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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
13,525 | Hi guys,
I'm working on the sound design for an animation and I need to create the sound of fairy dust. Visually think magic wand, or the sparkles that surround Tinkerbell. Light and magical and darting around.
I'm thinking the sounds needs to be light, high frequency and glistening, maybe chime like but not too musical. I have been recording bells and Glockenspiel with various processing but its not quite getting there.
Have any of you had any experience creating sounds for fairy dust or magical sparkles? Would be great to hear some techniques on how you have achieved this abstract sound.
Many thanks,
Tom | 2012/04/13 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/13525",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/3766/"
] | Have you tried the Bell Tree? It's definitely the staple for that type of sound. Check out the samples [here](http://www.compositiontoday.com/sound_bank/percussion/bell_tree.asp). It is a bit of a cliché, but you can always process it more to make it more unique.
Perhaps also think about other layers to go with it. This depends very much on how it looks visually, is it real world (like smoke or something) or is it CGI particle type effects?
Sometimes it helps to start with lots of very small sounds and find ways of triggering them at different rates, with a bit of randomness. This can be a bit difficult with traditional sequencers, but is much easier in something like Max/msp or PD. Because they're not linear you don't have to paste loads of individual sounds onto a timeline, just set up the patch and adjust the settings. I've probably got a few patches around if you're interested.
Banks of tuned resonant filters can also add that bell like resonance to otherwise non-tuned sounds.
Good luck! | I like Mark's answer, seconded. Done this sound numerous times. There's a lot of freedom but I've found most people like something sparkly, often some processed bell tree works. |
13,525 | Hi guys,
I'm working on the sound design for an animation and I need to create the sound of fairy dust. Visually think magic wand, or the sparkles that surround Tinkerbell. Light and magical and darting around.
I'm thinking the sounds needs to be light, high frequency and glistening, maybe chime like but not too musical. I have been recording bells and Glockenspiel with various processing but its not quite getting there.
Have any of you had any experience creating sounds for fairy dust or magical sparkles? Would be great to hear some techniques on how you have achieved this abstract sound.
Many thanks,
Tom | 2012/04/13 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/13525",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/3766/"
] | Have you tried the Bell Tree? It's definitely the staple for that type of sound. Check out the samples [here](http://www.compositiontoday.com/sound_bank/percussion/bell_tree.asp). It is a bit of a cliché, but you can always process it more to make it more unique.
Perhaps also think about other layers to go with it. This depends very much on how it looks visually, is it real world (like smoke or something) or is it CGI particle type effects?
Sometimes it helps to start with lots of very small sounds and find ways of triggering them at different rates, with a bit of randomness. This can be a bit difficult with traditional sequencers, but is much easier in something like Max/msp or PD. Because they're not linear you don't have to paste loads of individual sounds onto a timeline, just set up the patch and adjust the settings. I've probably got a few patches around if you're interested.
Banks of tuned resonant filters can also add that bell like resonance to otherwise non-tuned sounds.
Good luck! | Crystallizer does a great job. I would start by processing ice in a glass, glass debris, or a bell tree and then chop off the attack and doppler it or futz with the spacial feeling in Enigma. You can then layer and blend it with some sand blowing in the wind or wind buffets.
I did something similar for Science Channel's cube logo animation when the cube breaks into a bunch of little cubes and then sucks back into the big orange cube. I used ice cubes and wood blocks through the same process. I also put in some blocks that were graphic specific and threw them through the doppler anomaly setting and reversed them when needed. It was kind of a washy high end sound. I bet using glass debris or a bell tree as the source material would result in fairy dust. |
13,525 | Hi guys,
I'm working on the sound design for an animation and I need to create the sound of fairy dust. Visually think magic wand, or the sparkles that surround Tinkerbell. Light and magical and darting around.
I'm thinking the sounds needs to be light, high frequency and glistening, maybe chime like but not too musical. I have been recording bells and Glockenspiel with various processing but its not quite getting there.
Have any of you had any experience creating sounds for fairy dust or magical sparkles? Would be great to hear some techniques on how you have achieved this abstract sound.
Many thanks,
Tom | 2012/04/13 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/13525",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/3766/"
] | Crystallizer does a great job. I would start by processing ice in a glass, glass debris, or a bell tree and then chop off the attack and doppler it or futz with the spacial feeling in Enigma. You can then layer and blend it with some sand blowing in the wind or wind buffets.
I did something similar for Science Channel's cube logo animation when the cube breaks into a bunch of little cubes and then sucks back into the big orange cube. I used ice cubes and wood blocks through the same process. I also put in some blocks that were graphic specific and threw them through the doppler anomaly setting and reversed them when needed. It was kind of a washy high end sound. I bet using glass debris or a bell tree as the source material would result in fairy dust. | I like Mark's answer, seconded. Done this sound numerous times. There's a lot of freedom but I've found most people like something sparkly, often some processed bell tree works. |
13,525 | Hi guys,
I'm working on the sound design for an animation and I need to create the sound of fairy dust. Visually think magic wand, or the sparkles that surround Tinkerbell. Light and magical and darting around.
I'm thinking the sounds needs to be light, high frequency and glistening, maybe chime like but not too musical. I have been recording bells and Glockenspiel with various processing but its not quite getting there.
Have any of you had any experience creating sounds for fairy dust or magical sparkles? Would be great to hear some techniques on how you have achieved this abstract sound.
Many thanks,
Tom | 2012/04/13 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/13525",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/3766/"
] | Crystallizer does a great job. I would start by processing ice in a glass, glass debris, or a bell tree and then chop off the attack and doppler it or futz with the spacial feeling in Enigma. You can then layer and blend it with some sand blowing in the wind or wind buffets.
I did something similar for Science Channel's cube logo animation when the cube breaks into a bunch of little cubes and then sucks back into the big orange cube. I used ice cubes and wood blocks through the same process. I also put in some blocks that were graphic specific and threw them through the doppler anomaly setting and reversed them when needed. It was kind of a washy high end sound. I bet using glass debris or a bell tree as the source material would result in fairy dust. | Bell tree with a white noise swoosh. Resonant filter the whole sound to give it movement. Also some kind of envelope to give the sound some impact if it's coming from a wand or something. |
13,525 | Hi guys,
I'm working on the sound design for an animation and I need to create the sound of fairy dust. Visually think magic wand, or the sparkles that surround Tinkerbell. Light and magical and darting around.
I'm thinking the sounds needs to be light, high frequency and glistening, maybe chime like but not too musical. I have been recording bells and Glockenspiel with various processing but its not quite getting there.
Have any of you had any experience creating sounds for fairy dust or magical sparkles? Would be great to hear some techniques on how you have achieved this abstract sound.
Many thanks,
Tom | 2012/04/13 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/13525",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/3766/"
] | Have you tried the Bell Tree? It's definitely the staple for that type of sound. Check out the samples [here](http://www.compositiontoday.com/sound_bank/percussion/bell_tree.asp). It is a bit of a cliché, but you can always process it more to make it more unique.
Perhaps also think about other layers to go with it. This depends very much on how it looks visually, is it real world (like smoke or something) or is it CGI particle type effects?
Sometimes it helps to start with lots of very small sounds and find ways of triggering them at different rates, with a bit of randomness. This can be a bit difficult with traditional sequencers, but is much easier in something like Max/msp or PD. Because they're not linear you don't have to paste loads of individual sounds onto a timeline, just set up the patch and adjust the settings. I've probably got a few patches around if you're interested.
Banks of tuned resonant filters can also add that bell like resonance to otherwise non-tuned sounds.
Good luck! | Thanks for the tips guys. Really great advice.
I have had fun experimenting with some of these techniques and have managed to create some pretty cool fairy dust.
Cheers
Tom |
13,525 | Hi guys,
I'm working on the sound design for an animation and I need to create the sound of fairy dust. Visually think magic wand, or the sparkles that surround Tinkerbell. Light and magical and darting around.
I'm thinking the sounds needs to be light, high frequency and glistening, maybe chime like but not too musical. I have been recording bells and Glockenspiel with various processing but its not quite getting there.
Have any of you had any experience creating sounds for fairy dust or magical sparkles? Would be great to hear some techniques on how you have achieved this abstract sound.
Many thanks,
Tom | 2012/04/13 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/13525",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/3766/"
] | Crystallizer does a great job. I would start by processing ice in a glass, glass debris, or a bell tree and then chop off the attack and doppler it or futz with the spacial feeling in Enigma. You can then layer and blend it with some sand blowing in the wind or wind buffets.
I did something similar for Science Channel's cube logo animation when the cube breaks into a bunch of little cubes and then sucks back into the big orange cube. I used ice cubes and wood blocks through the same process. I also put in some blocks that were graphic specific and threw them through the doppler anomaly setting and reversed them when needed. It was kind of a washy high end sound. I bet using glass debris or a bell tree as the source material would result in fairy dust. | Theres an absynth effect called Atherizer that makes sparkly sounds. I highly suggest. Also GRM tools has a combfilter plug that works towards the sparklies. Working with granulator plugins might prove sparkley |
13,525 | Hi guys,
I'm working on the sound design for an animation and I need to create the sound of fairy dust. Visually think magic wand, or the sparkles that surround Tinkerbell. Light and magical and darting around.
I'm thinking the sounds needs to be light, high frequency and glistening, maybe chime like but not too musical. I have been recording bells and Glockenspiel with various processing but its not quite getting there.
Have any of you had any experience creating sounds for fairy dust or magical sparkles? Would be great to hear some techniques on how you have achieved this abstract sound.
Many thanks,
Tom | 2012/04/13 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/13525",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/3766/"
] | Crystallizer does a great job. I would start by processing ice in a glass, glass debris, or a bell tree and then chop off the attack and doppler it or futz with the spacial feeling in Enigma. You can then layer and blend it with some sand blowing in the wind or wind buffets.
I did something similar for Science Channel's cube logo animation when the cube breaks into a bunch of little cubes and then sucks back into the big orange cube. I used ice cubes and wood blocks through the same process. I also put in some blocks that were graphic specific and threw them through the doppler anomaly setting and reversed them when needed. It was kind of a washy high end sound. I bet using glass debris or a bell tree as the source material would result in fairy dust. | You can always use matchstick striking sounds instead of white noise. They have their own dynamics, and i find them very easy to use on abstract sounds. |
13,525 | Hi guys,
I'm working on the sound design for an animation and I need to create the sound of fairy dust. Visually think magic wand, or the sparkles that surround Tinkerbell. Light and magical and darting around.
I'm thinking the sounds needs to be light, high frequency and glistening, maybe chime like but not too musical. I have been recording bells and Glockenspiel with various processing but its not quite getting there.
Have any of you had any experience creating sounds for fairy dust or magical sparkles? Would be great to hear some techniques on how you have achieved this abstract sound.
Many thanks,
Tom | 2012/04/13 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/13525",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/3766/"
] | Crystallizer does a great job. I would start by processing ice in a glass, glass debris, or a bell tree and then chop off the attack and doppler it or futz with the spacial feeling in Enigma. You can then layer and blend it with some sand blowing in the wind or wind buffets.
I did something similar for Science Channel's cube logo animation when the cube breaks into a bunch of little cubes and then sucks back into the big orange cube. I used ice cubes and wood blocks through the same process. I also put in some blocks that were graphic specific and threw them through the doppler anomaly setting and reversed them when needed. It was kind of a washy high end sound. I bet using glass debris or a bell tree as the source material would result in fairy dust. | Thanks for the tips guys. Really great advice.
I have had fun experimenting with some of these techniques and have managed to create some pretty cool fairy dust.
Cheers
Tom |
13,525 | Hi guys,
I'm working on the sound design for an animation and I need to create the sound of fairy dust. Visually think magic wand, or the sparkles that surround Tinkerbell. Light and magical and darting around.
I'm thinking the sounds needs to be light, high frequency and glistening, maybe chime like but not too musical. I have been recording bells and Glockenspiel with various processing but its not quite getting there.
Have any of you had any experience creating sounds for fairy dust or magical sparkles? Would be great to hear some techniques on how you have achieved this abstract sound.
Many thanks,
Tom | 2012/04/13 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/13525",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/3766/"
] | Have you tried the Bell Tree? It's definitely the staple for that type of sound. Check out the samples [here](http://www.compositiontoday.com/sound_bank/percussion/bell_tree.asp). It is a bit of a cliché, but you can always process it more to make it more unique.
Perhaps also think about other layers to go with it. This depends very much on how it looks visually, is it real world (like smoke or something) or is it CGI particle type effects?
Sometimes it helps to start with lots of very small sounds and find ways of triggering them at different rates, with a bit of randomness. This can be a bit difficult with traditional sequencers, but is much easier in something like Max/msp or PD. Because they're not linear you don't have to paste loads of individual sounds onto a timeline, just set up the patch and adjust the settings. I've probably got a few patches around if you're interested.
Banks of tuned resonant filters can also add that bell like resonance to otherwise non-tuned sounds.
Good luck! | Theres an absynth effect called Atherizer that makes sparkly sounds. I highly suggest. Also GRM tools has a combfilter plug that works towards the sparklies. Working with granulator plugins might prove sparkley |
60,100 | I designed a pictures grid in sketch, and wanted to export the hole grid as one jpg or png, and then add it to my website. I am wondering if the quality of the jpg or png would be as good as photoshop? Is there specific settings I should use? What about color management? | 2015/09/04 | [
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/60100",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/users/50455/"
] | Sketch is designed especially for the web/mobile UI design. Therefore, unlike photoshop (older versions) Sketch is optimizing PNG and JPG formats successfully. You don't need to worry about lots of quailty settings as in the photoshop at Sketch. [Here is a tutorial for that](http://webdesign.tutsplus.com/tutorials/understanding-sketchs-export-options--cms-22207)
Therefore, go for it! | The answer is no.
Photoshop JPG export is far superior to Sketch.
This is frustrating as I have to export from Sketch as PNGs. Then open in Photoshop and save the PNGs as JPGs from Photoshop.
(This is the case, even if I set a very high jpg export quality when exporting from Sketch). Photoshop's save-for-web creates higher quality jpgs yet with a smaller file size. This is most noticeable around things like logos or areas of flat colour. |
1,460,146 | I am using Crystal Reports in Visual Studio 2008. I have about 5 pages worth of static text that needs to appear at the top of my report, so I put it in the report header section. I have a page footer section on the page that shows the page number. This does not show, and I suspect it has something to do with the long report header. How can I make the page footer show with a large report header?
Edit: The Page Footer is actually appearing once on the last page. The Report Header takes up 5 pages and there isn't a page footer on any of those pages. | 2009/09/22 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1460146",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/86191/"
] | Can you split static text between many header (sub)sections (in a way that every section has about pageful of text)? May help. | Ken Hammady has a solution for crosstabs at
<http://kenhamady.com/cru/archives/87>
It can be adapted to work with long texts in textboxes. |
1,460,146 | I am using Crystal Reports in Visual Studio 2008. I have about 5 pages worth of static text that needs to appear at the top of my report, so I put it in the report header section. I have a page footer section on the page that shows the page number. This does not show, and I suspect it has something to do with the long report header. How can I make the page footer show with a large report header?
Edit: The Page Footer is actually appearing once on the last page. The Report Header takes up 5 pages and there isn't a page footer on any of those pages. | 2009/09/22 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1460146",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/86191/"
] | Can you split static text between many header (sub)sections (in a way that every section has about pageful of text)? May help. | I moved all of my text from the Report Header to the Report Footer, and the page numbers will print. I will add a subreport to show my detailed data. |
1,460,146 | I am using Crystal Reports in Visual Studio 2008. I have about 5 pages worth of static text that needs to appear at the top of my report, so I put it in the report header section. I have a page footer section on the page that shows the page number. This does not show, and I suspect it has something to do with the long report header. How can I make the page footer show with a large report header?
Edit: The Page Footer is actually appearing once on the last page. The Report Header takes up 5 pages and there isn't a page footer on any of those pages. | 2009/09/22 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1460146",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/86191/"
] | Can you split static text between many header (sub)sections (in a way that every section has about pageful of text)? May help. | I had exactly the same problem. My report header was very long and the page number only was appearing at last page. The problem was that i had my page number in the Report Footer. Then i realize that i had a Page Footer section and moved the page number there. I also changed the section properties (it had the No Drill down option checked).
Now i have the same big header with the page number on all pages.
Bye |
1,460,146 | I am using Crystal Reports in Visual Studio 2008. I have about 5 pages worth of static text that needs to appear at the top of my report, so I put it in the report header section. I have a page footer section on the page that shows the page number. This does not show, and I suspect it has something to do with the long report header. How can I make the page footer show with a large report header?
Edit: The Page Footer is actually appearing once on the last page. The Report Header takes up 5 pages and there isn't a page footer on any of those pages. | 2009/09/22 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1460146",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/86191/"
] | I moved all of my text from the Report Header to the Report Footer, and the page numbers will print. I will add a subreport to show my detailed data. | Ken Hammady has a solution for crosstabs at
<http://kenhamady.com/cru/archives/87>
It can be adapted to work with long texts in textboxes. |
1,460,146 | I am using Crystal Reports in Visual Studio 2008. I have about 5 pages worth of static text that needs to appear at the top of my report, so I put it in the report header section. I have a page footer section on the page that shows the page number. This does not show, and I suspect it has something to do with the long report header. How can I make the page footer show with a large report header?
Edit: The Page Footer is actually appearing once on the last page. The Report Header takes up 5 pages and there isn't a page footer on any of those pages. | 2009/09/22 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1460146",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/86191/"
] | I had exactly the same problem. My report header was very long and the page number only was appearing at last page. The problem was that i had my page number in the Report Footer. Then i realize that i had a Page Footer section and moved the page number there. I also changed the section properties (it had the No Drill down option checked).
Now i have the same big header with the page number on all pages.
Bye | Ken Hammady has a solution for crosstabs at
<http://kenhamady.com/cru/archives/87>
It can be adapted to work with long texts in textboxes. |
12,428 | I just learned of Ripple and it still seems a bit fuzzy to grasp the concept, but from what I gathered so far its a decentralized exchange that basically has the potential to overtake Bitpay and Mt.gox. I read that there are Gateway points that do the currency conversions from bitcoin to fiat. Now the other question I have is how does Ripple derive the bitcoin exchange price if everyone starts abandoning traditional exchanges that kind of dictate the price exchanges from fiat to btc. Obviously not everyone is going to abandon those exchanges anytime soon. | 2013/07/31 | [
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/12428",
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com",
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/users/3029/"
] | Ripple supports a distributed currency exchange; anyone can offer to exchange from one currency to another. These offers are taken when a counter offer the same or better is made.
Like any exchange between two parties, the price would be based on supply and demand, world events, what the market will bear, etc.
The advantage is there’s no single point of failure that would cripple the market. We’ve seen what happens to bitcoin when Mt. Gox goes down or is under a denial of service attack. That’s obviously not a problem with decentralized exchanges.
And with the new [Bitcoin Bridge](https://ripple.com/blog/bitcoin-bridge-lets-ripple-users-make-payments-to-bitcoin-accounts/) feature of Ripple, you can pay anyone in Bitcoin from a Ripple wallet. The currency exchange is done by an organization (a.k.a a gateway I believe) running the freely available Bitcoin Bridge protocol, like [Bitstamp](https://www.bitstamp.net). You can see as of this moment, the Bitstamp rate is $98 per Bitcoin. You can see the exchange rates of the exchanges at [Bitcoin Average](http://bitcoinaverage.com). | Bitpay and Mt. Gox (or any other currency exchange) are fundamentally different. Bitpay is not a currency exchange. Bitpay is a service for merchants who wish to take payment in Bitcoin and receive a daily payout in the currency of their choice (including Bitcoin), at an exchange rate that is fixed at the time of the initial transaction.
Ripple is something else again, a distributed currency exchange and payment protocol. As a payment protocol, it is a competitor to Bitcoin, but not directly to Bitpay as a company. Ripple labs, the company, provides a different set of services. Looking at their website, it looks like there is space for a hypothetical company "Ripplepay" to provide the same technical support and guaranteed exchange rate that Bitpay offers.
*My views do not reflect the views of Bitpay as a company. I just work here.* |
12,428 | I just learned of Ripple and it still seems a bit fuzzy to grasp the concept, but from what I gathered so far its a decentralized exchange that basically has the potential to overtake Bitpay and Mt.gox. I read that there are Gateway points that do the currency conversions from bitcoin to fiat. Now the other question I have is how does Ripple derive the bitcoin exchange price if everyone starts abandoning traditional exchanges that kind of dictate the price exchanges from fiat to btc. Obviously not everyone is going to abandon those exchanges anytime soon. | 2013/07/31 | [
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/12428",
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com",
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/users/3029/"
] | Ripple supports a distributed currency exchange; anyone can offer to exchange from one currency to another. These offers are taken when a counter offer the same or better is made.
Like any exchange between two parties, the price would be based on supply and demand, world events, what the market will bear, etc.
The advantage is there’s no single point of failure that would cripple the market. We’ve seen what happens to bitcoin when Mt. Gox goes down or is under a denial of service attack. That’s obviously not a problem with decentralized exchanges.
And with the new [Bitcoin Bridge](https://ripple.com/blog/bitcoin-bridge-lets-ripple-users-make-payments-to-bitcoin-accounts/) feature of Ripple, you can pay anyone in Bitcoin from a Ripple wallet. The currency exchange is done by an organization (a.k.a a gateway I believe) running the freely available Bitcoin Bridge protocol, like [Bitstamp](https://www.bitstamp.net). You can see as of this moment, the Bitstamp rate is $98 per Bitcoin. You can see the exchange rates of the exchanges at [Bitcoin Average](http://bitcoinaverage.com). | You derive the exchange price by simulating attempting the exchange and seeing what it cost you.
For example, say you have 1 Bitcoin and you want to get the exchange rate to USD:
You could look for someone willing to take that Bitcoin and see, among all such offers, who is offering the most USD. You may need to combine several offers if there are people offering to take only a fraction of a Bitcoin.
But is that the best you can do? Maybe, maybe not. Perhaps you could trade that Bitcoin for Euros and then use those Euros to buy USD. Perhaps the best rate is to do a little bit of both, taking advantage of the best offers on multiple exchanges.
This is precisely what Ripple does using pathfinding.
You can think of the Ripple ledger as a giant pool of liquidity. There are balances for each account in whatever assets they hold, and order books containing offers to trade one asset for another. Pathfinding looks at this giant pool of liquidity to perform exchanges or cross-currency payments. |
49,633 | I'm replacing the wiring from a vintage chandelier and need to know what gauge wire to use. There are five lights on it. This is for the fixture only! | 2014/10/02 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/49633",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/25713/"
] | 18g stranded wire is [quite common on arms](http://www.thisoldhouse.com/toh/photos/0,,20267510_20599803,00.html)
14g stranded is often used to join the 18g arm strands, and to tie into the ceiling.
This applies to North America and normal chandeliers with relatively low (<50 each) wattage bulbs. | If you're in the US, NEC likely applies. Article 402 covers fixture wires, and explains what types and sizes are allowed.
Type
====
Table 402.3 lists the types of wires allowed to be used as fixture wires. If you're going to rewire the fixture, you'll have to use a type of wire listed in this table.
* FFH-2
* HF, HFF
* KF-1, KF-2, KFF-1, KFF-2
* PAF, PAFF
* PF, PFF
* PGF, PGFF
* PTF, PTFF
* RFH-1, RFH-2, RFHH-2, RFHH-3
* SF-1, SF-2, SFF-1, SFF-2
* TF, TFF
* TFN, TFFN
* XF, XFF
* ZF
* ZFF
* ZHF
Size
====
Table 402.5 lists the allowable ampacity for different sizes of wire. You'll want to use a wire that's sized properly for the load you'll be serving. In most cases, the maximum bulb size you'll have to account for is 100 Watt. Which means you'll likely only be looking at about 833 mA (100 Watts/120 Volts), so you can probably get away with 18 AWG wire.
>
> 
>
>
>
402.6 says that fixture wires cannot be smaller than 18 AWG, so you'll have to use at least that size wire.
Overcurrent Protection
======================
402.12 points to 240.5 for overcurrent protection of fixture wires, which tells you what size overcurrent is required for different sized wires. 240.5(B)(2) lists the size and length of fixture wires, when connected to circuits with various sizes of overcurrent protection.
>
> National Electrical Code 2014
> =============================
>
>
> Article 240 Overcurrent Protection
> ----------------------------------
>
>
> ### I. General
>
>
> **240.5 Protection of Flexible Cords, Flexible Cables, and Fixture Wires.**
>
>
> **(B) Branch-Circuit Overcurrent Device.**
>
>
> **(2) Fixture Wire.** Fixture wire shall be permitted to be
> tapped to the branch-circuit conductor of a branch circuit in
> accordance with the following:
>
>
> (1) 20-ampere circuits — 18 AWG, up to 15 m (50 ft) of run length
>
> (2) 20-ampere circuits — 16 AWG, up to 30 m (100 ft) of run length
>
> (3) 20-ampere circuits — 14 AWG and larger
>
> (4) 30-ampere circuits — 14 AWG and larger
>
> (5) 40-ampere circuits — 12 AWG and larger
>
> (6) 50-ampere circuits — 12 AWG and larger
>
>
>
Conduit/Tube Fill
=================
You may also have to refer to Table 1 of Chapter 9, to determine the maximum number of wires that can be in a conduit or tube. |
49,633 | I'm replacing the wiring from a vintage chandelier and need to know what gauge wire to use. There are five lights on it. This is for the fixture only! | 2014/10/02 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/49633",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/25713/"
] | 18g stranded wire is [quite common on arms](http://www.thisoldhouse.com/toh/photos/0,,20267510_20599803,00.html)
14g stranded is often used to join the 18g arm strands, and to tie into the ceiling.
This applies to North America and normal chandeliers with relatively low (<50 each) wattage bulbs. | Agree 18 awg for the arms and 16 awg is desirable for a splice if needed to feed the ceiling junction box although 18 awg could be used by code as long as the total current stays below 6 amps. House wiring must be at least 14 awg or larger. The thinner gauge 18 and 16 awg is allowed because the wiring is not buried in a wall and is not adjacent to flammable materials. It must be "fixture wire" with quality high temperature insulation; doorbell or speaker wire is not likely to have this type of insulation. |
49,633 | I'm replacing the wiring from a vintage chandelier and need to know what gauge wire to use. There are five lights on it. This is for the fixture only! | 2014/10/02 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/49633",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/25713/"
] | If you're in the US, NEC likely applies. Article 402 covers fixture wires, and explains what types and sizes are allowed.
Type
====
Table 402.3 lists the types of wires allowed to be used as fixture wires. If you're going to rewire the fixture, you'll have to use a type of wire listed in this table.
* FFH-2
* HF, HFF
* KF-1, KF-2, KFF-1, KFF-2
* PAF, PAFF
* PF, PFF
* PGF, PGFF
* PTF, PTFF
* RFH-1, RFH-2, RFHH-2, RFHH-3
* SF-1, SF-2, SFF-1, SFF-2
* TF, TFF
* TFN, TFFN
* XF, XFF
* ZF
* ZFF
* ZHF
Size
====
Table 402.5 lists the allowable ampacity for different sizes of wire. You'll want to use a wire that's sized properly for the load you'll be serving. In most cases, the maximum bulb size you'll have to account for is 100 Watt. Which means you'll likely only be looking at about 833 mA (100 Watts/120 Volts), so you can probably get away with 18 AWG wire.
>
> 
>
>
>
402.6 says that fixture wires cannot be smaller than 18 AWG, so you'll have to use at least that size wire.
Overcurrent Protection
======================
402.12 points to 240.5 for overcurrent protection of fixture wires, which tells you what size overcurrent is required for different sized wires. 240.5(B)(2) lists the size and length of fixture wires, when connected to circuits with various sizes of overcurrent protection.
>
> National Electrical Code 2014
> =============================
>
>
> Article 240 Overcurrent Protection
> ----------------------------------
>
>
> ### I. General
>
>
> **240.5 Protection of Flexible Cords, Flexible Cables, and Fixture Wires.**
>
>
> **(B) Branch-Circuit Overcurrent Device.**
>
>
> **(2) Fixture Wire.** Fixture wire shall be permitted to be
> tapped to the branch-circuit conductor of a branch circuit in
> accordance with the following:
>
>
> (1) 20-ampere circuits — 18 AWG, up to 15 m (50 ft) of run length
>
> (2) 20-ampere circuits — 16 AWG, up to 30 m (100 ft) of run length
>
> (3) 20-ampere circuits — 14 AWG and larger
>
> (4) 30-ampere circuits — 14 AWG and larger
>
> (5) 40-ampere circuits — 12 AWG and larger
>
> (6) 50-ampere circuits — 12 AWG and larger
>
>
>
Conduit/Tube Fill
=================
You may also have to refer to Table 1 of Chapter 9, to determine the maximum number of wires that can be in a conduit or tube. | Agree 18 awg for the arms and 16 awg is desirable for a splice if needed to feed the ceiling junction box although 18 awg could be used by code as long as the total current stays below 6 amps. House wiring must be at least 14 awg or larger. The thinner gauge 18 and 16 awg is allowed because the wiring is not buried in a wall and is not adjacent to flammable materials. It must be "fixture wire" with quality high temperature insulation; doorbell or speaker wire is not likely to have this type of insulation. |
17,104 | From *My Face for the World to See* (1958) by Alfred Hayes:
>
> Ah! she said, triumphantly: the little boy hurts, doesn't it? I said, stonily, it might be a good idea if, instead of a psychiatrist, she stopped off one afternoon at **a delousing station**.
>
>
> Did I (with her eyes widely open) really think so?
>
>
> Yes: I thought so. A delousing station might, after all, be ever so much more helpful than some poor doctor trying, in a scheduled hour, to disentangle that **soul** of hers.
>
>
> **How nice to say she had one.**
>
>
> She had one. Oh stained a little and dirtied a little and cheap a little. But she had one.
>
>
> White and fluttery?
>
>
> White and fluttery and from the hand of God.
