected (in blue) to V+ or ground.
The usual explanation is that Q20 base current, entering Q17 and flowing through R11, increases sharply. As a result, the voltage drop across R11 increases as well, Q22 begins conducting and fixes Q16 base voltage.
But how is it possible somehow to change Q17 collector current while its base voltage is kept constant? Q17, like any BJT, behaves as a constant current source (sink here); so its collector current cannot be changed from the side of the collector... the voltage drop across R11 cannot be changed as well...
I have some explanation... but if it is true, I will not like this circuit solution so much... because it would not be valid in any case...
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bzfpP.png) | 2020/02/29 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/483829",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/61398/"
] | I think I finally managed to unravel the mystery of the 741 sink (low-side) limiter... I will expose my guesses in the form of an imaginary story of how they were thinking when designing the circuit.
Original asymmetrical circuit solution
--------------------------------------
**Sensing and limiting through the previous stage.** In the initial 741 internal circuit diagram (Fig. 1), the Widlar's trick is applied only to the push transistor Q14 by Q15 and R9. For some reason (I will consider it below), it was unacceptable for it to be also applied to the pull transistor Q20. That is why they assigned the previous stage (the intermediate voltage amplifier Q16,Q17 and limiting transistor Q22) both to *sense* and *limit* the overcurrent.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DB3Yn.png)
Fig. 1. In the initial 741 op-amp circuit solution, the previous stage both senses and limits the overcurrent
**"Moving" the overload to the previous stage.** The sensing is based on the properties of the BJT emitter follower. Let me clarify what this is about. In an emitter follower, the base-emitter junction makes a direct connection between the input and output. It is a one-way "diode" connection (from input to output). Under normal operating conditions, the transistor "lifts" its emitter voltage almost to the input base voltage level so that this direct connection does not work... and the base current is low (bootstrapping). When the output is grounded (short circuit), this phenomenon ceases to operate and the input is also grounded through the base-emitter junction... i.e., the overload is also applied to it. It would be not the case if the follower had been implemented with FET (source follower); so it is only valid for BJT.
**No sensing the overload (ideal transistor).** OK, the low load resistance is applied (through the Q20 base-emitter junction and 50 ohms R10) to the Q17 collector. And now the riddle comes into the picture, "How is it possible the load to change the Q17 collector current while its base voltage is kept constant? Q17, like any BJT, behaves as a constant current source (sink here); so its collector current cannot be changed from the side of the collector... the voltage drop across R11 cannot be changed as well.
*(Practically, we have implemented this experiment as follows. In the beginning, we have set some constant input voltage so that Q17 base voltage is constant. Then we connect a variable load resistor (rheostat) between the output and V+. There is some (small) Q20 base current that, together with Q13 quiescent collector current, enters Q17 collector. Both they flow through R11 and create a voltage drop that is unsufficient to turn on Q22. Then we begin decreasing RL up to zero (short to V+). Q20 base current increases... but Q17 (behaving as a current sink) should not let it do that. So the voltage drop should not change.)*
And this would indeed be the case if Q17 was an "ideal" transistor (without any Early effect) having an almost horizontal output IV curve - Fig. 2. When the resistance applied to the collector changes from RL + R10 to only R10, the load line rotates clockwise... the intersection (operating) point moves from 1 to 2 position... but the collector current does not change - I1 = I2, dI = 0. So the voltage drop across R11 does not change as well... and Q22 does not sense the overload.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/q7sxG.jpg)
Fig. 2. Graphical solution of the circuit in the case of an "ideal" transistor (without Early effect)
There is even something else "harmful" here - the resistor R11 in the Q17 emitter introduces a negative feedback that tries to keep the current constant (emitter degeneration)... but, for the purposes of the overcurrent sensing, we want just the opposite...
**Sensing the overload (real transistor).** But Q17 is a real transistor with Early effect and its output IV curve has some slope - Fig. 3. So when the operating point moves from 1 to 2 position, the collector current will (slightly) change from I1 to I2... the voltage drop across R11 will also (slightly) change... and Q22 should sense this change.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qA5Nx.jpg)
Fig. 3. Graphical solution of the circuit in the case of a real transistor (with some Early effect)
**The paradox** of this idea is that, in order for this circuit to work well, the transistor Q17 should be poor... the poorer it is, the better Q22 will sense the overload. If Q17 is too perfect, Q22 may not sense it...
Never implemented symmetrical solution
--------------------------------------
However, the idea of a symmetrical current limiter in both output parts remains attractive. It can be found, for example, in the output stages of powerful amplifiers implemented by discrete elements - [Fig. 4](https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/worksheets/class-b-bjt-amplifiers/).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7aDlr.png)
Fig. 4. Power amplifier with identical current limiters in both push and pull part
So why did not Widlar and designers at Fairchild do it in 741 op-amp? One possible explanation is that it cannot be done as @Jonk has said in the [related question](https://electronics.stackexchange.com/q/483339/61398):
>
> A symmetrically equivalent low-side isn't possible...
>
>
>
I made a lot of effort to figure out what the problem with this circuit was that it did not work. I turned my imagination into top gear (Fig. 5)... I even dug up old books from my student years... and still I have not found the reason... maybe simply because there was no principal reason for it not to work...
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HJbEC.jpg)
Fig. 5. Can the symmetrical current limiter work?
Apparently the circuit can work properly... but it works poorly... So I am more inclined to rely on @EinarA explanation above about the low performance of p-n-p transistors...
Improved symmetrical circuit solution
-------------------------------------
Maybe that was the reason that, in the next 741 version, the Widlar's followers from Fairchild separated the two functions so that the pull output stage *senses* while the previous stage *limits* the overcurrent (Fig. 6).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/iYoCl.png)
Fig. 6. In the improved 741 op-amp, functions are separated - the pull output stage *senses* while the previous stage *limits* the overcurrent
It is done in the typical Widlar manner by connecting the low-side sensing circuit (Q21, R7) with the limiting transistor Q22 via a current mirror (Q22,Q24)... as though Q21 is moved at the place of Q22. The current mirror serves as a kind of "current transmission" connecting Q21 and Q22.
What is the benefit of all this? I think that thanks to the higher gain of the n-p-n Q22 and Q18, the current protection is triggered more sharply... and thus it is more efficient...
Is there a paradox here? No, now the transistor Q17 can be perfect as much as we want... | An essential point in understanding the behavior of this circuit is the low performance of Q20. The lateral PNPs of this era had a beta that dropped below ten at current levels of a few miliamps. So limiting current in Q17 will also limit current in Q20 to a reasonable amount. Later versions of the circuit used two diodes in series from the collector of Q17 to the output. |
191,871 | I am trying to install ubuntu 12.04 on windows 7. After running the wubi installer it downloaded the files but now the setup is just showing expanding and its been over 2 hours.
Any solution ? | 2012/09/22 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/191871",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/92115/"
] | You don't have to mount iso in daemon-tools, that may cause many problems. Best way is to download the iso and WUBI installer. Place it in same folder on Windows and run WUBI.
WUBI installer has built-in iso-check so corrupt iso is not possible to pass. In some cases, WUBI automatically download 64bit version if you have CPU 64bit capable.
That is a major problem if you have low RAM.
So, download the iso, download WUBI instaler, put them in same folder (*do not mount ISO in daemon*) and run WUBI as usual. | Hi I also had this problem.
I "fixed it" (more like a work-around) by downloading Ubuntu 11.10 iso image ([See the Oneiric download page](http://releases.ubuntu.com/11.10/)), mounting it with Daemon tools, installing it inside windows using the built-in wubi, and then updated to 12.04 through the Ubuntu updater. It's a bummer and takes time, but at least it worked.
I hope they fix Wubi ASAP.
Emannxx
PS: Don't download Ubuntu 12.04 iso image as it doesn't come with "Wubi installer" anymore. |
92,247 | This might be not strictly a photography question. But I imagine that someone had this problem before. I have quite large collection of digital photos organized in folders. Some of those are uploaded to Google Photos, some to Flickr (free version), but it gets tiresome to keep things up to date.
My question is - is there a service that allows to upload your photo collection and easily create albums / galleries / ... based on your folder structure? Preferably with a dedicated Windows uploader application.
I'm considering 500px or Flickr subscription, but from what I see 500px does not have an uploader and Flickr does not have an option to create albums from folders. | 2017/08/28 | [
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/92247",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/users/49692/"
] | [Microsoft OneDrive](https://onedrive.live.com) (formerly SkyDrive) is a cloud service that should suit your needs.
If you are a Windows user, you can have it integrated to the Windows Explorer and use this program as an uploader. Drag&drop to a web browser window is another option.
It does support the directory structure. (I'm not sure about the maximum depth though.)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dT0m0.png) | Flickr has an API which allows people to write their own uploaders, and which supports [creating photosets](https://www.flickr.com/services/api/flickr.photosets.create.html) (which I think is an alias for albums). There are at least some tools around which use it: see e.g. <https://github.com/trickortweak/flickr-uploader> ; <https://github.com/rdvdijk/flickr_uploader>
If you want to use Flickr but can't find a tool which does exactly what you want, you could hire someone to produce it. Creating a basic uploader is probably on the order of two to six hours for someone who's familiar with REST APIs. If you don't have any friends or contacts who freelance, there are websites for hiring freelance programmers. |
92,247 | This might be not strictly a photography question. But I imagine that someone had this problem before. I have quite large collection of digital photos organized in folders. Some of those are uploaded to Google Photos, some to Flickr (free version), but it gets tiresome to keep things up to date.
My question is - is there a service that allows to upload your photo collection and easily create albums / galleries / ... based on your folder structure? Preferably with a dedicated Windows uploader application.
I'm considering 500px or Flickr subscription, but from what I see 500px does not have an uploader and Flickr does not have an option to create albums from folders. | 2017/08/28 | [
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/92247",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/users/49692/"
] | [Microsoft OneDrive](https://onedrive.live.com) (formerly SkyDrive) is a cloud service that should suit your needs.
If you are a Windows user, you can have it integrated to the Windows Explorer and use this program as an uploader. Drag&drop to a web browser window is another option.
It does support the directory structure. (I'm not sure about the maximum depth though.)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dT0m0.png) | I’ve written a simple free and open source multi-platform desktop app that does exactly that: <http://jiotty-photos-uploader.yudichev.net/>. It’s been used quite a lot by now and is considered stable.
Jiotty Photos Uploader is a simple desktop application for Windows, macOS and Linux that scans a folder, including all subfolders, for photos and videos, and uploads them to your Google Photos gallery arranging into albums according to the directory structure. |
34,034,341 | While I am configuring my nginx, I found two modules: [ngx\_http\_limit\_conn\_module](http://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_limit_conn_module.html) and [ngx\_http\_limit\_req\_module](http://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_limit_req_module.html)
one is for limiting connection per defined key, and one for limiting request.
My question is what is the relationship (and difference) between
a HTTP connection and a request.
It seems that multiple HTTP requests can use one common HTTP connection, what is the principle under this? | 2015/12/02 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/34034341",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2861019/"
] | Basically connections are established to make requests using it. So for instance endpoint for given key may accept 5 connections per hour from given IP address. But it doesn't mean only 5 requests can be made but much more - if the connection is not closed after a request (from HTTP 1.1 it's by default kept alive).
E.g. an endpoint accepts 5 connections and 10 requests from given IP address. If connection is established for every request only 5 requests overall can be made. If connection is kept alive single client may make all the requests. If there are 5 clients, every establishes a connection and keeps it alive there are 2 request approx. that can be made by each client - however one can make all the request if it's fast enough. | HTTP connections - client and server introduce themselves.
HTTP requests - client ask something from server.
Making a connection with server involves TCP handshaking and it is basically creating a socket connection with the server. To make a HTTP request you should be already established a connection with the server. If you established connection with a server you can make multiple request using the same connection(HTTP/1.0 by default one request per connection, HTTP/1.1 by default it is keep alive). As most of the web pages need multiple resources from the server(ex: 100 photos to load in the screen). It is a low burden to the server if we keep the connection and request those 100 images using the same connection(No need to go through the connection establishment process 100 times). That is why HTTP/1.0 came up with keep alive as default. |
34,034,341 | While I am configuring my nginx, I found two modules: [ngx\_http\_limit\_conn\_module](http://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_limit_conn_module.html) and [ngx\_http\_limit\_req\_module](http://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_limit_req_module.html)
one is for limiting connection per defined key, and one for limiting request.
My question is what is the relationship (and difference) between
a HTTP connection and a request.
It seems that multiple HTTP requests can use one common HTTP connection, what is the principle under this? | 2015/12/02 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/34034341",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2861019/"
] | Basically connections are established to make requests using it. So for instance endpoint for given key may accept 5 connections per hour from given IP address. But it doesn't mean only 5 requests can be made but much more - if the connection is not closed after a request (from HTTP 1.1 it's by default kept alive).
E.g. an endpoint accepts 5 connections and 10 requests from given IP address. If connection is established for every request only 5 requests overall can be made. If connection is kept alive single client may make all the requests. If there are 5 clients, every establishes a connection and keeps it alive there are 2 request approx. that can be made by each client - however one can make all the request if it's fast enough. | A request is a functional execution: "Do something for me, and return the result back to me" - which is made by the client over a channel that the server is listening on, the "connection". Think of it as making a phone call to a restaurant. When the restaurant picks up the phone, you have an established "connection" - and now can place multiple requests over the same connection. The restaurant can handle multiple, simultaneous customer calls, if it has multiple phone lines open to receive the calls. This is your "connection pool" - at any point in time, you can only have as many simultaneous open connections (max) as the size of your connection pool. The number of requests however will vary. Some client may make 3 requests, and hang up, while other client may make 10 requests before hanging up.
The size of your connection pool determines concurrency - how many simultaneous clients can you talk to at any point in time? The length of those conversations will be use case specific. |
34,034,341 | While I am configuring my nginx, I found two modules: [ngx\_http\_limit\_conn\_module](http://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_limit_conn_module.html) and [ngx\_http\_limit\_req\_module](http://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_limit_req_module.html)
one is for limiting connection per defined key, and one for limiting request.
My question is what is the relationship (and difference) between
a HTTP connection and a request.
