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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
193,647 | In *The Colour of Magic*, we learn that:
>
> "Can't tell you. Don't really want to talk about it. But frankly," he
> sighed , "no spells are much good. It takes three months to commit
> even a simple one to memory, and then once you’ve used it, pow it's
> gone. that's what's so stupid about the whole magic thing, You know.
> You spend twenty years learning the spell that makes nude virgins
> appear in your bedroom, and then you're so poisoned by quicksilver
> fumes and half-blind from reading old grimoires that you can't
> remember what happens next."
>
>
>
So clearly: a spell is something you need to create, and you can use but once. And it's something utterly useless as a consequence.
In *Equal Rites*, Esk is able to do MANY spells without creating any of them. And afterwards, it seems that *The Colour of Magic* description of how magic works never holds...
Does Rincewind lie? Is there an explanation I missed out? | 2018/08/27 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/193647",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/84241/"
] | Pratchett himself always claimed that all consistencies in his work were accidental so there almost certainly is an inconsistency. That's the first point.
Secondly Rincewind is a special case, he has a very nasty spell in his head that chases other spells away so what he says is probably his exact experience of trying to learn other magicks.
Thirdly Esk is a special case as well, she's a female wizard and many of the usual rules of magic do not seem to apply to her. Simon's even worse.
There also seems to be major difference between Magic and Spells in the Discworld setting. Spells as formalised rituals are used far less than Magic; raw power applied to problems using a rough and ready, brute strength and massive ignorance approach. | A strong thread throughout the Discworld books is the idea that *what people believe* causes *what actually is real on the Discworld* (and especially that our fiction drives the Disc's reality), and its close relative idea that *[narrative causality](https://wiki.lspace.org/mediawiki/Narrative_Causality) is a real force* and that *events on the Discworld actually do conspire to make stories true*. Discworld is like a mirror that takes themes and tropes from our fiction and shows them, distorted and changed around, in a new way.
Given these basic facts, which are pretty fundamental to the nature of reality on the Discworld, and the fact that *there are a lot stories that have different kinds of magic that work in different ways*, it seems pretty unremarkable that there are multiple different ways for magic to work on Discworld. It wouldn't be able to mirror our fiction effectively if it didn't have room for all of those ideas. |
193,647 | In *The Colour of Magic*, we learn that:
>
> "Can't tell you. Don't really want to talk about it. But frankly," he
> sighed , "no spells are much good. It takes three months to commit
> even a simple one to memory, and then once you’ve used it, pow it's
> gone. that's what's so stupid about the whole magic thing, You know.
> You spend twenty years learning the spell that makes nude virgins
> appear in your bedroom, and then you're so poisoned by quicksilver
> fumes and half-blind from reading old grimoires that you can't
> remember what happens next."
>
>
>
So clearly: a spell is something you need to create, and you can use but once. And it's something utterly useless as a consequence.
In *Equal Rites*, Esk is able to do MANY spells without creating any of them. And afterwards, it seems that *The Colour of Magic* description of how magic works never holds...
Does Rincewind lie? Is there an explanation I missed out? | 2018/08/27 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/193647",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/84241/"
] | A strong thread throughout the Discworld books is the idea that *what people believe* causes *what actually is real on the Discworld* (and especially that our fiction drives the Disc's reality), and its close relative idea that *[narrative causality](https://wiki.lspace.org/mediawiki/Narrative_Causality) is a real force* and that *events on the Discworld actually do conspire to make stories true*. Discworld is like a mirror that takes themes and tropes from our fiction and shows them, distorted and changed around, in a new way.
Given these basic facts, which are pretty fundamental to the nature of reality on the Discworld, and the fact that *there are a lot stories that have different kinds of magic that work in different ways*, it seems pretty unremarkable that there are multiple different ways for magic to work on Discworld. It wouldn't be able to mirror our fiction effectively if it didn't have room for all of those ideas. | My interpretation is that in "The Colour of Magic" you don't have to create the spell to use it. You have to "capture" it (or channel it, if you prefer) and that spells have an existence beyond the manifestation of their effect.
It would seem that pronouncing a spell lets it free in the world allowing it to influence it as it is its nature. Powerful spells are often portrayed as having a will of their own in Pratchett's work and spells as a category are often referred to as "unstable" and "dangerous", which could be interpreted as a description of their temper instead of a description of their effects.
By that line of thought it could be that you could "acquire" a spell either by finding it through inspiration or by reading it or by walking a particularly bad patch of wild magic. You don't quite need to "create" it as spells can have an existence of its own (but of course it could be possible, after they have to come from *somewhere*).
Esk is a skilled magician. As such it would make sense for her to be able to recognize spells almost intuitively. Of course such a thing is rare but on occasions spells (and magic in general) have a way of being attracted to certain individuals, just like Rincewind was able to catalyze and attract magic when he was exposed to it or other magicians at times are shown using magic almost reflexively without actually preparing spells. Esk would probably be able to channel such forces while Rincewind actively tries not to for everyone's sake (but mostly his sake).
Also there was Sir Pratchett's utter disregard towards the limitations of consistency when he had a fun idea. |
193,647 | In *The Colour of Magic*, we learn that:
>
> "Can't tell you. Don't really want to talk about it. But frankly," he
> sighed , "no spells are much good. It takes three months to commit
> even a simple one to memory, and then once you’ve used it, pow it's
> gone. that's what's so stupid about the whole magic thing, You know.
> You spend twenty years learning the spell that makes nude virgins
> appear in your bedroom, and then you're so poisoned by quicksilver
> fumes and half-blind from reading old grimoires that you can't
> remember what happens next."
>
>
>
So clearly: a spell is something you need to create, and you can use but once. And it's something utterly useless as a consequence.
In *Equal Rites*, Esk is able to do MANY spells without creating any of them. And afterwards, it seems that *The Colour of Magic* description of how magic works never holds...
Does Rincewind lie? Is there an explanation I missed out? | 2018/08/27 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/193647",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/84241/"
] | >
> [Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SufficientlyAnalyzedMagic)
>
>
>
If you try to make sense of it, it stops being magic.
If that is not a satisfactory explanation for you, remember that on the disc, nothing is constant for too long. Even the stars tend to move and form new constellations, much to the chagrin of astrologers.
Last but not least, we are getting that information from secondhand sources and hearsay. Take the Rite of AshkEnte, for example. It only takes a simple incantation and two cc's of mouse blood, but if you ask the faculty for instructions they will include candles, cauldrons, a circle of eight and more paraphernalia. If you don't know better you may be fooled by wizards' love for power displays and drama. | My interpretation is that in "The Colour of Magic" you don't have to create the spell to use it. You have to "capture" it (or channel it, if you prefer) and that spells have an existence beyond the manifestation of their effect.
It would seem that pronouncing a spell lets it free in the world allowing it to influence it as it is its nature. Powerful spells are often portrayed as having a will of their own in Pratchett's work and spells as a category are often referred to as "unstable" and "dangerous", which could be interpreted as a description of their temper instead of a description of their effects.
By that line of thought it could be that you could "acquire" a spell either by finding it through inspiration or by reading it or by walking a particularly bad patch of wild magic. You don't quite need to "create" it as spells can have an existence of its own (but of course it could be possible, after they have to come from *somewhere*).
Esk is a skilled magician. As such it would make sense for her to be able to recognize spells almost intuitively. Of course such a thing is rare but on occasions spells (and magic in general) have a way of being attracted to certain individuals, just like Rincewind was able to catalyze and attract magic when he was exposed to it or other magicians at times are shown using magic almost reflexively without actually preparing spells. Esk would probably be able to channel such forces while Rincewind actively tries not to for everyone's sake (but mostly his sake).
Also there was Sir Pratchett's utter disregard towards the limitations of consistency when he had a fun idea. |
193,647 | In *The Colour of Magic*, we learn that:
>
> "Can't tell you. Don't really want to talk about it. But frankly," he
> sighed , "no spells are much good. It takes three months to commit
> even a simple one to memory, and then once you’ve used it, pow it's
> gone. that's what's so stupid about the whole magic thing, You know.
> You spend twenty years learning the spell that makes nude virgins
> appear in your bedroom, and then you're so poisoned by quicksilver
> fumes and half-blind from reading old grimoires that you can't
> remember what happens next."
>
>
>
So clearly: a spell is something you need to create, and you can use but once. And it's something utterly useless as a consequence.
In *Equal Rites*, Esk is able to do MANY spells without creating any of them. And afterwards, it seems that *The Colour of Magic* description of how magic works never holds...
Does Rincewind lie? Is there an explanation I missed out? | 2018/08/27 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/193647",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/84241/"
] | Pratchett himself always claimed that all consistencies in his work were accidental so there almost certainly is an inconsistency. That's the first point.
Secondly Rincewind is a special case, he has a very nasty spell in his head that chases other spells away so what he says is probably his exact experience of trying to learn other magicks.
Thirdly Esk is a special case as well, she's a female wizard and many of the usual rules of magic do not seem to apply to her. Simon's even worse.
There also seems to be major difference between Magic and Spells in the Discworld setting. Spells as formalised rituals are used far less than Magic; raw power applied to problems using a rough and ready, brute strength and massive ignorance approach. | >
> [Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SufficientlyAnalyzedMagic)
>
>
>
If you try to make sense of it, it stops being magic.
If that is not a satisfactory explanation for you, remember that on the disc, nothing is constant for too long. Even the stars tend to move and form new constellations, much to the chagrin of astrologers.
Last but not least, we are getting that information from secondhand sources and hearsay. Take the Rite of AshkEnte, for example. It only takes a simple incantation and two cc's of mouse blood, but if you ask the faculty for instructions they will include candles, cauldrons, a circle of eight and more paraphernalia. If you don't know better you may be fooled by wizards' love for power displays and drama. |
193,647 | In *The Colour of Magic*, we learn that:
>
> "Can't tell you. Don't really want to talk about it. But frankly," he
> sighed , "no spells are much good. It takes three months to commit
> even a simple one to memory, and then once you’ve used it, pow it's
> gone. that's what's so stupid about the whole magic thing, You know.
> You spend twenty years learning the spell that makes nude virgins
> appear in your bedroom, and then you're so poisoned by quicksilver
> fumes and half-blind from reading old grimoires that you can't
> remember what happens next."
>
>
>
So clearly: a spell is something you need to create, and you can use but once. And it's something utterly useless as a consequence.
In *Equal Rites*, Esk is able to do MANY spells without creating any of them. And afterwards, it seems that *The Colour of Magic* description of how magic works never holds...
Does Rincewind lie? Is there an explanation I missed out? | 2018/08/27 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/193647",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/84241/"
] | >
> [Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SufficientlyAnalyzedMagic)
>
>
>
If you try to make sense of it, it stops being magic.
If that is not a satisfactory explanation for you, remember that on the disc, nothing is constant for too long. Even the stars tend to move and form new constellations, much to the chagrin of astrologers.
Last but not least, we are getting that information from secondhand sources and hearsay. Take the Rite of AshkEnte, for example. It only takes a simple incantation and two cc's of mouse blood, but if you ask the faculty for instructions they will include candles, cauldrons, a circle of eight and more paraphernalia. If you don't know better you may be fooled by wizards' love for power displays and drama. | A strong thread throughout the Discworld books is the idea that *what people believe* causes *what actually is real on the Discworld* (and especially that our fiction drives the Disc's reality), and its close relative idea that *[narrative causality](https://wiki.lspace.org/mediawiki/Narrative_Causality) is a real force* and that *events on the Discworld actually do conspire to make stories true*. Discworld is like a mirror that takes themes and tropes from our fiction and shows them, distorted and changed around, in a new way.
Given these basic facts, which are pretty fundamental to the nature of reality on the Discworld, and the fact that *there are a lot stories that have different kinds of magic that work in different ways*, it seems pretty unremarkable that there are multiple different ways for magic to work on Discworld. It wouldn't be able to mirror our fiction effectively if it didn't have room for all of those ideas. |
165,553 | I see the Philips Hue and LIFX led bulb can generate the millions of colors, I can find .
can anyone tell me how this light works to generate millions of colors, what is the yellow LED light and white LED light, are they all the RGB led lights ? is each LED individually controlled by the circuit, and use all of them to make a color combination and is each LED controlled by simply opening/closing or dimming in different levels.
Thank you | 2015/04/19 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/165553",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/9927/"
] | Imagine you have three LEDs (red/green/blue "RGB").
Each LED primarily stimulates a corresponding type of "cone" in the human eye as described [here](http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/vision/colcon.html#c1).
So a perceived color is created by a combination of the intensities from the three LEDs. If we include intensity of color as a discrete color, then for 1,000,000 colors we would need log2(10^6)/3 bits per color or about 7 bits per 'color'.
Most likely they are using 8 bits PWM intensity per color (about 0.4% steps in intensity), giving 16,777,216 or 16 million 'colors'. In reality you are not going to be able to visually distinguish anything like that many, and many of the 'colors' are just different intensities of a color that is visually the same.
White LEDs look yellow when not on- also some sources use a yellow component to the light to make the color appearance better for sensitive things like flesh tones and food (so they're [RGBY](http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia/term/61725/rgby) rather than RGB). | >
> can anyone tell me how this light works to generate millions of colors, what is the yellow LED light and white LED light, are they all the RGB led lights ?
>
>
>
The white LEDs are individual red, green, or blue LEDs as indicated by their silkscreen. The yellow LEDs are white LEDs; the yellow part of the LED is a phosphorescent material that absorbs high-energy photons (e.g. blue light) and emits lower-energy photons (e.g. orange-yellow light).
>
> is each LED individually controlled by the circuit, and use all of them to make a color combination and is each LED controlled by simply opening/closing or dimming in different levels.
>
>
>
It is very common to use [PWM dimming](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulse-width_modulation#Power_delivery) in order to have fine control of a LEDs output; I have no proof that it is used here but that is very likely the case. |
165,553 | I see the Philips Hue and LIFX led bulb can generate the millions of colors, I can find .
can anyone tell me how this light works to generate millions of colors, what is the yellow LED light and white LED light, are they all the RGB led lights ? is each LED individually controlled by the circuit, and use all of them to make a color combination and is each LED controlled by simply opening/closing or dimming in different levels.
Thank you | 2015/04/19 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/165553",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/9927/"
] | >
> can anyone tell me how this light works to generate millions of colors, what is the yellow LED light and white LED light, are they all the RGB led lights ?
>
>
>
The white LEDs are individual red, green, or blue LEDs as indicated by their silkscreen. The yellow LEDs are white LEDs; the yellow part of the LED is a phosphorescent material that absorbs high-energy photons (e.g. blue light) and emits lower-energy photons (e.g. orange-yellow light).
>
> is each LED individually controlled by the circuit, and use all of them to make a color combination and is each LED controlled by simply opening/closing or dimming in different levels.
>
>
>
It is very common to use [PWM dimming](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulse-width_modulation#Power_delivery) in order to have fine control of a LEDs output; I have no proof that it is used here but that is very likely the case. | The connector in the center has four leads labelled "R", "G", "B" and "W".
So it's safe to assume that all red LEDs controlled by one signal (they work in unison). Same for the blue, green and white LED groups.
The traces seem to indicate that the LEDs for each color are connected in series.
Dimming LEDs by PWM is patented in some countries, so the dimming for each color could be achieved by by a very similar method, which is however sufficiently different from patent lawyer's perspective. Analog dimming is, most likely, not used as it would produce more heat in the driving electronics (and make them more complex; the controller circuit is digital anyway). |
165,553 | I see the Philips Hue and LIFX led bulb can generate the millions of colors, I can find .
can anyone tell me how this light works to generate millions of colors, what is the yellow LED light and white LED light, are they all the RGB led lights ? is each LED individually controlled by the circuit, and use all of them to make a color combination and is each LED controlled by simply opening/closing or dimming in different levels.
Thank you | 2015/04/19 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/165553",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/9927/"
] | Imagine you have three LEDs (red/green/blue "RGB").
Each LED primarily stimulates a corresponding type of "cone" in the human eye as described [here](http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/vision/colcon.html#c1).
So a perceived color is created by a combination of the intensities from the three LEDs. If we include intensity of color as a discrete color, then for 1,000,000 colors we would need log2(10^6)/3 bits per color or about 7 bits per 'color'.
Most likely they are using 8 bits PWM intensity per color (about 0.4% steps in intensity), giving 16,777,216 or 16 million 'colors'. In reality you are not going to be able to visually distinguish anything like that many, and many of the 'colors' are just different intensities of a color that is visually the same.
White LEDs look yellow when not on- also some sources use a yellow component to the light to make the color appearance better for sensitive things like flesh tones and food (so they're [RGBY](http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia/term/61725/rgby) rather than RGB). | The connector in the center has four leads labelled "R", "G", "B" and "W".
So it's safe to assume that all red LEDs controlled by one signal (they work in unison). Same for the blue, green and white LED groups.
The traces seem to indicate that the LEDs for each color are connected in series.
Dimming LEDs by PWM is patented in some countries, so the dimming for each color could be achieved by by a very similar method, which is however sufficiently different from patent lawyer's perspective. Analog dimming is, most likely, not used as it would produce more heat in the driving electronics (and make them more complex; the controller circuit is digital anyway). |
9,776 | There was a poem on the 2015 AP English Literature and Composition exam multiple choice section that I only barely remember. The topic was along the lines of "sleep is as great an equalizer as death" and featured a line like "even the great emperor ... laid his head down to rest."
Does anyone know the title of the poem? | 2019/04/13 | [
"https://literature.stackexchange.com/questions/9776",
"https://literature.stackexchange.com",
"https://literature.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | In addition to the good points that @jo1storm made, I'll add a few thoughts.
I think that the largest point is that Francisco d'Anconia was following the morality of the day to the hilt. He had the following discussion with James Taggart about the mines:
>
> "I'm entitled to an explanation! You owe your stockholders an account of the whole disgraceful affair! Why did you pick a worthless mine? Why did you waste all those millions? What sort of rotten swindle was it?"
>
> Francisco stood looking at him in polite astonishment. "Why, James," he said, "I thought you would approve of it."
>
> "Approve?!"
>
> "I thought you would consider the San Sebastian Mines as the practical realization of an ideal of the highest moral order. Remembering that you and I have disagreed so often in the past, **I thought you would be gratified to see me acting in accordance with your principles.**"
>
> "What are you talking about?"
>
> Francisco shook his head regretfully. "I don't know why you should call my behavior rotten. **I thought you would recognize it as an honest effort to practice what the whole world is preaching.** Doesn't everyone believe that it is evil to be selfish? I was totally selfless in regard to the San Sebastian project. Isn't it evil to pursue a personal interest? I had no personal interest in it whatever. Isn't it evil to work for a profit? I did not work for a profit - I took a loss. Doesn't everyone agree that the purpose and justification of an industrial enterprise are not production, but the livelihood of its employees? The San Sebastian Mines were the most eminently successful venture in industrial history: they produced no copper, but they provided a livelihood for thousands of men who could not have achieved in a lifetime, the equivalent of what they got for one day's work, which they could not do. Isn't it generally agreed that an owner is a parasite and an exploiter, that it is the employees who do all the work and make the product possible? I did not exploit anyone. I did not burden the San Sebastian Mines with my useless presence; I left them in the hands of the men who count. I did not pass judgment on the value of that property. I turned it over to a mining specialist. He was not a very good specialist, but he needed a job very badly. Isn't it generally conceded that when you hire a man for a job, it is his need that counts, not his ability? Doesn't everyone believe that in order to get the goods, all you have to do is need them? **I have carried out every moral precept of our age.** I expected gratitude and a citation of honor. I do not understand why I am being damned."
>
>
>
There you have it: the San Sebastian Mines was one more example of the outcome of following the Looter morality literally.
Earlier, when he discussed the situation with Dagny, he told her that
>
> "... your brother James and his friends knew nothing about the copper-mining industry. They knew nothing about making money. They did not consider it necessary to learn. They considered knowledge superfluous and judgment inessential... They thought it was safe to ride on my brain, because they assumed that the goal of my journey was wealth. All their calculations rested on the premise that I wanted to make money. What if I didn't?"
>
> "If you didn't, what did you want?"
>
> "They never asked me that. Not to inquire about my aims, motives or desires is an essential part of their theory."
>
>
>
He also compared it to "tearing the lid off hell and letting men see it."
He also pointed out that it really didn't make a difference whether he did the whole thing on purpose or through neglect or stupidity - the same thing was missing no matter what (his mind).
It's also important to recall what prompted the investments in the first place:
>
> When Francisco d'Anconia suddenly bought miles of bare mountains in Mexico, news leaked out that he had discovered vast deposits of copper. **He made no effort to sell stock in his venture; the stock was begged out of his hand**, and he merely chose those whom he wished to favor from among the applicants.
>
>
>
At the Taggart Transcontinental board meetings to discuss their proposed line to Mexico,
>
> They spoke about the future importance of the trade with Mexico, about the rich stream of freight, about the large revenues assured to the exclusive carrier of an inexhaustible supply of copper. They proved it by citing Francisco d'Anconia's past achievements. **They didn't mention any mineralogical facts about the San Sebastian Mines.** Few were available; the information which d'Anconia had released were not very specific; **but they did not seem to need facts.**
>
>
>
There you have it: while he was (by his own admission) deliberately trying to wipe out his American stockholders and the Mexican planners, he did so by following their morality to the letter. As for the Taggart Transcontinental line and the investments from people like James Taggart, they did that of their own accord without bothering to find out anything concrete about the mines themselves or why Francisco was investing in them in the first place. The secondary consequences (e.g. the destruction of the Phoenix-Durango Railroad) were instigated by James Taggart. (Granted, it was the direct result of their losses in the San Sebastian Mines, but it was still James Taggart who did it).