>
>
> She was delighted. A **soul**: an actual **soul**. No one, in years, had used the word. Were souls coming back, like **mahjong**? But it was such a waste, wasn't it, to have bothered giving her **one**. so superfluous. It was one of the least necessary things. A **soul**, how silly. Of what possible use could it be, except to get in the way and trip her, at critical moments, like a nightgown that was a bit too long?
>
>
> She was smiling, with her head somewhat to one side, tracing the rim of the martini glass with her finger.
>
>
> That was the trouble: **they** kept giving you things you didn't need. They never gave you quite what you really needed. Enough guts, for example.
>
>
> **Didn't she have her share?**
>
>
> Sadly, no. No she didn't. she didn't have nearly enough. **she could use more and more**. she could use scads of it for what she wanted to do. she'd trade it in: one **soul**, slightly damaged, for its equivalent in **guts**. Did I know a buyer? someone interested in second-hand **souls**? someone who'd care to exchange? Really: she was serious. She was perfectly serious. She'd love to get rid of the damn thing; it was such a nuisance having one, and being expected to take care of it, when really there wasn't time, and there were so many other more important things which needed her constant attention.
>
>
> Was I still brooding about the little boy?
>
>
>
I don't get the meaning of the whole context clearly and I think it is because the meaning of the "soul" is unclear to me. Does "soul" in this context mean "one person" or does it mean "her spirits"? it is somehow unclear to me. I think it means "person", but in the phrase: "to disentangle that soul of hers", I thought it means "spirits".
The meaning of some other words or phrase in this context that I wrote in bold is also unclear to me and maybe because the meaning of the word "soul" is unclear to me. Does "delousing station" mean "somewhere without bad people"? Does "guts" means "courage" and the writer is saying "some man who the girl become friend with give her courage"? The meaning of "did she have her shire?" is really unclear to me. Does it mean "some courage that she get"? I don't know whom "they" refers to.
Could you interpret this for me?
(I asked this question in ell.stackexchange with another title and they guide me to ask my question in this forum) | 2021/01/09 | [
"https://literature.stackexchange.com/questions/17104",
"https://literature.stackexchange.com",
"https://literature.stackexchange.com/users/11834/"
] | A delousing station would generally be a place that gets rid of your [lice](https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/louse) (small insects that live in your hair). However, in this extract, it seems to means a place that will stop you from being a louse (a contemptible or unpleasant person) yourself.
So *delousing station* is wordplay on the meaning of the word *louse.* The same thing is true for [*soul*](https://www.lexico.com/definition/soul) — the various usages of the word *soul* mean different things.
One meaning of *soul* is the part of a person that lives on after death, as opposed to their body (and either goes to heaven or to hell). This is often represented as a "white and fluttery thing." In folklore, people sometimes "sell their soul to the devil"; this is a deal where they go to Hell after they die in exchange for getting something they want in this life.
Another meaning is a person's emotional nature — this is presumably what the psychiatrist is treating.
For a third meaning, if you are [soulless](https://www.lexico.com/definition/soulless), you lack compassion or other human feelings. This is implicit when she talks about getting rid of her soul.
And guts means courage here.
Mahjongg means the game ... it presumably went out of fashion, and then was coming back into fashion around the time this was written.
For some of your other questions, "how nice to say she had one" refers to her soul; "didn't she have her share" refers to guts. | From the excerpt, it seems an argument could be made that "soul" refers to some sort of ethicality - (moral) cleanliness and purity.
The mention of a psychiatrist suggests some manner of mental illness. This could be from trauma or psychological disorder. White is a colour that generally represents purity and goodness.
Additionally, the mention of God, combined with the talk of a "delousing station," suggests that we might turn to biblical interpretation.
In Exo 8:16-19, one of the Plagues of Egypt was lice. On a basic level we can assume this further supports some kind of manifestation of evil. Lice are also small and difficult to find; this suggests that the woman is plagued by some sort of indeterminate evil.
It seems overall as though the woman is struggling internally with "good and evil."
I wonder if the part about the "gut" has anything to do with biblical sayings related to consumption, gluttony, and material desire. |
23,135 | 1. Go to this website: <http://parts-of-speech.info/>
2. Now go to this Wikipedia article: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_psychology>
3. Grab the first paragraph and feed it into POS tagger to see the
tags. This is an image of the result:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/9cgNz.png)
However, as human beings, to understand this text, we need to understand some concepts that are denoted by more than one word:
* Evolutionary psychology
* Natural science
* Natural selection
* ...
These are technical terms that mean more than simply a bunch of words and they are not tagged. For example, if you know **natural** and **selection**, you don't necessarily know **natural selection**.
Is there a technical term to refer to concepts which are composed of more than one word? Also, is there a way to identify them in a given text? In other words, what is the name for technical terms in Linguistics, and how does find technical terms using NLP algorithms and techniques? | 2017/06/09 | [
"https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/23135",
"https://linguistics.stackexchange.com",
"https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/users/141/"
] | There are several terminologies for such words. Here are their definitions found in Wikipedia:
**Multi-word Expressions (MWEs):** *A multiword expression (MWE), also called phraseme, is a lexeme made up of a sequence of two or more lexemes that has properties that are not predictable from the properties of the individual lexemes or their normal mode of combination.* [[URL]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiword_expression)
**Terminology:** *the study of terms and their use. Terms are words and compound words or multi-word expressions that in specific contexts are given specific meanings—these may deviate from the meanings the same words have in other contexts and in everyday language.* [[URL]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminology)
**Collocations:** *In corpus linguistics, a collocation is a sequence of words or terms that co-occur more often than would be expected by chance.* [[URL]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collocation)
Note that all of these are similar. Both "collocations" and "terms" are "MWEs". The terms are usually MWEs that are specific for a given topic, while collocations are MWEs which co-occur together in a corpus more frequently than by chance. Collocations and terms often coincide (you can always use a predefined MWE dictionary with terms/collocations).
If you want to discover MWEs in an unsupervised manner by using the corpus statistics - you should use [collocation extraction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collocation_extraction) techniques. There have been plenty of work on collocation extraction, so it should be easy for you to find software or some APIs.
Here's a list of tools (feel free to edit the list):
* Software:
+ [Collocation extraction software: Collocate](https://www.athel.com/colloc.html)
+ [Collocation Extract](http://en.freedownloadmanager.org/Windows-PC/Collocation-Extract-FREE.html)
+ [Collocation Extract (other source)](http://pioneer.chula.ac.th/~awirote/resources/collocation-extract.html)
* APIs:
+ [Java] Stanford's CoreNLP [CollocationFinder](https://nlp.stanford.edu/nlp/javadoc/javanlp/edu/stanford/nlp/trees/CollocationFinder.html) (predifined, uses WordNet)
+ [Java] Mahout's [collocation extraction](https://mahout.apache.org/users/basics/collocations.html)
* Resources (all of its MWEs can be seen as collocations/terms)
+ [WordNet](https://wordnet.princeton.edu/)
+ [Wiktionary](https://www.wiktionary.org/)
In my opinion, a nice reading resource is the paper ["50-something years of work on collocations"](http://www.linguistics.ucsb.edu/faculty/stgries/research/2013_STG_DeltaP&H_IJCL.pdf). | You are dealing with **[terminology](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminology)** (a discipline of applied linguistics) and **[term extraction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminology_extraction)**. You are looking for **terms**. The quoted wikipedia articles will give you some starters for further reading. |
23,135 | 1. Go to this website: <http://parts-of-speech.info/>
2. Now go to this Wikipedia article: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_psychology>
3. Grab the first paragraph and feed it into POS tagger to see the
tags. This is an image of the result:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/9cgNz.png)
However, as human beings, to understand this text, we need to understand some concepts that are denoted by more than one word:
* Evolutionary psychology
* Natural science
* Natural selection
* ...
These are technical terms that mean more than simply a bunch of words and they are not tagged. For example, if you know **natural** and **selection**, you don't necessarily know **natural selection**.
Is there a technical term to refer to concepts which are composed of more than one word? Also, is there a way to identify them in a given text? In other words, what is the name for technical terms in Linguistics, and how does find technical terms using NLP algorithms and techniques? | 2017/06/09 | [
"https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/23135",
"https://linguistics.stackexchange.com",
"https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/users/141/"
] | You are dealing with **[terminology](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminology)** (a discipline of applied linguistics) and **[term extraction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminology_extraction)**. You are looking for **terms**. The quoted wikipedia articles will give you some starters for further reading. | You may also want to look into **Idioms**. An Idiom is a phrase (series of words, usually) whose meaning is not composed of its parts, at least not without a layer of metaphorical or (usually lost) historical meaning. For example,
* The fly [kicked the bucket] (to mean the fly died)
is an idiom since knowing what [kick] and [the bucket] mean does not allow one to derive what [kick the bucket] means. It may be productive to look into whether or not [natural science] can be derived from what [natural] and [science] means in the technical sense. |
23,135 | 1. Go to this website: <http://parts-of-speech.info/>
2. Now go to this Wikipedia article: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_psychology>
3. Grab the first paragraph and feed it into POS tagger to see the
tags. This is an image of the result:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/9cgNz.png)
However, as human beings, to understand this text, we need to understand some concepts that are denoted by more than one word:
* Evolutionary psychology
* Natural science
* Natural selection
* ...
These are technical terms that mean more than simply a bunch of words and they are not tagged. For example, if you know **natural** and **selection**, you don't necessarily know **natural selection**.
Is there a technical term to refer to concepts which are composed of more than one word? Also, is there a way to identify them in a given text? In other words, what is the name for technical terms in Linguistics, and how does find technical terms using NLP algorithms and techniques? | 2017/06/09 | [
"https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/23135",
"https://linguistics.stackexchange.com",
"https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/users/141/"
] | There are several terminologies for such words. Here are their definitions found in Wikipedia:
**Multi-word Expressions (MWEs):** *A multiword expression (MWE), also called phraseme, is a lexeme made up of a sequence of two or more lexemes that has properties that are not predictable from the properties of the individual lexemes or their normal mode of combination.* [[URL]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiword_expression)
**Terminology:** *the study of terms and their use. Terms are words and compound words or multi-word expressions that in specific contexts are given specific meanings—these may deviate from the meanings the same words have in other contexts and in everyday language.* [[URL]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminology)
**Collocations:** *In corpus linguistics, a collocation is a sequence of words or terms that co-occur more often than would be expected by chance.* [[URL]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collocation)
Note that all of these are similar. Both "collocations" and "terms" are "MWEs". The terms are usually MWEs that are specific for a given topic, while collocations are MWEs which co-occur together in a corpus more frequently than by chance. Collocations and terms often coincide (you can always use a predefined MWE dictionary with terms/collocations).
If you want to discover MWEs in an unsupervised manner by using the corpus statistics - you should use [collocation extraction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collocation_extraction) techniques. There have been plenty of work on collocation extraction, so it should be easy for you to find software or some APIs.
Here's a list of tools (feel free to edit the list):
* Software:
+ [Collocation extraction software: Collocate](https://www.athel.com/colloc.html)
+ [Collocation Extract](http://en.freedownloadmanager.org/Windows-PC/Collocation-Extract-FREE.html)
+ [Collocation Extract (other source)](http://pioneer.chula.ac.th/~awirote/resources/collocation-extract.html)
* APIs:
+ [Java] Stanford's CoreNLP [CollocationFinder](https://nlp.stanford.edu/nlp/javadoc/javanlp/edu/stanford/nlp/trees/CollocationFinder.html) (predifined, uses WordNet)
+ [Java] Mahout's [collocation extraction](https://mahout.apache.org/users/basics/collocations.html)
* Resources (all of its MWEs can be seen as collocations/terms)
+ [WordNet](https://wordnet.princeton.edu/)
+ [Wiktionary](https://www.wiktionary.org/)
In my opinion, a nice reading resource is the paper ["50-something years of work on collocations"](http://www.linguistics.ucsb.edu/faculty/stgries/research/2013_STG_DeltaP&H_IJCL.pdf). | These are called multi-word expressions (MWEs). Before we put things into a POS tagger, we need to perform another process known as *tokenisation* to separate characters into words. This is especially important in Chinese, where there are no whitespaces at all, but is also needed in English, where strings surrounded by word boundaries (in the sense of regex) are not always words either.
For solutions, you can [search on Google scholar](https://scholar.google.com.hk/scholar?q=multiword%20expressions&btnG=&hl=zh-TW&as_sdt=0%2C5); there is a huge literature on that. :) |
23,135 | 1. Go to this website: <http://parts-of-speech.info/>
2. Now go to this Wikipedia article: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_psychology>
3. Grab the first paragraph and feed it into POS tagger to see the
tags. This is an image of the result:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/9cgNz.png)
However, as human beings, to understand this text, we need to understand some concepts that are denoted by more than one word:
* Evolutionary psychology
* Natural science
* Natural selection
* ...
These are technical terms that mean more than simply a bunch of words and they are not tagged. For example, if you know **natural** and **selection**, you don't necessarily know **natural selection**.
Is there a technical term to refer to concepts which are composed of more than one word? Also, is there a way to identify them in a given text? In other words, what is the name for technical terms in Linguistics, and how does find technical terms using NLP algorithms and techniques? | 2017/06/09 | [
"https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/23135",
"https://linguistics.stackexchange.com",
"https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/users/141/"
] | These are called multi-word expressions (MWEs). Before we put things into a POS tagger, we need to perform another process known as *tokenisation* to separate characters into words. This is especially important in Chinese, where there are no whitespaces at all, but is also needed in English, where strings surrounded by word boundaries (in the sense of regex) are not always words either.
For solutions, you can [search on Google scholar](https://scholar.google.com.hk/scholar?q=multiword%20expressions&btnG=&hl=zh-TW&as_sdt=0%2C5); there is a huge literature on that. :) | You may also want to look into **Idioms**. An Idiom is a phrase (series of words, usually) whose meaning is not composed of its parts, at least not without a layer of metaphorical or (usually lost) historical meaning. For example,
* The fly [kicked the bucket] (to mean the fly died)
is an idiom since knowing what [kick] and [the bucket] mean does not allow one to derive what [kick the bucket] means. It may be productive to look into whether or not [natural science] can be derived from what [natural] and [science] means in the technical sense. |
23,135 | 1. Go to this website: <http://parts-of-speech.info/>
2. Now go to this Wikipedia article: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_psychology>
3. Grab the first paragraph and feed it into POS tagger to see the
tags. This is an image of the result:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/9cgNz.png)
However, as human beings, to understand this text, we need to understand some concepts that are denoted by more than one word:
* Evolutionary psychology
* Natural science
* Natural selection
* ...
These are technical terms that mean more than simply a bunch of words and they are not tagged. For example, if you know **natural** and **selection**, you don't necessarily know **natural selection**.
Is there a technical term to refer to concepts which are composed of more than one word? Also, is there a way to identify them in a given text? In other words, what is the name for technical terms in Linguistics, and how does find technical terms using NLP algorithms and techniques? | 2017/06/09 | [
"https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/23135",
"https://linguistics.stackexchange.com",
"https://linguistics.stackexchange.com/users/141/"
] | There are several terminologies for such words. Here are their definitions found in Wikipedia:
**Multi-word Expressions (MWEs):** *A multiword expression (MWE), also called phraseme, is a lexeme made up of a sequence of two or more lexemes that has properties that are not predictable from the properties of the individual lexemes or their normal mode of combination.* [[URL]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiword_expression)
**Terminology:** *the study of terms and their use. Terms are words and compound words or multi-word expressions that in specific contexts are given specific meanings—these may deviate from the meanings the same words have in other contexts and in everyday language.* [[URL]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminology)
**Collocations:** *In corpus linguistics, a collocation is a sequence of words or terms that co-occur more often than would be expected by chance.* [[URL]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collocation)
Note that all of these are similar. Both "collocations" and "terms" are "MWEs". The terms are usually MWEs that are specific for a given topic, while collocations are MWEs which co-occur together in a corpus more frequently than by chance. Collocations and terms often coincide (you can always use a predefined MWE dictionary with terms/collocations).
If you want to discover MWEs in an unsupervised manner by using the corpus statistics - you should use [collocation extraction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collocation_extraction) techniques. There have been plenty of work on collocation extraction, so it should be easy for you to find software or some APIs.
Here's a list of tools (feel free to edit the list):
* Software:
+ [Collocation extraction software: Collocate](https://www.athel.com/colloc.html)
+ [Collocation Extract](http://en.freedownloadmanager.org/Windows-PC/Collocation-Extract-FREE.html)
+ [Collocation Extract (other source)](http://pioneer.chula.ac.th/~awirote/resources/collocation-extract.html)
* APIs:
+ [Java] Stanford's CoreNLP [CollocationFinder](https://nlp.stanford.edu/nlp/javadoc/javanlp/edu/stanford/nlp/trees/CollocationFinder.html) (predifined, uses WordNet)
+ [Java] Mahout's [collocation extraction](https://mahout.apache.org/users/basics/collocations.html)
* Resources (all of its MWEs can be seen as collocations/terms)
+ [WordNet](https://wordnet.princeton.edu/)
+ [Wiktionary](https://www.wiktionary.org/)
In my opinion, a nice reading resource is the paper ["50-something years of work on collocations"](http://www.linguistics.ucsb.edu/faculty/stgries/research/2013_STG_DeltaP&H_IJCL.pdf). | You may also want to look into **Idioms**. An Idiom is a phrase (series of words, usually) whose meaning is not composed of its parts, at least not without a layer of metaphorical or (usually lost) historical meaning. For example,
* The fly [kicked the bucket] (to mean the fly died)
is an idiom since knowing what [kick] and [the bucket] mean does not allow one to derive what [kick the bucket] means. It may be productive to look into whether or not [natural science] can be derived from what [natural] and [science] means in the technical sense. |
91,576 | Are the Jazz Masses, like the ones Mary Lou Williams and Joe Masters composed still licit forms of the Mass or have they been officially suppressed at some point in the last 50-60 years? | 2022/06/14 | [
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/91576",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/users/4/"
] | The 1967 instruction *[Musicam Sacram](https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_instr_19670305_musicam-sacram_en.html)* stated
>
> In permitting and using musical instruments, the culture and traditions of individual peoples must be taken into account. However, those instruments which are, by common opinion and use, suitable for secular music only, are to be altogether prohibited from every liturgical celebration and from popular devotions.
>
>
>
Note that this was written 8 years before *Mary Lou's Mass*, and the same year as Masters' *The Jazz Mass*.
In the 2003 *[Chirograph for the Centenary of the Motu Proprio "Tra le Sollecitudini" On Sacred Music](https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/letters/2003/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_20031203_musica-sacra.html)* St John Paul II wrote:
>
> With regard to compositions of liturgical music, I make my own the "general rule" that St Pius X formulated in these words: "The more closely a composition for church approaches in its movement, inspiration and savour the Gregorian melodic form, the more sacred and liturgical it becomes; and the more out of harmony it is with that supreme model, the less worthy it is of the temple"
>
>
>
And so in 1903 the rules for church music had been thoroughly formulated by St Pius X in *[Tra Le Sollecitudini](https://adoremus.org/1903/11/tra-le-sollecitudini/)*
Therefore, it seems any "jazz mass" could only take place either outside of a Catholic Mass, or in a Catholic Mass only illicitly. | They are certainly not suppressed, if not less popular than at one point in time. Various churches in the US have weekly Jazz Masses, and multiple dioceses sponsor annual ones (while others have commissioned them for special occasions). There's one coming up next month in Detroit.
This, of course, says nothing on the topic of whether they are licit canonically, but I should doubt that stalwart conservatives like Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone would knowingly celebrate illicit Masses in their cathedral every year. One Jazz Mass you mentioned, from Mary Lou Williams, premiered at St Patrick's Cathedral, if I'm not mistaken.
Certain Vatican music docs from the 1960s (often interpreted as banning certain, usually African-American music forms) are hardly applied even in Rome today, so I suspect they represent a particular historical perspective that has since been superseded by other pronouncements and norms. |
4,618 | I didn't see a related or similar question, but if you can find one, please link it and I'll close this.
**Background**
I had little experience in high school and college and learned some of my skills later. My first two serious girlfriends were in my twenties and they both cheated. From this I realized I didn't enjoy serious relationships, so I've avoided them. I have always been honest about this with people I date: "I'm just having fun and don't want this to ever get serious." This is my way of making it clear so that if the person wants "something more" - like marriage - they can move on faster. I just want to have fun - hang out, party, etc with the expectation that we'll be together for a few months with no intention of it leading to cohabitation or marriage.
I live in the US and am about to be 30.
My latest three dating experiences have ended with the other person upset about the relationship not becoming more serious, even though I made it clear that I would never get serious with the person.
*Example:*
>
> Me (initially): I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together.
>
> Her (initially): Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.
>
>
>
>
> Her (later): So we've been seeing each other for a few months ... [or some derivative that usually starts a conversation about where is this going, even though we both agreed initially "nowhere"].
>
>
>
**Problem**
When I meet someone to date, how can I communicate clearly that I am **only** interested in a casual/short-term dating relationship, such as dating for a few months by doing fun activities, going to parties, attending concerts, etc? | 2017/09/26 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/4618",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/6485/"
] | I don't have much experience with dating. But I want to leave this here.
>
> *When I meet someone to date, how can I communicate clearly that I am only interested in a casual/short-term dating relationship, such as dating for a few months by doing fun activities, going to parties, attending concerts, etc?*
>
>
>
I think the problem here is the words **date** and **relationship**. It's sort of like [my answer to this question](https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/a/4299/1599), only reversed: **You shouldn't mention those words!**
You are clearly looking for **friends**, not people you can have a short-term dating relationship with. It's okay to look for new friends, to do fun stuff with. But you don't take friends on dates, and you don't have 'relationships' with them (I prefer to call that particular form of a relation 'friendship', just to keep the two separated).
>
> *Me (initially): I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together.
>
> Her (initially): Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.*
>
>
>
If you mention this on a first date, of course, people might say that they are fine with it. They are on a first date with you, they don't know you. But the fact that they are on a **date** with you, means to me that they are at least interested in trying to see if a **serious relationship** can grow out of it. She might not have been looking for anything serious **right at that moment**. But the fact that she's dating, means that she is looking for something that can grow into something serious.
At least, I've never dated a guy for any other reason. If I don't want a serious relationship or a something casual that can grow into a serious one, I'm not going on a date with you. Then, we're just doing stuff together, without calling it a date.
I don't know how you are meeting these people, but I get the impression that they are firm believers that they are 'on a date' with you. If you get them via dating-apps or websites, I think it might be wise to quit doing so. People are there to find somebody to 'date'. Even though they might not be there to start a serious relationship right away, I think most people on these platforms are hoping for something that can develop into one given the time to grow.
If these are persons that you have a mutual friend with, that mutual friend might have acted like a middle-man. Make sure your friends know that you are willing to be introduced to new people, but that you are only looking for **friends** that share your interests, **not a girlfriend**.
I would believe that in this case, the magic words are **friend** and **shared interests**. And that you should avoid the words **date** and **relationship**. | >
> My latest three dating experiences have ended with the other person
> upset about the relationship not becoming more serious, even though
> I made it clear that I would **never** get serious with the person.
>
>
>
Are you sure you can always control your feelings? No matter how clearly or well you communicate
>
> that I am only interested in a casual/short-term dating relationship,
> such as dating for a few months by doing fun activities, going to
> parties, attending concerts, etc?
>
>
>
you can't prevent the woman you are dating from falling in love with you or developing deeper feelings for you. *You* may even develop feelings. What if the roles were reversed? What if someone you were dating short-term dumps you after they get tired of you and it's you this time wanting more?
Short-term dating specific sites? Sure. No guarantees.
You may need to consider having a friend with whom you mutually agree to also have sex. Again, no guarantees.
Or you could combine having friends for doing the fun stuff with plus hooking up with women for just sex (from specific sites if there are sites for that).
In the end, sure, you can be upfront all you like,
>
> Hey before we start [hanging out/dating/call it whatever], I just
> wanted to let you know that I'm not interested in a serious
> relationship and I won't be for a while. I'm being upfront with you to
> avoid misunderstandings in the future. I'm only interested in....
>
>
>
No guarantees. This is human nature you are talking about. Just, date responsibly. |
4,618 | I didn't see a related or similar question, but if you can find one, please link it and I'll close this.
**Background**
I had little experience in high school and college and learned some of my skills later. My first two serious girlfriends were in my twenties and they both cheated. From this I realized I didn't enjoy serious relationships, so I've avoided them. I have always been honest about this with people I date: "I'm just having fun and don't want this to ever get serious." This is my way of making it clear so that if the person wants "something more" - like marriage - they can move on faster. I just want to have fun - hang out, party, etc with the expectation that we'll be together for a few months with no intention of it leading to cohabitation or marriage.
I live in the US and am about to be 30.
My latest three dating experiences have ended with the other person upset about the relationship not becoming more serious, even though I made it clear that I would never get serious with the person.
*Example:*
>
> Me (initially): I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together.
>
> Her (initially): Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.
>
>
>
>
> Her (later): So we've been seeing each other for a few months ... [or some derivative that usually starts a conversation about where is this going, even though we both agreed initially "nowhere"].
>
>
>
**Problem**
When I meet someone to date, how can I communicate clearly that I am **only** interested in a casual/short-term dating relationship, such as dating for a few months by doing fun activities, going to parties, attending concerts, etc? | 2017/09/26 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/4618",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/6485/"
] | I don't have much experience with dating. But I want to leave this here.
>
> *When I meet someone to date, how can I communicate clearly that I am only interested in a casual/short-term dating relationship, such as dating for a few months by doing fun activities, going to parties, attending concerts, etc?*
>
>
>
I think the problem here is the words **date** and **relationship**. It's sort of like [my answer to this question](https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/a/4299/1599), only reversed: **You shouldn't mention those words!**
You are clearly looking for **friends**, not people you can have a short-term dating relationship with. It's okay to look for new friends, to do fun stuff with. But you don't take friends on dates, and you don't have 'relationships' with them (I prefer to call that particular form of a relation 'friendship', just to keep the two separated).
>
> *Me (initially): I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together.
>
> Her (initially): Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.*
>
>
>
If you mention this on a first date, of course, people might say that they are fine with it. They are on a first date with you, they don't know you. But the fact that they are on a **date** with you, means to me that they are at least interested in trying to see if a **serious relationship** can grow out of it. She might not have been looking for anything serious **right at that moment**. But the fact that she's dating, means that she is looking for something that can grow into something serious.
At least, I've never dated a guy for any other reason. If I don't want a serious relationship or a something casual that can grow into a serious one, I'm not going on a date with you. Then, we're just doing stuff together, without calling it a date.
I don't know how you are meeting these people, but I get the impression that they are firm believers that they are 'on a date' with you. If you get them via dating-apps or websites, I think it might be wise to quit doing so. People are there to find somebody to 'date'. Even though they might not be there to start a serious relationship right away, I think most people on these platforms are hoping for something that can develop into one given the time to grow.
If these are persons that you have a mutual friend with, that mutual friend might have acted like a middle-man. Make sure your friends know that you are willing to be introduced to new people, but that you are only looking for **friends** that share your interests, **not a girlfriend**.
I would believe that in this case, the magic words are **friend** and **shared interests**. And that you should avoid the words **date** and **relationship**. | First, the assumptions.
* When you say "short term dating relationship" I'm assuming you mean acting as BF and GF, including physical intimacy.
* You are not currently in this situation, you are looking toward the next one
It is not unseemly for her to want to renegotiate the terms as her feelings evolve over time. You are free to do the same. "You cannot look twice at the same river; for fresh waters are ever flowing in." Your job now is to work with her in the negotiation, while being respectful of her feelings.
That is to say, getting mad and saying "We had a deal" isn't the right approach [1]. Be aware that proximity, shared experiences, and physical intimacy often do spark those deeper feelings. It's by far the more common pattern than what you proposed to her. Do not be surprised. I mean heck, many people either consciously or not, date like this as ... well ... "tryouts" for long-term mate compatibility.
**So ... what should you do?**
First, introspect a little. How *do* you feel about your reluctance to have longer relationships, fall in love, and so on? Do you feel like you have some healing to do? If not, not, but do ask the question.
Second, your approach seems ... like kind of a hard sell. It would not be hard to hear it as "I want to have fun with you and then discard you". Another poster suggested that you desexualize it and just *make friends* with women. Do a lot of group activities. I really do think you'll have trouble finding women who want the deal you're proposing. I could be wrong.
[1] Unless you are both huge Star Wars geeks. If I told a girl "We had a deal" and she snapped back "I am altering the deal. Pray I do not alter it any further" she would **own** my heart for all time. ;D |
4,618 | I didn't see a related or similar question, but if you can find one, please link it and I'll close this.
**Background**
I had little experience in high school and college and learned some of my skills later. My first two serious girlfriends were in my twenties and they both cheated. From this I realized I didn't enjoy serious relationships, so I've avoided them. I have always been honest about this with people I date: "I'm just having fun and don't want this to ever get serious." This is my way of making it clear so that if the person wants "something more" - like marriage - they can move on faster. I just want to have fun - hang out, party, etc with the expectation that we'll be together for a few months with no intention of it leading to cohabitation or marriage.
I live in the US and am about to be 30.
My latest three dating experiences have ended with the other person upset about the relationship not becoming more serious, even though I made it clear that I would never get serious with the person.
*Example:*
>
> Me (initially): I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together.
>
> Her (initially): Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.
>
>
>
>
> Her (later): So we've been seeing each other for a few months ... [or some derivative that usually starts a conversation about where is this going, even though we both agreed initially "nowhere"].
>
>
>
**Problem**
When I meet someone to date, how can I communicate clearly that I am **only** interested in a casual/short-term dating relationship, such as dating for a few months by doing fun activities, going to parties, attending concerts, etc? | 2017/09/26 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/4618",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/6485/"
] | Short term dating relationships are just that *short term.* Meaning that regardless of how you try to frame it, you can only push them so long before people want or expect more.
I applaud your being honest about your intentions, telling people upfront what you're looking for is a good first step, but then you have to be willing to follow through and keep the relationship short.
There's no black and white rule for how long you'll be able to ride one of these situations out before feelings develop, so if it seems like people are getting more attached than you're comfortable with after a few months, you may want to keep things more in the few weeks range.