It seems that multiple HTTP requests can use one common HTTP connection, what is the principle under this? | 2015/12/02 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/34034341",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2861019/"
] | HTTP connections - client and server introduce themselves.
HTTP requests - client ask something from server.
Making a connection with server involves TCP handshaking and it is basically creating a socket connection with the server. To make a HTTP request you should be already established a connection with the server. If you established connection with a server you can make multiple request using the same connection(HTTP/1.0 by default one request per connection, HTTP/1.1 by default it is keep alive). As most of the web pages need multiple resources from the server(ex: 100 photos to load in the screen). It is a low burden to the server if we keep the connection and request those 100 images using the same connection(No need to go through the connection establishment process 100 times). That is why HTTP/1.0 came up with keep alive as default. | A request is a functional execution: "Do something for me, and return the result back to me" - which is made by the client over a channel that the server is listening on, the "connection". Think of it as making a phone call to a restaurant. When the restaurant picks up the phone, you have an established "connection" - and now can place multiple requests over the same connection. The restaurant can handle multiple, simultaneous customer calls, if it has multiple phone lines open to receive the calls. This is your "connection pool" - at any point in time, you can only have as many simultaneous open connections (max) as the size of your connection pool. The number of requests however will vary. Some client may make 3 requests, and hang up, while other client may make 10 requests before hanging up.
The size of your connection pool determines concurrency - how many simultaneous clients can you talk to at any point in time? The length of those conversations will be use case specific. |
15,265 | I've seen around here and in other sources that for homebrewers a secondary fermentation (concerning autolysis) isn't necessary, unless you're going to dry hoppy or something like that. My question is about autolysis when reusing yeast. When one storage an used yeast for several months, or over several batches, is it needed to be careful with autolysis?
Generally people says that a starter would be enough to get the right amount of live cells and therefore autolysis isn't a problem. But dead cells will survive through starters, why this is not a problem?
For how much time and how much batches is it safe to maintain the yeast cake? | 2015/05/03 | [
"https://homebrew.stackexchange.com/questions/15265",
"https://homebrew.stackexchange.com",
"https://homebrew.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | You'll want to keep the yeast cool (under some beer) or cold (in the fridge after the beer is removed) to minimize autolysis. The warmer it is the faster they run out of glycogen, and once they run out they'll start dying.
Dead cells aren't necessarily a problem, as long as your viability hasn't dropped too much. If most of the yeast are alive, then they will happily eat what's left of the dead ones after they get some sugar and oxygen. However, too much dead yeast is a problem because it means all the other yeast are very stressed. They might not perform as advertised when used again.
Pro brewers usually use yeast 8 to 10 times before they have problems. The problems are usually related to yeast health, but contamination is also a good reason to get fresh yeast from the lab.
Keep in mind that pros are probably storing the yeast only a few days between uses. Maybe someone else can say how long and how many times they get away with at home (no clear answer [here](https://homebrew.stackexchange.com/questions/4352/how-many-times-can-yeast-be-reused?rq=1)). But few serious home brewers do this. | Autolysis is not going to be an issue, but viability will be.
In my experience, viability is very hit and miss. I've stored yeast in canning jars in my fridge for 6 months and they still worked, and I've had some that were very slow to get going and some that didn't work at all that were only stored a month.
Really, I don't harvest yeast much anymore. The time, effort and cost that went in to the rest of the brew isn't worth saving a few dollars. In some cases, the flavor profile will not be the same as the original. It's also near impossible to tell how much yeast you are actually storing. Trub has so much non-yeast material in varying degrees, unless you use a microscope and actually count the cells, you really don't know how much you are working with.
On the other hand, it's kind of fun and interesting and you may want to develop a "house" strain.
Ideally, you should probably limit the storage to a few weeks and make a starter at least a week before you brew, in case it takes off slow. You should be able to build up enough yeast in that time and if it goes quickly, you can decant off the starter and put it in your fridge for a couple of days. If you have a backup yeast and use a starter, you'll be able to control the process and not risk your beer. |
190,267 | I work for a medium sized company of around 100 people or so - and I am employed to be Head of IT responsible for backups, security, sorting out technical issues, among other things etc etc.
However I have had my Office365 Exchange admin rights and backup access removed by the company directors on grounds that I "could access sensitive personnel information". (Something I have never or would not do)
I feel like this means they do not trust me, and that I cannot do my job properly (Like setting up new users on backups, or setting up Emails) because of it and I have to go via a director.
This is also the reason why they will not have a domain network as it means I would have access to everything and I would be the only one who knows how to sort a problem out if things went wrong.
Instead they have local standalone machines in a workgroup which everyone has their own PC as a local administrator which in my head is a horrible security nightmare as I cannot do any overall management for updates, security, virus checking, application installation, checking for rogue devices on the network etc etc.
Do you guys think this is a reasonable thing to do? | 2018/07/24 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/190267",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/101845/"
] | This seems borderline insane.
There's two major issues that seem to be overlooked by company directors:
* Business continuity planning/disaster recovery
* Role based access controls
Without *somebody* having admin rights to the Exchange server, how are backups even supposed to take place? Is every user responsible for making their own email backups and keeping them safe in case they need to be restored? For that matter, given that there's no domain network, how are workstations supposed to be centrally backed up/restored in case of failure? Each machine becomes a single point of failure and any critical documents on them could be lost forever if something goes wrong.
Secondly, putting every workstation in a homegroup is asking for improper data access. With each user being the sole administrator of their workstation, they essentially *own* whatever data resides on it. There would be nothing stopping them from giving access to other employees, regardless if those employees are supposed to have access or not. This could have *huge* legal ramifications depending on the type of business your company conducts and may be worth bringing up to the legal department.
Lastly, with each user being the master of their own workstations, keeping each network at a minimum security level will basically be impossible. Any antivirus or data loss prevention software could simply be disabled or removed by the user, not to mention all the potentially malicious software they may end up installing on their own. If any machine ends up compromised, it would likely be compromised with full administrator access on a network with no standardized access controls and no guaranteed backups or recovery options. Basically, a theft/damage/ransom nightmare (or paradise, depending on perspective). | >
> Do you guys think this is a reasonable thing to do?
>
>
>
No, not if there isn't something else going on that either you aren't aware of or are leaving out of the description.
An example reason that a company may severely clamp down on access to communications like email is if they are in discussions about buying/selling to/merging with another company. Tight control of this information prior to a public announcement may prevent a number of significant problems.
>
> I am employed to be Head of IT responsible for backups, security, sorting out technical issues, among other things
>
>
>
Clearly you are not "Head of IT" and I don't know if that is your actual position or a title you give yourself as part of a limited IT staff (possibly a staff of one). Clearly the director(s) making the decisions is the actual head of IT. If that is how your job description reads, then you need them to rewrite your job description.
I personally would not continue to work at a place where a job description reads like that and I don't have the means to do my job. I would have concerns that I would be the scapegoat if/when issues result. "It says in your job description you are responsible for xxx, so the failure is your fault."
>
> I have had my Office365 Exchange admin rights and backup access removed by the company directors on grounds that I "could access sensitive personnel information"
>
>
>
Clearly with that access you could access sensitive information. That is always a potential concern for hiring IT staff, but for IT staff to do their job they need access. There has to be a level of trust in the IT staff commensurate to their job expectations as well as sufficient protection for the company. For example, I myself have often found that I get the same (or more) training on privacy issues than medical professionals when working in such an environment. In other cases, an NDA and/or background check was required.
However, I am curious about the "I have had...access removed by the company directors" statement. This sounds like you had access and it was taken away. This is not something that would normally be done if you hadn't done something to warrant such a change. If you haven't, refer to a few paragraphs above in my answer starting at "I personally would not continue to work..."
>
> I feel like this means they do not trust me, and that I cannot do my job properly
>
>
>
If the job responsibilities you laid out are accurate and/or something else isn't going on, no they don't and no you can't.
However, perhaps they view your job responsibilities a bit differently and as such do not believe you need the access you describe. If this is the case, then be thankful. If I don't need access to perform my job, I would rather not have it. It is difficult to blame someone for things like leaked personal information if they don't have access to it in the first place.
>
> This is also the reason why they will not have a domain network as it means I would have access to everything and I would be the only one who knows how to sort a problem out if things went wrong.
>
>
>
Ah, um, wow? What can I say to that? So badly reasoned, I am hoping that is your frustrated translation of their stance.
A properly maintained and administered domain can significantly decrease the risk of something going wrong. That includes proper documentation and training of a secondary or backup admin (even if their primary job function is not IT...like the aforementioned director perhaps?).
Especially since that documentation should provide for disaster planning and for a smallish company I would recommend that include contact information for a third party support resource (local IT service company) - for when you are on vacation and your secondary admin is sick/injured/dead.
>
> Instead they have local standalone machines in a workgroup which everyone has their own PC as a local administrator which in my head is a horrible security nightmare as I cannot do any overall management for updates, security, virus checking, application installation, checking for rogue devices on the network
>
>
>
You could have simply ended this sentence after "nightmare" and removed "in my head." Again, it sounds like you have do not have control of IT in any sense, circling back to you are not the "Head of IT" for the company. If you were the "Head of IT" then you would be able to make decisions on how IT operates for the company.
Your network is only as secure as the weakest link and when each individual is responsible for their own workstation's maintenance and security, there is no standard for maintaining a minimum level of security. |
190,267 | I work for a medium sized company of around 100 people or so - and I am employed to be Head of IT responsible for backups, security, sorting out technical issues, among other things etc etc.
However I have had my Office365 Exchange admin rights and backup access removed by the company directors on grounds that I "could access sensitive personnel information". (Something I have never or would not do)
I feel like this means they do not trust me, and that I cannot do my job properly (Like setting up new users on backups, or setting up Emails) because of it and I have to go via a director.
This is also the reason why they will not have a domain network as it means I would have access to everything and I would be the only one who knows how to sort a problem out if things went wrong.
Instead they have local standalone machines in a workgroup which everyone has their own PC as a local administrator which in my head is a horrible security nightmare as I cannot do any overall management for updates, security, virus checking, application installation, checking for rogue devices on the network etc etc.
Do you guys think this is a reasonable thing to do? | 2018/07/24 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/190267",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/101845/"
] | This seems borderline insane.
There's two major issues that seem to be overlooked by company directors:
* Business continuity planning/disaster recovery
* Role based access controls
Without *somebody* having admin rights to the Exchange server, how are backups even supposed to take place? Is every user responsible for making their own email backups and keeping them safe in case they need to be restored? For that matter, given that there's no domain network, how are workstations supposed to be centrally backed up/restored in case of failure? Each machine becomes a single point of failure and any critical documents on them could be lost forever if something goes wrong.
Secondly, putting every workstation in a homegroup is asking for improper data access. With each user being the sole administrator of their workstation, they essentially *own* whatever data resides on it. There would be nothing stopping them from giving access to other employees, regardless if those employees are supposed to have access or not. This could have *huge* legal ramifications depending on the type of business your company conducts and may be worth bringing up to the legal department.
Lastly, with each user being the master of their own workstations, keeping each network at a minimum security level will basically be impossible. Any antivirus or data loss prevention software could simply be disabled or removed by the user, not to mention all the potentially malicious software they may end up installing on their own. If any machine ends up compromised, it would likely be compromised with full administrator access on a network with no standardized access controls and no guaranteed backups or recovery options. Basically, a theft/damage/ransom nightmare (or paradise, depending on perspective). | The point is here:
>
> I feel like this means they do not trust me, and that I cannot do my job properly
>
>
>
I had worked both as a sysadmin and as a non IT manager, and on both places were scared of what a sysadmin could see and do. The most common behaviour is to just ignore that point: highly confidential data are just left non encrypted on servers, with strict access rights - except that any member of the IT staff can also access it...
You are just facing the opposite behaviour, where the highest managers considere that you are not authorized to access their confidential data. It can make sense but it also means that you cannot protect and administer their machines.
If they have conducted a true risk analysis, and after that considere that the higher risk for data leak is inside the organization, then a network of standalone machines where everyone is a local admin could make sense. The IT department in then only in charge of peripheral security (proxy and firewalls), general support including storage and backup for low sensibility data, and advices.
In a real world, I cannot imagine on organization where all the machines should run standalone. The pre-requisites for that are highly sensitive data, and above basic knowledge on IT administration and security. From my experience, only the highest managers should need to be protected from the IT staff.
My opinion is that the correct way to handle the question is (as usual when it comes to security) a risk analysis. If the boss says that leakage of his data by the IT staff is a risk you must take it into account. And as the IT specialist, you must also warn him of the other risks involved by machines where security patches are not installed, and by machines where the owner is a local admin. Once this is done, the goal is to determine what threats should be considered and how to best mitigate the non acceptable risks. *Everybody does it nowadays* is not efficient to convince an executive manager. *Doing that exposes the organization to that threat with those possible outcomes* generaly speaks louder.
After all, the general responsability it theirs. You can only make clear what you could do, and what you will no be liable to, if somebody else has the admin privileges. |
190,267 | I work for a medium sized company of around 100 people or so - and I am employed to be Head of IT responsible for backups, security, sorting out technical issues, among other things etc etc.
However I have had my Office365 Exchange admin rights and backup access removed by the company directors on grounds that I "could access sensitive personnel information". (Something I have never or would not do)
I feel like this means they do not trust me, and that I cannot do my job properly (Like setting up new users on backups, or setting up Emails) because of it and I have to go via a director.
This is also the reason why they will not have a domain network as it means I would have access to everything and I would be the only one who knows how to sort a problem out if things went wrong.
Instead they have local standalone machines in a workgroup which everyone has their own PC as a local administrator which in my head is a horrible security nightmare as I cannot do any overall management for updates, security, virus checking, application installation, checking for rogue devices on the network etc etc.
Do you guys think this is a reasonable thing to do? | 2018/07/24 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/190267",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/101845/"
] | >
> Do you guys think this is a reasonable thing to do?
>
>
>
No, not if there isn't something else going on that either you aren't aware of or are leaving out of the description.
An example reason that a company may severely clamp down on access to communications like email is if they are in discussions about buying/selling to/merging with another company. Tight control of this information prior to a public announcement may prevent a number of significant problems.
