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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
8,858,918 | So I have been using Farseer for a platformer with physics, and I started running into some concerns as shown below:
When I want my character to jump, I don't only want to apply an impulse to the character body, but more realistically, the character body should be pushing down on objects below it (1) thus propelling itself upwards (2).
The same applies when I want my character to move. When the character moves, it should apply force and push off the objects below it (1), not carry the object with it and thus moving in the opposite direction (2).
Although I will be using skeletal animations for this game, I would like to keep it to be a bounding-box shape. This will be a networked game, and the physics will be handled via the server. I prefer to avoid server stress, so I will keep characters to a bounding box and keep all skeletal animations to the client side.
**So here are my questions:**
>
> Am I forced to "fake" these forces?
>
>
> Is it reasonable to duplicate skeletal animations on the server side,
> and just use capsule bodies for the different bones of each character?
> Will this be too intense?
>
>
>
The game should be able to support 20-30 people per room over multiple rooms. If it comes to it, I would like to avoid very heavy server stress.
I tried to post this to GameDev, but I don't have the reputation to post images there yet, so I will try to find an answer here first. | 2012/01/14 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/8858918",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/816824/"
] | Instead of applying a force in the direction you want your player to move, apply it in the opposite direction. This will essentially create a collision, and the box will push your character up. If you play around with the body restitution property, you might be able to reach an acceptable "bounciness" that could work for you.
You would need to check if your player is resting on top of a box first, or else your player will just fly downwards. | Farseer bodies should keep track of any current collisions, this is how the character knows it is supported by something underneath. I would recommend applying a force to whatever the character is supported by, and if you are going for realism, take into account the mass of both the character and the supported object, and how high the jump is going to be. Whatever is calculated as downward force to be applied to the supporting body should be reversed and also applied to the character.
If you want to try and use Farseer to make this happen, rather than calculate it yourself, you might be able to do this using springs, but otherwise pushing down on the supporting object isn't going to get the player to push upward. |
100,506 | I'm making a little linear PSU for my lab. Based on the good ol' LM338K. I fried one last night and I'm still trying to figure out why. I think it might be EMF from my transformer.
I have a transformer, a toroidal 220V to 12V 200W. I noticed it was built as two coils in parallel, so I figured i could connect the coils in series to make it 24V 100W. Indeed, this seems to work (when they're in the right phase, of course).
Now, to reduce dissipation on the LM338K, I decided to add a small relay and connect it like this (let's call the point where the two coils are joined together the "center tap").
* "Right" transformer leg: Diode Bridge ~ input.
* Relay common contact: Diode bridge ~ input.
* "Left" Transformer leg: Relay NO.
* "Center tap": Relay NC.
This allows my PSU to start at 12VAC -> diode bridge + capacitor -> LM338K (I added all the suggested external components, especially the discharge diodes from Vout to Vin).
To control the relay, I have a PIC (which also serves as voltmeter and current meter). I programmed the PIC so that when the output is over 9V, it switches to the full 24V. When it's below 8V, it switches back to 12V coil.
To recap: here's the schematic for the relevant part.
Now, I was testing this last night. Something weird happened. I dialed my pot to 12V, I heard the clicking of the relay and I had effectively 12VDC at the output. When I loaded it with a 120R resistor, all was fine. Then I used a 12V 50W lamp. I gave it 6V. it was working good, regulated excellent. So i started dialing the voltage up to 12V and it started clicking like crazy (I suppose the hysteresis on my program was too quick), it switched 12/24 a few tens of times and then the voltage output went to 0.3V. I quickly shut everything down. Discharged the 2x4700uF caps at the diode bridge output, and turned it back on. It was working again. Then I noticed the voltage was a little off and smelled of "heat": it was the potentiometer glowing inside! The voltage output was = Vin. My LM338K was dead (this is not a fake 338K as the autopsy revealed the component is genuine: i took the cap off and it had a proper copper heatsink and several bond wires for high current pins).
I'm thinking I didn't do anything wrong with this. All current and voltages were within spec of the regulator. The 338 has enough protections (my dad's 30 year old power supply has seen worse and the 338 never burned. Only that time when he accidentally hit a TV's B+ ..60V).
The only thing I can think went wrong is that, when the coil is switched over, I have an open circuit on the transformer for a few milliseconds. Then the other coil is connected. I **think** what could have happened is EMF from the coil switching making a very high voltage spike appear on the 338 and frying it.
Does this make sense? If EMF could be the problem, how could I solve this? I suppose a snubber network somewhere should do the work, but I'm not sure where. In my schematic, should a snubber network go between:
- A and C?
- A-B and B-C
- AB, BC and AC?
Also: how would I calculate the value for an RC network of this type? The relay specs 10mS "Operate time" and 5mS "release time". | 2014/02/21 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/100506",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/4767/"
] | Switching an inductor may make it work like a boost converter, and thus temporarily generate a higher voltage.
One way of making sure that the input voltage to the LM338 converter is no higher than allowed, is to wire a high-wattage (between 600W and 5 kW) TVS diode with an appropriate clamping max voltage biased against the input voltage and ground.
Also, if you're switching on the measured/actual output voltage, then you can get into oscillation. It would be safer to switch on "desired" output voltage, and let the regulator make sure it gets there. You could perhaps feed the bias voltage from the regulator ADJ into your microcontroller with a resistive divider to achieve this. Or you could just use a comparator with a pre-set trip point to drive/un-drive the relay. | Your system definetely oscillated, because of the wrong point of sampling, and wrong switching timing. So on each cycle the initial charge of the capacitor is quite large. What you've probably done is drive the regulator into over current as if it was being powered up 100 times/sec (in case of 50Hz).
Use an independent transformer winding to power the relay and the comparator circuit (with hysteresis off course)
**EDIT**
You can use this comparator to monitoring the output of psu, but don't mix grounds. Use a separate for Opamp power. Switch at around 10V because 9V and 12V used widely and it is not likely to switch at this levels. Look at the MCP6541 data sheet for calculations assistance if you want to to change the trip voltage.
 |
4,016,622 | I have observed that most of the design patterns (I refer mostly from the Gang of Four book) are all based on polymorphism. That leads me to a "enlightened" moment that OOP's polymorphism is the most important feature in the paradigm.
Some of the patterns use polymorphism are: strategy, factory, bridge...
With that, I don't understand why we are not just teaching developers really good polymorphic behavior of OOP instead of overloading them with a bunch of patterns which in fact are based on polymorphism? | 2010/10/25 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4016622",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/486664/"
] | Wouldn't
>
> really good polymorphic behavior
>
>
>
actually **be** how to apply the Gang of Four patterns in a **good** way?
As in, how to apply strategy as a tool so that you don't violate [SRP](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_responsibility_principle) for example. | Because, while polymorphism is *used* to implement the patterns *in OO languages*, but the patterns can be implemented without it (for example, imagine implementing a factory in C).
Additionally, design patterns are, like polymorphism, tools that help developers solve problems. Only learning a subset of the tools (eg, only polymorphism) will put developers at a disadvantage because they will need to “work from first principals“ (so to speak) instead of basing their work (and their thought) on higher level concepts (like design patterns). |
4,016,622 | I have observed that most of the design patterns (I refer mostly from the Gang of Four book) are all based on polymorphism. That leads me to a "enlightened" moment that OOP's polymorphism is the most important feature in the paradigm.
Some of the patterns use polymorphism are: strategy, factory, bridge...
With that, I don't understand why we are not just teaching developers really good polymorphic behavior of OOP instead of overloading them with a bunch of patterns which in fact are based on polymorphism? | 2010/10/25 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4016622",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/486664/"
] | This is a red herring. *Some* languages implement this as polymorphism. Others can implement it as interfaces. Still *others* can use duck-typing. Forcing readers/students into thinking "polymorphism" doesn't actually help in all situations without also being taught the other two mechanisms, which don't exist in every language. At that point it becomes noise. | @Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams I don't think duck-typing, interface and abstract class are different interpretation of polymorphism. If a implementation can not be determined at compile time and must be defined at runtime, it is polymorphism. You can name that concept anything you like, at the end of the day it is the definition of polymorphism. This is coined late/dynamic binding albeit the same principle. |
4,016,622 | I have observed that most of the design patterns (I refer mostly from the Gang of Four book) are all based on polymorphism. That leads me to a "enlightened" moment that OOP's polymorphism is the most important feature in the paradigm.
Some of the patterns use polymorphism are: strategy, factory, bridge...
With that, I don't understand why we are not just teaching developers really good polymorphic behavior of OOP instead of overloading them with a bunch of patterns which in fact are based on polymorphism? | 2010/10/25 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4016622",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/486664/"
] | Every language has its features that are the "killer features" of the whole concept. OOP, being some of the largest and oldest branch of advanced languages has polymorphism, but I can point out other amazing features such as strong functional programming, closures, parallel execution, and other unique things to other languages that are along the same lines of amazingly-powerful features that are must-haves.
Teaching just one method quickly turns you into a one-trick-pony. A strong foundation in theory allows you to pick up a very "different" language like Lisp or Erlang and know what's going on. | @Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams I don't think duck-typing, interface and abstract class are different interpretation of polymorphism. If a implementation can not be determined at compile time and must be defined at runtime, it is polymorphism. You can name that concept anything you like, at the end of the day it is the definition of polymorphism. This is coined late/dynamic binding albeit the same principle. |
4,016,622 | I have observed that most of the design patterns (I refer mostly from the Gang of Four book) are all based on polymorphism. That leads me to a "enlightened" moment that OOP's polymorphism is the most important feature in the paradigm.
Some of the patterns use polymorphism are: strategy, factory, bridge...
With that, I don't understand why we are not just teaching developers really good polymorphic behavior of OOP instead of overloading them with a bunch of patterns which in fact are based on polymorphism? | 2010/10/25 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4016622",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/486664/"
] | Every language has its features that are the "killer features" of the whole concept. OOP, being some of the largest and oldest branch of advanced languages has polymorphism, but I can point out other amazing features such as strong functional programming, closures, parallel execution, and other unique things to other languages that are along the same lines of amazingly-powerful features that are must-haves.
Teaching just one method quickly turns you into a one-trick-pony. A strong foundation in theory allows you to pick up a very "different" language like Lisp or Erlang and know what's going on. | Because, while polymorphism is *used* to implement the patterns *in OO languages*, but the patterns can be implemented without it (for example, imagine implementing a factory in C).
Additionally, design patterns are, like polymorphism, tools that help developers solve problems. Only learning a subset of the tools (eg, only polymorphism) will put developers at a disadvantage because they will need to “work from first principals“ (so to speak) instead of basing their work (and their thought) on higher level concepts (like design patterns). |
4,016,622 | I have observed that most of the design patterns (I refer mostly from the Gang of Four book) are all based on polymorphism. That leads me to a "enlightened" moment that OOP's polymorphism is the most important feature in the paradigm.
Some of the patterns use polymorphism are: strategy, factory, bridge...
With that, I don't understand why we are not just teaching developers really good polymorphic behavior of OOP instead of overloading them with a bunch of patterns which in fact are based on polymorphism? | 2010/10/25 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4016622",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/486664/"
] | Well, polymorphism is one of the fundamental concepts of OOP -- it's at a different level of abstraction than the more detailed patterns.
I don't think there is a problem having names for and teaching the more detailed/dependent patterns, it really does help with communication. But as you suggest, a solid understanding of polymorphism is definitely required before a developer would be able to effectively implement any of the dependent patterns. | @Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams I don't think duck-typing, interface and abstract class are different interpretation of polymorphism. If a implementation can not be determined at compile time and must be defined at runtime, it is polymorphism. You can name that concept anything you like, at the end of the day it is the definition of polymorphism. This is coined late/dynamic binding albeit the same principle. |
4,016,622 | I have observed that most of the design patterns (I refer mostly from the Gang of Four book) are all based on polymorphism. That leads me to a "enlightened" moment that OOP's polymorphism is the most important feature in the paradigm.
Some of the patterns use polymorphism are: strategy, factory, bridge...
With that, I don't understand why we are not just teaching developers really good polymorphic behavior of OOP instead of overloading them with a bunch of patterns which in fact are based on polymorphism? | 2010/10/25 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4016622",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/486664/"
] | This is a red herring. *Some* languages implement this as polymorphism. Others can implement it as interfaces. Still *others* can use duck-typing. Forcing readers/students into thinking "polymorphism" doesn't actually help in all situations without also being taught the other two mechanisms, which don't exist in every language. At that point it becomes noise. | Because, while polymorphism is *used* to implement the patterns *in OO languages*, but the patterns can be implemented without it (for example, imagine implementing a factory in C).
Additionally, design patterns are, like polymorphism, tools that help developers solve problems. Only learning a subset of the tools (eg, only polymorphism) will put developers at a disadvantage because they will need to “work from first principals“ (so to speak) instead of basing their work (and their thought) on higher level concepts (like design patterns). |
4,016,622 | I have observed that most of the design patterns (I refer mostly from the Gang of Four book) are all based on polymorphism. That leads me to a "enlightened" moment that OOP's polymorphism is the most important feature in the paradigm.
Some of the patterns use polymorphism are: strategy, factory, bridge...
With that, I don't understand why we are not just teaching developers really good polymorphic behavior of OOP instead of overloading them with a bunch of patterns which in fact are based on polymorphism? | 2010/10/25 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4016622",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/486664/"
] | Well, polymorphism is one of the fundamental concepts of OOP -- it's at a different level of abstraction than the more detailed patterns.
I don't think there is a problem having names for and teaching the more detailed/dependent patterns, it really does help with communication. But as you suggest, a solid understanding of polymorphism is definitely required before a developer would be able to effectively implement any of the dependent patterns. | Every language has its features that are the "killer features" of the whole concept. OOP, being some of the largest and oldest branch of advanced languages has polymorphism, but I can point out other amazing features such as strong functional programming, closures, parallel execution, and other unique things to other languages that are along the same lines of amazingly-powerful features that are must-haves.
Teaching just one method quickly turns you into a one-trick-pony. A strong foundation in theory allows you to pick up a very "different" language like Lisp or Erlang and know what's going on. |
4,016,622 | I have observed that most of the design patterns (I refer mostly from the Gang of Four book) are all based on polymorphism. That leads me to a "enlightened" moment that OOP's polymorphism is the most important feature in the paradigm.
Some of the patterns use polymorphism are: strategy, factory, bridge...
With that, I don't understand why we are not just teaching developers really good polymorphic behavior of OOP instead of overloading them with a bunch of patterns which in fact are based on polymorphism? | 2010/10/25 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4016622",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/486664/"
] | Wouldn't
>
> really good polymorphic behavior
>
>
>
actually **be** how to apply the Gang of Four patterns in a **good** way?
As in, how to apply strategy as a tool so that you don't violate [SRP](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_responsibility_principle) for example. | @Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams I don't think duck-typing, interface and abstract class are different interpretation of polymorphism. If a implementation can not be determined at compile time and must be defined at runtime, it is polymorphism. You can name that concept anything you like, at the end of the day it is the definition of polymorphism. This is coined late/dynamic binding albeit the same principle. |
4,016,622 | I have observed that most of the design patterns (I refer mostly from the Gang of Four book) are all based on polymorphism. That leads me to a "enlightened" moment that OOP's polymorphism is the most important feature in the paradigm.
Some of the patterns use polymorphism are: strategy, factory, bridge...
With that, I don't understand why we are not just teaching developers really good polymorphic behavior of OOP instead of overloading them with a bunch of patterns which in fact are based on polymorphism? | 2010/10/25 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4016622",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/486664/"
] | Well, polymorphism is one of the fundamental concepts of OOP -- it's at a different level of abstraction than the more detailed patterns.
I don't think there is a problem having names for and teaching the more detailed/dependent patterns, it really does help with communication. But as you suggest, a solid understanding of polymorphism is definitely required before a developer would be able to effectively implement any of the dependent patterns. | This is a red herring. *Some* languages implement this as polymorphism. Others can implement it as interfaces. Still *others* can use duck-typing. Forcing readers/students into thinking "polymorphism" doesn't actually help in all situations without also being taught the other two mechanisms, which don't exist in every language. At that point it becomes noise. |
4,016,622 | I have observed that most of the design patterns (I refer mostly from the Gang of Four book) are all based on polymorphism. That leads me to a "enlightened" moment that OOP's polymorphism is the most important feature in the paradigm.
Some of the patterns use polymorphism are: strategy, factory, bridge...
With that, I don't understand why we are not just teaching developers really good polymorphic behavior of OOP instead of overloading them with a bunch of patterns which in fact are based on polymorphism? | 2010/10/25 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4016622",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/486664/"
] | Well, polymorphism is one of the fundamental concepts of OOP -- it's at a different level of abstraction than the more detailed patterns.
I don't think there is a problem having names for and teaching the more detailed/dependent patterns, it really does help with communication. But as you suggest, a solid understanding of polymorphism is definitely required before a developer would be able to effectively implement any of the dependent patterns. | Because, while polymorphism is *used* to implement the patterns *in OO languages*, but the patterns can be implemented without it (for example, imagine implementing a factory in C).
Additionally, design patterns are, like polymorphism, tools that help developers solve problems. Only learning a subset of the tools (eg, only polymorphism) will put developers at a disadvantage because they will need to “work from first principals“ (so to speak) instead of basing their work (and their thought) on higher level concepts (like design patterns). |
97,969 | **Dateline**: 2067
**Setting**: A research base at the bottom of the [Marianas Trench](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_Trench)
**Depth**: 10,000 meters.
**Mission Duration**: Thirty days
A research base lies at the bottom of the Marianas Trench, housing 10-12 scientists of both sexes and a cat.
The mission starts well, the team have trained together for months, and they're tight knit. At least they thought they were...
One by one, they start to die, and it becomes obvious that their deaths are not accidental.
**Question**:
What would be a reasonable prime purpose of this research mission? For what reason would a dozen scientists be sent to the bottom of the ocean for a month where a robot/scans would not be appropriate? | 2017/11/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/97969",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | **Mars practice.**
I hope someone remembers Pauly Shore and Biodome, and thinks about that movie often. In any case, a reasonable premise for this deep sea mission could be practice for a prolonged space mission on the moon, Mars or elsewhere. This was the original goal behind [Biosphere 2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2): a contained environment where teams could practice for long extraterrestrial assignments.
One could make a case that the ISS could better serve in this role but there are any number of reasons why a practice run like this might not be doable in the ISS. Maybe ISS is reserved for months in advance, or the microgravity means it is a poor simulation, or it does not allow cats. | We would like to build underwater buildings with internal pressures of 100 atmospheres or more, which reduces the strength needed by the outer hull to keep the water out. A hydrogen-oxygen-helium mixture works, but hydrogen is a narcotic at those pressures. A special narcotics-blocking agent will supposedly allow people to function normally, but must pass Phase II trials to assess its effectiveness and side effects.
The scientists will use an abandoned military facility at the bottom of the Marianas Trench to save on costs, and because it happens to have built-in mechanisms capable of supporting 100 atmospheres of pressure.
Bummer - it turns out that long term side-effects of the drug include paranoid delusions. Bonus: the scientists would like to discontinue its use, but they have found cracks in the facility's hull and must keep the air pressure high to avoid collapse. It's going to be a long month.
<https://www.divecompare.com/blog/different-gases-used-for-diving/> |
97,969 | **Dateline**: 2067
**Setting**: A research base at the bottom of the [Marianas Trench](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_Trench)
**Depth**: 10,000 meters.
**Mission Duration**: Thirty days
A research base lies at the bottom of the Marianas Trench, housing 10-12 scientists of both sexes and a cat.
The mission starts well, the team have trained together for months, and they're tight knit. At least they thought they were...
One by one, they start to die, and it becomes obvious that their deaths are not accidental.
**Question**:
What would be a reasonable prime purpose of this research mission? For what reason would a dozen scientists be sent to the bottom of the ocean for a month where a robot/scans would not be appropriate? | 2017/11/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/97969",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | >
> What would be a reasonable prime purpose of this research mission? For what reason would a dozen scientists be sent to the bottom of the ocean for a month?
>
>
>
Study of the Xenophyophores down there - we don't know very much about them and a study of how they are able to survive such immense pressures would be of plausible scientific value. Some of the ones identified as living down there are as big as 10cm across! That's pretty noteworthy.
>
> What physiological reason could there be for one (or two) members of the research team to kill others, but for that same cause not to affect any other member of the team?
>
>
>
Claustrophobia, particularly the Cabin fever/stir crazy form - it's a an oldy-but-a-goody. Wiki describes the symptoms of being "stir crazy" as including "elevated and often increasing levels of anxiety, frustration, agitation, fidgeting, manic depressive type mood swings, and accessory episodes of acting out impulsively or otherwise antisocially on those feelings," combined with the description on the Cabin Fever article of "a distrust of anyone they are with" and that sounds like a recipe for a bit of good old fashioned homicide amongst "friends". Not everyone is affected by these things and if a member of the team were prone to such effects and it were missed during the pre-mission pysch screenings (maybe they even lied a little to get on the mission?) it could easily only affect one or two people sufficiently to cause them to go homicidal. | >
> What would be a reasonable prime purpose of this research mission? For what reason would a dozen scientists be sent to the bottom of the ocean for a month where a robot/scans would not be appropriate?
>
>
>
It's not the easiest to do a scientific reason here as by 2067 there shouldn't be too much we can't do through robotics that a human could do easier. That being said, I'd shift the reason from pure science...ya science can be a secondary reason, but the primary reason is more like the reason we stepped on the moon. To prove to the rest of the world we could.
I'd go with PR. This is some nation setting out to prove they can, either to show up a competitor nation or simply bragging rights. "We have the technology to go anywhere, including the Mariana trench". There can be some 'tourism' reasons coming along as well, just as 'space tourism' will come about, proving the technology can allow millionaires to see whatever is in the trench could also be a reason. In the end, it's just about proving we can.
>
> What physiological reason could there be for one (or two) members of the research team to kill others, but for that same cause not to affect any other member of the team?
>
>
>
The fun part of using a PR reason is you've now introduced the 'sabotage' motive...a well hidden spy sabotaging the mission. Someone intentionally planted in the group with the idea of making the entire 'prove we can' fail. |
97,969 | **Dateline**: 2067
**Setting**: A research base at the bottom of the [Marianas Trench](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_Trench)
**Depth**: 10,000 meters.
**Mission Duration**: Thirty days
A research base lies at the bottom of the Marianas Trench, housing 10-12 scientists of both sexes and a cat.
The mission starts well, the team have trained together for months, and they're tight knit. At least they thought they were...
One by one, they start to die, and it becomes obvious that their deaths are not accidental.
**Question**:
What would be a reasonable prime purpose of this research mission? For what reason would a dozen scientists be sent to the bottom of the ocean for a month where a robot/scans would not be appropriate? | 2017/11/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/97969",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | >
> What would be a reasonable prime purpose of this research mission?
>
>
>
Science. Pick your poison:
==========================
1. Marine Biology
2. Geology
3. Deep See Ecology
4. Habitation
>
> For what reason would a dozen scientists be sent to the bottom of the ocean for a month where a robot/scans would not be appropriate?
>
>
>
For the same reasons why human exploration of space usually trumps robotic exploration.
=======================================================================================
First of all, the belief or presumption that unmanned robotics are, and will always be, more efficient explorers of [place we wish to explore] is **intrinsically flawed**. This topic has been covered in academia [[1](https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1203/1203.6250.pdf)], media [[2](https://astrobites.org/2012/03/29/dispelling-the-myth-of-robotic-efficiency-why-astronomers-should-support-human-exploration-of-the-solar-system/), [3](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/robots-vs-humans-who-should-explore/)] with respect to Space, and many of the same reasons apply here. I grant that in many cases, robotic exploration is better; however, there are many reasons why human exploration may or will be preferred. Fundamentally it boils down to the long term goals and the available resources, and the long term ROI. For example, robotics is not always cheaper than human exploration. Here's quick list of broad (and paraphrased) reasons supporting human exploration over robotic exploration:
1. On-the-spot decision making.
2. Flexibility. Robots can't be redesigned to observe or respond unexpected phenomena.
3. Enhanced mobility and attendant opportunities (Something broke? Can't climb that [obstacle]? Remember when Spirit [got stuck](https://www.space.com/6740-spirit-stuck-insidious-invisible-rover-trap-mars.html)?).
4. Increased efficiency in sample collection and sample return capacity.
5. Increased potential for large-scale exploratory activities.
6. Increased potential and capacity for deployment and maintenance of complex equipment.
7. The development of a infrastructure capable of supporting further scientific applications. | >
> What would be a reasonable prime purpose of this research mission? For what reason would a dozen scientists be sent to the bottom of the ocean for a month where a robot/scans would not be appropriate?