As an aside I would advise you to get over your fear of being cheated on. It's better to have loved and lost n' all. [Also while dating like this can be fun for a while, it very often gets harder as you get older.](https://youtu.be/ruR4uI8Ift8) | First, the assumptions.
* When you say "short term dating relationship" I'm assuming you mean acting as BF and GF, including physical intimacy.
* You are not currently in this situation, you are looking toward the next one
It is not unseemly for her to want to renegotiate the terms as her feelings evolve over time. You are free to do the same. "You cannot look twice at the same river; for fresh waters are ever flowing in." Your job now is to work with her in the negotiation, while being respectful of her feelings.
That is to say, getting mad and saying "We had a deal" isn't the right approach [1]. Be aware that proximity, shared experiences, and physical intimacy often do spark those deeper feelings. It's by far the more common pattern than what you proposed to her. Do not be surprised. I mean heck, many people either consciously or not, date like this as ... well ... "tryouts" for long-term mate compatibility.
**So ... what should you do?**
First, introspect a little. How *do* you feel about your reluctance to have longer relationships, fall in love, and so on? Do you feel like you have some healing to do? If not, not, but do ask the question.
Second, your approach seems ... like kind of a hard sell. It would not be hard to hear it as "I want to have fun with you and then discard you". Another poster suggested that you desexualize it and just *make friends* with women. Do a lot of group activities. I really do think you'll have trouble finding women who want the deal you're proposing. I could be wrong.
[1] Unless you are both huge Star Wars geeks. If I told a girl "We had a deal" and she snapped back "I am altering the deal. Pray I do not alter it any further" she would **own** my heart for all time. ;D |
4,618 | I didn't see a related or similar question, but if you can find one, please link it and I'll close this.
**Background**
I had little experience in high school and college and learned some of my skills later. My first two serious girlfriends were in my twenties and they both cheated. From this I realized I didn't enjoy serious relationships, so I've avoided them. I have always been honest about this with people I date: "I'm just having fun and don't want this to ever get serious." This is my way of making it clear so that if the person wants "something more" - like marriage - they can move on faster. I just want to have fun - hang out, party, etc with the expectation that we'll be together for a few months with no intention of it leading to cohabitation or marriage.
I live in the US and am about to be 30.
My latest three dating experiences have ended with the other person upset about the relationship not becoming more serious, even though I made it clear that I would never get serious with the person.
*Example:*
>
> Me (initially): I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together.
>
> Her (initially): Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.
>
>
>
>
> Her (later): So we've been seeing each other for a few months ... [or some derivative that usually starts a conversation about where is this going, even though we both agreed initially "nowhere"].
>
>
>
**Problem**
When I meet someone to date, how can I communicate clearly that I am **only** interested in a casual/short-term dating relationship, such as dating for a few months by doing fun activities, going to parties, attending concerts, etc? | 2017/09/26 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/4618",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/6485/"
] | I don't have much experience with dating. But I want to leave this here.
>
> *When I meet someone to date, how can I communicate clearly that I am only interested in a casual/short-term dating relationship, such as dating for a few months by doing fun activities, going to parties, attending concerts, etc?*
>
>
>
I think the problem here is the words **date** and **relationship**. It's sort of like [my answer to this question](https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/a/4299/1599), only reversed: **You shouldn't mention those words!**
You are clearly looking for **friends**, not people you can have a short-term dating relationship with. It's okay to look for new friends, to do fun stuff with. But you don't take friends on dates, and you don't have 'relationships' with them (I prefer to call that particular form of a relation 'friendship', just to keep the two separated).
>
> *Me (initially): I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together.
>
> Her (initially): Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.*
>
>
>
If you mention this on a first date, of course, people might say that they are fine with it. They are on a first date with you, they don't know you. But the fact that they are on a **date** with you, means to me that they are at least interested in trying to see if a **serious relationship** can grow out of it. She might not have been looking for anything serious **right at that moment**. But the fact that she's dating, means that she is looking for something that can grow into something serious.
At least, I've never dated a guy for any other reason. If I don't want a serious relationship or a something casual that can grow into a serious one, I'm not going on a date with you. Then, we're just doing stuff together, without calling it a date.
I don't know how you are meeting these people, but I get the impression that they are firm believers that they are 'on a date' with you. If you get them via dating-apps or websites, I think it might be wise to quit doing so. People are there to find somebody to 'date'. Even though they might not be there to start a serious relationship right away, I think most people on these platforms are hoping for something that can develop into one given the time to grow.
If these are persons that you have a mutual friend with, that mutual friend might have acted like a middle-man. Make sure your friends know that you are willing to be introduced to new people, but that you are only looking for **friends** that share your interests, **not a girlfriend**.
I would believe that in this case, the magic words are **friend** and **shared interests**. And that you should avoid the words **date** and **relationship**. | Short term dating relationships are just that *short term.* Meaning that regardless of how you try to frame it, you can only push them so long before people want or expect more.
I applaud your being honest about your intentions, telling people upfront what you're looking for is a good first step, but then you have to be willing to follow through and keep the relationship short.
There's no black and white rule for how long you'll be able to ride one of these situations out before feelings develop, so if it seems like people are getting more attached than you're comfortable with after a few months, you may want to keep things more in the few weeks range.
As an aside I would advise you to get over your fear of being cheated on. It's better to have loved and lost n' all. [Also while dating like this can be fun for a while, it very often gets harder as you get older.](https://youtu.be/ruR4uI8Ift8) |
4,618 | I didn't see a related or similar question, but if you can find one, please link it and I'll close this.
**Background**
I had little experience in high school and college and learned some of my skills later. My first two serious girlfriends were in my twenties and they both cheated. From this I realized I didn't enjoy serious relationships, so I've avoided them. I have always been honest about this with people I date: "I'm just having fun and don't want this to ever get serious." This is my way of making it clear so that if the person wants "something more" - like marriage - they can move on faster. I just want to have fun - hang out, party, etc with the expectation that we'll be together for a few months with no intention of it leading to cohabitation or marriage.
I live in the US and am about to be 30.
My latest three dating experiences have ended with the other person upset about the relationship not becoming more serious, even though I made it clear that I would never get serious with the person.
*Example:*
>
> Me (initially): I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together.
>
> Her (initially): Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.
>
>
>
>
> Her (later): So we've been seeing each other for a few months ... [or some derivative that usually starts a conversation about where is this going, even though we both agreed initially "nowhere"].
>
>
>
**Problem**
When I meet someone to date, how can I communicate clearly that I am **only** interested in a casual/short-term dating relationship, such as dating for a few months by doing fun activities, going to parties, attending concerts, etc? | 2017/09/26 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/4618",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/6485/"
] | I don't see *sex* mentioned anywhere, or in reply to Catija's comments. It matters.
If you want to make it crystal clear that you're not interested in any long-term relationships, then put a time limit on it. Honest. Otherwise there's a good chance that the person you're "having fun with" might think they can change your mind. Let them know they can't. So, to pick up where you left off:
>
> You: I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together. [If you also want sex, add that between "hanging out" and "having fun", i.e., "just hanging out, having sex, and having fun together."]
>
> Her: Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.
>
> You: Really? Great! Because I'm in it for no more than three months at the most, then I'm gone to greener pastures, I promise you. But in the meantime, if you want to have fun [(and sex)], and don't mind that I'm dating others at the same time, I'd love to take you out.
>
>
>
If she goes out with you and complains when you tell her it's over in three months or less, she has absolutely no right to complain.
It's honest, straightforward, and real. Don't be surprised if you don't get many takers, though. But that's good. You don't want to disappoint anyone. | First, the assumptions.
* When you say "short term dating relationship" I'm assuming you mean acting as BF and GF, including physical intimacy.
* You are not currently in this situation, you are looking toward the next one
It is not unseemly for her to want to renegotiate the terms as her feelings evolve over time. You are free to do the same. "You cannot look twice at the same river; for fresh waters are ever flowing in." Your job now is to work with her in the negotiation, while being respectful of her feelings.
That is to say, getting mad and saying "We had a deal" isn't the right approach [1]. Be aware that proximity, shared experiences, and physical intimacy often do spark those deeper feelings. It's by far the more common pattern than what you proposed to her. Do not be surprised. I mean heck, many people either consciously or not, date like this as ... well ... "tryouts" for long-term mate compatibility.
**So ... what should you do?**
First, introspect a little. How *do* you feel about your reluctance to have longer relationships, fall in love, and so on? Do you feel like you have some healing to do? If not, not, but do ask the question.
Second, your approach seems ... like kind of a hard sell. It would not be hard to hear it as "I want to have fun with you and then discard you". Another poster suggested that you desexualize it and just *make friends* with women. Do a lot of group activities. I really do think you'll have trouble finding women who want the deal you're proposing. I could be wrong.
[1] Unless you are both huge Star Wars geeks. If I told a girl "We had a deal" and she snapped back "I am altering the deal. Pray I do not alter it any further" she would **own** my heart for all time. ;D |
4,618 | I didn't see a related or similar question, but if you can find one, please link it and I'll close this.
**Background**
I had little experience in high school and college and learned some of my skills later. My first two serious girlfriends were in my twenties and they both cheated. From this I realized I didn't enjoy serious relationships, so I've avoided them. I have always been honest about this with people I date: "I'm just having fun and don't want this to ever get serious." This is my way of making it clear so that if the person wants "something more" - like marriage - they can move on faster. I just want to have fun - hang out, party, etc with the expectation that we'll be together for a few months with no intention of it leading to cohabitation or marriage.
I live in the US and am about to be 30.
My latest three dating experiences have ended with the other person upset about the relationship not becoming more serious, even though I made it clear that I would never get serious with the person.
*Example:*
>
> Me (initially): I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together.
>
> Her (initially): Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.
>
>
>
>
> Her (later): So we've been seeing each other for a few months ... [or some derivative that usually starts a conversation about where is this going, even though we both agreed initially "nowhere"].
>
>
>
**Problem**
When I meet someone to date, how can I communicate clearly that I am **only** interested in a casual/short-term dating relationship, such as dating for a few months by doing fun activities, going to parties, attending concerts, etc? | 2017/09/26 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/4618",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/6485/"
] | I don't see *sex* mentioned anywhere, or in reply to Catija's comments. It matters.
If you want to make it crystal clear that you're not interested in any long-term relationships, then put a time limit on it. Honest. Otherwise there's a good chance that the person you're "having fun with" might think they can change your mind. Let them know they can't. So, to pick up where you left off:
>
> You: I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together. [If you also want sex, add that between "hanging out" and "having fun", i.e., "just hanging out, having sex, and having fun together."]
>
> Her: Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.
>
> You: Really? Great! Because I'm in it for no more than three months at the most, then I'm gone to greener pastures, I promise you. But in the meantime, if you want to have fun [(and sex)], and don't mind that I'm dating others at the same time, I'd love to take you out.
>
>
>
If she goes out with you and complains when you tell her it's over in three months or less, she has absolutely no right to complain.
It's honest, straightforward, and real. Don't be surprised if you don't get many takers, though. But that's good. You don't want to disappoint anyone. | >
> My latest three dating experiences have ended with the other person
> upset about the relationship not becoming more serious, even though
> I made it clear that I would **never** get serious with the person.
>
>
>
Are you sure you can always control your feelings? No matter how clearly or well you communicate
>
> that I am only interested in a casual/short-term dating relationship,
> such as dating for a few months by doing fun activities, going to
> parties, attending concerts, etc?
>
>
>
you can't prevent the woman you are dating from falling in love with you or developing deeper feelings for you. *You* may even develop feelings. What if the roles were reversed? What if someone you were dating short-term dumps you after they get tired of you and it's you this time wanting more?
Short-term dating specific sites? Sure. No guarantees.
You may need to consider having a friend with whom you mutually agree to also have sex. Again, no guarantees.
Or you could combine having friends for doing the fun stuff with plus hooking up with women for just sex (from specific sites if there are sites for that).
In the end, sure, you can be upfront all you like,
>
> Hey before we start [hanging out/dating/call it whatever], I just
> wanted to let you know that I'm not interested in a serious
> relationship and I won't be for a while. I'm being upfront with you to
> avoid misunderstandings in the future. I'm only interested in....
>
>
>
No guarantees. This is human nature you are talking about. Just, date responsibly. |
4,618 | I didn't see a related or similar question, but if you can find one, please link it and I'll close this.
**Background**
I had little experience in high school and college and learned some of my skills later. My first two serious girlfriends were in my twenties and they both cheated. From this I realized I didn't enjoy serious relationships, so I've avoided them. I have always been honest about this with people I date: "I'm just having fun and don't want this to ever get serious." This is my way of making it clear so that if the person wants "something more" - like marriage - they can move on faster. I just want to have fun - hang out, party, etc with the expectation that we'll be together for a few months with no intention of it leading to cohabitation or marriage.
I live in the US and am about to be 30.
My latest three dating experiences have ended with the other person upset about the relationship not becoming more serious, even though I made it clear that I would never get serious with the person.
*Example:*
>
> Me (initially): I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together.
>
> Her (initially): Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.
>
>
>
>
> Her (later): So we've been seeing each other for a few months ... [or some derivative that usually starts a conversation about where is this going, even though we both agreed initially "nowhere"].
>
>
>
**Problem**
When I meet someone to date, how can I communicate clearly that I am **only** interested in a casual/short-term dating relationship, such as dating for a few months by doing fun activities, going to parties, attending concerts, etc? | 2017/09/26 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/4618",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/6485/"
] | I don't see *sex* mentioned anywhere, or in reply to Catija's comments. It matters.
If you want to make it crystal clear that you're not interested in any long-term relationships, then put a time limit on it. Honest. Otherwise there's a good chance that the person you're "having fun with" might think they can change your mind. Let them know they can't. So, to pick up where you left off:
>
> You: I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together. [If you also want sex, add that between "hanging out" and "having fun", i.e., "just hanging out, having sex, and having fun together."]
>
> Her: Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.
>
> You: Really? Great! Because I'm in it for no more than three months at the most, then I'm gone to greener pastures, I promise you. But in the meantime, if you want to have fun [(and sex)], and don't mind that I'm dating others at the same time, I'd love to take you out.
>
>
>
If she goes out with you and complains when you tell her it's over in three months or less, she has absolutely no right to complain.
It's honest, straightforward, and real. Don't be surprised if you don't get many takers, though. But that's good. You don't want to disappoint anyone. | First of all, kudos to you for being so honest. And I think the other answers are great advice.
However, I think the following points are yet missing. You ask:
>
> When I meet someone to date, how can I communicate clearly [...]
>
>
>
The key point here is that this communication should not be a one-time thing you tell potential candidates only on your first date. There is no magic sentence that wards off emotions by your acquaintances for weeks, months or years. Especially if you send mixed signals:
>
> "Relationship", "dating", etc.
>
>
>
The power of words should not be overestimated. Telling someone that you only want to 'have fun', while being there for them in difficult times, having sex together, sleeping in the same bed [I just assume you do this], being monogamous, among other things, sends signals that are very different from whatever you say. From my experience, people automatically expect romantic relationships to become more serious over time. This is not something you can change. [This article](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2031498/Sex-Why-makes-women-fall-love--just-makes-men-want-MORE.html) even claims women automatically fall in love from sex alone.
>
> From this I realized I didn't enjoy serious relationships, so I've avoided them.
>
>
>
[Avoidance behaviour](https://www.iirp.edu/what-we-do/what-is-restorative-practices/defining-restorative/17-compass-of-shame) is rarely effective. This way, you are dealing with emotions, but not solving the problem. You're a firefighter spraying yourself (in order to cool yourself) instead of extinguishing the fire. You are now approaching 30. Around this age, two problems emerge for what I assume to be your current lifestyle:
1. Your friends develop serious relationships and/or mature.
2. Women expect 'more' from men of your age.
Problem 1:
Depending on your social circle, this might come sooner, later or might have already happened: Couples move in together, marry, have kids. Singles stay at home, use dating apps, focus on their career or simply go to bed early because they have to work the next day. Point being: Your friends won't do as much *cool* stuff as they used to. And they will prioritize their partners. It will be hard for you to have as much fun with your friends as you used to. Their serious partners offer a lot of possibilities to simply 'have a good time'. You deny yourself these possibilities.
Problem 2:
As you have mentioned yourself, the women you are attracted to generally want a more serious relationship. See problem 1.
**Solutions**
The solution you want: Keep sex and friendship separated, even if it means putting in more effort to continually find short-term sex partners and not being able to kiss your (female) friends at a concert.
The solution I consider more healthy: Seek psychotherapy. You already know what shapes your current relationship wishes: Your past relationships. That knowledge is a great starting point. However, you should ask yourself whether **your** future should be shaped by two people you don't even like anymore. A lot of people live great, satisfying relationships, free of cheating. It is possible for you, too. Also, you don't wake up with 35 and then you're magically able to open up to others emotionally and ready to sustain a serious relationship. You will have to face these problems sometime anyway. |
4,618 | I didn't see a related or similar question, but if you can find one, please link it and I'll close this.
**Background**
I had little experience in high school and college and learned some of my skills later. My first two serious girlfriends were in my twenties and they both cheated. From this I realized I didn't enjoy serious relationships, so I've avoided them. I have always been honest about this with people I date: "I'm just having fun and don't want this to ever get serious." This is my way of making it clear so that if the person wants "something more" - like marriage - they can move on faster. I just want to have fun - hang out, party, etc with the expectation that we'll be together for a few months with no intention of it leading to cohabitation or marriage.
I live in the US and am about to be 30.
My latest three dating experiences have ended with the other person upset about the relationship not becoming more serious, even though I made it clear that I would never get serious with the person.
*Example:*
>
> Me (initially): I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together.
>
> Her (initially): Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.
>
>
>
>
> Her (later): So we've been seeing each other for a few months ... [or some derivative that usually starts a conversation about where is this going, even though we both agreed initially "nowhere"].
>
>
>
**Problem**
When I meet someone to date, how can I communicate clearly that I am **only** interested in a casual/short-term dating relationship, such as dating for a few months by doing fun activities, going to parties, attending concerts, etc? | 2017/09/26 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/4618",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/6485/"
] | Short term dating relationships are just that *short term.* Meaning that regardless of how you try to frame it, you can only push them so long before people want or expect more.
I applaud your being honest about your intentions, telling people upfront what you're looking for is a good first step, but then you have to be willing to follow through and keep the relationship short.
There's no black and white rule for how long you'll be able to ride one of these situations out before feelings develop, so if it seems like people are getting more attached than you're comfortable with after a few months, you may want to keep things more in the few weeks range.
As an aside I would advise you to get over your fear of being cheated on. It's better to have loved and lost n' all. [Also while dating like this can be fun for a while, it very often gets harder as you get older.](https://youtu.be/ruR4uI8Ift8) | >
> My latest three dating experiences have ended with the other person
> upset about the relationship not becoming more serious, even though
> I made it clear that I would **never** get serious with the person.
>
>
>
Are you sure you can always control your feelings? No matter how clearly or well you communicate
>
> that I am only interested in a casual/short-term dating relationship,
> such as dating for a few months by doing fun activities, going to
> parties, attending concerts, etc?
>
>
>
you can't prevent the woman you are dating from falling in love with you or developing deeper feelings for you. *You* may even develop feelings. What if the roles were reversed? What if someone you were dating short-term dumps you after they get tired of you and it's you this time wanting more?
Short-term dating specific sites? Sure. No guarantees.
You may need to consider having a friend with whom you mutually agree to also have sex. Again, no guarantees.
Or you could combine having friends for doing the fun stuff with plus hooking up with women for just sex (from specific sites if there are sites for that).
In the end, sure, you can be upfront all you like,
>
> Hey before we start [hanging out/dating/call it whatever], I just
> wanted to let you know that I'm not interested in a serious
> relationship and I won't be for a while. I'm being upfront with you to
> avoid misunderstandings in the future. I'm only interested in....
>
>
>
No guarantees. This is human nature you are talking about. Just, date responsibly. |
4,618 | I didn't see a related or similar question, but if you can find one, please link it and I'll close this.
**Background**
I had little experience in high school and college and learned some of my skills later. My first two serious girlfriends were in my twenties and they both cheated. From this I realized I didn't enjoy serious relationships, so I've avoided them. I have always been honest about this with people I date: "I'm just having fun and don't want this to ever get serious." This is my way of making it clear so that if the person wants "something more" - like marriage - they can move on faster. I just want to have fun - hang out, party, etc with the expectation that we'll be together for a few months with no intention of it leading to cohabitation or marriage.
I live in the US and am about to be 30.
My latest three dating experiences have ended with the other person upset about the relationship not becoming more serious, even though I made it clear that I would never get serious with the person.
*Example:*
>
> Me (initially): I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together.
>
> Her (initially): Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.
>
>
>
>
> Her (later): So we've been seeing each other for a few months ... [or some derivative that usually starts a conversation about where is this going, even though we both agreed initially "nowhere"].
>
>
>
**Problem**
When I meet someone to date, how can I communicate clearly that I am **only** interested in a casual/short-term dating relationship, such as dating for a few months by doing fun activities, going to parties, attending concerts, etc? | 2017/09/26 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/4618",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/6485/"
] | I don't see *sex* mentioned anywhere, or in reply to Catija's comments. It matters.
If you want to make it crystal clear that you're not interested in any long-term relationships, then put a time limit on it. Honest. Otherwise there's a good chance that the person you're "having fun with" might think they can change your mind. Let them know they can't. So, to pick up where you left off:
>
> You: I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together. [If you also want sex, add that between "hanging out" and "having fun", i.e., "just hanging out, having sex, and having fun together."]
>
> Her: Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.
>
> You: Really? Great! Because I'm in it for no more than three months at the most, then I'm gone to greener pastures, I promise you. But in the meantime, if you want to have fun [(and sex)], and don't mind that I'm dating others at the same time, I'd love to take you out.
>
>
>
If she goes out with you and complains when you tell her it's over in three months or less, she has absolutely no right to complain.
It's honest, straightforward, and real. Don't be surprised if you don't get many takers, though. But that's good. You don't want to disappoint anyone. | Short term dating relationships are just that *short term.* Meaning that regardless of how you try to frame it, you can only push them so long before people want or expect more.
I applaud your being honest about your intentions, telling people upfront what you're looking for is a good first step, but then you have to be willing to follow through and keep the relationship short.
There's no black and white rule for how long you'll be able to ride one of these situations out before feelings develop, so if it seems like people are getting more attached than you're comfortable with after a few months, you may want to keep things more in the few weeks range.
As an aside I would advise you to get over your fear of being cheated on. It's better to have loved and lost n' all. [Also while dating like this can be fun for a while, it very often gets harder as you get older.](https://youtu.be/ruR4uI8Ift8) |
4,618 | I didn't see a related or similar question, but if you can find one, please link it and I'll close this.
**Background**
I had little experience in high school and college and learned some of my skills later. My first two serious girlfriends were in my twenties and they both cheated. From this I realized I didn't enjoy serious relationships, so I've avoided them. I have always been honest about this with people I date: "I'm just having fun and don't want this to ever get serious." This is my way of making it clear so that if the person wants "something more" - like marriage - they can move on faster. I just want to have fun - hang out, party, etc with the expectation that we'll be together for a few months with no intention of it leading to cohabitation or marriage.
I live in the US and am about to be 30.
My latest three dating experiences have ended with the other person upset about the relationship not becoming more serious, even though I made it clear that I would never get serious with the person.
*Example:*
>
> Me (initially): I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together.
>
> Her (initially): Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.
>
>
>
>
> Her (later): So we've been seeing each other for a few months ... [or some derivative that usually starts a conversation about where is this going, even though we both agreed initially "nowhere"].
>
>
>
**Problem**
When I meet someone to date, how can I communicate clearly that I am **only** interested in a casual/short-term dating relationship, such as dating for a few months by doing fun activities, going to parties, attending concerts, etc? | 2017/09/26 | [
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/4618",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com",
"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/users/6485/"
] | I don't have much experience with dating. But I want to leave this here.
>
> *When I meet someone to date, how can I communicate clearly that I am only interested in a casual/short-term dating relationship, such as dating for a few months by doing fun activities, going to parties, attending concerts, etc?*
>
>
>
I think the problem here is the words **date** and **relationship**. It's sort of like [my answer to this question](https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/a/4299/1599), only reversed: **You shouldn't mention those words!**
You are clearly looking for **friends**, not people you can have a short-term dating relationship with. It's okay to look for new friends, to do fun stuff with. But you don't take friends on dates, and you don't have 'relationships' with them (I prefer to call that particular form of a relation 'friendship', just to keep the two separated).
>
> *Me (initially): I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together.
>
> Her (initially): Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.*
>
>
>
If you mention this on a first date, of course, people might say that they are fine with it. They are on a first date with you, they don't know you. But the fact that they are on a **date** with you, means to me that they are at least interested in trying to see if a **serious relationship** can grow out of it. She might not have been looking for anything serious **right at that moment**. But the fact that she's dating, means that she is looking for something that can grow into something serious.
At least, I've never dated a guy for any other reason. If I don't want a serious relationship or a something casual that can grow into a serious one, I'm not going on a date with you. Then, we're just doing stuff together, without calling it a date.
I don't know how you are meeting these people, but I get the impression that they are firm believers that they are 'on a date' with you. If you get them via dating-apps or websites, I think it might be wise to quit doing so. People are there to find somebody to 'date'. Even though they might not be there to start a serious relationship right away, I think most people on these platforms are hoping for something that can develop into one given the time to grow.
If these are persons that you have a mutual friend with, that mutual friend might have acted like a middle-man. Make sure your friends know that you are willing to be introduced to new people, but that you are only looking for **friends** that share your interests, **not a girlfriend**.
I would believe that in this case, the magic words are **friend** and **shared interests**. And that you should avoid the words **date** and **relationship**. | I don't see *sex* mentioned anywhere, or in reply to Catija's comments. It matters.
If you want to make it crystal clear that you're not interested in any long-term relationships, then put a time limit on it. Honest. Otherwise there's a good chance that the person you're "having fun with" might think they can change your mind. Let them know they can't. So, to pick up where you left off:
>
> You: I don't do serious relationship; no boyfriend/girlfriend - just hanging out and having fun together. [If you also want sex, add that between "hanging out" and "having fun", i.e., "just hanging out, having sex, and having fun together."]
>
> Her: Great, I'm not looking for anything serious either.
>
> You: Really? Great! Because I'm in it for no more than three months at the most, then I'm gone to greener pastures, I promise you. But in the meantime, if you want to have fun [(and sex)], and don't mind that I'm dating others at the same time, I'd love to take you out.
>
>
>
If she goes out with you and complains when you tell her it's over in three months or less, she has absolutely no right to complain.
It's honest, straightforward, and real. Don't be surprised if you don't get many takers, though. But that's good. You don't want to disappoint anyone. |
6,781,204 | How does WebLogic 11g load libraries in an EAR file? I have this problem with a web application, that when deployed as a WAR (with libraries it depends on in WEB-INF/lib), it works just fine. However, when it's inside an EAR file, WebLogic does not find those libraries unless I put them in APP-INF/lib. Does that mean that if I'm deploying as an EAR I'd have to pull out all JAR files from the WEB-INF/lib directory and place them in APP-INF/lib ? or is there a configuration that can be done in WebLogic to avoid this?
Thanks! | 2011/07/21 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/6781204",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/86857/"
] | If you have JAR files that you need to share between multiple WAR files or between WAR files and EAR files then you will need to package them in the EAR.
If WAR#1 has a JAR in its WEB-INF/lib and is packaged in an EAR with WAR#2, then WAR#2 will not be able to see the JAR files in WAR#1/WEB-INF/lib. | Solving your problem will take some understanding of how Java EE classloading works in a container. You should look at [this link](http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E12839_01/web.1111/e13706/classloading.htm) to get an understanding, but the basic problem is that when you package your application as an EAR, you've introduced another classloader (the application classloader) into the class loading hierarchy. You can configure WebLogic to load from your webapp by using the [prefer-web-inf-classes](http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E12839_01/web.1111/e13706/classloading.htm#i1090543) element. |
37,894,081 | I see that no active development is going on from vogels page from a long time i.e, about 5 months <https://github.com/ryanfitz/vogels>
Are there any better options?
Has anyone faced issues with scalibility or I/O time with it? | 2016/06/18 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/37894081",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2379271/"
] | I've been using vogels on a project recently. While it seems like it isn't as well maintained as it used to be, it's still quite a nice API wrapper - certainly much nicer than using the SDK directly.
I haven't encountered any performance cost with it - it's really just assembling AWS SDK calls, and doesn't do anything too crazy. The code is simple enough that anything I was unsure about I can dive in and check it out, and the docs are pretty good.
However another option that I've found recently is this library, open sourced by Medium. It's promised based and looks well maintained:
<https://github.com/Medium/dynamite> | I've been using Vogels for around 6 months now and it's done everything I've needed it to do. The raw dynamoDB api is too low level for what I need. I too noticed that the module wasn't being 'maintained' so I created a fork of the project and republished it to npm:
[npm](https://www.npmjs.com/package/dynogels)
[github](https://github.com/clarkie/dynogels)
I'm actively working on it to bring it up to modern standards and looking for more contributors to help out. |
366,496 | I've seen that both 'hoi polloi' and 'the hoi polloi' can be used. Does anyone know which is more accepted or correct? Or are they the same? | 2017/01/03 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/366496",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/170840/"
] | In its definition of *[hoi polloi](http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/unabridged/hoi%20polloi)*, M-W Unabridged notes:
>
> Since *hoi polloi* is a transliteration of the Greek for “the many,”
> some critics have asserted that the phrase should not be preceded by
> the. They find “the hoi polloi” to be redundant, equivalent to “the
> the many”—an opinion that fails to recognize that *hoi* means nothing
> at all in English. Nonetheless, the opinion has influenced the
> omission of *the* in the usage of some writers.
>
>
> But most writers use *the*, which is normal English grammar.
