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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
165,915 | I applied for a job and during the various stages of the job interview the hiring person told me that they will get back to me in a certain amount of time. However, after every round of the interview the hiring person overstepped that limit. One week turned into two, two weeks turned into five. **And this happened after every single interview round.**
Even though the job sounds interesting and is with a reputable company, I wonder how they will treat me on the actual job if if they overstep their maximum allotted time to respond to me after every single interview round.
The position I'm applying for is relatively new in the company, so I think they're taking their time with the job applicants, but still, overstepping the time limit to get back to me on three separate occasions is non-professional to say the least. They also didn't acknowledge the delay.
**Should I consider this kind of behavior a red flag?** | 2020/10/13 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/165915",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/120871/"
] | >
> Would you consider an offer from a company which always took more time
> to get back to you after every single round of the interview?
>
>
>
I would consider an offer from a company no matter how much time it took to get back to me. In the big scheme of things, that time is a sunk cost and isn't relevant to the merit of the job itself. Once hired, I wouldn't be going through the interview process (with any delays) again.
That said, if the delay bothers you enough, you can easily dismiss the offer without even considering it. Since you used the term "non-professional to say the least" you have to decide if what you saw during the interview process extends to all the other processes in the company, or was perhaps an outlier. Think back over the interview - what you heard and what you saw - to help you decide.
For me, I might weigh that bother against all the other aspects of the company/job/offer and make a decision based on the whole. | Yes and no.
Yes since in normal times it would be obvious that you should get a proper estimate. No since hiring in Corona times may be more complicated and subject ton constantly changing rules (e.g. is there anybody on furlough who could do the work, prove to your boss that you checked, prove to working council that you believe it....) |
165,915 | I applied for a job and during the various stages of the job interview the hiring person told me that they will get back to me in a certain amount of time. However, after every round of the interview the hiring person overstepped that limit. One week turned into two, two weeks turned into five. **And this happened after every single interview round.**
Even though the job sounds interesting and is with a reputable company, I wonder how they will treat me on the actual job if if they overstep their maximum allotted time to respond to me after every single interview round.
The position I'm applying for is relatively new in the company, so I think they're taking their time with the job applicants, but still, overstepping the time limit to get back to me on three separate occasions is non-professional to say the least. They also didn't acknowledge the delay.
**Should I consider this kind of behavior a red flag?** | 2020/10/13 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/165915",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/120871/"
] | So there are a number of things to consider here.
### Hiring takes longer than people think
Companies underestimating how long it will take to get back to a job candidate is far from rare. It's arguably more common than the opposite. *A lot* of people are involved in a hiring process and they are very often quite busy. Especially for decision makers recruitment will be an added responsibility on top of their workload and their response time is something internal recruiters can't control. Some recruiters will therefore pad their timeline based on past experience. Some will give you the time that they hope to get back to you, realistic or not. Plenty don't bother giving a time line and there are any number of reasons for delays that could push whatever the original time line was.
You specifically mention a "time limit" and "maximum allotted time" in your question but that's really not how this works. A hiring company is in control of the timeline and they will typically tend towards optimistic estimates. Right now a hiring timeline is especially hard to predict because:
### We're in the midst of a pandemic and an economic downturn
Many companies are suspending their hiring process while almost all are reducing the number of new hires or introducing new approval processes. That means that what used to take a few weeks can now easily take a month. The kind of delays you describe are very much par for the course in any economic downturn and that's before you consider the impact that going remote can have on antiquated administrative processes. A simple employment contract that used to be a signed hardcopy might now cause a real headache for recruitment teams.
### Good recruiters will acknowledge delays
But there are plenty of bad and average recruiters out there. Ideally the person you spoke to would have acknowledge the delay and perhaps given a very good (pandemic-related) reason for it. Certainly if it's been several weeks they should update you on their new timeline both as a courtesy and to avoid losing you as a candidate.
When they don't acknowledge it at all, that's when I would push on the subject, ideally in a call or during the next interview. Their response will tell you much more than guessing at the reasons. ALso keep in mind that one unprofessional recruiter is not in and of itself a deal breaker because:
### Delays in the hiring process might not impact you on the job
When you're talking about red flags in a hiring process, you're talking about things that could negatively affect you in the job you're applying for. Unless you're applying for an HR position it's highly unlikely that you'll have much to do with the people in charge of recruitment. It could signal some level of administrative incompetence within HR in general meaning problems and delays in payroll and holiday approvals for instance. But even that isn't certain and it might not be something you'd consider an outright red flag.
Generally speaking, slow processes and long delays in hiring will tend to map to work cultures that are also heavy on red tape. But it's far from universal.
### What does that mean for you?
Overall, I'd take this as any other data point about a potential employer. Their process is slow but that's understandable. It sounds like they didn't acknowledge the delay which is somewhat unprofessional but again: pandemic. If you see other signs of severe administrative hurdles or other red tape, you can assume that it might be a thing for this company in general. If that's a potential issue for you I would definitely ask the hiring manager (the person you'd work for) about it.
Personally, I accepted a job with a company where the hiring process was concluded within 5 weeks, but the actual offer took another 4 *months* to materialise as a result of the pandemic. It was a clear sign to me that this company is process-heavy and likes its red tape. The experience on the job confirmed this! But the most that this impacts me is that tangential things like bid management and time sheets are more of a chore than in my previous company. Because I knew that, these delays ultimately were not a factor in my decision to accept the offer when it did come. (Though I should also mention that almost all firms suspended or delayed hiring during this team. Hopefully a disruptive event on this scale won't happen again any time soon.) | I would say that unless you apply for a job, the quality of their HR is not that important. Look for red flags with the people you are working with, they are more important. You can get an excellent job in a company with rubbish HR. |
165,915 | I applied for a job and during the various stages of the job interview the hiring person told me that they will get back to me in a certain amount of time. However, after every round of the interview the hiring person overstepped that limit. One week turned into two, two weeks turned into five. **And this happened after every single interview round.**
Even though the job sounds interesting and is with a reputable company, I wonder how they will treat me on the actual job if if they overstep their maximum allotted time to respond to me after every single interview round.
The position I'm applying for is relatively new in the company, so I think they're taking their time with the job applicants, but still, overstepping the time limit to get back to me on three separate occasions is non-professional to say the least. They also didn't acknowledge the delay.
**Should I consider this kind of behavior a red flag?** | 2020/10/13 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/165915",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/120871/"
] | So there are a number of things to consider here.
### Hiring takes longer than people think
Companies underestimating how long it will take to get back to a job candidate is far from rare. It's arguably more common than the opposite. *A lot* of people are involved in a hiring process and they are very often quite busy. Especially for decision makers recruitment will be an added responsibility on top of their workload and their response time is something internal recruiters can't control. Some recruiters will therefore pad their timeline based on past experience. Some will give you the time that they hope to get back to you, realistic or not. Plenty don't bother giving a time line and there are any number of reasons for delays that could push whatever the original time line was.
You specifically mention a "time limit" and "maximum allotted time" in your question but that's really not how this works. A hiring company is in control of the timeline and they will typically tend towards optimistic estimates. Right now a hiring timeline is especially hard to predict because:
### We're in the midst of a pandemic and an economic downturn
Many companies are suspending their hiring process while almost all are reducing the number of new hires or introducing new approval processes. That means that what used to take a few weeks can now easily take a month. The kind of delays you describe are very much par for the course in any economic downturn and that's before you consider the impact that going remote can have on antiquated administrative processes. A simple employment contract that used to be a signed hardcopy might now cause a real headache for recruitment teams.
### Good recruiters will acknowledge delays
But there are plenty of bad and average recruiters out there. Ideally the person you spoke to would have acknowledge the delay and perhaps given a very good (pandemic-related) reason for it. Certainly if it's been several weeks they should update you on their new timeline both as a courtesy and to avoid losing you as a candidate.
When they don't acknowledge it at all, that's when I would push on the subject, ideally in a call or during the next interview. Their response will tell you much more than guessing at the reasons. ALso keep in mind that one unprofessional recruiter is not in and of itself a deal breaker because:
### Delays in the hiring process might not impact you on the job
When you're talking about red flags in a hiring process, you're talking about things that could negatively affect you in the job you're applying for. Unless you're applying for an HR position it's highly unlikely that you'll have much to do with the people in charge of recruitment. It could signal some level of administrative incompetence within HR in general meaning problems and delays in payroll and holiday approvals for instance. But even that isn't certain and it might not be something you'd consider an outright red flag.
Generally speaking, slow processes and long delays in hiring will tend to map to work cultures that are also heavy on red tape. But it's far from universal.
### What does that mean for you?
Overall, I'd take this as any other data point about a potential employer. Their process is slow but that's understandable. It sounds like they didn't acknowledge the delay which is somewhat unprofessional but again: pandemic. If you see other signs of severe administrative hurdles or other red tape, you can assume that it might be a thing for this company in general. If that's a potential issue for you I would definitely ask the hiring manager (the person you'd work for) about it.
Personally, I accepted a job with a company where the hiring process was concluded within 5 weeks, but the actual offer took another 4 *months* to materialise as a result of the pandemic. It was a clear sign to me that this company is process-heavy and likes its red tape. The experience on the job confirmed this! But the most that this impacts me is that tangential things like bid management and time sheets are more of a chore than in my previous company. Because I knew that, these delays ultimately were not a factor in my decision to accept the offer when it did come. (Though I should also mention that almost all firms suspended or delayed hiring during this team. Hopefully a disruptive event on this scale won't happen again any time soon.) | Yes and no.
Yes since in normal times it would be obvious that you should get a proper estimate. No since hiring in Corona times may be more complicated and subject ton constantly changing rules (e.g. is there anybody on furlough who could do the work, prove to your boss that you checked, prove to working council that you believe it....) |
165,915 | I applied for a job and during the various stages of the job interview the hiring person told me that they will get back to me in a certain amount of time. However, after every round of the interview the hiring person overstepped that limit. One week turned into two, two weeks turned into five. **And this happened after every single interview round.**
Even though the job sounds interesting and is with a reputable company, I wonder how they will treat me on the actual job if if they overstep their maximum allotted time to respond to me after every single interview round.
The position I'm applying for is relatively new in the company, so I think they're taking their time with the job applicants, but still, overstepping the time limit to get back to me on three separate occasions is non-professional to say the least. They also didn't acknowledge the delay.
**Should I consider this kind of behavior a red flag?** | 2020/10/13 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/165915",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/120871/"
] | Yes and no.
Yes since in normal times it would be obvious that you should get a proper estimate. No since hiring in Corona times may be more complicated and subject ton constantly changing rules (e.g. is there anybody on furlough who could do the work, prove to your boss that you checked, prove to working council that you believe it....) | I would say that unless you apply for a job, the quality of their HR is not that important. Look for red flags with the people you are working with, they are more important. You can get an excellent job in a company with rubbish HR. |
6,233,540 | Are there any client-side validation gems similar to client\_side\_validations (https://github.com/bcardarella/client\_side\_validations) for Rails 2.x? | 2011/06/03 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/6233540",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/103709/"
] | I am actually in the process of backporting the current ClientSideValidations gem to Rails 2.x
<https://github.com/bcardarella/client_side_validations-rails_2>
It's not ready for public consumption yet, but you might want to keep an eye on it. It will inherit from the current gem and add the necessary functionality to Rails 2.x. | Here is a project for [client side validations for rails 2](https://github.com/dnclabs/client_side_validations), it seems to be the same project that the one you refer but it was left in order to give full functionality to rails 3. There is also an [example for rails 2](https://github.com/dnclabs/client_side_validations_examples).
I recommend to check a great tutorial using [jquery validations with rails](http://sleekd.com/tutorials/jquery-validation-in-ruby-on-rails/).
Hope this helps. |
2,940,599 | In Eclipse, what is a "Package" explained in .NET terms? | 2010/05/30 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2940599",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/172861/"
] | A package in java is most comparable to a namespace in .NET.
EDIT:
As pointed out by R0MANARMY, in Java the folder structure & where classes are dictate which package they belong to. In .NET classes can be marked as belonging to any namespace regardless of the folder they are in. | A Java package is something like a namespace in .NET |
140,673 | I'm to test a programming idea I have in Blender. I need to combine multiple cubes. I want to create lots of duplicate cubes, and then delete all faces that are doubled.
I know there is the remove double faces, but that doesn't do what I want. It leaves a single face where two faces were.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/NLm2w.png)
In this example, I want to join the two cubes, but where they join, I want both faces deleted since they can't be seen. | 2019/05/15 | [
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/140673",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/users/74277/"
] | * 'Remove Doubles' (that refers to vertices, actually, not faces) as you already have..
* In the header *Select* menu: *Select All by Trait* > *Interior Faces*
* `X` > *Delete Faces* | To do that, turn on all vertex visibility,
Select all the Vertex at the point of contact, then look for "Loop Tool" under the editing panel in the "Tool Shelf"
Use either "Bridge" or "Loft" in the "Loop Tool" option.
It will join them together |
32,732 | Has there ever a period in history when people were nice to each other and not killing each other?
In other words, since humans arrived, have the inhabitants of this planet ever enjoyed ***world peace***?
To answer this, we first have to define *period*. Let's define *period* as a minimum of 50 years. If there are any periods of time without records, we will have to ignore those periods.
Now let's define *not killing each other*. By this, I mean no known battles, wars, or genocides on planet earth. I'm not referring to individual acts of violence.
*As a curious side note, with over 5,000 questions asked on this StackExchange site, this is the first question to ever implement the [peace](/questions/tagged/peace "show questions tagged 'peace'") tag. Well... almost... I just realized that I don't have enough rep to create a new tag, so perhaps a moderator will be kind enough to add it.* | 2016/09/12 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/32732",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/16595/"
] | **Company vs Design Bureau**
It's important to distinguish between a company and a design bureau. Organisations such as MiG (Mikoyan-and-Gurevich Design Bureau), Yakolev (JSC A.S. Yakovlev Design Bureau), Tupolev (OKB-156 or Tupolev Design Bureau) and Sukhoi (OKB-51 / Sukhoi Design Bureau) where, as the names suggest, "design bureaus." They designed aircraft, but did not manufacturer them.
**Outsourced Manufacturing**
Manufacturing was handled by separate state-owned factories, often more than one, and was quite disconnected from the design process.
So MiG might design an aircraft in response to a design request or competition from the air force (i.e. the soviet government), and then a number of factories around the USSR would be spooled up to manufacture the parts and assemble them into working aircraft.
**Internal Competition**
The different design bureaus, as @sds commented, competed each other to win design competitions set forth by the government as a form of internal competition. Just like a modern company might have subsidiaries or departments compete internally for work, because it drives efficiency and/or innovation.
**Specialisation**
In addition, the bureaus tended to have their own specialities (fighters or bombers or civil aircraft, etc.), and were often personality driven by the name/s behind them. E.g. Mikoyan was a well respected engineer within the USSR and he headed MiG. He was also Sukhoi's mentor, and the latter eventually left MiG and founded his own design bureau.
**Post-USSR**
In Russia's modernised economy, some of the design bureaus successfully transitioned into corporations. For example, Sukhoi is now a privately-owned company (fully owned by United Aircraft Corporation) which designs and manufactures military and civil aviation aircraft. | Ryszard Kapuscinski in "*Imperium*", makes the point that often the centrally-planned COMECON economies like the USSR had *more* competing companies, not *fewer*, as they company with the inferior products would not go bankrupt.
The example he gave was televisions, at the time, a high-tech, prestige product. Directors of large industrial concerns would want to build them, even if it was not in the plan, and so would divert resources to make them. Therefore, there were very many substandard televisions on sale, built solely as vanity projects.
In the case of aircraft, it would be hard to divert the required quantity of resources to their production, but the simple fact that it is more efficient to rationalise production is not a necessary reason for doing it, except in a market economy.
It's also worth pointing out that the centrally-planned economies were not always exact copies of each other, all permitted various forms of market mechanisms, and that people did not always do what was in the plan. As others have pointed out, even in "market economies", government bodies often enforce rationalisation in industry. |
32,732 | Has there ever a period in history when people were nice to each other and not killing each other?
In other words, since humans arrived, have the inhabitants of this planet ever enjoyed ***world peace***?
To answer this, we first have to define *period*. Let's define *period* as a minimum of 50 years. If there are any periods of time without records, we will have to ignore those periods.
Now let's define *not killing each other*. By this, I mean no known battles, wars, or genocides on planet earth. I'm not referring to individual acts of violence.
*As a curious side note, with over 5,000 questions asked on this StackExchange site, this is the first question to ever implement the [peace](/questions/tagged/peace "show questions tagged 'peace'") tag. Well... almost... I just realized that I don't have enough rep to create a new tag, so perhaps a moderator will be kind enough to add it.* | 2016/09/12 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/32732",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/16595/"
] | MiG, Sukhoi, Tupolev, Yakovlev, Ilyushin, Mil, Kamov, Beriev, Antonov were design bureaus, not manufacturers. It was totally common if a certain factory would produce planes of Tupolev and Ilyushin designs at the same time.
Why several design bureaus? Possibly because of different personalities and methods of the chief designers. A person who had sufficient achievements would be given a team to guide. And the team's volume was limited by the leader's physical capabilities.
It is also to note that while the purpose of the planes could be interchangeable, there were differences in approach. For instance, Antonov produced civil airliners, like Tupolev and Ilyushin. But they specialized on planes with the wing on the top of fuselage while Tupolev and Ilyushin designed planes with the wing on the bottom. Tupolev designed narrow-body aircrafts, while Ilyushin designed both narrow and wide-bodied.
All of the design bureaus and plants were the subsidiaries of the respective Ministry of Aviation Industry. | There is no difference between central planning and capitalism. You can see an overview here:
<http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/stalinmodel.htm>
Each firm in the Soviet economy resembled a capitalist firm, had to sell products, and bought intermediate goods and labor on the market. Although there were technically "quotas", they made no practical difference to the firm's behavior in the vast majority of cases. There was also public housing, education, and similar government activities performed in capitalist countries.
From this you can see that the answer to "why did the Soviet economy do X?" type questions can be answered by "the same reason everyone else did that". |
32,732 | Has there ever a period in history when people were nice to each other and not killing each other?
In other words, since humans arrived, have the inhabitants of this planet ever enjoyed ***world peace***?
To answer this, we first have to define *period*. Let's define *period* as a minimum of 50 years. If there are any periods of time without records, we will have to ignore those periods.
Now let's define *not killing each other*. By this, I mean no known battles, wars, or genocides on planet earth. I'm not referring to individual acts of violence.
*As a curious side note, with over 5,000 questions asked on this StackExchange site, this is the first question to ever implement the [peace](/questions/tagged/peace "show questions tagged 'peace'") tag. Well... almost... I just realized that I don't have enough rep to create a new tag, so perhaps a moderator will be kind enough to add it.* | 2016/09/12 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/32732",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/16595/"
] | I can't speak to the specifics of the Soviet Union, but I want to address the opening assumption of the question.
>
> Generally, Communism believed in economic central planning, with each field being serviced by one "company" (to avoid waste).
>
>
>
This is untrue of (or at least unnecessary for) both communism and [centrally planned economies](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrally_planned_economy). A centrally planned economy is one where production, prices, and distribution are set by the government, not by market forces. No monopoly is necessary. [Communism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism) does not require a centrally planned economy, but rather is about the ownership of the means of production which covers a wide spectrum of social, political, and economic structures.
What you're asking about is [the Soviet model](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet-type_economic_planning). It's important to not use the Soviet model as a stand in for communism. Communism is a very broad set of social, political, and economic philosophies. The Soviet model is a specific, and rather broken, flavor featuring a centrally planned economy, single party control, and powerful committees. The Soviet model is more like an oligarchy masquerading as communism.
Two examples of centrally planned economies within the United States are large scale manufacturing for the military and, until very recently, space. The US government is the major buyer of things like aircraft carriers, tanks, nuclear submarines, and heavy launch vehicles. They effectively control what is produced, who it gets distributed to and, somewhat, the price.
The US government deliberately doles out contracts to multiple suppliers, even to the point of paying more money, in order to keep multiple suppliers around (also to get the votes of powerful senators by funneling money to their districts). This is to foster competition, prevent a single company from controlling the market, and also as a hedge in case one goes out of business.
For example, there were two builders of US Navy submarines, [Newport News Shipbuilding](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newport_News_Shipbuilding) and [General Dyanamics Electric Boat](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_Electric_Boat), but reductions in the US navy's submarine fleet means now there is only one, Electric Boat. Should something happen to General Dynamics this would be put the US's ability to build submarines, a highly specialized skill, in danger. | Let's put it simply, detailed answers have already been posted. Mikoyan-Gurevich (MiG), Sukhoi (Su), Tupolev (Tu), Yakolev (Yak), Petlyakov (Pe), Lavochkin-Gorbunov-Gudkov (LaGG) and Ilyshin (Il), the most notable ones, were all design bureaus or teams. All manufacturing was done by state factories (same applies to small arms, AFVs, etc.). So, once the design was complete, the design bureaus had nothing to do with the manufacture. They had no stake in it and, indeed, zero control over it. They merely provided the plans and development. We can think of it as the state being the company, which controls the factories, and the design bureaus being departments inside the company providing the plans. |
32,732 | Has there ever a period in history when people were nice to each other and not killing each other?
In other words, since humans arrived, have the inhabitants of this planet ever enjoyed ***world peace***?
To answer this, we first have to define *period*. Let's define *period* as a minimum of 50 years. If there are any periods of time without records, we will have to ignore those periods.
Now let's define *not killing each other*. By this, I mean no known battles, wars, or genocides on planet earth. I'm not referring to individual acts of violence.
*As a curious side note, with over 5,000 questions asked on this StackExchange site, this is the first question to ever implement the [peace](/questions/tagged/peace "show questions tagged 'peace'") tag. Well... almost... I just realized that I don't have enough rep to create a new tag, so perhaps a moderator will be kind enough to add it.* | 2016/09/12 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/32732",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/16595/"
] | I'll leave the airplane manufacturers and Soviet Union but I think It will be stil valid. So let's move a bit western and southern from moscow to Czechslovak Socialistic Republic. It was part of [Comecon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comecon) and obeyed the orders from the Kremlin.
There were many factories competing each other but under the rule of ["One Party"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_Czechoslovakia) the car-makers' fields were distinguished:
* [Aero](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aero_(automobile)): Car production abandonned;
* [Avia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avia): Airplanes abandonned, light trucks under licence of [Saviem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saviem)
* [Liaz](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIAZ_(Czech_Republic)): Light and medium size trucks, road and offroad.
* [Praga](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Praga_(company)): Car and motorbike production abandonned, army truck and offroad truck produced using Tatra engines.
* [Skoda](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%A0koda_Auto): Small family cars, limitted to 1300 ccm not to compete with [VAZ-Lada](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AvtoVAZ) and [Moskvich](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moskvitch). Former [Laurin & Klement](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurin_%26_Klement), official name: Automobilové závody, národní podnik (Automotive factories, national works).
* [Sodomka works](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomka): Car bodyworks discontinued; production of buses first labelled after engine maker, [Skoda works](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%A0koda_Works), later under [Karosa](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karosa) label. articulated buses were not produced in favour of [Ikarus](https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ikarus_280).
* [Tatra](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatra_(company)): Representative cars, cars for [big cheeses](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/papal%C3%A1%C5%A1). Heavy duty trucks.
* [Walter](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Engines): Car production discontinued, renamed as Motorlet and production aimed to aviation engines.
The companies did not compete agains each other; they were forced to share a lot of parts instead. The Tatra 613, last Tatra car, used same handles, switches as skoda 130 and Skoda Favorit. Praga V3S (sometimes called half-Tatra) used in-line 4 cylinder engine based on Tatra V8 engine and cab based on Tatra 805 truck. Liaz firetrucks used cabines based on Karosa B732 bus. | There is no difference between central planning and capitalism. You can see an overview here:
<http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/stalinmodel.htm>
Each firm in the Soviet economy resembled a capitalist firm, had to sell products, and bought intermediate goods and labor on the market. Although there were technically "quotas", they made no practical difference to the firm's behavior in the vast majority of cases. There was also public housing, education, and similar government activities performed in capitalist countries.
From this you can see that the answer to "why did the Soviet economy do X?" type questions can be answered by "the same reason everyone else did that". |
32,732 | Has there ever a period in history when people were nice to each other and not killing each other?
In other words, since humans arrived, have the inhabitants of this planet ever enjoyed ***world peace***?
To answer this, we first have to define *period*. Let's define *period* as a minimum of 50 years. If there are any periods of time without records, we will have to ignore those periods.
Now let's define *not killing each other*. By this, I mean no known battles, wars, or genocides on planet earth. I'm not referring to individual acts of violence.
*As a curious side note, with over 5,000 questions asked on this StackExchange site, this is the first question to ever implement the [peace](/questions/tagged/peace "show questions tagged 'peace'") tag. Well... almost... I just realized that I don't have enough rep to create a new tag, so perhaps a moderator will be kind enough to add it.* | 2016/09/12 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/32732",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/16595/"
] | I can't speak to the specifics of the Soviet Union, but I want to address the opening assumption of the question.
>
> Generally, Communism believed in economic central planning, with each field being serviced by one "company" (to avoid waste).
>
>
>
This is untrue of (or at least unnecessary for) both communism and [centrally planned economies](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrally_planned_economy). A centrally planned economy is one where production, prices, and distribution are set by the government, not by market forces. No monopoly is necessary. [Communism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism) does not require a centrally planned economy, but rather is about the ownership of the means of production which covers a wide spectrum of social, political, and economic structures.
What you're asking about is [the Soviet model](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet-type_economic_planning). It's important to not use the Soviet model as a stand in for communism. Communism is a very broad set of social, political, and economic philosophies. The Soviet model is a specific, and rather broken, flavor featuring a centrally planned economy, single party control, and powerful committees. The Soviet model is more like an oligarchy masquerading as communism.
Two examples of centrally planned economies within the United States are large scale manufacturing for the military and, until very recently, space. The US government is the major buyer of things like aircraft carriers, tanks, nuclear submarines, and heavy launch vehicles. They effectively control what is produced, who it gets distributed to and, somewhat, the price.
The US government deliberately doles out contracts to multiple suppliers, even to the point of paying more money, in order to keep multiple suppliers around (also to get the votes of powerful senators by funneling money to their districts). This is to foster competition, prevent a single company from controlling the market, and also as a hedge in case one goes out of business.
For example, there were two builders of US Navy submarines, [Newport News Shipbuilding](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newport_News_Shipbuilding) and [General Dyanamics Electric Boat](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_Electric_Boat), but reductions in the US navy's submarine fleet means now there is only one, Electric Boat. Should something happen to General Dynamics this would be put the US's ability to build submarines, a highly specialized skill, in danger. | I'll leave the airplane manufacturers and Soviet Union but I think It will be stil valid. So let's move a bit western and southern from moscow to Czechslovak Socialistic Republic. It was part of [Comecon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comecon) and obeyed the orders from the Kremlin.
There were many factories competing each other but under the rule of ["One Party"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_Czechoslovakia) the car-makers' fields were distinguished:
* [Aero](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aero_(automobile)): Car production abandonned;
* [Avia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avia): Airplanes abandonned, light trucks under licence of [Saviem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saviem)
* [Liaz](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIAZ_(Czech_Republic)): Light and medium size trucks, road and offroad.
* [Praga](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Praga_(company)): Car and motorbike production abandonned, army truck and offroad truck produced using Tatra engines.
* [Skoda](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%A0koda_Auto): Small family cars, limitted to 1300 ccm not to compete with [VAZ-Lada](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AvtoVAZ) and [Moskvich](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moskvitch). Former [Laurin & Klement](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurin_%26_Klement), official name: Automobilové závody, národní podnik (Automotive factories, national works).
* [Sodomka works](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomka): Car bodyworks discontinued; production of buses first labelled after engine maker, [Skoda works](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%A0koda_Works), later under [Karosa](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karosa) label. articulated buses were not produced in favour of [Ikarus](https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ikarus_280).
* [Tatra](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatra_(company)): Representative cars, cars for [big cheeses](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/papal%C3%A1%C5%A1). Heavy duty trucks.
* [Walter](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Engines): Car production discontinued, renamed as Motorlet and production aimed to aviation engines.
The companies did not compete agains each other; they were forced to share a lot of parts instead. The Tatra 613, last Tatra car, used same handles, switches as skoda 130 and Skoda Favorit. Praga V3S (sometimes called half-Tatra) used in-line 4 cylinder engine based on Tatra V8 engine and cab based on Tatra 805 truck. Liaz firetrucks used cabines based on Karosa B732 bus. |
32,732 | Has there ever a period in history when people were nice to each other and not killing each other?
In other words, since humans arrived, have the inhabitants of this planet ever enjoyed ***world peace***?
To answer this, we first have to define *period*. Let's define *period* as a minimum of 50 years. If there are any periods of time without records, we will have to ignore those periods.
Now let's define *not killing each other*. By this, I mean no known battles, wars, or genocides on planet earth. I'm not referring to individual acts of violence.
*As a curious side note, with over 5,000 questions asked on this StackExchange site, this is the first question to ever implement the [peace](/questions/tagged/peace "show questions tagged 'peace'") tag. Well... almost... I just realized that I don't have enough rep to create a new tag, so perhaps a moderator will be kind enough to add it.* | 2016/09/12 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/32732",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/16595/"
] | I'll leave the airplane manufacturers and Soviet Union but I think It will be stil valid. So let's move a bit western and southern from moscow to Czechslovak Socialistic Republic. It was part of [Comecon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comecon) and obeyed the orders from the Kremlin.
There were many factories competing each other but under the rule of ["One Party"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_Czechoslovakia) the car-makers' fields were distinguished:
* [Aero](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aero_(automobile)): Car production abandonned;
* [Avia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avia): Airplanes abandonned, light trucks under licence of [Saviem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saviem)
* [Liaz](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIAZ_(Czech_Republic)): Light and medium size trucks, road and offroad.
* [Praga](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Praga_(company)): Car and motorbike production abandonned, army truck and offroad truck produced using Tatra engines.
* [Skoda](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%A0koda_Auto): Small family cars, limitted to 1300 ccm not to compete with [VAZ-Lada](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AvtoVAZ) and [Moskvich](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moskvitch). Former [Laurin & Klement](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurin_%26_Klement), official name: Automobilové závody, národní podnik (Automotive factories, national works).
* [Sodomka works](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomka): Car bodyworks discontinued; production of buses first labelled after engine maker, [Skoda works](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%A0koda_Works), later under [Karosa](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karosa) label. articulated buses were not produced in favour of [Ikarus](https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ikarus_280).
* [Tatra](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatra_(company)): Representative cars, cars for [big cheeses](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/papal%C3%A1%C5%A1). Heavy duty trucks.
* [Walter](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Engines): Car production discontinued, renamed as Motorlet and production aimed to aviation engines.
