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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
33,476 | I'm currently a high school student trying to build an ultralight aircraft from scratch (I'm self taught and still learning from educational videos), but I don't have much savings (about RM 2.5k, which converts to roughly 587 USD), so I could only afford a small engine.
Is it possible to achieve a certain propeller's efficient rpm by using gears while still using a small engine? Like those gearboxes found in cars to increase rpm. | 2016/11/28 | [
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/33476",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/users/18299/"
] | Gliders fly without an engine and they do well :) Where I come from, it is common (and legal) to use an old car engine and build it into your own UL plane. Consider getting a car that is very old (70's or 80's) - these can be usually find either for free (after a rear crash) or very very cheap.
These old engines are also easy to remove and fit into an aircraft. In Europe, old Trabant engines are very common for this, but I am sure each region has some car model that is old, unused and waiting in planty in old scrapeyards.
If your legislation allows building a non-certified motor into your plane, than this wold be the way to go. These engines can easily output 40 to 80 kWs of power which is way more than you need.
*Safety notice: If you do this, the #1 rule is: Always remember the engine is non-certified and old, so always fly it like it should break the next minute - avoid flying over large forests and water areas.* | Keep in mind that I'm very interested in airplanes, but I don't fly anything full scale, so others may have better advice.
There's a very simple, very light homebuilt called the Sky Pup. I'm not sure, but I think the plans are still being sold. Many of these have been built, and they have a good reputation. I've read that the guys who designed it were aero engineers. The materials are mostly wood and extruded polystyrene foam. The instructions tell you that anything more than 20 hp is too much. You can find out more at machnone.com (My only connection with the Sky Pup is that I bought a set of plans and have read about it here and there.) If you weigh less than 170 lbs, you might find this a good choice.
Reduction drives are common, especially with two stroke engines. Another approach is to use half of a VW engine, although some of the power will be wasted. These engines are much too heavy for a Sky Pup, though. There's a design called the Legal Eagle, though, which uses a 1/2 VW engine.
New paramotor engines are probably far beyond your budget, but they might give you an idea of what can be done. They all have belt drives to reduce the propeller rpm. However, keep in mind that reduction drives can have big problems, unless they're engineered just right or have been tested and modified many times.
Unless you are very good at scrounging, or prices are MUCH lower where you are than they are here in the USA, your budget won't go far enough. Maybe there are some glider designs, though, that could be done with less than $1000 (US).
Depending on how an "ultralight" is defined in your country, there may be a bunch of other designs that you can use. For instance, the Pietenpol Sky Scout, which is smaller than the famous Air Camper, is meant for 20 or 30 hp (not sure which). It wasn't known for climbing quickly, but I expect a modern, lighter engine would help with that. I mention it because it's an old, low tech design which may be cheaper to build.
There are MANY other choices out there. Whatever you choose, get some flight training before flying solo. And be really careful when you're building it. |
33,476 | I'm currently a high school student trying to build an ultralight aircraft from scratch (I'm self taught and still learning from educational videos), but I don't have much savings (about RM 2.5k, which converts to roughly 587 USD), so I could only afford a small engine.
Is it possible to achieve a certain propeller's efficient rpm by using gears while still using a small engine? Like those gearboxes found in cars to increase rpm. | 2016/11/28 | [
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/33476",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/users/18299/"
] | The short answer is yes you can use some cheaply available engines to achieve flight however you are presumably asking about things like small car engines or motorcycle engines etc. The issue you have here is that these engines are [inherently different](https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/11527/what-are-some-of-the-differences-between-piston-engines-used-in-aircraft-and-aut/11528#11528) from a use case standpoint than your typical aircraft engine. Generally speaking, most car/motorcycle engines rev too high to be used in an aircraft, you actually want to lower the RPM, not raise it. You can read up on it [here](http://www.flyingmag.com/aircraft/do-car-engines-make-good-airplane-engines) and [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2fedpn/why_dont_propeller_driven_aircraft_use_automotive/) and [here](https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/11527/what-are-some-of-the-differences-between-piston-engines-used-in-aircraft-and-aut). You can pull it off with a stepper gear box ([like a turbo prop uses](https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/13837/given-the-same-engine-why-install-a-gearbox-on-a-turboprop-but-not-on-a-turbofa)) and it was even been done on [a piston plane back in the 80's by Mooney](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_PFM_3200). The other problem you will have with car engines is cooling them, generally cars are watercooled, something that adds a lot of weight and is not ideal for flight. A two stroke or other similar air cooled motorcycle/scooter engine may be a better thing to use.
Many small engines will produce more than enough horsepower to achieve flight. Keep in mind the [early piper cubs only had 40HP](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piper_J-3_Cub) which can be easily found in many 2 stroke engines.
Your best bet may be to look for a [used VW bug engine](http://www.greatplainsas.com/) as they are very similar to aircraft engines and even [were used in some air frames](http://www.enginehistory.org/HOAE/Limbach.html) at one point in history. Due to the cars high production numbers the engines are fairly easy to come by.
You did not list a jurisdiction in your question but the regulations and legislation on this change from place to place, so you may need to see what exactly you are allowed to do in your jurisdiction in relation to home built and experimental aircraft. | Keep in mind that I'm very interested in airplanes, but I don't fly anything full scale, so others may have better advice.
There's a very simple, very light homebuilt called the Sky Pup. I'm not sure, but I think the plans are still being sold. Many of these have been built, and they have a good reputation. I've read that the guys who designed it were aero engineers. The materials are mostly wood and extruded polystyrene foam. The instructions tell you that anything more than 20 hp is too much. You can find out more at machnone.com (My only connection with the Sky Pup is that I bought a set of plans and have read about it here and there.) If you weigh less than 170 lbs, you might find this a good choice.
Reduction drives are common, especially with two stroke engines. Another approach is to use half of a VW engine, although some of the power will be wasted. These engines are much too heavy for a Sky Pup, though. There's a design called the Legal Eagle, though, which uses a 1/2 VW engine.
New paramotor engines are probably far beyond your budget, but they might give you an idea of what can be done. They all have belt drives to reduce the propeller rpm. However, keep in mind that reduction drives can have big problems, unless they're engineered just right or have been tested and modified many times.
Unless you are very good at scrounging, or prices are MUCH lower where you are than they are here in the USA, your budget won't go far enough. Maybe there are some glider designs, though, that could be done with less than $1000 (US).
Depending on how an "ultralight" is defined in your country, there may be a bunch of other designs that you can use. For instance, the Pietenpol Sky Scout, which is smaller than the famous Air Camper, is meant for 20 or 30 hp (not sure which). It wasn't known for climbing quickly, but I expect a modern, lighter engine would help with that. I mention it because it's an old, low tech design which may be cheaper to build.
There are MANY other choices out there. Whatever you choose, get some flight training before flying solo. And be really careful when you're building it. |
33,476 | I'm currently a high school student trying to build an ultralight aircraft from scratch (I'm self taught and still learning from educational videos), but I don't have much savings (about RM 2.5k, which converts to roughly 587 USD), so I could only afford a small engine.
Is it possible to achieve a certain propeller's efficient rpm by using gears while still using a small engine? Like those gearboxes found in cars to increase rpm. | 2016/11/28 | [
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/33476",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/users/18299/"
] | Gliders fly without an engine and they do well :) Where I come from, it is common (and legal) to use an old car engine and build it into your own UL plane. Consider getting a car that is very old (70's or 80's) - these can be usually find either for free (after a rear crash) or very very cheap.
These old engines are also easy to remove and fit into an aircraft. In Europe, old Trabant engines are very common for this, but I am sure each region has some car model that is old, unused and waiting in planty in old scrapeyards.
If your legislation allows building a non-certified motor into your plane, than this wold be the way to go. These engines can easily output 40 to 80 kWs of power which is way more than you need.
*Safety notice: If you do this, the #1 rule is: Always remember the engine is non-certified and old, so always fly it like it should break the next minute - avoid flying over large forests and water areas.* | Actually, you'd be gearing the engine down, not up. Propellers become very inefficient if the tips go supersonic (as well as extremely noisy). You'd want to keep the prop at around 1800-2200 rpm, depending on the size of the prop. Smaller engines typically put out peak power at much higher rpm's than that, so they have to be geared down to match the prop to the engine's power curve.
A typical ultralight engine is the [Rotax 582](https://www.flyrotax.com/produkte/detail/rotax-582-ul.html). Designed for ultralight aircraft use, it can sustain high power output for long periods of time. That is current production, so it can be a bit expensive.
Now out of production but they can be found on the used market fairly inexpensively, is the [Rotax 503](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotax_503). It has been a very popular ultralight engine.
Motorcycle engines may have less than desirable reliability. Typically, they are designed for brief periods of acceleration, with long periods of cruising at low power output. If you take a stock small motorcycle engine and run it wide open for long periods of time, the cylinder head will probably overheat, blowing the gasket and leaving you with no power. When that happens, you are going to come down, regardless of whether there is a safe place to land, or not.
I have seen Rotax 503's with a gearbox for ultralight use, in the USD 1500 range. More than a small motorcycle engine, but cheaper than a funeral... |
33,476 | I'm currently a high school student trying to build an ultralight aircraft from scratch (I'm self taught and still learning from educational videos), but I don't have much savings (about RM 2.5k, which converts to roughly 587 USD), so I could only afford a small engine.
Is it possible to achieve a certain propeller's efficient rpm by using gears while still using a small engine? Like those gearboxes found in cars to increase rpm. | 2016/11/28 | [
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/33476",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/users/18299/"
] | The short answer is yes you can use some cheaply available engines to achieve flight however you are presumably asking about things like small car engines or motorcycle engines etc. The issue you have here is that these engines are [inherently different](https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/11527/what-are-some-of-the-differences-between-piston-engines-used-in-aircraft-and-aut/11528#11528) from a use case standpoint than your typical aircraft engine. Generally speaking, most car/motorcycle engines rev too high to be used in an aircraft, you actually want to lower the RPM, not raise it. You can read up on it [here](http://www.flyingmag.com/aircraft/do-car-engines-make-good-airplane-engines) and [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2fedpn/why_dont_propeller_driven_aircraft_use_automotive/) and [here](https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/11527/what-are-some-of-the-differences-between-piston-engines-used-in-aircraft-and-aut). You can pull it off with a stepper gear box ([like a turbo prop uses](https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/13837/given-the-same-engine-why-install-a-gearbox-on-a-turboprop-but-not-on-a-turbofa)) and it was even been done on [a piston plane back in the 80's by Mooney](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_PFM_3200). The other problem you will have with car engines is cooling them, generally cars are watercooled, something that adds a lot of weight and is not ideal for flight. A two stroke or other similar air cooled motorcycle/scooter engine may be a better thing to use.
Many small engines will produce more than enough horsepower to achieve flight. Keep in mind the [early piper cubs only had 40HP](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piper_J-3_Cub) which can be easily found in many 2 stroke engines.
Your best bet may be to look for a [used VW bug engine](http://www.greatplainsas.com/) as they are very similar to aircraft engines and even [were used in some air frames](http://www.enginehistory.org/HOAE/Limbach.html) at one point in history. Due to the cars high production numbers the engines are fairly easy to come by.
You did not list a jurisdiction in your question but the regulations and legislation on this change from place to place, so you may need to see what exactly you are allowed to do in your jurisdiction in relation to home built and experimental aircraft. | In order to minimize engine power, reduce speed. The power need of an aircraft scales with the third power of speed, and many designs of the 1920s successfully used motorcycle engines. A high aspect ratio and a low wing loading, like in a glider, will help to get airborne with just 25 HP. Successful designs with such small engines were the [Daimler L 20](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daimler_L20) or the [Messerschmitt M 17](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_M_17).
[](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/39/Messerschmitt_M17.jpg)
Messerschmitt M 17 (picture [source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_M_17#/media/File:Messerschmitt_M17.jpg)) |
33,476 | I'm currently a high school student trying to build an ultralight aircraft from scratch (I'm self taught and still learning from educational videos), but I don't have much savings (about RM 2.5k, which converts to roughly 587 USD), so I could only afford a small engine.
Is it possible to achieve a certain propeller's efficient rpm by using gears while still using a small engine? Like those gearboxes found in cars to increase rpm. | 2016/11/28 | [
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/33476",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/users/18299/"
] | The short answer is yes you can use some cheaply available engines to achieve flight however you are presumably asking about things like small car engines or motorcycle engines etc. The issue you have here is that these engines are [inherently different](https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/11527/what-are-some-of-the-differences-between-piston-engines-used-in-aircraft-and-aut/11528#11528) from a use case standpoint than your typical aircraft engine. Generally speaking, most car/motorcycle engines rev too high to be used in an aircraft, you actually want to lower the RPM, not raise it. You can read up on it [here](http://www.flyingmag.com/aircraft/do-car-engines-make-good-airplane-engines) and [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2fedpn/why_dont_propeller_driven_aircraft_use_automotive/) and [here](https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/11527/what-are-some-of-the-differences-between-piston-engines-used-in-aircraft-and-aut). You can pull it off with a stepper gear box ([like a turbo prop uses](https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/13837/given-the-same-engine-why-install-a-gearbox-on-a-turboprop-but-not-on-a-turbofa)) and it was even been done on [a piston plane back in the 80's by Mooney](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_PFM_3200). The other problem you will have with car engines is cooling them, generally cars are watercooled, something that adds a lot of weight and is not ideal for flight. A two stroke or other similar air cooled motorcycle/scooter engine may be a better thing to use.
Many small engines will produce more than enough horsepower to achieve flight. Keep in mind the [early piper cubs only had 40HP](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piper_J-3_Cub) which can be easily found in many 2 stroke engines.
Your best bet may be to look for a [used VW bug engine](http://www.greatplainsas.com/) as they are very similar to aircraft engines and even [were used in some air frames](http://www.enginehistory.org/HOAE/Limbach.html) at one point in history. Due to the cars high production numbers the engines are fairly easy to come by.
You did not list a jurisdiction in your question but the regulations and legislation on this change from place to place, so you may need to see what exactly you are allowed to do in your jurisdiction in relation to home built and experimental aircraft. | The answer is yes and no. Can an airplane be designed to fly on very low power? Yes. The Wright 1903 flyer flew on a mere 12 hp gasoline engine. The real question is not can you fly on a lower power engine but *can a lower power engine provide a meaningful flight envelope while carrying a realistic useful load over a wide range of atmospheric conditions*.
It all depends upon your performance requirements which you need to decide upon before engine selection, but the suggestion of using a VW Beetle engine is a good one. [Rotax's line of piston engines](http://www.flyrotax.com/) have also been a good choice, especially for LSA aircraft. |
33,476 | I'm currently a high school student trying to build an ultralight aircraft from scratch (I'm self taught and still learning from educational videos), but I don't have much savings (about RM 2.5k, which converts to roughly 587 USD), so I could only afford a small engine.
Is it possible to achieve a certain propeller's efficient rpm by using gears while still using a small engine? Like those gearboxes found in cars to increase rpm. | 2016/11/28 | [
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/33476",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/users/18299/"
] | The answer is yes and no. Can an airplane be designed to fly on very low power? Yes. The Wright 1903 flyer flew on a mere 12 hp gasoline engine. The real question is not can you fly on a lower power engine but *can a lower power engine provide a meaningful flight envelope while carrying a realistic useful load over a wide range of atmospheric conditions*.
It all depends upon your performance requirements which you need to decide upon before engine selection, but the suggestion of using a VW Beetle engine is a good one. [Rotax's line of piston engines](http://www.flyrotax.com/) have also been a good choice, especially for LSA aircraft. | Keep in mind that I'm very interested in airplanes, but I don't fly anything full scale, so others may have better advice.
There's a very simple, very light homebuilt called the Sky Pup. I'm not sure, but I think the plans are still being sold. Many of these have been built, and they have a good reputation. I've read that the guys who designed it were aero engineers. The materials are mostly wood and extruded polystyrene foam. The instructions tell you that anything more than 20 hp is too much. You can find out more at machnone.com (My only connection with the Sky Pup is that I bought a set of plans and have read about it here and there.) If you weigh less than 170 lbs, you might find this a good choice.
Reduction drives are common, especially with two stroke engines. Another approach is to use half of a VW engine, although some of the power will be wasted. These engines are much too heavy for a Sky Pup, though. There's a design called the Legal Eagle, though, which uses a 1/2 VW engine.
New paramotor engines are probably far beyond your budget, but they might give you an idea of what can be done. They all have belt drives to reduce the propeller rpm. However, keep in mind that reduction drives can have big problems, unless they're engineered just right or have been tested and modified many times.
Unless you are very good at scrounging, or prices are MUCH lower where you are than they are here in the USA, your budget won't go far enough. Maybe there are some glider designs, though, that could be done with less than $1000 (US).
Depending on how an "ultralight" is defined in your country, there may be a bunch of other designs that you can use. For instance, the Pietenpol Sky Scout, which is smaller than the famous Air Camper, is meant for 20 or 30 hp (not sure which). It wasn't known for climbing quickly, but I expect a modern, lighter engine would help with that. I mention it because it's an old, low tech design which may be cheaper to build.
There are MANY other choices out there. Whatever you choose, get some flight training before flying solo. And be really careful when you're building it. |
33,476 | I'm currently a high school student trying to build an ultralight aircraft from scratch (I'm self taught and still learning from educational videos), but I don't have much savings (about RM 2.5k, which converts to roughly 587 USD), so I could only afford a small engine.
Is it possible to achieve a certain propeller's efficient rpm by using gears while still using a small engine? Like those gearboxes found in cars to increase rpm. | 2016/11/28 | [
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/33476",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/users/18299/"
] | The short answer is yes you can use some cheaply available engines to achieve flight however you are presumably asking about things like small car engines or motorcycle engines etc. The issue you have here is that these engines are [inherently different](https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/11527/what-are-some-of-the-differences-between-piston-engines-used-in-aircraft-and-aut/11528#11528) from a use case standpoint than your typical aircraft engine. Generally speaking, most car/motorcycle engines rev too high to be used in an aircraft, you actually want to lower the RPM, not raise it. You can read up on it [here](http://www.flyingmag.com/aircraft/do-car-engines-make-good-airplane-engines) and [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2fedpn/why_dont_propeller_driven_aircraft_use_automotive/) and [here](https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/11527/what-are-some-of-the-differences-between-piston-engines-used-in-aircraft-and-aut). You can pull it off with a stepper gear box ([like a turbo prop uses](https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/13837/given-the-same-engine-why-install-a-gearbox-on-a-turboprop-but-not-on-a-turbofa)) and it was even been done on [a piston plane back in the 80's by Mooney](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_PFM_3200). The other problem you will have with car engines is cooling them, generally cars are watercooled, something that adds a lot of weight and is not ideal for flight. A two stroke or other similar air cooled motorcycle/scooter engine may be a better thing to use.
Many small engines will produce more than enough horsepower to achieve flight. Keep in mind the [early piper cubs only had 40HP](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piper_J-3_Cub) which can be easily found in many 2 stroke engines.
Your best bet may be to look for a [used VW bug engine](http://www.greatplainsas.com/) as they are very similar to aircraft engines and even [were used in some air frames](http://www.enginehistory.org/HOAE/Limbach.html) at one point in history. Due to the cars high production numbers the engines are fairly easy to come by.
You did not list a jurisdiction in your question but the regulations and legislation on this change from place to place, so you may need to see what exactly you are allowed to do in your jurisdiction in relation to home built and experimental aircraft. | Gliders fly without an engine and they do well :) Where I come from, it is common (and legal) to use an old car engine and build it into your own UL plane. Consider getting a car that is very old (70's or 80's) - these can be usually find either for free (after a rear crash) or very very cheap.
These old engines are also easy to remove and fit into an aircraft. In Europe, old Trabant engines are very common for this, but I am sure each region has some car model that is old, unused and waiting in planty in old scrapeyards.
If your legislation allows building a non-certified motor into your plane, than this wold be the way to go. These engines can easily output 40 to 80 kWs of power which is way more than you need.
*Safety notice: If you do this, the #1 rule is: Always remember the engine is non-certified and old, so always fly it like it should break the next minute - avoid flying over large forests and water areas.* |
18,225,785 | I have a push button in a Revit plug-in. When I click on it I would like to invoke two different commands (custom commands). Is that possible?
I use Revit 2012 Architecture API and my platform is C# .NET | 2013/08/14 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/18225785",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2681446/"
] | If your two commands are IExternalCommand implementations then certainly.
Create another IExternalCommand interface, and just have it call the entry points of the two commands you want (same as calling any other class method).
You may need to ensure that your transaction management is correct between the three commands. | Agreed. If you are wanting one single UI button to invoke (2) separate IExternalCommands, then you need to implement some sort of logic in a single IExternalCommand to read a state of some sort and then execute your desired Method based on the result of the state.
You might also want to initialize the state of your variable in your App.cs OnStartup() method to reset each time Revit is opened. |
18,225,785 | I have a push button in a Revit plug-in. When I click on it I would like to invoke two different commands (custom commands). Is that possible?
I use Revit 2012 Architecture API and my platform is C# .NET | 2013/08/14 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/18225785",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2681446/"
] | If your two commands are IExternalCommand implementations then certainly.
Create another IExternalCommand interface, and just have it call the entry points of the two commands you want (same as calling any other class method).
You may need to ensure that your transaction management is correct between the three commands. | If you're using the Revit 2012 API calling the entry points of the required commands is the only way I see.
You may consider upgrading to the Revit 2014 API or later though, as they have provided an approach to External Commands.
More info: <http://thebuildingcoder.typepad.com/blog/2013/10/programmatic-custom-add-in-external-command-launch.html> |
755,126 | **The Problem**
When I start Netbeans, it tells me that 21 updates have been found, and I have clickable action to update the IDE:
The install fails and gives me these messages:
**What I've Tried**
* Disabled anti-virus (AVG)
* Disabled Windows Firewall
* Added Netbeans 8.0 to be allowed by the firewall
**Other**
* Windows 7 - 64 bit | 2014/05/16 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/755126",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/41329/"
] | Turns out it was Norton Family that was blocking the connection. My network admin had to disable it temporarily so I could do the IDE update. | Netbeans seems to fail the whole update process if there is some temporary network problem when downloading some plugin. It was probably your case to and when you retry the update it simply worked (not really having anything to do with your AntiVirus Software).
I had to upgrade from full edition Netbeans 8.0 to 8.0.2 and managed to do that by simply re-trying several times. Not sure if that is important by I updated through Tools -> Plugins and use Update button. I then hit "Try again" every time the download failed.
For anyone with a similar problem you can follow [Bug 249791 - Retry should only download missing plugins](https://netbeans.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249791). |
755,126 | **The Problem**
When I start Netbeans, it tells me that 21 updates have been found, and I have clickable action to update the IDE:
The install fails and gives me these messages:
**What I've Tried**
* Disabled anti-virus (AVG)
* Disabled Windows Firewall
* Added Netbeans 8.0 to be allowed by the firewall
**Other**
* Windows 7 - 64 bit | 2014/05/16 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/755126",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/41329/"
] | Turns out it was Norton Family that was blocking the connection. My network admin had to disable it temporarily so I could do the IDE update. | For me, neither Antivirus software or Firewall settings were the issue.
However, getting every single update one at a time instead of updating everything in one go worked!
Go to Tools->Plugins-Updates and uncheck everything but one component and then click update. Repeat until done.
Also helps you identify the plugin that breaks the entire update process ... in my case, it was 'Git'. |
13,048,379 | I want to change the background of a grid containing an image and a textblock dynamicly with a specific duration and a nice animation (like tiles for exemple), let's say every 30 seconds, from a flux XML. any help please ? | 2012/10/24 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/13048379",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/981893/"
] | Use tile control from [coding4fun](http://coding4fun.codeplex.com/). See [here](http://www.windowsphonegeek.com/articles/Getting-Started-with-the-Coding4Fun-toolkit-Tile-Control)
For dynamic update:
1. Create a dispatcher timer and update the tile property in callback
(Or)
2. Bind tile background dependency property to Image source property in a viewmodel. As long as you figure a way to update viewmodel, the ui will get refreshed. | Have-you try one method? have you search on the web ?
For tiles effect (and more effects...) you want use [Telerik Rad control](http://www.telerik.com/products/windows-phone.aspx) (animation named [HubTile](http://www.telerik.com/products/windows-phone/overview/all-controls.aspx#hubtile)) but isn't free.. you want to try the trial version :) |
341 | Assuming that feature flag toggles are a good idea, and should be implemented into code that developers write. For example Etsy swear by them as a [major part of their culture](https://codeascraft.com/2011/02/04/how-does-etsy-manage-development-and-operations/).
**What is a good way to persuade (and enforce) developers to start using feature flag toggles?**
More information about feature flag toggles is explained in [Q: How to use feature flag toggles](https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/162/how-to-use-feature-flag-toggles), [Q: What are feature flag toggles](https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/344/what-is-a-feature-flag-toggle-and-when-to-use-them-or-not) and very extensively in Pete Hodgson's [article on the subject on Martin Fowler's blog](https://martinfowler.com/articles/feature-toggles.html). | 2017/03/05 | [
"https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/341",
"https://devops.stackexchange.com",
"https://devops.stackexchange.com/users/6/"
] | Feature toggles are a common practice in high-velocity development because they de-couple *development* from *release.* Dev teams can "soft-release" a new feature to production, in a disabled state. This allows the feature to be released any time. If the feature is dependent on other work or preparation, it doesn't have to wait for a major release to go to production.
As far as "convincing" developers to use them, that's an exercise in making the case for the freedom it offers. My experience is that it's not a tough sell to developers. It's management that tends to be reluctant to try new things. Try this:
* Find a feature toggle framework. Management/the business may be more
amenable to trying something supported by a common system
* Start small. Introduce the toggle system on a trial basis for a feature that will demonstrate its utility.
* Demonstrate the toggle's ability to do A/B testing. Enable the toggle for a subset of your web farm, then gather metrics on behavior. Tiny differences in page layout have been demonstrated to have huge effects on revenue for retail applications (e.g. Ebay, Amazon) | A successful high-velocity development environment typically relies on a pretty strict automated system involving quality verifications with detection and rejection of faulty changes causing regressions.
Feature toggles offer the ability to commit even work-in-progress, untested changes without getting rejected for causing regressions in the integration branch. Which constitues a very good **incentive** to introduce the feature toggles very early in the life of the feature.
One of the disadvantages of deviating from true CI and moving feature development on feature branches is the lack of such incentive. Adding the feature toggle later on, when merging the feature branch into the integration branch is typically more difficult, like any late integration. |
341 | Assuming that feature flag toggles are a good idea, and should be implemented into code that developers write. For example Etsy swear by them as a [major part of their culture](https://codeascraft.com/2011/02/04/how-does-etsy-manage-development-and-operations/).
**What is a good way to persuade (and enforce) developers to start using feature flag toggles?**
More information about feature flag toggles is explained in [Q: How to use feature flag toggles](https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/162/how-to-use-feature-flag-toggles), [Q: What are feature flag toggles](https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/344/what-is-a-feature-flag-toggle-and-when-to-use-them-or-not) and very extensively in Pete Hodgson's [article on the subject on Martin Fowler's blog](https://martinfowler.com/articles/feature-toggles.html). | 2017/03/05 | [
"https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/341",
"https://devops.stackexchange.com",
"https://devops.stackexchange.com/users/6/"
] | Feature toggles are a common practice in high-velocity development because they de-couple *development* from *release.* Dev teams can "soft-release" a new feature to production, in a disabled state. This allows the feature to be released any time. If the feature is dependent on other work or preparation, it doesn't have to wait for a major release to go to production.
As far as "convincing" developers to use them, that's an exercise in making the case for the freedom it offers. My experience is that it's not a tough sell to developers. It's management that tends to be reluctant to try new things. Try this:
* Find a feature toggle framework. Management/the business may be more
amenable to trying something supported by a common system
* Start small. Introduce the toggle system on a trial basis for a feature that will demonstrate its utility.
* Demonstrate the toggle's ability to do A/B testing. Enable the toggle for a subset of your web farm, then gather metrics on behavior. Tiny differences in page layout have been demonstrated to have huge effects on revenue for retail applications (e.g. Ebay, Amazon) | In an ideal world I think you roll out a new build and surprise! NOTHING changes. This is because all of your new features are behind switches that go out with the switch off.
Post-deployment you verify that your rolled-out service still works, the phones aren't ringing any more (unless ringing phones is your purpose, that is), etc. Once you are back to a known stable operation you begin enabling and verifying your newly deployed features.