>
> I am employed to be Head of IT responsible for backups, security, sorting out technical issues, among other things
>
>
>
Clearly you are not "Head of IT" and I don't know if that is your actual position or a title you give yourself as part of a limited IT staff (possibly a staff of one). Clearly the director(s) making the decisions is the actual head of IT. If that is how your job description reads, then you need them to rewrite your job description.
I personally would not continue to work at a place where a job description reads like that and I don't have the means to do my job. I would have concerns that I would be the scapegoat if/when issues result. "It says in your job description you are responsible for xxx, so the failure is your fault."
>
> I have had my Office365 Exchange admin rights and backup access removed by the company directors on grounds that I "could access sensitive personnel information"
>
>
>
Clearly with that access you could access sensitive information. That is always a potential concern for hiring IT staff, but for IT staff to do their job they need access. There has to be a level of trust in the IT staff commensurate to their job expectations as well as sufficient protection for the company. For example, I myself have often found that I get the same (or more) training on privacy issues than medical professionals when working in such an environment. In other cases, an NDA and/or background check was required.
However, I am curious about the "I have had...access removed by the company directors" statement. This sounds like you had access and it was taken away. This is not something that would normally be done if you hadn't done something to warrant such a change. If you haven't, refer to a few paragraphs above in my answer starting at "I personally would not continue to work..."
>
> I feel like this means they do not trust me, and that I cannot do my job properly
>
>
>
If the job responsibilities you laid out are accurate and/or something else isn't going on, no they don't and no you can't.
However, perhaps they view your job responsibilities a bit differently and as such do not believe you need the access you describe. If this is the case, then be thankful. If I don't need access to perform my job, I would rather not have it. It is difficult to blame someone for things like leaked personal information if they don't have access to it in the first place.
>
> This is also the reason why they will not have a domain network as it means I would have access to everything and I would be the only one who knows how to sort a problem out if things went wrong.
>
>
>
Ah, um, wow? What can I say to that? So badly reasoned, I am hoping that is your frustrated translation of their stance.
A properly maintained and administered domain can significantly decrease the risk of something going wrong. That includes proper documentation and training of a secondary or backup admin (even if their primary job function is not IT...like the aforementioned director perhaps?).
Especially since that documentation should provide for disaster planning and for a smallish company I would recommend that include contact information for a third party support resource (local IT service company) - for when you are on vacation and your secondary admin is sick/injured/dead.
>
> Instead they have local standalone machines in a workgroup which everyone has their own PC as a local administrator which in my head is a horrible security nightmare as I cannot do any overall management for updates, security, virus checking, application installation, checking for rogue devices on the network
>
>
>
You could have simply ended this sentence after "nightmare" and removed "in my head." Again, it sounds like you have do not have control of IT in any sense, circling back to you are not the "Head of IT" for the company. If you were the "Head of IT" then you would be able to make decisions on how IT operates for the company.
Your network is only as secure as the weakest link and when each individual is responsible for their own workstation's maintenance and security, there is no standard for maintaining a minimum level of security. | The point is here:
>
> I feel like this means they do not trust me, and that I cannot do my job properly
>
>
>
I had worked both as a sysadmin and as a non IT manager, and on both places were scared of what a sysadmin could see and do. The most common behaviour is to just ignore that point: highly confidential data are just left non encrypted on servers, with strict access rights - except that any member of the IT staff can also access it...
You are just facing the opposite behaviour, where the highest managers considere that you are not authorized to access their confidential data. It can make sense but it also means that you cannot protect and administer their machines.
If they have conducted a true risk analysis, and after that considere that the higher risk for data leak is inside the organization, then a network of standalone machines where everyone is a local admin could make sense. The IT department in then only in charge of peripheral security (proxy and firewalls), general support including storage and backup for low sensibility data, and advices.
In a real world, I cannot imagine on organization where all the machines should run standalone. The pre-requisites for that are highly sensitive data, and above basic knowledge on IT administration and security. From my experience, only the highest managers should need to be protected from the IT staff.
My opinion is that the correct way to handle the question is (as usual when it comes to security) a risk analysis. If the boss says that leakage of his data by the IT staff is a risk you must take it into account. And as the IT specialist, you must also warn him of the other risks involved by machines where security patches are not installed, and by machines where the owner is a local admin. Once this is done, the goal is to determine what threats should be considered and how to best mitigate the non acceptable risks. *Everybody does it nowadays* is not efficient to convince an executive manager. *Doing that exposes the organization to that threat with those possible outcomes* generaly speaks louder.
After all, the general responsability it theirs. You can only make clear what you could do, and what you will no be liable to, if somebody else has the admin privileges. |
19,754 | I'm currently a sound editor and sound designer in the Los Angeles area and I've worked on various shows that have aired on different networks.
I'm trying to find a way to break into working on bigger TV shows and eventually larger budgeted feature films. And I know there isn't a sure-fire way to go about it but any suggestions would be of much help!
Thanks in advance! | 2013/07/11 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/19754",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | NOTE: this response was to the original iteration of the question.
To be perfectly honest, this question rubs me the wrong way - a first actually.
What rubs me the wrong way, and this is merely an observation of principal and NOT a judgement of personality/character... is that **I sense a lack of gratitude**, a lack of appreciation for what has been had and materialized thusfar. At this young in ones career (I did look you up on IMDB), those are outstanding projects to be working on let alone garnering nominations for as well. It truly is a great start. A greater start than even some who work for their entire lives in this industry might be able to achieve recognition for. Again, not a judgement - just an observation of the facts. Emmys and MPSEs aren't some Jelly-of-the-month club award either, they carry some professional weight and have the potential to open doors for you.
I am a big believer of both karmic debt as well as allowing ones credibility to promote itself through their body of work and dedication to the craft - do good work, the work speaks for itself and opens you doors. To this end, I find that when I appreciate what I do have, and strive to do good deeds for others (whether it be keeping my head down on the job at hand, always providing my best effort, sharing ideas with others and not squandering them to myself, etc), the doors open themselves through the laws of attraction, and some amazing things have happened within my own journey - relationships forged, coincidences, connections I never know existed, ways into landing a certain gig I never even expected was possible and felt like luck.
This is a very small world in this industry, so incredibly small with each passing day, and (as I've said many times) word gets around fast, both good and bad, positive and negative. As does your body of work and your reputation, your appreciation and gratitude for what you have and being known for being kind and generous in return. Some of the top-regarded talent I have had the opportunity to meet are some of the nicest and most humble people I know. They are hungry for the gig yes, but do not seek recognition(some even shy away from it), are not greedy, and most of all, are extremely grateful for what they have in their "feather cap" and are willing to share with others in kind, especially willing to share and help those who share their same values and desire to work humbly and grow into their craft.
This is how one moves forward. Always putting out their best effort in out body of work, always having the desire to grow, always being humble and truthful, ALWAYS possessing the gratitude for what they have. What shows we have worked on or awards or nominations garnered, one earns those - they cannot be taken away. **But** the very second one loses gratitude for these things very things, they CAN actually be taken away by the outside, universal circumstances of life.
And once again, this is merely observation of principal and NOT a judgement of personality/character. One in which I truly feel I need to share my thoughts on because of how adverse the question makes me feel. | Good question Jessey. I am in no way any further than yourself by the sounds of it but it all just seems to be about who you know and if people like working with you (apart from having the goods to begin with). A friend of mine just got picked up by a big post production house as head of SFX and she's much younger than I am, but really very talented. From what I can tell it started off by one guy hiring her for all of his projects. From moving from city to city for each film, she at one point worked in the studio in which ultimately offered her the position overseas. So again, I don't know but I think personal relations is a huge part of any success. At the same time a good director friend has said he can track all of his current work back to one single guy he met at uni. So, I think nurture what relations you have around you and people will be attracted to you in turn. Hope that helps! |
19,754 | I'm currently a sound editor and sound designer in the Los Angeles area and I've worked on various shows that have aired on different networks.
I'm trying to find a way to break into working on bigger TV shows and eventually larger budgeted feature films. And I know there isn't a sure-fire way to go about it but any suggestions would be of much help!
Thanks in advance! | 2013/07/11 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/19754",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | Hard work, talent and a good attitude ...
Your reputation well precede you. If you are good people will find out. | Good question Jessey. I am in no way any further than yourself by the sounds of it but it all just seems to be about who you know and if people like working with you (apart from having the goods to begin with). A friend of mine just got picked up by a big post production house as head of SFX and she's much younger than I am, but really very talented. From what I can tell it started off by one guy hiring her for all of his projects. From moving from city to city for each film, she at one point worked in the studio in which ultimately offered her the position overseas. So again, I don't know but I think personal relations is a huge part of any success. At the same time a good director friend has said he can track all of his current work back to one single guy he met at uni. So, I think nurture what relations you have around you and people will be attracted to you in turn. Hope that helps! |
47,539 | For certain categories of items, namely weapons, armor and machinery (that's pretty general, I know), how well would stone fare vs metal? Assume that any complications with shaping the stone are gone.
As far as machinery goes, I would like to know about things as simple as door hinges, to things as complex as systems of gears, or even vehicles of some description. What about the hull of the vehicle?
For context:
I'm trying to build a world for a tabletop game, and it's going to be fairly high magic. In D&D, there's a spell called Stone Shape. In my world, wizards (or the like) with the capability of casting a spell like that would be fairly ubiquitous, so it's use could be very common. The spell can shape at most a 5 ft cube of stone, and into any shape (of the same mass of course), or even multiple shapes (the spell says the object can have hinges, and hinges are really two separate parts). The spell is instantaneous. That, to me, seems like a good incentive to use stone over metal where applicable, as it doesn't take anywhere near the same effort to forge.
So, given that forging from stone is instantaneous, and nearly effortless, and forging from metal is not, what sorts of things that we are used to being metal would be stone instead, if any?
I didn't include the magic tag, because while magic is being used to shape the stone, any application of the stone is decidedly non magical. | 2016/07/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/47539",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/23046/"
] | Given that people used polished stone axes in the real world and went to a great deal of effort to make them, your wizards being able to knock out dozens for very little effort seems likely. [Neolithic stone axe industry](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langdale_axe_industry) If the magic takes no effort, these axes will be the cheap and cheerful ones that every peasant has dozens of. Metal axes will be expensive and high status objects in comparison.
Pottery may take a hit. Why bother firing up a kiln and processing all that clay if a wizard can make you a stone jug or stone bowl with virtually the same properties? So anything made of ceramics - from your toilet to your roof tiles - could be made of stone instead.
If wizards can do the shape stone thing to make the stone flow out of the way, then they'd be very popular with folks who want to do mining or dig tunnels through rock. Even if each wizard can only do 5' cube a day, they'll be burrowing through granite faster than a bunch of guys with pickaxes. Aqueducts, railway cuttings and canal tunnels will have gangs of wizards as navvies.
Castles with thick stone walls will have teams of wizard sappers burrowing holes through their walls, undermining their foundations and generally wreaking havoc, unless there is some sort of anti-magic cast on the walls.
[Lithographic printing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithography) is so named because it used limestone. If wizards can make this process faster or cheaper, books may be more common.
Anything we make out of glass a wizard could make out of quartz (rock crystal) or other gemstones like amethyst. Most quartz will be semi-opaque compared to modern glass, but it will let a bit of light through. Making lenses from flawless clear quartz will be dead easy, so telescopes, magnifying glasses and spectacles should be another wizardly product. And crystal balls actually made of real crystal, obviously! | As a general principle, different materials have different properties. There's many variants of stone, and many variants of metal. Far too many to explore fully. However, there are some general trends you can rely on:
* Stone is far harder than metal, but more brittle. This means that it totally ignores hits that may dent metal, but harder strike which may have left a large dent, or even a small hole in metal may shatter the entire stone because once stone starts to give, it gives all the way.
* Because of this, stone things tend to have to be made thicker. A 1/8" layer of steel is effective in combat as armor. a 1/8" layer of stone in combat may be very easily shattered. This also means stone things will typically weigh much more, simply because they have to be thicker to have the mechanical properties.
* Because stone doesn't bend, any errors in the final finish tend to lead to chips. Your stone hinges could work great if they're well polished, but imperfectly polished stone would quickly wear on itself and wear out. |
47,539 | For certain categories of items, namely weapons, armor and machinery (that's pretty general, I know), how well would stone fare vs metal? Assume that any complications with shaping the stone are gone.
As far as machinery goes, I would like to know about things as simple as door hinges, to things as complex as systems of gears, or even vehicles of some description. What about the hull of the vehicle?
For context:
I'm trying to build a world for a tabletop game, and it's going to be fairly high magic. In D&D, there's a spell called Stone Shape. In my world, wizards (or the like) with the capability of casting a spell like that would be fairly ubiquitous, so it's use could be very common. The spell can shape at most a 5 ft cube of stone, and into any shape (of the same mass of course), or even multiple shapes (the spell says the object can have hinges, and hinges are really two separate parts). The spell is instantaneous. That, to me, seems like a good incentive to use stone over metal where applicable, as it doesn't take anywhere near the same effort to forge.
So, given that forging from stone is instantaneous, and nearly effortless, and forging from metal is not, what sorts of things that we are used to being metal would be stone instead, if any?
I didn't include the magic tag, because while magic is being used to shape the stone, any application of the stone is decidedly non magical. | 2016/07/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/47539",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/23046/"
] | As a general principle, different materials have different properties. There's many variants of stone, and many variants of metal. Far too many to explore fully. However, there are some general trends you can rely on:
* Stone is far harder than metal, but more brittle. This means that it totally ignores hits that may dent metal, but harder strike which may have left a large dent, or even a small hole in metal may shatter the entire stone because once stone starts to give, it gives all the way.
* Because of this, stone things tend to have to be made thicker. A 1/8" layer of steel is effective in combat as armor. a 1/8" layer of stone in combat may be very easily shattered. This also means stone things will typically weigh much more, simply because they have to be thicker to have the mechanical properties.
* Because stone doesn't bend, any errors in the final finish tend to lead to chips. Your stone hinges could work great if they're well polished, but imperfectly polished stone would quickly wear on itself and wear out. | Generally bronze age trumps stone age and iron age trumps bronze age. Not because it is easier to create but because the tools are stronger, better and typically longer lasting.