So, there was no contradictions. Everything was done in accord with the Looters' code, and the consequences were the direct result of that fact. | >
> Given that part of the point of the Strike in the first place was to
> prove that looter governments would eventually collapse when they were
> deprived of people to enable them, was the fact that Francisco
> d'Anconia (and, for that fact, Ragnar Danneskjöld) was deliberately
> destroying the economy contrary to that goal?
>
>
>
There are two answers to that question: yes and no. Which answer you accept depends whether you accept either of two connected premises Ayn Rand 'pushed' in the book. If you don't accept them, then the answer is "Yes, and they are very hypocritical about it". If you accept one of them, the answer is "No, it makes perfect sense, they were just trying to save the thousands of innocent people by hastening the collapse."
The first idea can be summed as "If there is not the best person for the job doing it (or at least the person in top ten), the job wouldn't get done at all and the whole system will grind to a halt. And everybody knows who the best person for the job is." and that's the whole idea behind The Strike. The thing to know entertaining the idea here is that Rand never worked in a business or a corporation. She never did any scientific research either. As a rule (with certain exceptions) writing is a solitary profession. Business and scientific research are not. Businesses and scientific research are built on the work and knowledge of many individuals.
I'll get back to this idea later. The idea leads to her second idea.
The second idea is so called "[impotence of evil](http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/evil.html)" . Basically, the idea that evil people can create anything useful and prosper in the long term without the good guys helping them was absolutely unbelievable to Rand. It is shown in the book itself with Galt fixing the machine used to torture him. The idea is basically "the only thing evil needs to win is for the good men to do nothing to prevent it" with addition of "or to keep doing their jobs for the wrong reasons". Because evil can't create, it cannot even maintain what greater ("good") people created, not even to further its goals. It can only destroy.
Short answer: the heroes believe and the narrative that is pushed is: the world is doomed anyway, everything is going downhill quickly and the heroes want to hasten that doom so they can start the rebuilding process sooner. Basically, let the system burn down completely before rebuilding it from the ashes. Make it from 0 instead of fixing the existing one. Which is example of [broken window fallacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window), because it is easier to peel a few spuds off the current system than destroy and rebuild. If that is the case, then the answer is "No, destroying shipments wasn't contrary to their goals". And why didn't they use them and repurposed them for something else? Because that would have made them moochers and looters. The more interesting example is Ellis Wyat burning his oil fields, which demonstrates lack of understanding of [negative externalities](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality#Negative) and would be an example of ecological terrorism.
Long answer:
In real world, sometimes people are doing jobs they are not perfect for. In fact, they sometimes are assigned tasks they are ill suited for. And they do them anyway, to the standard lower than what an expert for the job would have done, sometimes much lower, but (and this is crucial) it still somehow works. There are three possibilities: either
option 1) the task is done perfectly or
option 2)it is done badly but it still works or
option 3)it is not done at all.
If it is
1) done perfectly, everything is good with the world. That is what Randian hero would do.
If it is
2) done badly (and badly here means anything less than perfect, from barely works to slightly worse than what the best of the best would have done. Basically everything which can be improved later if you tomorrow call an expert in), it is done in such a way that after the task is finished, it still works. Not as efficiently as it would work if it was expert doing it in the first place (in fact, if expert saw it they would say it was done by rank amateur and suggest improvements immediately), but it still works. It does its designed purpose. If it doesn't, you get straight to option 3.
Option 3: The task wasn't done. Our current workers and expertise tried their best, they really did, after trying for a month they decided the task and change behind it as designed and decided is impossible to implement. That means back to the drawing board, we will have to figure something else, some workaround to the original problem which is not the current solution/task which we found that it is impossible for us to implement.
Now, that's one of the reasons immigration of the best educated and most efficient workers from the economy is bad. Your expertise is going away and your growth slows down considerably. It slows down, but it never stops completely. Why not? Because expertise and knowledge can be gained and given time and resources even the lowest worker on the assembly line can become expert in something! Which was almost anathema for Rand.
She was in love with idea of natural born geniuses without understanding technological and societal basis for innovation. Or basis and origination of societal welfare and wealth. Thus the idea that somebody could do the job badly but not badly enough that it doesn't work out in the end is impossible in that book. And that's why The Strike works. Because in the book the job is either done by the best or is not done at all. Without a few thousand supermen in power things are not getting done and are collapsing. In real world, you would replace a single superman with 3, 4 or 10 regular people and keep on going. In time, one of them will become 50% superman, or 75% superman. They might never become a genius like the original, but they would be good enough for the system to keep functioning. And growing and innovating too.
In fact, there is a metric which measures whether the project will fail if one member of the organization or project team is taken out. It is called [the bus factor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_factor) and organizations take care to ensure continued existence if something happens to a key team member or leader (eg they get hit by a bus or join The Strike).
And because Rand didn't really understand economics and basis for wealth of society, she thought that it is better idea to burn everything to the ground and then rebuild than to just innovate and fix the problems with the existing world. The truth is, if there is big enough societal collapse, there is no quick rebuilding possible. And as Mike Rowe's "Dirtiest Jobs" show [demonstrates](https://youtu.be/IRVdiHu1VCc?t=19m20s), you need some really dirty jobs for our shiny civilization and technology to be possible. Like the picture below hints at with tongue firmly in cheek.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/j8ssu.gif)
Edit to clarify after comments, because I focused on Dagnar and background more than on Francisco:
What Francisco did fits definition of industrial sabotage. And fraud. And wide definition of terrorism, e.g using fear and violence to make people change their habits and convert them to his way of thinking.
He used the weakness of quality control mechanisms (which were set up by Francisco himself) to intentionally do a subpar job which caused people to die. And he basically used the excuse every fraudster ever used to justify himself. "If they were smarter, if there was one good and smart guy among my victims, I wouldn't have been able to pull it off. They got exactly what they deserve." .
Again, keep in mind that Ayn never worked in business. And that she believed in those two things above. And that she decided to make the world and characters intentionally archetypal, sharper than they would be realistically, all to prove the point.
I'll again compare real world and the world of the book and this is going to be a long edit, so...
In real world, contractors are not just chosen according to their price and their needs. When the project is made and contractors chosen, minimal standards of quality are decided on before choosing the contractors to do the jobs. Even after choosing the contractor, there are minimal standards of quality that their work has to fulfill to be accepted and contractors paid. There are multiple control mechanisms which check for defects, workarounds and shoddy work. The contractor is forced to fix defects found before the work is accepted as good and the next phase of the project begins. Once the final phase of the project is complete, there is final sets of checks which says "Yes, this work is done and it can now be open to the public. " or "No, you need to fix these major problems before it can be allowed. These minor problems can stand."
There is penalty for every major defect found and for every day the project is late.
Now, we get back to her "impotence of evil" theory. In the book Francisco intentionally hired the worst contractor he could find. He intentionally crippled every quality control mechanism, by firing any competent person from the Quality control commission and by bullying any competent worker of contractor he hired to do subpar work. In his mind, Francisco is doing exactly what the looters are doing. In his mind, he is following the principles of the looters to the letter. "If there was one truly good and competent among them, that person would stand up to Francisco" Ayn says. The only way the evil can win is if the good people do nothing and let themselves be bullied - she says. Except, Francisco is one of Ayn's supermen. If there existed superman to oppose him, he would have instead joined him on moral principles else he wouldn't be superman!
Francisco is wrong. Ayn wants to have her cake and eat it too.
There is a difference between doing something bad unintentionally, from incompetence and doing something from pure malice. Ayn wanted to prove that planners are incompetent, even when they think they are acting rationally.
She chose to prove it by planting the saboteur at the highest level of the enterprise who doesn't act rationally. Unless you know he is saboteur and fraud, then his behavior makes perfect sense. Keep in mind, the victim of a fraud often finds out it was tricked only after the fact. Then all that weird behavior you dismissed earlier starts to make sense. Those were the warning signs you chose to ignore and have suffered for it.
So, genealogy of the fraud which potentially left thousands of people dead and [hundreds of people ruined](https://www.patheos.com/blogs/daylightatheism/2013/08/atlas-shrugged-marge-vs-the-monorail/) from the point of view of defrauded businessman:
Francisco, a man who up to that point always turned profit in all his business endeavors, starts gathering money to buy some mountains and build a settlement. He is in copper mining business, so you logically assume that he found some rich vein of copper there.
He always acted rationally before, he always worked with a profit motive and his self interest at heart, he is a trusted member of the community. Investing in him was always a sure bet (Rand emphasizes that point multiple times). Asked for a few investments, some people you trust invested in him. You ask for details. He provides them to you. You invest in him too.
He starts working on his project. A few months later, the project is a failure and it turns out Francisco sabotaged it. He ruined himself and the other people intentionally. A year before starting the project, he joined some "End of the world" cult and has decided to get rid of all his worldly possessions so he can join Heaven. Nobody knew about that before investing else they wouldn't have invested in him. When asked why did he do that, he replies "If you weren't so rotten and fallen, you would have been able to stop me. This proves that I am right and just, that I am one of the chosen ones. Heaven's gates are now wide open for me. And all of you got exactly what you deserved, sinners as you are, this is just punishment for your sins!"
"But thousands of innocent people have died! Miners and their families! Children died." You reply weakly.
"If they were smart people and true believers, they would have noticed all the shortcuts I have used, all the defects, all the shoddy workmanship. They were sinners, all of them, enablers! Each and every one! They got what they deserve!" Francisco replies, his eyes burning with the fire of fanaticism.
When put like that, it makes just as much sense as his explanation. And that's what the scam was, if you look away from the text a bit and assume that the two principles Ayn Rand pushed in the book do not quite hold up to scrutiny. And that heroes are not quite reliable. But that would be breaking the suspension of disbelief. You can read the quotes in the answer below. |
1,518,910 | I am getting a client date in JavaScript function using "new date()" object. But this object is considering the properties set for Date&Time control in the control panel of the system.
For example,
if I check the check box of Date&Time control of the system (control panel) "Automatically adjust clock for daylight saving changes", then I am getting the date (from JavaScript) according to the Daylight savings time and if I uncheck it, I am getting the date according to the standard time.
What I need is to get the date from a JavaScript function irrespective of the Date&Time control of the control panel. Is there a way to do that? | 2009/10/05 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1518910",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/146276/"
] | Or base everything on UTC
Here is a timezone detection ignoring DST. Looks a bit brute force, but I could not find one I used to use <http://www.michaelapproved.com/articles/timezone-detect-and-ignore-daylight-saving-time-dst/> | Why can't you just generate the date from the server-side, where you have more control over this? |
1,518,910 | I am getting a client date in JavaScript function using "new date()" object. But this object is considering the properties set for Date&Time control in the control panel of the system.
For example,
if I check the check box of Date&Time control of the system (control panel) "Automatically adjust clock for daylight saving changes", then I am getting the date (from JavaScript) according to the Daylight savings time and if I uncheck it, I am getting the date according to the standard time.
What I need is to get the date from a JavaScript function irrespective of the Date&Time control of the control panel. Is there a way to do that? | 2009/10/05 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1518910",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/146276/"
] | Or base everything on UTC
Here is a timezone detection ignoring DST. Looks a bit brute force, but I could not find one I used to use <http://www.michaelapproved.com/articles/timezone-detect-and-ignore-daylight-saving-time-dst/> | As you say, you are getting the time on the client, which is determined by the system clock of the client computer. If you want a constant time, you will have to get the time server side and expose it to your client-side script somehow. |
23,814,306 | For some reason I am getting a "Cannot initialize ActiveScript" error when I try to run tsc. Any ideas how to fix it?
I did read the other question in here, but I am already running IE11, så installing IE10 does not sound like a solution. Also I am not looking for the workaround of running it through node. | 2014/05/22 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/23814306",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/68374/"
] | I know this is an older issue but I had the same issue a few weeks back.
In my case there where two version in the following directory (0.9 and 1.0): C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft SDKs\TypeScript#
I resolved it by removing the older version and everything started working again! | I started to get this error when I accidentally deleted tschost.dll, which had been next to tsc.exe (we are way back on version 1.6.2, lucky us.) Replacing tschost.dll corrected the error. |
81,157 | There is a known issue with SVN repositories and the windows indexing service fighting over .svn metadata files. [Here for more details.](http://schleichermann.wordpress.com/2009/12/09/svn-tortoisesvn-cant-move-the-file-or-directory-is-corrupted-and-unreadable-windows-7/)
How can we set it up so there are **automatically** no problems having subversion repositories indexed by windows (Vista/Win7). *(We don't want to have to manually do something every time we add repo directory.)*
One idea is to setup Windows to automatically not index folders named ".svn", however I can not find a way to do this.
I know you can disable certain extensions, but that doesn't seem to work since the svn metadata files are in a folder.
Note: The | 2009/12/10 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/81157",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/15365/"
] | AFAIK, Windows Indexing service on Windows 7 only looks within the Users folder as default (correct me if I am wrong). If you have your SVN repositories within your personal folder, you can:
a) Putting your SVN repositories elsewhere
b) By excluding those folders from the index. [Here](http://www.windowsnetworking.com/articles_tutorials/Exploring-Windows-7s-New-Search-Features-Part2.html) you will find how to exclude a folder. | The obvious fix would be to change Subversion to set this "don't index" flag whenever it creates a .svn directory. The problem is that this feature will be no longer needed when it's introduced.
The known problem will most likely go away in the Subversion versions that's currently being developed (version 1.7). There will be far less file operations inside the .svn directory, and also just 1 .svn directory per working copy.
This makes it less likely that the problem will occur, and also makes it far easier to disable indexing, because there's just a single .svn folder. |
52,287 | Looking on [thesaurus.com](http://thesaurus.com/browse/desert) I can find only synonyms for "desert" with negative connotations. Are there any synonyms with positive connotations? Specifically, something that invokes the sense of clean desolation and unspoiled nature. | 2011/12/19 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/52287",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/11856/"
] | The [Etymology](http://www.myetymology.com/latin/deserta.html) tells the story:
>
> The Classical Latin word *deserta* (abandoned, deserted wife) is
> derived from the Latin word *desertus* (deserted, uninhabited, without people), which is
> derived from the Latin verb *deserere* (to cease to be concerned with; to fail, fall short; to leave, depart, quit), which is derived from negative or past *de-* plus the verb *serere* (to plant, sow).
>
>
>
Hence, a desert is unused or unusable land. *Arabia Deserta* is the classical Latin name for guess which country? And guess what it means?
There really aren't many positive connotations available for the word *desert*; perhaps that's one reason why we often spell it *dessert* and vice versa. There's rarely any confusion about which word is meant. | Rather than look for a word with positive connotations (even National Geographic wasn't able to put their usual positive gloss on an [article about the Atacama](http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0308/feature3/)), you can use a word that gives an exotic flavor to the defining feature of a desert:
>
> **xeric**, *adj*.: (of an environment or habitat) containing little moisture; very dry [OED]
>
>
>
So you can write about *crossing the xeric landscape of the Mojave*, for example. |
52,287 | Looking on [thesaurus.com](http://thesaurus.com/browse/desert) I can find only synonyms for "desert" with negative connotations. Are there any synonyms with positive connotations? Specifically, something that invokes the sense of clean desolation and unspoiled nature. | 2011/12/19 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/52287",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/11856/"
] | One positive synonym I can think of is 'The Sands'. This might be a useful version for you. | [***Thebaid***](http://www.wordreference.com/fren/th%C3%A9ba%C3%AFde)
>
> The [*Thebaid*](https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=thebaid%2CThebaid&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cthebaid%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CThebaid%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2Cthebaid%3B%2Cc1%3B.t1%3B%2CThebaid%3B%2Cc0) or *Thebais* (Greek: Θηβαΐς, Thēbaïs) is the region of ancient Egypt containing the thirteen southernmost nomes of Upper Egypt, from Abydos to Aswan. It acquired its name from its proximity to the ancient Egyptian capital of Thebes. During the Ancient Egyptian dynasties this region was dominated by Thebes and its priesthood at the temple of Amun at Karnak. [...]
>
>
> Around the 5th century, since it was a desert, the Thebaid became a place of retreat of a number of Christian hermits, and was the birthplace of Pachomius. In Christian art, the Thebaid was represented as a place with numerous monks.
>
>
> [Social Vocabulary](http://socialvocabulary.com/defines/Thebaid)
>
>
> *The subjects range from the pleasures of courtly life to the spiritual rewards of religious retirement from the world in a Thebaid, to the degradations and miseries of the poor* [...]
>
>
> [The Oxford Dictionary of Christian Art and Architecture](https://books.google.fr/books?id=Te2dAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA622&lpg=PA622&dq=%22in+a+thebaid%22&source=bl&ots=dM5YLar5BL&sig=pOyqoB522XFD9tb6-ykCDpq5UHs&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi3zIfrspvMAhUDfRoKHULfCP8Q6AEIIDAC#v=onepage&q=%22in%20a%20thebaid%22&f=false)
>
>
> |
52,287 | Looking on [thesaurus.com](http://thesaurus.com/browse/desert) I can find only synonyms for "desert" with negative connotations. Are there any synonyms with positive connotations? Specifically, something that invokes the sense of clean desolation and unspoiled nature. | 2011/12/19 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/52287",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/11856/"
] | One positive synonym I can think of is 'The Sands'. This might be a useful version for you. | Untouched, undeveloped, uninhabited. Perhaps wilderness. |
52,287 | Looking on [thesaurus.com](http://thesaurus.com/browse/desert) I can find only synonyms for "desert" with negative connotations. Are there any synonyms with positive connotations? Specifically, something that invokes the sense of clean desolation and unspoiled nature. | 2011/12/19 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/52287",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/11856/"
] | Untouched, undeveloped, uninhabited. Perhaps wilderness. | [***Thebaid***](http://www.wordreference.com/fren/th%C3%A9ba%C3%AFde)
>
> The [*Thebaid*](https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=thebaid%2CThebaid&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cthebaid%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CThebaid%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2Cthebaid%3B%2Cc1%3B.t1%3B%2CThebaid%3B%2Cc0) or *Thebais* (Greek: Θηβαΐς, Thēbaïs) is the region of ancient Egypt containing the thirteen southernmost nomes of Upper Egypt, from Abydos to Aswan. It acquired its name from its proximity to the ancient Egyptian capital of Thebes. During the Ancient Egyptian dynasties this region was dominated by Thebes and its priesthood at the temple of Amun at Karnak. [...]
>
>
> Around the 5th century, since it was a desert, the Thebaid became a place of retreat of a number of Christian hermits, and was the birthplace of Pachomius. In Christian art, the Thebaid was represented as a place with numerous monks.
>
>
> [Social Vocabulary](http://socialvocabulary.com/defines/Thebaid)
>
>
> *The subjects range from the pleasures of courtly life to the spiritual rewards of religious retirement from the world in a Thebaid, to the degradations and miseries of the poor* [...]
>
>
> [The Oxford Dictionary of Christian Art and Architecture](https://books.google.fr/books?id=Te2dAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA622&lpg=PA622&dq=%22in+a+thebaid%22&source=bl&ots=dM5YLar5BL&sig=pOyqoB522XFD9tb6-ykCDpq5UHs&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi3zIfrspvMAhUDfRoKHULfCP8Q6AEIIDAC#v=onepage&q=%22in%20a%20thebaid%22&f=false)
>
>
> |
52,287 | Looking on [thesaurus.com](http://thesaurus.com/browse/desert) I can find only synonyms for "desert" with negative connotations. Are there any synonyms with positive connotations? Specifically, something that invokes the sense of clean desolation and unspoiled nature. | 2011/12/19 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/52287",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/11856/"
] | Following your link shows a tremendous number of synonyms with negative connotations! Here are some relatively neutral, albeit not quite synonomous, words:
* *[solitude](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/solitude)*, with sense "A lonely or deserted place."
* *[sere](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/sere)*, "Without moisture."
* *[unpeopled](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/unpeopled)*, "Not inhabited by people."
* The *[Outback](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outback)* in Australia is a vast, remote, arid area, and you might compare an area to it.
* You could talk about *[horny toad](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horny_toad)* country; that's pretty neutral, isn't it? | Untouched, undeveloped, uninhabited. Perhaps wilderness. |
52,287 | Looking on [thesaurus.com](http://thesaurus.com/browse/desert) I can find only synonyms for "desert" with negative connotations. Are there any synonyms with positive connotations? Specifically, something that invokes the sense of clean desolation and unspoiled nature. | 2011/12/19 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/52287",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/11856/"
] | The [Etymology](http://www.myetymology.com/latin/deserta.html) tells the story:
>
> The Classical Latin word *deserta* (abandoned, deserted wife) is
> derived from the Latin word *desertus* (deserted, uninhabited, without people), which is
> derived from the Latin verb *deserere* (to cease to be concerned with; to fail, fall short; to leave, depart, quit), which is derived from negative or past *de-* plus the verb *serere* (to plant, sow).
>
>
>
Hence, a desert is unused or unusable land. *Arabia Deserta* is the classical Latin name for guess which country? And guess what it means?
