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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5,881,031 | From where can I get image processing libraries in C# .Net? | 2011/05/04 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5881031",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/737628/"
] | **edit:** Check out the list here <https://github.com/quozd/awesome-dotnet/blob/master/README.md#image-processing>:
* [ImageResizer](https://imageresizing.net/) - Add commands to image URLs to get altered versions in milliseconds. Resizing, editing etc of images in real-time.
* [ImageProcessor](https://github.com/JimBobSquarePants/ImageProcessor) - Open-source .NET library to manipulate images on-the-fly.
* [DynamicImage](http://dynamicimage.apphb.com/) - High-performance open-source image manipulation library for ASP.NET.
* [MetadataExtractor](https://github.com/drewnoakes/metadata-extractor-dotnet) - Extracts Exif, IPTC, XMP, ICC and other metadata from image files.
* [Emgu CV](http://www.emgu.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page) - Cross-platform .NET wrapper for the OpenCV library.
* [DotImaging](https://github.com/dajuric/dot-imaging) - Minimalistic .NET imaging portable platform
* [Magick.NET](https://github.com/dlemstra/Magick.NET) - .NET wrapper for the ImageMagick library.
* [OpenCvSharp](https://github.com/shimat/opencvsharp/) - Cross platform wrapper of OpenCV for .NET Framework.
---
Check the [AForge](http://code.google.com/p/aforge/) library. It is a set of libraries in which you'll find an image processing and a vision library. | Beside the framework functions I like [Image\_Processing\_Lab](http://www.codeproject.com/KB/GDI-plus/Image_Processing_Lab.aspx). |
5,881,031 | From where can I get image processing libraries in C# .Net? | 2011/05/04 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5881031",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/737628/"
] | Have a look at Craig's Utility Library <http://cul.codeplex.com/>
>
> Image manipulation available:
>
>
> * Cropping, resizing, rotating, flipping
> * To black and white or sepia tone
> * Threshold and edge detection (including Sobel and Laplace)
> * Text drawing, watermarks, object drawing helpers
> * Taking a screenshot which spans monitors
> * RGB Histograms
> * Various convolution filters such as sharpen, sobel emboss, etc. along
>
> with the ability to create your own
>
> easily
> * Various other filters such as "jitter", pixelate, sin wave, median
>
> filter, and dilation, -red/green/blue
> filters
> * Multiple blurring techniques including box blur, Gaussian blur,
>
> Kuwahara, and Symmetric Nearest
>
> Neighbor blur
> * Bump map and Normal map helpers
> * ASCII art generator
> * Adjust brightness, gamma, and contrast
>
>
>
Also you may like: [OpenCVSharp](http://code.google.com/p/opencvsharp) and [EmguCV](http://www.emgu.com) - by the way, EmguCV the most advanced one. | Beside the framework functions I like [Image\_Processing\_Lab](http://www.codeproject.com/KB/GDI-plus/Image_Processing_Lab.aspx). |
5,881,031 | From where can I get image processing libraries in C# .Net? | 2011/05/04 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5881031",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/737628/"
] | I know a third-party toolkit named leadtools that provides many image processing functions. Also, it supports hundreds of image formats. You can find more information here:
<http://www.leadtools.com/sdk/image-processing/default.htm> | Beside the framework functions I like [Image\_Processing\_Lab](http://www.codeproject.com/KB/GDI-plus/Image_Processing_Lab.aspx). |
5,881,031 | From where can I get image processing libraries in C# .Net? | 2011/05/04 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5881031",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/737628/"
] | **edit:** Check out the list here <https://github.com/quozd/awesome-dotnet/blob/master/README.md#image-processing>:
* [ImageResizer](https://imageresizing.net/) - Add commands to image URLs to get altered versions in milliseconds. Resizing, editing etc of images in real-time.
* [ImageProcessor](https://github.com/JimBobSquarePants/ImageProcessor) - Open-source .NET library to manipulate images on-the-fly.
* [DynamicImage](http://dynamicimage.apphb.com/) - High-performance open-source image manipulation library for ASP.NET.
* [MetadataExtractor](https://github.com/drewnoakes/metadata-extractor-dotnet) - Extracts Exif, IPTC, XMP, ICC and other metadata from image files.
* [Emgu CV](http://www.emgu.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page) - Cross-platform .NET wrapper for the OpenCV library.
* [DotImaging](https://github.com/dajuric/dot-imaging) - Minimalistic .NET imaging portable platform
* [Magick.NET](https://github.com/dlemstra/Magick.NET) - .NET wrapper for the ImageMagick library.
* [OpenCvSharp](https://github.com/shimat/opencvsharp/) - Cross platform wrapper of OpenCV for .NET Framework.
---
Check the [AForge](http://code.google.com/p/aforge/) library. It is a set of libraries in which you'll find an image processing and a vision library. | Have a look at Craig's Utility Library <http://cul.codeplex.com/>
>
> Image manipulation available:
>
>
> * Cropping, resizing, rotating, flipping
> * To black and white or sepia tone
> * Threshold and edge detection (including Sobel and Laplace)
> * Text drawing, watermarks, object drawing helpers
> * Taking a screenshot which spans monitors
> * RGB Histograms
> * Various convolution filters such as sharpen, sobel emboss, etc. along
>
> with the ability to create your own
>
> easily
> * Various other filters such as "jitter", pixelate, sin wave, median
>
> filter, and dilation, -red/green/blue
> filters
> * Multiple blurring techniques including box blur, Gaussian blur,
>
> Kuwahara, and Symmetric Nearest
>
> Neighbor blur
> * Bump map and Normal map helpers
> * ASCII art generator
> * Adjust brightness, gamma, and contrast
>
>
>
Also you may like: [OpenCVSharp](http://code.google.com/p/opencvsharp) and [EmguCV](http://www.emgu.com) - by the way, EmguCV the most advanced one. |
5,881,031 | From where can I get image processing libraries in C# .Net? | 2011/05/04 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5881031",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/737628/"
] | **edit:** Check out the list here <https://github.com/quozd/awesome-dotnet/blob/master/README.md#image-processing>:
* [ImageResizer](https://imageresizing.net/) - Add commands to image URLs to get altered versions in milliseconds. Resizing, editing etc of images in real-time.
* [ImageProcessor](https://github.com/JimBobSquarePants/ImageProcessor) - Open-source .NET library to manipulate images on-the-fly.
* [DynamicImage](http://dynamicimage.apphb.com/) - High-performance open-source image manipulation library for ASP.NET.
* [MetadataExtractor](https://github.com/drewnoakes/metadata-extractor-dotnet) - Extracts Exif, IPTC, XMP, ICC and other metadata from image files.
* [Emgu CV](http://www.emgu.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page) - Cross-platform .NET wrapper for the OpenCV library.
* [DotImaging](https://github.com/dajuric/dot-imaging) - Minimalistic .NET imaging portable platform
* [Magick.NET](https://github.com/dlemstra/Magick.NET) - .NET wrapper for the ImageMagick library.
* [OpenCvSharp](https://github.com/shimat/opencvsharp/) - Cross platform wrapper of OpenCV for .NET Framework.
---
Check the [AForge](http://code.google.com/p/aforge/) library. It is a set of libraries in which you'll find an image processing and a vision library. | I know a third-party toolkit named leadtools that provides many image processing functions. Also, it supports hundreds of image formats. You can find more information here:
<http://www.leadtools.com/sdk/image-processing/default.htm> |
5,838,478 | I’m new to Pentaho, and I need to create a transformation that reads input from Paradox tables. We’re using a really old version of Paradox – It’s 4.5. The tables that I need to load have .db extension. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks! | 2011/04/29 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5838478",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/731787/"
] | Paradox isn't a database that understands SQL, so JDBC drivers won't help much. Your best bet is to convert the Paradox database to a bunch of CSV files and load them into Kettle using the "CSV file input" step. Another option is to open your Paradox database files with Microsoft Access to convert the tables to Access files. Then you can use the "Microsoft Access Input" step. | As long as Paradox has a JDBC driver, The Pentaho tools should be able to connect to the database without any trouble. Just make sure that the jdbc driver is added into the tool(s) you are using. |
6,994 | It is said [here](http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200607/the-mysteries-perfect-pitch) that 1 in 10,000 people have absolute pitch. I wonder if there is any serious poll that could confirm this.
Do you know any study that could tell how common/uncommon it is to have absolute pitch ? | 2012/08/20 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/6994",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/1371/"
] | Those numbers are a rough estimate, and only applies to US citizens.
Wikipedia has a thorough overview of the relevant information, [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_pitch). The most salient points:
* Absolute pitch seems to be a cognitive act. It's a property of our brains, and not our ears
* Most people exhibit some ability or sub-components of absolute pitch
* Absolute pitch appears to be trainable to a very high degree. It can be taught/learned.
* Different populations have different percent exhibition for absolute pitch - some estimates for chinese speaking populations go as high as 40-50%.
So, two answers to your question:
* 1/10000 is a rough estimate for US citizens exhibiting absolute pitch
* Since absolute pitch is trainable, and most people exhibit some components of it, it's unlikely we can get better than a very rough estimate. | This is less a music question than a behavioral science question, and there is a self-diagnosed issue with much such research is focused on a sample set that is *"WEIRD"*: Western, educated, industrialized, rich and democratic.
There is no reason to believe that the proportion of people with perfect pitch in a university with researchers studying the brain, which often has a school of music which might attract people with perfect pitch wanting to participate in scientific studies for pizza money, has any relation to the proportion of the same generally. |
196,619 | I recently flagged a post on SO as "Unclear what you're asking". Afterwards, for whatever reason, I clicked `flag` again and found this:
Is there any reason it says I've raised a duplicate flag too when I'm positive I have not? Is this a bug? The question, as of 2:56 PM UTC, 11 September, 2013, has only existed for 26 minutes and the flag doesn't exist in my flag history:
**Note**: There are several similar questions:
* ["You have already raised this flag" Well, not really](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/188818/you-have-already-raised-this-flag-well-not-really)
* [No, I haven't already raised this flag (not here, anyway)](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/189288/no-i-havent-already-raised-this-flag-not-here-anyway)
The first was never answered and the second is unrelated as it appears the person asking did, in fact, raise the flag they assumed they hadn't raised. | 2013/09/11 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/196619",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/227680/"
] | It was deleted by a moderator after being flagged as "It should be a comment".
For users with >=10k reputation it is still [visible](https://stackoverflow.com/a/18673478/1983854). Comments show:
>
> That should be a comment. Based on his current question state it's
> impossible to see what's the problem . – Michael IV Sep 7 at 12:54
>
>
> i've added some code – Schnizel1337 Sep 7 at 13:05
>
>
> got it, i changed the loop iteration order and now it works, thanks! –
> Schnizel1337 Sep 7 at 13:55
>
>
>
I don't know if it should be undeleted, as it is not clear if it was useful to solve the question. | It seems like a reasonable, though not stellar answer. Three people thought it was good enough to upvote, and it seems to contain useful information.
I don't think it should have been deleted.
Here's the full text of the answer:
>
> Maybe you should post some code?
>
>
> Check the memory traversal if you use loops. You should traverse your
> buffer in the right order, otherwise you may have cache miss at each
> iteration. If you use nested loops sometimes you only have to switch
> the x/y iteration order.
>
>
> Also, don't read data from graphic memory. It tends to be slow. Only
> write to PBO.
>
>
> Edit:
>
>
> It looks like a syncro issue. I'm not sure you need to map pbo at
> every frame. Check this [link on OpenGL Pixel Buffer Object (PBO)](http://www.songho.ca/opengl/gl_pbo.html).
> There's also a workaround for stalls which could improve things
>
>
> |
196,619 | I recently flagged a post on SO as "Unclear what you're asking". Afterwards, for whatever reason, I clicked `flag` again and found this:
Is there any reason it says I've raised a duplicate flag too when I'm positive I have not? Is this a bug? The question, as of 2:56 PM UTC, 11 September, 2013, has only existed for 26 minutes and the flag doesn't exist in my flag history:
**Note**: There are several similar questions:
* ["You have already raised this flag" Well, not really](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/188818/you-have-already-raised-this-flag-well-not-really)
* [No, I haven't already raised this flag (not here, anyway)](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/189288/no-i-havent-already-raised-this-flag-not-here-anyway)
The first was never answered and the second is unrelated as it appears the person asking did, in fact, raise the flag they assumed they hadn't raised. | 2013/09/11 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/196619",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/227680/"
] | I've seen worse answers. I've undeleted this one.
Worth noting: You don't have to put **EDIT** in your posts. Every post on Stack Overflow has a detailed edit history, which anyone can look at. The edit history for your answer is [here](https://stackoverflow.com/posts/18673478/revisions).
But *"maybe you should post some code"* definitely belongs in a comment, not in answers. You should try to keep such content out of your answers, if you can.
Stack Overflow moderators are only presented with an excerpt of the answer in the moderator dashboard. If "maybe you should post some code" is all they see (which suggests that your merely trying to communicate with someone, rather than answering the question), your answer is going to get deleted. | It was deleted by a moderator after being flagged as "It should be a comment".
For users with >=10k reputation it is still [visible](https://stackoverflow.com/a/18673478/1983854). Comments show:
>
> That should be a comment. Based on his current question state it's
> impossible to see what's the problem . – Michael IV Sep 7 at 12:54
>
>
> i've added some code – Schnizel1337 Sep 7 at 13:05
>
>
> got it, i changed the loop iteration order and now it works, thanks! –
> Schnizel1337 Sep 7 at 13:55
>
>
>
I don't know if it should be undeleted, as it is not clear if it was useful to solve the question. |
196,619 | I recently flagged a post on SO as "Unclear what you're asking". Afterwards, for whatever reason, I clicked `flag` again and found this:
Is there any reason it says I've raised a duplicate flag too when I'm positive I have not? Is this a bug? The question, as of 2:56 PM UTC, 11 September, 2013, has only existed for 26 minutes and the flag doesn't exist in my flag history:
**Note**: There are several similar questions:
* ["You have already raised this flag" Well, not really](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/188818/you-have-already-raised-this-flag-well-not-really)
* [No, I haven't already raised this flag (not here, anyway)](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/189288/no-i-havent-already-raised-this-flag-not-here-anyway)
The first was never answered and the second is unrelated as it appears the person asking did, in fact, raise the flag they assumed they hadn't raised. | 2013/09/11 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/196619",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/227680/"
] | It was deleted by a moderator after being flagged as "It should be a comment".
For users with >=10k reputation it is still [visible](https://stackoverflow.com/a/18673478/1983854). Comments show:
>
> That should be a comment. Based on his current question state it's
> impossible to see what's the problem . – Michael IV Sep 7 at 12:54
>
>
> i've added some code – Schnizel1337 Sep 7 at 13:05
>
>
> got it, i changed the loop iteration order and now it works, thanks! –
> Schnizel1337 Sep 7 at 13:55
>
>
>
I don't know if it should be undeleted, as it is not clear if it was useful to solve the question. | Going through each part of your answer:
>
> Maybe you should post some code?
>
>
>
This is a request for clarification. This belongs as a comment, not an answer. This isn't answering a question.
>
> Check the memory traversal if you use loops. You should traverse your buffer in the right order, otherwise you may have cache miss at each iteration. If you use nested loops sometimes you only have to switch the x/y iteration order.
>
>
>
This is mentioning something that the OP should look into. Here it seems that you don't have enough information from the question itself to know if this is something that could be built into an answer or not, so you're providing some debugging tips for the OP to help him get to an answer. Again, this would make a great comment, but it's not an answer to the question, it's leading to an answer but it itself isn't an answer.
>
> Also, don't read data from graphic memory. It tends to be slow. Only write to PBO.
>
>
>
This is just a general tip unrelated to the question. It makes a good comment, and is something you could add to an answer if it also answers the question. By itself though, this isn't an answer.
>
> **Edit:**
>
>
>
As Robert said in his answer, there's no need to include this.
>
> It looks like a syncro issue. I'm not sure you need to map pbo at every frame. Check this link on [OpenGL Pixel Buffer Object (PBO)](http://www.songho.ca/opengl/gl_pbo.html). There's also a workaround for stalls which could improve things
>
>
>
Here your not answering the question, you're linking to an external resource that *might* help the OP come to an answer. On SO any links in an answer should be supplementary, not essential to the post answering the question. If someone never follows any link in your post they should still get an answer. Links should be either to cite works, or to provide additional information beyond the answer to the specific question. If you quoted or summarized enough of the information from this link to answer the question, then this post could become an answer.
---
All in all, this post is *close* to being an acceptable answer, there's a nugget there that could be turned into one (which is likely why Robert decided to undelete it), but it's not there yet.
When you have requests for clarification, or just general ideas that require more information from the OP for them to be developed into a real answer, you should comment. When the OP responds/edits with the requested information (as he did in this case) you can then turn these ideas into a post that truly *answers the question*.
With that, and incorporating enough of the content of anything you link to within the post itself, you could turn this into a good answer. |
196,619 | I recently flagged a post on SO as "Unclear what you're asking". Afterwards, for whatever reason, I clicked `flag` again and found this:
Is there any reason it says I've raised a duplicate flag too when I'm positive I have not? Is this a bug? The question, as of 2:56 PM UTC, 11 September, 2013, has only existed for 26 minutes and the flag doesn't exist in my flag history:
**Note**: There are several similar questions:
* ["You have already raised this flag" Well, not really](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/188818/you-have-already-raised-this-flag-well-not-really)
* [No, I haven't already raised this flag (not here, anyway)](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/189288/no-i-havent-already-raised-this-flag-not-here-anyway)
The first was never answered and the second is unrelated as it appears the person asking did, in fact, raise the flag they assumed they hadn't raised. | 2013/09/11 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/196619",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/227680/"
] | I've seen worse answers. I've undeleted this one.
Worth noting: You don't have to put **EDIT** in your posts. Every post on Stack Overflow has a detailed edit history, which anyone can look at. The edit history for your answer is [here](https://stackoverflow.com/posts/18673478/revisions).
But *"maybe you should post some code"* definitely belongs in a comment, not in answers. You should try to keep such content out of your answers, if you can.
Stack Overflow moderators are only presented with an excerpt of the answer in the moderator dashboard. If "maybe you should post some code" is all they see (which suggests that your merely trying to communicate with someone, rather than answering the question), your answer is going to get deleted. | It seems like a reasonable, though not stellar answer. Three people thought it was good enough to upvote, and it seems to contain useful information.
I don't think it should have been deleted.
Here's the full text of the answer:
>
> Maybe you should post some code?
>
>
> Check the memory traversal if you use loops. You should traverse your
> buffer in the right order, otherwise you may have cache miss at each
> iteration. If you use nested loops sometimes you only have to switch
> the x/y iteration order.
>
>
> Also, don't read data from graphic memory. It tends to be slow. Only
> write to PBO.
>
>
> Edit:
>
>
> It looks like a syncro issue. I'm not sure you need to map pbo at
> every frame. Check this [link on OpenGL Pixel Buffer Object (PBO)](http://www.songho.ca/opengl/gl_pbo.html).
> There's also a workaround for stalls which could improve things
>
>
> |
196,619 | I recently flagged a post on SO as "Unclear what you're asking". Afterwards, for whatever reason, I clicked `flag` again and found this:
Is there any reason it says I've raised a duplicate flag too when I'm positive I have not? Is this a bug? The question, as of 2:56 PM UTC, 11 September, 2013, has only existed for 26 minutes and the flag doesn't exist in my flag history:
**Note**: There are several similar questions:
* ["You have already raised this flag" Well, not really](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/188818/you-have-already-raised-this-flag-well-not-really)
* [No, I haven't already raised this flag (not here, anyway)](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/189288/no-i-havent-already-raised-this-flag-not-here-anyway)
The first was never answered and the second is unrelated as it appears the person asking did, in fact, raise the flag they assumed they hadn't raised. | 2013/09/11 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/196619",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/227680/"
] | The [answer](https://stackoverflow.com/a/18673478/1488917) should not have been deleted.
The answer is not a good answer, but nonetheless attempts to provide inputs and suggestions as to what the problem may have been. It should have been downvoted at most, but not deleted.
Chances are that the first line in your answer prompted the deletion:
>
> Maybe you should post some code?
>
>
>
This should not be a part of answers, but added as comments to the question. | It seems like a reasonable, though not stellar answer. Three people thought it was good enough to upvote, and it seems to contain useful information.
I don't think it should have been deleted.
Here's the full text of the answer:
>
> Maybe you should post some code?
>
>
> Check the memory traversal if you use loops. You should traverse your
> buffer in the right order, otherwise you may have cache miss at each
> iteration. If you use nested loops sometimes you only have to switch
> the x/y iteration order.
>
>
> Also, don't read data from graphic memory. It tends to be slow. Only
> write to PBO.
>
>
> Edit:
>
>
> It looks like a syncro issue. I'm not sure you need to map pbo at
> every frame. Check this [link on OpenGL Pixel Buffer Object (PBO)](http://www.songho.ca/opengl/gl_pbo.html).
> There's also a workaround for stalls which could improve things
>
>
> |
196,619 | I recently flagged a post on SO as "Unclear what you're asking". Afterwards, for whatever reason, I clicked `flag` again and found this:
Is there any reason it says I've raised a duplicate flag too when I'm positive I have not? Is this a bug? The question, as of 2:56 PM UTC, 11 September, 2013, has only existed for 26 minutes and the flag doesn't exist in my flag history:
**Note**: There are several similar questions:
* ["You have already raised this flag" Well, not really](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/188818/you-have-already-raised-this-flag-well-not-really)
* [No, I haven't already raised this flag (not here, anyway)](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/189288/no-i-havent-already-raised-this-flag-not-here-anyway)
The first was never answered and the second is unrelated as it appears the person asking did, in fact, raise the flag they assumed they hadn't raised. | 2013/09/11 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/196619",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/227680/"
] | I've seen worse answers. I've undeleted this one.
Worth noting: You don't have to put **EDIT** in your posts. Every post on Stack Overflow has a detailed edit history, which anyone can look at. The edit history for your answer is [here](https://stackoverflow.com/posts/18673478/revisions).
But *"maybe you should post some code"* definitely belongs in a comment, not in answers. You should try to keep such content out of your answers, if you can.
Stack Overflow moderators are only presented with an excerpt of the answer in the moderator dashboard. If "maybe you should post some code" is all they see (which suggests that your merely trying to communicate with someone, rather than answering the question), your answer is going to get deleted. | The [answer](https://stackoverflow.com/a/18673478/1488917) should not have been deleted.
The answer is not a good answer, but nonetheless attempts to provide inputs and suggestions as to what the problem may have been. It should have been downvoted at most, but not deleted.
Chances are that the first line in your answer prompted the deletion:
>
> Maybe you should post some code?