The companies did not compete agains each other; they were forced to share a lot of parts instead. The Tatra 613, last Tatra car, used same handles, switches as skoda 130 and Skoda Favorit. Praga V3S (sometimes called half-Tatra) used in-line 4 cylinder engine based on Tatra V8 engine and cab based on Tatra 805 truck. Liaz firetrucks used cabines based on Karosa B732 bus. | Ryszard Kapuscinski in "*Imperium*", makes the point that often the centrally-planned COMECON economies like the USSR had *more* competing companies, not *fewer*, as they company with the inferior products would not go bankrupt.
The example he gave was televisions, at the time, a high-tech, prestige product. Directors of large industrial concerns would want to build them, even if it was not in the plan, and so would divert resources to make them. Therefore, there were very many substandard televisions on sale, built solely as vanity projects.
In the case of aircraft, it would be hard to divert the required quantity of resources to their production, but the simple fact that it is more efficient to rationalise production is not a necessary reason for doing it, except in a market economy.
It's also worth pointing out that the centrally-planned economies were not always exact copies of each other, all permitted various forms of market mechanisms, and that people did not always do what was in the plan. As others have pointed out, even in "market economies", government bodies often enforce rationalisation in industry. |
32,732 | Has there ever a period in history when people were nice to each other and not killing each other?
In other words, since humans arrived, have the inhabitants of this planet ever enjoyed ***world peace***?
To answer this, we first have to define *period*. Let's define *period* as a minimum of 50 years. If there are any periods of time without records, we will have to ignore those periods.
Now let's define *not killing each other*. By this, I mean no known battles, wars, or genocides on planet earth. I'm not referring to individual acts of violence.
*As a curious side note, with over 5,000 questions asked on this StackExchange site, this is the first question to ever implement the [peace](/questions/tagged/peace "show questions tagged 'peace'") tag. Well... almost... I just realized that I don't have enough rep to create a new tag, so perhaps a moderator will be kind enough to add it.* | 2016/09/12 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/32732",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/16595/"
] | I can't speak to the specifics of the Soviet Union, but I want to address the opening assumption of the question.
>
> Generally, Communism believed in economic central planning, with each field being serviced by one "company" (to avoid waste).
>
>
>
This is untrue of (or at least unnecessary for) both communism and [centrally planned economies](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrally_planned_economy). A centrally planned economy is one where production, prices, and distribution are set by the government, not by market forces. No monopoly is necessary. [Communism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism) does not require a centrally planned economy, but rather is about the ownership of the means of production which covers a wide spectrum of social, political, and economic structures.
What you're asking about is [the Soviet model](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet-type_economic_planning). It's important to not use the Soviet model as a stand in for communism. Communism is a very broad set of social, political, and economic philosophies. The Soviet model is a specific, and rather broken, flavor featuring a centrally planned economy, single party control, and powerful committees. The Soviet model is more like an oligarchy masquerading as communism.
Two examples of centrally planned economies within the United States are large scale manufacturing for the military and, until very recently, space. The US government is the major buyer of things like aircraft carriers, tanks, nuclear submarines, and heavy launch vehicles. They effectively control what is produced, who it gets distributed to and, somewhat, the price.
The US government deliberately doles out contracts to multiple suppliers, even to the point of paying more money, in order to keep multiple suppliers around (also to get the votes of powerful senators by funneling money to their districts). This is to foster competition, prevent a single company from controlling the market, and also as a hedge in case one goes out of business.
For example, there were two builders of US Navy submarines, [Newport News Shipbuilding](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newport_News_Shipbuilding) and [General Dyanamics Electric Boat](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_Electric_Boat), but reductions in the US navy's submarine fleet means now there is only one, Electric Boat. Should something happen to General Dynamics this would be put the US's ability to build submarines, a highly specialized skill, in danger. | Ryszard Kapuscinski in "*Imperium*", makes the point that often the centrally-planned COMECON economies like the USSR had *more* competing companies, not *fewer*, as they company with the inferior products would not go bankrupt.
The example he gave was televisions, at the time, a high-tech, prestige product. Directors of large industrial concerns would want to build them, even if it was not in the plan, and so would divert resources to make them. Therefore, there were very many substandard televisions on sale, built solely as vanity projects.
In the case of aircraft, it would be hard to divert the required quantity of resources to their production, but the simple fact that it is more efficient to rationalise production is not a necessary reason for doing it, except in a market economy.
It's also worth pointing out that the centrally-planned economies were not always exact copies of each other, all permitted various forms of market mechanisms, and that people did not always do what was in the plan. As others have pointed out, even in "market economies", government bodies often enforce rationalisation in industry. |
32,732 | Has there ever a period in history when people were nice to each other and not killing each other?
In other words, since humans arrived, have the inhabitants of this planet ever enjoyed ***world peace***?
To answer this, we first have to define *period*. Let's define *period* as a minimum of 50 years. If there are any periods of time without records, we will have to ignore those periods.
Now let's define *not killing each other*. By this, I mean no known battles, wars, or genocides on planet earth. I'm not referring to individual acts of violence.
*As a curious side note, with over 5,000 questions asked on this StackExchange site, this is the first question to ever implement the [peace](/questions/tagged/peace "show questions tagged 'peace'") tag. Well... almost... I just realized that I don't have enough rep to create a new tag, so perhaps a moderator will be kind enough to add it.* | 2016/09/12 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/32732",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/16595/"
] | Economy was indeed centralized but not absolutely. This applies not only to airplanes but to cars and to many other items. There were usually more than one manufacturer.
Speaking of the airplanes one has to distinguish the plants and design bureaus. There were really many airplane designers, and there was a severe competition between them. The state commission usually selected a model from
several models made by different designers. The winning model went in production on one of the state owned plants. The fight between various design bureaus
was very far from "honest competition". But I suppose that this situation satisfied the authorities: probably they understood that competition is good.
Same situation prevailed in the missile industry and in some other war-related sectors of economy.
Airplane design was a very prestigious occupation, and some design bureaus directors were relatives of Politbureau members (like Mikoyan and Kaganovich) or other people closely affiliated to the power structure (Yakovlev). | The reason for it is that "manufacturing airplanes" is misleading in terms of suggesting that it's like uniform activity regardless of plane category. It's not, manufacturing a bomber might very well require a different experience, skillset and tooling than manufacturing a fighter.
This is counter-intuitive, but joint programs can often induce greater costs per unit and type than separate programs taken together. For instance, Joint Strike Fighter would likely be significantly cheaper if ordered as three separate airplanes:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/CkGYn.jpg)
Source: "Do Joint Fighter Programs Save Money?" by RAND Corp (<http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/MG1200/MG1225/RAND_MG1225.pdf>)
Suppose you have One Big Soviet Airplane Factory that produces all the airplanes. According to findings cited above, it would make sense for it to have several separate divisions (definitely two for fighters and bombers, maybe a third one for tactical bombers, and what about marine aviation? how about piston-engine-powered basic training aircraft, does it make sense to manufacture them in the same division/facility as jet fighters? what about utility helicopters? what about anti-submarine warfare helicopters? how about wing-in-ground-effect ASW ekranoplan like Beriev VVA-14? <http://uk.businessinsider.com/soviet-unions-bartini-beriev-vva-14-plane-2015-1>). They likely would have to have their own specialized facilities.
What if those divisions were separate enterprises? The cost savings by lumping them all into one would not be great (save some on a few managers more + more than 1 HR, that's it), while likely a lot of value would be lost: different mindsets, better specialization, unique experience, different bosses and managers trying out different approaches to do stuff.
The Soviet theory to do this, that is, to separate design bureaus from fabrication facilities was actually optimum way to do it: have the best design first, then have it manufactured by the facility best suited for peculiarities of the job.
Economically speaking, it makes sense to merge only enterprises and facilities fulfilling both of the following conditions:
* they use very similar designs and manufacturing technology
* merger allows to realize economy of scale (falling marginal unit cost with growth of production volume)
It did not make sense for the Soviets to go beyond that. |
32,732 | Has there ever a period in history when people were nice to each other and not killing each other?
In other words, since humans arrived, have the inhabitants of this planet ever enjoyed ***world peace***?
To answer this, we first have to define *period*. Let's define *period* as a minimum of 50 years. If there are any periods of time without records, we will have to ignore those periods.
Now let's define *not killing each other*. By this, I mean no known battles, wars, or genocides on planet earth. I'm not referring to individual acts of violence.
*As a curious side note, with over 5,000 questions asked on this StackExchange site, this is the first question to ever implement the [peace](/questions/tagged/peace "show questions tagged 'peace'") tag. Well... almost... I just realized that I don't have enough rep to create a new tag, so perhaps a moderator will be kind enough to add it.* | 2016/09/12 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/32732",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/16595/"
] | **Company vs Design Bureau**
It's important to distinguish between a company and a design bureau. Organisations such as MiG (Mikoyan-and-Gurevich Design Bureau), Yakolev (JSC A.S. Yakovlev Design Bureau), Tupolev (OKB-156 or Tupolev Design Bureau) and Sukhoi (OKB-51 / Sukhoi Design Bureau) where, as the names suggest, "design bureaus." They designed aircraft, but did not manufacturer them.
**Outsourced Manufacturing**
Manufacturing was handled by separate state-owned factories, often more than one, and was quite disconnected from the design process.
So MiG might design an aircraft in response to a design request or competition from the air force (i.e. the soviet government), and then a number of factories around the USSR would be spooled up to manufacture the parts and assemble them into working aircraft.
**Internal Competition**
The different design bureaus, as @sds commented, competed each other to win design competitions set forth by the government as a form of internal competition. Just like a modern company might have subsidiaries or departments compete internally for work, because it drives efficiency and/or innovation.
**Specialisation**
In addition, the bureaus tended to have their own specialities (fighters or bombers or civil aircraft, etc.), and were often personality driven by the name/s behind them. E.g. Mikoyan was a well respected engineer within the USSR and he headed MiG. He was also Sukhoi's mentor, and the latter eventually left MiG and founded his own design bureau.
**Post-USSR**
In Russia's modernised economy, some of the design bureaus successfully transitioned into corporations. For example, Sukhoi is now a privately-owned company (fully owned by United Aircraft Corporation) which designs and manufactures military and civil aviation aircraft. | Economy was indeed centralized but not absolutely. This applies not only to airplanes but to cars and to many other items. There were usually more than one manufacturer.
Speaking of the airplanes one has to distinguish the plants and design bureaus. There were really many airplane designers, and there was a severe competition between them. The state commission usually selected a model from
several models made by different designers. The winning model went in production on one of the state owned plants. The fight between various design bureaus
was very far from "honest competition". But I suppose that this situation satisfied the authorities: probably they understood that competition is good.
Same situation prevailed in the missile industry and in some other war-related sectors of economy.
Airplane design was a very prestigious occupation, and some design bureaus directors were relatives of Politbureau members (like Mikoyan and Kaganovich) or other people closely affiliated to the power structure (Yakovlev). |
32,732 | Has there ever a period in history when people were nice to each other and not killing each other?
In other words, since humans arrived, have the inhabitants of this planet ever enjoyed ***world peace***?
To answer this, we first have to define *period*. Let's define *period* as a minimum of 50 years. If there are any periods of time without records, we will have to ignore those periods.
Now let's define *not killing each other*. By this, I mean no known battles, wars, or genocides on planet earth. I'm not referring to individual acts of violence.
*As a curious side note, with over 5,000 questions asked on this StackExchange site, this is the first question to ever implement the [peace](/questions/tagged/peace "show questions tagged 'peace'") tag. Well... almost... I just realized that I don't have enough rep to create a new tag, so perhaps a moderator will be kind enough to add it.* | 2016/09/12 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/32732",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/16595/"
] | **Company vs Design Bureau**
It's important to distinguish between a company and a design bureau. Organisations such as MiG (Mikoyan-and-Gurevich Design Bureau), Yakolev (JSC A.S. Yakovlev Design Bureau), Tupolev (OKB-156 or Tupolev Design Bureau) and Sukhoi (OKB-51 / Sukhoi Design Bureau) where, as the names suggest, "design bureaus." They designed aircraft, but did not manufacturer them.
**Outsourced Manufacturing**
Manufacturing was handled by separate state-owned factories, often more than one, and was quite disconnected from the design process.
So MiG might design an aircraft in response to a design request or competition from the air force (i.e. the soviet government), and then a number of factories around the USSR would be spooled up to manufacture the parts and assemble them into working aircraft.
**Internal Competition**
The different design bureaus, as @sds commented, competed each other to win design competitions set forth by the government as a form of internal competition. Just like a modern company might have subsidiaries or departments compete internally for work, because it drives efficiency and/or innovation.
**Specialisation**
In addition, the bureaus tended to have their own specialities (fighters or bombers or civil aircraft, etc.), and were often personality driven by the name/s behind them. E.g. Mikoyan was a well respected engineer within the USSR and he headed MiG. He was also Sukhoi's mentor, and the latter eventually left MiG and founded his own design bureau.
**Post-USSR**
In Russia's modernised economy, some of the design bureaus successfully transitioned into corporations. For example, Sukhoi is now a privately-owned company (fully owned by United Aircraft Corporation) which designs and manufactures military and civil aviation aircraft. | hmm,
The country here is not really important. This happens in USA and other countries that want to support aircraft builders.
From what I remember from MIG / Sukhov / Illushin documentaries, they always competed between each other.
BUT, MIG and SU from 60s until now started to make DIFFERENT types of fighters made for different purposes.
Example could be:
Su-27 - MIG-29
Su-35 - MIG-35
Both are fighters, but SU-35 is a heavy fighter and MIG is light fighter. Both have their own separate purposes.
USSR and Russia support their manufacturers so that those important industries dont die and start selling bicycles like it was in 90s.
Russia right now is 2 in arms sales(27% of world sales) - building high technology products nets a big buck. |
1,266,084 | That has reg expression checks for phone, zip, email.
Comparison checks for email and password.
Bonus: masking and forcing letters and numbers only options.
I would like one that works well with this:
**<http://www.malsup.com/jquery/form/>**
This is a multistage sign-up and would work when step 1 is complete(the form) it would send it to the server (via url serialized) on valid success go to step 2, which is a sliding div system.
**What is the best way to do this, and combine it inside the above mention ajax form submit plugin's "beforeSubmit" option?** | 2009/08/12 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1266084",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/312842/"
] | The best validation plugin is Jorns [here](http://bassistance.de/jquery-plugins/jquery-plugin-validation/). Coupled with the [metadata](http://docs.jquery.com/Plugins/Metadata) plugin it provides a powerful clientside validation framework.
Multipart form demo [here](http://jquery.bassistance.de/validate/demo/multipart/)
Please go and read and view the examples then ask any specific issues that crop up along the way in your solution. | You can try bValidator: <http://code.google.com/p/bvalidator/> |
1,266,084 | That has reg expression checks for phone, zip, email.
Comparison checks for email and password.
Bonus: masking and forcing letters and numbers only options.
I would like one that works well with this:
**<http://www.malsup.com/jquery/form/>**
This is a multistage sign-up and would work when step 1 is complete(the form) it would send it to the server (via url serialized) on valid success go to step 2, which is a sliding div system.
**What is the best way to do this, and combine it inside the above mention ajax form submit plugin's "beforeSubmit" option?** | 2009/08/12 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1266084",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/312842/"
] | The best validation plugin is Jorns [here](http://bassistance.de/jquery-plugins/jquery-plugin-validation/). Coupled with the [metadata](http://docs.jquery.com/Plugins/Metadata) plugin it provides a powerful clientside validation framework.
Multipart form demo [here](http://jquery.bassistance.de/validate/demo/multipart/)
Please go and read and view the examples then ask any specific issues that crop up along the way in your solution. | I want my error messages to float independently of my HTML forms. Here's another validation alternative that looks promising:
<https://github.com/posabsolute/jQuery-Validation-Engine> |
1,266,084 | That has reg expression checks for phone, zip, email.
Comparison checks for email and password.
Bonus: masking and forcing letters and numbers only options.
I would like one that works well with this:
**<http://www.malsup.com/jquery/form/>**
This is a multistage sign-up and would work when step 1 is complete(the form) it would send it to the server (via url serialized) on valid success go to step 2, which is a sliding div system.
**What is the best way to do this, and combine it inside the above mention ajax form submit plugin's "beforeSubmit" option?** | 2009/08/12 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1266084",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/312842/"
] | The best validation plugin is Jorns [here](http://bassistance.de/jquery-plugins/jquery-plugin-validation/). Coupled with the [metadata](http://docs.jquery.com/Plugins/Metadata) plugin it provides a powerful clientside validation framework.
Multipart form demo [here](http://jquery.bassistance.de/validate/demo/multipart/)
Please go and read and view the examples then ask any specific issues that crop up along the way in your solution. | I like jQuery tools validator, it uses html 5 input types, support for server validation and a lot of other resources. <http://flowplayer.org/tools/demos/validator/index.html> |
1,266,084 | That has reg expression checks for phone, zip, email.
Comparison checks for email and password.
Bonus: masking and forcing letters and numbers only options.
I would like one that works well with this:
**<http://www.malsup.com/jquery/form/>**
This is a multistage sign-up and would work when step 1 is complete(the form) it would send it to the server (via url serialized) on valid success go to step 2, which is a sliding div system.
**What is the best way to do this, and combine it inside the above mention ajax form submit plugin's "beforeSubmit" option?** | 2009/08/12 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1266084",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/312842/"
] | You can try bValidator: <http://code.google.com/p/bvalidator/> | I like jQuery tools validator, it uses html 5 input types, support for server validation and a lot of other resources. <http://flowplayer.org/tools/demos/validator/index.html> |
1,266,084 | That has reg expression checks for phone, zip, email.
Comparison checks for email and password.
Bonus: masking and forcing letters and numbers only options.
I would like one that works well with this:
**<http://www.malsup.com/jquery/form/>**
This is a multistage sign-up and would work when step 1 is complete(the form) it would send it to the server (via url serialized) on valid success go to step 2, which is a sliding div system.
**What is the best way to do this, and combine it inside the above mention ajax form submit plugin's "beforeSubmit" option?** | 2009/08/12 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1266084",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/312842/"
] | I want my error messages to float independently of my HTML forms. Here's another validation alternative that looks promising:
<https://github.com/posabsolute/jQuery-Validation-Engine> | I like jQuery tools validator, it uses html 5 input types, support for server validation and a lot of other resources. <http://flowplayer.org/tools/demos/validator/index.html> |
22,029 | There has been a very toxic person to the community of a multiplayer Minecraft server I'm a moderator on (I'll call them Mr Toxic from now on). Apart from using really irritating cheats (the cheats that Mr Toxic used really broke the game for other users) they have caused shitstorms on a multitude of different chats and insulted a lot of people (including staff and players).
Now, they're barred from ever joining our server. But the day after the ban, a new player appeared (let's call them Mr Newbie). However usual it is, the player quickly "developed" an interest in Mr Toxic. They have also exhibited simply too much knowledge for a new player they were posing as.
Yesterday the new player has made a mistake of unconsciously and indirectly confirming they are an alternate account of Mr Toxic (technical details skipped but we're 100% sure). On my first thought, I should ban the new Mr Newbie.
That being said, Mr Newbie is much nicer and is not cheating. I can sense the same style of talking, but different attitude towards others. Now they're an active member of the community. If they were not the same player, I'd have no reason to ban them.
How can I address Mr Newbie/Mr Toxic about this to ensure that they do not misbehave anymore?
Just for the record, we're hosting a community of 20 active players, 20 less active players and about two hundred players in total.
There is also a [question](https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/22030/multiplayer-game-nice-fake-account-of-toxic-player-community) about addressing the community. | 2019/06/11 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/22029",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/24560/"
] | In cases where you have to tell someone things that they probably don't want to hear, these are the principles that I generally try to abide by, and they have served me well.
* Be clear but not unkind. Try not to leave the door open for her to misinterpret the situation.
* Avoid lying or making excessive or elaborate excuses.
* Remember that you are allowed to set and enforce your boundaries!
* You are not required to justify or explain why you don't want sex (although you can give your reasons if you want to).
* Don't try to 'soften the blow' or avoid conflict by allowing her to think it *might* happen between you when you know that is not what you want.
* Let her know your expectations in advance, so she knows she is agreeing to a platonic visit only before she solidifies her plans.
In this case you might want use words like, "I'm happy to have you visit *as a friend*" and "My *guestroom* is always open to you." You may also decide to tell her that while you would greatly enjoy her company, you're seeing someone else now. She does not need to know the details or exact nature of your new relationship unless you wish to tell her-- honesty without oversharing is the goal here.
Avoid getting into situations that send mixed signals. Don't do things that appear to be leading to a possible romantic encounter, like drinking heavily together, cuddling on the couch, etc. If you want to be just friends, keep things on a friendly level and enforce your boundaries firmly but kindly as needed. | I've never been in your position with someone that I previously had a physical relationship with, but I have had the need in the past to make it clear to someone that when they are staying over, sex is not on the table. The way I have done this is to mention the sleeping arrangements when telling them they can stay over. It doesn't need to be elaborate, just a simple
>
> Yeah, I have a spare bed/couch that you can sleep in.
>
>
>
This makes it pretty clear that things will be staying platonic. I've used it a few times and never had sex even brought up once the night happened. |
14,676 | This [question](https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/358641/are-there-any-working-item-duplication-glitches-on-a-minecraft-1-14-4-server-run) asked about how to do item duplication in Minecraft, which on most servers would probably be considered cheating. But is a blanket ban on all exploits in multiplayer games appropriate?
Consider [skiing in Tribes](https://tribes.fandom.com/wiki/Skiing) for example. It was pretty clearly an exploit not intended by the developers, but it became so popular that the sequel was designed around it.
Contrast it with whatever you call [this glitch](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAidBlMoKj0) in TF2, in which a player can hit people with a flamethrower from across the map.
Where is the dividing line between an acceptable exploit and an unacceptable exploit?
Edit: I'm aware of [this question](https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/14674/asking-questions-about-cheating-in-games-that-have-a-multiplayer-setting?cb=1), but I think this is a different issue. That question is asking about what cheats are ok to discuss. The examples given are unquestionably cheating, but may be OK depending on whether the game is competitive multiplayer or not. My question is about how you judge whether or not an exploit is a cheat or just a fun quirk of the game. | 2019/10/29 | [
"https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/14676",
"https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/users/223992/"
] | It seems to me that there are two main factors when it comes to whether a glitch/bug/cheat/exploit/etc is acceptable or not.
1. What is the *counterplay*? If it's just something else that other players can watch out for and reasonably react to, that seems fine. If there's nothing that other players can do about it, or they have to go very out of their way to do so, that's probably not fine.
2. Does it cause *degeneration*? Is it just another tool in the toolbox? Or is it so strong that in order to win you have no choice but to use it because everyone else is?
Of course people are always going to argue over whether trick X is truly uncounterable or degenerative (see [wobbling](https://www.ssbwiki.com/Wobbling) in SSBM). | In my opinion, the question "What is a glitch and what is a cheat?" is not as important as "What sorts of glitches should we support in questions?", but I will give my opinion on both these topics.
What is the line between a glitch and a cheat?
==============================================
Naively, a cheat is something that was added intentionally by the developer, in one way or another. If a developer sat down and said "Alright, so if a player enters , they will have infinite lives", then this is clearly an intentional feature of the game, even though it may be hidden. Other "cheats" may be a reward for completing certain optional tasks.
A glitch is something that should not happen. A very good example for this is the old gravel trick in Minecraft, in which partially submerging yourself in gravel would allow you to see through solid blocks and find caves easily. This feature was clearly not intended, and can thus be considered a glitch.
The trickier question is, when is something a "glitch", and when is something "a very advanced technique"? The skiing example, as noted above, really blurs the line. It's difficult to say, and topic of extensive debate among many speedrun communities. I would argue that defining a clear line when something is a glitch or not is a very philosophical question, which I am not equipped to answer.
Should all cheats and glitches be considered off-topic?
=======================================================
I would say it depends if it negatively affects the enjoyment of others. It's actually a remarkably similar question as to what to do with spoilers for movies or shows, where some hardliners even consider "Wow, that movie was really good" to be a spoiler.
My suggestion is the following: If the execution of a cheat or glitch does not negatively affect the way others can enjoy the game, then it should be allowed. A question like "What are all known cheat codes for GTA: San Andreas?" should not be voted off-topic, as cheating in this game is the sole reason why many people bought it in the first place.
Of course, questions such as "How can I duplicate items on a multiplayer server?" are a gray area. It depends on the people playing there, and if they appreciate item duplication or not. It might interfere with their enjoyment, if one player suddenly has an excessive amount of a very rare item.
Other questions, such as "How can I make an undetectable aimbot?", are blatantly off-topic, as they are bound to be used in a way that negatively affects other players. |
73,895 | Using Vinagre on Ubuntu 11.10, when I RDC into a remote Windows XP machine, I only get a 800x600 resolution on the remote display. I can't increase it on the Windows machine, it's stuck at 800x600. Any way to customise?
If I use Terminal Server Client on Ubuntu instead of Vinagre, I can adjust the res. Any way to fix for Vinagre? | 2011/10/30 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/73895",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/14396/"
] | I couldn't figure it out either. I'm now using remmina based on this post: <http://www.jonathanmoeller.com/screed/?p=3411>
remmina has more (or easier to find) settings, right when you set up the connection.
-Amir | Remmina → Vinagre, if only because it allows different RDP resolutions, and it includes a feature to import `tsclient` config files. |
18,362 | We'd like to log all transactional emails within a customers Salesforce account. I'm looking at things like Mandrill (as marketing is already using Mailchimp) and SendGrid.
Before jumping into this more and using Mandrill simply because we have our foot half in there already, does anyone have any experience with Salesforce compatible email platforms?
We're looking to send emails, log transactions back to Salesforce, and do some fancy reporting. | 2013/10/18 | [
"https://salesforce.stackexchange.com/questions/18362",
"https://salesforce.stackexchange.com",
"https://salesforce.stackexchange.com/users/4155/"
] | There are definitely a myriad of options. I'm not quite as familiar with pricing, but ExactTarget did just get purchased by Salesforce, and provides an AppExchange app to keep track of your send results in Salesforce.
I have worked with Mailchimp and Mandrill with regards to Salesforce. While I think Mailchimp has released an AppExchange product in the last few months, the implementation that I worked on simply used the native webhooks available with Mailchimp and Mandrill, along with a custom REST Resource I wrote, where I retrieved all the email sends and created completed Task records against Contacts and Leads with matching email addresses. While you have to watch out for scale (the webhooks could send enormous amounts of data back if you are sending a ton of data), for a smaller company this is a viable option as it lets you do reporting on those records. | We've been using mandrill in production and have been very happy with it. We use a custom object and webhooks. Works great. Let me know if you need tips on implementing. It took a fair amount of custom apex. |
18,362 | We'd like to log all transactional emails within a customers Salesforce account. I'm looking at things like Mandrill (as marketing is already using Mailchimp) and SendGrid.
Before jumping into this more and using Mandrill simply because we have our foot half in there already, does anyone have any experience with Salesforce compatible email platforms?
We're looking to send emails, log transactions back to Salesforce, and do some fancy reporting. | 2013/10/18 | [
"https://salesforce.stackexchange.com/questions/18362",
"https://salesforce.stackexchange.com",
"https://salesforce.stackexchange.com/users/4155/"
] | There are definitely a myriad of options. I'm not quite as familiar with pricing, but ExactTarget did just get purchased by Salesforce, and provides an AppExchange app to keep track of your send results in Salesforce.
I have worked with Mailchimp and Mandrill with regards to Salesforce. While I think Mailchimp has released an AppExchange product in the last few months, the implementation that I worked on simply used the native webhooks available with Mailchimp and Mandrill, along with a custom REST Resource I wrote, where I retrieved all the email sends and created completed Task records against Contacts and Leads with matching email addresses. While you have to watch out for scale (the webhooks could send enormous amounts of data back if you are sending a ton of data), for a smaller company this is a viable option as it lets you do reporting on those records. | Since no one has yet weighed in with a sendgrid opinion, I thought I'd throw in my 2c.
There is already a sendgrid integration package that you can purchase called mass mailer. [MassMailer AppExchange Link](https://appexchange.salesforce.com/listingDetail?listingId=a0N30000005uxj5EAA)
This makes it pretty trivial to use sendgrid, and with sendgrid there's no warming or reputation building as there is with mandril. |
18,362 | We'd like to log all transactional emails within a customers Salesforce account. I'm looking at things like Mandrill (as marketing is already using Mailchimp) and SendGrid.
Before jumping into this more and using Mandrill simply because we have our foot half in there already, does anyone have any experience with Salesforce compatible email platforms?
We're looking to send emails, log transactions back to Salesforce, and do some fancy reporting. | 2013/10/18 | [
"https://salesforce.stackexchange.com/questions/18362",
"https://salesforce.stackexchange.com",
"https://salesforce.stackexchange.com/users/4155/"
] | Since no one has yet weighed in with a sendgrid opinion, I thought I'd throw in my 2c.
There is already a sendgrid integration package that you can purchase called mass mailer. [MassMailer AppExchange Link](https://appexchange.salesforce.com/listingDetail?listingId=a0N30000005uxj5EAA)
This makes it pretty trivial to use sendgrid, and with sendgrid there's no warming or reputation building as there is with mandril. | We've been using mandrill in production and have been very happy with it. We use a custom object and webhooks. Works great. Let me know if you need tips on implementing. It took a fair amount of custom apex. |
42,516 | I have a quest that requires me to collect 10 "Dwarven Cogs". However, I've yet to find such a thing in my adventures.
To be clear, I've covered a good bit of territory here already. I've got over 70 hours of gameplay logged already, am now at level 28, and have discovered countless dozens of locations all over the map. For anything I could generally be expected to collect ten of, I would imagine I'd have encountered a few already.
Now, I have run into some "Dwemer" machinery which occasionally contains a "Dwemer Cog". In other conversations and writing, it also seems that the terms "Dwarven" and "Dwemer" are used almost interchangeably. Usually though, when calling for specific items, I expect quests to use the correct and proper label in its requirements. (Unless of course, figuring out what the item is is part of the quest.)
Are these "Dwemer Cogs" the "Dwarven Cogs" I should be looking for, or is there something else out there I haven't encountered yet? | 2011/12/19 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/42516",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/6274/"
] | In The Elder Scrolls franchise, Dwarves are an extinct sub-race of elves (the species of which is collectively known as "mer").
So "Dwarf" is to "Dwemer" just the same as "Dark Elf" is to "Dunmer" or "Wood Elf" is to "Bosmer".
So if someone told you to collect "Dwarven Cogs", they really meant for you to collect "Dwemer Cogs", found almost exclusively in the assorted Dwarven ruins.
I assume you're doing [Arniel's Endeavor](http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Arniel%27s_Endeavor_%28A%29)? UESP says you're looking for Dwemer Cogs, despite the quest text.
The biggest issue of course being:
>
> Currently the Quest tracker will not track it when you pick up a Dwemer Cog, however they still count for the quest, so you must keep count of them yourself.
>
>
> | If you are talking about the quest from [Arniel Gane](http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Arniel%27s_Endeavor_%28A%29), yes Dwarven Cogs are Dwemer Cogs. |
39,249 | The opposite of a budget deficit is a budget surplus
But what is the opposite of public debt?