There really aren't many positive connotations available for the word *desert*; perhaps that's one reason why we often spell it *dessert* and vice versa. There's rarely any confusion about which word is meant. | *Expanse*, as in *wide expanse* or *open expanse*, is fairly positive. It evokes a sense of opportunity and possibility, to me: *Riding off into the open expanse.*
>
> [**expanse**](http://www.thefreedictionary.com/expanses) *A wide and open extent, as of surface, land, or sky.*
>
>
> |
52,287 | Looking on [thesaurus.com](http://thesaurus.com/browse/desert) I can find only synonyms for "desert" with negative connotations. Are there any synonyms with positive connotations? Specifically, something that invokes the sense of clean desolation and unspoiled nature. | 2011/12/19 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/52287",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/11856/"
] | Rather than look for a word with positive connotations (even National Geographic wasn't able to put their usual positive gloss on an [article about the Atacama](http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0308/feature3/)), you can use a word that gives an exotic flavor to the defining feature of a desert:
>
> **xeric**, *adj*.: (of an environment or habitat) containing little moisture; very dry [OED]
>
>
>
So you can write about *crossing the xeric landscape of the Mojave*, for example. | Untouched, undeveloped, uninhabited. Perhaps wilderness. |
52,287 | Looking on [thesaurus.com](http://thesaurus.com/browse/desert) I can find only synonyms for "desert" with negative connotations. Are there any synonyms with positive connotations? Specifically, something that invokes the sense of clean desolation and unspoiled nature. | 2011/12/19 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/52287",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/11856/"
] | The [Etymology](http://www.myetymology.com/latin/deserta.html) tells the story:
>
> The Classical Latin word *deserta* (abandoned, deserted wife) is
> derived from the Latin word *desertus* (deserted, uninhabited, without people), which is
> derived from the Latin verb *deserere* (to cease to be concerned with; to fail, fall short; to leave, depart, quit), which is derived from negative or past *de-* plus the verb *serere* (to plant, sow).
>
>
>
Hence, a desert is unused or unusable land. *Arabia Deserta* is the classical Latin name for guess which country? And guess what it means?
There really aren't many positive connotations available for the word *desert*; perhaps that's one reason why we often spell it *dessert* and vice versa. There's rarely any confusion about which word is meant. | [***Thebaid***](http://www.wordreference.com/fren/th%C3%A9ba%C3%AFde)
>
> The [*Thebaid*](https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=thebaid%2CThebaid&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cthebaid%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CThebaid%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2Cthebaid%3B%2Cc1%3B.t1%3B%2CThebaid%3B%2Cc0) or *Thebais* (Greek: Θηβαΐς, Thēbaïs) is the region of ancient Egypt containing the thirteen southernmost nomes of Upper Egypt, from Abydos to Aswan. It acquired its name from its proximity to the ancient Egyptian capital of Thebes. During the Ancient Egyptian dynasties this region was dominated by Thebes and its priesthood at the temple of Amun at Karnak. [...]
>
>
> Around the 5th century, since it was a desert, the Thebaid became a place of retreat of a number of Christian hermits, and was the birthplace of Pachomius. In Christian art, the Thebaid was represented as a place with numerous monks.
>
>
> [Social Vocabulary](http://socialvocabulary.com/defines/Thebaid)
>
>
> *The subjects range from the pleasures of courtly life to the spiritual rewards of religious retirement from the world in a Thebaid, to the degradations and miseries of the poor* [...]
>
>
> [The Oxford Dictionary of Christian Art and Architecture](https://books.google.fr/books?id=Te2dAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA622&lpg=PA622&dq=%22in+a+thebaid%22&source=bl&ots=dM5YLar5BL&sig=pOyqoB522XFD9tb6-ykCDpq5UHs&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi3zIfrspvMAhUDfRoKHULfCP8Q6AEIIDAC#v=onepage&q=%22in%20a%20thebaid%22&f=false)
>
>
> |
52,287 | Looking on [thesaurus.com](http://thesaurus.com/browse/desert) I can find only synonyms for "desert" with negative connotations. Are there any synonyms with positive connotations? Specifically, something that invokes the sense of clean desolation and unspoiled nature. | 2011/12/19 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/52287",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/11856/"
] | Rather than look for a word with positive connotations (even National Geographic wasn't able to put their usual positive gloss on an [article about the Atacama](http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0308/feature3/)), you can use a word that gives an exotic flavor to the defining feature of a desert:
>
> **xeric**, *adj*.: (of an environment or habitat) containing little moisture; very dry [OED]
>
>
>
So you can write about *crossing the xeric landscape of the Mojave*, for example. | [***Thebaid***](http://www.wordreference.com/fren/th%C3%A9ba%C3%AFde)
>
> The [*Thebaid*](https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=thebaid%2CThebaid&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cthebaid%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CThebaid%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2Cthebaid%3B%2Cc1%3B.t1%3B%2CThebaid%3B%2Cc0) or *Thebais* (Greek: Θηβαΐς, Thēbaïs) is the region of ancient Egypt containing the thirteen southernmost nomes of Upper Egypt, from Abydos to Aswan. It acquired its name from its proximity to the ancient Egyptian capital of Thebes. During the Ancient Egyptian dynasties this region was dominated by Thebes and its priesthood at the temple of Amun at Karnak. [...]
>
>
> Around the 5th century, since it was a desert, the Thebaid became a place of retreat of a number of Christian hermits, and was the birthplace of Pachomius. In Christian art, the Thebaid was represented as a place with numerous monks.
>
>
> [Social Vocabulary](http://socialvocabulary.com/defines/Thebaid)
>
>
> *The subjects range from the pleasures of courtly life to the spiritual rewards of religious retirement from the world in a Thebaid, to the degradations and miseries of the poor* [...]
>
>
> [The Oxford Dictionary of Christian Art and Architecture](https://books.google.fr/books?id=Te2dAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA622&lpg=PA622&dq=%22in+a+thebaid%22&source=bl&ots=dM5YLar5BL&sig=pOyqoB522XFD9tb6-ykCDpq5UHs&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi3zIfrspvMAhUDfRoKHULfCP8Q6AEIIDAC#v=onepage&q=%22in%20a%20thebaid%22&f=false)
>
>
> |
52,287 | Looking on [thesaurus.com](http://thesaurus.com/browse/desert) I can find only synonyms for "desert" with negative connotations. Are there any synonyms with positive connotations? Specifically, something that invokes the sense of clean desolation and unspoiled nature. | 2011/12/19 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/52287",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/11856/"
] | Following your link shows a tremendous number of synonyms with negative connotations! Here are some relatively neutral, albeit not quite synonomous, words:
* *[solitude](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/solitude)*, with sense "A lonely or deserted place."
* *[sere](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/sere)*, "Without moisture."
* *[unpeopled](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/unpeopled)*, "Not inhabited by people."
* The *[Outback](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outback)* in Australia is a vast, remote, arid area, and you might compare an area to it.
* You could talk about *[horny toad](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horny_toad)* country; that's pretty neutral, isn't it? | [***Thebaid***](http://www.wordreference.com/fren/th%C3%A9ba%C3%AFde)
>
> The [*Thebaid*](https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=thebaid%2CThebaid&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cthebaid%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CThebaid%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2Cthebaid%3B%2Cc1%3B.t1%3B%2CThebaid%3B%2Cc0) or *Thebais* (Greek: Θηβαΐς, Thēbaïs) is the region of ancient Egypt containing the thirteen southernmost nomes of Upper Egypt, from Abydos to Aswan. It acquired its name from its proximity to the ancient Egyptian capital of Thebes. During the Ancient Egyptian dynasties this region was dominated by Thebes and its priesthood at the temple of Amun at Karnak. [...]
>
>
> Around the 5th century, since it was a desert, the Thebaid became a place of retreat of a number of Christian hermits, and was the birthplace of Pachomius. In Christian art, the Thebaid was represented as a place with numerous monks.
>
>
> [Social Vocabulary](http://socialvocabulary.com/defines/Thebaid)
>
>
> *The subjects range from the pleasures of courtly life to the spiritual rewards of religious retirement from the world in a Thebaid, to the degradations and miseries of the poor* [...]
>
>
> [The Oxford Dictionary of Christian Art and Architecture](https://books.google.fr/books?id=Te2dAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA622&lpg=PA622&dq=%22in+a+thebaid%22&source=bl&ots=dM5YLar5BL&sig=pOyqoB522XFD9tb6-ykCDpq5UHs&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi3zIfrspvMAhUDfRoKHULfCP8Q6AEIIDAC#v=onepage&q=%22in%20a%20thebaid%22&f=false)
>
>
> |
161,423 | [Pseudodragons](https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/pseudodragon) are Tiny CR 1/4 dragons, but they're not quite dragon-like enough for my purposes. I want to homebrew some alternative stat blocks to the pseudodragon so that they more so resemble the various metallic/chromatic dragons, but at the same time I'd prefer it if my changes didn't change their overall CR. Specifically, I want to add damage resistance and a breath weapon, similar to "true dragons", resulting in 10 variations of the pseudodragon, and I want these 10 variations to still all be CR 1/4.
To that end, **I have swapped out their Magic Resistance trait for the damage resistance** that relates to their colour (as per the [Draconic Ancestry](https://www.dndbeyond.com/races/dragonborn#DragonbornTraits) table of the dragonborn playable race, for example) **and have swapped out their Sting attack for a [Breath Weapon](https://www.dndbeyond.com/races/dragonborn#DragonbornTraits) attack** (again, taken directly from the dragonborn playable race, assuming the lowest possible number of damage dice; i.e. 2d6 from a level 1 dragonborn PC). I'd have the DC for the breath weapon be the same as the DC for the Sting attack, and I'd have it on a Recharge 6, same as, say, a [dust mephit](https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/dust-mephit)'s Blinding Breath.
**If I were to make these changes to the pseudodragon, would it still be the same CR? Is this true for each "colour" pseudodragon** (i.e. does fire damage vs. cold damage make one variant inherently more powerful than the other, etc)? I'm hoping that they're all the same CR (ideally CR 1/4), regardless of the damage type resisted/dealt via breath weapon...
---
If this isn't too much for one question, assuming that they are all balanced against each other regardless of damage type, as I hope, then if I were to add a 15 ft. swim speed and the Amphibious trait of certain dragons that can swim and breathe underwater (such as gold dragons) to the corresponding pseudodragons (i.e. my gold pseudodragon), would that make much of a difference to their CR vs. those that would not have those traits (i.e. my red pseudodragon)?
I'd probably also want to add a 15 ft. climb speed to the pseudodragons that are of the same colour as true dragons that have climb speeds, i.e. my red pseudodragon (although given that pseudodragons can fly, I'm guessing this is of no consequence to the CR, but I thought I'd mention it just in case it matters). | 2019/12/16 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/161423",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/35259/"
] | Their calculated CR remains the same, but they are far stronger
===============================================================
Carcer rightly points out the way your CR is calculated, but I feel like that doesn't capture the entire picture.
I feel like this pseudodragon may very well be punching above its 1/4 weight with a 2d6 breath weapon. With a lucky roll, there's a good chance it could knock out an entire first level party in a single breath weapon. CR 1/4 indicates it should be roughly 2-3 pseudodragons to form a decent challenge for a first level party, but 2-3 pseudodragons with this breath weapon will absolutely annihilate any first level party round one if they know how to aim.
Ogres suffer from a similar problem. If you calculate their CR, it comes down to a CR 1 creature, but they are still listed as a CR 2 creature, simply because there's a really good chance that it'll oneshot a first level character.
On top of that, you've replaced their attack which requires getting in melee range with a breath attack they can use from a distance. This, combined with a fly speed of 60, means they can very easily fly into range, breath weapon, fly away, and then fly away until their breath weapon has recovered, before coming again for a new run.
This is at a level where most characters will have very few ways of dealing with a flying opponent.
***I for one would not want to face even one of these creatures at level 1.***
If the breath weapon is changed to be once per short rest instead of Recharge 6, it'll at least make it a lot more manageable because it can't hit and run. Also reducing the damage to 1d6 may very well be enough to keep it around roughly the same challenge rating. It'll at least no longer be something I'd really dread fighting at level 1.
As an aside, regarding being used as a familiar (say, for a Warlock via Pact of the Chain), it's most likely not that big a deal, I doubt it'll be more impressive than invisible scouts. Familiars used for combat purposes tend to be dead familiars before long. It'll be good for killing some goblins every now and then, but it'll be costly to keep resummoning your dead familiar. | Roughly, yes, their CR should be the same
=========================================
Applying the [DMG's guidance on modifying monsters and calculating challenge ratings](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dmg/dungeon-masters-workshop#CreatingaMonster), I reckon your modified pseudodragons are roughly on par with standard pseudodragons. Specifically:
Defensive CR
------------
The pseudodragon's normal Magic Resistance trait is much more useful than damage resistance to one elemental damage type. The DMG suggests MR is comparable to raising a monster's AC by 2 for defensive CR purposes, but resistance to a single damage type has no effect on a monster's CR - it's too easy to bypass and will be rarely relevant.
A standard pseudodragon has a defensive CR of 1/4 only because of its Magic Resistance. Without that benefit, the estimated defensive CR drops to 1/8 (for a creature with 7hp and an AC of 13).
Offensive CR
------------
Replacing the pseudodragon's sting with a 2d6 AoE breath weapon increases their potential damage output. Averaging over three rounds of combat as the DMG describes, having the breath weapon raises its DPR from 4.5 to 8.33 (assuming it uses the breath weapon once and affects two targets).
That would bump the pseudodragon's offensive CR from 1/4 to 1/2 (as it averages ~8 DPR and its attack bonus is within two points of expected for CR 1/2). The possibility of being poisoned by the normal pseudodragon's sting isn't something the DMG's guidance actually takes into account, since it doesn't describe how to adjust CR for such attack riders (indeed, the chance to impose a condition on targets is described as a "flavorful twist"...) so I've not worried about it.
Final CR
--------
Altogether, your modifications drop the creature's defensive CR by one step but raise its offensive CR by one step, so that still averages out at CR 1/4. Extra details such as adding the (mostly redundant) climbing speed, Keen Senses, etc. are irrelevant for determining CR since they would have no material impact on the creature's combat efficacy.
Practically, I would actually expect your modified pseudodragons to be *somewhat* more effective in combat than default pseudodragons are, purely because they can open by using their breath weapon and do more damage in one round than a default pseudodragon could hope to. At a mere 7hp/AC13, pseudodragons were already extremely unlikely to survive more than one round in combat, so this improved first round burst damage gives them an edge over their default cousins. For this same reason, I don't think it matters what you set the breath weapon's recharge to - the pseudodragon is extremely unlikely to get to use it more than once. |
2,290,382 | I am in the process of writing a message queue system.
My question is... Is it better to do this queue with files or in a database?
If I were to choose the database, it needs to check for new jobs every second and that just seems a bit of an overhead to me?
If it's files I guess you just constantly monitor the folder and execute based on that?
BR, | 2010/02/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2290382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/190530/"
] | I choose option "C" — use message queue that's already built in to Windows:
>
> <https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms973860.aspx>
>
>
> | Are you writing a message queue system because you want to write a message queue system; or is this just part of solving a bigger problem?
I would suggest not writing a new message queue system. You can use MSMQ or something else off the shelf. |
2,290,382 | I am in the process of writing a message queue system.
My question is... Is it better to do this queue with files or in a database?
If I were to choose the database, it needs to check for new jobs every second and that just seems a bit of an overhead to me?
If it's files I guess you just constantly monitor the folder and execute based on that?
BR, | 2010/02/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2290382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/190530/"
] | I choose option "C" — use message queue that's already built in to Windows:
>
> <https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms973860.aspx>
>
>
> | How might want to look into [MSMQ](https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms711472(v=vs.85).aspx) |
2,290,382 | I am in the process of writing a message queue system.
My question is... Is it better to do this queue with files or in a database?
If I were to choose the database, it needs to check for new jobs every second and that just seems a bit of an overhead to me?
If it's files I guess you just constantly monitor the folder and execute based on that?
BR, | 2010/02/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2290382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/190530/"
] | I choose option "C" — use message queue that's already built in to Windows:
>
> <https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms973860.aspx>
>
>
> | It depends on your requirements, but if you need to queue up multiple messages as one single group, you'll need some sort of transactional support. In that case the database is your friend. |
2,290,382 | I am in the process of writing a message queue system.
My question is... Is it better to do this queue with files or in a database?
If I were to choose the database, it needs to check for new jobs every second and that just seems a bit of an overhead to me?
If it's files I guess you just constantly monitor the folder and execute based on that?
BR, | 2010/02/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2290382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/190530/"
] | Don't [reinvent](http://www.rabbitmq.com/) [the](https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms711472(v=vs.85).aspx) [wheel](http://www.nservicebus.com/).
[Edit: updated for 2014, now linking to rabbit MQ as Ayende has moved on to making document databases and not message queues but then again RabbitMQ has come on. I would not be writing this but now posts need 30 characters so I need to blabber a bit.] | what are your criteria for deciding "Better"? performance? scalability? reliability? cost?
The basic tradeoffs are:
Database - transactional support, integrity guarantees (via constraints), richer query support, *probably* will scale better (depending on implementation)
filesystem - cheaper, simpler, less moving parts (at least initially)
You may want to look at existing solutions first - MSMQ, SQL Server broker, open source libraries such as Rhino queues (<http://ayende.com/Blog/archive/2008/08/01/Rhino-Queues.aspx>) |
2,290,382 | I am in the process of writing a message queue system.
My question is... Is it better to do this queue with files or in a database?
If I were to choose the database, it needs to check for new jobs every second and that just seems a bit of an overhead to me?
If it's files I guess you just constantly monitor the folder and execute based on that?
BR, | 2010/02/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2290382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/190530/"
] | what are your criteria for deciding "Better"? performance? scalability? reliability? cost?
The basic tradeoffs are:
Database - transactional support, integrity guarantees (via constraints), richer query support, *probably* will scale better (depending on implementation)
filesystem - cheaper, simpler, less moving parts (at least initially)
You may want to look at existing solutions first - MSMQ, SQL Server broker, open source libraries such as Rhino queues (<http://ayende.com/Blog/archive/2008/08/01/Rhino-Queues.aspx>) | It depends on your requirements, but if you need to queue up multiple messages as one single group, you'll need some sort of transactional support. In that case the database is your friend. |
2,290,382 | I am in the process of writing a message queue system.
My question is... Is it better to do this queue with files or in a database?
If I were to choose the database, it needs to check for new jobs every second and that just seems a bit of an overhead to me?
If it's files I guess you just constantly monitor the folder and execute based on that?
BR, | 2010/02/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2290382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/190530/"
] | Don't [reinvent](http://www.rabbitmq.com/) [the](https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms711472(v=vs.85).aspx) [wheel](http://www.nservicebus.com/).
[Edit: updated for 2014, now linking to rabbit MQ as Ayende has moved on to making document databases and not message queues but then again RabbitMQ has come on. I would not be writing this but now posts need 30 characters so I need to blabber a bit.] | Are you writing a message queue system because you want to write a message queue system; or is this just part of solving a bigger problem?
I would suggest not writing a new message queue system. You can use MSMQ or something else off the shelf. |
2,290,382 | I am in the process of writing a message queue system.
My question is... Is it better to do this queue with files or in a database?
If I were to choose the database, it needs to check for new jobs every second and that just seems a bit of an overhead to me?
If it's files I guess you just constantly monitor the folder and execute based on that?
BR, | 2010/02/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2290382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/190530/"
] | Don't [reinvent](http://www.rabbitmq.com/) [the](https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms711472(v=vs.85).aspx) [wheel](http://www.nservicebus.com/).
[Edit: updated for 2014, now linking to rabbit MQ as Ayende has moved on to making document databases and not message queues but then again RabbitMQ has come on. I would not be writing this but now posts need 30 characters so I need to blabber a bit.] | It depends on your requirements, but if you need to queue up multiple messages as one single group, you'll need some sort of transactional support. In that case the database is your friend. |
2,290,382 | I am in the process of writing a message queue system.
My question is... Is it better to do this queue with files or in a database?
If I were to choose the database, it needs to check for new jobs every second and that just seems a bit of an overhead to me?
If it's files I guess you just constantly monitor the folder and execute based on that?
BR, | 2010/02/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2290382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/190530/"
] | Don't [reinvent](http://www.rabbitmq.com/) [the](https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms711472(v=vs.85).aspx) [wheel](http://www.nservicebus.com/).
[Edit: updated for 2014, now linking to rabbit MQ as Ayende has moved on to making document databases and not message queues but then again RabbitMQ has come on. I would not be writing this but now posts need 30 characters so I need to blabber a bit.] | How might want to look into [MSMQ](https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms711472(v=vs.85).aspx) |
2,290,382 | I am in the process of writing a message queue system.
My question is... Is it better to do this queue with files or in a database?
If I were to choose the database, it needs to check for new jobs every second and that just seems a bit of an overhead to me?
If it's files I guess you just constantly monitor the folder and execute based on that?
BR, | 2010/02/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2290382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/190530/"
] | what are your criteria for deciding "Better"? performance? scalability? reliability? cost?
The basic tradeoffs are:
Database - transactional support, integrity guarantees (via constraints), richer query support, *probably* will scale better (depending on implementation)
filesystem - cheaper, simpler, less moving parts (at least initially)
You may want to look at existing solutions first - MSMQ, SQL Server broker, open source libraries such as Rhino queues (<http://ayende.com/Blog/archive/2008/08/01/Rhino-Queues.aspx>) | How might want to look into [MSMQ](https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms711472(v=vs.85).aspx) |
2,290,382 | I am in the process of writing a message queue system.