>
>
>
In its example usage sentences, M-W Unabridged gives examples of both usages:
>
> "strain so hard in making their questions comprehensible to *hoi
> polloi*" — S. L. Payne
>
>
> "burlesque performance … for the *hoi polloi*" — Henry Miller
>
>
> | From [this](http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/183475.html) article it seems like an article (the) is necessary because it translates directly to 'the many' |
366,496 | I've seen that both 'hoi polloi' and 'the hoi polloi' can be used. Does anyone know which is more accepted or correct? Or are they the same? | 2017/01/03 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/366496",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/170840/"
] | In its definition of *[hoi polloi](http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/unabridged/hoi%20polloi)*, M-W Unabridged notes:
>
> Since *hoi polloi* is a transliteration of the Greek for “the many,”
> some critics have asserted that the phrase should not be preceded by
> the. They find “the hoi polloi” to be redundant, equivalent to “the
> the many”—an opinion that fails to recognize that *hoi* means nothing
> at all in English. Nonetheless, the opinion has influenced the
> omission of *the* in the usage of some writers.
>
>
> But most writers use *the*, which is normal English grammar.
>
>
>
In its example usage sentences, M-W Unabridged gives examples of both usages:
>
> "strain so hard in making their questions comprehensible to *hoi
> polloi*" — S. L. Payne
>
>
> "burlesque performance … for the *hoi polloi*" — Henry Miller
>
>
> | I have been lectured by Brits that "the" should never be used, so English vs. American usage may be the crux of this question. |
54,174 | Lately I've started learning some basic music theory and I have been trying to rationalize some of the interesting chords I have heard of from famous pieces. Here is an example of which I am not sure if my understanding is correct.
Below are bar 11-12 from Mozart's Piano Sonata No.11 in A major, K.331. I have marked the chords using Roman numeral notations.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Px8LY.png)
The blue text shows a naive marking. To me the ♯iv° chord gives a warm and sweet shifting feeling. I found that if I think of it as an applied chord (by tonicizing V) then the last three chords becomes a (vii° - IV - I) progression. If this is the case I was wondering how come the IV chord, as a pre-dominant chord, appears *after* the dominant chord vii° instead of before it? Why would the progression still sound inevitable when the strong dominant -> tonic progression is broken?
---
Per @Dekkadeci's answer I revised the analysis as follows. The final three-chord progression simultaneously resolves two tension (cadential I chord to V, and on the V scale, dominant vii° to tonic I.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/mf2pZ.png) | 2017/03/08 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/54174",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/37541/"
] | You ask how to rationalise the progression. Here's how. It's a bare-bones B7, the dominant of the following chord, E, to which it resolves, delayed by a suspension. There's no room for all the notes of B7 in 3-part texture, but that's no reason to analyse it as something unnecessarily complicated. | I'm not exactly qualified to give you the classical language answer but conceptually I hope I point you in the right direction. I had to look up the difference between an appogiatura, a suspension etc. etc. In Jazz we tend to call all resolving non chord tones suspensions, but I'm pretty sure in classical music a suspension has to come directly from the previous chord rather than be just any resolving non chord tone (which I believe in classical is strictly an "apogiatura".) I could be wrong with my terminology here, but hopefully that won't bog you down; the point is I'm talking about resolving non-chord tones!
Anyway, you are right that the diminished chord is absolutely tonicizing the V. The reason the A chord in its second inversion works here is that it ends up sounding like a suspended E chord, rather than an A chord.
The diminished chord resolves to the E in the bass, and then the the A and C# are apogiatura that resolve downwards to an E chord (it has a certain plagal cadence feel to it, but it's really an apogiatura.). To give an example without modulation, check this crappy midi thing I just whipped up <http://onlinesequencer.net/425519> . It's progression ending in a perfect cadence in A, but the ending I chord has resolving D and F# in it.
To illustrate the point, I added an F# apogiatura to the passage you gave. <http://onlinesequencer.net/425524>. The point is, an F# obviously isn't in an A chord, but doesn't sound at all out of place here; it's performing the same function as the A and the C# resolving downwards to the E chord.
You could also put a B above the E in the bass and not change the harmony (although it's a bit of an ugly voicing). |
54,174 | Lately I've started learning some basic music theory and I have been trying to rationalize some of the interesting chords I have heard of from famous pieces. Here is an example of which I am not sure if my understanding is correct.
Below are bar 11-12 from Mozart's Piano Sonata No.11 in A major, K.331. I have marked the chords using Roman numeral notations.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Px8LY.png)
The blue text shows a naive marking. To me the ♯iv° chord gives a warm and sweet shifting feeling. I found that if I think of it as an applied chord (by tonicizing V) then the last three chords becomes a (vii° - IV - I) progression. If this is the case I was wondering how come the IV chord, as a pre-dominant chord, appears *after* the dominant chord vii° instead of before it? Why would the progression still sound inevitable when the strong dominant -> tonic progression is broken?
---
Per @Dekkadeci's answer I revised the analysis as follows. The final three-chord progression simultaneously resolves two tension (cadential I chord to V, and on the V scale, dominant vii° to tonic I.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/mf2pZ.png) | 2017/03/08 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/54174",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/37541/"
] | >
> If this is the case I was wondering how come the IV chord, as a pre-dominant chord, appears after the dominant chord vii° instead of before it? Why would the progression still sound inevitable when the strong dominant -> tonic progression is broken?
>
>
>
Due to the E as a root instead of an A, the second last chord is not formally a I or a plain IV/V chord, but it is actually a I 6/4 chord. The I 6/4 chord is treated as a pre-dominant chord that must be immediately followed by a dominant-function chord (often V, just like the last chord). Its pre-dominant function is so strong that one of the theory books I was told to use in harmony class labels it as V 6/4 instead.
(I also believe that the "#iv° 6" is actually vii° 6 of V.) | I'm not exactly qualified to give you the classical language answer but conceptually I hope I point you in the right direction. I had to look up the difference between an appogiatura, a suspension etc. etc. In Jazz we tend to call all resolving non chord tones suspensions, but I'm pretty sure in classical music a suspension has to come directly from the previous chord rather than be just any resolving non chord tone (which I believe in classical is strictly an "apogiatura".) I could be wrong with my terminology here, but hopefully that won't bog you down; the point is I'm talking about resolving non-chord tones!
Anyway, you are right that the diminished chord is absolutely tonicizing the V. The reason the A chord in its second inversion works here is that it ends up sounding like a suspended E chord, rather than an A chord.
The diminished chord resolves to the E in the bass, and then the the A and C# are apogiatura that resolve downwards to an E chord (it has a certain plagal cadence feel to it, but it's really an apogiatura.). To give an example without modulation, check this crappy midi thing I just whipped up <http://onlinesequencer.net/425519> . It's progression ending in a perfect cadence in A, but the ending I chord has resolving D and F# in it.
To illustrate the point, I added an F# apogiatura to the passage you gave. <http://onlinesequencer.net/425524>. The point is, an F# obviously isn't in an A chord, but doesn't sound at all out of place here; it's performing the same function as the A and the C# resolving downwards to the E chord.
You could also put a B above the E in the bass and not change the harmony (although it's a bit of an ugly voicing). |
54,174 | Lately I've started learning some basic music theory and I have been trying to rationalize some of the interesting chords I have heard of from famous pieces. Here is an example of which I am not sure if my understanding is correct.
Below are bar 11-12 from Mozart's Piano Sonata No.11 in A major, K.331. I have marked the chords using Roman numeral notations.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Px8LY.png)
The blue text shows a naive marking. To me the ♯iv° chord gives a warm and sweet shifting feeling. I found that if I think of it as an applied chord (by tonicizing V) then the last three chords becomes a (vii° - IV - I) progression. If this is the case I was wondering how come the IV chord, as a pre-dominant chord, appears *after* the dominant chord vii° instead of before it? Why would the progression still sound inevitable when the strong dominant -> tonic progression is broken?
---
Per @Dekkadeci's answer I revised the analysis as follows. The final three-chord progression simultaneously resolves two tension (cadential I chord to V, and on the V scale, dominant vii° to tonic I.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/mf2pZ.png) | 2017/03/08 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/54174",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/37541/"
] | >
> If this is the case I was wondering how come the IV chord, as a pre-dominant chord, appears after the dominant chord vii° instead of before it? Why would the progression still sound inevitable when the strong dominant -> tonic progression is broken?
>
>
>
Due to the E as a root instead of an A, the second last chord is not formally a I or a plain IV/V chord, but it is actually a I 6/4 chord. The I 6/4 chord is treated as a pre-dominant chord that must be immediately followed by a dominant-function chord (often V, just like the last chord). Its pre-dominant function is so strong that one of the theory books I was told to use in harmony class labels it as V 6/4 instead.
(I also believe that the "#iv° 6" is actually vii° 6 of V.) | You ask how to rationalise the progression. Here's how. It's a bare-bones B7, the dominant of the following chord, E, to which it resolves, delayed by a suspension. There's no room for all the notes of B7 in 3-part texture, but that's no reason to analyse it as something unnecessarily complicated. |
54,174 | Lately I've started learning some basic music theory and I have been trying to rationalize some of the interesting chords I have heard of from famous pieces. Here is an example of which I am not sure if my understanding is correct.
Below are bar 11-12 from Mozart's Piano Sonata No.11 in A major, K.331. I have marked the chords using Roman numeral notations.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Px8LY.png)
The blue text shows a naive marking. To me the ♯iv° chord gives a warm and sweet shifting feeling. I found that if I think of it as an applied chord (by tonicizing V) then the last three chords becomes a (vii° - IV - I) progression. If this is the case I was wondering how come the IV chord, as a pre-dominant chord, appears *after* the dominant chord vii° instead of before it? Why would the progression still sound inevitable when the strong dominant -> tonic progression is broken?
---
Per @Dekkadeci's answer I revised the analysis as follows. The final three-chord progression simultaneously resolves two tension (cadential I chord to V, and on the V scale, dominant vii° to tonic I.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/mf2pZ.png) | 2017/03/08 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/54174",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/37541/"
] | You ask how to rationalise the progression. Here's how. It's a bare-bones B7, the dominant of the following chord, E, to which it resolves, delayed by a suspension. There's no room for all the notes of B7 in 3-part texture, but that's no reason to analyse it as something unnecessarily complicated. | The second chord could easily be the leading tone chord with the E functioning like an escape tone. That big jump up and the step down is typical of an escape tone.
The d sharp that resolves to an e in bar two gives the very real impression of a leading tone resolving, Im thinking E major. The notes in the top two voices of the last beat just look like suspensions from the previous beat |
54,174 | Lately I've started learning some basic music theory and I have been trying to rationalize some of the interesting chords I have heard of from famous pieces. Here is an example of which I am not sure if my understanding is correct.
Below are bar 11-12 from Mozart's Piano Sonata No.11 in A major, K.331. I have marked the chords using Roman numeral notations.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Px8LY.png)
The blue text shows a naive marking. To me the ♯iv° chord gives a warm and sweet shifting feeling. I found that if I think of it as an applied chord (by tonicizing V) then the last three chords becomes a (vii° - IV - I) progression. If this is the case I was wondering how come the IV chord, as a pre-dominant chord, appears *after* the dominant chord vii° instead of before it? Why would the progression still sound inevitable when the strong dominant -> tonic progression is broken?
---
Per @Dekkadeci's answer I revised the analysis as follows. The final three-chord progression simultaneously resolves two tension (cadential I chord to V, and on the V scale, dominant vii° to tonic I.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/mf2pZ.png) | 2017/03/08 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/54174",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/37541/"
] | >
> If this is the case I was wondering how come the IV chord, as a pre-dominant chord, appears after the dominant chord vii° instead of before it? Why would the progression still sound inevitable when the strong dominant -> tonic progression is broken?
>
>
>
Due to the E as a root instead of an A, the second last chord is not formally a I or a plain IV/V chord, but it is actually a I 6/4 chord. The I 6/4 chord is treated as a pre-dominant chord that must be immediately followed by a dominant-function chord (often V, just like the last chord). Its pre-dominant function is so strong that one of the theory books I was told to use in harmony class labels it as V 6/4 instead.
(I also believe that the "#iv° 6" is actually vii° 6 of V.) | The second chord could easily be the leading tone chord with the E functioning like an escape tone. That big jump up and the step down is typical of an escape tone.
The d sharp that resolves to an e in bar two gives the very real impression of a leading tone resolving, Im thinking E major. The notes in the top two voices of the last beat just look like suspensions from the previous beat |
89,052 | We read in Lk 4: 38-39 :
>
> After leaving the synagogue he entered Simon’s house. Now Simon’s mother-in-law was suffering from a high fever, and they asked him about her. Then he stood over her and rebuked the fever, and it left her.
>
>
>
Elsewhere, we see Jesus rebuking the evil spirit (Lk 9: 42). But it is doubtful if anyone who witnessed the healing believed that the fever of Simon's MiL had been caused by evil spirit. Even more doubtful is the existence of knowledge that it could have been caused by an animate thing say, virus . Even today, fever is more often than not, measured by the external symptom namely high temperature. Is it that Jesus rebuked the temperature which is an inanimate entity?
My question therefore is: **According to Catholic scholars, what exactly did Jesus rebuke while healing the mother-in-law of Simon?** | 2022/01/17 | [
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/89052",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/users/21496/"
] | **What exactly did Jesus rebuke while healing the mother-in-law of Simon?**
English translations vary and if you do not mind I would like to use another version than the one you used. Translation can make a big difference. Thus I will use the Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA). After all it is a Catholic Catholic Bible.
>
> 38 And Jesus rising up out of the synagogue, went into Simon's house. And Simon's wife's mother was taken with a great fever, and they besought him for her.
>
>
> 39 And standing over her, he commanded the fever, and it left her. And immediately rising, she ministered to them. - [Luke 4:38-39](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%204%3A38-39&version=DRA)
>
>
>
Now it becomes abundantly clear that Jesus simply commanded the fever to leave Peter’s Mother-in-Law. It much more than a simply rebuke! The Divine Healer cured her!
I would simply like to add a few reflections of the Church Fathers on this passage.
>
> [**Commentary from the Church Fathers**](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healing_the_mother_of_Peter%27s_wife)
>
>
> * **Glossa Ordinaria**: And it is not enough that she is cured, but strength is given her besides, for she arose and ministered unto them.
> * **Chrysostom**: This, she arose and ministered unto them, shows at once the Lord's power, and the woman's feeling towards Christ.
> * **Bede**: Figuratively; Peter's house is the Law, or the circumcision, his mother-in-law the synagogue, which is as it were the mother of the Church committed to Peter. She is in a fever, that is, she is sick of zealous hate, and persecutes the Church. The Lord touches her hand, when He turns her carnal works to spiritual uses.[6]
> * **Saint Remigius**: Or by Peter's mother-in-law may be understood the Law, which according to the Apostle was made weak through the flesh, i. e. the carnal understanding. But when the Lord through the mystery of the Incarnation appeared visibly in the synagogue, and fulfilled the Law in action, and taught that it was to be understood spiritually; straightway it thus allied with the grace of the Gospel received such strength, that what had been the minister of death and punishment, became the minister of life and glory.
> * **Rabanus Maurus**: Or, every soul that struggles with fleshly lusts is sick of a fever, but touched with the hand of Divine mercy, it recovers health, and restrains the concupiscence of the flesh by the bridle of continence, and with those limbs with which it had served uncleanness, it now ministers to righteousness.
> * **Hilary of Poitiers**: Or; In Peter's wife's mother is shown the sickly condition of infidelity, to which freedom of will is near akin, being united by the bonds as it were of wedlock. By the Lord's entrance into Peter's house, that is into the body, unbelief is cured, which was before sick of the fever of sin, and ministers in duties of righteousness to the Saviour.
>
>
> | On September 1, 2021, Fr. Simon, on his show Father Simon Says on Relevant Radio, discussed this.
<https://relevantradio.com/2021/09/father-simon-says-september-1-2021-orthodox-musings/>
>
> All right, let's go to the word of the day! [gong]
>
>
> Very interestingly, Jesus goes from the synagogue to Simon Peter's
> house, and he stands over his mother-in-law, and rebuked the fever,
> and it left her.
>
>
> He rebuked a fever? That's very interesting.
>
>
> We see this in the scripture quite a bit. Moses was told to speak to
> the rock. Jesus rebukes a fever.
>
>
> Well, the word of the day is rebuke.
>
>
> The word in Greek is epitimaó. It can mean to honor. It means to
> measure out a due measure or to censure.
>
>
> I remember I had a buddy who was very pentecostal and he believed that
> you rebuke illness, and he came up to me one day and said "Fr. Simon,
> you got an aspirin? I been rebuking this headache all day long."
> [sigh] He should have just come and got the aspirin in the first
> place.
>
>
> This idea of rebuking a fever or speaking to a rock... Why do we do
> that? Because words do have power. What this really means is to esteem
> it suitably. It isn't just scaring the fever. It is speaking of the
> fever what the fever is. Jesus said "Fever, you've got no power around
> me."
>
>
> We need to do that, occasionally. I never drive by an adult bookstore
> without rebuking Satan.
>
>
> I think we need to get used to that, to speak to things -- it's
> biblical -- and to rebuke that thing when it's appropriate. "In
> Jesus's name, I rebuke this illness." That's something we don't do,
> but it's in the biblical bag of tricks. Try it some time.
>
>
> I remember for years I drove by this store -- I think it was on
> Western Avenue in Chicago -- and I rebuked the store. Eventually it
> turned into a candy shop. [laughs] I don't know if my rebuking had
> anything to do with it, but, well...
>
>
> We have a power in our faith that we never use. We have a power to
> bless, and we also have a power to curse. Use it wisely and sparingly.
> You don't curse people, but you can curse illness, you can curse sin,
> and you can tell the devil where to go. I'm not saying that when
> you're sick you're possessed, however, there is a continuum that
> relates, I think, all things that are evil, and we have this amazing
> right, and even duty, to rebuke things that are out of order.
>
>
> Just a thought, who knows.
>
>
> All right, let's go to phone calls.
>
>
> That was weird...
>
>
> |
180,382 | Which one is the correct way of asking this question? When?
a) Why you changed your job?
b) Why did you change your Job?
c) Let me know why you changed your job?
d) Let me know why did you change your job? | 2018/09/21 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/180382",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/4084/"
] | Not in Standard English. Main clause interrogatives like this require subject-auxiliary inversion: "Where did you bring all these vegetables from?" Note that the plain verb-form "bring" is required after the auxiliary verb "did".
(answer transcribed from comment) | The format of the question is not quite correct. You need to have:
* auxiliary verb + subject + verb
So, we would say:
>
> Where **did** (*aux verb*) **you** (*subject*) **bring** (*verb*) all these vegetables from?
>
>
> |
40,262,413 | I wanted to use CloudFlare for my website (hosted on Microsoft Azure).
I have added my domain to Cloudflare, and changed my domains nameservers to the ones I got from Cloudflare.
Furthermore, cloudflare imported my current DNS settings which are the following (my domain has been replaced with domain.com):
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Gnkgr.png)
I thought the migration would go smoothly, however, when I go to www.domain.com I get the error:
>
> The webpage at <http://www.domain.com/> might be temporarily down or
> it may have moved permanently to a new web address.
>
>
>
However, when I refresh a couple of times it finally loads the site.
If I go to domain.com (no www-prefix), I get the error:
>
> domain.com’s server DNS address could not be found.
>
>
>
What could be going on? | 2016/10/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/40262413",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/6047390/"
] | For the first issue...if you are seeing inconsistent responses from your Azure Website, they you should raise an Azure support ticket.
For the second issue...try verifying the CLOUDFLARE DNS resolution via <http://digwebinterface.com>, both via a recursive DNS service and by querying against the CLOUDFLARE name servers directly. If the latter is working, there must be a problem in your DNS delegation (check name server settings with your registrar, try also a delegation validation service such as <http://dnscheck.pingdom.com/>). If the latter is not working, you'll need to take it up with CLOUDFLARE. | You need both @ and www CNAME specified in your host records. Not just www.
the refresh is normal after you make a dns change. The browser keeps the dns lookup in cache, so if you visit the site on another browser you won't have to do a refresh. Just clear your browser cache when you want to see dns changes, but some edits could take 15min or longer to see changes. |
201,138 | Wrote a long story about me moving my mothers washing machine but decided to keep it short:
Machine 8 years old, aesthetically in perfect condition other than some exposed sheet metal on the side due to a scratch. Reportedly a few of its programs don't work.
The room where I installed it was (according to the previous owner) intended for a washing machine but he never got around to it. It had water but no electrical sockets, only an improvised lamp attached to a heavy gauge 3 core electrical cable sticking out the wall.
I removed the lamp and attached a grounded outlet instead. Plugged the machine in, all the lights came on as normal. Reached over to adjust the drain hose and got a mild shock from the scratch of exposed metal on the side. Didn't try if any other parts of it would shock me too, just unplugged it.
Searched around the internet, some claim that its normal if the machine isn't grounded properly. I have no clue if the ground on that wire I connected the outlet to actually serves any purpose. The other end of the cable is connected to the electricity of the bathroom next to it but I have no clue where. The bathroom has no sockets either, only lamps. I looked under the housing of a few of the bathroom lamps, they get their electricity via a 2 core cable.
In the electrical panel, the switch that controls the bathroom and the washing machine room has a 3 core medium gauge cable leaving and disappearing into a wall. Its not the same kind of cable as either the washing machine room or the bathroom have.
So now I'm suspecting that the grounding in that room might be fake and as such would justify the shock that the machine gave me. Is that a plausible scenario? Or should I just be looking for a new washing machine?
This took place in europe, 230V is the standard. Blue and brown wires make zap, yellow/green stripe wire is supposed to be ground.
EDIT: Looked up how to test for grounding, turns out all I needed was a multimeter, I got one of those. Surely enough, the cable in the washing machine room is not grounded. Also tested other outlets around the house, the grounding works in most places, other than the washing machine room, all the basement outlets save for one, the outlets behind the house on the patio don't work at all. | 2020/08/15 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/201138",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/51018/"
] | Well, don't be confused by what happens in North America. There, some very silly things were done to dryers regarding bootlegging ground off neutral, and so dryers are a holy terror. Not Your Problem.
Your washer hooks up just like a normal appliance - Hot, Neutral and Earth.
I suspect the root of your problem is this "improvised" electrical connection. The first thing you did - that is a cardinal sin in Britain and European influenced areas - is **you attached an appliance to a lighting circuit**. Many lighting circuits are some piddly small ampacity like 3 or 6 amps. They are simply not intended for a large appliance. Only lighting can be on those circuits. It's possible that light was herky-jerked off an appliance circuit, but you should have investigated that.
Further, it's likely the lighting cord that was run for it, was "lighting-sized". So too small to run a large appliance like a washer. Again, in Europe, never convert a lighting outlet to an appliance outlet!
Generally anytime you find hork-a-dork wiring like that, you need to go through it "with a fine-tooth comb". Think about it -- when you're *looking right at* several Code violations, it would be insane to assume the rest of it was done safely to Code.
What you really need to do is find out whether DIY is allowed in your country, and either *properly* install a receptacle outlet in the room off an appliance circuit, or wire a dedicated circuit (that's Code in *El NEC* countries like Panama and the USA), or have a professional do it if local Code requires that. | I would verify the polarization is correct. When I was a kid all of my grand mothers house outlets were non polarized. I remember getting the tingle touching the metal toaster. My grandma pulled the cord out flipped it over and plugged it back in. I remember trying that as I got older with socks on then with shoes until I finally rewired that house in my 2nd year as an apprentice. She was so proud. But I think with no ground and the polarity being swapped may be your issue since the washer is working. My example is 120v but the same thing would happen with shoes on on a higher voltage. |
172,288 | Multiple times I've found myself in a situation in a meeting where I'm laying out my plans for a project I've been assigned and either my manager or a co-worker identify something to be impossible and therefore I should do something else (taking the time to explain how to do it). Instead of trying to convince them that my plan is possible in the meeting (which I've learned the hard way is a very bad thing to do), I instead after the meeting go and create a proof of concept to show that it is possible and present it the next time we have a meeting about my project with pros and cons compared to the solution they presented.
Is this bad etiquette on my part and should I just go with the group and implement the suggested solution just to keep a good rapport with my coworkers (not making them look bad).
Normally if the meeting is about my co-worker's project, I won't do anything after the meeting if they choose a different path than what I would have done and if my boss or co-worker states that they don't want something implemented a particular way and they don't specify that its because they think it's impossible I respect their viewpoint and adjust my project accordingly.
If this is bad etiquette, what should I do when someone is trying to guide my project using known incorrect reasoning? | 2021/05/08 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/172288",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/81043/"
] | >
> If this is bad etiquette, what should I do when someone is trying to
> guide my project using known incorrect reasoning?
>
>
>
Make your case. If they reject your suggestions, ideas, and opinions then do what your boss tells you to do. It isn't your company. It isn't your decision. At the end of the day, they pay you to perform work. You may sometimes disagree with that work. That's OK. | In the future, present your ideas privately one-on-one to the usual meeting participants before you bring them up to the entire group in the larger meeting.
Group dynamics are weird, and it's much easier to correct your idea or convince someone of your idea when you're dealing with them one-on-one.
Do the same with your manager as well. If your manager has any hesitation, then you can ask them for permission to build a quick proof-of-concept.
With that said, the situation is a little bit different now since the group has already shot down your idea. If you'd be willing to work on this idea during your own personal time, and assuming you have a good relationship with your manager, I don't see anything wrong with trying to build a proof-of-concept that specifically addresses the features that are supposedly "impossible".
But if you do this, and if you've used your own time, and assuming it actually works, present your proof-of-concept privately to your manager and see what he says. Do not surprise him with this during a meeting with others. |
172,288 | Multiple times I've found myself in a situation in a meeting where I'm laying out my plans for a project I've been assigned and either my manager or a co-worker identify something to be impossible and therefore I should do something else (taking the time to explain how to do it). Instead of trying to convince them that my plan is possible in the meeting (which I've learned the hard way is a very bad thing to do), I instead after the meeting go and create a proof of concept to show that it is possible and present it the next time we have a meeting about my project with pros and cons compared to the solution they presented.
Is this bad etiquette on my part and should I just go with the group and implement the suggested solution just to keep a good rapport with my coworkers (not making them look bad).
Normally if the meeting is about my co-worker's project, I won't do anything after the meeting if they choose a different path than what I would have done and if my boss or co-worker states that they don't want something implemented a particular way and they don't specify that its because they think it's impossible I respect their viewpoint and adjust my project accordingly.
If this is bad etiquette, what should I do when someone is trying to guide my project using known incorrect reasoning? | 2021/05/08 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/172288",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/81043/"
] | >
> If this is bad etiquette, what should I do when someone is trying to
> guide my project using known incorrect reasoning?
>
>
>
Make your case. If they reject your suggestions, ideas, and opinions then do what your boss tells you to do. It isn't your company. It isn't your decision. At the end of the day, they pay you to perform work. You may sometimes disagree with that work. That's OK. | >
> I instead after the meeting go and create a proof of concept to show that it is possible and present it the next time
>
>
>
Do this before the first meeting. Meeting dynamics are things to learn from. If you want something to happen a certain way you prepare for the meeting and have your strategies in place before it starts to accomplish what you want. Make this a normal part of your meeting preparations.
Anticipate objections and overwhelm them, you have the huge advantage of being prepared and ready while others are raising issues on the fly. |
172,288 | Multiple times I've found myself in a situation in a meeting where I'm laying out my plans for a project I've been assigned and either my manager or a co-worker identify something to be impossible and therefore I should do something else (taking the time to explain how to do it). Instead of trying to convince them that my plan is possible in the meeting (which I've learned the hard way is a very bad thing to do), I instead after the meeting go and create a proof of concept to show that it is possible and present it the next time we have a meeting about my project with pros and cons compared to the solution they presented.
Is this bad etiquette on my part and should I just go with the group and implement the suggested solution just to keep a good rapport with my coworkers (not making them look bad).
Normally if the meeting is about my co-worker's project, I won't do anything after the meeting if they choose a different path than what I would have done and if my boss or co-worker states that they don't want something implemented a particular way and they don't specify that its because they think it's impossible I respect their viewpoint and adjust my project accordingly.
If this is bad etiquette, what should I do when someone is trying to guide my project using known incorrect reasoning? | 2021/05/08 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/172288",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/81043/"
] | >
> I instead after the meeting go and create a proof of concept to show that it is possible and present it the next time
>
>
>
Do this before the first meeting. Meeting dynamics are things to learn from. If you want something to happen a certain way you prepare for the meeting and have your strategies in place before it starts to accomplish what you want. Make this a normal part of your meeting preparations.
Anticipate objections and overwhelm them, you have the huge advantage of being prepared and ready while others are raising issues on the fly. | In the future, present your ideas privately one-on-one to the usual meeting participants before you bring them up to the entire group in the larger meeting.
Group dynamics are weird, and it's much easier to correct your idea or convince someone of your idea when you're dealing with them one-on-one.
Do the same with your manager as well. If your manager has any hesitation, then you can ask them for permission to build a quick proof-of-concept.
With that said, the situation is a little bit different now since the group has already shot down your idea. If you'd be willing to work on this idea during your own personal time, and assuming you have a good relationship with your manager, I don't see anything wrong with trying to build a proof-of-concept that specifically addresses the features that are supposedly "impossible".
But if you do this, and if you've used your own time, and assuming it actually works, present your proof-of-concept privately to your manager and see what he says. Do not surprise him with this during a meeting with others. |
62,101 | Just what the title says. Suppose I know the feature that I want to be used for splitting for the root node in a tree model in XGBoost; is there a way for me to tell XGBoost to split on this feature at the root node? | 2019/10/22 | [
"https://datascience.stackexchange.com/questions/62101",
"https://datascience.stackexchange.com",
"https://datascience.stackexchange.com/users/84189/"
] | It's hard to prove a negative, but I think the answer is no. Especially in xgboost compared to other tree-model packages, it's rather hard to even access the base trees, let alone modify their build. | Could you enforce this using [feature interactions](https://xgboost.readthedocs.io/en/stable/tutorials/feature_interaction_constraint.html)? Maybe create two sets of features with only that one feature in common? I’m not sure if it will guarantee that that shared feature is the one on which the first split is made. |
107,732 | I've tried researching this question myself, but the only data I can find is over huge timescales, like situations where the continents have reformed back into a Neo-Pangea.