>
>
>
This should not be a part of answers, but added as comments to the question. |
196,619 | I recently flagged a post on SO as "Unclear what you're asking". Afterwards, for whatever reason, I clicked `flag` again and found this:
Is there any reason it says I've raised a duplicate flag too when I'm positive I have not? Is this a bug? The question, as of 2:56 PM UTC, 11 September, 2013, has only existed for 26 minutes and the flag doesn't exist in my flag history:
**Note**: There are several similar questions:
* ["You have already raised this flag" Well, not really](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/188818/you-have-already-raised-this-flag-well-not-really)
* [No, I haven't already raised this flag (not here, anyway)](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/189288/no-i-havent-already-raised-this-flag-not-here-anyway)
The first was never answered and the second is unrelated as it appears the person asking did, in fact, raise the flag they assumed they hadn't raised. | 2013/09/11 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/196619",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/227680/"
] | I've seen worse answers. I've undeleted this one.
Worth noting: You don't have to put **EDIT** in your posts. Every post on Stack Overflow has a detailed edit history, which anyone can look at. The edit history for your answer is [here](https://stackoverflow.com/posts/18673478/revisions).
But *"maybe you should post some code"* definitely belongs in a comment, not in answers. You should try to keep such content out of your answers, if you can.
Stack Overflow moderators are only presented with an excerpt of the answer in the moderator dashboard. If "maybe you should post some code" is all they see (which suggests that your merely trying to communicate with someone, rather than answering the question), your answer is going to get deleted. | Going through each part of your answer:
>
> Maybe you should post some code?
>
>
>
This is a request for clarification. This belongs as a comment, not an answer. This isn't answering a question.
>
> Check the memory traversal if you use loops. You should traverse your buffer in the right order, otherwise you may have cache miss at each iteration. If you use nested loops sometimes you only have to switch the x/y iteration order.
>
>
>
This is mentioning something that the OP should look into. Here it seems that you don't have enough information from the question itself to know if this is something that could be built into an answer or not, so you're providing some debugging tips for the OP to help him get to an answer. Again, this would make a great comment, but it's not an answer to the question, it's leading to an answer but it itself isn't an answer.
>
> Also, don't read data from graphic memory. It tends to be slow. Only write to PBO.
>
>
>
This is just a general tip unrelated to the question. It makes a good comment, and is something you could add to an answer if it also answers the question. By itself though, this isn't an answer.
>
> **Edit:**
>
>
>
As Robert said in his answer, there's no need to include this.
>
> It looks like a syncro issue. I'm not sure you need to map pbo at every frame. Check this link on [OpenGL Pixel Buffer Object (PBO)](http://www.songho.ca/opengl/gl_pbo.html). There's also a workaround for stalls which could improve things
>
>
>
Here your not answering the question, you're linking to an external resource that *might* help the OP come to an answer. On SO any links in an answer should be supplementary, not essential to the post answering the question. If someone never follows any link in your post they should still get an answer. Links should be either to cite works, or to provide additional information beyond the answer to the specific question. If you quoted or summarized enough of the information from this link to answer the question, then this post could become an answer.
---
All in all, this post is *close* to being an acceptable answer, there's a nugget there that could be turned into one (which is likely why Robert decided to undelete it), but it's not there yet.
When you have requests for clarification, or just general ideas that require more information from the OP for them to be developed into a real answer, you should comment. When the OP responds/edits with the requested information (as he did in this case) you can then turn these ideas into a post that truly *answers the question*.
With that, and incorporating enough of the content of anything you link to within the post itself, you could turn this into a good answer. |
196,619 | I recently flagged a post on SO as "Unclear what you're asking". Afterwards, for whatever reason, I clicked `flag` again and found this:
Is there any reason it says I've raised a duplicate flag too when I'm positive I have not? Is this a bug? The question, as of 2:56 PM UTC, 11 September, 2013, has only existed for 26 minutes and the flag doesn't exist in my flag history:
**Note**: There are several similar questions:
* ["You have already raised this flag" Well, not really](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/188818/you-have-already-raised-this-flag-well-not-really)
* [No, I haven't already raised this flag (not here, anyway)](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/189288/no-i-havent-already-raised-this-flag-not-here-anyway)
The first was never answered and the second is unrelated as it appears the person asking did, in fact, raise the flag they assumed they hadn't raised. | 2013/09/11 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/196619",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/227680/"
] | The [answer](https://stackoverflow.com/a/18673478/1488917) should not have been deleted.
The answer is not a good answer, but nonetheless attempts to provide inputs and suggestions as to what the problem may have been. It should have been downvoted at most, but not deleted.
Chances are that the first line in your answer prompted the deletion:
>
> Maybe you should post some code?
>
>
>
This should not be a part of answers, but added as comments to the question. | Going through each part of your answer:
>
> Maybe you should post some code?
>
>
>
This is a request for clarification. This belongs as a comment, not an answer. This isn't answering a question.
>
> Check the memory traversal if you use loops. You should traverse your buffer in the right order, otherwise you may have cache miss at each iteration. If you use nested loops sometimes you only have to switch the x/y iteration order.
>
>
>
This is mentioning something that the OP should look into. Here it seems that you don't have enough information from the question itself to know if this is something that could be built into an answer or not, so you're providing some debugging tips for the OP to help him get to an answer. Again, this would make a great comment, but it's not an answer to the question, it's leading to an answer but it itself isn't an answer.
>
> Also, don't read data from graphic memory. It tends to be slow. Only write to PBO.
>
>
>
This is just a general tip unrelated to the question. It makes a good comment, and is something you could add to an answer if it also answers the question. By itself though, this isn't an answer.
>
> **Edit:**
>
>
>
As Robert said in his answer, there's no need to include this.
>
> It looks like a syncro issue. I'm not sure you need to map pbo at every frame. Check this link on [OpenGL Pixel Buffer Object (PBO)](http://www.songho.ca/opengl/gl_pbo.html). There's also a workaround for stalls which could improve things
>
>
>
Here your not answering the question, you're linking to an external resource that *might* help the OP come to an answer. On SO any links in an answer should be supplementary, not essential to the post answering the question. If someone never follows any link in your post they should still get an answer. Links should be either to cite works, or to provide additional information beyond the answer to the specific question. If you quoted or summarized enough of the information from this link to answer the question, then this post could become an answer.
---
All in all, this post is *close* to being an acceptable answer, there's a nugget there that could be turned into one (which is likely why Robert decided to undelete it), but it's not there yet.
When you have requests for clarification, or just general ideas that require more information from the OP for them to be developed into a real answer, you should comment. When the OP responds/edits with the requested information (as he did in this case) you can then turn these ideas into a post that truly *answers the question*.
With that, and incorporating enough of the content of anything you link to within the post itself, you could turn this into a good answer. |
51,142 | I've recently started to do dedicated sight-reading exercises. As I make progress I can either move on towards more difficult pieces or stay at the same level while increasing the speed. Currently I'm doing the former while playing rather slow (around 60bpm).
Will that approach also improve my speed in the long run or should I practice for speed separately?
I'm playing the piano, but I think the question applies to other instruments, too. | 2016/12/15 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/51142",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/1093/"
] | Its worth noting that as you develop as a player you will become better at sight-reading simply because you become a better player.
But by definition you cannot attempt to sight-read a piece more than once can you? After that its not really sight-reading is it.
So @alephzero has made a really significant point that is worth repeating: If you want to use sight-reading as a skill then you need to be able to read the pieces at the intended tempo. Anything else is just practicing the instrument.
You need to find lots of music and just try playing it. Start with things that are simple. Move on when you find yourself managing that level of piece easily at first sight. Be critical and be honest about what you managed and what you didn't. That will give you an insight into where you need to strengthen your technique.
Good luck. | Sight reading is a place where you should always try to push yourself to harder music. Speed can be practiced in different ways, but the benefit of sight reading really comes from your brain being forced to focus on seeing and processing the notation. Part of the notation is playing at the indicated speed. Sight reading a Largo can be quite different as you sub-divide to stay in time.
So practice playing faster in other ways, separately, and push the "harder music" in the sight reading. |
51,142 | I've recently started to do dedicated sight-reading exercises. As I make progress I can either move on towards more difficult pieces or stay at the same level while increasing the speed. Currently I'm doing the former while playing rather slow (around 60bpm).
Will that approach also improve my speed in the long run or should I practice for speed separately?
I'm playing the piano, but I think the question applies to other instruments, too. | 2016/12/15 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/51142",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/1093/"
] | **TL;DR**
One should go for speed and difficulty simultaneously, where
* *difficulty* = only at the level where one can make music; and
* *speed* = only at the speed one can handle the difficulty.
---
### Three axioms
(1) Speed comes from experience.
(2) Difficulty is the presence of lots of simple things in close proximity.
(3) Simple things are easiest to learn in a simple context.
### Two corrolaries
(4) To read difficult things, one needs to read multiple simple things quickly.
(5) Experience with simple things in simple contexts allows one to read them quickly.
### Thus, an effective formula:
**Play music that can be easily and understood at sight**. Choose practice material from the level at which you can *easily* read *all* of the music — notes, rhythm, dynamics, articulation, and any other instructions in the score (such as pedaling, for piano) — so that one is *reading music, not notes*. Sight-reading practice only works if you understand (i.e., can make music out of) what you're reading.
I highly recommend getting "book 1" of some teaching method series — or better yet, the "pre book 1" book — and read through it — making every exercise as musical as you can. A person who can make music out of a "song" with just quarter notes and one or two pitches, can make music with compositions where the musicality is "built in" by the composer.
### Facilitated and reinforced...
**"Sight-read" things multiple times** — even to the point of memorization. This reinforces the connections between what one sees, how one executes, and what one hears. In this way, one is far better prepared when those things occur in a new, more difficult/complex context. They have become "easy" to read, so that one's attention can be focused on other aspects of the complexity.
**Nothing makes sight-reading easier than pattern recognition**. Study music theory, and practice scales, arpeggios, and chords. Pattern recognition is at the heart of these studies. It's far easier to read complex scale patterns if one recognizes the scales as opposed to reading each note separately. Similarly with arpeggios and broken chords, and so on. | Sight reading is a place where you should always try to push yourself to harder music. Speed can be practiced in different ways, but the benefit of sight reading really comes from your brain being forced to focus on seeing and processing the notation. Part of the notation is playing at the indicated speed. Sight reading a Largo can be quite different as you sub-divide to stay in time.
So practice playing faster in other ways, separately, and push the "harder music" in the sight reading. |
51,142 | I've recently started to do dedicated sight-reading exercises. As I make progress I can either move on towards more difficult pieces or stay at the same level while increasing the speed. Currently I'm doing the former while playing rather slow (around 60bpm).
Will that approach also improve my speed in the long run or should I practice for speed separately?
I'm playing the piano, but I think the question applies to other instruments, too. | 2016/12/15 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/51142",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/1093/"
] | Its worth noting that as you develop as a player you will become better at sight-reading simply because you become a better player.
But by definition you cannot attempt to sight-read a piece more than once can you? After that its not really sight-reading is it.
So @alephzero has made a really significant point that is worth repeating: If you want to use sight-reading as a skill then you need to be able to read the pieces at the intended tempo. Anything else is just practicing the instrument.
You need to find lots of music and just try playing it. Start with things that are simple. Move on when you find yourself managing that level of piece easily at first sight. Be critical and be honest about what you managed and what you didn't. That will give you an insight into where you need to strengthen your technique.
Good luck. | **TL;DR**
One should go for speed and difficulty simultaneously, where
* *difficulty* = only at the level where one can make music; and
* *speed* = only at the speed one can handle the difficulty.
---
### Three axioms
(1) Speed comes from experience.
(2) Difficulty is the presence of lots of simple things in close proximity.
(3) Simple things are easiest to learn in a simple context.
### Two corrolaries
(4) To read difficult things, one needs to read multiple simple things quickly.
(5) Experience with simple things in simple contexts allows one to read them quickly.
### Thus, an effective formula:
**Play music that can be easily and understood at sight**. Choose practice material from the level at which you can *easily* read *all* of the music — notes, rhythm, dynamics, articulation, and any other instructions in the score (such as pedaling, for piano) — so that one is *reading music, not notes*. Sight-reading practice only works if you understand (i.e., can make music out of) what you're reading.
I highly recommend getting "book 1" of some teaching method series — or better yet, the "pre book 1" book — and read through it — making every exercise as musical as you can. A person who can make music out of a "song" with just quarter notes and one or two pitches, can make music with compositions where the musicality is "built in" by the composer.
### Facilitated and reinforced...
**"Sight-read" things multiple times** — even to the point of memorization. This reinforces the connections between what one sees, how one executes, and what one hears. In this way, one is far better prepared when those things occur in a new, more difficult/complex context. They have become "easy" to read, so that one's attention can be focused on other aspects of the complexity.
**Nothing makes sight-reading easier than pattern recognition**. Study music theory, and practice scales, arpeggios, and chords. Pattern recognition is at the heart of these studies. It's far easier to read complex scale patterns if one recognizes the scales as opposed to reading each note separately. Similarly with arpeggios and broken chords, and so on. |
102,823 | Suppose you have an app with graphical components like this:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/tSM2b.png)
You want to share this with your friend.
Most apps just send a link.
But suppose you can't send a link (because it is applet based) and you want to add more info than just a link. Will you use HTML5 in the email share to make it more appealing and in context in contrast to just text? | 2016/12/22 | [
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/102823",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/users/13204/"
] | **Sharing with a link is the simplest form to share between apps**. Removing the simplest functionality and adding extra content has some other considerations:
1. **The original app decides which is the content to share**: This only works if you are sending it through an app which allows this kind of content being sent, like an email. What if the user just wants to send a link because he is not satisfied with the content resume you made for him?
2. **The user decides which is the content to share**: This implies that the user is in more control of what to share. Similarly to [Evernote Web clipper](https://evernote.com/intl/es/webclipper/). Now it adds an extra step of an editor. If you want to use an editor, I would still give the user the simple link copy.
3. **The app where it is viewed decides which is the content to share**: Some apps do this such as WhatsApp, when you share a link to a YouTube video, the app adds a thumb image and the title. Will your destination app (email in your case) add anything extra? If so it can be mixed with this point.
Proceed with caution. Check that adding content from your side doesn't conflict with destination app. **Let the user be in control** either letting him remove the extra content or having a simple copy link. Measure the success or failure of the approach. | Personally, I'm very cautious on clicking the links in the emails because of security reasons (phishing, etc.).
Unless your goal is not purely to lure the user into your website, I would present the content in the email directly (technically it can be a dynamically generated image, hot-linked image, HTML5) and making the content itself the link to some more information.
To sum it up:
* your app (where the user needs to register) has the option "Share with friend"
* upon clicking you can chose friend's email from your contacts
* an email is sent from a central server and you hope it doesn't end in the recipient's spam box
* the recipients receives a neat email titled "AsafBO shared the weather with you" and the picture and "...more weather..." click prompt.
In such case the link would not diminish my cautiousness on clicking the links in the emails, but I would value the service for sending some information anyway and not being "click or you get nothing" type. |
22,313 | I'm looking at deploying some software via GPSI and the current version of the software is distributed as a .exe so I need to convert it to an MSI file.
furthermore, why does MS still distribute some of its software (WMI Tools) as .exe | 2009/06/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/22313",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/6071/"
] | It's not free but if you have any Visual Studio licenses, that has a great MSI packager available in it. | I copy here two lists from a couple of webpages I found.
A long list of deployment software, including repackagers, with descriptions added: <http://www.installsite.org/pages/en/tt_corp.htm>
Here I copy only the names mentioned in this webpage:
* AdminStudio
* Advanced Installer Architect
* AppDeploy Repackager
* Asdis
* CapaInstaller ezMSI
* BMC Software
* MSI Package Builder
* NetInstall
* Network Software Scanner
* Packaging Robot
* Prism
* Radia
* RayPack
* Real Packaging
* RemoteExec
* Remote Installer
* Smart Packager
One more list from: <http://www.interfacett.com/blogs/exe-msi-deploy-exe-based-installer-microsoft-world/>
Probably not all of them are repackagers.
* WinInstall
* wItem Installer (also called Installer2Go)
* VMWare ThinApp
* EXE to MSI Converter (exetomsi.com)
* AppDeploy repackager
* Exemsi MSI Wrapper (exemsi.com)
* Advanced Installer (advancedinstaller.com) |
22,313 | I'm looking at deploying some software via GPSI and the current version of the software is distributed as a .exe so I need to convert it to an MSI file.
furthermore, why does MS still distribute some of its software (WMI Tools) as .exe | 2009/06/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/22313",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/6071/"
] | It's not free but if you have any Visual Studio licenses, that has a great MSI packager available in it. | [Microsoft's Windows Installer XML toolkit](http://wix.sourceforge.net/) (WiX). |
22,313 | I'm looking at deploying some software via GPSI and the current version of the software is distributed as a .exe so I need to convert it to an MSI file.
furthermore, why does MS still distribute some of its software (WMI Tools) as .exe | 2009/06/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/22313",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/6071/"
] | IMO WiX may be the best way, since repackager working with snapshots tend to record unrelated changes, as far as you don't spend some time setting exclusions...
Using the [Wixtool](http://sourceforge.net/projects/wixtool/) makes the creation of an MSI quite convenient instead of writing lots of xml containers ;) | [Microsoft's Windows Installer XML toolkit](http://wix.sourceforge.net/) (WiX). |
22,313 | I'm looking at deploying some software via GPSI and the current version of the software is distributed as a .exe so I need to convert it to an MSI file.
furthermore, why does MS still distribute some of its software (WMI Tools) as .exe | 2009/06/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/22313",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/6071/"
] | IMO WiX may be the best way, since repackager working with snapshots tend to record unrelated changes, as far as you don't spend some time setting exclusions...
Using the [Wixtool](http://sourceforge.net/projects/wixtool/) makes the creation of an MSI quite convenient instead of writing lots of xml containers ;) | I copy here two lists from a couple of webpages I found.
A long list of deployment software, including repackagers, with descriptions added: <http://www.installsite.org/pages/en/tt_corp.htm>
Here I copy only the names mentioned in this webpage:
* AdminStudio
* Advanced Installer Architect
* AppDeploy Repackager
* Asdis
* CapaInstaller ezMSI
* BMC Software
* MSI Package Builder
* NetInstall
* Network Software Scanner
* Packaging Robot
* Prism
* Radia
* RayPack
* Real Packaging
* RemoteExec
* Remote Installer
* Smart Packager
One more list from: <http://www.interfacett.com/blogs/exe-msi-deploy-exe-based-installer-microsoft-world/>
Probably not all of them are repackagers.
* WinInstall
* wItem Installer (also called Installer2Go)
* VMWare ThinApp
* EXE to MSI Converter (exetomsi.com)
* AppDeploy repackager
* Exemsi MSI Wrapper (exemsi.com)
* Advanced Installer (advancedinstaller.com) |
22,313 | I'm looking at deploying some software via GPSI and the current version of the software is distributed as a .exe so I need to convert it to an MSI file.
furthermore, why does MS still distribute some of its software (WMI Tools) as .exe | 2009/06/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/22313",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/6071/"
] | Heh, I'll try and answer my own question..
I'm also going to look at The [AppDeploy Repackager](http://www.appdeploy.com/tools/repackager/). It looks like it will do pretty much the same thing as Joseph mentioned. I'll see which one does the job with less stress on my part :) | [Microsoft's Windows Installer XML toolkit](http://wix.sourceforge.net/) (WiX). |
22,313 | I'm looking at deploying some software via GPSI and the current version of the software is distributed as a .exe so I need to convert it to an MSI file.
furthermore, why does MS still distribute some of its software (WMI Tools) as .exe | 2009/06/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/22313",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/6071/"
] | Check out WinINSTALL LE:
<https://www.softpile.com/wininstall-le/>
You have to install the program, and it will watch what happens and create an MSI installer. I usually make my installs on a clean VM so that it doesn't catch background activities of programs I usually use. | It's not free but if you have any Visual Studio licenses, that has a great MSI packager available in it. |
22,313 | I'm looking at deploying some software via GPSI and the current version of the software is distributed as a .exe so I need to convert it to an MSI file.
furthermore, why does MS still distribute some of its software (WMI Tools) as .exe | 2009/06/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/22313",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/6071/"
] | The type of tool you're looking for is called an Application Repackaging tool. The process would include capturing an installation (take a machine snapshot, run your installation and make customisations, then run a second snapshot to calculate the differences) then compiling the captured data into MSI format.
The following are some free tools to perform these tasks, in order:
1. [AppDeploy Repackager](http://www.appdeploy.com/tools/repackager/): Use this to capture your installation and create an MSI from the captured data. If your app is reasonably simple then this may be all you need.
2. [Microsoft Orca](http://support.microsoft.com/kb/255905): Use this to edit the MSI that has been created with AppDeploy Repackager. You will need to know how MSI's work to really make the most of Orca. Microsoft's [Installer Database Reference](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa369398(VS.85).aspx) is the definitive source for information on MSI contents.
As for your second question: You will find that sometimes vendors will supply an MSI wrapped in an executable, so if you run the .exe you might be able to dig out the MSI from a temp directory. | It's not free but if you have any Visual Studio licenses, that has a great MSI packager available in it. |
22,313 | I'm looking at deploying some software via GPSI and the current version of the software is distributed as a .exe so I need to convert it to an MSI file.
furthermore, why does MS still distribute some of its software (WMI Tools) as .exe | 2009/06/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/22313",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/6071/"
] | Check out WinINSTALL LE:
<https://www.softpile.com/wininstall-le/>
You have to install the program, and it will watch what happens and create an MSI installer. I usually make my installs on a clean VM so that it doesn't catch background activities of programs I usually use. | I copy here two lists from a couple of webpages I found.
A long list of deployment software, including repackagers, with descriptions added: <http://www.installsite.org/pages/en/tt_corp.htm>
Here I copy only the names mentioned in this webpage:
* AdminStudio
* Advanced Installer Architect
* AppDeploy Repackager
* Asdis
* CapaInstaller ezMSI
* BMC Software
* MSI Package Builder
* NetInstall
* Network Software Scanner
* Packaging Robot
* Prism
* Radia
* RayPack
* Real Packaging
* RemoteExec
* Remote Installer
* Smart Packager
One more list from: <http://www.interfacett.com/blogs/exe-msi-deploy-exe-based-installer-microsoft-world/>
Probably not all of them are repackagers.
* WinInstall
* wItem Installer (also called Installer2Go)
* VMWare ThinApp
* EXE to MSI Converter (exetomsi.com)
* AppDeploy repackager
* Exemsi MSI Wrapper (exemsi.com)
* Advanced Installer (advancedinstaller.com) |
22,313 | I'm looking at deploying some software via GPSI and the current version of the software is distributed as a .exe so I need to convert it to an MSI file.
furthermore, why does MS still distribute some of its software (WMI Tools) as .exe | 2009/06/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/22313",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/6071/"
] | The type of tool you're looking for is called an Application Repackaging tool. The process would include capturing an installation (take a machine snapshot, run your installation and make customisations, then run a second snapshot to calculate the differences) then compiling the captured data into MSI format.
The following are some free tools to perform these tasks, in order:
1. [AppDeploy Repackager](http://www.appdeploy.com/tools/repackager/): Use this to capture your installation and create an MSI from the captured data. If your app is reasonably simple then this may be all you need.