My question is... Is it better to do this queue with files or in a database?
If I were to choose the database, it needs to check for new jobs every second and that just seems a bit of an overhead to me?
If it's files I guess you just constantly monitor the folder and execute based on that?
BR, | 2010/02/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2290382",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/190530/"
] | what are your criteria for deciding "Better"? performance? scalability? reliability? cost?
The basic tradeoffs are:
Database - transactional support, integrity guarantees (via constraints), richer query support, *probably* will scale better (depending on implementation)
filesystem - cheaper, simpler, less moving parts (at least initially)
You may want to look at existing solutions first - MSMQ, SQL Server broker, open source libraries such as Rhino queues (<http://ayende.com/Blog/archive/2008/08/01/Rhino-Queues.aspx>) | Are you writing a message queue system because you want to write a message queue system; or is this just part of solving a bigger problem?
I would suggest not writing a new message queue system. You can use MSMQ or something else off the shelf. |
655 | This is more a suggestion than a question, though answers and comments are welcome.
In question [What should the tag wikis contain?](https://cstheory.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/341/what-should-the-tag-wikis-contain), Robin suggests the preferred content for tag wikis. Unfortunately, most tags I checked did not have any wiki.
I added several tag wikis, and felt like suggesting this to other colleagues as well. I believe at least the top-20 tags must have wikis. | 2010/11/15 | [
"https://cstheory.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/655",
"https://cstheory.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://cstheory.meta.stackexchange.com/users/873/"
] | We can use some help for setting-up tag-wikis:
>
> **We need your help to make the page 1 and page 2 tags great** — so please pitch in and contribute a tag wiki excerpt or edit a tag wiki excerpt to make it better. To invite editing, there’s a small edit link that will dynamically appear as you mouse over the tags page if you have enough reputation.
>
>
> Here’s a few words of advice on writing tag wiki excerpts:
>
>
> 1. **The excerpt is the elevator pitch for the tag.** You only have ~500 plain text characters for the excerpt, so don’t feel obligated to cover everything in it! Save that for the 30,000+ character Markdown tag wiki. The excerpt should define the shared quality of questions containing this tag — boiled down to a few short sentences.
> 2. **Avoid generically defining the concept behind a tag, unless it is highly specialized.** The “email” tag, for example, does not need to explain what email is. I think we can safely assume most internet users know what email is; there’s no value in a boilerplate explanation of email to anyone.
> 3. **Concentrate on what a tag means to your community.** For “email” on Server Fault, mention the server aspects of email including POP3, SMTP, IMAP, and server software. For “email” on Super User, mention desktop email clients and explicitly exclude webmail, as that would be more appropriate for webapps.stackexchange.com.
> 4. **Provide basic guidance on when to use the tag.** In other words, what kinds of questions should have this tag? Tags only exist as ways of organizing questions, so if we don’t provide proper guidance on which questions need this tag, they won’t get tagged at all, rendering the tag excerpt moot. Think of it as a sales pitch: in a room full of tags screaming “pick me!”, what would convince a question asker to select your tag?
>
>
>
<http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/03/redesigned-tags-page/> | List of high priority [tags](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/tags) for creating tag-wikis:
### highly used tags
* [~~np-hardness~~](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/np-hardness)
* [complexity-classes](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/complexity-classes)
* [quantum-computing](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/quantum-computing)
* [automata-theory](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/automata-theory)
* [circuit-complexity](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/circuit-complexity)
* [~~approximation-algorithms~~](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/approximation-algorithms)
* [lower-bounds](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lower-bounds)
* [machine-learning](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/machine-learning)
* [~~graph-theory~~](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/graph-theory)
* [graph-algorithms](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/graph-algorithms)
### tags like [soft-question], [big-picture]:
* [reference-request](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reference-request)
* [big-list](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/big-list)
* [tag-removed](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tag-removed)
* [advice-request](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/advice-request)
* [research-practice](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/research-practice)
* [open-problem](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/open-problem)
* [ho.history-overview](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ho.history-overview)
* [teaching](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/teaching)
* [software](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/software)
* [books](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/books)
* [authorship](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/authorship)
* [thesis-topic](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/thesis-topic)
* [terminology](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terminology)
* [notation](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/notation)
* [implementation](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/implementation)
* [conferences](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/conferences)
* [employment](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/employment)
* [examples](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/examples)
* [proofs](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/proofs)
* [survey](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/survey)
* [illustration](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/illustration)
### top level arXiv tags
* [ds.data-structures](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ds.data-structures)
* [fl.formal-languages](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fl.formal-languages)
* [cg.comp-geom](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cg.comp-geom)
* [pl.programming-languages](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pl.programming-lang)
* [lg.learning](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/lg.learning)
* [dc.distributed-comp](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dc.distributed-comp)
* [dc.parallel-comp](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dc.parallel-comp)
* [ne.neural-evol](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ne.neural-evol)
* [it.information-theory](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/it.information-theory)
* [gt.game-theory](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/gt.game-theory)
* [db.databases](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/db.databases)
* [co.combinatorics](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/co.combinatorics)
* [dm.discrete-mathematics](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dm.discrete-mathematics)
* [pr.probability](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pr.probability)
* [st.statistics](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/st.statistics)
* [ct.category-theory](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ct.category-theory)
* [physics](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/physics)
### highly misused tags
* [advice](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/advice) (it is a complexity concept and should not be used for requesting advice on something)
### tags which should not be tags |
655 | This is more a suggestion than a question, though answers and comments are welcome.
In question [What should the tag wikis contain?](https://cstheory.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/341/what-should-the-tag-wikis-contain), Robin suggests the preferred content for tag wikis. Unfortunately, most tags I checked did not have any wiki.
I added several tag wikis, and felt like suggesting this to other colleagues as well. I believe at least the top-20 tags must have wikis. | 2010/11/15 | [
"https://cstheory.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/655",
"https://cstheory.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://cstheory.meta.stackexchange.com/users/873/"
] | We can use some help for setting-up tag-wikis:
>
> **We need your help to make the page 1 and page 2 tags great** — so please pitch in and contribute a tag wiki excerpt or edit a tag wiki excerpt to make it better. To invite editing, there’s a small edit link that will dynamically appear as you mouse over the tags page if you have enough reputation.
>
>
> Here’s a few words of advice on writing tag wiki excerpts:
>
>
> 1. **The excerpt is the elevator pitch for the tag.** You only have ~500 plain text characters for the excerpt, so don’t feel obligated to cover everything in it! Save that for the 30,000+ character Markdown tag wiki. The excerpt should define the shared quality of questions containing this tag — boiled down to a few short sentences.
> 2. **Avoid generically defining the concept behind a tag, unless it is highly specialized.** The “email” tag, for example, does not need to explain what email is. I think we can safely assume most internet users know what email is; there’s no value in a boilerplate explanation of email to anyone.
> 3. **Concentrate on what a tag means to your community.** For “email” on Server Fault, mention the server aspects of email including POP3, SMTP, IMAP, and server software. For “email” on Super User, mention desktop email clients and explicitly exclude webmail, as that would be more appropriate for webapps.stackexchange.com.
> 4. **Provide basic guidance on when to use the tag.** In other words, what kinds of questions should have this tag? Tags only exist as ways of organizing questions, so if we don’t provide proper guidance on which questions need this tag, they won’t get tagged at all, rendering the tag excerpt moot. Think of it as a sales pitch: in a room full of tags screaming “pick me!”, what would convince a question asker to select your tag?
>
>
>
<http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/03/redesigned-tags-page/> | There is nothing wrong with writing tag wikis if someone wants to. That said, I do not find it “unfortunate” that many tags lack wiki.
For some tags, it is very desirable to have some explanation. For example, the meaning of the tag [qma](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/qma "show questions tagged 'qma'") is unclear to those who are not familiar with the complexity class QMA, but renaming it to something like “quantum-merlin-arthur” makes the meaning of the tag less clear to those who are familiar with the concept, so using the tag wiki (actually its one-line summary which is shown on the question list page) is very appropriate. Another example is [csp](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/csp "show questions tagged 'csp'"); renaming it to “constraint-satisfaction-problem” might have been better, but the system does not support this long tag.
Some tags have closely related tags which may be more appropriate for particular questions (such as [approximation-algorithms](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/approximation-algorithms "show questions tagged 'approximation-algorithms'"), to which [approximation-hardness](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/approximation-hardness "show questions tagged 'approximation-hardness'") is a possible alternative). Other tags deserve some explanation of usage (such as [big-list](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/big-list "show questions tagged 'big-list'") and [open-problem](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/open-problem "show questions tagged 'open-problem'")). I do not think that tag wiki is a very effective place to write this kind of explanation, but we do not have many choices anyway, so I think that writing tag wiki is one of the best options available.
Other than these cases, it seems to me that tag wiki is completely optional. As I said, there is nothing wrong with writing tag wikis if someone wants to, but I do not think that tag wiki is very much needed. |
2 | When looking to sew a piece of fabric, what factors are looked at to determine the correct stitch length? | 2016/04/26 | [
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com/questions/2",
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com",
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com/users/22/"
] | [Stitching lengths:](http://www.the-sewing-partner.com/sewing-stitch-adjustments.html)
>
> 2mm is the short stitch length that should be used for lightweight
> fabrics, for satin stitching, and decorative stitching.
>
>
> 2.5 - 3mm is the average stitch length range that should be used for medium weight fabrics.
>
>
> 4 - 5mm is the long stitch length range that should be used for
> basting and topstitching.
>
>
>
[Stitches for Dummies puts it this way:](http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/making-machine-stitches-work-for-you.html)
>
> * The average stitch length for mid-weight fabrics is 2.5 to 3 mm/10 to 12 spi.
> * The average stitch length for fine fabrics is 2 mm/13 to 20 spi.
> * For heavier fabrics, basting, or topstitching, use 4 to 5 mm/5 to 6 spi.
>
>
>
Personally, I baste by hand and use a shorter length stitch for strength when necessary. This [video](http://www.howcast.com/videos/454064-how-to-select-stitch-length-sewing-lessons/) explains where I am coming from! | >
> The theory behind stitch length is pretty straight forward. The shorter the stitches, the more will be packed into each inch of stitching, creating a tighter seam. The longer the stitches, the fewer within each inch, therefore, the looser the seam. Short equals tight; long equals loose. Another way to think about it is: short equals stronger and permanent, long equals weaker and temporary.
>
>
>
I found [this article](http://www.sew4home.com/tips-resources/sewing-tips-tricks/setting-stitch-length-quick-look-how-and-why) very helpful in understanding the basics of choosing stitch length. |
2 | When looking to sew a piece of fabric, what factors are looked at to determine the correct stitch length? | 2016/04/26 | [
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com/questions/2",
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com",
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com/users/22/"
] | >
> The theory behind stitch length is pretty straight forward. The shorter the stitches, the more will be packed into each inch of stitching, creating a tighter seam. The longer the stitches, the fewer within each inch, therefore, the looser the seam. Short equals tight; long equals loose. Another way to think about it is: short equals stronger and permanent, long equals weaker and temporary.
>
>
>
I found [this article](http://www.sew4home.com/tips-resources/sewing-tips-tricks/setting-stitch-length-quick-look-how-and-why) very helpful in understanding the basics of choosing stitch length. | In addition to the good answers by other responders, I want to add that with a short stitch, you also increase the possibility of puckering, sometimes a longer stitch gives a much smoother appearance.
When the stitch length is very short, yes, you can achieve some seam strength, but if the fabric is light-weight and/or has some stretch and the seam has none (short stitch length used), the fabric can tear away from the seam, or the thread in the seam can even break if pulled hard enough.
There are so many variables with the fabric you are using, its weight, density, stretchiness, etc., that it's always good practice to do a quick test on a small piece of your fabric (including linings and interfacings if used).
Most newer machines have very good User's Guides with a lot of useful information, including tables showing best stitch lengths for different types of fabrics, best needle size, what foot to use to achieve a certain stitch, etc. |
2 | When looking to sew a piece of fabric, what factors are looked at to determine the correct stitch length? | 2016/04/26 | [
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com/questions/2",
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com",
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com/users/22/"
] | [Stitching lengths:](http://www.the-sewing-partner.com/sewing-stitch-adjustments.html)
>
> 2mm is the short stitch length that should be used for lightweight
> fabrics, for satin stitching, and decorative stitching.
>
>
> 2.5 - 3mm is the average stitch length range that should be used for medium weight fabrics.
>
>
> 4 - 5mm is the long stitch length range that should be used for
> basting and topstitching.
>
>
>
[Stitches for Dummies puts it this way:](http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/making-machine-stitches-work-for-you.html)
>
> * The average stitch length for mid-weight fabrics is 2.5 to 3 mm/10 to 12 spi.
> * The average stitch length for fine fabrics is 2 mm/13 to 20 spi.
> * For heavier fabrics, basting, or topstitching, use 4 to 5 mm/5 to 6 spi.
>
>
>
Personally, I baste by hand and use a shorter length stitch for strength when necessary. This [video](http://www.howcast.com/videos/454064-how-to-select-stitch-length-sewing-lessons/) explains where I am coming from! | In addition to the good answers by other responders, I want to add that with a short stitch, you also increase the possibility of puckering, sometimes a longer stitch gives a much smoother appearance.
When the stitch length is very short, yes, you can achieve some seam strength, but if the fabric is light-weight and/or has some stretch and the seam has none (short stitch length used), the fabric can tear away from the seam, or the thread in the seam can even break if pulled hard enough.
There are so many variables with the fabric you are using, its weight, density, stretchiness, etc., that it's always good practice to do a quick test on a small piece of your fabric (including linings and interfacings if used).
Most newer machines have very good User's Guides with a lot of useful information, including tables showing best stitch lengths for different types of fabrics, best needle size, what foot to use to achieve a certain stitch, etc. |
456,689 | I have a C# Application I am creating that stores all data in SQL Server.
Sometimes it's easier for me to make data changes programmatically and sometimes it's easier to have stored procedures and functions in the SQL Server database and call them.
I am rather new to programming and I don't know what the subtle advantages and/or disadvantages of each method are.
I figure I should probably be doing things one way or the other instead of using several methods.
My code is starting to look like a random collection of thoughts all just shoved into one spot. No offense to Joel Spolsky. I love his books.
This is a solo project, so I can refactor any amount of code I want to make it better. All options are on the table.
Thanks,
J3r3myK | 2009/01/19 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/456689",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/53605/"
] | Well, Stored Procs can be an additional level of abstraction or a set of functions/methods if you look at the database like an object or service. This can be beneficial, since you can hide underlying implementation details and change it when need be without breaking the app (as long as you leave the interface, e.g. the stored proc parameters, alone). Also, if you can hide your table details behind a set of stored procs, no matter how someone gets access to your database, they'll only be able to interact with it using the methods you designed and wrote for it --> there's less risk of someone firing up Excel and hacking into your database.
On the other hand, Stored Proc require extensive T-SQL knowledge and you'll be spreading your business and app logic across two sets of code bases, which can be a downside. Anything you can do in a stored proc can also be done in ADO.NET with straight SQL statements, and it's not even slower anymore.
A further plus for Stored Procs is the fact that if something is wrong in your proc, you can fix it merely by deploying the proc with the fix - you don't need to touch your C# app. This can be a great plus in a "hosted" environment if you only get 3 releases per year - applying a hotfix by means of fixing an Stored Proc can be your live-saver then! :-)
All in all: there are lots of pros and cons for or against stored procs; I'd suggest, if you feel comfortable with writing T-SQL, why not give it a try and see how it works for you. If it feels to cumbersome or too inflexible or like too much work in the long run, you can always switch back to using straight SQL in your C# app.
Just my $0.02. Marc | Allow me to rephrase that: should you be pulling down the data, modifying it in code, and then **having an SP update the DB with the new values**, or should you just call the SP as a "function".
My point of emphasis is, even if you do the data manipulations in code, you should still only be accessing SPs on the db.
Whether you do that, or have more complex SPs do the data manipulation, would depend on several factors:
* your level of comfort with complex SQL (as opposed to C#)
* how much data you need to pull down and modify - there may be performance aspects (it costs to pull all that data to the code)
* connected to the previous one, your architecture may come into play - e.g. are you accessing a local db server, or remote
* What kind of manipulations you need to do, it may be so complex you dont want to muddy your sql
* What kind of business logic you need to enforce, what is the data dependent on, etc.
It really comes down to a judgment call, there is no **right** way (though there are many *wrong* ways...). Though it is important to remain consistent, it is perfectly acceptable to have different types of db access in your system, as long as the context/need justifies it.
I would say choose whichever you're most comfortable with, and stick to that - **until you have a reason to do it differently**. No reason to be dogmatic about it... |
456,689 | I have a C# Application I am creating that stores all data in SQL Server.
Sometimes it's easier for me to make data changes programmatically and sometimes it's easier to have stored procedures and functions in the SQL Server database and call them.
I am rather new to programming and I don't know what the subtle advantages and/or disadvantages of each method are.
I figure I should probably be doing things one way or the other instead of using several methods.
My code is starting to look like a random collection of thoughts all just shoved into one spot. No offense to Joel Spolsky. I love his books.
This is a solo project, so I can refactor any amount of code I want to make it better. All options are on the table.
Thanks,
J3r3myK | 2009/01/19 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/456689",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/53605/"
] | Well, Stored Procs can be an additional level of abstraction or a set of functions/methods if you look at the database like an object or service. This can be beneficial, since you can hide underlying implementation details and change it when need be without breaking the app (as long as you leave the interface, e.g. the stored proc parameters, alone). Also, if you can hide your table details behind a set of stored procs, no matter how someone gets access to your database, they'll only be able to interact with it using the methods you designed and wrote for it --> there's less risk of someone firing up Excel and hacking into your database.
On the other hand, Stored Proc require extensive T-SQL knowledge and you'll be spreading your business and app logic across two sets of code bases, which can be a downside. Anything you can do in a stored proc can also be done in ADO.NET with straight SQL statements, and it's not even slower anymore.
A further plus for Stored Procs is the fact that if something is wrong in your proc, you can fix it merely by deploying the proc with the fix - you don't need to touch your C# app. This can be a great plus in a "hosted" environment if you only get 3 releases per year - applying a hotfix by means of fixing an Stored Proc can be your live-saver then! :-)
All in all: there are lots of pros and cons for or against stored procs; I'd suggest, if you feel comfortable with writing T-SQL, why not give it a try and see how it works for you. If it feels to cumbersome or too inflexible or like too much work in the long run, you can always switch back to using straight SQL in your C# app.
Just my $0.02. Marc | I would recommend following one convention or the other (either have your SQL code as strings in your classes or use stored procedures). There are countless debates about this, but there really isn't any important reasons to choose one or the other. |
456,689 | I have a C# Application I am creating that stores all data in SQL Server.
Sometimes it's easier for me to make data changes programmatically and sometimes it's easier to have stored procedures and functions in the SQL Server database and call them.
I am rather new to programming and I don't know what the subtle advantages and/or disadvantages of each method are.
I figure I should probably be doing things one way or the other instead of using several methods.
My code is starting to look like a random collection of thoughts all just shoved into one spot. No offense to Joel Spolsky. I love his books.
This is a solo project, so I can refactor any amount of code I want to make it better. All options are on the table.
Thanks,
J3r3myK | 2009/01/19 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/456689",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/53605/"
] | Well, Stored Procs can be an additional level of abstraction or a set of functions/methods if you look at the database like an object or service. This can be beneficial, since you can hide underlying implementation details and change it when need be without breaking the app (as long as you leave the interface, e.g. the stored proc parameters, alone). Also, if you can hide your table details behind a set of stored procs, no matter how someone gets access to your database, they'll only be able to interact with it using the methods you designed and wrote for it --> there's less risk of someone firing up Excel and hacking into your database.
On the other hand, Stored Proc require extensive T-SQL knowledge and you'll be spreading your business and app logic across two sets of code bases, which can be a downside. Anything you can do in a stored proc can also be done in ADO.NET with straight SQL statements, and it's not even slower anymore.
A further plus for Stored Procs is the fact that if something is wrong in your proc, you can fix it merely by deploying the proc with the fix - you don't need to touch your C# app. This can be a great plus in a "hosted" environment if you only get 3 releases per year - applying a hotfix by means of fixing an Stored Proc can be your live-saver then! :-)
All in all: there are lots of pros and cons for or against stored procs; I'd suggest, if you feel comfortable with writing T-SQL, why not give it a try and see how it works for you. If it feels to cumbersome or too inflexible or like too much work in the long run, you can always switch back to using straight SQL in your C# app.
Just my $0.02. Marc | Two points that haven't been covered yet:
SProcs can be placed in a schema, and impersonate a different schema. This means that you can lock down the database access and give users permissions ONLY to execute your SProcs, not to select update etc, which is a very nice security bonus.
Secondly, the sproc can be SIGNIFICANTLY faster depending on what operations your doing. If your constrained by network IO and your able to perform set operations on your data, doing so in a single stored procedure instead of doing a fetch of the ENTIRE dataset, processing it, then transmitting the change will give you a nice speed increase.
Same goes for transactions, if you need to perform operations serially (i.e change a value in two tables at once which involves some logic) then you will need to hold a transaction for the time it takes for you to compute the value and transmit back in two SQL queries, whereas the stored procedure can do it in a single procedure. |
456,689 | I have a C# Application I am creating that stores all data in SQL Server.