>
>
>
It's not the easiest to do a scientific reason here as by 2067 there shouldn't be too much we can't do through robotics that a human could do easier. That being said, I'd shift the reason from pure science...ya science can be a secondary reason, but the primary reason is more like the reason we stepped on the moon. To prove to the rest of the world we could.
I'd go with PR. This is some nation setting out to prove they can, either to show up a competitor nation or simply bragging rights. "We have the technology to go anywhere, including the Mariana trench". There can be some 'tourism' reasons coming along as well, just as 'space tourism' will come about, proving the technology can allow millionaires to see whatever is in the trench could also be a reason. In the end, it's just about proving we can.
>
> What physiological reason could there be for one (or two) members of the research team to kill others, but for that same cause not to affect any other member of the team?
>
>
>
The fun part of using a PR reason is you've now introduced the 'sabotage' motive...a well hidden spy sabotaging the mission. Someone intentionally planted in the group with the idea of making the entire 'prove we can' fail. |
97,969 | **Dateline**: 2067
**Setting**: A research base at the bottom of the [Marianas Trench](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_Trench)
**Depth**: 10,000 meters.
**Mission Duration**: Thirty days
A research base lies at the bottom of the Marianas Trench, housing 10-12 scientists of both sexes and a cat.
The mission starts well, the team have trained together for months, and they're tight knit. At least they thought they were...
One by one, they start to die, and it becomes obvious that their deaths are not accidental.
**Question**:
What would be a reasonable prime purpose of this research mission? For what reason would a dozen scientists be sent to the bottom of the ocean for a month where a robot/scans would not be appropriate? | 2017/11/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/97969",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | **Mars practice.**
I hope someone remembers Pauly Shore and Biodome, and thinks about that movie often. In any case, a reasonable premise for this deep sea mission could be practice for a prolonged space mission on the moon, Mars or elsewhere. This was the original goal behind [Biosphere 2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2): a contained environment where teams could practice for long extraterrestrial assignments.
One could make a case that the ISS could better serve in this role but there are any number of reasons why a practice run like this might not be doable in the ISS. Maybe ISS is reserved for months in advance, or the microgravity means it is a poor simulation, or it does not allow cats. | I'm not curious about what the 12 scientists are doing there, I'm curious about the cat. The "cat" could actually be a prototype of an artificial lifeform designed to survive that intense pressure. Now you've got yourself a plot...
How you design an artificial lifeform to survive that pressure - you're going to have to think hard about the physics of that, because it's likely to be non-trivial. |
97,969 | **Dateline**: 2067
**Setting**: A research base at the bottom of the [Marianas Trench](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_Trench)
**Depth**: 10,000 meters.
**Mission Duration**: Thirty days
A research base lies at the bottom of the Marianas Trench, housing 10-12 scientists of both sexes and a cat.
The mission starts well, the team have trained together for months, and they're tight knit. At least they thought they were...
One by one, they start to die, and it becomes obvious that their deaths are not accidental.
**Question**:
What would be a reasonable prime purpose of this research mission? For what reason would a dozen scientists be sent to the bottom of the ocean for a month where a robot/scans would not be appropriate? | 2017/11/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/97969",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | You could take inspiration from the game *Subnautica*. In the game, the player crash lands on an alien planet which is covered with water. While trying to survive, he learns that the aliens that used to live on the planet had been wiped out by a virulent disease. They had been researching various lifeforms on the planet in the hopes of finding one that was resistant to the disease, so that they could extract that resistance and save their species. Most of their research was done thousands of meters underwater, because that's where the most promising creatures lived.
In your situation, the scientists could be researching anything about the local fauna, as long as they need physical samples for their tests - anything from blood work to actual live specimens. Robots and scans might be able to determine general information about the creatures, but they would probably not be able to retrieve these samples without damaging them (after all, removing the samples from their natural high-pressure environment could cause some crucial piece of info being lost somehow), so the only logical conclusion is that research has to be done manually and on-site. | Of course no humans would be sent, but a robot. Because, as you state correctly, a robot can work much better in that environment.
The first robot they sent didn't come back.
The second robot they sent to search for the first floated to the surface a week later. It was not damaged, and had been switched off.
This is a first contact mission. |
97,969 | **Dateline**: 2067
**Setting**: A research base at the bottom of the [Marianas Trench](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_Trench)
**Depth**: 10,000 meters.
**Mission Duration**: Thirty days
A research base lies at the bottom of the Marianas Trench, housing 10-12 scientists of both sexes and a cat.
The mission starts well, the team have trained together for months, and they're tight knit. At least they thought they were...
One by one, they start to die, and it becomes obvious that their deaths are not accidental.
**Question**:
What would be a reasonable prime purpose of this research mission? For what reason would a dozen scientists be sent to the bottom of the ocean for a month where a robot/scans would not be appropriate? | 2017/11/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/97969",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | >
> What would be a reasonable prime purpose of this research mission?
>
>
>
Science. Pick your poison:
==========================
1. Marine Biology
2. Geology
3. Deep See Ecology
4. Habitation
>
> For what reason would a dozen scientists be sent to the bottom of the ocean for a month where a robot/scans would not be appropriate?
>
>
>
For the same reasons why human exploration of space usually trumps robotic exploration.
=======================================================================================
First of all, the belief or presumption that unmanned robotics are, and will always be, more efficient explorers of [place we wish to explore] is **intrinsically flawed**. This topic has been covered in academia [[1](https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1203/1203.6250.pdf)], media [[2](https://astrobites.org/2012/03/29/dispelling-the-myth-of-robotic-efficiency-why-astronomers-should-support-human-exploration-of-the-solar-system/), [3](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/robots-vs-humans-who-should-explore/)] with respect to Space, and many of the same reasons apply here. I grant that in many cases, robotic exploration is better; however, there are many reasons why human exploration may or will be preferred. Fundamentally it boils down to the long term goals and the available resources, and the long term ROI. For example, robotics is not always cheaper than human exploration. Here's quick list of broad (and paraphrased) reasons supporting human exploration over robotic exploration:
1. On-the-spot decision making.
2. Flexibility. Robots can't be redesigned to observe or respond unexpected phenomena.
3. Enhanced mobility and attendant opportunities (Something broke? Can't climb that [obstacle]? Remember when Spirit [got stuck](https://www.space.com/6740-spirit-stuck-insidious-invisible-rover-trap-mars.html)?).
4. Increased efficiency in sample collection and sample return capacity.
5. Increased potential for large-scale exploratory activities.
6. Increased potential and capacity for deployment and maintenance of complex equipment.
7. The development of a infrastructure capable of supporting further scientific applications. | The scientists are in an underwater prison. They have all committed crimes that would normally have sent them to a maximum security prison, but instead, they had the option of spending 6 months of every year in a facility from which there is really no escape.
The scientists may be studying deep-sea oil extraction, or new organisms that were found, or even the effects of extreme claustrophobia on extremely intelligent people.
It could even be something totally unrelated to the ocean, like figuring out how to weaponize some particular toxins or diseases. If the experiments go wrong, the lab is already sealed off as far as possible, at least according to the government official who authorized this secret base. All the staff are expendable prisoners, so there is no down side. Until you contaminate the entire ocean. |
97,969 | **Dateline**: 2067
**Setting**: A research base at the bottom of the [Marianas Trench](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_Trench)
**Depth**: 10,000 meters.
**Mission Duration**: Thirty days
A research base lies at the bottom of the Marianas Trench, housing 10-12 scientists of both sexes and a cat.
The mission starts well, the team have trained together for months, and they're tight knit. At least they thought they were...
One by one, they start to die, and it becomes obvious that their deaths are not accidental.
**Question**:
What would be a reasonable prime purpose of this research mission? For what reason would a dozen scientists be sent to the bottom of the ocean for a month where a robot/scans would not be appropriate? | 2017/11/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/97969",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | >
> What would be a reasonable prime purpose of this research mission? For what reason would a dozen scientists be sent to the bottom of the ocean for a month?
>
>
>
Study of the Xenophyophores down there - we don't know very much about them and a study of how they are able to survive such immense pressures would be of plausible scientific value. Some of the ones identified as living down there are as big as 10cm across! That's pretty noteworthy.
>
> What physiological reason could there be for one (or two) members of the research team to kill others, but for that same cause not to affect any other member of the team?
>
>
>
Claustrophobia, particularly the Cabin fever/stir crazy form - it's a an oldy-but-a-goody. Wiki describes the symptoms of being "stir crazy" as including "elevated and often increasing levels of anxiety, frustration, agitation, fidgeting, manic depressive type mood swings, and accessory episodes of acting out impulsively or otherwise antisocially on those feelings," combined with the description on the Cabin Fever article of "a distrust of anyone they are with" and that sounds like a recipe for a bit of good old fashioned homicide amongst "friends". Not everyone is affected by these things and if a member of the team were prone to such effects and it were missed during the pre-mission pysch screenings (maybe they even lied a little to get on the mission?) it could easily only affect one or two people sufficiently to cause them to go homicidal. | I'm not curious about what the 12 scientists are doing there, I'm curious about the cat. The "cat" could actually be a prototype of an artificial lifeform designed to survive that intense pressure. Now you've got yourself a plot...
How you design an artificial lifeform to survive that pressure - you're going to have to think hard about the physics of that, because it's likely to be non-trivial. |
97,969 | **Dateline**: 2067
**Setting**: A research base at the bottom of the [Marianas Trench](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_Trench)
**Depth**: 10,000 meters.
**Mission Duration**: Thirty days
A research base lies at the bottom of the Marianas Trench, housing 10-12 scientists of both sexes and a cat.
The mission starts well, the team have trained together for months, and they're tight knit. At least they thought they were...
One by one, they start to die, and it becomes obvious that their deaths are not accidental.
**Question**:
What would be a reasonable prime purpose of this research mission? For what reason would a dozen scientists be sent to the bottom of the ocean for a month where a robot/scans would not be appropriate? | 2017/11/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/97969",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | We would like to build underwater buildings with internal pressures of 100 atmospheres or more, which reduces the strength needed by the outer hull to keep the water out. A hydrogen-oxygen-helium mixture works, but hydrogen is a narcotic at those pressures. A special narcotics-blocking agent will supposedly allow people to function normally, but must pass Phase II trials to assess its effectiveness and side effects.
The scientists will use an abandoned military facility at the bottom of the Marianas Trench to save on costs, and because it happens to have built-in mechanisms capable of supporting 100 atmospheres of pressure.
Bummer - it turns out that long term side-effects of the drug include paranoid delusions. Bonus: the scientists would like to discontinue its use, but they have found cracks in the facility's hull and must keep the air pressure high to avoid collapse. It's going to be a long month.
<https://www.divecompare.com/blog/different-gases-used-for-diving/> | Could be an effort to battle [terror from the deep](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-COM:_Terror_from_the_Deep).
**In short:** Aliens have come to earth, and they are hiding out building bases on the ocean beds, sometimes striking out attacking human cities, abducting people et.c. We simply have to hunt them down in the deep to protect ourselves (or we die later anyway when they attack us on land). |
97,969 | **Dateline**: 2067
**Setting**: A research base at the bottom of the [Marianas Trench](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_Trench)
**Depth**: 10,000 meters.
**Mission Duration**: Thirty days
A research base lies at the bottom of the Marianas Trench, housing 10-12 scientists of both sexes and a cat.
The mission starts well, the team have trained together for months, and they're tight knit. At least they thought they were...
One by one, they start to die, and it becomes obvious that their deaths are not accidental.
**Question**:
What would be a reasonable prime purpose of this research mission? For what reason would a dozen scientists be sent to the bottom of the ocean for a month where a robot/scans would not be appropriate? | 2017/11/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/97969",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | You could take inspiration from the game *Subnautica*. In the game, the player crash lands on an alien planet which is covered with water. While trying to survive, he learns that the aliens that used to live on the planet had been wiped out by a virulent disease. They had been researching various lifeforms on the planet in the hopes of finding one that was resistant to the disease, so that they could extract that resistance and save their species. Most of their research was done thousands of meters underwater, because that's where the most promising creatures lived.
In your situation, the scientists could be researching anything about the local fauna, as long as they need physical samples for their tests - anything from blood work to actual live specimens. Robots and scans might be able to determine general information about the creatures, but they would probably not be able to retrieve these samples without damaging them (after all, removing the samples from their natural high-pressure environment could cause some crucial piece of info being lost somehow), so the only logical conclusion is that research has to be done manually and on-site. | >
> What would be a reasonable prime purpose of this research mission? For what reason would a dozen scientists be sent to the bottom of the ocean for a month where a robot/scans would not be appropriate?
>
>
>
**There is none,** robots are more effective at scientific data collection down there than humans so there is no value at sending humans.
The premise of this plot is flawed conceptually. 30 days is way to short to acclimate to the pressure differences. Deep sea divers on oil rigs spend months in pressure chambers before and after their operational stint. It is also extremely risky where an accident can result in fatality or long term injury. Sending scientists is infeasible when scientists are better used analyzing data instead of doing dangerous hands on work.
What would more likely be the case is you have a dozen technicians sent down there to maintain equipment and do detail work machines cant yet do. However, at these pressures the human body cannot be acclimated to survive without an external vehicle (like a futuristic mech dive suit).
>
> What physiological reason could there be for one (or two) members of the research team to kill others, but for that same cause not to affect any other member of the team?
>
>
>
In these situations the common conditional occurrence is called "Cabin Fever". Essentially when a human trapped in a confined space with limited social exposure for long periods, certain predisposed minds can snap in violent and/or psychotic ways. This rarely happens in deep sea or space missions anymore as candidates usually undergo psych evaluations to prevent exactly this scenario.
So you would have to go with the cop out solution which is Person A suddenly decides he hates everyone because they small funny (or whatever) and does something about it. |
97,969 | **Dateline**: 2067
**Setting**: A research base at the bottom of the [Marianas Trench](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_Trench)
**Depth**: 10,000 meters.
**Mission Duration**: Thirty days
A research base lies at the bottom of the Marianas Trench, housing 10-12 scientists of both sexes and a cat.
The mission starts well, the team have trained together for months, and they're tight knit. At least they thought they were...
One by one, they start to die, and it becomes obvious that their deaths are not accidental.
**Question**:
What would be a reasonable prime purpose of this research mission? For what reason would a dozen scientists be sent to the bottom of the ocean for a month where a robot/scans would not be appropriate? | 2017/11/15 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/97969",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | >
> What would be a reasonable prime purpose of this research mission?
>
>
>
Science. Pick your poison:
==========================
1. Marine Biology
2. Geology
3. Deep See Ecology
4. Habitation
>
> For what reason would a dozen scientists be sent to the bottom of the ocean for a month where a robot/scans would not be appropriate?
>
>
>
For the same reasons why human exploration of space usually trumps robotic exploration.
=======================================================================================
First of all, the belief or presumption that unmanned robotics are, and will always be, more efficient explorers of [place we wish to explore] is **intrinsically flawed**. This topic has been covered in academia [[1](https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1203/1203.6250.pdf)], media [[2](https://astrobites.org/2012/03/29/dispelling-the-myth-of-robotic-efficiency-why-astronomers-should-support-human-exploration-of-the-solar-system/), [3](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/robots-vs-humans-who-should-explore/)] with respect to Space, and many of the same reasons apply here. I grant that in many cases, robotic exploration is better; however, there are many reasons why human exploration may or will be preferred. Fundamentally it boils down to the long term goals and the available resources, and the long term ROI. For example, robotics is not always cheaper than human exploration. Here's quick list of broad (and paraphrased) reasons supporting human exploration over robotic exploration:
1. On-the-spot decision making.
2. Flexibility. Robots can't be redesigned to observe or respond unexpected phenomena.
3. Enhanced mobility and attendant opportunities (Something broke? Can't climb that [obstacle]? Remember when Spirit [got stuck](https://www.space.com/6740-spirit-stuck-insidious-invisible-rover-trap-mars.html)?).
4. Increased efficiency in sample collection and sample return capacity.
5. Increased potential for large-scale exploratory activities.
6. Increased potential and capacity for deployment and maintenance of complex equipment.
7. The development of a infrastructure capable of supporting further scientific applications. | Of course no humans would be sent, but a robot. Because, as you state correctly, a robot can work much better in that environment.
The first robot they sent didn't come back.
The second robot they sent to search for the first floated to the surface a week later. It was not damaged, and had been switched off.
This is a first contact mission. |
178,717 | Is there any way of creating a public folder calendar using the Exchange Management Shell?
Outlook is not installed on the Exchange Server nor do I want to install it. Access is very limited to client computers so I would rather create it from the server itself. Surely it can't be that difficult to do?
I have tried using the PFDAVAdmin tool but it fails to connect despite numerous attempts and I have given up on it for now. | 2010/09/07 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/178717",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/17533/"
] | That is correct. You can create the elastic load balancers and turn CloudWatch on for the instances using the GUI console, but to set up autoscaling config, groups, and triggers you have to use the [AutoScaling API tools](http://developer.amazonwebservices.com/connect/entry.jspa?externalID=2535&categoryID=88).
Your other option would be to use a third party provisioning vendor like [RightScale](http://www.rightscale.com/) that adds more GUI provisioning and scaling kinds of functionality. | To follow up on what Ernest said, it is indeed correct. Amazon autoscaling features works pretty well. But in order to use it you will need to do API calls.
However, if you want out-of-the-box autoscaling, you should consider using a third party cloud management platforms such as RightScale or [**Scalr**](http://scalr.net) (where I work). You will be able to scale based on CPU, Ram, Disk io, Network io... The autoscaling process itself is managed a bit differently. You can have more info on the [wiki](http://wiki.scalr.net/FAQ/Scalr_vs_AWS_auto-scaling). |
178,717 | Is there any way of creating a public folder calendar using the Exchange Management Shell?
Outlook is not installed on the Exchange Server nor do I want to install it. Access is very limited to client computers so I would rather create it from the server itself. Surely it can't be that difficult to do?
I have tried using the PFDAVAdmin tool but it fails to connect despite numerous attempts and I have given up on it for now. | 2010/09/07 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/178717",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/17533/"
] | That is correct. You can create the elastic load balancers and turn CloudWatch on for the instances using the GUI console, but to set up autoscaling config, groups, and triggers you have to use the [AutoScaling API tools](http://developer.amazonwebservices.com/connect/entry.jspa?externalID=2535&categoryID=88).
Your other option would be to use a third party provisioning vendor like [RightScale](http://www.rightscale.com/) that adds more GUI provisioning and scaling kinds of functionality. | Yes, so far Amazon does not offer a GUI for Auto Scaling. You do have to use the command line tools (in conjunction with CloudWatch to setup monitoring to add/remove auto scaling instances), or use the APIs. In addition to Scalr you can also try
[EZAutoScaling](http://www.ezautoscaling.com) (only does Auto Scaling GUI, very cheap) and [Ylastic](http://www.ylastic.com) (does Auto Scaling GUI plus a ton more, a little more expensive).
Disclosure: I was slightly involved in EZAutoScaling. |
178,717 | Is there any way of creating a public folder calendar using the Exchange Management Shell?
Outlook is not installed on the Exchange Server nor do I want to install it. Access is very limited to client computers so I would rather create it from the server itself. Surely it can't be that difficult to do?
I have tried using the PFDAVAdmin tool but it fails to connect despite numerous attempts and I have given up on it for now. | 2010/09/07 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/178717",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/17533/"
] | Yes, so far Amazon does not offer a GUI for Auto Scaling. You do have to use the command line tools (in conjunction with CloudWatch to setup monitoring to add/remove auto scaling instances), or use the APIs. In addition to Scalr you can also try
[EZAutoScaling](http://www.ezautoscaling.com) (only does Auto Scaling GUI, very cheap) and [Ylastic](http://www.ylastic.com) (does Auto Scaling GUI plus a ton more, a little more expensive).
Disclosure: I was slightly involved in EZAutoScaling. | To follow up on what Ernest said, it is indeed correct. Amazon autoscaling features works pretty well. But in order to use it you will need to do API calls.
However, if you want out-of-the-box autoscaling, you should consider using a third party cloud management platforms such as RightScale or [**Scalr**](http://scalr.net) (where I work). You will be able to scale based on CPU, Ram, Disk io, Network io... The autoscaling process itself is managed a bit differently. You can have more info on the [wiki](http://wiki.scalr.net/FAQ/Scalr_vs_AWS_auto-scaling). |
1,692,257 | Does anyone know of any opensource tool for creating dynamic organization chart in flex by reading values from database | 2009/11/07 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1692257",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/205464/"
] | Have a look at KapLab (<http://lab.kapit.fr>)
They have free data vizualisation components. I think you might be interested by the Visualizer component.
It's not open-source though, but you can get the source code if you buy a licence.
(If you need more info, you can still contact me because I'm working closely with them) | The [IBM ILog Elixer](http://www.ilog.com/visualization/trials/) library has an [organization charting component](http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flex/tourdeflex/web/#sampleId=14500;illustIndex=0;docIndex=0). It's not free, but it fits the bill of what you are looking for. |
1,692,257 | Does anyone know of any opensource tool for creating dynamic organization chart in flex by reading values from database | 2009/11/07 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1692257",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/205464/"
] | Have a look at KapLab (<http://lab.kapit.fr>)
They have free data vizualisation components. I think you might be interested by the Visualizer component.
It's not open-source though, but you can get the source code if you buy a licence.
(If you need more info, you can still contact me because I'm working closely with them) | The most polished "free" components I've seen are the [KapLab Visualizer](http://lab.kapit.fr/display/visualizer/Visualizer) that Pez mentioned.
However for actual open source your best be is the [BirdEye](http://code.google.com/p/birdeye/) Information Visualization and Visual Analytics Library. Check out the [demo](http://birdeye.googlecode.com/svn/branches/ng/examples/demo/BirdEyeExplorer.html), the "Graphs" tab and I think tree is right up your alley. BirdEye is built with [degrafa](http://www.degrafa.org/) as is [axiis](http://axiis.org/) another open source data visualization library.
Good luck! |
1,692,257 | Does anyone know of any opensource tool for creating dynamic organization chart in flex by reading values from database | 2009/11/07 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1692257",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/205464/"
] | Have a look at KapLab (<http://lab.kapit.fr>)
They have free data vizualisation components. I think you might be interested by the Visualizer component.
It's not open-source though, but you can get the source code if you buy a licence.
(If you need more info, you can still contact me because I'm working closely with them) | Maybe The Flare library would suit your needs , I am starting to use it. Looks kinda funky
<http://flare.prefuse.org/> |
89,613 | My probation period is ending soon, and my boss asked if I want to continue with the technology I was using, or to change to other one.
I have to announce my decision on the last day of the probation period. Changing doesn't make a lot of sense, which makes me wonder if I choose wrong, will that be my last day.
So my question is is it common and widely accepted to test person's worth and motivation by setting this kind of tests?
(This is not a company-specific question, but more like "do these kinds of habits and company cultures exist?"). | 2017/04/21 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/89613",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/68751/"
] | >
> This is not a company-specific question, but more like "do this kind of habits and company cultures exist"
>
>
>
Clearly such things do exist or you wouldn't be asking the question but in my 30+ years in the workplace, I've never heard of it. It's an interesting question to be sure.
I can understand why you would be suspicious of it as a trap, especially if you have to "announce" a decision rather than a preference.
Were it me, I'd answer honestly. It may well be a trap but there's not a lot you can do about it. Answer with your honest choice but follow it up by saying, "but I understand that the needs of the company obviously are important and so I'm willing and happy to go where needed."
Make it clear that you're a team player and you'll go where they need you to go if you're willing to do so.
Something else you might consider is the place of the "other one" in the company. Your boss could be offering you an opportunity that you might otherwise have. For instance, if you're working on a technology that is still well-used but the company has plans for something different, that might be something to consider. For instance, if you're an Microsoft person but the company will be transitioning to LAMP, they could both have a strong need for the future, but the longevity of the other could be greater.
Also, perhaps your boss is testing you in a way you hadn't considered, giving you the opportunity to ask "where am I most needed?" or maybe even a simple, "what do you think?" to show that you value (or at least consider) his opinion. I could definitely see a question like that being used to see how focused you are on company needs versus personal desires. | Having never met your boss, it is hard to gauge his motivations. But let's look at this logically. Your employer hired you for a reason. They need the work done. The probationary period is only there to give them a way out in case they made a mistake in hiring.