2. [Microsoft Orca](http://support.microsoft.com/kb/255905): Use this to edit the MSI that has been created with AppDeploy Repackager. You will need to know how MSI's work to really make the most of Orca. Microsoft's [Installer Database Reference](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa369398(VS.85).aspx) is the definitive source for information on MSI contents.
As for your second question: You will find that sometimes vendors will supply an MSI wrapped in an executable, so if you run the .exe you might be able to dig out the MSI from a temp directory. | IMO WiX may be the best way, since repackager working with snapshots tend to record unrelated changes, as far as you don't spend some time setting exclusions...
Using the [Wixtool](http://sourceforge.net/projects/wixtool/) makes the creation of an MSI quite convenient instead of writing lots of xml containers ;) |
22,313 | I'm looking at deploying some software via GPSI and the current version of the software is distributed as a .exe so I need to convert it to an MSI file.
furthermore, why does MS still distribute some of its software (WMI Tools) as .exe | 2009/06/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/22313",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/6071/"
] | The type of tool you're looking for is called an Application Repackaging tool. The process would include capturing an installation (take a machine snapshot, run your installation and make customisations, then run a second snapshot to calculate the differences) then compiling the captured data into MSI format.
The following are some free tools to perform these tasks, in order:
1. [AppDeploy Repackager](http://www.appdeploy.com/tools/repackager/): Use this to capture your installation and create an MSI from the captured data. If your app is reasonably simple then this may be all you need.
2. [Microsoft Orca](http://support.microsoft.com/kb/255905): Use this to edit the MSI that has been created with AppDeploy Repackager. You will need to know how MSI's work to really make the most of Orca. Microsoft's [Installer Database Reference](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa369398(VS.85).aspx) is the definitive source for information on MSI contents.
As for your second question: You will find that sometimes vendors will supply an MSI wrapped in an executable, so if you run the .exe you might be able to dig out the MSI from a temp directory. | I've used
[Advanced Installer](http://www.advancedinstaller.com/) and AppDeploy Repackager and have gotten good results. |
8,332 | We know that the ocean depth is varies from ocean to ocean. Mariana trench is about 11 km deep. If we consider as a whole, what is the average depth of the ocean? | 2016/07/04 | [
"https://earthscience.stackexchange.com/questions/8332",
"https://earthscience.stackexchange.com",
"https://earthscience.stackexchange.com/users/6239/"
] | About four kilometers, see, for example:
<http://www.mbgnet.net/salt/oceans/data.htm>
But bear in mind that much of the oceans, especially in the southern hemisphere, have scarcely been mapped at all, so it is currently impossible to give an accurate estimate. | From NOAA: (Official US Science) A recent estimate for the average depth of the ocean is 3,682 meters, or 12,080 feet.
This is an estimate from 2010. Older estimates have deeper average ocean. |
10,140 | I have a cat that LOVES to play fetch. Most of the time she'll bring me the toy and we'll play for a good 20-40 minutes. However lately she's gotten lazy with bringing the toy all the way, instead dropping it a couple feet away. She doesn't seem to understand that I'm not going to get up every time she does this, but I'm not sure how I can educate her that she needs to bring the toy to me.
I've already clicker trained her for when she can rest on my lap, as well as when she can and cannot have attention. Though whether this helps with further training such as when playing is beyond me. | 2015/08/26 | [
"https://pets.stackexchange.com/questions/10140",
"https://pets.stackexchange.com",
"https://pets.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | Never go get it when she drops it part way. She has either become tired of the game and does not want you to throw it any more, or she is training you come pick it up. In either case if she drops it part way back when playing fetch the game is over. | You need to use the clicker to reinforce what you want. Just like with a dog, many people just have an animal that's naturally inclined one way or the other. Either the dog doesn't like to fetch or it does, but either way it isn't trained. My cat fetches as well, but again, it's just something he picked up on his own.
If you truly want it trained, then like keshlam said, you need to train her to target, then work on teaching her to pick up the fetch toy. You work at it incrementally by clicking when she's goes to pick it up. You can either click when she goes near it and only click for closer and closer movements, or you can probably more easily just capture the behavior when you naturally provides it.
If she knows 'target' like come to your hand, then you just get her to pick it up and tell her 'target'. She has to come to your hand to complete the task. You can faze the treat out. I think a good training treat is wet food. Just enough for a single lick. My cat doesn't get wet food regularly and it's a treat he really likes. If you're cat does get wet food, just use his meal as his training aid. |
18,294 | Each physical user will have about 20 tables in the database.
When a new user registers, another 20 tables will be created with access only for their new MySQL account.
Data does not have to be shared between users.
Is this logic more secure than simply having just 20 tables for all the users?
And what about performance will be dead or not ?
**EDIT**
I just want to be sure that a user who likes to "play" with injections and finds a way around will not be able to access other user data. | 2012/08/08 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/18294",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/6205/"
] | I'm not exactly sure what you mean, but yes. The output of a properly written hash function should be the same regardless of language.
The only difference between the hashes of different programming languages libraries and on different platforms will be speed. Although in properly written libraries - the difference will be trivial. | It will always be the same if you're not using a salt. If you're using a salt then it will be different if you change the salt. |
18,294 | Each physical user will have about 20 tables in the database.
When a new user registers, another 20 tables will be created with access only for their new MySQL account.
Data does not have to be shared between users.
Is this logic more secure than simply having just 20 tables for all the users?
And what about performance will be dead or not ?
**EDIT**
I just want to be sure that a user who likes to "play" with injections and finds a way around will not be able to access other user data. | 2012/08/08 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/18294",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/6205/"
] | I'm not exactly sure what you mean, but yes. The output of a properly written hash function should be the same regardless of language.
The only difference between the hashes of different programming languages libraries and on different platforms will be speed. Although in properly written libraries - the difference will be trivial. | Yes, the exact same "byte sequence" will always yield the exact same digest value regardless of implementation (assuming it's a correct implementation!)
The key word is this is always true for "byte sequence", but not always for "string" as you wrote. Depending on a lot of things, strings can be generated differently on different systems. There is the potential for a lot of white space or line ending differences, or ASCII vs Unicode UTF-16 encoding issues.
Also, be aware that when you display the digest value, you run into similar issues. Different implementations might represent hexadecimal digits with either upper case or lower case values, so a string equality test might fail. |
18,294 | Each physical user will have about 20 tables in the database.
When a new user registers, another 20 tables will be created with access only for their new MySQL account.
Data does not have to be shared between users.
Is this logic more secure than simply having just 20 tables for all the users?
And what about performance will be dead or not ?
**EDIT**
I just want to be sure that a user who likes to "play" with injections and finds a way around will not be able to access other user data. | 2012/08/08 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/18294",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/6205/"
] | I'm not exactly sure what you mean, but yes. The output of a properly written hash function should be the same regardless of language.
The only difference between the hashes of different programming languages libraries and on different platforms will be speed. Although in properly written libraries - the difference will be trivial. | The behaviour that every string in a sha1 hash is the same lies in a common convert format called base64 as a convention (and byte sequence). This is due to encoding a 20-byte hash value into 40 bytes of hex, and then encoding those 40 bytes of hex into 56 bytes (40 / 3 \* 4, then rounded up to the nearest 4 bytes) of base64 data.
So the proof is that 2^160 = 16^40 in hexadecimal representation. |
18,294 | Each physical user will have about 20 tables in the database.
When a new user registers, another 20 tables will be created with access only for their new MySQL account.
Data does not have to be shared between users.
Is this logic more secure than simply having just 20 tables for all the users?
And what about performance will be dead or not ?
**EDIT**
I just want to be sure that a user who likes to "play" with injections and finds a way around will not be able to access other user data. | 2012/08/08 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/18294",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/6205/"
] | Yes, the exact same "byte sequence" will always yield the exact same digest value regardless of implementation (assuming it's a correct implementation!)
The key word is this is always true for "byte sequence", but not always for "string" as you wrote. Depending on a lot of things, strings can be generated differently on different systems. There is the potential for a lot of white space or line ending differences, or ASCII vs Unicode UTF-16 encoding issues.
Also, be aware that when you display the digest value, you run into similar issues. Different implementations might represent hexadecimal digits with either upper case or lower case values, so a string equality test might fail. | It will always be the same if you're not using a salt. If you're using a salt then it will be different if you change the salt. |
18,294 | Each physical user will have about 20 tables in the database.
When a new user registers, another 20 tables will be created with access only for their new MySQL account.
Data does not have to be shared between users.
Is this logic more secure than simply having just 20 tables for all the users?
And what about performance will be dead or not ?
**EDIT**
I just want to be sure that a user who likes to "play" with injections and finds a way around will not be able to access other user data. | 2012/08/08 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/18294",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/6205/"
] | It will always be the same if you're not using a salt. If you're using a salt then it will be different if you change the salt. | The behaviour that every string in a sha1 hash is the same lies in a common convert format called base64 as a convention (and byte sequence). This is due to encoding a 20-byte hash value into 40 bytes of hex, and then encoding those 40 bytes of hex into 56 bytes (40 / 3 \* 4, then rounded up to the nearest 4 bytes) of base64 data.
So the proof is that 2^160 = 16^40 in hexadecimal representation. |
18,294 | Each physical user will have about 20 tables in the database.
When a new user registers, another 20 tables will be created with access only for their new MySQL account.
Data does not have to be shared between users.
Is this logic more secure than simply having just 20 tables for all the users?
And what about performance will be dead or not ?
**EDIT**
I just want to be sure that a user who likes to "play" with injections and finds a way around will not be able to access other user data. | 2012/08/08 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/18294",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/6205/"
] | Yes, the exact same "byte sequence" will always yield the exact same digest value regardless of implementation (assuming it's a correct implementation!)
The key word is this is always true for "byte sequence", but not always for "string" as you wrote. Depending on a lot of things, strings can be generated differently on different systems. There is the potential for a lot of white space or line ending differences, or ASCII vs Unicode UTF-16 encoding issues.
Also, be aware that when you display the digest value, you run into similar issues. Different implementations might represent hexadecimal digits with either upper case or lower case values, so a string equality test might fail. | The behaviour that every string in a sha1 hash is the same lies in a common convert format called base64 as a convention (and byte sequence). This is due to encoding a 20-byte hash value into 40 bytes of hex, and then encoding those 40 bytes of hex into 56 bytes (40 / 3 \* 4, then rounded up to the nearest 4 bytes) of base64 data.
So the proof is that 2^160 = 16^40 in hexadecimal representation. |
122,324 | Up to now I have been using "to go fencing" and "to do fencing". But today I read [this article](http://www.englishteachermelanie.com/vocabulary-verbs-used-to-talk-about-sports-play-do-go/) which says that to use "go" with "fencing" is not correct:
>
> There’s always an exception to the rule in English! These sports are
> not used with go:
>
>
> boxing
>
>
> fencing
>
>
> weight training
>
>
> Don’t use a verb with these sports. They don’t fit easily into any of
> the three categories. Don’t say “I do boxing” or “I go fencing.”
>
>
>
I have never heard of it. Does "to go fencing" have the right to exist?
[Here](https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/do-fencing-go-fencing.2045153/) are another opinions. | 2017/03/13 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/122324",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/44895/"
] | You must be studying British English, because I can't actually imagine someone asking me "Have you got it?" in American English.
I would guess that in British English, where present perfect is much more common and *got* is the proper past participle of *get*, this doesn't sound as "slangy" as it does in American English.
So if you are treating this as proper English, then you should pretty much always just answer the question in the *same* tense in which it was asked:
> Have you got it?
>
> Yes, **we've** got it.
In American English, this question is more likely to be asked in the present tense, when being proper:
> Do you get it?
>
> Yes, we get it.
Amusingly, we still seem to take some of our slang from the forms that are proper in BrE. This is something like a meme:
> Got it?
>
> Got it!
>
> Good! | As stangdon said, this is fairly slangy. However, I personally would not say "Yes, we've got it." If you break apart the contraction, you have:
>
> Yes, we have got it.
>
>
>
This implies that you got it, in the past. I would usually either say:
>
> Yes, we got it.
>
>
>
or
>
> Yes, we have it.
>
>
>
Note that (as far as I can tell) "Yes, we've got it" is grammatically correct, and could have its uses. "Yes, we've gotten it" may be the correct way to say it. |
6,091 | I'm making bird houses and I have been screwing the joints together. I have been drilling a pilot hole (2mm bit) and using 3mm X 30mm screws.
I hung one in my garden and noticed that a couple of joints appear to be coming apart slightly after around a month or so. The houses are finished with Cuprinol Shades outdoor paint and the wood is bare before I paint (no primer etc).
Is there a more effective way of joining end grain to prevent warping/movement? Would gluing the joints, using larger screws, a smaller pilot hole or priming the wood first help to prevent this? The joints are 30 and 45 degrees. | 2017/06/14 | [
"https://woodworking.stackexchange.com/questions/6091",
"https://woodworking.stackexchange.com",
"https://woodworking.stackexchange.com/users/3821/"
] | I don't know how much effort you want to put into a birdhouse, but consider some type of woodworking joint. Depending on the grain orientation at the joint, a glued spline joint might be easy enough, and give the strength you need.
Screws in end grain typically don't hold very well.
Here are some good illustrations of a variety of mitered joints, including a splined miter: <http://www.craftsmanspace.com/knowledge/mitered-woodworking-joints.html> | the joint is coming apart because the wood has warped due to moisture. A miter joint will "work" if both pieces are sufficiently stabilized. You can achieve this using cross-grain battens screwed in on the underside. |
39,775 | Is it possible to create a route on your internet router which routes traffic unknown to null. So you basically dont even let traffic route into your firewall unless its approved? Can this help detour the ICMP pings which take down your circit? | 2013/07/29 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/39775",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/28844/"
] | The problem with some kind of DDoS attacks isn't what happens to traffic. The problem is the existence of the traffic itself on the link. At some point, your link will just be too full for your router to be able to handle the requests (dropping or null-routing). You see, it doesn't matter what the server/router/firewall is doing, the hose is just too congested.
You defend against this kind of DDoS either by having more links than your attackers can fill (using big service providers like CloudFlare or Akamai, they take the hit for you) or just take your connection/server down. | To answer your question, yes, null routes can be added to your router to help mitigate a DoS attack. |
33,710,474 | I am a bit confused. I am using iCloud Drive to store backups from my internal data each time the user clicks 'backup'. This doesn't work as I would like to, because sometimes it just doesn't sync between the devices and users that click restore get's their old backup.
Now I've read about iCloud Documents and that you could trigger a sync manually from there. What's the difference between iCloud Drive and iCloud Documents for me as a developer? I just don't get it..
I am not sure whether it would be better to store backups with iCloud Documents...? | 2015/11/14 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/33710474",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/867432/"
] | I think iCloud Drive provides the service that user can edit document through specified interface.
In contrast, iCloud Documents Storage provides a kind of service that stores some confidential or unchangeable data for application. | iCloud Drive - Apple's Cloud-Based Service for consumers. Typical known for their ability to sync between different devices through storage in the Cloud.
iCloud Document - A single file of UIDocument type.
iCloud document storage - Service that provides developer access to iCloud for their files which are usually UIDocument type or file packages which are of NSFileWrapper.
iCloud - Cumulative set of Apple's cloud services consisting of iCloud document storage, Key-value storage, CloudKit, Core Data.
* So above question is not relevant as they are not comparable technology. |
370,077 | I have an i5 760 system with 2-way SLI capable mobo with a GTS 450 1Gb DDR5 128 bit VGA, I'm still running a single card right now but I'm planning to scale up soon but first I would like to know:
1. Is it better to SLI 2 cards or just have 2 VGA card one as a primary and a seperate one as a dedicated physx card?
2. Is it OK if I use two GTS 450's from two different manufacturer as a SLI tandem?
3. Will there be any conflict if one of my two VGA cards in SLI has OC and the other one don't have OC?
4. For example: is it OK if I use a GTS 450 1Gb DDR5 128 bit from a manufacturer A and a GTS 450 1Gb DDR5 192 bit from manufacturer B as an SLI?
5. Does the example in question No. 4 will work for primary and physx card set up too? | 2011/12/21 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/370077",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/110430/"
] | 1. SLI will be better than 1 VGA and 1 for physX. Unless you specifically play a *bunch* of physX games and a weak CPU, you'll find a better benefit to having the additional rendering power.
2. Yes.
3. Faster card will downclock to the speed of the slower card. It will effectively run without the OC.
4. I don't know about memory bandwidth differences; I think that should work, since they are both the same size memory. If they are not the same size memory, then the card with extra memory has the extra memory disabled in SLI.
5. Yes, it'll work fine. | 1 It *depends*... Darth reason, difference between main and PhysX card also play game (as I see in my config)
...
4 Yes, but bandwidth will be lowered to thin card bus
5 Yes, but use 128bit card as PhysX and 192bit as main for better results |
119,229 | The spell [*alter self*](http://dndsrd.net/spellsAtoB.html#alter-self) says
>
> You acquire the physical qualities of the new form while retaining your own mind. Physical qualities include natural size, mundane movement capabilities (such as burrowing, climbing, walking, swimming, and flight with wings, to a maximum speed of 120 feet for flying or 60 feet for nonflying movement), natural armor bonus, natural weapons (such as claws, bite, and so on), racial skill bonuses, racial bonus feats, and any gross physical qualities (presence or absence of wings, number of extremities, and so forth). A body with extra limbs does not allow you to make more attacks (or more advantageous two-weapon attacks) than normal.
>
>
> You do not gain any extraordinary special attacks or special qualities not noted above under physical qualities, such as darkvision, low-light vision, blindsense, blindsight, fast healing, regeneration, scent, and so forth.
>
>
>
The racial traits of the [aquatic elf](http://dndsrd.net/monstersEtoF.html#aquatic-elf) says
>
> Also called sea elves, these creatures are waterbreathing cousins to
> land-dwelling elves.…
>
>
> * **Gills:** Aquatic elves can survive out of the water for 1 hour per point of Constitution (after that, refer to the suffocation rules).
>
>
>
Does a caster that uses the spell *alter self* to assume the form of an aquatic elf get gills that allow the caster to breathe water? | 2018/03/26 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/119229",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/23007/"
] | The traits of the [aquatic elf](http://dndsrd.net/monstersEtoF.html#aquatic-elf) (*Monster Manual* 103) *are* listed as extraordinary abilities in the *Monster Manual* (2003) and in the *SRD*, but they are *not* listed as extraordinary abilities by the premium edition *Monster Manual* (2012), therefore they're actually [natural abilities](http://dndsrd.net/specialAbilities.html#natural-abilities) *via* stealth errata. (This change is consistent throughout the premium edition and, for example, eliminates some confusion with races that had *all* their racial traits listed as extraordinary abilities even when those extraordinary abilities were *also* spell-like abilities, like some possessed by a [drow](http://dndsrd.net/monstersEtoF.html#drow-elf) (103) or a [gnome](http://dndsrd.net/monstersG.html#gnome) (131).)
With this in mind, this DM would consider the natural ability gills of the aquatic elf a gross physical quality of the creature, therefore acquired by a creature when it assumes aquatic elf form using the 2nd-level Sor/Wiz spell [*alter self*](http://dndsrd.net/spellsAtoB.html#alter-self) [trans] (*Player's Handbook* 197).
(It's fortunate for humanoid casters who want to breathe underwater that the aquatic elf specifically relies on the racial trait gills to breathe underwater. Many sea creatures—even humanoids like the [locathah](http://dndsrd.net/monstersKtoL.html#locathah) (*MM* 169-70)—instead rely on the subtype [aquatic](http://dndsrd.net/monsterTypes.html#aquatic) to breathe underwater, yet, while the subtype aquatic *is* specifically granted by, for example, the supernatural ability [alternate form](http://dndsrd.net/monsterTypes.html#alternate-form) (and effects based on it like [wild shape](http://dndsrd.net/druid.html#druid-wild-shape)), the spell *alter self* doesn't add or change a creature's subtypes; getting types and subtypes takes an effect like the 4th-level Sor/Wiz spell [*polymorph*](http://dndsrd.net/spellsPtoR.html#polymorph) [trans] (*PH* 263).) | While I certainly can appreciate that @HeyICanChan’s answer accounts for RAW interpretations, the OP didn’t ask for RAW and there is a much simpler answer. The spell specifically calls out “gross physical qualities”. Gills are a gross physical quality, regardless of any mechanical designations associated with it in the MM, unless you have a reason to believe that the gills (or any other analogous body part on another species) of aquatic elves who suffocate on land are somehow superfluous to their ability to exist as a living entity. Ditto waterbreathing as a result of the “aquatic” subtype. Anything more is putting undue strain on yourself and the rules. |
895,554 | I have a C++ desktop application (written in wxWidgets) and I want to add support for some scripting language.
Scripting would mostly be used for run-time conversions of strings, numbers and dates by user supplied JavaScript code.
I'd like to use JavaScript because it is widely used and everyone is familiar with the syntax.
Googling around, it seems I have two options:
* SpiderMonkey from Mozilla
* JavaScriptCore from WebKit
Has anyone tried those? Which one would be easier to set up?
Do you know of some other implementation that is better for my needs?
BTW, I target Windows and Linux platforms. | 2009/05/21 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/895554",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/14690/"
] | Of course, you could also use [Lua](http://lua.org), which not only is designed specifically for this, it's vastly faster than any JS.
Also, it's has well-designed semantics, a very minimal core, simple C API, great portability, a very mature [JIT](http://luajit.org), the most helpful online community I've seen, etc... | JavaScriptCore has a stable C API (and ABI), and has been available (and used as) a standard system framework on macos.
[edit: oh, and it works on linux and windows as a standalone library, although i believe only debian distributes it as such] |
895,554 | I have a C++ desktop application (written in wxWidgets) and I want to add support for some scripting language.
Scripting would mostly be used for run-time conversions of strings, numbers and dates by user supplied JavaScript code.
I'd like to use JavaScript because it is widely used and everyone is familiar with the syntax.
Googling around, it seems I have two options:
* SpiderMonkey from Mozilla
* JavaScriptCore from WebKit
Has anyone tried those? Which one would be easier to set up?
Do you know of some other implementation that is better for my needs?
BTW, I target Windows and Linux platforms. | 2009/05/21 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/895554",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/14690/"
] | There is also Google's V8 JavaScript engine, builds nicely on Linux, embedding API seems quite straightforward too: (Compared to SpiderMonkey's, never looked at the JavaScriptCore API)
<http://code.google.com/apis/v8/get_started.html> | JavaScriptCore has a stable C API (and ABI), and has been available (and used as) a standard system framework on macos.
[edit: oh, and it works on linux and windows as a standalone library, although i believe only debian distributes it as such] |
895,554 | I have a C++ desktop application (written in wxWidgets) and I want to add support for some scripting language.
Scripting would mostly be used for run-time conversions of strings, numbers and dates by user supplied JavaScript code.
I'd like to use JavaScript because it is widely used and everyone is familiar with the syntax.
Googling around, it seems I have two options:
* SpiderMonkey from Mozilla
* JavaScriptCore from WebKit
Has anyone tried those? Which one would be easier to set up?
Do you know of some other implementation that is better for my needs?