Now for your answer: How would you like to work on a team where being on call is practically a no-brainer and our users love us because our sites and services are rock solid stable?
That's the team I want to work on.
You can stop reading here if you want.
Putting everything behind a feature switch seems like it can lead to spaghetti code everywhere. If you use IoC and are able to select between vNow/vNext/vPrevious then it comes down to maintaining your configuration. Yes more check ins, yes more classes (componentV1, componentV2, componentV3, etc.) but you actually have a more stable system? How? vNext is wonky? Switch back to vNow with your control tower. Been a week and vNow has a subtle bug? Same thing - go back to vPrevious just as easily.
No hassle, no worries, no lost sleep, no stress.
This isn't a pipe dream. I used to work there. Wish I could sell this to my current team. |
341 | Assuming that feature flag toggles are a good idea, and should be implemented into code that developers write. For example Etsy swear by them as a [major part of their culture](https://codeascraft.com/2011/02/04/how-does-etsy-manage-development-and-operations/).
**What is a good way to persuade (and enforce) developers to start using feature flag toggles?**
More information about feature flag toggles is explained in [Q: How to use feature flag toggles](https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/162/how-to-use-feature-flag-toggles), [Q: What are feature flag toggles](https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/344/what-is-a-feature-flag-toggle-and-when-to-use-them-or-not) and very extensively in Pete Hodgson's [article on the subject on Martin Fowler's blog](https://martinfowler.com/articles/feature-toggles.html). | 2017/03/05 | [
"https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/341",
"https://devops.stackexchange.com",
"https://devops.stackexchange.com/users/6/"
] | Feature toggles are a common practice in high-velocity development because they de-couple *development* from *release.* Dev teams can "soft-release" a new feature to production, in a disabled state. This allows the feature to be released any time. If the feature is dependent on other work or preparation, it doesn't have to wait for a major release to go to production.
As far as "convincing" developers to use them, that's an exercise in making the case for the freedom it offers. My experience is that it's not a tough sell to developers. It's management that tends to be reluctant to try new things. Try this:
* Find a feature toggle framework. Management/the business may be more
amenable to trying something supported by a common system
* Start small. Introduce the toggle system on a trial basis for a feature that will demonstrate its utility.
* Demonstrate the toggle's ability to do A/B testing. Enable the toggle for a subset of your web farm, then gather metrics on behavior. Tiny differences in page layout have been demonstrated to have huge effects on revenue for retail applications (e.g. Ebay, Amazon) | Developers (and usually development managers) usually look for two outcomes associated with framework: ease of management, and speed of deployment. You want to ship code faster, and easier.
Provide evidence that the approach works; try building a small POC using feature flags versus the old way. Case studies matter less to tactical people (developers\engineers) than strategic people (middle management\product designers). |
341 | Assuming that feature flag toggles are a good idea, and should be implemented into code that developers write. For example Etsy swear by them as a [major part of their culture](https://codeascraft.com/2011/02/04/how-does-etsy-manage-development-and-operations/).
**What is a good way to persuade (and enforce) developers to start using feature flag toggles?**
More information about feature flag toggles is explained in [Q: How to use feature flag toggles](https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/162/how-to-use-feature-flag-toggles), [Q: What are feature flag toggles](https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/344/what-is-a-feature-flag-toggle-and-when-to-use-them-or-not) and very extensively in Pete Hodgson's [article on the subject on Martin Fowler's blog](https://martinfowler.com/articles/feature-toggles.html). | 2017/03/05 | [
"https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/341",
"https://devops.stackexchange.com",
"https://devops.stackexchange.com/users/6/"
] | Feature toggles are a common practice in high-velocity development because they de-couple *development* from *release.* Dev teams can "soft-release" a new feature to production, in a disabled state. This allows the feature to be released any time. If the feature is dependent on other work or preparation, it doesn't have to wait for a major release to go to production.
As far as "convincing" developers to use them, that's an exercise in making the case for the freedom it offers. My experience is that it's not a tough sell to developers. It's management that tends to be reluctant to try new things. Try this:
* Find a feature toggle framework. Management/the business may be more
amenable to trying something supported by a common system
* Start small. Introduce the toggle system on a trial basis for a feature that will demonstrate its utility.
* Demonstrate the toggle's ability to do A/B testing. Enable the toggle for a subset of your web farm, then gather metrics on behavior. Tiny differences in page layout have been demonstrated to have huge effects on revenue for retail applications (e.g. Ebay, Amazon) | The rationale to have feature toggles is not something for developers to decide. This is something for product owners to care. Developers enable this change in the most sustainable and safe manner. I critique this very question. |
341 | Assuming that feature flag toggles are a good idea, and should be implemented into code that developers write. For example Etsy swear by them as a [major part of their culture](https://codeascraft.com/2011/02/04/how-does-etsy-manage-development-and-operations/).
**What is a good way to persuade (and enforce) developers to start using feature flag toggles?**
More information about feature flag toggles is explained in [Q: How to use feature flag toggles](https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/162/how-to-use-feature-flag-toggles), [Q: What are feature flag toggles](https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/344/what-is-a-feature-flag-toggle-and-when-to-use-them-or-not) and very extensively in Pete Hodgson's [article on the subject on Martin Fowler's blog](https://martinfowler.com/articles/feature-toggles.html). | 2017/03/05 | [
"https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/341",
"https://devops.stackexchange.com",
"https://devops.stackexchange.com/users/6/"
] | In an ideal world I think you roll out a new build and surprise! NOTHING changes. This is because all of your new features are behind switches that go out with the switch off.
Post-deployment you verify that your rolled-out service still works, the phones aren't ringing any more (unless ringing phones is your purpose, that is), etc. Once you are back to a known stable operation you begin enabling and verifying your newly deployed features.
Now for your answer: How would you like to work on a team where being on call is practically a no-brainer and our users love us because our sites and services are rock solid stable?
That's the team I want to work on.
You can stop reading here if you want.
Putting everything behind a feature switch seems like it can lead to spaghetti code everywhere. If you use IoC and are able to select between vNow/vNext/vPrevious then it comes down to maintaining your configuration. Yes more check ins, yes more classes (componentV1, componentV2, componentV3, etc.) but you actually have a more stable system? How? vNext is wonky? Switch back to vNow with your control tower. Been a week and vNow has a subtle bug? Same thing - go back to vPrevious just as easily.
No hassle, no worries, no lost sleep, no stress.
This isn't a pipe dream. I used to work there. Wish I could sell this to my current team. | A successful high-velocity development environment typically relies on a pretty strict automated system involving quality verifications with detection and rejection of faulty changes causing regressions.
Feature toggles offer the ability to commit even work-in-progress, untested changes without getting rejected for causing regressions in the integration branch. Which constitues a very good **incentive** to introduce the feature toggles very early in the life of the feature.
One of the disadvantages of deviating from true CI and moving feature development on feature branches is the lack of such incentive. Adding the feature toggle later on, when merging the feature branch into the integration branch is typically more difficult, like any late integration. |
341 | Assuming that feature flag toggles are a good idea, and should be implemented into code that developers write. For example Etsy swear by them as a [major part of their culture](https://codeascraft.com/2011/02/04/how-does-etsy-manage-development-and-operations/).
**What is a good way to persuade (and enforce) developers to start using feature flag toggles?**
More information about feature flag toggles is explained in [Q: How to use feature flag toggles](https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/162/how-to-use-feature-flag-toggles), [Q: What are feature flag toggles](https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/344/what-is-a-feature-flag-toggle-and-when-to-use-them-or-not) and very extensively in Pete Hodgson's [article on the subject on Martin Fowler's blog](https://martinfowler.com/articles/feature-toggles.html). | 2017/03/05 | [
"https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/341",
"https://devops.stackexchange.com",
"https://devops.stackexchange.com/users/6/"
] | A successful high-velocity development environment typically relies on a pretty strict automated system involving quality verifications with detection and rejection of faulty changes causing regressions.
Feature toggles offer the ability to commit even work-in-progress, untested changes without getting rejected for causing regressions in the integration branch. Which constitues a very good **incentive** to introduce the feature toggles very early in the life of the feature.
One of the disadvantages of deviating from true CI and moving feature development on feature branches is the lack of such incentive. Adding the feature toggle later on, when merging the feature branch into the integration branch is typically more difficult, like any late integration. | The rationale to have feature toggles is not something for developers to decide. This is something for product owners to care. Developers enable this change in the most sustainable and safe manner. I critique this very question. |
341 | Assuming that feature flag toggles are a good idea, and should be implemented into code that developers write. For example Etsy swear by them as a [major part of their culture](https://codeascraft.com/2011/02/04/how-does-etsy-manage-development-and-operations/).
**What is a good way to persuade (and enforce) developers to start using feature flag toggles?**
More information about feature flag toggles is explained in [Q: How to use feature flag toggles](https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/162/how-to-use-feature-flag-toggles), [Q: What are feature flag toggles](https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/344/what-is-a-feature-flag-toggle-and-when-to-use-them-or-not) and very extensively in Pete Hodgson's [article on the subject on Martin Fowler's blog](https://martinfowler.com/articles/feature-toggles.html). | 2017/03/05 | [
"https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/341",
"https://devops.stackexchange.com",
"https://devops.stackexchange.com/users/6/"
] | In an ideal world I think you roll out a new build and surprise! NOTHING changes. This is because all of your new features are behind switches that go out with the switch off.
Post-deployment you verify that your rolled-out service still works, the phones aren't ringing any more (unless ringing phones is your purpose, that is), etc. Once you are back to a known stable operation you begin enabling and verifying your newly deployed features.
Now for your answer: How would you like to work on a team where being on call is practically a no-brainer and our users love us because our sites and services are rock solid stable?
That's the team I want to work on.
You can stop reading here if you want.
Putting everything behind a feature switch seems like it can lead to spaghetti code everywhere. If you use IoC and are able to select between vNow/vNext/vPrevious then it comes down to maintaining your configuration. Yes more check ins, yes more classes (componentV1, componentV2, componentV3, etc.) but you actually have a more stable system? How? vNext is wonky? Switch back to vNow with your control tower. Been a week and vNow has a subtle bug? Same thing - go back to vPrevious just as easily.
No hassle, no worries, no lost sleep, no stress.
This isn't a pipe dream. I used to work there. Wish I could sell this to my current team. | Developers (and usually development managers) usually look for two outcomes associated with framework: ease of management, and speed of deployment. You want to ship code faster, and easier.
Provide evidence that the approach works; try building a small POC using feature flags versus the old way. Case studies matter less to tactical people (developers\engineers) than strategic people (middle management\product designers). |
341 | Assuming that feature flag toggles are a good idea, and should be implemented into code that developers write. For example Etsy swear by them as a [major part of their culture](https://codeascraft.com/2011/02/04/how-does-etsy-manage-development-and-operations/).
**What is a good way to persuade (and enforce) developers to start using feature flag toggles?**
More information about feature flag toggles is explained in [Q: How to use feature flag toggles](https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/162/how-to-use-feature-flag-toggles), [Q: What are feature flag toggles](https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/344/what-is-a-feature-flag-toggle-and-when-to-use-them-or-not) and very extensively in Pete Hodgson's [article on the subject on Martin Fowler's blog](https://martinfowler.com/articles/feature-toggles.html). | 2017/03/05 | [
"https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/341",
"https://devops.stackexchange.com",
"https://devops.stackexchange.com/users/6/"
] | In an ideal world I think you roll out a new build and surprise! NOTHING changes. This is because all of your new features are behind switches that go out with the switch off.
Post-deployment you verify that your rolled-out service still works, the phones aren't ringing any more (unless ringing phones is your purpose, that is), etc. Once you are back to a known stable operation you begin enabling and verifying your newly deployed features.
Now for your answer: How would you like to work on a team where being on call is practically a no-brainer and our users love us because our sites and services are rock solid stable?
That's the team I want to work on.
You can stop reading here if you want.
Putting everything behind a feature switch seems like it can lead to spaghetti code everywhere. If you use IoC and are able to select between vNow/vNext/vPrevious then it comes down to maintaining your configuration. Yes more check ins, yes more classes (componentV1, componentV2, componentV3, etc.) but you actually have a more stable system? How? vNext is wonky? Switch back to vNow with your control tower. Been a week and vNow has a subtle bug? Same thing - go back to vPrevious just as easily.
No hassle, no worries, no lost sleep, no stress.
This isn't a pipe dream. I used to work there. Wish I could sell this to my current team. | The rationale to have feature toggles is not something for developers to decide. This is something for product owners to care. Developers enable this change in the most sustainable and safe manner. I critique this very question. |
341 | Assuming that feature flag toggles are a good idea, and should be implemented into code that developers write. For example Etsy swear by them as a [major part of their culture](https://codeascraft.com/2011/02/04/how-does-etsy-manage-development-and-operations/).
**What is a good way to persuade (and enforce) developers to start using feature flag toggles?**
More information about feature flag toggles is explained in [Q: How to use feature flag toggles](https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/162/how-to-use-feature-flag-toggles), [Q: What are feature flag toggles](https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/344/what-is-a-feature-flag-toggle-and-when-to-use-them-or-not) and very extensively in Pete Hodgson's [article on the subject on Martin Fowler's blog](https://martinfowler.com/articles/feature-toggles.html). | 2017/03/05 | [
"https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/341",
"https://devops.stackexchange.com",
"https://devops.stackexchange.com/users/6/"
] | Developers (and usually development managers) usually look for two outcomes associated with framework: ease of management, and speed of deployment. You want to ship code faster, and easier.
Provide evidence that the approach works; try building a small POC using feature flags versus the old way. Case studies matter less to tactical people (developers\engineers) than strategic people (middle management\product designers). | The rationale to have feature toggles is not something for developers to decide. This is something for product owners to care. Developers enable this change in the most sustainable and safe manner. I critique this very question. |
47,378 | In Italian, [translating from the Italian wikipedia](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_%28linguistica%29) as accurately as I can muster,
>
> a "complemento" is a part of a sentence (one or more words) that specify, clarify and enrich the meaning thereof.
>
>
>
Italian has a [loooong, punctilious list of various possible types of "complemento"](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_%28linguistica%29#Classificazione), for example:
* I have plenty *of diamonds* — ["complemento" of abundance](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementi_di_abbondanza_e_privazione)
* I am short *of diamonds* — ["complemento" of privation](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementi_di_abbondanza_e_privazione)
* It's made *of diamonds* — ["complemento" of matter](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_di_materia)
* Some *of the diamonds* are valuable — ["complemento" of partition](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_partitivo)
* Each *of these diamonds* is valuable — ["complemento" of specification](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_di_specificazione)
* It's worthy *of diamonds* — ["complemento" of value](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_di_stima)
I can't find anything like this on the English wikipedia - although [adjuncts](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjunct_%28grammar%29) sound suspiciously similar, I'd say none of these are temporal, locative, modicative, causal, instrumental, conditional or concessive - although there certainly are some that are, and not all require prepositions:
* I'm waiting *there* - ["complemento" of being in place](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_di_stato_in_luogo)
* I'm going *there* - ["complemento" of motion to place](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_di_moto_a_luogo)
* I'm going *to Rome* - ["complemento" of motion to place](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_di_moto_a_luogo) also.
The next closest thing would be [adverbial complements](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverbial_complement), but most of these aren't required for the sentence to make sense, or tied to the verb. | 2011/11/05 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/47378",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/865/"
] | The Italian Wikipedia appears to call both complements and adjuncts *complementi*. Therefore I conclude that an Italian *complemento* is a very broad category, and it is **not** the same as an English complement. I'd call it a **[constituent](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constituent_%28linguistics%29)**. The Italian list includes both complements, like subject and object, and adjuncts, like adjuncts of time and location.
>
> Complementi essenziali e circostanziali
>
>
>
Under this sub-header, it explains that there are *complementi* that are essential (*essenziali*) to the structure of the sentence, and those that are not (*circostanziali*).
In English, a *complement* is a part that cannot be left out, while an *adjunct* (also called *satellite*) can be left out without too much fuss.
>
> I like *pigs*.
>
>
>
Here, *pigs* is the object to the verb *like*: it is essential and a complement. *I like* is not a grammatical sentence, because the object cannot be left out.
>
> I like pigs *sometimes*.
>
>
>
Here, *sometimes* is an adverbial constituent of time; it is not essential and hence an adjunct. Note that the distinction between what is essential and what isn't is not always clear: the categories *complement* and *adjunct/satellite* are by no means clear cut. There is often debate about various practical examples.
Since the Italian word seems to include both complements and adjuncts, it must signify a *constituent*, which is basically a building-block in a sentence that has its own syntactic function. The above sentence has three constituents: *I, pigs, sometimes*. Subjects and object are complements; constituents of time are mostly adjuncts (but not always).
Many of the examples in your question are adverbial; some are adverbial adjuncts, others adverbial complements. Note that adverbial constituents are usually adjuncts. | From looking at Wikipedia's page on *[adverbials](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverbial)*, I gather that any *complemento* is also an *adverbial*; in your examples, either an *[adjunct](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjunct)* or an *[adverbial complement](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverbial_complement)*. Wikipedia says:
>
> In grammar an *adverbial* is a word (an adverb) or a group of words (an adverbial phrase or an adverbial clause) that modifies or tells us something about the sentence or the verb. The word *adverbial* is also used as an adjective, meaning 'having the same function as an adverb'. Look at the examples below:
>
>
> Danny speaks **fluently**. (telling us more about the verb)
>
> Lorna ate breakfast **yesterday morning**.
>
>
> [...]
>
>
> Adverbials are typically divided into four classes:
>
>
> [adverbial complements](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverbial_complement) (i.e. obligatory adverbial) are adverbials that render a sentence ungrammatical and meaningless if removed.
>
>
> *John put the flowers **in a vase**.*
>
>
> [adjuncts](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjunct): these are part of the core meaning of the sentence, but if omitted still leave a meaningful sentence.
>
>
> *John helped me **with my homework**.*
>
>
> [conjuncts](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjunct): these link two sentences together.
>
>
> *John helped so I was, **therefore**, able to do my homework.*
>
>
> [disjuncts](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disjunct): these make comments on the meaning of the rest of the sentence.
>
>
> ***Surprisingly**, he passed all of his exams.*
>
>
>
About *adverbial complement*:
>
> An *adverbial complement* is an adverbial that is obligatorily subcategorized for by a verb, such that if removed, it will yield an ungrammatical sentence:
>
>
> * She put the cheese **back**.
> * \*She put the cheese.
>
>
>
*Adjunct*:
>
> In linguistics, an adjunct is an optional, or structurally dispensable, part of a sentence that, when removed, will not affect the remainder of the sentence except to discard from it some auxiliary information.
>
>
> [...]
>
>
> An adjunct can be a single word, a phrase, or a clause.
>
>
> **Single word**
>
>
> *She will leave **tomorrow.***
>
>
> **Phrase**
>
>
> *She will leave **in the morning.***
>
>
> **Clause**
>
>
> *She will leave **after she has had breakfast.***
>
>
> |
47,378 | In Italian, [translating from the Italian wikipedia](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_%28linguistica%29) as accurately as I can muster,
>
> a "complemento" is a part of a sentence (one or more words) that specify, clarify and enrich the meaning thereof.
>
>
>
Italian has a [loooong, punctilious list of various possible types of "complemento"](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_%28linguistica%29#Classificazione), for example:
* I have plenty *of diamonds* — ["complemento" of abundance](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementi_di_abbondanza_e_privazione)
* I am short *of diamonds* — ["complemento" of privation](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementi_di_abbondanza_e_privazione)
* It's made *of diamonds* — ["complemento" of matter](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_di_materia)
* Some *of the diamonds* are valuable — ["complemento" of partition](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_partitivo)
* Each *of these diamonds* is valuable — ["complemento" of specification](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_di_specificazione)
* It's worthy *of diamonds* — ["complemento" of value](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_di_stima)
I can't find anything like this on the English wikipedia - although [adjuncts](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjunct_%28grammar%29) sound suspiciously similar, I'd say none of these are temporal, locative, modicative, causal, instrumental, conditional or concessive - although there certainly are some that are, and not all require prepositions:
* I'm waiting *there* - ["complemento" of being in place](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_di_stato_in_luogo)
* I'm going *there* - ["complemento" of motion to place](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_di_moto_a_luogo)
* I'm going *to Rome* - ["complemento" of motion to place](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_di_moto_a_luogo) also.
The next closest thing would be [adverbial complements](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverbial_complement), but most of these aren't required for the sentence to make sense, or tied to the verb. | 2011/11/05 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/47378",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/865/"
] | From looking at Wikipedia's page on *[adverbials](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverbial)*, I gather that any *complemento* is also an *adverbial*; in your examples, either an *[adjunct](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjunct)* or an *[adverbial complement](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverbial_complement)*. Wikipedia says:
>
> In grammar an *adverbial* is a word (an adverb) or a group of words (an adverbial phrase or an adverbial clause) that modifies or tells us something about the sentence or the verb. The word *adverbial* is also used as an adjective, meaning 'having the same function as an adverb'. Look at the examples below:
>
>
> Danny speaks **fluently**. (telling us more about the verb)
>
> Lorna ate breakfast **yesterday morning**.
>
>
> [...]
>
>
> Adverbials are typically divided into four classes:
>
>
> [adverbial complements](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverbial_complement) (i.e. obligatory adverbial) are adverbials that render a sentence ungrammatical and meaningless if removed.
>
>
> *John put the flowers **in a vase**.*
>
>
> [adjuncts](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjunct): these are part of the core meaning of the sentence, but if omitted still leave a meaningful sentence.
>
>
> *John helped me **with my homework**.*
>
>
> [conjuncts](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjunct): these link two sentences together.
>
>
> *John helped so I was, **therefore**, able to do my homework.*
>
>
> [disjuncts](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disjunct): these make comments on the meaning of the rest of the sentence.
>
>
> ***Surprisingly**, he passed all of his exams.*
>
>
>
About *adverbial complement*:
>
> An *adverbial complement* is an adverbial that is obligatorily subcategorized for by a verb, such that if removed, it will yield an ungrammatical sentence:
>
>
> * She put the cheese **back**.
> * \*She put the cheese.
>
>
>
*Adjunct*:
>
> In linguistics, an adjunct is an optional, or structurally dispensable, part of a sentence that, when removed, will not affect the remainder of the sentence except to discard from it some auxiliary information.
>
>
> [...]
>
>
> An adjunct can be a single word, a phrase, or a clause.
>
>
> **Single word**
>
>
> *She will leave **tomorrow.***
>
>
> **Phrase**
>
>
> *She will leave **in the morning.***
>
>
> **Clause**
>
>
> *She will leave **after she has had breakfast.***
>
>
> | In its broadest sense, a complement in English grammar is anything that completes a clause or a phrase. To that extent, it has some similarity with Italian *complemento*: in your first set of examples, *(the) diamonds* is the complement of the prepositional phrase that begins with *of*. More specifically, however, it describes, in the words of one grammarian, 'a slot in a sentence that expresses attributes of the Subject or Object.' In this sense, it is perhaps best known as a description of the words that follow a copular verb: *good* in *This looks good*, or *my destiny* in *This is my destiny*. |
47,378 | In Italian, [translating from the Italian wikipedia](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_%28linguistica%29) as accurately as I can muster,
>
> a "complemento" is a part of a sentence (one or more words) that specify, clarify and enrich the meaning thereof.
>
>
>
Italian has a [loooong, punctilious list of various possible types of "complemento"](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_%28linguistica%29#Classificazione), for example:
* I have plenty *of diamonds* — ["complemento" of abundance](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementi_di_abbondanza_e_privazione)
* I am short *of diamonds* — ["complemento" of privation](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementi_di_abbondanza_e_privazione)
* It's made *of diamonds* — ["complemento" of matter](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_di_materia)
* Some *of the diamonds* are valuable — ["complemento" of partition](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_partitivo)
* Each *of these diamonds* is valuable — ["complemento" of specification](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_di_specificazione)
* It's worthy *of diamonds* — ["complemento" of value](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_di_stima)
I can't find anything like this on the English wikipedia - although [adjuncts](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjunct_%28grammar%29) sound suspiciously similar, I'd say none of these are temporal, locative, modicative, causal, instrumental, conditional or concessive - although there certainly are some that are, and not all require prepositions:
* I'm waiting *there* - ["complemento" of being in place](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_di_stato_in_luogo)
* I'm going *there* - ["complemento" of motion to place](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_di_moto_a_luogo)
* I'm going *to Rome* - ["complemento" of motion to place](http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complemento_di_moto_a_luogo) also.
The next closest thing would be [adverbial complements](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverbial_complement), but most of these aren't required for the sentence to make sense, or tied to the verb. | 2011/11/05 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/47378",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/865/"
] | The Italian Wikipedia appears to call both complements and adjuncts *complementi*. Therefore I conclude that an Italian *complemento* is a very broad category, and it is **not** the same as an English complement. I'd call it a **[constituent](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constituent_%28linguistics%29)**. The Italian list includes both complements, like subject and object, and adjuncts, like adjuncts of time and location.
>
> Complementi essenziali e circostanziali
>
>
>
Under this sub-header, it explains that there are *complementi* that are essential (*essenziali*) to the structure of the sentence, and those that are not (*circostanziali*).
In English, a *complement* is a part that cannot be left out, while an *adjunct* (also called *satellite*) can be left out without too much fuss.
>
> I like *pigs*.
>
>
>
Here, *pigs* is the object to the verb *like*: it is essential and a complement. *I like* is not a grammatical sentence, because the object cannot be left out.
>
> I like pigs *sometimes*.
>
>
>
Here, *sometimes* is an adverbial constituent of time; it is not essential and hence an adjunct. Note that the distinction between what is essential and what isn't is not always clear: the categories *complement* and *adjunct/satellite* are by no means clear cut. There is often debate about various practical examples.
Since the Italian word seems to include both complements and adjuncts, it must signify a *constituent*, which is basically a building-block in a sentence that has its own syntactic function. The above sentence has three constituents: *I, pigs, sometimes*. Subjects and object are complements; constituents of time are mostly adjuncts (but not always).
Many of the examples in your question are adverbial; some are adverbial adjuncts, others adverbial complements. Note that adverbial constituents are usually adjuncts. | In its broadest sense, a complement in English grammar is anything that completes a clause or a phrase. To that extent, it has some similarity with Italian *complemento*: in your first set of examples, *(the) diamonds* is the complement of the prepositional phrase that begins with *of*. More specifically, however, it describes, in the words of one grammarian, 'a slot in a sentence that expresses attributes of the Subject or Object.' In this sense, it is perhaps best known as a description of the words that follow a copular verb: *good* in *This looks good*, or *my destiny* in *This is my destiny*. |
9,969 | My budgie pair is all ready for breeding. But for the last 2 months I've been using WiFi throughout my home. Now I'm worried if WiFi radiation will lead newly hatched babies to death, or if there will be some other troubles.
Has anybody ever faced such a situation? Is it risky? | 2015/08/09 | [
"https://pets.stackexchange.com/questions/9969",
"https://pets.stackexchange.com",
"https://pets.stackexchange.com/users/5554/"
] | Most of the research that I can find is inconclusive, and deals with networks that run on different specifications than home WiFi.
Basic Technology Background
---------------------------
There is some research on ELF (extremely low frequency, like from power lines or appliances). This is generally below 300 MHz (and much lower)
Another area that I can find research on are cell phone networks. These run generally from 900-1800 MHz. A cell phone tower generally has an [effective radiated power of 5-10 W](https://www.fcc.gov/guides/human-exposure-rf-fields-guidelines-cellular-and-pcs-sites) (right in front of the antenna, it falls away pretty quickly). A cell phone transmits between 0.5 W - 3 W (sources vary, depends on manufacturer, etc).
For comparision, WiFi is generally run at 2.4 GHz (2400 MHz) or 5.6 GHz (5600 MHz). A WiFi basestation's [specifications](http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/wireless/access_point/channels/lwapp/reference/guide/lw_chp2/1140_chp.html) say that it can have at most 20 dBm (0.1 Watts) on each of the frequencies that it runs.
Research
--------
Balmori and Hallberg are two researchers who studied sparrows in Spain in the mid 00's. They determined that sparrows were in generally poorer condition and had worse breeding outcomes when electronic magnetic environment increased.
Everaert and Bauwens did a similar study in Belgium (with similar results). The problem with these studies is that it is difficult to determine how much of the decrease in health/outcomes is due to the EMF and how much is due to increasing urbanization (loss of habitat, food sources, etc).