If you've been a good employee and lived up to their expectations of you, it would be extremely foolish of them to kick you out just because you expressed an interest in continuing work in a technology you know. Good talent is surprisingly hard to find. Replacing you would be difficult and expensive for them. This would not be a good move on their part.
If, on the other hand, your work has not been up to snuff and they are planning to let you go, they wouldn't be giving you a test to try and save yourself. The probationary period you've gone through is there expressly to give them a way to rid of you if they want to. They don't need to come up with an excuse to do it by testing you, they're just going to kick you out.
So I think it is very unlikely this is some kind of trap. It is more likely that your boss has already decided that you have passed your probation and wants to keep you. He is now looking to your future giving you a choice as to whether you want to keep doing what you are doing or try something new. It could be he waited until the end of your probation because he knows that learning a new technology is hard, you are likely to stumble, and didn't want that to be a reason for you to fail.
The thing to do is have an honest discussion with your manager. Express your concerns and always remember that you have control of your career. But hear him out too, because he probably has a good reason for asking you to change. Then you can make your decision.
As a side note: It sounds like you are working in technology, so I will caution you about getting too attached to any technology you are working with now. Our industry is extremely fluid and anything you are doing now is going to look completely different in 5 years (or less). By all means, take the time to master your skills, but in the long run adaptability is far more valuable. |
89,613 | My probation period is ending soon, and my boss asked if I want to continue with the technology I was using, or to change to other one.
I have to announce my decision on the last day of the probation period. Changing doesn't make a lot of sense, which makes me wonder if I choose wrong, will that be my last day.
So my question is is it common and widely accepted to test person's worth and motivation by setting this kind of tests?
(This is not a company-specific question, but more like "do these kinds of habits and company cultures exist?"). | 2017/04/21 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/89613",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/68751/"
] | >
> This is not a company-specific question, but more like "do this kind of habits and company cultures exist"
>
>
>
Clearly such things do exist or you wouldn't be asking the question but in my 30+ years in the workplace, I've never heard of it. It's an interesting question to be sure.
I can understand why you would be suspicious of it as a trap, especially if you have to "announce" a decision rather than a preference.
Were it me, I'd answer honestly. It may well be a trap but there's not a lot you can do about it. Answer with your honest choice but follow it up by saying, "but I understand that the needs of the company obviously are important and so I'm willing and happy to go where needed."
Make it clear that you're a team player and you'll go where they need you to go if you're willing to do so.
Something else you might consider is the place of the "other one" in the company. Your boss could be offering you an opportunity that you might otherwise have. For instance, if you're working on a technology that is still well-used but the company has plans for something different, that might be something to consider. For instance, if you're an Microsoft person but the company will be transitioning to LAMP, they could both have a strong need for the future, but the longevity of the other could be greater.
Also, perhaps your boss is testing you in a way you hadn't considered, giving you the opportunity to ask "where am I most needed?" or maybe even a simple, "what do you think?" to show that you value (or at least consider) his opinion. I could definitely see a question like that being used to see how focused you are on company needs versus personal desires. | It's very unlikely that this is a trap. However you can use this opportunity to your benefit.
The important thing is not to just pick a technology because you like it, or because it's new. **Talk to your boss and ask what changing technology will mean**.
* Ask what projects you will be working on with both technologies;
* Likewise ask who you will be working with, and who your boss will be in both cases
* Ask which one the company sees as growing, and which might be key to the company
* Assuming you get on averagely well with your boss, ask him which he would recommend |
41,640 | When a garage hooks up their battery tester what does it actually measure and how does this differ from tests you might perform yourself with a volt-meter?
For example, recently a garage measured my battery and said it was bad because it scored "around 40" when it should have been "around 80". I have no idea what these numbers mean, CCA (cold cranking amps) perhaps? | 2017/02/05 | [
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/questions/41640",
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com",
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/users/12694/"
] | There are two things that professional battery testers can measure. One is to somehow based on the voltage measure the charge level. Another is to measure cranking amperes.
Of these, the second measurement (cranking amperes) is accurate. Unfortunately, old batteries don't die by having reduced cranking amperes: they die by having reduced capacity. So, the cranking amperes test for a battery that has 95% of its life behind and 5% of its life left will still show that the battery is good.
The first measurement (charge level deduction based on voltage) is very hard to do. At the minimum, you need temperature compensation because temperature has an effect on open circuit voltage. Furthermore, measuring the temperature of the measurement equipment is not enough, the temperature should be measured on the battery. Also, you should leave the battery rest for long enough and garages on busy schedule don't have time for that. Even when all conditions are perfect, the voltage between full battery and a nearly empty battery is only very slightly different.
40 and 80 are way too low to be cranking amperes. I suspect the measurement equipment deduced that your battery is 40% full and it should have been 80% full. But remember that these percentages are very hard to be calculated correctly.
Because it's practically impossible by measurements to identify a battery that is dying, I recommend you to change the battery if it's too old. For example, if you plan to keep your car for 20 years, you could change the battery twice in its lifetime: once when it's about 7 years old and the second time when it's about 14 years old.
I let a garage measure my battery using such an equipment because they offered the service for free. Their diagnosis was: the battery is fine (cranking amps good) but requires a recharge (the charge percentage wasn't close to 100%), and recommended me to occasionally drive for long durations. Well, I had occasionally driven the car for long durations. I had also noticed that when the start/stop system operates to start the engine, the headlights flicker. The battery was 5 years old. It never failed to crank the car even at -20 degrees Celsius temperature, but I suspect it was nearing the end of its lifetime.
The ultimate test for battery would be to test its ampere-hours. However, that requires a deep discharge which lead-acid batteries don't like. It also causes you to lose radio settings. The measurement would take many hours, something for which garages don't have time.
If you know the current draw from your headlights, you could leave the car with the headlights on and see for how many hours they are still on. For example, if the headlights are 120W = 10A @ 12V, it means that a 50 Ah battery should be able to keep the headlights on for 5 hours. This will however, as I said, lose your radio settings. | A voltmeter can tell you part of the story.
The second part is twofold. One is how much your battery can deliver in the cold. Cold cranking amps means worse case senerio.
Two is how long that battery can deliver some amount of current over time.
Usually both figures are published on the battery or someplace. One tends to be more important over the other based on it's use.
Now as to what a tester can do. One is simple resistance load over maybe 10 seconds. This was the standard used for maybe 100 years. Now there are a few "electronic" testers that send a signal into the battery for some result. Both may read differently but can provide some clue as to quality. |
6,372,609 | Well, my problem is what the title says.
I have build a small application (php + mysql), to test my skills in an e-commerce environment - 6 pages in total.
Each page after the 1st, relies on an id to retrieve/save data. This id is passed usually as hidden form field between pages.
On top of each page i have a small script that checks in what state is the selected id (2 checks actually.... a) if user has reached the last page/step of application and b) if a fantastic payment has been completed for this user) - if both of these conditions are valid, then i redirect user to a thank you page, stating that his process is already completed and he can choose to start over.
Yet i have problems with hitting the back button on my browser.
Hitting the back button once, works good - validation check forces the redirect i have implemented in my code.
But hitting the back button fast for 2 or more times, break this script - leading to lost records in my database - in live environment these will be purchases.
So my question is this: what measures should i take to prevent the "back hitting user" of duplicating/deleting/overwrite data records in the application.
I am looking for ideas and strategies. | 2011/06/16 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/6372609",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/701961/"
] | Check wether the user is eligble for the thank-you page on any of the pages. You can do this with sessions or by storing a flag into the database.
If a user that has finished the checkout already moves back more than one step you can check on that page if the user has already the checkout done or not - an react according to it. | I don't think is a good idea to pass variables from pages in post forms. Most likely you should make a good use out of sessions, paths and database.
What I'm trying to say is to save all info in a good structured database, every step has to be separated, that way you can always return to any step and load that step info from database without losing or breaking anything.
Since is an e-commerce website you can't afford to make a double payment or errors, since one single error can lead you into losing that client.
After finishing the forms you can save a field in database and tell other scripts to redirect the client on another page since he finished. |
654 | I'm writing/starting with my bachelor thesis, the subject is about "infinity": what it is, why do we accept it, etc., but most of all my goal is to give an overview of the history of the interpretation from mathematicians (or maybe philosophic intellectuals).
So my concrete question is: I am looking for great 'history of mathematics' books, where the books focus on 'infinity' (ancient Greeks, etc.), so that I can show how the interpretation has changed through the past millenia, and why it changed. And what about the concept of infinity now? There are today still math professors who do not want to accept infinity.
Does anybody have good resources for the 'historical view of infinity'? Later, if I have time, I will extend it with some philosophical side tracks, but first I need the basis to fully understand, mathematically, what the concept is, how it developed etc. | 2014/12/14 | [
"https://hsm.stackexchange.com/questions/654",
"https://hsm.stackexchange.com",
"https://hsm.stackexchange.com/users/525/"
] | The way I would go about this would be to take references from decent online papers and journals on the subject, and then research which of those might seem worth your money. I would pay particular attention to books about [Georg Cantor](https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=georg%20cantor).
Here is an example of such a book chase. A paper titled [A History of Infinity](http://www.math.tamu.edu/~dallen/history/infinity.pdf) was written at Texas A&M by a professor in the math department ([Dr. Allen](http://www.math.tamu.edu/~dallen/)). In the references to that paper, I see at least two stand out book sources:
>
> Dauben, Josheph Warren, Georg Cantor, His Mathematics and Philosophy of the Infinite, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1979
>
>
>
and
>
> Lavine, Shaughan, Understanding the Infinite, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1994.
>
>
>
If possible see if you can't survey 20 such references in this manner, secure from your library, possibly through inter library loan, and buy the ones you like the best after making your mind up as to whether the book is something you should own.
You will know when it is time to stop surveying and start picking acquisitions. Now you are ahead by at least two sources, but you might want to look at Dr. Allen's other references in that paper above as that looks like a pretty decent paper. You can certainly cite that online paper as well, it being from a reputable mathematician with the stamp of a university on it. | For the distinction of potential and actual infinity see [Transfinity](https://www.hs-augsburg.de/~mueckenh/Transfinity/Transfinity/pdf), in particular chapter I, but also a lot of sources in chapter V, and for some statements without references but easily to be found in the internet and pointing to further sources: the lecture slides <https://www.hs-augsburg.de/homes/mueckenh/HI/HI11.PPT> and <https://www.hs-augsburg.de/homes/mueckenh/HI/HI12.PPT> |
895,002 | I should say that I don't mean splitting a long image onto separate pieces of paper, but rather literally using a very long piece of paper, onto which images/text/whatever could be printed. I am aware this may introduce whitespace at page breaks but I'm more interested in how the hardware would handle it.
I guess the issue is if there is some feed mechanism in most printers which would cause a malfunction with a long roll of paper. | 2015/03/28 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/895002",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/432297/"
] | Windows (and Mac, linux) drivers generally work on a "page". The page sizes available in the driver depend on the paper sizes your printer supports. For desktop printers this is A3 (US Tabloid) or smaller.
Laser printers generally only support those sizes, but some may also support a longer page (banner), typically up to 1.2m (4ft) long. These are all "single pass" printers, where all colours are printed simultaneously. 4-pass laser printers (one colour at a time, hence colour printing is 4 times slower than mono) cannot print banners. There are no desktop lasers that support longer sizes.
With inkjets it is conceivable that the printer can print continuously, without having to eject the paper. Only the printer manuals can tell you whether your printer is able to. If it is, you still need special software that supports continuous printing. | The majority of the time, the driver or printer itself supports a banner option. If not, your printer may support continuous printing through physical trays or requires pressing a few physical buttons |
82,508 | I want the ability to animate a scene where I can draw boxes, circles, text, and other things like images, and be able to record it. I figure I will need my own recording software, but that is separate from this post.
Because my needs are very simple, the tool I use should be free.
Since some of the things will be computer science and math related, originally I was looking at 3Blue1Brown's videos, but the application used for those videos is a bit overkill for what I need. | 2022/03/15 | [
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/82508",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/users/13458/"
] | Expanding on Alejandro's comment you could try [p5js](https://p5js.org/get-started/).
>
> p5.js is a JavaScript library for creative coding, with a focus on making coding accessible and inclusive for artists, designers, educators, beginners, and anyone else!
>
>
>
[Here is an implementation of snake](https://editor.p5js.org/p5/sketches/Interaction:_snake) in their online editor. (Use i,j,k,l to control the snake).
[The Coding Train](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HerCR8bw_GE&list=PLRqwX-V7Uu6Zy51Q-x9tMWIv9cueOFTFA) on YouTube has lots of video tutorials on p5js (and processing, what p5js is based on (I think!)) | The excellent OpenFL library <https://www.openfl.org/> uses many of the same APIs as Actionscript 3.0; even the Haxe programming language used in OpenFL is quite similar in syntax/grammar to Actionscript 3.0. OpenFL is made with portability in mind, so native and HTML5 build targets are available out of the box. |
82,508 | I want the ability to animate a scene where I can draw boxes, circles, text, and other things like images, and be able to record it. I figure I will need my own recording software, but that is separate from this post.
Because my needs are very simple, the tool I use should be free.
Since some of the things will be computer science and math related, originally I was looking at 3Blue1Brown's videos, but the application used for those videos is a bit overkill for what I need. | 2022/03/15 | [
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/82508",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/users/13458/"
] | [Wick Editor](https://www.wickeditor.com) can be used as a free alternative to Adobe Animate (formely named Flash Professional).
Similiarities and differences to/from Animate:
* The editor itself doesn't have the "pen" tool, so to draw curves indirectly you use the line tool, then hover the line with the mouse pointer using *Path Cursor* tool and curve it.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/nrlA7.png)
* Like Animate, timeline can have code (instead of ActionScript, it is JavaScript).
Other information:
* If you want NPM (Node.js Package Manager) dependencies, then you'll want to explicitly use the .wick runtime from a NPM project. Currently the .wick runtime is not available on NPM, so it means it must be extracted from an archive export from the Wick Editor.
These posts might help you with the .wick runtime:
* [Control timeline from HTML](https://forum.wickeditor.com/t/control-timeline-from-html/8753)
* [Is there API for loading .wick files?](https://forum.wickeditor.com/t/is-there-api-for-loading-wick-files-like-actionscripts-loader/8747/2) | The excellent OpenFL library <https://www.openfl.org/> uses many of the same APIs as Actionscript 3.0; even the Haxe programming language used in OpenFL is quite similar in syntax/grammar to Actionscript 3.0. OpenFL is made with portability in mind, so native and HTML5 build targets are available out of the box. |
82,508 | I want the ability to animate a scene where I can draw boxes, circles, text, and other things like images, and be able to record it. I figure I will need my own recording software, but that is separate from this post.
Because my needs are very simple, the tool I use should be free.
Since some of the things will be computer science and math related, originally I was looking at 3Blue1Brown's videos, but the application used for those videos is a bit overkill for what I need. | 2022/03/15 | [
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/82508",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/users/13458/"
] | [Godot Engine](https://godotengine.org/) is an open-source game engine and IDE that can produce games that run on multiple platforms, including the web. For the latter, it produces a WASM (WebAssembly) package that you can integrate with a few lines of HTML/JS into any web page.
Here's an example of a 2D game written in Godot, playable in the browser: [Wurst Day Ever](https://blinry.org/wurst-day-ever/). | All the answers that were posted there ignore that we have OpenGL-like API ([WebGL](https://www.khronos.org/webgl/)), 2D graphics ([canvas](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/CanvasRenderingContext2D) and SVG) and transpilers (something→JS) for many programming languages, and even binary executables ([wasm](https://webassembly.org/)). You can use these technologies to develop games for web browsers and all of these are standard technologies and well-supported by current browsers.
You can develop the game in pure JS with drawing onto canvas with the ordinary 2D commands (for rather simple graphics). If you want 3D or just more complex graphics, you can use WebGL.
When you do not want to use JS, but something more portable (Scheme, …) or compilable to machine code (C, C++, [Rust](https://www.rust-lang.org/what/wasm), … – see also Emscripten project), you can choose some transpiler or compiler that produces either WebAssembly (bytecode supported by the most common browsers) or asm.js (assembly-like form of JavaScript, supported everywhere where the JS is).
So, the solution is simple: Modern web standards are enough for such purposes. |
82,508 | I want the ability to animate a scene where I can draw boxes, circles, text, and other things like images, and be able to record it. I figure I will need my own recording software, but that is separate from this post.
Because my needs are very simple, the tool I use should be free.
Since some of the things will be computer science and math related, originally I was looking at 3Blue1Brown's videos, but the application used for those videos is a bit overkill for what I need. | 2022/03/15 | [
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/82508",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/users/13458/"
] | Expanding on Alejandro's comment you could try [p5js](https://p5js.org/get-started/).
>
> p5.js is a JavaScript library for creative coding, with a focus on making coding accessible and inclusive for artists, designers, educators, beginners, and anyone else!
>
>
>
[Here is an implementation of snake](https://editor.p5js.org/p5/sketches/Interaction:_snake) in their online editor. (Use i,j,k,l to control the snake).
[The Coding Train](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HerCR8bw_GE&list=PLRqwX-V7Uu6Zy51Q-x9tMWIv9cueOFTFA) on YouTube has lots of video tutorials on p5js (and processing, what p5js is based on (I think!)) | All the answers that were posted there ignore that we have OpenGL-like API ([WebGL](https://www.khronos.org/webgl/)), 2D graphics ([canvas](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/CanvasRenderingContext2D) and SVG) and transpilers (something→JS) for many programming languages, and even binary executables ([wasm](https://webassembly.org/)). You can use these technologies to develop games for web browsers and all of these are standard technologies and well-supported by current browsers.
You can develop the game in pure JS with drawing onto canvas with the ordinary 2D commands (for rather simple graphics). If you want 3D or just more complex graphics, you can use WebGL.
When you do not want to use JS, but something more portable (Scheme, …) or compilable to machine code (C, C++, [Rust](https://www.rust-lang.org/what/wasm), … – see also Emscripten project), you can choose some transpiler or compiler that produces either WebAssembly (bytecode supported by the most common browsers) or asm.js (assembly-like form of JavaScript, supported everywhere where the JS is).
So, the solution is simple: Modern web standards are enough for such purposes. |
82,508 | I want the ability to animate a scene where I can draw boxes, circles, text, and other things like images, and be able to record it. I figure I will need my own recording software, but that is separate from this post.
Because my needs are very simple, the tool I use should be free.
Since some of the things will be computer science and math related, originally I was looking at 3Blue1Brown's videos, but the application used for those videos is a bit overkill for what I need. | 2022/03/15 | [
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/82508",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/users/13458/"
] | [Godot Engine](https://godotengine.org/) is an open-source game engine and IDE that can produce games that run on multiple platforms, including the web. For the latter, it produces a WASM (WebAssembly) package that you can integrate with a few lines of HTML/JS into any web page.
Here's an example of a 2D game written in Godot, playable in the browser: [Wurst Day Ever](https://blinry.org/wurst-day-ever/). | The Unity web player still works, though it's no longer supported and requires the user to install it.
Supernova flash player is an option for legacy swf files.
Everything else is going to be HTML5, probably backed up with a canvas element. You can use plain javascript or one of the very many js libraries designed for this sort of thing. The first 3 I can think of which aren't already in another answer are phaser, melon and createjs. |
82,508 | I want the ability to animate a scene where I can draw boxes, circles, text, and other things like images, and be able to record it. I figure I will need my own recording software, but that is separate from this post.
Because my needs are very simple, the tool I use should be free.
Since some of the things will be computer science and math related, originally I was looking at 3Blue1Brown's videos, but the application used for those videos is a bit overkill for what I need. | 2022/03/15 | [
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/82508",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/users/13458/"
] | [Wick Editor](https://www.wickeditor.com) can be used as a free alternative to Adobe Animate (formely named Flash Professional).
Similiarities and differences to/from Animate:
* The editor itself doesn't have the "pen" tool, so to draw curves indirectly you use the line tool, then hover the line with the mouse pointer using *Path Cursor* tool and curve it.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/nrlA7.png)
* Like Animate, timeline can have code (instead of ActionScript, it is JavaScript).
Other information:
* If you want NPM (Node.js Package Manager) dependencies, then you'll want to explicitly use the .wick runtime from a NPM project. Currently the .wick runtime is not available on NPM, so it means it must be extracted from an archive export from the Wick Editor.
These posts might help you with the .wick runtime:
* [Control timeline from HTML](https://forum.wickeditor.com/t/control-timeline-from-html/8753)
* [Is there API for loading .wick files?](https://forum.wickeditor.com/t/is-there-api-for-loading-wick-files-like-actionscripts-loader/8747/2) | The Unity web player still works, though it's no longer supported and requires the user to install it.
Supernova flash player is an option for legacy swf files.
Everything else is going to be HTML5, probably backed up with a canvas element. You can use plain javascript or one of the very many js libraries designed for this sort of thing. The first 3 I can think of which aren't already in another answer are phaser, melon and createjs. |
82,508 | I want the ability to animate a scene where I can draw boxes, circles, text, and other things like images, and be able to record it. I figure I will need my own recording software, but that is separate from this post.
Because my needs are very simple, the tool I use should be free.
Since some of the things will be computer science and math related, originally I was looking at 3Blue1Brown's videos, but the application used for those videos is a bit overkill for what I need. | 2022/03/15 | [
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/82508",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/users/13458/"
] | Modern standard web technologies seem to be reasonably powerful to reproduce what you once did with Flash Player. What about <https://rive.app/> for example? | The excellent OpenFL library <https://www.openfl.org/> uses many of the same APIs as Actionscript 3.0; even the Haxe programming language used in OpenFL is quite similar in syntax/grammar to Actionscript 3.0. OpenFL is made with portability in mind, so native and HTML5 build targets are available out of the box. |
82,508 | I want the ability to animate a scene where I can draw boxes, circles, text, and other things like images, and be able to record it. I figure I will need my own recording software, but that is separate from this post.
Because my needs are very simple, the tool I use should be free.
Since some of the things will be computer science and math related, originally I was looking at 3Blue1Brown's videos, but the application used for those videos is a bit overkill for what I need. | 2022/03/15 | [
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/82508",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/users/13458/"
] | Modern standard web technologies seem to be reasonably powerful to reproduce what you once did with Flash Player. What about <https://rive.app/> for example? | The Unity web player still works, though it's no longer supported and requires the user to install it.
Supernova flash player is an option for legacy swf files.
Everything else is going to be HTML5, probably backed up with a canvas element. You can use plain javascript or one of the very many js libraries designed for this sort of thing. The first 3 I can think of which aren't already in another answer are phaser, melon and createjs. |
82,508 | I want the ability to animate a scene where I can draw boxes, circles, text, and other things like images, and be able to record it. I figure I will need my own recording software, but that is separate from this post.
Because my needs are very simple, the tool I use should be free.
Since some of the things will be computer science and math related, originally I was looking at 3Blue1Brown's videos, but the application used for those videos is a bit overkill for what I need. | 2022/03/15 | [
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/82508",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/users/13458/"
] | [Godot Engine](https://godotengine.org/) is an open-source game engine and IDE that can produce games that run on multiple platforms, including the web. For the latter, it produces a WASM (WebAssembly) package that you can integrate with a few lines of HTML/JS into any web page.
Here's an example of a 2D game written in Godot, playable in the browser: [Wurst Day Ever](https://blinry.org/wurst-day-ever/). | The excellent OpenFL library <https://www.openfl.org/> uses many of the same APIs as Actionscript 3.0; even the Haxe programming language used in OpenFL is quite similar in syntax/grammar to Actionscript 3.0. OpenFL is made with portability in mind, so native and HTML5 build targets are available out of the box. |
82,508 | I want the ability to animate a scene where I can draw boxes, circles, text, and other things like images, and be able to record it. I figure I will need my own recording software, but that is separate from this post.
Because my needs are very simple, the tool I use should be free.
Since some of the things will be computer science and math related, originally I was looking at 3Blue1Brown's videos, but the application used for those videos is a bit overkill for what I need. | 2022/03/15 | [
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/82508",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/users/13458/"
] | Expanding on Alejandro's comment you could try [p5js](https://p5js.org/get-started/).
>
> p5.js is a JavaScript library for creative coding, with a focus on making coding accessible and inclusive for artists, designers, educators, beginners, and anyone else!
>
>
>
[Here is an implementation of snake](https://editor.p5js.org/p5/sketches/Interaction:_snake) in their online editor. (Use i,j,k,l to control the snake).