Sometimes it's easier for me to make data changes programmatically and sometimes it's easier to have stored procedures and functions in the SQL Server database and call them.
I am rather new to programming and I don't know what the subtle advantages and/or disadvantages of each method are.
I figure I should probably be doing things one way or the other instead of using several methods.
My code is starting to look like a random collection of thoughts all just shoved into one spot. No offense to Joel Spolsky. I love his books.
This is a solo project, so I can refactor any amount of code I want to make it better. All options are on the table.
Thanks,
J3r3myK | 2009/01/19 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/456689",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/53605/"
] | Allow me to rephrase that: should you be pulling down the data, modifying it in code, and then **having an SP update the DB with the new values**, or should you just call the SP as a "function".
My point of emphasis is, even if you do the data manipulations in code, you should still only be accessing SPs on the db.
Whether you do that, or have more complex SPs do the data manipulation, would depend on several factors:
* your level of comfort with complex SQL (as opposed to C#)
* how much data you need to pull down and modify - there may be performance aspects (it costs to pull all that data to the code)
* connected to the previous one, your architecture may come into play - e.g. are you accessing a local db server, or remote
* What kind of manipulations you need to do, it may be so complex you dont want to muddy your sql
* What kind of business logic you need to enforce, what is the data dependent on, etc.
It really comes down to a judgment call, there is no **right** way (though there are many *wrong* ways...). Though it is important to remain consistent, it is perfectly acceptable to have different types of db access in your system, as long as the context/need justifies it.
I would say choose whichever you're most comfortable with, and stick to that - **until you have a reason to do it differently**. No reason to be dogmatic about it... | I would recommend following one convention or the other (either have your SQL code as strings in your classes or use stored procedures). There are countless debates about this, but there really isn't any important reasons to choose one or the other. |
456,689 | I have a C# Application I am creating that stores all data in SQL Server.
Sometimes it's easier for me to make data changes programmatically and sometimes it's easier to have stored procedures and functions in the SQL Server database and call them.
I am rather new to programming and I don't know what the subtle advantages and/or disadvantages of each method are.
I figure I should probably be doing things one way or the other instead of using several methods.
My code is starting to look like a random collection of thoughts all just shoved into one spot. No offense to Joel Spolsky. I love his books.
This is a solo project, so I can refactor any amount of code I want to make it better. All options are on the table.
Thanks,
J3r3myK | 2009/01/19 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/456689",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/53605/"
] | Two points that haven't been covered yet:
SProcs can be placed in a schema, and impersonate a different schema. This means that you can lock down the database access and give users permissions ONLY to execute your SProcs, not to select update etc, which is a very nice security bonus.
Secondly, the sproc can be SIGNIFICANTLY faster depending on what operations your doing. If your constrained by network IO and your able to perform set operations on your data, doing so in a single stored procedure instead of doing a fetch of the ENTIRE dataset, processing it, then transmitting the change will give you a nice speed increase.
Same goes for transactions, if you need to perform operations serially (i.e change a value in two tables at once which involves some logic) then you will need to hold a transaction for the time it takes for you to compute the value and transmit back in two SQL queries, whereas the stored procedure can do it in a single procedure. | Allow me to rephrase that: should you be pulling down the data, modifying it in code, and then **having an SP update the DB with the new values**, or should you just call the SP as a "function".
My point of emphasis is, even if you do the data manipulations in code, you should still only be accessing SPs on the db.
Whether you do that, or have more complex SPs do the data manipulation, would depend on several factors:
* your level of comfort with complex SQL (as opposed to C#)
* how much data you need to pull down and modify - there may be performance aspects (it costs to pull all that data to the code)
* connected to the previous one, your architecture may come into play - e.g. are you accessing a local db server, or remote
* What kind of manipulations you need to do, it may be so complex you dont want to muddy your sql
* What kind of business logic you need to enforce, what is the data dependent on, etc.
It really comes down to a judgment call, there is no **right** way (though there are many *wrong* ways...). Though it is important to remain consistent, it is perfectly acceptable to have different types of db access in your system, as long as the context/need justifies it.
I would say choose whichever you're most comfortable with, and stick to that - **until you have a reason to do it differently**. No reason to be dogmatic about it... |
456,689 | I have a C# Application I am creating that stores all data in SQL Server.
Sometimes it's easier for me to make data changes programmatically and sometimes it's easier to have stored procedures and functions in the SQL Server database and call them.
I am rather new to programming and I don't know what the subtle advantages and/or disadvantages of each method are.
I figure I should probably be doing things one way or the other instead of using several methods.
My code is starting to look like a random collection of thoughts all just shoved into one spot. No offense to Joel Spolsky. I love his books.
This is a solo project, so I can refactor any amount of code I want to make it better. All options are on the table.
Thanks,
J3r3myK | 2009/01/19 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/456689",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/53605/"
] | Two points that haven't been covered yet:
SProcs can be placed in a schema, and impersonate a different schema. This means that you can lock down the database access and give users permissions ONLY to execute your SProcs, not to select update etc, which is a very nice security bonus.
Secondly, the sproc can be SIGNIFICANTLY faster depending on what operations your doing. If your constrained by network IO and your able to perform set operations on your data, doing so in a single stored procedure instead of doing a fetch of the ENTIRE dataset, processing it, then transmitting the change will give you a nice speed increase.
Same goes for transactions, if you need to perform operations serially (i.e change a value in two tables at once which involves some logic) then you will need to hold a transaction for the time it takes for you to compute the value and transmit back in two SQL queries, whereas the stored procedure can do it in a single procedure. | I would recommend following one convention or the other (either have your SQL code as strings in your classes or use stored procedures). There are countless debates about this, but there really isn't any important reasons to choose one or the other. |
99,351 | I have a hyphenated surname, namely *Kinara-Williams.* I intend to be published in the future when I graduate and during/after my PhD.
But Kinara-Williams seems like a mouthful to cite. After reading other threads, it appears pseudonyms are frowned upon in the scientific/academic community; so what do people usually do?
Just go with the preferred one? | 2017/11/24 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/99351",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83332/"
] | As other have commented, the length of your hyphenated surname is not problematic at all: keep it and don't worry.
Fun fact. Uh, well, it took me years to discover that [Lennard-Jones](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennard-Jones_potential) was actually just one person and not two, and that the [Hanbury-Brown-Twiss](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanbury_Brown_and_Twiss_effect) experiment was devised by two people and not three, Hanbury Brown (no hyphen) and Twiss. For [Jaynes-Cummings](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaynes%E2%80%93Cummings_model), instead, I tought they were two and they were actually two - amazing! But I would count this as a minor inconvenience, which actually taught me not to make assumptions on surnames (and, as suggested by E.P., [this popular page](http://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-names/) discusses other false assumptions). | In Spain, Portugal and Iberoamerican countries this happens often, since two surnames are used (one for the father, one for the mother). A long name is not a problem. My reference manager is full of Sánchez-Martínez, Prats-Rodríguez, Jiménez-Muñoz, Gómez-Rodríguez and the like.
The main advice in this situation is **be consistent** in the usage of your name to avoid confusions and that your publications are considered as made by two different authors (e.g. Kinara and Kinara-Williams).
Then you have two options:
* Use your complete name. This decreases the probability of being confounded with another researcher.
* Use one of your names. In this case it may be preferable to use the less common, again to decrease the probability of confusion with another author. |
99,351 | I have a hyphenated surname, namely *Kinara-Williams.* I intend to be published in the future when I graduate and during/after my PhD.
But Kinara-Williams seems like a mouthful to cite. After reading other threads, it appears pseudonyms are frowned upon in the scientific/academic community; so what do people usually do?
Just go with the preferred one? | 2017/11/24 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/99351",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83332/"
] | As other have commented, the length of your hyphenated surname is not problematic at all: keep it and don't worry.
Fun fact. Uh, well, it took me years to discover that [Lennard-Jones](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennard-Jones_potential) was actually just one person and not two, and that the [Hanbury-Brown-Twiss](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanbury_Brown_and_Twiss_effect) experiment was devised by two people and not three, Hanbury Brown (no hyphen) and Twiss. For [Jaynes-Cummings](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaynes%E2%80%93Cummings_model), instead, I tought they were two and they were actually two - amazing! But I would count this as a minor inconvenience, which actually taught me not to make assumptions on surnames (and, as suggested by E.P., [this popular page](http://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-names/) discusses other false assumptions). | Side comment:
If the hyphenated name is due to marriage, it is common to use the premarital name, especially if papers have been published before the name change. This has nothing to do with a name being too long, but rather to preserve an academic identity that has been established before the marriage.
Assuming you don't have a pre-hyphen identity you wish to hang on to, I wouldn't worry about it too much. I also have a hyphenated name and as far as I can tell, the only difference it makes is that my name is more likely to be abbreviated on posters, slides or SO usernames. |
99,351 | I have a hyphenated surname, namely *Kinara-Williams.* I intend to be published in the future when I graduate and during/after my PhD.
But Kinara-Williams seems like a mouthful to cite. After reading other threads, it appears pseudonyms are frowned upon in the scientific/academic community; so what do people usually do?
Just go with the preferred one? | 2017/11/24 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/99351",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83332/"
] | As other have commented, the length of your hyphenated surname is not problematic at all: keep it and don't worry.
Fun fact. Uh, well, it took me years to discover that [Lennard-Jones](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennard-Jones_potential) was actually just one person and not two, and that the [Hanbury-Brown-Twiss](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanbury_Brown_and_Twiss_effect) experiment was devised by two people and not three, Hanbury Brown (no hyphen) and Twiss. For [Jaynes-Cummings](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaynes%E2%80%93Cummings_model), instead, I tought they were two and they were actually two - amazing! But I would count this as a minor inconvenience, which actually taught me not to make assumptions on surnames (and, as suggested by E.P., [this popular page](http://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-names/) discusses other false assumptions). | Like others said, be consistent. Both myself and my wife's names (which are different) are longer than yours and hyphenated and it's not a problem. |
99,351 | I have a hyphenated surname, namely *Kinara-Williams.* I intend to be published in the future when I graduate and during/after my PhD.
But Kinara-Williams seems like a mouthful to cite. After reading other threads, it appears pseudonyms are frowned upon in the scientific/academic community; so what do people usually do?
Just go with the preferred one? | 2017/11/24 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/99351",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83332/"
] | In Spain, Portugal and Iberoamerican countries this happens often, since two surnames are used (one for the father, one for the mother). A long name is not a problem. My reference manager is full of Sánchez-Martínez, Prats-Rodríguez, Jiménez-Muñoz, Gómez-Rodríguez and the like.
The main advice in this situation is **be consistent** in the usage of your name to avoid confusions and that your publications are considered as made by two different authors (e.g. Kinara and Kinara-Williams).
Then you have two options:
* Use your complete name. This decreases the probability of being confounded with another researcher.
* Use one of your names. In this case it may be preferable to use the less common, again to decrease the probability of confusion with another author. | Side comment:
If the hyphenated name is due to marriage, it is common to use the premarital name, especially if papers have been published before the name change. This has nothing to do with a name being too long, but rather to preserve an academic identity that has been established before the marriage.
Assuming you don't have a pre-hyphen identity you wish to hang on to, I wouldn't worry about it too much. I also have a hyphenated name and as far as I can tell, the only difference it makes is that my name is more likely to be abbreviated on posters, slides or SO usernames. |
99,351 | I have a hyphenated surname, namely *Kinara-Williams.* I intend to be published in the future when I graduate and during/after my PhD.
But Kinara-Williams seems like a mouthful to cite. After reading other threads, it appears pseudonyms are frowned upon in the scientific/academic community; so what do people usually do?
Just go with the preferred one? | 2017/11/24 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/99351",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83332/"
] | In Spain, Portugal and Iberoamerican countries this happens often, since two surnames are used (one for the father, one for the mother). A long name is not a problem. My reference manager is full of Sánchez-Martínez, Prats-Rodríguez, Jiménez-Muñoz, Gómez-Rodríguez and the like.
The main advice in this situation is **be consistent** in the usage of your name to avoid confusions and that your publications are considered as made by two different authors (e.g. Kinara and Kinara-Williams).
Then you have two options:
* Use your complete name. This decreases the probability of being confounded with another researcher.
* Use one of your names. In this case it may be preferable to use the less common, again to decrease the probability of confusion with another author. | Like others said, be consistent. Both myself and my wife's names (which are different) are longer than yours and hyphenated and it's not a problem. |
99,351 | I have a hyphenated surname, namely *Kinara-Williams.* I intend to be published in the future when I graduate and during/after my PhD.
But Kinara-Williams seems like a mouthful to cite. After reading other threads, it appears pseudonyms are frowned upon in the scientific/academic community; so what do people usually do?
Just go with the preferred one? | 2017/11/24 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/99351",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83332/"
] | Side comment:
If the hyphenated name is due to marriage, it is common to use the premarital name, especially if papers have been published before the name change. This has nothing to do with a name being too long, but rather to preserve an academic identity that has been established before the marriage.
Assuming you don't have a pre-hyphen identity you wish to hang on to, I wouldn't worry about it too much. I also have a hyphenated name and as far as I can tell, the only difference it makes is that my name is more likely to be abbreviated on posters, slides or SO usernames. | Like others said, be consistent. Both myself and my wife's names (which are different) are longer than yours and hyphenated and it's not a problem. |
3,233,705 | I have very little PeopleSoft experience but have been put in a position to support an install. This question could straddles serverfault but is certainly developer oriented.
On a daily basis, we have a PeopleSoft "developer" who writes scripts to fix records/journal entries/approval status etc. To me this screams "bad install" and botched customizations. Is this normal? Is it best practice to have an employee having to write scripts daily just to keep things running?
Note: there is no fraud happening here, he has the full approval of the accounting department when doing this. | 2010/07/13 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3233705",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/101777/"
] | It is unlikely that it is the installation. Likely causes:
1. Bad customization
2. Missing patches
3. Bugs in the delivered code
If you only have one admin, though, and you have only one developer, I would be shocked to hear that there is much in the way of custom code.
Back to the question: It is not normal to need to do SQL updates regularly to fix data. Yes, it happens, but not too often. It is also possible that the end users could fix it from the application, but do not for some reason. | Ad-hoc SQL updates can be dangerous and the SQL may change on every request. It is difficult to fully test ad-hoc scripts due to the turnaround they typically require.
I assume these "fixes" are in fact making changes not implemented by the system.
It would be more sensible to either:
* Build a custom page to "fix" the entries (or less sensible: modify the delivered pages).
* Build and thoroughly test a paramater-driven App Engine to perform the most commonly made changes. It could potentially be run as part of the batch stream.
Watch out on your next upgrade: application tables have had a lot of changes in recent releases. |
518,700 | How do I get my program to remember the users settings? | 2009/02/06 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/518700",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/56555/"
] | You can either:
* write the settings to a file
* Create setting in VS with Project->Properties->Settings... then by using
Properties.Settings.Default.SettingName = "something"; // Set setting
this.Text = Properties.Settings.Default.SettingName; // Use setting | Looks like you are looking for [UserScopedSettingAttribute](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.configuration.userscopedsettingattribute.aspx) |
29,285 | I was wondering whether the rotational speed of a discus has any influence on the flight of the discus. Would slowing the rotation or speeding it up change the trajectory in any way or would the flight simply become unstable when slowing down? | 2012/05/31 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/29285",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/9559/"
] | Allegedly the rotation has two effects. I say "allegedly" because although I was told this in physics lectures at university I'm not sure if anyone has ever rigorously proved it.
Anyhow, with the disclaimer behind me, the first effect is that the angular momentum stabilises the angle of the discus as it travels through the air. That allows the angle of attack to be maintained at the optimum value and hence increases the lift and therefore the range. The second effect is that a high rotational speed makes the boundary layer turbulent, and this decreases aerodynamic drag and once again increases the range.
Given this I guess higher rotational speed is better, though presumably an athlete is limited to how high a rotational speed they can generate without compromising the speed they can throw at. | Given the physical conditions, this seems like an appropriate explanation: The faster the discus rotates, the more violently and quickly it displaces the air around it. Now the absence or scarcity of air causes a reduction in air friction or viscosity around the discus and this allows it to move onward in the direction of propulsion; now that depends on what angle the athlete projects it. After a certain distance there begins a constant deceleration of rotational speed because at some point, the air friction starts overpowering the rotation and this results in the discus entering the second half of its trajectory, i.e., moves downward along a curved path. I hope that answers your question. |
29,285 | I was wondering whether the rotational speed of a discus has any influence on the flight of the discus. Would slowing the rotation or speeding it up change the trajectory in any way or would the flight simply become unstable when slowing down? | 2012/05/31 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/29285",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/9559/"
] | The faster it spins, the greater the aerodynamic side force on it; see [Magnus effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnus_effect).
Also, higher rotation increases the $\mu$ (ratio of edge speed relative to body to airspeed of the body) of the disc; the higher airspeed of the advancing edge relative to the retreating edge creates asymmetric lift & drag. The former would impart a rolling moment, while the latter would impart a moment opposing the in-plane rotation of the discus.
All that said, I doubt either are particularly significant effects. | Given the physical conditions, this seems like an appropriate explanation: The faster the discus rotates, the more violently and quickly it displaces the air around it. Now the absence or scarcity of air causes a reduction in air friction or viscosity around the discus and this allows it to move onward in the direction of propulsion; now that depends on what angle the athlete projects it. After a certain distance there begins a constant deceleration of rotational speed because at some point, the air friction starts overpowering the rotation and this results in the discus entering the second half of its trajectory, i.e., moves downward along a curved path. I hope that answers your question. |
220,049 | Skype has recently started charging $10/month for group video chat, which neither me nor my friends wish to pay. Are there any *free*, cross-platform (Windows and OS X) applications which can do *video* chat between 3 or more people at once? Either a desktop application or a web application would work. When making recommendations, it would be helpful to state whether it's a desktop or web app, what features it has, and whether it requires sign-up for the service. Thanks. | 2010/12/09 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/220049",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/20088/"
] | * [ooVoo](http://www.oovoo.com)
* [TokBox](http://www.tokbox.com) | [Google+ hangouts](http://www.google.com/+/learnmore/hangouts/?hl=en) is the only free tool I've been able to use – it's a webapp though. |
17,044,571 | What is the rate for creating a custom metric in AWS CloudWatch.
Is it free of charges?
I don't want a detailed monitoring in my CloudWatch metric. | 2013/06/11 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/17044571",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1550506/"
] | Its $0.50 per month per metric. I don't think you have the choice of detailed or not with custom metrics. That is only applicable to basic EC2 metrics.
Current prices are available at the [Amazon Cloudwatch website](http://aws.amazon.com/cloudwatch/pricing/). | Basic Monitoring can be enable on an EC2 instance and is included free of charge.
You can track up to 10 custom metrics for free as of August 18, 2021. Best to double check the allotment of the free tier and price of the paid tier directly on the AWS website: <https://aws.amazon.com/cloudwatch/pricing/>.
There are a few gotchas to be aware of when it comes to metrics. The community maintains a resource on cloud costs [here][1]. You can view CloudWatch specific details here: https://handbook.vantage.sh/aws/services/cloudwatch-pricing/ |
4,374,297 | I have a Windows application developed using Visual Studio 2008 (C#).
It has a app.config file, where various configuration related information are kept. After creating an installer for the project and installing it, there are no app.config file being copied to the installed directory. However, the functionalities that rely on settings in this file seem to work.
Now one of these settings is a database connection string, which obviously needs changing when installed in a different PC. My question is, how to have the app.config file available with the Setup file so that it can be configured later? | 2010/12/07 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4374297",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/326820/"
] | The app.config is copied/renamed <assembly name>.config as part of the compilation process, and placed in the bin directory. If you're using a Visual Studio Installer project (*blech*!), then it should have picked it up also and included it in the installer, IIRC.
(In response to your comment to both answers)
You can't keep using it as "app.config". The .NET config system searches for the configuration file whose name is the same as the entry assembly. If you renamed the file back to "app.config", then the configuration classes would stop working. | Your app.config file gets renamed on compilation, with the name of the binary. I.e. if your binary is myapp.exe then your app.config will be renamed to either myapp.config or myapp.exe.config.
This is the file that you should add to the setup package in order to use it on deployment for configuration. |
37,800,092 | I'm having a problem with Physics! I have imported an object which a bridge from 3ds max to unity 5 ,but the problem is that whenever I want to walk through on it ,I just fall down. It's like there's nothing called BRIDGE! I know there must be a problem about Physics. But how to fix it ?!
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/1B7KP.png) | 2016/06/13 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/37800092",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | When importing a model into Unity it does not have any Collider.
Even though using auto-generated "MeshColliders" is an option
I **highly recommend** **not to use them**.
You never need such highly detailed colliders in a game.
Instead, you have to
Add the colliders manually
==========================
**Here is a little step by step guide**
This is the imported model (made with blender) without any collider whatsoever
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/aInbz.png)
### First thing to do is add a new box collider to the components
as shown in this gif
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/rWSQQ.gif)
### The next thing to do is scaling the box collider
by either entering the values manually or using the drag/GUI version like I do in the gif below
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PZaUa.gif)
*(you probably know that already but the mode can be changed to orthographic by licking the small cube in between the cones in the upper right)*
### If necessary you can add as many "detail" collider as you want
by repeating the steps. Sometimes sphere or capsule colliders might fit better but keep in mind that they have a higher resolution!