>
> Reijt et al. (2007) studied breeding tits in nesting boxes around a military radar station compared with a control location. The exposure levels were reported as being from 2.0 to 5.0 W/m2. No change in breeding biology was observed. However there was a shift in the ratio of blue tits to great tits compared with the control location. Thus one interpretation of this study and those on house sparrows is that the electromagnetic fields may discourage some bird species from breeding there or alternatively might encourage other species to build their nests in the areas with higher RF EMF fields.
> [source](http://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/opinions_layman/en/electromagnetic-fields/l-3/9-environmental-effects.htm#1p0)
>
>
>
If you want to look into this more, I suggest including the term "non-thermal" as a search term. Most of the current safety guidelines discuss the ability of the energy waves to heat flesh. There are no concerns with the thermal safety of any of these forms of radiation, but non-thermal effects are still being studied. | In my experience, it does effect slightly but it shouldn’t effect so much. Keep it in a room where there is thick walls and no WiFi usage inside but visit there often for the budgie not to feel lonely. |
215,234 | See this:
>
> 
>
>
>
It's real. (Thanks [Manishearth](https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/178438/manishearth) for helping me on this!)
Any user with upvote privilege can simply click the upvote button repeatedly to cause this to any other user, at any time.
How can we block this? I couldn't come with a concrete suggestion so your ideas are welcome. | 2014/01/07 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/215234",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/152859/"
] | According to [The Complete Rate-Limiting Guide](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/164899/the-complete-rate-limiting-guide), after you have undone and redone your vote 30 times, it is locked in:
So you would only be able to do this 30 times for each post. | I might suggest implementing a similar limit seen with undoing and redoing upvotes with accepting answers.
[The Complete Rate-Limiting Guide](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/164899/the-complete-rate-limiting-guide) says the following about accepting answers:
* All must wait 15 minutes after asking to accept any answer
* All must wait 48 hours after asking to accept *own* answer
This says nothing about flicking the acceptance on and off like the asker is talking about for upvotes. I think a similar limit needs to be implemented for accepting answers to prevent abuse like this.
Even with the 30 undo and redo limit for votes, this still allows *some* abuse like this, since it's pretty easy to count off 25 or so undo/redos and not hit the 30 limit. If you had to wait 15 seconds or so to undo or redo a vote or accepted answer, it would completely prevent this sort of rapid-fire on-and-off abuse of the system. |
1,241,111 | I am trying to extract the data in every fourth cell. For instance the data I want are in cells A1, A4, A7, A10 etc. When I enter =A1 in cell B1 and =A4 in cell B2 and selecting both cells and then drag down instead of entering =A7 in cell B3 Excel enters =A3 in cell B3 and =A6 in cell B4. B5 and B6 gets filled with =A5 and =A8 respectively. When I enter 1 and 4 in cell B1 and B2 and drag down I get 7, 10, 13 etc. as expected.
I tried disabling and re-enabling fill handle and cell drag and drop but without success. Any ideas as to why this is happening will be very helpful! | 2017/08/15 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/1241111",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/761610/"
] | You don't.
There are actually two schools of thought in regard to forensic disk imaging.
The *oldschool* method was to unplug the PC *immediately*, and image the drive in *that state*, to ensure that nothing got changed. It also assured a certain degree of plausible deniability...
And that didn't really work too well the moment folks realised you could encrypt a drive with a password.
While *live* forensic capture doesn't ensure that *nothing* at all is *ever* altered, with proper logging, you know what the examiner has done. It's also handy since if the suspect hasn't locked his system you can probably get enough data copied out to work out what's happening.
>
> I learned in forensics you can deploy an agent to a remote computer and have it retrieve an exact copy of the remote hard drive, including unallocated space and swap, even while it is being used. This copy gets sent to your pc over the internet by the agent and then you can work on it on your pc.
>
>
>
Feels like you're confusing both processes - you'd *either* run an agent and other tools on a livedisk, or pull the hard drive to image in the 'traditional' methods, or use live tools, or good old investigative work on a running system. You can't really get a proper forensic duplicate on a running system.
[EnCase](https://www.guidancesoftware.com/encase-forensic), for example, lets you work on a VHD or VMDK made with another tool - but you aren't going to run it directly on a system being investigated. | Yes, In some cases you have to have a physical link to the device, and permission. If not you will need hash sets and a court order. Careful.. this is wiretapping |
1,241,111 | I am trying to extract the data in every fourth cell. For instance the data I want are in cells A1, A4, A7, A10 etc. When I enter =A1 in cell B1 and =A4 in cell B2 and selecting both cells and then drag down instead of entering =A7 in cell B3 Excel enters =A3 in cell B3 and =A6 in cell B4. B5 and B6 gets filled with =A5 and =A8 respectively. When I enter 1 and 4 in cell B1 and B2 and drag down I get 7, 10, 13 etc. as expected.
I tried disabling and re-enabling fill handle and cell drag and drop but without success. Any ideas as to why this is happening will be very helpful! | 2017/08/15 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/1241111",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/761610/"
] | You don't.
There are actually two schools of thought in regard to forensic disk imaging.
The *oldschool* method was to unplug the PC *immediately*, and image the drive in *that state*, to ensure that nothing got changed. It also assured a certain degree of plausible deniability...
And that didn't really work too well the moment folks realised you could encrypt a drive with a password.
While *live* forensic capture doesn't ensure that *nothing* at all is *ever* altered, with proper logging, you know what the examiner has done. It's also handy since if the suspect hasn't locked his system you can probably get enough data copied out to work out what's happening.
>
> I learned in forensics you can deploy an agent to a remote computer and have it retrieve an exact copy of the remote hard drive, including unallocated space and swap, even while it is being used. This copy gets sent to your pc over the internet by the agent and then you can work on it on your pc.
>
>
>
Feels like you're confusing both processes - you'd *either* run an agent and other tools on a livedisk, or pull the hard drive to image in the 'traditional' methods, or use live tools, or good old investigative work on a running system. You can't really get a proper forensic duplicate on a running system.
[EnCase](https://www.guidancesoftware.com/encase-forensic), for example, lets you work on a VHD or VMDK made with another tool - but you aren't going to run it directly on a system being investigated. | The goal isn't to create a perfect image of the drive, but a reasonable copy of the important data, that is, user data. If the drive is accessed using low-level disk commands, not file system commands it can workaround issues such as file locks and open files. But those are likely OS files not user data.
The bottom line is that the data you are interested in is usually at rest on the disk even when the system is running. |
839,929 | I have a specific OU with several machines in it.
I just created a domain-user who is meant to have normal standard-rights like an absolutely normal local-user on all the machines - the only thing he needs to be able to do, is installing any kind of software he wants, but **without** being either a domain or a local Administrator at the same time.
I thought maybe I could realize this, using a GPO for that user but I haven't come very far yet.
Is there a way to give the newly created user the permission of installing things on machines being located in that specific OU, without giving him all the other administrator-rights? | 2017/03/22 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/839929",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/406828/"
] | No, the problem you have is that to install a program the installer usually needs to write to C:\Program Files, C:\Program Files (x86), and C:\Windows. All of those directories are protected by the Operating System and can only be written to by an administrator. Additionally, if you make a change for all users on the computer (e.g. installing a program) usually the installer will write to HKEY\_LOCAL\_MACHINE in the registry. The HKEY\_LOCAL\_MACHINE registry hive is also protected by the Operating System and requires administrative access to write to.
Your other option is to push the software through Group Policy. That would allow to you to install the software on computers in the OU without users having administrative access. To do you will need MSI installation packages for each program you want to install. | Well, two approaches here:
* You've to be local administrator to install software, there's no "Installing software delegation". But the good news is you can do that with a GPO, using Restricted groups: <http://social.technet.microsoft.com/wiki/contents/articles/20402.active-directory-group-policy-restricted-groups.aspx>
* You can use a GPO to "Publish software": opposed to "Assign software", which will force an installation of a given software to the computers affected by that GPO, "Publish software" will allow any user logged on a computer affected by the GPO to install the software you've, well, published in that GPO:
<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/816102/how-to-use-group-policy-to-remotely-install-software-in-windows-server-2008-and-in-windows-server-2003>
Pros and cons: first option gives the user too much power, but he may install whatever he needs to; second option gives no power to the user, but you'll have to do extra work to publish any software he needs. And it's to come in MSI format! |
839,929 | I have a specific OU with several machines in it.
I just created a domain-user who is meant to have normal standard-rights like an absolutely normal local-user on all the machines - the only thing he needs to be able to do, is installing any kind of software he wants, but **without** being either a domain or a local Administrator at the same time.
I thought maybe I could realize this, using a GPO for that user but I haven't come very far yet.
Is there a way to give the newly created user the permission of installing things on machines being located in that specific OU, without giving him all the other administrator-rights? | 2017/03/22 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/839929",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/406828/"
] | No, the problem you have is that to install a program the installer usually needs to write to C:\Program Files, C:\Program Files (x86), and C:\Windows. All of those directories are protected by the Operating System and can only be written to by an administrator. Additionally, if you make a change for all users on the computer (e.g. installing a program) usually the installer will write to HKEY\_LOCAL\_MACHINE in the registry. The HKEY\_LOCAL\_MACHINE registry hive is also protected by the Operating System and requires administrative access to write to.
Your other option is to push the software through Group Policy. That would allow to you to install the software on computers in the OU without users having administrative access. To do you will need MSI installation packages for each program you want to install. | One way I've done it is create security groups. I have a Local\_Admin security group on the domain that is put in the local Administrators group on all computers. Then you can move a user in and out of that security group, have them log off/on, do what they need, then remove them from the group. It gives them local admin rights so they can modify the machine. Here's one website with instructions on what I'm talking about. Different application but the process is the same.
<https://community.spiceworks.com/how_to/907-gpo-to-push-out-local-administrators-across-a-domain> |
839,929 | I have a specific OU with several machines in it.
I just created a domain-user who is meant to have normal standard-rights like an absolutely normal local-user on all the machines - the only thing he needs to be able to do, is installing any kind of software he wants, but **without** being either a domain or a local Administrator at the same time.
I thought maybe I could realize this, using a GPO for that user but I haven't come very far yet.
Is there a way to give the newly created user the permission of installing things on machines being located in that specific OU, without giving him all the other administrator-rights? | 2017/03/22 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/839929",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/406828/"
] | Well, two approaches here:
* You've to be local administrator to install software, there's no "Installing software delegation". But the good news is you can do that with a GPO, using Restricted groups: <http://social.technet.microsoft.com/wiki/contents/articles/20402.active-directory-group-policy-restricted-groups.aspx>
* You can use a GPO to "Publish software": opposed to "Assign software", which will force an installation of a given software to the computers affected by that GPO, "Publish software" will allow any user logged on a computer affected by the GPO to install the software you've, well, published in that GPO:
<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/816102/how-to-use-group-policy-to-remotely-install-software-in-windows-server-2008-and-in-windows-server-2003>
Pros and cons: first option gives the user too much power, but he may install whatever he needs to; second option gives no power to the user, but you'll have to do extra work to publish any software he needs. And it's to come in MSI format! | One way I've done it is create security groups. I have a Local\_Admin security group on the domain that is put in the local Administrators group on all computers. Then you can move a user in and out of that security group, have them log off/on, do what they need, then remove them from the group. It gives them local admin rights so they can modify the machine. Here's one website with instructions on what I'm talking about. Different application but the process is the same.
<https://community.spiceworks.com/how_to/907-gpo-to-push-out-local-administrators-across-a-domain> |
57,784 | Can we use "I can't come right now, I need to take a shower" if we are informing a friend? Or should it be "I can't come right now, I will need to take a shower"? | 2012/02/12 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/57784",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/17953/"
] | If you say "I will need to take a shower", you mean "at some (understood) future time", which doesn't sound to me as if it matches your case, because the clause is supposed to be explaining why you can't come right now.
I think you can concoct a scenario in which it would make sense ("I can't come right now, I will need to take a shower later so I have to do my other chores now"), but without some such it will sound odd.
The fact that your shower might not be this very minute doesn't make any difference - the present tense is often used with future meaning in English (just as often as the so-called "future tense"). | *I need to take a shower* is the correct variant in the situation you describe. The present tense is used because the **need** exists in the present.
In the following examples the future tense is used because the need will not exist until some time in the future:
* If I decide to go out after all, I will need to take a shower.
* As soon as I arrive I will need to find somewhere to eat. |
57,784 | Can we use "I can't come right now, I need to take a shower" if we are informing a friend? Or should it be "I can't come right now, I will need to take a shower"? | 2012/02/12 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/57784",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/17953/"
] | "I can't come right now, I need to take a shower."
This means that because you have something else to do, namely taking a shower, you can't come right now. Note that it implies that even if you aren't going, you still need to take a shower.
"I can't come right now, I will need to take a shower."
This means that you don't necessarily need to take a shower now. However, if you were to come, you couldn't do it now because you would have to take a shower first. This does not imply that you need to take a shower unless you are going to come.
"I need" is a present need. "I will need" is a conditional need at an unspecified future time. | *I need to take a shower* is the correct variant in the situation you describe. The present tense is used because the **need** exists in the present.
In the following examples the future tense is used because the need will not exist until some time in the future:
* If I decide to go out after all, I will need to take a shower.
* As soon as I arrive I will need to find somewhere to eat. |
12,408 | I have a Dell Inspiron Duo - The tablet netbook, the 1090. It's beautiful, and I want to get the most out of it.
I don't mind digging deep into a distro and installing patches and such to get multitouch working, but that's me. I have to think of others that also would like this goodness.
So my question, which distro has the best multi touch / tablet support out the box.
>
> Imagine I have to recommend something
> to someone about to go on an Arctic
> expedition, who has a touch screen laptop, and needs FOSS installed because of cutbacks :)
>
>
> | 2011/05/01 | [
"https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/12408",
"https://unix.stackexchange.com",
"https://unix.stackexchange.com/users/4847/"
] | I would recommend Ubuntu as it tends to have the latest software and drivers. The latest version (11.04) supports multitouch out of the box (<https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Multitouch/GettingStarted/Natty>), but whether that includes the 1090 will depend on what multitouch device it has (<https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Multitouch/HardwareSupport>). | I have a Planar 23 inch 2430mw display. It works flawlessly on touch with Windows 7 and 8. The only Linux Distribution which I have found which works out of the box is Ubuntu 11.10. I have tried Debian, Fedora , Suse and nothing I have found will even detect my display USB interface. I tried playing with Ubuntu 12.04 and tried everything I could find on the net to add touch nothing worked. I screwed up X so badly I had to re-install Ubuntu.
I believe with the release for Win8 in the next few months (4Q12) we will see a flood of Tablets, Slates, Laptops and Monitors all with touch. I sure home some Linux Guru with the necessary skills will develop a method to get this huge number on Win 8 devices to work on touch with all Linux Distro's. |
12,385 | [This article](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/5711129/Uranium-could-be-mined-on-the-Moon.html) talks about the possibility of mining Uranium on the moon. Since the Moon lacks the geological forces that have created veins of concentrated minerals on Earth, would extraterrestrial mining be more difficult or impractical? How does Moon, Martian, or asteroid mining overcome the lack of mineral veins otherwise formed by Earth's geology?
It seems like extraterrestrial mining would be at least as difficult as trying to refine desert sand, which isn't a thing.
[A short video on how gold veins form](https://youtu.be/HOjWRGgBpyU)
Wayfaring Stranger added an interesting link on [ore genesis.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ore_genesis#Uranium) | 2015/11/04 | [
"https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/12385",
"https://astronomy.stackexchange.com",
"https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/users/7973/"
] | I vaguely remember my dad talking about this.
Uranium and other heavy elements are dense. When the celestial body was molten (early in it's life) all the heavy elements sank to the core of the body. Now, with tectonics, the heavy elements are brought back up to the surface. This is why we can mine Uranium on Earth near the surface: the Uranium was brought back up due to convention current on Earth.
In conclusion, it's not worth it at all to mine on a non-tectonically active planet/moon
If anyone can extend this, please do. | Quakes and other large scale geological activity ( and indeed running water ! ) cause no end of trouble for mining operations. Much better to be able to sit on a nice quiet rock in space without all that craziness going on.
We have, at this time, no real basis for saying one way or another, that there are not mineral concentrations. If all I let you do was dig a few meter deep boreholes in the surface of the Earth at random locations, what are the odds you would know anything about mineral concentrations for mining ? |
12,385 | [This article](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/5711129/Uranium-could-be-mined-on-the-Moon.html) talks about the possibility of mining Uranium on the moon. Since the Moon lacks the geological forces that have created veins of concentrated minerals on Earth, would extraterrestrial mining be more difficult or impractical? How does Moon, Martian, or asteroid mining overcome the lack of mineral veins otherwise formed by Earth's geology?
It seems like extraterrestrial mining would be at least as difficult as trying to refine desert sand, which isn't a thing.
[A short video on how gold veins form](https://youtu.be/HOjWRGgBpyU)
Wayfaring Stranger added an interesting link on [ore genesis.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ore_genesis#Uranium) | 2015/11/04 | [
"https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/12385",
"https://astronomy.stackexchange.com",
"https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/users/7973/"
] | I vaguely remember my dad talking about this.
Uranium and other heavy elements are dense. When the celestial body was molten (early in it's life) all the heavy elements sank to the core of the body. Now, with tectonics, the heavy elements are brought back up to the surface. This is why we can mine Uranium on Earth near the surface: the Uranium was brought back up due to convention current on Earth.
In conclusion, it's not worth it at all to mine on a non-tectonically active planet/moon
If anyone can extend this, please do. | See this Physics Stack Exchange Question/ Answer: <https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/141839/why-heavy-elements-dont-sink-to-the-core> . You don't need volcanics nor meteorites to keep many heavy elements in the crust (and mineable). Gold is one of the elements that bonds to iron, however, and sinks, which is why it is rare and valuable. |
103,906 | I am looking for arguments to convince management to invest effort into refactoring.
We log work using Jira and relate every svn-commit to a jira call.
My idea is to do the following:
* manually spot an area of code which is extremely bad implemented, but often used: both from User-POV and of Developer-POV (bugfixes)
* get the svn-commits which contain the JIRA-Issues
* filter the issues according to some criteria (issue type, version, prio. etc...)
* compute the time/effort spent on these bugs
* estimate efforts and risks of refactoring
* present the numbers and ask for effort to fix it.
What do you think of this? Would such a measurement be useful and/or convincing? What are the Pros and Cons? | 2011/08/26 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/103906",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/53656/"
] | I've found that if you can provide valid numbers, managers are more likely to act. (If they can understand the logic and the cost/benefit.)
IMHO, to make a convincing case, you would need the following to show how bad it is:
* number of support incidents logged for the issues
* time spent in hours maintaining/band-aiding bad code/doing support
fixes
* time cost based on hourly rate of people doing the maintenance/band
aids/support
* some way to demonstrate how mission critical these items are to the
business
And to make the case for refactoring, you'll need:
* time estimate to refactor and implement each of the top 3 of these
bad things
* cost estimate for implementation (same hourly rates as used above)
With these, you can make the case for time savings if the refactoring takes a whole lot less than support time for 3 incidents for each of those top 3 items. You can argue that this shorter amount of time spent will
* be less than n more support incidents
* there won't be any more of these incidents for these things (EVEN BETTER!)
However, the hardest part of this sell will be answering the following question, since lots of people don't budget time in schedules for all the support you're doing:
*How much longer will I have to wait for current project Y to get done while you're spending time working on these issues with X?????* (despite the current support timesinks, which can't be predicted and scheduled in Gantt charts)
This depends a lot on how well you communicate with the decision makers, and how they understand the situation.
I DEFINITELY think this is worth doing, so you get the practice of building the case with the metrics, and to save yourselves time, even if they don't go for it. Unfortunately, not everyone is easy to convince, despite the data. GOOD LUCK! | All such numbers are ultimately based on guesses, in your case comparing the amount you guess it would cost *not* to refactor vs. what you guess it would cost *to* refactor. The best you can do is show you have some kind of numeric, factual basis for the guesses, and you have a pretty good one.
The pros are that it will probably be effective in convincing them to let you refactor, and it might go well and reduce the number of bugs.
The cons are that if the amount of time spent fixing bugs doesn't drop by at least as much as the time spent refactoring, you probably won't be allowed to refactor anymore, and you will probably be blamed for the "wasted" time.
The savings in debugging time gained by reducing complexity of the overall project, or in making it easier to add features, may be too hard to measure to help you much, but you could mention that those exist. |
103,906 | I am looking for arguments to convince management to invest effort into refactoring.
We log work using Jira and relate every svn-commit to a jira call.
My idea is to do the following:
* manually spot an area of code which is extremely bad implemented, but often used: both from User-POV and of Developer-POV (bugfixes)
* get the svn-commits which contain the JIRA-Issues
* filter the issues according to some criteria (issue type, version, prio. etc...)
* compute the time/effort spent on these bugs
* estimate efforts and risks of refactoring
* present the numbers and ask for effort to fix it.
What do you think of this? Would such a measurement be useful and/or convincing? What are the Pros and Cons? | 2011/08/26 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/103906",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/53656/"
] | I've found that if you can provide valid numbers, managers are more likely to act. (If they can understand the logic and the cost/benefit.)
IMHO, to make a convincing case, you would need the following to show how bad it is:
* number of support incidents logged for the issues
* time spent in hours maintaining/band-aiding bad code/doing support
fixes
* time cost based on hourly rate of people doing the maintenance/band
aids/support
* some way to demonstrate how mission critical these items are to the
business
And to make the case for refactoring, you'll need:
* time estimate to refactor and implement each of the top 3 of these
bad things
* cost estimate for implementation (same hourly rates as used above)
With these, you can make the case for time savings if the refactoring takes a whole lot less than support time for 3 incidents for each of those top 3 items. You can argue that this shorter amount of time spent will
* be less than n more support incidents
* there won't be any more of these incidents for these things (EVEN BETTER!)
However, the hardest part of this sell will be answering the following question, since lots of people don't budget time in schedules for all the support you're doing:
*How much longer will I have to wait for current project Y to get done while you're spending time working on these issues with X?????* (despite the current support timesinks, which can't be predicted and scheduled in Gantt charts)
This depends a lot on how well you communicate with the decision makers, and how they understand the situation.
I DEFINITELY think this is worth doing, so you get the practice of building the case with the metrics, and to save yourselves time, even if they don't go for it. Unfortunately, not everyone is easy to convince, despite the data. GOOD LUCK! | Keep in mind that refactoring introduces bugs as well (which you will catch in your testing, but nonetheless are bugs and must be fixed). Don't pull a Netscape on accident. It depends on your personal definition of "refactoring." To some, this means "rewrite all the code" to others it means "change some internals." How do you tell what kind you are? Ask yourself the following question:
Am I changing the public interface at all?
If the answer is yes, you are doing redesign. If the answer is no, you are doing refactoring and can probably just do it along the course of your daily activities without special approval. This is relevant to your question because a redesign will generate many more bugs, while a refactoring is usually easier to perform (since your tests will already exercise the public interface and will not themselves need to be modified).
It is a difficult case to make, because no one ever knows how much X would have cost with or without the refactor that was done a year ago. In my experience the pragmatic managers always shoot this kind of thing down because:
1. No direct revenue stream comes from the effort (financial cost, not billable)
2. Ugly working code is still working code, you risk creating problems instead of fixing them (potential quality cost)
3. Other projects will be delayed while you refactor (time cost) |
103,906 | I am looking for arguments to convince management to invest effort into refactoring.
We log work using Jira and relate every svn-commit to a jira call.
My idea is to do the following:
* manually spot an area of code which is extremely bad implemented, but often used: both from User-POV and of Developer-POV (bugfixes)
* get the svn-commits which contain the JIRA-Issues
* filter the issues according to some criteria (issue type, version, prio. etc...)
* compute the time/effort spent on these bugs
* estimate efforts and risks of refactoring
* present the numbers and ask for effort to fix it.
What do you think of this? Would such a measurement be useful and/or convincing? What are the Pros and Cons? | 2011/08/26 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/103906",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/53656/"
] | Keep in mind that refactoring introduces bugs as well (which you will catch in your testing, but nonetheless are bugs and must be fixed). Don't pull a Netscape on accident. It depends on your personal definition of "refactoring." To some, this means "rewrite all the code" to others it means "change some internals." How do you tell what kind you are? Ask yourself the following question:
Am I changing the public interface at all?
If the answer is yes, you are doing redesign. If the answer is no, you are doing refactoring and can probably just do it along the course of your daily activities without special approval. This is relevant to your question because a redesign will generate many more bugs, while a refactoring is usually easier to perform (since your tests will already exercise the public interface and will not themselves need to be modified).
It is a difficult case to make, because no one ever knows how much X would have cost with or without the refactor that was done a year ago. In my experience the pragmatic managers always shoot this kind of thing down because:
1. No direct revenue stream comes from the effort (financial cost, not billable)
2. Ugly working code is still working code, you risk creating problems instead of fixing them (potential quality cost)
3. Other projects will be delayed while you refactor (time cost) | All such numbers are ultimately based on guesses, in your case comparing the amount you guess it would cost *not* to refactor vs. what you guess it would cost *to* refactor. The best you can do is show you have some kind of numeric, factual basis for the guesses, and you have a pretty good one.
The pros are that it will probably be effective in convincing them to let you refactor, and it might go well and reduce the number of bugs.
The cons are that if the amount of time spent fixing bugs doesn't drop by at least as much as the time spent refactoring, you probably won't be allowed to refactor anymore, and you will probably be blamed for the "wasted" time.
The savings in debugging time gained by reducing complexity of the overall project, or in making it easier to add features, may be too hard to measure to help you much, but you could mention that those exist. |
27,151 | We're currently hiring for a software engineer position and I've been charged with advancing candidates to the in-person interview stage. We've gotten a number of applications from people who have strong development backgrounds but are recent immigrants from India and China and are very clearly English-as-a-Second-Language speakers, ESL.
We're a really small company and our successful candidate would be the lone developer. In addition to programming, they'll also have to occasionally write content as well as make themselves clearly understood to non-tech people.
As such, I'm leaning towards disqualifying anyone whose English comes across as not being totally fluent. Just a note, I'd disqualify native speakers who wrote poorly as well, but for some reason the fact that most of the applications that would be disqualified on these grounds are non-native speakers feels a little wrong to me.
I'd love for someone to weigh in on the legality of disqualifying obviously ESL applicants. | 2014/06/11 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/27151",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/18061/"
] | I am not a lawyer, but I'd say you should make sure that it's not the ESL that's the issue but the ability to write well.
There are plenty of people who can't write intelligible English despite being raised in the UK or US. There are also some/many people who don't speak all that fluently, but may still be able to write well. (I, personally, have a noticeable accent when speaking English and occasionally stumble over words. Hearing me speak, you'd probably know that I'm ESL - but my writing rarely garners that reaction.) So don't focus on whether they're "obviously ESL", instead focus on their written language abilities.
A lot of places will have some form of programming test for developers. You could just as well have a test of asking them to write the type of documentation you want, and have a non-technical user at your company review it. (If you avoid giving the reviewer any information about the applicant, you are further limiting the risk of accusation of discrimination.) | ESL - English as a Second Language
Having cleaned up my share of poorly written, poorly organized posts from native as well non-native speakers on this site, my attitude is pretty much "a pox on both your houses".
Since you are mainly interested in the applicant's ability to communicate clearly, request a writing sample. You need not request a writing sample from those who sent you poorly written resumes and cover letter.
I am not going to answer your question as to whether it's legal to discriminate against ESL applicants. I am not a lawyer. The [US civil rights statutes](http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/emp/) say nothing about discriminating on the basis of ESL but they do outlaw discrimination on the basis of national origin. In addition, IRCA (Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1996) doesn't say anything about discriminating about ESL either but [specifically outlaws discrimination against non-citizens with proper authorization to work](http://hiring.monster.com/hr/hr-best-practices/monster-training/security-center/hiring-non-us-workers.aspx). Related story: [John Jay Accused of Bias against non-citizens](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/17/nyregion/17johnjay.html?_r=0). In my case, English is not my second or even third language, it's my fourth - being born as a non-European in a Western European country will do that to you :) And it's obvious from my name that I am foreign-born and not so obvious that I am American.