[The Coding Train](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HerCR8bw_GE&list=PLRqwX-V7Uu6Zy51Q-x9tMWIv9cueOFTFA) on YouTube has lots of video tutorials on p5js (and processing, what p5js is based on (I think!)) | The Unity web player still works, though it's no longer supported and requires the user to install it.
Supernova flash player is an option for legacy swf files.
Everything else is going to be HTML5, probably backed up with a canvas element. You can use plain javascript or one of the very many js libraries designed for this sort of thing. The first 3 I can think of which aren't already in another answer are phaser, melon and createjs. |
157,551 | I am currently employed by a major consulting firm, where I work on a contract for a federal agency. I recently recieved a final job offer and EOD from this same federal agency, which I've accepted. I told my manager at the consulting firm about my plans and gave her several weeks notice. However, this manager told me she would talk with her contact at the federal agency about delaying my EOD or having me spend my first few months of federal employment working on her contract. Is it possible that the federal agency would modify my start date at her behest? | 2020/04/25 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/157551",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/117801/"
] | It's unlikely that she'll be able to delay your end date at her company, but it's possible that you could end up working on her project at your new job. But it doesn't come down to what you want; it's up to the federal agency to decide, and they may or may not want to give your previous employer what she'd like. | While I have never gone from non-government to government employee, I have seen it done a number of times.
If you are going to end up working for the same agency in the same region I have seen the government managers negotiate a deal where for X months you will be available to provide a limited amount of assistance. But during that time you remain a government employee.
I have also known when the new manager doesn't cooperate and the employee is blocked from providing help, though I have seen a few cases where they snuck in a few hours in a crisis. The risk for the employee is if they get caught, or if the old project starts demanding too many hours.
I have never known a manager to be able to delay the start date unless the the employee would be moving to the same project and there were budget or logistical reasons.
why does your manager want to delay your start date besides the normal concerns of a departing employee? I have seen these a few times:
* Money. They can't bill for your hours anymore and they are concerned that it will take time to fill the slot.
* Contract. They are obligated by the current contract to fill that position in X days or they will face punitive damages that goes beyond the lower amount they can bill.
* Competition. They fear that the government will decide that a competitor can fill the position, and award that part to a competitor.
* Future. They fear that the government will be slowly bringing jobs in-house, which will mean eventually the contract will be cancelled.
These are real concerns. But they are unlikey to persuade a government agency to delay your start date. |
388,303 | I know there are devices to measure power (e.g., dynamometers) but I can't think of any example of a device that measures work directly. Is there such a thing? | 2018/02/23 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/388303",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/185915/"
] | Several things that we don't normally think about as "work meters" effectively measure work.
For instance, if you marked a spring scale with energies instead of forces, you would have a device that measures work done to it. | I'm having trouble thinking of many things that measure "directly" in general.
The best examples I can think of would be length measurements; but even that is a convoluted physical process involving the comparison of light reflections that humans just happen to be really good at.
I'd say a dynamometer isn't very direct either. They usually measure torque and RPM, or some other variables that can be converted to work.
Basically, measurement is giving mathematical value to something physical. It's hard (impossible?) to make any measurement without a medium. |
388,303 | I know there are devices to measure power (e.g., dynamometers) but I can't think of any example of a device that measures work directly. Is there such a thing? | 2018/02/23 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/388303",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/185915/"
] | Several things that we don't normally think about as "work meters" effectively measure work.
For instance, if you marked a spring scale with energies instead of forces, you would have a device that measures work done to it. | Note that to know work, you must measure a flow variable, an effort variable, and a time variable. I know of no measurement device that can capture all three "directly" i.e., in a single measurement.
But in the electrical realm, a work meter is called a watt-hour meter and there's one sitting on the outside of your house, which furnishes the basis for your monthly power bill.
And in the mechanical realm (specifically, steam power) there is a device called an indicator in which the stroke displacement of a piston in a steam engine is drawn onto the x-axis of a piece of chart paper while the steam pressure above the piston is drawn onto the y-axis. the area under the curve is an analog representation of the work done per stroke. |
965,113 | For an application we are working on I need to generate sample credit card numbers which pass the Luhn algorithm but which are also unique, so we cannot use the sample credit card numbers.
We need to be able to generate around 300 card numbers at a time, and ideally i would be able to do this when generating my input data.
Many Thanks | 2009/06/08 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/965113",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/87783/"
] | Create random numbers, then calculate the checksum number.
You can find more information at [Wikipedia - Luhn](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luhn), both details about the algorithm and links to different implementations. | From what I see you just need to ensure that when running through the algorithm you get a result of 0 (mod 10). So you can pick any number of random digits (or sequential if you like) and just add one last digit which will ensure that the number is valid. |
965,113 | For an application we are working on I need to generate sample credit card numbers which pass the Luhn algorithm but which are also unique, so we cannot use the sample credit card numbers.
We need to be able to generate around 300 card numbers at a time, and ideally i would be able to do this when generating my input data.
Many Thanks | 2009/06/08 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/965113",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/87783/"
] | Create random numbers, then calculate the checksum number.
You can find more information at [Wikipedia - Luhn](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luhn), both details about the algorithm and links to different implementations. | If you need a list to test each card, you'll find one here. [How to test credit card interactions?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/66880/how-to-test-credit-card-interactions/66988#66988) |
965,113 | For an application we are working on I need to generate sample credit card numbers which pass the Luhn algorithm but which are also unique, so we cannot use the sample credit card numbers.
We need to be able to generate around 300 card numbers at a time, and ideally i would be able to do this when generating my input data.
Many Thanks | 2009/06/08 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/965113",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/87783/"
] | Create random numbers, then calculate the checksum number.
You can find more information at [Wikipedia - Luhn](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luhn), both details about the algorithm and links to different implementations. | Do you need the credit card #'s to pass any other tests? i.e. should they look like valid VISA, MasterCard, or AMEX, etc.
If so, you may want a resource like [Graham King's](http://www.darkcoding.net/credit-card-numbers/) otherwise some of the other suggestions here are good.
The latest version of Graham King's generator (including c# code) can be found on [GitHub](https://github.com/grahamking/darkcoding-credit-card/). |
965,113 | For an application we are working on I need to generate sample credit card numbers which pass the Luhn algorithm but which are also unique, so we cannot use the sample credit card numbers.
We need to be able to generate around 300 card numbers at a time, and ideally i would be able to do this when generating my input data.
Many Thanks | 2009/06/08 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/965113",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/87783/"
] | Create random numbers, then calculate the checksum number.
You can find more information at [Wikipedia - Luhn](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luhn), both details about the algorithm and links to different implementations. | I took the code from Graham Kings site and ported it to c#, also emailing Graham a copy, you can find it here [link text](http://kevhunter.wordpress.com/2009/08/16/creating-fake-credit-card-numbers/) |
965,113 | For an application we are working on I need to generate sample credit card numbers which pass the Luhn algorithm but which are also unique, so we cannot use the sample credit card numbers.
We need to be able to generate around 300 card numbers at a time, and ideally i would be able to do this when generating my input data.
Many Thanks | 2009/06/08 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/965113",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/87783/"
] | From what I see you just need to ensure that when running through the algorithm you get a result of 0 (mod 10). So you can pick any number of random digits (or sequential if you like) and just add one last digit which will ensure that the number is valid. | If you need a list to test each card, you'll find one here. [How to test credit card interactions?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/66880/how-to-test-credit-card-interactions/66988#66988) |
965,113 | For an application we are working on I need to generate sample credit card numbers which pass the Luhn algorithm but which are also unique, so we cannot use the sample credit card numbers.
We need to be able to generate around 300 card numbers at a time, and ideally i would be able to do this when generating my input data.
Many Thanks | 2009/06/08 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/965113",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/87783/"
] | Do you need the credit card #'s to pass any other tests? i.e. should they look like valid VISA, MasterCard, or AMEX, etc.
If so, you may want a resource like [Graham King's](http://www.darkcoding.net/credit-card-numbers/) otherwise some of the other suggestions here are good.
The latest version of Graham King's generator (including c# code) can be found on [GitHub](https://github.com/grahamking/darkcoding-credit-card/). | If you need a list to test each card, you'll find one here. [How to test credit card interactions?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/66880/how-to-test-credit-card-interactions/66988#66988) |
965,113 | For an application we are working on I need to generate sample credit card numbers which pass the Luhn algorithm but which are also unique, so we cannot use the sample credit card numbers.
We need to be able to generate around 300 card numbers at a time, and ideally i would be able to do this when generating my input data.
Many Thanks | 2009/06/08 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/965113",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/87783/"
] | I took the code from Graham Kings site and ported it to c#, also emailing Graham a copy, you can find it here [link text](http://kevhunter.wordpress.com/2009/08/16/creating-fake-credit-card-numbers/) | If you need a list to test each card, you'll find one here. [How to test credit card interactions?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/66880/how-to-test-credit-card-interactions/66988#66988) |
3,277 | What is this and why does it need to be discussed?
==================================================
### An illustrative example
Consider the following discussion on the closure of a question:
>
> * User A: I am voting to close this question as a duplicate of question X.
> * User B: Why? Question X is obviously different.
> * User A: The answers to question X answer this question.
> * User B: This question is asking for […], but question X is asking for […].
> * User A: Look at answer Y. It directly provides an answer to this question.
> * User B: Yes, but this is not what is asked here.
> * User A: Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall.
> * User B: Your father smelled of elderberries.
>
>
>
This discussion leads nowhere and escalates because User A and B are arguing on the wrong level.
They agree about each other’s assessments (“the answers to question X already answer it”, “question X is different”), but argue about them.
However, they fail to see that they disagree on a more general level, namely what suffices for closure as a duplicate:
* User A focusses on similarity of the answers.
* User B focusses on similarity of the questions.
### Our general problem
Going by previous discussions, comments left by close voters, and in custom close reasons, I think that we have a problem similar to that in the example:
We discuss on a rather specific level; we argue from different motivations on a more general level; but we never address those differences.
Even worse, I have the feeling that some people think that some motivations are carved in stone, even though they do not agree with them.
Before discussing about closure in detailed cases, I therefore wish to establish or confirm a common ground, i.e., a set of good motivations for closure.
Actual question
===============
**What are good, sufficient motivations for closure on this site?**
Please mind the keyword ***sufficient***:
Naturally many of the above reasons tend to coincide, but that does not mean that they are good motivations for closure **on their own**.
* Each answer should only contain one motivation.
* Answers should be roughly one level more basic than a pre-defined close reason.
If possible, elaborate why it is acceptable to close a question with this motivation and provide examples.
* Each answers should elaborate whether it is acceptable to answer questions fitting the motivation (i.e., that one votes to close with this motivation).
* As duplicate closure is considerably different from other reasons for closure and there seems to be no major disagreement about it, I would exclude motivations specific to it from this discussion.
* Indicate your agreement or disagreement by voting.
* To keep things simple, please refrain from playing devil’s advocate and posting motivations that you disagree with.
### Potential answers
To provide some example answers, I will post some motivations that I consider good.
Furthermore, here are some motivations that I observed being given for closure (not that I agree with them):
* >
> The question is better suited for/belongs on another site.
>
>
>
* >
> The question has a low quality.
>
>
>
* >
> The question cannot be answered by us.
>
>
>
* >
> The question is not about design per se.
>
>
>
* >
> The question can be answered by a simple Internet search.
>
>
>
* >
> Answers to the question only help the asker.
>
>
> | 2017/07/22 | [
"https://graphicdesign.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3277",
"https://graphicdesign.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://graphicdesign.meta.stackexchange.com/users/19174/"
] | ### ‘Gimme teh codez’
This is a phrase which has been used for many years on StackOverflow especially to refer to questions which show no evidence that the asker has done anything at all to try to arrive at an answer, or at the very least a proper understanding of the problem, before asking. It is characterised by askers simply wanting full, working code that they can copy-paste into their own project without having to worry about understanding how the code works or what it really does.
It has several guises on different SE sites, but it boils down to the equivalent of asking for a fish instead of asking how to fish.
Here on GD, it mostly comes in the guise of people who find an image somewhere on the Internet and seemingly come straight here to ask, “How do I make this?”—or for that matter, “What is this font?”. The underlying question itself isn’t necessarily bad, and there can be a lot to learn from it, but the way it is asked reveals an attitude towards the community that we shouldn’t want to encourage. The most egregious questions of this type are ones that simply just ask people to do free work for them, like [this one](https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/95456/looking-for-a-graphic-designer-to-create-a-logo-for-me-for-free); these are quite consistently quickly closed, but there are less blatant ones that are sometimes closed, sometimes not.
[This question](https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/95414/how-can-i-recreate-this-blue-smoke-effect) is a recent example, posted yesterday. The entirety of the question reads:
>
> <https://dribbble.com/shots/3665378-Renault>
>
>
> Anyone knows how to achieve this in PSD?
>
>
>
As the answer by user287001 shows, there is a great deal of very useful detail to take from this question, so it definitely belongs here. But the basis of the question (shown also in the comment to the answer, asking for the PSD file) is a request for a finished, cut-and-paste job, rather than a request for an explanation of a way to solve the problem; a fish rather than a fishing rod.
In the same way that we require people to first try to identify fonts themselves by using automated font identifiers, it’s only reasonable to also expect people who ask for advice on how to achieve an effect, style, or design to show what their own understanding of the problem is and how far towards the goal that takes them.
If nothing of the sort is evident from the question, it should be perfectly acceptable to close it—keeping in mind that closing a question is not actually *closing* it, but *putting it on hold* pending improvements. (As Wrzlprmft mentions in the comment below, there actually used to be a tailored close-reason specifically for requests for free work.) | ### The question does not fit the general Stack Exchange format
These are questions that would not be a good fit for any Stack Exchange site¹.
Questions not fitting Stack Exchange’s question-and-answer format at least cause frustration because users cannot act as they want to or as is appropriate.
Moreover, our mechanisms for improving the quality of content, getting rid of bad-quality content, making posts useful to future visitors, and moderation are impeded.
Typical examples of such questions are most opinion-based and too-broad questions as well as bad critique and style-identification questions.
It is not acceptable to answer such questions, as answers only increase the problems caused by such questions.
---
¹ with the possible exception of “special” sites such as Software Recommendations or Code Review |
3,277 | What is this and why does it need to be discussed?
==================================================
### An illustrative example
Consider the following discussion on the closure of a question:
>
> * User A: I am voting to close this question as a duplicate of question X.
> * User B: Why? Question X is obviously different.
> * User A: The answers to question X answer this question.
> * User B: This question is asking for […], but question X is asking for […].
> * User A: Look at answer Y. It directly provides an answer to this question.
> * User B: Yes, but this is not what is asked here.
> * User A: Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall.
> * User B: Your father smelled of elderberries.
>
>
>
This discussion leads nowhere and escalates because User A and B are arguing on the wrong level.
They agree about each other’s assessments (“the answers to question X already answer it”, “question X is different”), but argue about them.
However, they fail to see that they disagree on a more general level, namely what suffices for closure as a duplicate:
* User A focusses on similarity of the answers.
* User B focusses on similarity of the questions.
### Our general problem
Going by previous discussions, comments left by close voters, and in custom close reasons, I think that we have a problem similar to that in the example:
We discuss on a rather specific level; we argue from different motivations on a more general level; but we never address those differences.
Even worse, I have the feeling that some people think that some motivations are carved in stone, even though they do not agree with them.
Before discussing about closure in detailed cases, I therefore wish to establish or confirm a common ground, i.e., a set of good motivations for closure.
Actual question
===============
**What are good, sufficient motivations for closure on this site?**
Please mind the keyword ***sufficient***:
Naturally many of the above reasons tend to coincide, but that does not mean that they are good motivations for closure **on their own**.
* Each answer should only contain one motivation.
* Answers should be roughly one level more basic than a pre-defined close reason.
If possible, elaborate why it is acceptable to close a question with this motivation and provide examples.
* Each answers should elaborate whether it is acceptable to answer questions fitting the motivation (i.e., that one votes to close with this motivation).
* As duplicate closure is considerably different from other reasons for closure and there seems to be no major disagreement about it, I would exclude motivations specific to it from this discussion.
* Indicate your agreement or disagreement by voting.
* To keep things simple, please refrain from playing devil’s advocate and posting motivations that you disagree with.
### Potential answers
To provide some example answers, I will post some motivations that I consider good.
Furthermore, here are some motivations that I observed being given for closure (not that I agree with them):
* >
> The question is better suited for/belongs on another site.
>
>
>
* >
> The question has a low quality.
>
>
>
* >
> The question cannot be answered by us.
>
>
>
* >
> The question is not about design per se.
>
>
>
* >
> The question can be answered by a simple Internet search.
>
>
>
* >
> Answers to the question only help the asker.
>
>
> | 2017/07/22 | [
"https://graphicdesign.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3277",
"https://graphicdesign.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://graphicdesign.meta.stackexchange.com/users/19174/"
] | ### The question does not fit the general Stack Exchange format
These are questions that would not be a good fit for any Stack Exchange site¹.
Questions not fitting Stack Exchange’s question-and-answer format at least cause frustration because users cannot act as they want to or as is appropriate.
Moreover, our mechanisms for improving the quality of content, getting rid of bad-quality content, making posts useful to future visitors, and moderation are impeded.
Typical examples of such questions are most opinion-based and too-broad questions as well as bad critique and style-identification questions.
It is not acceptable to answer such questions, as answers only increase the problems caused by such questions.
---
¹ with the possible exception of “special” sites such as Software Recommendations or Code Review | ### There is no good criterion to tell a good answer from a bad one
A central aspect about the Stack Exchange system is that answers are evaluated by users via votes and thus good answers raise to the top.
This allows the askers and others to see which answers are judged to be the best by experts (i.e., us) and allows them to read the best answer first.
If we cannot evaluate answers, this mechanism is broken.
Note that this is not about whether existing or expected answers to a question are good or bad.
This is about questions where we cannot even conceive how to tell a good answer from a bad one.
Examples for such questions are unclear questions or primarily opinion-based questions.
For a specific example, consider the question:
>
> How did you start with Graphic Design?
>
>
>
As long as I answer this question truthfully, my answer is correct. Moreover, every (truthful) answer to this question is equally valid.
It is not acceptable to answer such a question as answers to such questions are a considerable source of dispute. Also, any answer may turn into a bad one if the question is salvaged. |
3,277 | What is this and why does it need to be discussed?
==================================================
### An illustrative example
Consider the following discussion on the closure of a question:
>
> * User A: I am voting to close this question as a duplicate of question X.
> * User B: Why? Question X is obviously different.
> * User A: The answers to question X answer this question.
> * User B: This question is asking for […], but question X is asking for […].
> * User A: Look at answer Y. It directly provides an answer to this question.
> * User B: Yes, but this is not what is asked here.
> * User A: Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall.
> * User B: Your father smelled of elderberries.
>
>
>
This discussion leads nowhere and escalates because User A and B are arguing on the wrong level.
They agree about each other’s assessments (“the answers to question X already answer it”, “question X is different”), but argue about them.
However, they fail to see that they disagree on a more general level, namely what suffices for closure as a duplicate:
* User A focusses on similarity of the answers.
* User B focusses on similarity of the questions.
### Our general problem
Going by previous discussions, comments left by close voters, and in custom close reasons, I think that we have a problem similar to that in the example:
We discuss on a rather specific level; we argue from different motivations on a more general level; but we never address those differences.
Even worse, I have the feeling that some people think that some motivations are carved in stone, even though they do not agree with them.
Before discussing about closure in detailed cases, I therefore wish to establish or confirm a common ground, i.e., a set of good motivations for closure.
Actual question
===============
**What are good, sufficient motivations for closure on this site?**
Please mind the keyword ***sufficient***:
Naturally many of the above reasons tend to coincide, but that does not mean that they are good motivations for closure **on their own**.
* Each answer should only contain one motivation.
* Answers should be roughly one level more basic than a pre-defined close reason.
If possible, elaborate why it is acceptable to close a question with this motivation and provide examples.
* Each answers should elaborate whether it is acceptable to answer questions fitting the motivation (i.e., that one votes to close with this motivation).
* As duplicate closure is considerably different from other reasons for closure and there seems to be no major disagreement about it, I would exclude motivations specific to it from this discussion.
* Indicate your agreement or disagreement by voting.
* To keep things simple, please refrain from playing devil’s advocate and posting motivations that you disagree with.
### Potential answers
To provide some example answers, I will post some motivations that I consider good.
Furthermore, here are some motivations that I observed being given for closure (not that I agree with them):
* >
> The question is better suited for/belongs on another site.
>
>
>
* >
> The question has a low quality.
>
>
>
* >
> The question cannot be answered by us.
>
>
>
* >
> The question is not about design per se.
>
>
>
* >
> The question can be answered by a simple Internet search.
>
>
>
* >
> Answers to the question only help the asker.
>
>
> | 2017/07/22 | [
"https://graphicdesign.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3277",
"https://graphicdesign.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://graphicdesign.meta.stackexchange.com/users/19174/"
] | ### ‘Gimme teh codez’
This is a phrase which has been used for many years on StackOverflow especially to refer to questions which show no evidence that the asker has done anything at all to try to arrive at an answer, or at the very least a proper understanding of the problem, before asking. It is characterised by askers simply wanting full, working code that they can copy-paste into their own project without having to worry about understanding how the code works or what it really does.
It has several guises on different SE sites, but it boils down to the equivalent of asking for a fish instead of asking how to fish.
Here on GD, it mostly comes in the guise of people who find an image somewhere on the Internet and seemingly come straight here to ask, “How do I make this?”—or for that matter, “What is this font?”. The underlying question itself isn’t necessarily bad, and there can be a lot to learn from it, but the way it is asked reveals an attitude towards the community that we shouldn’t want to encourage. The most egregious questions of this type are ones that simply just ask people to do free work for them, like [this one](https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/95456/looking-for-a-graphic-designer-to-create-a-logo-for-me-for-free); these are quite consistently quickly closed, but there are less blatant ones that are sometimes closed, sometimes not.
[This question](https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/95414/how-can-i-recreate-this-blue-smoke-effect) is a recent example, posted yesterday. The entirety of the question reads:
>
> <https://dribbble.com/shots/3665378-Renault>
>
>
> Anyone knows how to achieve this in PSD?
>
>
>
As the answer by user287001 shows, there is a great deal of very useful detail to take from this question, so it definitely belongs here. But the basis of the question (shown also in the comment to the answer, asking for the PSD file) is a request for a finished, cut-and-paste job, rather than a request for an explanation of a way to solve the problem; a fish rather than a fishing rod.
In the same way that we require people to first try to identify fonts themselves by using automated font identifiers, it’s only reasonable to also expect people who ask for advice on how to achieve an effect, style, or design to show what their own understanding of the problem is and how far towards the goal that takes them.
If nothing of the sort is evident from the question, it should be perfectly acceptable to close it—keeping in mind that closing a question is not actually *closing* it, but *putting it on hold* pending improvements. (As Wrzlprmft mentions in the comment below, there actually used to be a tailored close-reason specifically for requests for free work.) | ### Our community cannot judge answers to the question
A central aspect about the Stack Exchange system is that answers are evaluated by users via votes and thus good answers raise to the top.
This allows the askers and others to see which answers are judged to be the best by experts (i.e., us) and allows them to read the best answer first.
If we cannot evaluate answers, this mechanism is broken.
In contrast to [this similar answer](https://graphicdesign.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3278/19174), this is about questions which can be evaluated in general, but we are not not the experts but as good as random people from the Internet.
Of course, for almost every good question, you will find some user of this site who can adequately judge it due to their hobbies or day job, but not because they care about graphic design.
Examples are out-of-scope questions, including a considerable portion of tech-support questions.
For a specific example consider the question:
>
> Does the uncertainty principle go against chaos theory?
>
>
>
Some of us may tell a good answer to that question from a bad one¹, but that has nothing to with us being interested in graphic design.
We, as a community, are as good at evaluating this question as random folks from the Internet.
It is acceptable to answer such questions as the answers may help the asker and future visitors and are preserved in case of a possible migration.
However, we should be careful not to encourage people to ask such questions here.
¹ in fact, I answered this question on Physics SE |
3,277 | What is this and why does it need to be discussed?
==================================================
### An illustrative example
Consider the following discussion on the closure of a question:
>
> * User A: I am voting to close this question as a duplicate of question X.
> * User B: Why? Question X is obviously different.
> * User A: The answers to question X answer this question.
> * User B: This question is asking for […], but question X is asking for […].
> * User A: Look at answer Y. It directly provides an answer to this question.
> * User B: Yes, but this is not what is asked here.
> * User A: Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall.