Instead of govt/state being in debt, having the government have extra money to keep or to lend it to banks or companies.
Say the extra money are kept Instead of being lent. What is the name of such a surplus?
It would be the sum of the budget surplus for the curent year and all the years before. | 2020/08/17 | [
"https://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/39249",
"https://economics.stackexchange.com",
"https://economics.stackexchange.com/users/5161/"
] | Such government would be called net lender. However, note that for a country to be net lender it is not required that debt is zero, only that the amount it is lending is higher than its liabilities (debt). A country can chose to have some level of debt even if it is not necessary for it to have it because its revenues are higher than expenses. An example of net lender would be Norway (see [here)](https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/national-accounts-at-a-glance-2014_na_glance-2014-en). | The opposite of liabiliteis, i.e. debt and own equity, is assets. The net of outstanding financial assets and liabilities is by definition zero as one party's financial asset is by definition the counterparty's debt. The net of libilities and assets in a balance sheet is also by definition zero. A government can keep assets for instance in a sovereign wealth fund. One could here mention Norway which has collected oil revenue in a govenment owned wealth fund and which by the same time runs a very small public debt.
The opposite of public debt would be public assets in so far we don't expect it to be any equity in the public balances. |
389,549 | I've got an older iMac running macOs Mojave. It is terribly slow and I am interested to see if we can improve the performance. Can you recommend steps to consider to improve the performance?
The performance issues I see impact the operating system and all applications. It's not specific to a single app.
When viewing the About modal:
* MacOS Mojave Version 10.14.6 (18G103)
* iMac 27-inch, Late 2012
* Processor: 3.2 Ghz Intel Core i5
* Memory: 8 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
* Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX 1GB
Looking at the System Report, I see:
* Status on Memory Slots is OK. Has 2 4GB 1600 DDR3 cards.
* Hard Drive: I have about 500GB of available storage on 1TB hard drive
Other than these basic stats, I'm not sure what would be relevant to help diagnose the performance issues on this machine. What information could I provide to help determine the issue? Thank you. | 2020/04/26 | [
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/389549",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/users/373153/"
] | The only two things you can realistically do are change the HD to an SSD & upgrade the RAM.
Some iMacs have GPUs that can be upgraded [slightly] but that's not really going to gain you much.
A 1TB SSD can be bought these days for the price your 1TB HD would have cost back then, approx $£€ 100.
According to [Everymac](https://everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/specs/imac-core-i5-2.9-27-inch-aluminum-late-2012-specs.html) that model can take 32GB RAM. I'd recommend at least 16GB these days.
The SSD alone will put some spring back in its step. The RAM will let it breathe a bit better. | There are basically two things you can do:
* Get more RAM. There are two free slots, so adding 2x4 GB is easy and having 16 GB instead of 8 GB will make a difference
* [Replace the drive](https://everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/imac-aluminum-tapered-edge-faq/how-to-upgrade-imac-hard-drive-aluminum-2012-2013.html) with an SSD
I have a late 2012 Mac mini as my main machine, with 16 GB and a Fusion drive. Definitively not the fastest machine but useable, even with big RAW files etc. |
389,549 | I've got an older iMac running macOs Mojave. It is terribly slow and I am interested to see if we can improve the performance. Can you recommend steps to consider to improve the performance?
The performance issues I see impact the operating system and all applications. It's not specific to a single app.
When viewing the About modal:
* MacOS Mojave Version 10.14.6 (18G103)
* iMac 27-inch, Late 2012
* Processor: 3.2 Ghz Intel Core i5
* Memory: 8 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
* Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX 1GB
Looking at the System Report, I see:
* Status on Memory Slots is OK. Has 2 4GB 1600 DDR3 cards.
* Hard Drive: I have about 500GB of available storage on 1TB hard drive
Other than these basic stats, I'm not sure what would be relevant to help diagnose the performance issues on this machine. What information could I provide to help determine the issue? Thank you. | 2020/04/26 | [
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/389549",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/users/373153/"
] | The only two things you can realistically do are change the HD to an SSD & upgrade the RAM.
Some iMacs have GPUs that can be upgraded [slightly] but that's not really going to gain you much.
A 1TB SSD can be bought these days for the price your 1TB HD would have cost back then, approx $£€ 100.
According to [Everymac](https://everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/specs/imac-core-i5-2.9-27-inch-aluminum-late-2012-specs.html) that model can take 32GB RAM. I'd recommend at least 16GB these days.
The SSD alone will put some spring back in its step. The RAM will let it breathe a bit better. | 1. Replace the hard drive with an SSD. I recommend an SSD of at least 1 TB again. Not sure about if this is possible with your iMac either but I had my original 1 TB drive left inside my mid-2011 27” iMac. I am now happily using both drives. My iMac boots from the SSD which has the OS and the programs while my pics, videos and music are on the original drive. If keeping the original drive inside the computer is not possible, you can (have it) put it inside a proper enclosure and use it as an external drive.
2. Have the RAM increased to at least 16 GB and more if you can afford it.
Each of these two alone should make a big difference and together they should make you feel like you got a brand new computer. Plan ahead well about what to do, especially when adding / replacing the hard drive, and, if you are not already doing so, backup with Time Machine before doing or getting done either. |
389,549 | I've got an older iMac running macOs Mojave. It is terribly slow and I am interested to see if we can improve the performance. Can you recommend steps to consider to improve the performance?
The performance issues I see impact the operating system and all applications. It's not specific to a single app.
When viewing the About modal:
* MacOS Mojave Version 10.14.6 (18G103)
* iMac 27-inch, Late 2012
* Processor: 3.2 Ghz Intel Core i5
* Memory: 8 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
* Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX 1GB
Looking at the System Report, I see:
* Status on Memory Slots is OK. Has 2 4GB 1600 DDR3 cards.
* Hard Drive: I have about 500GB of available storage on 1TB hard drive
Other than these basic stats, I'm not sure what would be relevant to help diagnose the performance issues on this machine. What information could I provide to help determine the issue? Thank you. | 2020/04/26 | [
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/389549",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/users/373153/"
] | There are basically two things you can do:
* Get more RAM. There are two free slots, so adding 2x4 GB is easy and having 16 GB instead of 8 GB will make a difference
* [Replace the drive](https://everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/imac-aluminum-tapered-edge-faq/how-to-upgrade-imac-hard-drive-aluminum-2012-2013.html) with an SSD
I have a late 2012 Mac mini as my main machine, with 16 GB and a Fusion drive. Definitively not the fastest machine but useable, even with big RAW files etc. | 1. Replace the hard drive with an SSD. I recommend an SSD of at least 1 TB again. Not sure about if this is possible with your iMac either but I had my original 1 TB drive left inside my mid-2011 27” iMac. I am now happily using both drives. My iMac boots from the SSD which has the OS and the programs while my pics, videos and music are on the original drive. If keeping the original drive inside the computer is not possible, you can (have it) put it inside a proper enclosure and use it as an external drive.
2. Have the RAM increased to at least 16 GB and more if you can afford it.
Each of these two alone should make a big difference and together they should make you feel like you got a brand new computer. Plan ahead well about what to do, especially when adding / replacing the hard drive, and, if you are not already doing so, backup with Time Machine before doing or getting done either. |
200,964 | I have been going everywhere for some tips on Pokemon ORAS and everyone is saying that Pokemon GTS is unsafe.
I want to know why because I've been thinking of putting up Shiny Pokemon, and I don't want anything to happen to them (except a person taking the shiny and giving me a good Pokemon!) | 2015/01/08 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/200964",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/99025/"
] | GTS is **very** simplistic in how you can request Pokemon, the only things that you can specifically restrict are:
* Pokemon Gender (if the Pokemon you are requesting has one)
* Pokemon Level (you can request that a Pokemon be within a certain 10-level range, but not 'Levels > 50' or 'Level 100 only' etc.
Thus stuff like Individual Values (IVs), Natures, Abilities, whether it has the 6th-Generation Pentagon and Shiny values cannot be filtered on. You can use the description field to request these specifically, however it can be ignored by the trader. There is no 'take-backsies', and no recourse should someone trade you something you don't want.
In summary, what this means is that -should you put a Pokemon up on GTS- you risk getting traded a dud for your hard-earned Pokemon.
---
So what can you do?
* **Only trade rare Pokemon for rare Pokemon** - Request legendaries or failing that, higher leveled Pokemon. Generally speaking, if a Pokemon is level 91-100, then the trader has had to put effort into training them (cheating notwithstanding), and thus you're more guaranteed to get a better Pokemon. It's still not a guarantee though.
* **Only trade easy Pokemon for easy Pokemon** - have a 4IV Protean Froakie, but need a Gale Wings Talonflame for your own breeding efforts? Offer away! You might not get what you want first try, but if you don't, no biggie, there's plenty more where that came from!
Of course, when trading shinies, I would recommend:
* **Avoid GTS Entirely** - Join Trading groups online, you can find them on most forums, on Reddit, Facebook and other social platforms. Specifically request what you want, and what you have to offer in return. The best part of this is - the trading is manual, so if you don't like what someone is offering, don't accept and walk away (or if the other person gets rude, report them because that sort of behavior is wrong). | Gts trading is not bad you cannot get cheated. If you are trying to get Mew you cannot trade it but it is on the game. If you wanted to trade a higher leveled shiny Pokemon put the setting to 91 or higher because some people will give it to you within like 10 minutes or so.
I traded my groudon level 48 for a level 98 dialga so I would recommend using gts trading hope that helped. :) |
6,403,813 | What are the differences between NowJS and Pusher? | 2011/06/19 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/6403813",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/435951/"
] | NowJS is currently Node.js-only, even though you can use it with other platforms like Rails with simple requests between the two server stacks.
Pusher can be used on a variety of platforms.
NowJS is free, while Pusher is not.
Pusher is a cloud service, where they host the servers for you. NowJS, and their enterprise offering NowCluster, is not a cloud service, allowing you to host and manage servers on private & public clouds like AWS. The advantage of a cloud service is that it requires no managing of servers. The disadvantage of a cloud service is that it is a single point-of-failure residing with a 3rd party. The former makes the lives of individual developers easier, while the latter fits with the needs of enterprises.
To make the lives of individual developers and startups easier, NowJS may soon be available on various platforms as a service like Heroku and CloudFoundry and others. NowJS can already be easily deployed some of the Node.js Platform-as-a-Service providers such as Nodester, providing the ease-of-use benefits of a PaaS. | There are naturally lots of differences, but mainly:
Pusher is a framework that can be used with several platforms (Java, Python, PHP, Ruby, and lots more) and uses a centralized server at pusher.com with your account that handles the Comet-technology stack.
NowJS is all node and runs on your own server. |
6,403,813 | What are the differences between NowJS and Pusher? | 2011/06/19 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/6403813",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/435951/"
] | As an addendum, here's RMSN - a drop in replacement for Pusher that I've written using NowJS.
<https://github.com/leppert/RMSN> | There are naturally lots of differences, but mainly:
Pusher is a framework that can be used with several platforms (Java, Python, PHP, Ruby, and lots more) and uses a centralized server at pusher.com with your account that handles the Comet-technology stack.
NowJS is all node and runs on your own server. |
6,403,813 | What are the differences between NowJS and Pusher? | 2011/06/19 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/6403813",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/435951/"
] | NowJS is currently Node.js-only, even though you can use it with other platforms like Rails with simple requests between the two server stacks.
Pusher can be used on a variety of platforms.
NowJS is free, while Pusher is not.
Pusher is a cloud service, where they host the servers for you. NowJS, and their enterprise offering NowCluster, is not a cloud service, allowing you to host and manage servers on private & public clouds like AWS. The advantage of a cloud service is that it requires no managing of servers. The disadvantage of a cloud service is that it is a single point-of-failure residing with a 3rd party. The former makes the lives of individual developers easier, while the latter fits with the needs of enterprises.
To make the lives of individual developers and startups easier, NowJS may soon be available on various platforms as a service like Heroku and CloudFoundry and others. NowJS can already be easily deployed some of the Node.js Platform-as-a-Service providers such as Nodester, providing the ease-of-use benefits of a PaaS. | As an addendum, here's RMSN - a drop in replacement for Pusher that I've written using NowJS.
<https://github.com/leppert/RMSN> |
410,828 | I'm hoping to restore a backup from SQL Server 2008 into a Sql Server 2005 instance. Is there a way to have Sql 2008 back up in a format that 2005 will understand? | 2012/07/24 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/410828",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/66848/"
] | Short answer:
No
--
You cannot restore to a lower major version of SQL Server.
You can however [Generate Scripts](http://blog.sqlauthority.com/2009/07/29/sql-server-2008-copy-database-with-data-generate-t-sql-for-inserting-data-from-one-table-to-another-table/) from your database for SQL Server 2005, just choose to include data in the wizard, and then you'll just need to rebuild indices and such, once you've run the scripts on your 2005 instance | No, the formats are incompatible. In order to go backward you will need to script out your database and create it via script in the older version.
Note that you could run into incompatabilities due to new features and datatypes in SQL 2008 that weren't available in 2005. |
410,828 | I'm hoping to restore a backup from SQL Server 2008 into a Sql Server 2005 instance. Is there a way to have Sql 2008 back up in a format that 2005 will understand? | 2012/07/24 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/410828",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/66848/"
] | No, the formats are incompatible. In order to go backward you will need to script out your database and create it via script in the older version.
Note that you could run into incompatabilities due to new features and datatypes in SQL 2008 that weren't available in 2005. | You can use a tool like Talend to migrate your tables. It has a GUI interface and can work with SQL Server 2008/2005/2000 and is OSS/Free
<http://www.talend.com> |
410,828 | I'm hoping to restore a backup from SQL Server 2008 into a Sql Server 2005 instance. Is there a way to have Sql 2008 back up in a format that 2005 will understand? | 2012/07/24 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/410828",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/66848/"
] | Short answer:
No
--
You cannot restore to a lower major version of SQL Server.
You can however [Generate Scripts](http://blog.sqlauthority.com/2009/07/29/sql-server-2008-copy-database-with-data-generate-t-sql-for-inserting-data-from-one-table-to-another-table/) from your database for SQL Server 2005, just choose to include data in the wizard, and then you'll just need to rebuild indices and such, once you've run the scripts on your 2005 instance | You can use a tool like Talend to migrate your tables. It has a GUI interface and can work with SQL Server 2008/2005/2000 and is OSS/Free
<http://www.talend.com> |
129,968 | My coworker is ruining what's otherwise a great job. I love all my other coworkers and the benefits are great, but this guy is incredibly offensive and rude. Here's some highlights:
* He'll make comments about my body, like saying that he likes that my shirt is low-cut or that I have "nice forearms".
* He tries to start political arguments. Today I was talking to something else in the hallway about dogs and he walked up and said "That reminds me of how I called into a radio show yesterday to argue with this dumb republican. You're not one, are you?"
* He criticizes every thing I do or own if it's not something he's into or owns: "Why do you go to the gym? You know it's bad for you." "What are your plans this weekend? Why do you like going out for a drink? You seem like an alcoholic."
* He chews while talking and spits food on me all the time. Today it was when I had my headphones on and didn't know he was talking to me.
* He comes into meetings I'm having with someone else about work projects to tell me that he watched some TV show yesterday and it was good.
I've tried telling him that I don't like each of these individual things, but there's always something else he does. If this was outside of work I'd say something like "shut the fuck up" but obviously that's unprofessional here. What are some ways I can deal with this? | 2019/02/22 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/129968",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | Every time he starts talking to you in a way that is offensive, shut him down.
If he makes a comment about your body or clothes: "Please don't comment on my body."
If he starts talking politics: "I would rather not hear political talk at work, so please stop."
If he starts putting down people based on race: "Please don't make racist comments around me."
Don't argue or try to explain your reasoning. If he says the comment isn't racist or tries to explain why what he said or did wasn't offensive, just walk away.
Annoying comments about TV shows and possessions can be ignored, but when he comments on your body or makes racist comments, that's veering into protected territory. If he doesn't stop those, you have a responsibility to go to your manager or HR. (And yes, even if you're a guy, it can still be considered sexual harassment for him to comment on your body.)
**Edit:** Considering the comments about the person possibly being on the spectrum of autism - Someone with autism is perfectly capable of playing by the same behavioral rules as everyone else, they just need those rules more explicitly defined. So when shutting down inappropriate conversations, you don't need to unkind, but you can still shut them down.
Some conversations are just ones that annoy you, and there you are better off making it about you, not them: "Hey, I'm working with Jose right now, so please can you take your TV conversation elsewhere so I can concentrate?." "Please, can you eat elsewhere - it bothers me when you eat that closely to me." | Is your coworker autistic? If so, does HR know?
If so, then you need to tread lightly, as you could get an ADA action against you if you are not careful.
If you tell him to not do a specific thing, and he stops, then does something else similar, then he's doing **EXACTLY** what you are telling him.
Full disclosure, I am autistic and have a similar problem to your coworker, what works and has worked with me is being explicit.
If he's stopped doing the things that you've told him to stop, the best way to address it is to lay out clear guidelines.
>
> Bob, we've had discussions before, let me be clear this time. Not only do I want you to stop commenting on my shirts and forearms, I do not want you commenting on my appearance at all.
>
>
>
You can take it a step further.
>
> Bob, I don't want to hear about your politics, and I don't care to hear any criticisms about anything not work related.
>
>
>
If he does indeed have autism, things that may seem as common sense to you are things that need to be spelled out to him.
When and if you do so, be clear, vehement, concise, and don't get into a debate with him.
If he starts to make an argument, just say.
>
> Bob, I've already made this clear to you and I am not going to discuss this further. Stop these behaviors, I don't care if **YOU** see nothing wrong with them, they are bothering **ME** and that is not going to change. Thank you.
>
>
>
Now, that might sound harsh, but it's what MANY autistics need to hear if you're going to correct behavior. We tend to think yes/no, black/white with little nuance. We don't catch subtle hints, we don't catch obvious hints. Anything less subtle than an airhorn just may escape our notice. The good thing is that we tend to **NOT** take these seemingly harsh pronouncements as rude.
Good luck |
129,968 | My coworker is ruining what's otherwise a great job. I love all my other coworkers and the benefits are great, but this guy is incredibly offensive and rude. Here's some highlights:
* He'll make comments about my body, like saying that he likes that my shirt is low-cut or that I have "nice forearms".
* He tries to start political arguments. Today I was talking to something else in the hallway about dogs and he walked up and said "That reminds me of how I called into a radio show yesterday to argue with this dumb republican. You're not one, are you?"
* He criticizes every thing I do or own if it's not something he's into or owns: "Why do you go to the gym? You know it's bad for you." "What are your plans this weekend? Why do you like going out for a drink? You seem like an alcoholic."
* He chews while talking and spits food on me all the time. Today it was when I had my headphones on and didn't know he was talking to me.
* He comes into meetings I'm having with someone else about work projects to tell me that he watched some TV show yesterday and it was good.
I've tried telling him that I don't like each of these individual things, but there's always something else he does. If this was outside of work I'd say something like "shut the fuck up" but obviously that's unprofessional here. What are some ways I can deal with this? | 2019/02/22 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/129968",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | Every time he starts talking to you in a way that is offensive, shut him down.
If he makes a comment about your body or clothes: "Please don't comment on my body."
If he starts talking politics: "I would rather not hear political talk at work, so please stop."
If he starts putting down people based on race: "Please don't make racist comments around me."
Don't argue or try to explain your reasoning. If he says the comment isn't racist or tries to explain why what he said or did wasn't offensive, just walk away.
Annoying comments about TV shows and possessions can be ignored, but when he comments on your body or makes racist comments, that's veering into protected territory. If he doesn't stop those, you have a responsibility to go to your manager or HR. (And yes, even if you're a guy, it can still be considered sexual harassment for him to comment on your body.)
**Edit:** Considering the comments about the person possibly being on the spectrum of autism - Someone with autism is perfectly capable of playing by the same behavioral rules as everyone else, they just need those rules more explicitly defined. So when shutting down inappropriate conversations, you don't need to unkind, but you can still shut them down.
Some conversations are just ones that annoy you, and there you are better off making it about you, not them: "Hey, I'm working with Jose right now, so please can you take your TV conversation elsewhere so I can concentrate?." "Please, can you eat elsewhere - it bothers me when you eat that closely to me." | Like all the above answers have said, yes, you should strictly tell him to stop making personal comments about you, you don't like him interrupting in meetings and when he makes racist comments.
Any sane person will understand and will respect your preferences and opinion. If the behaviour still continues it is a red flag. It's high time you ask your boss to intervene. |
6,868 | I was reading some clickbait "cleaning hacks" article, and it mentioned cleaning a mattress by using vodka in a spray bottle, then leaving it to air dry.
Is this actually effective? If so, I'd rather use something with even more alcohol, like everclear (190 proof).
Are there any other more effective ways to clean a mattress? | 2015/05/05 | [
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/questions/6868",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/users/4785/"
] | The idea of using alcohol is that the alcohol will evaporate quickly. So the more alcohol content will help but you need careful about the smell.
This might help
[Wiki - Clean a Mattress](http://www.wikihow.com/Clean-a-Mattress) | If you have a steam cleaner (for cleaning bathrooms/ovens etc) they are ideal for also cleaning a mattress as long as you can air it out afterwards to allow it to dry.
Simply move it over the surface of the mattress, the steam will kill any organics within the mattress and the water will cause dirt to wash away/lift out.
Once done, the best way to dry it is to leave it outside in the sunshine. The UV rays are also antibacteria. |
6,868 | I was reading some clickbait "cleaning hacks" article, and it mentioned cleaning a mattress by using vodka in a spray bottle, then leaving it to air dry.
Is this actually effective? If so, I'd rather use something with even more alcohol, like everclear (190 proof).
Are there any other more effective ways to clean a mattress? | 2015/05/05 | [
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/questions/6868",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com",
"https://lifehacks.stackexchange.com/users/4785/"
] | Alcohol solutions are used for removal of living tissue and oils. The ideal blend is 70% alcohol to 30% water. The alcohol damages the cell wall, and the water causes the living cell to rupture.
The best solution is prevention, or a sacrificial top to the mattress. A separate layer of high density foam at the top of the mattress is ideal. This can be aired out every so often and the cover laundered. | If you have a steam cleaner (for cleaning bathrooms/ovens etc) they are ideal for also cleaning a mattress as long as you can air it out afterwards to allow it to dry.
Simply move it over the surface of the mattress, the steam will kill any organics within the mattress and the water will cause dirt to wash away/lift out.
Once done, the best way to dry it is to leave it outside in the sunshine. The UV rays are also antibacteria. |
13,227 | In 2012, when the first incarnation of Astronomy SE closed, the community at Physics SE felt compelled to give a home to astronomy questions and overwhelmingly [voted](https://physics.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1197/75633) to expand the scope of the site.
Not long after, however, Astronomy SE [was "reopened"](https://physics.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5327/75633), and is still [alive](https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/) and well, even if still in beta.
A degree of overlap in scope between the two sites is completely unproblematic, of course, but I believe there are questions on the more technical side of astronomy that, when there is an SE especially [geared towards them](https://astronomy.meta.stackexchange.com/a/101), should be redirected there, to the benefit of both communities (and of the OP).
**Question**: Is it time to rethink that decision a bit, and make off topic here questions about technical astronomical topics such as observation and equipment?
Example: [What light pollution levels are required to see the Milky Way?](https://physics.stackexchange.com/q/594633/75633), which a couple of users felt didn't quite belong to Physics SE and voted to close - only to be reminded by [ACuriousMind](https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/50583) that, as it stands, the question is actually fully on topic.
I **propose** the answer is *Yes*, see my answer bellow for details. | 2020/11/24 | [
"https://physics.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/13227",
"https://physics.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.meta.stackexchange.com/users/75633/"
] | Both of the existing answers seem to be based on a mischaracterization of how migration and off-topic closures are related, particularly with things like
>
> I would like to see Astronomy SE added to the list of options to migrate a question to, but not to make questions like this completely off-topic here. [...] I don't think having astronomy off-topic helps users.
>
>
>
>
> I would prefer to migrate them rather than say they were off-topic.
>
>
>
Migration from one site to another requires two things:
1. the question is likely on-topic at the target site
2. the question is off-topic where it was posted.
We can't say "all of these questions should be migrated, but they're still on-topic here". Migration is, instead, a way of saying "this question doesn't fit here, but fortunately there's a separate site that can take it". This philosophy has informed a large number of decisions thus far, and it's baked into how the closure dialog is structured (with migration as an option under off-topic).
So, what options do we have?
* We can decide to keep the status quo as it is: astronomy questions are on-topic here. Posters can be pointed to astro.se as a potential better home for their questions, but closure is not appropriate.
* Alternatively, we can decide that a subset of astronomy questions (say, questions about amateur observational astronomy) are off-topic here and should be closed as off-topic ("I'm voting to close this question because it is not about physics"), and consistently flag closed astronomy questions so that moderators can migrate them.
What we cannot do, however, is set up a direct migration pathway to astro.se, because it is still in beta. I find this faintly ridiculous, given how long astro.se has been running (and therefore how little stock is left in arguments like "it would skew their site definition), but [this is how things have stood for some time](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/258593/do-the-new-graduation-policies-have-any-effect-on-migrations-to-beta-sites/) and [SE doesn't seem to be in a rush to update things](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/354124/as-of-2020-is-it-possible-to-set-up-migration-paths-to-beta-sites).
So, there is definitely a good call to make a choice as a community, between the two options above (and to set the scope for the latter), but the existing proposals don't really reflect the current reality, unfortunately. | >
> Is it time to rethink that decision a bit, and make off topic here questions about technical astronomical topics such as observation and equipment?
>
>
>
I would like to see Astronomy SE added to the list of options to migrate a question to, but not to make questions like this completely off-topic here.
This allows the option to either "close" the question by moving it to Astronomy SE or to keep the question alive on Physics SE. This makes it easy to migrate the questions without needing to make a hard and fast rule about what is Astronomy SE and what is Physics SE territories.
I don't think having astronomy off-topic helps users. It will most likely arise with new users and having your question closed and being told to do it all over again on a different SE just puts off new users. Let's help them by helping ourselves easily vote to move questions to the best site.
I know in the past the argument is that this does not arise very often. OK, but it's not a huge change to implement and maybe it will be used more often if we do have the option.
I think we also need to consider that maybe sometimes answers from the Astronomy SE will be more specific and cover more than we do here. Also the rules on Astronomy SE are a little different - there is less of an issue with history related questions and homework closing is no an official reason to close on Astronomy SE. So maybe a question we won't deal with well here could fair better on Astronomy SE.
EDIT :
In view of Emilio Pisanty's very helpful post I would amend my preference to leaving the status quo. No off-topic bans for subsets of astronomy questions and we just suggest the user consider the Astronomy SE site as a better fit if we think that way.
I would still prefer we could migrate directly to Astronomy SE but as Emilio points out it is not possible as it's a beta site, we can only hope SE move it to full status and make the other option viable. |
13,227 | In 2012, when the first incarnation of Astronomy SE closed, the community at Physics SE felt compelled to give a home to astronomy questions and overwhelmingly [voted](https://physics.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1197/75633) to expand the scope of the site.
Not long after, however, Astronomy SE [was "reopened"](https://physics.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5327/75633), and is still [alive](https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/) and well, even if still in beta.
A degree of overlap in scope between the two sites is completely unproblematic, of course, but I believe there are questions on the more technical side of astronomy that, when there is an SE especially [geared towards them](https://astronomy.meta.stackexchange.com/a/101), should be redirected there, to the benefit of both communities (and of the OP).
**Question**: Is it time to rethink that decision a bit, and make off topic here questions about technical astronomical topics such as observation and equipment?
Example: [What light pollution levels are required to see the Milky Way?](https://physics.stackexchange.com/q/594633/75633), which a couple of users felt didn't quite belong to Physics SE and voted to close - only to be reminded by [ACuriousMind](https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/50583) that, as it stands, the question is actually fully on topic.
I **propose** the answer is *Yes*, see my answer bellow for details. | 2020/11/24 | [
"https://physics.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/13227",
"https://physics.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.meta.stackexchange.com/users/75633/"
] | Both of the existing answers seem to be based on a mischaracterization of how migration and off-topic closures are related, particularly with things like
>
> I would like to see Astronomy SE added to the list of options to migrate a question to, but not to make questions like this completely off-topic here. [...] I don't think having astronomy off-topic helps users.
>
>
>
>
> I would prefer to migrate them rather than say they were off-topic.
>
>
>
Migration from one site to another requires two things:
1. the question is likely on-topic at the target site
2. the question is off-topic where it was posted.
We can't say "all of these questions should be migrated, but they're still on-topic here". Migration is, instead, a way of saying "this question doesn't fit here, but fortunately there's a separate site that can take it". This philosophy has informed a large number of decisions thus far, and it's baked into how the closure dialog is structured (with migration as an option under off-topic).
So, what options do we have?
* We can decide to keep the status quo as it is: astronomy questions are on-topic here. Posters can be pointed to astro.se as a potential better home for their questions, but closure is not appropriate.
* Alternatively, we can decide that a subset of astronomy questions (say, questions about amateur observational astronomy) are off-topic here and should be closed as off-topic ("I'm voting to close this question because it is not about physics"), and consistently flag closed astronomy questions so that moderators can migrate them.
What we cannot do, however, is set up a direct migration pathway to astro.se, because it is still in beta. I find this faintly ridiculous, given how long astro.se has been running (and therefore how little stock is left in arguments like "it would skew their site definition), but [this is how things have stood for some time](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/258593/do-the-new-graduation-policies-have-any-effect-on-migrations-to-beta-sites/) and [SE doesn't seem to be in a rush to update things](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/354124/as-of-2020-is-it-possible-to-set-up-migration-paths-to-beta-sites).
So, there is definitely a good call to make a choice as a community, between the two options above (and to set the scope for the latter), but the existing proposals don't really reflect the current reality, unfortunately. | Yes, I think it is. But I would prefer to migrate them rather than say they were off-topic.
I think there is a reasonably clear distinction between questions about astrophysics and questions about astronomy.
I do agree that questions about astronomy would be better to migrate to Astronomy SE.
Maybe the distinction here is to ask yourself, where would I go and look for the answer to this question - would I look on Astronomy SE or Physics SE?
For most professional astrophysicists/astronomers, they would appreciate the difference and head to the appropriate site, but if they didn't find it there then they would head to the other.
For the non-professionals and general public, the distinction is not that obvious - but they would tend to go to Astronomy SE first for anything "astro-related", and this would be especially true for astronomy questions (as opposed to astrophysics). In other words, an astronomy question asked on Physics SE, especially one which is about amateur observing or the night sky, is in danger of being lost to its likely audience.
My solution would be to migrate anything that you couldn't tag as astrophysics, cosmology or as some branch of experimental physics. And yes, I know there will be grey areas - but the question cited in this post is not an example. |
7,378 | I am underweight and only able to do 3 pushups at best. I am wondering what I should focus on: getting stronger or gaining weight? | 2012/07/20 | [
"https://fitness.stackexchange.com/questions/7378",
"https://fitness.stackexchange.com",
"https://fitness.stackexchange.com/users/3892/"
] | Focus on getting stronger.