It was easier to bash two stones together and shape them than to take said stones, break them down into smaller chips, heat them, and learn how to forge them into a metal.
That being said, the metal end result was always stronger or more durable, and most importantly prettier! We humans love a shiny bauble!
A stone item may last for a millenia while a metal one rusts and breaks down. But that is if the stone item is not used for millenia and just allowed to sit there. If you have a stone pickaxe and a metal pickaxe, the stone would wear out from use before the metal could rust. So speaking in tool use and moving machinery parts, metal would outlast stone.
As mentioned before, stone is hard but brittle. We use metal tools to shape stone, so metal is actually harder. Because it is 'flexible' it doesn't shatter into pieces when hit too hard ( generally, I'm sure there are examples where it does).
Stone items that do not have lots of moving parts or need to be moved regularly would most likely continue to exist in your world. Eg a stone table is simple enough but it is easier to move a metal or wooden table around the room than drag a ton of rock...
Replacing moving parts made of heavier stone would be more frequent than moving lightweight longer lasting metal components. We humans are incredibly lazy. So while it may be cheaper to buy a stone cog once, having to buy and replace four 2ton cogs in a month/year would be repetitive, back breaking and annoying. It would still end up being cheaper in the long run to have things made up of longerlasting metal.
Think of todays economy. People have the choice of buying cheap and nasty items that need frequent replacing or they can simply buy a single more expensive quality made item.
So in summary. For simple things and quick fixes, your stone spell would work. But in the longer run, metal would still be used. Especially as this allows you to be independent of those wiley wizards! |
47,539 | For certain categories of items, namely weapons, armor and machinery (that's pretty general, I know), how well would stone fare vs metal? Assume that any complications with shaping the stone are gone.
As far as machinery goes, I would like to know about things as simple as door hinges, to things as complex as systems of gears, or even vehicles of some description. What about the hull of the vehicle?
For context:
I'm trying to build a world for a tabletop game, and it's going to be fairly high magic. In D&D, there's a spell called Stone Shape. In my world, wizards (or the like) with the capability of casting a spell like that would be fairly ubiquitous, so it's use could be very common. The spell can shape at most a 5 ft cube of stone, and into any shape (of the same mass of course), or even multiple shapes (the spell says the object can have hinges, and hinges are really two separate parts). The spell is instantaneous. That, to me, seems like a good incentive to use stone over metal where applicable, as it doesn't take anywhere near the same effort to forge.
So, given that forging from stone is instantaneous, and nearly effortless, and forging from metal is not, what sorts of things that we are used to being metal would be stone instead, if any?
I didn't include the magic tag, because while magic is being used to shape the stone, any application of the stone is decidedly non magical. | 2016/07/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/47539",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/23046/"
] | As a general principle, different materials have different properties. There's many variants of stone, and many variants of metal. Far too many to explore fully. However, there are some general trends you can rely on:
* Stone is far harder than metal, but more brittle. This means that it totally ignores hits that may dent metal, but harder strike which may have left a large dent, or even a small hole in metal may shatter the entire stone because once stone starts to give, it gives all the way.
* Because of this, stone things tend to have to be made thicker. A 1/8" layer of steel is effective in combat as armor. a 1/8" layer of stone in combat may be very easily shattered. This also means stone things will typically weigh much more, simply because they have to be thicker to have the mechanical properties.
* Because stone doesn't bend, any errors in the final finish tend to lead to chips. Your stone hinges could work great if they're well polished, but imperfectly polished stone would quickly wear on itself and wear out. | If the wizard can alter crystalline structure of the stone or yet better, purify it, this could lead to ceramics made from natural minerals with interesting properties. Alumina, which is very widespread in nature, allows for metal/ceramics composites used in modern armour. Zirconia (found in nature as mineral Baddeleyite) is used for ceramic knives. Both can be used to prolong life of metal tools/weapons by coating them.
For heavy duty bulk structural uses (hinges, bearings, hulls etc.) you need carbide and nitride ceramics, which aren't found in useful quantities in nature and must be made technologically or magically. |
47,539 | For certain categories of items, namely weapons, armor and machinery (that's pretty general, I know), how well would stone fare vs metal? Assume that any complications with shaping the stone are gone.
As far as machinery goes, I would like to know about things as simple as door hinges, to things as complex as systems of gears, or even vehicles of some description. What about the hull of the vehicle?
For context:
I'm trying to build a world for a tabletop game, and it's going to be fairly high magic. In D&D, there's a spell called Stone Shape. In my world, wizards (or the like) with the capability of casting a spell like that would be fairly ubiquitous, so it's use could be very common. The spell can shape at most a 5 ft cube of stone, and into any shape (of the same mass of course), or even multiple shapes (the spell says the object can have hinges, and hinges are really two separate parts). The spell is instantaneous. That, to me, seems like a good incentive to use stone over metal where applicable, as it doesn't take anywhere near the same effort to forge.
So, given that forging from stone is instantaneous, and nearly effortless, and forging from metal is not, what sorts of things that we are used to being metal would be stone instead, if any?
I didn't include the magic tag, because while magic is being used to shape the stone, any application of the stone is decidedly non magical. | 2016/07/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/47539",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/23046/"
] | As a general principle, different materials have different properties. There's many variants of stone, and many variants of metal. Far too many to explore fully. However, there are some general trends you can rely on:
* Stone is far harder than metal, but more brittle. This means that it totally ignores hits that may dent metal, but harder strike which may have left a large dent, or even a small hole in metal may shatter the entire stone because once stone starts to give, it gives all the way.
* Because of this, stone things tend to have to be made thicker. A 1/8" layer of steel is effective in combat as armor. a 1/8" layer of stone in combat may be very easily shattered. This also means stone things will typically weigh much more, simply because they have to be thicker to have the mechanical properties.
* Because stone doesn't bend, any errors in the final finish tend to lead to chips. Your stone hinges could work great if they're well polished, but imperfectly polished stone would quickly wear on itself and wear out. | How about reinforced concrete? If you can introduce other material into the mix (like steel rods), you have a much more flexible range of substances to work with.
Is silica rock? You can make lenses, mirrors and all kinds of interesting stuff.
Also: elegant stone boats. |
47,539 | For certain categories of items, namely weapons, armor and machinery (that's pretty general, I know), how well would stone fare vs metal? Assume that any complications with shaping the stone are gone.
As far as machinery goes, I would like to know about things as simple as door hinges, to things as complex as systems of gears, or even vehicles of some description. What about the hull of the vehicle?
For context:
I'm trying to build a world for a tabletop game, and it's going to be fairly high magic. In D&D, there's a spell called Stone Shape. In my world, wizards (or the like) with the capability of casting a spell like that would be fairly ubiquitous, so it's use could be very common. The spell can shape at most a 5 ft cube of stone, and into any shape (of the same mass of course), or even multiple shapes (the spell says the object can have hinges, and hinges are really two separate parts). The spell is instantaneous. That, to me, seems like a good incentive to use stone over metal where applicable, as it doesn't take anywhere near the same effort to forge.
So, given that forging from stone is instantaneous, and nearly effortless, and forging from metal is not, what sorts of things that we are used to being metal would be stone instead, if any?
I didn't include the magic tag, because while magic is being used to shape the stone, any application of the stone is decidedly non magical. | 2016/07/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/47539",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/23046/"
] | Given that people used polished stone axes in the real world and went to a great deal of effort to make them, your wizards being able to knock out dozens for very little effort seems likely. [Neolithic stone axe industry](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langdale_axe_industry) If the magic takes no effort, these axes will be the cheap and cheerful ones that every peasant has dozens of. Metal axes will be expensive and high status objects in comparison.
Pottery may take a hit. Why bother firing up a kiln and processing all that clay if a wizard can make you a stone jug or stone bowl with virtually the same properties? So anything made of ceramics - from your toilet to your roof tiles - could be made of stone instead.
If wizards can do the shape stone thing to make the stone flow out of the way, then they'd be very popular with folks who want to do mining or dig tunnels through rock. Even if each wizard can only do 5' cube a day, they'll be burrowing through granite faster than a bunch of guys with pickaxes. Aqueducts, railway cuttings and canal tunnels will have gangs of wizards as navvies.
Castles with thick stone walls will have teams of wizard sappers burrowing holes through their walls, undermining their foundations and generally wreaking havoc, unless there is some sort of anti-magic cast on the walls.
[Lithographic printing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithography) is so named because it used limestone. If wizards can make this process faster or cheaper, books may be more common.
Anything we make out of glass a wizard could make out of quartz (rock crystal) or other gemstones like amethyst. Most quartz will be semi-opaque compared to modern glass, but it will let a bit of light through. Making lenses from flawless clear quartz will be dead easy, so telescopes, magnifying glasses and spectacles should be another wizardly product. And crystal balls actually made of real crystal, obviously! | Generally bronze age trumps stone age and iron age trumps bronze age. Not because it is easier to create but because the tools are stronger, better and typically longer lasting.
It was easier to bash two stones together and shape them than to take said stones, break them down into smaller chips, heat them, and learn how to forge them into a metal.
That being said, the metal end result was always stronger or more durable, and most importantly prettier! We humans love a shiny bauble!
A stone item may last for a millenia while a metal one rusts and breaks down. But that is if the stone item is not used for millenia and just allowed to sit there. If you have a stone pickaxe and a metal pickaxe, the stone would wear out from use before the metal could rust. So speaking in tool use and moving machinery parts, metal would outlast stone.
As mentioned before, stone is hard but brittle. We use metal tools to shape stone, so metal is actually harder. Because it is 'flexible' it doesn't shatter into pieces when hit too hard ( generally, I'm sure there are examples where it does).
Stone items that do not have lots of moving parts or need to be moved regularly would most likely continue to exist in your world. Eg a stone table is simple enough but it is easier to move a metal or wooden table around the room than drag a ton of rock...
Replacing moving parts made of heavier stone would be more frequent than moving lightweight longer lasting metal components. We humans are incredibly lazy. So while it may be cheaper to buy a stone cog once, having to buy and replace four 2ton cogs in a month/year would be repetitive, back breaking and annoying. It would still end up being cheaper in the long run to have things made up of longerlasting metal.
Think of todays economy. People have the choice of buying cheap and nasty items that need frequent replacing or they can simply buy a single more expensive quality made item.
So in summary. For simple things and quick fixes, your stone spell would work. But in the longer run, metal would still be used. Especially as this allows you to be independent of those wiley wizards! |
47,539 | For certain categories of items, namely weapons, armor and machinery (that's pretty general, I know), how well would stone fare vs metal? Assume that any complications with shaping the stone are gone.
As far as machinery goes, I would like to know about things as simple as door hinges, to things as complex as systems of gears, or even vehicles of some description. What about the hull of the vehicle?
For context:
I'm trying to build a world for a tabletop game, and it's going to be fairly high magic. In D&D, there's a spell called Stone Shape. In my world, wizards (or the like) with the capability of casting a spell like that would be fairly ubiquitous, so it's use could be very common. The spell can shape at most a 5 ft cube of stone, and into any shape (of the same mass of course), or even multiple shapes (the spell says the object can have hinges, and hinges are really two separate parts). The spell is instantaneous. That, to me, seems like a good incentive to use stone over metal where applicable, as it doesn't take anywhere near the same effort to forge.
So, given that forging from stone is instantaneous, and nearly effortless, and forging from metal is not, what sorts of things that we are used to being metal would be stone instead, if any?
I didn't include the magic tag, because while magic is being used to shape the stone, any application of the stone is decidedly non magical. | 2016/07/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/47539",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/23046/"
] | Given that people used polished stone axes in the real world and went to a great deal of effort to make them, your wizards being able to knock out dozens for very little effort seems likely. [Neolithic stone axe industry](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langdale_axe_industry) If the magic takes no effort, these axes will be the cheap and cheerful ones that every peasant has dozens of. Metal axes will be expensive and high status objects in comparison.
Pottery may take a hit. Why bother firing up a kiln and processing all that clay if a wizard can make you a stone jug or stone bowl with virtually the same properties? So anything made of ceramics - from your toilet to your roof tiles - could be made of stone instead.
If wizards can do the shape stone thing to make the stone flow out of the way, then they'd be very popular with folks who want to do mining or dig tunnels through rock. Even if each wizard can only do 5' cube a day, they'll be burrowing through granite faster than a bunch of guys with pickaxes. Aqueducts, railway cuttings and canal tunnels will have gangs of wizards as navvies.
Castles with thick stone walls will have teams of wizard sappers burrowing holes through their walls, undermining their foundations and generally wreaking havoc, unless there is some sort of anti-magic cast on the walls.
[Lithographic printing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithography) is so named because it used limestone. If wizards can make this process faster or cheaper, books may be more common.
Anything we make out of glass a wizard could make out of quartz (rock crystal) or other gemstones like amethyst. Most quartz will be semi-opaque compared to modern glass, but it will let a bit of light through. Making lenses from flawless clear quartz will be dead easy, so telescopes, magnifying glasses and spectacles should be another wizardly product. And crystal balls actually made of real crystal, obviously! | If the wizard can alter crystalline structure of the stone or yet better, purify it, this could lead to ceramics made from natural minerals with interesting properties. Alumina, which is very widespread in nature, allows for metal/ceramics composites used in modern armour. Zirconia (found in nature as mineral Baddeleyite) is used for ceramic knives. Both can be used to prolong life of metal tools/weapons by coating them.
For heavy duty bulk structural uses (hinges, bearings, hulls etc.) you need carbide and nitride ceramics, which aren't found in useful quantities in nature and must be made technologically or magically. |
47,539 | For certain categories of items, namely weapons, armor and machinery (that's pretty general, I know), how well would stone fare vs metal? Assume that any complications with shaping the stone are gone.
As far as machinery goes, I would like to know about things as simple as door hinges, to things as complex as systems of gears, or even vehicles of some description. What about the hull of the vehicle?
For context:
I'm trying to build a world for a tabletop game, and it's going to be fairly high magic. In D&D, there's a spell called Stone Shape. In my world, wizards (or the like) with the capability of casting a spell like that would be fairly ubiquitous, so it's use could be very common. The spell can shape at most a 5 ft cube of stone, and into any shape (of the same mass of course), or even multiple shapes (the spell says the object can have hinges, and hinges are really two separate parts). The spell is instantaneous. That, to me, seems like a good incentive to use stone over metal where applicable, as it doesn't take anywhere near the same effort to forge.