BTW, I target Windows and Linux platforms. | 2009/05/21 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/895554",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/14690/"
] | There is also Google's V8 JavaScript engine, builds nicely on Linux, embedding API seems quite straightforward too: (Compared to SpiderMonkey's, never looked at the JavaScriptCore API)
<http://code.google.com/apis/v8/get_started.html> | Of course, you could also use [Lua](http://lua.org), which not only is designed specifically for this, it's vastly faster than any JS.
Also, it's has well-designed semantics, a very minimal core, simple C API, great portability, a very mature [JIT](http://luajit.org), the most helpful online community I've seen, etc... |
70,483 | >
> **Possible Duplicate:**
>
> [Desktop forgets theme?](https://askubuntu.com/questions/21305/desktop-forgets-theme)
>
>
>
I upgraded to 11.10 from 11.04 earlier this week, and ran in to some problems booting up into the GUI. When I booted, I got a message saying there was an error with my display, but I was be able to get into the tty2 terminal. I did some research, and found that a lot of people actually ran into the problem; I was finally able to boot into the GUI by running "sudo startx", but the icons and display configurations are messed up. I made a new account, and the display for the new account is how it should be, but the display in my original account is still not right. Here are images of my original account, and of my new account:
messed up display on original account
how display should look on new account
Does anyone know why the display is different on my original account, but look perfectly fine when I made the new account? I didn't change any of the display configurations on my original account. | 2011/10/22 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/70483",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/29680/"
] | What desktop theme was set on your original user account in 11.04?
I suspect some leftover theme files are effecting your desktop display in 11.10 from your original user account.
Try and change the theme to Ambiance or Radiance in your original desktop and let me know what happens.
11.10 does not support installed theme files as yet other than those provided with the installation. You can however change icon sets using dconf editor. | type sudo apt-get update once more, then
type sudo apt-get upgrade, after that
type sudo apt-get autoremove it will change some file, then
type yes
restart your comp |
5,497,210 | I am asked to develop a software which should be able to create Flow chart/ Control Flow of the input Java source code. So I started researching on it and arrived at following solutions:
To create flow chart/control flow I have to recognize controlling statements and function calls made in the given source code Now I have two ways of recognizing:
1. Parse the Source code by writing my own grammars (A complex solution I think). I am thinking to use Antlr for this.
2. Read input source code files as text and search for the specific patterns (May become inefficient)
Am I right here? Or I am missing something very fundamental and simple? Which approach would take less time and do the work efficiently? Any other suggestions in this regard will be welcome too. Any other efficient approach would help because the input source code may span multiple files and can be fairly complex.
I am good in .NET languages but this is my first big project in Java. I have basic knowledge of Compiler Design so writing grammars should not be impossible for me.
Sorry If I am being unclear. Please ask for any clarifications. | 2011/03/31 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5497210",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/685327/"
] | >
> Now I have two ways of recognizing:
>
>
>
You have many more ways than that. JavaCC ships with a Java 1.5 grammar already built. I'm sure other parser generators ditto. There is no reason for you to either have to write your own grammar or construct your own parser.
And specifically 'read[ing] input source code files as text and search for the specific patterns' isn't a viable choice at all, as it isn't parsing, and therefore cannot possibly recognize Java programs correctly. | Smarter solution is to use Eclipse's java parser. Read more here: <http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/library/os-ast/> |
5,497,210 | I am asked to develop a software which should be able to create Flow chart/ Control Flow of the input Java source code. So I started researching on it and arrived at following solutions:
To create flow chart/control flow I have to recognize controlling statements and function calls made in the given source code Now I have two ways of recognizing:
1. Parse the Source code by writing my own grammars (A complex solution I think). I am thinking to use Antlr for this.
2. Read input source code files as text and search for the specific patterns (May become inefficient)
Am I right here? Or I am missing something very fundamental and simple? Which approach would take less time and do the work efficiently? Any other suggestions in this regard will be welcome too. Any other efficient approach would help because the input source code may span multiple files and can be fairly complex.
I am good in .NET languages but this is my first big project in Java. I have basic knowledge of Compiler Design so writing grammars should not be impossible for me.
Sorry If I am being unclear. Please ask for any clarifications. | 2011/03/31 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5497210",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/685327/"
] | Eclipse has a library for parsing the source code and creating Abstract Syntax Tree from it which would let you extract what you want.
See here for a tutorial
<http://www.vogella.de/articles/EclipseJDT/article.html>
See here for api
<http://help.eclipse.org/indigo/topic/org.eclipse.jdt.doc.isv/reference/api/org/eclipse/jdt/core/dom/package-summary.html#package_description> | >
> Now I have two ways of recognizing:
>
>
>
You have many more ways than that. JavaCC ships with a Java 1.5 grammar already built. I'm sure other parser generators ditto. There is no reason for you to either have to write your own grammar or construct your own parser.
And specifically 'read[ing] input source code files as text and search for the specific patterns' isn't a viable choice at all, as it isn't parsing, and therefore cannot possibly recognize Java programs correctly. |
5,497,210 | I am asked to develop a software which should be able to create Flow chart/ Control Flow of the input Java source code. So I started researching on it and arrived at following solutions:
To create flow chart/control flow I have to recognize controlling statements and function calls made in the given source code Now I have two ways of recognizing:
1. Parse the Source code by writing my own grammars (A complex solution I think). I am thinking to use Antlr for this.
2. Read input source code files as text and search for the specific patterns (May become inefficient)
Am I right here? Or I am missing something very fundamental and simple? Which approach would take less time and do the work efficiently? Any other suggestions in this regard will be welcome too. Any other efficient approach would help because the input source code may span multiple files and can be fairly complex.
I am good in .NET languages but this is my first big project in Java. I have basic knowledge of Compiler Design so writing grammars should not be impossible for me.
Sorry If I am being unclear. Please ask for any clarifications. | 2011/03/31 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5497210",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/685327/"
] | All tools handling Java code usually decide first whether they want to process the language Java or Java byte code files. That is a strategic decision and depends on your use case. I could image both for flow chart generation. When you have decided that question. There are already several frameworks or libraries, which could help you on that. For byte code engineering there are: [ASM](http:///asm.ow2.org/), [JavaAssist](http://www.csg.is.titech.ac.jp/~chiba/javassist/), [Soot](http://www.sable.mcgill.ca/soot/), and [BCEL](http://jakarta.apache.org/bcel/), which seems to be dead. For Java language parsing and analyzing, there are: [Polyglot](http://www.cs.cornell.edu/projects/polyglot/), the eclipse compiler, and javac. All of these include a complete compiler frontend for Java and are open source.
I would try to avoid writing my own parser for Java. I did that once. Java has a rather complex grammar, but which can be found elsewhere. The real work begins with name and type resolution. And you would need both, if you want to generate graphs which cover more than one method body. | Or even more easy: Use reflection. You should be able to compile the sources, load the classes with java classloader and analyse them from there. I think this is far more easy than any parsing. |
5,497,210 | I am asked to develop a software which should be able to create Flow chart/ Control Flow of the input Java source code. So I started researching on it and arrived at following solutions:
To create flow chart/control flow I have to recognize controlling statements and function calls made in the given source code Now I have two ways of recognizing:
1. Parse the Source code by writing my own grammars (A complex solution I think). I am thinking to use Antlr for this.
2. Read input source code files as text and search for the specific patterns (May become inefficient)
Am I right here? Or I am missing something very fundamental and simple? Which approach would take less time and do the work efficiently? Any other suggestions in this regard will be welcome too. Any other efficient approach would help because the input source code may span multiple files and can be fairly complex.
I am good in .NET languages but this is my first big project in Java. I have basic knowledge of Compiler Design so writing grammars should not be impossible for me.
Sorry If I am being unclear. Please ask for any clarifications. | 2011/03/31 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5497210",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/685327/"
] | I'd go with [Antlr](http://www.antlr.org/) and use an existing Java grammar: <https://github.com/antlr/grammars-v4> | The way I would do it is to analyse compiled code. This would allow you to read jars without source and avoid parsing the code yourself. I would use Objectwebs ASM to read the class files. |
5,497,210 | I am asked to develop a software which should be able to create Flow chart/ Control Flow of the input Java source code. So I started researching on it and arrived at following solutions:
To create flow chart/control flow I have to recognize controlling statements and function calls made in the given source code Now I have two ways of recognizing:
1. Parse the Source code by writing my own grammars (A complex solution I think). I am thinking to use Antlr for this.
2. Read input source code files as text and search for the specific patterns (May become inefficient)
Am I right here? Or I am missing something very fundamental and simple? Which approach would take less time and do the work efficiently? Any other suggestions in this regard will be welcome too. Any other efficient approach would help because the input source code may span multiple files and can be fairly complex.
I am good in .NET languages but this is my first big project in Java. I have basic knowledge of Compiler Design so writing grammars should not be impossible for me.
Sorry If I am being unclear. Please ask for any clarifications. | 2011/03/31 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5497210",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/685327/"
] | I'd go with [Antlr](http://www.antlr.org/) and use an existing Java grammar: <https://github.com/antlr/grammars-v4> | All tools handling Java code usually decide first whether they want to process the language Java or Java byte code files. That is a strategic decision and depends on your use case. I could image both for flow chart generation. When you have decided that question. There are already several frameworks or libraries, which could help you on that. For byte code engineering there are: [ASM](http:///asm.ow2.org/), [JavaAssist](http://www.csg.is.titech.ac.jp/~chiba/javassist/), [Soot](http://www.sable.mcgill.ca/soot/), and [BCEL](http://jakarta.apache.org/bcel/), which seems to be dead. For Java language parsing and analyzing, there are: [Polyglot](http://www.cs.cornell.edu/projects/polyglot/), the eclipse compiler, and javac. All of these include a complete compiler frontend for Java and are open source.
I would try to avoid writing my own parser for Java. I did that once. Java has a rather complex grammar, but which can be found elsewhere. The real work begins with name and type resolution. And you would need both, if you want to generate graphs which cover more than one method body. |
5,497,210 | I am asked to develop a software which should be able to create Flow chart/ Control Flow of the input Java source code. So I started researching on it and arrived at following solutions:
To create flow chart/control flow I have to recognize controlling statements and function calls made in the given source code Now I have two ways of recognizing:
1. Parse the Source code by writing my own grammars (A complex solution I think). I am thinking to use Antlr for this.
2. Read input source code files as text and search for the specific patterns (May become inefficient)
Am I right here? Or I am missing something very fundamental and simple? Which approach would take less time and do the work efficiently? Any other suggestions in this regard will be welcome too. Any other efficient approach would help because the input source code may span multiple files and can be fairly complex.
I am good in .NET languages but this is my first big project in Java. I have basic knowledge of Compiler Design so writing grammars should not be impossible for me.
Sorry If I am being unclear. Please ask for any clarifications. | 2011/03/31 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5497210",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/685327/"
] | Eclipse has a library for parsing the source code and creating Abstract Syntax Tree from it which would let you extract what you want.
See here for a tutorial
<http://www.vogella.de/articles/EclipseJDT/article.html>
See here for api
<http://help.eclipse.org/indigo/topic/org.eclipse.jdt.doc.isv/reference/api/org/eclipse/jdt/core/dom/package-summary.html#package_description> | Our [DMS Software Reengineering Toolkit](http://www.semanticdesigns.com/Products/DMS/DMSToolkit.html) is general purpose program analysis and transformation machinery, with built in capability for parsing, building ASTs, constructing symbol tables, extracting control and data flow, transforming the ASTs, prettyprinting ASTs back to text, etc.
DMS is parameterized by an explicit language definition, and has [a large set of preexisting definitions](http://www.semanticdesigns.com/Products/FrontEnds).
DMS's [Java Front End](http://www.semanticdesigns.com/Products/FrontEnds/JavaFrontEnd.html) already computes [control and data flow graphs](http://www.semanticdesigns.com/Products/DMS/FlowAnalysis.html), so your problem would be reduced to exporting them.
EDIT 7/19/2014: Now handles Java 8. |
5,497,210 | I am asked to develop a software which should be able to create Flow chart/ Control Flow of the input Java source code. So I started researching on it and arrived at following solutions:
To create flow chart/control flow I have to recognize controlling statements and function calls made in the given source code Now I have two ways of recognizing:
1. Parse the Source code by writing my own grammars (A complex solution I think). I am thinking to use Antlr for this.
2. Read input source code files as text and search for the specific patterns (May become inefficient)
Am I right here? Or I am missing something very fundamental and simple? Which approach would take less time and do the work efficiently? Any other suggestions in this regard will be welcome too. Any other efficient approach would help because the input source code may span multiple files and can be fairly complex.
I am good in .NET languages but this is my first big project in Java. I have basic knowledge of Compiler Design so writing grammars should not be impossible for me.
Sorry If I am being unclear. Please ask for any clarifications. | 2011/03/31 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5497210",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/685327/"
] | All tools handling Java code usually decide first whether they want to process the language Java or Java byte code files. That is a strategic decision and depends on your use case. I could image both for flow chart generation. When you have decided that question. There are already several frameworks or libraries, which could help you on that. For byte code engineering there are: [ASM](http:///asm.ow2.org/), [JavaAssist](http://www.csg.is.titech.ac.jp/~chiba/javassist/), [Soot](http://www.sable.mcgill.ca/soot/), and [BCEL](http://jakarta.apache.org/bcel/), which seems to be dead. For Java language parsing and analyzing, there are: [Polyglot](http://www.cs.cornell.edu/projects/polyglot/), the eclipse compiler, and javac. All of these include a complete compiler frontend for Java and are open source.
I would try to avoid writing my own parser for Java. I did that once. Java has a rather complex grammar, but which can be found elsewhere. The real work begins with name and type resolution. And you would need both, if you want to generate graphs which cover more than one method body. | Your input files are written in Java, and the software should be written in Java, but this is your first project in Java? First of all, I'd suggest learning the language with smaller projects. Also you need to learn how to use graphics in Java (there are various libraries). Then, you should focus on what you want to show on your graphs. Or is text sufficient? |
5,497,210 | I am asked to develop a software which should be able to create Flow chart/ Control Flow of the input Java source code. So I started researching on it and arrived at following solutions:
To create flow chart/control flow I have to recognize controlling statements and function calls made in the given source code Now I have two ways of recognizing:
1. Parse the Source code by writing my own grammars (A complex solution I think). I am thinking to use Antlr for this.
2. Read input source code files as text and search for the specific patterns (May become inefficient)
Am I right here? Or I am missing something very fundamental and simple? Which approach would take less time and do the work efficiently? Any other suggestions in this regard will be welcome too. Any other efficient approach would help because the input source code may span multiple files and can be fairly complex.
I am good in .NET languages but this is my first big project in Java. I have basic knowledge of Compiler Design so writing grammars should not be impossible for me.
Sorry If I am being unclear. Please ask for any clarifications. | 2011/03/31 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5497210",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/685327/"
] | I'd go with [Antlr](http://www.antlr.org/) and use an existing Java grammar: <https://github.com/antlr/grammars-v4> | Our [DMS Software Reengineering Toolkit](http://www.semanticdesigns.com/Products/DMS/DMSToolkit.html) is general purpose program analysis and transformation machinery, with built in capability for parsing, building ASTs, constructing symbol tables, extracting control and data flow, transforming the ASTs, prettyprinting ASTs back to text, etc.
DMS is parameterized by an explicit language definition, and has [a large set of preexisting definitions](http://www.semanticdesigns.com/Products/FrontEnds).
DMS's [Java Front End](http://www.semanticdesigns.com/Products/FrontEnds/JavaFrontEnd.html) already computes [control and data flow graphs](http://www.semanticdesigns.com/Products/DMS/FlowAnalysis.html), so your problem would be reduced to exporting them.
EDIT 7/19/2014: Now handles Java 8. |
5,497,210 | I am asked to develop a software which should be able to create Flow chart/ Control Flow of the input Java source code. So I started researching on it and arrived at following solutions:
To create flow chart/control flow I have to recognize controlling statements and function calls made in the given source code Now I have two ways of recognizing:
1. Parse the Source code by writing my own grammars (A complex solution I think). I am thinking to use Antlr for this.
2. Read input source code files as text and search for the specific patterns (May become inefficient)
Am I right here? Or I am missing something very fundamental and simple? Which approach would take less time and do the work efficiently? Any other suggestions in this regard will be welcome too. Any other efficient approach would help because the input source code may span multiple files and can be fairly complex.
I am good in .NET languages but this is my first big project in Java. I have basic knowledge of Compiler Design so writing grammars should not be impossible for me.
Sorry If I am being unclear. Please ask for any clarifications. | 2011/03/31 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5497210",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/685327/"
] | I'd go with [Antlr](http://www.antlr.org/) and use an existing Java grammar: <https://github.com/antlr/grammars-v4> | Eclipse has a library for parsing the source code and creating Abstract Syntax Tree from it which would let you extract what you want.
See here for a tutorial
<http://www.vogella.de/articles/EclipseJDT/article.html>
See here for api
<http://help.eclipse.org/indigo/topic/org.eclipse.jdt.doc.isv/reference/api/org/eclipse/jdt/core/dom/package-summary.html#package_description> |
5,497,210 | I am asked to develop a software which should be able to create Flow chart/ Control Flow of the input Java source code. So I started researching on it and arrived at following solutions:
To create flow chart/control flow I have to recognize controlling statements and function calls made in the given source code Now I have two ways of recognizing:
1. Parse the Source code by writing my own grammars (A complex solution I think). I am thinking to use Antlr for this.
2. Read input source code files as text and search for the specific patterns (May become inefficient)
Am I right here? Or I am missing something very fundamental and simple? Which approach would take less time and do the work efficiently? Any other suggestions in this regard will be welcome too. Any other efficient approach would help because the input source code may span multiple files and can be fairly complex.
I am good in .NET languages but this is my first big project in Java. I have basic knowledge of Compiler Design so writing grammars should not be impossible for me.
Sorry If I am being unclear. Please ask for any clarifications. | 2011/03/31 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5497210",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/685327/"
] | All tools handling Java code usually decide first whether they want to process the language Java or Java byte code files. That is a strategic decision and depends on your use case. I could image both for flow chart generation. When you have decided that question. There are already several frameworks or libraries, which could help you on that. For byte code engineering there are: [ASM](http:///asm.ow2.org/), [JavaAssist](http://www.csg.is.titech.ac.jp/~chiba/javassist/), [Soot](http://www.sable.mcgill.ca/soot/), and [BCEL](http://jakarta.apache.org/bcel/), which seems to be dead. For Java language parsing and analyzing, there are: [Polyglot](http://www.cs.cornell.edu/projects/polyglot/), the eclipse compiler, and javac. All of these include a complete compiler frontend for Java and are open source.
I would try to avoid writing my own parser for Java. I did that once. Java has a rather complex grammar, but which can be found elsewhere. The real work begins with name and type resolution. And you would need both, if you want to generate graphs which cover more than one method body. | >
> Now I have two ways of recognizing:
>
>
>
You have many more ways than that. JavaCC ships with a Java 1.5 grammar already built. I'm sure other parser generators ditto. There is no reason for you to either have to write your own grammar or construct your own parser.
And specifically 'read[ing] input source code files as text and search for the specific patterns' isn't a viable choice at all, as it isn't parsing, and therefore cannot possibly recognize Java programs correctly. |
150,860 | The Second Civil War has begun. Ignoring how succession happens, the American west coast (including Baja California & the Mexican state of Sonora) becomes an independent republic. Their border runs from southern Sonora, runs along the eastern border Arizona & Utah, then finally up beside Idaho until it comes to Canada.
Twenty-two years after the war began (this takes place in 2019), fighting has evolved into something like it has with North & South Korea, with nuclear weapons preventing the return of invasions or conventional warfare. For this border I described, what would the Western Republic need to monitor, patrol and protect this stretch of land? And with the Rocky Mountains serving as a natural barrier, how would this affect it? | 2019/07/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/150860",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/61917/"
] | ### If the border is in a natural place for a border then you shouldn't need to patrol it all that much.
Long term stable borders tend to be along mountain ranges, rivers, across seas and deserts etc. Places where an army naturally comes to a halt and moving further is a serious bit of logistics. The borders of Britain, Italy, and Spain for example.
On the other hand the borders of somewhere like France or Belgium have shown themselves not to be so stable over the past century or so. The [European plain](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Plain) is a wonderful territory for marching an army and everyone from Napoleon to Hitler have tried it.
So if you've drawn your border down a mountain range with limited passes, then all you need to do is watch the passes and keep half an eye over the rest of the range but you don't need to man the whole thing. | **Bullet trains.**
And by bullet I mean fast and also small. Existing rail lines are connected and upgraded, and armed trains zip up and down the line, looking for trouble at 250 mph. Maybe some of these are robot trains THE SIZE OF A VW bug; train drones. Bullet train drones that speak in train drone voices to anything that gets too close to the tracks!
Tracks are a good way to cross large distances and it is possible to use tracks to go really fast. And war trains are AWESOME!
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VQ0SS.jpg)
<http://www.darkroastedblend.com/2013/05/awesome-armoured-trains-and-rail.html> |
150,860 | The Second Civil War has begun. Ignoring how succession happens, the American west coast (including Baja California & the Mexican state of Sonora) becomes an independent republic. Their border runs from southern Sonora, runs along the eastern border Arizona & Utah, then finally up beside Idaho until it comes to Canada.
Twenty-two years after the war began (this takes place in 2019), fighting has evolved into something like it has with North & South Korea, with nuclear weapons preventing the return of invasions or conventional warfare. For this border I described, what would the Western Republic need to monitor, patrol and protect this stretch of land? And with the Rocky Mountains serving as a natural barrier, how would this affect it? | 2019/07/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/150860",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/61917/"
] | When looking at a border of this size, there are multiple factors to consider. I'll use the US-Mexico border as an example, since it's almost the same size as yours.
**Technology**
Today at the US-Mexico border, there no single, continuous barrier (see [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico%E2%80%93United_States_border#Barrier)). Only about 25% is covered by the fence. In between the sections of fencing are varying forms of sensors. In your world, these could be cameras, seismic sensors, physical guard towers, border checkpoints, or moving patrols.
Satellites would be impractical due to the number you would need to maintain a constant view of your border, but for the troop buildups along the border, like you describe. If US-191 is in our territory, it would become an equivalent to I-10(and US-90 east of Sierra Blanca, TX) on the US-Mexico, that is, a major artery for civilian traffic and border patrol. If not, then the same would apply to I-70, US-40, US-491, CO-90, and CO-141.
Depending on the military spending of the government, they would have Reapers and Global Hawks patrolling the border out of Peterson AFB(a decent choice, given it's on our side of the Rockies and the current home of [NORAD](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Aerospace_Defense_Command))
**Geography**
A large section of the border is located in the center of the Rio Grande (see [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico%E2%80%93United_States_border#Border_region)). Parts of the Rio Grande are too fast moving to cross, so large parts of your border could be impassible due to geography. Of course this opens up opportunities for daring smuggler- or coyote-equivalents to try and find routes through (Hannibal and his *freaking war elephants* are a great example of the military using this tactic as well) | Any patrol on foot through this territory would be very hard.