I think you should sidestep the whole discrimination issue/minefield by requiring a writing sample from the candidates you are interested in. Talking to the candidates would allow you to do further filtering. |
27,151 | We're currently hiring for a software engineer position and I've been charged with advancing candidates to the in-person interview stage. We've gotten a number of applications from people who have strong development backgrounds but are recent immigrants from India and China and are very clearly English-as-a-Second-Language speakers, ESL.
We're a really small company and our successful candidate would be the lone developer. In addition to programming, they'll also have to occasionally write content as well as make themselves clearly understood to non-tech people.
As such, I'm leaning towards disqualifying anyone whose English comes across as not being totally fluent. Just a note, I'd disqualify native speakers who wrote poorly as well, but for some reason the fact that most of the applications that would be disqualified on these grounds are non-native speakers feels a little wrong to me.
I'd love for someone to weigh in on the legality of disqualifying obviously ESL applicants. | 2014/06/11 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/27151",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/18061/"
] | I am not a lawyer, but I'd say you should make sure that it's not the ESL that's the issue but the ability to write well.
There are plenty of people who can't write intelligible English despite being raised in the UK or US. There are also some/many people who don't speak all that fluently, but may still be able to write well. (I, personally, have a noticeable accent when speaking English and occasionally stumble over words. Hearing me speak, you'd probably know that I'm ESL - but my writing rarely garners that reaction.) So don't focus on whether they're "obviously ESL", instead focus on their written language abilities.
A lot of places will have some form of programming test for developers. You could just as well have a test of asking them to write the type of documentation you want, and have a non-technical user at your company review it. (If you avoid giving the reviewer any information about the applicant, you are further limiting the risk of accusation of discrimination.) | I'm not sure legal questions are on-topic here. The answer will vary by time and location.
As for the "correct" way to screen candidates in this situation, I'd suggest adding it *very clearly* to the list of requirements and duties, such as:
>
> * The candidate will have very strong written/spoken English skills, as they will be required to write and create content in English, with little to no supervision.
>
>
>
I don't think anyone could get upset over discrimination in this case as you've clearly stated that in addition to the normal technical nature of programming, the job will also require effective non-technical writing. And there are some ESL students I've seen who probably could meet or exceed your requirements!
Requesting a writing sample (either with the resume or after you've seen their resume and want to test them before an interview), as others have suggested, might also work. You could ask them to do something simple, such as write a brief (no more than 0.5 page) summary of the last movie they saw, or what they did over the weekend. Or if they have a blog where they write, they could provide a link to that. |
27,151 | We're currently hiring for a software engineer position and I've been charged with advancing candidates to the in-person interview stage. We've gotten a number of applications from people who have strong development backgrounds but are recent immigrants from India and China and are very clearly English-as-a-Second-Language speakers, ESL.
We're a really small company and our successful candidate would be the lone developer. In addition to programming, they'll also have to occasionally write content as well as make themselves clearly understood to non-tech people.
As such, I'm leaning towards disqualifying anyone whose English comes across as not being totally fluent. Just a note, I'd disqualify native speakers who wrote poorly as well, but for some reason the fact that most of the applications that would be disqualified on these grounds are non-native speakers feels a little wrong to me.
I'd love for someone to weigh in on the legality of disqualifying obviously ESL applicants. | 2014/06/11 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/27151",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/18061/"
] | I am not a lawyer, but I'd say you should make sure that it's not the ESL that's the issue but the ability to write well.
There are plenty of people who can't write intelligible English despite being raised in the UK or US. There are also some/many people who don't speak all that fluently, but may still be able to write well. (I, personally, have a noticeable accent when speaking English and occasionally stumble over words. Hearing me speak, you'd probably know that I'm ESL - but my writing rarely garners that reaction.) So don't focus on whether they're "obviously ESL", instead focus on their written language abilities.
A lot of places will have some form of programming test for developers. You could just as well have a test of asking them to write the type of documentation you want, and have a non-technical user at your company review it. (If you avoid giving the reviewer any information about the applicant, you are further limiting the risk of accusation of discrimination.) | Like other posts you should focus on requiring effective communication in English both written and verbal to perform the job, but be careful you're not going beyond the job requirements.
If you set requirements too high or aren't really required for this job that can be perceived as discrimination, you could get into trouble. Yes, they need to speak so they can communicate and be understood, but if you indicate that an accent is annoying or "rolling your r's" is unacceptable, that could be trouble. Of course no one says this to the person's face, but someone may notice a trend.
There were times when practices to keep females out of the work place were applied like requiring applicants to pick up heavy boxes or other test of strength/endurance for a purely office job. |
426,509 | I'm kind of surprised this is not easy, so I might be looking for the wrong thing.
I have a folder full of images that all have GPS location data embedded in them. I'd like to find an image viewer that makes it easy to view the image and a map of where the image was taken.
The problem I'm having is that when I search for it, I don't come up with much. Most of the hits are for *geotagging your images* rather than *viewing the location of a geotagged image*.
What should I be searching for? Or is there a go-to application for the desktop that everybody already knows you should be using to view geotagged images? | 2012/05/19 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/426509",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/-1/"
] | [GeoSetter](http://www.geosetter.de) is an amazing free portable Windows app that has a fantastic user interface and shows your folder (and optionally subfolders) on a Map including Google Maps, OpenStreetMap.org, and MyTopo etc. | Picasa does an OK job.. but i haven't found an amazing app yet.. |
426,509 | I'm kind of surprised this is not easy, so I might be looking for the wrong thing.
I have a folder full of images that all have GPS location data embedded in them. I'd like to find an image viewer that makes it easy to view the image and a map of where the image was taken.
The problem I'm having is that when I search for it, I don't come up with much. Most of the hits are for *geotagging your images* rather than *viewing the location of a geotagged image*.
What should I be searching for? Or is there a go-to application for the desktop that everybody already knows you should be using to view geotagged images? | 2012/05/19 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/426509",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/-1/"
] | [GeoSetter](http://www.geosetter.de) is an amazing free portable Windows app that has a fantastic user interface and shows your folder (and optionally subfolders) on a Map including Google Maps, OpenStreetMap.org, and MyTopo etc. | You could use [QGIS](http://qgis.org/ "QGIS"). It's a free & open source GIS software, but it allows you to import files or folders and view them as points on a map through a plugin called [ImportPhotos](https://mariosmsk.com/2019/07/02/qgis-plugin-importphotos/ "ImportPhotos") which you can add from the toolbar menu. Each point becomes clickable. A data table is also generated with coordinates, which you can use to browse the photos. |
4,675,266 | From what I understand, taking a polygon and breaking it up into composite triangles is called "tesselation". What's the opposite process called and can anyone link me to an algorithm for it?
Essentially, I have a list of 2D triangles and I need an algorithm to recombine them into a polygon.
Thanks! | 2011/01/12 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4675266",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/195625/"
] | I think you need to transform your triangles as a [half edge data structure](http://www.flipcode.com/archives/The_Half-Edge_Data_Structure.shtml), and then you should be able to easily find the half edges which have no opposite.
 | The thing that you are calling tessellation is actually called [triangulation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygon_triangulation). The thing you are searching for is [tessellation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tessellation) (you may have heard of it referred to as tiling).
If you are more specific about the problem you are trying to solve (e.g. do you know the shape of the final polygon?) I can try to recommend some more specific algorithms. |
4,675,266 | From what I understand, taking a polygon and breaking it up into composite triangles is called "tesselation". What's the opposite process called and can anyone link me to an algorithm for it?
Essentially, I have a list of 2D triangles and I need an algorithm to recombine them into a polygon.
Thanks! | 2011/01/12 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4675266",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/195625/"
] | I think you need to transform your triangles as a [half edge data structure](http://www.flipcode.com/archives/The_Half-Edge_Data_Structure.shtml), and then you should be able to easily find the half edges which have no opposite.
 | It's called *mesh decimation*. Here is some code I wrote to do this for a class. Tibur is correct that the half edge data structure makes this much more efficient.
<http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~mjh7v/advgfx/proj1/> |
4,675,266 | From what I understand, taking a polygon and breaking it up into composite triangles is called "tesselation". What's the opposite process called and can anyone link me to an algorithm for it?
Essentially, I have a list of 2D triangles and I need an algorithm to recombine them into a polygon.
Thanks! | 2011/01/12 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4675266",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/195625/"
] | It's called *mesh decimation*. Here is some code I wrote to do this for a class. Tibur is correct that the half edge data structure makes this much more efficient.
<http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~mjh7v/advgfx/proj1/> | The thing that you are calling tessellation is actually called [triangulation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygon_triangulation). The thing you are searching for is [tessellation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tessellation) (you may have heard of it referred to as tiling).
If you are more specific about the problem you are trying to solve (e.g. do you know the shape of the final polygon?) I can try to recommend some more specific algorithms. |
896,271 | If using nginx + php-fpm, does nginx need to have access to the php files?
Context: building a kuberentes pod, with two containers: nginx and php-fpm, we can built the php code into php-fpm container. It's possible to share the php files with volumes, but is it really needed?
Please correct my understanding: nginx will just forward a pre-processed request to php-fpm (using fast-cgi protocol) which will execute the script. So php-fpm needs to read php files. However I don't see the reason why would nginx need to, apart from checking if script is found or not. It could send the script name to php-fpm without accessing the php file.
Thanks | 2018/02/08 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/896271",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/455729/"
] | If (and *only* if) the actual server has been set up with a HTTPS service in port 445, it will work. That will also mean the server must not have SMB service running in that same port.
That server had better be in a network segment with no SMB traffic in it, though, or the HTTPS server instance in port 445 might get some garbage log entries from mis-aimed SMB connection attempts. But since we're talking about load balancers, this is probably a fairly serious set-up: the server is likely to be in some sort of a DMZ network segment anyway, and so SMB traffic in that segment is likely to be non-existent or heavily restricted.
(To me, this would suggest that the server might have multiple HTTPS services: maybe first there was one in the standard port 443, then another was added in port 444, then yet another in 445...) | Using the well known port numbers to run common protocols allows clients and servers to easily interact without needing to explicitly agree and communicate beforehand on what port to connect to.
But when you control both to client and the server there is nothing that stops you from running a service on a non-standard port.
So yes, you can reverse proxy and load balance port 443 to port 445 if that is where the HTTPS service is running.
Please note that running **public services using non-standard ports** will frequently make them unavailable to part of your users (many firewalls will allow and/or block specific traffic based on the destination port number).
My current hosting provider for instance actively blocks the ports for Netbios 135-139 and Port 445 for SMB as they should only be used in a LAN and not on the internet. |
68,865 | I have this sandwich I make that I think is pretty good, except that I have a problem with it falling apart.
Basically I take sliced salami, sliced pepperoni, (precooked) bacon, and banana peppers and throw them into a food processor to grind it up fairly ground up but not pasty.
I then put it in a skillet with some olive oil and brown/crisp it a little and then I add some red wine vinegar and black pepper to taste and set aside.
Then I take a loaf of french bread (there's this "everything" french bread at my local store that has "everything" seasoning on top of it, which I like to use, vs. plain french bread). I cut it in half lengthwise and scoop out some of the inside of the bread.
I squirt some horseradish sauce on the bottom side, then add a layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese. Then I add heap of the meat mix, and finally top with another layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese.
I then butter the skillet and press the sandwich on the skillet on each side for about a minute (like a cubano).
So this is one of my favorite sandwiches to make, and I think it's yummy! The problem is it's a little bit of a pain to eat, because there really isn't anything binding the meat together.
So I've been trying to figure out what I can do to make it not fall apart. The first thing I tried is to shred/grate the cheese and mix it in with the meat. Unfortunately, that doesn't work. I assume it's because of the olive oil and vinegar, but I haven't tried outright removing them, as it's a crucial part of the flavor I'm going for.
Next time I get a chance to make this sandwich, I was thinking maybe I would try browning the meat without adding the oil/vinegar, and instead sprinkle them on the top while building the sandwich. I figure this *might* help, but I'm not entirely sure it will completely help, since these meats are a bit fatty in their own right.
I was also thinking I could go the route of making it a patty (like making a hamburger patty), where I mix an egg and some breadcrumbs and cook it as a patty. I'm not so sure I really want to do that though. I'm not outright opposed to it, but I already feel like the flavor is where I want it, so I'd like to avoid throwing new flavors into the mix (though admittedly, eggs and breadcrumbs are fairly neutral).
But I'm also not sure I dig the idea of a patty for this sandwich in general. I like the mouth feels of heaping mass of chopped meat, and I actually don't mind if there's *some* amount of "fall apartness". I just really want to reduce it a bit somehow.
I'm certainly down for experimenting but I'm not by any means even fractionally rich, so I can only indulge in this pleasure about once a month or so, so I was hoping I could maybe see if anybody else out there might have any ideas?
If you got this far, thanks for reading my TL;DR! | 2016/05/07 | [
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/68865",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45631/"
] | What I did to solve my problem was I made a thick cheese sauce with some of the pepperjack/sharp cheddar (grated some of it, coated in corn starch, melted in a little bit of milk), and mixed that into the meat mix, just enough cheese sauce to bind it, just enough to make the meat start sticking together (and I reduced amount of sliced cheese on top and bottom to make up for the addition of cheese in the meat). Worked pretty well for me! | You can bind proteins using transglutaminase (otherwise known as meat glue). You could grind your pepperoni, salami, and bacon, mix with transglutanimase, roll into a roulade using plastic. Once it is set, you will be able to slice it. You could then build your sandwich. You will lose that ground meat feel, but it won't fall apart. |
68,865 | I have this sandwich I make that I think is pretty good, except that I have a problem with it falling apart.
Basically I take sliced salami, sliced pepperoni, (precooked) bacon, and banana peppers and throw them into a food processor to grind it up fairly ground up but not pasty.
I then put it in a skillet with some olive oil and brown/crisp it a little and then I add some red wine vinegar and black pepper to taste and set aside.
Then I take a loaf of french bread (there's this "everything" french bread at my local store that has "everything" seasoning on top of it, which I like to use, vs. plain french bread). I cut it in half lengthwise and scoop out some of the inside of the bread.
I squirt some horseradish sauce on the bottom side, then add a layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese. Then I add heap of the meat mix, and finally top with another layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese.
I then butter the skillet and press the sandwich on the skillet on each side for about a minute (like a cubano).
So this is one of my favorite sandwiches to make, and I think it's yummy! The problem is it's a little bit of a pain to eat, because there really isn't anything binding the meat together.
So I've been trying to figure out what I can do to make it not fall apart. The first thing I tried is to shred/grate the cheese and mix it in with the meat. Unfortunately, that doesn't work. I assume it's because of the olive oil and vinegar, but I haven't tried outright removing them, as it's a crucial part of the flavor I'm going for.
Next time I get a chance to make this sandwich, I was thinking maybe I would try browning the meat without adding the oil/vinegar, and instead sprinkle them on the top while building the sandwich. I figure this *might* help, but I'm not entirely sure it will completely help, since these meats are a bit fatty in their own right.
I was also thinking I could go the route of making it a patty (like making a hamburger patty), where I mix an egg and some breadcrumbs and cook it as a patty. I'm not so sure I really want to do that though. I'm not outright opposed to it, but I already feel like the flavor is where I want it, so I'd like to avoid throwing new flavors into the mix (though admittedly, eggs and breadcrumbs are fairly neutral).
But I'm also not sure I dig the idea of a patty for this sandwich in general. I like the mouth feels of heaping mass of chopped meat, and I actually don't mind if there's *some* amount of "fall apartness". I just really want to reduce it a bit somehow.
I'm certainly down for experimenting but I'm not by any means even fractionally rich, so I can only indulge in this pleasure about once a month or so, so I was hoping I could maybe see if anybody else out there might have any ideas?
If you got this far, thanks for reading my TL;DR! | 2016/05/07 | [
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/68865",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45631/"
] | Your binding challenge can be solved by:
* Julienne cut your meats so they are stringy and tangle together (but not too compact).
* Take most, not all the cheese from top and bottom layers and mix with the stringy meat (cheese becoming your binder intertwined in the meat.
* Put the meat and cheese in the oven to get a jump-start on the cheese to melt
* Finish the Cubano style grilling on your sandwich.
Side note: Some caramelized, stringy onions, mixed with the meat will be a binder and give additional flavor.
P.S. I like your recipe and am going to try it out myself! | You can bind proteins using transglutaminase (otherwise known as meat glue). You could grind your pepperoni, salami, and bacon, mix with transglutanimase, roll into a roulade using plastic. Once it is set, you will be able to slice it. You could then build your sandwich. You will lose that ground meat feel, but it won't fall apart. |
68,865 | I have this sandwich I make that I think is pretty good, except that I have a problem with it falling apart.
Basically I take sliced salami, sliced pepperoni, (precooked) bacon, and banana peppers and throw them into a food processor to grind it up fairly ground up but not pasty.
I then put it in a skillet with some olive oil and brown/crisp it a little and then I add some red wine vinegar and black pepper to taste and set aside.
Then I take a loaf of french bread (there's this "everything" french bread at my local store that has "everything" seasoning on top of it, which I like to use, vs. plain french bread). I cut it in half lengthwise and scoop out some of the inside of the bread.
I squirt some horseradish sauce on the bottom side, then add a layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese. Then I add heap of the meat mix, and finally top with another layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese.
I then butter the skillet and press the sandwich on the skillet on each side for about a minute (like a cubano).
So this is one of my favorite sandwiches to make, and I think it's yummy! The problem is it's a little bit of a pain to eat, because there really isn't anything binding the meat together.
So I've been trying to figure out what I can do to make it not fall apart. The first thing I tried is to shred/grate the cheese and mix it in with the meat. Unfortunately, that doesn't work. I assume it's because of the olive oil and vinegar, but I haven't tried outright removing them, as it's a crucial part of the flavor I'm going for.
Next time I get a chance to make this sandwich, I was thinking maybe I would try browning the meat without adding the oil/vinegar, and instead sprinkle them on the top while building the sandwich. I figure this *might* help, but I'm not entirely sure it will completely help, since these meats are a bit fatty in their own right.
I was also thinking I could go the route of making it a patty (like making a hamburger patty), where I mix an egg and some breadcrumbs and cook it as a patty. I'm not so sure I really want to do that though. I'm not outright opposed to it, but I already feel like the flavor is where I want it, so I'd like to avoid throwing new flavors into the mix (though admittedly, eggs and breadcrumbs are fairly neutral).
But I'm also not sure I dig the idea of a patty for this sandwich in general. I like the mouth feels of heaping mass of chopped meat, and I actually don't mind if there's *some* amount of "fall apartness". I just really want to reduce it a bit somehow.
I'm certainly down for experimenting but I'm not by any means even fractionally rich, so I can only indulge in this pleasure about once a month or so, so I was hoping I could maybe see if anybody else out there might have any ideas?
If you got this far, thanks for reading my TL;DR! | 2016/05/07 | [
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/68865",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45631/"
] | Take a Mozzarella cheese ball and break apart about 2 inch sections. Take enough that you think is going to be enough for how much meat you would like for your sandwich. Put the ingredients of meat and cheese together in a food processor. Grind together and then cook or sear the patties. The cheese should melt well enough to hold all of the meat with it, and then put it on your bread while all of the ingredients are hot and cheese is melted. | Egg makes for a great binder?
Either toss in one egg when yer blending and proceed as usual or make into a patty, might need to add some bread crumbs. |
68,865 | I have this sandwich I make that I think is pretty good, except that I have a problem with it falling apart.
Basically I take sliced salami, sliced pepperoni, (precooked) bacon, and banana peppers and throw them into a food processor to grind it up fairly ground up but not pasty.
I then put it in a skillet with some olive oil and brown/crisp it a little and then I add some red wine vinegar and black pepper to taste and set aside.
Then I take a loaf of french bread (there's this "everything" french bread at my local store that has "everything" seasoning on top of it, which I like to use, vs. plain french bread). I cut it in half lengthwise and scoop out some of the inside of the bread.
I squirt some horseradish sauce on the bottom side, then add a layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese. Then I add heap of the meat mix, and finally top with another layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese.
I then butter the skillet and press the sandwich on the skillet on each side for about a minute (like a cubano).
So this is one of my favorite sandwiches to make, and I think it's yummy! The problem is it's a little bit of a pain to eat, because there really isn't anything binding the meat together.
So I've been trying to figure out what I can do to make it not fall apart. The first thing I tried is to shred/grate the cheese and mix it in with the meat. Unfortunately, that doesn't work. I assume it's because of the olive oil and vinegar, but I haven't tried outright removing them, as it's a crucial part of the flavor I'm going for.
Next time I get a chance to make this sandwich, I was thinking maybe I would try browning the meat without adding the oil/vinegar, and instead sprinkle them on the top while building the sandwich. I figure this *might* help, but I'm not entirely sure it will completely help, since these meats are a bit fatty in their own right.
I was also thinking I could go the route of making it a patty (like making a hamburger patty), where I mix an egg and some breadcrumbs and cook it as a patty. I'm not so sure I really want to do that though. I'm not outright opposed to it, but I already feel like the flavor is where I want it, so I'd like to avoid throwing new flavors into the mix (though admittedly, eggs and breadcrumbs are fairly neutral).
But I'm also not sure I dig the idea of a patty for this sandwich in general. I like the mouth feels of heaping mass of chopped meat, and I actually don't mind if there's *some* amount of "fall apartness". I just really want to reduce it a bit somehow.
I'm certainly down for experimenting but I'm not by any means even fractionally rich, so I can only indulge in this pleasure about once a month or so, so I was hoping I could maybe see if anybody else out there might have any ideas?
If you got this far, thanks for reading my TL;DR! | 2016/05/07 | [
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/68865",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45631/"
] | What I did to solve my problem was I made a thick cheese sauce with some of the pepperjack/sharp cheddar (grated some of it, coated in corn starch, melted in a little bit of milk), and mixed that into the meat mix, just enough cheese sauce to bind it, just enough to make the meat start sticking together (and I reduced amount of sliced cheese on top and bottom to make up for the addition of cheese in the meat). Worked pretty well for me! | Egg makes for a great binder?
Either toss in one egg when yer blending and proceed as usual or make into a patty, might need to add some bread crumbs. |
68,865 | I have this sandwich I make that I think is pretty good, except that I have a problem with it falling apart.
Basically I take sliced salami, sliced pepperoni, (precooked) bacon, and banana peppers and throw them into a food processor to grind it up fairly ground up but not pasty.
I then put it in a skillet with some olive oil and brown/crisp it a little and then I add some red wine vinegar and black pepper to taste and set aside.
Then I take a loaf of french bread (there's this "everything" french bread at my local store that has "everything" seasoning on top of it, which I like to use, vs. plain french bread). I cut it in half lengthwise and scoop out some of the inside of the bread.
I squirt some horseradish sauce on the bottom side, then add a layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese. Then I add heap of the meat mix, and finally top with another layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese.
I then butter the skillet and press the sandwich on the skillet on each side for about a minute (like a cubano).
So this is one of my favorite sandwiches to make, and I think it's yummy! The problem is it's a little bit of a pain to eat, because there really isn't anything binding the meat together.
So I've been trying to figure out what I can do to make it not fall apart. The first thing I tried is to shred/grate the cheese and mix it in with the meat. Unfortunately, that doesn't work. I assume it's because of the olive oil and vinegar, but I haven't tried outright removing them, as it's a crucial part of the flavor I'm going for.
Next time I get a chance to make this sandwich, I was thinking maybe I would try browning the meat without adding the oil/vinegar, and instead sprinkle them on the top while building the sandwich. I figure this *might* help, but I'm not entirely sure it will completely help, since these meats are a bit fatty in their own right.
I was also thinking I could go the route of making it a patty (like making a hamburger patty), where I mix an egg and some breadcrumbs and cook it as a patty. I'm not so sure I really want to do that though. I'm not outright opposed to it, but I already feel like the flavor is where I want it, so I'd like to avoid throwing new flavors into the mix (though admittedly, eggs and breadcrumbs are fairly neutral).
But I'm also not sure I dig the idea of a patty for this sandwich in general. I like the mouth feels of heaping mass of chopped meat, and I actually don't mind if there's *some* amount of "fall apartness". I just really want to reduce it a bit somehow.
I'm certainly down for experimenting but I'm not by any means even fractionally rich, so I can only indulge in this pleasure about once a month or so, so I was hoping I could maybe see if anybody else out there might have any ideas?
If you got this far, thanks for reading my TL;DR! | 2016/05/07 | [
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/68865",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45631/"
] | Your binding challenge can be solved by:
* Julienne cut your meats so they are stringy and tangle together (but not too compact).
* Take most, not all the cheese from top and bottom layers and mix with the stringy meat (cheese becoming your binder intertwined in the meat.
* Put the meat and cheese in the oven to get a jump-start on the cheese to melt
* Finish the Cubano style grilling on your sandwich.
Side note: Some caramelized, stringy onions, mixed with the meat will be a binder and give additional flavor.
P.S. I like your recipe and am going to try it out myself! | Sandwich sounds wonderful. I would add some roasted red peppers & sundried tomato to make the flavor even more complex! To hold it together, I would make multiple layers of cheeses with the ground meats sprinkled between each layer. Another possibility could be to put the ground, fried meats in an "envelope" made out of thinly sliced prosciutto.
Using the TG on the uncooked, but cured meats, could work. But, if you you tried to glue the fried meats, their protein will probably have been altered too much, by the heat, for the TG to work.
The other thing to consider is that their is really no reason to grind the meats & peppers. Thin slices can still be sauteed with the olive oil & wine and scrambled together. An egg could even be mixed in to make a sort of omelet. This could be placed in between the bread and cheese.
Still another idea is to make this sandwich in a "sandwich maker" A/K/A a "sandwich press" with creates sandwich packets and toasts the outside. |
68,865 | I have this sandwich I make that I think is pretty good, except that I have a problem with it falling apart.
Basically I take sliced salami, sliced pepperoni, (precooked) bacon, and banana peppers and throw them into a food processor to grind it up fairly ground up but not pasty.
I then put it in a skillet with some olive oil and brown/crisp it a little and then I add some red wine vinegar and black pepper to taste and set aside.
Then I take a loaf of french bread (there's this "everything" french bread at my local store that has "everything" seasoning on top of it, which I like to use, vs. plain french bread). I cut it in half lengthwise and scoop out some of the inside of the bread.
I squirt some horseradish sauce on the bottom side, then add a layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese. Then I add heap of the meat mix, and finally top with another layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese.
I then butter the skillet and press the sandwich on the skillet on each side for about a minute (like a cubano).
So this is one of my favorite sandwiches to make, and I think it's yummy! The problem is it's a little bit of a pain to eat, because there really isn't anything binding the meat together.
So I've been trying to figure out what I can do to make it not fall apart. The first thing I tried is to shred/grate the cheese and mix it in with the meat. Unfortunately, that doesn't work. I assume it's because of the olive oil and vinegar, but I haven't tried outright removing them, as it's a crucial part of the flavor I'm going for.
Next time I get a chance to make this sandwich, I was thinking maybe I would try browning the meat without adding the oil/vinegar, and instead sprinkle them on the top while building the sandwich. I figure this *might* help, but I'm not entirely sure it will completely help, since these meats are a bit fatty in their own right.
I was also thinking I could go the route of making it a patty (like making a hamburger patty), where I mix an egg and some breadcrumbs and cook it as a patty. I'm not so sure I really want to do that though. I'm not outright opposed to it, but I already feel like the flavor is where I want it, so I'd like to avoid throwing new flavors into the mix (though admittedly, eggs and breadcrumbs are fairly neutral).
But I'm also not sure I dig the idea of a patty for this sandwich in general. I like the mouth feels of heaping mass of chopped meat, and I actually don't mind if there's *some* amount of "fall apartness". I just really want to reduce it a bit somehow.
I'm certainly down for experimenting but I'm not by any means even fractionally rich, so I can only indulge in this pleasure about once a month or so, so I was hoping I could maybe see if anybody else out there might have any ideas?
If you got this far, thanks for reading my TL;DR! | 2016/05/07 | [
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/68865",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45631/"
] | Your binding challenge can be solved by:
* Julienne cut your meats so they are stringy and tangle together (but not too compact).
* Take most, not all the cheese from top and bottom layers and mix with the stringy meat (cheese becoming your binder intertwined in the meat.
* Put the meat and cheese in the oven to get a jump-start on the cheese to melt
* Finish the Cubano style grilling on your sandwich.
Side note: Some caramelized, stringy onions, mixed with the meat will be a binder and give additional flavor.