> * User B: Your father smelled of elderberries.
>
>
>
This discussion leads nowhere and escalates because User A and B are arguing on the wrong level.
They agree about each other’s assessments (“the answers to question X already answer it”, “question X is different”), but argue about them.
However, they fail to see that they disagree on a more general level, namely what suffices for closure as a duplicate:
* User A focusses on similarity of the answers.
* User B focusses on similarity of the questions.
### Our general problem
Going by previous discussions, comments left by close voters, and in custom close reasons, I think that we have a problem similar to that in the example:
We discuss on a rather specific level; we argue from different motivations on a more general level; but we never address those differences.
Even worse, I have the feeling that some people think that some motivations are carved in stone, even though they do not agree with them.
Before discussing about closure in detailed cases, I therefore wish to establish or confirm a common ground, i.e., a set of good motivations for closure.
Actual question
===============
**What are good, sufficient motivations for closure on this site?**
Please mind the keyword ***sufficient***:
Naturally many of the above reasons tend to coincide, but that does not mean that they are good motivations for closure **on their own**.
* Each answer should only contain one motivation.
* Answers should be roughly one level more basic than a pre-defined close reason.
If possible, elaborate why it is acceptable to close a question with this motivation and provide examples.
* Each answers should elaborate whether it is acceptable to answer questions fitting the motivation (i.e., that one votes to close with this motivation).
* As duplicate closure is considerably different from other reasons for closure and there seems to be no major disagreement about it, I would exclude motivations specific to it from this discussion.
* Indicate your agreement or disagreement by voting.
* To keep things simple, please refrain from playing devil’s advocate and posting motivations that you disagree with.
### Potential answers
To provide some example answers, I will post some motivations that I consider good.
Furthermore, here are some motivations that I observed being given for closure (not that I agree with them):
* >
> The question is better suited for/belongs on another site.
>
>
>
* >
> The question has a low quality.
>
>
>
* >
> The question cannot be answered by us.
>
>
>
* >
> The question is not about design per se.
>
>
>
* >
> The question can be answered by a simple Internet search.
>
>
>
* >
> Answers to the question only help the asker.
>
>
> | 2017/07/22 | [
"https://graphicdesign.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3277",
"https://graphicdesign.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://graphicdesign.meta.stackexchange.com/users/19174/"
] | ### ‘Gimme teh codez’
This is a phrase which has been used for many years on StackOverflow especially to refer to questions which show no evidence that the asker has done anything at all to try to arrive at an answer, or at the very least a proper understanding of the problem, before asking. It is characterised by askers simply wanting full, working code that they can copy-paste into their own project without having to worry about understanding how the code works or what it really does.
It has several guises on different SE sites, but it boils down to the equivalent of asking for a fish instead of asking how to fish.
Here on GD, it mostly comes in the guise of people who find an image somewhere on the Internet and seemingly come straight here to ask, “How do I make this?”—or for that matter, “What is this font?”. The underlying question itself isn’t necessarily bad, and there can be a lot to learn from it, but the way it is asked reveals an attitude towards the community that we shouldn’t want to encourage. The most egregious questions of this type are ones that simply just ask people to do free work for them, like [this one](https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/95456/looking-for-a-graphic-designer-to-create-a-logo-for-me-for-free); these are quite consistently quickly closed, but there are less blatant ones that are sometimes closed, sometimes not.
[This question](https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/95414/how-can-i-recreate-this-blue-smoke-effect) is a recent example, posted yesterday. The entirety of the question reads:
>
> <https://dribbble.com/shots/3665378-Renault>
>
>
> Anyone knows how to achieve this in PSD?
>
>
>
As the answer by user287001 shows, there is a great deal of very useful detail to take from this question, so it definitely belongs here. But the basis of the question (shown also in the comment to the answer, asking for the PSD file) is a request for a finished, cut-and-paste job, rather than a request for an explanation of a way to solve the problem; a fish rather than a fishing rod.
In the same way that we require people to first try to identify fonts themselves by using automated font identifiers, it’s only reasonable to also expect people who ask for advice on how to achieve an effect, style, or design to show what their own understanding of the problem is and how far towards the goal that takes them.
If nothing of the sort is evident from the question, it should be perfectly acceptable to close it—keeping in mind that closing a question is not actually *closing* it, but *putting it on hold* pending improvements. (As Wrzlprmft mentions in the comment below, there actually used to be a tailored close-reason specifically for requests for free work.) | ### There is no good criterion to tell a good answer from a bad one
A central aspect about the Stack Exchange system is that answers are evaluated by users via votes and thus good answers raise to the top.
This allows the askers and others to see which answers are judged to be the best by experts (i.e., us) and allows them to read the best answer first.
If we cannot evaluate answers, this mechanism is broken.
Note that this is not about whether existing or expected answers to a question are good or bad.
This is about questions where we cannot even conceive how to tell a good answer from a bad one.
Examples for such questions are unclear questions or primarily opinion-based questions.
For a specific example, consider the question:
>
> How did you start with Graphic Design?
>
>
>
As long as I answer this question truthfully, my answer is correct. Moreover, every (truthful) answer to this question is equally valid.
It is not acceptable to answer such a question as answers to such questions are a considerable source of dispute. Also, any answer may turn into a bad one if the question is salvaged. |
3,277 | What is this and why does it need to be discussed?
==================================================
### An illustrative example
Consider the following discussion on the closure of a question:
>
> * User A: I am voting to close this question as a duplicate of question X.
> * User B: Why? Question X is obviously different.
> * User A: The answers to question X answer this question.
> * User B: This question is asking for […], but question X is asking for […].
> * User A: Look at answer Y. It directly provides an answer to this question.
> * User B: Yes, but this is not what is asked here.
> * User A: Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall.
> * User B: Your father smelled of elderberries.
>
>
>
This discussion leads nowhere and escalates because User A and B are arguing on the wrong level.
They agree about each other’s assessments (“the answers to question X already answer it”, “question X is different”), but argue about them.
However, they fail to see that they disagree on a more general level, namely what suffices for closure as a duplicate:
* User A focusses on similarity of the answers.
* User B focusses on similarity of the questions.
### Our general problem
Going by previous discussions, comments left by close voters, and in custom close reasons, I think that we have a problem similar to that in the example:
We discuss on a rather specific level; we argue from different motivations on a more general level; but we never address those differences.
Even worse, I have the feeling that some people think that some motivations are carved in stone, even though they do not agree with them.
Before discussing about closure in detailed cases, I therefore wish to establish or confirm a common ground, i.e., a set of good motivations for closure.
Actual question
===============
**What are good, sufficient motivations for closure on this site?**
Please mind the keyword ***sufficient***:
Naturally many of the above reasons tend to coincide, but that does not mean that they are good motivations for closure **on their own**.
* Each answer should only contain one motivation.
* Answers should be roughly one level more basic than a pre-defined close reason.
If possible, elaborate why it is acceptable to close a question with this motivation and provide examples.
* Each answers should elaborate whether it is acceptable to answer questions fitting the motivation (i.e., that one votes to close with this motivation).
* As duplicate closure is considerably different from other reasons for closure and there seems to be no major disagreement about it, I would exclude motivations specific to it from this discussion.
* Indicate your agreement or disagreement by voting.
* To keep things simple, please refrain from playing devil’s advocate and posting motivations that you disagree with.
### Potential answers
To provide some example answers, I will post some motivations that I consider good.
Furthermore, here are some motivations that I observed being given for closure (not that I agree with them):
* >
> The question is better suited for/belongs on another site.
>
>
>
* >
> The question has a low quality.
>
>
>
* >
> The question cannot be answered by us.
>
>
>
* >
> The question is not about design per se.
>
>
>
* >
> The question can be answered by a simple Internet search.
>
>
>
* >
> Answers to the question only help the asker.
>
>
> | 2017/07/22 | [
"https://graphicdesign.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3277",
"https://graphicdesign.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://graphicdesign.meta.stackexchange.com/users/19174/"
] | ### Our community cannot judge answers to the question
A central aspect about the Stack Exchange system is that answers are evaluated by users via votes and thus good answers raise to the top.
This allows the askers and others to see which answers are judged to be the best by experts (i.e., us) and allows them to read the best answer first.
If we cannot evaluate answers, this mechanism is broken.
In contrast to [this similar answer](https://graphicdesign.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3278/19174), this is about questions which can be evaluated in general, but we are not not the experts but as good as random people from the Internet.
Of course, for almost every good question, you will find some user of this site who can adequately judge it due to their hobbies or day job, but not because they care about graphic design.
Examples are out-of-scope questions, including a considerable portion of tech-support questions.
For a specific example consider the question:
>
> Does the uncertainty principle go against chaos theory?
>
>
>
Some of us may tell a good answer to that question from a bad one¹, but that has nothing to with us being interested in graphic design.
We, as a community, are as good at evaluating this question as random folks from the Internet.
It is acceptable to answer such questions as the answers may help the asker and future visitors and are preserved in case of a possible migration.
However, we should be careful not to encourage people to ask such questions here.
¹ in fact, I answered this question on Physics SE | ### There is no good criterion to tell a good answer from a bad one
A central aspect about the Stack Exchange system is that answers are evaluated by users via votes and thus good answers raise to the top.
This allows the askers and others to see which answers are judged to be the best by experts (i.e., us) and allows them to read the best answer first.
If we cannot evaluate answers, this mechanism is broken.
Note that this is not about whether existing or expected answers to a question are good or bad.
This is about questions where we cannot even conceive how to tell a good answer from a bad one.
Examples for such questions are unclear questions or primarily opinion-based questions.
For a specific example, consider the question:
>
> How did you start with Graphic Design?
>
>
>
As long as I answer this question truthfully, my answer is correct. Moreover, every (truthful) answer to this question is equally valid.
It is not acceptable to answer such a question as answers to such questions are a considerable source of dispute. Also, any answer may turn into a bad one if the question is salvaged. |
123,180 | I work on a website where users:
* fill in a registration form (with only 2 fields: password & confirm password; each user have a unique token which is stored in the URL)
* then land directly after on the login page (2 fields again: login & password)
During an UX session with end-users, we noticed that this is a bit confusing to them, because registration form and login form look very similar (two fields). Some users take some time to realize that they're actually on a different page and now need to log in.
In this context, what would be the best solution?
* Create a transition between both screens?
* Automatically log the user in after he sets his password? (This may be a security issue...)
* Somehow differentiate the screens? For example by putting some welcoming message on login page if user just registered...
Thanks in advance, I hope this post is appropriate, first time here. | 2019/01/16 | [
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/123180",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/users/122341/"
] | Just like Mike, I would also find it really annoying if I am asked to sign in again after registering unless there is an email verification that is required.
Another thought - How would you solve cases where a user does not remember if they've previously signed up for the website?
To solve this, I was thinking of a flow where we could replace these two screens '**Registration**' and '**Login**' with this flow -
* '**Get Started**' screen to input '**Email**' and '**Proceed**' button
* Once user proceeds, we check from backend if the user is a registered user or not
* If the user is not registered, prompt them to enter '**Password**' & '**Confirm Password**'
* If the user is registered, prompt them to enter '**Password**' and allow them to log in. | Personally I find it pretty annoying when I am forced to log in after I've just finished filling in an extensive registration form.
Nevertheless, have a look at this topic: [Making the user login again after registration](https://ux.stackexchange.com/q/21619/98561) where it is discussed whether or not to automatically log the users in after they filled in the registration form.
In your case, if the registration form consists only of login and password (with confirmation) I would **log the users automatically in**, but (depends on the type of your website):
* offer a somewhat crippled account (e.g. they can search the forum but not post anything) until they validate their account with a link sent by email
* allow them to add items to the cart and allow to make the purchase only after they provide the billing information (can be one of the check-out steps)
* periodically ask them for some more information about themselves (in small chunks) to complete their full profile
If you're concerned about the security (out of scope of this site), I'd rather use session token stored as a cookie instead of an URL token, and provide it as a UUID.
When the token expires you simply request the login information along with "reset password" option coupled with the email address provided during registration. |
397,292 | If anybody know how to do the **Internationalization and localization in WPF through only XAML**. I have already done through WPF .cs file by using Resource Manager class.
***I would greatly appericiate, if anybody can guide me and given me the code samples.***
Thanks in advance,
Cheers...
Karthikeyan Manickam. | 2008/12/29 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/397292",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/49764/"
] | Try looking at <http://www.microsoft.com/uk/remix08/agenda.aspx>. In particular select "Day two" -> *Internationalizing WPF And Silverlight Applications*. | Use localization tool. We use Sisulizer
<http://www.sisulizer.com>
It can easily make localized XAML files and satellite assembly files. No need to modify your existig XAML files. |
126,944 | I am moving a minkaire ceiling fan from a flat kithen ceiling to a sloped family room ceiling. The slope of the fm rm ceiling requires that a 1 foot extension be added to the fan to avoid having the blades touch the ceiling. The fan has a receiving unit on it that receives signals from the wall switch unit, which controls various aspects of the fan and it's lights. The extension will require me to add extensions to the wires from the ceiling down to the fan unit. All of the wires on the receiving unit and wall switch are 18 awg stranded wires. I can not find 18 awg at either HD or Lowes. The closest they have is 16 awg. Is it safe to make my 1 foot extensions out of 16 awg wire? | 2017/11/12 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/126944",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/77686/"
] | Yes the 16-gauge will work just fine. Make sure your connections are well insulated. P. | 14AWG is the minimum legal size usable for AC power wiring in the US. That's why you don't find anything smaller.
Smaller wires are legal inside an appliance or as the leads to a lamp. But if you are extending power, that is part of the power system, not the lamp, and should use the appropriate wire size for your circuit.
Signal wires are a different matter and can be as small as 18AWG. You are always allowed to use a larger size wire, so no need to go crazy trying to find a particular size. |
126,944 | I am moving a minkaire ceiling fan from a flat kithen ceiling to a sloped family room ceiling. The slope of the fm rm ceiling requires that a 1 foot extension be added to the fan to avoid having the blades touch the ceiling. The fan has a receiving unit on it that receives signals from the wall switch unit, which controls various aspects of the fan and it's lights. The extension will require me to add extensions to the wires from the ceiling down to the fan unit. All of the wires on the receiving unit and wall switch are 18 awg stranded wires. I can not find 18 awg at either HD or Lowes. The closest they have is 16 awg. Is it safe to make my 1 foot extensions out of 16 awg wire? | 2017/11/12 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/126944",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/77686/"
] | Yes the 16-gauge will work just fine. Make sure your connections are well insulated. P. | You said all of the wires on the receiving unit and wall switch are 18 awg stranded wires. I can not imagine a wall switch wired with 18AWG and carrying anything but low voltage - certainly a code violation in the USA if it is carrying 120V or higher..
The minimum gauge for carrying 120v to a ceiling fan / light is 14awg.
If it is truly a low voltage system (control circuit - like a garage
door opener wall switch or door bell switch) going up from 18(smaller)
to 16(thicker wire) should not be an issue.
>
> If it is not low voltage - you have a bigger problem - the wiring is
> not in code and is really a fire waiting to happen.
>
>
> |
57,730 | If you gave an animal a [Headband of Vast Intelligence](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/h-l/headband-of-vast-intelligence), thus raising its intelligence beyond 2, would that allow it to learn to understand new languages (and speak if it's a [thrush](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/animals/thrush) for example)?
---
Sidenotes:
This doesn't seem to effectively turn it into an [awakened](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/a/awaken) animal, based on the last answer in [this question about temporary intelligence boosts](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/30388/does-making-an-animal-more-intelligent-automatically-make-them-a-magical-beast) that has been answered with "no" (obviously) — though another source of
intelligence boosting (the [Collar of the True Companion](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/c-d/collar-of-the-true-companion)) is mentioned with a description that it turns the animal sentient after a week.
How about if you build the intelligence-boosting headband to grant the
skill "Linguistics"? It would teach the language (and later if the
animal ever "levels up" others as well) for much less gold, than the collar mentioned above. | 2015/03/08 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57730",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/8307/"
] | First, instead of a *headband of vast intelligence*, I recommend the [*circlet of speaking*](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/c-d/circlet-of-speaking) (4,800 gp; 0 lbs.), which grants an animal wearing it the ability to speak 1 language yet *doesn't* increase the animal's intelligence. Although slightly more expensive than the cheapest *headband*, the *circlet* is, in many ways, superior if you want a talking animal that can still be trained; it neatly sidesteps the intelligent animal's language issues detailed below. That said...
### Yes, were an animal to wear a [*headband of vast intelligence +2*](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/h-l/headband-of-vast-intelligence) et al. that animal could learn a language were its Intelligence score to have gone from 1 or 2 to at least 3
Such an animal could learn to *understand* a language but couldn't learn to *speak*. The section on [Intelligent Animals](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/wizard/familiar#TOC-Intelligent-Animals) says that
>
> Increasing an animal's Intelligence to 3 or higher means it is smart enough to understand a language. However, unless an [*awaken*](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/a/awaken) spell is used, the animal doesn't automatically and instantly learn a language, any more than a human child does. The animal must be taught a language, usually over the course of months, giving it the understanding of the meaning of words and sentences beyond its trained responses to commands like "attack" and "heel."
>
>
> Even if the animal is taught to understand a language, it probably lacks the anatomy to actually speak (unless awaken is used). For example, dogs, elephants, and even gorillas lack the proper physiology to speak humanoid languages, though they can use their limited "vocabulary" of sounds to articulate concepts, especially if working with a person who learns what the sounds mean.
>
>
>
So the vague description above of how to teach an intelligent animal language all but says not to bother trying. Further, the most obvious way of improving an animal—taking the animal on adventures so it can gain XP—isn't an option, either, because animals, like most NPCs (cf. the feats [Leadership](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/leadership---final) and [Squire](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/squire)), just [don't earn XP](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/character-advancement).
Thus while the intelligent animal has the *potential* for language—all it would take is but 1 rank in the skill [Linguistics](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/skills/linguistics) for the animal to understand a language—, the intelligent animal lacks the ability to *gain* that rank. It's stuck with what it has.
However, to *use* what it has, the creature can employ the rules for [retraining](http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/ultimateCampaign/campaignSystems/retraining.html#retraining) its skill ranks. By spending a paltry sum and as long as a several weeks, a creature can allocate its accumulated skill ranks differently. For an intelligent animal, this lets it put that minimum 1 rank in the skill Linguistics and understand a language.
>
> **Example**
>
> A [common cat](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/animals/cat) has 1 Hit Die and while wearing a *headband of vast intelligence +2* an Intelligence score of 4. The cat murders a family of commoners and takes the family's treasure, as is a cat's wont. The cat spends 50 gp and 5 8-hour work days avoiding strenuous activity and, afterward, reallocates its skill rank from the skill Perception to the skill Linguistics, therefore learning the language of its choice.
>
>
>
Unfortunately, as they have no starting language, most animals are barred from using the retraining rules to learn a New Language *independent* of their ranks in the skill Linguistics because
>
> Each language [gained through the New Languages section of the retraining rules] requires a trainer **who shares a language with you** and knows the language you want to learn, or a book written **in a language you know** that explains the basics of the language you want to learn.
>
>
>
Emphasis mine, and these rules make me sad. However, the DM could allow a trainer with the ability to [*speak with animals*](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/s/speak-with-animals) for 8 hours a day and who was willing to do so be an intelligent animal's language trainer. Extending the duration of a *speak with animals* effect from its typical 1 min./level to at least 8 hours is not impossible (e.g. a friendly high-level character's [familiar](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/wizard/familiar) that can *both* speak a language *and* speak to others of its kind, a creature with the [animal domain](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/cleric/domains/paizo---domains/animal-domain) and the [*pelt of the beast*](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/m-p/pelt-of-the-beast), feral speech *a la* [wizard](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/wizard/arcane-discoveries/arcane-discoveries-paizo/feral-speech) or [witch](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/witch/hexes/common-hexes/hex-feral-speech-su)). This New Language retraining, were it available, would cost the intelligent animal 200 gp and occupy both the intelligent animal and its trainer for 20 8-hour work days that must be otherwise absent of strenuous activity.1
Strangely, [an animal with an Intelligence score of 1 or 2 *can* put ranks in the skill Linguistics](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/rules-for-monsters/creature-types#TOC-Animal), doing so through retraining as described above or just using its native skill ranks.2 The animal, however, still isn't "smart enough to understand a language," so what, exactly, these ranks in the skill Linguistics *do* for an animal is unclear. (Animals that are also [animal companions](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/druid/animal-companions) have a skill list that prevents the animal companion from putting ranks into some skills at all.3 Such a creature can't put ranks in the skill Linguistics until it has an Intelligence score of at least 3.)
### Yes, a *headband of vast intelligence +2 et al.* that's imbued with the skill Linguistics and that raises an animal's Intelligence score to at least 3 grants the animal the ability to understand a number of languages equal to the animal's Hit Dice.
Such languages are probably picked by the item's creator, although this isn't entirely clear. An animal wearing such an item wouldn't need to "be taught a language, usually over the course of months," nor retrain as described above. Such a creature still can't speak, however.
### No, a typical [thrush](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/animals/thrush) or typical [raven](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/animals/raven) (or parrot) wearing a *headband of vast intelligence +2 et al.* that learned a language would *not* be able to speak that language.
Only when these creatures become [familiars](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/wizard/familiar) do they gain the supernatural ability to speak but 1 language. In fact, only if further effects permit is such a familiar *ever* able to speak more than the 1 language picked when the familiar was first gained. While the familiar may be able to *understand* other languages (e.g. bonus languages from a high Intelligence score, its master's Linguistics skill, a *headband of vast intelligence +2 et al.* imbued with the skill Linguistics), the familiar will remain unable to *speak* those languages.
However, it's a reasonable house rule to allow a familiar with the supernatural ability to speak 1 language to speak, instead, any language it knows.
---
**1** Undoubtedly, there's a sitcom pilot being pitched right now about a good-hearted but down-on-his-luck wizard with the arcane discovery feral speech who teaches Common as a First Language classes to wealthy, murderous cats at the local night wizards' school. *Attention, Networks: I will pay real money to watch this show.*
**2** An animal's class skills are Acrobatics, Climb, Fly, Perception, Stealth, and Swim. Thus the animal can put ranks into the skill Linguistics, but won't get the bonus that comes from the skill being a class skill.
**3** "Animal companions can have ranks in any of the following skills: Acrobatics\* (Dex), Climb\* (Str), Escape Artist (Dex), Fly\* (Dex), Intimidate (Cha), Perception\* (Wis), Stealth\* (Dex), Survival (Wis), and Swim\* (Str). All of the skills marked with an (\*) are class skills for animal companions. Animal companions with an Intelligence of 3 or higher can put ranks into any skill." | **Yes**
>
> Any creature capable of understanding speech has a score of at least 3.
>
>
>
This is the only thing that prevents Animals from learning languages in the first place. They can still take ranks in linguistics, in order to learn to read and write various languages (and communicate fully via sign languages or [Otyugh Scent](http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/aberrations/otyugh)), decipher ancient runes, and forge promissory notes (among other things) unless your GM rules otherwise\*. Note that the -4 (at least) INT penalty to active linguistics checks animals will take is quite hefty.
Increasing an animal's INT score puts them over the 3 int threshold and allows them to speak any languages they know (regardless of whether familiars in their shape are capable of doing so). This occurs whether the boost is temporary or not. Animals, by virtue of not having any starting languages, generally can't speak anyways, but any animal with ranks in Linguistics (or some other language-granting ability) would be able to speak.
A permanent upgrade would certainly encourage taking ranks in linguistics, but is otherwise identical to a temporary one for the purposes of this question.
---
\* Animal Companions, and thus all creatures provided by effects mimicking that ability, have the following text:
>
> Animal companions can assign skill ranks to any skill listed under Animal Skills. If an animal companion increases its Intelligence to 10 or higher, it gains bonus skill ranks as normal. Animal companions with an Intelligence of 3 or higher can purchase ranks in any skill.
>
>
>
and, under 'animal skills', we find:
>
> Animal companions can have ranks in any of the following skills:
>
>
> Acrobatics\* (Dex), Climb\* (Str), Escape Artist (Dex), Fly\* (Dex), Intimidate (Cha), Perception\* (Wis), Stealth\* (Dex), Survival (Wis), and Swim\* (Str).
>
>
>
Technically this doesn't prevent them from taking other skills (since they already could) but it probably is meant to do so. Your GM may further rule that, rather than applying only to animal companions, these restrictions apply to all animals. This latter house-rule is fairly uncommon. The former reading of 'can' as 'can only' is quite common, but since this house-rule is only infrequently applied to animals in general, it's effect on your question is negligible.