Military imaging satellites and drones would be the most effective means to patrol along the rocky mountains. |
150,860 | The Second Civil War has begun. Ignoring how succession happens, the American west coast (including Baja California & the Mexican state of Sonora) becomes an independent republic. Their border runs from southern Sonora, runs along the eastern border Arizona & Utah, then finally up beside Idaho until it comes to Canada.
Twenty-two years after the war began (this takes place in 2019), fighting has evolved into something like it has with North & South Korea, with nuclear weapons preventing the return of invasions or conventional warfare. For this border I described, what would the Western Republic need to monitor, patrol and protect this stretch of land? And with the Rocky Mountains serving as a natural barrier, how would this affect it? | 2019/07/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/150860",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/61917/"
] | Mostly you just don't patrol them. You patrol the populated areas and targets that are along the border. Any invasion will go to a populated area first.
Spies will get through naturally and there is nothing you can do to stop it. Sensors and camera will record unprotected areas, film will be analyzed by computers for movement and possible human presence. If found, the film would be forwarded to some official that would verify it is in fact a person, and not a deer running across the border, and then run facial recognition to see which side they are on. If they are from the wrong side, facial recognition will locate them in whatever populated area they are spying in. | **Bullet trains.**
And by bullet I mean fast and also small. Existing rail lines are connected and upgraded, and armed trains zip up and down the line, looking for trouble at 250 mph. Maybe some of these are robot trains THE SIZE OF A VW bug; train drones. Bullet train drones that speak in train drone voices to anything that gets too close to the tracks!
Tracks are a good way to cross large distances and it is possible to use tracks to go really fast. And war trains are AWESOME!
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VQ0SS.jpg)
<http://www.darkroastedblend.com/2013/05/awesome-armoured-trains-and-rail.html> |
150,860 | The Second Civil War has begun. Ignoring how succession happens, the American west coast (including Baja California & the Mexican state of Sonora) becomes an independent republic. Their border runs from southern Sonora, runs along the eastern border Arizona & Utah, then finally up beside Idaho until it comes to Canada.
Twenty-two years after the war began (this takes place in 2019), fighting has evolved into something like it has with North & South Korea, with nuclear weapons preventing the return of invasions or conventional warfare. For this border I described, what would the Western Republic need to monitor, patrol and protect this stretch of land? And with the Rocky Mountains serving as a natural barrier, how would this affect it? | 2019/07/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/150860",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/61917/"
] | Any patrol on foot through this territory would be very hard.
Military imaging satellites and drones would be the most effective means to patrol along the rocky mountains. | **Bullet trains.**
And by bullet I mean fast and also small. Existing rail lines are connected and upgraded, and armed trains zip up and down the line, looking for trouble at 250 mph. Maybe some of these are robot trains THE SIZE OF A VW bug; train drones. Bullet train drones that speak in train drone voices to anything that gets too close to the tracks!
Tracks are a good way to cross large distances and it is possible to use tracks to go really fast. And war trains are AWESOME!
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VQ0SS.jpg)
<http://www.darkroastedblend.com/2013/05/awesome-armoured-trains-and-rail.html> |
150,860 | The Second Civil War has begun. Ignoring how succession happens, the American west coast (including Baja California & the Mexican state of Sonora) becomes an independent republic. Their border runs from southern Sonora, runs along the eastern border Arizona & Utah, then finally up beside Idaho until it comes to Canada.
Twenty-two years after the war began (this takes place in 2019), fighting has evolved into something like it has with North & South Korea, with nuclear weapons preventing the return of invasions or conventional warfare. For this border I described, what would the Western Republic need to monitor, patrol and protect this stretch of land? And with the Rocky Mountains serving as a natural barrier, how would this affect it? | 2019/07/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/150860",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/61917/"
] | When looking at a border of this size, there are multiple factors to consider. I'll use the US-Mexico border as an example, since it's almost the same size as yours.
**Technology**
Today at the US-Mexico border, there no single, continuous barrier (see [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico%E2%80%93United_States_border#Barrier)). Only about 25% is covered by the fence. In between the sections of fencing are varying forms of sensors. In your world, these could be cameras, seismic sensors, physical guard towers, border checkpoints, or moving patrols.
Satellites would be impractical due to the number you would need to maintain a constant view of your border, but for the troop buildups along the border, like you describe. If US-191 is in our territory, it would become an equivalent to I-10(and US-90 east of Sierra Blanca, TX) on the US-Mexico, that is, a major artery for civilian traffic and border patrol. If not, then the same would apply to I-70, US-40, US-491, CO-90, and CO-141.
Depending on the military spending of the government, they would have Reapers and Global Hawks patrolling the border out of Peterson AFB(a decent choice, given it's on our side of the Rockies and the current home of [NORAD](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Aerospace_Defense_Command))
**Geography**
A large section of the border is located in the center of the Rio Grande (see [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico%E2%80%93United_States_border#Border_region)). Parts of the Rio Grande are too fast moving to cross, so large parts of your border could be impassible due to geography. Of course this opens up opportunities for daring smuggler- or coyote-equivalents to try and find routes through (Hannibal and his *freaking war elephants* are a great example of the military using this tactic as well) | Mostly you just don't patrol them. You patrol the populated areas and targets that are along the border. Any invasion will go to a populated area first.
Spies will get through naturally and there is nothing you can do to stop it. Sensors and camera will record unprotected areas, film will be analyzed by computers for movement and possible human presence. If found, the film would be forwarded to some official that would verify it is in fact a person, and not a deer running across the border, and then run facial recognition to see which side they are on. If they are from the wrong side, facial recognition will locate them in whatever populated area they are spying in. |
150,860 | The Second Civil War has begun. Ignoring how succession happens, the American west coast (including Baja California & the Mexican state of Sonora) becomes an independent republic. Their border runs from southern Sonora, runs along the eastern border Arizona & Utah, then finally up beside Idaho until it comes to Canada.
Twenty-two years after the war began (this takes place in 2019), fighting has evolved into something like it has with North & South Korea, with nuclear weapons preventing the return of invasions or conventional warfare. For this border I described, what would the Western Republic need to monitor, patrol and protect this stretch of land? And with the Rocky Mountains serving as a natural barrier, how would this affect it? | 2019/07/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/150860",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/61917/"
] | When looking at a border of this size, there are multiple factors to consider. I'll use the US-Mexico border as an example, since it's almost the same size as yours.
**Technology**
Today at the US-Mexico border, there no single, continuous barrier (see [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico%E2%80%93United_States_border#Barrier)). Only about 25% is covered by the fence. In between the sections of fencing are varying forms of sensors. In your world, these could be cameras, seismic sensors, physical guard towers, border checkpoints, or moving patrols.
Satellites would be impractical due to the number you would need to maintain a constant view of your border, but for the troop buildups along the border, like you describe. If US-191 is in our territory, it would become an equivalent to I-10(and US-90 east of Sierra Blanca, TX) on the US-Mexico, that is, a major artery for civilian traffic and border patrol. If not, then the same would apply to I-70, US-40, US-491, CO-90, and CO-141.
Depending on the military spending of the government, they would have Reapers and Global Hawks patrolling the border out of Peterson AFB(a decent choice, given it's on our side of the Rockies and the current home of [NORAD](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Aerospace_Defense_Command))
**Geography**
A large section of the border is located in the center of the Rio Grande (see [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico%E2%80%93United_States_border#Border_region)). Parts of the Rio Grande are too fast moving to cross, so large parts of your border could be impassible due to geography. Of course this opens up opportunities for daring smuggler- or coyote-equivalents to try and find routes through (Hannibal and his *freaking war elephants* are a great example of the military using this tactic as well) | If the purpose is to prevent infiltration, this is a solved problem. It actually is easier to implement the solution in gentle terrain than in rough terrain.
[Build a sturdy fence, topped with barbed wire, with a road / kill-zone behind it.](https://www.defenceprocurementinternational.com/features/land/middle-east-countries-use-blimps-and-sensors-to-beef-up-border-security) Optionally, build a second fence behind the road. The up-front cost is roughly 2 million dollars per mile, not including land costs.
Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, and Algeria have all built such fences.
The Great Wall of China performed the same purpose. It had a wall wide enough to be a road, with sheer drops on both sides. It made it difficult for small-scale raiders to return home with loot. Large-scale raiders bribed or coerced the border guards. |
150,860 | The Second Civil War has begun. Ignoring how succession happens, the American west coast (including Baja California & the Mexican state of Sonora) becomes an independent republic. Their border runs from southern Sonora, runs along the eastern border Arizona & Utah, then finally up beside Idaho until it comes to Canada.
Twenty-two years after the war began (this takes place in 2019), fighting has evolved into something like it has with North & South Korea, with nuclear weapons preventing the return of invasions or conventional warfare. For this border I described, what would the Western Republic need to monitor, patrol and protect this stretch of land? And with the Rocky Mountains serving as a natural barrier, how would this affect it? | 2019/07/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/150860",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/61917/"
] | When looking at a border of this size, there are multiple factors to consider. I'll use the US-Mexico border as an example, since it's almost the same size as yours.
**Technology**
Today at the US-Mexico border, there no single, continuous barrier (see [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico%E2%80%93United_States_border#Barrier)). Only about 25% is covered by the fence. In between the sections of fencing are varying forms of sensors. In your world, these could be cameras, seismic sensors, physical guard towers, border checkpoints, or moving patrols.
Satellites would be impractical due to the number you would need to maintain a constant view of your border, but for the troop buildups along the border, like you describe. If US-191 is in our territory, it would become an equivalent to I-10(and US-90 east of Sierra Blanca, TX) on the US-Mexico, that is, a major artery for civilian traffic and border patrol. If not, then the same would apply to I-70, US-40, US-491, CO-90, and CO-141.
Depending on the military spending of the government, they would have Reapers and Global Hawks patrolling the border out of Peterson AFB(a decent choice, given it's on our side of the Rockies and the current home of [NORAD](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Aerospace_Defense_Command))
**Geography**
A large section of the border is located in the center of the Rio Grande (see [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico%E2%80%93United_States_border#Border_region)). Parts of the Rio Grande are too fast moving to cross, so large parts of your border could be impassible due to geography. Of course this opens up opportunities for daring smuggler- or coyote-equivalents to try and find routes through (Hannibal and his *freaking war elephants* are a great example of the military using this tactic as well) | ### If the border is in a natural place for a border then you shouldn't need to patrol it all that much.
Long term stable borders tend to be along mountain ranges, rivers, across seas and deserts etc. Places where an army naturally comes to a halt and moving further is a serious bit of logistics. The borders of Britain, Italy, and Spain for example.
On the other hand the borders of somewhere like France or Belgium have shown themselves not to be so stable over the past century or so. The [European plain](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Plain) is a wonderful territory for marching an army and everyone from Napoleon to Hitler have tried it.
So if you've drawn your border down a mountain range with limited passes, then all you need to do is watch the passes and keep half an eye over the rest of the range but you don't need to man the whole thing. |
150,860 | The Second Civil War has begun. Ignoring how succession happens, the American west coast (including Baja California & the Mexican state of Sonora) becomes an independent republic. Their border runs from southern Sonora, runs along the eastern border Arizona & Utah, then finally up beside Idaho until it comes to Canada.
Twenty-two years after the war began (this takes place in 2019), fighting has evolved into something like it has with North & South Korea, with nuclear weapons preventing the return of invasions or conventional warfare. For this border I described, what would the Western Republic need to monitor, patrol and protect this stretch of land? And with the Rocky Mountains serving as a natural barrier, how would this affect it? | 2019/07/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/150860",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/61917/"
] | **Bullet trains.**
And by bullet I mean fast and also small. Existing rail lines are connected and upgraded, and armed trains zip up and down the line, looking for trouble at 250 mph. Maybe some of these are robot trains THE SIZE OF A VW bug; train drones. Bullet train drones that speak in train drone voices to anything that gets too close to the tracks!
Tracks are a good way to cross large distances and it is possible to use tracks to go really fast. And war trains are AWESOME!
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VQ0SS.jpg)
<http://www.darkroastedblend.com/2013/05/awesome-armoured-trains-and-rail.html> | You aren't going anywhere with an enemy with nukes. Unless you make a force field, which is quite sci-fi, to block all unauthorized objects. Your best bet is what you see between North and South Korea, with some anti-air and anti-tank missiles. |
150,860 | The Second Civil War has begun. Ignoring how succession happens, the American west coast (including Baja California & the Mexican state of Sonora) becomes an independent republic. Their border runs from southern Sonora, runs along the eastern border Arizona & Utah, then finally up beside Idaho until it comes to Canada.
Twenty-two years after the war began (this takes place in 2019), fighting has evolved into something like it has with North & South Korea, with nuclear weapons preventing the return of invasions or conventional warfare. For this border I described, what would the Western Republic need to monitor, patrol and protect this stretch of land? And with the Rocky Mountains serving as a natural barrier, how would this affect it? | 2019/07/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/150860",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/61917/"
] | If the purpose is to prevent infiltration, this is a solved problem. It actually is easier to implement the solution in gentle terrain than in rough terrain.
[Build a sturdy fence, topped with barbed wire, with a road / kill-zone behind it.](https://www.defenceprocurementinternational.com/features/land/middle-east-countries-use-blimps-and-sensors-to-beef-up-border-security) Optionally, build a second fence behind the road. The up-front cost is roughly 2 million dollars per mile, not including land costs.
Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, and Algeria have all built such fences.
The Great Wall of China performed the same purpose. It had a wall wide enough to be a road, with sheer drops on both sides. It made it difficult for small-scale raiders to return home with loot. Large-scale raiders bribed or coerced the border guards. | You aren't going anywhere with an enemy with nukes. Unless you make a force field, which is quite sci-fi, to block all unauthorized objects. Your best bet is what you see between North and South Korea, with some anti-air and anti-tank missiles. |
150,860 | The Second Civil War has begun. Ignoring how succession happens, the American west coast (including Baja California & the Mexican state of Sonora) becomes an independent republic. Their border runs from southern Sonora, runs along the eastern border Arizona & Utah, then finally up beside Idaho until it comes to Canada.
Twenty-two years after the war began (this takes place in 2019), fighting has evolved into something like it has with North & South Korea, with nuclear weapons preventing the return of invasions or conventional warfare. For this border I described, what would the Western Republic need to monitor, patrol and protect this stretch of land? And with the Rocky Mountains serving as a natural barrier, how would this affect it? | 2019/07/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/150860",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/61917/"
] | If the purpose is to prevent infiltration, this is a solved problem. It actually is easier to implement the solution in gentle terrain than in rough terrain.
[Build a sturdy fence, topped with barbed wire, with a road / kill-zone behind it.](https://www.defenceprocurementinternational.com/features/land/middle-east-countries-use-blimps-and-sensors-to-beef-up-border-security) Optionally, build a second fence behind the road. The up-front cost is roughly 2 million dollars per mile, not including land costs.
Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, and Algeria have all built such fences.
The Great Wall of China performed the same purpose. It had a wall wide enough to be a road, with sheer drops on both sides. It made it difficult for small-scale raiders to return home with loot. Large-scale raiders bribed or coerced the border guards. | **Bullet trains.**
And by bullet I mean fast and also small. Existing rail lines are connected and upgraded, and armed trains zip up and down the line, looking for trouble at 250 mph. Maybe some of these are robot trains THE SIZE OF A VW bug; train drones. Bullet train drones that speak in train drone voices to anything that gets too close to the tracks!
Tracks are a good way to cross large distances and it is possible to use tracks to go really fast. And war trains are AWESOME!
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VQ0SS.jpg)
<http://www.darkroastedblend.com/2013/05/awesome-armoured-trains-and-rail.html> |
125,988 | I work remotely. I'm soon off abroad for a few months and will continue to work remotely while I'm away, taking the company laptop and possibly other similar hardware with me to perform my duties. The trip is my own choice.
My employer has asked if I could insure the hardware through my travel insurance, saying that he doubts the company policy will cover the USA (we're based in the UK).
As the hardware itself does not belong to me and is needed to fulfil my job (without any clauses covering insurance in my contract), is this something I can reasonably be expected to do? | 2019/01/07 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/125988",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/97662/"
] | I do not have sufficient reputation to comment, hence writing this as an answer.
You say you work remotely. Does your contract explicitly mention this?
If yes, does it impose any limitations to the place you can work remotely from (e.g. to the UK)?
If no, then I would see the responsibility of getting insurance at your employers side. | TL;DR
-----
Yes, the employer can have good reasons and might request you for such additional insurance. However it's best to check all details first.
Full answer
-----------
Let me address this question from a perspective of a person with some experience in insurance industry.
There are two factors to consider. In general you are usually liable for the property of your employer however this is usually limited to some degree. So if you leave your laptop in a car and it gets stolen you may be liable for its loss as this is in general something you should not do. On the other hand if you accidentally drop the laptop at your home it's usually insured and it the insurer takes a liability on this.
Yet the insurance has its limitations and details depends on the insurer's product and employers choice (and for large companies negotiations). If the company is based in UK and doesn't expect their employees to travel outside the country the company may buy an insurance limited to UK only (that in general will be cheaper). On the other hand they may as well have coverage for trips abroad, albeit it can be limited, e.g. to EU/Europe only or to business trips ordered by the employer only. As you can see both cases wouldn't apply if your laptop gets damaged in the US which essentially means the liability is on you then.
So yes, the employer might request you to additionally insure the laptop.
What I would suggest is to ask the employer to check details about the insurance coverage they have. They probably have some specific person responsible for that inside a company and/or a broker who is responsible for handling their insurances. Ask about two things - to check if your specific situation is covered and what should be the conditions of the insurance to match those normally covered cases. If it is covered you're clear and good to go.
If not, you should ask if it is possible to extend the insurance for the laptop and on what cost (to be covered by you as a reimbursement to your company, you'll probably need sign some extra agreement on it).
Then go to insurance company/agent and ask if it is possible to include such insurance. It can be already included (unlikely), an additionally paid extension or a separate insurance. If the insurer of your choice doesn't have such option, ask other insurers as well.
Now you have a clear situation and know the costs. It should be up to you to choose one, however check with your employer if they are happy with your choice of insurer. There may be some crappy companies as well and employer may say they won't accept such insurance.
Another approach is that you agree to cover the loss if the equipment is lost or damaged and it's not covered by the insurance. You have probably agreed to that already but if not then again - there should be some formal agreement. Now unless the agreement clearly says you are obliged to insure the equipment (two sides can agree on almost anything) it's up to your discretion if you look for some kind of insurance to cover that risk or you just accept the risk on yourself. |
125,988 | I work remotely. I'm soon off abroad for a few months and will continue to work remotely while I'm away, taking the company laptop and possibly other similar hardware with me to perform my duties. The trip is my own choice.
My employer has asked if I could insure the hardware through my travel insurance, saying that he doubts the company policy will cover the USA (we're based in the UK).
As the hardware itself does not belong to me and is needed to fulfil my job (without any clauses covering insurance in my contract), is this something I can reasonably be expected to do? | 2019/01/07 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/125988",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/97662/"
] | You have a little bit outside the box problem here.
1. You are voluntarily traveling, this is not for business, but yourself.
2. The company wants to minimize the obvious risk of losing their equipment while you are jetting around the world (their view, not yours)
3. Any insurance YOU buy is NOT going to cover something you do not own, period.
You need to have a conversation with your manager. Indicate that since the equipment belongs to the company and not yourself, you will be unable to obtain any insurance coverage for it on your own. If they would like to obtain additional coverage than what they normally carry, then you could have a discussion about having that additional expense reduced from your salary.
In summary this is how I see it.
1. You are voluntarily making this trip, it is not business related or directed.
2. The company owns the equipment though, so they need to make whatever arrangements they see fit.
3. You will have to decide if you can accept what they come up with or work out your own plan.
Additionally if you were to buy your own equipment and use it for work while traveling you would need to additionally indicate with the insurance company that you are using this equipment for work, they may reject a claim at some point if you did not indicate this.
This will NOT be travel insurance, that is for if you get sick etc. and have to cancel your trip. You need to look into a 'personal articles' policy (US terminology your local agent can help you determine the right UK coverage). This is insurance that covers a specific item. I have it on several computers, my wife's expensive jewelry and a few other items easily lost, damaged, or stolen. | If it's a work trip (i.e. they are sending you) then it's their responsibility, if it's a personal trip it's reasonable to expect the employee to cover it. |
125,988 | I work remotely. I'm soon off abroad for a few months and will continue to work remotely while I'm away, taking the company laptop and possibly other similar hardware with me to perform my duties. The trip is my own choice.
My employer has asked if I could insure the hardware through my travel insurance, saying that he doubts the company policy will cover the USA (we're based in the UK).
As the hardware itself does not belong to me and is needed to fulfil my job (without any clauses covering insurance in my contract), is this something I can reasonably be expected to do? | 2019/01/07 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/125988",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/97662/"
] | Firstly, check if your travel insurance covers business, or if it's just a tourist coverage.
Secondly... I'd be a bit suspicious of any company that requires me to insure their own property (you can't buy insurance on an item that you don't have any financial interest in), or any company that can't self-insure something as cheap as a laptop (even a Macbook Pro is pretty cheap in the scheme of things). | Given that you already work remotely and the equipment is not already insured, you should not be required to insure this equipment just because you are going to a separate remote location.
If the company would like their equipment insured, they should do it themselves. |
125,988 | I work remotely. I'm soon off abroad for a few months and will continue to work remotely while I'm away, taking the company laptop and possibly other similar hardware with me to perform my duties. The trip is my own choice.
My employer has asked if I could insure the hardware through my travel insurance, saying that he doubts the company policy will cover the USA (we're based in the UK).
As the hardware itself does not belong to me and is needed to fulfil my job (without any clauses covering insurance in my contract), is this something I can reasonably be expected to do? | 2019/01/07 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/125988",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/97662/"
] | Given that you already work remotely and the equipment is not already insured, you should not be required to insure this equipment just because you are going to a separate remote location.
If the company would like their equipment insured, they should do it themselves. | I do not have sufficient reputation to comment, hence writing this as an answer.
You say you work remotely. Does your contract explicitly mention this?
If yes, does it impose any limitations to the place you can work remotely from (e.g. to the UK)?
If no, then I would see the responsibility of getting insurance at your employers side. |
125,988 | I work remotely. I'm soon off abroad for a few months and will continue to work remotely while I'm away, taking the company laptop and possibly other similar hardware with me to perform my duties. The trip is my own choice.
My employer has asked if I could insure the hardware through my travel insurance, saying that he doubts the company policy will cover the USA (we're based in the UK).
As the hardware itself does not belong to me and is needed to fulfil my job (without any clauses covering insurance in my contract), is this something I can reasonably be expected to do? | 2019/01/07 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/125988",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/97662/"
] | You have a little bit outside the box problem here.