You may also gain weight (if you're underweight), but it will just happen naturally when you lift weights and feed yourself enough to support your strength gains. | Well by gaining weight and not strength essentially means you'll be gaining fat???!! Meaning you may not be able to do those 3 press ups at all.
Focus on strength - check out my answer on a previous question:
[Is this program good to achieve functional strength and fitness?](https://fitness.stackexchange.com/questions/7059/is-this-program-good-to-achieve-functional-strength-and-fitness/7089#7089)
Train simple and hard, eat and rest! Good luck |
7,378 | I am underweight and only able to do 3 pushups at best. I am wondering what I should focus on: getting stronger or gaining weight? | 2012/07/20 | [
"https://fitness.stackexchange.com/questions/7378",
"https://fitness.stackexchange.com",
"https://fitness.stackexchange.com/users/3892/"
] | I think this also depends on your age. But putting that aside you should treat yourself to whatever you can get your hands on and eat the motherload out of it. Then get yourself in the weight room, decrease the cardio to a minimum, and hit some solid weights. Don't worry about any strict programming in training, merely focus on doing something. After the body goes through the adaptation process you can look into certain workouts posted in t-nation or even bodybuilding.com. Any of those will work.
As for diet add olive oil to everything, have protein shakes like no tomorrow, try to drink a half of gallon a milk a day, eat eggs like their your girlfriend. After you get a good increase of quality protein meals in your system, have hit the weight room 3-4 times a week, diminished cardio then look into refining your structure. It will come naturally since you learn how your body reacts to certain movements, meals, etc. You will build an excellent rhythm after a few weeks and months and fall in love in training. Here's a trick: **Try to really focus on a heavy protein diet and training for 14 days straight**. You'll kick start a habit ritual in your system and everything else will seem easy from then on.
After training for 3-4 years on a very consistent basis you can really drill down the details that will help you get your squat over 600pds and get your bodyfat % below 9%. Then you're on fire and will look back at your post and laugh at your 3 pushups. Until then it's being super consistent, have a big freaking breakfast for quality energy throughout the day and punch it hard like Chewie did. | Focus on getting stronger.
You may also gain weight (if you're underweight), but it will just happen naturally when you lift weights and feed yourself enough to support your strength gains. |
7,378 | I am underweight and only able to do 3 pushups at best. I am wondering what I should focus on: getting stronger or gaining weight? | 2012/07/20 | [
"https://fitness.stackexchange.com/questions/7378",
"https://fitness.stackexchange.com",
"https://fitness.stackexchange.com/users/3892/"
] | Focus on getting stronger.
You may also gain weight (if you're underweight), but it will just happen naturally when you lift weights and feed yourself enough to support your strength gains. | Honestly, I think whether you are over or under-weight it is never healthy to fixate on the scale. Total body weight is like a thermometer, it only tells you if something is wrong--but it doesn't tell you what it could be.
Gaining muscle requires that you work hard, and eat a lot of food. For some reason, there are people who's bodies tell them they had enough food very early. Other people whether through years of ignoring the full signals or just genetically don't get that feeling as quickly tend to pack on weight. The hormone most associated with this affect is Leptin. If you struggle to put on weight, your body either makes too much of it, or is too sensitive to it and you stop eating before you can gain weight. If you struggle with gaining weight, then the body either doesn't make enough Leptin, or it is too insensitive to it.
Leptin, like insulin, is sensitive to carb intake. Also like insulin, overstuffing yourself with carbs over time will make you insensitive to that hormone. For people already overweight, backing off carbs for a few weeks will help restore some sensitivity. If you are underweight, you may want to pack up on carbs during this time. The purpose is to decrease your sensitivity to leptin.
That said, make sure you have the physical activity to match the food. Work hard to the point of depleting all the energy from you muscles, and then eat a meal with a decent amount of protein, but go for a lot of carbs. It really doesn't matter at this point what kind. The bulk of what you eat will go into your muscles to replenish what you need.
So if you work your diet like this:
* Protein: ~1g per pound total body weight. remains constant--easy to figure out
* Carbs on rest day: keep it low. No more 0.5g per pound total body weight.
* Carbs on training days: ~1g per pound total body weight, most after training
* Fat: fill in your caloric needs to move towards your weight goals
You should be able to get bigger and increase your body weight in a way that still looks good. The same structure can be used to lose weight--but in that case you should probably take 10 days and keep the carbs at or below 30g, and on rest days keep the carbs as low as 30g. |
7,378 | I am underweight and only able to do 3 pushups at best. I am wondering what I should focus on: getting stronger or gaining weight? | 2012/07/20 | [
"https://fitness.stackexchange.com/questions/7378",
"https://fitness.stackexchange.com",
"https://fitness.stackexchange.com/users/3892/"
] | I think this also depends on your age. But putting that aside you should treat yourself to whatever you can get your hands on and eat the motherload out of it. Then get yourself in the weight room, decrease the cardio to a minimum, and hit some solid weights. Don't worry about any strict programming in training, merely focus on doing something. After the body goes through the adaptation process you can look into certain workouts posted in t-nation or even bodybuilding.com. Any of those will work.
As for diet add olive oil to everything, have protein shakes like no tomorrow, try to drink a half of gallon a milk a day, eat eggs like their your girlfriend. After you get a good increase of quality protein meals in your system, have hit the weight room 3-4 times a week, diminished cardio then look into refining your structure. It will come naturally since you learn how your body reacts to certain movements, meals, etc. You will build an excellent rhythm after a few weeks and months and fall in love in training. Here's a trick: **Try to really focus on a heavy protein diet and training for 14 days straight**. You'll kick start a habit ritual in your system and everything else will seem easy from then on.
After training for 3-4 years on a very consistent basis you can really drill down the details that will help you get your squat over 600pds and get your bodyfat % below 9%. Then you're on fire and will look back at your post and laugh at your 3 pushups. Until then it's being super consistent, have a big freaking breakfast for quality energy throughout the day and punch it hard like Chewie did. | Well by gaining weight and not strength essentially means you'll be gaining fat???!! Meaning you may not be able to do those 3 press ups at all.
Focus on strength - check out my answer on a previous question:
[Is this program good to achieve functional strength and fitness?](https://fitness.stackexchange.com/questions/7059/is-this-program-good-to-achieve-functional-strength-and-fitness/7089#7089)
Train simple and hard, eat and rest! Good luck |
7,378 | I am underweight and only able to do 3 pushups at best. I am wondering what I should focus on: getting stronger or gaining weight? | 2012/07/20 | [
"https://fitness.stackexchange.com/questions/7378",
"https://fitness.stackexchange.com",
"https://fitness.stackexchange.com/users/3892/"
] | I think this also depends on your age. But putting that aside you should treat yourself to whatever you can get your hands on and eat the motherload out of it. Then get yourself in the weight room, decrease the cardio to a minimum, and hit some solid weights. Don't worry about any strict programming in training, merely focus on doing something. After the body goes through the adaptation process you can look into certain workouts posted in t-nation or even bodybuilding.com. Any of those will work.
As for diet add olive oil to everything, have protein shakes like no tomorrow, try to drink a half of gallon a milk a day, eat eggs like their your girlfriend. After you get a good increase of quality protein meals in your system, have hit the weight room 3-4 times a week, diminished cardio then look into refining your structure. It will come naturally since you learn how your body reacts to certain movements, meals, etc. You will build an excellent rhythm after a few weeks and months and fall in love in training. Here's a trick: **Try to really focus on a heavy protein diet and training for 14 days straight**. You'll kick start a habit ritual in your system and everything else will seem easy from then on.
After training for 3-4 years on a very consistent basis you can really drill down the details that will help you get your squat over 600pds and get your bodyfat % below 9%. Then you're on fire and will look back at your post and laugh at your 3 pushups. Until then it's being super consistent, have a big freaking breakfast for quality energy throughout the day and punch it hard like Chewie did. | Honestly, I think whether you are over or under-weight it is never healthy to fixate on the scale. Total body weight is like a thermometer, it only tells you if something is wrong--but it doesn't tell you what it could be.
Gaining muscle requires that you work hard, and eat a lot of food. For some reason, there are people who's bodies tell them they had enough food very early. Other people whether through years of ignoring the full signals or just genetically don't get that feeling as quickly tend to pack on weight. The hormone most associated with this affect is Leptin. If you struggle to put on weight, your body either makes too much of it, or is too sensitive to it and you stop eating before you can gain weight. If you struggle with gaining weight, then the body either doesn't make enough Leptin, or it is too insensitive to it.
Leptin, like insulin, is sensitive to carb intake. Also like insulin, overstuffing yourself with carbs over time will make you insensitive to that hormone. For people already overweight, backing off carbs for a few weeks will help restore some sensitivity. If you are underweight, you may want to pack up on carbs during this time. The purpose is to decrease your sensitivity to leptin.
That said, make sure you have the physical activity to match the food. Work hard to the point of depleting all the energy from you muscles, and then eat a meal with a decent amount of protein, but go for a lot of carbs. It really doesn't matter at this point what kind. The bulk of what you eat will go into your muscles to replenish what you need.
So if you work your diet like this:
* Protein: ~1g per pound total body weight. remains constant--easy to figure out
* Carbs on rest day: keep it low. No more 0.5g per pound total body weight.
* Carbs on training days: ~1g per pound total body weight, most after training
* Fat: fill in your caloric needs to move towards your weight goals
You should be able to get bigger and increase your body weight in a way that still looks good. The same structure can be used to lose weight--but in that case you should probably take 10 days and keep the carbs at or below 30g, and on rest days keep the carbs as low as 30g. |
973,067 | We have around 50 AWS accounts and each account is connect to ON premise , Data centers , some other AWS Accounts.
Sometimes due to misconfig , the connectivity gets lost and then developers tell us later on.
I want o build monitoring solution where i have something running in each subnet in each account which can ping the ips in other account and then publish metric in single AWS account so i can plot it.
Inintially i was thinking of using Lamda and all was ok untill i found that i can't use PING in Lambda and that blow away my solution.
I really dont want to create unnecessary resources. Is there any better way to do it? | 2019/06/27 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/973067",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/529419/"
] | Please check **AWS Organizations**, <https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/announcing-aws-organizations-centrally-manage-multiple-aws-accounts/>
Other way could be using cloud watch on all account(or centrally) with lambda. | There are two tools which I believe can fit in this scenario but you will have to install their agents on nodes.
* Monit - It can monitor network and trigger based on any malfunction.
* Zabbix - An enterprise level monitoring tool
I have been using both Monit and Zabbix for our servers (both local data center and AWS) in different combination. |
20,622,503 | I'm not clear about below queries and curious to know what is the different between them even though both retrieves same results. (Database used sports2000).
FOR EACH Customer WHERE State = "NH",
FIRST Order OF Customer:
DISPLAY Customer.Cust-Num NAME Order-Num Order-Date.
END.
FOR EACH Customer WHERE State = "NH":
FIND FIRST Order OF Customer NO-ERROR.
IF AVAILABLE Order THEN
DISPLAY Customer.Cust-Num NAME Order-Num Order-Date.
END.
Please explain me
Regards
Suga | 2013/12/16 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/20622503",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2884486/"
] | As AquaAlex says your first snippet is a join (the "," part of the syntax makes it a join) and has all of the pros and cons he mentions. There is, however, a significant additional "con" -- the join is being made with FIRST and FOR ... FIRST should never be used.
[FOR LAST - Query, giving wrong result](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/14234893/for-last-query-giving-wrong-result/14235708#14235708)
It will eventually bite you in the butt.
FIND FIRST is not much better.
The fundamental problem with both statements is that they imply that there is an order which your desired record is the FIRST instance of. But no part of the statement specifies that order. So in the event that there is more than one record that satisfies the query you have no idea which record you will actually get. That might be ok if the only reason that you are doing this is to probe to see if there is one or more records and you have no intention of actually using the record buffer. But if that is the case then CAN-FIND() would be a better statement to be using.
There is a myth that FIND FIRST is supposedly faster. If you believe this, or know someone who does, I urge you to test it. It is not true. It is true that in the case where FIND returns a large set of records adding FIRST is faster -- but that is not apples to apples. That is throwing away the bushel after randomly grabbing an apple. And if you code like that your apple now has magical properties which will lead to impossible to cure bugs.
OF is also problematic. OF implies a WHERE clause based on the compiler guessing that fields with the same name in both tables and which are part of a unique index can be used to join the tables. That may seem reasonable, and perhaps it is, but it obscures the code and makes the maintenance programmer's job much more difficult. It makes a good demo but should never be used in real life. | Your first statement is a join statement, which means less network traffic. And you will only receive records where both the customer and order record exist so do not need to do any further checks. (MORE EFFICIENT)
The second statement will retrieve each customer and then for each customer found it will do a find on order. Because there may not be an order you need to do an additional statement (If Available) as well. This is a less efficient way to retrieve the records and will result in much more unwanted network traffic and more statements being executed. |
221,476 | After update, old Eclipse plugins remain in "plugins" folder (there are also leftovers in "features" folder).
Is there a way to remove those automatically? | 2008/10/21 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/221476",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/5817/"
] | To get rid of the old plugins you have to clear the Installation History. Go to Help | About Eclipse | Installation Details | Installation History and select all the old stuff. Then click delete and restart. Voila. This works with Eclipse Helios (3.6) | Eclipse allows you to revert back to any previous configuration (go to the Help menu, then "Software Updates"). My guess is that Eclipse won't remove these old versions, or this functionality would no longer work.
If when you restart Eclipse you provide the "-clean" argument, it performs various cleanup operations, but for reasons stated above I don't think it will remove old plugins/features. |
64,305 | I ran across a [deleted answer](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3695396/what-is-the-best-way-to-run-your-program-code-after-fixed-intervals/3695447#3695447) to a question that, although not helpful to the questioner's particular situation, may be helpful to others who find themselves in similar situations.
We can't comment on deleted answers, and even if we could, [the author wouldn't receive a notification](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/38461/allow-comments-on-deleted-answers). Jeff's answer suggests that a notice for the revision wouldn't make it either.
I'd like to encourage the author to undelete the post. | 2010/09/12 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/64305",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/140234/"
] | Votes on deleted posts affect rep until your next reputation recalculates — which you can request from a moderator by flagging one of your own posts and asking nicely. You can preview what the recalculated rep will be through /reputation, as you saw. (So there's not much point if it's close to what you have now.)
**Balance**
There is something of a limit to rep loss for a bad question/answer merely because people hesitate to vote down most negative posts. In fact, given the disparity of reputation (+5/10 for upvote, -2 for downvote), a highly negative answer can still be a net rep gain!
**Flagging Behavior**
Flagging is different, and you do lose 100 rep (for non-CW posts only). That requires 6 flags within 2 days. These posts are then deleted similarly to when you self-delete. However, they are also locked to prevent undelete votes (from 10k+ users). | * You would gain 6 rep per hour. The effect of flagging [depends on the type of flag](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/22174/how-does-the-offensive-flag-work/22175#22175).
* You lose the rep, but not
permenantly. You can get it back by flagging one of your posts for moderator attention
and asking for a rep recalc (as Diago said) ([see this](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/18308/how-do-deleted-posts-affect-rep)).
* Votes still have the same values no matter what the score of the post is ([see this](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1390/should-we-reduce-rep-bonus-for-upvotes-on-posts-with-a-negative-score)). |
180,451 | The GDPR changes a lot of data protection law, but how will it affect dumped databases of passwords?
At the moment these can be used to work out the most common passwords, and sites can use this knowledge to prevent people choosing overly common passwords.
Will this still be allowed under GDPR, as the password databases can be considered personal data, and if not would anonymising the passwords, so that they are stored without account details fix the issue, or would the passwords still be treated as personal information? | 2018/02/24 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/180451",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/159064/"
] | GDPR relates specifically to personally identifiable information, that is information that could be reasonably used to identify a person, like address, email address, user names, IP address.
If the password dump contains only a password and no username, account details or IP address, it is likely that they would not be considered PII for the purposes of GDPR.
However, remember that if you have the plain text password and someone has used something personal as their password, maybe *firstname\_lastname\_dob* , that could be construed as personally identifiable.
Standard caveat: This is not legal advice, I am not a lawyer but I am based in the EU and working on a team ensuing GDPR compliance for a company processing sensitive data. | While this is indeed mostly a legal question, as to what of it pertains to the practicalities of security:
* Storing accounts+passwords would be information relating to an identifiable person, so definitely personal under GDPR.
* You only need to store hashes of passwords to catch collisions. This doesn't change whether data is personal under GDPR, just turns it into pseudonymous data.
* The most practical way to store passwords that I see for this purpose is a two-row table with the password's hash and the number of times that it's been found. Only passwords where that number is >1 should be included, as that would ensure that they can't uniquely ID anyone.
Specific implementation:
1. The server randomly picks and periodically changes salt1
2. The server hashes its dictionary of bad password hashes as badphash1+salt1->badphash2
3. salt1 sent server->client
4. The user enters the password in his client (browser)
5. The client hashes the password, then hashes hash1+salt1=>hash2
6. hash2 sent client->server
7. The server requires new password (step 4) up if hash2 is IN badphash2
8. Else the server creates user-specific salt2, sends it server->client
9. The client hashes password+salt2=>hash3
10. hash3 sent client->server
11. salt2+hash3 stored on the server
12. On login, hash(password+salt2) is checked against hash3.
This way, the salt isn't the same for all passwords. This follows best storage and best transmission practices.
IOW: There's no security reason to store plaintext passwords, not even to check for duplicates. Even that can be done on hashes without compromising anything. |
1,519,944 | How could a UPS switch between battery and AC wall socket fast from around 4 ms to 12 ms. What make it especial to switch in that very low time. As far as I know it has relays inside it to perform the switching action, but the relay itself can't switch as fast. I am asking this because I need something to switch between 2 DC lines and I tried multiple 12 V DC relays to 30 amps ones and my devices still has to switch off or to reboot once the main DC power source cutt so the backup can't keep up.
I have a DC power system and AC one. The DC works as the backup batteries and the AC is the city power which I don't care about consumed watts from it, but what I care about is every watt from my batteries as 70% of time I am on batteries.
I have a mini DC gaming rig with 60 watts GTX 1060 and low powered I3 8th gen and my total consumption is around 110 watts per hour. The PC is meant to work on battery systems as his input voltage is from 6 to 36 voltage wide input range and can use 250 watts max components.
I already own an AC to DC 12 V adpater 300 watts to power it up, but I don't want it to switch off every time I lose the city power suddenly and I would like to keep it on so I bought a bunch of relays to switch between the AC to DC 12 V adapter and the 12 V battery system but none of them worked properly so I refunded them as the PC has to shutdown or restart at every power switching.
Note that of course I won't use inverter, switch the internal power supply to another AC power supply and use normal UPS to increase my power consumption to double of what I already have..... so please don't suggest AC stuff | 2020/01/24 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/1519944",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/1126501/"
] | Answer you don't switch AT all.
You connect the battery and AC/DC converter at the same time.
The battery is constantly being charged so discharge is not a problem.
If you feel like it you can add a couple diodes to prevent back flow of electricity from the PC to the battery. In fact you could add 2 sets of diodes, but its probably over kill.
The battery power is ON 100% of the time so there should be 0 switching time.
This is a simplified version of how online/inline UPS work that have no switching time. | The reason a UPS switches over "fast enough" is exactly that it switches the AC side: The PSU in your PC is a switching power supply, this means, that it stores a significant amount of energy in itself.
Desktop power supplies are typically designed to store enough energy, that loss of a single half-wave on the input side will not cause interruption of the DC output. Server power supplies are usually designed with double that, so that loss of full wave on the input side doesn't cause an interruption on the DC output - this is because server PSUs are usually used as redundant pairs and the survival interval of half a wave must be achievable as well if the server runs on only one PSU.
UPSes are designed to need less than a half-wave for switchover (less than 10ms on 50Hz), so the amount of energy stored in the PSU comfortably bridges the gap caused by the UPS switchover.
On the DC side, there is no such survival interval - even a bloss of DC for a few NS will cause a malfunction, so not even the fastest relais will be able to switch. In addition to that, the PSU supplies a digital "Power Good" signal to the Motherboard, which will go inactive even if an alternative DC source is available.
To overcome this, you need (at least) to:
* Add survival capacity to the DC side (normally by capacitators)
* Rewire your "Power Good" signal to keep active if the alternative power is available (if your motherboard doesn't ignore it as many consumer boards do)
This is very intrusive, so you might consider using a double-conversion system, either a prebuilt UPS or a DIY version: The losses from double conversion have been greatly reduced with newer microcontroller-based inverters. This gives you the option of not being picky about your PC, Display etc. components. |
12,151,953 | VB6 came with `WinDiff`.
Is there a free modern version of WinDiff available that is able to ignore case? | 2012/08/28 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/12151953",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/327528/"
] | Along with WinMerge and the WinDiff from the latest SDK, I also have SourceGear's free DiffMerge.
I use WinMerge (which hasn't changed for a while either -- don't ignore blank lines; that exercises bugs) most, especially its ability to open two blank editable pages and you can paste anything, such as from a Remote Desktop to a machine that does not have any visual diff installed, and the differences automatically (or manually if you prefer) update.
DiffMerge's feature I like is its display of differences, which seems to cater for spuriously different line breaks better.
And, to answer your question, the WinDiff from the latest SDK (or at least the one included with Visual Studio 2010), WinMerge, and DiffMerge can all ignore case. | WinDiff is part of the Windows SDK, it still ships with it. But no, the SDK is targeted to programmers that write code in case-sensitive languages, C and C++.
The source code of WinDiff was once part of the SDK samples. You can still get it from [this web page](http://www.grigsoft.com/download-windiff.htm), assuming you're into hacking C code and have an old compiler laying around. You'll need to adapt line.c, the line\_gethashcode() and line\_compare() functions. Lower-casing the line is easiest.
Well, that was the programmer's answer. Plenty of other fish in the sea, Beyond Compare typically gets a lot of nods. |
339,468 | Actually we have following setup for our website that gets traffic around the world:
All JS, Images, Photos are stored on a CDN: Cloud Files ("Akamai light" powered).
The WebApp server who send the dynamic content out are located in Switzerland, the average page size is around 14KB (3-5KB after GZip).
70% of the traffic is from North America. Our network latency time is between 105 - 185 ms to the USA (just-ping.com) mostly measured from data centers I think, means a home user will have higher latency.
Would it be a good solution to place a proxy server on east and west coast of the USA in a data center with a good latency (100ms) to us and to serve the dynamic content from WebAPP server to our visitors from the USA from there? Means the proxy server will forward the request to us and send the answer back. | 2011/12/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/339468",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/50554/"
] | If you have many cachable contents, it will be much better in terms of response time and bandwidth usage to use a proxy server between your web server and your clients.
The proxy server will server the pages/objects very quickly without contacting the original servers while the cached objects are not expired. Moving the proxy server(s) closer to the client will improve the response time in most cases. | IF 70% of the traffic is in US then it would make great sense to place the app server here. From that point using some HA delivery system would be advisable.
I have a set target for experience of under 1 second for my app to service a client. Whatever needs to happen to make that target is my job. |
339,468 | Actually we have following setup for our website that gets traffic around the world:
All JS, Images, Photos are stored on a CDN: Cloud Files ("Akamai light" powered).
The WebApp server who send the dynamic content out are located in Switzerland, the average page size is around 14KB (3-5KB after GZip).
70% of the traffic is from North America. Our network latency time is between 105 - 185 ms to the USA (just-ping.com) mostly measured from data centers I think, means a home user will have higher latency.
Would it be a good solution to place a proxy server on east and west coast of the USA in a data center with a good latency (100ms) to us and to serve the dynamic content from WebAPP server to our visitors from the USA from there? Means the proxy server will forward the request to us and send the answer back. | 2011/12/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/339468",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/50554/"
] | If you have many cachable contents, it will be much better in terms of response time and bandwidth usage to use a proxy server between your web server and your clients.
The proxy server will server the pages/objects very quickly without contacting the original servers while the cached objects are not expired. Moving the proxy server(s) closer to the client will improve the response time in most cases. | I don't see how the proxy server will help, if all the pages have to be sent from Europe. It's just another hop with no benefits. You already have static resources on a CDN in the USA. If it's only one page hit of up to 180ms and all other resources are cached I think that's probably ok, it's if there's multiple hits on your server that it could be an issue - Ajax counts.
You could:
- Move your application closer to your users
- If applicable you could have application servers in different countries, either talking to a database in Europe (possibly slower than you have now if it's db heavy) or synchronised databases in each country (more complex but faster). A master DB in Europe with a read replica in the USA may work. |
339,468 | Actually we have following setup for our website that gets traffic around the world:
All JS, Images, Photos are stored on a CDN: Cloud Files ("Akamai light" powered).
The WebApp server who send the dynamic content out are located in Switzerland, the average page size is around 14KB (3-5KB after GZip).
70% of the traffic is from North America. Our network latency time is between 105 - 185 ms to the USA (just-ping.com) mostly measured from data centers I think, means a home user will have higher latency.
Would it be a good solution to place a proxy server on east and west coast of the USA in a data center with a good latency (100ms) to us and to serve the dynamic content from WebAPP server to our visitors from the USA from there? Means the proxy server will forward the request to us and send the answer back. | 2011/12/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/339468",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/50554/"
] | I don't see how the proxy server will help, if all the pages have to be sent from Europe. It's just another hop with no benefits. You already have static resources on a CDN in the USA. If it's only one page hit of up to 180ms and all other resources are cached I think that's probably ok, it's if there's multiple hits on your server that it could be an issue - Ajax counts.
You could:
- Move your application closer to your users
- If applicable you could have application servers in different countries, either talking to a database in Europe (possibly slower than you have now if it's db heavy) or synchronised databases in each country (more complex but faster). A master DB in Europe with a read replica in the USA may work. | IF 70% of the traffic is in US then it would make great sense to place the app server here. From that point using some HA delivery system would be advisable.
I have a set target for experience of under 1 second for my app to service a client. Whatever needs to happen to make that target is my job. |
101,508 | Recently, my players faced off against an enemy spellcaster. During the fight, the barbarian stated that it was his intention to grab the spellcaster in a bearhug, pinning his arms to his sides to prevent him from casting spells with somatic or material components (unable to reach his component pouch).
I'm pretty sure that this doesn't fall under the grapple rules, because [grapple has no rules other than preventing movement](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44702/does-grappling-in-dd-5-have-any-rules-other-than-preventing-movement). Normally when something is outside the rules, I would fall back on the standard adjudication cycle:
1. The DM describes the environment
2. The players describe what they want
3. The DM narrates the result of the character's actions
However, this got me thinking about the "scope" of 5e combat. Certain actions, such as [Called Shots](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72836/aiming-at-specific-body-parts) are outside the scope of 5e combat; that is to say, they try to go beyond the inherently abstract nature of AC, HP and attack rolls to simulate aiming at specific body parts, which the game was not designed to do. Thus, it seems the correct decision when a player wants to "shoot him right in the eye with my arrow" is to simply say "the system doesn't support that" rather than rely on the standard adjudication cycle.
Like a Called Shot, this arm-pinning ignores the abstract nature of combat by targeting a specific part of the body, shutting down an opponent without reducing their HP. This becomes more blatant if we imagine the barbarian had said "I want to break his arms so he can't cast spells." Furthermore, one could imagine an analogous case in which the same maneuver is used to prevent a melee combatant from using their weapons.
On the other hand, creative play should be rewarded, and "doing anything you can think of" is one of the main draws of D&D over, for example, video games. If the scope of combat is constrained too tightly, combat devolves into "pressing the attack button" over and over.
My question: which case should my player's desired action fall under? **Is trying to pin an opponent's arms within the scope of 5e combat?** Should it be adjudicated via a contest of some sort, or by saying "the system doesn't support that"? | 2017/06/13 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101508",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/26124/"
] | It's not in the rules, but DMs have the latitude to allow it.
-------------------------------------------------------------
As you point out, I couldn't find anywhere in the rules to support an action like that. However, the system allows for DMs to make judgments about whether an action is reasonable/possible, as well as how difficult it is (PHB 192):
>
> When you describe an action not detailed elsewhere in the rules, the DM tells you whether that action is possible and what kind of roll you need to make, if any, to determine success or failure.
>
>
>
This specific instance is probably balanced.
--------------------------------------------
Thus, it's up to you as the DM to determine whether this specific case should be allowed. More specifically, we need to ask, "If creatures are allowed to do this, would they always do it?"
From a theorycrafting perspective, it seems roughly balanced. The effects of pinning a caster's arms (or any character's arms, really), is roughly comparable to Hold Person, which is a second-level spell. We can take a cue from Hold Person, and say that if we want the effect to last multiple rounds, the grabbed character should get an opportunity to escape every round (as if from a grapple). The rest of the balance is probably a wash, because such a pin prevents the attacker from doing anything else, but they can do it for free.
We can also look to the grappler feat, which does something similar (PHB 167):
>
> You can use your action to try to pin a creature grappled by you. To do so, make another grapple check. If you succeed, you and the creature are both restrained until the grapple ends.
>
>
>
Consider that you're allowing any character to take the benefit of this feat for free, and that the effect you're trying to create is actually more powerful than this feat. I'm personally OK with this, given that my players don't really use feats, but it's ultimately up to you and your players.
I have used a similar rule in actual play, and it seems to be a bit underpowered compared to other possible actions. I had a few of my NPC characters try to grab and pin the PCs, both to prevent them from escaping and to incapacitate them. I required my NPCs to initiate a grapple with one action, and then make a contested strength check to pin them with another action. Because the process costs two actions, allows for two "saving throws", does no damage, *and still permits verbal-only spellcasting,* its opportunity cost is very high--imagine the damage that a strong creature could do in two rounds! Additionally, once they are pinned, the grappler cannot do anything else, which effectively takes them out of the combat. While such an action was appropriate for the situation, I cannot imagine a smart combatant wanting to do this with any frequency.
However, if you do include this rule, you should remember that it will affect your future combats. It might not make much sense to try this move if there are lots of enemies, but it can completely shut down a combat with a solo spellcaster, if they ever move within melee range. It will also open up this option to enemies restraining the PCs, which they might not be super happy about. | Would be within the scope. Depending on how the PC does it, the nitty-gritty would be up to the DM. However it should just be treated as a PC attempts to grapple the arms of an enemy. This would just constitute an Athletics check, as usual with grappling. However with the condition that the PC doing the grappling would not be able to make an attack action on the target as they are attempting to restrain the targets hands/making them unable to cast spells requiring some form of semantic on their part. |
101,508 | Recently, my players faced off against an enemy spellcaster. During the fight, the barbarian stated that it was his intention to grab the spellcaster in a bearhug, pinning his arms to his sides to prevent him from casting spells with somatic or material components (unable to reach his component pouch).