I'm not looking for any real drastic changes in positioning, just relatively minor things like seas disappearing or continents slightly shrinking or pushing into each other.
Would there be any noteworthy changes at all, or would it be pretty much the same as today aside from some minor changes that wouldn't affect anything?
Let's just assume humanity suddenly stopped existing today for the purposes of the question, so they don't make any more changes to the world than they already have.
As always, I'm very grateful for any answers, and if you need anything clarified feel free to leave a comment and I'll do my best to clear things up. | 2018/03/23 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/107732",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/48871/"
] | A millennium is a blink of an eye on a geological scale. But interesting things can happen in a blink of an eye. Even disegarding the changes which may happen as a result of the present climatological instability, small but important modification can occur here and there.
I have no idea of the geographical changes between today and 3000 CE; but I do know of *some* geographical changes between 1 CE and today, either because they happened in places in which I have a local interest, or because they are somehow important to various historical events, or because I found out about them by accident and found them interesting enough to remember.
Geographical changes during the last 1000 or 2000 years
-------------------------------------------------------
* While sea level is today not very different from what it was in the first century, *in some places the sea advanced or retreated considerably:*
+ Some cities which used to be seaports in the first century are now several miles inland. For example:
- In the Antiquity [Ephesus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephesus) and [Miletus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miletus) were major ports on the Ionian coast; they are now several kilometers inland.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miletus#/media/File:Miletus_Bay_silting_evolution_map-en.svg)
*The silting evolution of Miletus Bay due to the alluvium brought by the Maeander River during Antiquity. Map by Eric Gaba, available on Wikimedia under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license.*
- Closer to me, in the Antiquity the city of Histria was a seaport on the western coast of the Black Sea. Now its ruins lay on the shore of a shallow lagoon, and the sea is kilometers away.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histria_(ancient_city)#/media/File:Scythia_Minor_map.jpg)
*Ancient towns and colonies in Dobruja; modern coastline shown as a dotted line. Map by Bogdan, available on Wikimedia under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license.*
+ On the other hand, in some places the sea advanced. For example, what is now the [IJselmeer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IJsselmeer) in the Netherlands used to be a low-lying plain in the first century, with a large lake known by the Romans as [Lake Flevo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Flevo). In 1287, [Saint Lucia's flood](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Lucia%27s_flood) broke through and submerged the former river [Vlie](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlie), creating a large shallow gulf which was called the [Zuiderzee](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuiderzee).
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Flevo#/media/File:50nc_ex_leg_copy.jpg)
*The region of the Netherlands in the 1st century CE. Map by the Dutch Nationale Onderzoeksagenda Archeologie (www.noaa.nl), available on Wikimedia under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license.*
Then in 1932 the long effort of the Dutch to build the [Afsluitdijk](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afsluitdijk) was brough to completion, and the gulf was separated from the sea and became a lake, which the Dutch then proceeded to drain in order to increase the territory of their country; and now the Netherlands has a new 1500 square kilometer province, called [Flevoland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flevoland).
* Rivers sometimes change course dramatically. For me, the most spectacular example is the [Oxus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amu_Darya), which is today known as the Amu Darya. Until the 16th century it used to flow into the Caspian Sea, through what is now the dry [Uzboy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uzboy) valley; it then changed its mind, abandoned the Caspian and went to empty into the Aral Sea.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uzboy#/media/File:XXth_Century_Citizen%27s_Atlas_map_of_Central_Asia.png)
*The old course of the Oxus (Amu Darya), when it flew into the Caspian Sea, marked as "Old Bed of the Oxus". Map from 1903, available on Wikimedia. Public domain.*
At the beginning of the 18th century, [Peter the Great](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_the_Great), emperor of Russia, sent prince [Alexander Bekovich-Cherkassky](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Bekovich-Cherkassky) to find the mouth of the Oxus, with the intention of establishing a trade route from the Caspian to Transoxiana. The prince dutifully mapped the coast and returned with the sad news that the river no longer flowed into the Caspian...
* Speaking of the [Aral Sea](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aral_Sea), the Soviet Union killed it in the 20th century. The former immense lake of 68,000 square kilometers is now a desert, the [Aralkum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aralkum_Desert).
* Speaking of the Soviet Union and Transoxiana: in the 1930s the Soviet Union conceived a titanic project to *"divert the flow of the Northern rivers in the Soviet Union, which "uselessly" drain into the Arctic Ocean, southwards towards the populated agricultural areas of Central Asia, which lack water"* (Wikipedia). The [Northern River Reversal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_river_reversal) eventually grew and grew, design and planning progressed through the 1960s and 1970s, so that by 1980 the Soviets were talking of diverting 12 major Siberian rivers into the Central Asian desert. They even envisaged using atomic bombs to move massive amounts of dirt speedily. Then the Soviet Union fell; but who knows?
* Speaking of using atomic bombs to dig canals, Egypt is considering a [plan to dig a canal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression_Project) from the Mediterranean to the [Qattara Depression](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression), flooding it and creating a solar-powered 2000 megawatt hydropower plant.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression_Project#/media/File:All_proposed_routes.PNG)
*All proposed routes for a tunnel and/or canal route from the Mediterranean Sea towards the Qattara Depression. Map by AlwaysUnite, available on Wikimedia under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license.*
And yes, in the 1950s the international Board of Advisers led by Prof. [Friedrich Bassler](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Bassler) proposed to dig the canal using atomic blasts, part of President Eisenhower's [Atoms for Peace](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atoms_for_Peace) program.
* The [Frisian Islands](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frisian_Islands) on the eastern edge of the North Sea are notoriously shifty, so that the approaches to the Dutch ports have changed considerably from the Middle Ages to the present. For example, the northern part of what is now the island of [Texel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texel) was until the 13th century the southern part of the island of [Vlieland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlieland); it then left Vlieland and became a separate island, the [Eierland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eierland); in the 17th century the Dutch reclaimed the land between the Texel and Eierland, and the two islands became one.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eierland#/media/File:PaysBas_delisle_1743_fragment.jpg)
*Eierland when it was a separate island. Map from 1702, available on Wikimedia. Public domain.*
Geography is not static
-----------------------
The list could be very much expanded. The Panama Canal. The proposed Nicaragua Canal. The lockless Suez Canal, which has brought the marine life of the Red Sea into the Mediterranean. The Hot Gates of Greece. The shifting barrier islands off the coast of Texas. The absent-minded [Yellow River](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_River) of China. The wandering lake [Lop Nor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lop_Nur). The unstable coastline of England -- how many of the medieval [Cinque Ports](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinque_Ports) are still ports, that is, if they exist at all?
Geography changes wherever you look closely. | >
> Would there be any noteworthy changes at all,
>
>
> just assume humanity suddenly stopped existing today for the purposes of the question
>
>
>
Global Warming would continue for a while, if for no other reason than approximately 2.5% of CO2 is sequestered per annum.
<http://euanmearns.com/the-half-life-of-co2-in-earths-atmosphere-part-1/>
>
> Sequestration of CO2 from the atmosphere can be modelled using a single exponential decay constant of 2.5% per annum.
>
>
>
At that rate, it would take 14 years to return to a CO2 value of 280ppm.
But in the meantime,
1. much polar ice has disappeared, and blue ocean absorbs more energy than white ice, and
2. the permafrosts are thawing, releasing lots of methane, which an even stronger greenhouse gas. This northern warming is causing even more methane to be released, in a vicious cycle.
Thus, it's very possible that most of the Greenland icecap will be melted, and also Antarctica, raising the ocean levels by 70 meters. |
107,732 | I've tried researching this question myself, but the only data I can find is over huge timescales, like situations where the continents have reformed back into a Neo-Pangea.
I'm not looking for any real drastic changes in positioning, just relatively minor things like seas disappearing or continents slightly shrinking or pushing into each other.
Would there be any noteworthy changes at all, or would it be pretty much the same as today aside from some minor changes that wouldn't affect anything?
Let's just assume humanity suddenly stopped existing today for the purposes of the question, so they don't make any more changes to the world than they already have.
As always, I'm very grateful for any answers, and if you need anything clarified feel free to leave a comment and I'll do my best to clear things up. | 2018/03/23 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/107732",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/48871/"
] | >
> Would there be any noteworthy changes at all,
>
>
> just assume humanity suddenly stopped existing today for the purposes of the question
>
>
>
Global Warming would continue for a while, if for no other reason than approximately 2.5% of CO2 is sequestered per annum.
<http://euanmearns.com/the-half-life-of-co2-in-earths-atmosphere-part-1/>
>
> Sequestration of CO2 from the atmosphere can be modelled using a single exponential decay constant of 2.5% per annum.
>
>
>
At that rate, it would take 14 years to return to a CO2 value of 280ppm.
But in the meantime,
1. much polar ice has disappeared, and blue ocean absorbs more energy than white ice, and
2. the permafrosts are thawing, releasing lots of methane, which an even stronger greenhouse gas. This northern warming is causing even more methane to be released, in a vicious cycle.
Thus, it's very possible that most of the Greenland icecap will be melted, and also Antarctica, raising the ocean levels by 70 meters. | In addition to the previously noted changes due to climate and normal geology, the sudden removal of humans a la Discovery Channel's [Life After People](https://www.history.com/shows/life-after-people) would quickly lead to the breakdown of electrical and mechanical infrastructure, including pumping stations (e.g., the [California Aqueduct](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Aqueduct), [New Orleans' pumping stations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drainage_in_New_Orleans), and the Netherlands' [pumping stations in Flevoland](https://www.visitflevoland.nl/en/on-expedition/heritage/pumping-stations-in-flevoland/)), with the obvious results. In the longer term (a few centuries at most, according to Discovery), the majority of earthen and concrete structures are likely to fail, which includes essentially all of the world's dams, dikes, and levees. Their collapses will cause significant flooding, erosion, and scouring of low-lying areas downstream, and some river channels will be changed significantly enough to still show the effects a millennium hence.
Earth's cities and highways are also likely to be largely buried in vegetation (again, per Discovery), with the result that urban and linear features that are prominent from the air or even space will become much harder to see.
The disappearance of humans will also eliminate agriculture and logging, which is likely to reduce silt and fertilizer runoff in most places, with at least some visible changes in watersheds. (For example, [mangroves](https://go.nasa.gov/2FY1CnO) can be expected to make a larger comeback in some rivers; clear-cut areas of the Amazon and other forests will recover to some extent; and a number of river deltas like the [Ebro's](https://go.nasa.gov/2Ik9OQV) will stop growing so quickly and may actually erode.) The Aral Sea may make a comeback as well.
Astronomy might also play a small part; according to [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_event), there's about a 20% chance of an asteroid strike large enough to create a crater actually hitting land and doing so.
By the way, spacecraft, even the ISS, are too small to make much of a mark, and what little damage they do cause would be hidden by vegetation and weathering very quickly (years, or decades at most). |
107,732 | I've tried researching this question myself, but the only data I can find is over huge timescales, like situations where the continents have reformed back into a Neo-Pangea.
I'm not looking for any real drastic changes in positioning, just relatively minor things like seas disappearing or continents slightly shrinking or pushing into each other.
Would there be any noteworthy changes at all, or would it be pretty much the same as today aside from some minor changes that wouldn't affect anything?
Let's just assume humanity suddenly stopped existing today for the purposes of the question, so they don't make any more changes to the world than they already have.
As always, I'm very grateful for any answers, and if you need anything clarified feel free to leave a comment and I'll do my best to clear things up. | 2018/03/23 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/107732",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/48871/"
] | >
> Would there be any noteworthy changes at all,
>
>
> just assume humanity suddenly stopped existing today for the purposes of the question
>
>
>
Global Warming would continue for a while, if for no other reason than approximately 2.5% of CO2 is sequestered per annum.
<http://euanmearns.com/the-half-life-of-co2-in-earths-atmosphere-part-1/>
>
> Sequestration of CO2 from the atmosphere can be modelled using a single exponential decay constant of 2.5% per annum.
>
>
>
At that rate, it would take 14 years to return to a CO2 value of 280ppm.
But in the meantime,
1. much polar ice has disappeared, and blue ocean absorbs more energy than white ice, and
2. the permafrosts are thawing, releasing lots of methane, which an even stronger greenhouse gas. This northern warming is causing even more methane to be released, in a vicious cycle.
Thus, it's very possible that most of the Greenland icecap will be melted, and also Antarctica, raising the ocean levels by 70 meters. | "Is removing people sufficient to stop global warming?" Good question. Answer is not clear. If we have passed the tipping point for arctic permafrost collapse, arctic ocean being ice free in summer, then we may release huge amounts of methane clathrates.
On top of this while oil has to be pumped, natural gas is often under pressure. As distribuiton systems break down, more methane is released.
Net result: ALL of antarctica and Greenland melt over the space of that thousand years.
So we have an new continent free from ice in the south, we have a new archipelago of islands where Greenland was. We have new ecologies in the arctic regions, and the ocean shoreline moves in a bunch.
Details here: <https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2013/09/rising-seas-ice-melt-new-shoreline-maps/#/07-ice-melt-antarctica.jpg> |
107,732 | I've tried researching this question myself, but the only data I can find is over huge timescales, like situations where the continents have reformed back into a Neo-Pangea.
I'm not looking for any real drastic changes in positioning, just relatively minor things like seas disappearing or continents slightly shrinking or pushing into each other.
Would there be any noteworthy changes at all, or would it be pretty much the same as today aside from some minor changes that wouldn't affect anything?
Let's just assume humanity suddenly stopped existing today for the purposes of the question, so they don't make any more changes to the world than they already have.
As always, I'm very grateful for any answers, and if you need anything clarified feel free to leave a comment and I'll do my best to clear things up. | 2018/03/23 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/107732",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/48871/"
] | A millennium is a blink of an eye on a geological scale. But interesting things can happen in a blink of an eye. Even disegarding the changes which may happen as a result of the present climatological instability, small but important modification can occur here and there.
I have no idea of the geographical changes between today and 3000 CE; but I do know of *some* geographical changes between 1 CE and today, either because they happened in places in which I have a local interest, or because they are somehow important to various historical events, or because I found out about them by accident and found them interesting enough to remember.
Geographical changes during the last 1000 or 2000 years
-------------------------------------------------------
* While sea level is today not very different from what it was in the first century, *in some places the sea advanced or retreated considerably:*
+ Some cities which used to be seaports in the first century are now several miles inland. For example:
- In the Antiquity [Ephesus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephesus) and [Miletus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miletus) were major ports on the Ionian coast; they are now several kilometers inland.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miletus#/media/File:Miletus_Bay_silting_evolution_map-en.svg)
*The silting evolution of Miletus Bay due to the alluvium brought by the Maeander River during Antiquity. Map by Eric Gaba, available on Wikimedia under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license.*
- Closer to me, in the Antiquity the city of Histria was a seaport on the western coast of the Black Sea. Now its ruins lay on the shore of a shallow lagoon, and the sea is kilometers away.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histria_(ancient_city)#/media/File:Scythia_Minor_map.jpg)
*Ancient towns and colonies in Dobruja; modern coastline shown as a dotted line. Map by Bogdan, available on Wikimedia under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license.*
+ On the other hand, in some places the sea advanced. For example, what is now the [IJselmeer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IJsselmeer) in the Netherlands used to be a low-lying plain in the first century, with a large lake known by the Romans as [Lake Flevo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Flevo). In 1287, [Saint Lucia's flood](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Lucia%27s_flood) broke through and submerged the former river [Vlie](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlie), creating a large shallow gulf which was called the [Zuiderzee](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuiderzee).
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Flevo#/media/File:50nc_ex_leg_copy.jpg)
*The region of the Netherlands in the 1st century CE. Map by the Dutch Nationale Onderzoeksagenda Archeologie (www.noaa.nl), available on Wikimedia under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license.*
Then in 1932 the long effort of the Dutch to build the [Afsluitdijk](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afsluitdijk) was brough to completion, and the gulf was separated from the sea and became a lake, which the Dutch then proceeded to drain in order to increase the territory of their country; and now the Netherlands has a new 1500 square kilometer province, called [Flevoland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flevoland).
* Rivers sometimes change course dramatically. For me, the most spectacular example is the [Oxus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amu_Darya), which is today known as the Amu Darya. Until the 16th century it used to flow into the Caspian Sea, through what is now the dry [Uzboy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uzboy) valley; it then changed its mind, abandoned the Caspian and went to empty into the Aral Sea.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uzboy#/media/File:XXth_Century_Citizen%27s_Atlas_map_of_Central_Asia.png)
*The old course of the Oxus (Amu Darya), when it flew into the Caspian Sea, marked as "Old Bed of the Oxus". Map from 1903, available on Wikimedia. Public domain.*
At the beginning of the 18th century, [Peter the Great](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_the_Great), emperor of Russia, sent prince [Alexander Bekovich-Cherkassky](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Bekovich-Cherkassky) to find the mouth of the Oxus, with the intention of establishing a trade route from the Caspian to Transoxiana. The prince dutifully mapped the coast and returned with the sad news that the river no longer flowed into the Caspian...
* Speaking of the [Aral Sea](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aral_Sea), the Soviet Union killed it in the 20th century. The former immense lake of 68,000 square kilometers is now a desert, the [Aralkum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aralkum_Desert).
* Speaking of the Soviet Union and Transoxiana: in the 1930s the Soviet Union conceived a titanic project to *"divert the flow of the Northern rivers in the Soviet Union, which "uselessly" drain into the Arctic Ocean, southwards towards the populated agricultural areas of Central Asia, which lack water"* (Wikipedia). The [Northern River Reversal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_river_reversal) eventually grew and grew, design and planning progressed through the 1960s and 1970s, so that by 1980 the Soviets were talking of diverting 12 major Siberian rivers into the Central Asian desert. They even envisaged using atomic bombs to move massive amounts of dirt speedily. Then the Soviet Union fell; but who knows?
* Speaking of using atomic bombs to dig canals, Egypt is considering a [plan to dig a canal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression_Project) from the Mediterranean to the [Qattara Depression](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression), flooding it and creating a solar-powered 2000 megawatt hydropower plant.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression_Project#/media/File:All_proposed_routes.PNG)
*All proposed routes for a tunnel and/or canal route from the Mediterranean Sea towards the Qattara Depression. Map by AlwaysUnite, available on Wikimedia under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license.*
And yes, in the 1950s the international Board of Advisers led by Prof. [Friedrich Bassler](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Bassler) proposed to dig the canal using atomic blasts, part of President Eisenhower's [Atoms for Peace](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atoms_for_Peace) program.
* The [Frisian Islands](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frisian_Islands) on the eastern edge of the North Sea are notoriously shifty, so that the approaches to the Dutch ports have changed considerably from the Middle Ages to the present. For example, the northern part of what is now the island of [Texel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texel) was until the 13th century the southern part of the island of [Vlieland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlieland); it then left Vlieland and became a separate island, the [Eierland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eierland); in the 17th century the Dutch reclaimed the land between the Texel and Eierland, and the two islands became one.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eierland#/media/File:PaysBas_delisle_1743_fragment.jpg)
*Eierland when it was a separate island. Map from 1702, available on Wikimedia. Public domain.*
Geography is not static
-----------------------
The list could be very much expanded. The Panama Canal. The proposed Nicaragua Canal. The lockless Suez Canal, which has brought the marine life of the Red Sea into the Mediterranean. The Hot Gates of Greece. The shifting barrier islands off the coast of Texas. The absent-minded [Yellow River](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_River) of China. The wandering lake [Lop Nor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lop_Nur). The unstable coastline of England -- how many of the medieval [Cinque Ports](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinque_Ports) are still ports, that is, if they exist at all?
Geography changes wherever you look closely. | You mention plate tectonics as a cause of change; there are others
* **Rising sea levels**. [Wikipedia has a map](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_rise#/media/File:6m_Sea_Level_Rise.jpg) from NASA about how a 6-meter sea level rise would change the world map. Current predictions seem to be something between 0.3m and 2.5m in the next hundred years, so 6m doesn't seem crazy over 1000 years.
* **Coastal erosion** can cause significant changes: for example, the [seashore at Hemsby](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-43472150) in eastern England is receding at the rate of about 35 metres (115 ft) per year.
* [**Post-glacial rebound**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound). During the ice age, ice-covered land was weighted down; it's slowly springing back. For example, much of Finland was underwater a few thousand years ago, even though sea levels were much lower. Southern England is pivoting downwards as Scotland rises, which will lower southern England by about 0.5m in the next thousand years.
* **Vulcanism** can and does create new islands.
* **Deposition** from rivers causes estuaries to grow out into the sea. |
107,732 | I've tried researching this question myself, but the only data I can find is over huge timescales, like situations where the continents have reformed back into a Neo-Pangea.
I'm not looking for any real drastic changes in positioning, just relatively minor things like seas disappearing or continents slightly shrinking or pushing into each other.
Would there be any noteworthy changes at all, or would it be pretty much the same as today aside from some minor changes that wouldn't affect anything?
Let's just assume humanity suddenly stopped existing today for the purposes of the question, so they don't make any more changes to the world than they already have.
As always, I'm very grateful for any answers, and if you need anything clarified feel free to leave a comment and I'll do my best to clear things up. | 2018/03/23 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/107732",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/48871/"
] | A millennium is a blink of an eye on a geological scale. But interesting things can happen in a blink of an eye. Even disegarding the changes which may happen as a result of the present climatological instability, small but important modification can occur here and there.
I have no idea of the geographical changes between today and 3000 CE; but I do know of *some* geographical changes between 1 CE and today, either because they happened in places in which I have a local interest, or because they are somehow important to various historical events, or because I found out about them by accident and found them interesting enough to remember.
Geographical changes during the last 1000 or 2000 years
-------------------------------------------------------
* While sea level is today not very different from what it was in the first century, *in some places the sea advanced or retreated considerably:*
+ Some cities which used to be seaports in the first century are now several miles inland. For example:
- In the Antiquity [Ephesus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephesus) and [Miletus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miletus) were major ports on the Ionian coast; they are now several kilometers inland.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miletus#/media/File:Miletus_Bay_silting_evolution_map-en.svg)
*The silting evolution of Miletus Bay due to the alluvium brought by the Maeander River during Antiquity. Map by Eric Gaba, available on Wikimedia under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license.*
- Closer to me, in the Antiquity the city of Histria was a seaport on the western coast of the Black Sea. Now its ruins lay on the shore of a shallow lagoon, and the sea is kilometers away.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histria_(ancient_city)#/media/File:Scythia_Minor_map.jpg)
*Ancient towns and colonies in Dobruja; modern coastline shown as a dotted line. Map by Bogdan, available on Wikimedia under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license.*
+ On the other hand, in some places the sea advanced. For example, what is now the [IJselmeer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IJsselmeer) in the Netherlands used to be a low-lying plain in the first century, with a large lake known by the Romans as [Lake Flevo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Flevo). In 1287, [Saint Lucia's flood](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Lucia%27s_flood) broke through and submerged the former river [Vlie](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlie), creating a large shallow gulf which was called the [Zuiderzee](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuiderzee).
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Flevo#/media/File:50nc_ex_leg_copy.jpg)
*The region of the Netherlands in the 1st century CE. Map by the Dutch Nationale Onderzoeksagenda Archeologie (www.noaa.nl), available on Wikimedia under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license.*
Then in 1932 the long effort of the Dutch to build the [Afsluitdijk](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afsluitdijk) was brough to completion, and the gulf was separated from the sea and became a lake, which the Dutch then proceeded to drain in order to increase the territory of their country; and now the Netherlands has a new 1500 square kilometer province, called [Flevoland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flevoland).
* Rivers sometimes change course dramatically. For me, the most spectacular example is the [Oxus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amu_Darya), which is today known as the Amu Darya. Until the 16th century it used to flow into the Caspian Sea, through what is now the dry [Uzboy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uzboy) valley; it then changed its mind, abandoned the Caspian and went to empty into the Aral Sea.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uzboy#/media/File:XXth_Century_Citizen%27s_Atlas_map_of_Central_Asia.png)
*The old course of the Oxus (Amu Darya), when it flew into the Caspian Sea, marked as "Old Bed of the Oxus". Map from 1903, available on Wikimedia. Public domain.*
At the beginning of the 18th century, [Peter the Great](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_the_Great), emperor of Russia, sent prince [Alexander Bekovich-Cherkassky](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Bekovich-Cherkassky) to find the mouth of the Oxus, with the intention of establishing a trade route from the Caspian to Transoxiana. The prince dutifully mapped the coast and returned with the sad news that the river no longer flowed into the Caspian...
* Speaking of the [Aral Sea](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aral_Sea), the Soviet Union killed it in the 20th century. The former immense lake of 68,000 square kilometers is now a desert, the [Aralkum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aralkum_Desert).
* Speaking of the Soviet Union and Transoxiana: in the 1930s the Soviet Union conceived a titanic project to *"divert the flow of the Northern rivers in the Soviet Union, which "uselessly" drain into the Arctic Ocean, southwards towards the populated agricultural areas of Central Asia, which lack water"* (Wikipedia). The [Northern River Reversal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_river_reversal) eventually grew and grew, design and planning progressed through the 1960s and 1970s, so that by 1980 the Soviets were talking of diverting 12 major Siberian rivers into the Central Asian desert. They even envisaged using atomic bombs to move massive amounts of dirt speedily. Then the Soviet Union fell; but who knows?
* Speaking of using atomic bombs to dig canals, Egypt is considering a [plan to dig a canal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression_Project) from the Mediterranean to the [Qattara Depression](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression), flooding it and creating a solar-powered 2000 megawatt hydropower plant.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression_Project#/media/File:All_proposed_routes.PNG)
*All proposed routes for a tunnel and/or canal route from the Mediterranean Sea towards the Qattara Depression. Map by AlwaysUnite, available on Wikimedia under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license.*
And yes, in the 1950s the international Board of Advisers led by Prof. [Friedrich Bassler](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Bassler) proposed to dig the canal using atomic blasts, part of President Eisenhower's [Atoms for Peace](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atoms_for_Peace) program.
* The [Frisian Islands](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frisian_Islands) on the eastern edge of the North Sea are notoriously shifty, so that the approaches to the Dutch ports have changed considerably from the Middle Ages to the present. For example, the northern part of what is now the island of [Texel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texel) was until the 13th century the southern part of the island of [Vlieland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlieland); it then left Vlieland and became a separate island, the [Eierland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eierland); in the 17th century the Dutch reclaimed the land between the Texel and Eierland, and the two islands became one.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eierland#/media/File:PaysBas_delisle_1743_fragment.jpg)
*Eierland when it was a separate island. Map from 1702, available on Wikimedia. Public domain.*
Geography is not static
-----------------------
The list could be very much expanded. The Panama Canal. The proposed Nicaragua Canal. The lockless Suez Canal, which has brought the marine life of the Red Sea into the Mediterranean. The Hot Gates of Greece. The shifting barrier islands off the coast of Texas. The absent-minded [Yellow River](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_River) of China. The wandering lake [Lop Nor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lop_Nur). The unstable coastline of England -- how many of the medieval [Cinque Ports](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinque_Ports) are still ports, that is, if they exist at all?
Geography changes wherever you look closely. | In addition to the previously noted changes due to climate and normal geology, the sudden removal of humans a la Discovery Channel's [Life After People](https://www.history.com/shows/life-after-people) would quickly lead to the breakdown of electrical and mechanical infrastructure, including pumping stations (e.g., the [California Aqueduct](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Aqueduct), [New Orleans' pumping stations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drainage_in_New_Orleans), and the Netherlands' [pumping stations in Flevoland](https://www.visitflevoland.nl/en/on-expedition/heritage/pumping-stations-in-flevoland/)), with the obvious results. In the longer term (a few centuries at most, according to Discovery), the majority of earthen and concrete structures are likely to fail, which includes essentially all of the world's dams, dikes, and levees. Their collapses will cause significant flooding, erosion, and scouring of low-lying areas downstream, and some river channels will be changed significantly enough to still show the effects a millennium hence.
Earth's cities and highways are also likely to be largely buried in vegetation (again, per Discovery), with the result that urban and linear features that are prominent from the air or even space will become much harder to see.
The disappearance of humans will also eliminate agriculture and logging, which is likely to reduce silt and fertilizer runoff in most places, with at least some visible changes in watersheds. (For example, [mangroves](https://go.nasa.gov/2FY1CnO) can be expected to make a larger comeback in some rivers; clear-cut areas of the Amazon and other forests will recover to some extent; and a number of river deltas like the [Ebro's](https://go.nasa.gov/2Ik9OQV) will stop growing so quickly and may actually erode.) The Aral Sea may make a comeback as well.
Astronomy might also play a small part; according to [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_event), there's about a 20% chance of an asteroid strike large enough to create a crater actually hitting land and doing so.
By the way, spacecraft, even the ISS, are too small to make much of a mark, and what little damage they do cause would be hidden by vegetation and weathering very quickly (years, or decades at most). |
107,732 | I've tried researching this question myself, but the only data I can find is over huge timescales, like situations where the continents have reformed back into a Neo-Pangea.
I'm not looking for any real drastic changes in positioning, just relatively minor things like seas disappearing or continents slightly shrinking or pushing into each other.
Would there be any noteworthy changes at all, or would it be pretty much the same as today aside from some minor changes that wouldn't affect anything?
Let's just assume humanity suddenly stopped existing today for the purposes of the question, so they don't make any more changes to the world than they already have.
As always, I'm very grateful for any answers, and if you need anything clarified feel free to leave a comment and I'll do my best to clear things up. | 2018/03/23 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/107732",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/48871/"
] | A millennium is a blink of an eye on a geological scale. But interesting things can happen in a blink of an eye. Even disegarding the changes which may happen as a result of the present climatological instability, small but important modification can occur here and there.
I have no idea of the geographical changes between today and 3000 CE; but I do know of *some* geographical changes between 1 CE and today, either because they happened in places in which I have a local interest, or because they are somehow important to various historical events, or because I found out about them by accident and found them interesting enough to remember.