1. You are voluntarily traveling, this is not for business, but yourself.
2. The company wants to minimize the obvious risk of losing their equipment while you are jetting around the world (their view, not yours)
3. Any insurance YOU buy is NOT going to cover something you do not own, period.
You need to have a conversation with your manager. Indicate that since the equipment belongs to the company and not yourself, you will be unable to obtain any insurance coverage for it on your own. If they would like to obtain additional coverage than what they normally carry, then you could have a discussion about having that additional expense reduced from your salary.
In summary this is how I see it.
1. You are voluntarily making this trip, it is not business related or directed.
2. The company owns the equipment though, so they need to make whatever arrangements they see fit.
3. You will have to decide if you can accept what they come up with or work out your own plan.
Additionally if you were to buy your own equipment and use it for work while traveling you would need to additionally indicate with the insurance company that you are using this equipment for work, they may reject a claim at some point if you did not indicate this.
This will NOT be travel insurance, that is for if you get sick etc. and have to cancel your trip. You need to look into a 'personal articles' policy (US terminology your local agent can help you determine the right UK coverage). This is insurance that covers a specific item. I have it on several computers, my wife's expensive jewelry and a few other items easily lost, damaged, or stolen. | Given that you already work remotely and the equipment is not already insured, you should not be required to insure this equipment just because you are going to a separate remote location.
If the company would like their equipment insured, they should do it themselves. |
125,988 | I work remotely. I'm soon off abroad for a few months and will continue to work remotely while I'm away, taking the company laptop and possibly other similar hardware with me to perform my duties. The trip is my own choice.
My employer has asked if I could insure the hardware through my travel insurance, saying that he doubts the company policy will cover the USA (we're based in the UK).
As the hardware itself does not belong to me and is needed to fulfil my job (without any clauses covering insurance in my contract), is this something I can reasonably be expected to do? | 2019/01/07 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/125988",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/97662/"
] | You have a little bit outside the box problem here.
1. You are voluntarily traveling, this is not for business, but yourself.
2. The company wants to minimize the obvious risk of losing their equipment while you are jetting around the world (their view, not yours)
3. Any insurance YOU buy is NOT going to cover something you do not own, period.
You need to have a conversation with your manager. Indicate that since the equipment belongs to the company and not yourself, you will be unable to obtain any insurance coverage for it on your own. If they would like to obtain additional coverage than what they normally carry, then you could have a discussion about having that additional expense reduced from your salary.
In summary this is how I see it.
1. You are voluntarily making this trip, it is not business related or directed.
2. The company owns the equipment though, so they need to make whatever arrangements they see fit.
3. You will have to decide if you can accept what they come up with or work out your own plan.
Additionally if you were to buy your own equipment and use it for work while traveling you would need to additionally indicate with the insurance company that you are using this equipment for work, they may reject a claim at some point if you did not indicate this.
This will NOT be travel insurance, that is for if you get sick etc. and have to cancel your trip. You need to look into a 'personal articles' policy (US terminology your local agent can help you determine the right UK coverage). This is insurance that covers a specific item. I have it on several computers, my wife's expensive jewelry and a few other items easily lost, damaged, or stolen. | TL;DR
-----
Yes, the employer can have good reasons and might request you for such additional insurance. However it's best to check all details first.
Full answer
-----------
Let me address this question from a perspective of a person with some experience in insurance industry.
There are two factors to consider. In general you are usually liable for the property of your employer however this is usually limited to some degree. So if you leave your laptop in a car and it gets stolen you may be liable for its loss as this is in general something you should not do. On the other hand if you accidentally drop the laptop at your home it's usually insured and it the insurer takes a liability on this.
Yet the insurance has its limitations and details depends on the insurer's product and employers choice (and for large companies negotiations). If the company is based in UK and doesn't expect their employees to travel outside the country the company may buy an insurance limited to UK only (that in general will be cheaper). On the other hand they may as well have coverage for trips abroad, albeit it can be limited, e.g. to EU/Europe only or to business trips ordered by the employer only. As you can see both cases wouldn't apply if your laptop gets damaged in the US which essentially means the liability is on you then.
So yes, the employer might request you to additionally insure the laptop.
What I would suggest is to ask the employer to check details about the insurance coverage they have. They probably have some specific person responsible for that inside a company and/or a broker who is responsible for handling their insurances. Ask about two things - to check if your specific situation is covered and what should be the conditions of the insurance to match those normally covered cases. If it is covered you're clear and good to go.
If not, you should ask if it is possible to extend the insurance for the laptop and on what cost (to be covered by you as a reimbursement to your company, you'll probably need sign some extra agreement on it).
Then go to insurance company/agent and ask if it is possible to include such insurance. It can be already included (unlikely), an additionally paid extension or a separate insurance. If the insurer of your choice doesn't have such option, ask other insurers as well.
Now you have a clear situation and know the costs. It should be up to you to choose one, however check with your employer if they are happy with your choice of insurer. There may be some crappy companies as well and employer may say they won't accept such insurance.
Another approach is that you agree to cover the loss if the equipment is lost or damaged and it's not covered by the insurance. You have probably agreed to that already but if not then again - there should be some formal agreement. Now unless the agreement clearly says you are obliged to insure the equipment (two sides can agree on almost anything) it's up to your discretion if you look for some kind of insurance to cover that risk or you just accept the risk on yourself. |
2,141,687 | I have a rather unusual idea. I want to run a single instance of a Java EE application client inside app server, in a similar way that JMS provider is run/embedded "within" the app server, so that it is started and stopped with the app server. Why? To ease deployment and maintenance of a complex distributed Java EE system which has application client as part of its architecture.
So:
1. There is only one application client on each server where there is app server (Glassfish).
2. I would like to have the application client run in the same start-stop cycle as the application server, and not as a totally separate entity run under a (apache or similar) system service wrapper.
Is this possible? | 2010/01/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2141687",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/189972/"
] | OpenWebKitSharp gives you full control over WebKit Nightly, which is very close to webkit in terms of performance and compatibility. Chrome uses WebKit Chromium engine, while WebKit.NET uses Cairo and OpenWebKitSharp Nightly. Chromium should be the best of these builds, while at 2nd place should come Nightly and that's why I suggest OpenWebKitSharp.
<http://gt-web-software.webs.com/libraries.htm> at the OpenWebKitSharp section | Update for 2014:
I use [geckofx](https://bitbucket.org/geckofx), a healthy open source project that (as of this writing) keeps up to date pretty well with the latest Firefox releases.
To embed Chrome, you might consider another healthy looking open source project, [Xilium.cefGlue](https://bitbucket.org/xilium/xilium.cefglue/wiki/Home), based on [The Chromium Embedded Framework (CEF)](https://code.google.com/p/chromiumembedded/).
Both of these support WPF and Winforms, and both projects have support for .net and mono. |
2,141,687 | I have a rather unusual idea. I want to run a single instance of a Java EE application client inside app server, in a similar way that JMS provider is run/embedded "within" the app server, so that it is started and stopped with the app server. Why? To ease deployment and maintenance of a complex distributed Java EE system which has application client as part of its architecture.
So:
1. There is only one application client on each server where there is app server (Glassfish).
2. I would like to have the application client run in the same start-stop cycle as the application server, and not as a totally separate entity run under a (apache or similar) system service wrapper.
Is this possible? | 2010/01/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2141687",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/189972/"
] | I use Awesomium, I think it is better than GeckoFX/WebKit
<http://awesomium.com> | *1/3/2017 --> January the 3rd 2017*
Hi there, today I found this article to achieve this, the article is called "Creating an HTML UI for Desktop .NET Applications" and is intended to embed a chromium based control in a WPF application. It saved me the day.
<https://www.infoq.com/articles/html-desktop-net>
I hope it helps somebody else.
NOTE: it is based on DotNetBrowser, see license agreement here: <https://www.teamdev.com/dotnetbrowser-licence-agreement> |
2,141,687 | I have a rather unusual idea. I want to run a single instance of a Java EE application client inside app server, in a similar way that JMS provider is run/embedded "within" the app server, so that it is started and stopped with the app server. Why? To ease deployment and maintenance of a complex distributed Java EE system which has application client as part of its architecture.
So:
1. There is only one application client on each server where there is app server (Glassfish).
2. I would like to have the application client run in the same start-stop cycle as the application server, and not as a totally separate entity run under a (apache or similar) system service wrapper.
Is this possible? | 2010/01/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2141687",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/189972/"
] | You can use [WebKit.NET](http://webkitdotnet.sourceforge.net/). This is a C# wrapper for WebKit, which is the rendering engine used by Chrome. | Update for 2014:
I use [geckofx](https://bitbucket.org/geckofx), a healthy open source project that (as of this writing) keeps up to date pretty well with the latest Firefox releases.
To embed Chrome, you might consider another healthy looking open source project, [Xilium.cefGlue](https://bitbucket.org/xilium/xilium.cefglue/wiki/Home), based on [The Chromium Embedded Framework (CEF)](https://code.google.com/p/chromiumembedded/).
Both of these support WPF and Winforms, and both projects have support for .net and mono. |
2,141,687 | I have a rather unusual idea. I want to run a single instance of a Java EE application client inside app server, in a similar way that JMS provider is run/embedded "within" the app server, so that it is started and stopped with the app server. Why? To ease deployment and maintenance of a complex distributed Java EE system which has application client as part of its architecture.
So:
1. There is only one application client on each server where there is app server (Glassfish).
2. I would like to have the application client run in the same start-stop cycle as the application server, and not as a totally separate entity run under a (apache or similar) system service wrapper.
Is this possible? | 2010/01/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2141687",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/189972/"
] | I use Awesomium, I think it is better than GeckoFX/WebKit
<http://awesomium.com> | **Update 2016:**
Unfortunately most of the above solutions are out of date and no longer maintained.
There are 3 additional options I can suggest that are still actively developed:
[1. BrowseEmAll.Cef](http://www.browseemall.com/CoreAPI/Cef)
A .Net component that can be used to integrate the **Chrome engine** into your .Net Application. Based on [CefGlue](http://xilium.bitbucket.org/cefglue/) but a little faster on updates to the latest Chrome version. Also there is a **commercial support** option available which might come in handy for some. Of course the component itself is **open source**.
[2. BrowseEmAll.Gecko](http://www.browseemall.com/CoreAPI/Gecko)
Another .Net component which can be used to integrate the **Firefox engine** into your .Net application. This is based on [Geckofx](https://bitbucket.org/geckofx/) but unlike the current version of Geckofx this will work with a normal release build of Firefox. To use Geckofx you will need to build Firefox yourself. Again **commercial support** is available but the component itself is fully **open source**.
[3. BrowseEmAll Core API](http://www.browseemall.com/CoreAPI)
Need all the different browsers in your .Net Application? Which the BrowseEmAll Core API you can **integrate Chrome, Firefox, Webkit and Internet Explorer** into your application. This is a **commercial product** though so be warned.
*(Full disclosure: I work for this company so take everything I say with a grain of salt)* |
2,141,687 | I have a rather unusual idea. I want to run a single instance of a Java EE application client inside app server, in a similar way that JMS provider is run/embedded "within" the app server, so that it is started and stopped with the app server. Why? To ease deployment and maintenance of a complex distributed Java EE system which has application client as part of its architecture.
So:
1. There is only one application client on each server where there is app server (Glassfish).
2. I would like to have the application client run in the same start-stop cycle as the application server, and not as a totally separate entity run under a (apache or similar) system service wrapper.
Is this possible? | 2010/01/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2141687",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/189972/"
] | You can use [WebKit.NET](http://webkitdotnet.sourceforge.net/). This is a C# wrapper for WebKit, which is the rendering engine used by Chrome. | You can use [GeckoFX](http://code.google.com/p/geckofx/) to embed firefox |
2,141,687 | I have a rather unusual idea. I want to run a single instance of a Java EE application client inside app server, in a similar way that JMS provider is run/embedded "within" the app server, so that it is started and stopped with the app server. Why? To ease deployment and maintenance of a complex distributed Java EE system which has application client as part of its architecture.
So:
1. There is only one application client on each server where there is app server (Glassfish).
2. I would like to have the application client run in the same start-stop cycle as the application server, and not as a totally separate entity run under a (apache or similar) system service wrapper.
Is this possible? | 2010/01/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2141687",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/189972/"
] | OpenWebKitSharp gives you full control over WebKit Nightly, which is very close to webkit in terms of performance and compatibility. Chrome uses WebKit Chromium engine, while WebKit.NET uses Cairo and OpenWebKitSharp Nightly. Chromium should be the best of these builds, while at 2nd place should come Nightly and that's why I suggest OpenWebKitSharp.
<http://gt-web-software.webs.com/libraries.htm> at the OpenWebKitSharp section | **Update 2016:**
Unfortunately most of the above solutions are out of date and no longer maintained.
There are 3 additional options I can suggest that are still actively developed:
[1. BrowseEmAll.Cef](http://www.browseemall.com/CoreAPI/Cef)
A .Net component that can be used to integrate the **Chrome engine** into your .Net Application. Based on [CefGlue](http://xilium.bitbucket.org/cefglue/) but a little faster on updates to the latest Chrome version. Also there is a **commercial support** option available which might come in handy for some. Of course the component itself is **open source**.
[2. BrowseEmAll.Gecko](http://www.browseemall.com/CoreAPI/Gecko)
Another .Net component which can be used to integrate the **Firefox engine** into your .Net application. This is based on [Geckofx](https://bitbucket.org/geckofx/) but unlike the current version of Geckofx this will work with a normal release build of Firefox. To use Geckofx you will need to build Firefox yourself. Again **commercial support** is available but the component itself is fully **open source**.
[3. BrowseEmAll Core API](http://www.browseemall.com/CoreAPI)
Need all the different browsers in your .Net Application? Which the BrowseEmAll Core API you can **integrate Chrome, Firefox, Webkit and Internet Explorer** into your application. This is a **commercial product** though so be warned.
*(Full disclosure: I work for this company so take everything I say with a grain of salt)* |
2,141,687 | I have a rather unusual idea. I want to run a single instance of a Java EE application client inside app server, in a similar way that JMS provider is run/embedded "within" the app server, so that it is started and stopped with the app server. Why? To ease deployment and maintenance of a complex distributed Java EE system which has application client as part of its architecture.
So:
1. There is only one application client on each server where there is app server (Glassfish).
2. I would like to have the application client run in the same start-stop cycle as the application server, and not as a totally separate entity run under a (apache or similar) system service wrapper.
Is this possible? | 2010/01/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2141687",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/189972/"
] | I don't know of any *full* Chrome component, but you could use WebKit, which is the rendering engine that Chrome uses. The Mono project made [WebKit Sharp](https://github.com/mono/webkit-sharp), which might work for you. | OpenWebKitSharp gives you full control over WebKit Nightly, which is very close to webkit in terms of performance and compatibility. Chrome uses WebKit Chromium engine, while WebKit.NET uses Cairo and OpenWebKitSharp Nightly. Chromium should be the best of these builds, while at 2nd place should come Nightly and that's why I suggest OpenWebKitSharp.
<http://gt-web-software.webs.com/libraries.htm> at the OpenWebKitSharp section |
2,141,687 | I have a rather unusual idea. I want to run a single instance of a Java EE application client inside app server, in a similar way that JMS provider is run/embedded "within" the app server, so that it is started and stopped with the app server. Why? To ease deployment and maintenance of a complex distributed Java EE system which has application client as part of its architecture.
So:
1. There is only one application client on each server where there is app server (Glassfish).
2. I would like to have the application client run in the same start-stop cycle as the application server, and not as a totally separate entity run under a (apache or similar) system service wrapper.
Is this possible? | 2010/01/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2141687",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/189972/"
] | You can use [WebKit.NET](http://webkitdotnet.sourceforge.net/). This is a C# wrapper for WebKit, which is the rendering engine used by Chrome. | *1/3/2017 --> January the 3rd 2017*
Hi there, today I found this article to achieve this, the article is called "Creating an HTML UI for Desktop .NET Applications" and is intended to embed a chromium based control in a WPF application. It saved me the day.
<https://www.infoq.com/articles/html-desktop-net>
I hope it helps somebody else.
NOTE: it is based on DotNetBrowser, see license agreement here: <https://www.teamdev.com/dotnetbrowser-licence-agreement> |
2,141,687 | I have a rather unusual idea. I want to run a single instance of a Java EE application client inside app server, in a similar way that JMS provider is run/embedded "within" the app server, so that it is started and stopped with the app server. Why? To ease deployment and maintenance of a complex distributed Java EE system which has application client as part of its architecture.
So:
1. There is only one application client on each server where there is app server (Glassfish).
2. I would like to have the application client run in the same start-stop cycle as the application server, and not as a totally separate entity run under a (apache or similar) system service wrapper.
Is this possible? | 2010/01/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2141687",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/189972/"
] | You can use [GeckoFX](http://code.google.com/p/geckofx/) to embed firefox | Try this: <http://code.google.com/p/geckofx/> |
2,141,687 | I have a rather unusual idea. I want to run a single instance of a Java EE application client inside app server, in a similar way that JMS provider is run/embedded "within" the app server, so that it is started and stopped with the app server. Why? To ease deployment and maintenance of a complex distributed Java EE system which has application client as part of its architecture.
So:
1. There is only one application client on each server where there is app server (Glassfish).
2. I would like to have the application client run in the same start-stop cycle as the application server, and not as a totally separate entity run under a (apache or similar) system service wrapper.
Is this possible? | 2010/01/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2141687",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/189972/"
] | I don't know of any *full* Chrome component, but you could use WebKit, which is the rendering engine that Chrome uses. The Mono project made [WebKit Sharp](https://github.com/mono/webkit-sharp), which might work for you. | *1/3/2017 --> January the 3rd 2017*
Hi there, today I found this article to achieve this, the article is called "Creating an HTML UI for Desktop .NET Applications" and is intended to embed a chromium based control in a WPF application. It saved me the day.
<https://www.infoq.com/articles/html-desktop-net>
I hope it helps somebody else.
NOTE: it is based on DotNetBrowser, see license agreement here: <https://www.teamdev.com/dotnetbrowser-licence-agreement> |
63,351 | So, as I've mentioned in previous questions, I am writing a series in which the four young main characters encounter natural, traversable wormholes that connect the present time to another one. I've vaguely figured how I want them to work and how this way connects (mostly) to the real theoretical science behind it (specifics will be explained below for those curious and if it connects to my question). My question now is this; If I want to continue being vaguely scientifically accurate, how would a speculative wormhole look to humans looking at it from outside? For someone stepping through it to the other side? How many artistic liberties can I really take while still being scientifically accurate? Thanks so much for taking the time to speculatively answer this question and have a good day!
(For those interested, the wormholes tend to stick near objects with larger gravity to keep our intrepid little explorers from stepping through one and ending up somewhere out in space and suffocating. They tend to occur most on the time equivalent of "fault lines" where time 'tears' more easily, like weak points on a blanket. Yes, I do know it's definitely more complicated than that, but I'm simplifying things a bit so it makes more sense. They also can connect places in both place and time, so they can end up from a little town in modern day Oklahoma to the volcanic jungles of Early Cretaceous China. Finally, they are also traversable by simply stepping through since the main characters are just a few teenagers who stumble across them and don't exactly have resources to get a vessel to take them through Interestellar style.) | 2016/12/04 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/63351",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/20457/"
] | Wormholes can be manifested similarly to black-holes, but I think this image sums up what a transversable wormhole would look like under your criteria:
[](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/Wurmloch.jpg)
The light would also probably be redshifted a small bit, but this simulation is appealing enough.
Furthermore, you're asking how it would look to step through it. Depending on a few factors, I'd say Interstellar is a good source. A short burst of warped space-time and light, then you're out the other side. | if you've seen the film interstellar, it gives a pretty accurate representation of a wormhole
the argument goes something like this:
in 2-D models of wormholes, you have a bit of paper (our universe), you drill two hole in it with paper, then fold the paper to make the holes line up - wormhole
but a 2 d hole in 3 d becomes a sphere - which is what a wormhole would probably look like |
63,351 | So, as I've mentioned in previous questions, I am writing a series in which the four young main characters encounter natural, traversable wormholes that connect the present time to another one. I've vaguely figured how I want them to work and how this way connects (mostly) to the real theoretical science behind it (specifics will be explained below for those curious and if it connects to my question). My question now is this; If I want to continue being vaguely scientifically accurate, how would a speculative wormhole look to humans looking at it from outside? For someone stepping through it to the other side? How many artistic liberties can I really take while still being scientifically accurate? Thanks so much for taking the time to speculatively answer this question and have a good day!
(For those interested, the wormholes tend to stick near objects with larger gravity to keep our intrepid little explorers from stepping through one and ending up somewhere out in space and suffocating. They tend to occur most on the time equivalent of "fault lines" where time 'tears' more easily, like weak points on a blanket. Yes, I do know it's definitely more complicated than that, but I'm simplifying things a bit so it makes more sense. They also can connect places in both place and time, so they can end up from a little town in modern day Oklahoma to the volcanic jungles of Early Cretaceous China. Finally, they are also traversable by simply stepping through since the main characters are just a few teenagers who stumble across them and don't exactly have resources to get a vessel to take them through Interestellar style.) | 2016/12/04 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/63351",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/20457/"
] | Wormholes can be manifested similarly to black-holes, but I think this image sums up what a transversable wormhole would look like under your criteria:
[](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/Wurmloch.jpg)
The light would also probably be redshifted a small bit, but this simulation is appealing enough.
Furthermore, you're asking how it would look to step through it. Depending on a few factors, I'd say Interstellar is a good source. A short burst of warped space-time and light, then you're out the other side. | My postulations:
1. What the wormhole looks like depends on how light interacts with it/ passes through it.
2. If matter can pass through it trivially (i.e. simply stepping through with no ill-effect), light should act in very much the same way.
3. As mentioned by others, a wormhole is simply a 3D hole (most likely spherical).
In this case, I would imagine that the "look" of a wormhole will be surprisingly simple - in fact you would not see it at all! All you would see is a circular view of the destination the wormhole connects to, with no distortion, refraction (disregarding differences in air pressure on either side), etc. It would actually look a lot like an open door, except without a door or a frame.
The peculiarity would only show when you tried to walk around it - the hole will remain a perfect circle no matter how you tried to walk around it, and what you saw in it would be a 360-degree view of what was on the other side. Imagine if you had a wormhole from your current location to the inside of a museum, for instance - by just walking around the wormhole you would be able to see the entirety of the museum's displays. |
63,351 | So, as I've mentioned in previous questions, I am writing a series in which the four young main characters encounter natural, traversable wormholes that connect the present time to another one. I've vaguely figured how I want them to work and how this way connects (mostly) to the real theoretical science behind it (specifics will be explained below for those curious and if it connects to my question). My question now is this; If I want to continue being vaguely scientifically accurate, how would a speculative wormhole look to humans looking at it from outside? For someone stepping through it to the other side? How many artistic liberties can I really take while still being scientifically accurate? Thanks so much for taking the time to speculatively answer this question and have a good day!