In this case i added another box collider representing the upper part of the car:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/XouuD.gif)
Thats all you need to make things collide with your object
----------------------------------------------------------
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/tnlXj.gif) | Right now you only have a MeshFilter, MeshRenderer, and Animator component attached. You walk through it because the mesh is only being rendered. In order to add collision, add a [MeshCollider](http://docs.unity3d.com/ScriptReference/MeshCollider.html) component to it.
Joe offers another way to do it with box colliders. There is a bit to know about both methods:
* Box colliders will take more time to set up (rather than just adding a
component) and will have less precision. They will have faster performance.
* Mesh colliders do not collide well with other mesh colliders.
However, this is often not an issue. If a mesh collider has the
"convex" checkbox checked then it will collide just fine with other
mesh colliders. Small items and any convex-shaped meshes should have
"convex" checked.
For something like your bridge.. it depends on your game. If you are doing a top-down game with limited mobility (no jumping) then box colliders may work for you. If you are making a first-person game then I would strongly suggest mesh colliders. If you decide to use box colliders then you must set them up carefully. Otherwise, physics may not match up with what the player sees!
Do not worry about performance at this time. Worry about it later *IF* it becomes an issue. With the physics upgrade in Unity 5, it probably won't be. |
368,180 | Is there a way (reliable and preferably not commercial) to prevent from Reflector to reflect my source code???
Thanks,
Adi | 2008/12/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/368180",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | There is no way to prevent decompiling of .net code, with that said a good obfuscator will make reflected code harder to read, some of them like dotfuscator will prevent reflector from showing the C# code; however, you will always be able to see the IL.
One of the options in Dotfuscator is to use non-printable names (Reflect on reflector) This makes decompiling extremly difficult IMHO.
Microsoft used to sell a Software Proctection and Licensing Service which would encrypt the IL and use a custom VM that was tied to an encryption key which preventing reflecting using the conventional tools. This had a huge performance cost however it was good if you wanted to protect critical algorithims or for example your licensing code.
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/slps/default.aspx> | DISCLAIMER: I don't work for RedGate the makers of SmartAssembly. I'm just a very happy customer who found a good, affordable solution.
The choice is very simple, choose SmartAssembly! Don't waste your time or money with the other obfuscators in the marketplace. I spent more money in terms of non-billable hours evaluating competing products. They all had fatal flaws and were next to impossible to debug. SmartAssembly is an easy-to-use, well documented, polished application with excellent support. Post a question on their forum and expect an answer reasonably fast by the actual developers.
SmartAssembly is more than an obsfuscator. It has a slew of features, including a built-in, highly customizable crash report generator that your customers can automatically email to you. You can view these reports on either your own server or on red-gates servers. I can't tell you how useful this is when you're beta testing or releasing the product to customers. It also generates debugger files so you can debug any post-release issues you may encounter with your obsfucated product.
If you are delivering a commercial application, it makes sense to spend the money on a decent obsfuscator. A bad choice here can compromise your intellectual property or worse lead you to days of gruesome debugging. What would this cost in comparison to what SmartAssembly costs? |
368,180 | Is there a way (reliable and preferably not commercial) to prevent from Reflector to reflect my source code???
Thanks,
Adi | 2008/12/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/368180",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | There is no way to prevent decompiling of .net code, with that said a good obfuscator will make reflected code harder to read, some of them like dotfuscator will prevent reflector from showing the C# code; however, you will always be able to see the IL.
One of the options in Dotfuscator is to use non-printable names (Reflect on reflector) This makes decompiling extremly difficult IMHO.
Microsoft used to sell a Software Proctection and Licensing Service which would encrypt the IL and use a custom VM that was tied to an encryption key which preventing reflecting using the conventional tools. This had a huge performance cost however it was good if you wanted to protect critical algorithims or for example your licensing code.
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/slps/default.aspx> | try dotfuscator. 2005/2008 comes with a community edition. Failing that re-architecture your code (painful) i.e. ATL/COM objects(private) called by the .NET components (public).
Choice is yours. |
368,180 | Is there a way (reliable and preferably not commercial) to prevent from Reflector to reflect my source code???
Thanks,
Adi | 2008/12/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/368180",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | No. Reflector looks at your assembly just like the .NET runtime would in order to generate native code to execute. The best you could hope for would be to [obfuscate](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2525/best-net-obfuscation-toolsstrategy) your code and make it (somewhat) harder for the reader to understand.
Some pros and cons of performing the obfuscation can be found at [Should you obfuscate a commercial .Net application?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/71195/should-you-obfuscate-a-commercial-net-application) | Not so long ago there was Anti reflector trick which was effective because .NET reflector couldn’t translate one particular IL instruction into c# code , but they've released patch and fun is over. |
368,180 | Is there a way (reliable and preferably not commercial) to prevent from Reflector to reflect my source code???
Thanks,
Adi | 2008/12/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/368180",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | No. Reflector looks at your assembly just like the .NET runtime would in order to generate native code to execute. The best you could hope for would be to [obfuscate](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2525/best-net-obfuscation-toolsstrategy) your code and make it (somewhat) harder for the reader to understand.
Some pros and cons of performing the obfuscation can be found at [Should you obfuscate a commercial .Net application?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/71195/should-you-obfuscate-a-commercial-net-application) | try dotfuscator. 2005/2008 comes with a community edition. Failing that re-architecture your code (painful) i.e. ATL/COM objects(private) called by the .NET components (public).
Choice is yours. |
368,180 | Is there a way (reliable and preferably not commercial) to prevent from Reflector to reflect my source code???
Thanks,
Adi | 2008/12/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/368180",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | No. Reflector looks at your assembly just like the .NET runtime would in order to generate native code to execute. The best you could hope for would be to [obfuscate](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2525/best-net-obfuscation-toolsstrategy) your code and make it (somewhat) harder for the reader to understand.
Some pros and cons of performing the obfuscation can be found at [Should you obfuscate a commercial .Net application?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/71195/should-you-obfuscate-a-commercial-net-application) | [Xheo Codeveil](http://www.xheo.com/products/codeveil/) is a great product as well. They also have a Licensing solution (for creating serial numbers etc. and then have them activated thorugh your own activation server0 |
368,180 | Is there a way (reliable and preferably not commercial) to prevent from Reflector to reflect my source code???
Thanks,
Adi | 2008/12/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/368180",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | There is no way to prevent decompiling of .net code, with that said a good obfuscator will make reflected code harder to read, some of them like dotfuscator will prevent reflector from showing the C# code; however, you will always be able to see the IL.
One of the options in Dotfuscator is to use non-printable names (Reflect on reflector) This makes decompiling extremly difficult IMHO.
Microsoft used to sell a Software Proctection and Licensing Service which would encrypt the IL and use a custom VM that was tied to an encryption key which preventing reflecting using the conventional tools. This had a huge performance cost however it was good if you wanted to protect critical algorithims or for example your licensing code.
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/slps/default.aspx> | Reflector does not use Reflection to show your source code. It uses the .Net metadata (which is in well known published format) to do that.
There is no way to prevent this, but you make make it pointless by obfuscating your assemblies. After obfuscating, class/method/fields are renamed, inline strings in methods are encrypted, method calls are hidden, method control flow is scrambled and so on. So, anybody who use Reflector will see a lot of garbage and will not be able to make sense of most of it.
DISCLAIMER: I work for LogicNP Software, the developers of [Crypto Obfuscator](http://www.ssware.com/cryptoobfuscator/obfuscator-net.htm) |
368,180 | Is there a way (reliable and preferably not commercial) to prevent from Reflector to reflect my source code???
Thanks,
Adi | 2008/12/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/368180",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | No. Reflector looks at your assembly just like the .NET runtime would in order to generate native code to execute. The best you could hope for would be to [obfuscate](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2525/best-net-obfuscation-toolsstrategy) your code and make it (somewhat) harder for the reader to understand.
Some pros and cons of performing the obfuscation can be found at [Should you obfuscate a commercial .Net application?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/71195/should-you-obfuscate-a-commercial-net-application) | If you are looking for a good Obfuscator, give [RemoteSoft](http://www.remotesoft.com) a try. |
368,180 | Is there a way (reliable and preferably not commercial) to prevent from Reflector to reflect my source code???
Thanks,
Adi | 2008/12/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/368180",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | try dotfuscator. 2005/2008 comes with a community edition. Failing that re-architecture your code (painful) i.e. ATL/COM objects(private) called by the .NET components (public).
Choice is yours. | [Xheo Codeveil](http://www.xheo.com/products/codeveil/) is a great product as well. They also have a Licensing solution (for creating serial numbers etc. and then have them activated thorugh your own activation server0 |
368,180 | Is there a way (reliable and preferably not commercial) to prevent from Reflector to reflect my source code???
Thanks,
Adi | 2008/12/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/368180",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | No. Reflector looks at your assembly just like the .NET runtime would in order to generate native code to execute. The best you could hope for would be to [obfuscate](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2525/best-net-obfuscation-toolsstrategy) your code and make it (somewhat) harder for the reader to understand.
Some pros and cons of performing the obfuscation can be found at [Should you obfuscate a commercial .Net application?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/71195/should-you-obfuscate-a-commercial-net-application) | DISCLAIMER: I don't work for RedGate the makers of SmartAssembly. I'm just a very happy customer who found a good, affordable solution.
The choice is very simple, choose SmartAssembly! Don't waste your time or money with the other obfuscators in the marketplace. I spent more money in terms of non-billable hours evaluating competing products. They all had fatal flaws and were next to impossible to debug. SmartAssembly is an easy-to-use, well documented, polished application with excellent support. Post a question on their forum and expect an answer reasonably fast by the actual developers.
SmartAssembly is more than an obsfuscator. It has a slew of features, including a built-in, highly customizable crash report generator that your customers can automatically email to you. You can view these reports on either your own server or on red-gates servers. I can't tell you how useful this is when you're beta testing or releasing the product to customers. It also generates debugger files so you can debug any post-release issues you may encounter with your obsfucated product.
If you are delivering a commercial application, it makes sense to spend the money on a decent obsfuscator. A bad choice here can compromise your intellectual property or worse lead you to days of gruesome debugging. What would this cost in comparison to what SmartAssembly costs? |
368,180 | Is there a way (reliable and preferably not commercial) to prevent from Reflector to reflect my source code???
Thanks,
Adi | 2008/12/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/368180",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | No. Reflector looks at your assembly just like the .NET runtime would in order to generate native code to execute. The best you could hope for would be to [obfuscate](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2525/best-net-obfuscation-toolsstrategy) your code and make it (somewhat) harder for the reader to understand.
Some pros and cons of performing the obfuscation can be found at [Should you obfuscate a commercial .Net application?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/71195/should-you-obfuscate-a-commercial-net-application) | Reflector does not use Reflection to show your source code. It uses the .Net metadata (which is in well known published format) to do that.
There is no way to prevent this, but you make make it pointless by obfuscating your assemblies. After obfuscating, class/method/fields are renamed, inline strings in methods are encrypted, method calls are hidden, method control flow is scrambled and so on. So, anybody who use Reflector will see a lot of garbage and will not be able to make sense of most of it.
DISCLAIMER: I work for LogicNP Software, the developers of [Crypto Obfuscator](http://www.ssware.com/cryptoobfuscator/obfuscator-net.htm) |
27,282 | The [**British** Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC) is, as far as I know, a fully government-subsidized British TV channel. Does that not make it an arm of the British government? While some may point to its independence, the same is claimed for the US judiciary system. Yet no one claims that its independence makes the US judiciary something other than a branch of the government. The BBC is an entity which was founded by the British government, which is funded by the British government, and which at times (most notably during WWII) was a propaganda arm of the government.
Since the Russian channel [RT (formerly "*Russia Today*")](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)) was recently asked to register as a foreign agent, because it is owned by the Russian government, shouldn't the same be requested of the BBC? Is there any distinction?
While it may be tempting to point to the fact that Russia is at odds (to put it mildly) with the US and GB is an ally, I don't think that British agents (of other branches of the GB government) are excused from registering as foreign agents. So what's different about BBC? | 2018/01/05 | [
"https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/27282",
"https://politics.stackexchange.com",
"https://politics.stackexchange.com/users/13162/"
] | The BBC is a collection of entities, some of which are funded by the British government, some of which are not.
The BBC's news output which is available outside of the UK is run by BBC Global News, Ltd. This company is not funded in any way by the UK government or by the license fee that is paid by UK residents, but strictly [by advertising and subscription revenues](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-radio-and-tv-12957296). It is because of this lack of funding from the UK government, as well as the editorial independence that you mentioned earlier, that means the BBC would not be covered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.
As for the BBC's entertainment programming (such as what you'll find on BBC Americas), while much of the content is part-funded by the UK license fee (because we enjoy it in the UK as well), it's very difficult to argue that there is any political activity involved, so that would also not be covered under FARA. | While the BBC might well be part of the British *establishment*, it does have independence from the government. We could argue all day about funding sources and whether the licence fee is a tax. From outside the UK the views it presents do appear to coincide with those of the government on many issues. In your comments you mention attitudes to former colonies. The mainstream view of Britain's colonial past is very rosy; even many figures on the left seem to regret the loss of the empire, a veiw that's almost universal on the right (including among the current government, whose representatives do get quite a lot of airtime). Similar arguments apply to Israel/Palestine, where other parts of the traditional British media are much more pro-Israel.
Within the UK the BBC is often perceived as left-wing by Tories and the right-wing press, especially so since the Brexit vote. As the Tories are in government that means a significant perception within the UK of *anti*-government bias. Conversely the left of the Labour party feel pretty hard-done-by and accuse the BBC of unfair treatment. They are required to tread a fine line and by drawing the ire of both sides must be getting it right much of the time. |
27,282 | The [**British** Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC) is, as far as I know, a fully government-subsidized British TV channel. Does that not make it an arm of the British government? While some may point to its independence, the same is claimed for the US judiciary system. Yet no one claims that its independence makes the US judiciary something other than a branch of the government. The BBC is an entity which was founded by the British government, which is funded by the British government, and which at times (most notably during WWII) was a propaganda arm of the government.
Since the Russian channel [RT (formerly "*Russia Today*")](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)) was recently asked to register as a foreign agent, because it is owned by the Russian government, shouldn't the same be requested of the BBC? Is there any distinction?
While it may be tempting to point to the fact that Russia is at odds (to put it mildly) with the US and GB is an ally, I don't think that British agents (of other branches of the GB government) are excused from registering as foreign agents. So what's different about BBC? | 2018/01/05 | [
"https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/27282",
"https://politics.stackexchange.com",
"https://politics.stackexchange.com/users/13162/"
] | The relevant US law is the [Foreign Agents Registration Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Agents_Registration_Act), which covers agents who act "at the order, request, or under the direction or control" of a foreign power.
Therefore, institutional and editorial independence is the key.
If the UK Prime Minister tells (say) an employee of MI6 or the Foreign Office to do something, that person is required to either do it or resign.
This is [not so for the BBC](http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/governance/governance_framework.html). Even [during the Second World War](http://www.bbc.co.uk/historyofthebbc/research/general/censorship-propaganda), the BBC maintained its editorial independence; this was a deliberate policy, as it was believed the BBC would be more trusted if it was seen to be independent rather than a direct mouthpiece for government.
Instead of comparing the BBC to agencies under direct government control, a better analogy would be a university. British universities receive most of their funding from central government; but the Prime Minister is unable to sack university professors at will, and the mere fact of being a professor at (say) Oxford University does not make a person an agent of the British government in any meaningful sense.
Of course, both the BBC and Oxford University are part of the British establishment, and for cultural reasons will tend to reflect the establishment consensus; but that is a different matter from being agencies under the control of the government of the day. | The BBC is a collection of entities, some of which are funded by the British government, some of which are not.
The BBC's news output which is available outside of the UK is run by BBC Global News, Ltd. This company is not funded in any way by the UK government or by the license fee that is paid by UK residents, but strictly [by advertising and subscription revenues](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-radio-and-tv-12957296). It is because of this lack of funding from the UK government, as well as the editorial independence that you mentioned earlier, that means the BBC would not be covered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.
As for the BBC's entertainment programming (such as what you'll find on BBC Americas), while much of the content is part-funded by the UK license fee (because we enjoy it in the UK as well), it's very difficult to argue that there is any political activity involved, so that would also not be covered under FARA. |
27,282 | The [**British** Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC) is, as far as I know, a fully government-subsidized British TV channel. Does that not make it an arm of the British government? While some may point to its independence, the same is claimed for the US judiciary system. Yet no one claims that its independence makes the US judiciary something other than a branch of the government. The BBC is an entity which was founded by the British government, which is funded by the British government, and which at times (most notably during WWII) was a propaganda arm of the government.
Since the Russian channel [RT (formerly "*Russia Today*")](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)) was recently asked to register as a foreign agent, because it is owned by the Russian government, shouldn't the same be requested of the BBC? Is there any distinction?
While it may be tempting to point to the fact that Russia is at odds (to put it mildly) with the US and GB is an ally, I don't think that British agents (of other branches of the GB government) are excused from registering as foreign agents. So what's different about BBC? | 2018/01/05 | [
"https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/27282",
"https://politics.stackexchange.com",
"https://politics.stackexchange.com/users/13162/"
] | The BBC is a collection of entities, some of which are funded by the British government, some of which are not.
The BBC's news output which is available outside of the UK is run by BBC Global News, Ltd. This company is not funded in any way by the UK government or by the license fee that is paid by UK residents, but strictly [by advertising and subscription revenues](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-radio-and-tv-12957296). It is because of this lack of funding from the UK government, as well as the editorial independence that you mentioned earlier, that means the BBC would not be covered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.
As for the BBC's entertainment programming (such as what you'll find on BBC Americas), while much of the content is part-funded by the UK license fee (because we enjoy it in the UK as well), it's very difficult to argue that there is any political activity involved, so that would also not be covered under FARA. | Because FARA is a vague written law that can be used to target particular individuals/entities that the current US government does not like.
For example from Wikipedia, [United States v. Franklin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Franklin):
>
> The 2005 case of United States v. Franklin, Rosen, and Weissman
> against United States Department of Defense employee Larry Franklin
> and American Israel Public Affairs Committee policy director Steven
> Rosen and AIPAC senior Iran analyst Keith Weissman[41][42] raised the
> possibility that AIPAC would come under greater scrutiny by the
> Department of Justice. While Franklin pleaded guilty to passing
> government secrets to Rosen and Weissman, as well as to an Israeli
> government official,[43][44] the cases against Rosen and Weissman were
> dismissed and no actions against AIPAC were instituted.[40]
>
>
>
So it is a matter of a poorly written law that makes "everybody" guilty but allows the government to pick when to enforce it.
Unfortunately this is considered "conspiracy" but it is true in multiple areas some of which are not related to Russia. For example recently there was a discussion if Jeff Sessions will start enforcing federal laws regarding Marijuana(Obama administration decided not to enforce a certain law and now Sessions plans to end that practice). In other words law did not change, but different administrations choose to ignore it or not ignore it. |
27,282 | The [**British** Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC) is, as far as I know, a fully government-subsidized British TV channel. Does that not make it an arm of the British government? While some may point to its independence, the same is claimed for the US judiciary system. Yet no one claims that its independence makes the US judiciary something other than a branch of the government. The BBC is an entity which was founded by the British government, which is funded by the British government, and which at times (most notably during WWII) was a propaganda arm of the government.
Since the Russian channel [RT (formerly "*Russia Today*")](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)) was recently asked to register as a foreign agent, because it is owned by the Russian government, shouldn't the same be requested of the BBC? Is there any distinction?
While it may be tempting to point to the fact that Russia is at odds (to put it mildly) with the US and GB is an ally, I don't think that British agents (of other branches of the GB government) are excused from registering as foreign agents. So what's different about BBC? | 2018/01/05 | [
"https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/27282",
"https://politics.stackexchange.com",
"https://politics.stackexchange.com/users/13162/"
] | The BBC is a collection of entities, some of which are funded by the British government, some of which are not.
The BBC's news output which is available outside of the UK is run by BBC Global News, Ltd. This company is not funded in any way by the UK government or by the license fee that is paid by UK residents, but strictly [by advertising and subscription revenues](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-radio-and-tv-12957296). It is because of this lack of funding from the UK government, as well as the editorial independence that you mentioned earlier, that means the BBC would not be covered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.
As for the BBC's entertainment programming (such as what you'll find on BBC Americas), while much of the content is part-funded by the UK license fee (because we enjoy it in the UK as well), it's very difficult to argue that there is any political activity involved, so that would also not be covered under FARA. | The majority of the BBC is NOT government funded. It is important to make this distinction.
The bulk of the BBC's domestic programming is funded by the TV licence. This is not a tax, but it is an enforceable charge levied on households consuming broadcast TV.
The majority of the BBC's international programming is not funded by the licence fee, but is funded by commercial revenues (advertising etc.).
However, the BBC World Service IS directly funded by the Foreign Office (UK government department).
There are many controversies around the way the BBC is funded (is the license fee a "tax"/how can you "sell" programmes that are made with licence fee funding/where does the World Service draw the line between "international development" and "propaganda" etc etc), but it is fundamentally NOT an organ of the state.
"Auntie" has a unique relationship with the UK public. Politically, the left think it is too conservative and the right think it is too liberal. Since nobody is happy, BBC News (which is required to be impartial) must be getting the balance about right. Yet when there is an event of national importance - people will choose to watch the BBC's coverage of it.