I'm pretty sure that this doesn't fall under the grapple rules, because [grapple has no rules other than preventing movement](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44702/does-grappling-in-dd-5-have-any-rules-other-than-preventing-movement). Normally when something is outside the rules, I would fall back on the standard adjudication cycle:
1. The DM describes the environment
2. The players describe what they want
3. The DM narrates the result of the character's actions
However, this got me thinking about the "scope" of 5e combat. Certain actions, such as [Called Shots](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72836/aiming-at-specific-body-parts) are outside the scope of 5e combat; that is to say, they try to go beyond the inherently abstract nature of AC, HP and attack rolls to simulate aiming at specific body parts, which the game was not designed to do. Thus, it seems the correct decision when a player wants to "shoot him right in the eye with my arrow" is to simply say "the system doesn't support that" rather than rely on the standard adjudication cycle.
Like a Called Shot, this arm-pinning ignores the abstract nature of combat by targeting a specific part of the body, shutting down an opponent without reducing their HP. This becomes more blatant if we imagine the barbarian had said "I want to break his arms so he can't cast spells." Furthermore, one could imagine an analogous case in which the same maneuver is used to prevent a melee combatant from using their weapons.
On the other hand, creative play should be rewarded, and "doing anything you can think of" is one of the main draws of D&D over, for example, video games. If the scope of combat is constrained too tightly, combat devolves into "pressing the attack button" over and over.
My question: which case should my player's desired action fall under? **Is trying to pin an opponent's arms within the scope of 5e combat?** Should it be adjudicated via a contest of some sort, or by saying "the system doesn't support that"? | 2017/06/13 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101508",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/26124/"
] | Conditions
==========
Conditions aren't generally super easy to come by in 5e - especially those that can completely shut down a character.
If the barbarian is wanting to prevent the spellcaster from casting a spell *at all*, then from a 5e perspective that is removing their action (or ending their ability to have somatic, material *and* verbal components.) Given that pinning arms is *not* a way to stop a verbal component, the only real way to stop a spellcasting action is to stop an action. There is a condition specifically for this: [Incapacitated](https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/basic-rules/appendix-a-conditions#Incapacitated).
>
> An incapacitated creature can’t take actions or reactions.
>
>
>
[Restrained](https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/basic-rules/appendix-a-conditions#Restrained) is another potential option, but they are still able to take actions.
>
> * A restrained creature’s speed becomes 0, and it can’t benefit from any bonus to its speed.
> * Attack rolls against the creature have advantage, and the creature’s attack rolls have disadvantage.
> * The creature has disadvantage on Dexterity saving throws.
>
>
>
Changing Restrained to include removal of use of their arms to limit their somatic/material access is less impactful, but still should be considered for it's impact on the game world.
Arms vs. Hands
--------------
One other thing to consider is that you are pinning their arms...not their fingers. Nowhere does it say that there is a need for arm movements vs finger movements for somatic components. In fact, all it says is you need **a hand** free. Not an arm. Pinning an arm to prevent Somatic may not be a viable option.
If you make a ruling that pinned arms equal no somatic movement, then Verbal only spells can always be cast and possibly material if there is a focus (depending on the focus and ruling.)
Lots of spells are still available
----------------------------------
Some Verbal-only spells that could have an impact are: ***misty step*** (bonus action and remove yourself from the grapple), ***dimension door*** (action to completely remove themselves up to 500' away!), ***immolation***, ***Otto's irresistible dance***, the ***power word*** spells, ***sword burst***, ***time stop*** and ***wish***.
Many of these can do immense damage or completely escape this situation.
Grappling: it just doesn't do it.
---------------------------------
Grappling itself does not really provide what you're looking for. Even if your Barbarian invested in the [Grappler](https://www.dndbeyond.com/characters/feats/grappler) feat, they'd only generate the Restrained condition (PHB, 167), which would still allow the target to cast any spell.
Rule of Cool vs. Balanced
-------------------------
What your Barbarian wants to do is Cool. But is it Balanced? There aren't many things out there that can make someone Incapacitated. Allowing a Str/Dex-based character to use their Grapple skill on a character that isn't proficient in those skills to effectively remove them from combat is potentially unbalancing. One way of talking to your table about it is by turning the question around.
You are also effectively turning either *Hold Person* (2nd level)/*Hold Monster* (5th level) - which are spells that have a spell slot cost, *and* if the creature saves, result in *nothing* - into an Attack action (which Barbarians get more than one of) at no other cost then their action. That's incredibly powerful.
Turnaround is fair play?
------------------------
If this becomes a viable tactic for your players...they should fully expect it to be a viable tactic *against* them. While they may not always fight spellcasters, there is (if there is one now) always a spellcaster in your party. Do they want this to happen to them regularly?
Still want to do it?
--------------------
There may still be a way to balance it! Think about what it would take to make it more worthwhile. Possibly it takes multiple Grapple attempts in order for this to work - with a save at the *start* of each round instead of the end. First attack is the standard Grapple. Next Grapple contest would be to give the Incapacitated condition. Then allow a "save" at the start of each turn for Grappled character, and maybe also require a new grapple check by the Grappler as one of the attack actions during their turn (sort of emulating a concentration type mechanic... or simply give the Grappler the Restrained condition that the Grappler feat gives when Restraining a creature with a grapple.) | Would be within the scope. Depending on how the PC does it, the nitty-gritty would be up to the DM. However it should just be treated as a PC attempts to grapple the arms of an enemy. This would just constitute an Athletics check, as usual with grappling. However with the condition that the PC doing the grappling would not be able to make an attack action on the target as they are attempting to restrain the targets hands/making them unable to cast spells requiring some form of semantic on their part. |
101,508 | Recently, my players faced off against an enemy spellcaster. During the fight, the barbarian stated that it was his intention to grab the spellcaster in a bearhug, pinning his arms to his sides to prevent him from casting spells with somatic or material components (unable to reach his component pouch).
I'm pretty sure that this doesn't fall under the grapple rules, because [grapple has no rules other than preventing movement](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44702/does-grappling-in-dd-5-have-any-rules-other-than-preventing-movement). Normally when something is outside the rules, I would fall back on the standard adjudication cycle:
1. The DM describes the environment
2. The players describe what they want
3. The DM narrates the result of the character's actions
However, this got me thinking about the "scope" of 5e combat. Certain actions, such as [Called Shots](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72836/aiming-at-specific-body-parts) are outside the scope of 5e combat; that is to say, they try to go beyond the inherently abstract nature of AC, HP and attack rolls to simulate aiming at specific body parts, which the game was not designed to do. Thus, it seems the correct decision when a player wants to "shoot him right in the eye with my arrow" is to simply say "the system doesn't support that" rather than rely on the standard adjudication cycle.
Like a Called Shot, this arm-pinning ignores the abstract nature of combat by targeting a specific part of the body, shutting down an opponent without reducing their HP. This becomes more blatant if we imagine the barbarian had said "I want to break his arms so he can't cast spells." Furthermore, one could imagine an analogous case in which the same maneuver is used to prevent a melee combatant from using their weapons.
On the other hand, creative play should be rewarded, and "doing anything you can think of" is one of the main draws of D&D over, for example, video games. If the scope of combat is constrained too tightly, combat devolves into "pressing the attack button" over and over.
My question: which case should my player's desired action fall under? **Is trying to pin an opponent's arms within the scope of 5e combat?** Should it be adjudicated via a contest of some sort, or by saying "the system doesn't support that"? | 2017/06/13 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101508",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/26124/"
] | Using Opposed Ability Checks / Contests
---------------------------------------
Let's examine two cases of trying to do this: one with the Grappler Feat and one without.
### With the Grappler Feat
If the Barbarian has the Grappler Feat, the grapple does more than simply reduce speed to zero. It allows *a chance* to restrain the caster with a subsequent action. The pinned/restrained condition *does not explicitly say that it prevents spell casting* ... but let's work with what we have.
Grapple:
>
> ... a Strength (Athletics) check contested by the target’s Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check (the target chooses the ability to use). If you succeed, you subject the target to the grappled condition
>
>
>
The significant grappled condition is: *A grappled creature’s speed becomes 0, and it can’t benefit from any bonus to its speed*. As you note, that by itself is no prevention to spell casting (unless a spell requires a movement component).
Escaping a Grapple
>
> A grappled creature can use its action to escape. To do so, it must succeed on a Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check contested by your Strength (Athletics) check.
>
>
>
Each turn of grapple is a contest: grappled creature can to get free, which might include casting a spell to do so.
Action Economy Note: this attempt to escape may preclude using an action to cast a spell, but any bonus action or reaction spell casting is still available should the caster try to escape using an action.
Using a subsequent action ... with the feat
>
> • You can use your action to try to pin a creature grappled by you. To do so, make another grapple check. If you succeed, you and the creature are both restrained until the grapple ends.
>
>
>
Restrained Condition from Appendix A: (You both are restrained)
>
> • A restrained creature’s speed becomes 0, and it can’t benefit from any bonus to its speed.
>
> • Attack rolls against the creature have advantage, and the creature’s attack rolls have disadvantage.
>
> • The creature has disadvantage on Dexterity saving throws.
>
>
>
No disadvantage on attempt to get out of the grapple. On subsequent rounds you can use non-weapon attacks (advantage for attacks against caster are canceled out by disadvantage for attacks on the caster).
Note: If your party cleric wants to cast Sacred Flame at this caster, the target has disadvantage on the Dex save ... it's a single target cantrip. But that's not what you are trying to accomplish.
Even with the feat, the DM has to make a ruling.
**Recommended Ruling**: require an additional contested check to stop the caster from trying to cast during each turn. The caster is resisting with a will. (And likely trying to break the grapple). *There is no easy button, the enemy fights back*.
Note: Spells with only a verbal component are not going to be stopped. For example, a Command to "grovel" that the Barbarian fails his save on should break the grapple.
### Without the Grappler Feat
Reduce the target to speed zero, no explicit constraints otherwise, and of course each turn the caster can try to break grapple. So far, this kind of detailed restraint, while familiar in a cinematic sense from TV and movies, doesn't have explicit rules support with a simple Grapple. Since the Barbarian has not paid the price for the feat, simple grapple should be less effective than grapple with feat.
### Rulings over Rules
I recommend that if you want to add this feature or capability, and there's no feat, the Barbarian has to attempt a second Grapple after a successful grapple, each turn/round, with \*disadvantage. (Otherwise, why the Grappler feat?). Likewise, the caster isn't restrained. I'd also rule that the Barbarian can make no other attacks when trying this advanced grapple without the feat.
Disadvantage reflects how much harder it is to control a resistant opponent, but leaves open a chance for some heroics or unique happenings during the game.
### [Inspiration](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/41852/22566), Advantage and Disadvantage
Does the Barbarian have an inspiration point, previously awarded? The DMG pages 240-241 introduces the use of inspiration:
>
> Awarding Inspiration [is an effective way to encourage roleplaying and risk taking](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/67164/22566) ... the character can have no more than one Inspiration at a time.
>
>
>
The lesser case of a bardic inspiration point helping a given roll isn't as powerful as DM awarded inspiration, which gives advantage, but it can't hurt to add a few points to the die roll.
>
> You usually gain advantage or disadvantage through the use of special abilities, actions, or spells. *Inspiration can also give a character advantage*. The GM can also decide that circumstances influence a roll in one direction or the other and grant advantage or impose disadvantage as a result.
>
>
>
This is the kind of scenario where, as a GM, I see the Inspiration rules as providing that "one special time" that the player *with an inspiration point* burns that one precious point and gets advantage, to cancel disadvantage when trying to pin/restrain the caster. It is not guaranteed to work, but it can tip the odds in the Barbarian's favor for that first round.
>
> If circumstances cause a roll to have both advantage and disadvantage, you are considered to have neither of them, and you roll one d20.
>
>
>
If the player has not earned an inspiration point, it's less likely that the cool thing he's trying to do will work. If he's earned that inspiration point, there's a better chance he pulls it off.
Inspiration aside, and depending upon circumstances, you can always apply advantage or disadvantage for a given attempt if a circumstance suggests to you that it makes sense. (For either the barbarian, or for the spell caster trying not to be controlled like this). That's one of those judgment things that you'll rule on in each situation as it arises.
### No "Easy Button"
**Don't forget: every turn, the caster gets that chance to escape the grapple.** | Would be within the scope. Depending on how the PC does it, the nitty-gritty would be up to the DM. However it should just be treated as a PC attempts to grapple the arms of an enemy. This would just constitute an Athletics check, as usual with grappling. However with the condition that the PC doing the grappling would not be able to make an attack action on the target as they are attempting to restrain the targets hands/making them unable to cast spells requiring some form of semantic on their part. |
101,508 | Recently, my players faced off against an enemy spellcaster. During the fight, the barbarian stated that it was his intention to grab the spellcaster in a bearhug, pinning his arms to his sides to prevent him from casting spells with somatic or material components (unable to reach his component pouch).
I'm pretty sure that this doesn't fall under the grapple rules, because [grapple has no rules other than preventing movement](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44702/does-grappling-in-dd-5-have-any-rules-other-than-preventing-movement). Normally when something is outside the rules, I would fall back on the standard adjudication cycle:
1. The DM describes the environment
2. The players describe what they want
3. The DM narrates the result of the character's actions
However, this got me thinking about the "scope" of 5e combat. Certain actions, such as [Called Shots](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72836/aiming-at-specific-body-parts) are outside the scope of 5e combat; that is to say, they try to go beyond the inherently abstract nature of AC, HP and attack rolls to simulate aiming at specific body parts, which the game was not designed to do. Thus, it seems the correct decision when a player wants to "shoot him right in the eye with my arrow" is to simply say "the system doesn't support that" rather than rely on the standard adjudication cycle.
Like a Called Shot, this arm-pinning ignores the abstract nature of combat by targeting a specific part of the body, shutting down an opponent without reducing their HP. This becomes more blatant if we imagine the barbarian had said "I want to break his arms so he can't cast spells." Furthermore, one could imagine an analogous case in which the same maneuver is used to prevent a melee combatant from using their weapons.
On the other hand, creative play should be rewarded, and "doing anything you can think of" is one of the main draws of D&D over, for example, video games. If the scope of combat is constrained too tightly, combat devolves into "pressing the attack button" over and over.
My question: which case should my player's desired action fall under? **Is trying to pin an opponent's arms within the scope of 5e combat?** Should it be adjudicated via a contest of some sort, or by saying "the system doesn't support that"? | 2017/06/13 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101508",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/26124/"
] | Although the scope of this question was in regards to grabbing someone's arms in combat, it's worthwhile to note that grabbing someone's arms wouldn't *necessarily* prevent casting.
While there are some spells that explicitly state the somatic component required, many others do not.
For example, *fireball* [states](http://www.5esrd.com/spellcasting/all-spells/f/fireball):
>
> A bright streak flashes from your **pointing finger** to a point you choose within range and then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame. Each creature in a 20-foot-radius sphere centered on that point must make a Dexterity saving throw. A target takes 8d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
>
>
> The fire spreads around corners. It ignites flammable objects in the area that aren’t being worn or carried.
>
>
>
But *flaming sphere* [does not state](http://www.5esrd.com/spellcasting/all-spells/f/flaming-sphere) any specific somatic component required:
>
> A 5-foot-diameter sphere of fire appears in an unoccupied space of your choice within range and lasts for the duration. Any creature that ends its turn within 5 feet of the sphere must make a Dexterity saving throw. The creature takes 2d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
>
>
>
In cases where there is no specific description, the [SRD describes](http://www.5esrd.com/spellcasting/#Somatic_S) a somatic component as follows:
>
> Spellcasting gestures might include a forceful gesticulation or an intricate set of gestures. If a spell requires a somatic component, the caster must have **free use of at least one hand** to perform these gestures.
>
>
>
Depending on how you restrain them, they could have "free use of at least one hand" in order to cast spells that do not dictate what the somatic component is. The usage of the spell would be largely up to DM discretion and what they consider "free use." This could lead to rather interesting circumstances should an NPC rather cast *fireball* at their feet than be captured.
*Note to mods: This might be better suited for a comment, but I was unable to fit it within the character limit.* | Would be within the scope. Depending on how the PC does it, the nitty-gritty would be up to the DM. However it should just be treated as a PC attempts to grapple the arms of an enemy. This would just constitute an Athletics check, as usual with grappling. However with the condition that the PC doing the grappling would not be able to make an attack action on the target as they are attempting to restrain the targets hands/making them unable to cast spells requiring some form of semantic on their part. |
101,508 | Recently, my players faced off against an enemy spellcaster. During the fight, the barbarian stated that it was his intention to grab the spellcaster in a bearhug, pinning his arms to his sides to prevent him from casting spells with somatic or material components (unable to reach his component pouch).
I'm pretty sure that this doesn't fall under the grapple rules, because [grapple has no rules other than preventing movement](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44702/does-grappling-in-dd-5-have-any-rules-other-than-preventing-movement). Normally when something is outside the rules, I would fall back on the standard adjudication cycle:
1. The DM describes the environment
2. The players describe what they want
3. The DM narrates the result of the character's actions
However, this got me thinking about the "scope" of 5e combat. Certain actions, such as [Called Shots](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72836/aiming-at-specific-body-parts) are outside the scope of 5e combat; that is to say, they try to go beyond the inherently abstract nature of AC, HP and attack rolls to simulate aiming at specific body parts, which the game was not designed to do. Thus, it seems the correct decision when a player wants to "shoot him right in the eye with my arrow" is to simply say "the system doesn't support that" rather than rely on the standard adjudication cycle.
Like a Called Shot, this arm-pinning ignores the abstract nature of combat by targeting a specific part of the body, shutting down an opponent without reducing their HP. This becomes more blatant if we imagine the barbarian had said "I want to break his arms so he can't cast spells." Furthermore, one could imagine an analogous case in which the same maneuver is used to prevent a melee combatant from using their weapons.
On the other hand, creative play should be rewarded, and "doing anything you can think of" is one of the main draws of D&D over, for example, video games. If the scope of combat is constrained too tightly, combat devolves into "pressing the attack button" over and over.
My question: which case should my player's desired action fall under? **Is trying to pin an opponent's arms within the scope of 5e combat?** Should it be adjudicated via a contest of some sort, or by saying "the system doesn't support that"? | 2017/06/13 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101508",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/26124/"
] | It's not in the rules, but DMs have the latitude to allow it.
-------------------------------------------------------------
As you point out, I couldn't find anywhere in the rules to support an action like that. However, the system allows for DMs to make judgments about whether an action is reasonable/possible, as well as how difficult it is (PHB 192):
>
> When you describe an action not detailed elsewhere in the rules, the DM tells you whether that action is possible and what kind of roll you need to make, if any, to determine success or failure.
>
>
>
This specific instance is probably balanced.
--------------------------------------------
Thus, it's up to you as the DM to determine whether this specific case should be allowed. More specifically, we need to ask, "If creatures are allowed to do this, would they always do it?"
From a theorycrafting perspective, it seems roughly balanced. The effects of pinning a caster's arms (or any character's arms, really), is roughly comparable to Hold Person, which is a second-level spell. We can take a cue from Hold Person, and say that if we want the effect to last multiple rounds, the grabbed character should get an opportunity to escape every round (as if from a grapple). The rest of the balance is probably a wash, because such a pin prevents the attacker from doing anything else, but they can do it for free.
We can also look to the grappler feat, which does something similar (PHB 167):
>
> You can use your action to try to pin a creature grappled by you. To do so, make another grapple check. If you succeed, you and the creature are both restrained until the grapple ends.
>
>
>
Consider that you're allowing any character to take the benefit of this feat for free, and that the effect you're trying to create is actually more powerful than this feat. I'm personally OK with this, given that my players don't really use feats, but it's ultimately up to you and your players.
I have used a similar rule in actual play, and it seems to be a bit underpowered compared to other possible actions. I had a few of my NPC characters try to grab and pin the PCs, both to prevent them from escaping and to incapacitate them. I required my NPCs to initiate a grapple with one action, and then make a contested strength check to pin them with another action. Because the process costs two actions, allows for two "saving throws", does no damage, *and still permits verbal-only spellcasting,* its opportunity cost is very high--imagine the damage that a strong creature could do in two rounds! Additionally, once they are pinned, the grappler cannot do anything else, which effectively takes them out of the combat. While such an action was appropriate for the situation, I cannot imagine a smart combatant wanting to do this with any frequency.
However, if you do include this rule, you should remember that it will affect your future combats. It might not make much sense to try this move if there are lots of enemies, but it can completely shut down a combat with a solo spellcaster, if they ever move within melee range. It will also open up this option to enemies restraining the PCs, which they might not be super happy about. | Conditions
==========
Conditions aren't generally super easy to come by in 5e - especially those that can completely shut down a character.
If the barbarian is wanting to prevent the spellcaster from casting a spell *at all*, then from a 5e perspective that is removing their action (or ending their ability to have somatic, material *and* verbal components.) Given that pinning arms is *not* a way to stop a verbal component, the only real way to stop a spellcasting action is to stop an action. There is a condition specifically for this: [Incapacitated](https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/basic-rules/appendix-a-conditions#Incapacitated).
>
> An incapacitated creature can’t take actions or reactions.
>
>
>
[Restrained](https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/basic-rules/appendix-a-conditions#Restrained) is another potential option, but they are still able to take actions.
>
> * A restrained creature’s speed becomes 0, and it can’t benefit from any bonus to its speed.
> * Attack rolls against the creature have advantage, and the creature’s attack rolls have disadvantage.
> * The creature has disadvantage on Dexterity saving throws.
>
>
>
Changing Restrained to include removal of use of their arms to limit their somatic/material access is less impactful, but still should be considered for it's impact on the game world.
Arms vs. Hands
--------------
One other thing to consider is that you are pinning their arms...not their fingers. Nowhere does it say that there is a need for arm movements vs finger movements for somatic components. In fact, all it says is you need **a hand** free. Not an arm. Pinning an arm to prevent Somatic may not be a viable option.
If you make a ruling that pinned arms equal no somatic movement, then Verbal only spells can always be cast and possibly material if there is a focus (depending on the focus and ruling.)
Lots of spells are still available
----------------------------------
Some Verbal-only spells that could have an impact are: ***misty step*** (bonus action and remove yourself from the grapple), ***dimension door*** (action to completely remove themselves up to 500' away!), ***immolation***, ***Otto's irresistible dance***, the ***power word*** spells, ***sword burst***, ***time stop*** and ***wish***.
Many of these can do immense damage or completely escape this situation.
Grappling: it just doesn't do it.
---------------------------------
Grappling itself does not really provide what you're looking for. Even if your Barbarian invested in the [Grappler](https://www.dndbeyond.com/characters/feats/grappler) feat, they'd only generate the Restrained condition (PHB, 167), which would still allow the target to cast any spell.
Rule of Cool vs. Balanced
-------------------------
What your Barbarian wants to do is Cool. But is it Balanced? There aren't many things out there that can make someone Incapacitated. Allowing a Str/Dex-based character to use their Grapple skill on a character that isn't proficient in those skills to effectively remove them from combat is potentially unbalancing. One way of talking to your table about it is by turning the question around.
You are also effectively turning either *Hold Person* (2nd level)/*Hold Monster* (5th level) - which are spells that have a spell slot cost, *and* if the creature saves, result in *nothing* - into an Attack action (which Barbarians get more than one of) at no other cost then their action. That's incredibly powerful.
Turnaround is fair play?
------------------------
If this becomes a viable tactic for your players...they should fully expect it to be a viable tactic *against* them. While they may not always fight spellcasters, there is (if there is one now) always a spellcaster in your party. Do they want this to happen to them regularly?
Still want to do it?
--------------------
There may still be a way to balance it! Think about what it would take to make it more worthwhile. Possibly it takes multiple Grapple attempts in order for this to work - with a save at the *start* of each round instead of the end. First attack is the standard Grapple. Next Grapple contest would be to give the Incapacitated condition. Then allow a "save" at the start of each turn for Grappled character, and maybe also require a new grapple check by the Grappler as one of the attack actions during their turn (sort of emulating a concentration type mechanic... or simply give the Grappler the Restrained condition that the Grappler feat gives when Restraining a creature with a grapple.) |
101,508 | Recently, my players faced off against an enemy spellcaster. During the fight, the barbarian stated that it was his intention to grab the spellcaster in a bearhug, pinning his arms to his sides to prevent him from casting spells with somatic or material components (unable to reach his component pouch).
I'm pretty sure that this doesn't fall under the grapple rules, because [grapple has no rules other than preventing movement](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44702/does-grappling-in-dd-5-have-any-rules-other-than-preventing-movement). Normally when something is outside the rules, I would fall back on the standard adjudication cycle:
1. The DM describes the environment
2. The players describe what they want
3. The DM narrates the result of the character's actions
However, this got me thinking about the "scope" of 5e combat. Certain actions, such as [Called Shots](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72836/aiming-at-specific-body-parts) are outside the scope of 5e combat; that is to say, they try to go beyond the inherently abstract nature of AC, HP and attack rolls to simulate aiming at specific body parts, which the game was not designed to do. Thus, it seems the correct decision when a player wants to "shoot him right in the eye with my arrow" is to simply say "the system doesn't support that" rather than rely on the standard adjudication cycle.
Like a Called Shot, this arm-pinning ignores the abstract nature of combat by targeting a specific part of the body, shutting down an opponent without reducing their HP. This becomes more blatant if we imagine the barbarian had said "I want to break his arms so he can't cast spells." Furthermore, one could imagine an analogous case in which the same maneuver is used to prevent a melee combatant from using their weapons.
On the other hand, creative play should be rewarded, and "doing anything you can think of" is one of the main draws of D&D over, for example, video games. If the scope of combat is constrained too tightly, combat devolves into "pressing the attack button" over and over.
My question: which case should my player's desired action fall under? **Is trying to pin an opponent's arms within the scope of 5e combat?** Should it be adjudicated via a contest of some sort, or by saying "the system doesn't support that"? | 2017/06/13 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101508",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/26124/"
] | It's not in the rules, but DMs have the latitude to allow it.
-------------------------------------------------------------
As you point out, I couldn't find anywhere in the rules to support an action like that. However, the system allows for DMs to make judgments about whether an action is reasonable/possible, as well as how difficult it is (PHB 192):
>
> When you describe an action not detailed elsewhere in the rules, the DM tells you whether that action is possible and what kind of roll you need to make, if any, to determine success or failure.
>
>
>
This specific instance is probably balanced.
--------------------------------------------
Thus, it's up to you as the DM to determine whether this specific case should be allowed. More specifically, we need to ask, "If creatures are allowed to do this, would they always do it?"
From a theorycrafting perspective, it seems roughly balanced. The effects of pinning a caster's arms (or any character's arms, really), is roughly comparable to Hold Person, which is a second-level spell. We can take a cue from Hold Person, and say that if we want the effect to last multiple rounds, the grabbed character should get an opportunity to escape every round (as if from a grapple). The rest of the balance is probably a wash, because such a pin prevents the attacker from doing anything else, but they can do it for free.
We can also look to the grappler feat, which does something similar (PHB 167):
>
> You can use your action to try to pin a creature grappled by you. To do so, make another grapple check. If you succeed, you and the creature are both restrained until the grapple ends.
>
>
>
Consider that you're allowing any character to take the benefit of this feat for free, and that the effect you're trying to create is actually more powerful than this feat. I'm personally OK with this, given that my players don't really use feats, but it's ultimately up to you and your players.
I have used a similar rule in actual play, and it seems to be a bit underpowered compared to other possible actions. I had a few of my NPC characters try to grab and pin the PCs, both to prevent them from escaping and to incapacitate them. I required my NPCs to initiate a grapple with one action, and then make a contested strength check to pin them with another action. Because the process costs two actions, allows for two "saving throws", does no damage, *and still permits verbal-only spellcasting,* its opportunity cost is very high--imagine the damage that a strong creature could do in two rounds! Additionally, once they are pinned, the grappler cannot do anything else, which effectively takes them out of the combat. While such an action was appropriate for the situation, I cannot imagine a smart combatant wanting to do this with any frequency.
However, if you do include this rule, you should remember that it will affect your future combats. It might not make much sense to try this move if there are lots of enemies, but it can completely shut down a combat with a solo spellcaster, if they ever move within melee range. It will also open up this option to enemies restraining the PCs, which they might not be super happy about. | Using Opposed Ability Checks / Contests
---------------------------------------
Let's examine two cases of trying to do this: one with the Grappler Feat and one without.
### With the Grappler Feat
If the Barbarian has the Grappler Feat, the grapple does more than simply reduce speed to zero. It allows *a chance* to restrain the caster with a subsequent action. The pinned/restrained condition *does not explicitly say that it prevents spell casting* ... but let's work with what we have.
Grapple:
>
> ... a Strength (Athletics) check contested by the target’s Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check (the target chooses the ability to use). If you succeed, you subject the target to the grappled condition
>
>
>
The significant grappled condition is: *A grappled creature’s speed becomes 0, and it can’t benefit from any bonus to its speed*. As you note, that by itself is no prevention to spell casting (unless a spell requires a movement component).
Escaping a Grapple
>
> A grappled creature can use its action to escape. To do so, it must succeed on a Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check contested by your Strength (Athletics) check.
>
>
>
Each turn of grapple is a contest: grappled creature can to get free, which might include casting a spell to do so.
Action Economy Note: this attempt to escape may preclude using an action to cast a spell, but any bonus action or reaction spell casting is still available should the caster try to escape using an action.
Using a subsequent action ... with the feat
>
> • You can use your action to try to pin a creature grappled by you. To do so, make another grapple check. If you succeed, you and the creature are both restrained until the grapple ends.
>
>
>
Restrained Condition from Appendix A: (You both are restrained)
>
> • A restrained creature’s speed becomes 0, and it can’t benefit from any bonus to its speed.
>
> • Attack rolls against the creature have advantage, and the creature’s attack rolls have disadvantage.
>
> • The creature has disadvantage on Dexterity saving throws.
>
>
>
No disadvantage on attempt to get out of the grapple. On subsequent rounds you can use non-weapon attacks (advantage for attacks against caster are canceled out by disadvantage for attacks on the caster).
Note: If your party cleric wants to cast Sacred Flame at this caster, the target has disadvantage on the Dex save ... it's a single target cantrip. But that's not what you are trying to accomplish.
Even with the feat, the DM has to make a ruling.
**Recommended Ruling**: require an additional contested check to stop the caster from trying to cast during each turn. The caster is resisting with a will. (And likely trying to break the grapple). *There is no easy button, the enemy fights back*.
Note: Spells with only a verbal component are not going to be stopped. For example, a Command to "grovel" that the Barbarian fails his save on should break the grapple.
### Without the Grappler Feat
Reduce the target to speed zero, no explicit constraints otherwise, and of course each turn the caster can try to break grapple. So far, this kind of detailed restraint, while familiar in a cinematic sense from TV and movies, doesn't have explicit rules support with a simple Grapple. Since the Barbarian has not paid the price for the feat, simple grapple should be less effective than grapple with feat.
### Rulings over Rules
I recommend that if you want to add this feature or capability, and there's no feat, the Barbarian has to attempt a second Grapple after a successful grapple, each turn/round, with \*disadvantage. (Otherwise, why the Grappler feat?). Likewise, the caster isn't restrained. I'd also rule that the Barbarian can make no other attacks when trying this advanced grapple without the feat.