(For those interested, the wormholes tend to stick near objects with larger gravity to keep our intrepid little explorers from stepping through one and ending up somewhere out in space and suffocating. They tend to occur most on the time equivalent of "fault lines" where time 'tears' more easily, like weak points on a blanket. Yes, I do know it's definitely more complicated than that, but I'm simplifying things a bit so it makes more sense. They also can connect places in both place and time, so they can end up from a little town in modern day Oklahoma to the volcanic jungles of Early Cretaceous China. Finally, they are also traversable by simply stepping through since the main characters are just a few teenagers who stumble across them and don't exactly have resources to get a vessel to take them through Interestellar style.) | 2016/12/04 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/63351",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/20457/"
] | Wormholes are purely hypothetical, but would probably appear similar to a black hole. Take a look at the artistic interpretation of a black hole, from the movie Interstellar [here](http://interstellarfilm.wikia.com/wiki/Gargantua), and that of a wormhole [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole). | My postulations:
1. What the wormhole looks like depends on how light interacts with it/ passes through it.
2. If matter can pass through it trivially (i.e. simply stepping through with no ill-effect), light should act in very much the same way.
3. As mentioned by others, a wormhole is simply a 3D hole (most likely spherical).
In this case, I would imagine that the "look" of a wormhole will be surprisingly simple - in fact you would not see it at all! All you would see is a circular view of the destination the wormhole connects to, with no distortion, refraction (disregarding differences in air pressure on either side), etc. It would actually look a lot like an open door, except without a door or a frame.
The peculiarity would only show when you tried to walk around it - the hole will remain a perfect circle no matter how you tried to walk around it, and what you saw in it would be a 360-degree view of what was on the other side. Imagine if you had a wormhole from your current location to the inside of a museum, for instance - by just walking around the wormhole you would be able to see the entirety of the museum's displays. |
63,351 | So, as I've mentioned in previous questions, I am writing a series in which the four young main characters encounter natural, traversable wormholes that connect the present time to another one. I've vaguely figured how I want them to work and how this way connects (mostly) to the real theoretical science behind it (specifics will be explained below for those curious and if it connects to my question). My question now is this; If I want to continue being vaguely scientifically accurate, how would a speculative wormhole look to humans looking at it from outside? For someone stepping through it to the other side? How many artistic liberties can I really take while still being scientifically accurate? Thanks so much for taking the time to speculatively answer this question and have a good day!
(For those interested, the wormholes tend to stick near objects with larger gravity to keep our intrepid little explorers from stepping through one and ending up somewhere out in space and suffocating. They tend to occur most on the time equivalent of "fault lines" where time 'tears' more easily, like weak points on a blanket. Yes, I do know it's definitely more complicated than that, but I'm simplifying things a bit so it makes more sense. They also can connect places in both place and time, so they can end up from a little town in modern day Oklahoma to the volcanic jungles of Early Cretaceous China. Finally, they are also traversable by simply stepping through since the main characters are just a few teenagers who stumble across them and don't exactly have resources to get a vessel to take them through Interestellar style.) | 2016/12/04 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/63351",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/20457/"
] | Wormholes can be manifested similarly to black-holes, but I think this image sums up what a transversable wormhole would look like under your criteria:
[](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/Wurmloch.jpg)
The light would also probably be redshifted a small bit, but this simulation is appealing enough.
Furthermore, you're asking how it would look to step through it. Depending on a few factors, I'd say Interstellar is a good source. A short burst of warped space-time and light, then you're out the other side. | It seems to me that a photograph of a *non-lethal* wormhole will look exactly like two photographs, one on top of the other. The one on top will have a circular hole in it. The two should be the same scale, that is no magnification, nor should their be any distortion.
Why? Because if the light is being distorted, then there would have to be tremendous gravitational tidal forces involved, which would do bad things to matter, specifically to living matter. You could surround each hole with some sort of "leakage" - maybe a glow, or sparks, or some mild sort of distortion (like mirages - you know - *wavering*).
And of course while the hole would look circular, as you changed your position, the view would change as well. As you moved around the hole, the view through the hole would rotate as well. So, it would basically be a spherical TV screen. In fact, we could probably make one today that came pretty close (some TVs have horizontal curvature so you could make a ring out of a bunch of them.
Two problems with that:
1. The screen is concave, and you want convex
2. Screens available today don't have both horizontal and vertical curvature (as far as I know)
But anyway, a polygon with enough faces is very close to looking like a sphere, so just picture a ball with monitors stuck to it. Reduce it to the size you want your hole to be (4 ft radius?) and imagine the cameras showing the entire 4π steradians of from the (multiple) cameras viewpoint. |
63,351 | So, as I've mentioned in previous questions, I am writing a series in which the four young main characters encounter natural, traversable wormholes that connect the present time to another one. I've vaguely figured how I want them to work and how this way connects (mostly) to the real theoretical science behind it (specifics will be explained below for those curious and if it connects to my question). My question now is this; If I want to continue being vaguely scientifically accurate, how would a speculative wormhole look to humans looking at it from outside? For someone stepping through it to the other side? How many artistic liberties can I really take while still being scientifically accurate? Thanks so much for taking the time to speculatively answer this question and have a good day!
(For those interested, the wormholes tend to stick near objects with larger gravity to keep our intrepid little explorers from stepping through one and ending up somewhere out in space and suffocating. They tend to occur most on the time equivalent of "fault lines" where time 'tears' more easily, like weak points on a blanket. Yes, I do know it's definitely more complicated than that, but I'm simplifying things a bit so it makes more sense. They also can connect places in both place and time, so they can end up from a little town in modern day Oklahoma to the volcanic jungles of Early Cretaceous China. Finally, they are also traversable by simply stepping through since the main characters are just a few teenagers who stumble across them and don't exactly have resources to get a vessel to take them through Interestellar style.) | 2016/12/04 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/63351",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/20457/"
] | Wormholes are purely hypothetical, but would probably appear similar to a black hole. Take a look at the artistic interpretation of a black hole, from the movie Interstellar [here](http://interstellarfilm.wikia.com/wiki/Gargantua), and that of a wormhole [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole). | if you've seen the film interstellar, it gives a pretty accurate representation of a wormhole
the argument goes something like this:
in 2-D models of wormholes, you have a bit of paper (our universe), you drill two hole in it with paper, then fold the paper to make the holes line up - wormhole
but a 2 d hole in 3 d becomes a sphere - which is what a wormhole would probably look like |
63,351 | So, as I've mentioned in previous questions, I am writing a series in which the four young main characters encounter natural, traversable wormholes that connect the present time to another one. I've vaguely figured how I want them to work and how this way connects (mostly) to the real theoretical science behind it (specifics will be explained below for those curious and if it connects to my question). My question now is this; If I want to continue being vaguely scientifically accurate, how would a speculative wormhole look to humans looking at it from outside? For someone stepping through it to the other side? How many artistic liberties can I really take while still being scientifically accurate? Thanks so much for taking the time to speculatively answer this question and have a good day!
(For those interested, the wormholes tend to stick near objects with larger gravity to keep our intrepid little explorers from stepping through one and ending up somewhere out in space and suffocating. They tend to occur most on the time equivalent of "fault lines" where time 'tears' more easily, like weak points on a blanket. Yes, I do know it's definitely more complicated than that, but I'm simplifying things a bit so it makes more sense. They also can connect places in both place and time, so they can end up from a little town in modern day Oklahoma to the volcanic jungles of Early Cretaceous China. Finally, they are also traversable by simply stepping through since the main characters are just a few teenagers who stumble across them and don't exactly have resources to get a vessel to take them through Interestellar style.) | 2016/12/04 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/63351",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/20457/"
] | What you most likely want is an [Ellis wormhole](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellis_wormhole). The picture in A. Forty's answer most likely shows exactly that; and as others have mentioned, Interstellar is about as good a visualization a wormhole as you're going to get from Hollywood. However, I don't think Interstellar got all the details right.
From the outside, the wormhole would look very much like A. Forty's image. Moving through the wormhole, the image of the other side of the hole would appear to expand around you, swallowing you up, and then you're on the other side.
If you were to look left or right (or up or down, for that matter) while in the middle of the wormhole, you would see the back of your own head. The hole has no walls; each side just wraps around to the opposite side. I believe Interstellar goofed on this one.
Shown here is what an Ellis wormhole in a 2-dimensional universe might look like from the outside:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wlb7K.png)
Interstellar showed something like what you would see if you piloted a spaceship along this surface and through the hole in the middle, from one side to the other. However, in reality, the wormhole would be three-dimensional. You'd never actually see anything even remotely resembling the above surface- because we're *inside* it.
Imagine taking a 2-dimensional spaceship and sliding it around on that surface. Try to visualize what the ship's pilot would see, looking at the wormhole. Near the hole, his lines of sight would be bent toward it, so objects behind the hole would appear distorted and stretched out at the edges of the hole. Closer to the hole, rays of light could wrap around the hole multiple times before coming back out without going through, so the pilot would see all 360° of his surroundings (including the front of his own ship) reflected back and forth, squeezed into tighter and tighter rings.
Just inside that, an infinitesimally thin black ring coinciding with the black ring in the image, where light (and anything else) can zip around and around forever.
And inside that, he'd see into the world on the other side of the wormhole.
In the center of the wormhole, his line of sight would fold back around, like the black line on the right-hand side of the image. Off-center, the space would bend the pilot's line of sight at a much larger angle, so he'd get a (very distorted) 360° view of the other universe. The effect would closely resemble an image taken with a strong fish-eye lens, like the ones used in those 360° cameras. As before, all of those 360° would be repeated over and over, compressed into tighter and tighter rings approaching the black ring representing the halfway point.
Now compare all that to A. Forty's image.
Now, imagine that the pilot takes his ship through the wormhole. What does he see?
Well, first thing, as he approached, the fish-eye view of the other side would start occupying more and more of his field of view, as would the distorted space around the hole. Upon reaching the halfway point, light emitted from the left side of the ship would circle around the hole to the ship's right side. So by looking out either window, he's just see the outside of the ship from the opposite side. The black ring is now whatever color his ship is. Watching out the back window while exiting the hole would look much the same as going in did, except that the pilot's original universe now fills the fish-eye view in the center.
In three dimensions, the wormhole experience would be fairly similar, except the halfway point would be a spherical surface (which would appear as an infinitesimally thin black ring) around which light can orbit.
If these wormholes somehow exist in a gravitational field (because they're on Earth's surface, say), that should still work without any completely broken physics or anything. I'm not completely sure how it would work, but I have a guess.
Say the people on one side of one of these wormholes decide to build a bridge through it, so they can just walk through, from one side to the other, without having to jump through it or anything, because that sounds hard. This should be doable; there might even be normal gravity all the way through. If you were to fall off the bridge inside the wormhole, you'd just drop out of the hole on one side or the other. If you fell off the exact center of the bridge, you might wind up in a sort of gravitational saddle point. You'd feel as if you were being stretched in one direction (along the X axis, call it, toward the mouths of the wormhole), but gently compressed in the other two (Y and Z). You could float there as long as you were perfectly balanced in the X direction, but just a little bit off and you'd fall straight out the bottom of one side of the wormhole.
And finally, as to what being in one of these wormholes might feel like. Note how, in the image above, all of the space in and around the hole is curved kind of like a saddle or a Pringles chip, so if you drew two intersecting "straight" lines on the surface, they could curve in opposite directions. For instance, the two black lines shown. The center ring curves toward the hole in the center, while the line on the right curves away. This means the space has negative [Gaussian curvature](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_curvature). A funny thing about negative-curvature surfaces is that there is less space inside any shape drawn on the surface than you'd expect, based on its perimeter. This will do... weird things... to anything put into the wormhole.
Imagine you're sliding a small square of paper around on the surface shown above. If you try to slide it to the hole, you'll find that it won't stay flat on the surface. Either the center of the paper will pop up above the surface, or it'll just kind of crinkle. If you wanted it to lay flat, you could cut a notch from the edge of the square to the center, so it could spread out a bit and sit flatter on the surface.
Now... what would you happen if you put your hand into one of these wormholes? Quite suddenly, there would no longer be enough space inside your hand for all the bone and muscle and such that is there. Your skin would suddenly feel very tight, and some of the blood in your hand would be squeezed back into your arm. The bones in your fingers and hand probably wouldn't take kindly to being distorted in this manner, either. Like the piece of paper, they might just crack.
Best make these wormholes quite large, so these effects aren't strong enough to cause harm to something the size of a human. | It seems to me that a photograph of a *non-lethal* wormhole will look exactly like two photographs, one on top of the other. The one on top will have a circular hole in it. The two should be the same scale, that is no magnification, nor should their be any distortion.
Why? Because if the light is being distorted, then there would have to be tremendous gravitational tidal forces involved, which would do bad things to matter, specifically to living matter. You could surround each hole with some sort of "leakage" - maybe a glow, or sparks, or some mild sort of distortion (like mirages - you know - *wavering*).
And of course while the hole would look circular, as you changed your position, the view would change as well. As you moved around the hole, the view through the hole would rotate as well. So, it would basically be a spherical TV screen. In fact, we could probably make one today that came pretty close (some TVs have horizontal curvature so you could make a ring out of a bunch of them.
Two problems with that:
1. The screen is concave, and you want convex
2. Screens available today don't have both horizontal and vertical curvature (as far as I know)
But anyway, a polygon with enough faces is very close to looking like a sphere, so just picture a ball with monitors stuck to it. Reduce it to the size you want your hole to be (4 ft radius?) and imagine the cameras showing the entire 4π steradians of from the (multiple) cameras viewpoint. |
63,351 | So, as I've mentioned in previous questions, I am writing a series in which the four young main characters encounter natural, traversable wormholes that connect the present time to another one. I've vaguely figured how I want them to work and how this way connects (mostly) to the real theoretical science behind it (specifics will be explained below for those curious and if it connects to my question). My question now is this; If I want to continue being vaguely scientifically accurate, how would a speculative wormhole look to humans looking at it from outside? For someone stepping through it to the other side? How many artistic liberties can I really take while still being scientifically accurate? Thanks so much for taking the time to speculatively answer this question and have a good day!
(For those interested, the wormholes tend to stick near objects with larger gravity to keep our intrepid little explorers from stepping through one and ending up somewhere out in space and suffocating. They tend to occur most on the time equivalent of "fault lines" where time 'tears' more easily, like weak points on a blanket. Yes, I do know it's definitely more complicated than that, but I'm simplifying things a bit so it makes more sense. They also can connect places in both place and time, so they can end up from a little town in modern day Oklahoma to the volcanic jungles of Early Cretaceous China. Finally, they are also traversable by simply stepping through since the main characters are just a few teenagers who stumble across them and don't exactly have resources to get a vessel to take them through Interestellar style.) | 2016/12/04 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/63351",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/20457/"
] | What you most likely want is an [Ellis wormhole](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellis_wormhole). The picture in A. Forty's answer most likely shows exactly that; and as others have mentioned, Interstellar is about as good a visualization a wormhole as you're going to get from Hollywood. However, I don't think Interstellar got all the details right.
From the outside, the wormhole would look very much like A. Forty's image. Moving through the wormhole, the image of the other side of the hole would appear to expand around you, swallowing you up, and then you're on the other side.
If you were to look left or right (or up or down, for that matter) while in the middle of the wormhole, you would see the back of your own head. The hole has no walls; each side just wraps around to the opposite side. I believe Interstellar goofed on this one.
Shown here is what an Ellis wormhole in a 2-dimensional universe might look like from the outside:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wlb7K.png)
Interstellar showed something like what you would see if you piloted a spaceship along this surface and through the hole in the middle, from one side to the other. However, in reality, the wormhole would be three-dimensional. You'd never actually see anything even remotely resembling the above surface- because we're *inside* it.
Imagine taking a 2-dimensional spaceship and sliding it around on that surface. Try to visualize what the ship's pilot would see, looking at the wormhole. Near the hole, his lines of sight would be bent toward it, so objects behind the hole would appear distorted and stretched out at the edges of the hole. Closer to the hole, rays of light could wrap around the hole multiple times before coming back out without going through, so the pilot would see all 360° of his surroundings (including the front of his own ship) reflected back and forth, squeezed into tighter and tighter rings.
Just inside that, an infinitesimally thin black ring coinciding with the black ring in the image, where light (and anything else) can zip around and around forever.
And inside that, he'd see into the world on the other side of the wormhole.
In the center of the wormhole, his line of sight would fold back around, like the black line on the right-hand side of the image. Off-center, the space would bend the pilot's line of sight at a much larger angle, so he'd get a (very distorted) 360° view of the other universe. The effect would closely resemble an image taken with a strong fish-eye lens, like the ones used in those 360° cameras. As before, all of those 360° would be repeated over and over, compressed into tighter and tighter rings approaching the black ring representing the halfway point.
Now compare all that to A. Forty's image.
Now, imagine that the pilot takes his ship through the wormhole. What does he see?
Well, first thing, as he approached, the fish-eye view of the other side would start occupying more and more of his field of view, as would the distorted space around the hole. Upon reaching the halfway point, light emitted from the left side of the ship would circle around the hole to the ship's right side. So by looking out either window, he's just see the outside of the ship from the opposite side. The black ring is now whatever color his ship is. Watching out the back window while exiting the hole would look much the same as going in did, except that the pilot's original universe now fills the fish-eye view in the center.
In three dimensions, the wormhole experience would be fairly similar, except the halfway point would be a spherical surface (which would appear as an infinitesimally thin black ring) around which light can orbit.
If these wormholes somehow exist in a gravitational field (because they're on Earth's surface, say), that should still work without any completely broken physics or anything. I'm not completely sure how it would work, but I have a guess.
Say the people on one side of one of these wormholes decide to build a bridge through it, so they can just walk through, from one side to the other, without having to jump through it or anything, because that sounds hard. This should be doable; there might even be normal gravity all the way through. If you were to fall off the bridge inside the wormhole, you'd just drop out of the hole on one side or the other. If you fell off the exact center of the bridge, you might wind up in a sort of gravitational saddle point. You'd feel as if you were being stretched in one direction (along the X axis, call it, toward the mouths of the wormhole), but gently compressed in the other two (Y and Z). You could float there as long as you were perfectly balanced in the X direction, but just a little bit off and you'd fall straight out the bottom of one side of the wormhole.
And finally, as to what being in one of these wormholes might feel like. Note how, in the image above, all of the space in and around the hole is curved kind of like a saddle or a Pringles chip, so if you drew two intersecting "straight" lines on the surface, they could curve in opposite directions. For instance, the two black lines shown. The center ring curves toward the hole in the center, while the line on the right curves away. This means the space has negative [Gaussian curvature](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_curvature). A funny thing about negative-curvature surfaces is that there is less space inside any shape drawn on the surface than you'd expect, based on its perimeter. This will do... weird things... to anything put into the wormhole.
Imagine you're sliding a small square of paper around on the surface shown above. If you try to slide it to the hole, you'll find that it won't stay flat on the surface. Either the center of the paper will pop up above the surface, or it'll just kind of crinkle. If you wanted it to lay flat, you could cut a notch from the edge of the square to the center, so it could spread out a bit and sit flatter on the surface.
Now... what would you happen if you put your hand into one of these wormholes? Quite suddenly, there would no longer be enough space inside your hand for all the bone and muscle and such that is there. Your skin would suddenly feel very tight, and some of the blood in your hand would be squeezed back into your arm. The bones in your fingers and hand probably wouldn't take kindly to being distorted in this manner, either. Like the piece of paper, they might just crack.
Best make these wormholes quite large, so these effects aren't strong enough to cause harm to something the size of a human. | My postulations:
1. What the wormhole looks like depends on how light interacts with it/ passes through it.
2. If matter can pass through it trivially (i.e. simply stepping through with no ill-effect), light should act in very much the same way.
3. As mentioned by others, a wormhole is simply a 3D hole (most likely spherical).
In this case, I would imagine that the "look" of a wormhole will be surprisingly simple - in fact you would not see it at all! All you would see is a circular view of the destination the wormhole connects to, with no distortion, refraction (disregarding differences in air pressure on either side), etc. It would actually look a lot like an open door, except without a door or a frame.
The peculiarity would only show when you tried to walk around it - the hole will remain a perfect circle no matter how you tried to walk around it, and what you saw in it would be a 360-degree view of what was on the other side. Imagine if you had a wormhole from your current location to the inside of a museum, for instance - by just walking around the wormhole you would be able to see the entirety of the museum's displays. |
63,351 | So, as I've mentioned in previous questions, I am writing a series in which the four young main characters encounter natural, traversable wormholes that connect the present time to another one. I've vaguely figured how I want them to work and how this way connects (mostly) to the real theoretical science behind it (specifics will be explained below for those curious and if it connects to my question). My question now is this; If I want to continue being vaguely scientifically accurate, how would a speculative wormhole look to humans looking at it from outside? For someone stepping through it to the other side? How many artistic liberties can I really take while still being scientifically accurate? Thanks so much for taking the time to speculatively answer this question and have a good day!
(For those interested, the wormholes tend to stick near objects with larger gravity to keep our intrepid little explorers from stepping through one and ending up somewhere out in space and suffocating. They tend to occur most on the time equivalent of "fault lines" where time 'tears' more easily, like weak points on a blanket. Yes, I do know it's definitely more complicated than that, but I'm simplifying things a bit so it makes more sense. They also can connect places in both place and time, so they can end up from a little town in modern day Oklahoma to the volcanic jungles of Early Cretaceous China. Finally, they are also traversable by simply stepping through since the main characters are just a few teenagers who stumble across them and don't exactly have resources to get a vessel to take them through Interestellar style.) | 2016/12/04 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/63351",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/20457/"
] | if you've seen the film interstellar, it gives a pretty accurate representation of a wormhole
the argument goes something like this:
in 2-D models of wormholes, you have a bit of paper (our universe), you drill two hole in it with paper, then fold the paper to make the holes line up - wormhole
but a 2 d hole in 3 d becomes a sphere - which is what a wormhole would probably look like | My postulations:
1. What the wormhole looks like depends on how light interacts with it/ passes through it.
2. If matter can pass through it trivially (i.e. simply stepping through with no ill-effect), light should act in very much the same way.
3. As mentioned by others, a wormhole is simply a 3D hole (most likely spherical).
In this case, I would imagine that the "look" of a wormhole will be surprisingly simple - in fact you would not see it at all! All you would see is a circular view of the destination the wormhole connects to, with no distortion, refraction (disregarding differences in air pressure on either side), etc. It would actually look a lot like an open door, except without a door or a frame.
The peculiarity would only show when you tried to walk around it - the hole will remain a perfect circle no matter how you tried to walk around it, and what you saw in it would be a 360-degree view of what was on the other side. Imagine if you had a wormhole from your current location to the inside of a museum, for instance - by just walking around the wormhole you would be able to see the entirety of the museum's displays. |
63,351 | So, as I've mentioned in previous questions, I am writing a series in which the four young main characters encounter natural, traversable wormholes that connect the present time to another one. I've vaguely figured how I want them to work and how this way connects (mostly) to the real theoretical science behind it (specifics will be explained below for those curious and if it connects to my question). My question now is this; If I want to continue being vaguely scientifically accurate, how would a speculative wormhole look to humans looking at it from outside? For someone stepping through it to the other side? How many artistic liberties can I really take while still being scientifically accurate? Thanks so much for taking the time to speculatively answer this question and have a good day!