P.S. Channel 4 IS government owned, but commercially funded. |
27,282 | The [**British** Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC) is, as far as I know, a fully government-subsidized British TV channel. Does that not make it an arm of the British government? While some may point to its independence, the same is claimed for the US judiciary system. Yet no one claims that its independence makes the US judiciary something other than a branch of the government. The BBC is an entity which was founded by the British government, which is funded by the British government, and which at times (most notably during WWII) was a propaganda arm of the government.
Since the Russian channel [RT (formerly "*Russia Today*")](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)) was recently asked to register as a foreign agent, because it is owned by the Russian government, shouldn't the same be requested of the BBC? Is there any distinction?
While it may be tempting to point to the fact that Russia is at odds (to put it mildly) with the US and GB is an ally, I don't think that British agents (of other branches of the GB government) are excused from registering as foreign agents. So what's different about BBC? | 2018/01/05 | [
"https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/27282",
"https://politics.stackexchange.com",
"https://politics.stackexchange.com/users/13162/"
] | The relevant US law is the [Foreign Agents Registration Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Agents_Registration_Act), which covers agents who act "at the order, request, or under the direction or control" of a foreign power.
Therefore, institutional and editorial independence is the key.
If the UK Prime Minister tells (say) an employee of MI6 or the Foreign Office to do something, that person is required to either do it or resign.
This is [not so for the BBC](http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/governance/governance_framework.html). Even [during the Second World War](http://www.bbc.co.uk/historyofthebbc/research/general/censorship-propaganda), the BBC maintained its editorial independence; this was a deliberate policy, as it was believed the BBC would be more trusted if it was seen to be independent rather than a direct mouthpiece for government.
Instead of comparing the BBC to agencies under direct government control, a better analogy would be a university. British universities receive most of their funding from central government; but the Prime Minister is unable to sack university professors at will, and the mere fact of being a professor at (say) Oxford University does not make a person an agent of the British government in any meaningful sense.
Of course, both the BBC and Oxford University are part of the British establishment, and for cultural reasons will tend to reflect the establishment consensus; but that is a different matter from being agencies under the control of the government of the day. | While the BBC might well be part of the British *establishment*, it does have independence from the government. We could argue all day about funding sources and whether the licence fee is a tax. From outside the UK the views it presents do appear to coincide with those of the government on many issues. In your comments you mention attitudes to former colonies. The mainstream view of Britain's colonial past is very rosy; even many figures on the left seem to regret the loss of the empire, a veiw that's almost universal on the right (including among the current government, whose representatives do get quite a lot of airtime). Similar arguments apply to Israel/Palestine, where other parts of the traditional British media are much more pro-Israel.
Within the UK the BBC is often perceived as left-wing by Tories and the right-wing press, especially so since the Brexit vote. As the Tories are in government that means a significant perception within the UK of *anti*-government bias. Conversely the left of the Labour party feel pretty hard-done-by and accuse the BBC of unfair treatment. They are required to tread a fine line and by drawing the ire of both sides must be getting it right much of the time. |
27,282 | The [**British** Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC) is, as far as I know, a fully government-subsidized British TV channel. Does that not make it an arm of the British government? While some may point to its independence, the same is claimed for the US judiciary system. Yet no one claims that its independence makes the US judiciary something other than a branch of the government. The BBC is an entity which was founded by the British government, which is funded by the British government, and which at times (most notably during WWII) was a propaganda arm of the government.
Since the Russian channel [RT (formerly "*Russia Today*")](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)) was recently asked to register as a foreign agent, because it is owned by the Russian government, shouldn't the same be requested of the BBC? Is there any distinction?
While it may be tempting to point to the fact that Russia is at odds (to put it mildly) with the US and GB is an ally, I don't think that British agents (of other branches of the GB government) are excused from registering as foreign agents. So what's different about BBC? | 2018/01/05 | [
"https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/27282",
"https://politics.stackexchange.com",
"https://politics.stackexchange.com/users/13162/"
] | Because FARA is a vague written law that can be used to target particular individuals/entities that the current US government does not like.
For example from Wikipedia, [United States v. Franklin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Franklin):
>
> The 2005 case of United States v. Franklin, Rosen, and Weissman
> against United States Department of Defense employee Larry Franklin
> and American Israel Public Affairs Committee policy director Steven
> Rosen and AIPAC senior Iran analyst Keith Weissman[41][42] raised the
> possibility that AIPAC would come under greater scrutiny by the
> Department of Justice. While Franklin pleaded guilty to passing
> government secrets to Rosen and Weissman, as well as to an Israeli
> government official,[43][44] the cases against Rosen and Weissman were
> dismissed and no actions against AIPAC were instituted.[40]
>
>
>
So it is a matter of a poorly written law that makes "everybody" guilty but allows the government to pick when to enforce it.
Unfortunately this is considered "conspiracy" but it is true in multiple areas some of which are not related to Russia. For example recently there was a discussion if Jeff Sessions will start enforcing federal laws regarding Marijuana(Obama administration decided not to enforce a certain law and now Sessions plans to end that practice). In other words law did not change, but different administrations choose to ignore it or not ignore it. | While the BBC might well be part of the British *establishment*, it does have independence from the government. We could argue all day about funding sources and whether the licence fee is a tax. From outside the UK the views it presents do appear to coincide with those of the government on many issues. In your comments you mention attitudes to former colonies. The mainstream view of Britain's colonial past is very rosy; even many figures on the left seem to regret the loss of the empire, a veiw that's almost universal on the right (including among the current government, whose representatives do get quite a lot of airtime). Similar arguments apply to Israel/Palestine, where other parts of the traditional British media are much more pro-Israel.
Within the UK the BBC is often perceived as left-wing by Tories and the right-wing press, especially so since the Brexit vote. As the Tories are in government that means a significant perception within the UK of *anti*-government bias. Conversely the left of the Labour party feel pretty hard-done-by and accuse the BBC of unfair treatment. They are required to tread a fine line and by drawing the ire of both sides must be getting it right much of the time. |
27,282 | The [**British** Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC) is, as far as I know, a fully government-subsidized British TV channel. Does that not make it an arm of the British government? While some may point to its independence, the same is claimed for the US judiciary system. Yet no one claims that its independence makes the US judiciary something other than a branch of the government. The BBC is an entity which was founded by the British government, which is funded by the British government, and which at times (most notably during WWII) was a propaganda arm of the government.
Since the Russian channel [RT (formerly "*Russia Today*")](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)) was recently asked to register as a foreign agent, because it is owned by the Russian government, shouldn't the same be requested of the BBC? Is there any distinction?
While it may be tempting to point to the fact that Russia is at odds (to put it mildly) with the US and GB is an ally, I don't think that British agents (of other branches of the GB government) are excused from registering as foreign agents. So what's different about BBC? | 2018/01/05 | [
"https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/27282",
"https://politics.stackexchange.com",
"https://politics.stackexchange.com/users/13162/"
] | The relevant US law is the [Foreign Agents Registration Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Agents_Registration_Act), which covers agents who act "at the order, request, or under the direction or control" of a foreign power.
Therefore, institutional and editorial independence is the key.
If the UK Prime Minister tells (say) an employee of MI6 or the Foreign Office to do something, that person is required to either do it or resign.
This is [not so for the BBC](http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/governance/governance_framework.html). Even [during the Second World War](http://www.bbc.co.uk/historyofthebbc/research/general/censorship-propaganda), the BBC maintained its editorial independence; this was a deliberate policy, as it was believed the BBC would be more trusted if it was seen to be independent rather than a direct mouthpiece for government.
Instead of comparing the BBC to agencies under direct government control, a better analogy would be a university. British universities receive most of their funding from central government; but the Prime Minister is unable to sack university professors at will, and the mere fact of being a professor at (say) Oxford University does not make a person an agent of the British government in any meaningful sense.
Of course, both the BBC and Oxford University are part of the British establishment, and for cultural reasons will tend to reflect the establishment consensus; but that is a different matter from being agencies under the control of the government of the day. | Because FARA is a vague written law that can be used to target particular individuals/entities that the current US government does not like.
For example from Wikipedia, [United States v. Franklin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Franklin):
>
> The 2005 case of United States v. Franklin, Rosen, and Weissman
> against United States Department of Defense employee Larry Franklin
> and American Israel Public Affairs Committee policy director Steven
> Rosen and AIPAC senior Iran analyst Keith Weissman[41][42] raised the
> possibility that AIPAC would come under greater scrutiny by the
> Department of Justice. While Franklin pleaded guilty to passing
> government secrets to Rosen and Weissman, as well as to an Israeli
> government official,[43][44] the cases against Rosen and Weissman were
> dismissed and no actions against AIPAC were instituted.[40]
>
>
>
So it is a matter of a poorly written law that makes "everybody" guilty but allows the government to pick when to enforce it.
Unfortunately this is considered "conspiracy" but it is true in multiple areas some of which are not related to Russia. For example recently there was a discussion if Jeff Sessions will start enforcing federal laws regarding Marijuana(Obama administration decided not to enforce a certain law and now Sessions plans to end that practice). In other words law did not change, but different administrations choose to ignore it or not ignore it. |
27,282 | The [**British** Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC) is, as far as I know, a fully government-subsidized British TV channel. Does that not make it an arm of the British government? While some may point to its independence, the same is claimed for the US judiciary system. Yet no one claims that its independence makes the US judiciary something other than a branch of the government. The BBC is an entity which was founded by the British government, which is funded by the British government, and which at times (most notably during WWII) was a propaganda arm of the government.
Since the Russian channel [RT (formerly "*Russia Today*")](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)) was recently asked to register as a foreign agent, because it is owned by the Russian government, shouldn't the same be requested of the BBC? Is there any distinction?
While it may be tempting to point to the fact that Russia is at odds (to put it mildly) with the US and GB is an ally, I don't think that British agents (of other branches of the GB government) are excused from registering as foreign agents. So what's different about BBC? | 2018/01/05 | [
"https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/27282",
"https://politics.stackexchange.com",
"https://politics.stackexchange.com/users/13162/"
] | The relevant US law is the [Foreign Agents Registration Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Agents_Registration_Act), which covers agents who act "at the order, request, or under the direction or control" of a foreign power.
Therefore, institutional and editorial independence is the key.
If the UK Prime Minister tells (say) an employee of MI6 or the Foreign Office to do something, that person is required to either do it or resign.
This is [not so for the BBC](http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/governance/governance_framework.html). Even [during the Second World War](http://www.bbc.co.uk/historyofthebbc/research/general/censorship-propaganda), the BBC maintained its editorial independence; this was a deliberate policy, as it was believed the BBC would be more trusted if it was seen to be independent rather than a direct mouthpiece for government.
Instead of comparing the BBC to agencies under direct government control, a better analogy would be a university. British universities receive most of their funding from central government; but the Prime Minister is unable to sack university professors at will, and the mere fact of being a professor at (say) Oxford University does not make a person an agent of the British government in any meaningful sense.
Of course, both the BBC and Oxford University are part of the British establishment, and for cultural reasons will tend to reflect the establishment consensus; but that is a different matter from being agencies under the control of the government of the day. | The majority of the BBC is NOT government funded. It is important to make this distinction.
The bulk of the BBC's domestic programming is funded by the TV licence. This is not a tax, but it is an enforceable charge levied on households consuming broadcast TV.
The majority of the BBC's international programming is not funded by the licence fee, but is funded by commercial revenues (advertising etc.).
However, the BBC World Service IS directly funded by the Foreign Office (UK government department).
There are many controversies around the way the BBC is funded (is the license fee a "tax"/how can you "sell" programmes that are made with licence fee funding/where does the World Service draw the line between "international development" and "propaganda" etc etc), but it is fundamentally NOT an organ of the state.
"Auntie" has a unique relationship with the UK public. Politically, the left think it is too conservative and the right think it is too liberal. Since nobody is happy, BBC News (which is required to be impartial) must be getting the balance about right. Yet when there is an event of national importance - people will choose to watch the BBC's coverage of it.
P.S. Channel 4 IS government owned, but commercially funded. |
27,282 | The [**British** Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC) is, as far as I know, a fully government-subsidized British TV channel. Does that not make it an arm of the British government? While some may point to its independence, the same is claimed for the US judiciary system. Yet no one claims that its independence makes the US judiciary something other than a branch of the government. The BBC is an entity which was founded by the British government, which is funded by the British government, and which at times (most notably during WWII) was a propaganda arm of the government.
Since the Russian channel [RT (formerly "*Russia Today*")](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)) was recently asked to register as a foreign agent, because it is owned by the Russian government, shouldn't the same be requested of the BBC? Is there any distinction?
While it may be tempting to point to the fact that Russia is at odds (to put it mildly) with the US and GB is an ally, I don't think that British agents (of other branches of the GB government) are excused from registering as foreign agents. So what's different about BBC? | 2018/01/05 | [
"https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/27282",
"https://politics.stackexchange.com",
"https://politics.stackexchange.com/users/13162/"
] | Because FARA is a vague written law that can be used to target particular individuals/entities that the current US government does not like.
For example from Wikipedia, [United States v. Franklin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Franklin):
>
> The 2005 case of United States v. Franklin, Rosen, and Weissman
> against United States Department of Defense employee Larry Franklin
> and American Israel Public Affairs Committee policy director Steven
> Rosen and AIPAC senior Iran analyst Keith Weissman[41][42] raised the
> possibility that AIPAC would come under greater scrutiny by the
> Department of Justice. While Franklin pleaded guilty to passing
> government secrets to Rosen and Weissman, as well as to an Israeli
> government official,[43][44] the cases against Rosen and Weissman were
> dismissed and no actions against AIPAC were instituted.[40]
>
>
>
So it is a matter of a poorly written law that makes "everybody" guilty but allows the government to pick when to enforce it.
Unfortunately this is considered "conspiracy" but it is true in multiple areas some of which are not related to Russia. For example recently there was a discussion if Jeff Sessions will start enforcing federal laws regarding Marijuana(Obama administration decided not to enforce a certain law and now Sessions plans to end that practice). In other words law did not change, but different administrations choose to ignore it or not ignore it. | The majority of the BBC is NOT government funded. It is important to make this distinction.
The bulk of the BBC's domestic programming is funded by the TV licence. This is not a tax, but it is an enforceable charge levied on households consuming broadcast TV.
The majority of the BBC's international programming is not funded by the licence fee, but is funded by commercial revenues (advertising etc.).
However, the BBC World Service IS directly funded by the Foreign Office (UK government department).
There are many controversies around the way the BBC is funded (is the license fee a "tax"/how can you "sell" programmes that are made with licence fee funding/where does the World Service draw the line between "international development" and "propaganda" etc etc), but it is fundamentally NOT an organ of the state.
"Auntie" has a unique relationship with the UK public. Politically, the left think it is too conservative and the right think it is too liberal. Since nobody is happy, BBC News (which is required to be impartial) must be getting the balance about right. Yet when there is an event of national importance - people will choose to watch the BBC's coverage of it.
P.S. Channel 4 IS government owned, but commercially funded. |
160,866 | By default, only the most recently used plan as well as "balanced" are available. How do I display all 3 default power plans? I'd like to avoid third party programs if possible. | 2010/07/07 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/160866",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/373/"
] | Battery Care installs malware along with it. You can opt out (although not obviously at first glance). I would discourage users from installing software that bundles malware. The author gets barely enough to buy a beer per year from that stuff and it only serves as a distribution point for malware and spyware. It needs to end.
[Here's an alternative](http://powerschemeswitcher.codeplex.com/) that doesn't bundle any malware. | I'll throw in a late update to this, [Power Scheme Switcher](http://powerschemeswitcher.codeplex.com/), under the MIT license with source code available from the same place. Built in C# on Visual Studio 2012. |
160,866 | By default, only the most recently used plan as well as "balanced" are available. How do I display all 3 default power plans? I'd like to avoid third party programs if possible. | 2010/07/07 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/160866",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/373/"
] | Just use the shortcut key `WIN`+`X` which will bring up the mobility center; then you may choose the power plan you want. very simple!! | See my answer to this an other question, on how to create your own Power Scheme switcher menu, using only Windows built-in features :
<https://superuser.com/a/1631250/711015>
That way you can show and have access to switch to any number of schemes. |
160,866 | By default, only the most recently used plan as well as "balanced" are available. How do I display all 3 default power plans? I'd like to avoid third party programs if possible. | 2010/07/07 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/160866",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/373/"
] | I would recommend [Battery Care](http://batterycare.net/en/index.html), a freeware tool that does more than allowing you to easily change the power plans (Power Saver, Balanced and High Performance) . See this [Battery Care review](http://answers-tips.blogspot.com/2010/05/optimize-usage-and-performance-of.html) | Have you looked at [Power Plan Assistant](http://www.techspot.com/downloads/4883-power-plan-assistant-for-windows-7.html)
>
> Searching for 'show all 3 power plans in tray software'? Congratulations, you just have found a comprehensive solution. Power Plan Assistant for Windows 7 is an ultimate manual / automatic power plan switcher and a compact (yet very informative) system Power icon replacement. It's the multiple award-winning, the world's smartest power management tool.
> Blockquote
>
>
> |
160,866 | By default, only the most recently used plan as well as "balanced" are available. How do I display all 3 default power plans? I'd like to avoid third party programs if possible. | 2010/07/07 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/160866",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/373/"
] | Shameless plug:
[Power Buddy](https://github.com/PerfectlyCromulentLtd/PowerBuddy/releases)
Power Buddy is a very lightweight system tray application that allows you to switch between all the defined power plans.
No malware. No junk.
**Full Disclosure: I am the author of this project.** | Have you looked at [Power Plan Assistant](http://www.techspot.com/downloads/4883-power-plan-assistant-for-windows-7.html)
>
> Searching for 'show all 3 power plans in tray software'? Congratulations, you just have found a comprehensive solution. Power Plan Assistant for Windows 7 is an ultimate manual / automatic power plan switcher and a compact (yet very informative) system Power icon replacement. It's the multiple award-winning, the world's smartest power management tool.
> Blockquote
>
>
> |
160,866 | By default, only the most recently used plan as well as "balanced" are available. How do I display all 3 default power plans? I'd like to avoid third party programs if possible. | 2010/07/07 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/160866",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/373/"
] | Shameless plug:
[Power Buddy](https://github.com/PerfectlyCromulentLtd/PowerBuddy/releases)
Power Buddy is a very lightweight system tray application that allows you to switch between all the defined power plans.
No malware. No junk.
**Full Disclosure: I am the author of this project.** | Battery Care installs malware along with it. You can opt out (although not obviously at first glance). I would discourage users from installing software that bundles malware. The author gets barely enough to buy a beer per year from that stuff and it only serves as a distribution point for malware and spyware. It needs to end.
[Here's an alternative](http://powerschemeswitcher.codeplex.com/) that doesn't bundle any malware. |
160,866 | By default, only the most recently used plan as well as "balanced" are available. How do I display all 3 default power plans? I'd like to avoid third party programs if possible. | 2010/07/07 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/160866",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/373/"
] | I'll throw in a late update to this, [Power Scheme Switcher](http://powerschemeswitcher.codeplex.com/), under the MIT license with source code available from the same place. Built in C# on Visual Studio 2012. | See my answer to this an other question, on how to create your own Power Scheme switcher menu, using only Windows built-in features :
<https://superuser.com/a/1631250/711015>
That way you can show and have access to switch to any number of schemes. |
160,866 | By default, only the most recently used plan as well as "balanced" are available. How do I display all 3 default power plans? I'd like to avoid third party programs if possible. | 2010/07/07 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/160866",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/373/"
] | I would recommend [Battery Care](http://batterycare.net/en/index.html), a freeware tool that does more than allowing you to easily change the power plans (Power Saver, Balanced and High Performance) . See this [Battery Care review](http://answers-tips.blogspot.com/2010/05/optimize-usage-and-performance-of.html) | I'll throw in a late update to this, [Power Scheme Switcher](http://powerschemeswitcher.codeplex.com/), under the MIT license with source code available from the same place. Built in C# on Visual Studio 2012. |
160,866 | By default, only the most recently used plan as well as "balanced" are available. How do I display all 3 default power plans? I'd like to avoid third party programs if possible. | 2010/07/07 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/160866",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/373/"
] | Windows 7 has no natural settings to show more than 2 power plans in the system tray. However, you can create shortcuts or hotkeys to switch between your power plans. How-to Geek has a nice article about how to do that: [Create a Shortcut or Hotkey to Switch Power Plans.](http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/windows-vista/create-a-shortcut-or-hotkey-to-switch-power-plans/)
One of the users in a forum having the same question as you says that this solution is perfect; but each time he ran the shortcut, the command prompt popped up for a second. To prevent this he created a small script. You can see the related post [here](http://forum.notebookreview.com/microsoft-windows-7/417165-more-than-just-2-power-plans-battery-tray-icon-popup-3.html#post5315312).
There is also a Windows sidebar gadget which can do what you want. It's called Power Scheme and can be downloaded from this [page](http://gallery.live.com/liveItemDetail.aspx?li=e0040b09-c1c8-4ad0-b2a4-a3efc8fa850f&bt=1&pl=1).