So, given that forging from stone is instantaneous, and nearly effortless, and forging from metal is not, what sorts of things that we are used to being metal would be stone instead, if any?
I didn't include the magic tag, because while magic is being used to shape the stone, any application of the stone is decidedly non magical. | 2016/07/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/47539",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/23046/"
] | Given that people used polished stone axes in the real world and went to a great deal of effort to make them, your wizards being able to knock out dozens for very little effort seems likely. [Neolithic stone axe industry](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langdale_axe_industry) If the magic takes no effort, these axes will be the cheap and cheerful ones that every peasant has dozens of. Metal axes will be expensive and high status objects in comparison.
Pottery may take a hit. Why bother firing up a kiln and processing all that clay if a wizard can make you a stone jug or stone bowl with virtually the same properties? So anything made of ceramics - from your toilet to your roof tiles - could be made of stone instead.
If wizards can do the shape stone thing to make the stone flow out of the way, then they'd be very popular with folks who want to do mining or dig tunnels through rock. Even if each wizard can only do 5' cube a day, they'll be burrowing through granite faster than a bunch of guys with pickaxes. Aqueducts, railway cuttings and canal tunnels will have gangs of wizards as navvies.
Castles with thick stone walls will have teams of wizard sappers burrowing holes through their walls, undermining their foundations and generally wreaking havoc, unless there is some sort of anti-magic cast on the walls.
[Lithographic printing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithography) is so named because it used limestone. If wizards can make this process faster or cheaper, books may be more common.
Anything we make out of glass a wizard could make out of quartz (rock crystal) or other gemstones like amethyst. Most quartz will be semi-opaque compared to modern glass, but it will let a bit of light through. Making lenses from flawless clear quartz will be dead easy, so telescopes, magnifying glasses and spectacles should be another wizardly product. And crystal balls actually made of real crystal, obviously! | How about reinforced concrete? If you can introduce other material into the mix (like steel rods), you have a much more flexible range of substances to work with.
Is silica rock? You can make lenses, mirrors and all kinds of interesting stuff.
Also: elegant stone boats. |
47,539 | For certain categories of items, namely weapons, armor and machinery (that's pretty general, I know), how well would stone fare vs metal? Assume that any complications with shaping the stone are gone.
As far as machinery goes, I would like to know about things as simple as door hinges, to things as complex as systems of gears, or even vehicles of some description. What about the hull of the vehicle?
For context:
I'm trying to build a world for a tabletop game, and it's going to be fairly high magic. In D&D, there's a spell called Stone Shape. In my world, wizards (or the like) with the capability of casting a spell like that would be fairly ubiquitous, so it's use could be very common. The spell can shape at most a 5 ft cube of stone, and into any shape (of the same mass of course), or even multiple shapes (the spell says the object can have hinges, and hinges are really two separate parts). The spell is instantaneous. That, to me, seems like a good incentive to use stone over metal where applicable, as it doesn't take anywhere near the same effort to forge.
So, given that forging from stone is instantaneous, and nearly effortless, and forging from metal is not, what sorts of things that we are used to being metal would be stone instead, if any?
I didn't include the magic tag, because while magic is being used to shape the stone, any application of the stone is decidedly non magical. | 2016/07/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/47539",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/23046/"
] | Generally bronze age trumps stone age and iron age trumps bronze age. Not because it is easier to create but because the tools are stronger, better and typically longer lasting.
It was easier to bash two stones together and shape them than to take said stones, break them down into smaller chips, heat them, and learn how to forge them into a metal.
That being said, the metal end result was always stronger or more durable, and most importantly prettier! We humans love a shiny bauble!
A stone item may last for a millenia while a metal one rusts and breaks down. But that is if the stone item is not used for millenia and just allowed to sit there. If you have a stone pickaxe and a metal pickaxe, the stone would wear out from use before the metal could rust. So speaking in tool use and moving machinery parts, metal would outlast stone.
As mentioned before, stone is hard but brittle. We use metal tools to shape stone, so metal is actually harder. Because it is 'flexible' it doesn't shatter into pieces when hit too hard ( generally, I'm sure there are examples where it does).
Stone items that do not have lots of moving parts or need to be moved regularly would most likely continue to exist in your world. Eg a stone table is simple enough but it is easier to move a metal or wooden table around the room than drag a ton of rock...
Replacing moving parts made of heavier stone would be more frequent than moving lightweight longer lasting metal components. We humans are incredibly lazy. So while it may be cheaper to buy a stone cog once, having to buy and replace four 2ton cogs in a month/year would be repetitive, back breaking and annoying. It would still end up being cheaper in the long run to have things made up of longerlasting metal.
Think of todays economy. People have the choice of buying cheap and nasty items that need frequent replacing or they can simply buy a single more expensive quality made item.
So in summary. For simple things and quick fixes, your stone spell would work. But in the longer run, metal would still be used. Especially as this allows you to be independent of those wiley wizards! | If the wizard can alter crystalline structure of the stone or yet better, purify it, this could lead to ceramics made from natural minerals with interesting properties. Alumina, which is very widespread in nature, allows for metal/ceramics composites used in modern armour. Zirconia (found in nature as mineral Baddeleyite) is used for ceramic knives. Both can be used to prolong life of metal tools/weapons by coating them.
For heavy duty bulk structural uses (hinges, bearings, hulls etc.) you need carbide and nitride ceramics, which aren't found in useful quantities in nature and must be made technologically or magically. |
47,539 | For certain categories of items, namely weapons, armor and machinery (that's pretty general, I know), how well would stone fare vs metal? Assume that any complications with shaping the stone are gone.
As far as machinery goes, I would like to know about things as simple as door hinges, to things as complex as systems of gears, or even vehicles of some description. What about the hull of the vehicle?
For context:
I'm trying to build a world for a tabletop game, and it's going to be fairly high magic. In D&D, there's a spell called Stone Shape. In my world, wizards (or the like) with the capability of casting a spell like that would be fairly ubiquitous, so it's use could be very common. The spell can shape at most a 5 ft cube of stone, and into any shape (of the same mass of course), or even multiple shapes (the spell says the object can have hinges, and hinges are really two separate parts). The spell is instantaneous. That, to me, seems like a good incentive to use stone over metal where applicable, as it doesn't take anywhere near the same effort to forge.
So, given that forging from stone is instantaneous, and nearly effortless, and forging from metal is not, what sorts of things that we are used to being metal would be stone instead, if any?
I didn't include the magic tag, because while magic is being used to shape the stone, any application of the stone is decidedly non magical. | 2016/07/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/47539",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/23046/"
] | Generally bronze age trumps stone age and iron age trumps bronze age. Not because it is easier to create but because the tools are stronger, better and typically longer lasting.
It was easier to bash two stones together and shape them than to take said stones, break them down into smaller chips, heat them, and learn how to forge them into a metal.
That being said, the metal end result was always stronger or more durable, and most importantly prettier! We humans love a shiny bauble!
A stone item may last for a millenia while a metal one rusts and breaks down. But that is if the stone item is not used for millenia and just allowed to sit there. If you have a stone pickaxe and a metal pickaxe, the stone would wear out from use before the metal could rust. So speaking in tool use and moving machinery parts, metal would outlast stone.
As mentioned before, stone is hard but brittle. We use metal tools to shape stone, so metal is actually harder. Because it is 'flexible' it doesn't shatter into pieces when hit too hard ( generally, I'm sure there are examples where it does).
Stone items that do not have lots of moving parts or need to be moved regularly would most likely continue to exist in your world. Eg a stone table is simple enough but it is easier to move a metal or wooden table around the room than drag a ton of rock...
Replacing moving parts made of heavier stone would be more frequent than moving lightweight longer lasting metal components. We humans are incredibly lazy. So while it may be cheaper to buy a stone cog once, having to buy and replace four 2ton cogs in a month/year would be repetitive, back breaking and annoying. It would still end up being cheaper in the long run to have things made up of longerlasting metal.
Think of todays economy. People have the choice of buying cheap and nasty items that need frequent replacing or they can simply buy a single more expensive quality made item.
So in summary. For simple things and quick fixes, your stone spell would work. But in the longer run, metal would still be used. Especially as this allows you to be independent of those wiley wizards! | How about reinforced concrete? If you can introduce other material into the mix (like steel rods), you have a much more flexible range of substances to work with.
Is silica rock? You can make lenses, mirrors and all kinds of interesting stuff.
Also: elegant stone boats. |
47,539 | For certain categories of items, namely weapons, armor and machinery (that's pretty general, I know), how well would stone fare vs metal? Assume that any complications with shaping the stone are gone.
As far as machinery goes, I would like to know about things as simple as door hinges, to things as complex as systems of gears, or even vehicles of some description. What about the hull of the vehicle?
For context:
I'm trying to build a world for a tabletop game, and it's going to be fairly high magic. In D&D, there's a spell called Stone Shape. In my world, wizards (or the like) with the capability of casting a spell like that would be fairly ubiquitous, so it's use could be very common. The spell can shape at most a 5 ft cube of stone, and into any shape (of the same mass of course), or even multiple shapes (the spell says the object can have hinges, and hinges are really two separate parts). The spell is instantaneous. That, to me, seems like a good incentive to use stone over metal where applicable, as it doesn't take anywhere near the same effort to forge.
So, given that forging from stone is instantaneous, and nearly effortless, and forging from metal is not, what sorts of things that we are used to being metal would be stone instead, if any?
I didn't include the magic tag, because while magic is being used to shape the stone, any application of the stone is decidedly non magical. | 2016/07/16 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/47539",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/23046/"
] | If the wizard can alter crystalline structure of the stone or yet better, purify it, this could lead to ceramics made from natural minerals with interesting properties. Alumina, which is very widespread in nature, allows for metal/ceramics composites used in modern armour. Zirconia (found in nature as mineral Baddeleyite) is used for ceramic knives. Both can be used to prolong life of metal tools/weapons by coating them.
For heavy duty bulk structural uses (hinges, bearings, hulls etc.) you need carbide and nitride ceramics, which aren't found in useful quantities in nature and must be made technologically or magically. | How about reinforced concrete? If you can introduce other material into the mix (like steel rods), you have a much more flexible range of substances to work with.
Is silica rock? You can make lenses, mirrors and all kinds of interesting stuff.
Also: elegant stone boats. |
13,654 | I may soon have to transport a washing machine to my appartment. The problem is that
1. I live upstairs.
2. I may not be able to find a friend to help.
So I'm thinking whether it is practical to transport a washing machine up/down stairs alone. Obviously just carrying it is pretty much out of the question, given that a household washing machine weighs about 60 - 80 kg. I know that professional movers usually use moving straps to carry heavy loads, but I think these do not work for a single person.
The only practical option I found is to use a [hand truck](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_truck), and to tie the machine to the truck. Ideally I'll use a stairclimber, which has special wheels to make it easier to climb/descend stairs. However, I'm not sure whether even a stairclimber will let me transport a washing machine without help.
So:
* Is it feasible to transport a washing machine alone with a stairclimber or similar?
* Is there any other option? | 2016/07/25 | [
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/questions/13654",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/users/15967/"
] | Unless your name is Bruce Banner and the thought of hiring someone makes you angry, you need help.
See if there's an organization near you similar to Seattle's "Millionairs Club" -- they specialize in day labor, staffed by homeless or otherwise disadvantaged men (men only in this case, but that may not always be the case -- tell them what you're doing, they'll make sure the worker they send out is up to the job). This method will cost you a little, but far less than hiring day labor from a common temp agency. You'll still want/need straps, but this will give you a second body to carry the other end of the machine.
You could use mechanical methods (strap washer to a "sled" and winch it up the stairs, for instance) but its unlikely they'll work well in your apartment building. | deconstruct the problem: Open the washing machine and take out the top concrete block if easily accessible. Move the block separately. Do not lose the screws, nuts and bolts. You'll need them later. Tie the now 25 kg lighter machine onto your cart and choose correct angle of attack on stairs following others' advice above. Remember that your neighborhood laundromat may have social advantages. |
13,654 | I may soon have to transport a washing machine to my appartment. The problem is that
1. I live upstairs.
2. I may not be able to find a friend to help.
So I'm thinking whether it is practical to transport a washing machine up/down stairs alone. Obviously just carrying it is pretty much out of the question, given that a household washing machine weighs about 60 - 80 kg. I know that professional movers usually use moving straps to carry heavy loads, but I think these do not work for a single person.
The only practical option I found is to use a [hand truck](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_truck), and to tie the machine to the truck. Ideally I'll use a stairclimber, which has special wheels to make it easier to climb/descend stairs. However, I'm not sure whether even a stairclimber will let me transport a washing machine without help.
So:
* Is it feasible to transport a washing machine alone with a stairclimber or similar?
* Is there any other option? | 2016/07/25 | [
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/questions/13654",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/users/15967/"
] | deconstruct the problem: Open the washing machine and take out the top concrete block if easily accessible. Move the block separately. Do not lose the screws, nuts and bolts. You'll need them later. Tie the now 25 kg lighter machine onto your cart and choose correct angle of attack on stairs following others' advice above. Remember that your neighborhood laundromat may have social advantages. | .. end over end ..is the fastest and easiest way..
Get behind it and end over end..
Like roll it up..
I am a woman going to move a washer! |
13,654 | I may soon have to transport a washing machine to my appartment. The problem is that
1. I live upstairs.
2. I may not be able to find a friend to help.
So I'm thinking whether it is practical to transport a washing machine up/down stairs alone. Obviously just carrying it is pretty much out of the question, given that a household washing machine weighs about 60 - 80 kg. I know that professional movers usually use moving straps to carry heavy loads, but I think these do not work for a single person.
The only practical option I found is to use a [hand truck](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_truck), and to tie the machine to the truck. Ideally I'll use a stairclimber, which has special wheels to make it easier to climb/descend stairs. However, I'm not sure whether even a stairclimber will let me transport a washing machine without help.
So:
* Is it feasible to transport a washing machine alone with a stairclimber or similar?