Familiars have similar text, stating:
>
> Regardless of a familiar's total skill modifiers, some skills may remain beyond the familiar's ability to use.
>
>
>
Which may also be applied to animals in general, even though Familiars are actually Magical Beasts. This house-rule is actually very common, and might interfere with active uses of the linguistics skill.
You should note that in the latter case, taking ranks in Linguistics is permitted even if the skill is rendered useless, and these ranks *do* provide additional languages known, as that is a property of taking ranks in Linguistics, not a 'use' of the skill. The familiar can even make limited (reading/writing, no speech) use of the languages as communicating via a known language is not a 'use' of the Linguistics skill either. |
155,674 | 
At my university, I'll be using the ELENCO S-1325 oscilloscope for a instrumentation lab. Since I'm a mechanical engineering student and not an electrical engineering one, I don't know exactly how to use all the functions though I am familiar with the basic use and operation of it. However, I want to know how to use some of the more complex functions of the oscilloscope.
On an oscilloscope, why would anyone move the variable knobs off their “calibrated” positions? the variable knobs (red VAR knob) for voltage measurements? the small gray “var sweep” knob for the time base?
Isn't it a good thing to keep things calibrated rather than use uncalibrated settings? | 2015/02/17 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/155674",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/67974/"
] | If you want to measure the rise or fall time of a digital signal, you use the variable knob for voltage to adjust the amplitude, so that it fits between the horizontal dotted lines (5 divisions). Then you measure the time from 10% to 90% (the middle 4 divisions). Conveniently, there are even percent marks on the screen.
It's less common to use the horizontal variable adjust, maybe it could be used for measuring duty cycle. | Sometimes the relative positions or phases of the signals are more important than the absolute values. E.g. in the photo in your question, you can see that the two traces (i.e. channel 1 and 2) are in phase with each other. If you don't need to know the voltage or exact frequency of the signals, their's no need for exact calibration.
Also, @starblue's answer is spot-on.
Mmmm - I don't have enough reputation to comment, hence the answer. |
155,674 | 
At my university, I'll be using the ELENCO S-1325 oscilloscope for a instrumentation lab. Since I'm a mechanical engineering student and not an electrical engineering one, I don't know exactly how to use all the functions though I am familiar with the basic use and operation of it. However, I want to know how to use some of the more complex functions of the oscilloscope.
On an oscilloscope, why would anyone move the variable knobs off their “calibrated” positions? the variable knobs (red VAR knob) for voltage measurements? the small gray “var sweep” knob for the time base?
Isn't it a good thing to keep things calibrated rather than use uncalibrated settings? | 2015/02/17 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/155674",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/67974/"
] | If you want to measure the rise or fall time of a digital signal, you use the variable knob for voltage to adjust the amplitude, so that it fits between the horizontal dotted lines (5 divisions). Then you measure the time from 10% to 90% (the middle 4 divisions). Conveniently, there are even percent marks on the screen.
It's less common to use the horizontal variable adjust, maybe it could be used for measuring duty cycle. | There are many reasons why you might want to leave the calibrated setting : StarBlue touched on one, here's another.
Imagine you need to do a quick check on the frequency response of an amplifier with a gain of 3. That's usually defined at the -3dB point (amplitude=0.7) It's much easier to see differences between input and output signals if they look the same in the first place, so set up the signal generator on Channel 1 so that the input channel covers 10 of those calibration marks (on the crosshair, i.e. 2 divisions). Now set up the Channel 2 on the output ... the oscilloscope gain is fixed, and none of the calibration settings give you exactly 2 divisions, so use the next largest one and de-calibrate the gain until you have 10 calibration marks.
Now you can adjust the input frequency and observe the frequency response. You need the frequencies where Ch1 covers 10 divisions and Ch2 only covers 7. If the signal generator amplitude changes with frequency, you will see it on Ch1, and adjust the sig gen to compensate. |
327,926 | The suggested edit: <https://stackoverflow.com/review/suggested-edits/13006182>
Link to the question: [Read the data from the CSV File and it should automatically generate the EMAIL\_ID to the JSP Page](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38349727)
I want to know why shouldn't edit the question like this. It fairly improves the question.
Glorfindel's Edit:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/e6neP.jpg)
My Edit:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/1Zz3d.jpg) | 2016/07/14 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/327926",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/3682535/"
] | I agree with you, the reviewers should have approved your edit. You indicated your action in the edit summary, but we all know reviewers aren't always paying attention. They just see a wall of code / data being added to the question, seemingly out of nowhere (note that when reviewing suggested edits, you **cannot** see the comments on the post.)
The OP is to blame, because they could easily edit their code / data into their own question. I informed them about this and fixed the post in the meantime. | I think I was actually the one who rejected it. The main reason was that it added a large body of code that did not seem to originate from the original poster. The edit summary "edited code as provided in comments" did not convey to me that the code was given by the OP in the comments.
Another reason was that the line "This is my sample Excel Sheet" still did not introduce an excel sheet. |
152,554 | I bought an Apple Time Machine. I have a home studio with several hard drives. I'm trying to find the best way to setup Time Machine to keep all my storage backed up all the time.
Studio Computer (12 Core Mac Pro)
* 250 GB - Internal SSD System Drive
* 2 TB - Internal Media Drive (Audio Samples, Sample Instrument Files)
* 2 TB - Internal Storage 1 (Recording Sessions)
* 2 TB - Internal Storage 2 (Recording Sessions)
* (Note: Internal Storage 1 & 2 are used until full and then they are stored away and new drives are purchased to replace them)
MacBook Pro (13″ i7)
* 250 GB - Internal SSD (OS X files and software only)
* 1 TB - Internal Media (Audio Samples, Instruments, User Folder, Etc.)
Questions:
* What kind of setup do I need to back all of this up?
* Do I need a big USB hub with a hard drive connected that mirrors every drive in my system?
* Do those drives need to be larger than each of the primary drives?
* Should I get a Drobo or some kind of RAID drive? | 2014/10/23 | [
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/152554",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/users/97251/"
] | Another answer in addition to my previous one: if your extension is actually runnable (i.e.: it doesn't crash when started via System Preferences -> Extensions), find the extension in your Activity Monitor, double click the process, then go to the "Open Files and Ports" tab. You'll see the path of your extension listed. | You need to remove it from **DerivedData** and restart the finder.
I use **DevCleaner**, a free utility on the app store to deal with that:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ejjiE.png) |
501,421 | Recently an editor just changed the plural verbs in my essay to singular ones, but I don't understand why he did so. Please see below:
(Original sentence)
After rising to power through multiple revolutions, the Chinese Communist Party holds a subversive notion and ideology that not only **aspire** to break the old world, but also **aim** to build a new one.
(revised sentence)
After rising to power through multiple revolutions, the Chinese Communist Party holds a subversive notion and ideology that not only **aspires** to break the old world, but also **aims** to build a new one.
In my understanding, there are two nouns in "a subversive notion and ideology", and that should be followed by a plural verb? | 2019/06/11 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/501421",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/232539/"
] | The key is in the use of the indefinite article.
To paraphrase:
>
> The CPP holds **a** subversive notion and ideology that **aspires** . . .
>
>
>
I have put the subject in superscript in order to set it off from the rest of the text. Especially because of the ***a***, the syntax treats the phrase as a compound single subject.
It is the same idea as:
>
> **This** fish and chips **is** delicious.
>
>
>
Although there are actually two separate things joined together, they are thought of, and treated as, a singular item.
---
In order for the syntax to show that there are *multiple* things being used as individual subjects, you would need to remove the indefinite article and pluralize the subjects:
>
> The CPP holds subversive **notions** and **ideologies** that **aspire** . . .
>
>
>
Alternatively, it's possible to use a phrasing similar to what follows—but it would be somewhat awkward:
>
> The CPP holds **a** subversive notion ***as well as*** **a** subversive ideology that ***both*** aspire . . .
>
>
> | Yes. tchrist and Minty are right I think. But are both the notion and the ideology subversive? It isn't quite clear. And can a notion itself aspire to do something? Perhaps an ideology can, but I'm not sure. I would leave *notion* out, and say something like
>
> "The CCP's subversive ideologies suggest that it aspires not only to break the
> old world but also to build a new one."
>
>
> |
136,250 | I would like to know whether there is any way I can run an absolutely unknown executable file without being hacked even if the file contains a lot of malicious code. Is there any program in which I can run it without putting myself in any risk? | 2016/09/08 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/136250",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/123105/"
] | If you really want the closest thing to a 100% safe way of running malware:
Create an account with Amazon Web Services, fire up a server but don't connect it to anything (read: put it in its **own** VPC) and do your analysis there. Burn after analyzing.
Side note: there are some pre-created AMIs in the " Ec2 Market Place" that have malware analysis tools loaded on them already if you feel like getting frisky. | Another thing to consider, is whether this program will attempt to replicate, leak data, or do other damage over the network. To prevent that from occurring, I would recommend using a Virtual Machine. Take care to remove host access (or sometimes called host / guest file sharing) and remove any virtual networking interfaces before running the program in the VM. Good VM hypervisors should give reasonable protection to the data and hardware on the VM host, but if you're really worried about that, consider running it in a VM on dedicated, non-networked VM host.
Also check out [sandboxie](http://www.sandboxie.com/), it's basically intended for running untrusted programs in isolation. This does not prevent the program from making network connections though. |
136,250 | I would like to know whether there is any way I can run an absolutely unknown executable file without being hacked even if the file contains a lot of malicious code. Is there any program in which I can run it without putting myself in any risk? | 2016/09/08 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/136250",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/123105/"
] | If you really want the closest thing to a 100% safe way of running malware:
Create an account with Amazon Web Services, fire up a server but don't connect it to anything (read: put it in its **own** VPC) and do your analysis there. Burn after analyzing.
Side note: there are some pre-created AMIs in the " Ec2 Market Place" that have malware analysis tools loaded on them already if you feel like getting frisky. | Barring NSA-level attacks that alter hard drive firmware and the like, there is a relatively simple and cheap solution.
* Buy an extra hard drive that include some sort of free "clone" or "migration" software, or a linux "repair" bootable thumb drive.
* Clone your system's hard drive to the new drive then unplug the new drive.
* Unplug the internet source (router, modem, etc) to stop exfiltration
* Install/run your un-trusted EXE as much as needed.
* Reboot and wipe the main hard drive from a bootable thumb drive.
* Clone the copy back to the main box and reboot.
This lets you run code in your normal setup, locally (w/o net), and be rest assured that no harm will come to your machine or data. You could still get hit with a targeted attack that uses something like fan-based exfiltration, but if you're just worried about ransomware, spyware, or a virus, the copy and restore method is very effective.
Use this routine on an extra $100 computer (refurb on newegg or ebay) if the EXE needs internet. |
136,250 | I would like to know whether there is any way I can run an absolutely unknown executable file without being hacked even if the file contains a lot of malicious code. Is there any program in which I can run it without putting myself in any risk? | 2016/09/08 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/136250",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/123105/"
] | If you really want the closest thing to a 100% safe way of running malware:
Create an account with Amazon Web Services, fire up a server but don't connect it to anything (read: put it in its **own** VPC) and do your analysis there. Burn after analyzing.
Side note: there are some pre-created AMIs in the " Ec2 Market Place" that have malware analysis tools loaded on them already if you feel like getting frisky. | You cannot.
If you use OS-level virtualization solution (sandboxes, containers, selinux), the malware can use local privilege escalation exploit.
If you use hardware virtualization the malware can exploit vulnerabilities in the hypervisor (and other underlying software including OS, bios and firmwares (a lot of devices have firmwares flashable, this allow creation of extremely persistent rootkits)) and fault injection like RowHammer.
If you use an emulator, the malware can try to exploit a vulnerability in the emulator.
So you need a separate physical machine and if you need to analyse binaries automatically you need the software on the analysing machine to be not vulnerable.
Now forget everything written above because it is not a real life scenario (unless you are high-value target for intellegence agencies). A hardware virtualization solution (for example QubesOS) should be enough, if you cut it from devices (no OpenGL passthrough, no PCI passthrough, no USB passthrough, no access to storage, etc ...) |
136,250 | I would like to know whether there is any way I can run an absolutely unknown executable file without being hacked even if the file contains a lot of malicious code. Is there any program in which I can run it without putting myself in any risk? | 2016/09/08 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/136250",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/123105/"
] | Another thing to consider, is whether this program will attempt to replicate, leak data, or do other damage over the network. To prevent that from occurring, I would recommend using a Virtual Machine. Take care to remove host access (or sometimes called host / guest file sharing) and remove any virtual networking interfaces before running the program in the VM. Good VM hypervisors should give reasonable protection to the data and hardware on the VM host, but if you're really worried about that, consider running it in a VM on dedicated, non-networked VM host.
Also check out [sandboxie](http://www.sandboxie.com/), it's basically intended for running untrusted programs in isolation. This does not prevent the program from making network connections though. | You cannot.
If you use OS-level virtualization solution (sandboxes, containers, selinux), the malware can use local privilege escalation exploit.
If you use hardware virtualization the malware can exploit vulnerabilities in the hypervisor (and other underlying software including OS, bios and firmwares (a lot of devices have firmwares flashable, this allow creation of extremely persistent rootkits)) and fault injection like RowHammer.
If you use an emulator, the malware can try to exploit a vulnerability in the emulator.
So you need a separate physical machine and if you need to analyse binaries automatically you need the software on the analysing machine to be not vulnerable.
Now forget everything written above because it is not a real life scenario (unless you are high-value target for intellegence agencies). A hardware virtualization solution (for example QubesOS) should be enough, if you cut it from devices (no OpenGL passthrough, no PCI passthrough, no USB passthrough, no access to storage, etc ...) |
136,250 | I would like to know whether there is any way I can run an absolutely unknown executable file without being hacked even if the file contains a lot of malicious code. Is there any program in which I can run it without putting myself in any risk? | 2016/09/08 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/136250",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/123105/"
] | >
> does this guarantee 100 percent protection?
>
>
>
No. Never. Never ever ever ever ever. Period.
100% guarantees simply do not exist in the real world. If you wanted an example of what might get close to 100%:
* Buy a brand new machine. Put it on isolated power. Put the executable on it
* Disconnect it from the network.
* Run the program
* Don't look at the results (you might be tempted to act on them, breaking the 100% guarantee. For all you know the results may hypnotize you into murdering your dog)
* Power the computer down.
* Put the computer in a wood chipper
* Gather then remains, and pour them into a steel foundry a. la. Terminator 2
Now there are things you can do to *mitigate* the risk. Things like running it in a VM (such as the Amazon Web Service Hollowproc recommend) are powerful tools for strongly mitigating the risk. Wiping the harddrive after use is helpful too. However, there is no 100% guarantee.
For an example of this, consider Stuxnet. Stuxnet is infamous for attacking a nuclear enrichment facility *across an airgap*! It wasn't easy, but it did happen.
A better solution would be to not open a file if you can't say *anything* about how safe it is. | Another thing to consider, is whether this program will attempt to replicate, leak data, or do other damage over the network. To prevent that from occurring, I would recommend using a Virtual Machine. Take care to remove host access (or sometimes called host / guest file sharing) and remove any virtual networking interfaces before running the program in the VM. Good VM hypervisors should give reasonable protection to the data and hardware on the VM host, but if you're really worried about that, consider running it in a VM on dedicated, non-networked VM host.
Also check out [sandboxie](http://www.sandboxie.com/), it's basically intended for running untrusted programs in isolation. This does not prevent the program from making network connections though. |
136,250 | I would like to know whether there is any way I can run an absolutely unknown executable file without being hacked even if the file contains a lot of malicious code. Is there any program in which I can run it without putting myself in any risk? | 2016/09/08 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/136250",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/123105/"
] | Barring NSA-level attacks that alter hard drive firmware and the like, there is a relatively simple and cheap solution.
* Buy an extra hard drive that include some sort of free "clone" or "migration" software, or a linux "repair" bootable thumb drive.
* Clone your system's hard drive to the new drive then unplug the new drive.
* Unplug the internet source (router, modem, etc) to stop exfiltration
* Install/run your un-trusted EXE as much as needed.
* Reboot and wipe the main hard drive from a bootable thumb drive.
* Clone the copy back to the main box and reboot.
This lets you run code in your normal setup, locally (w/o net), and be rest assured that no harm will come to your machine or data. You could still get hit with a targeted attack that uses something like fan-based exfiltration, but if you're just worried about ransomware, spyware, or a virus, the copy and restore method is very effective.
Use this routine on an extra $100 computer (refurb on newegg or ebay) if the EXE needs internet. | You cannot.
If you use OS-level virtualization solution (sandboxes, containers, selinux), the malware can use local privilege escalation exploit.
If you use hardware virtualization the malware can exploit vulnerabilities in the hypervisor (and other underlying software including OS, bios and firmwares (a lot of devices have firmwares flashable, this allow creation of extremely persistent rootkits)) and fault injection like RowHammer.
If you use an emulator, the malware can try to exploit a vulnerability in the emulator.
So you need a separate physical machine and if you need to analyse binaries automatically you need the software on the analysing machine to be not vulnerable.
Now forget everything written above because it is not a real life scenario (unless you are high-value target for intellegence agencies). A hardware virtualization solution (for example QubesOS) should be enough, if you cut it from devices (no OpenGL passthrough, no PCI passthrough, no USB passthrough, no access to storage, etc ...) |
136,250 | I would like to know whether there is any way I can run an absolutely unknown executable file without being hacked even if the file contains a lot of malicious code. Is there any program in which I can run it without putting myself in any risk? | 2016/09/08 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/136250",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/123105/"
] | >
> does this guarantee 100 percent protection?
>
>
>
No. Never. Never ever ever ever ever. Period.
100% guarantees simply do not exist in the real world. If you wanted an example of what might get close to 100%:
* Buy a brand new machine. Put it on isolated power. Put the executable on it
* Disconnect it from the network.
* Run the program
* Don't look at the results (you might be tempted to act on them, breaking the 100% guarantee. For all you know the results may hypnotize you into murdering your dog)
* Power the computer down.
* Put the computer in a wood chipper
* Gather then remains, and pour them into a steel foundry a. la. Terminator 2
Now there are things you can do to *mitigate* the risk. Things like running it in a VM (such as the Amazon Web Service Hollowproc recommend) are powerful tools for strongly mitigating the risk. Wiping the harddrive after use is helpful too. However, there is no 100% guarantee.
For an example of this, consider Stuxnet. Stuxnet is infamous for attacking a nuclear enrichment facility *across an airgap*! It wasn't easy, but it did happen.
A better solution would be to not open a file if you can't say *anything* about how safe it is. | Barring NSA-level attacks that alter hard drive firmware and the like, there is a relatively simple and cheap solution.
* Buy an extra hard drive that include some sort of free "clone" or "migration" software, or a linux "repair" bootable thumb drive.
* Clone your system's hard drive to the new drive then unplug the new drive.
* Unplug the internet source (router, modem, etc) to stop exfiltration
* Install/run your un-trusted EXE as much as needed.
* Reboot and wipe the main hard drive from a bootable thumb drive.
* Clone the copy back to the main box and reboot.
This lets you run code in your normal setup, locally (w/o net), and be rest assured that no harm will come to your machine or data. You could still get hit with a targeted attack that uses something like fan-based exfiltration, but if you're just worried about ransomware, spyware, or a virus, the copy and restore method is very effective.
Use this routine on an extra $100 computer (refurb on newegg or ebay) if the EXE needs internet. |
136,250 | I would like to know whether there is any way I can run an absolutely unknown executable file without being hacked even if the file contains a lot of malicious code. Is there any program in which I can run it without putting myself in any risk? | 2016/09/08 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/136250",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/123105/"
] | >
> does this guarantee 100 percent protection?
>
>
>
No. Never. Never ever ever ever ever. Period.
100% guarantees simply do not exist in the real world. If you wanted an example of what might get close to 100%:
* Buy a brand new machine. Put it on isolated power. Put the executable on it
* Disconnect it from the network.
* Run the program
* Don't look at the results (you might be tempted to act on them, breaking the 100% guarantee. For all you know the results may hypnotize you into murdering your dog)
* Power the computer down.
* Put the computer in a wood chipper
* Gather then remains, and pour them into a steel foundry a. la. Terminator 2
Now there are things you can do to *mitigate* the risk. Things like running it in a VM (such as the Amazon Web Service Hollowproc recommend) are powerful tools for strongly mitigating the risk. Wiping the harddrive after use is helpful too. However, there is no 100% guarantee.
For an example of this, consider Stuxnet. Stuxnet is infamous for attacking a nuclear enrichment facility *across an airgap*! It wasn't easy, but it did happen.
A better solution would be to not open a file if you can't say *anything* about how safe it is. | You cannot.
If you use OS-level virtualization solution (sandboxes, containers, selinux), the malware can use local privilege escalation exploit.
If you use hardware virtualization the malware can exploit vulnerabilities in the hypervisor (and other underlying software including OS, bios and firmwares (a lot of devices have firmwares flashable, this allow creation of extremely persistent rootkits)) and fault injection like RowHammer.
If you use an emulator, the malware can try to exploit a vulnerability in the emulator.
So you need a separate physical machine and if you need to analyse binaries automatically you need the software on the analysing machine to be not vulnerable.
Now forget everything written above because it is not a real life scenario (unless you are high-value target for intellegence agencies). A hardware virtualization solution (for example QubesOS) should be enough, if you cut it from devices (no OpenGL passthrough, no PCI passthrough, no USB passthrough, no access to storage, etc ...) |
90,925 | I am planning to buy an used one for outdoor shooting with my Pentax k-x.Is this a good budget choice for first tripod?
<http://www.digidirect.com.au/accessories/tripods_and_monopods_/velbon_/photo_tripods_enthusiast/velbon_cx-660> | 2017/07/15 | [
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/90925",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com",
"https://photo.stackexchange.com/users/57383/"
] | This is an alignment pin. This pin dovetails into a receiving hollow built into the base of most video cameras. The idea is to prevent unwanted camera movement that otherwise might occur when panning. Additionally, when the camera is dismounted and remounted, this pin affords accurate repositioning.
Additionally, many video and still cameras are mounted to a tripod via a quick release mechanism. These allow rapid camera attachment and detachment. The locator pin helps insure the remounted camera is accurately aligned as before. | I can answer the title of the question - "What is the purpose of the second bump on the plate of this tripod" but your actual question differs greatly
The bump is designed to prevent or reduce rotation of the camera on the tripod plate. For example, my Canon 80D has ridges on its base which the bump would protrude into and prevent rotation of the camera.
Often they are sprung, to make them adjustable for different cameras |
8,017 | Edit: This was originally posted in law.stackexchange and was moved here with no input from me. I'm well aware that most Open Source advocates argue against any license that restricts others from profiting from any open source work. I think my best option is to break my question down in to several questions and reask them over at law.
Original Post:
I am working on a project and I have the source code on github. I'd like to add a license to it, but I'm not sure exactly what I need. I have the following circumstances:
* I'd like to eventually be able to sell or otherwise benefit financially from the project.
* I'd like to prevent anyone else from doing so.
* However, I'd like to make the source code freely available to others for personal use, including giving them the right to modify it and pass it on to others.
* I'd like to keep my right to be identified as the original author.
* Part of the code includes work that was originally published under the MIT license by someone else, but it has been reworked extensively by myself. I don't want to make any claim over this part of the code.
Is there a widely available license that will let me do all of the above?
If not, with regard to the final point, I assume I have the option of hosting the modified code in a separate repository, so that the main repository would only contain my original work. What license could I use then?
EDIT: If there's a tool that let's me create a legally valid license with the above criteria, that would be a good answer too. | 2019/02/21 | [
"https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/8017",
"https://opensource.stackexchange.com",
"https://opensource.stackexchange.com/users/14409/"
] | What you describe is usually called *freeware*.
The FSF does not consider freeware to be free software, considering it to be proprietary software, and [asks people](https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html#freeware) not to call free software freeware.
So such a software package would not be permitted in the Ubuntu `universe` repository. | I think answer is No. By definition closed-source software goes to Multiverse.
I would handle this with care. How can you tell that software is not using third-party commercial libraries or patents? |
26,706 | I have not been able to find guidelines (let alone user studies backing up the guidelines) specifying best practice for this aspect of tab behavior: when (if ever) should the selected (active) tab be made selectable?
I have long assumed that only the inactive tabs should be selectable. Recently however I came across a UI in which the only way to get back to the tab's initial state is to click the active tab again. (There is navigation within the tab.)