Disadvantage reflects how much harder it is to control a resistant opponent, but leaves open a chance for some heroics or unique happenings during the game.
### [Inspiration](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/41852/22566), Advantage and Disadvantage
Does the Barbarian have an inspiration point, previously awarded? The DMG pages 240-241 introduces the use of inspiration:
>
> Awarding Inspiration [is an effective way to encourage roleplaying and risk taking](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/67164/22566) ... the character can have no more than one Inspiration at a time.
>
>
>
The lesser case of a bardic inspiration point helping a given roll isn't as powerful as DM awarded inspiration, which gives advantage, but it can't hurt to add a few points to the die roll.
>
> You usually gain advantage or disadvantage through the use of special abilities, actions, or spells. *Inspiration can also give a character advantage*. The GM can also decide that circumstances influence a roll in one direction or the other and grant advantage or impose disadvantage as a result.
>
>
>
This is the kind of scenario where, as a GM, I see the Inspiration rules as providing that "one special time" that the player *with an inspiration point* burns that one precious point and gets advantage, to cancel disadvantage when trying to pin/restrain the caster. It is not guaranteed to work, but it can tip the odds in the Barbarian's favor for that first round.
>
> If circumstances cause a roll to have both advantage and disadvantage, you are considered to have neither of them, and you roll one d20.
>
>
>
If the player has not earned an inspiration point, it's less likely that the cool thing he's trying to do will work. If he's earned that inspiration point, there's a better chance he pulls it off.
Inspiration aside, and depending upon circumstances, you can always apply advantage or disadvantage for a given attempt if a circumstance suggests to you that it makes sense. (For either the barbarian, or for the spell caster trying not to be controlled like this). That's one of those judgment things that you'll rule on in each situation as it arises.
### No "Easy Button"
**Don't forget: every turn, the caster gets that chance to escape the grapple.** |
101,508 | Recently, my players faced off against an enemy spellcaster. During the fight, the barbarian stated that it was his intention to grab the spellcaster in a bearhug, pinning his arms to his sides to prevent him from casting spells with somatic or material components (unable to reach his component pouch).
I'm pretty sure that this doesn't fall under the grapple rules, because [grapple has no rules other than preventing movement](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44702/does-grappling-in-dd-5-have-any-rules-other-than-preventing-movement). Normally when something is outside the rules, I would fall back on the standard adjudication cycle:
1. The DM describes the environment
2. The players describe what they want
3. The DM narrates the result of the character's actions
However, this got me thinking about the "scope" of 5e combat. Certain actions, such as [Called Shots](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72836/aiming-at-specific-body-parts) are outside the scope of 5e combat; that is to say, they try to go beyond the inherently abstract nature of AC, HP and attack rolls to simulate aiming at specific body parts, which the game was not designed to do. Thus, it seems the correct decision when a player wants to "shoot him right in the eye with my arrow" is to simply say "the system doesn't support that" rather than rely on the standard adjudication cycle.
Like a Called Shot, this arm-pinning ignores the abstract nature of combat by targeting a specific part of the body, shutting down an opponent without reducing their HP. This becomes more blatant if we imagine the barbarian had said "I want to break his arms so he can't cast spells." Furthermore, one could imagine an analogous case in which the same maneuver is used to prevent a melee combatant from using their weapons.
On the other hand, creative play should be rewarded, and "doing anything you can think of" is one of the main draws of D&D over, for example, video games. If the scope of combat is constrained too tightly, combat devolves into "pressing the attack button" over and over.
My question: which case should my player's desired action fall under? **Is trying to pin an opponent's arms within the scope of 5e combat?** Should it be adjudicated via a contest of some sort, or by saying "the system doesn't support that"? | 2017/06/13 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101508",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/26124/"
] | It's not in the rules, but DMs have the latitude to allow it.
-------------------------------------------------------------
As you point out, I couldn't find anywhere in the rules to support an action like that. However, the system allows for DMs to make judgments about whether an action is reasonable/possible, as well as how difficult it is (PHB 192):
>
> When you describe an action not detailed elsewhere in the rules, the DM tells you whether that action is possible and what kind of roll you need to make, if any, to determine success or failure.
>
>
>
This specific instance is probably balanced.
--------------------------------------------
Thus, it's up to you as the DM to determine whether this specific case should be allowed. More specifically, we need to ask, "If creatures are allowed to do this, would they always do it?"
From a theorycrafting perspective, it seems roughly balanced. The effects of pinning a caster's arms (or any character's arms, really), is roughly comparable to Hold Person, which is a second-level spell. We can take a cue from Hold Person, and say that if we want the effect to last multiple rounds, the grabbed character should get an opportunity to escape every round (as if from a grapple). The rest of the balance is probably a wash, because such a pin prevents the attacker from doing anything else, but they can do it for free.
We can also look to the grappler feat, which does something similar (PHB 167):
>
> You can use your action to try to pin a creature grappled by you. To do so, make another grapple check. If you succeed, you and the creature are both restrained until the grapple ends.
>
>
>
Consider that you're allowing any character to take the benefit of this feat for free, and that the effect you're trying to create is actually more powerful than this feat. I'm personally OK with this, given that my players don't really use feats, but it's ultimately up to you and your players.
I have used a similar rule in actual play, and it seems to be a bit underpowered compared to other possible actions. I had a few of my NPC characters try to grab and pin the PCs, both to prevent them from escaping and to incapacitate them. I required my NPCs to initiate a grapple with one action, and then make a contested strength check to pin them with another action. Because the process costs two actions, allows for two "saving throws", does no damage, *and still permits verbal-only spellcasting,* its opportunity cost is very high--imagine the damage that a strong creature could do in two rounds! Additionally, once they are pinned, the grappler cannot do anything else, which effectively takes them out of the combat. While such an action was appropriate for the situation, I cannot imagine a smart combatant wanting to do this with any frequency.
However, if you do include this rule, you should remember that it will affect your future combats. It might not make much sense to try this move if there are lots of enemies, but it can completely shut down a combat with a solo spellcaster, if they ever move within melee range. It will also open up this option to enemies restraining the PCs, which they might not be super happy about. | Although the scope of this question was in regards to grabbing someone's arms in combat, it's worthwhile to note that grabbing someone's arms wouldn't *necessarily* prevent casting.
While there are some spells that explicitly state the somatic component required, many others do not.
For example, *fireball* [states](http://www.5esrd.com/spellcasting/all-spells/f/fireball):
>
> A bright streak flashes from your **pointing finger** to a point you choose within range and then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame. Each creature in a 20-foot-radius sphere centered on that point must make a Dexterity saving throw. A target takes 8d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
>
>
> The fire spreads around corners. It ignites flammable objects in the area that aren’t being worn or carried.
>
>
>
But *flaming sphere* [does not state](http://www.5esrd.com/spellcasting/all-spells/f/flaming-sphere) any specific somatic component required:
>
> A 5-foot-diameter sphere of fire appears in an unoccupied space of your choice within range and lasts for the duration. Any creature that ends its turn within 5 feet of the sphere must make a Dexterity saving throw. The creature takes 2d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
>
>
>
In cases where there is no specific description, the [SRD describes](http://www.5esrd.com/spellcasting/#Somatic_S) a somatic component as follows:
>
> Spellcasting gestures might include a forceful gesticulation or an intricate set of gestures. If a spell requires a somatic component, the caster must have **free use of at least one hand** to perform these gestures.
>
>
>
Depending on how you restrain them, they could have "free use of at least one hand" in order to cast spells that do not dictate what the somatic component is. The usage of the spell would be largely up to DM discretion and what they consider "free use." This could lead to rather interesting circumstances should an NPC rather cast *fireball* at their feet than be captured.
*Note to mods: This might be better suited for a comment, but I was unable to fit it within the character limit.* |
101,508 | Recently, my players faced off against an enemy spellcaster. During the fight, the barbarian stated that it was his intention to grab the spellcaster in a bearhug, pinning his arms to his sides to prevent him from casting spells with somatic or material components (unable to reach his component pouch).
I'm pretty sure that this doesn't fall under the grapple rules, because [grapple has no rules other than preventing movement](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44702/does-grappling-in-dd-5-have-any-rules-other-than-preventing-movement). Normally when something is outside the rules, I would fall back on the standard adjudication cycle:
1. The DM describes the environment
2. The players describe what they want
3. The DM narrates the result of the character's actions
However, this got me thinking about the "scope" of 5e combat. Certain actions, such as [Called Shots](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72836/aiming-at-specific-body-parts) are outside the scope of 5e combat; that is to say, they try to go beyond the inherently abstract nature of AC, HP and attack rolls to simulate aiming at specific body parts, which the game was not designed to do. Thus, it seems the correct decision when a player wants to "shoot him right in the eye with my arrow" is to simply say "the system doesn't support that" rather than rely on the standard adjudication cycle.
Like a Called Shot, this arm-pinning ignores the abstract nature of combat by targeting a specific part of the body, shutting down an opponent without reducing their HP. This becomes more blatant if we imagine the barbarian had said "I want to break his arms so he can't cast spells." Furthermore, one could imagine an analogous case in which the same maneuver is used to prevent a melee combatant from using their weapons.
On the other hand, creative play should be rewarded, and "doing anything you can think of" is one of the main draws of D&D over, for example, video games. If the scope of combat is constrained too tightly, combat devolves into "pressing the attack button" over and over.
My question: which case should my player's desired action fall under? **Is trying to pin an opponent's arms within the scope of 5e combat?** Should it be adjudicated via a contest of some sort, or by saying "the system doesn't support that"? | 2017/06/13 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101508",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/26124/"
] | Conditions
==========
Conditions aren't generally super easy to come by in 5e - especially those that can completely shut down a character.
If the barbarian is wanting to prevent the spellcaster from casting a spell *at all*, then from a 5e perspective that is removing their action (or ending their ability to have somatic, material *and* verbal components.) Given that pinning arms is *not* a way to stop a verbal component, the only real way to stop a spellcasting action is to stop an action. There is a condition specifically for this: [Incapacitated](https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/basic-rules/appendix-a-conditions#Incapacitated).
>
> An incapacitated creature can’t take actions or reactions.
>
>
>
[Restrained](https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/basic-rules/appendix-a-conditions#Restrained) is another potential option, but they are still able to take actions.
>
> * A restrained creature’s speed becomes 0, and it can’t benefit from any bonus to its speed.
> * Attack rolls against the creature have advantage, and the creature’s attack rolls have disadvantage.
> * The creature has disadvantage on Dexterity saving throws.
>
>
>
Changing Restrained to include removal of use of their arms to limit their somatic/material access is less impactful, but still should be considered for it's impact on the game world.
Arms vs. Hands
--------------
One other thing to consider is that you are pinning their arms...not their fingers. Nowhere does it say that there is a need for arm movements vs finger movements for somatic components. In fact, all it says is you need **a hand** free. Not an arm. Pinning an arm to prevent Somatic may not be a viable option.
If you make a ruling that pinned arms equal no somatic movement, then Verbal only spells can always be cast and possibly material if there is a focus (depending on the focus and ruling.)
Lots of spells are still available
----------------------------------
Some Verbal-only spells that could have an impact are: ***misty step*** (bonus action and remove yourself from the grapple), ***dimension door*** (action to completely remove themselves up to 500' away!), ***immolation***, ***Otto's irresistible dance***, the ***power word*** spells, ***sword burst***, ***time stop*** and ***wish***.
Many of these can do immense damage or completely escape this situation.
Grappling: it just doesn't do it.
---------------------------------
Grappling itself does not really provide what you're looking for. Even if your Barbarian invested in the [Grappler](https://www.dndbeyond.com/characters/feats/grappler) feat, they'd only generate the Restrained condition (PHB, 167), which would still allow the target to cast any spell.
Rule of Cool vs. Balanced
-------------------------
What your Barbarian wants to do is Cool. But is it Balanced? There aren't many things out there that can make someone Incapacitated. Allowing a Str/Dex-based character to use their Grapple skill on a character that isn't proficient in those skills to effectively remove them from combat is potentially unbalancing. One way of talking to your table about it is by turning the question around.
You are also effectively turning either *Hold Person* (2nd level)/*Hold Monster* (5th level) - which are spells that have a spell slot cost, *and* if the creature saves, result in *nothing* - into an Attack action (which Barbarians get more than one of) at no other cost then their action. That's incredibly powerful.
Turnaround is fair play?
------------------------
If this becomes a viable tactic for your players...they should fully expect it to be a viable tactic *against* them. While they may not always fight spellcasters, there is (if there is one now) always a spellcaster in your party. Do they want this to happen to them regularly?
Still want to do it?
--------------------
There may still be a way to balance it! Think about what it would take to make it more worthwhile. Possibly it takes multiple Grapple attempts in order for this to work - with a save at the *start* of each round instead of the end. First attack is the standard Grapple. Next Grapple contest would be to give the Incapacitated condition. Then allow a "save" at the start of each turn for Grappled character, and maybe also require a new grapple check by the Grappler as one of the attack actions during their turn (sort of emulating a concentration type mechanic... or simply give the Grappler the Restrained condition that the Grappler feat gives when Restraining a creature with a grapple.) | Although the scope of this question was in regards to grabbing someone's arms in combat, it's worthwhile to note that grabbing someone's arms wouldn't *necessarily* prevent casting.
While there are some spells that explicitly state the somatic component required, many others do not.
For example, *fireball* [states](http://www.5esrd.com/spellcasting/all-spells/f/fireball):
>
> A bright streak flashes from your **pointing finger** to a point you choose within range and then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame. Each creature in a 20-foot-radius sphere centered on that point must make a Dexterity saving throw. A target takes 8d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
>
>
> The fire spreads around corners. It ignites flammable objects in the area that aren’t being worn or carried.
>
>
>
But *flaming sphere* [does not state](http://www.5esrd.com/spellcasting/all-spells/f/flaming-sphere) any specific somatic component required:
>
> A 5-foot-diameter sphere of fire appears in an unoccupied space of your choice within range and lasts for the duration. Any creature that ends its turn within 5 feet of the sphere must make a Dexterity saving throw. The creature takes 2d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
>
>
>
In cases where there is no specific description, the [SRD describes](http://www.5esrd.com/spellcasting/#Somatic_S) a somatic component as follows:
>
> Spellcasting gestures might include a forceful gesticulation or an intricate set of gestures. If a spell requires a somatic component, the caster must have **free use of at least one hand** to perform these gestures.
>
>
>
Depending on how you restrain them, they could have "free use of at least one hand" in order to cast spells that do not dictate what the somatic component is. The usage of the spell would be largely up to DM discretion and what they consider "free use." This could lead to rather interesting circumstances should an NPC rather cast *fireball* at their feet than be captured.
*Note to mods: This might be better suited for a comment, but I was unable to fit it within the character limit.* |
101,508 | Recently, my players faced off against an enemy spellcaster. During the fight, the barbarian stated that it was his intention to grab the spellcaster in a bearhug, pinning his arms to his sides to prevent him from casting spells with somatic or material components (unable to reach his component pouch).
I'm pretty sure that this doesn't fall under the grapple rules, because [grapple has no rules other than preventing movement](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44702/does-grappling-in-dd-5-have-any-rules-other-than-preventing-movement). Normally when something is outside the rules, I would fall back on the standard adjudication cycle:
1. The DM describes the environment
2. The players describe what they want
3. The DM narrates the result of the character's actions
However, this got me thinking about the "scope" of 5e combat. Certain actions, such as [Called Shots](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/72836/aiming-at-specific-body-parts) are outside the scope of 5e combat; that is to say, they try to go beyond the inherently abstract nature of AC, HP and attack rolls to simulate aiming at specific body parts, which the game was not designed to do. Thus, it seems the correct decision when a player wants to "shoot him right in the eye with my arrow" is to simply say "the system doesn't support that" rather than rely on the standard adjudication cycle.
Like a Called Shot, this arm-pinning ignores the abstract nature of combat by targeting a specific part of the body, shutting down an opponent without reducing their HP. This becomes more blatant if we imagine the barbarian had said "I want to break his arms so he can't cast spells." Furthermore, one could imagine an analogous case in which the same maneuver is used to prevent a melee combatant from using their weapons.
On the other hand, creative play should be rewarded, and "doing anything you can think of" is one of the main draws of D&D over, for example, video games. If the scope of combat is constrained too tightly, combat devolves into "pressing the attack button" over and over.
My question: which case should my player's desired action fall under? **Is trying to pin an opponent's arms within the scope of 5e combat?** Should it be adjudicated via a contest of some sort, or by saying "the system doesn't support that"? | 2017/06/13 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/101508",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/26124/"
] | Using Opposed Ability Checks / Contests
---------------------------------------
Let's examine two cases of trying to do this: one with the Grappler Feat and one without.
### With the Grappler Feat
If the Barbarian has the Grappler Feat, the grapple does more than simply reduce speed to zero. It allows *a chance* to restrain the caster with a subsequent action. The pinned/restrained condition *does not explicitly say that it prevents spell casting* ... but let's work with what we have.
Grapple:
>
> ... a Strength (Athletics) check contested by the target’s Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check (the target chooses the ability to use). If you succeed, you subject the target to the grappled condition
>
>
>
The significant grappled condition is: *A grappled creature’s speed becomes 0, and it can’t benefit from any bonus to its speed*. As you note, that by itself is no prevention to spell casting (unless a spell requires a movement component).
Escaping a Grapple
>
> A grappled creature can use its action to escape. To do so, it must succeed on a Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check contested by your Strength (Athletics) check.
>
>
>
Each turn of grapple is a contest: grappled creature can to get free, which might include casting a spell to do so.
Action Economy Note: this attempt to escape may preclude using an action to cast a spell, but any bonus action or reaction spell casting is still available should the caster try to escape using an action.
Using a subsequent action ... with the feat
>
> • You can use your action to try to pin a creature grappled by you. To do so, make another grapple check. If you succeed, you and the creature are both restrained until the grapple ends.
>
>
>
Restrained Condition from Appendix A: (You both are restrained)
>
> • A restrained creature’s speed becomes 0, and it can’t benefit from any bonus to its speed.
>
> • Attack rolls against the creature have advantage, and the creature’s attack rolls have disadvantage.
>
> • The creature has disadvantage on Dexterity saving throws.
>
>
>
No disadvantage on attempt to get out of the grapple. On subsequent rounds you can use non-weapon attacks (advantage for attacks against caster are canceled out by disadvantage for attacks on the caster).
Note: If your party cleric wants to cast Sacred Flame at this caster, the target has disadvantage on the Dex save ... it's a single target cantrip. But that's not what you are trying to accomplish.
Even with the feat, the DM has to make a ruling.
**Recommended Ruling**: require an additional contested check to stop the caster from trying to cast during each turn. The caster is resisting with a will. (And likely trying to break the grapple). *There is no easy button, the enemy fights back*.
Note: Spells with only a verbal component are not going to be stopped. For example, a Command to "grovel" that the Barbarian fails his save on should break the grapple.
### Without the Grappler Feat
Reduce the target to speed zero, no explicit constraints otherwise, and of course each turn the caster can try to break grapple. So far, this kind of detailed restraint, while familiar in a cinematic sense from TV and movies, doesn't have explicit rules support with a simple Grapple. Since the Barbarian has not paid the price for the feat, simple grapple should be less effective than grapple with feat.
### Rulings over Rules
I recommend that if you want to add this feature or capability, and there's no feat, the Barbarian has to attempt a second Grapple after a successful grapple, each turn/round, with \*disadvantage. (Otherwise, why the Grappler feat?). Likewise, the caster isn't restrained. I'd also rule that the Barbarian can make no other attacks when trying this advanced grapple without the feat.
Disadvantage reflects how much harder it is to control a resistant opponent, but leaves open a chance for some heroics or unique happenings during the game.
### [Inspiration](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/41852/22566), Advantage and Disadvantage
Does the Barbarian have an inspiration point, previously awarded? The DMG pages 240-241 introduces the use of inspiration:
>
> Awarding Inspiration [is an effective way to encourage roleplaying and risk taking](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/67164/22566) ... the character can have no more than one Inspiration at a time.
>
>
>
The lesser case of a bardic inspiration point helping a given roll isn't as powerful as DM awarded inspiration, which gives advantage, but it can't hurt to add a few points to the die roll.
>
> You usually gain advantage or disadvantage through the use of special abilities, actions, or spells. *Inspiration can also give a character advantage*. The GM can also decide that circumstances influence a roll in one direction or the other and grant advantage or impose disadvantage as a result.
>
>
>
This is the kind of scenario where, as a GM, I see the Inspiration rules as providing that "one special time" that the player *with an inspiration point* burns that one precious point and gets advantage, to cancel disadvantage when trying to pin/restrain the caster. It is not guaranteed to work, but it can tip the odds in the Barbarian's favor for that first round.
>
> If circumstances cause a roll to have both advantage and disadvantage, you are considered to have neither of them, and you roll one d20.
>
>
>
If the player has not earned an inspiration point, it's less likely that the cool thing he's trying to do will work. If he's earned that inspiration point, there's a better chance he pulls it off.
Inspiration aside, and depending upon circumstances, you can always apply advantage or disadvantage for a given attempt if a circumstance suggests to you that it makes sense. (For either the barbarian, or for the spell caster trying not to be controlled like this). That's one of those judgment things that you'll rule on in each situation as it arises.
### No "Easy Button"
**Don't forget: every turn, the caster gets that chance to escape the grapple.** | Although the scope of this question was in regards to grabbing someone's arms in combat, it's worthwhile to note that grabbing someone's arms wouldn't *necessarily* prevent casting.
While there are some spells that explicitly state the somatic component required, many others do not.
For example, *fireball* [states](http://www.5esrd.com/spellcasting/all-spells/f/fireball):
>
> A bright streak flashes from your **pointing finger** to a point you choose within range and then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame. Each creature in a 20-foot-radius sphere centered on that point must make a Dexterity saving throw. A target takes 8d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
>
>
> The fire spreads around corners. It ignites flammable objects in the area that aren’t being worn or carried.
>
>
>
But *flaming sphere* [does not state](http://www.5esrd.com/spellcasting/all-spells/f/flaming-sphere) any specific somatic component required:
>
> A 5-foot-diameter sphere of fire appears in an unoccupied space of your choice within range and lasts for the duration. Any creature that ends its turn within 5 feet of the sphere must make a Dexterity saving throw. The creature takes 2d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
>
>
>
In cases where there is no specific description, the [SRD describes](http://www.5esrd.com/spellcasting/#Somatic_S) a somatic component as follows:
>
> Spellcasting gestures might include a forceful gesticulation or an intricate set of gestures. If a spell requires a somatic component, the caster must have **free use of at least one hand** to perform these gestures.
>
>
>
Depending on how you restrain them, they could have "free use of at least one hand" in order to cast spells that do not dictate what the somatic component is. The usage of the spell would be largely up to DM discretion and what they consider "free use." This could lead to rather interesting circumstances should an NPC rather cast *fireball* at their feet than be captured.
*Note to mods: This might be better suited for a comment, but I was unable to fit it within the character limit.* |
556,363 | When I launch a server with a security group that allows all traffic into my private subnet, it displays a warning that it may be open to the world.
If it is a private subnet, how can that be? | 2013/11/20 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/556363",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/192084/"
] | The main difference is the route for 0.0.0.0/0 in the associated route table.
A private subnet sets that route to a NAT gateway/instance. Private subnet instances only need a private ip and internet traffic is routed through the NAT in the public subnet. You could also have no route to 0.0.0.0/0 to make it a truly **private** subnet with no internet access in or out.
A public subnet routes 0.0.0.0/0 through an Internet Gateway (igw). Instances in a public subnet require public IPs to talk to the internet.
The warning appears even for private subnets, but the instance is only accessible inside your vpc. | As documented [here](https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/VPC_Subnets.html)
**PUBLIC SUBNET** If a subnet's traffic is routed to an internet gateway, the subnet is known as a public subnet.
**PRIVATE SUBNET**If a subnet doesn't have a route to the internet gateway, the subnet is known as a private subnet. |
556,363 | When I launch a server with a security group that allows all traffic into my private subnet, it displays a warning that it may be open to the world.
If it is a private subnet, how can that be? | 2013/11/20 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/556363",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/192084/"
] | The main difference is the route for 0.0.0.0/0 in the associated route table.
A private subnet sets that route to a NAT gateway/instance. Private subnet instances only need a private ip and internet traffic is routed through the NAT in the public subnet. You could also have no route to 0.0.0.0/0 to make it a truly **private** subnet with no internet access in or out.
A public subnet routes 0.0.0.0/0 through an Internet Gateway (igw). Instances in a public subnet require public IPs to talk to the internet.
The warning appears even for private subnets, but the instance is only accessible inside your vpc. | The Topic of this question is different from the actual problem which is described above. This **topic is also important and highly searched over the Internet**, and just because of this, other websites have much higher views of the same topic as it is not well defined here, if both Public and Private Subnets can go To the Internet to download updates and packages then what is the difference between them? Both should be Public then, but let me clear this and add my answer from AWS point of view, as well as a conceptual, practical point of view.
**Answer of the Topic:**
>
> Public and Private Subnets are the name of the concept, not actually a separate entity.
>
>
>
**Answer of the Actual Problem which is being asked**
>
> The warning is **Correct** technically, I am assuming you are talking
> about Inbound Traffic, not Outbound, because if you wanted to download
> software, packages, updates so you have to add every single IP in the
> Outbound which is practically not good and time consuming., so, the
> warning is about other networks and Private classes
>
>
> **For example:** if you are adding a rule in Private Subnet security group like Inbound 0.0.0.0/0 so it doesn't mean that it is available
> for Public and someone can send a request to that Instance/service/machine, what
> actually it means that other Private Subnets or Private networks can
> communicate with your instance or services, like 192.168.x.x,
> 172.16.x.x, 10.0.0.0 Private classes, which is only possible if your routes are allowed to do that. Other than this, you can ignore that warning and
> not worry about it. Here you have to understand the difference between **From the Internet** and **To the Internet**, so as per Security Group rules and help info, it will show you that warning which can be misunderstood by anyone.
>
>
>
**The Confusion**
>
> When you create a Subnet in AWS VPC, there is an option **Auto-assign
> Public IPv4** This is the main problem which makes confusion to the
> people if it is set to Yes, then your Subnet is Public, no matter what
> name or key-value you tagged to the Subnet, which means, at the time of Subnet creation, if you use a name like Private Subnet-A so it doesn't mean its Private Subnet, it depends on your use case and configurations (Auto-assign Public IP option).
>
>
>
**Difference between Public and Private Subnet:**
>
> **Instances in Public Subnet** can be accessible From the Internet, which means traffic From the Internet can hit a machine/Instance/Service in Public Subnet. You normally keep things like Load Balancers, Web Servers in Public Subnet. So when you create them, you add name Public in front of them to keep them separate from others and, it doesn't matter you enabled **Auto-assign Public IPv4**, but every time you choose the Public Subnet that you marked Public, you have to check or enable **Auto-assign Public IPv4** option when you launch an instance of EC2 or RDS/Service. But it's better if you enable **Auto-assign Public IPv4** at Subnet level to make it properly Public because this is the reason you are making difference and using Public-Private concept, so whenever you launch any service/Instance/machine in Public Subnet, it will be able to accessible From the Internet and To the Internet, means, You can hit the service/Instance over the Internet and can download updates and packages in the service/Instance as well. You can check who is going To the Internet by simply typing the command ***curl wgetIP.com***, you will see your Instance/machine Public IP in results.
>
>
> **"Because, when you launch an instance into a Subnet that has this attribute enabled, a Public IP address is assigned to the primary network interface (eth0) that's created for the instance. A Public IP address is mapped to the primary Private IP address through network address translation (NAT)."**.....said, **AWS**.
>
>
> **Instances in Private Subnet** can not be accessible From the Internet. E.g. you can put Database Server, Redis Server or these kinds of other services in a Private Subnet and no one can access it From the Internet. It would be accessible only via Instances/machines/Services in Public Subnet (Web server, ELB, etc). Because it doesn't have Public IP enabled option and also we marked it as Private for the specific use as explain, for security and unwanted access over the Internet. This is good for architecture level security to avoid loopholes. To access this Private Subnet services/Instances, you have to add allow rule in Security group and add proper routes in the route table.
>
>
>
Now the question is,
**Can Private Subnet go To the Internet?**
So, answer is by **default no**,
If you wanted to access To the Internet through a Private Subnet or a Subnet having no Public IP or a Subnet having disabled **Auto-assign Public IPv4**, you need to create NAT instance or a NAT-gateway, and that NAT-gateway must have Public IP so, your service/Instance with Private IP will go to the Internet and can download updates,software and packages.
Private IP will route traffic to NAT-gateway and NAT-gateway will route to Internet Gateway. Then your communication from Private Subnets to Internet can start, you can check your IP by simply running command ***curl wgetIP.com***, it will give you NAT-gateway Public IP, because NAT-gateway will go to the Internet for you and Internet gateway is a path of outside communication to the world and its a term in networking as well to pass the traffic from inbound to outbound. You can simply understand its main gate of the building for the exit.
**Conclusion**
The instances in the public subnet can send outbound traffic directly to the Internet, whereas the instances in the private subnet can't. Instead, the instances in the private subnet can access the Internet by using a network address translation (NAT) gateway that resides in the public subnet. The database servers can connect to the Internet for software updates using the NAT gateway, but the Internet cannot establish connections to the database servers."**.....said, AWS**
Links:
**Internet Access:** <https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/VPC_Internet_Gateway.html>
**VPC & Subnets Basics:** <https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/VPC_Subnets.html>
**VPC with Public and Private Subnets (NAT):** <https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/VPC_Scenario2.html> |
556,363 | When I launch a server with a security group that allows all traffic into my private subnet, it displays a warning that it may be open to the world.
If it is a private subnet, how can that be? | 2013/11/20 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/556363",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/192084/"
] | The main difference is the route for 0.0.0.0/0 in the associated route table.
A private subnet sets that route to a NAT gateway/instance. Private subnet instances only need a private ip and internet traffic is routed through the NAT in the public subnet. You could also have no route to 0.0.0.0/0 to make it a truly **private** subnet with no internet access in or out.
A public subnet routes 0.0.0.0/0 through an Internet Gateway (igw). Instances in a public subnet require public IPs to talk to the internet.
The warning appears even for private subnets, but the instance is only accessible inside your vpc. | The distinction between "public" and "private" subnets in AWS VPC is determined only by whether the subnet has an Internet Gateway (IGW) attached to it. From [the AWS docs](https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/VPC_Internet_Gateway.html):
>
> If a subnet is associated with a route table that has a route to an internet gateway, it's known as a public subnet. If a subnet is associated with a route table that does not have a route to an internet gateway, it's known as a private subnet.
>
>
>
The IGW allows network traffic from the internet to reach endpoints inside the subnet.
To answer your second question:
>
> When I launch a server with a security group that allows all traffic into my private subnet, it displays a warning that it may be open to the world. If it is a private subnet, how can that be?