P.S. I like your recipe and am going to try it out myself! | Egg makes for a great binder?
Either toss in one egg when yer blending and proceed as usual or make into a patty, might need to add some bread crumbs. |
68,865 | I have this sandwich I make that I think is pretty good, except that I have a problem with it falling apart.
Basically I take sliced salami, sliced pepperoni, (precooked) bacon, and banana peppers and throw them into a food processor to grind it up fairly ground up but not pasty.
I then put it in a skillet with some olive oil and brown/crisp it a little and then I add some red wine vinegar and black pepper to taste and set aside.
Then I take a loaf of french bread (there's this "everything" french bread at my local store that has "everything" seasoning on top of it, which I like to use, vs. plain french bread). I cut it in half lengthwise and scoop out some of the inside of the bread.
I squirt some horseradish sauce on the bottom side, then add a layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese. Then I add heap of the meat mix, and finally top with another layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese.
I then butter the skillet and press the sandwich on the skillet on each side for about a minute (like a cubano).
So this is one of my favorite sandwiches to make, and I think it's yummy! The problem is it's a little bit of a pain to eat, because there really isn't anything binding the meat together.
So I've been trying to figure out what I can do to make it not fall apart. The first thing I tried is to shred/grate the cheese and mix it in with the meat. Unfortunately, that doesn't work. I assume it's because of the olive oil and vinegar, but I haven't tried outright removing them, as it's a crucial part of the flavor I'm going for.
Next time I get a chance to make this sandwich, I was thinking maybe I would try browning the meat without adding the oil/vinegar, and instead sprinkle them on the top while building the sandwich. I figure this *might* help, but I'm not entirely sure it will completely help, since these meats are a bit fatty in their own right.
I was also thinking I could go the route of making it a patty (like making a hamburger patty), where I mix an egg and some breadcrumbs and cook it as a patty. I'm not so sure I really want to do that though. I'm not outright opposed to it, but I already feel like the flavor is where I want it, so I'd like to avoid throwing new flavors into the mix (though admittedly, eggs and breadcrumbs are fairly neutral).
But I'm also not sure I dig the idea of a patty for this sandwich in general. I like the mouth feels of heaping mass of chopped meat, and I actually don't mind if there's *some* amount of "fall apartness". I just really want to reduce it a bit somehow.
I'm certainly down for experimenting but I'm not by any means even fractionally rich, so I can only indulge in this pleasure about once a month or so, so I was hoping I could maybe see if anybody else out there might have any ideas?
If you got this far, thanks for reading my TL;DR! | 2016/05/07 | [
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/68865",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45631/"
] | You can bind proteins using transglutaminase (otherwise known as meat glue). You could grind your pepperoni, salami, and bacon, mix with transglutanimase, roll into a roulade using plastic. Once it is set, you will be able to slice it. You could then build your sandwich. You will lose that ground meat feel, but it won't fall apart. | Egg makes for a great binder?
Either toss in one egg when yer blending and proceed as usual or make into a patty, might need to add some bread crumbs. |
68,865 | I have this sandwich I make that I think is pretty good, except that I have a problem with it falling apart.
Basically I take sliced salami, sliced pepperoni, (precooked) bacon, and banana peppers and throw them into a food processor to grind it up fairly ground up but not pasty.
I then put it in a skillet with some olive oil and brown/crisp it a little and then I add some red wine vinegar and black pepper to taste and set aside.
Then I take a loaf of french bread (there's this "everything" french bread at my local store that has "everything" seasoning on top of it, which I like to use, vs. plain french bread). I cut it in half lengthwise and scoop out some of the inside of the bread.
I squirt some horseradish sauce on the bottom side, then add a layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese. Then I add heap of the meat mix, and finally top with another layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese.
I then butter the skillet and press the sandwich on the skillet on each side for about a minute (like a cubano).
So this is one of my favorite sandwiches to make, and I think it's yummy! The problem is it's a little bit of a pain to eat, because there really isn't anything binding the meat together.
So I've been trying to figure out what I can do to make it not fall apart. The first thing I tried is to shred/grate the cheese and mix it in with the meat. Unfortunately, that doesn't work. I assume it's because of the olive oil and vinegar, but I haven't tried outright removing them, as it's a crucial part of the flavor I'm going for.
Next time I get a chance to make this sandwich, I was thinking maybe I would try browning the meat without adding the oil/vinegar, and instead sprinkle them on the top while building the sandwich. I figure this *might* help, but I'm not entirely sure it will completely help, since these meats are a bit fatty in their own right.
I was also thinking I could go the route of making it a patty (like making a hamburger patty), where I mix an egg and some breadcrumbs and cook it as a patty. I'm not so sure I really want to do that though. I'm not outright opposed to it, but I already feel like the flavor is where I want it, so I'd like to avoid throwing new flavors into the mix (though admittedly, eggs and breadcrumbs are fairly neutral).
But I'm also not sure I dig the idea of a patty for this sandwich in general. I like the mouth feels of heaping mass of chopped meat, and I actually don't mind if there's *some* amount of "fall apartness". I just really want to reduce it a bit somehow.
I'm certainly down for experimenting but I'm not by any means even fractionally rich, so I can only indulge in this pleasure about once a month or so, so I was hoping I could maybe see if anybody else out there might have any ideas?
If you got this far, thanks for reading my TL;DR! | 2016/05/07 | [
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/68865",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45631/"
] | Sandwich sounds wonderful. I would add some roasted red peppers & sundried tomato to make the flavor even more complex! To hold it together, I would make multiple layers of cheeses with the ground meats sprinkled between each layer. Another possibility could be to put the ground, fried meats in an "envelope" made out of thinly sliced prosciutto.
Using the TG on the uncooked, but cured meats, could work. But, if you you tried to glue the fried meats, their protein will probably have been altered too much, by the heat, for the TG to work.
The other thing to consider is that their is really no reason to grind the meats & peppers. Thin slices can still be sauteed with the olive oil & wine and scrambled together. An egg could even be mixed in to make a sort of omelet. This could be placed in between the bread and cheese.
Still another idea is to make this sandwich in a "sandwich maker" A/K/A a "sandwich press" with creates sandwich packets and toasts the outside. | You can bind proteins using transglutaminase (otherwise known as meat glue). You could grind your pepperoni, salami, and bacon, mix with transglutanimase, roll into a roulade using plastic. Once it is set, you will be able to slice it. You could then build your sandwich. You will lose that ground meat feel, but it won't fall apart. |
68,865 | I have this sandwich I make that I think is pretty good, except that I have a problem with it falling apart.
Basically I take sliced salami, sliced pepperoni, (precooked) bacon, and banana peppers and throw them into a food processor to grind it up fairly ground up but not pasty.
I then put it in a skillet with some olive oil and brown/crisp it a little and then I add some red wine vinegar and black pepper to taste and set aside.
Then I take a loaf of french bread (there's this "everything" french bread at my local store that has "everything" seasoning on top of it, which I like to use, vs. plain french bread). I cut it in half lengthwise and scoop out some of the inside of the bread.
I squirt some horseradish sauce on the bottom side, then add a layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese. Then I add heap of the meat mix, and finally top with another layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese.
I then butter the skillet and press the sandwich on the skillet on each side for about a minute (like a cubano).
So this is one of my favorite sandwiches to make, and I think it's yummy! The problem is it's a little bit of a pain to eat, because there really isn't anything binding the meat together.
So I've been trying to figure out what I can do to make it not fall apart. The first thing I tried is to shred/grate the cheese and mix it in with the meat. Unfortunately, that doesn't work. I assume it's because of the olive oil and vinegar, but I haven't tried outright removing them, as it's a crucial part of the flavor I'm going for.
Next time I get a chance to make this sandwich, I was thinking maybe I would try browning the meat without adding the oil/vinegar, and instead sprinkle them on the top while building the sandwich. I figure this *might* help, but I'm not entirely sure it will completely help, since these meats are a bit fatty in their own right.
I was also thinking I could go the route of making it a patty (like making a hamburger patty), where I mix an egg and some breadcrumbs and cook it as a patty. I'm not so sure I really want to do that though. I'm not outright opposed to it, but I already feel like the flavor is where I want it, so I'd like to avoid throwing new flavors into the mix (though admittedly, eggs and breadcrumbs are fairly neutral).
But I'm also not sure I dig the idea of a patty for this sandwich in general. I like the mouth feels of heaping mass of chopped meat, and I actually don't mind if there's *some* amount of "fall apartness". I just really want to reduce it a bit somehow.
I'm certainly down for experimenting but I'm not by any means even fractionally rich, so I can only indulge in this pleasure about once a month or so, so I was hoping I could maybe see if anybody else out there might have any ideas?
If you got this far, thanks for reading my TL;DR! | 2016/05/07 | [
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/68865",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45631/"
] | Sandwich sounds wonderful. I would add some roasted red peppers & sundried tomato to make the flavor even more complex! To hold it together, I would make multiple layers of cheeses with the ground meats sprinkled between each layer. Another possibility could be to put the ground, fried meats in an "envelope" made out of thinly sliced prosciutto.
Using the TG on the uncooked, but cured meats, could work. But, if you you tried to glue the fried meats, their protein will probably have been altered too much, by the heat, for the TG to work.
The other thing to consider is that their is really no reason to grind the meats & peppers. Thin slices can still be sauteed with the olive oil & wine and scrambled together. An egg could even be mixed in to make a sort of omelet. This could be placed in between the bread and cheese.
Still another idea is to make this sandwich in a "sandwich maker" A/K/A a "sandwich press" with creates sandwich packets and toasts the outside. | Egg makes for a great binder?
Either toss in one egg when yer blending and proceed as usual or make into a patty, might need to add some bread crumbs. |
68,865 | I have this sandwich I make that I think is pretty good, except that I have a problem with it falling apart.
Basically I take sliced salami, sliced pepperoni, (precooked) bacon, and banana peppers and throw them into a food processor to grind it up fairly ground up but not pasty.
I then put it in a skillet with some olive oil and brown/crisp it a little and then I add some red wine vinegar and black pepper to taste and set aside.
Then I take a loaf of french bread (there's this "everything" french bread at my local store that has "everything" seasoning on top of it, which I like to use, vs. plain french bread). I cut it in half lengthwise and scoop out some of the inside of the bread.
I squirt some horseradish sauce on the bottom side, then add a layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese. Then I add heap of the meat mix, and finally top with another layer of sliced sharp chedder and pepper jack cheese.
I then butter the skillet and press the sandwich on the skillet on each side for about a minute (like a cubano).
So this is one of my favorite sandwiches to make, and I think it's yummy! The problem is it's a little bit of a pain to eat, because there really isn't anything binding the meat together.
So I've been trying to figure out what I can do to make it not fall apart. The first thing I tried is to shred/grate the cheese and mix it in with the meat. Unfortunately, that doesn't work. I assume it's because of the olive oil and vinegar, but I haven't tried outright removing them, as it's a crucial part of the flavor I'm going for.
Next time I get a chance to make this sandwich, I was thinking maybe I would try browning the meat without adding the oil/vinegar, and instead sprinkle them on the top while building the sandwich. I figure this *might* help, but I'm not entirely sure it will completely help, since these meats are a bit fatty in their own right.
I was also thinking I could go the route of making it a patty (like making a hamburger patty), where I mix an egg and some breadcrumbs and cook it as a patty. I'm not so sure I really want to do that though. I'm not outright opposed to it, but I already feel like the flavor is where I want it, so I'd like to avoid throwing new flavors into the mix (though admittedly, eggs and breadcrumbs are fairly neutral).
But I'm also not sure I dig the idea of a patty for this sandwich in general. I like the mouth feels of heaping mass of chopped meat, and I actually don't mind if there's *some* amount of "fall apartness". I just really want to reduce it a bit somehow.
I'm certainly down for experimenting but I'm not by any means even fractionally rich, so I can only indulge in this pleasure about once a month or so, so I was hoping I could maybe see if anybody else out there might have any ideas?
If you got this far, thanks for reading my TL;DR! | 2016/05/07 | [
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/68865",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45631/"
] | Your binding challenge can be solved by:
* Julienne cut your meats so they are stringy and tangle together (but not too compact).
* Take most, not all the cheese from top and bottom layers and mix with the stringy meat (cheese becoming your binder intertwined in the meat.
* Put the meat and cheese in the oven to get a jump-start on the cheese to melt
* Finish the Cubano style grilling on your sandwich.
Side note: Some caramelized, stringy onions, mixed with the meat will be a binder and give additional flavor.
P.S. I like your recipe and am going to try it out myself! | Take a Mozzarella cheese ball and break apart about 2 inch sections. Take enough that you think is going to be enough for how much meat you would like for your sandwich. Put the ingredients of meat and cheese together in a food processor. Grind together and then cook or sear the patties. The cheese should melt well enough to hold all of the meat with it, and then put it on your bread while all of the ingredients are hot and cheese is melted. |
34,762 | I am working on a story where a character is witnessing something being written out but I don't know the correct way to write that.
It will write out *death*
I wrote out
>
> I witnessed something being scratched into the floor, There was a D then an E, then an A then a T and H
>
>
>
But I can tell this is very wrong and doesn't flow at all but I am trying to show how it's not written out as
>
> D E A T H
>
>
>
I want the reader to know it was being scratched right infront of them letter by letter not just reading the word Death on the floor
I also want it to inflict a sort of fear since it is something abnormal and they are not just reading something they found and are witnessing it. | 2018/04/02 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/34762",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/30607/"
] | One common piece of advice for this sort of scenario, is to focus more on the character's response. And, try to raise the tension progressively, during the experience.
If we are in the POV of the person watching DEATH being written out, we may suspect what the word is at DE or DEA.
But, maybe the character hopes against hope that the word will be DEAR or DEAL or something.
So add in the response to your POV character, and raise the tension wth each letter written. Add in dread, racing heart, the character breaking into a sweat as he/she watches that "T" form, maybe the character whimpers, knowing that DEAT only leads to one possible word .....
You could draw this out into a paragraph. And when the 'H' falls, the character may have some precipitous response, hurling themselves backwards agains a wall, panicked look around the room, something.
This idea has some analogies to the idea of a ticking timer, and how that device is useful for building tension. You have a possible opportunity here... | The convention is to represent text written on objects in **italics**:
>
> *Come quickly,* the note read.
>
>
> The graffiti said: *ACAB*.
>
>
> John read that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution says that: *Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...*
>
>
>
Note that in fiction you do not cite written text in quotations marks! Quotation marks always signify spoken language:
>
> Peter quoted the First Amendment to John smugly: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof!"
>
>
> |
34,762 | I am working on a story where a character is witnessing something being written out but I don't know the correct way to write that.
It will write out *death*
I wrote out
>
> I witnessed something being scratched into the floor, There was a D then an E, then an A then a T and H
>
>
>
But I can tell this is very wrong and doesn't flow at all but I am trying to show how it's not written out as
>
> D E A T H
>
>
>
I want the reader to know it was being scratched right infront of them letter by letter not just reading the word Death on the floor
I also want it to inflict a sort of fear since it is something abnormal and they are not just reading something they found and are witnessing it. | 2018/04/02 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/34762",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/30607/"
] | One common piece of advice for this sort of scenario, is to focus more on the character's response. And, try to raise the tension progressively, during the experience.
If we are in the POV of the person watching DEATH being written out, we may suspect what the word is at DE or DEA.
But, maybe the character hopes against hope that the word will be DEAR or DEAL or something.
So add in the response to your POV character, and raise the tension wth each letter written. Add in dread, racing heart, the character breaking into a sweat as he/she watches that "T" form, maybe the character whimpers, knowing that DEAT only leads to one possible word .....
You could draw this out into a paragraph. And when the 'H' falls, the character may have some precipitous response, hurling themselves backwards agains a wall, panicked look around the room, something.
This idea has some analogies to the idea of a ticking timer, and how that device is useful for building tension. You have a possible opportunity here... | First, this question seems to be in a vacuum. We know nothing about WHO or what is scratching out the message/letters. That's more important than anything. Let's say it's being done by an invisible hand and maybe someone else is nearby--
>
> At my feet a straight line appeared, as though an invisible hand were
> scratching the groove into the floor. But it wasn't just a line, now
> it was a letter--D. I looked on in fascinated horror as more grooves appeared next to the first, and after
> an agonizingly long time, it too became a letter. F. No. E. "Mary," I
> called out through the doorway "come see." But Mary didn't answer. Looking back at the floor
> again, I saw an A had appeared next to the first two letters. How had
> it happened so quickly when the other letters had taken so long?
>
>
>
That description might be nothing like what you want, but it gives *context* to the letters. And that's what your description needs. If you're describing letters being scratched out on the floor, you need to actually describe the process of them being scratched out, and reactions as it occurs.
If it's a person scratching out the letters in front of your POV character, that will be important too. Describing the actual formation of the letters, what it's in answer to, what they hope the letters might form, all that, it's part of this description and the reaction to it.
If you're building suspense, just get inside the head of the person seeing the letters happen, what their reaction is, what they believe that the letters might spell out as @DPT says. |
34,762 | I am working on a story where a character is witnessing something being written out but I don't know the correct way to write that.
It will write out *death*
I wrote out
>
> I witnessed something being scratched into the floor, There was a D then an E, then an A then a T and H
>
>
>
But I can tell this is very wrong and doesn't flow at all but I am trying to show how it's not written out as
>
> D E A T H
>
>
>
I want the reader to know it was being scratched right infront of them letter by letter not just reading the word Death on the floor
I also want it to inflict a sort of fear since it is something abnormal and they are not just reading something they found and are witnessing it. | 2018/04/02 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/34762",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/30607/"
] | First, this question seems to be in a vacuum. We know nothing about WHO or what is scratching out the message/letters. That's more important than anything. Let's say it's being done by an invisible hand and maybe someone else is nearby--
>
> At my feet a straight line appeared, as though an invisible hand were
> scratching the groove into the floor. But it wasn't just a line, now
> it was a letter--D. I looked on in fascinated horror as more grooves appeared next to the first, and after
> an agonizingly long time, it too became a letter. F. No. E. "Mary," I
> called out through the doorway "come see." But Mary didn't answer. Looking back at the floor
> again, I saw an A had appeared next to the first two letters. How had
> it happened so quickly when the other letters had taken so long?
>
>
>
That description might be nothing like what you want, but it gives *context* to the letters. And that's what your description needs. If you're describing letters being scratched out on the floor, you need to actually describe the process of them being scratched out, and reactions as it occurs.
If it's a person scratching out the letters in front of your POV character, that will be important too. Describing the actual formation of the letters, what it's in answer to, what they hope the letters might form, all that, it's part of this description and the reaction to it.
If you're building suspense, just get inside the head of the person seeing the letters happen, what their reaction is, what they believe that the letters might spell out as @DPT says. | The convention is to represent text written on objects in **italics**:
>
> *Come quickly,* the note read.
>
>
> The graffiti said: *ACAB*.
>
>
> John read that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution says that: *Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...*
>
>
>
Note that in fiction you do not cite written text in quotations marks! Quotation marks always signify spoken language:
>
> Peter quoted the First Amendment to John smugly: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof!"
>
>
> |
4,130 | I have noticed that when I find myself sleep deprived my singing voice gets greatly impaired. It is difficult to reach and sustain higher notes and it's like my voice muscles are "sore".
I guess that's a given, considering I'm tired, but I wanted to know what are the implications of these less than optimal nights in my voice. Should I avoid singing in this kind of situation? Can this permanently damage my voice? Can this be corrected by posterior well rested nights? | 2011/09/24 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/4130",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/1186/"
] | One word: Severely.
Of all the musicians in a group, the singer must be the most concerned about getting enough sleep. And the older you get, the more important this becomes.
You should also be concerned about staying hydrated, meaning: drink a lot of water. Be careful with alcohol or caffeine or smoking, all of which can fatigue the voice due to depriving the mouth and larynx of moisture, leading to fatigue and strain when you sing.
If you have had too little sleep and too little hydration, and you sing anyway, you will increase the likelihood of straining and injuring your voice by singing. So if there is a day that you have not had enough sleep, try to sing less and talk less also.
If you develop severe voice problems, the first thing a doctor will tell you is to stop singing and talking for a week, a month, or longer, and to stop rehearsing and performing until you have healed. You do not want to let things get that bad.
Some people are more prone to vocal problems than others. Simply be mindful of how you feel each day, and figure out what you should do to protect your voice from unnecessary strain. But of course you must also practice singing to keep your voice strong. You are like an athlete; you want to keep your physical training up, but you do not want to risk injury from too much exertion.
Your voice must last your entire life, so if you are serious about singing your best, be mindful of all the advice on this page. | The simple answer is that without sleep, your voice gets tired. Tired voices become injured over time. Tired voices are rested by sleep.
So, yes, you should avoid singing with a tired voice. You can extend your vocal stamina by singing a lot (which it sounds like you're already doing), and by avoiding tensing up when you sing (describing how is a little beyond the scope of this answer).
Most vocal strain is reversible; you can become hoarse and a few days later, you'll be fine. However, over a long period of time of damaging your voice, you can develop nodules on your vocal cords. These are permanent, but surgically reversible. That's the extent of my knowledge of vocal damage; I have no idea how long it takes to develop (but I suspect the time frame is years and decades), or any of the symptoms of having it, or how risky the corrective surgery is.
Here's hoping someone else can give you a more descriptive answer! |
4,130 | I have noticed that when I find myself sleep deprived my singing voice gets greatly impaired. It is difficult to reach and sustain higher notes and it's like my voice muscles are "sore".
I guess that's a given, considering I'm tired, but I wanted to know what are the implications of these less than optimal nights in my voice. Should I avoid singing in this kind of situation? Can this permanently damage my voice? Can this be corrected by posterior well rested nights? | 2011/09/24 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/4130",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/1186/"
] | The simple answer is that without sleep, your voice gets tired. Tired voices become injured over time. Tired voices are rested by sleep.
So, yes, you should avoid singing with a tired voice. You can extend your vocal stamina by singing a lot (which it sounds like you're already doing), and by avoiding tensing up when you sing (describing how is a little beyond the scope of this answer).
Most vocal strain is reversible; you can become hoarse and a few days later, you'll be fine. However, over a long period of time of damaging your voice, you can develop nodules on your vocal cords. These are permanent, but surgically reversible. That's the extent of my knowledge of vocal damage; I have no idea how long it takes to develop (but I suspect the time frame is years and decades), or any of the symptoms of having it, or how risky the corrective surgery is.
Here's hoping someone else can give you a more descriptive answer! | All depends on the person. There are singers that can go go go, and others that whisper during the day to save their voice. Look at Celine Dion in comparison to Steve Perry. |
4,130 | I have noticed that when I find myself sleep deprived my singing voice gets greatly impaired. It is difficult to reach and sustain higher notes and it's like my voice muscles are "sore".
I guess that's a given, considering I'm tired, but I wanted to know what are the implications of these less than optimal nights in my voice. Should I avoid singing in this kind of situation? Can this permanently damage my voice? Can this be corrected by posterior well rested nights? | 2011/09/24 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/4130",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/1186/"
] | The simple answer is that without sleep, your voice gets tired. Tired voices become injured over time. Tired voices are rested by sleep.
So, yes, you should avoid singing with a tired voice. You can extend your vocal stamina by singing a lot (which it sounds like you're already doing), and by avoiding tensing up when you sing (describing how is a little beyond the scope of this answer).
Most vocal strain is reversible; you can become hoarse and a few days later, you'll be fine. However, over a long period of time of damaging your voice, you can develop nodules on your vocal cords. These are permanent, but surgically reversible. That's the extent of my knowledge of vocal damage; I have no idea how long it takes to develop (but I suspect the time frame is years and decades), or any of the symptoms of having it, or how risky the corrective surgery is.
Here's hoping someone else can give you a more descriptive answer! | its happened to me too. Lack of sleep makes your entire body tired and makes it work more slowly than usual. Your voice muscles get tired and they shut down, you may completely lose the ability to talk or sing for a while. So yeah...sleep is important |
4,130 | I have noticed that when I find myself sleep deprived my singing voice gets greatly impaired. It is difficult to reach and sustain higher notes and it's like my voice muscles are "sore".
I guess that's a given, considering I'm tired, but I wanted to know what are the implications of these less than optimal nights in my voice. Should I avoid singing in this kind of situation? Can this permanently damage my voice? Can this be corrected by posterior well rested nights? | 2011/09/24 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/4130",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/1186/"
] | The simple answer is that without sleep, your voice gets tired. Tired voices become injured over time. Tired voices are rested by sleep.
So, yes, you should avoid singing with a tired voice. You can extend your vocal stamina by singing a lot (which it sounds like you're already doing), and by avoiding tensing up when you sing (describing how is a little beyond the scope of this answer).
Most vocal strain is reversible; you can become hoarse and a few days later, you'll be fine. However, over a long period of time of damaging your voice, you can develop nodules on your vocal cords. These are permanent, but surgically reversible. That's the extent of my knowledge of vocal damage; I have no idea how long it takes to develop (but I suspect the time frame is years and decades), or any of the symptoms of having it, or how risky the corrective surgery is.
Here's hoping someone else can give you a more descriptive answer! | Think of Taylor Swift who spends long days awake making songs and meeting fans, yet she still sings to this day.
Yet even Lady Gaga had trouble sleeping at times, and she still sings.
It's literally dependent though good health's important even for singing, like said here. |
4,130 | I have noticed that when I find myself sleep deprived my singing voice gets greatly impaired. It is difficult to reach and sustain higher notes and it's like my voice muscles are "sore".
I guess that's a given, considering I'm tired, but I wanted to know what are the implications of these less than optimal nights in my voice. Should I avoid singing in this kind of situation? Can this permanently damage my voice? Can this be corrected by posterior well rested nights? | 2011/09/24 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/4130",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/1186/"
] | One word: Severely.
Of all the musicians in a group, the singer must be the most concerned about getting enough sleep. And the older you get, the more important this becomes.
You should also be concerned about staying hydrated, meaning: drink a lot of water. Be careful with alcohol or caffeine or smoking, all of which can fatigue the voice due to depriving the mouth and larynx of moisture, leading to fatigue and strain when you sing.
If you have had too little sleep and too little hydration, and you sing anyway, you will increase the likelihood of straining and injuring your voice by singing. So if there is a day that you have not had enough sleep, try to sing less and talk less also.
If you develop severe voice problems, the first thing a doctor will tell you is to stop singing and talking for a week, a month, or longer, and to stop rehearsing and performing until you have healed. You do not want to let things get that bad.
Some people are more prone to vocal problems than others. Simply be mindful of how you feel each day, and figure out what you should do to protect your voice from unnecessary strain. But of course you must also practice singing to keep your voice strong. You are like an athlete; you want to keep your physical training up, but you do not want to risk injury from too much exertion.
Your voice must last your entire life, so if you are serious about singing your best, be mindful of all the advice on this page. | All depends on the person. There are singers that can go go go, and others that whisper during the day to save their voice. Look at Celine Dion in comparison to Steve Perry. |
4,130 | I have noticed that when I find myself sleep deprived my singing voice gets greatly impaired. It is difficult to reach and sustain higher notes and it's like my voice muscles are "sore".
I guess that's a given, considering I'm tired, but I wanted to know what are the implications of these less than optimal nights in my voice. Should I avoid singing in this kind of situation? Can this permanently damage my voice? Can this be corrected by posterior well rested nights? | 2011/09/24 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/4130",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/1186/"
] | One word: Severely.
Of all the musicians in a group, the singer must be the most concerned about getting enough sleep. And the older you get, the more important this becomes.
You should also be concerned about staying hydrated, meaning: drink a lot of water. Be careful with alcohol or caffeine or smoking, all of which can fatigue the voice due to depriving the mouth and larynx of moisture, leading to fatigue and strain when you sing.
If you have had too little sleep and too little hydration, and you sing anyway, you will increase the likelihood of straining and injuring your voice by singing. So if there is a day that you have not had enough sleep, try to sing less and talk less also.
If you develop severe voice problems, the first thing a doctor will tell you is to stop singing and talking for a week, a month, or longer, and to stop rehearsing and performing until you have healed. You do not want to let things get that bad.
Some people are more prone to vocal problems than others. Simply be mindful of how you feel each day, and figure out what you should do to protect your voice from unnecessary strain. But of course you must also practice singing to keep your voice strong. You are like an athlete; you want to keep your physical training up, but you do not want to risk injury from too much exertion.