Poking around I've found several places where active tabs are selectable. One is Google. There it seems to be equivalent to a page refresh. If you are in Google Maps, for example, selecting Maps from the row of tabs at the top returns the page to the default state, looking down on your location from satellite distance. Here in UX.stackexchange, if Questions is the active tab it is still selectable. Selecting it refreshes the page. This is perhaps useful if you are on p.5 of Questions and want to get back to p.1. There are several other ways users can do the same thing however (refresh page in the browser, select 1 in the pagination widget.)
The guidelines I've explored never mention the issue. The assumption seems to be that there is only one page per tab and thus no need for the active tab to be "live."
If I were to write a guideline myself I'd say: there is nothing wrong with making an active tab selectable, but that should not be the only way to return to the tab's default state. Most sets of tabs do not behave this way, so many if not most users will not think to select the active tab.
Thoughts? Pointers? | 2012/10/12 | [
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/26706",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/users/19605/"
] | I particularly like [Open Sans](http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Open+Sans), "[especially designed for legibility across print, web, and mobile interfaces](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Sans)."
But a few days ago Adobe released [Source Sans Pro](http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html), it might be worth a try.
>
> The primary need for type in Adobe’s open source applications has thus
> far been for usage within user interfaces. A second environment of
> perennial interest to Adobe is the realm of text typography. Thus the
> immediate constraints on the design were to create a set of fonts that
> would be both legible in short UI labels, as well as being comfortable
> to read in longer passages of text on screen and in print.
>
>
>
---
[Update]
As Rahul said, a nice idea is to give a look at OS fonts that are designed specifically to have very good readability.
* Android has [Droid Sans](http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Droid+Sans) and [Roboto](http://developer.android.com/design/style/typography.html).
* iOS uses Helvetica Neue.
* Windows 8 uses Segoe.
* And Ubuntu created [Ubuntu](http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Ubuntu#charset). | Appropriately kerned san serif's. |
26,706 | I have not been able to find guidelines (let alone user studies backing up the guidelines) specifying best practice for this aspect of tab behavior: when (if ever) should the selected (active) tab be made selectable?
I have long assumed that only the inactive tabs should be selectable. Recently however I came across a UI in which the only way to get back to the tab's initial state is to click the active tab again. (There is navigation within the tab.)
Poking around I've found several places where active tabs are selectable. One is Google. There it seems to be equivalent to a page refresh. If you are in Google Maps, for example, selecting Maps from the row of tabs at the top returns the page to the default state, looking down on your location from satellite distance. Here in UX.stackexchange, if Questions is the active tab it is still selectable. Selecting it refreshes the page. This is perhaps useful if you are on p.5 of Questions and want to get back to p.1. There are several other ways users can do the same thing however (refresh page in the browser, select 1 in the pagination widget.)
The guidelines I've explored never mention the issue. The assumption seems to be that there is only one page per tab and thus no need for the active tab to be "live."
If I were to write a guideline myself I'd say: there is nothing wrong with making an active tab selectable, but that should not be the only way to return to the tab's default state. Most sets of tabs do not behave this way, so many if not most users will not think to select the active tab.
Thoughts? Pointers? | 2012/10/12 | [
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/26706",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/users/19605/"
] | I particularly like [Open Sans](http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Open+Sans), "[especially designed for legibility across print, web, and mobile interfaces](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Sans)."
But a few days ago Adobe released [Source Sans Pro](http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html), it might be worth a try.
>
> The primary need for type in Adobe’s open source applications has thus
> far been for usage within user interfaces. A second environment of
> perennial interest to Adobe is the realm of text typography. Thus the
> immediate constraints on the design were to create a set of fonts that
> would be both legible in short UI labels, as well as being comfortable
> to read in longer passages of text on screen and in print.
>
>
>
---
[Update]
As Rahul said, a nice idea is to give a look at OS fonts that are designed specifically to have very good readability.
* Android has [Droid Sans](http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Droid+Sans) and [Roboto](http://developer.android.com/design/style/typography.html).
* iOS uses Helvetica Neue.
* Windows 8 uses Segoe.
* And Ubuntu created [Ubuntu](http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Ubuntu#charset). | Bad eyes like characters made with pen strokes of uniform width, like Arial or the one developed by the American Printing House for the Blind, I think it is called APHont
I have seen that serif fonts are not good, but I think it has nothing to do with the serifs. To my old eyes the fine curved strokes that go between strong verticals are invisible, leaving a forest of tree trunks with no branches, illegible. |
26,706 | I have not been able to find guidelines (let alone user studies backing up the guidelines) specifying best practice for this aspect of tab behavior: when (if ever) should the selected (active) tab be made selectable?
I have long assumed that only the inactive tabs should be selectable. Recently however I came across a UI in which the only way to get back to the tab's initial state is to click the active tab again. (There is navigation within the tab.)
Poking around I've found several places where active tabs are selectable. One is Google. There it seems to be equivalent to a page refresh. If you are in Google Maps, for example, selecting Maps from the row of tabs at the top returns the page to the default state, looking down on your location from satellite distance. Here in UX.stackexchange, if Questions is the active tab it is still selectable. Selecting it refreshes the page. This is perhaps useful if you are on p.5 of Questions and want to get back to p.1. There are several other ways users can do the same thing however (refresh page in the browser, select 1 in the pagination widget.)
The guidelines I've explored never mention the issue. The assumption seems to be that there is only one page per tab and thus no need for the active tab to be "live."
If I were to write a guideline myself I'd say: there is nothing wrong with making an active tab selectable, but that should not be the only way to return to the tab's default state. Most sets of tabs do not behave this way, so many if not most users will not think to select the active tab.
Thoughts? Pointers? | 2012/10/12 | [
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/26706",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/users/19605/"
] | There are lots of standards and guidelines for accessibility, many of which deal with the aspects of design relating to typography and the legibility of the text. Some of the areas addressed that can be used to help guide your decision include:
* Knowing the audience and demographics: the classic example is the elderly people that require fonts that work well in larger sizes, so don't choose a font that is designed to be very compact and read in small viewports that don't resize up well.
* Looking at specific characters in the glyph charts: the classic examples are the difference between the character 'B' and the number '8', the difference between the uppercase letter 'I', lowercase 'l' and the number '1'
* Look for character spacing and balance: this will improve the readability and legibility for the audience with clear and distinct spacing helping to group and differentiate between letters and words
* Web-safe fonts: so it doesn't revert to a default font that doesn't have good accessibility characteristics (lots of web-safe fonts to choose from these days so not really an issue) | Recently came across [B612](https://b612-font.com) and been using it a text heavy SaaS product of my own. Pretty happy with the feedback.
>
> B612 is an highly legible open source font family designed and tested to be used on aircraft cockpit screens.
>
>
> |
26,706 | I have not been able to find guidelines (let alone user studies backing up the guidelines) specifying best practice for this aspect of tab behavior: when (if ever) should the selected (active) tab be made selectable?
I have long assumed that only the inactive tabs should be selectable. Recently however I came across a UI in which the only way to get back to the tab's initial state is to click the active tab again. (There is navigation within the tab.)
Poking around I've found several places where active tabs are selectable. One is Google. There it seems to be equivalent to a page refresh. If you are in Google Maps, for example, selecting Maps from the row of tabs at the top returns the page to the default state, looking down on your location from satellite distance. Here in UX.stackexchange, if Questions is the active tab it is still selectable. Selecting it refreshes the page. This is perhaps useful if you are on p.5 of Questions and want to get back to p.1. There are several other ways users can do the same thing however (refresh page in the browser, select 1 in the pagination widget.)
The guidelines I've explored never mention the issue. The assumption seems to be that there is only one page per tab and thus no need for the active tab to be "live."
If I were to write a guideline myself I'd say: there is nothing wrong with making an active tab selectable, but that should not be the only way to return to the tab's default state. Most sets of tabs do not behave this way, so many if not most users will not think to select the active tab.
Thoughts? Pointers? | 2012/10/12 | [
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/26706",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/users/19605/"
] | I am working on an interface with these exact concerns. We want something very clear and optimized at small sizes, yet have it be a bit different from the default and specified in our app for consistency across platforms.
Open Sans seemed a great choice, I really love the modern look, however I found a big problem (at least with open sans served by google fonts).
The kerning is different between Firefox and Chrome- specifically, Firefox renders the characters a bit farther apart. This is a problem. It is not fixable by the letter-spacing or kerning properties.
So we've gone with Adobe's source sans for now. | I just found this while looking for open source accessible fonts:
<https://github.com/Orange-OpenSource/font-accessible-dfa>
If you don't need open source I was just reading this article <https://medium.com/chels-codes/web-typography-for-dyslexia-31bd6958d4b2> which suggests <https://www.dyslexiefont.com/en/typeface/> |
26,706 | I have not been able to find guidelines (let alone user studies backing up the guidelines) specifying best practice for this aspect of tab behavior: when (if ever) should the selected (active) tab be made selectable?
I have long assumed that only the inactive tabs should be selectable. Recently however I came across a UI in which the only way to get back to the tab's initial state is to click the active tab again. (There is navigation within the tab.)
Poking around I've found several places where active tabs are selectable. One is Google. There it seems to be equivalent to a page refresh. If you are in Google Maps, for example, selecting Maps from the row of tabs at the top returns the page to the default state, looking down on your location from satellite distance. Here in UX.stackexchange, if Questions is the active tab it is still selectable. Selecting it refreshes the page. This is perhaps useful if you are on p.5 of Questions and want to get back to p.1. There are several other ways users can do the same thing however (refresh page in the browser, select 1 in the pagination widget.)
The guidelines I've explored never mention the issue. The assumption seems to be that there is only one page per tab and thus no need for the active tab to be "live."
If I were to write a guideline myself I'd say: there is nothing wrong with making an active tab selectable, but that should not be the only way to return to the tab's default state. Most sets of tabs do not behave this way, so many if not most users will not think to select the active tab.
Thoughts? Pointers? | 2012/10/12 | [
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/26706",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/users/19605/"
] | There are lots of standards and guidelines for accessibility, many of which deal with the aspects of design relating to typography and the legibility of the text. Some of the areas addressed that can be used to help guide your decision include:
* Knowing the audience and demographics: the classic example is the elderly people that require fonts that work well in larger sizes, so don't choose a font that is designed to be very compact and read in small viewports that don't resize up well.
* Looking at specific characters in the glyph charts: the classic examples are the difference between the character 'B' and the number '8', the difference between the uppercase letter 'I', lowercase 'l' and the number '1'
* Look for character spacing and balance: this will improve the readability and legibility for the audience with clear and distinct spacing helping to group and differentiate between letters and words
* Web-safe fonts: so it doesn't revert to a default font that doesn't have good accessibility characteristics (lots of web-safe fonts to choose from these days so not really an issue) | I just found this while looking for open source accessible fonts:
<https://github.com/Orange-OpenSource/font-accessible-dfa>
If you don't need open source I was just reading this article <https://medium.com/chels-codes/web-typography-for-dyslexia-31bd6958d4b2> which suggests <https://www.dyslexiefont.com/en/typeface/> |
26,706 | I have not been able to find guidelines (let alone user studies backing up the guidelines) specifying best practice for this aspect of tab behavior: when (if ever) should the selected (active) tab be made selectable?
I have long assumed that only the inactive tabs should be selectable. Recently however I came across a UI in which the only way to get back to the tab's initial state is to click the active tab again. (There is navigation within the tab.)
Poking around I've found several places where active tabs are selectable. One is Google. There it seems to be equivalent to a page refresh. If you are in Google Maps, for example, selecting Maps from the row of tabs at the top returns the page to the default state, looking down on your location from satellite distance. Here in UX.stackexchange, if Questions is the active tab it is still selectable. Selecting it refreshes the page. This is perhaps useful if you are on p.5 of Questions and want to get back to p.1. There are several other ways users can do the same thing however (refresh page in the browser, select 1 in the pagination widget.)
The guidelines I've explored never mention the issue. The assumption seems to be that there is only one page per tab and thus no need for the active tab to be "live."
If I were to write a guideline myself I'd say: there is nothing wrong with making an active tab selectable, but that should not be the only way to return to the tab's default state. Most sets of tabs do not behave this way, so many if not most users will not think to select the active tab.
Thoughts? Pointers? | 2012/10/12 | [
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/26706",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/users/19605/"
] | I particularly like [Open Sans](http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Open+Sans), "[especially designed for legibility across print, web, and mobile interfaces](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Sans)."
But a few days ago Adobe released [Source Sans Pro](http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html), it might be worth a try.
>
> The primary need for type in Adobe’s open source applications has thus
> far been for usage within user interfaces. A second environment of
> perennial interest to Adobe is the realm of text typography. Thus the
> immediate constraints on the design were to create a set of fonts that
> would be both legible in short UI labels, as well as being comfortable
> to read in longer passages of text on screen and in print.
>
>
>
---
[Update]
As Rahul said, a nice idea is to give a look at OS fonts that are designed specifically to have very good readability.
* Android has [Droid Sans](http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Droid+Sans) and [Roboto](http://developer.android.com/design/style/typography.html).
* iOS uses Helvetica Neue.
* Windows 8 uses Segoe.
* And Ubuntu created [Ubuntu](http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Ubuntu#charset). | There are lots of standards and guidelines for accessibility, many of which deal with the aspects of design relating to typography and the legibility of the text. Some of the areas addressed that can be used to help guide your decision include:
* Knowing the audience and demographics: the classic example is the elderly people that require fonts that work well in larger sizes, so don't choose a font that is designed to be very compact and read in small viewports that don't resize up well.
* Looking at specific characters in the glyph charts: the classic examples are the difference between the character 'B' and the number '8', the difference between the uppercase letter 'I', lowercase 'l' and the number '1'
* Look for character spacing and balance: this will improve the readability and legibility for the audience with clear and distinct spacing helping to group and differentiate between letters and words
* Web-safe fonts: so it doesn't revert to a default font that doesn't have good accessibility characteristics (lots of web-safe fonts to choose from these days so not really an issue) |
26,706 | I have not been able to find guidelines (let alone user studies backing up the guidelines) specifying best practice for this aspect of tab behavior: when (if ever) should the selected (active) tab be made selectable?
I have long assumed that only the inactive tabs should be selectable. Recently however I came across a UI in which the only way to get back to the tab's initial state is to click the active tab again. (There is navigation within the tab.)
Poking around I've found several places where active tabs are selectable. One is Google. There it seems to be equivalent to a page refresh. If you are in Google Maps, for example, selecting Maps from the row of tabs at the top returns the page to the default state, looking down on your location from satellite distance. Here in UX.stackexchange, if Questions is the active tab it is still selectable. Selecting it refreshes the page. This is perhaps useful if you are on p.5 of Questions and want to get back to p.1. There are several other ways users can do the same thing however (refresh page in the browser, select 1 in the pagination widget.)
The guidelines I've explored never mention the issue. The assumption seems to be that there is only one page per tab and thus no need for the active tab to be "live."
If I were to write a guideline myself I'd say: there is nothing wrong with making an active tab selectable, but that should not be the only way to return to the tab's default state. Most sets of tabs do not behave this way, so many if not most users will not think to select the active tab.
Thoughts? Pointers? | 2012/10/12 | [
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/26706",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/users/19605/"
] | I am working on an interface with these exact concerns. We want something very clear and optimized at small sizes, yet have it be a bit different from the default and specified in our app for consistency across platforms.
Open Sans seemed a great choice, I really love the modern look, however I found a big problem (at least with open sans served by google fonts).
The kerning is different between Firefox and Chrome- specifically, Firefox renders the characters a bit farther apart. This is a problem. It is not fixable by the letter-spacing or kerning properties.
So we've gone with Adobe's source sans for now. | Recently came across [B612](https://b612-font.com) and been using it a text heavy SaaS product of my own. Pretty happy with the feedback.
>
> B612 is an highly legible open source font family designed and tested to be used on aircraft cockpit screens.
>
>
> |
26,706 | I have not been able to find guidelines (let alone user studies backing up the guidelines) specifying best practice for this aspect of tab behavior: when (if ever) should the selected (active) tab be made selectable?
I have long assumed that only the inactive tabs should be selectable. Recently however I came across a UI in which the only way to get back to the tab's initial state is to click the active tab again. (There is navigation within the tab.)
Poking around I've found several places where active tabs are selectable. One is Google. There it seems to be equivalent to a page refresh. If you are in Google Maps, for example, selecting Maps from the row of tabs at the top returns the page to the default state, looking down on your location from satellite distance. Here in UX.stackexchange, if Questions is the active tab it is still selectable. Selecting it refreshes the page. This is perhaps useful if you are on p.5 of Questions and want to get back to p.1. There are several other ways users can do the same thing however (refresh page in the browser, select 1 in the pagination widget.)
The guidelines I've explored never mention the issue. The assumption seems to be that there is only one page per tab and thus no need for the active tab to be "live."
If I were to write a guideline myself I'd say: there is nothing wrong with making an active tab selectable, but that should not be the only way to return to the tab's default state. Most sets of tabs do not behave this way, so many if not most users will not think to select the active tab.
Thoughts? Pointers? | 2012/10/12 | [
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/26706",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/users/19605/"
] | I particularly like [Open Sans](http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Open+Sans), "[especially designed for legibility across print, web, and mobile interfaces](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Sans)."
But a few days ago Adobe released [Source Sans Pro](http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/08/source-sans-pro.html), it might be worth a try.
>
> The primary need for type in Adobe’s open source applications has thus
> far been for usage within user interfaces. A second environment of
> perennial interest to Adobe is the realm of text typography. Thus the
> immediate constraints on the design were to create a set of fonts that
> would be both legible in short UI labels, as well as being comfortable
> to read in longer passages of text on screen and in print.
>
>
>
---
[Update]
As Rahul said, a nice idea is to give a look at OS fonts that are designed specifically to have very good readability.
* Android has [Droid Sans](http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Droid+Sans) and [Roboto](http://developer.android.com/design/style/typography.html).
* iOS uses Helvetica Neue.
* Windows 8 uses Segoe.
* And Ubuntu created [Ubuntu](http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Ubuntu#charset). | I am working on an interface with these exact concerns. We want something very clear and optimized at small sizes, yet have it be a bit different from the default and specified in our app for consistency across platforms.
Open Sans seemed a great choice, I really love the modern look, however I found a big problem (at least with open sans served by google fonts).
The kerning is different between Firefox and Chrome- specifically, Firefox renders the characters a bit farther apart. This is a problem. It is not fixable by the letter-spacing or kerning properties.
So we've gone with Adobe's source sans for now. |
26,706 | I have not been able to find guidelines (let alone user studies backing up the guidelines) specifying best practice for this aspect of tab behavior: when (if ever) should the selected (active) tab be made selectable?
I have long assumed that only the inactive tabs should be selectable. Recently however I came across a UI in which the only way to get back to the tab's initial state is to click the active tab again. (There is navigation within the tab.)
Poking around I've found several places where active tabs are selectable. One is Google. There it seems to be equivalent to a page refresh. If you are in Google Maps, for example, selecting Maps from the row of tabs at the top returns the page to the default state, looking down on your location from satellite distance. Here in UX.stackexchange, if Questions is the active tab it is still selectable. Selecting it refreshes the page. This is perhaps useful if you are on p.5 of Questions and want to get back to p.1. There are several other ways users can do the same thing however (refresh page in the browser, select 1 in the pagination widget.)
The guidelines I've explored never mention the issue. The assumption seems to be that there is only one page per tab and thus no need for the active tab to be "live."
If I were to write a guideline myself I'd say: there is nothing wrong with making an active tab selectable, but that should not be the only way to return to the tab's default state. Most sets of tabs do not behave this way, so many if not most users will not think to select the active tab.
Thoughts? Pointers? | 2012/10/12 | [
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/26706",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/users/19605/"
] | There are lots of standards and guidelines for accessibility, many of which deal with the aspects of design relating to typography and the legibility of the text. Some of the areas addressed that can be used to help guide your decision include:
* Knowing the audience and demographics: the classic example is the elderly people that require fonts that work well in larger sizes, so don't choose a font that is designed to be very compact and read in small viewports that don't resize up well.
* Looking at specific characters in the glyph charts: the classic examples are the difference between the character 'B' and the number '8', the difference between the uppercase letter 'I', lowercase 'l' and the number '1'
* Look for character spacing and balance: this will improve the readability and legibility for the audience with clear and distinct spacing helping to group and differentiate between letters and words
* Web-safe fonts: so it doesn't revert to a default font that doesn't have good accessibility characteristics (lots of web-safe fonts to choose from these days so not really an issue) | I am working on an interface with these exact concerns. We want something very clear and optimized at small sizes, yet have it be a bit different from the default and specified in our app for consistency across platforms.
Open Sans seemed a great choice, I really love the modern look, however I found a big problem (at least with open sans served by google fonts).
The kerning is different between Firefox and Chrome- specifically, Firefox renders the characters a bit farther apart. This is a problem. It is not fixable by the letter-spacing or kerning properties.
So we've gone with Adobe's source sans for now. |
26,706 | I have not been able to find guidelines (let alone user studies backing up the guidelines) specifying best practice for this aspect of tab behavior: when (if ever) should the selected (active) tab be made selectable?
I have long assumed that only the inactive tabs should be selectable. Recently however I came across a UI in which the only way to get back to the tab's initial state is to click the active tab again. (There is navigation within the tab.)
Poking around I've found several places where active tabs are selectable. One is Google. There it seems to be equivalent to a page refresh. If you are in Google Maps, for example, selecting Maps from the row of tabs at the top returns the page to the default state, looking down on your location from satellite distance. Here in UX.stackexchange, if Questions is the active tab it is still selectable. Selecting it refreshes the page. This is perhaps useful if you are on p.5 of Questions and want to get back to p.1. There are several other ways users can do the same thing however (refresh page in the browser, select 1 in the pagination widget.)
The guidelines I've explored never mention the issue. The assumption seems to be that there is only one page per tab and thus no need for the active tab to be "live."
If I were to write a guideline myself I'd say: there is nothing wrong with making an active tab selectable, but that should not be the only way to return to the tab's default state. Most sets of tabs do not behave this way, so many if not most users will not think to select the active tab.
Thoughts? Pointers? | 2012/10/12 | [
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/26706",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/users/19605/"
] | There are lots of standards and guidelines for accessibility, many of which deal with the aspects of design relating to typography and the legibility of the text. Some of the areas addressed that can be used to help guide your decision include:
* Knowing the audience and demographics: the classic example is the elderly people that require fonts that work well in larger sizes, so don't choose a font that is designed to be very compact and read in small viewports that don't resize up well.
* Looking at specific characters in the glyph charts: the classic examples are the difference between the character 'B' and the number '8', the difference between the uppercase letter 'I', lowercase 'l' and the number '1'
* Look for character spacing and balance: this will improve the readability and legibility for the audience with clear and distinct spacing helping to group and differentiate between letters and words
* Web-safe fonts: so it doesn't revert to a default font that doesn't have good accessibility characteristics (lots of web-safe fonts to choose from these days so not really an issue) | Appropriately kerned san serif's. |
153,262 | We are currently using transactional replication in SQL Server 2008 to keep a secondary reporting server synchronized with a primary database server. This has been working weel and keeps some of the load off the primary server. Would it be possible to scale this solution to multiple reporting servers? We're expecting an increased load of read-only queries and it would be nice to be able to add reporting servers as needed.
The general idea was the following:
1. Each reporting server would use a "pull" subscription to get the data from the primary database publication. These reporting databases could be a couple of minutes behind the primary server without it being an issue.
2. The reporting servers would be NLB'd together. All read-only queries would be directed to the NLB which should spread the load across the servers. | 2010/06/21 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/153262",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/-1/"
] | Sounds like it would work, to me. As long as you're only doing queries to the NLB name. However, I would take a long deep look into the MS SQL deployment and architecture documentation to see if there's anything that says "build it this way, taking care that you do X and don't do Y" or "It won't work at all because of Frob." | Wouldn't it be a lot better to have multiple servers running Reporting Services, all of them querying a single Database Engine server?
There's no need at all for RS to use a DE on the same machine.
About NLBing Reporting Services: yes, you can, but it has some caveats. See <http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc281307.aspx>. |
153,262 | We are currently using transactional replication in SQL Server 2008 to keep a secondary reporting server synchronized with a primary database server. This has been working weel and keeps some of the load off the primary server. Would it be possible to scale this solution to multiple reporting servers? We're expecting an increased load of read-only queries and it would be nice to be able to add reporting servers as needed.