>
>
>
It appears AWS does not check whether your chosen subnet has a route table with an IGW or not, when displaying that warning. It's a blanket warning they always show when you set up an instance with a security group allowlisting all inbound traffic. They use "may be" (as opposed to "will be") in there to cover their butts, but the warning is only relevant if you are on a public subnet. |
556,363 | When I launch a server with a security group that allows all traffic into my private subnet, it displays a warning that it may be open to the world.
If it is a private subnet, how can that be? | 2013/11/20 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/556363",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/192084/"
] | The main difference is the route for 0.0.0.0/0 in the associated route table.
A private subnet sets that route to a NAT gateway/instance. Private subnet instances only need a private ip and internet traffic is routed through the NAT in the public subnet. You could also have no route to 0.0.0.0/0 to make it a truly **private** subnet with no internet access in or out.
A public subnet routes 0.0.0.0/0 through an Internet Gateway (igw). Instances in a public subnet require public IPs to talk to the internet.
The warning appears even for private subnets, but the instance is only accessible inside your vpc. | The problem we are trying to solve is to make some resources "private", that is deny inbound traffic from outside your VPC, but still allow those private resouces to access the internet for e.g. updates.
There are a couple of ways to do this:
* You could *try* to use Network Access Control Lists (NACL) but these affect inbound- and outbound traffic the same way ("stateless"). Therefore, you cannot deny inbound traffic while allowing outbound traffic. Also, they seem to be rarely recommended anyhow (see second comment of [this SO post](https://stackoverflow.com/a/61181364/2135504)).
* You could use security groups associated with each resource. This [would work well](https://stackoverflow.com/a/61181364/2135504) but seems the less popular solution (maybe because it's easy to forget adding a security group to a resource?)
* At last, you could setup a separate subnet without a connection to the internet gateway but instead a connection to a [NAT gateway](https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/vpc-nat-gateway.html). That NAT gateway is usually (always?!) placed in another subnet which has a connection to the internet gateway. You'd then call these two subnets private and public, respectively. In other words, the terms "private subnet" and "public subnet" are really just names for this specific setup (as the other posts here state) and do not describe an inherent feature of the subnet. |
556,363 | When I launch a server with a security group that allows all traffic into my private subnet, it displays a warning that it may be open to the world.
If it is a private subnet, how can that be? | 2013/11/20 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/556363",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/192084/"
] | As documented [here](https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/VPC_Subnets.html)
**PUBLIC SUBNET** If a subnet's traffic is routed to an internet gateway, the subnet is known as a public subnet.
**PRIVATE SUBNET**If a subnet doesn't have a route to the internet gateway, the subnet is known as a private subnet. | The distinction between "public" and "private" subnets in AWS VPC is determined only by whether the subnet has an Internet Gateway (IGW) attached to it. From [the AWS docs](https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/VPC_Internet_Gateway.html):
>
> If a subnet is associated with a route table that has a route to an internet gateway, it's known as a public subnet. If a subnet is associated with a route table that does not have a route to an internet gateway, it's known as a private subnet.
>
>
>
The IGW allows network traffic from the internet to reach endpoints inside the subnet.
To answer your second question:
>
> When I launch a server with a security group that allows all traffic into my private subnet, it displays a warning that it may be open to the world. If it is a private subnet, how can that be?
>
>
>
It appears AWS does not check whether your chosen subnet has a route table with an IGW or not, when displaying that warning. It's a blanket warning they always show when you set up an instance with a security group allowlisting all inbound traffic. They use "may be" (as opposed to "will be") in there to cover their butts, but the warning is only relevant if you are on a public subnet. |
556,363 | When I launch a server with a security group that allows all traffic into my private subnet, it displays a warning that it may be open to the world.
If it is a private subnet, how can that be? | 2013/11/20 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/556363",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/192084/"
] | As documented [here](https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/VPC_Subnets.html)
**PUBLIC SUBNET** If a subnet's traffic is routed to an internet gateway, the subnet is known as a public subnet.
**PRIVATE SUBNET**If a subnet doesn't have a route to the internet gateway, the subnet is known as a private subnet. | The problem we are trying to solve is to make some resources "private", that is deny inbound traffic from outside your VPC, but still allow those private resouces to access the internet for e.g. updates.
There are a couple of ways to do this:
* You could *try* to use Network Access Control Lists (NACL) but these affect inbound- and outbound traffic the same way ("stateless"). Therefore, you cannot deny inbound traffic while allowing outbound traffic. Also, they seem to be rarely recommended anyhow (see second comment of [this SO post](https://stackoverflow.com/a/61181364/2135504)).
* You could use security groups associated with each resource. This [would work well](https://stackoverflow.com/a/61181364/2135504) but seems the less popular solution (maybe because it's easy to forget adding a security group to a resource?)
* At last, you could setup a separate subnet without a connection to the internet gateway but instead a connection to a [NAT gateway](https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/vpc-nat-gateway.html). That NAT gateway is usually (always?!) placed in another subnet which has a connection to the internet gateway. You'd then call these two subnets private and public, respectively. In other words, the terms "private subnet" and "public subnet" are really just names for this specific setup (as the other posts here state) and do not describe an inherent feature of the subnet. |
556,363 | When I launch a server with a security group that allows all traffic into my private subnet, it displays a warning that it may be open to the world.
If it is a private subnet, how can that be? | 2013/11/20 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/556363",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/192084/"
] | The Topic of this question is different from the actual problem which is described above. This **topic is also important and highly searched over the Internet**, and just because of this, other websites have much higher views of the same topic as it is not well defined here, if both Public and Private Subnets can go To the Internet to download updates and packages then what is the difference between them? Both should be Public then, but let me clear this and add my answer from AWS point of view, as well as a conceptual, practical point of view.
**Answer of the Topic:**
>
> Public and Private Subnets are the name of the concept, not actually a separate entity.
>
>
>
**Answer of the Actual Problem which is being asked**
>
> The warning is **Correct** technically, I am assuming you are talking
> about Inbound Traffic, not Outbound, because if you wanted to download
> software, packages, updates so you have to add every single IP in the
> Outbound which is practically not good and time consuming., so, the
> warning is about other networks and Private classes
>
>
> **For example:** if you are adding a rule in Private Subnet security group like Inbound 0.0.0.0/0 so it doesn't mean that it is available
> for Public and someone can send a request to that Instance/service/machine, what
> actually it means that other Private Subnets or Private networks can
> communicate with your instance or services, like 192.168.x.x,
> 172.16.x.x, 10.0.0.0 Private classes, which is only possible if your routes are allowed to do that. Other than this, you can ignore that warning and
> not worry about it. Here you have to understand the difference between **From the Internet** and **To the Internet**, so as per Security Group rules and help info, it will show you that warning which can be misunderstood by anyone.
>
>
>
**The Confusion**
>
> When you create a Subnet in AWS VPC, there is an option **Auto-assign
> Public IPv4** This is the main problem which makes confusion to the
> people if it is set to Yes, then your Subnet is Public, no matter what
> name or key-value you tagged to the Subnet, which means, at the time of Subnet creation, if you use a name like Private Subnet-A so it doesn't mean its Private Subnet, it depends on your use case and configurations (Auto-assign Public IP option).
>
>
>
**Difference between Public and Private Subnet:**
>
> **Instances in Public Subnet** can be accessible From the Internet, which means traffic From the Internet can hit a machine/Instance/Service in Public Subnet. You normally keep things like Load Balancers, Web Servers in Public Subnet. So when you create them, you add name Public in front of them to keep them separate from others and, it doesn't matter you enabled **Auto-assign Public IPv4**, but every time you choose the Public Subnet that you marked Public, you have to check or enable **Auto-assign Public IPv4** option when you launch an instance of EC2 or RDS/Service. But it's better if you enable **Auto-assign Public IPv4** at Subnet level to make it properly Public because this is the reason you are making difference and using Public-Private concept, so whenever you launch any service/Instance/machine in Public Subnet, it will be able to accessible From the Internet and To the Internet, means, You can hit the service/Instance over the Internet and can download updates and packages in the service/Instance as well. You can check who is going To the Internet by simply typing the command ***curl wgetIP.com***, you will see your Instance/machine Public IP in results.
>
>
> **"Because, when you launch an instance into a Subnet that has this attribute enabled, a Public IP address is assigned to the primary network interface (eth0) that's created for the instance. A Public IP address is mapped to the primary Private IP address through network address translation (NAT)."**.....said, **AWS**.
>
>
> **Instances in Private Subnet** can not be accessible From the Internet. E.g. you can put Database Server, Redis Server or these kinds of other services in a Private Subnet and no one can access it From the Internet. It would be accessible only via Instances/machines/Services in Public Subnet (Web server, ELB, etc). Because it doesn't have Public IP enabled option and also we marked it as Private for the specific use as explain, for security and unwanted access over the Internet. This is good for architecture level security to avoid loopholes. To access this Private Subnet services/Instances, you have to add allow rule in Security group and add proper routes in the route table.
>
>
>
Now the question is,
**Can Private Subnet go To the Internet?**
So, answer is by **default no**,
If you wanted to access To the Internet through a Private Subnet or a Subnet having no Public IP or a Subnet having disabled **Auto-assign Public IPv4**, you need to create NAT instance or a NAT-gateway, and that NAT-gateway must have Public IP so, your service/Instance with Private IP will go to the Internet and can download updates,software and packages.
Private IP will route traffic to NAT-gateway and NAT-gateway will route to Internet Gateway. Then your communication from Private Subnets to Internet can start, you can check your IP by simply running command ***curl wgetIP.com***, it will give you NAT-gateway Public IP, because NAT-gateway will go to the Internet for you and Internet gateway is a path of outside communication to the world and its a term in networking as well to pass the traffic from inbound to outbound. You can simply understand its main gate of the building for the exit.
**Conclusion**
The instances in the public subnet can send outbound traffic directly to the Internet, whereas the instances in the private subnet can't. Instead, the instances in the private subnet can access the Internet by using a network address translation (NAT) gateway that resides in the public subnet. The database servers can connect to the Internet for software updates using the NAT gateway, but the Internet cannot establish connections to the database servers."**.....said, AWS**
Links:
**Internet Access:** <https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/VPC_Internet_Gateway.html>
**VPC & Subnets Basics:** <https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/VPC_Subnets.html>
**VPC with Public and Private Subnets (NAT):** <https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/VPC_Scenario2.html> | The distinction between "public" and "private" subnets in AWS VPC is determined only by whether the subnet has an Internet Gateway (IGW) attached to it. From [the AWS docs](https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/VPC_Internet_Gateway.html):
>
> If a subnet is associated with a route table that has a route to an internet gateway, it's known as a public subnet. If a subnet is associated with a route table that does not have a route to an internet gateway, it's known as a private subnet.
>
>
>
The IGW allows network traffic from the internet to reach endpoints inside the subnet.
To answer your second question:
>
> When I launch a server with a security group that allows all traffic into my private subnet, it displays a warning that it may be open to the world. If it is a private subnet, how can that be?
>
>
>
It appears AWS does not check whether your chosen subnet has a route table with an IGW or not, when displaying that warning. It's a blanket warning they always show when you set up an instance with a security group allowlisting all inbound traffic. They use "may be" (as opposed to "will be") in there to cover their butts, but the warning is only relevant if you are on a public subnet. |
556,363 | When I launch a server with a security group that allows all traffic into my private subnet, it displays a warning that it may be open to the world.
If it is a private subnet, how can that be? | 2013/11/20 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/556363",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/192084/"
] | The Topic of this question is different from the actual problem which is described above. This **topic is also important and highly searched over the Internet**, and just because of this, other websites have much higher views of the same topic as it is not well defined here, if both Public and Private Subnets can go To the Internet to download updates and packages then what is the difference between them? Both should be Public then, but let me clear this and add my answer from AWS point of view, as well as a conceptual, practical point of view.
**Answer of the Topic:**
>
> Public and Private Subnets are the name of the concept, not actually a separate entity.
>
>
>
**Answer of the Actual Problem which is being asked**
>
> The warning is **Correct** technically, I am assuming you are talking
> about Inbound Traffic, not Outbound, because if you wanted to download
> software, packages, updates so you have to add every single IP in the
> Outbound which is practically not good and time consuming., so, the
> warning is about other networks and Private classes
>
>
> **For example:** if you are adding a rule in Private Subnet security group like Inbound 0.0.0.0/0 so it doesn't mean that it is available
> for Public and someone can send a request to that Instance/service/machine, what
> actually it means that other Private Subnets or Private networks can
> communicate with your instance or services, like 192.168.x.x,
> 172.16.x.x, 10.0.0.0 Private classes, which is only possible if your routes are allowed to do that. Other than this, you can ignore that warning and
> not worry about it. Here you have to understand the difference between **From the Internet** and **To the Internet**, so as per Security Group rules and help info, it will show you that warning which can be misunderstood by anyone.
>
>
>
**The Confusion**
>
> When you create a Subnet in AWS VPC, there is an option **Auto-assign
> Public IPv4** This is the main problem which makes confusion to the
> people if it is set to Yes, then your Subnet is Public, no matter what
> name or key-value you tagged to the Subnet, which means, at the time of Subnet creation, if you use a name like Private Subnet-A so it doesn't mean its Private Subnet, it depends on your use case and configurations (Auto-assign Public IP option).
>
>
>
**Difference between Public and Private Subnet:**
>
> **Instances in Public Subnet** can be accessible From the Internet, which means traffic From the Internet can hit a machine/Instance/Service in Public Subnet. You normally keep things like Load Balancers, Web Servers in Public Subnet. So when you create them, you add name Public in front of them to keep them separate from others and, it doesn't matter you enabled **Auto-assign Public IPv4**, but every time you choose the Public Subnet that you marked Public, you have to check or enable **Auto-assign Public IPv4** option when you launch an instance of EC2 or RDS/Service. But it's better if you enable **Auto-assign Public IPv4** at Subnet level to make it properly Public because this is the reason you are making difference and using Public-Private concept, so whenever you launch any service/Instance/machine in Public Subnet, it will be able to accessible From the Internet and To the Internet, means, You can hit the service/Instance over the Internet and can download updates and packages in the service/Instance as well. You can check who is going To the Internet by simply typing the command ***curl wgetIP.com***, you will see your Instance/machine Public IP in results.
>
>
> **"Because, when you launch an instance into a Subnet that has this attribute enabled, a Public IP address is assigned to the primary network interface (eth0) that's created for the instance. A Public IP address is mapped to the primary Private IP address through network address translation (NAT)."**.....said, **AWS**.
>
>
> **Instances in Private Subnet** can not be accessible From the Internet. E.g. you can put Database Server, Redis Server or these kinds of other services in a Private Subnet and no one can access it From the Internet. It would be accessible only via Instances/machines/Services in Public Subnet (Web server, ELB, etc). Because it doesn't have Public IP enabled option and also we marked it as Private for the specific use as explain, for security and unwanted access over the Internet. This is good for architecture level security to avoid loopholes. To access this Private Subnet services/Instances, you have to add allow rule in Security group and add proper routes in the route table.
>
>
>
Now the question is,
**Can Private Subnet go To the Internet?**
So, answer is by **default no**,
If you wanted to access To the Internet through a Private Subnet or a Subnet having no Public IP or a Subnet having disabled **Auto-assign Public IPv4**, you need to create NAT instance or a NAT-gateway, and that NAT-gateway must have Public IP so, your service/Instance with Private IP will go to the Internet and can download updates,software and packages.
Private IP will route traffic to NAT-gateway and NAT-gateway will route to Internet Gateway. Then your communication from Private Subnets to Internet can start, you can check your IP by simply running command ***curl wgetIP.com***, it will give you NAT-gateway Public IP, because NAT-gateway will go to the Internet for you and Internet gateway is a path of outside communication to the world and its a term in networking as well to pass the traffic from inbound to outbound. You can simply understand its main gate of the building for the exit.
**Conclusion**
The instances in the public subnet can send outbound traffic directly to the Internet, whereas the instances in the private subnet can't. Instead, the instances in the private subnet can access the Internet by using a network address translation (NAT) gateway that resides in the public subnet. The database servers can connect to the Internet for software updates using the NAT gateway, but the Internet cannot establish connections to the database servers."**.....said, AWS**
Links:
**Internet Access:** <https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/VPC_Internet_Gateway.html>
**VPC & Subnets Basics:** <https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/VPC_Subnets.html>
**VPC with Public and Private Subnets (NAT):** <https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/VPC_Scenario2.html> | The problem we are trying to solve is to make some resources "private", that is deny inbound traffic from outside your VPC, but still allow those private resouces to access the internet for e.g. updates.
There are a couple of ways to do this:
* You could *try* to use Network Access Control Lists (NACL) but these affect inbound- and outbound traffic the same way ("stateless"). Therefore, you cannot deny inbound traffic while allowing outbound traffic. Also, they seem to be rarely recommended anyhow (see second comment of [this SO post](https://stackoverflow.com/a/61181364/2135504)).
* You could use security groups associated with each resource. This [would work well](https://stackoverflow.com/a/61181364/2135504) but seems the less popular solution (maybe because it's easy to forget adding a security group to a resource?)
* At last, you could setup a separate subnet without a connection to the internet gateway but instead a connection to a [NAT gateway](https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/vpc-nat-gateway.html). That NAT gateway is usually (always?!) placed in another subnet which has a connection to the internet gateway. You'd then call these two subnets private and public, respectively. In other words, the terms "private subnet" and "public subnet" are really just names for this specific setup (as the other posts here state) and do not describe an inherent feature of the subnet. |
556,363 | When I launch a server with a security group that allows all traffic into my private subnet, it displays a warning that it may be open to the world.
If it is a private subnet, how can that be? | 2013/11/20 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/556363",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/192084/"
] | The distinction between "public" and "private" subnets in AWS VPC is determined only by whether the subnet has an Internet Gateway (IGW) attached to it. From [the AWS docs](https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/VPC_Internet_Gateway.html):
>
> If a subnet is associated with a route table that has a route to an internet gateway, it's known as a public subnet. If a subnet is associated with a route table that does not have a route to an internet gateway, it's known as a private subnet.
>
>
>
The IGW allows network traffic from the internet to reach endpoints inside the subnet.
To answer your second question:
>
> When I launch a server with a security group that allows all traffic into my private subnet, it displays a warning that it may be open to the world. If it is a private subnet, how can that be?
>
>
>
It appears AWS does not check whether your chosen subnet has a route table with an IGW or not, when displaying that warning. It's a blanket warning they always show when you set up an instance with a security group allowlisting all inbound traffic. They use "may be" (as opposed to "will be") in there to cover their butts, but the warning is only relevant if you are on a public subnet. | The problem we are trying to solve is to make some resources "private", that is deny inbound traffic from outside your VPC, but still allow those private resouces to access the internet for e.g. updates.
There are a couple of ways to do this:
* You could *try* to use Network Access Control Lists (NACL) but these affect inbound- and outbound traffic the same way ("stateless"). Therefore, you cannot deny inbound traffic while allowing outbound traffic. Also, they seem to be rarely recommended anyhow (see second comment of [this SO post](https://stackoverflow.com/a/61181364/2135504)).
* You could use security groups associated with each resource. This [would work well](https://stackoverflow.com/a/61181364/2135504) but seems the less popular solution (maybe because it's easy to forget adding a security group to a resource?)
* At last, you could setup a separate subnet without a connection to the internet gateway but instead a connection to a [NAT gateway](https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/vpc-nat-gateway.html). That NAT gateway is usually (always?!) placed in another subnet which has a connection to the internet gateway. You'd then call these two subnets private and public, respectively. In other words, the terms "private subnet" and "public subnet" are really just names for this specific setup (as the other posts here state) and do not describe an inherent feature of the subnet. |
5,414,967 | Does anyone have a good example of using CARingBuffer to buffer a large audio file and how to read it in a callback?
Should it be reading the audio file in a secondary thread? How do I pause loading the audio file until the loaded buffers have been played (how do I pre-queue the audio file)? CAPlayThrough seems close but is only streaming audio from a microphone.
Thanks! | 2011/03/24 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5414967",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/674321/"
] | You can find an example that uses this ring buffer if you download the example code of the [book](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/0321636848) *Learning Core Audio* [here](http://www.informit.com/store/learning-core-audio-a-hands-on-guide-to-audio-programming-9780321636843) (under the *downloads* tab). Jump to the chapter 8 example in a folder called CH08\_AUGraphInput.
However, if you are simply reading audio from a file, then using an (extra) ring buffer seems like an overkill.. A ring buffer comes in handy when you are having real time (or near real time) input and output (read chapter 8 in the said book for a more detailed explanation of when a ring buffer is necessary.. note that the example in chapter 8 is about playing audio immediately after recording it by a mic, which isn't what you want to do).
The reason why I said extra ring buffer, is because in core Audio there is already an audio Queue (which can be thought of as a ring buffer.. or at least it in your case it replaces the need for a ring buffer: you populate it with data, it plays the data, then fires a callback that informs you that the data you supplied has been played). The apple [documentation](https://stackoverflow.com/a/5476017/766570) offers a good explanation on this one.
In your case, if you are simply reading audio from a file, then you can easily control the throughput of the audio from the file. You can pause it by blocking the thread that reads data from the audio file for example.
For a simple example of what I'm talking about, see this [example](https://github.com/abbood/audioSamplingToAudioQueue) I created on github. For a more advanced example, see Matt Gallagher's famous [example](https://github.com/abbood/audioSamplingToAudioQueue). | Generally for audio playback anything that can block or take an unbounded amount of time (in particular file or disk IO) should be done in a secondary thread. So you want to read the audio file's data in a producer thread, and consume the data in your IOProc or RemoteIO callback.
Synchronization becomes an issue with multiple threads, but if you have only one reader and one writer generally it isn't too hard. In fact, CARingBuffer is thread safe for this case.
The general flow should look like:
From the main thread:
1. Create the producer thread
2. Tell it which file to process
From the producer thread:
1. Open the specified file
2. Fill the empty space in the ring buffer with audio data
3. Wait until signaled or a timeout happens, and go back to #2
In your IOProc/callback:
1. Read data from the ring buffer
2. Signal the producer that more data is needed
Posting code to do this here would be much too long to read, but here are a few pointers to get you started. None of these are for the iPhone, but the principles are the same.
* <https://github.com/sbooth/SFBAudioEngine/blob/master/Player/AudioPlayer.cpp>
* <http://www.snoize.com/> |
89,610 | I’d like to know how to emboss or deboss a more complex logo/mesh into another flat surface/mesh as shown in the example:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/1A6hI.gif)
What I have got so far is: transforming a logo into an \*.svg from Illustrator and importing it into Blender. Now that I try to convert it to a mesh it becomes quite messy and complex and I don’t know how to emboss or deboss it into another mesh.
I tried it with the Displacement modifier, however you need to really subdivide the mesh a lot of times to get an suitable result. Is there a more elegant solution? | 2017/09/05 | [
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/89610",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/users/23939/"
] | Here's a quick guide for doing it with microdisplacement. Note this won't work for you if you actually need a good mesh, but it'll give a result similar to your reference image.
1) Enable Blender's experimental feature set:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/93Fzy.png)
2) Add a new Cycles materal, and set its displacement method to True:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ceWvR.png)
3) Add a subsurf modifier; select Simple, and enable adaptive rendering:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/rhNYX.png)
4) From edit mode, select all vertices and unwrap the plane (`U`):
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/F3LGn.png)
5) In an image editor, threshold your logo and blur it a bit:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/x7wGdm.png)
6) Add the image texture to the displacement at your material output node:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/5ttd2.png)
The result should look something like this:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/b99c7.png) | I recommend to use a normal map instead of physically embossing or debossing the logo into a flat surface.
By using a normal map you should get a similar effect without all the problems of a messed up mesh.
You can use this freeware tool to create normal maps: <https://sourceforge.net/projects/ssbumpgenerator/>
In order to use a normal map you have to:
- create a normal map with a 3rd party tool
- unwrap your object
- create a new material
- create a new texture
- load the normal map image into that texture
- Switch the normal map checkboxes on (see image)
After that you should be good to go.
I hope this helps. |
89,610 | I’d like to know how to emboss or deboss a more complex logo/mesh into another flat surface/mesh as shown in the example:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/1A6hI.gif)
What I have got so far is: transforming a logo into an \*.svg from Illustrator and importing it into Blender. Now that I try to convert it to a mesh it becomes quite messy and complex and I don’t know how to emboss or deboss it into another mesh.
I tried it with the Displacement modifier, however you need to really subdivide the mesh a lot of times to get an suitable result. Is there a more elegant solution? | 2017/09/05 | [
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/89610",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/users/23939/"
] | I recommend to use a normal map instead of physically embossing or debossing the logo into a flat surface.
By using a normal map you should get a similar effect without all the problems of a messed up mesh.
You can use this freeware tool to create normal maps: <https://sourceforge.net/projects/ssbumpgenerator/>
In order to use a normal map you have to:
- create a normal map with a 3rd party tool
- unwrap your object
- create a new material
- create a new texture
- load the normal map image into that texture
- Switch the normal map checkboxes on (see image)
After that you should be good to go.
I hope this helps. | You could do this with two separate objects:
1. import your logo as svg, which will be a 2D curve in blender; add a bit of "bevel depth" and/or "extrude" in the *geometry* panel of the *data* tab.
2. add a plane mesh positioned just under you logo
Since they're two separate objects, you'll need to explicitly align their texture coordinates by using the "object" socket from a *Texture Coordinates* node.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/GKfV9.png) |
89,610 | I’d like to know how to emboss or deboss a more complex logo/mesh into another flat surface/mesh as shown in the example:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/1A6hI.gif)
What I have got so far is: transforming a logo into an \*.svg from Illustrator and importing it into Blender. Now that I try to convert it to a mesh it becomes quite messy and complex and I don’t know how to emboss or deboss it into another mesh.
I tried it with the Displacement modifier, however you need to really subdivide the mesh a lot of times to get an suitable result. Is there a more elegant solution? | 2017/09/05 | [
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/89610",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/users/23939/"
] | Here's a quick guide for doing it with microdisplacement. Note this won't work for you if you actually need a good mesh, but it'll give a result similar to your reference image.
1) Enable Blender's experimental feature set:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/93Fzy.png)
2) Add a new Cycles materal, and set its displacement method to True:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ceWvR.png)
3) Add a subsurf modifier; select Simple, and enable adaptive rendering:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/rhNYX.png)
4) From edit mode, select all vertices and unwrap the plane (`U`):
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/F3LGn.png)
5) In an image editor, threshold your logo and blur it a bit:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/x7wGdm.png)
6) Add the image texture to the displacement at your material output node:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/5ttd2.png)
The result should look something like this:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/b99c7.png) | You could do this with two separate objects:
1. import your logo as svg, which will be a 2D curve in blender; add a bit of "bevel depth" and/or "extrude" in the *geometry* panel of the *data* tab.
2. add a plane mesh positioned just under you logo
Since they're two separate objects, you'll need to explicitly align their texture coordinates by using the "object" socket from a *Texture Coordinates* node.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/GKfV9.png) |
4,710,220 | I need to write a translator for vbscript to c#. What would be the basic steps invloved to translate **using ANTLR**? I am not very clear about whether to use grammar (lexer/parser? file or stringtemplate or AST or all.
Suggestions?
Thanks in advance. | 2011/01/17 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4710220",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/578074/"
] | Is this really possible?
I'm "translating" (read: rewriting) a MS Access/VBA application since two years to C# and found out that even the online available converters (like [this one](http://www.developerfusion.com/tools/convert/vb-to-csharp/) which is more VB.NET, but anyway) fails at most basic conversions.
So my assumption until now is that there are way too much kind of constructs that are simply not translatable from VBScript to C#. | The easiest way to translate VBScript to C# would be using VB.NET as an intermediate step. VBScript is very similar to VB.NET (there are some differences though), so all you need to do is copy-paste your code in a new solution in Visual Studio. After you make a few changes, the code will be able to compile.
You can leave it at that (you can call the resulting DLL from your C# code), but even if you don't want to do that, converting VB.NET to C# is trivial. You can even decompile your resulting DLL/EXE (although this will lead to some loss of information) or use any online VB.NET to C# converter. |
4,710,220 | I need to write a translator for vbscript to c#. What would be the basic steps invloved to translate **using ANTLR**? I am not very clear about whether to use grammar (lexer/parser? file or stringtemplate or AST or all.
Suggestions?
Thanks in advance. | 2011/01/17 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4710220",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/578074/"
] | See [What kinds of patterns could I enforce on the code to make it easier to translate to another programming language?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3455456/how-to-translate-between-programming-languages) | The easiest way to translate VBScript to C# would be using VB.NET as an intermediate step. VBScript is very similar to VB.NET (there are some differences though), so all you need to do is copy-paste your code in a new solution in Visual Studio. After you make a few changes, the code will be able to compile.
You can leave it at that (you can call the resulting DLL from your C# code), but even if you don't want to do that, converting VB.NET to C# is trivial. You can even decompile your resulting DLL/EXE (although this will lead to some loss of information) or use any online VB.NET to C# converter. |
162,409 | Is the Arcana Skill capable of influencing or affecting actual spells being cast or other spell-centred details? For example, are you able to influence the effect or characteristics of a spell by rolling a high enough Arcana check? Or does that fall primarily within relation to magic items and not cast spells? | 2020/01/06 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/162409",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/59793/"
] | According to the D&D 5e *Basic Rules* (as published on [D&D Beyond](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/using-ability-scores)), Arcana is defined as:
>
> Arcana
>
>
> Your Intelligence (Arcana) check measures your ability to
> recall lore about spells, magic items, eldritch symbols, magical
> traditions, the planes of existence, and the inhabitants of those
> planes.
>
>
>
Any usage other than that would be purely up to your DM, but as described above, you could use your proficiency in Arcana to identify a spell or know lore about it, but not to cast or modify it in any way. | The closest to this the Arcana skill has is to identify a spell being cast
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
With the arcana ability, one can deduce what spell is being cast or has been cast. From *Xanathar's Guide to Everything*, pg. 85, under ["Identifying a Spell"](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/xgte/dungeon-masters-tools#IdentifyingaSpell):
>
> Sometimes a character wants to identify a spell that someone else is casting or that was already cast. To do so, a character can use their reaction to identify a spell as it's being cast, or they can use an action on their turn to identify a spell by its effect after it is cast.
>
>
> If the character perceived the casting, the spell's effect, or both, the character can make an Intelligence (Arcana) check with the reaction or action. The DC equals 15 + the spell's level. If the spell is cast as a class spell and the character is a member of that class, the check is made with advantage.
>
>
>
Informative wizard companion
----------------------------
In practice, this can be useful for a companion of a wizard to identify a spell as it's being cast to shout in order to inform the wizard to use their reaction to cast [*counterspell*](https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/counterspell). In this way, the Arcana skill can be used to facilitate when to know when to ~~modify~~ *counter* a spell being cast. |
43,213 | In the Minority Report movie there are precogs who can predict some events that will occur in the near future. Why do precogs shiver before they make any prediction? | 2013/10/29 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/43213",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/18957/"
] | It's precognition (hence pre-cog) also called future sight, and second sight. As they are receiving these "visions of murder", they are experiencing a number of powerful emotions. Bad emotions, which resonate in visual, auditory, physical, and emotional registers. All these things lead their bodies to shiver or shake. It's murder they are experiencing, both victims and murderers emotions. They are scared, in many ways they also feel pain. It's a state they fall into upon seeing or witnessing the crime.