* Is there any other option? | 2016/07/25 | [
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/questions/13654",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/users/15967/"
] | For flat surfaces, using the hand truck to move this is fairly easy.
For the stairs, there is a strategy; however, to determine feasibility, it depends how strong you are, and the type of stairs you will traverse, and the amount of time you will have.
For a wide, flat staircase, with regular landings every few meters, it might be possible to slide the machine up on a flat pieces of wood. Place wood slates like a 2x4 flat on the stair, tip the side of the washing machine onto the wood, then push it up to the landing. Make sure the machine doesn't push you back down the stairs; serious injury would be the result.
For a spiral staircase, this won't work. A decent option in this case is to identify what is the heaviest part of the machine, and remove is and carry it separately. For an old washing machine,perhaps just removing the motor will make it possible for you to carry it up in parts.
I personally would hire someone though. | .. end over end ..is the fastest and easiest way..
Get behind it and end over end..
Like roll it up..
I am a woman going to move a washer! |
13,654 | I may soon have to transport a washing machine to my appartment. The problem is that
1. I live upstairs.
2. I may not be able to find a friend to help.
So I'm thinking whether it is practical to transport a washing machine up/down stairs alone. Obviously just carrying it is pretty much out of the question, given that a household washing machine weighs about 60 - 80 kg. I know that professional movers usually use moving straps to carry heavy loads, but I think these do not work for a single person.
The only practical option I found is to use a [hand truck](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_truck), and to tie the machine to the truck. Ideally I'll use a stairclimber, which has special wheels to make it easier to climb/descend stairs. However, I'm not sure whether even a stairclimber will let me transport a washing machine without help.
So:
* Is it feasible to transport a washing machine alone with a stairclimber or similar?
* Is there any other option? | 2016/07/25 | [
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/questions/13654",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/users/15967/"
] | You can achieve this fairly easily, without needing to be the Hulk... Bruce Banner physique would be sufficient (i.e. An average person) He's NOT the Hulk - nor would you need to be to pull this off with a good sized dolly that has crank/lever tightened straps (fairly common and rentable at Home Depot)
Once the machine is on the forks, apply straps, tighten securely, and go up backward...*pulling* the machine up, stair by stair. Most machines are actually not near as heavy as you'd think. Be sure to measure opening at the top before attempting...you would want to get to the top only to realize it wouldn't fit in. Carrying it down the stairs on a dolly would be **much** harder !
would be harder. Much harder! | For flat surfaces, using the hand truck to move this is fairly easy.
For the stairs, there is a strategy; however, to determine feasibility, it depends how strong you are, and the type of stairs you will traverse, and the amount of time you will have.
For a wide, flat staircase, with regular landings every few meters, it might be possible to slide the machine up on a flat pieces of wood. Place wood slates like a 2x4 flat on the stair, tip the side of the washing machine onto the wood, then push it up to the landing. Make sure the machine doesn't push you back down the stairs; serious injury would be the result.
For a spiral staircase, this won't work. A decent option in this case is to identify what is the heaviest part of the machine, and remove is and carry it separately. For an old washing machine,perhaps just removing the motor will make it possible for you to carry it up in parts.
I personally would hire someone though. |
13,654 | I may soon have to transport a washing machine to my appartment. The problem is that
1. I live upstairs.
2. I may not be able to find a friend to help.
So I'm thinking whether it is practical to transport a washing machine up/down stairs alone. Obviously just carrying it is pretty much out of the question, given that a household washing machine weighs about 60 - 80 kg. I know that professional movers usually use moving straps to carry heavy loads, but I think these do not work for a single person.
The only practical option I found is to use a [hand truck](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_truck), and to tie the machine to the truck. Ideally I'll use a stairclimber, which has special wheels to make it easier to climb/descend stairs. However, I'm not sure whether even a stairclimber will let me transport a washing machine without help.
So:
* Is it feasible to transport a washing machine alone with a stairclimber or similar?
* Is there any other option? | 2016/07/25 | [
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/questions/13654",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/users/15967/"
] | You can achieve this fairly easily, without needing to be the Hulk... Bruce Banner physique would be sufficient (i.e. An average person) He's NOT the Hulk - nor would you need to be to pull this off with a good sized dolly that has crank/lever tightened straps (fairly common and rentable at Home Depot)
Once the machine is on the forks, apply straps, tighten securely, and go up backward...*pulling* the machine up, stair by stair. Most machines are actually not near as heavy as you'd think. Be sure to measure opening at the top before attempting...you would want to get to the top only to realize it wouldn't fit in. Carrying it down the stairs on a dolly would be **much** harder !
would be harder. Much harder! | I realise that I'm a little late to the discussion here, but for anyone searching for a solution to this problem - use a block and tackle.
Kind regards,
David |
13,654 | I may soon have to transport a washing machine to my appartment. The problem is that
1. I live upstairs.
2. I may not be able to find a friend to help.
So I'm thinking whether it is practical to transport a washing machine up/down stairs alone. Obviously just carrying it is pretty much out of the question, given that a household washing machine weighs about 60 - 80 kg. I know that professional movers usually use moving straps to carry heavy loads, but I think these do not work for a single person.
The only practical option I found is to use a [hand truck](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_truck), and to tie the machine to the truck. Ideally I'll use a stairclimber, which has special wheels to make it easier to climb/descend stairs. However, I'm not sure whether even a stairclimber will let me transport a washing machine without help.
So:
* Is it feasible to transport a washing machine alone with a stairclimber or similar?
* Is there any other option? | 2016/07/25 | [
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/questions/13654",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/users/15967/"
] | I realise that I'm a little late to the discussion here, but for anyone searching for a solution to this problem - use a block and tackle.
Kind regards,
David | For flat surfaces, using the hand truck to move this is fairly easy.
For the stairs, there is a strategy; however, to determine feasibility, it depends how strong you are, and the type of stairs you will traverse, and the amount of time you will have.
For a wide, flat staircase, with regular landings every few meters, it might be possible to slide the machine up on a flat pieces of wood. Place wood slates like a 2x4 flat on the stair, tip the side of the washing machine onto the wood, then push it up to the landing. Make sure the machine doesn't push you back down the stairs; serious injury would be the result.
For a spiral staircase, this won't work. A decent option in this case is to identify what is the heaviest part of the machine, and remove is and carry it separately. For an old washing machine,perhaps just removing the motor will make it possible for you to carry it up in parts.
I personally would hire someone though. |
13,654 | I may soon have to transport a washing machine to my appartment. The problem is that
1. I live upstairs.
2. I may not be able to find a friend to help.
So I'm thinking whether it is practical to transport a washing machine up/down stairs alone. Obviously just carrying it is pretty much out of the question, given that a household washing machine weighs about 60 - 80 kg. I know that professional movers usually use moving straps to carry heavy loads, but I think these do not work for a single person.
The only practical option I found is to use a [hand truck](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_truck), and to tie the machine to the truck. Ideally I'll use a stairclimber, which has special wheels to make it easier to climb/descend stairs. However, I'm not sure whether even a stairclimber will let me transport a washing machine without help.
So:
* Is it feasible to transport a washing machine alone with a stairclimber or similar?
* Is there any other option? | 2016/07/25 | [
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/questions/13654",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/users/15967/"
] | I realise that I'm a little late to the discussion here, but for anyone searching for a solution to this problem - use a block and tackle.
Kind regards,
David | Can you easily dead lift 80 kg (several times). That is basically what you are doing.
I am right at 80 kg and I can get a get 80 kg up stairs with just single large pneumatic wheels. I am pretty strong. So with climber wheels if you can easily dead lift 80 kg then you should be OK.
If you have two then both pulling seems to work better. It is hard to get a good push angle.
Down stairs to me is more scary. |
13,654 | I may soon have to transport a washing machine to my appartment. The problem is that
1. I live upstairs.
2. I may not be able to find a friend to help.
So I'm thinking whether it is practical to transport a washing machine up/down stairs alone. Obviously just carrying it is pretty much out of the question, given that a household washing machine weighs about 60 - 80 kg. I know that professional movers usually use moving straps to carry heavy loads, but I think these do not work for a single person.
The only practical option I found is to use a [hand truck](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_truck), and to tie the machine to the truck. Ideally I'll use a stairclimber, which has special wheels to make it easier to climb/descend stairs. However, I'm not sure whether even a stairclimber will let me transport a washing machine without help.
So:
* Is it feasible to transport a washing machine alone with a stairclimber or similar?
* Is there any other option? | 2016/07/25 | [
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/questions/13654",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/users/15967/"
] | You can achieve this fairly easily, without needing to be the Hulk... Bruce Banner physique would be sufficient (i.e. An average person) He's NOT the Hulk - nor would you need to be to pull this off with a good sized dolly that has crank/lever tightened straps (fairly common and rentable at Home Depot)
Once the machine is on the forks, apply straps, tighten securely, and go up backward...*pulling* the machine up, stair by stair. Most machines are actually not near as heavy as you'd think. Be sure to measure opening at the top before attempting...you would want to get to the top only to realize it wouldn't fit in. Carrying it down the stairs on a dolly would be **much** harder !
would be harder. Much harder! | .. end over end ..is the fastest and easiest way..
Get behind it and end over end..
Like roll it up..
I am a woman going to move a washer! |
13,654 | I may soon have to transport a washing machine to my appartment. The problem is that
1. I live upstairs.
2. I may not be able to find a friend to help.
So I'm thinking whether it is practical to transport a washing machine up/down stairs alone. Obviously just carrying it is pretty much out of the question, given that a household washing machine weighs about 60 - 80 kg. I know that professional movers usually use moving straps to carry heavy loads, but I think these do not work for a single person.
The only practical option I found is to use a [hand truck](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_truck), and to tie the machine to the truck. Ideally I'll use a stairclimber, which has special wheels to make it easier to climb/descend stairs. However, I'm not sure whether even a stairclimber will let me transport a washing machine without help.
So:
* Is it feasible to transport a washing machine alone with a stairclimber or similar?
* Is there any other option? | 2016/07/25 | [
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/questions/13654",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/users/15967/"
] | You can achieve this fairly easily, without needing to be the Hulk... Bruce Banner physique would be sufficient (i.e. An average person) He's NOT the Hulk - nor would you need to be to pull this off with a good sized dolly that has crank/lever tightened straps (fairly common and rentable at Home Depot)
Once the machine is on the forks, apply straps, tighten securely, and go up backward...*pulling* the machine up, stair by stair. Most machines are actually not near as heavy as you'd think. Be sure to measure opening at the top before attempting...you would want to get to the top only to realize it wouldn't fit in. Carrying it down the stairs on a dolly would be **much** harder !
would be harder. Much harder! | deconstruct the problem: Open the washing machine and take out the top concrete block if easily accessible. Move the block separately. Do not lose the screws, nuts and bolts. You'll need them later. Tie the now 25 kg lighter machine onto your cart and choose correct angle of attack on stairs following others' advice above. Remember that your neighborhood laundromat may have social advantages. |
13,654 | I may soon have to transport a washing machine to my appartment. The problem is that
1. I live upstairs.
2. I may not be able to find a friend to help.
So I'm thinking whether it is practical to transport a washing machine up/down stairs alone. Obviously just carrying it is pretty much out of the question, given that a household washing machine weighs about 60 - 80 kg. I know that professional movers usually use moving straps to carry heavy loads, but I think these do not work for a single person.
The only practical option I found is to use a [hand truck](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_truck), and to tie the machine to the truck. Ideally I'll use a stairclimber, which has special wheels to make it easier to climb/descend stairs. However, I'm not sure whether even a stairclimber will let me transport a washing machine without help.
So:
* Is it feasible to transport a washing machine alone with a stairclimber or similar?
* Is there any other option? | 2016/07/25 | [
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/questions/13654",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/users/15967/"
] | You can achieve this fairly easily, without needing to be the Hulk... Bruce Banner physique would be sufficient (i.e. An average person) He's NOT the Hulk - nor would you need to be to pull this off with a good sized dolly that has crank/lever tightened straps (fairly common and rentable at Home Depot)
Once the machine is on the forks, apply straps, tighten securely, and go up backward...*pulling* the machine up, stair by stair. Most machines are actually not near as heavy as you'd think. Be sure to measure opening at the top before attempting...you would want to get to the top only to realize it wouldn't fit in. Carrying it down the stairs on a dolly would be **much** harder !
would be harder. Much harder! | Can you easily dead lift 80 kg (several times). That is basically what you are doing.
I am right at 80 kg and I can get a get 80 kg up stairs with just single large pneumatic wheels. I am pretty strong. So with climber wheels if you can easily dead lift 80 kg then you should be OK.
If you have two then both pulling seems to work better. It is hard to get a good push angle.
Down stairs to me is more scary. |
3,713,839 | a client wants to "modernize" a 5 year old web/html-based Blackberry "application".
The application allows field service technicians and franchisees to inquire on warranty
and service status. Currently they use very simple php/html pages.
Application seems slow, especially on repeated inquiries which require constant reload.
Blackberry/Java seems to be obvious choice, but client seems to think that
development and maintainace is expensive, which I suppose is true because this skill
is not very common around here.
I am thinking of maybe loading all pages in a single initial load and use a javascript
hide/show type technique to reveal pages as user requests them, and using ajax to populate/update data.
They want to target javascript enabled Blackberry devices (OS 4.5 and later). I know that issues and limitations
with css and js on early browsers. i would like to hear other people's experiences.
I know jQuery so that would be obvious choice, but it is pretty fat for wireless. Is there a better
toolkit for this purpose - I found the iqTouch site, but that was not Blackberry specific. Any sites with examples that I can harvest? | 2010/09/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3713839",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/440931/"
] | If you're targeting OS 4.5 and later, all I can say is good luck. BlackBerry support for HTML was pretty poor in older devices, and you're hit and miss at best with anything more than the most basic use of JavaScript. I've had very little luck with anything other than non-dynamic HTML websites with the older browsers.
With OS 5.0 and later you have a lot more options. Support for the Gears APIs and better JavaScript. The [Widget SDK](http://na.blackberry.com/eng/developers/browserdev/widgetsdk.jsp) even lets you easily create HTML/JS based 'Widgets' for BlackBerry that can contain a bunch of pre-cached data. BlackBerry 6 of course, with its WebKit based browser and HTML5 support can do pretty much anything that iOS or Android devices can.