Although you avoid 3rd party solutions, there is a tool called [Power Plan Assistant for Windows® 7](http://www.powerplan7.com/features.htm) which can do the job as well.
 | I'll throw in a late update to this, [Power Scheme Switcher](http://powerschemeswitcher.codeplex.com/), under the MIT license with source code available from the same place. Built in C# on Visual Studio 2012. |
160,866 | By default, only the most recently used plan as well as "balanced" are available. How do I display all 3 default power plans? I'd like to avoid third party programs if possible. | 2010/07/07 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/160866",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/373/"
] | I would recommend [Battery Care](http://batterycare.net/en/index.html), a freeware tool that does more than allowing you to easily change the power plans (Power Saver, Balanced and High Performance) . See this [Battery Care review](http://answers-tips.blogspot.com/2010/05/optimize-usage-and-performance-of.html) | See my answer to this an other question, on how to create your own Power Scheme switcher menu, using only Windows built-in features :
<https://superuser.com/a/1631250/711015>
That way you can show and have access to switch to any number of schemes. |
160,866 | By default, only the most recently used plan as well as "balanced" are available. How do I display all 3 default power plans? I'd like to avoid third party programs if possible. | 2010/07/07 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/160866",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/373/"
] | Just use the shortcut key `WIN`+`X` which will bring up the mobility center; then you may choose the power plan you want. very simple!! | I'll throw in a late update to this, [Power Scheme Switcher](http://powerschemeswitcher.codeplex.com/), under the MIT license with source code available from the same place. Built in C# on Visual Studio 2012. |
499,878 | Kirchhoff’s junction rule is based on conservation of charge and the
outgoing currents add up and are equal to incoming current at a
junction.
but Bending or reorienting the wire does not change the validity of Kirchhoff’s junction rule. how it is possible? | 2019/09/02 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/499878",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/238651/"
] | The physical basis of KCL is that charge doesn't build up in any region of the wire. And since charge is a conserved quantity that means that for any volume of space within your circuit, the algebraic sum of currents through the surface of that volume must be zero.
Since none of the physical assumptions behind KCL depend on the specific arrangement or shape of the wires, changing the arrangement or shape of the wires doesn't invalidate the law.
But, the pre-condition that charge doesn't build up in any region of the wire isn't a truth of nature. It's an approximation (part of the *lumped circuit approximation*) that limits the type of circuits where KCL is actually valid. If this approximation weren't valid for some particular circuit, we just wouldn't use KCL to analyze it.
In a physical circuit bending the wires might change the parasitic capacitance between one wire (for example, one that's inside the test volume) and another one (outside the volume). Then there would be some charge build up in the two capacitively coupled wires. To apply KCL in this case we must represent the parasitic capacitance with a capacitor element in our circuit model, and keep track of the current through it as one of the currents that contributes to the inward or outward current of the nodes it connects to. | Why it will change. it is like coming charge or electrons equals to going electrons on junction,if you disorient it will have no effect on those electrons , as long as you don't touch two conducting wires. Imagine you have a extension board and you are just moving wires connecting devices to it.i know it is not ideal example , but it'll work i think. |
4,315 | Obviously, each of us has his or her own answer to this question. When I am asked I tell students that the way we talk changes rapidly and, because there is a solid cultural reason that we need to understand what people read and wrote a few hundred years ago, academics have a valid reason for slowing change in the English language. I'd be interested to learn what others say. | 2013/12/09 | [
"https://english.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4315",
"https://english.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.meta.stackexchange.com/users/48653/"
] | This depends on your audience, of course, but, assuming we're dealing with younger students, I wouldn't attempt to motivate them by explaining that they'll need to understand proper grammar so they can read and understand what people wrote centuries ago. After all, we're dealing with a generation where it's often a small victory when you can get them to read a book before watching the movie.
There's something to be said about proper grammar, though, particularly when it's time to start a profession, or even get a job. I remind my kids, "When you turn in a job application, it's probably going into a stack with 50 others. How will your application stand out, to the point where it gets pulled off the applicant pile, and put into the candidate pile?" When the application form asks, *"Why do you want to work for our company?"* and you can't muster anything much better than an internet cat ("Bcuz i need ca$h"), there's a good chance your application will collect dust for a long time. If you have a strong command of language, though – if you can be articulate, precise, and grammatical – you stand a much better chance of rising above your peers from the outset.
Sure, language evolves, but that's not a good excuse to remain ignorant.
As for slowing down change, I don't mind language evolving, but I'd rather not see it devolve. It's one thing to see a dictionary's usage panel gradually accept a new usage of a word, it's another to plainly sound unintelligent. Everyone will draw their own lines between what makes them bristle and where they are comfortable. Personally, I don't find the use of *fun* as an adjective particularly irritating, but I'd rather hear fingernails scrape across a chalkboard than hear [*funner*](https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/137907/is-funner-a-word) in a sentence. But that's just me. If everyone drew their acceptability boundaries in the same place, there'd probably be little need for ELU. | My answer is similar to J.R.'s, except my students read voraciously, and still do. One of my students, my son, gave me a book he enjoyed greatly: *The Road*, by Cormac McCarthy. For about a year, I was unable to read it; it is full of sentence fragments. Regarding punctuation, he said, “I believe in periods, in capitals, in the occasional comma, and that’s it.” While I loved His *All the Pretty Horses*, he takes it too far in *the Road*.
Where grammar is concerned, as a Latin teacher, I was unmoving. I always told my students that there would come a day that they would need to impress *my* generation with their command of the English Language. Here I agree completely with J.R. To stand out is a good thing. As for motivating others, it's like the best reason for etiquette - it puts people at ease. If you speak clearly and well, your audience won't struggle to understand your meaning. |
25,384,603 | Would a CalDAV server provide faster syncing than .ics files? Specifically for iOS and Google Calendar. I realize the client is responsible for updating and frequency.
Many posts indicate Google Calendar is slow to update .ics feeds. I tested and after 6+hrs, it still hadn't updated the changes I made to the .ics file.
Same issue with iOS. Initial load of the .ics file loads the calendar fine. But after changes to the .ics file, iOS never makes another request for the file again for days (watching apache log file).
I'm trying to share a calendar feed. I only need to post the calendar (read-only). I don't need the user to make changes. .ics seems easier than running a full CalDAV server. If I do, is it worth it? Will it sync to Google Calendar, iOS, and other clients quickly (minutes, not days)? | 2014/08/19 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/25384603",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/3185615/"
] | CalDAV is a better choice if your data changes quite a bit anyways. It'll only send changed data (instead of the full calendar), which is particularly important on mobile devices. (you don't want to sent a full 1MB calendar to the client just because a title of a single event changed ...)
For webcal, checkout this one: [Set Update Limits on iCalendar Feed](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/538081/set-update-limits-on-icalendar-feed). You might want to try the REFRESH-INTERVAL and X-PUBLISHED-TTL properties on your calendar.
I suppose if you don't have such, clients will fall back to the weekly refresh ...
Having said that, CalDAV updates should definitely default to faster refreshes (like 15 mins instead of a week?).
For essentially instant refreshes on iOS/OSX, use either iCloud or OS X server to host your calendar. Changes to such will be pushed to the devices via APS.
Maybe it's also worth noting that you can host subscribed/webcal calendars within a CalDAV account. And configure the refresh settings of such via WebDAV properties.
The right approach depends a little bit on what you actually try to achieve ;-)
P.S.: All this doesn't help you with Google calendar clients as they don't support CalDAV in the first place ... | Normally, a .ics file is for importing static data into a calendar. I wouldn't expect to use a .ics file if the entries are going to be updated and need to be pushed to the client. Think of it like a snapshot.
CalDAV is a lot more sensible here: it's a whole protocol for sending and receiving updates. |
25,384,603 | Would a CalDAV server provide faster syncing than .ics files? Specifically for iOS and Google Calendar. I realize the client is responsible for updating and frequency.
Many posts indicate Google Calendar is slow to update .ics feeds. I tested and after 6+hrs, it still hadn't updated the changes I made to the .ics file.
Same issue with iOS. Initial load of the .ics file loads the calendar fine. But after changes to the .ics file, iOS never makes another request for the file again for days (watching apache log file).
I'm trying to share a calendar feed. I only need to post the calendar (read-only). I don't need the user to make changes. .ics seems easier than running a full CalDAV server. If I do, is it worth it? Will it sync to Google Calendar, iOS, and other clients quickly (minutes, not days)? | 2014/08/19 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/25384603",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/3185615/"
] | CalDAV is a better choice if your data changes quite a bit anyways. It'll only send changed data (instead of the full calendar), which is particularly important on mobile devices. (you don't want to sent a full 1MB calendar to the client just because a title of a single event changed ...)
For webcal, checkout this one: [Set Update Limits on iCalendar Feed](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/538081/set-update-limits-on-icalendar-feed). You might want to try the REFRESH-INTERVAL and X-PUBLISHED-TTL properties on your calendar.
I suppose if you don't have such, clients will fall back to the weekly refresh ...
Having said that, CalDAV updates should definitely default to faster refreshes (like 15 mins instead of a week?).
For essentially instant refreshes on iOS/OSX, use either iCloud or OS X server to host your calendar. Changes to such will be pushed to the devices via APS.
Maybe it's also worth noting that you can host subscribed/webcal calendars within a CalDAV account. And configure the refresh settings of such via WebDAV properties.
The right approach depends a little bit on what you actually try to achieve ;-)
P.S.: All this doesn't help you with Google calendar clients as they don't support CalDAV in the first place ... | As of today, CalDAV is not an option in your scenario I'm afraid:
1. There is no such thing as a caldav url.
2. Clients could, through a few queries, make the distinction between a basic ics file and a CalDAV collection but they currently don't. So you will have to expose that ics versus caldav business to the end user somehow.
3. Some of the CalDAV clients that you seem to care about (iOS) don't offer a way to anonymously "subscribe" to an individual CalDAV collection. They will interact only with a full-fledged CalDAV account. |
428,168 | Is there any way to view the stars even in a cloudy sky? For example by using a particular camera, or a particular UV filter in front of the camera, and so on. | 2018/09/11 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/428168",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/206370/"
] | Have a look at the liquid water absorption spectrum across a wide wavelength range:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/XxmcX.jpg)
As long as you are not observing from from space, there is always some water vapour along the line of sight to a star. Depending on the thickness of the cloud cover and the brightness of the stars, it may be possible to view some of the stars.
[Relevant Wikipedia article.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_absorption_by_water) | for a cloudy sky, Mie scattering is playing the role. to see a star you have to use larger wavelength :
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/N1LzO.jpg)
but the ordinary cameras are not sensitive in IR ($\lambda$ >900 nm)
as a rule of thumb, the larger the wavelength the easier way to image through the particles. |
428,168 | Is there any way to view the stars even in a cloudy sky? For example by using a particular camera, or a particular UV filter in front of the camera, and so on. | 2018/09/11 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/428168",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/206370/"
] | Have a look at the liquid water absorption spectrum across a wide wavelength range:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/XxmcX.jpg)
As long as you are not observing from from space, there is always some water vapour along the line of sight to a star. Depending on the thickness of the cloud cover and the brightness of the stars, it may be possible to view some of the stars.
[Relevant Wikipedia article.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_absorption_by_water) | You need an app to see the stars in a cloudy sky. |
428,168 | Is there any way to view the stars even in a cloudy sky? For example by using a particular camera, or a particular UV filter in front of the camera, and so on. | 2018/09/11 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/428168",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/206370/"
] | for a cloudy sky, Mie scattering is playing the role. to see a star you have to use larger wavelength :
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/N1LzO.jpg)
but the ordinary cameras are not sensitive in IR ($\lambda$ >900 nm)
as a rule of thumb, the larger the wavelength the easier way to image through the particles. | You need an app to see the stars in a cloudy sky. |
24,071,902 | I'm trying to implement pre-authorization for google wallet purchases for an android application. Google has [a page describing this feature](https://developers.google.com/wallet/instant-buy/preauth), but the instructions stop after obtaining a api client ID; no code samples on how to initiate the request.
The API has [references to checking the status](https://developer.android.com/reference/com/google/android/gms/wallet/Wallet.html#checkForPreAuthorization%28com.google.android.gms.common.api.GoogleApiClient,%20int%29) of pre-authorization, but again nothing about how to request it.
Can anyone point me to a code sample or api call I'm missing? | 2014/06/05 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/24071902",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/627919/"
] | (I work at Asana.) This is a very good question. Asana has actually been working on a subscriptions endpoint for the API, and has alpha-tested a version in the past. Finishing it up and launching it are on the near-term roadmap so in all likelihood you will hear something about it in the next few months. | Asana now has beta support for webhooks which can "allow an application to be notified of changes" which can do away with polling:
* <https://asana.com/developers/feed/webhooks-beta>
* <https://asana.com/developers/api-reference/webhooks>
This is in addition to (and in a sense based on) "Events" mentioned in the comments. |
101,352 | If Bitcoin is going down, do I only lose if I sell my bitcoin?
So, if I hold them I won’t lose? | 2021/01/11 | [
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/101352",
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com",
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/users/113922/"
] | Hardware wallets such as the Trezor ones you mentioned are only a secure method of storing and using your private keys. When you want to send BTC, that transaction will be signed mathematically completely within the confines of the key itself.
One *could* design a hardware wallet with a full user interface, negating the need for a separate computer all together, but that would be far more expensive; in the realm of the price of a modern mobile phone. Keeping the code inside a Trezor to the utter minimum reduces the potential for security weaknesses and improves reliability, too. | Note that hardware wallets do you store any bitcoins. Without going too technical, hardware wallets securely store the private keys (derived from the special 12/18/24 words). All your bitcoins are stored in the actual blockchain. You use your private keys to unlock your funds in the blockchain. Think of your wallet as the key and the blockchain as the vault. The hardware wallet does the necessary cryptographic calculations to query your funds or send bitcoin to another address. It cannot do it offline, it must require internet connection to communicate with the blockchain.
>
> Actually, I vaguely had the idea that I would be able to buy one and
> then physically take it with me somewhere, without any computer
> around, and sort of "beam" any amount of my coins into another
> person's Trezor or even other hardware wallet...
>
>
>
That is technically possible but that means the wallets will require some sort of NFC and also connection to the internet (4G/5G/WiFi). The wallet will also require better CPU and higher RAM. This will significantly increase the price of the hardware wallet and also make it bulkier.
And finally, no, you do not necessarily need to use the Trezor website. You can host the web interface right on your laptop but might be of an overkill for any average user. See <https://wiki.trezor.io/User_manual:Running_a_local_instance_of_Trezor_Wallet_backend_(Blockbook)> |
20,891,373 | So im about to start developing a responsive site and was wondering if i should use media queries to modify one element, or have multiple elements and just hide them in and out... Thanks
Ex. one nav and modify it based on resolution or 3 navs big, med, and small.. and just hide them based on resolution | 2014/01/02 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/20891373",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2515563/"
] | It's better to have one element and modify the style via media queries unless your content is so drastically different that having one element becomes kludgy. In which case, maybe you need to ask yourself why your mobile content is so very different than your desktop.
I'd suggest starting here: <http://alistapart.com/article/responsive-web-design/> | Media queries are definitely the way to go :). Else it will probably get pretty messy. |
508 | It is very tempting to assign extra credit problems that are (a) substantially more difficult than others on the problem set, (b) ask for the history of something we discussed in class, or (c) are related to something just barely outside of the scope of the class.
However, I have never done so because, in my experience, very few professors give extra credit.
* **Why do so few professors assign extra credit (or is this not the case)?**
* **What are the arguments against assigning extra credit problems?** | 2014/03/19 | [
"https://matheducators.stackexchange.com/questions/508",
"https://matheducators.stackexchange.com",
"https://matheducators.stackexchange.com/users/52/"
] | >
> **Why do so few professors assign extra credit?**
>
>
>
In my experience, the attitude towards extra credit is consistent throughout the department. Nearly every professor in the education department at my university puts extra credit questions on the test, but only a few in the math department do. After chatting with other students and professors, this seems to be common in other universities as well.
According to [this article on Faculty Focus](http://www.facultyfocus.com/seminars/extra-credit-an-undeserved-gift-or-a-second-chance-to-learn/), *of the 362 people who answered the question “Do you give extra credit?” 42 percent said sometimes, 31 percent said often and 27 percent said never.* While this doesn't give a breakdown of what type of extra credit, it's interesting to see that 73% of respondents give extra credit at least some of the time.
>
> **What are the arguments against assigning extra credit problems?**
>
>
>
From [an article on that seminar](http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-and-learning/does-extra-credit-have-a-place-in-the-college-classroom/):
>
> According to Weimer, some instructors oppose extra credit because they believe that:
>
>
> * It reinforces students’ beliefs that they don’t have to work hard because whatever they miss they can make up with extra credit.
> * Students who ask for extra credit tend to be those who aren’t working very hard — or those who hope they won’t have to work hard — because some easy extra credit options will be available to them.
> * Time spent on extra credit means less time spent on regular assignments.
> * Extra credit (especially if it’s easy) lowers academic standards.
> * It’s inherently unfair to students who work hard and get it done right the first time.
> * It means more work for already busy teachers.
>
>
>
**But I disagree with those issues!**
I like giving extra credit problems. I believe extra credit problems that are significantly more difficult and require more analytic thinking on the part of the student are fantastic as long as they're used properly. If you're planning on using extra credit problems, consider what you're trying to achieve by providing those problems. Personally, I want to use extra credit to separate the best students and provide those who have worked extremely hard to understand the concepts some leeway on simple mistakes.
* **Don't weigh them too heavily** - Extra credit should give a good student some extra points to offset "stupid" mistakes but not allow a student to pass without understanding the basics.
* **Do make them difficult** - You're not giving away free points. You want to reward students who understand the concepts you've taught them above and beyond what is required.
* **Do put them at the end and label them properly** - It would be terrible for a student to get stuck on the more difficult extra credit and not have time to finish the main problems in a test. | I give extra credits routinely, mostly to reward not-asked-for work (point out an error in the class notes, suggest an interesting alternative solution for an exam or homework problem, ...) and sometimes for extra homework assigned. In my (by now extensive) experience, students who go the mile to get extra credit would get good or outstanding grades even without the extra points. A very few of those hanging in the balance get over the bump by this, but then they have shown enough insight to merit a passing grade.
In exams I asign a few extra points, but not a problem marked specially. That gives some leeway for mistakes and still getting a perfect score. My exams are typically a fairly simple, general question ("do you even know what we are talking about?") and the remainder several more difficult problems covering the material about evenly. Sometimes questions have a "bonus track" part, if it makes sense to look somewhat further. |
508 | It is very tempting to assign extra credit problems that are (a) substantially more difficult than others on the problem set, (b) ask for the history of something we discussed in class, or (c) are related to something just barely outside of the scope of the class.
However, I have never done so because, in my experience, very few professors give extra credit.
* **Why do so few professors assign extra credit (or is this not the case)?**
* **What are the arguments against assigning extra credit problems?** | 2014/03/19 | [
"https://matheducators.stackexchange.com/questions/508",
"https://matheducators.stackexchange.com",
"https://matheducators.stackexchange.com/users/52/"
] | >
> **Why do so few professors assign extra credit?**
>
>
>
In my experience, the attitude towards extra credit is consistent throughout the department. Nearly every professor in the education department at my university puts extra credit questions on the test, but only a few in the math department do. After chatting with other students and professors, this seems to be common in other universities as well.
According to [this article on Faculty Focus](http://www.facultyfocus.com/seminars/extra-credit-an-undeserved-gift-or-a-second-chance-to-learn/), *of the 362 people who answered the question “Do you give extra credit?” 42 percent said sometimes, 31 percent said often and 27 percent said never.* While this doesn't give a breakdown of what type of extra credit, it's interesting to see that 73% of respondents give extra credit at least some of the time.
>
> **What are the arguments against assigning extra credit problems?**
>
>
>
From [an article on that seminar](http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-and-learning/does-extra-credit-have-a-place-in-the-college-classroom/):
>
> According to Weimer, some instructors oppose extra credit because they believe that:
>
>
> * It reinforces students’ beliefs that they don’t have to work hard because whatever they miss they can make up with extra credit.
> * Students who ask for extra credit tend to be those who aren’t working very hard — or those who hope they won’t have to work hard — because some easy extra credit options will be available to them.
> * Time spent on extra credit means less time spent on regular assignments.
> * Extra credit (especially if it’s easy) lowers academic standards.
> * It’s inherently unfair to students who work hard and get it done right the first time.
> * It means more work for already busy teachers.
>
>
>
**But I disagree with those issues!**
I like giving extra credit problems. I believe extra credit problems that are significantly more difficult and require more analytic thinking on the part of the student are fantastic as long as they're used properly. If you're planning on using extra credit problems, consider what you're trying to achieve by providing those problems. Personally, I want to use extra credit to separate the best students and provide those who have worked extremely hard to understand the concepts some leeway on simple mistakes.
* **Don't weigh them too heavily** - Extra credit should give a good student some extra points to offset "stupid" mistakes but not allow a student to pass without understanding the basics.
* **Do make them difficult** - You're not giving away free points. You want to reward students who understand the concepts you've taught them above and beyond what is required.
* **Do put them at the end and label them properly** - It would be terrible for a student to get stuck on the more difficult extra credit and not have time to finish the main problems in a test. | **Extra credit often leads to problems with curves.** I've heard dialogues like this:
**Student:** *I got 88% overall, I think I deserve an A.*
**Teacher:** *But lots of other students got 90's by answering extra credit.*
Here the grade without extra credit is being compared against a standard of grades with extra credit. So the credit was not "extra" at all, but just a badly-labeled part of the class.
To avoid this, keep two sets of grade books, and don't look at the one with extra credit until you've set grade cutoffs from the one without extra credit.
Or, more easily and more transparently, don't give extra credit at all. Your suggestions a, b, and c sound good for short required written assignments. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.