Geographical changes during the last 1000 or 2000 years
-------------------------------------------------------
* While sea level is today not very different from what it was in the first century, *in some places the sea advanced or retreated considerably:*
+ Some cities which used to be seaports in the first century are now several miles inland. For example:
- In the Antiquity [Ephesus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephesus) and [Miletus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miletus) were major ports on the Ionian coast; they are now several kilometers inland.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miletus#/media/File:Miletus_Bay_silting_evolution_map-en.svg)
*The silting evolution of Miletus Bay due to the alluvium brought by the Maeander River during Antiquity. Map by Eric Gaba, available on Wikimedia under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license.*
- Closer to me, in the Antiquity the city of Histria was a seaport on the western coast of the Black Sea. Now its ruins lay on the shore of a shallow lagoon, and the sea is kilometers away.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histria_(ancient_city)#/media/File:Scythia_Minor_map.jpg)
*Ancient towns and colonies in Dobruja; modern coastline shown as a dotted line. Map by Bogdan, available on Wikimedia under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license.*
+ On the other hand, in some places the sea advanced. For example, what is now the [IJselmeer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IJsselmeer) in the Netherlands used to be a low-lying plain in the first century, with a large lake known by the Romans as [Lake Flevo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Flevo). In 1287, [Saint Lucia's flood](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Lucia%27s_flood) broke through and submerged the former river [Vlie](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlie), creating a large shallow gulf which was called the [Zuiderzee](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuiderzee).
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Flevo#/media/File:50nc_ex_leg_copy.jpg)
*The region of the Netherlands in the 1st century CE. Map by the Dutch Nationale Onderzoeksagenda Archeologie (www.noaa.nl), available on Wikimedia under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license.*
Then in 1932 the long effort of the Dutch to build the [Afsluitdijk](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afsluitdijk) was brough to completion, and the gulf was separated from the sea and became a lake, which the Dutch then proceeded to drain in order to increase the territory of their country; and now the Netherlands has a new 1500 square kilometer province, called [Flevoland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flevoland).
* Rivers sometimes change course dramatically. For me, the most spectacular example is the [Oxus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amu_Darya), which is today known as the Amu Darya. Until the 16th century it used to flow into the Caspian Sea, through what is now the dry [Uzboy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uzboy) valley; it then changed its mind, abandoned the Caspian and went to empty into the Aral Sea.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uzboy#/media/File:XXth_Century_Citizen%27s_Atlas_map_of_Central_Asia.png)
*The old course of the Oxus (Amu Darya), when it flew into the Caspian Sea, marked as "Old Bed of the Oxus". Map from 1903, available on Wikimedia. Public domain.*
At the beginning of the 18th century, [Peter the Great](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_the_Great), emperor of Russia, sent prince [Alexander Bekovich-Cherkassky](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Bekovich-Cherkassky) to find the mouth of the Oxus, with the intention of establishing a trade route from the Caspian to Transoxiana. The prince dutifully mapped the coast and returned with the sad news that the river no longer flowed into the Caspian...
* Speaking of the [Aral Sea](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aral_Sea), the Soviet Union killed it in the 20th century. The former immense lake of 68,000 square kilometers is now a desert, the [Aralkum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aralkum_Desert).
* Speaking of the Soviet Union and Transoxiana: in the 1930s the Soviet Union conceived a titanic project to *"divert the flow of the Northern rivers in the Soviet Union, which "uselessly" drain into the Arctic Ocean, southwards towards the populated agricultural areas of Central Asia, which lack water"* (Wikipedia). The [Northern River Reversal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_river_reversal) eventually grew and grew, design and planning progressed through the 1960s and 1970s, so that by 1980 the Soviets were talking of diverting 12 major Siberian rivers into the Central Asian desert. They even envisaged using atomic bombs to move massive amounts of dirt speedily. Then the Soviet Union fell; but who knows?
* Speaking of using atomic bombs to dig canals, Egypt is considering a [plan to dig a canal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression_Project) from the Mediterranean to the [Qattara Depression](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression), flooding it and creating a solar-powered 2000 megawatt hydropower plant.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression_Project#/media/File:All_proposed_routes.PNG)
*All proposed routes for a tunnel and/or canal route from the Mediterranean Sea towards the Qattara Depression. Map by AlwaysUnite, available on Wikimedia under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license.*
And yes, in the 1950s the international Board of Advisers led by Prof. [Friedrich Bassler](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Bassler) proposed to dig the canal using atomic blasts, part of President Eisenhower's [Atoms for Peace](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atoms_for_Peace) program.
* The [Frisian Islands](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frisian_Islands) on the eastern edge of the North Sea are notoriously shifty, so that the approaches to the Dutch ports have changed considerably from the Middle Ages to the present. For example, the northern part of what is now the island of [Texel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texel) was until the 13th century the southern part of the island of [Vlieland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlieland); it then left Vlieland and became a separate island, the [Eierland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eierland); in the 17th century the Dutch reclaimed the land between the Texel and Eierland, and the two islands became one.
[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eierland#/media/File:PaysBas_delisle_1743_fragment.jpg)
*Eierland when it was a separate island. Map from 1702, available on Wikimedia. Public domain.*
Geography is not static
-----------------------
The list could be very much expanded. The Panama Canal. The proposed Nicaragua Canal. The lockless Suez Canal, which has brought the marine life of the Red Sea into the Mediterranean. The Hot Gates of Greece. The shifting barrier islands off the coast of Texas. The absent-minded [Yellow River](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_River) of China. The wandering lake [Lop Nor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lop_Nur). The unstable coastline of England -- how many of the medieval [Cinque Ports](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinque_Ports) are still ports, that is, if they exist at all?
Geography changes wherever you look closely. | "Is removing people sufficient to stop global warming?" Good question. Answer is not clear. If we have passed the tipping point for arctic permafrost collapse, arctic ocean being ice free in summer, then we may release huge amounts of methane clathrates.
On top of this while oil has to be pumped, natural gas is often under pressure. As distribuiton systems break down, more methane is released.
Net result: ALL of antarctica and Greenland melt over the space of that thousand years.
So we have an new continent free from ice in the south, we have a new archipelago of islands where Greenland was. We have new ecologies in the arctic regions, and the ocean shoreline moves in a bunch.
Details here: <https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2013/09/rising-seas-ice-melt-new-shoreline-maps/#/07-ice-melt-antarctica.jpg> |
107,732 | I've tried researching this question myself, but the only data I can find is over huge timescales, like situations where the continents have reformed back into a Neo-Pangea.
I'm not looking for any real drastic changes in positioning, just relatively minor things like seas disappearing or continents slightly shrinking or pushing into each other.
Would there be any noteworthy changes at all, or would it be pretty much the same as today aside from some minor changes that wouldn't affect anything?
Let's just assume humanity suddenly stopped existing today for the purposes of the question, so they don't make any more changes to the world than they already have.
As always, I'm very grateful for any answers, and if you need anything clarified feel free to leave a comment and I'll do my best to clear things up. | 2018/03/23 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/107732",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/48871/"
] | You mention plate tectonics as a cause of change; there are others
* **Rising sea levels**. [Wikipedia has a map](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_rise#/media/File:6m_Sea_Level_Rise.jpg) from NASA about how a 6-meter sea level rise would change the world map. Current predictions seem to be something between 0.3m and 2.5m in the next hundred years, so 6m doesn't seem crazy over 1000 years.
* **Coastal erosion** can cause significant changes: for example, the [seashore at Hemsby](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-43472150) in eastern England is receding at the rate of about 35 metres (115 ft) per year.
* [**Post-glacial rebound**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound). During the ice age, ice-covered land was weighted down; it's slowly springing back. For example, much of Finland was underwater a few thousand years ago, even though sea levels were much lower. Southern England is pivoting downwards as Scotland rises, which will lower southern England by about 0.5m in the next thousand years.
* **Vulcanism** can and does create new islands.
* **Deposition** from rivers causes estuaries to grow out into the sea. | In addition to the previously noted changes due to climate and normal geology, the sudden removal of humans a la Discovery Channel's [Life After People](https://www.history.com/shows/life-after-people) would quickly lead to the breakdown of electrical and mechanical infrastructure, including pumping stations (e.g., the [California Aqueduct](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Aqueduct), [New Orleans' pumping stations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drainage_in_New_Orleans), and the Netherlands' [pumping stations in Flevoland](https://www.visitflevoland.nl/en/on-expedition/heritage/pumping-stations-in-flevoland/)), with the obvious results. In the longer term (a few centuries at most, according to Discovery), the majority of earthen and concrete structures are likely to fail, which includes essentially all of the world's dams, dikes, and levees. Their collapses will cause significant flooding, erosion, and scouring of low-lying areas downstream, and some river channels will be changed significantly enough to still show the effects a millennium hence.
Earth's cities and highways are also likely to be largely buried in vegetation (again, per Discovery), with the result that urban and linear features that are prominent from the air or even space will become much harder to see.
The disappearance of humans will also eliminate agriculture and logging, which is likely to reduce silt and fertilizer runoff in most places, with at least some visible changes in watersheds. (For example, [mangroves](https://go.nasa.gov/2FY1CnO) can be expected to make a larger comeback in some rivers; clear-cut areas of the Amazon and other forests will recover to some extent; and a number of river deltas like the [Ebro's](https://go.nasa.gov/2Ik9OQV) will stop growing so quickly and may actually erode.) The Aral Sea may make a comeback as well.
Astronomy might also play a small part; according to [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_event), there's about a 20% chance of an asteroid strike large enough to create a crater actually hitting land and doing so.
By the way, spacecraft, even the ISS, are too small to make much of a mark, and what little damage they do cause would be hidden by vegetation and weathering very quickly (years, or decades at most). |
107,732 | I've tried researching this question myself, but the only data I can find is over huge timescales, like situations where the continents have reformed back into a Neo-Pangea.
I'm not looking for any real drastic changes in positioning, just relatively minor things like seas disappearing or continents slightly shrinking or pushing into each other.
Would there be any noteworthy changes at all, or would it be pretty much the same as today aside from some minor changes that wouldn't affect anything?
Let's just assume humanity suddenly stopped existing today for the purposes of the question, so they don't make any more changes to the world than they already have.
As always, I'm very grateful for any answers, and if you need anything clarified feel free to leave a comment and I'll do my best to clear things up. | 2018/03/23 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/107732",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/48871/"
] | You mention plate tectonics as a cause of change; there are others
* **Rising sea levels**. [Wikipedia has a map](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_rise#/media/File:6m_Sea_Level_Rise.jpg) from NASA about how a 6-meter sea level rise would change the world map. Current predictions seem to be something between 0.3m and 2.5m in the next hundred years, so 6m doesn't seem crazy over 1000 years.
* **Coastal erosion** can cause significant changes: for example, the [seashore at Hemsby](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-43472150) in eastern England is receding at the rate of about 35 metres (115 ft) per year.
* [**Post-glacial rebound**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound). During the ice age, ice-covered land was weighted down; it's slowly springing back. For example, much of Finland was underwater a few thousand years ago, even though sea levels were much lower. Southern England is pivoting downwards as Scotland rises, which will lower southern England by about 0.5m in the next thousand years.
* **Vulcanism** can and does create new islands.
* **Deposition** from rivers causes estuaries to grow out into the sea. | "Is removing people sufficient to stop global warming?" Good question. Answer is not clear. If we have passed the tipping point for arctic permafrost collapse, arctic ocean being ice free in summer, then we may release huge amounts of methane clathrates.
On top of this while oil has to be pumped, natural gas is often under pressure. As distribuiton systems break down, more methane is released.
Net result: ALL of antarctica and Greenland melt over the space of that thousand years.
So we have an new continent free from ice in the south, we have a new archipelago of islands where Greenland was. We have new ecologies in the arctic regions, and the ocean shoreline moves in a bunch.
Details here: <https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2013/09/rising-seas-ice-melt-new-shoreline-maps/#/07-ice-melt-antarctica.jpg> |
107,732 | I've tried researching this question myself, but the only data I can find is over huge timescales, like situations where the continents have reformed back into a Neo-Pangea.
I'm not looking for any real drastic changes in positioning, just relatively minor things like seas disappearing or continents slightly shrinking or pushing into each other.
Would there be any noteworthy changes at all, or would it be pretty much the same as today aside from some minor changes that wouldn't affect anything?
Let's just assume humanity suddenly stopped existing today for the purposes of the question, so they don't make any more changes to the world than they already have.
As always, I'm very grateful for any answers, and if you need anything clarified feel free to leave a comment and I'll do my best to clear things up. | 2018/03/23 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/107732",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/48871/"
] | In addition to the previously noted changes due to climate and normal geology, the sudden removal of humans a la Discovery Channel's [Life After People](https://www.history.com/shows/life-after-people) would quickly lead to the breakdown of electrical and mechanical infrastructure, including pumping stations (e.g., the [California Aqueduct](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Aqueduct), [New Orleans' pumping stations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drainage_in_New_Orleans), and the Netherlands' [pumping stations in Flevoland](https://www.visitflevoland.nl/en/on-expedition/heritage/pumping-stations-in-flevoland/)), with the obvious results. In the longer term (a few centuries at most, according to Discovery), the majority of earthen and concrete structures are likely to fail, which includes essentially all of the world's dams, dikes, and levees. Their collapses will cause significant flooding, erosion, and scouring of low-lying areas downstream, and some river channels will be changed significantly enough to still show the effects a millennium hence.
Earth's cities and highways are also likely to be largely buried in vegetation (again, per Discovery), with the result that urban and linear features that are prominent from the air or even space will become much harder to see.
The disappearance of humans will also eliminate agriculture and logging, which is likely to reduce silt and fertilizer runoff in most places, with at least some visible changes in watersheds. (For example, [mangroves](https://go.nasa.gov/2FY1CnO) can be expected to make a larger comeback in some rivers; clear-cut areas of the Amazon and other forests will recover to some extent; and a number of river deltas like the [Ebro's](https://go.nasa.gov/2Ik9OQV) will stop growing so quickly and may actually erode.) The Aral Sea may make a comeback as well.
Astronomy might also play a small part; according to [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_event), there's about a 20% chance of an asteroid strike large enough to create a crater actually hitting land and doing so.
By the way, spacecraft, even the ISS, are too small to make much of a mark, and what little damage they do cause would be hidden by vegetation and weathering very quickly (years, or decades at most). | "Is removing people sufficient to stop global warming?" Good question. Answer is not clear. If we have passed the tipping point for arctic permafrost collapse, arctic ocean being ice free in summer, then we may release huge amounts of methane clathrates.
On top of this while oil has to be pumped, natural gas is often under pressure. As distribuiton systems break down, more methane is released.
Net result: ALL of antarctica and Greenland melt over the space of that thousand years.
So we have an new continent free from ice in the south, we have a new archipelago of islands where Greenland was. We have new ecologies in the arctic regions, and the ocean shoreline moves in a bunch.
Details here: <https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2013/09/rising-seas-ice-melt-new-shoreline-maps/#/07-ice-melt-antarctica.jpg> |
45,964 | Buddha talks of becoming have a cause, is dependent on something other. Like Lamp's flame and light, shadow and real object, The sun and it's aura, object and mirage.
The dependent origination generates the false 'I' which is nothing but the becoming.
Then can one conclude the cessation of becoming is also carried out by reversal of dependent origination I.e Dependent Cessation? I think that's the way!
Shadow can be ceased only when the real object is perceived, if not the shadow thinks it as real, even though it's unreal or non existing thing! Previously perceived snake was actually the rope, when the wisdom dawns upon.
This shadow is false 'I', the illusion, the non-existant thing. But only when one sees it with eyes of wisdom! Can we say that?
Some quotes of Saints have this testimony in common,
√ Cure for Pain is in Pain!\_ Rumi
√ Samudayadhamma(origination) = nirodhadhamma(cessation)\_ Buddha
I believe the becoming and cessation are two opposite sides of the same coin!
What do others have to say about this? Please don't bring here quotes of scriptures. Do we have here the seekers which can see with eyes of wisdom?
I am asking them! Others please don't bother! | 2021/10/07 | [
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/45964",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/12115/"
] | Good question, more to the point than your first one, IMO.
Regular samsaric mind is "flat", we see things and we interpret them non-ambiguously as per our ego's convictions.
Buddha's mind is "non-flat", it's not like it doesn't interpret at all, rather it produces a solution space of all possible and plausible interpretations at once. It's not a collection of individual distinct interpretations, more like a multidimensional gradient space.
This is why it's said the Buddha's mind is indescribable, Buddha has no position on things etc.
This has been described variously in Buddhist literature as openness or vastness or groundlessness or Emptiness or suchness or ambiguity or metaphorical homelessness etc.
So it's not that you need to stop the thought and become a rock or a log, not at all. Undoing the ego is about opening up and removing the boundaries, towards the fully open Buddha-mind (Bodhi-citta).
In practice this sort of open multiperspective is actually very helpful in everyday life. It makes one a lot less prone to being stuck in a box or getting into a conflict with others. So it's not just good for enlightenment, it makes one more robust in the regular life, too. | You cannot, not at least until you are enlightened & choose to do so.
What you can do is cease identification with the thought; detach yourself from the one who is doing the thinking. Karma will still play out for you, things happen, situations occur, thoughts arise. You can't really stop this.
The waves still as a consequence of following the path, you cannot willfully curb thought. |
45,964 | Buddha talks of becoming have a cause, is dependent on something other. Like Lamp's flame and light, shadow and real object, The sun and it's aura, object and mirage.
The dependent origination generates the false 'I' which is nothing but the becoming.
Then can one conclude the cessation of becoming is also carried out by reversal of dependent origination I.e Dependent Cessation? I think that's the way!
Shadow can be ceased only when the real object is perceived, if not the shadow thinks it as real, even though it's unreal or non existing thing! Previously perceived snake was actually the rope, when the wisdom dawns upon.
This shadow is false 'I', the illusion, the non-existant thing. But only when one sees it with eyes of wisdom! Can we say that?
Some quotes of Saints have this testimony in common,
√ Cure for Pain is in Pain!\_ Rumi
√ Samudayadhamma(origination) = nirodhadhamma(cessation)\_ Buddha
I believe the becoming and cessation are two opposite sides of the same coin!
What do others have to say about this? Please don't bring here quotes of scriptures. Do we have here the seekers which can see with eyes of wisdom?
I am asking them! Others please don't bother! | 2021/10/07 | [
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/45964",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/12115/"
] | Good question, more to the point than your first one, IMO.
Regular samsaric mind is "flat", we see things and we interpret them non-ambiguously as per our ego's convictions.
Buddha's mind is "non-flat", it's not like it doesn't interpret at all, rather it produces a solution space of all possible and plausible interpretations at once. It's not a collection of individual distinct interpretations, more like a multidimensional gradient space.
This is why it's said the Buddha's mind is indescribable, Buddha has no position on things etc.
This has been described variously in Buddhist literature as openness or vastness or groundlessness or Emptiness or suchness or ambiguity or metaphorical homelessness etc.
So it's not that you need to stop the thought and become a rock or a log, not at all. Undoing the ego is about opening up and removing the boundaries, towards the fully open Buddha-mind (Bodhi-citta).
In practice this sort of open multiperspective is actually very helpful in everyday life. It makes one a lot less prone to being stuck in a box or getting into a conflict with others. So it's not just good for enlightenment, it makes one more robust in the regular life, too. | >
> How does one accomplish a reality not governed by the mind when thought is required to function?
>
>
>
There is no one who can govern. There are only realities which causing others.
So, the purification of understanding in realities is the only way to specify the using of "govern" word whether wrong or right using.
It's ok to say "governed by the mind" if the speaker realizing in every moment weather "there are only realities depending on other realities, nothing controllable itself".
It's wrong if the speaker don't realize even one moment, although the speaker avoid to say the word "govern".
**And that ability required proficient Jhana and Abhidhammic detail. The proficient Jhana let the practitioner see ultimate realities in very advance, abhidhammic detail. The abhidhammic detail are seeing the smallest reality more than atom, fastest arising&vanishing more than the light speed, more than trillion time in a second.**
>
> It often seems that ultimate reality is only available in the absence of thought, yet interactions, work and daily functioning requires thought.
>
>
>
The ultimate reality is every where either thinking or not. The mind can know only a reality or a concept per arising, however it's conascence-wisdom can understand both of them at the same moment.
So, the thought is the opposite of only Jhana.
However, the unwholesome is the opposite of the insight-meditation as well, so it is important to do Jhana for pausing the thought. Jhana is easier than the insight-meditation, less detail, so it is good in short term to stop the unwholesome mind.
>
> How does one curb thought when it is uncertain as to whether there is utility in the thought and that it is necessary to follow that thought to achieve something? Wouldn't this mean that ultimate reality can't be accomplished?
>
>
>
"Curbing thought" is Jhana. Jhana is required but not all the time.
It's important for insight meditation weather "how deep in detail that you can see the realities?".
But it's important for Jhana meditation weather "how long time that you can pause the thought?"
However, both Jhana-meditation and insight-meditation are important to do. |
45,964 | Buddha talks of becoming have a cause, is dependent on something other. Like Lamp's flame and light, shadow and real object, The sun and it's aura, object and mirage.
The dependent origination generates the false 'I' which is nothing but the becoming.
Then can one conclude the cessation of becoming is also carried out by reversal of dependent origination I.e Dependent Cessation? I think that's the way!
Shadow can be ceased only when the real object is perceived, if not the shadow thinks it as real, even though it's unreal or non existing thing! Previously perceived snake was actually the rope, when the wisdom dawns upon.
This shadow is false 'I', the illusion, the non-existant thing. But only when one sees it with eyes of wisdom! Can we say that?
Some quotes of Saints have this testimony in common,
√ Cure for Pain is in Pain!\_ Rumi
√ Samudayadhamma(origination) = nirodhadhamma(cessation)\_ Buddha
I believe the becoming and cessation are two opposite sides of the same coin!
What do others have to say about this? Please don't bring here quotes of scriptures. Do we have here the seekers which can see with eyes of wisdom?
I am asking them! Others please don't bother! | 2021/10/07 | [
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/45964",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/12115/"
] | Good question, more to the point than your first one, IMO.
Regular samsaric mind is "flat", we see things and we interpret them non-ambiguously as per our ego's convictions.
Buddha's mind is "non-flat", it's not like it doesn't interpret at all, rather it produces a solution space of all possible and plausible interpretations at once. It's not a collection of individual distinct interpretations, more like a multidimensional gradient space.
This is why it's said the Buddha's mind is indescribable, Buddha has no position on things etc.
This has been described variously in Buddhist literature as openness or vastness or groundlessness or Emptiness or suchness or ambiguity or metaphorical homelessness etc.
So it's not that you need to stop the thought and become a rock or a log, not at all. Undoing the ego is about opening up and removing the boundaries, towards the fully open Buddha-mind (Bodhi-citta).
In practice this sort of open multiperspective is actually very helpful in everyday life. It makes one a lot less prone to being stuck in a box or getting into a conflict with others. So it's not just good for enlightenment, it makes one more robust in the regular life, too. | "governed by the mind" suggest that there is one who is governed. Once you enter the 2nd refuge of the 3 jewels of Buddhism (taking refuge in the Dharma) and the teacher and the teaching as localized sources melt away, you become one with all , therefore the continued teaching and realizations do not flow from a person or from a book anymore. The whole starts teaching herself.
2+2=4 not because your mind is localized and is able to calculate. The same way, things can be happening (urge to go to the bathroom) without the mind creating a story about it. Then "you aren't going to the bathroom", but rather "the whole is going to the bathroom". There is still "going to the bathroom", but a localized mind is not required to achieve the act.
Also IMPORTANT, none of these states are black/white, on/off, etc. In most cases there are partial realizations or degrees of achievements. Once you notice the gap (between what is and what is in the mind), you can widen that gap with practice and repetition. So the functionality of the mind can be slowly/quickly, gradually/at once be transferred/tasked to work as part of the whole, rather than work for the individual. The Eightfold Path gives you specific training to work on the mind and its functionality, to slowly erode its fascination with itself. Then it becomes a tool, rather than the seat of your god. |
45,964 | Buddha talks of becoming have a cause, is dependent on something other. Like Lamp's flame and light, shadow and real object, The sun and it's aura, object and mirage.
The dependent origination generates the false 'I' which is nothing but the becoming.
Then can one conclude the cessation of becoming is also carried out by reversal of dependent origination I.e Dependent Cessation? I think that's the way!
Shadow can be ceased only when the real object is perceived, if not the shadow thinks it as real, even though it's unreal or non existing thing! Previously perceived snake was actually the rope, when the wisdom dawns upon.
This shadow is false 'I', the illusion, the non-existant thing. But only when one sees it with eyes of wisdom! Can we say that?
Some quotes of Saints have this testimony in common,
√ Cure for Pain is in Pain!\_ Rumi
√ Samudayadhamma(origination) = nirodhadhamma(cessation)\_ Buddha
I believe the becoming and cessation are two opposite sides of the same coin!
What do others have to say about this? Please don't bring here quotes of scriptures. Do we have here the seekers which can see with eyes of wisdom?
I am asking them! Others please don't bother! | 2021/10/07 | [
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/45964",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/12115/"
] | >
> How does one accomplish a reality not governed by the mind when thought is required to function?
>
>
>
There is no one who can govern. There are only realities which causing others.
So, the purification of understanding in realities is the only way to specify the using of "govern" word whether wrong or right using.
It's ok to say "governed by the mind" if the speaker realizing in every moment weather "there are only realities depending on other realities, nothing controllable itself".
It's wrong if the speaker don't realize even one moment, although the speaker avoid to say the word "govern".
**And that ability required proficient Jhana and Abhidhammic detail. The proficient Jhana let the practitioner see ultimate realities in very advance, abhidhammic detail. The abhidhammic detail are seeing the smallest reality more than atom, fastest arising&vanishing more than the light speed, more than trillion time in a second.**
>
> It often seems that ultimate reality is only available in the absence of thought, yet interactions, work and daily functioning requires thought.
>
>
>
The ultimate reality is every where either thinking or not. The mind can know only a reality or a concept per arising, however it's conascence-wisdom can understand both of them at the same moment.
So, the thought is the opposite of only Jhana.
However, the unwholesome is the opposite of the insight-meditation as well, so it is important to do Jhana for pausing the thought. Jhana is easier than the insight-meditation, less detail, so it is good in short term to stop the unwholesome mind.
>
> How does one curb thought when it is uncertain as to whether there is utility in the thought and that it is necessary to follow that thought to achieve something? Wouldn't this mean that ultimate reality can't be accomplished?
>
>
>
"Curbing thought" is Jhana. Jhana is required but not all the time.
It's important for insight meditation weather "how deep in detail that you can see the realities?".
But it's important for Jhana meditation weather "how long time that you can pause the thought?"
However, both Jhana-meditation and insight-meditation are important to do. | You cannot, not at least until you are enlightened & choose to do so.
What you can do is cease identification with the thought; detach yourself from the one who is doing the thinking. Karma will still play out for you, things happen, situations occur, thoughts arise. You can't really stop this.
The waves still as a consequence of following the path, you cannot willfully curb thought. |
45,964 | Buddha talks of becoming have a cause, is dependent on something other. Like Lamp's flame and light, shadow and real object, The sun and it's aura, object and mirage.
The dependent origination generates the false 'I' which is nothing but the becoming.
Then can one conclude the cessation of becoming is also carried out by reversal of dependent origination I.e Dependent Cessation? I think that's the way!
Shadow can be ceased only when the real object is perceived, if not the shadow thinks it as real, even though it's unreal or non existing thing! Previously perceived snake was actually the rope, when the wisdom dawns upon.
This shadow is false 'I', the illusion, the non-existant thing. But only when one sees it with eyes of wisdom! Can we say that?
Some quotes of Saints have this testimony in common,
√ Cure for Pain is in Pain!\_ Rumi
√ Samudayadhamma(origination) = nirodhadhamma(cessation)\_ Buddha
I believe the becoming and cessation are two opposite sides of the same coin!
What do others have to say about this? Please don't bring here quotes of scriptures. Do we have here the seekers which can see with eyes of wisdom?
I am asking them! Others please don't bother! | 2021/10/07 | [
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/45964",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/12115/"
] | "governed by the mind" suggest that there is one who is governed. Once you enter the 2nd refuge of the 3 jewels of Buddhism (taking refuge in the Dharma) and the teacher and the teaching as localized sources melt away, you become one with all , therefore the continued teaching and realizations do not flow from a person or from a book anymore. The whole starts teaching herself.
2+2=4 not because your mind is localized and is able to calculate. The same way, things can be happening (urge to go to the bathroom) without the mind creating a story about it. Then "you aren't going to the bathroom", but rather "the whole is going to the bathroom". There is still "going to the bathroom", but a localized mind is not required to achieve the act.
Also IMPORTANT, none of these states are black/white, on/off, etc. In most cases there are partial realizations or degrees of achievements. Once you notice the gap (between what is and what is in the mind), you can widen that gap with practice and repetition. So the functionality of the mind can be slowly/quickly, gradually/at once be transferred/tasked to work as part of the whole, rather than work for the individual. The Eightfold Path gives you specific training to work on the mind and its functionality, to slowly erode its fascination with itself. Then it becomes a tool, rather than the seat of your god. | You cannot, not at least until you are enlightened & choose to do so.
What you can do is cease identification with the thought; detach yourself from the one who is doing the thinking. Karma will still play out for you, things happen, situations occur, thoughts arise. You can't really stop this.
The waves still as a consequence of following the path, you cannot willfully curb thought. |
10,598 | Reading [the answer to a question about Sabé](https://scifi.stackexchange.com/a/10590/2565) (the Amidala stand-in) I remembered that I always wondered why she ordered the actual queen to scrub R2-D2. There were enough actual servants who could have done it, so why Padmé? If that wasn't enough, after giving the actual queen (Padmé) the order to go away, she tells Panaka to continue with the discussion. How does that make sense?
The significant piece of dialogue:
>
> AMIDALA : Thank you, Artoo Detoo. You have proven to be very loyal...Padme!
> ...