So my recommendation is to only go dynamic if you can target 5.0 and later. Or potentially a site that degrades gracefully to browsers that don't support JS well (either user agent detection or some fancy JS coding) and users with older devices have to deal with a slower experience. | have you looked at features available in HTML 5? |
342,261 | I recently asked my first [question](https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/132815/how-do-i-turn-a-2d-coin-texture-to-a-3d-image/132833?noredirect=1#comment197721_132833) on the Graphic Design Community and got some great answers.
To my surprise, within a day it said that it had 2k views. Now it has 4k, which is a ton. Before most of my questions that I asked on SO got 50-100 views, the highest was ~450.
Was there something that I said that made a difference? Is there a way I could see if it was "Featured"? Is this just a thing that happens by random chance? | 2020/01/16 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/342261",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/423796/"
] | If you look at the [timeline](https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/posts/132815/timeline) of your question, you can see that it became a Hot Network Question, and it was tweeted. Both of these are things that tend to increase views on questions, as the question is now exposed to many other people besides the core users of the site.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/I4pP1.png) | I am assuming that your question must have appeared under Hot Network Questions in the right-hand sidebar.
To try and work out why it reached there you could review [What are the criteria for questions to be selected for Hot Network Questions?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/60756/what-are-the-criteria-for-questions-to-be-selected-for-hot-network-questions) |
30,648 | I'm trying to cut a hole in a mesh to create torpedo tubes on a spacecraft, and am running into a bit of trouble. I can get the hole cut out just fine using Knife Project, the problem, however, is that it completely screws with the shading of the mesh.
Here are the target and pattern meshes:
Here's a detail of the pattern that creates the shape of the outer tube:
and the target mesh:
Now, as I said I can cut the hole in the target mesh just fine. The problem is, I get this:
As you can see, cutting the hole in the mesh throws off the smoothing of the mesh, leading to some odd shading which is just unacceptable.
I'm trying to do this with as few extra polys as possible. | 2015/05/09 | [
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/30648",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/users/7576/"
] | Prior to cutting the new geometry the transitions are smooth because the shading is a function of the average face normals connected to each vertex. Because each of those adjacent face normals is different as you go around the surface of the object, the transition is relatively smooth. It's a cheap but effective trick.
Once you start cutting into a face, you get new geometry which has a number of vertices which are surrounded by faces which have the same face normals, therefore the shading is 'flat' on those sections. The transition from surrounding faces onto that flat area is also abrupt, and more prominent with transitions between quads and triangles.
Read Blender [docs about custom normals](http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Mont29/Foundation/Split_Vertex_Normals/Custom_Split_Normals_Manual)
### possible solutions
1. A way out of that is to carefully adjust the positions of the new vertices such that they follow the inferred curvature, this doesn't have to be exact. as long as you get away from the faces all having the same normals on that spot.
The dark area just below the blue arrow indicates the flow that your geometry would need to have (seen from the side of that edited face). If you can move the internal vertices to match the curvature you'll get reasonable smoothing.
2. or adjust the vertex normals to follow the curvature, but (May 2015) this is not exposed to the UI, but can be scripted. Manual changes might be overwritten by operations such as remove doubles / recalc normals.
3. [Normal Edit modifier](http://www.blender.org/manual/modifiers/modify/normal_edit.html). It takes a vertex group, and an object, and modifies the normals of the vertices in the vertex group to follow as if they eminated from the center of the object (radial) or directionally if you use a mesh object to help guide the normals.
Blender's *Proportional Editing* feature can help get nice curvature, but you'll have to experiment with it. | Zeffi mentioned surface normals and shading. Perhaps you want sharp edges where the hull meets the torpedo launcher. This effect is often achieved using an Edge Split modifier for Sharp edges. You have to leave the Sharp Edges checkbox checked, and then mark those edges in the mesh editor (Ctrl-E > Mark Sharp).
Another thing that sometimes causes strange shading is if the surface normals are flipped. You can check that using the 3d View's N-panel Mesh Display > Normals (pick the Face icon). |
30,648 | I'm trying to cut a hole in a mesh to create torpedo tubes on a spacecraft, and am running into a bit of trouble. I can get the hole cut out just fine using Knife Project, the problem, however, is that it completely screws with the shading of the mesh.
Here are the target and pattern meshes:
Here's a detail of the pattern that creates the shape of the outer tube:
and the target mesh:
Now, as I said I can cut the hole in the target mesh just fine. The problem is, I get this:
As you can see, cutting the hole in the mesh throws off the smoothing of the mesh, leading to some odd shading which is just unacceptable.
I'm trying to do this with as few extra polys as possible. | 2015/05/09 | [
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/30648",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/users/7576/"
] | Prior to cutting the new geometry the transitions are smooth because the shading is a function of the average face normals connected to each vertex. Because each of those adjacent face normals is different as you go around the surface of the object, the transition is relatively smooth. It's a cheap but effective trick.
Once you start cutting into a face, you get new geometry which has a number of vertices which are surrounded by faces which have the same face normals, therefore the shading is 'flat' on those sections. The transition from surrounding faces onto that flat area is also abrupt, and more prominent with transitions between quads and triangles.
Read Blender [docs about custom normals](http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Mont29/Foundation/Split_Vertex_Normals/Custom_Split_Normals_Manual)
### possible solutions
1. A way out of that is to carefully adjust the positions of the new vertices such that they follow the inferred curvature, this doesn't have to be exact. as long as you get away from the faces all having the same normals on that spot.
The dark area just below the blue arrow indicates the flow that your geometry would need to have (seen from the side of that edited face). If you can move the internal vertices to match the curvature you'll get reasonable smoothing.
2. or adjust the vertex normals to follow the curvature, but (May 2015) this is not exposed to the UI, but can be scripted. Manual changes might be overwritten by operations such as remove doubles / recalc normals.
3. [Normal Edit modifier](http://www.blender.org/manual/modifiers/modify/normal_edit.html). It takes a vertex group, and an object, and modifies the normals of the vertices in the vertex group to follow as if they eminated from the center of the object (radial) or directionally if you use a mesh object to help guide the normals.
Blender's *Proportional Editing* feature can help get nice curvature, but you'll have to experiment with it. | I ended up turning on Auto-Smooth and then making the transition between the sides of the hull and the bottom (specifically, the edge along the bottom of the poly in which the torpedo tube was cut) sharp, and that fixed it. It's not exactly how I wanted the contour to look, but it works.
 |
101,658 | If you have a system of independently radiating electrons/point-charges, the far field distribution of the EM waves can be approximated by the Fraunhoffer diffraction integral, or simply by the Fourier transform of the charge/electron density distribution.
When taking the Fourier transform of something, there is always a zero frequency value. What does this represent in terms of the EM wave example? Is it the average of the near field? Is it the average of the entire field summed in all space (this case it should never vary)? | 2014/03/03 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/101658",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/26819/"
] | I don't believe it means a great deal. The reason is that the the Fraunhofer approximation or other *farfield* approximations assume that the point where you're calculating the EM field is at a distance from the source that is **(*i*)** big compared with the extent of the source and **(*ii*)** big compared with the wavelength. These two assumptions are needed to make *e.g.* the stationary phase method approximation of the diffraction integral that one finds in Born and Wolf work.
Once you're down to momentums near $k=0$, these approximations are violated and you're either doing electrostatics or the Fourier transform methods are inadequate: you're now in the near field régime, where the evanescent field can be important. | I assume that by zero frequency, you mean zero momentum transfer. Zero momentum transfer corresponds to the $k=0$ value of the Fourier transform. The value of this part of the fourier transform is the integral of the scattering strength over all space. So you can think of this value as being the total amount of stuff that is there.
Another thing to keep in mind, though, is that if the thing doing the diffraction scatters light only very weakly, like if it is a single molecule, most of the light will go through undiffracted and so at zero momentum transfer you will see a spot whose intensity is just approximately the laser's intensity regardless of how much stuff is there (in the limit of weak scattering). |
65,476 | Given a 12 or 24 word seed with one one or more missing words what would be the difficulty of brute-forcing the missing words? E.g. for:
* one missing word
* two missing words
* three missing words
By difficulty I mean the number of permutations against a dictionary wordlist.
And the related question: how many words would have to be missing in order to make the attack reliably unfeasible? | 2017/12/16 | [
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/65476",
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com",
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/users/38324/"
] | I see a solution using [ZMQ](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/zmq.md).
[An example](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/dac2caa371a1c65faf34966c85dbafc30a0c640a/contrib/zmq/zmq_sub.py) of using it is also available on Python.
By enabling ZMQ you can process network updates (blocks, new transactions) and select most relevant events accordingly. Also, some libraries to deserialize bitcoin blocks and transactions could be useful. If you work with Python, you can use python-bitcoinlib. | Not sure if this will be efficient enough for you, but when walletnotify is called it can pass along the txid it was called with. Then whatever program is executed, from walletnotify can do something like a decoderawtransaction using that txid and see if the blockHash field is filled in, and confirmations>0.
You can also use some intermediary program to prevent the primary program from being called twice. For example in bitcoin.conf have walletnotify call to something like 'checkconfirmed.py' . checkonfirmed.py can do the decoderawtransaction opreration described above, and only if confirmed will it call out to "finalprogram.py". |
403,040 | Closing good questions which have useful answers and apply to many developers for being "opinion-based" or "too broad" is one of the huge problems I have with Stack Overflow in general. It **unnecessarily prevents developers from learning from each other in ways that are otherwise impossible--especially for isolated developers**.
Here's one potential example: "What are the pros and cons of Unity vs Unreal Engine?" Allowing this question to remain and be answered gleans expert knowledge from real, professional users of each and helps people make informed decisions. It helps the community immensely to gain these insights from real users! I've answered and asked many questions with some aspect of opinion in them, and I *want* the opinion-part included and answered, because it *helps* me and others and *combines experience*.
Many questions which are closed widely benefit the community. See this search result for Stack Overflow questions which are closed: <https://stackoverflow.com/search?q=closed%3A1>.
1. The [very first one](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/549/the-definitive-guide-to-form-based-website-authentication) has 5426 upvotes with 12 answers, the highest of which has 3816 upvotes, yet it is closed for needing to be
"more focused". I'm pretty sure a question with 5426 upvotes and and answer with 3816 is focused enough.
2. The [next one](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/14994391/thinking-in-angularjs-if-i-have-a-jquery-background): 4513 upvotes on the question, 7177 on the main answer, yet it is apparently also not "focused" enough.
3. [This one](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2189452/when-to-use-margin-vs-padding-in-css), closed for being "opinion-based" has 2407 upvotes on the question, with 1635 on the answer.
4. [This one](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2532729/daylight-saving-time-and-time-zone-best-practices) is requesting information on industry "best practices", from fellow developers, yet it "needs to be more focused"--this is an alias for "closed because it contains opinions."
All of these questions are closed when their upvotes very clearly yell that they *do* greatly benefit the community, and thousands more which *could* greatly benefit the community are closed before they even get the chance to begin gaining traction.
### I vote we allow "opinion-based" questions on the site which either:
1. expose constructive discussion on pros and cons of different techniques, as this helps us all as developers in our decision-making processes, OR:
2. expose industry best practices, as this helps us identify patterns which are more-widely-accepted, more-widely-understood by others, and more-likely to be successful, OR:
3. provides a useful list of tools or approaches to begin solving a problem, as this is immensely helpful as well
**I'd like to stop seeing good questions closed--especially those which are widely-upvoted and have a strong answer base, purely for being "opinion-based".**
Personally, I hypothesize that many people with closing power follow Stack Overflow's policy of closing opinion-based questions because they simply believe Stack Overflow got it right and they want to be helpful. The new generations of developers went to school (ALL of their college) *after Stack Overflow had already been founded and gained an industry-wide foothold as the place to ask software development questions.* This means that when this new generation got their jobs, they likely already knew that Stack Overflow was the industry standard, and believed that Stack Overflow is good, Stack Overflow does what should be done for sites like these because it is so successful, and Stack Overflow doesn't allow opinion-based questions, so that's how it should be. These new generations are trained from the beginning to see through a certain lens. Perhaps they learned to begin downvoting and closing questions which are "opinion-based" simply because that's what they see done all the time and that's what they see repeated they are "supposed" to do. They may not look as deeply as they should at questions and answers based on their merit, usefulness, correctness, and community contribution, and instead simply start scanning them to quickly identify if they might be "opinion-based". They then get a false sense of "helping" and accomplishment by closing these "opinion-based" questions. They think they are making the site "better" because this is what the main answerers want.
This is the status quo Stack Overflow has created. I challenge it because I think it is a mistake. | 2020/11/21 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/403040",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/4561887/"
] | Ultimately, in order for a question and answer format to work, questions [need to be able to be *answered*](https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/01/17/real-questions-have-answers/), not just discussed. That's the entire point of having a question and answer format.
That doesn't mean that all subjective questions are terrible and can't be asked. The linked article has some clear guidance on what we consider a constructive subjective question, but again, it must be possible to answer questions with facts and evidence (rather than just opinions and discussion).
Discussion forums may be interesting or entertaining for the participants, but if you're an outsider looking for specific information from the thread you usually have to wade through endless *me too!* comments and thread hijacking to find it.
With that said, note that Software Engineering SE does take somewhat more "subjective" questions than SO does, so you may want to check to see if your question is on-topic there.
Also, speculating on the motives of people who close questions is little more than an [ad hominem attack](https://fallacyinlogic.com/circumstantial-ad-hominem-definition-and-examples/); it [does not provide any relevant evidence in support of your conclusion](https://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/) even if true (which it isn't). | You know, when I joined here and started curating this site, I saw the opinion based close reason and thought the same thing as you. At the time, I knew what Stack Exchange's existed for, which was to provide a useful repository of knowledge.
The thing is, nobody wants to answer a one sentence question that reads,
>
> Should I use Unreal Engine, or Unity?
>
>
>
The question asker didn't put much effort into their question, and now the answerer has to spend at least an hour cooking up a good list of reasons.