Your voice must last your entire life, so if you are serious about singing your best, be mindful of all the advice on this page. | its happened to me too. Lack of sleep makes your entire body tired and makes it work more slowly than usual. Your voice muscles get tired and they shut down, you may completely lose the ability to talk or sing for a while. So yeah...sleep is important |
4,130 | I have noticed that when I find myself sleep deprived my singing voice gets greatly impaired. It is difficult to reach and sustain higher notes and it's like my voice muscles are "sore".
I guess that's a given, considering I'm tired, but I wanted to know what are the implications of these less than optimal nights in my voice. Should I avoid singing in this kind of situation? Can this permanently damage my voice? Can this be corrected by posterior well rested nights? | 2011/09/24 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/4130",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/1186/"
] | One word: Severely.
Of all the musicians in a group, the singer must be the most concerned about getting enough sleep. And the older you get, the more important this becomes.
You should also be concerned about staying hydrated, meaning: drink a lot of water. Be careful with alcohol or caffeine or smoking, all of which can fatigue the voice due to depriving the mouth and larynx of moisture, leading to fatigue and strain when you sing.
If you have had too little sleep and too little hydration, and you sing anyway, you will increase the likelihood of straining and injuring your voice by singing. So if there is a day that you have not had enough sleep, try to sing less and talk less also.
If you develop severe voice problems, the first thing a doctor will tell you is to stop singing and talking for a week, a month, or longer, and to stop rehearsing and performing until you have healed. You do not want to let things get that bad.
Some people are more prone to vocal problems than others. Simply be mindful of how you feel each day, and figure out what you should do to protect your voice from unnecessary strain. But of course you must also practice singing to keep your voice strong. You are like an athlete; you want to keep your physical training up, but you do not want to risk injury from too much exertion.
Your voice must last your entire life, so if you are serious about singing your best, be mindful of all the advice on this page. | Think of Taylor Swift who spends long days awake making songs and meeting fans, yet she still sings to this day.
Yet even Lady Gaga had trouble sleeping at times, and she still sings.
It's literally dependent though good health's important even for singing, like said here. |
2,573,372 | I'm building a web application that shows users interesting visualizations of their Gmail activity (who they're emailing the most, etc). Obviously the user needs to give me his Gmail password to use the application, and I'm wondering how I should store it:
1. Store the Gmail password in plaintext. Risky!
2. Don't store the Gmail password at all; force the user to enter it every time he wants to sync data. Potentially inconvenient!
3. Encrypt the Gmail password before storing it. The user's password to my application is the key.
Something like (3) seems best, but with (3) I can only sync data when the user logs in (since I won't know his password to my application at any other time), which isn't ideal. I'd prefer a [Mint.com](http://Mint.com)-like solution whereby the user can click a button to sync data from Gmail at any time without re-entering his password (any idea how Mint accomplishes this without storing your banking passwords?) | 2010/04/04 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2573372",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/25068/"
] | As of [4 days ago](http://googlecode.blogspot.com/2010/03/oauth-access-to-imapsmtp-in-gmail.html) (good timing!) Gmail supports OAuth for accessing message data through IMAP. This means your apps never needs to see users' passwords. The [documentation](http://code.google.com/apis/gmail/oauth/) includes [libraries and sample code](http://code.google.com/apis/gmail/oauth/code.html). | You are getting into a very risky business of account aggregation kind of deal here. Yodlee does the account aggregation for Mint, and in fact Mint does not store the banking passwords as WhirlWind suggests. Mint offloads it to Yodlee who may store or could have some kind of secure integration with banking institutions. My advice is to not store the passwords and let the users enter it everytime or use the limited OAUTH that google lets you use. Not sure if you can get all you analytics from this. |
129,784 | I had dual boot, Win7 64bit, and Ubuntu 11.10
I updated to Ubuntu 12.04
Now I am not met with the prompt asking which OS to boot into (setup via EasyBCD in Windows while I had Ubuntu 11.10)
Is there an easy way to get the boot manager to recognize both OS's again, or do I need to reinstall Windows again and go through that headache again? Any programs similar to EasyBCD for Ubuntu?
Thanks | 2012/05/02 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/129784",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/55599/"
] | Boot into a Windows recovery CD (ask your computer manufacturer for one) and open a command prompt.
Then type this:
bootrec /fixmbr
Next you will see the Windows Bootloader instead of GRUB. Now follow the steps here to get GRUB back:
<http://neosmart.net/wiki/display/EBCD/Ubuntu>
IGNORE the Restore MBR Step! | do you have your windows 7 recovery disk? if you do then great! put that in and boot to that. instead of re-installing Windows, there should be an option for a recovery console or something close to that. Here is a detailed explanation on what to do:
<http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/20864-mbr-restore-windows-7-master-boot-record.html>
BE CAREFUL THOUGH!! i went through this process on my laptop with vista. once you fix the master boot record as the article shows you, you probably won't be able to see Ubuntu as an option to boot to when you turn on your computer. this is an easy fix though so don't worry. before you fix it you should restart your computer 2 or 3 times so that you can "train" your MBR(master boot record). once you have done that boot up your computer to a Ubuntu CD or USB and then follow this article here to fix your boot and reinstall grub. this worked for me a few days ago.
<https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Boot-Repair>
good luck!
PS. I'm not really familiar with EasyBCD |
129,784 | I had dual boot, Win7 64bit, and Ubuntu 11.10
I updated to Ubuntu 12.04
Now I am not met with the prompt asking which OS to boot into (setup via EasyBCD in Windows while I had Ubuntu 11.10)
Is there an easy way to get the boot manager to recognize both OS's again, or do I need to reinstall Windows again and go through that headache again? Any programs similar to EasyBCD for Ubuntu?
Thanks | 2012/05/02 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/129784",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/55599/"
] | **Solved:**
I reinstalled Windows (all I had was an install disk, it wouldn't let me "repair" from the menu....something about partitions not showing up how they should have been....)
*anyways* .... I did a custom/clean install of Windows7, when it was all finished, I again had my option of "Ubuntu or Windows 7" as if nothing had happened at all.
Sure enough, I loaded into Ubuntu 12.04 like nothing had ever happened.
=====================================================
=====================================================
Not sure why that all happened, but I only lost Win7 information (not important cause it's only used for Netflix, LOL
Now hopefully this post helps someone else someday.
Thanks! | do you have your windows 7 recovery disk? if you do then great! put that in and boot to that. instead of re-installing Windows, there should be an option for a recovery console or something close to that. Here is a detailed explanation on what to do:
<http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/20864-mbr-restore-windows-7-master-boot-record.html>
BE CAREFUL THOUGH!! i went through this process on my laptop with vista. once you fix the master boot record as the article shows you, you probably won't be able to see Ubuntu as an option to boot to when you turn on your computer. this is an easy fix though so don't worry. before you fix it you should restart your computer 2 or 3 times so that you can "train" your MBR(master boot record). once you have done that boot up your computer to a Ubuntu CD or USB and then follow this article here to fix your boot and reinstall grub. this worked for me a few days ago.
<https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Boot-Repair>
good luck!
PS. I'm not really familiar with EasyBCD |
129,784 | I had dual boot, Win7 64bit, and Ubuntu 11.10
I updated to Ubuntu 12.04
Now I am not met with the prompt asking which OS to boot into (setup via EasyBCD in Windows while I had Ubuntu 11.10)
Is there an easy way to get the boot manager to recognize both OS's again, or do I need to reinstall Windows again and go through that headache again? Any programs similar to EasyBCD for Ubuntu?
Thanks | 2012/05/02 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/129784",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/55599/"
] | **Solved:**
I reinstalled Windows (all I had was an install disk, it wouldn't let me "repair" from the menu....something about partitions not showing up how they should have been....)
*anyways* .... I did a custom/clean install of Windows7, when it was all finished, I again had my option of "Ubuntu or Windows 7" as if nothing had happened at all.
Sure enough, I loaded into Ubuntu 12.04 like nothing had ever happened.
=====================================================
=====================================================
Not sure why that all happened, but I only lost Win7 information (not important cause it's only used for Netflix, LOL
Now hopefully this post helps someone else someday.
Thanks! | Boot into a Windows recovery CD (ask your computer manufacturer for one) and open a command prompt.
Then type this:
bootrec /fixmbr
Next you will see the Windows Bootloader instead of GRUB. Now follow the steps here to get GRUB back:
<http://neosmart.net/wiki/display/EBCD/Ubuntu>
IGNORE the Restore MBR Step! |
100,683 | I want to know the exact command to shut down a Red Hat linux server.
I was using `init 0`, but some one said it's not the proper method to shut down my linux server.
If not, what command should I use? | 2010/01/26 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/100683",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/26161/"
] | Try `poweroff` . | shutdown -h now |
98,091 | So... I just got Hitman: Absolution for PS3. I have started playing a few missions, but I feel like I am missing something.
Do I feel like I am missing something because I haven't played the other Hitman games OR of my failure to understand the story due to some other reason?
**Should I play the other Hitman games to understand the story?** | 2013/01/02 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/98091",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/38416/"
] | This answer may be different for everyone but I am going to say no. After you finish absolution, a lot of your questions will be answered [ I'm not going to provide those spoilers]. If you want some Hitman Lore, check out this very short video explaining some background to Agent 47 | well its good to start with hitman codename 47 to get to know the story better or watch videos on the games |
98,091 | So... I just got Hitman: Absolution for PS3. I have started playing a few missions, but I feel like I am missing something.
Do I feel like I am missing something because I haven't played the other Hitman games OR of my failure to understand the story due to some other reason?
**Should I play the other Hitman games to understand the story?** | 2013/01/02 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/98091",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/38416/"
] | This answer may be different for everyone but I am going to say no. After you finish absolution, a lot of your questions will be answered [ I'm not going to provide those spoilers]. If you want some Hitman Lore, check out this very short video explaining some background to Agent 47 | Not really, but i do recommend you do play the other ones :) |
98,091 | So... I just got Hitman: Absolution for PS3. I have started playing a few missions, but I feel like I am missing something.
Do I feel like I am missing something because I haven't played the other Hitman games OR of my failure to understand the story due to some other reason?
**Should I play the other Hitman games to understand the story?** | 2013/01/02 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/98091",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/38416/"
] | well its good to start with hitman codename 47 to get to know the story better or watch videos on the games | Not really, but i do recommend you do play the other ones :) |
32,348,514 | I used rm -rf \* command and all my files and documents in the computer got deleted.
I want to retrieve them back.
So, which software should I use to retrieve them back. | 2015/09/02 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/32348514",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1150119/"
] | SQL%ROWCOUNT is what you're searching for.
REF: [Implicit cursors attributes](http://docs.oracle.com/cd/B28359_01/appdev.111/b28370/sql_cursor.htm) | yes you can use SQL%ROWCOUNT ,In the other way you can also use cnt variable.intialyze it and increase the counter varibale inside your loop and print it. |
145,282 | What's the difference between:
>
> I want it
>
>
>
>
> I want to have it
>
>
>
And what is the reason? | 2017/10/21 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/145282",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/63483/"
] | There isn't much difference, as far as I can tell. There might be more immediacy and emphasis to ***want*** than ***want to have***. For example:
>
> He wants sex.
>
>
> He wants to have sex.
>
>
>
People might disagree, but I think ***he wants sex*** could connote a stronger or more spontaneous urge than ***he wants to have sex***, which connotes a more deliberate or more formalized or less immediate action.
EDIT: Adding some more examples just so people can draw conclusions for themselves:
>
> I want the kidney transplant.
>
>
> I want to have the kidney transplant.
>
>
> The CEO wanted the Ferrari.
>
>
> The CEO wanted to have the Ferrari.
>
>
> The dog wants a kiss.
>
>
> The dog wants to have a kiss.
>
>
> We wanted a World Series championship.
>
>
> We wanted to have a World Series championship.
>
>
>
Looking at these examples, I still believe ***wants to have*** implies a more deliberate or more formalized action. The desire in ***wants*** is perhaps more ephemeral or spontaneous.
For example, it's a tiny bit awkward to say ***The dog wants to have a kiss*** because it implies that the dog is thinking about it and has made a conscious decision that he would like you to kiss him. We know dogs don't reason in this way, so it's a little humorous to say a dog wants to have a kiss. Instead, we would say, "The dog wants a kiss." It's a simple, spontaneous desire. | There is a slight difference between the two. So little that both can be used in place of each other without changing the actual meaning of the sentence.
'want to have it" is a stronger urge to get something than 'want it'. |
145,282 | What's the difference between:
>
> I want it
>
>
>
>
> I want to have it
>
>
>
And what is the reason? | 2017/10/21 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/145282",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/63483/"
] | Cheers Ringo for great examples and sound reasoning. I wasn't sure but you have me sold. Rereading this I get a feeling that "to have" has a slightly different feel to it, using the Ferrari example (as an example), "I want to have" says something about continued possession of the Ferrari but I'm just sleep deprived and also really bad at both speaking and comprehending the English language and you obviously are not. | There is a slight difference between the two. So little that both can be used in place of each other without changing the actual meaning of the sentence.
'want to have it" is a stronger urge to get something than 'want it'. |
17,621 | I just wanted to clear this up, because i think a question I'm attempting may be somewhat badly written. It talks about a set of functions being 'bounded pointwise by 1' - but isn't that just 'bounded by 1'? I don't understand in what sense it is bounded pointwise by a single value, because surely as 1 is constant, it is uniformly bounded by 1? Perhaps the question is just confusingly phrased.
Thanks for the help - M. | 2011/01/15 | [
"https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/17621",
"https://math.stackexchange.com",
"https://math.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | "Bounded pointwise by 1" and "uniformly bounded by 1" mean exactly the same thing. Perhaps it is written this way for emphasis. You would have to ask the author. | If some norm were mentioned, the functions could be bounded in norm (and this does not necessarily mean pointwise bounded). Likely, however, the author is just repeating himself at the risk of being repetitive. |
11,085 | We look after about 50 websites for clients on shared hosting. We'll soon be moving them to a dedicated server so I am looking for a good place to manage my DNS records (the shared server is currently used as the nameserver too). I want something more reliable.
I found DynDNS and was looking at their [Small to Medium Business offering](http://www.dyndns.com/services/dynectsmb/), does anyone have experience of using them? Also I presume '100 records' means 100 A records, CNAMES etc, not 100 different domains (my DNS knowledge is very limited).
Can anyone suggest a good provider for a design/web agency that manages the hosting for it's clients?
Thanks
Ric | 2011/03/23 | [
"https://webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/11085",
"https://webmasters.stackexchange.com",
"https://webmasters.stackexchange.com/users/6174/"
] | My votes with an oldie but a goodie - <http://dyn.com/enterprise-dns/dynect-platform> | <http://www.internet.bs> is quite a good |
16,745 | Inspired by recent events, I am wondering what would happen if a court makes a clear ruling (say, that border officials must not turn back refugees) and if CBP explicitly refuses to comply.
(I say "clearly" and "explicitly" because the point of this question is *not* to worry about cases where the ruling or non-compliance is unclear.)
Can/would they send US Marshals to compel or arrest CBP officers to let in people at the border, for example? What if the officers are ordered not to comply? How could it realistically play out? | 2017/01/29 | [
"https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/16745",
"https://law.stackexchange.com",
"https://law.stackexchange.com/users/345/"
] | @Dale M is basically correct, but fudges a bit on the process.
The court issuing the order would issue an order to show cause to a government official who is alleged by the person who sought the order to have violated the order after having received legal notice (i.e. service) of the order.
If that individual fails to appear at the appointed time and place in the order to show cause, a warrant issues for that individual's arrest. If that individual does appear, the allegedly contemptuous individual is read their rights and a hearing date is set.
At the hearing, if the person appears, the person seeking the contempt finding (or some other attorney appointed by the court) prosecutes the case and if the person is found in contempt, then contempt sanctions issue. If they do not appear, a warrant issues for their arrest and a hearing is held on the merits promptly following that arrest.
An individual can also be ordered to show cause in an official capacity in which case the contempt sanctions would be imposed against the organization rather than the individual.
Usually, in federal court, the U.S. Marshal's office has primary responsibility for arresting people on contempt warrants. The [U.S. Marshal's office](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Marshals_Service) primarily reports to the judicial branch, although strictly speaking, it is part of the Justice Department, and ultimately reports to the Attorney-General.
There are actually two kinds of contempt - remedial and punitive. Remedial contempt sanction can include indefinite incarceration or a fine (often a per day fine) until the violation of the order of the court ceases and is allowed only when it is possible to comply with the order going forward. Punitive contempt has a sanction comparable to a misdemeanor conviction and applies in cases where the goal is to punish someone for a past violation of a court order whether or not it is possible to comply going forward.
(Both of these are examples of "indirect contempt", i.e. violations of court orders that take place outside the courtroom. A different summary process called "direct contempt" applies when someone misbehaves in the presence of the court - this is summary incarceration or fine without a trial on the spot for disrespecting the dignity of the court in the courtroom.)
Established practice is to direct a contempt order at the lowest level official necessary to remedy the violation of the order. There are a few examples in living memory of cabinet members being held in contempt, however (e.g. the Secretary of Interior, with regard to Indian Trust fund litigation), and keep in mind that in the case of remedial contempt an official can purge the contempt and be released from any sanction by resigning from office, after which the official no longer has the ability to comply.
I am not aware of any instance in which the President of the United States has personally been held in contempt of court, but I am also not aware of any authority that specifically prohibits a court from holding the President in contempt of court.
While contempt is the only "hard" remedy for a violation of a court order, the bureaucratic structure of the federal government is also set up in a manner that once a court order definitively resolves a legal issue, the higher ups in a federal agency are supposed to take all reasonable actions to insure that their subordinates follow that order (and they are themselves subject to contempt sanctions if they fail to do so). And, keep in mind that most of the people in the chain of command are civil servants with legal protections from unlawful employment actions hired on a merit basis, not political appointees, and that lots of the people in the chain of command are also members of unions that provide individual employees with the ability to fight wrongful employment action from a superior for violating a court order.
In particular, the top lawyers in the executive branch would in ordinary times direct government employees to follow a clear court order and to cease and desist from explicitly disobeying one. Among other things, the courts could probably deny lawyers who refused to do so the right to practice law in federal court. But, usually things never reach this point. Then again, we are living in interesting times.
There are about 670 political appointee positions in the executive branch, many of which are currently vacant and less than a dozen of which would be relevant to any given dispute in any case. There are about a million, civilian, non-defense department, non-postal service employees in the United States government, of which perhaps 100,000 or so are in the Department of Homeland Security and fewer are in the CBP. As far as I know, the CBP political appointees from the Obama administration have resigned and a replacement has not been confirmed by the U.S. Senate yet (there has been a Department of Homeland Security appointee confirmed if I recall correctly), and there are only a few people in the agency that political appointees can hire without either receiving Senate confirmation or using the merit based hiring process for civil servants (which takes a while, especially given an executive order imposing a hiring freeze). So, realistically, we have a case where the acting head of the CBP is probably a GS-15 or Senior Executive Service grade civil servant, rather than a political appointee, at the moment, who was hired as a civil servant many years ago, who is doing his (or her) best to follow the less than clear guidance he is receiving from his superiors and government lawyers (perhaps errantly).
There could also be remedies in the form of declaratory judgment. The Court could declare as a matter of law on a case by case basis that, for example, Fatima Jones is not deportable and is lawfully within the United States and is entitled to be released from custody. This specific finding as to an individual would be very hard for the administration to escape sanction for.
And, the Court could also declare that the entire executive order, at least as applied, is invalid (e.g. for failure to comply with the administrative procedures act, or for failing to include an exception for contrary court orders) or is unconstitutional. | The normal course of events for a person who defies a court order is that the court would issue a warrant for their arrest for contempt. This warrant would then be executed by the relevant law enforcement agency (US Marshals, FBI, local police, whatever) and the person would be placed in jail until they agreed to comply with the order.
In the case of an organisation that was refusing to comply, arrest warrants could be issued against each person who was not complying until someone decided that they would comply.
In practice, a government agency would either immediately comply with the order or lodge an application for injunctive relief from it in a higher court.
Of course, if *everybody* refuses to comply with a court order you have what is known as a breakdown of law and order and things get really, really bad e.g. Syria. |
8,446,089 | I am developing a tool that is to replace a rather large Excel Workbook and I am trying to minimise the development effort. In order to do so - I am looking for Java Components that do similar things to what excel does.
The primary functionality that I am looking to implement is the following:
1. A table that can be easily exported to Excel
2. Provides the Pivot Table functionality (as in Excel)
3. Provides the general table functionality like - filtering, sorting, copy & paste
4. Is something that has a real professional look and the look & feel can be customised.
Can i use Spring Rich Client to do the same thing.
Is there any plugin or inbuilt support to develop pivot table in groovy/grails | 2011/12/09 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/8446089",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/625454/"
] | The best way to include one application within another is by using engines. This might help you [Ruby on Rails 3.1 Blog Engines](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6741172/ruby-on-rails-3-1-blog-engines) | Perhaps [Typo](http://fdv.github.com/typo/) would address your needs installed as a Rails Engine. |
8,446,089 | I am developing a tool that is to replace a rather large Excel Workbook and I am trying to minimise the development effort. In order to do so - I am looking for Java Components that do similar things to what excel does.
The primary functionality that I am looking to implement is the following:
1. A table that can be easily exported to Excel
2. Provides the Pivot Table functionality (as in Excel)
3. Provides the general table functionality like - filtering, sorting, copy & paste
4. Is something that has a real professional look and the look & feel can be customised.
Can i use Spring Rich Client to do the same thing.
Is there any plugin or inbuilt support to develop pivot table in groovy/grails | 2011/12/09 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/8446089",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/625454/"
] | The best way to include one application within another is by using engines. This might help you [Ruby on Rails 3.1 Blog Engines](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6741172/ruby-on-rails-3-1-blog-engines) | Since nobody has done it so far I need to mention here that the spirit of Rails is to make everything friendly enough so that you can code your own.
It's a bit more work but then your blog module fits right in with the rest of the app. |
58,880 | Galatians 2:1-5 (ESV):
>
> Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. 2 I went up because of a revelation and set before them (though privately before those who seemed influential) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain. 3 But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek. 4 Yet because of **false brothers secretly brought in—who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery—** 5 to them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you.
>
>
>
In verse 4, Paul alludes to false brothers who were spying out their **freedom in Christ**, in order to bring them to **slavery**.
**Question**: What is meant by *"freedom in Christ"* and *"slavery"* in this context?
---
**Some personal reflections**
If we look at the context, verse 3 mentions circumcision. Hence, one could feel tempted to equate slavery with circumcision. However, I'm skeptical of that interpretation. Getting circumcised only takes a few minutes to be accomplished, after which the person can simply forget about it for the rest of their life. It's not such a big deal if think about it, especially for women who don't even need to worry about it for obvious biological reasons. In other words, I fail to see how circumcision, in and of itself, could be considered equal to "slavery". For me, slavery has the connotation of restricting one's freedom for a significant period of time -- it entails much more than just a few minutes of surgical foreskin removal.
As for the concept of *freedom in Christ*, we get the hint from verse 4 that it has to be something that can be spied out by others. In other words, someone's freedom in Christ manifests outwardly through their actions. Others can pick up on your freedom in Christ by observing your outward behavior. Hence, I believe the concept of *freedom in Christ* is linked to visible, observable outward behavior somehow.
Those are my insights so far, but my comprehension of these concepts is far from thorough. I would greatly appreciate answers explaining what is meant by *"freedom in Christ"* and *"slavery"* in a way that is as concrete, illustrative and unambiguous as possible. | 2021/04/13 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/58880",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | Scriptures don't always give you word for word answers, but when you read it you can understand the story line. God drove them out, primarily so that they don't have access to the tree of life, if not they would also have eaten from it. Which equals to "no room for redemption " so your answer lies in God's statement there | The Tree of Life
----------------
We seem to be given a couple of glimpses into the Tree of Life, and certain inferences that Adam knew all about it:
>
> **Genesis 2:8-9**: The LORD God planted a garden toward the east, in Eden; and there He placed the man whom He had formed. Out of the ground the LORD God caused to grow every tree that is pleasing to the sight and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
>
>
>
We later learn that Adam and Eve were prohibited from eating of the Tree of Life after they had disobeyed God:
>
> **Genesis 3:23-24**: [The] LORD God sent [Adam (and Eve)] out from the garden of Eden, to cultivate the ground from which he was taken. So He drove the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life.
>
>
>
In the above verses from Genesis 3, the implication is that if God had not stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword to guard the way to the Tree of Life, Adam and Eve would definitely have eaten from it, presumably with the full knowledge of its identity.
What About the *Other* Tree: The Tree of Knowledge?
---------------------------------------------------
This leads to an interesting consideration of the *other Tree*. Perhaps we should understand that the reason God planted the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil directly in the middle of the Garden of Eden was to **hasten** the Fall.
You read that correctly. Imagine that the Tree was located high atop a distant mountain, and Satan was never present to tempt anyone. It might take many centuries, even millennia, before some unfortunate soul ate of the Tree. But it was inevitable that someone would do so, whether intentionally or not. Therefore, God expected all human beings to be just as accountable as every other. That was God’s Plan. And, the serpent appears to have been central to that plan. This can be a difficult concept because many of us tend to overlook the fact that nothing can surprise a supremely omniscient Being. Everything that occurred in the Garden was well-known to God and indeed preordained by Him before the foundation of the world.
Were Adam and Eve Initially Automatons?
---------------------------------------
Many will argue that prior to their disobedience, Adam and Eve had no free will. They maintain that without the ability to disobey God, the first couple would have been little more than automatons, or robots. However, anyone who is aware of the behavior of true automatons should immediately recognize the fallacy of this assertion. A computer or automaton or robot, is thoroughly incapable of disobeying its instructions. It can do nothing more than strictly adhere to its programming. It would be impossible for an automaton to disobey a strict commandment, let alone one delivered by God. Further, let us reflect on the words of the Trinity from the first chapter of the Book of Genesis:
>
> **Genesis 1:26**
> “Then God said, ‘Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth’” (emphasis added).
>
>
>
Since God created Adam and Eve “in [His] image, according to [His] likeness,” to “rule … over all the Earth,” they clearly were not automatons. If they were, they would not have been created in God’s image! It is hardly the case that Eve possessed free will only after she had transgressed God’s Law. Notice carefully what Eve did: she chose to eat of the Tree of Knowledge. Far from being a creature without volition, this voluntary act demonstrated Eve’s free will before the Fall – before she had yet to disobey God. It is striking that so many seem to overlook this fact. They are convinced that “free will” is contingent upon the threat of disobedience including the subsequent transgression itself.
There is a final point to consider. Are we to actually believe that once we join God in heaven, we will be nothing more than automatons since there will no longer be any Tree of Knowledge and no serpent to tempt us? What purpose could that possibly serve? Why would God create creatures with free will only to deny that same freedom once they enter His Presence eternally? To ask such a question is to answer it.
Genesis 3: The Serpent
----------------------
We often visualize the “serpent” like a snake or other reptilian figure. In the first verse of the Book of Genesis, we are told:
>
> **Genesis 3:1**: “Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made” (Gen. 3:1).
>
>
>
Is this not the same as merely stating that “The serpent was craftier than any beast” – and that he really wasn’t a “beast” at all? This being, whatever his form, could apparently communicate verbally. And, he knew of certain other-worldly truths. Some of his initial acts were to 1) lie to Eve, and through that lie to 2) inflict spiritual death upon her, her husband Adam, and all of their posterity. We appear to see the Devil as both a liar and a murderer from the beginning, just as Christ describes in the Gospel of John (8:44).
All of this suggests that Satan was ordained by God to fulfill His Divine Arrangement. However, it would be incorrect to conclude that God is the Author of evil. Rather, God knew that if He raised a creature like Satan, the outcome was certain: human beings would then be left with a stark choice. On the surface, this may seem unreasonable. But is it really? Did God not raise Pharaoh with the knowledge that He (God) would “harden Pharaoh’s heart” continually against the Israelites (Ex. 8:32, 9:12, 10:27, 11:10)?
Here we should understand that God did not make Pharaoh do the things that he did. Pharaoh chose to act against the Israelites with divine consent, very likely under the influence of Satan. The forces of darkness are always at work in our world, and they must surely have played a significant role in Pharaoh’s poor decisions. Similarly, God knew that the serpent would deceive Eve because it was all part of the Grand Design. The Devil would be the catalyst for the inevitable disobedience that followed, something that had to occur in relatively short order beginning with Adam and Eve.