>
> AMIDALA : (Cont'd) Clean this droid up the best you can. It deserves our gratitude...(to Panaka) Continue, Captain.
>
>
>
Note that this question is two-fold:
1. Why was Padmé chosen in the first place?
2. Why would an important meeting with the ship's captain be continued without her? | 2012/02/07 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/10598",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/2565/"
] | In addition to what Chris stated, it also gave Amidala an more ready excuse to be around the Jedi, Anakin and JarJar in a non-formal environment where discussion might flow more freely. An attendant to the Queen would be expected to be in attendance to the Queen whenever possible and allows little time to just "hang out" as it were in that more free environment. But if she were given a task that would take some time, she could spend time getting to know the travelers more and perhaps gain more of their trust in return. | The decision to ask her to clean the droid seems to have been to give Padmé an opportunity to interact directly with the Queen *without it seeming like she's consulting her*. Presumably if Padmé had disagreed, she could have shaken her head sadly as she looked at how dirty the droid was.
It's a little clearer in the film's [official novelisation](http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_Wars_Episode_I:_The_Phantom_Menace_(novel))
>
> The Queen looked at Qui-Gon. The Jedi did not waver. **“You must trust
> my judgment, Your Highness.”**
>
>
> **“Must I?” Amidala asked quietly. She shifted her gaze to her
> handmaidens, ending with Padmé.** The girl had not moved from the
> Queen’s side, but seemed to remember suddenly she had been given a
> task to complete. **She nodded briefly to the Queen,** and moved to take
> R2-D2 in hand.
>
>
> Amidala looked back at Qui-Gon Jinn. “**We are in your hands,**” she
> advised, and the matter was settled.
>
>
>
It also helps to maintain her subterfuge
>
> *Now that I am Padmé, **the Queen can command me to perform tasks. I told
> Sabé she must do this, or it will look suspicious. But does Sabé get
> just a little pleasure out of telling me to clean up an astromech
> droid?***
>
>
> ***Maybe. She's only human.** Actually, once I began, I didn't mind the
> task. I like working with my hands, it takes my mind off the
> impatience. And after all, the droid saved my life.*
>
>
> [Star Wars Journals - Episode 1 #2 - Queen Amidala](https://www.scholastic.com/teachers/books/star-wars-journals-episode-1-02-amidala-by-jude-watson/)
>
>
> |
10,598 | Reading [the answer to a question about Sabé](https://scifi.stackexchange.com/a/10590/2565) (the Amidala stand-in) I remembered that I always wondered why she ordered the actual queen to scrub R2-D2. There were enough actual servants who could have done it, so why Padmé? If that wasn't enough, after giving the actual queen (Padmé) the order to go away, she tells Panaka to continue with the discussion. How does that make sense?
The significant piece of dialogue:
>
> AMIDALA : Thank you, Artoo Detoo. You have proven to be very loyal...Padme!
> ...
>
> AMIDALA : (Cont'd) Clean this droid up the best you can. It deserves our gratitude...(to Panaka) Continue, Captain.
>
>
>
Note that this question is two-fold:
1. Why was Padmé chosen in the first place?
2. Why would an important meeting with the ship's captain be continued without her? | 2012/02/07 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/10598",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/2565/"
] | The decision to ask her to clean the droid seems to have been to give Padmé an opportunity to interact directly with the Queen *without it seeming like she's consulting her*. Presumably if Padmé had disagreed, she could have shaken her head sadly as she looked at how dirty the droid was.
It's a little clearer in the film's [official novelisation](http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_Wars_Episode_I:_The_Phantom_Menace_(novel))
>
> The Queen looked at Qui-Gon. The Jedi did not waver. **“You must trust
> my judgment, Your Highness.”**
>
>
> **“Must I?” Amidala asked quietly. She shifted her gaze to her
> handmaidens, ending with Padmé.** The girl had not moved from the
> Queen’s side, but seemed to remember suddenly she had been given a
> task to complete. **She nodded briefly to the Queen,** and moved to take
> R2-D2 in hand.
>
>
> Amidala looked back at Qui-Gon Jinn. “**We are in your hands,**” she
> advised, and the matter was settled.
>
>
>
It also helps to maintain her subterfuge
>
> *Now that I am Padmé, **the Queen can command me to perform tasks. I told
> Sabé she must do this, or it will look suspicious. But does Sabé get
> just a little pleasure out of telling me to clean up an astromech
> droid?***
>
>
> ***Maybe. She's only human.** Actually, once I began, I didn't mind the
> task. I like working with my hands, it takes my mind off the
> impatience. And after all, the droid saved my life.*
>
>
> [Star Wars Journals - Episode 1 #2 - Queen Amidala](https://www.scholastic.com/teachers/books/star-wars-journals-episode-1-02-amidala-by-jude-watson/)
>
>
> | The smile that Sabe gives Padme after she orders her to do it is quite telling. Like it's some kind of joke. Whether it's a joke that she's making her do something menial, or a joke that "Hey, we're going to pull off you infiiltrating the strangers' ranks" is unknown. |
10,598 | Reading [the answer to a question about Sabé](https://scifi.stackexchange.com/a/10590/2565) (the Amidala stand-in) I remembered that I always wondered why she ordered the actual queen to scrub R2-D2. There were enough actual servants who could have done it, so why Padmé? If that wasn't enough, after giving the actual queen (Padmé) the order to go away, she tells Panaka to continue with the discussion. How does that make sense?
The significant piece of dialogue:
>
> AMIDALA : Thank you, Artoo Detoo. You have proven to be very loyal...Padme!
> ...
>
> AMIDALA : (Cont'd) Clean this droid up the best you can. It deserves our gratitude...(to Panaka) Continue, Captain.
>
>
>
Note that this question is two-fold:
1. Why was Padmé chosen in the first place?
2. Why would an important meeting with the ship's captain be continued without her? | 2012/02/07 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/10598",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/2565/"
] | In addition to what Chris stated, it also gave Amidala an more ready excuse to be around the Jedi, Anakin and JarJar in a non-formal environment where discussion might flow more freely. An attendant to the Queen would be expected to be in attendance to the Queen whenever possible and allows little time to just "hang out" as it were in that more free environment. But if she were given a task that would take some time, she could spend time getting to know the travelers more and perhaps gain more of their trust in return. | Perhaps Padmé *wanted* to clean the droid--both to learn more about the people she was traveling with, and the droid that had saved her and her ship. She didn't seem to treat it as an onerous task, did she? |
10,598 | Reading [the answer to a question about Sabé](https://scifi.stackexchange.com/a/10590/2565) (the Amidala stand-in) I remembered that I always wondered why she ordered the actual queen to scrub R2-D2. There were enough actual servants who could have done it, so why Padmé? If that wasn't enough, after giving the actual queen (Padmé) the order to go away, she tells Panaka to continue with the discussion. How does that make sense?
The significant piece of dialogue:
>
> AMIDALA : Thank you, Artoo Detoo. You have proven to be very loyal...Padme!
> ...
>
> AMIDALA : (Cont'd) Clean this droid up the best you can. It deserves our gratitude...(to Panaka) Continue, Captain.
>
>
>
Note that this question is two-fold:
1. Why was Padmé chosen in the first place?
2. Why would an important meeting with the ship's captain be continued without her? | 2012/02/07 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/10598",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/2565/"
] | 1. It underscores the subterfuge - if the "queen" were deferential and reluctant to use a particular handmaiden as a servant, that would raise suspicions. If Padme wanted to be seen as a servant, she would have walk the walk.
2. I think that Sabé was well-trained enough to handle the situation. They were out of danger, and she could couch any major decision she was pressed for as "I need some time to think about it", huddle with Padme, and there you are. If you've cultivated a habit of consulting your handmaidens *anyway*, this seems perfectly logical - I suspect that the handmaidens are probably noble-born and highly educated as well. | I always thought it was Sabe playing a joke on her friend the Queen. The Queen and her handmaidens are supposed to be very close (look at how distraught Padme was when Corde, who wasn't even HER handmaiden was killed) so maybe Sabe felt secure enough in their friendship to make her do dirty work. I know that if my best friend was a noble and I was his servant and we switched for a few weeks, I'd have him on latrine duty from 8 o'clock, day one. |
10,598 | Reading [the answer to a question about Sabé](https://scifi.stackexchange.com/a/10590/2565) (the Amidala stand-in) I remembered that I always wondered why she ordered the actual queen to scrub R2-D2. There were enough actual servants who could have done it, so why Padmé? If that wasn't enough, after giving the actual queen (Padmé) the order to go away, she tells Panaka to continue with the discussion. How does that make sense?
The significant piece of dialogue:
>
> AMIDALA : Thank you, Artoo Detoo. You have proven to be very loyal...Padme!
> ...
>
> AMIDALA : (Cont'd) Clean this droid up the best you can. It deserves our gratitude...(to Panaka) Continue, Captain.
>
>
>
Note that this question is two-fold:
1. Why was Padmé chosen in the first place?
2. Why would an important meeting with the ship's captain be continued without her? | 2012/02/07 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/10598",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/2565/"
] | The decision to ask her to clean the droid seems to have been to give Padmé an opportunity to interact directly with the Queen *without it seeming like she's consulting her*. Presumably if Padmé had disagreed, she could have shaken her head sadly as she looked at how dirty the droid was.
It's a little clearer in the film's [official novelisation](http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_Wars_Episode_I:_The_Phantom_Menace_(novel))
>
> The Queen looked at Qui-Gon. The Jedi did not waver. **“You must trust
> my judgment, Your Highness.”**
>
>
> **“Must I?” Amidala asked quietly. She shifted her gaze to her
> handmaidens, ending with Padmé.** The girl had not moved from the
> Queen’s side, but seemed to remember suddenly she had been given a
> task to complete. **She nodded briefly to the Queen,** and moved to take
> R2-D2 in hand.
>
>
> Amidala looked back at Qui-Gon Jinn. “**We are in your hands,**” she
> advised, and the matter was settled.
>
>
>
It also helps to maintain her subterfuge
>
> *Now that I am Padmé, **the Queen can command me to perform tasks. I told
> Sabé she must do this, or it will look suspicious. But does Sabé get
> just a little pleasure out of telling me to clean up an astromech
> droid?***
>
>
> ***Maybe. She's only human.** Actually, once I began, I didn't mind the
> task. I like working with my hands, it takes my mind off the
> impatience. And after all, the droid saved my life.*
>
>
> [Star Wars Journals - Episode 1 #2 - Queen Amidala](https://www.scholastic.com/teachers/books/star-wars-journals-episode-1-02-amidala-by-jude-watson/)
>
>
> | Perhaps Padmé *wanted* to clean the droid--both to learn more about the people she was traveling with, and the droid that had saved her and her ship. She didn't seem to treat it as an onerous task, did she? |
10,598 | Reading [the answer to a question about Sabé](https://scifi.stackexchange.com/a/10590/2565) (the Amidala stand-in) I remembered that I always wondered why she ordered the actual queen to scrub R2-D2. There were enough actual servants who could have done it, so why Padmé? If that wasn't enough, after giving the actual queen (Padmé) the order to go away, she tells Panaka to continue with the discussion. How does that make sense?
The significant piece of dialogue:
>
> AMIDALA : Thank you, Artoo Detoo. You have proven to be very loyal...Padme!
> ...
>
> AMIDALA : (Cont'd) Clean this droid up the best you can. It deserves our gratitude...(to Panaka) Continue, Captain.
>
>
>
Note that this question is two-fold:
1. Why was Padmé chosen in the first place?
2. Why would an important meeting with the ship's captain be continued without her? | 2012/02/07 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/10598",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/2565/"
] | In addition to what Chris stated, it also gave Amidala an more ready excuse to be around the Jedi, Anakin and JarJar in a non-formal environment where discussion might flow more freely. An attendant to the Queen would be expected to be in attendance to the Queen whenever possible and allows little time to just "hang out" as it were in that more free environment. But if she were given a task that would take some time, she could spend time getting to know the travelers more and perhaps gain more of their trust in return. | I always thought it was Sabe playing a joke on her friend the Queen. The Queen and her handmaidens are supposed to be very close (look at how distraught Padme was when Corde, who wasn't even HER handmaiden was killed) so maybe Sabe felt secure enough in their friendship to make her do dirty work. I know that if my best friend was a noble and I was his servant and we switched for a few weeks, I'd have him on latrine duty from 8 o'clock, day one. |
10,598 | Reading [the answer to a question about Sabé](https://scifi.stackexchange.com/a/10590/2565) (the Amidala stand-in) I remembered that I always wondered why she ordered the actual queen to scrub R2-D2. There were enough actual servants who could have done it, so why Padmé? If that wasn't enough, after giving the actual queen (Padmé) the order to go away, she tells Panaka to continue with the discussion. How does that make sense?
The significant piece of dialogue:
>
> AMIDALA : Thank you, Artoo Detoo. You have proven to be very loyal...Padme!
> ...
>
> AMIDALA : (Cont'd) Clean this droid up the best you can. It deserves our gratitude...(to Panaka) Continue, Captain.
>
>
>
Note that this question is two-fold:
1. Why was Padmé chosen in the first place?
2. Why would an important meeting with the ship's captain be continued without her? | 2012/02/07 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/10598",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/2565/"
] | I always thought it was Sabe playing a joke on her friend the Queen. The Queen and her handmaidens are supposed to be very close (look at how distraught Padme was when Corde, who wasn't even HER handmaiden was killed) so maybe Sabe felt secure enough in their friendship to make her do dirty work. I know that if my best friend was a noble and I was his servant and we switched for a few weeks, I'd have him on latrine duty from 8 o'clock, day one. | Perhaps Padmé *wanted* to clean the droid--both to learn more about the people she was traveling with, and the droid that had saved her and her ship. She didn't seem to treat it as an onerous task, did she? |
10,598 | Reading [the answer to a question about Sabé](https://scifi.stackexchange.com/a/10590/2565) (the Amidala stand-in) I remembered that I always wondered why she ordered the actual queen to scrub R2-D2. There were enough actual servants who could have done it, so why Padmé? If that wasn't enough, after giving the actual queen (Padmé) the order to go away, she tells Panaka to continue with the discussion. How does that make sense?
The significant piece of dialogue:
>
> AMIDALA : Thank you, Artoo Detoo. You have proven to be very loyal...Padme!
> ...
>
> AMIDALA : (Cont'd) Clean this droid up the best you can. It deserves our gratitude...(to Panaka) Continue, Captain.
>
>
>
Note that this question is two-fold:
1. Why was Padmé chosen in the first place?
2. Why would an important meeting with the ship's captain be continued without her? | 2012/02/07 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/10598",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/2565/"
] | 1. It underscores the subterfuge - if the "queen" were deferential and reluctant to use a particular handmaiden as a servant, that would raise suspicions. If Padme wanted to be seen as a servant, she would have walk the walk.
2. I think that Sabé was well-trained enough to handle the situation. They were out of danger, and she could couch any major decision she was pressed for as "I need some time to think about it", huddle with Padme, and there you are. If you've cultivated a habit of consulting your handmaidens *anyway*, this seems perfectly logical - I suspect that the handmaidens are probably noble-born and highly educated as well. | The smile that Sabe gives Padme after she orders her to do it is quite telling. Like it's some kind of joke. Whether it's a joke that she's making her do something menial, or a joke that "Hey, we're going to pull off you infiiltrating the strangers' ranks" is unknown. |
10,598 | Reading [the answer to a question about Sabé](https://scifi.stackexchange.com/a/10590/2565) (the Amidala stand-in) I remembered that I always wondered why she ordered the actual queen to scrub R2-D2. There were enough actual servants who could have done it, so why Padmé? If that wasn't enough, after giving the actual queen (Padmé) the order to go away, she tells Panaka to continue with the discussion. How does that make sense?
The significant piece of dialogue:
>
> AMIDALA : Thank you, Artoo Detoo. You have proven to be very loyal...Padme!
> ...
>
> AMIDALA : (Cont'd) Clean this droid up the best you can. It deserves our gratitude...(to Panaka) Continue, Captain.
>
>
>
Note that this question is two-fold:
1. Why was Padmé chosen in the first place?
2. Why would an important meeting with the ship's captain be continued without her? | 2012/02/07 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/10598",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/2565/"
] | 1. It underscores the subterfuge - if the "queen" were deferential and reluctant to use a particular handmaiden as a servant, that would raise suspicions. If Padme wanted to be seen as a servant, she would have walk the walk.
2. I think that Sabé was well-trained enough to handle the situation. They were out of danger, and she could couch any major decision she was pressed for as "I need some time to think about it", huddle with Padme, and there you are. If you've cultivated a habit of consulting your handmaidens *anyway*, this seems perfectly logical - I suspect that the handmaidens are probably noble-born and highly educated as well. | The decision to ask her to clean the droid seems to have been to give Padmé an opportunity to interact directly with the Queen *without it seeming like she's consulting her*. Presumably if Padmé had disagreed, she could have shaken her head sadly as she looked at how dirty the droid was.
It's a little clearer in the film's [official novelisation](http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_Wars_Episode_I:_The_Phantom_Menace_(novel))
>
> The Queen looked at Qui-Gon. The Jedi did not waver. **“You must trust
> my judgment, Your Highness.”**
>
>
> **“Must I?” Amidala asked quietly. She shifted her gaze to her
> handmaidens, ending with Padmé.** The girl had not moved from the
> Queen’s side, but seemed to remember suddenly she had been given a
> task to complete. **She nodded briefly to the Queen,** and moved to take
> R2-D2 in hand.
>
>
> Amidala looked back at Qui-Gon Jinn. “**We are in your hands,**” she
> advised, and the matter was settled.
>
>
>
It also helps to maintain her subterfuge
>
> *Now that I am Padmé, **the Queen can command me to perform tasks. I told
> Sabé she must do this, or it will look suspicious. But does Sabé get
> just a little pleasure out of telling me to clean up an astromech
> droid?***
>
>
> ***Maybe. She's only human.** Actually, once I began, I didn't mind the
> task. I like working with my hands, it takes my mind off the
> impatience. And after all, the droid saved my life.*
>
>
> [Star Wars Journals - Episode 1 #2 - Queen Amidala](https://www.scholastic.com/teachers/books/star-wars-journals-episode-1-02-amidala-by-jude-watson/)
>
>
> |
10,598 | Reading [the answer to a question about Sabé](https://scifi.stackexchange.com/a/10590/2565) (the Amidala stand-in) I remembered that I always wondered why she ordered the actual queen to scrub R2-D2. There were enough actual servants who could have done it, so why Padmé? If that wasn't enough, after giving the actual queen (Padmé) the order to go away, she tells Panaka to continue with the discussion. How does that make sense?
The significant piece of dialogue:
>
> AMIDALA : Thank you, Artoo Detoo. You have proven to be very loyal...Padme!
> ...
>
> AMIDALA : (Cont'd) Clean this droid up the best you can. It deserves our gratitude...(to Panaka) Continue, Captain.
>
>
>
Note that this question is two-fold:
1. Why was Padmé chosen in the first place?
2. Why would an important meeting with the ship's captain be continued without her? | 2012/02/07 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/10598",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/2565/"
] | I always thought it was Sabe playing a joke on her friend the Queen. The Queen and her handmaidens are supposed to be very close (look at how distraught Padme was when Corde, who wasn't even HER handmaiden was killed) so maybe Sabe felt secure enough in their friendship to make her do dirty work. I know that if my best friend was a noble and I was his servant and we switched for a few weeks, I'd have him on latrine duty from 8 o'clock, day one. | The smile that Sabe gives Padme after she orders her to do it is quite telling. Like it's some kind of joke. Whether it's a joke that she's making her do something menial, or a joke that "Hey, we're going to pull off you infiiltrating the strangers' ranks" is unknown. |
43,798 | I have been playing piano for almost 7 years. I am trying to learn "Flight of the Bumblebee", Rachmaninoff version. The problem is that the left hand has certain chords that my fingers cannot reach. There is AEC#, C#AE, F#ADA, and maybe more. I am able to reach an octave and one note over an octave, but thats it. I have tried compromising notes to fit my finger length, but it makes the song sound different. I don't know what to do, because this is an an assignment that is due on May 31. | 2016/04/23 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/43798",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/28137/"
] | Very large chords like the one you mention are quite common in fact in classical romantic music piano literature.
Basics about this issue is, play like an arpeggio (alephzero answer). Most pianists do that indeed. This is absolutely normal, as even pianists with very long fingers can't reach some insane chords (see image; *La Campanella* from Lizst).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/RlXxB.jpg)
One practical way of doing this is simply working on hand/wrist (and not fingers) movement. Just bring the fingers in order for them to do their job with the help of your entire arm. | Just play the chords that you can't reach as arpeggios (rolled chords). When you get the piece up to the correct tempo, nobody will notice. For consistency, you might want to roll some of the chords that you *can* reach, as well as the ones you can't.
(The score is here: <http://imslp.org/wiki/Special:ImagefromIndex/99876>) |
43,798 | I have been playing piano for almost 7 years. I am trying to learn "Flight of the Bumblebee", Rachmaninoff version. The problem is that the left hand has certain chords that my fingers cannot reach. There is AEC#, C#AE, F#ADA, and maybe more. I am able to reach an octave and one note over an octave, but thats it. I have tried compromising notes to fit my finger length, but it makes the song sound different. I don't know what to do, because this is an an assignment that is due on May 31. | 2016/04/23 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/43798",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/28137/"
] | Very large chords like the one you mention are quite common in fact in classical romantic music piano literature.
Basics about this issue is, play like an arpeggio (alephzero answer). Most pianists do that indeed. This is absolutely normal, as even pianists with very long fingers can't reach some insane chords (see image; *La Campanella* from Lizst).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/RlXxB.jpg)
One practical way of doing this is simply working on hand/wrist (and not fingers) movement. Just bring the fingers in order for them to do their job with the help of your entire arm. | In the specific case of Rachmaninoff's arrangement of "Flight of the Bumblebee" there is an option that works well for pianists who find arpeggiation difficult or unworkable.
### The ACE chord (e.g., mm. 9-13)
* Play the low A and E with the left hand.
* Play the middle C with the right hand.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bgsda.jpg) ======> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/62Gi9.jpg)
### The C#AE and DAF chords (e.g., m. 17)
* Move the C# and D up two octaves and play them with the right hand.
* Play the low AE and AF with the left hand.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/zCeq4.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/3kyxi.jpg)
### The FDA chord (e.g., m. 20)
There are two options for this chord:
* Like the ACE chord, move the topmost A to the right hand.
* Like the C#AE/DAF chords, move the low F up two octaves to the right hand.
### The F#ADA chord (e.g., mm. 64 and 66)
Here, too, there are two options:
* Omit the topmost A in the left hand. A is already both the lowest and highest pitch present, so this inner A can be safely left out.
* With some careful fingering, the inner A can be shifted to the right hand.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/r0buR.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/oGAu0.jpg)
### The remainder of the piece
These same techniques can be applied throughout, with any octave displacement being adjusted to the octave in which the right hand is playing. In general it works best to move the highest left-hand note to the right hand. |
22,343 | I saw this question somewhere in the Internet(I forgot the source) and I think this forum is a good place to ask it.
According to what I know, the atoms in a persons body are replaced every certain amount of years:
<https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/18427/are-all-the-atoms-in-our-bodies-replaced-on-a-regular-basis>
Then, if a persons body atoms are replaced every x years, should the person be prosecuted today for a crime that he/she committed x years ago, when today that person is physically another person(different atoms)?
And lets say hypothetically that 0.00001% of atoms are never replaced, should 0.99999% of the sentence in years be eliminated (the person is 0.00001% responsible for the crime) ?
This is a related question in the forum:
[Am I still the same person as I was yesterday?](https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/2747/am-i-still-the-same-person-as-i-was-yesterday) | 2015/03/15 | [
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/22343",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/users/13954/"
] | Atoms do not contain little tags that say "I am part of user63152", and whose unique properties determine the actions of user63152. Indeed, aside from differences in isotopes, and a handful of observables like nuclear spin, atoms of the same type are indistinguishable from each other.
Thus, we needn't care whether the atoms are replaced every minute, every decade, or never. That ongoing entity which is you is you by virtue of emergent properties (like thought) which are robust to changes in which atoms you are made from. So while time may have *some* bearing on how we choose to prosecute crime, it should *not* be because there has been some swapping around of functionally equivalent parts. | What is the purpose of punishment? If it is to link consequences to decisions, then the question is whether that old collection of molecules should have predicted the damage it would cause any better than this new collection of molecules.
Our notions of learning imply that behavior is a feedback loop and the consistency of personality is unrelated to the set of molecules that embody it, but related to the information that flows through them. So by and large, the prediction of recidivism remains good over long periods of time. Our morality gets no better with time, and the corresponding replacement of molecules, unless something else changes.
The better question is whether you should incarcerate, for instance, an amnesiac, or an addict who has just undergone something like ibogaine therapy, a rapist subject to chemical castration, or a terrorist who has undergone a religious conversion: a person who really feels like a 'new person' and has had a real part of their personality deactivated or removed in a way that has statistically proven likely to change current and future decision making. |
22,343 | I saw this question somewhere in the Internet(I forgot the source) and I think this forum is a good place to ask it.
According to what I know, the atoms in a persons body are replaced every certain amount of years:
<https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/18427/are-all-the-atoms-in-our-bodies-replaced-on-a-regular-basis>
Then, if a persons body atoms are replaced every x years, should the person be prosecuted today for a crime that he/she committed x years ago, when today that person is physically another person(different atoms)?
And lets say hypothetically that 0.00001% of atoms are never replaced, should 0.99999% of the sentence in years be eliminated (the person is 0.00001% responsible for the crime) ?
This is a related question in the forum:
[Am I still the same person as I was yesterday?](https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/2747/am-i-still-the-same-person-as-i-was-yesterday) | 2015/03/15 | [
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/22343",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/users/13954/"
] | Atoms do not contain little tags that say "I am part of user63152", and whose unique properties determine the actions of user63152. Indeed, aside from differences in isotopes, and a handful of observables like nuclear spin, atoms of the same type are indistinguishable from each other.
Thus, we needn't care whether the atoms are replaced every minute, every decade, or never. That ongoing entity which is you is you by virtue of emergent properties (like thought) which are robust to changes in which atoms you are made from. So while time may have *some* bearing on how we choose to prosecute crime, it should *not* be because there has been some swapping around of functionally equivalent parts. | It seems to me that this is just a reformulation of Theseus' paradox. Plutarch notes in his biography of Theseus that the ship that Theseus and the other Athenian youths returned upon was preserved by the city of Athens through the ages. As various planks and rails rotted, they were replaced leading to the question commonly discussed among philosophers over whether or not the ship we have now is one and the same as the ship that Theseus returned to Athens upon.
Really the question at hand is the very question of identity. It's not an easy question to answer. A good starting place is the subtopic Understanding the Persistence Question over at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy in the Identity entry: <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/identity-personal/#UndPerQue> |
22,343 | I saw this question somewhere in the Internet(I forgot the source) and I think this forum is a good place to ask it.
According to what I know, the atoms in a persons body are replaced every certain amount of years:
<https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/18427/are-all-the-atoms-in-our-bodies-replaced-on-a-regular-basis>
Then, if a persons body atoms are replaced every x years, should the person be prosecuted today for a crime that he/she committed x years ago, when today that person is physically another person(different atoms)?
And lets say hypothetically that 0.00001% of atoms are never replaced, should 0.99999% of the sentence in years be eliminated (the person is 0.00001% responsible for the crime) ?
This is a related question in the forum:
[Am I still the same person as I was yesterday?](https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/2747/am-i-still-the-same-person-as-i-was-yesterday) | 2015/03/15 | [
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/22343",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/users/13954/"
] | Arne Naess wrote many essays about the Self. In them, he argued for a concept called the Ecological Self, but along the way he used a series of phrases to challenge commonly held approaches to defining the self. Such class of phrase pairs looked like:
* I enjoy listening to Mozart.
* My body enjoys listening to Mozart.
Or
* I am my mother's son. ("daughter" if you are female)
* My body is my mother's son ("daughter" if you are female)
If one considers the pairs of phrases to not be *quite* identical, it suggests that "my body," i.e. the atoms in my body, are not quite exactly the same concept as "my self." Thus, replacement of the atoms in the body is probably not sufficient to be a change of self. | What is the purpose of punishment? If it is to link consequences to decisions, then the question is whether that old collection of molecules should have predicted the damage it would cause any better than this new collection of molecules.
Our notions of learning imply that behavior is a feedback loop and the consistency of personality is unrelated to the set of molecules that embody it, but related to the information that flows through them. So by and large, the prediction of recidivism remains good over long periods of time. Our morality gets no better with time, and the corresponding replacement of molecules, unless something else changes.
The better question is whether you should incarcerate, for instance, an amnesiac, or an addict who has just undergone something like ibogaine therapy, a rapist subject to chemical castration, or a terrorist who has undergone a religious conversion: a person who really feels like a 'new person' and has had a real part of their personality deactivated or removed in a way that has statistically proven likely to change current and future decision making. |
22,343 | I saw this question somewhere in the Internet(I forgot the source) and I think this forum is a good place to ask it.
According to what I know, the atoms in a persons body are replaced every certain amount of years:
<https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/18427/are-all-the-atoms-in-our-bodies-replaced-on-a-regular-basis>
Then, if a persons body atoms are replaced every x years, should the person be prosecuted today for a crime that he/she committed x years ago, when today that person is physically another person(different atoms)?
And lets say hypothetically that 0.00001% of atoms are never replaced, should 0.99999% of the sentence in years be eliminated (the person is 0.00001% responsible for the crime) ?
This is a related question in the forum:
[Am I still the same person as I was yesterday?](https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/2747/am-i-still-the-same-person-as-i-was-yesterday) | 2015/03/15 | [
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/22343",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/users/13954/"
] | Arne Naess wrote many essays about the Self. In them, he argued for a concept called the Ecological Self, but along the way he used a series of phrases to challenge commonly held approaches to defining the self. Such class of phrase pairs looked like:
* I enjoy listening to Mozart.
* My body enjoys listening to Mozart.