You may argue that a new contributor will answer, but their answer may go something like,
>
> uNitY bEcaUSe yOLo
>
>
>
or something similarly crappy, then it will be downvoted, and far from providing useful knowledge, it will simply litter the site. You see, questions have potential to be useful, but these questions need to get ***good answers***. That's the thing.
Also, you've mentioned [this question](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/52732931/is-it-bad-practice-to-specify-an-array-size-using-a-variable-instead-of-define), which you wrote that was closed as opinion based.
Right off the bat, I can tell that it is asking if [something] is good or bad practice. We don't encourage questions like these, because 99% of questions that relate to "good or bad practice" give such ***obscure*** cases. Plus, think about it. A lot of people view questions even after they are answered. Who will go looking for a question that reads, "Is [this] a good practice?"? Remember, all questions need to have value for future readers as well, not just the answerer.
In any case, your question has a net score of around 0, and you actually got an answer with a good net score! It contributed (somewhat) to the repository of knowledge we try to build.
So, to conclude, we don't want to allow opinion based questions, as there's just no scope on Stack Overflow. A lot of them will go unanswered, and without answers, questions don't contribute anything.
I go by [Makoto's answer](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/274766/12708583) which I read 2 mins ago. I realised that on a site like Stack Overflow, there's just no place for opinion based questions. Experts don't want to answer them, they can be crappy, etc. |
403,040 | Closing good questions which have useful answers and apply to many developers for being "opinion-based" or "too broad" is one of the huge problems I have with Stack Overflow in general. It **unnecessarily prevents developers from learning from each other in ways that are otherwise impossible--especially for isolated developers**.
Here's one potential example: "What are the pros and cons of Unity vs Unreal Engine?" Allowing this question to remain and be answered gleans expert knowledge from real, professional users of each and helps people make informed decisions. It helps the community immensely to gain these insights from real users! I've answered and asked many questions with some aspect of opinion in them, and I *want* the opinion-part included and answered, because it *helps* me and others and *combines experience*.
Many questions which are closed widely benefit the community. See this search result for Stack Overflow questions which are closed: <https://stackoverflow.com/search?q=closed%3A1>.
1. The [very first one](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/549/the-definitive-guide-to-form-based-website-authentication) has 5426 upvotes with 12 answers, the highest of which has 3816 upvotes, yet it is closed for needing to be
"more focused". I'm pretty sure a question with 5426 upvotes and and answer with 3816 is focused enough.
2. The [next one](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/14994391/thinking-in-angularjs-if-i-have-a-jquery-background): 4513 upvotes on the question, 7177 on the main answer, yet it is apparently also not "focused" enough.
3. [This one](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2189452/when-to-use-margin-vs-padding-in-css), closed for being "opinion-based" has 2407 upvotes on the question, with 1635 on the answer.
4. [This one](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2532729/daylight-saving-time-and-time-zone-best-practices) is requesting information on industry "best practices", from fellow developers, yet it "needs to be more focused"--this is an alias for "closed because it contains opinions."
All of these questions are closed when their upvotes very clearly yell that they *do* greatly benefit the community, and thousands more which *could* greatly benefit the community are closed before they even get the chance to begin gaining traction.
### I vote we allow "opinion-based" questions on the site which either:
1. expose constructive discussion on pros and cons of different techniques, as this helps us all as developers in our decision-making processes, OR:
2. expose industry best practices, as this helps us identify patterns which are more-widely-accepted, more-widely-understood by others, and more-likely to be successful, OR:
3. provides a useful list of tools or approaches to begin solving a problem, as this is immensely helpful as well
**I'd like to stop seeing good questions closed--especially those which are widely-upvoted and have a strong answer base, purely for being "opinion-based".**
Personally, I hypothesize that many people with closing power follow Stack Overflow's policy of closing opinion-based questions because they simply believe Stack Overflow got it right and they want to be helpful. The new generations of developers went to school (ALL of their college) *after Stack Overflow had already been founded and gained an industry-wide foothold as the place to ask software development questions.* This means that when this new generation got their jobs, they likely already knew that Stack Overflow was the industry standard, and believed that Stack Overflow is good, Stack Overflow does what should be done for sites like these because it is so successful, and Stack Overflow doesn't allow opinion-based questions, so that's how it should be. These new generations are trained from the beginning to see through a certain lens. Perhaps they learned to begin downvoting and closing questions which are "opinion-based" simply because that's what they see done all the time and that's what they see repeated they are "supposed" to do. They may not look as deeply as they should at questions and answers based on their merit, usefulness, correctness, and community contribution, and instead simply start scanning them to quickly identify if they might be "opinion-based". They then get a false sense of "helping" and accomplishment by closing these "opinion-based" questions. They think they are making the site "better" because this is what the main answerers want.
This is the status quo Stack Overflow has created. I challenge it because I think it is a mistake. | 2020/11/21 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/403040",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/4561887/"
] | Well, such 'questions' fall into two categories:
1. Grossly underspecified requirements that, if any answer was possible, would be as close to guesses as anything else,(99.9%).
2. Requirement specs that ask, essentially, for a system design to be done for free, (0.1%).
So, no and no. | You know, when I joined here and started curating this site, I saw the opinion based close reason and thought the same thing as you. At the time, I knew what Stack Exchange's existed for, which was to provide a useful repository of knowledge.
The thing is, nobody wants to answer a one sentence question that reads,
>
> Should I use Unreal Engine, or Unity?
>
>
>
The question asker didn't put much effort into their question, and now the answerer has to spend at least an hour cooking up a good list of reasons.
You may argue that a new contributor will answer, but their answer may go something like,
>
> uNitY bEcaUSe yOLo
>
>
>
or something similarly crappy, then it will be downvoted, and far from providing useful knowledge, it will simply litter the site. You see, questions have potential to be useful, but these questions need to get ***good answers***. That's the thing.
Also, you've mentioned [this question](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/52732931/is-it-bad-practice-to-specify-an-array-size-using-a-variable-instead-of-define), which you wrote that was closed as opinion based.
Right off the bat, I can tell that it is asking if [something] is good or bad practice. We don't encourage questions like these, because 99% of questions that relate to "good or bad practice" give such ***obscure*** cases. Plus, think about it. A lot of people view questions even after they are answered. Who will go looking for a question that reads, "Is [this] a good practice?"? Remember, all questions need to have value for future readers as well, not just the answerer.
In any case, your question has a net score of around 0, and you actually got an answer with a good net score! It contributed (somewhat) to the repository of knowledge we try to build.
So, to conclude, we don't want to allow opinion based questions, as there's just no scope on Stack Overflow. A lot of them will go unanswered, and without answers, questions don't contribute anything.
I go by [Makoto's answer](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/274766/12708583) which I read 2 mins ago. I realised that on a site like Stack Overflow, there's just no place for opinion based questions. Experts don't want to answer them, they can be crappy, etc. |
58,706 | What is the most efficient symmetrical airfoil shape to make for a covering for a round upright bar that measures 40mm outside diameter?
The speed of travel will be 25Kph and I also need a shape to travel at 30Kph. I assume these will be different to some extent? | 2019/01/04 | [
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/58706",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/users/36420/"
] | Truncation (chopping off the rear portion of the airfoil) does not reduce drag, although reducing up to 20% of the chord does not significantly increase it. As Peter says, "trade off between more separation and more wetted surface area. Hence "boat tail" bullets.
The 3:1 ratio of chord to width is apparently a bike racing specification. Nothing new here,
the full airfoil produces the lowest drag. Hence the cone they put on the back of the Space Shuttle while it was piggybacked on its 747.
What they did to meet the 3:1 specification was to truncate 66% of a 9 to 1 airfoil.
This produces the lowest drag within the specification.
The Kamm tail shape was designed for automobiles, providing a weight savings (as racers constantly accelerate and deccelerate) and to make the vehicle a little shorter, which can help changing lanes in a crowd. Two different applications. But a fully symmetrical airfoil, such as the struts of a Cessna 172 will do the job.
For an aircraft strut, if strength allows, make it as long and thin as possible until drag values begin to rise. 9 to 1 rings a bell from boat hull design, and would be a good place to start. | This site discusses tube width and length ratios for least drag
<https://bikerumor.com/2011/04/14/scott-f01l-aka-f01-finally-released-to-the-public/>
<https://www.bikerumor.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Airflow-tubing-visual.png>
>
> Tyler just had a chance to speak directly with Scott regarding the final profile, and reported back that they found that a 9:1 ratio profile with a truncated tail was indeed the fastest, lightest, and most stiff. According to Scott, Scott Aero Science engineers began with various tubing shapes first in CFdesign programs to identify shapes before producing prototypes that would then be validated in the wind tunnel. Over 100 hours of wind tunnel validation time was invested solely in the F01 project using Drag2Zero facilities in Mercedes-Benz Grand Prix Wind Tunnel. Starting with raw tubes, shapes were identified and built into complete test mules, and then analyzed against current competitor designs. Over 60 tube shapes were tested in order to identify the optimum “cut ratio”. The engineers selected tube shapes that are wider than normal NACA aero tubes. They were designed with a “leading edge” and a ratio of height to width that complies with UCI regulations, while still maintaining the lowest air disturbance vis-àvis both individual tubes and the overall frame structure. The ratios of the aggregate tubes are between 6:1 and 12:1 resulting in a 9:1 average ratio, well within the UCI limits and actually going the opposite direction in relation to other manufacturers in this regard. The result is a virtual tube shape, a tube that is not NACA shaped but a truncated cross section, which acts in the same way. Each and every tube in the frameset is analyzed for cut position along the “chord”, or length of the tube profile. Most tubes are cut retaining between 25-35% of the overall chord length. This science of tube shape is a contrast to the Kamm tail designs that emerged 80 years ago in the auto industry in that we use the leading edge of the tube rather than simply cutting the trailing edge like some competitors practice.
>
>
>
Here's another site discussing the same shape.
<https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/inside_trek/kammtail_virtual_foil/> |
73,165 | Is it possible at all?
I want to make a device to explore the files inside USB flash drive and do some jobs (like copy them to another flash drive fast or renaming the files or folders)
I googled a lot but I couldn't find any answer.
Several modules with different usages but none of them can transfer files to each other on high speed.
Can I use any kind of Raspberry to do this job very fast? | 2017/09/30 | [
"https://raspberrypi.stackexchange.com/questions/73165",
"https://raspberrypi.stackexchange.com",
"https://raspberrypi.stackexchange.com/users/74068/"
] | You could use [MQTT](http://mqtt.org/) and use publisher(server) and subscribers(clients). [core-electronics.com.au](https://core-electronics.com.au/tutorials/getting-started-with-home-automation-using-mqtt.html) have a very good tutorial and video there also. On the publisher you could have a Realtime clock and periodically send the time out, then a "play video" command to start at a given time ie 2 seconds away to make sure they all received the command before video starts. | To do this simultaneously you probably need to assume each Pi has a common time reference. If they are networked one can assume that they may all be synced to network time.
Rather than propagating a do now command which will be subject to random network delays I would send a do at time X command, where X is some time in the future (say 60 seconds). E.g. do at 1.00 p.m. Each Pi could then do a busy spin waiting on that time to arrive to execute the command. That method should eliminate random network delays. |
211 | Is there a GIS standard to display transportation specific information in GIS databases.
The information I'm interested in are:
* Road Directionality
* Center turning lanes
* Ramps / Bridges / Over or under passes / culverts / merge lanes
* grade / crown / ditch
* Traffic Signals and timing
* allowable turning movements, u turns / left / right / through turns, penalties or bonuses(Time)
As we're all aware, transportation data is very general and includes a lot of fields. The only resource that address this are [GIS-T book by Milelr](http://www.amazon.ca/Geographic-Information-Systems-Transportation-Applications/dp/0195123948/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1279894407&sr=8-1), [ESRI's designing transportation databases book](http://www.amazon.ca/Designing-Geodatabases-Transportation-Allison-Butler/dp/158948164X/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1279894438&sr=1-1-fkmr0), and a few papers by [Michael Goodchild](http://www.urisa.org/hall/goodchild)
Some Software like TransCAD, Emme 2/3, and ArcGIS have their own ways of representing network topology. It'll be interesting if there was a standard that all software companies can adhere too | 2010/07/23 | [
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/211",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/users/127/"
] | Maybe the [INSPIRE data specification for transport networks](http://inspire.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/Data_Specifications/INSPIRE_DataSpecification_TN_v3.1.pdf) could be usefull?
It uses a generic model of networks presented in [this document](http://inspire.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/Data_Specifications/D2.5_v3_3.pdf), part 9.9.3. | It seems like [OSM Binary format](http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Binary_Format) might come close. It's not really a "standard" in the formal sense however.
I wonder if an extension to KML could efficiently store road metadata. It seems like it could be easily inserted into the current KML schema. |
137,902 | I created a device, based on an Arduino Uno, which runs on 6 rechargeable NiMH batteries. Now I would like to add a check, if the batteries have enough power left, to warn with a signal when the batteries needs recharging.
As I understand, the voltage of the batteries will slowly go down, until they drop under the minimum required level.
**How is a battery load level check implemented? What kind of elements do I need?** | 2014/11/10 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/137902",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/56669/"
] | The most accurate way to know how much energy is left in a battery is to monitor the voltage, current, and temperature over time, then use knowledge of that particular chemistry to estimate remaining energy. There are ICs which do parts of this, sometimes called battery *fuel guage* ICs. Of course you can do the same thing with a microcontroller, but it takes constant A/D readings and the algorithm can be complicated, depending on how accurate you want to be.
A much simpler but less accurate way is to just monitor voltage. NiMH cells start at about 1.4 to 1.5 V right after being charged, quickly drop to 1.2 or so, go down only slowly over most of the discharge cycle, then drop quickly at the end of charge. Usually you stop discharging at 900 mV or so. Letting the voltage of any cell get less than that can risk permanent damage.
You could simply pick a voltage around 1.0 to 1.1 V and decide to warn the user when the battery gets that low, then go dead at 900 mV. The best levels depend on your load.
Of course you need to consult the datasheet for whatever particular batteries you are using. The manufacturer will give you discharge plots at various currents, tell you how low you can go without damage, etc. As always **read the datasheet**. | You should use a voltage divider using 2 resistors to decrease the voltage to the range that mcu can meager, and connect the output to the ABC pin of mcu. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.