I couldn't explain it better that this author.
>
> The question is posed even more resonantly below the narrative
> register, in the ways that the film's mood, its images and sounds,
> play on our sensibilities to amplify a sense of vulnerability, and
> fear of violent crime. Certainly, the powerful images and sensations
> evoked by our first viewings of this film remain with us, years later.
> One of us associates the film with a visual tinge of blue. The other,
> with the physical sensation of shivering; of a chill that did not
> leave her even as she walked out of the air conditioned theater in the
> summer of 2002. The film operated powerfully across the bodies of its
> viewers, including our own, making skin crawl and shiver, inducing
> sensations of nausea. One of us found it virtually impossible to sit
> through the entire film again even when reviewing it in her own living
> room for this project. Minority Report is as much about feelings of
> paranoia, anxiety, and fear fullness it induces, as the story of
> vengeance, retribution, and justice it plays out. Something in the
> speeds, the color, the jolts, the music, the screaming, incites
> sensations of panic and need to escape. The film seems to produce in
> the viewer a certain affect that we might describe as a 'heightened
> receptivity' to the event no-screen, that is, a sense of being reduce
> to a twanging tuning fork or vibrating wire. The viewer is placed to
> occupy the same affective dimension as the 'pre-cogs' - genetically
> damaged individuals who (are) can see violent crimes before they are
> actually committed. The visions of the pre-cogs are powerfully
> affecting. They resonate in the visual, auditory, physical, and
> emotional registers - **the pre-cogs are often seen shaken/shaking
> during the witnessing, as they experience the emotions of those whose
> impending death they inhabit.** Although it is not immediately evident
> to the viewer, the opening sequence of this film is one such vision,
> which has the dual effect of placing the viewer in subject location of
> the pre-cog and of introducing a sense of anxiety and a desire for
> escape that seeps into/saturates the entire experience of watching the
> film.
> -[Studies in Law, Politics and Society - pages 48, 49](http://books.google.com/books?id=nqw4bEUIzHQC&pg=PA48&lpg=PA48&dq=minority%20report%20precogs%20shiver&source=bl&ots=S71C338hMs&sig=sl_OdCp_kWSudx0Cz7_MUbBER4Q&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tu7mUpyMLoqUtAaw7YDoAQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=minority%20report%20precogs%20shiver&f=false)
>
>
>
(*ratchet freak's comment is spot on. It is right in so many ways.*)
The pre-cogs are also in water "plugged in" (as stated in the movie) which could be also be the cause of some of the shaking/shivering. They all appear to have scanners or monitors hooked up to their heads reading their brains. From a medical point of view we can only speculate that they are being monitored for health purposes and that the device could be some sort of EEG, reading them for seizure to the brain, epileptic seizure most probably. They could also be experiencing minor seizures at the time of their visions, causing their shivering. | its speculation but their precog abilities could be causing seizures
the precogs have had their brains altered in utero by their mothers using a drug while pregant while that particular drug somehow gave them their abilities its probable that it also altered them in other more damaging ways |
152,088 | So I have a boss from Ireland that works out of the UK. He tells me that he is on leave for a half term? What is he talking about? | 2014/02/14 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/152088",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/51137/"
] | Term as in part of an academic year, more often called semesters in the US, though strictly that only applies to two-term systems and Irish schools tend to use trimesters, though many third-level institutions changed to semesters relatively recently.
Schools often have a break in the middle of the term, called *half-term*, of which one is coming up soon, the exact time depending on the school. This break is normally relatively short, around a week.
If you aren't in an academic field yourself, I'd guess that their children will be on a half-term break, and they are taking to be with them. | From the Cambridge English dictionary:
in the UK, a short holiday in the middle of each of the three periods into which the school year is divided <http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/half-term?q=half-term> |
4,323 | Can anyone suggest an alternative to energy from a battery?
I'd like a system to replace my deep cycle leisure battery, I currently use [this](http://www.halfords.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_storeId_10001_catalogId_10151_productId_264265_langId_-1_categoryId_165475) 110 AH leisure battery with a 1200W inverter.
I run my computer, lighting and sound system off it while I'm "out in the sticks", It works just perfect, there's more than enough energy to get a couple of days usage between charges, I just wanted to know if there's a greener way of storing the energy - instead of using ye olde plastic box full of acid and corroding metal.
I'm not interested in using a diesel or petrol generator, I'm looking for something a bit cleaner and greener than that, was thinking about the possibility of running a dynamo off a bottle of pressurized gas or air? - I'd probably need an unfeasibly large tank for this tho!
Cheers Chiphackers :) | 2010/09/09 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/4323",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/399/"
] | You could collect a lot of lumber (like >50kg), tie it all together and throw a long rope over a big tree branch. Then using several winches lift up all the lumber high in the air, and then utilise the energy of the timber slowly descending towards the ground. The winches would convert high torque to low torque but with a very long rope, which would be a good way to drive a dynamo.
Just thinking alternatively... :) | I don't think there's anything necessarily un-green about a battery, unless you're talking about the production methods of energy required to manufacture it. All of the materials in the battery were in the environment somewhere - all the manufacturing process has done is concentrate it into a small package.
If there's anything un-green about a battery, I'd say it's the inefficiency of the cycle. While the above idea is very clever, you still have to put some energy into the system in the first place. If that's a hand crank, then that's pretty good...without getting into the question of the green-ness of the food production that put the energy into the food and then into you (the mind boggles).
Ultimately, I would look at what local power sources you might have available...wind, solar, hydrothermal, geothermal, hydromechanical. And if you want to take it really seriously, you then have to look into what energy went into refining the materials necessary to harness the energy, transporting it, warehousing it...
This is probably more trouble than you asked about, but "energy out in the sticks" is a favorite research topic of mine. If you want to get REALLY serious about it, live underground and don't need 90% of the energy you use in the first place. Then you can run a generator guilt-free in the knowledge that you're light years ahead of the pack. |
4,323 | Can anyone suggest an alternative to energy from a battery?
I'd like a system to replace my deep cycle leisure battery, I currently use [this](http://www.halfords.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_storeId_10001_catalogId_10151_productId_264265_langId_-1_categoryId_165475) 110 AH leisure battery with a 1200W inverter.
I run my computer, lighting and sound system off it while I'm "out in the sticks", It works just perfect, there's more than enough energy to get a couple of days usage between charges, I just wanted to know if there's a greener way of storing the energy - instead of using ye olde plastic box full of acid and corroding metal.
I'm not interested in using a diesel or petrol generator, I'm looking for something a bit cleaner and greener than that, was thinking about the possibility of running a dynamo off a bottle of pressurized gas or air? - I'd probably need an unfeasibly large tank for this tho!
Cheers Chiphackers :) | 2010/09/09 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/4323",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/399/"
] | You could collect a lot of lumber (like >50kg), tie it all together and throw a long rope over a big tree branch. Then using several winches lift up all the lumber high in the air, and then utilise the energy of the timber slowly descending towards the ground. The winches would convert high torque to low torque but with a very long rope, which would be a good way to drive a dynamo.
Just thinking alternatively... :) | How about solar power? |
4,323 | Can anyone suggest an alternative to energy from a battery?
I'd like a system to replace my deep cycle leisure battery, I currently use [this](http://www.halfords.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_storeId_10001_catalogId_10151_productId_264265_langId_-1_categoryId_165475) 110 AH leisure battery with a 1200W inverter.
I run my computer, lighting and sound system off it while I'm "out in the sticks", It works just perfect, there's more than enough energy to get a couple of days usage between charges, I just wanted to know if there's a greener way of storing the energy - instead of using ye olde plastic box full of acid and corroding metal.
I'm not interested in using a diesel or petrol generator, I'm looking for something a bit cleaner and greener than that, was thinking about the possibility of running a dynamo off a bottle of pressurized gas or air? - I'd probably need an unfeasibly large tank for this tho!
Cheers Chiphackers :) | 2010/09/09 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/4323",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/399/"
] | You could collect a lot of lumber (like >50kg), tie it all together and throw a long rope over a big tree branch. Then using several winches lift up all the lumber high in the air, and then utilise the energy of the timber slowly descending towards the ground. The winches would convert high torque to low torque but with a very long rope, which would be a good way to drive a dynamo.
Just thinking alternatively... :) | One alterna-power answer might be fuel cells. A more old-fashioned and commonly available one would be a generator running off some liquid fuel (probably diesel). You might still want a buffer battery for that, of course, but you might be able to get rid of the inverter in some cases. |
4,323 | Can anyone suggest an alternative to energy from a battery?
I'd like a system to replace my deep cycle leisure battery, I currently use [this](http://www.halfords.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_storeId_10001_catalogId_10151_productId_264265_langId_-1_categoryId_165475) 110 AH leisure battery with a 1200W inverter.
I run my computer, lighting and sound system off it while I'm "out in the sticks", It works just perfect, there's more than enough energy to get a couple of days usage between charges, I just wanted to know if there's a greener way of storing the energy - instead of using ye olde plastic box full of acid and corroding metal.
I'm not interested in using a diesel or petrol generator, I'm looking for something a bit cleaner and greener than that, was thinking about the possibility of running a dynamo off a bottle of pressurized gas or air? - I'd probably need an unfeasibly large tank for this tho!
Cheers Chiphackers :) | 2010/09/09 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/4323",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/399/"
] | I don't think there's anything necessarily un-green about a battery, unless you're talking about the production methods of energy required to manufacture it. All of the materials in the battery were in the environment somewhere - all the manufacturing process has done is concentrate it into a small package.
If there's anything un-green about a battery, I'd say it's the inefficiency of the cycle. While the above idea is very clever, you still have to put some energy into the system in the first place. If that's a hand crank, then that's pretty good...without getting into the question of the green-ness of the food production that put the energy into the food and then into you (the mind boggles).
Ultimately, I would look at what local power sources you might have available...wind, solar, hydrothermal, geothermal, hydromechanical. And if you want to take it really seriously, you then have to look into what energy went into refining the materials necessary to harness the energy, transporting it, warehousing it...
This is probably more trouble than you asked about, but "energy out in the sticks" is a favorite research topic of mine. If you want to get REALLY serious about it, live underground and don't need 90% of the energy you use in the first place. Then you can run a generator guilt-free in the knowledge that you're light years ahead of the pack. | One alterna-power answer might be fuel cells. A more old-fashioned and commonly available one would be a generator running off some liquid fuel (probably diesel). You might still want a buffer battery for that, of course, but you might be able to get rid of the inverter in some cases. |
4,323 | Can anyone suggest an alternative to energy from a battery?
I'd like a system to replace my deep cycle leisure battery, I currently use [this](http://www.halfords.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_storeId_10001_catalogId_10151_productId_264265_langId_-1_categoryId_165475) 110 AH leisure battery with a 1200W inverter.
I run my computer, lighting and sound system off it while I'm "out in the sticks", It works just perfect, there's more than enough energy to get a couple of days usage between charges, I just wanted to know if there's a greener way of storing the energy - instead of using ye olde plastic box full of acid and corroding metal.
I'm not interested in using a diesel or petrol generator, I'm looking for something a bit cleaner and greener than that, was thinking about the possibility of running a dynamo off a bottle of pressurized gas or air? - I'd probably need an unfeasibly large tank for this tho!
Cheers Chiphackers :) | 2010/09/09 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/4323",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/399/"
] | How about solar power? | One alterna-power answer might be fuel cells. A more old-fashioned and commonly available one would be a generator running off some liquid fuel (probably diesel). You might still want a buffer battery for that, of course, but you might be able to get rid of the inverter in some cases. |
530,340 | To save board space I want to replace relays with SSRs where possible. Most of the relays I use don't need to carry a lot of current and don't to switch high voltages. Mostly slow 24V digital signals to connect to other devices working at other potentials.
Classically relays are use for this, but SSRs would be a lot more convenient.
The question is: Can SSRs designed for DC voltages switch currents at arbitrary potentials (obviously < isolation voltage). There is really not much information about this. | 2020/11/02 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/530340",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/3663/"
] | The TP4056 uses a **[pass transistor](https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/analogue_circuits/power-supply-electronics/linear-psu-series-regulator-circuit.php)** to regulate the charging voltage / current to the battery.
That pass transistor is controlled in a **linear** way, meaning a **gradual** on/off control. So the pass transistor can be fully on, fully off or any state in between (having a certain resistance).
A different type of regulator is the **switched** regulator where the pass transistor is **switched** so it can be **on** or it can be **off**. There is no state in between (like a high resistance state).
>
> Or is it linear as in "linear power supply vs switching power supply"?
>
>
>
Yes it is. | It is linear as in *linear power supply*. It works by using a pass element, whose resistance is modulated so either constant current or constant voltage is supplied to the battery, charging it correctly.
**Update:**
A pass element in a linear regulator is some form of a transistor, which is operated in its "linear"/"ohmic" region, so it is neither fully conducting ("on"), nor fully off. The magic is in the biasing circuit (the rest of the linear regulator) which provides suitable voltage or current to the gate or base terminal of the transistor, so the required amount of current is *passed* from input to output. |
522,400 | [Touch panels](https://www.buydisplay.com/2-inch-4-wire-resistive-touch-panel-screen) seem to have a connector that has thin lines on a thin film.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/EvkWX.png) [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/2TIAa.png)
Factories should have sophisticated machines to do such thing, but what about for individuals at home? If a person wants to connect such a thing to an Arduino or Raspberry Pi, is it possible? I wonder if there is some kind of adapter that makes the printed lines into common pins. | 2020/09/20 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/522400",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/43997/"
] | You could get one of these (picture) and solder a few cable to the pin holes which then connects to the Arduino/Raspberry Pi
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/u6QOu.png)
Picture:
[https://www.amazon.com/Flexible-Adapter-Raspberry-Sealink-Equipment/dp/B0819V6G9M](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/B0819V6G9M)
6 pins (0.5mm 1mm pitch):
[https://www.amazon.com/uxcell-Converter-Couple-Extend-Adapter/dp/B07RWRK4WX/ref=sr\_1\_4?dchild=1&keywords=fpc+ffc+5+pin&qid=1600629771&sr=8-4](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/B07RWRK4WX) | The things you refer to aren't called "Ribbon Cables". A ribbon cable looks like this:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZPJ9t.png)
They're made of many conductors, each a cyclinder in approximately cylindric insulators.
What you show is FPC cable, flexible printed circuitry cable.
It's more like a PCB than a cable!
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/T5aAe.jpg)
You can design these with normal PCB design tools, and order them in factories.
Then, they'll have the shape you define, and there's a lot of connectors you can "snap" them into, and these come with info on how the connecting parts (golden in your photo) have to be designed.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/4u8s7.jpg)
There's also "middle ground": FFC, which is basically FPC with "simple" shapes that someone else already designed for you:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/NBnoP.jpg)
However, the FFC/FPC connectors typically require designed PCBs themselves – it simply makes little sense trying to connect a high-density cable to e.g. a breadboard, geometrically. So, you'd need a *breakout board* (a type of adapter) to connect your board to a connector to connect a cable that's actually a board to another board.
That might very well be the point where it pays to learn how to design your own boards so that you don't need another adapter. Also: When someone decides that it's best to use FPC like your touchscreen designer did, chances are there's high-speed signals involved, which you can't transport well on anything with a 2.54mm pitch, anyways.
But all that is very much in the realm of possible for individuals – designing PCBs is not that hard anymore, and ordering them has become incredibly easy and cheap. You just upload your KiCAD, Eagle, … file to e.g. oshpark.com, and get your PCB a while later for little money. |
522,400 | [Touch panels](https://www.buydisplay.com/2-inch-4-wire-resistive-touch-panel-screen) seem to have a connector that has thin lines on a thin film.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/EvkWX.png) [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/2TIAa.png)
Factories should have sophisticated machines to do such thing, but what about for individuals at home? If a person wants to connect such a thing to an Arduino or Raspberry Pi, is it possible? I wonder if there is some kind of adapter that makes the printed lines into common pins. | 2020/09/20 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/522400",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/43997/"
] | You could get one of these (picture) and solder a few cable to the pin holes which then connects to the Arduino/Raspberry Pi
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/u6QOu.png)
Picture:
[https://www.amazon.com/Flexible-Adapter-Raspberry-Sealink-Equipment/dp/B0819V6G9M](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/B0819V6G9M)
6 pins (0.5mm 1mm pitch):
[https://www.amazon.com/uxcell-Converter-Couple-Extend-Adapter/dp/B07RWRK4WX/ref=sr\_1\_4?dchild=1&keywords=fpc+ffc+5+pin&qid=1600629771&sr=8-4](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/B07RWRK4WX) | From site referenced:
>
> The FPC is the soldering type, no need connector.
>
>
>
If you check the [datasheet for touchscreen](https://www.buydisplay.com/download/manual/ER-TP020-1_Drawing.pdf), pins appear to have a 0.8mm pitch (P).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dsg7zm.png)
You need a [0.8mm pitch FPC to 0.1 inch pitch adapter](https://www.proto-advantage.com/store/product_info.php?products_id=3400020) or [Adafruit Multi-pitch FPC Adapter](https://www.adafruit.com/product/1436). Doubtful at 0.8mm pitch you will find throughhole connector, but SMT connectors exist.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/4HLAKm.png)
Or choose [one with a connector or adapter board](https://www.buydisplay.com/1-8-inch-4-wire-resistive-touch-panel-screen). Solder wires to connector or plug into USB for adapter.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/JBdpv.png) |
522,400 | [Touch panels](https://www.buydisplay.com/2-inch-4-wire-resistive-touch-panel-screen) seem to have a connector that has thin lines on a thin film.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/EvkWX.png) [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/2TIAa.png)
Factories should have sophisticated machines to do such thing, but what about for individuals at home? If a person wants to connect such a thing to an Arduino or Raspberry Pi, is it possible? I wonder if there is some kind of adapter that makes the printed lines into common pins. | 2020/09/20 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/522400",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/43997/"
] | The things you refer to aren't called "Ribbon Cables". A ribbon cable looks like this:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZPJ9t.png)
They're made of many conductors, each a cyclinder in approximately cylindric insulators.
What you show is FPC cable, flexible printed circuitry cable.
It's more like a PCB than a cable!
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/T5aAe.jpg)
You can design these with normal PCB design tools, and order them in factories.
Then, they'll have the shape you define, and there's a lot of connectors you can "snap" them into, and these come with info on how the connecting parts (golden in your photo) have to be designed.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/4u8s7.jpg)
There's also "middle ground": FFC, which is basically FPC with "simple" shapes that someone else already designed for you:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/NBnoP.jpg)
However, the FFC/FPC connectors typically require designed PCBs themselves – it simply makes little sense trying to connect a high-density cable to e.g. a breadboard, geometrically. So, you'd need a *breakout board* (a type of adapter) to connect your board to a connector to connect a cable that's actually a board to another board.
That might very well be the point where it pays to learn how to design your own boards so that you don't need another adapter. Also: When someone decides that it's best to use FPC like your touchscreen designer did, chances are there's high-speed signals involved, which you can't transport well on anything with a 2.54mm pitch, anyways.
But all that is very much in the realm of possible for individuals – designing PCBs is not that hard anymore, and ordering them has become incredibly easy and cheap. You just upload your KiCAD, Eagle, … file to e.g. oshpark.com, and get your PCB a while later for little money. | From site referenced:
>
> The FPC is the soldering type, no need connector.
>
>
>
If you check the [datasheet for touchscreen](https://www.buydisplay.com/download/manual/ER-TP020-1_Drawing.pdf), pins appear to have a 0.8mm pitch (P).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dsg7zm.png)
You need a [0.8mm pitch FPC to 0.1 inch pitch adapter](https://www.proto-advantage.com/store/product_info.php?products_id=3400020) or [Adafruit Multi-pitch FPC Adapter](https://www.adafruit.com/product/1436). Doubtful at 0.8mm pitch you will find throughhole connector, but SMT connectors exist.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/4HLAKm.png)
Or choose [one with a connector or adapter board](https://www.buydisplay.com/1-8-inch-4-wire-resistive-touch-panel-screen). Solder wires to connector or plug into USB for adapter.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/JBdpv.png) |
79,999 | New here! Will say right off the bat car knowledge isn't my strongest suit but i've been trying to tackle my latest problem. I've got a 2004 Ford Fusion.
About a week ago when parking up i noticed a puddle under my car (under the driver foot well it seemed to be coming from). Enough liquid to start trickling down the street. After looking under the hood i noticed my coolant tank was now near empty. So i re-filled it, with a coolant/distilled water mix and made my journey back. On the journey back i noticed a little bit of stream coming from under my bonnet and when i got home i realised my coolant tank was nearly empty again.
I re-filled it and sat on my drive revving my car, trying to heat it up and i noticed that my coolant tank was boiling, whistling, giving off steam and sure enough after a point water/coolant started spluttering out of the cap area. I thought it might be a dud cap so i bought a replacement one.
After replacing that i decided to re-fill it and make the short half mile trip to the petrol station to test it, i noticed some steam again, and this time i felt like i could HEAR bubbling coming from the tank. I also felt like the power steering got heavy turning corners, not sure how/if thats related but has never happened before. Sure enough when i got back the coolant tank was completely EMPTY again.
I've checked my oil, there is no milky white coloration in the oil etc. There is no oil in the coolant tank either. I am wondering if replacing the actual coolant tank is the next step. It holds liquid absolutely fine when the engine is off, level doesn't deplete so wondering if its an expansion issue.
Any suggestions/diagnosis would be greatly appreciated as like i said, relatively clueless when it comes to this stuff.
Thanks guys. | 2020/10/03 | [
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/questions/79999",
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com",
"https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/users/60598/"
] | I would try purchasing either a battery charger or jump starter.
When purchasing a battery charger, the most important features to look for are (apart from the voltage which should be 12V for most cars):
1. Whether it has a mode to forcibly supply current to a battery at zero volts. A modern intelligent charger can simply refuse to charge something that's at 0 volts. Thus, you may be out of luck. This is the most important feature.
2. Is the charger suitable for use in wet environments? Some are "indoor only", it's extremely likely a high-amperage (25A) charger that's very cheap is "indoor only" because it needs forced air cooling with a fan for such a high current done such cheaply.
3. Whether it has temperature compensation for charging in very cold or hot conditions
4. Whether it has a mode for batteries that requires slightly higher voltage than others (usually batteries are charged with 14.4 V but some batteries like some AGMs might require 14.7 V)
5. Whether it has a mode to supply voltage even when the battery is disconnected -- this is useful for maintaining the radio settings when swapping a battery that's dying but not fully dead
6. How high maximum current can the charger provide? Note lead-acid batteries in cars are usually around 40-50 amp hours, so 4 amp charger takes half a day to charge. If the only outlet you have is a timed "2 hour" outlet mainly intended for running block heaters, you need to turn the 2 hour clock quite many times to get acceptable charge with a 4 amp charger.
7. Are the cables made of good quality rubber as opposed to PVC? (PVC doesn't bend in freezing temperatures well)
Battery charger would be my recommendation if there's an outlet nearby, since rescuing a dead battery could take a lot of time and so much energy that a jump starter doesn't have such high energy amounts in the battery. If no outlet nearby, then you can only try a jump starter and hope for the best.
When purchasing a jump starter, the most important features to look for are:
1. The joules rating, how many joules it can provide in 3 seconds. Some jump starters claim high peak currents but are missing the important number, how many joules it provides for a 3-second start. 800 amperes doesn't mean anything if it's maintained only for a fraction of a second.
2. Is there a mode to forcibly supply current for a battery that's at 0 volts. This forcible supply mode can also be useful to save radio settings when swapping a battery, if the jump starter doesn't have a short "timeout" to automatically turn off.
3. Can you USB charge it? (If it has non-USB charging, you may lose the charger and the jump starter becomes a very expensive brick)
4. Is the cable span long enough to use it in your car? Some hybrid cars have the battery in the trunk (and you can't access the trunk with flat battery if it has an electric trunk door), and under the hood there's only a single positive terminal. You may need to find negative grounded object with good ground very close to the positive terminal to be able to use the jump starter.
Note that lead acid batteries don't like deep discharge. If it has been flat for a month, it's likely some life have been stolen away from the battery. If you can rescue it, it's very likely you have something like 10-20% of the capacity left that it used to have. If it has been flat for only a day due to lights forgotten on, it may still have more than 50% of its capacity left.
Also completely flat batteries can have frozen electrolyte (fully charged batteries won't freeze at reasonable temperatures but fully depleted batteries will). Don't try charging a frozen battery. | You will need an actual battery charger. Most battery maintainers will not charge a completely discharged battery. |
13,950,772 | I have found that certain android applications show my site, I think they use with webview,
How do I block all applications that can show my site ? | 2012/12/19 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/13950772",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/907334/"
] | >
> How do I block all applications that can show my site ?
>
>
>
You have no means of conclusively determining what software is sending the HTTP request, and Web browsers are "applications". So, either take down your site, which will "block all applications that can show [your] site", or do not worry about what "applications" the user has chosen to view your site. | I don't think there is a 100% secure way of doing this. What you can do is to attach a header property to your app browser with a server-validated key. Without this key, in combination with a [mobile browser detection library](http://wurfl.sourceforge.net/php_index.php) you'll know if the app is authorized or not.
But if a developer acquire this key there is no prevention for him to implement it. Also detecting a mobile browser is not an exact science. |
37,651 | How to get from Langkawi (Malaysia) to Phuket (Thailand) either by ferry, land (train or bus) or by air?
What's the most convenient way?
It seems there are no direct flights and no obvious land routes. | 2014/10/18 | [
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/37651",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/users/2879/"
] | Please bear in mind that it's a quite long whole day journey.
There are the following option to get from Langkawi to Phuket. I believe the same should work in reverse.
By ferry:
* [Tigerline](http://www.tigerlinetravel.com) (~3300-3700 THB)
>
> Service was launched at the end of 2012. High season route only (operating Nov - April). Check in point located inside the Kuah Jetty (located in Kuah Town) on the Pattaya Beach. Travel Time 10 hrs.
>
>
> Bookings can be made in person at a booth on the pier road in Chalong or by various payment methods over the internet. It appears there is no luggage restriction as there would be when flying. The ferry stops and collects at Koh Lipe (immigration clearance), Trang (30 minute break), Koh Mook, Koh Kradan, Koh Ngai, Koh Lanta, Koh Phi Phi (7 stops in total).
>
>
> The Malaysia Immigration & Customs officials are located inside the jetty. If you do not check-in at least 60 minutes prior to departure, you will not be allowed on board of our ferry.
>
>
> The Thailand Immigration & Customs officials are located on Koh Lipe.
>
>
> Note that if there are not enough passengers, they could cancel or postpone the trip.
>
>
>
By air:
* Only in-direct commercial flights either by Penang ([FireFlyz](http://booking.fireflyz.com.my/)), Kuala Lumpur (Air Asia) or Singapore (Air Asia). Check [Langkawi Airport](http://www.langkawiairport.com/) for further details.
* Easiest is to fly Langkawi-Penang-Phuket but you have to check schedules work out. If you have extra time in Penang, check the trip to Phi Phi or Khao Lak.
* By [Happy Air](http://www.happyair.co.th/). They operate daily flights between Langkawi and Phuket. They have a little box office at the airport. Flights and office hours are on Mon, Wed, Fri, Sat-Sun. But I'm not sure how this information is reliable. Please contact them for further info.
By land (public transport):
1. Langawi - Satun
* By [Langkawi Ferry Service](https://langkawi-ferry.com/) to Satun (~300THB). It takes around 1,5h.
* By [Tigerline](http://www.tigerlinetravel.com) ferry to Koh Lipe (1200-1400THB), from there to Satun Ferry Port - Pakbara Pier (600-700THB).
* There are also pre-organised “tour” tickets that would pick you from your guesthouse in Langawi and deliver straight to the centre of Hat Yai (~RM 70.00). In total it takes around 7 hours.
2. Satun - Phuket or Krabi (by bus)
As [pnuts](https://travel.stackexchange.com/users/4995/pnuts) mentioned, there is a air-con bus from Satun's bus station to Phuket. Tickets are 400 baht (230 baht to Krabi) and the trip takes about 8 hours.
>
> Satun's bus station is a few kilometres south of town, but buses can be flagged down on Burivanich Road as they leave. Read more at [Travelfish](http://www.travelfish.org/transport/thailand/southern_thailand/satun/satun/all) site.
>
>
>
Or:
2. Satun - Hat Yai
* By taxi, motorcycle taxis or small songthaews.
* By van (on an hourly basis).
* By local bus. It takes around 3-4 hours in total. You can tell the bus driver where you wanted to get off in Hat Yai and he will try to get you as close as he can. It costs around 80 THB.
3. Hat Yai - Phuket
* By direct bus (around 7 hours).
* By train Hat Yai to Surat Thani (for Ko Samui, Krabi). Check [seat61](http://www.seat61.com/Thailand.htm) site for trains details. Then road to Phuket. Surat Thani is about 290km from Phuket. This road journey by bus to Phuket from Surat Thani takes about 5-6hrs.
* By van that goes to Phuket on an hourly basis.
* By air, check the [Hat Yai Airport](http://hatyaiairportthai.com/) site for further details.
By land (by car):
1. By ferry to Satun, from there by car or taxi along the coastal (faster) or inner road.
>
> Along the coastal road, the next major town, after Satun is Trang (Satun to Trang is about 110kms), which is about 320kms (route distance) from Phuket. After Trang is another town called Krabi, which is about 90kms from Phuket.
>
>
>
---
>
> There is the alternative of going to Hat Yai from Satun, about 60kms, then taking a domestic flight to Phuket, via Bangkok; fastest available connecting flights makes this flight journey in about 3 hrs 50 mins(via TG). All other flights e.g. Thai AirAsia, One To Go, Nok Air- also fly into Phuket via Bangkok. ([source](http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/ShowTopic-g298283-i8829-k880771-Please_tell_me_how_to_reach_Phuket_from_Langkawi-Langkawi_Langkawi_District_Kedah.html))
>
>
>
---
Ferry map:
---
Note that Langawi local time is 1 hour ahead of Thai time (GMT+8).
---
See also:
* [How to get from Langkawi, Malaysia to Hat Yai, Thailand](http://magictravelblog.com/2012/01/how-to-get-from-langkawi-malaysia-to-hat-yai-thailand/) by Tanya
* [Please tell me how to reach Phuket from Langkawi](http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/ShowTopic-g298283-i8829-k880771-Please_tell_me_how_to_reach_Phuket_from_Langkawi-Langkawi_Langkawi_District_Kedah.html) at TripAdvisor | There is a direct flight from Hat Yai to Phuket with Bangkok Airways. Takes about 1 hr and costs around 1800 thb. From Satun to Hat Yai you can take bus or train or taxi. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.