The general idea was the following:
1. Each reporting server would use a "pull" subscription to get the data from the primary database publication. These reporting databases could be a couple of minutes behind the primary server without it being an issue.
2. The reporting servers would be NLB'd together. All read-only queries would be directed to the NLB which should spread the load across the servers. | 2010/06/21 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/153262",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/-1/"
] | Sounds like it would work, to me. As long as you're only doing queries to the NLB name. However, I would take a long deep look into the MS SQL deployment and architecture documentation to see if there's anything that says "build it this way, taking care that you do X and don't do Y" or "It won't work at all because of Frob." | The usual bottleneck is the distributor. Make sure you do not have the publisher act as its own distributor, with many ('unlimited') scaling the subscribers load on the distributor becomes quite significant. One solution is to stage the distribution, have one of the subscribers (or more) act as a publisher/distributor too. This way more subscribers can be added as subscribers to this second-hand publication without adding further load on the original distributor.
But given the caching capabilities of Reporting Services and extensive built-in capabilities for scale out (see [Planning for Scale-Out Deployment](http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb630407.aspx)), one has to wonder whether such a replication topology is truly needed. |
53,579 | Hi my wordpress admin is acting really slow, is there some diagnostic plugin I can use (like Debug queries on the front end) to see which plugin is slowing down the dashboard? | 2012/05/29 | [
"https://wordpress.stackexchange.com/questions/53579",
"https://wordpress.stackexchange.com",
"https://wordpress.stackexchange.com/users/5844/"
] | First i recommend you to use Chrome Ctrl+Shift+j -> Timeline, click record button and refresh admin page and in that timeline you will see what caused the longest load. if HTML then php/sql part is slow, but maybe some javascript causes slow load.
Second - one by one disable plugins and test loading time. | 1. you could disable plugins one by one to find the bad guy
2. wp-admin runs a lot of javascript. If you use Firefox I recommend opera or Chrome Which are much better and faster with handling javascript. |
35,987 | Ephesians 2:2. "...you once walked, followng the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience". ESV
Matthew 8:25-26. "...they went and woke him, saying, "Save us, Lord..Then he rose and rebuked the winds and the sea, and there was a great calm". ESV
Certainly the air has an appearance of power in a tornado. But since God rules over the wind and the waves the air is not autonomous.
May we see in "the prince of the power of the air" that the Devil may have a grand sounding title but actually is entirely under God's almighty power? In Hebrews 2:7-8 "You made him for a little while lower than the angels; you have crowned him with glory and honour, putting everything under his feet".
Is "the prince of the power of the air" saying that Satan has no more ultimate authority over himself than the air has over itself? | 2018/11/23 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/35987",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/25763/"
] | An inferior foe
---------------
Paul refers in this same letter to what he calls a 'battle': not in the physical or material world, but rather the spiritual or 'heavenly' realms:
>
> For we are not contending against flesh and blood, but against the
> principalities, against the powers, against the world rulers of this
> present darkness, **against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the
> heavenly places.** (Ephesians 6:12)
>
>
>
The 'spirit' at work in the sons of 'unbelievers' (*ἀπειθείας*, those not persuaded) is this prince/ruler of the power/authority of 'the air'.
>
> τὸν **ἄρχοντα** τῆς **ἐξουσίας** τοῦ **ἀέρος** (Ephesians 2:2)
>
>
>
The English term 'prince' assumes a crown and inheritance, but the Greek word *ἄρχοντα* refers to a chief or ruler with authority over the people **only in a certain jurisdiction**.
This is backed up by the word for power as *ἐξουσίας*, meaning an *assigned* authority. It implies a *lesser* or partial power - similar to that wielded by Jewish authorities or Roman rulers - that is not *actually* theirs, but has been assigned either by a higher authority OR by the people themselves. This is in contrast with the *complete* power (*κράτει*) and *absolute* might (*ἰσχύος*) of God:
>
> Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the **strength** (κράτει) **of his might** (ἰσχύος).
> (Ephesians 6:10)
>
>
>
The Greek word *ἀέρος* also refers to the *lower* air or atmosphere that we breathe, as opposed to the higher, rarefied air of *ὁ αἰθήρ*, as in Homer's *Iliad*. So 'the air' here suggests a realm that may technically be 'in the heavenly places' (above the earth, non-material, not physically tangible/visible), but is a **lower section** of it.
Conclusion
----------
The title translated as 'the prince of the power of the air' uses Greek words that imply a **lesser** ruler with an **assigned** authority in a **lower** realm. | The “air” is where words travel to our ears.
It is the medium (the channel, system of communication) in which languages travel to the hearing ears of others….and there are many voices saying many different things in the air. The air has power as words travel in it. These words can benefit us or cause us harm. Death and life are in the power of the tongue.
The words we choose to listen to as spoken by another can lead us to the Truth or can lead us very much astray.
False teachers speak feigned words in the air in order to lead us astray from the Way of righteousness as shown to us by the Lord Jesus Christ. Their goal is the make merchandise of us….if we fall victim to their words which travel in the “air” to our hearing ears.
>
> *2 Peter 2:1-3 KJV (1) But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there s**hall be false teachers among you**, who privily
> shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought
> them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. (2) And many shall
> follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall
> be evil spoken of. (3) **And through covetousness shall they with
> feigned words make merchandise of you:** whose judgment now of a long
> time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.*
>
>
>
They speak (in the air) great swelling words of emptiness to recapture those who are just escaping the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
>
> *2 Peter 2:18-22 KJV (18) **For when they speak great swelling words of vanity,** they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much
> wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error.
> (19) While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the
> servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is
> he brought in bondage. (20) **For if after they have escaped the
> pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour
> Jesus Christ,** they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the
> latter end is worse with them than the beginning.*
>
>
>
They seek to steer us from the Way of righteousness…..the narrow way that leads to life. They want us to turn from the Holy Commandment (to have love for one another) as delivered for us to keep.
>
> *(21) **For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy
> commandment delivered unto them.** (22) But it is happened unto them
> according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit
> again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.*
>
>
>
This reminds me of the “Amaleks”…meaning “people who lick” ( as they speak great swelling words of emptiness, flattery)….who came forth and did meet people by the way (Way of righteousness) just as they were coming forth out of Egypt (just escaping the pollutions of the world).
They did smite those who were “feeble”….”faint and weary” (today: people become weary in well doing and so fall victim to spiritual Amaleks with their use of the flattering tongue).
>
> *Deuteronomy 25:17-18 KJV (17) R**emember what Amalek did unto thee by the way, when ye were come forth out of Egypt;** (18) How he met thee
> by the way, and smote the hindmost of thee, even all that were feeble
> behind thee, **when thou wast faint and weary;** and he feared not God.*
>
>
>
Let us not be “weary in well doing”. Let us faint not. Not only shall we reap everlasting life in due season but we shall also keep out of the reach of those who love to be first in this world (those who love to have the preeminence among us are the “princes” of this world) and speak things they ought not be speaking in order to lead us astray from the Way of righteousness. They profit from this situation as they get their earthly needs met: what to eat, drink and wear. They mind earthly things.
>
> *Galatians 6:9-10 KJV (9) **And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.** (10) As we have
> therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto
> them who are of the household of faith.*
>
>
>
There are false prophets who speak “peace, peace” to us but there is none in their company. They lead us away from the narrow Way that leads to life and down the wide road to destruction. They pose as ministers of righteousness (wolves in sheep’s clothing).
They say they are sent by the Lord in His authority but they are falsely sent (“apostle” = “sent”)…..false apostles.
>
> *2 Corinthians 11:13-15 KJV (13) For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, **transforming themselves into the apostles of
> Christ.***
>
>
>
They work in accordance to the working of Satan in order to lead us astray. They present themselves to us as “ministers of righteousness”.
>
> \*(14) And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. (15) T
> herefore it is no great thing if his ministers also
>
>
>
> >
> > be transformed as the ministers of righteousness;whose end shall be
> > according to their works.\*
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
These are those who have crept in unawares.
>
> *Jude 1:3-5 KJV (3) Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you,
> and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which
> was once delivered unto the saints. (4) F**or there are certain men
> crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this
> condemnation, ungodly men,** turning the grace of our God into
> lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus
> Christ.*
>
>
>
Their function: to lead those who do not really believe in the Way, the Truth and the Life to their destruction. Believing is active. Believing is doing.
>
> *(5) I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, **having saved the people out of the land of
> Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not**.*
>
>
>
Their presence (coming) among us is in accordance to the working of Satan….
>
> *2 Thessalonians 2:9-12 KJV (9) Even him, **whose coming is after the working of Satan** with all power and signs and lying wonders,*
>
>
>
….and those who fall victim to them are those who do not receive the love of the Truth (they know it but don’t do it or become weary and faint in well doing) and be saved….
>
> *(10) **And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they
> might be saved.** (11) And for this cause God shall send them strong
> delusion, that they should believe a lie:*
>
>
>
…so that they might be condemned who believed not the Truth but had pleasure in their unrighteousness.
>
> *(12) **That they all might be damned who believed not the truth,** but had pleasure in unrighteousness.*
>
>
>
It seems that the Lord allows this because of the people who do not receive the love of the Truth and be saved. |
73,581 | My friend records jams at 96kHz using Cakewalk Sonar on a PC, and the audio is saved as .w64 (Sony format). I offered to mix the tracks but my Mac's Logic Pro X DAW can't read the files.
There are converters online, but some are limited to 1GB whereas my files are as big as 7GB. I am reluctant to invest in an expensive converter only to find it either doesn't work, or I lose a lot of information in the conversion (after all a WAV file can't hold 7GB since it's limited to 4GB).
My friend wants to keep working at 96kHz and won't go back to provide smaller formats.
Suggestions? | 2018/08/09 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/73581",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/35051/"
] | I *believe* that VideoLan aka VLC media player can read .w64 files and it is also capable of transcoding. You might also be able to split the files leaving the sample rate untouched. As CarlWitthoft pointed out, 96k is probably excessive and may actually be a problem for some track effects etc.
VLC is free open source software and there is an [OSX binary](https://www.videolan.org/vlc/download-macosx.html) available.
You might also check the docs for ffmpeg/libavcodec which may support w64. | Sony's Sound Forge application is able to read 96KHz 24-bit .w64 files and convert them to 48KHz 24bit files I can use. But it is very cumbersome (read file, wait for peaks to be gathered, then save and convert). It took me several hours to convert about 20 6GB files.
This worked but is not a good long-term solution. I would prefer a batch processing app, or I will try to talk my friend into producing smaller files.
I would like to know why 96KHz is overkill. |
63,657 | The more i study science and maths these days, the more i continuously question myself whether all the knowledge we have built up until now is in fact true or correct.
But before being picky with what true is, like i know in science that knowledge will never be perfected, as scientific theories are just theories which claim to understand the natural phenomena in a better way than before, justified by experimental verification. But the scientific theory or knowledge built may always be superseded with a better scientific theory, which questions whether at any point in time what we know from science is really true at all?
This is just one aspect of the confusion which i am having; however, more generally, if i were to say everything we know up til now is wrong, does this claim have any validity?
In other words, if i were to say that everything we know is wrong, is this considered true? | 2019/05/28 | [
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/63657",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/users/34802/"
] | This is a very common issue when dealing with science. Much of science's approaches to Truth (with a capital letter) is through [abduction](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/abduction/), an approach which assumes the most likely hypothesis is true. If you read the linked SEP article, this is fraught with nuances, as you suggest.
Personally, I am a fan of radical skepticism, and the [Aggripan Trilemma](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnchhausen_trilemma). It's not popular these days to declare that one cannot truly know anything, but if nothing else it's an interesting foil to challenge the current tendency for other systems of thought to declare they have the Truth.
As an example, I find it is *very* common to assume that we know the true semantic meaning of a word or sentence. While we tend to permit axioms to be challenged, tested, and sometimes proven, the behavior of the language we are using is typically assumed to be true (for good reason: there's major issues that arise with a language defining its own semantics). What if the answer is simply that we are not using the same meaning of "knowledge?" I might be communicating about what I believe knowledge is, and you might be communicating about what you believe knowledge is!
An interesting follow on might be to question how one might live life if nothing can be known, using whatever concept of knowledge suits you. I believe there are some related things targetted by Zen Koans, which many state are designed to try to break you out of the way you think. Do we really need to know Truth? Myself, I find the answer I get about that question depends greatly on the individual doing the answering. | From a science perspective, we don't know that what we know is right. You could argue that at the most fundamental level the only thing that an individual knows is that they exist, that they are conscious.
It is also a mistake to say that science can "understand" natural phenomena. Scientific theories can really only describe natural phenomena. They do this by creating a model, often a mathematical model. For example, it is not correct to say that that anyone "understands" quantum theory. We have equations to describe the behaviour of very small particles that are moving at a large fraction of the speed of light. It turns out that compared to objects in our everyday experience, the behaviour of these particles is bonkers. This means that it essentially impossible to "understand" the behaviour of say, an electron in the same way that I "understand" the colour green, or the word "dog".
Scientific theories are models that describe natural phenomena. Our current theories do a better job at describing these phenomena than previous theories, and it is plausible that better theories will supplant (more likely, improve) our current ones. |
63,657 | The more i study science and maths these days, the more i continuously question myself whether all the knowledge we have built up until now is in fact true or correct.
But before being picky with what true is, like i know in science that knowledge will never be perfected, as scientific theories are just theories which claim to understand the natural phenomena in a better way than before, justified by experimental verification. But the scientific theory or knowledge built may always be superseded with a better scientific theory, which questions whether at any point in time what we know from science is really true at all?
This is just one aspect of the confusion which i am having; however, more generally, if i were to say everything we know up til now is wrong, does this claim have any validity?
In other words, if i were to say that everything we know is wrong, is this considered true? | 2019/05/28 | [
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/63657",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/users/34802/"
] | This is a very common issue when dealing with science. Much of science's approaches to Truth (with a capital letter) is through [abduction](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/abduction/), an approach which assumes the most likely hypothesis is true. If you read the linked SEP article, this is fraught with nuances, as you suggest.
Personally, I am a fan of radical skepticism, and the [Aggripan Trilemma](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnchhausen_trilemma). It's not popular these days to declare that one cannot truly know anything, but if nothing else it's an interesting foil to challenge the current tendency for other systems of thought to declare they have the Truth.
As an example, I find it is *very* common to assume that we know the true semantic meaning of a word or sentence. While we tend to permit axioms to be challenged, tested, and sometimes proven, the behavior of the language we are using is typically assumed to be true (for good reason: there's major issues that arise with a language defining its own semantics). What if the answer is simply that we are not using the same meaning of "knowledge?" I might be communicating about what I believe knowledge is, and you might be communicating about what you believe knowledge is!
An interesting follow on might be to question how one might live life if nothing can be known, using whatever concept of knowledge suits you. I believe there are some related things targetted by Zen Koans, which many state are designed to try to break you out of the way you think. Do we really need to know Truth? Myself, I find the answer I get about that question depends greatly on the individual doing the answering. | It's impossible for everything we know to be wrong.
There is certainty in our thought.
Consider the following: (i) not everything is what it seems. This means that the objects of our thinking can differ from what we think they are.
This claim cannot be disputed without assuming its validity first. Thus, trying to dispute this claim necessarily leads to a contradiction.
By the Principle of Non-Contradiction demonstrated by Aristotle in his Metaphysics, we know contradictions are not true.
From (i) [the possibility of error] it follows that the external world is not created by our mind, but rather, is independent of it given the possibility of inadequacy between our thoughts and the external world.
Thus, we know something besides our conscience exists.
This is an example of something you could know for sure, but by studying logic and a priori claims there is more you can discover.
A priori knowledge is the only we can have certainty about. Logic is a priori and every empirical scientist assumes the validity of logic in order to do science. Thus, any science has an a priori foundation. This foundation is what we can know for sure, the rest could be the case or not. But don't discard empirical knowledge for a priori reasoning is limited. |
63,657 | The more i study science and maths these days, the more i continuously question myself whether all the knowledge we have built up until now is in fact true or correct.
But before being picky with what true is, like i know in science that knowledge will never be perfected, as scientific theories are just theories which claim to understand the natural phenomena in a better way than before, justified by experimental verification. But the scientific theory or knowledge built may always be superseded with a better scientific theory, which questions whether at any point in time what we know from science is really true at all?
This is just one aspect of the confusion which i am having; however, more generally, if i were to say everything we know up til now is wrong, does this claim have any validity?
In other words, if i were to say that everything we know is wrong, is this considered true? | 2019/05/28 | [
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/63657",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/users/34802/"
] | This is a very common issue when dealing with science. Much of science's approaches to Truth (with a capital letter) is through [abduction](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/abduction/), an approach which assumes the most likely hypothesis is true. If you read the linked SEP article, this is fraught with nuances, as you suggest.
Personally, I am a fan of radical skepticism, and the [Aggripan Trilemma](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnchhausen_trilemma). It's not popular these days to declare that one cannot truly know anything, but if nothing else it's an interesting foil to challenge the current tendency for other systems of thought to declare they have the Truth.
As an example, I find it is *very* common to assume that we know the true semantic meaning of a word or sentence. While we tend to permit axioms to be challenged, tested, and sometimes proven, the behavior of the language we are using is typically assumed to be true (for good reason: there's major issues that arise with a language defining its own semantics). What if the answer is simply that we are not using the same meaning of "knowledge?" I might be communicating about what I believe knowledge is, and you might be communicating about what you believe knowledge is!
An interesting follow on might be to question how one might live life if nothing can be known, using whatever concept of knowledge suits you. I believe there are some related things targetted by Zen Koans, which many state are designed to try to break you out of the way you think. Do we really need to know Truth? Myself, I find the answer I get about that question depends greatly on the individual doing the answering. | One of the most influential definitions of knowledge dates back to Plato, and describes knowledge as **"justified true belief."** We cannot "know" anything that is not true, we cannot be said to "know" something that we do not believe, and we don't actually "know" something if we don't have any legitimate reason for believing it (even if it's true).
From the point of view of radical skepticism, **we have no access to whether things are *actually* true or not**. So, a lot of modern thinkers tend to focus on *what justifies our beliefs*. From this point of view, science is essentially a standardized process for generating linked networks of *mutually* justified beliefs. Disciplinary hygienes such as empirical experiment, peer review, randomized trials, and so forth, are designed to minimize the admission of unjustified beliefs to the established canon. In theory, every scientific "fact" accords with all the others.
You are right if you say that we don't know if any given scientific belief is true --and in fact, wrong beliefs go out under the scientific imprimatur all the time. However, **most people consider scientific beliefs to be largely reliable in the aggregate**. There aren't many other systems that do as well at conserving and extending justification. Systems of religious belief have a putative advantage over science in as much as they are typically founded on claims of direct access to truth (rather than inferred truth). But many of their elaborated dogmas are only loosely justified by (or even connected to) their core truths/beliefs. |
63,657 | The more i study science and maths these days, the more i continuously question myself whether all the knowledge we have built up until now is in fact true or correct.
But before being picky with what true is, like i know in science that knowledge will never be perfected, as scientific theories are just theories which claim to understand the natural phenomena in a better way than before, justified by experimental verification. But the scientific theory or knowledge built may always be superseded with a better scientific theory, which questions whether at any point in time what we know from science is really true at all?
This is just one aspect of the confusion which i am having; however, more generally, if i were to say everything we know up til now is wrong, does this claim have any validity?
In other words, if i were to say that everything we know is wrong, is this considered true? | 2019/05/28 | [
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/63657",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/users/34802/"
] | From a science perspective, we don't know that what we know is right. You could argue that at the most fundamental level the only thing that an individual knows is that they exist, that they are conscious.
It is also a mistake to say that science can "understand" natural phenomena. Scientific theories can really only describe natural phenomena. They do this by creating a model, often a mathematical model. For example, it is not correct to say that that anyone "understands" quantum theory. We have equations to describe the behaviour of very small particles that are moving at a large fraction of the speed of light. It turns out that compared to objects in our everyday experience, the behaviour of these particles is bonkers. This means that it essentially impossible to "understand" the behaviour of say, an electron in the same way that I "understand" the colour green, or the word "dog".
Scientific theories are models that describe natural phenomena. Our current theories do a better job at describing these phenomena than previous theories, and it is plausible that better theories will supplant (more likely, improve) our current ones. | It's impossible for everything we know to be wrong.
There is certainty in our thought.
Consider the following: (i) not everything is what it seems. This means that the objects of our thinking can differ from what we think they are.
This claim cannot be disputed without assuming its validity first. Thus, trying to dispute this claim necessarily leads to a contradiction.
By the Principle of Non-Contradiction demonstrated by Aristotle in his Metaphysics, we know contradictions are not true.
From (i) [the possibility of error] it follows that the external world is not created by our mind, but rather, is independent of it given the possibility of inadequacy between our thoughts and the external world.
Thus, we know something besides our conscience exists.
This is an example of something you could know for sure, but by studying logic and a priori claims there is more you can discover.
A priori knowledge is the only we can have certainty about. Logic is a priori and every empirical scientist assumes the validity of logic in order to do science. Thus, any science has an a priori foundation. This foundation is what we can know for sure, the rest could be the case or not. But don't discard empirical knowledge for a priori reasoning is limited. |
63,657 | The more i study science and maths these days, the more i continuously question myself whether all the knowledge we have built up until now is in fact true or correct.
But before being picky with what true is, like i know in science that knowledge will never be perfected, as scientific theories are just theories which claim to understand the natural phenomena in a better way than before, justified by experimental verification. But the scientific theory or knowledge built may always be superseded with a better scientific theory, which questions whether at any point in time what we know from science is really true at all?
This is just one aspect of the confusion which i am having; however, more generally, if i were to say everything we know up til now is wrong, does this claim have any validity?
In other words, if i were to say that everything we know is wrong, is this considered true? | 2019/05/28 | [
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/63657",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/users/34802/"
] | From a science perspective, we don't know that what we know is right. You could argue that at the most fundamental level the only thing that an individual knows is that they exist, that they are conscious.
It is also a mistake to say that science can "understand" natural phenomena. Scientific theories can really only describe natural phenomena. They do this by creating a model, often a mathematical model. For example, it is not correct to say that that anyone "understands" quantum theory. We have equations to describe the behaviour of very small particles that are moving at a large fraction of the speed of light. It turns out that compared to objects in our everyday experience, the behaviour of these particles is bonkers. This means that it essentially impossible to "understand" the behaviour of say, an electron in the same way that I "understand" the colour green, or the word "dog".
Scientific theories are models that describe natural phenomena. Our current theories do a better job at describing these phenomena than previous theories, and it is plausible that better theories will supplant (more likely, improve) our current ones. | One of the most influential definitions of knowledge dates back to Plato, and describes knowledge as **"justified true belief."** We cannot "know" anything that is not true, we cannot be said to "know" something that we do not believe, and we don't actually "know" something if we don't have any legitimate reason for believing it (even if it's true).
From the point of view of radical skepticism, **we have no access to whether things are *actually* true or not**. So, a lot of modern thinkers tend to focus on *what justifies our beliefs*. From this point of view, science is essentially a standardized process for generating linked networks of *mutually* justified beliefs. Disciplinary hygienes such as empirical experiment, peer review, randomized trials, and so forth, are designed to minimize the admission of unjustified beliefs to the established canon. In theory, every scientific "fact" accords with all the others.
You are right if you say that we don't know if any given scientific belief is true --and in fact, wrong beliefs go out under the scientific imprimatur all the time. However, **most people consider scientific beliefs to be largely reliable in the aggregate**. There aren't many other systems that do as well at conserving and extending justification. Systems of religious belief have a putative advantage over science in as much as they are typically founded on claims of direct access to truth (rather than inferred truth). But many of their elaborated dogmas are only loosely justified by (or even connected to) their core truths/beliefs. |
3,427 | I have created a menu using [Superfish](http://drupal.org/project/superfish) containing the following items: "Menu 1," "Menu 2," "Menu 3," and "Contact."
When I click on each menu, the heading title is displayed. I want to hide the contact menu title. i was trying to hide it from the block but each menu doesn't have a block title.
How can I hide only the "Contact" menu heading title? | 2011/05/11 | [
"https://drupal.stackexchange.com/questions/3427",
"https://drupal.stackexchange.com",
"https://drupal.stackexchange.com/users/1049/"
] | You should:
* select the Structure->Blocks menu;
* from the blocks list, click on "configure" next to your menu block;
* specify `<none>` as block title. | It works
.is-active:before {
font-family: FontAwesome;
content: "\f015";
}
This doesn't work
display:none |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.