(For those interested, the wormholes tend to stick near objects with larger gravity to keep our intrepid little explorers from stepping through one and ending up somewhere out in space and suffocating. They tend to occur most on the time equivalent of "fault lines" where time 'tears' more easily, like weak points on a blanket. Yes, I do know it's definitely more complicated than that, but I'm simplifying things a bit so it makes more sense. They also can connect places in both place and time, so they can end up from a little town in modern day Oklahoma to the volcanic jungles of Early Cretaceous China. Finally, they are also traversable by simply stepping through since the main characters are just a few teenagers who stumble across them and don't exactly have resources to get a vessel to take them through Interestellar style.) | 2016/12/04 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/63351",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/20457/"
] | Wormholes are purely hypothetical, but would probably appear similar to a black hole. Take a look at the artistic interpretation of a black hole, from the movie Interstellar [here](http://interstellarfilm.wikia.com/wiki/Gargantua), and that of a wormhole [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole). | It seems to me that a photograph of a *non-lethal* wormhole will look exactly like two photographs, one on top of the other. The one on top will have a circular hole in it. The two should be the same scale, that is no magnification, nor should their be any distortion.
Why? Because if the light is being distorted, then there would have to be tremendous gravitational tidal forces involved, which would do bad things to matter, specifically to living matter. You could surround each hole with some sort of "leakage" - maybe a glow, or sparks, or some mild sort of distortion (like mirages - you know - *wavering*).
And of course while the hole would look circular, as you changed your position, the view would change as well. As you moved around the hole, the view through the hole would rotate as well. So, it would basically be a spherical TV screen. In fact, we could probably make one today that came pretty close (some TVs have horizontal curvature so you could make a ring out of a bunch of them.
Two problems with that:
1. The screen is concave, and you want convex
2. Screens available today don't have both horizontal and vertical curvature (as far as I know)
But anyway, a polygon with enough faces is very close to looking like a sphere, so just picture a ball with monitors stuck to it. Reduce it to the size you want your hole to be (4 ft radius?) and imagine the cameras showing the entire 4π steradians of from the (multiple) cameras viewpoint. |
63,351 | So, as I've mentioned in previous questions, I am writing a series in which the four young main characters encounter natural, traversable wormholes that connect the present time to another one. I've vaguely figured how I want them to work and how this way connects (mostly) to the real theoretical science behind it (specifics will be explained below for those curious and if it connects to my question). My question now is this; If I want to continue being vaguely scientifically accurate, how would a speculative wormhole look to humans looking at it from outside? For someone stepping through it to the other side? How many artistic liberties can I really take while still being scientifically accurate? Thanks so much for taking the time to speculatively answer this question and have a good day!
(For those interested, the wormholes tend to stick near objects with larger gravity to keep our intrepid little explorers from stepping through one and ending up somewhere out in space and suffocating. They tend to occur most on the time equivalent of "fault lines" where time 'tears' more easily, like weak points on a blanket. Yes, I do know it's definitely more complicated than that, but I'm simplifying things a bit so it makes more sense. They also can connect places in both place and time, so they can end up from a little town in modern day Oklahoma to the volcanic jungles of Early Cretaceous China. Finally, they are also traversable by simply stepping through since the main characters are just a few teenagers who stumble across them and don't exactly have resources to get a vessel to take them through Interestellar style.) | 2016/12/04 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/63351",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/20457/"
] | What you most likely want is an [Ellis wormhole](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellis_wormhole). The picture in A. Forty's answer most likely shows exactly that; and as others have mentioned, Interstellar is about as good a visualization a wormhole as you're going to get from Hollywood. However, I don't think Interstellar got all the details right.
From the outside, the wormhole would look very much like A. Forty's image. Moving through the wormhole, the image of the other side of the hole would appear to expand around you, swallowing you up, and then you're on the other side.
If you were to look left or right (or up or down, for that matter) while in the middle of the wormhole, you would see the back of your own head. The hole has no walls; each side just wraps around to the opposite side. I believe Interstellar goofed on this one.
Shown here is what an Ellis wormhole in a 2-dimensional universe might look like from the outside:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wlb7K.png)
Interstellar showed something like what you would see if you piloted a spaceship along this surface and through the hole in the middle, from one side to the other. However, in reality, the wormhole would be three-dimensional. You'd never actually see anything even remotely resembling the above surface- because we're *inside* it.
Imagine taking a 2-dimensional spaceship and sliding it around on that surface. Try to visualize what the ship's pilot would see, looking at the wormhole. Near the hole, his lines of sight would be bent toward it, so objects behind the hole would appear distorted and stretched out at the edges of the hole. Closer to the hole, rays of light could wrap around the hole multiple times before coming back out without going through, so the pilot would see all 360° of his surroundings (including the front of his own ship) reflected back and forth, squeezed into tighter and tighter rings.
Just inside that, an infinitesimally thin black ring coinciding with the black ring in the image, where light (and anything else) can zip around and around forever.
And inside that, he'd see into the world on the other side of the wormhole.
In the center of the wormhole, his line of sight would fold back around, like the black line on the right-hand side of the image. Off-center, the space would bend the pilot's line of sight at a much larger angle, so he'd get a (very distorted) 360° view of the other universe. The effect would closely resemble an image taken with a strong fish-eye lens, like the ones used in those 360° cameras. As before, all of those 360° would be repeated over and over, compressed into tighter and tighter rings approaching the black ring representing the halfway point.
Now compare all that to A. Forty's image.
Now, imagine that the pilot takes his ship through the wormhole. What does he see?
Well, first thing, as he approached, the fish-eye view of the other side would start occupying more and more of his field of view, as would the distorted space around the hole. Upon reaching the halfway point, light emitted from the left side of the ship would circle around the hole to the ship's right side. So by looking out either window, he's just see the outside of the ship from the opposite side. The black ring is now whatever color his ship is. Watching out the back window while exiting the hole would look much the same as going in did, except that the pilot's original universe now fills the fish-eye view in the center.
In three dimensions, the wormhole experience would be fairly similar, except the halfway point would be a spherical surface (which would appear as an infinitesimally thin black ring) around which light can orbit.
If these wormholes somehow exist in a gravitational field (because they're on Earth's surface, say), that should still work without any completely broken physics or anything. I'm not completely sure how it would work, but I have a guess.
Say the people on one side of one of these wormholes decide to build a bridge through it, so they can just walk through, from one side to the other, without having to jump through it or anything, because that sounds hard. This should be doable; there might even be normal gravity all the way through. If you were to fall off the bridge inside the wormhole, you'd just drop out of the hole on one side or the other. If you fell off the exact center of the bridge, you might wind up in a sort of gravitational saddle point. You'd feel as if you were being stretched in one direction (along the X axis, call it, toward the mouths of the wormhole), but gently compressed in the other two (Y and Z). You could float there as long as you were perfectly balanced in the X direction, but just a little bit off and you'd fall straight out the bottom of one side of the wormhole.
And finally, as to what being in one of these wormholes might feel like. Note how, in the image above, all of the space in and around the hole is curved kind of like a saddle or a Pringles chip, so if you drew two intersecting "straight" lines on the surface, they could curve in opposite directions. For instance, the two black lines shown. The center ring curves toward the hole in the center, while the line on the right curves away. This means the space has negative [Gaussian curvature](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_curvature). A funny thing about negative-curvature surfaces is that there is less space inside any shape drawn on the surface than you'd expect, based on its perimeter. This will do... weird things... to anything put into the wormhole.
Imagine you're sliding a small square of paper around on the surface shown above. If you try to slide it to the hole, you'll find that it won't stay flat on the surface. Either the center of the paper will pop up above the surface, or it'll just kind of crinkle. If you wanted it to lay flat, you could cut a notch from the edge of the square to the center, so it could spread out a bit and sit flatter on the surface.
Now... what would you happen if you put your hand into one of these wormholes? Quite suddenly, there would no longer be enough space inside your hand for all the bone and muscle and such that is there. Your skin would suddenly feel very tight, and some of the blood in your hand would be squeezed back into your arm. The bones in your fingers and hand probably wouldn't take kindly to being distorted in this manner, either. Like the piece of paper, they might just crack.
Best make these wormholes quite large, so these effects aren't strong enough to cause harm to something the size of a human. | if you've seen the film interstellar, it gives a pretty accurate representation of a wormhole
the argument goes something like this:
in 2-D models of wormholes, you have a bit of paper (our universe), you drill two hole in it with paper, then fold the paper to make the holes line up - wormhole
but a 2 d hole in 3 d becomes a sphere - which is what a wormhole would probably look like |
210,829 | What is an NP-complete problem? Why is it such an important topic in computer science? | 2008/10/17 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/210829",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/15055/"
] | What is [NP](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP_(complexity))?
------------------------------------------------------------
NP is the set of all [decision problems](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_problem) (questions with a yes-or-no answer) for which the 'yes'-answers can be ***verified*** in polynomial time (O(nk) where *n* is the problem size, and *k* is a constant) by a [deterministic Turing machine](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterministic_Turing_machine). Polynomial time is sometimes used as the definition of *fast* or *quickly*.
What is [P](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P_(complexity))?
----------------------------------------------------------
P is the set of all decision problems which can be **solved** in *polynomial time* by a *deterministic Turing machine*. Since they can be solved in polynomial time, they can also be verified in polynomial time. Therefore P is a subset of NP.
What is [NP-Complete](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP-complete)?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A problem x that is in NP is also in NP-Complete *if and only if* every other problem in NP can be quickly (ie. in polynomial time) transformed into x.
In other words:
1. x is in NP, and
2. Every problem in NP is [*reducible*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduction_(complexity)) to x
So, what makes *NP-Complete* so interesting is that if any one of the NP-Complete problems was to be solved quickly, then all *NP* problems can be solved quickly.
See also the post [What's "P=NP?", and why is it such a famous question?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/111307/whats-pnp-and-why-is-it-such-a-famous-question)
What is [NP-Hard](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP-hard)?
---------------------------------------------------------
NP-Hard are problems that are at least as hard as the hardest problems in NP. Note that NP-Complete problems are also NP-hard. However not all NP-hard problems are NP (or even a decision problem), despite having `NP` as a prefix. That is the NP in NP-hard does not mean *non-deterministic polynomial time*. Yes, this is confusing, but its usage is entrenched and unlikely to change. | As far as I understand
P is the set of problems which could be solved in polynomial time with a deterministic TM.
NP is the set of problems which requires a non-deterministic TM to be solved in polynomial time.
This means that we can check all different combinations of variables in parallel with each instance taking polynomial time. If the problem is solvable then at least one of those parallel instances of TM would halt with "yes".
This also means that if you could make a correct guess about the variables/solution then you just need to check it's validity in polynomial time.
NP-Hard is the set where problems are harder than NP. This means NP-Hard problem are more difficult than any problem in NP set. These problems are exponential even when using non-determinism of Turing machines. So parallel computation does not helps while solving these problems.
NP-Complete is the intersection set of NP and NP-Hard. According to what I understood,
1. problems in NP-Complete are at least as hard as the hardest problem in the NP set.
2. The class of all NP-Complete problems are equivalent to each other, i.e, a problem in NP-Complete set can be reduced to any other NP-Complete problem. That means if any of the NP-Complete problem would have an efficient solution then all of the NP-Complete problems could be solved with same solution.
If any problem in NP-Complete set is deterministically solvable in polynomial time, then the entire NP-Complete set is deterministically solvable in polynomial time. Also since NP-Complete problems are at least as hard as the hardest problem in the NP set, all problems in the NP set (which are equal or easier than the problems in NP-Complete set) will be bounded above by deterministically polynomial running time, expanding the P set over the NP set, resulting in P=NP.
Please let me know if I made any mistake. |
210,829 | What is an NP-complete problem? Why is it such an important topic in computer science? | 2008/10/17 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/210829",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/15055/"
] | It's a class of problems where we must simulate every possibility to be sure we have the optimal solution.
There are a lot of good heuristics for some NP-Complete problems, but they are only an educated guess at best. | As far as I understand
P is the set of problems which could be solved in polynomial time with a deterministic TM.
NP is the set of problems which requires a non-deterministic TM to be solved in polynomial time.
This means that we can check all different combinations of variables in parallel with each instance taking polynomial time. If the problem is solvable then at least one of those parallel instances of TM would halt with "yes".
This also means that if you could make a correct guess about the variables/solution then you just need to check it's validity in polynomial time.
NP-Hard is the set where problems are harder than NP. This means NP-Hard problem are more difficult than any problem in NP set. These problems are exponential even when using non-determinism of Turing machines. So parallel computation does not helps while solving these problems.
NP-Complete is the intersection set of NP and NP-Hard. According to what I understood,
1. problems in NP-Complete are at least as hard as the hardest problem in the NP set.
2. The class of all NP-Complete problems are equivalent to each other, i.e, a problem in NP-Complete set can be reduced to any other NP-Complete problem. That means if any of the NP-Complete problem would have an efficient solution then all of the NP-Complete problems could be solved with same solution.
If any problem in NP-Complete set is deterministically solvable in polynomial time, then the entire NP-Complete set is deterministically solvable in polynomial time. Also since NP-Complete problems are at least as hard as the hardest problem in the NP set, all problems in the NP set (which are equal or easier than the problems in NP-Complete set) will be bounded above by deterministically polynomial running time, expanding the P set over the NP set, resulting in P=NP.
Please let me know if I made any mistake. |
210,829 | What is an NP-complete problem? Why is it such an important topic in computer science? | 2008/10/17 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/210829",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/15055/"
] | **NP** stands for ***Non-deterministic* Polynomial** time.
This means that the problem can be solved in Polynomial time using a Non-deterministic Turing machine (like a regular Turing machine but also including a non-deterministic "choice" function). Basically, a solution has to be *testable* in poly time. If that's the case, and a known NP problem can be solved using the given problem with modified input (an NP problem can be *reduced* to the given problem) then the problem is NP complete.
The main thing to take away from an NP-complete problem is that it cannot be solved in polynomial time in any known way. NP-Hard/NP-Complete is a way of showing that certain classes of problems are not solvable in realistic time.
Edit: As others have noted, there are often approximate solutions for NP-Complete problems. In this case, the approximate solution usually gives an approximation bound using special notation which tells us how close the approximation is. | NP-complete problems are a set of problems to each of which any
other NP-problem can be reduced in polynomial time, and whose solution
may still be verified in polynomial time. That is, any NP problem can be
transformed into any of the NP-complete problems.
– Informally, an NP-complete problem is an NP problem that is at least as "tough"
as any other problem in NP. |
210,829 | What is an NP-complete problem? Why is it such an important topic in computer science? | 2008/10/17 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/210829",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/15055/"
] | What is [NP](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP_(complexity))?
------------------------------------------------------------
NP is the set of all [decision problems](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_problem) (questions with a yes-or-no answer) for which the 'yes'-answers can be ***verified*** in polynomial time (O(nk) where *n* is the problem size, and *k* is a constant) by a [deterministic Turing machine](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterministic_Turing_machine). Polynomial time is sometimes used as the definition of *fast* or *quickly*.
What is [P](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P_(complexity))?
----------------------------------------------------------
P is the set of all decision problems which can be **solved** in *polynomial time* by a *deterministic Turing machine*. Since they can be solved in polynomial time, they can also be verified in polynomial time. Therefore P is a subset of NP.
What is [NP-Complete](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP-complete)?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A problem x that is in NP is also in NP-Complete *if and only if* every other problem in NP can be quickly (ie. in polynomial time) transformed into x.
In other words:
1. x is in NP, and
2. Every problem in NP is [*reducible*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduction_(complexity)) to x
So, what makes *NP-Complete* so interesting is that if any one of the NP-Complete problems was to be solved quickly, then all *NP* problems can be solved quickly.
See also the post [What's "P=NP?", and why is it such a famous question?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/111307/whats-pnp-and-why-is-it-such-a-famous-question)
What is [NP-Hard](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP-hard)?
---------------------------------------------------------
NP-Hard are problems that are at least as hard as the hardest problems in NP. Note that NP-Complete problems are also NP-hard. However not all NP-hard problems are NP (or even a decision problem), despite having `NP` as a prefix. That is the NP in NP-hard does not mean *non-deterministic polynomial time*. Yes, this is confusing, but its usage is entrenched and unlikely to change. | We need to separate algorithms and problems. We write algorithms to solve problems, and they scale in a certain way. Although this is a simplification, let's label an algorithm with a 'P' if the scaling is good enough, and 'NP' if it isn't.
It's helpful to know things about the problems we're trying to solve, rather than the algorithms we use to solve them. So we'll say that all the problems which have a well-scaling algorithm are "in P". And the ones which have a poor-scaling algorithm are "in NP".
That means that lots of simple problems are "in NP" too, because we can write bad algorithms to solve easy problems. It would be good to know which problems in NP are the really tricky ones, but we don't just want to say "it's the ones we haven't found a good algorithm for". After all, I could come up with a problem (call it X) that I think needs a super-amazing algorithm. I tell the world that the best algorithm I could come up with to solve X scales badly, and so I think that X is a really tough problem. But tomorrow, maybe somebody cleverer than me invents an algorithm which solves X and is in P. So this isn't a very good definition of hard problems.
All the same, there are lots of problems in NP that nobody knows a good algorithm for. So if I could *prove* that X is a certain sort of problem: one where a good algorithm to solve X could *also* be used, in some roundabout way, to give a good algorithm for *every* other problem in NP. Well now people might be a bit more convinced that X is a genuinely tricky problem. And in this case we call X NP-Complete. |
210,829 | What is an NP-complete problem? Why is it such an important topic in computer science? | 2008/10/17 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/210829",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/15055/"
] | I have heard an explanation, that is:"
NP-Completeness is probably one of the more enigmatic ideas in the study of algorithms. "NP" stands for "nondeterministic polynomial time," and is the name for what is called a complexity class to which problems can belong. The important thing about the **NP** complexity class is that problems within that class can be **verified** by a polynomial time algorithm.
As an example, consider the problem of counting stuff. Suppose there are a bunch of apples on a table. The problem is "How many apples are there?" You are provided with a possible answer, 8. You can verify this answer in polynomial time by using the algorithm of, duh, counting the apples. Counting the apples happens in O(n) (that's Big-oh notation) time, because it takes one step to count each apple. For n apples, you need n steps. This problem is in the NP complexity class.
A problem is classified as **NP-complete** if it can be shown that it is both **NP-Hard** and **verifiable** in polynomial time. Without going too deeply into the discussion of NP-Hard, suffice it to say that there are certain problems to which polynomial time solutions have not been found. That is, it takes something like n! (n factorial) steps to solve them. However, if you're given a solution to an NP-Complete problem, you can verify it in polynomial time.
A classic example of an NP-Complete problem is The Traveling Salesman Problem."
The author: ApoxyButt
From: <http://www.everything2.com/title/NP-complete> | NP Problem :-
-------------
1. NP problem are such problem that can be solved in non-deterministic polynomial time.
2. Non deterministic algorithm operate in two stage.
3. Non deterministic guessing stage && Non deterministic verification stage.
### Type of Np Problem
1. NP complete
2. NP Hard
**NP Complete problem :-**
1 Decision Problem A is called NP complete if it has following two properties:-
1. It belong to class NP.
2. Every other problem in NP can be transformed to P in polynomial time.
Some Ex :-
* Knapsack problem
* sub set sum problem
* Vertex covering problem |
210,829 | What is an NP-complete problem? Why is it such an important topic in computer science? | 2008/10/17 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/210829",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/15055/"
] | It's a class of problems where we must simulate every possibility to be sure we have the optimal solution.
There are a lot of good heuristics for some NP-Complete problems, but they are only an educated guess at best. | Honestly, [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP-complete) might be the best place to look for an answer to this.
If NP = P, then we can solve very hard problems much faster than we thought we could before. If we solve only one NP-Complete problem in P (polynomial) time, then it can be applied to all other problems in the NP-Complete category. |
210,829 | What is an NP-complete problem? Why is it such an important topic in computer science? | 2008/10/17 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/210829",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/15055/"
] | What is [NP](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP_(complexity))?
------------------------------------------------------------
NP is the set of all [decision problems](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_problem) (questions with a yes-or-no answer) for which the 'yes'-answers can be ***verified*** in polynomial time (O(nk) where *n* is the problem size, and *k* is a constant) by a [deterministic Turing machine](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterministic_Turing_machine). Polynomial time is sometimes used as the definition of *fast* or *quickly*.
What is [P](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P_(complexity))?
----------------------------------------------------------
P is the set of all decision problems which can be **solved** in *polynomial time* by a *deterministic Turing machine*. Since they can be solved in polynomial time, they can also be verified in polynomial time. Therefore P is a subset of NP.
What is [NP-Complete](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP-complete)?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A problem x that is in NP is also in NP-Complete *if and only if* every other problem in NP can be quickly (ie. in polynomial time) transformed into x.
In other words:
1. x is in NP, and
2. Every problem in NP is [*reducible*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduction_(complexity)) to x
So, what makes *NP-Complete* so interesting is that if any one of the NP-Complete problems was to be solved quickly, then all *NP* problems can be solved quickly.
See also the post [What's "P=NP?", and why is it such a famous question?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/111307/whats-pnp-and-why-is-it-such-a-famous-question)
What is [NP-Hard](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP-hard)?
---------------------------------------------------------
NP-Hard are problems that are at least as hard as the hardest problems in NP. Note that NP-Complete problems are also NP-hard. However not all NP-hard problems are NP (or even a decision problem), despite having `NP` as a prefix. That is the NP in NP-hard does not mean *non-deterministic polynomial time*. Yes, this is confusing, but its usage is entrenched and unlikely to change. | NP-Complete means something very specific and you have to be careful or you will get the definition wrong. First, an NP problem is a yes/no problem such that
1. There is polynomial-time proof for every instance of the problem with a "yes" answer that the answer is "yes", or (equivalently)
2. There exists a polynomial-time algorithm (possibly using random variables) that has a non-zero probability of answering "yes" if the answer to an instance of the problem is "yes" and will say "no" 100% of the time if the answer is "no." In other words, the algorithm must have a false-negative rate less than 100% and no false positives.
A problem X is NP-Complete if
1. X is in NP, and
2. For any problem Y in NP, there is a "reduction" from Y to X: a polynomial-time algorithm that transforms any instance of Y into an instance of X such that the answer to the Y-instance is "yes" if and only if the answer X-instance is "yes".
If X is NP-complete and a deterministic, polynomial-time algorithm exists that can solve all instances of X correctly (0% false-positives, 0% false-negatives), then any problem in NP can be solved in deterministic-polynomial-time (by reduction to X).
So far, nobody has come up with such a deterministic polynomial-time algorithm, but nobody has proven one doesn't exist (there's a million bucks for anyone who can do either: the is the [P = NP problem](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P_%3D_NP_problem)). That doesn't mean that you can't solve a particular instance of an NP-Complete (or NP-Hard) problem. It just means you can't have something that will work reliably on all instances of a problem the same way you could reliably sort a list of integers. You might very well be able to come up with an algorithm that will work very well on all practical instances of a NP-Hard problem. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.