Paradise Lost
-------------
Adam and Eve existed in a paradise where had they obeyed God (implausible, given the circumstances), they could presumably have lived forever. There was no decay, no disease, no death, and no animal predators to worry about – other than the serpent’s influence. Their only challenge was the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. All that Satan could do, and, of course, did, was tempt them to disobey God’s only restriction. After the first couple ate of the Tree, something profound occurred.
While they spent an indeterminate amount of time in the Garden without clothing, they apparently had no awareness of their nakedness. Perhaps the reason they had no concern about such things is that they shared a common ethereal identity, a spiritual consciousness in which they were at one with God, with each other, and with their surroundings. This suggests that before their transgression Adam and Eve possessed a superior supernatural awareness; they had no real sense of self but were united both intellectually and spiritually.
However, after they had eaten of the Tree, it seems that this undifferentiated perfection was shattered; they became disassociated with one another into self-identities. Our original parents were no longer one with God or with their environment. They at once became separate and distinct, spiritually and psychologically detached. Their disobedience deprived them of their blessed, shared consciousness replacing it with selfish personal identities. And, with an intense recognition of self, there is an awareness of what one does, and of what one can do to others.
There is a profound vulnerability associated with individuality. It is the instant recognition that a person is alone in their thoughts about themselves and their surroundings. The “self” presents great restrictions because an intense responsibility arises with individual awareness: we are capable either of acting in accordance with God’s wishes or of behaving contrary to His expectations and thus committing malevolent acts. Through this individual identity, we entertain evil thoughts and intentions, theft, coveting, lust, cheating, envy, murder, strife, and so on (Mk. 7:21-23). All that defiles us as human beings originates from our sense of self – our Pride – a soul spiritually adrift from all others. Author C.S. Lewis once wrote about this dilemma in his book, *Mere Christianity*:
>
> The natural life in each of us is something self-centered, something that wants to be petted and admired, to take advantage of other lives, to exploit the whole universe. And especially it wants to be left to itself: to keep well away from anything better or stronger or higher than it, anything that might make it feel small. It is afraid of the light and air of the spiritual world, just as people who have been brought up to be dirty are afraid of a bath. And in a sense, it is quite right. It knows that if the spiritual life gets hold of it, all its self-centeredness and self-will are going to be killed and it is ready to fight tooth and nail to avoid that.
>
>
>
Indeed, the self is the very foundation upon which we become our own god, blinded by our own narcissistic ambitions. Everything else becomes incidental as a means of gratifying the insatiable self. When we reflect on our very early years as children under the age of four or five, we had not yet formed any defining sense of personhood. We were largely unaware of the world and of all that it represents; we were oblivious to much of the world around us, and might easily step directly in front of oncoming traffic. Generally speaking, we lived a quasi-heavenly existence, at relative peace with ourselves and everything else: We had not yet eaten of the Tree.
There seems to be a distinct parallel between the effects of consuming the forbidden fruit (disobedience) and our own awareness, beginning around the age of four or five. Prior to that, we really have no consciousness of our vulnerabilities. Just as Adam and Eve, we do not recognize evil at that tender age. By five years or so, we too begin to understand the difference between right and wrong. We begin to understand when we have disobeyed our parents and are conscious of our guilt – just as if we too had partaken of the same deadly fruit. Once we become fully aware of ourselves as uniquely separate individuals, we have become thoroughly unrighteous beings. In other words, we have eaten of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.
This may explain why most of us are unable to remember those enchanted formative years. Many understand that it is only when we finally reach this age that we suddenly feel a desperate need to clothe ourselves. Although Adam and Eve were full-grown adults, we do not know how long they had existed during their great loss. But it seems at least plausible that they too may only have lived for four or five years; the evidence from the biblical record is inconclusive. |
58,880 | Galatians 2:1-5 (ESV):
>
> Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. 2 I went up because of a revelation and set before them (though privately before those who seemed influential) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain. 3 But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek. 4 Yet because of **false brothers secretly brought in—who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery—** 5 to them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you.
>
>
>
In verse 4, Paul alludes to false brothers who were spying out their **freedom in Christ**, in order to bring them to **slavery**.
**Question**: What is meant by *"freedom in Christ"* and *"slavery"* in this context?
---
**Some personal reflections**
If we look at the context, verse 3 mentions circumcision. Hence, one could feel tempted to equate slavery with circumcision. However, I'm skeptical of that interpretation. Getting circumcised only takes a few minutes to be accomplished, after which the person can simply forget about it for the rest of their life. It's not such a big deal if think about it, especially for women who don't even need to worry about it for obvious biological reasons. In other words, I fail to see how circumcision, in and of itself, could be considered equal to "slavery". For me, slavery has the connotation of restricting one's freedom for a significant period of time -- it entails much more than just a few minutes of surgical foreskin removal.
As for the concept of *freedom in Christ*, we get the hint from verse 4 that it has to be something that can be spied out by others. In other words, someone's freedom in Christ manifests outwardly through their actions. Others can pick up on your freedom in Christ by observing your outward behavior. Hence, I believe the concept of *freedom in Christ* is linked to visible, observable outward behavior somehow.
Those are my insights so far, but my comprehension of these concepts is far from thorough. I would greatly appreciate answers explaining what is meant by *"freedom in Christ"* and *"slavery"* in a way that is as concrete, illustrative and unambiguous as possible. | 2021/04/13 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/58880",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | As I often investigate the scriptures to get to the truth, the most interesting discovery of both Trees is that God doesn’t give any description of those trees on how they look actually look, what color, what type and so on. So if there are multiple trees in a Garden even if they are in the middle and you are told two trees are in the middle but not to eat of one, How can anyone know which tree not to eat from if there is not specific details besides the two in the middle which could be any tree. If you ever been in a field of corn or wine vineyard or any other field that grows fruits and vegetables, you realize that if you are in the field surrounded by the crops it’s nearly impossible to know where the middle is because they all look alike unless you have a bird’s eye view that can guide you to the middle. Folks spend lots of time wasted over looking the facts in the text. Westernized English translations of scriptures often distort the true meaning of the scripture. In order to get the meaning correct, All scripture must be looked at in the original Hebrew to understand what the true meaning is. English words often change the meaning therefore causing misinterpreted scriptures which mislead people. For example in the NT Yeshua (Jesus) in English translations the word hypocrites is used by him to describe The Pharisees which is most commonly defined as someone who says one thing and does something else. However in the original Greek text that the NT was written, hyprocrite literally means “actor”, “stage player”, or pretender in Greek, therefore if those scriptures are read with the understanding as in the original Greek you get the true meaning as intended and not the common understanding of what a Hypocrite is which makes the interpretation wrong. | The Tree of Life
----------------
We seem to be given a couple of glimpses into the Tree of Life, and certain inferences that Adam knew all about it:
>
> **Genesis 2:8-9**: The LORD God planted a garden toward the east, in Eden; and there He placed the man whom He had formed. Out of the ground the LORD God caused to grow every tree that is pleasing to the sight and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
>
>
>
We later learn that Adam and Eve were prohibited from eating of the Tree of Life after they had disobeyed God:
>
> **Genesis 3:23-24**: [The] LORD God sent [Adam (and Eve)] out from the garden of Eden, to cultivate the ground from which he was taken. So He drove the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life.
>
>
>
In the above verses from Genesis 3, the implication is that if God had not stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword to guard the way to the Tree of Life, Adam and Eve would definitely have eaten from it, presumably with the full knowledge of its identity.
What About the *Other* Tree: The Tree of Knowledge?
---------------------------------------------------
This leads to an interesting consideration of the *other Tree*. Perhaps we should understand that the reason God planted the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil directly in the middle of the Garden of Eden was to **hasten** the Fall.
You read that correctly. Imagine that the Tree was located high atop a distant mountain, and Satan was never present to tempt anyone. It might take many centuries, even millennia, before some unfortunate soul ate of the Tree. But it was inevitable that someone would do so, whether intentionally or not. Therefore, God expected all human beings to be just as accountable as every other. That was God’s Plan. And, the serpent appears to have been central to that plan. This can be a difficult concept because many of us tend to overlook the fact that nothing can surprise a supremely omniscient Being. Everything that occurred in the Garden was well-known to God and indeed preordained by Him before the foundation of the world.
Were Adam and Eve Initially Automatons?
---------------------------------------
Many will argue that prior to their disobedience, Adam and Eve had no free will. They maintain that without the ability to disobey God, the first couple would have been little more than automatons, or robots. However, anyone who is aware of the behavior of true automatons should immediately recognize the fallacy of this assertion. A computer or automaton or robot, is thoroughly incapable of disobeying its instructions. It can do nothing more than strictly adhere to its programming. It would be impossible for an automaton to disobey a strict commandment, let alone one delivered by God. Further, let us reflect on the words of the Trinity from the first chapter of the Book of Genesis:
>
> **Genesis 1:26**
> “Then God said, ‘Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth’” (emphasis added).
>
>
>
Since God created Adam and Eve “in [His] image, according to [His] likeness,” to “rule … over all the Earth,” they clearly were not automatons. If they were, they would not have been created in God’s image! It is hardly the case that Eve possessed free will only after she had transgressed God’s Law. Notice carefully what Eve did: she chose to eat of the Tree of Knowledge. Far from being a creature without volition, this voluntary act demonstrated Eve’s free will before the Fall – before she had yet to disobey God. It is striking that so many seem to overlook this fact. They are convinced that “free will” is contingent upon the threat of disobedience including the subsequent transgression itself.
There is a final point to consider. Are we to actually believe that once we join God in heaven, we will be nothing more than automatons since there will no longer be any Tree of Knowledge and no serpent to tempt us? What purpose could that possibly serve? Why would God create creatures with free will only to deny that same freedom once they enter His Presence eternally? To ask such a question is to answer it.
Genesis 3: The Serpent
----------------------
We often visualize the “serpent” like a snake or other reptilian figure. In the first verse of the Book of Genesis, we are told:
>
> **Genesis 3:1**: “Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made” (Gen. 3:1).
>
>
>
Is this not the same as merely stating that “The serpent was craftier than any beast” – and that he really wasn’t a “beast” at all? This being, whatever his form, could apparently communicate verbally. And, he knew of certain other-worldly truths. Some of his initial acts were to 1) lie to Eve, and through that lie to 2) inflict spiritual death upon her, her husband Adam, and all of their posterity. We appear to see the Devil as both a liar and a murderer from the beginning, just as Christ describes in the Gospel of John (8:44).
All of this suggests that Satan was ordained by God to fulfill His Divine Arrangement. However, it would be incorrect to conclude that God is the Author of evil. Rather, God knew that if He raised a creature like Satan, the outcome was certain: human beings would then be left with a stark choice. On the surface, this may seem unreasonable. But is it really? Did God not raise Pharaoh with the knowledge that He (God) would “harden Pharaoh’s heart” continually against the Israelites (Ex. 8:32, 9:12, 10:27, 11:10)?
Here we should understand that God did not make Pharaoh do the things that he did. Pharaoh chose to act against the Israelites with divine consent, very likely under the influence of Satan. The forces of darkness are always at work in our world, and they must surely have played a significant role in Pharaoh’s poor decisions. Similarly, God knew that the serpent would deceive Eve because it was all part of the Grand Design. The Devil would be the catalyst for the inevitable disobedience that followed, something that had to occur in relatively short order beginning with Adam and Eve.
Paradise Lost
-------------
Adam and Eve existed in a paradise where had they obeyed God (implausible, given the circumstances), they could presumably have lived forever. There was no decay, no disease, no death, and no animal predators to worry about – other than the serpent’s influence. Their only challenge was the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. All that Satan could do, and, of course, did, was tempt them to disobey God’s only restriction. After the first couple ate of the Tree, something profound occurred.
While they spent an indeterminate amount of time in the Garden without clothing, they apparently had no awareness of their nakedness. Perhaps the reason they had no concern about such things is that they shared a common ethereal identity, a spiritual consciousness in which they were at one with God, with each other, and with their surroundings. This suggests that before their transgression Adam and Eve possessed a superior supernatural awareness; they had no real sense of self but were united both intellectually and spiritually.
However, after they had eaten of the Tree, it seems that this undifferentiated perfection was shattered; they became disassociated with one another into self-identities. Our original parents were no longer one with God or with their environment. They at once became separate and distinct, spiritually and psychologically detached. Their disobedience deprived them of their blessed, shared consciousness replacing it with selfish personal identities. And, with an intense recognition of self, there is an awareness of what one does, and of what one can do to others.
There is a profound vulnerability associated with individuality. It is the instant recognition that a person is alone in their thoughts about themselves and their surroundings. The “self” presents great restrictions because an intense responsibility arises with individual awareness: we are capable either of acting in accordance with God’s wishes or of behaving contrary to His expectations and thus committing malevolent acts. Through this individual identity, we entertain evil thoughts and intentions, theft, coveting, lust, cheating, envy, murder, strife, and so on (Mk. 7:21-23). All that defiles us as human beings originates from our sense of self – our Pride – a soul spiritually adrift from all others. Author C.S. Lewis once wrote about this dilemma in his book, *Mere Christianity*:
>
> The natural life in each of us is something self-centered, something that wants to be petted and admired, to take advantage of other lives, to exploit the whole universe. And especially it wants to be left to itself: to keep well away from anything better or stronger or higher than it, anything that might make it feel small. It is afraid of the light and air of the spiritual world, just as people who have been brought up to be dirty are afraid of a bath. And in a sense, it is quite right. It knows that if the spiritual life gets hold of it, all its self-centeredness and self-will are going to be killed and it is ready to fight tooth and nail to avoid that.
>
>
>
Indeed, the self is the very foundation upon which we become our own god, blinded by our own narcissistic ambitions. Everything else becomes incidental as a means of gratifying the insatiable self. When we reflect on our very early years as children under the age of four or five, we had not yet formed any defining sense of personhood. We were largely unaware of the world and of all that it represents; we were oblivious to much of the world around us, and might easily step directly in front of oncoming traffic. Generally speaking, we lived a quasi-heavenly existence, at relative peace with ourselves and everything else: We had not yet eaten of the Tree.
There seems to be a distinct parallel between the effects of consuming the forbidden fruit (disobedience) and our own awareness, beginning around the age of four or five. Prior to that, we really have no consciousness of our vulnerabilities. Just as Adam and Eve, we do not recognize evil at that tender age. By five years or so, we too begin to understand the difference between right and wrong. We begin to understand when we have disobeyed our parents and are conscious of our guilt – just as if we too had partaken of the same deadly fruit. Once we become fully aware of ourselves as uniquely separate individuals, we have become thoroughly unrighteous beings. In other words, we have eaten of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.
This may explain why most of us are unable to remember those enchanted formative years. Many understand that it is only when we finally reach this age that we suddenly feel a desperate need to clothe ourselves. Although Adam and Eve were full-grown adults, we do not know how long they had existed during their great loss. But it seems at least plausible that they too may only have lived for four or five years; the evidence from the biblical record is inconclusive. |
58,880 | Galatians 2:1-5 (ESV):
>
> Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. 2 I went up because of a revelation and set before them (though privately before those who seemed influential) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain. 3 But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek. 4 Yet because of **false brothers secretly brought in—who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery—** 5 to them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you.
>
>
>
In verse 4, Paul alludes to false brothers who were spying out their **freedom in Christ**, in order to bring them to **slavery**.
**Question**: What is meant by *"freedom in Christ"* and *"slavery"* in this context?
---
**Some personal reflections**
If we look at the context, verse 3 mentions circumcision. Hence, one could feel tempted to equate slavery with circumcision. However, I'm skeptical of that interpretation. Getting circumcised only takes a few minutes to be accomplished, after which the person can simply forget about it for the rest of their life. It's not such a big deal if think about it, especially for women who don't even need to worry about it for obvious biological reasons. In other words, I fail to see how circumcision, in and of itself, could be considered equal to "slavery". For me, slavery has the connotation of restricting one's freedom for a significant period of time -- it entails much more than just a few minutes of surgical foreskin removal.
As for the concept of *freedom in Christ*, we get the hint from verse 4 that it has to be something that can be spied out by others. In other words, someone's freedom in Christ manifests outwardly through their actions. Others can pick up on your freedom in Christ by observing your outward behavior. Hence, I believe the concept of *freedom in Christ* is linked to visible, observable outward behavior somehow.
Those are my insights so far, but my comprehension of these concepts is far from thorough. I would greatly appreciate answers explaining what is meant by *"freedom in Christ"* and *"slavery"* in a way that is as concrete, illustrative and unambiguous as possible. | 2021/04/13 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/58880",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | The fact that both the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil were located "in the midst of the garden" indicates that God must have had to tell Adam which one was which.
>
> And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is
> pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the
> midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
> (Genesis 2:9, KJV)
>
>
>
The Tree of Life is that which will extend human life, potentially forever. It is never called "The Tree of Immortality," and many people confuse it with such. The fact that the first generations of people lived nearly 1000 years shows the effects of both God having freshly created mankind and of their having eaten of this tree. Because they were removed from this tree, their bodies eventually wore out and failed. Had they continued to eat of it, they would have lived forever.
>
> And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know
> good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of
> the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: (Genesis 3:22, KJV)
>
>
>
The Hebrew verb translated here as "take" is יִשְׁלַ֣ח/yiš·laḥ (H7971). In this verse it appears in the Qal imperfect form, which means it applies to a forward-looking, ongoing or continuous action. It is imperfect because it is not a single complete/finished action. The meaning, then, is that Adam should *continue* to take of this fruit. It does not indicate whether or not Adam might already have eaten of it. It is possible, given the grammar here, either way. I believe Adam *had* eaten of it, but the Hebrew is ambiguous.
**Conclusion**
While we cannot know with perfect certainty, the facts imply that God must have explained to Adam the difference between the two trees in the Garden, so he would have known about the Tree of Life. | The Tree of Life
----------------
We seem to be given a couple of glimpses into the Tree of Life, and certain inferences that Adam knew all about it:
>
> **Genesis 2:8-9**: The LORD God planted a garden toward the east, in Eden; and there He placed the man whom He had formed. Out of the ground the LORD God caused to grow every tree that is pleasing to the sight and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
>
>
>
We later learn that Adam and Eve were prohibited from eating of the Tree of Life after they had disobeyed God:
>
> **Genesis 3:23-24**: [The] LORD God sent [Adam (and Eve)] out from the garden of Eden, to cultivate the ground from which he was taken. So He drove the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life.
>
>
>
In the above verses from Genesis 3, the implication is that if God had not stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword to guard the way to the Tree of Life, Adam and Eve would definitely have eaten from it, presumably with the full knowledge of its identity.
What About the *Other* Tree: The Tree of Knowledge?
---------------------------------------------------
This leads to an interesting consideration of the *other Tree*. Perhaps we should understand that the reason God planted the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil directly in the middle of the Garden of Eden was to **hasten** the Fall.
You read that correctly. Imagine that the Tree was located high atop a distant mountain, and Satan was never present to tempt anyone. It might take many centuries, even millennia, before some unfortunate soul ate of the Tree. But it was inevitable that someone would do so, whether intentionally or not. Therefore, God expected all human beings to be just as accountable as every other. That was God’s Plan. And, the serpent appears to have been central to that plan. This can be a difficult concept because many of us tend to overlook the fact that nothing can surprise a supremely omniscient Being. Everything that occurred in the Garden was well-known to God and indeed preordained by Him before the foundation of the world.
Were Adam and Eve Initially Automatons?
---------------------------------------
Many will argue that prior to their disobedience, Adam and Eve had no free will. They maintain that without the ability to disobey God, the first couple would have been little more than automatons, or robots. However, anyone who is aware of the behavior of true automatons should immediately recognize the fallacy of this assertion. A computer or automaton or robot, is thoroughly incapable of disobeying its instructions. It can do nothing more than strictly adhere to its programming. It would be impossible for an automaton to disobey a strict commandment, let alone one delivered by God. Further, let us reflect on the words of the Trinity from the first chapter of the Book of Genesis:
>
> **Genesis 1:26**
> “Then God said, ‘Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth’” (emphasis added).
>
>
>
Since God created Adam and Eve “in [His] image, according to [His] likeness,” to “rule … over all the Earth,” they clearly were not automatons. If they were, they would not have been created in God’s image! It is hardly the case that Eve possessed free will only after she had transgressed God’s Law. Notice carefully what Eve did: she chose to eat of the Tree of Knowledge. Far from being a creature without volition, this voluntary act demonstrated Eve’s free will before the Fall – before she had yet to disobey God. It is striking that so many seem to overlook this fact. They are convinced that “free will” is contingent upon the threat of disobedience including the subsequent transgression itself.
There is a final point to consider. Are we to actually believe that once we join God in heaven, we will be nothing more than automatons since there will no longer be any Tree of Knowledge and no serpent to tempt us? What purpose could that possibly serve? Why would God create creatures with free will only to deny that same freedom once they enter His Presence eternally? To ask such a question is to answer it.
Genesis 3: The Serpent
----------------------
We often visualize the “serpent” like a snake or other reptilian figure. In the first verse of the Book of Genesis, we are told:
>
> **Genesis 3:1**: “Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made” (Gen. 3:1).
>
>
>
Is this not the same as merely stating that “The serpent was craftier than any beast” – and that he really wasn’t a “beast” at all? This being, whatever his form, could apparently communicate verbally. And, he knew of certain other-worldly truths. Some of his initial acts were to 1) lie to Eve, and through that lie to 2) inflict spiritual death upon her, her husband Adam, and all of their posterity. We appear to see the Devil as both a liar and a murderer from the beginning, just as Christ describes in the Gospel of John (8:44).
All of this suggests that Satan was ordained by God to fulfill His Divine Arrangement. However, it would be incorrect to conclude that God is the Author of evil. Rather, God knew that if He raised a creature like Satan, the outcome was certain: human beings would then be left with a stark choice. On the surface, this may seem unreasonable. But is it really? Did God not raise Pharaoh with the knowledge that He (God) would “harden Pharaoh’s heart” continually against the Israelites (Ex. 8:32, 9:12, 10:27, 11:10)?
Here we should understand that God did not make Pharaoh do the things that he did. Pharaoh chose to act against the Israelites with divine consent, very likely under the influence of Satan. The forces of darkness are always at work in our world, and they must surely have played a significant role in Pharaoh’s poor decisions. Similarly, God knew that the serpent would deceive Eve because it was all part of the Grand Design. The Devil would be the catalyst for the inevitable disobedience that followed, something that had to occur in relatively short order beginning with Adam and Eve.
Paradise Lost
-------------
Adam and Eve existed in a paradise where had they obeyed God (implausible, given the circumstances), they could presumably have lived forever. There was no decay, no disease, no death, and no animal predators to worry about – other than the serpent’s influence. Their only challenge was the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. All that Satan could do, and, of course, did, was tempt them to disobey God’s only restriction. After the first couple ate of the Tree, something profound occurred.
While they spent an indeterminate amount of time in the Garden without clothing, they apparently had no awareness of their nakedness. Perhaps the reason they had no concern about such things is that they shared a common ethereal identity, a spiritual consciousness in which they were at one with God, with each other, and with their surroundings. This suggests that before their transgression Adam and Eve possessed a superior supernatural awareness; they had no real sense of self but were united both intellectually and spiritually.
However, after they had eaten of the Tree, it seems that this undifferentiated perfection was shattered; they became disassociated with one another into self-identities. Our original parents were no longer one with God or with their environment. They at once became separate and distinct, spiritually and psychologically detached. Their disobedience deprived them of their blessed, shared consciousness replacing it with selfish personal identities. And, with an intense recognition of self, there is an awareness of what one does, and of what one can do to others.
There is a profound vulnerability associated with individuality. It is the instant recognition that a person is alone in their thoughts about themselves and their surroundings. The “self” presents great restrictions because an intense responsibility arises with individual awareness: we are capable either of acting in accordance with God’s wishes or of behaving contrary to His expectations and thus committing malevolent acts. Through this individual identity, we entertain evil thoughts and intentions, theft, coveting, lust, cheating, envy, murder, strife, and so on (Mk. 7:21-23). All that defiles us as human beings originates from our sense of self – our Pride – a soul spiritually adrift from all others. Author C.S. Lewis once wrote about this dilemma in his book, *Mere Christianity*:
>
> The natural life in each of us is something self-centered, something that wants to be petted and admired, to take advantage of other lives, to exploit the whole universe. And especially it wants to be left to itself: to keep well away from anything better or stronger or higher than it, anything that might make it feel small. It is afraid of the light and air of the spiritual world, just as people who have been brought up to be dirty are afraid of a bath. And in a sense, it is quite right. It knows that if the spiritual life gets hold of it, all its self-centeredness and self-will are going to be killed and it is ready to fight tooth and nail to avoid that.
>
>
>
Indeed, the self is the very foundation upon which we become our own god, blinded by our own narcissistic ambitions. Everything else becomes incidental as a means of gratifying the insatiable self. When we reflect on our very early years as children under the age of four or five, we had not yet formed any defining sense of personhood. We were largely unaware of the world and of all that it represents; we were oblivious to much of the world around us, and might easily step directly in front of oncoming traffic. Generally speaking, we lived a quasi-heavenly existence, at relative peace with ourselves and everything else: We had not yet eaten of the Tree.
There seems to be a distinct parallel between the effects of consuming the forbidden fruit (disobedience) and our own awareness, beginning around the age of four or five. Prior to that, we really have no consciousness of our vulnerabilities. Just as Adam and Eve, we do not recognize evil at that tender age. By five years or so, we too begin to understand the difference between right and wrong. We begin to understand when we have disobeyed our parents and are conscious of our guilt – just as if we too had partaken of the same deadly fruit. Once we become fully aware of ourselves as uniquely separate individuals, we have become thoroughly unrighteous beings. In other words, we have eaten of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.
This may explain why most of us are unable to remember those enchanted formative years. Many understand that it is only when we finally reach this age that we suddenly feel a desperate need to clothe ourselves. Although Adam and Eve were full-grown adults, we do not know how long they had existed during their great loss. But it seems at least plausible that they too may only have lived for four or five years; the evidence from the biblical record is inconclusive. |
58,880 | Galatians 2:1-5 (ESV):
>
> Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. 2 I went up because of a revelation and set before them (though privately before those who seemed influential) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain. 3 But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek. 4 Yet because of **false brothers secretly brought in—who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery—** 5 to them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you.
>
>
>
In verse 4, Paul alludes to false brothers who were spying out their **freedom in Christ**, in order to bring them to **slavery**.
**Question**: What is meant by *"freedom in Christ"* and *"slavery"* in this context?
---
**Some personal reflections**
If we look at the context, verse 3 mentions circumcision. Hence, one could feel tempted to equate slavery with circumcision. However, I'm skeptical of that interpretation. Getting circumcised only takes a few minutes to be accomplished, after which the person can simply forget about it for the rest of their life. It's not such a big deal if think about it, especially for women who don't even need to worry about it for obvious biological reasons. In other words, I fail to see how circumcision, in and of itself, could be considered equal to "slavery". For me, slavery has the connotation of restricting one's freedom for a significant period of time -- it entails much more than just a few minutes of surgical foreskin removal.
As for the concept of *freedom in Christ*, we get the hint from verse 4 that it has to be something that can be spied out by others. In other words, someone's freedom in Christ manifests outwardly through their actions. Others can pick up on your freedom in Christ by observing your outward behavior. Hence, I believe the concept of *freedom in Christ* is linked to visible, observable outward behavior somehow.
Those are my insights so far, but my comprehension of these concepts is far from thorough. I would greatly appreciate answers explaining what is meant by *"freedom in Christ"* and *"slavery"* in a way that is as concrete, illustrative and unambiguous as possible. | 2021/04/13 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/58880",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | Scriptures don't always give you word for word answers, but when you read it you can understand the story line. God drove them out, primarily so that they don't have access to the tree of life, if not they would also have eaten from it. Which equals to "no room for redemption " so your answer lies in God's statement there | Genesis 2:9
>
> The LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground--trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the **middle** of the garden were the tree of **life** and the tree of the **knowledge** of good and evil.
>
>
>
The Tree of Life was prominently displayed in the middle of the garden.
God commanded Adam in Genesis 2:17
>
> but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.
>
>
>
As far as Adam, Eve, and their descendants were concerned, whether they knew the property of the tree of life or not, they were designed to freely eat the fruit of it.