Or
* I am my mother's son. ("daughter" if you are female)
* My body is my mother's son ("daughter" if you are female)
If one considers the pairs of phrases to not be *quite* identical, it suggests that "my body," i.e. the atoms in my body, are not quite exactly the same concept as "my self." Thus, replacement of the atoms in the body is probably not sufficient to be a change of self. | It seems to me that this is just a reformulation of Theseus' paradox. Plutarch notes in his biography of Theseus that the ship that Theseus and the other Athenian youths returned upon was preserved by the city of Athens through the ages. As various planks and rails rotted, they were replaced leading to the question commonly discussed among philosophers over whether or not the ship we have now is one and the same as the ship that Theseus returned to Athens upon.
Really the question at hand is the very question of identity. It's not an easy question to answer. A good starting place is the subtopic Understanding the Persistence Question over at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy in the Identity entry: <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/identity-personal/#UndPerQue> |
355,341 | Recently the Reopen Votes queue has been overrun with questions that have been closed, then edited by a user who is not the asker after the closure, and their edit has been approved.
95% of the time this happens, this approved edit does nothing to attempt to fix the question's content, but consists merely of formatting tweaks - which has the sole effect of (a) gaining rep for the editor (b) pushing the question into the Reopen Votes queue where shmucks like myself have to take a look at it to confirm that yes, it is still terribad and should never be reopened.
My procedure so far has been to go back to the stupidly-edited question and mod flag them with a comment that the edit is bad and whoever approved it should be review-banned, but seriously... that isn't instant, I have better things to do with my day, and I'm not the one who approved the bad edit and caused the problem in the first place, so why should I have to suffer?
I haven't thought long and hard about this, but I feel that some ways this could be mitigated (aside from review-banning the a\*\*hats who are accepting these useless reviews) are:
* If a question was closed as a dupe, don't nominate it for reopening if it's edited by someone other than the asker.
* If a question is closed, and someone who is not the asker edits it after the fact, show a warning banner on the edit screen - something to the effect of "This question was closed due to serious problems; please do not edit it unless you are certain you can materially improve its content to make it answerable".
* If an edit in the Suggested Edits queue is for a closed question and was not performed by the asker of the question, show a warning banner on that suggested edit for that particular question to reviewers.
Please proceed to shoot holes in my suggestions and/or tell me I'm a terrible human being. You could also provide your own thoughts and suggestions on how this can be addressed, if you're feeling constructive. ;)
Also if there is a better way to deal with bad suggested edits than mod-flagging the offending questions, please advise. | 2017/08/19 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/355341",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/70345/"
] | Here's a better suggestion: edits should only cause questions to go into the reopen queue if the OP is the editor.
Let's consider every possible close reason, and then decide who is more likely to make an edit that makes the question reopen-worthy:
* Duplicate: If the question is not a duplicate, the OP is the one who is most able to disambiguate it from the dupe-target.
* Off-topic/General Computing/Hardware: If the question is not hardware-related, the OP is the best person to be able to explain why this is not the case.
* Off-topic/Server: Ditto
* Off-topic/Recommendation: If a question looks like a recommendation question but is instead a "how to achieve X" question, it is possible that people who aren't the OP can explain the difference.
* Off-topic/MCVE: The OP is the person who has the code; therefore, they are in the best position to provide the code.
* Off-topic/No-Repro: Such questions usually don't get reopened. But if they do, it is usually by the OP providing further information/clarification. Which the OP is uniquely suited to do.
* Unclear: The OP is the person most likely to be able to provide sufficient information to clarify the problem. Others may be able to guess sometimes, but only the OP *knows*.
* Too Broad: The OP is the *only one* who can narrow it down. They're the only one who knows exactly what they're looking for.
* Opinion-based: The OP is the person most capable of finding a more objective form of their question. If someone else has a more objective form, they can ask it anew themselves.
Note that there are a lot of "most likely" equivocation in the above statements. Yes, I recognize that it is *possible* for other people to provide that information in those cases. So what?
If the OP is not engaged enough to fix the problem with their question themselves, then they're not really in a position to ask someone else to do it. Therefore, only edits by the OP should be considered when putting something in the reopen queue.
Furthermore, the OP already failed once. We need to teach the OP how to fix their question's problems. And that's not done by fixing them for them. By only considering OP edits, we make sure that other people coming along to fix it won't get the same effect. This rewards OPs who actually work to improve their questions. | You know what? I'm not seeing it.
Out the 10 I've reviewed, not all where pushed to the queue with edits. The 6 which were, are done by users which fall in one of these two categories:
* Are the OP
* Have >2k reputation
My guess is that my filters rock (only reviewing off topic or primarily opinion based). |
355,341 | Recently the Reopen Votes queue has been overrun with questions that have been closed, then edited by a user who is not the asker after the closure, and their edit has been approved.
95% of the time this happens, this approved edit does nothing to attempt to fix the question's content, but consists merely of formatting tweaks - which has the sole effect of (a) gaining rep for the editor (b) pushing the question into the Reopen Votes queue where shmucks like myself have to take a look at it to confirm that yes, it is still terribad and should never be reopened.
My procedure so far has been to go back to the stupidly-edited question and mod flag them with a comment that the edit is bad and whoever approved it should be review-banned, but seriously... that isn't instant, I have better things to do with my day, and I'm not the one who approved the bad edit and caused the problem in the first place, so why should I have to suffer?
I haven't thought long and hard about this, but I feel that some ways this could be mitigated (aside from review-banning the a\*\*hats who are accepting these useless reviews) are:
* If a question was closed as a dupe, don't nominate it for reopening if it's edited by someone other than the asker.
* If a question is closed, and someone who is not the asker edits it after the fact, show a warning banner on the edit screen - something to the effect of "This question was closed due to serious problems; please do not edit it unless you are certain you can materially improve its content to make it answerable".
* If an edit in the Suggested Edits queue is for a closed question and was not performed by the asker of the question, show a warning banner on that suggested edit for that particular question to reviewers.
Please proceed to shoot holes in my suggestions and/or tell me I'm a terrible human being. You could also provide your own thoughts and suggestions on how this can be addressed, if you're feeling constructive. ;)
Also if there is a better way to deal with bad suggested edits than mod-flagging the offending questions, please advise. | 2017/08/19 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/355341",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/70345/"
] | Maybe when a question is edited the person doing the edit should be asked if they wish to “vote to reopen”. Often even as the OP I may edit a question (for example a duplicate) to make it clearer, but not wish it to be reopened that that point.
So prompt for “should be considered to be reopened” on an edit, but don’t automatically assume it. The reviewers of the edit should get the same prompt and the question put in the reopen queue only if they also agree. | You know what? I'm not seeing it.
Out the 10 I've reviewed, not all where pushed to the queue with edits. The 6 which were, are done by users which fall in one of these two categories:
* Are the OP
* Have >2k reputation
My guess is that my filters rock (only reviewing off topic or primarily opinion based). |
355,341 | Recently the Reopen Votes queue has been overrun with questions that have been closed, then edited by a user who is not the asker after the closure, and their edit has been approved.
95% of the time this happens, this approved edit does nothing to attempt to fix the question's content, but consists merely of formatting tweaks - which has the sole effect of (a) gaining rep for the editor (b) pushing the question into the Reopen Votes queue where shmucks like myself have to take a look at it to confirm that yes, it is still terribad and should never be reopened.
My procedure so far has been to go back to the stupidly-edited question and mod flag them with a comment that the edit is bad and whoever approved it should be review-banned, but seriously... that isn't instant, I have better things to do with my day, and I'm not the one who approved the bad edit and caused the problem in the first place, so why should I have to suffer?
I haven't thought long and hard about this, but I feel that some ways this could be mitigated (aside from review-banning the a\*\*hats who are accepting these useless reviews) are:
* If a question was closed as a dupe, don't nominate it for reopening if it's edited by someone other than the asker.
* If a question is closed, and someone who is not the asker edits it after the fact, show a warning banner on the edit screen - something to the effect of "This question was closed due to serious problems; please do not edit it unless you are certain you can materially improve its content to make it answerable".
* If an edit in the Suggested Edits queue is for a closed question and was not performed by the asker of the question, show a warning banner on that suggested edit for that particular question to reviewers.
Please proceed to shoot holes in my suggestions and/or tell me I'm a terrible human being. You could also provide your own thoughts and suggestions on how this can be addressed, if you're feeling constructive. ;)
Also if there is a better way to deal with bad suggested edits than mod-flagging the offending questions, please advise. | 2017/08/19 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/355341",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/70345/"
] | I think suggestion #2 has some merit as it somewhat attempts to educate users. Along those lines, I am pretty sure most <2k users do not understand that the +2 rep they get for editing the closed post will go away when the post is deleted.
So how about something like this?
* If a question is closed, and <2k user who is not the asker edits it after the fact, show an info banner on the edit screen - something to the effect of:
>
> "This question was closed due to serious problems, please do not edit it unless you can materially improve its content to make it answerable; if it ends up being deleted, your +2 edit rep will be removed".
>
>
> | How about a ban on users that edit questions that get review rejected for:
These should be strikes for sure and count very heavily,
* No improvement
* Conflicts with authors intent
things like
* attempt to answer
* me too
* other (comments as answers)
should count towards a ban but with less weight than the others.
With an appropriately aggressive ban threshold this would automatically resolve the problem without any human intervention and dis-incentivise/degamify the behavior. |
355,341 | Recently the Reopen Votes queue has been overrun with questions that have been closed, then edited by a user who is not the asker after the closure, and their edit has been approved.
95% of the time this happens, this approved edit does nothing to attempt to fix the question's content, but consists merely of formatting tweaks - which has the sole effect of (a) gaining rep for the editor (b) pushing the question into the Reopen Votes queue where shmucks like myself have to take a look at it to confirm that yes, it is still terribad and should never be reopened.
My procedure so far has been to go back to the stupidly-edited question and mod flag them with a comment that the edit is bad and whoever approved it should be review-banned, but seriously... that isn't instant, I have better things to do with my day, and I'm not the one who approved the bad edit and caused the problem in the first place, so why should I have to suffer?
I haven't thought long and hard about this, but I feel that some ways this could be mitigated (aside from review-banning the a\*\*hats who are accepting these useless reviews) are:
* If a question was closed as a dupe, don't nominate it for reopening if it's edited by someone other than the asker.
* If a question is closed, and someone who is not the asker edits it after the fact, show a warning banner on the edit screen - something to the effect of "This question was closed due to serious problems; please do not edit it unless you are certain you can materially improve its content to make it answerable".
* If an edit in the Suggested Edits queue is for a closed question and was not performed by the asker of the question, show a warning banner on that suggested edit for that particular question to reviewers.
Please proceed to shoot holes in my suggestions and/or tell me I'm a terrible human being. You could also provide your own thoughts and suggestions on how this can be addressed, if you're feeling constructive. ;)
Also if there is a better way to deal with bad suggested edits than mod-flagging the offending questions, please advise. | 2017/08/19 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/355341",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/70345/"
] | Maybe when a question is edited the person doing the edit should be asked if they wish to “vote to reopen”. Often even as the OP I may edit a question (for example a duplicate) to make it clearer, but not wish it to be reopened that that point.
So prompt for “should be considered to be reopened” on an edit, but don’t automatically assume it. The reviewers of the edit should get the same prompt and the question put in the reopen queue only if they also agree. | How about a ban on users that edit questions that get review rejected for:
These should be strikes for sure and count very heavily,
* No improvement
* Conflicts with authors intent
things like
* attempt to answer
* me too
* other (comments as answers)
should count towards a ban but with less weight than the others.
With an appropriately aggressive ban threshold this would automatically resolve the problem without any human intervention and dis-incentivise/degamify the behavior. |
94,886 | So I have a server that has a few harddrives in it, all formatted and mounted. However I'm told there is another drive attached to it. How do I find out what drives are attached? How do I find out the device filename for this new drive (that's not mounted) | 2009/12/16 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/94886",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/8950/"
] | `fdisk -l` | fdisk -l
dmesg
/var/log/message.. |
5,437,501 | I have a concern of using GPL v2 and GPL v3 licensed software in commercial production environment. I would like to use HaProxy as a load balancing solution. Is it safe against copy-left? I won't modify anything from source code and the architecture of the system requires the use of a load balancer.
It will be embedded in a larger distributed system. So what we sell is the whole system. On another site, we will need to install the load balancer again and could mix with something else. I think it's the "Distributing" term which is confusing me. | 2011/03/25 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5437501",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/395146/"
] | If you're distributing (unmodified) binaries along with a product you ship, then you're required to distribute the source with them, or provide a way for people to request the sources. This is not a situation where you can ignore the GPL, but it's not going to be a real problem for you. The GPL won't infect your proprietary software unless you link to it.
Distributing in this sense means giving (or selling) to customers. If you're just using a distributed (multi-node) system inside your company, then you're entirely in the clear, as yan says.
Incidentally, the [GPLv2](http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html) ([v3 here](http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html)) is written to be read by non-lawyers. I strongly recommend you take a look at it. If English isn't your first language, [translations](http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-translations.html) are available in many languages. | If you're not modifying the source and using the binaries, you should be entirely in the clear. |
5,437,501 | I have a concern of using GPL v2 and GPL v3 licensed software in commercial production environment. I would like to use HaProxy as a load balancing solution. Is it safe against copy-left? I won't modify anything from source code and the architecture of the system requires the use of a load balancer.
It will be embedded in a larger distributed system. So what we sell is the whole system. On another site, we will need to install the load balancer again and could mix with something else. I think it's the "Distributing" term which is confusing me. | 2011/03/25 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5437501",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/395146/"
] | Haproxy is GPLv2, so you can redistribute it in binary form provided you give enough information to the end user about where to fetch the sources to rebuild it. You also need to inform them about the build options / environment, because without them, it's possible that they won't be able to get the same features.
When you have a doubt on those points, keep in mind that the GPL's goal is to ensure that if you disappear, your customers will not be left with a buggy software they can't fix. So you just have to provide them means not to depend on your availability. When you keep that in mind, it's a lot easier to make the right choice. And good faith always counts if you try to make this possible but fail because you've not thought about everything.
Also, keep in mind that whenever you start distributing software, some of your customers will ask for specific changes to better cover their needs. At first you'll refuse but after losing a few customers who all want the exact same minor feature, you'll accept. Then you'll have patched the code and be embarrassed because you won't be able to point the customer to the original site to get the code.
There are two approaches to this :
- the patch is of general use and you don't want to maintain it. Just submit it for inclusion into mainstream. If it's accepted, you can update your version and don't need to maintain a patch anymore ;
- the patch is too much customer-specific and has no chance of being accepted, then you need to make it available to your customer along with the build instructions so that the customer can still grab the official release, patch it and build it.
One possible typical patch is to remove some names/urls/versions etc in the doc to make it appear cleaner and better integrated with your solution. Removing these information is right if you provide the patch which removes them. That way there's no obfuscation, your changes are transparent.
In any case, if you spot a bug and think you fixed it, you're strongly encouraged to submit it for review, as it's common to fix the consequences instead of the causes. | If you're not modifying the source and using the binaries, you should be entirely in the clear. |
5,437,501 | I have a concern of using GPL v2 and GPL v3 licensed software in commercial production environment. I would like to use HaProxy as a load balancing solution. Is it safe against copy-left? I won't modify anything from source code and the architecture of the system requires the use of a load balancer.
It will be embedded in a larger distributed system. So what we sell is the whole system. On another site, we will need to install the load balancer again and could mix with something else. I think it's the "Distributing" term which is confusing me. | 2011/03/25 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5437501",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/395146/"
] | Another point about the title of your question "Can I use GPL software binaries in commercial environment?" : yes you can and you're even encouraged to do so. The more free software we'll have in commercial environments, the less hassle we'll have to fix issues in production ! | If you're not modifying the source and using the binaries, you should be entirely in the clear. |
5,437,501 | I have a concern of using GPL v2 and GPL v3 licensed software in commercial production environment. I would like to use HaProxy as a load balancing solution. Is it safe against copy-left? I won't modify anything from source code and the architecture of the system requires the use of a load balancer.
It will be embedded in a larger distributed system. So what we sell is the whole system. On another site, we will need to install the load balancer again and could mix with something else. I think it's the "Distributing" term which is confusing me. | 2011/03/25 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5437501",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/395146/"
] | If you're distributing (unmodified) binaries along with a product you ship, then you're required to distribute the source with them, or provide a way for people to request the sources. This is not a situation where you can ignore the GPL, but it's not going to be a real problem for you. The GPL won't infect your proprietary software unless you link to it.
Distributing in this sense means giving (or selling) to customers. If you're just using a distributed (multi-node) system inside your company, then you're entirely in the clear, as yan says.
Incidentally, the [GPLv2](http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html) ([v3 here](http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html)) is written to be read by non-lawyers. I strongly recommend you take a look at it. If English isn't your first language, [translations](http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-translations.html) are available in many languages. | Haproxy is GPLv2, so you can redistribute it in binary form provided you give enough information to the end user about where to fetch the sources to rebuild it. You also need to inform them about the build options / environment, because without them, it's possible that they won't be able to get the same features.
When you have a doubt on those points, keep in mind that the GPL's goal is to ensure that if you disappear, your customers will not be left with a buggy software they can't fix. So you just have to provide them means not to depend on your availability. When you keep that in mind, it's a lot easier to make the right choice. And good faith always counts if you try to make this possible but fail because you've not thought about everything.
Also, keep in mind that whenever you start distributing software, some of your customers will ask for specific changes to better cover their needs. At first you'll refuse but after losing a few customers who all want the exact same minor feature, you'll accept. Then you'll have patched the code and be embarrassed because you won't be able to point the customer to the original site to get the code.
There are two approaches to this :
- the patch is of general use and you don't want to maintain it. Just submit it for inclusion into mainstream. If it's accepted, you can update your version and don't need to maintain a patch anymore ;
- the patch is too much customer-specific and has no chance of being accepted, then you need to make it available to your customer along with the build instructions so that the customer can still grab the official release, patch it and build it.
One possible typical patch is to remove some names/urls/versions etc in the doc to make it appear cleaner and better integrated with your solution. Removing these information is right if you provide the patch which removes them. That way there's no obfuscation, your changes are transparent.
In any case, if you spot a bug and think you fixed it, you're strongly encouraged to submit it for review, as it's common to fix the consequences instead of the causes. |
5,437,501 | I have a concern of using GPL v2 and GPL v3 licensed software in commercial production environment. I would like to use HaProxy as a load balancing solution. Is it safe against copy-left? I won't modify anything from source code and the architecture of the system requires the use of a load balancer.
It will be embedded in a larger distributed system. So what we sell is the whole system. On another site, we will need to install the load balancer again and could mix with something else. I think it's the "Distributing" term which is confusing me. | 2011/03/25 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5437501",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/395146/"
] | If you're distributing (unmodified) binaries along with a product you ship, then you're required to distribute the source with them, or provide a way for people to request the sources. This is not a situation where you can ignore the GPL, but it's not going to be a real problem for you. The GPL won't infect your proprietary software unless you link to it.
Distributing in this sense means giving (or selling) to customers. If you're just using a distributed (multi-node) system inside your company, then you're entirely in the clear, as yan says.
Incidentally, the [GPLv2](http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html) ([v3 here](http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html)) is written to be read by non-lawyers. I strongly recommend you take a look at it. If English isn't your first language, [translations](http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-translations.html) are available in many languages. | Another point about the title of your question "Can I use GPL software binaries in commercial environment?" : yes you can and you're even encouraged to do so. The more free software we'll have in commercial environments, the less hassle we'll have to fix issues in production ! |
47,350,199 | Environment:
Asp Net MVC app(.net framework 4.5.1) hosted on Azure app service with two instances.
App uses Azure SQL server database.
Also, app uses MemoryCache (System.Runtime.Caching) for caching purposes.
Recently, I noticed availability loss of the app. It happens almost every day.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ExZnC.png)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZmXAq.png)
Observations:
The memory counter Page Reads/sec was at a dangerous level (242) on instance RD0003FF1F6B1B. Any value over 200 can cause delays or failures for any app on that instance.
What 'The memory counter Page Reads/sec' means?
How to fix this issue? | 2017/11/17 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/47350199",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/5841485/"
] | >
> What 'The memory counter Page Reads/sec' means?
>
>
>
We could get the answer from this [blog](https://www.sqlshack.com/sql-server-memory-performance-metrics-part-3-sql-server-buffer-manager-metrics-memory-counters/). The recommended Page reads/sec value should be under **90**. Higher values indicate **insufficient memory** and **indexing issues**.
>
> “Page reads/sec indicates the number of physical database page reads that are issued per second. This statistic displays the total number of physical page reads across all databases. Because physical I/O is expensive, you may be able to minimize the cost, either by using a larger data cache, intelligent indexes, and more efficient queries, or by changing the database design.”
>
>
>
---
>
> How to fix this issue?
>
>
>
Based on my experience, you could have a try to [enable Local Cache in App
Service](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/app-service/app-service-local-cache-overview#enable-local-cache-in-app-service).
>
> You enable Local Cache on a per-web-app basis by using this app setting: **WEBSITE\_LOCAL\_CACHE\_OPTION = Always**
>
>
> By default, the local cache size is **300 MB**. This includes the /site and /siteextensions folders that are copied from the content store, as well as any locally created logs and data folders. To increase this limit, use the app setting **WEBSITE\_LOCAL\_CACHE\_SIZEINMB**. You can increase the size up to **2 GB (2000 MB)** per web app.
>
>
> | There is some memory performance problems can be listed
* excessive paging,
* memory shortages,
* memory leaks
Memory counter values can be used to detect the presence of various performance problems. Tracking counter values both on a **system-wide** and a **per-process** basis helps you to pinpoint the cause in Azure such as in other systems.
Even if there is no change in the process, a change in the system can cause memory problems. the **system-wide**
**researching in the azure**:
Shared resources plans (Free and Basic) have memory limits as seen here: <https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-subscription-service-limits#app-service-limits>.
**Quotas**: <https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/app-service-web/web-sites-monitor>
Also, you can check in the portal under your web app settings, search for “quotas”, and also check out “Diagnose and solve problems” and hit “metrics per instance (app service plan)” which will show you memory used for the plan.
A MemoryCache bug in .net 4 can also cause this type of behavior
<https://stackoverflow.com/a/15715990/914284> |
229,329 | I have a huge collection of PDF. Mostly it consists of research papers, of self-created documents but also of scanned documents.
Right now I drop them all in one folder and give them precise names with tags in the filename.
But even that gets impractical, so **I am looking for a PDF library management application**. I am thinking of something like [Yep](http://www.ironicsoftware.com/yep/) for Mac, with the following features:
* PDF cover browsing (with large preview, larger than Nautilus allows)
* tagging of PDF (data should be readable cross-platform)
* possibility to share across network (thus rather flat files than database)
* if possible: cross-platform
Mendeley seemed to be a good choice, but I am not only having academic papers and don't want to fill it all metadata that is required there.
The only alternative I could find thus far is [Shoka](http://www.mauropiccini.it/shoka/), but the features are limited and developments seems to have stopped already. | 2012/12/15 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/229329",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/78383/"
] | One possibility is [Calibre](http://calibre-ebook.com).
It is an ebook management program which permits conversion to various ebook formats but is cross-platform and can manage databases of pdf files (and not only).
If you decide to install I suggest you do so manually as the version in the repos is not very up to date. Follow the instructions on the site.
A screenshot:
Another possibility is [Zotero](http://www.zotero.org/)
It is is bibliography manager but permits adding book details directly through a browser Amazon.com and other sites, pdf attachments and more.
To import the pdf's into Zotero you can [see this page](http://libguides.northwestern.edu/content.php?pid=68444&sid=1179558). | **[Referencer](http://packages.ubuntu.com/de/lucid/referencer)** (GNOME) is a simple tool for managing document collections.
Tagging is possible.
It tries to find metadata on arXiv or via DOI, but you can add metadata manually too, of course.
But I guess development stopped. |
229,329 | I have a huge collection of PDF. Mostly it consists of research papers, of self-created documents but also of scanned documents.
Right now I drop them all in one folder and give them precise names with tags in the filename.
But even that gets impractical, so **I am looking for a PDF library management application**. I am thinking of something like [Yep](http://www.ironicsoftware.com/yep/) for Mac, with the following features:
* PDF cover browsing (with large preview, larger than Nautilus allows)
* tagging of PDF (data should be readable cross-platform)
* possibility to share across network (thus rather flat files than database)
* if possible: cross-platform
Mendeley seemed to be a good choice, but I am not only having academic papers and don't want to fill it all metadata that is required there.
The only alternative I could find thus far is [Shoka](http://www.mauropiccini.it/shoka/), but the features are limited and developments seems to have stopped already. | 2012/12/15 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/229329",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/78383/"
] | One possibility is [Calibre](http://calibre-ebook.com).
It is an ebook management program which permits conversion to various ebook formats but is cross-platform and can manage databases of pdf files (and not only).
If you decide to install I suggest you do so manually as the version in the repos is not very up to date. Follow the instructions on the site.
A screenshot:
Another possibility is [Zotero](http://www.zotero.org/)
It is is bibliography manager but permits adding book details directly through a browser Amazon.com and other sites, pdf attachments and more.
To import the pdf's into Zotero you can [see this page](http://libguides.northwestern.edu/content.php?pid=68444&sid=1179558). | Have you Tried Gnome Documents?
>
> GNOME Documents is a standalone application to find, organize and view
> your documents.
>
>
>
[](https://apps.ubuntu.com/cat/applications/gnome-documents) |
229,329 | I have a huge collection of PDF. Mostly it consists of research papers, of self-created documents but also of scanned documents.
Right now I drop them all in one folder and give them precise names with tags in the filename.
But even that gets impractical, so **I am looking for a PDF library management application**. I am thinking of something like [Yep](http://www.ironicsoftware.com/yep/) for Mac, with the following features:
* PDF cover browsing (with large preview, larger than Nautilus allows)
* tagging of PDF (data should be readable cross-platform)
* possibility to share across network (thus rather flat files than database)
* if possible: cross-platform
Mendeley seemed to be a good choice, but I am not only having academic papers and don't want to fill it all metadata that is required there.
The only alternative I could find thus far is [Shoka](http://www.mauropiccini.it/shoka/), but the features are limited and developments seems to have stopped already. | 2012/12/15 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/229329",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/78383/"
] | One possibility is [Calibre](http://calibre-ebook.com).
It is an ebook management program which permits conversion to various ebook formats but is cross-platform and can manage databases of pdf files (and not only).
If you decide to install I suggest you do so manually as the version in the repos is not very up to date. Follow the instructions on the site.
A screenshot:
Another possibility is [Zotero](http://www.zotero.org/)
It is is bibliography manager but permits adding book details directly through a browser Amazon.com and other sites, pdf attachments and more.
To import the pdf's into Zotero you can [see this page](http://libguides.northwestern.edu/content.php?pid=68444&sid=1179558). | I use Docear. Mind-mapping is the mode which I prefer to explore tagged (hierarchical) notes and references. The way they implement hierarchical node trees, it is effectively tagging.
The UI for building out mind maps is fast. Though there is some learning curve to overcome at the beginning, it pays off in spades when you actually index your material in a way which primes your recollection later on. It is the closest thing to augmented memory that I have found besides the Google/Wikipedia/[askubuntu]/etc. combos. =)
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docear> |
229,329 | I have a huge collection of PDF. Mostly it consists of research papers, of self-created documents but also of scanned documents.
Right now I drop them all in one folder and give them precise names with tags in the filename.
But even that gets impractical, so **I am looking for a PDF library management application**. I am thinking of something like [Yep](http://www.ironicsoftware.com/yep/) for Mac, with the following features:
* PDF cover browsing (with large preview, larger than Nautilus allows)
* tagging of PDF (data should be readable cross-platform)
* possibility to share across network (thus rather flat files than database)
* if possible: cross-platform
Mendeley seemed to be a good choice, but I am not only having academic papers and don't want to fill it all metadata that is required there.
The only alternative I could find thus far is [Shoka](http://www.mauropiccini.it/shoka/), but the features are limited and developments seems to have stopped already. | 2012/12/15 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/229329",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/78383/"
] | One possibility is [Calibre](http://calibre-ebook.com).
It is an ebook management program which permits conversion to various ebook formats but is cross-platform and can manage databases of pdf files (and not only).
If you decide to install I suggest you do so manually as the version in the repos is not very up to date. Follow the instructions on the site.
A screenshot:
Another possibility is [Zotero](http://www.zotero.org/)
It is is bibliography manager but permits adding book details directly through a browser Amazon.com and other sites, pdf attachments and more.
To import the pdf's into Zotero you can [see this page](http://libguides.northwestern.edu/content.php?pid=68444&sid=1179558). | Give I, Librarian a try:
<http://i-librarian.net>
It shows PDF covers, it allows tagging, it is web-based so network access is easy and fully cross-platform. |
229,329 | I have a huge collection of PDF. Mostly it consists of research papers, of self-created documents but also of scanned documents.
Right now I drop them all in one folder and give them precise names with tags in the filename.
But even that gets impractical, so **I am looking for a PDF library management application**. I am thinking of something like [Yep](http://www.ironicsoftware.com/yep/) for Mac, with the following features:
* PDF cover browsing (with large preview, larger than Nautilus allows)
* tagging of PDF (data should be readable cross-platform)
* possibility to share across network (thus rather flat files than database)
* if possible: cross-platform
Mendeley seemed to be a good choice, but I am not only having academic papers and don't want to fill it all metadata that is required there.
The only alternative I could find thus far is [Shoka](http://www.mauropiccini.it/shoka/), but the features are limited and developments seems to have stopped already. | 2012/12/15 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/229329",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/78383/"
] | Have you Tried Gnome Documents?
>
> GNOME Documents is a standalone application to find, organize and view
> your documents.
>
>
>
[](https://apps.ubuntu.com/cat/applications/gnome-documents) | **[Referencer](http://packages.ubuntu.com/de/lucid/referencer)** (GNOME) is a simple tool for managing document collections.
Tagging is possible.
It tries to find metadata on arXiv or via DOI, but you can add metadata manually too, of course.
But I guess development stopped. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.