Adam and Eve might have eaten the fruit before they sinned. But before the fall, they had already had life forever. They could not die before they had sinned. The tree of life would not have added any special effect on them. Before the fall, there was no need for God to tell Adam about this special effect.
What happened then after the fall?
Genesis 3:22
>
> And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of **life** and eat, and live forever."
>
>
>
After the fall, Adam and Eve were aware of their shame and mortality. They were banned from the garden so that it was no longer possible for them to eat from the tree of life and live forever.
Did Adam know about the Tree of Life?
Aam was likely aware of the tree of life but didn't know its special property because God didn't think that it was important for him to know. |
58,880 | Galatians 2:1-5 (ESV):
>
> Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. 2 I went up because of a revelation and set before them (though privately before those who seemed influential) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain. 3 But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek. 4 Yet because of **false brothers secretly brought in—who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery—** 5 to them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you.
>
>
>
In verse 4, Paul alludes to false brothers who were spying out their **freedom in Christ**, in order to bring them to **slavery**.
**Question**: What is meant by *"freedom in Christ"* and *"slavery"* in this context?
---
**Some personal reflections**
If we look at the context, verse 3 mentions circumcision. Hence, one could feel tempted to equate slavery with circumcision. However, I'm skeptical of that interpretation. Getting circumcised only takes a few minutes to be accomplished, after which the person can simply forget about it for the rest of their life. It's not such a big deal if think about it, especially for women who don't even need to worry about it for obvious biological reasons. In other words, I fail to see how circumcision, in and of itself, could be considered equal to "slavery". For me, slavery has the connotation of restricting one's freedom for a significant period of time -- it entails much more than just a few minutes of surgical foreskin removal.
As for the concept of *freedom in Christ*, we get the hint from verse 4 that it has to be something that can be spied out by others. In other words, someone's freedom in Christ manifests outwardly through their actions. Others can pick up on your freedom in Christ by observing your outward behavior. Hence, I believe the concept of *freedom in Christ* is linked to visible, observable outward behavior somehow.
Those are my insights so far, but my comprehension of these concepts is far from thorough. I would greatly appreciate answers explaining what is meant by *"freedom in Christ"* and *"slavery"* in a way that is as concrete, illustrative and unambiguous as possible. | 2021/04/13 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/58880",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | As I often investigate the scriptures to get to the truth, the most interesting discovery of both Trees is that God doesn’t give any description of those trees on how they look actually look, what color, what type and so on. So if there are multiple trees in a Garden even if they are in the middle and you are told two trees are in the middle but not to eat of one, How can anyone know which tree not to eat from if there is not specific details besides the two in the middle which could be any tree. If you ever been in a field of corn or wine vineyard or any other field that grows fruits and vegetables, you realize that if you are in the field surrounded by the crops it’s nearly impossible to know where the middle is because they all look alike unless you have a bird’s eye view that can guide you to the middle. Folks spend lots of time wasted over looking the facts in the text. Westernized English translations of scriptures often distort the true meaning of the scripture. In order to get the meaning correct, All scripture must be looked at in the original Hebrew to understand what the true meaning is. English words often change the meaning therefore causing misinterpreted scriptures which mislead people. For example in the NT Yeshua (Jesus) in English translations the word hypocrites is used by him to describe The Pharisees which is most commonly defined as someone who says one thing and does something else. However in the original Greek text that the NT was written, hyprocrite literally means “actor”, “stage player”, or pretender in Greek, therefore if those scriptures are read with the understanding as in the original Greek you get the true meaning as intended and not the common understanding of what a Hypocrite is which makes the interpretation wrong. | Genesis 2:9
>
> The LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground--trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the **middle** of the garden were the tree of **life** and the tree of the **knowledge** of good and evil.
>
>
>
The Tree of Life was prominently displayed in the middle of the garden.
God commanded Adam in Genesis 2:17
>
> but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.
>
>
>
As far as Adam, Eve, and their descendants were concerned, whether they knew the property of the tree of life or not, they were designed to freely eat the fruit of it.
Adam and Eve might have eaten the fruit before they sinned. But before the fall, they had already had life forever. They could not die before they had sinned. The tree of life would not have added any special effect on them. Before the fall, there was no need for God to tell Adam about this special effect.
What happened then after the fall?
Genesis 3:22
>
> And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of **life** and eat, and live forever."
>
>
>
After the fall, Adam and Eve were aware of their shame and mortality. They were banned from the garden so that it was no longer possible for them to eat from the tree of life and live forever.
Did Adam know about the Tree of Life?
Aam was likely aware of the tree of life but didn't know its special property because God didn't think that it was important for him to know. |
58,880 | Galatians 2:1-5 (ESV):
>
> Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. 2 I went up because of a revelation and set before them (though privately before those who seemed influential) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain. 3 But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek. 4 Yet because of **false brothers secretly brought in—who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery—** 5 to them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you.
>
>
>
In verse 4, Paul alludes to false brothers who were spying out their **freedom in Christ**, in order to bring them to **slavery**.
**Question**: What is meant by *"freedom in Christ"* and *"slavery"* in this context?
---
**Some personal reflections**
If we look at the context, verse 3 mentions circumcision. Hence, one could feel tempted to equate slavery with circumcision. However, I'm skeptical of that interpretation. Getting circumcised only takes a few minutes to be accomplished, after which the person can simply forget about it for the rest of their life. It's not such a big deal if think about it, especially for women who don't even need to worry about it for obvious biological reasons. In other words, I fail to see how circumcision, in and of itself, could be considered equal to "slavery". For me, slavery has the connotation of restricting one's freedom for a significant period of time -- it entails much more than just a few minutes of surgical foreskin removal.
As for the concept of *freedom in Christ*, we get the hint from verse 4 that it has to be something that can be spied out by others. In other words, someone's freedom in Christ manifests outwardly through their actions. Others can pick up on your freedom in Christ by observing your outward behavior. Hence, I believe the concept of *freedom in Christ* is linked to visible, observable outward behavior somehow.
Those are my insights so far, but my comprehension of these concepts is far from thorough. I would greatly appreciate answers explaining what is meant by *"freedom in Christ"* and *"slavery"* in a way that is as concrete, illustrative and unambiguous as possible. | 2021/04/13 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/58880",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | The fact that both the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil were located "in the midst of the garden" indicates that God must have had to tell Adam which one was which.
>
> And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is
> pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the
> midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
> (Genesis 2:9, KJV)
>
>
>
The Tree of Life is that which will extend human life, potentially forever. It is never called "The Tree of Immortality," and many people confuse it with such. The fact that the first generations of people lived nearly 1000 years shows the effects of both God having freshly created mankind and of their having eaten of this tree. Because they were removed from this tree, their bodies eventually wore out and failed. Had they continued to eat of it, they would have lived forever.
>
> And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know
> good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of
> the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: (Genesis 3:22, KJV)
>
>
>
The Hebrew verb translated here as "take" is יִשְׁלַ֣ח/yiš·laḥ (H7971). In this verse it appears in the Qal imperfect form, which means it applies to a forward-looking, ongoing or continuous action. It is imperfect because it is not a single complete/finished action. The meaning, then, is that Adam should *continue* to take of this fruit. It does not indicate whether or not Adam might already have eaten of it. It is possible, given the grammar here, either way. I believe Adam *had* eaten of it, but the Hebrew is ambiguous.
**Conclusion**
While we cannot know with perfect certainty, the facts imply that God must have explained to Adam the difference between the two trees in the Garden, so he would have known about the Tree of Life. | Genesis 2:9
>
> The LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground--trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the **middle** of the garden were the tree of **life** and the tree of the **knowledge** of good and evil.
>
>
>
The Tree of Life was prominently displayed in the middle of the garden.
God commanded Adam in Genesis 2:17
>
> but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.
>
>
>
As far as Adam, Eve, and their descendants were concerned, whether they knew the property of the tree of life or not, they were designed to freely eat the fruit of it.
Adam and Eve might have eaten the fruit before they sinned. But before the fall, they had already had life forever. They could not die before they had sinned. The tree of life would not have added any special effect on them. Before the fall, there was no need for God to tell Adam about this special effect.
What happened then after the fall?
Genesis 3:22
>
> And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of **life** and eat, and live forever."
>
>
>
After the fall, Adam and Eve were aware of their shame and mortality. They were banned from the garden so that it was no longer possible for them to eat from the tree of life and live forever.
Did Adam know about the Tree of Life?
Aam was likely aware of the tree of life but didn't know its special property because God didn't think that it was important for him to know. |
58,880 | Galatians 2:1-5 (ESV):
>
> Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. 2 I went up because of a revelation and set before them (though privately before those who seemed influential) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain. 3 But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek. 4 Yet because of **false brothers secretly brought in—who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery—** 5 to them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you.
>
>
>
In verse 4, Paul alludes to false brothers who were spying out their **freedom in Christ**, in order to bring them to **slavery**.
**Question**: What is meant by *"freedom in Christ"* and *"slavery"* in this context?
---
**Some personal reflections**
If we look at the context, verse 3 mentions circumcision. Hence, one could feel tempted to equate slavery with circumcision. However, I'm skeptical of that interpretation. Getting circumcised only takes a few minutes to be accomplished, after which the person can simply forget about it for the rest of their life. It's not such a big deal if think about it, especially for women who don't even need to worry about it for obvious biological reasons. In other words, I fail to see how circumcision, in and of itself, could be considered equal to "slavery". For me, slavery has the connotation of restricting one's freedom for a significant period of time -- it entails much more than just a few minutes of surgical foreskin removal.
As for the concept of *freedom in Christ*, we get the hint from verse 4 that it has to be something that can be spied out by others. In other words, someone's freedom in Christ manifests outwardly through their actions. Others can pick up on your freedom in Christ by observing your outward behavior. Hence, I believe the concept of *freedom in Christ* is linked to visible, observable outward behavior somehow.
Those are my insights so far, but my comprehension of these concepts is far from thorough. I would greatly appreciate answers explaining what is meant by *"freedom in Christ"* and *"slavery"* in a way that is as concrete, illustrative and unambiguous as possible. | 2021/04/13 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/58880",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | Scriptures don't always give you word for word answers, but when you read it you can understand the story line. God drove them out, primarily so that they don't have access to the tree of life, if not they would also have eaten from it. Which equals to "no room for redemption " so your answer lies in God's statement there | As I often investigate the scriptures to get to the truth, the most interesting discovery of both Trees is that God doesn’t give any description of those trees on how they look actually look, what color, what type and so on. So if there are multiple trees in a Garden even if they are in the middle and you are told two trees are in the middle but not to eat of one, How can anyone know which tree not to eat from if there is not specific details besides the two in the middle which could be any tree. If you ever been in a field of corn or wine vineyard or any other field that grows fruits and vegetables, you realize that if you are in the field surrounded by the crops it’s nearly impossible to know where the middle is because they all look alike unless you have a bird’s eye view that can guide you to the middle. Folks spend lots of time wasted over looking the facts in the text. Westernized English translations of scriptures often distort the true meaning of the scripture. In order to get the meaning correct, All scripture must be looked at in the original Hebrew to understand what the true meaning is. English words often change the meaning therefore causing misinterpreted scriptures which mislead people. For example in the NT Yeshua (Jesus) in English translations the word hypocrites is used by him to describe The Pharisees which is most commonly defined as someone who says one thing and does something else. However in the original Greek text that the NT was written, hyprocrite literally means “actor”, “stage player”, or pretender in Greek, therefore if those scriptures are read with the understanding as in the original Greek you get the true meaning as intended and not the common understanding of what a Hypocrite is which makes the interpretation wrong. |
58,880 | Galatians 2:1-5 (ESV):
>
> Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. 2 I went up because of a revelation and set before them (though privately before those who seemed influential) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain. 3 But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek. 4 Yet because of **false brothers secretly brought in—who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery—** 5 to them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you.
>
>
>
In verse 4, Paul alludes to false brothers who were spying out their **freedom in Christ**, in order to bring them to **slavery**.
**Question**: What is meant by *"freedom in Christ"* and *"slavery"* in this context?
---
**Some personal reflections**
If we look at the context, verse 3 mentions circumcision. Hence, one could feel tempted to equate slavery with circumcision. However, I'm skeptical of that interpretation. Getting circumcised only takes a few minutes to be accomplished, after which the person can simply forget about it for the rest of their life. It's not such a big deal if think about it, especially for women who don't even need to worry about it for obvious biological reasons. In other words, I fail to see how circumcision, in and of itself, could be considered equal to "slavery". For me, slavery has the connotation of restricting one's freedom for a significant period of time -- it entails much more than just a few minutes of surgical foreskin removal.
As for the concept of *freedom in Christ*, we get the hint from verse 4 that it has to be something that can be spied out by others. In other words, someone's freedom in Christ manifests outwardly through their actions. Others can pick up on your freedom in Christ by observing your outward behavior. Hence, I believe the concept of *freedom in Christ* is linked to visible, observable outward behavior somehow.
Those are my insights so far, but my comprehension of these concepts is far from thorough. I would greatly appreciate answers explaining what is meant by *"freedom in Christ"* and *"slavery"* in a way that is as concrete, illustrative and unambiguous as possible. | 2021/04/13 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/58880",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | Scriptures don't always give you word for word answers, but when you read it you can understand the story line. God drove them out, primarily so that they don't have access to the tree of life, if not they would also have eaten from it. Which equals to "no room for redemption " so your answer lies in God's statement there | The fact that both the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil were located "in the midst of the garden" indicates that God must have had to tell Adam which one was which.
>
> And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is
> pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the
> midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
> (Genesis 2:9, KJV)
>
>
>
The Tree of Life is that which will extend human life, potentially forever. It is never called "The Tree of Immortality," and many people confuse it with such. The fact that the first generations of people lived nearly 1000 years shows the effects of both God having freshly created mankind and of their having eaten of this tree. Because they were removed from this tree, their bodies eventually wore out and failed. Had they continued to eat of it, they would have lived forever.
>
> And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know
> good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of
> the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: (Genesis 3:22, KJV)
>
>
>
The Hebrew verb translated here as "take" is יִשְׁלַ֣ח/yiš·laḥ (H7971). In this verse it appears in the Qal imperfect form, which means it applies to a forward-looking, ongoing or continuous action. It is imperfect because it is not a single complete/finished action. The meaning, then, is that Adam should *continue* to take of this fruit. It does not indicate whether or not Adam might already have eaten of it. It is possible, given the grammar here, either way. I believe Adam *had* eaten of it, but the Hebrew is ambiguous.
**Conclusion**
While we cannot know with perfect certainty, the facts imply that God must have explained to Adam the difference between the two trees in the Garden, so he would have known about the Tree of Life. |
24,270,196 | In theory a large 1000+ line of code behind code is "bad practice" what if the majority of the code effects controls on the page?
For example what if there were 30 text boxes to collect user data, but depending upon answers to questions, visibility, validation, etc changed on these text boxes.
Should you then be writting methods in classes for validation that take collections of text boxes and disable validation, or set the visibility? I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around the design practices of large code files.
I guess I'd like to know the best practice for breaking out large code behind files that still allows for easy control manipulation. | 2014/06/17 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/24270196",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/410791/"
] | I'd devide the text boxes into groups depending on the contents. Make a **User Control** for each group (With a dedicated visual container). A user control can take care of validation and some computations, but it is very readable and can event be reused somewhere else if the problem you are solving allows that.
Another option is to use a **wizard**. This could be more complicated, but if you have the time, you can get nice results. | First of all I do not think 1000+ is not too much for a code behind file at all and I wouldn't consider this bad practice as long as you follow the DRY ( do not repeat yourself ) approach. If you really want to split this up there might be a possibility to have more code behind files for group of controls and do ajax requests to validate parts of the page. You could then evaluate the results from the ajax calls and check if the return message is success and assume that the validation is successfully if all individual ajax calls have a success flag.
For ASP.NET I do most of the logic on the client side with the knockout framework using the visible binding:
<http://knockoutjs.com/documentation/visible-binding.html>
I use knockout to generate the controls via foreach binding and set the visible binding to an observable inside the obserable array. If the array you pass to the foreach binding is an obserable array you can also add / remove controls via JS.
You could use a validation framework and on validation you can change the observable array adding more questions / removing questions from HTTP post.
Another option would be to do the validation on the server side.
You can check in the post method the values which have been submitted and change the view model adding or removing elements. You then return the view with the modified model.
If required I would use a strongly typed collection to have a reference for the page elements and modify the properties as required.
For WPF I use Observable collections to track property change events which notifies the UI when the collection changes. |
84,300 | May have been in a SF magazine about 25 years ago (90s). I remember it having a complex society and it was punishable by law if one creature rams into two others causing a pregnancy. | 2015/03/19 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/84300",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/43262/"
] | I think you may be refering to one of the books (probably the first) in Pier's Anthony's '[Cluster](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_%28novels%29)' series (1977). There was at least one underwater race (they show up in several books) that had three genders. If all three got close enough together, mating would occur involuntarily, and involved them overlapping as part of it.
The order they came together determined what role each ended up taking, and it was a crime to initiate it without consent of the parties involved.
The stories are actually kind of interesting, but at many times devolve into an excuse to describe alien sex.
Stealing from an [article on Strange Horizons](https://web.archive.org/web/20150523135045/www.strangehorizons.com/2001/20011217/bug-eyed_monster.shtml):
>
> Anthony breaks away from these models and creates a three-sex system that includes, rather than men and women, Impacts, Sibilants, and Undulants.
>
>
> As an Impact member of this oceanic race, Flint swims along, proceeding on his mission, and accidentally crosses a boundary zone designed to keep the three sexes from intermingling. The reason for this soon becomes clear. For this species, sex is not a voluntary act. The presence of all three sexes causes an overpowering biological urge that culminates in sex. "It was sex -- with three sexes . . . [t]he three entities were penetrating each other -- but not as a man penetrated a woman. Not even as a two-man/one-woman trio. They were interpenetrating."
>
>
> Even more alien is Flint's discovery that for this species, the sexual act automatically results in reproduction. The actual gender roles played by each sex vary depending on the circumstances. Whoever initiates the sexual act (in this case, Flint) becomes the catalyst. The other two become the sire and the parent, the latter of which actually creates the offspring. (Anthony never makes it clear how the remaining two participants become parent or sire.) As a result, someone who was a parent could easily become a catalyst in another union. As befitting the watery environment, gender identity is truly fluid. Sex only serves to create three possible roles, not to assign an individual irrevocably to any one of those roles.
>
>
> | This sounds a lot like [*The Gods Themselves*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gods_Themselves) (1972) by Isaac Asimov, although I don't remember them as being sea creatures,
or the bit about the law against what sounds like rape. |
43,052,444 | why we create private classes in c#? As we know that private class couldn't be make base class and we couldn't derived the classes from them.And what is the use and purpose of private class? | 2017/03/27 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/43052444",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/7558187/"
] | Private classes (or private anything, really) are important because control of scope is important, due to the notion of [encapsulation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encapsulation_(computer_programming)).
If you are building a library with "private" (`internal`) classes, your library can use those classes while anyone using your library will not be able to even see them. This can hide implementation-specific details that you wish to conceal.
If you are building a class that has private nested classes, the containing class can use those private classes without anyone else being able to see them. Again, you can use this to hide implementation-specific details that you wish to conceal.
If you don't hide implementation-specific details (e.g. by making a private or internal class public) then it becomes more difficult to change the implementation, since you can't be sure that users of your library haven't created dependencies on those classes. But if they are non-public, you can change them, replace them, or remove them, all without any worry of disrupting external dependencies. | It is widely considered to be a good practice to divide our code up into separate logical units. Each unit has a limited number of reponsibilities that are all related. That makes it easier to test the code, and once it is well-tested, those units become building blocks with which we can create more complex patterns. Private classes are useful for creating building blocks that are implementing internal functionality that you don't necessarily want visible to other projects using a library. They can also implement interfaces, and thus are useful if you want to set up a factory so that you control what instances of the class get made -- callers can then still use the class via the interface, even though they can't see the class type itself. |
43,052,444 | why we create private classes in c#? As we know that private class couldn't be make base class and we couldn't derived the classes from them.And what is the use and purpose of private class? | 2017/03/27 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/43052444",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/7558187/"
] | Private classes (or private anything, really) are important because control of scope is important, due to the notion of [encapsulation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encapsulation_(computer_programming)).
If you are building a library with "private" (`internal`) classes, your library can use those classes while anyone using your library will not be able to even see them. This can hide implementation-specific details that you wish to conceal.
If you are building a class that has private nested classes, the containing class can use those private classes without anyone else being able to see them. Again, you can use this to hide implementation-specific details that you wish to conceal.
If you don't hide implementation-specific details (e.g. by making a private or internal class public) then it becomes more difficult to change the implementation, since you can't be sure that users of your library haven't created dependencies on those classes. But if they are non-public, you can change them, replace them, or remove them, all without any worry of disrupting external dependencies. | Private classes can only be created inside nested classes and are used to retrict access and to only be used inside this nested class. |
117,802 | I have noticed by doing some tests that when I publish the same contract on different networks, the address is the same. Then, the "Etherscan" of each network show a link to **blockscan.com** where it show all the EVM networks with the same address.
But I can't find the pattern of how it happens...
How could deploy a contract in several EVM networks with the certainty that all will have the same address? | 2022/01/02 | [
"https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/questions/117802",
"https://ethereum.stackexchange.com",
"https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/users/69965/"
] | Your contracts will also have the same address if you deploy them with the same nonce. Let's say you take a fresh wallet that has 0 transactions in it. And you use the very first transaction in each network to deploy your contract, then you will also have the same contract addresses across all networks.
Incoming transactions do not use a nonce, so you can send some ETH or whatever to that fresh wallet to fund the deployment. But do nothing else with it...just deploy. Then you will have same addresses. | You can do this with CREATE2, and there are at least two tools that I know of that you can use to deploy contracts at deterministic addresses on multiple chains:
1. [Zoltu/deterministic-deployment-proxy](https://github.com/Zoltu/deterministic-deployment-proxy) (also [Arachnid's fork](https://github.com/Arachnid/deterministic-deployment-proxy) if you need salts)
2. [pcaversaccio/xdeployer](https://github.com/pcaversaccio/xdeployer) |
3,114,086 | In the course of asking about catching 'divide by 0' exception, I found that with C++, we can't do that. I mean, divide by 0 doesn't throw an std::exception.
Some of the hints that I found were I have to check the value, and throw the exception by self.
I say it's confusing, as I've thought that C++ adopted the exception idea in order to replace the 'good old C/UNIX report error by returning value method'.
Here are my questions
* Q1 : Why C++ doesn't throw std::exception error for divide by 0? Is there any reason behind that?
* Q2 : Normally, what error processing scheme the C++ users use? Always throw an error, and the exception is the divide by 0 error?
* Q3 : In general, OOP languages prefer (or even enforce) using exception. Is this correct? | 2010/06/24 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3114086",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/260127/"
] | C++ assumes you know what you're doing, doesn't pay for things you don't ask for, and makes no assumptions about the platforms it's intended for.
If you want to divide numbers, it would be quite inefficient to mandate the compiler check the denominator and throw before dividing. (We didn't ask it to do that.) So that option is out; we can't have this check on every division, and it's especially wasteful since most divisions are not by zero.
So, how can we just divide by zero and find out if it worked? Because C++ cannot assume anything about it's platform, it cannot assume there is a way to check the result, hardware-wise. That is to say, while many CPU's will jump to an interrupt of some sort when division by zero occurs, the C++ language cannot guarantee such a thing.
The only option then is to let the behavior be undefined. And that's exactly what you get: undefined behavior.
---
OOP languages might do something or another, it doesn't matter since OOP isn't well-defined and C++ isn't an OOP language anyway. In general, use the tool that's most appropriate. (Exceptions are for exceptional situations.) | C++ doesn't use a lot of good principles in some places in order to maintain compatibility with C code. Java and such has no such constraints, so they can do what they'd like.
In C++, always throw an exception. But, for something like divide by zero, you really should just check it yourself. It's not an exceptional circumstance, it's you failing to check yourself. |
3,114,086 | In the course of asking about catching 'divide by 0' exception, I found that with C++, we can't do that. I mean, divide by 0 doesn't throw an std::exception.
Some of the hints that I found were I have to check the value, and throw the exception by self.
I say it's confusing, as I've thought that C++ adopted the exception idea in order to replace the 'good old C/UNIX report error by returning value method'.
Here are my questions
* Q1 : Why C++ doesn't throw std::exception error for divide by 0? Is there any reason behind that?
* Q2 : Normally, what error processing scheme the C++ users use? Always throw an error, and the exception is the divide by 0 error?
* Q3 : In general, OOP languages prefer (or even enforce) using exception. Is this correct? | 2010/06/24 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3114086",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/260127/"
] | C++ assumes you know what you're doing, doesn't pay for things you don't ask for, and makes no assumptions about the platforms it's intended for.
If you want to divide numbers, it would be quite inefficient to mandate the compiler check the denominator and throw before dividing. (We didn't ask it to do that.) So that option is out; we can't have this check on every division, and it's especially wasteful since most divisions are not by zero.
So, how can we just divide by zero and find out if it worked? Because C++ cannot assume anything about it's platform, it cannot assume there is a way to check the result, hardware-wise. That is to say, while many CPU's will jump to an interrupt of some sort when division by zero occurs, the C++ language cannot guarantee such a thing.
The only option then is to let the behavior be undefined. And that's exactly what you get: undefined behavior.
---
OOP languages might do something or another, it doesn't matter since OOP isn't well-defined and C++ isn't an OOP language anyway. In general, use the tool that's most appropriate. (Exceptions are for exceptional situations.) | 1) Throwing exceptions is an expensive operation. The C++ philosophy is not to pay for what you don't use. If you want exceptions, you throw them yourself (or use libraries that do).
2) Never accept the divide by zero error. It depends on the situation, if you know the input will never be a 0 never check for it. If you are unsure, always check for it. Then either throw an exception, or swallow the error quietly. It is up to you.
3) Exception throwing, especially combined with RAII can make for truely elegant and beautiful code. This may not be acceptable in all situations. You may have 100% confidence in your inputs and wish for raw performance. If you are creating a DLL you do not really want to be throwing exceptions out of your api, but for a critically consistant statically linked library you would be advised to. |
3,114,086 | In the course of asking about catching 'divide by 0' exception, I found that with C++, we can't do that. I mean, divide by 0 doesn't throw an std::exception.
Some of the hints that I found were I have to check the value, and throw the exception by self.
I say it's confusing, as I've thought that C++ adopted the exception idea in order to replace the 'good old C/UNIX report error by returning value method'.
Here are my questions
* Q1 : Why C++ doesn't throw std::exception error for divide by 0? Is there any reason behind that?
* Q2 : Normally, what error processing scheme the C++ users use? Always throw an error, and the exception is the divide by 0 error?
* Q3 : In general, OOP languages prefer (or even enforce) using exception. Is this correct? | 2010/06/24 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3114086",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/260127/"
] | C++ assumes you know what you're doing, doesn't pay for things you don't ask for, and makes no assumptions about the platforms it's intended for.
If you want to divide numbers, it would be quite inefficient to mandate the compiler check the denominator and throw before dividing. (We didn't ask it to do that.) So that option is out; we can't have this check on every division, and it's especially wasteful since most divisions are not by zero.
So, how can we just divide by zero and find out if it worked? Because C++ cannot assume anything about it's platform, it cannot assume there is a way to check the result, hardware-wise. That is to say, while many CPU's will jump to an interrupt of some sort when division by zero occurs, the C++ language cannot guarantee such a thing.
The only option then is to let the behavior be undefined. And that's exactly what you get: undefined behavior.
---
OOP languages might do something or another, it doesn't matter since OOP isn't well-defined and C++ isn't an OOP language anyway. In general, use the tool that's most appropriate. (Exceptions are for exceptional situations.) | 1. Because C++ is intended to be "close to the metal" and mostly tries to pass simple operations like division through to the hardware relatively directly (so if you can't depend on hardware to enforce a constraint, C++ probably won't by default either).
2. I don't think there's a universal answer to that. Some C++ programmers write almost C-like code that almost never uses exception handling. Others use exception handling quite rigorously (and most are somewhere in between).
3. While there's almost certainly a correlation between OO and exception handing, I don't think it's really cause and effect. The factors that seem likely to me are:
1. OOP and exception handling tend to be most useful in similar (e.g., large) projects.
2. OOP and exception handling have both become more common over time. Older OO languages often lack exception handling. Newer languages often have exception handling, even if they're not OO at all. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.