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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
103,513 | In my story, I want a creature to be immune to bullets, but giving it bulletproof skin seems too obvious. I want it so that you could shoot the creature a few times at its seemingly vital spots (the head, heart, etc.), but it won't die right away and can still escape or attack you. The best way to make sure it dies quickly is by draining most of its blood, which means you have to get close enough to cause a large wound with a bladed weapon.
Yes, I know you can just use a really big gun or explosives to achieve the same effect, but in this scenario, the options are limited to something relatively cheap, lightweight, and doesn't cause a lot of collateral damage. To give you some image, the creature is about as agile, as strong, and as big as a polar bear.
Preferably the reason it's immune to bullets is based on real animals, or at least something that could exist in the natural world. | 2018/01/30 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/103513",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/41106/"
] | Um why not use an actual polar bear? Or something very similar; bears, especially the big bears, (Polar and Grisly) are notoriously hard to kill with small calibre rounds, the combination of muscle layers, fat, and fur over their primary body cavity makes getting at their organs really unlikely with handgun rounds. They also have very thick muscles and bones in their skulls so headshots often lodge near the surface breaking bone but not punching through. | **FUR**
What about a massive stubborn fur, that is thick enough to absorb most of a bullets energy or/and deflect it from it's original path.
**HORNS**
The creature also could have horn like growths around its vital spots, which can deflect a bullet from the vital area when incoming on certain angels.
This still mean that a bullet may be deflected to a less vital area or if shot at the right angel (which might be difficult) still might hit a vital area. This makes it also very challenging to hunt such a creature. |
103,513 | In my story, I want a creature to be immune to bullets, but giving it bulletproof skin seems too obvious. I want it so that you could shoot the creature a few times at its seemingly vital spots (the head, heart, etc.), but it won't die right away and can still escape or attack you. The best way to make sure it dies quickly is by draining most of its blood, which means you have to get close enough to cause a large wound with a bladed weapon.
Yes, I know you can just use a really big gun or explosives to achieve the same effect, but in this scenario, the options are limited to something relatively cheap, lightweight, and doesn't cause a lot of collateral damage. To give you some image, the creature is about as agile, as strong, and as big as a polar bear.
Preferably the reason it's immune to bullets is based on real animals, or at least something that could exist in the natural world. | 2018/01/30 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/103513",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/41106/"
] | Amorphism, if the creature has no vital organs but rather is composed of "full function" non-specialised cells that all do a bit of everything but require a certain critical mass to function as a whole. Then point damage like a bullet wound does little to no damage to the overall organism while cutting it up with a sword reduces individual sections below survival mass killing chunks of it off until the whole no longer has enough cells to grow back. Something like the [Oozes](https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/oozes) of Dungeons and Dragons or Calvin in [Life](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_(2017_film)). Real world examples of amorphic life are the [Sponges](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponge) that have mutable cell functions based on location rather than a fixed function for a given cell. | **FUR**
What about a massive stubborn fur, that is thick enough to absorb most of a bullets energy or/and deflect it from it's original path.
**HORNS**
The creature also could have horn like growths around its vital spots, which can deflect a bullet from the vital area when incoming on certain angels.
This still mean that a bullet may be deflected to a less vital area or if shot at the right angel (which might be difficult) still might hit a vital area. This makes it also very challenging to hunt such a creature. |
103,513 | In my story, I want a creature to be immune to bullets, but giving it bulletproof skin seems too obvious. I want it so that you could shoot the creature a few times at its seemingly vital spots (the head, heart, etc.), but it won't die right away and can still escape or attack you. The best way to make sure it dies quickly is by draining most of its blood, which means you have to get close enough to cause a large wound with a bladed weapon.
Yes, I know you can just use a really big gun or explosives to achieve the same effect, but in this scenario, the options are limited to something relatively cheap, lightweight, and doesn't cause a lot of collateral damage. To give you some image, the creature is about as agile, as strong, and as big as a polar bear.
Preferably the reason it's immune to bullets is based on real animals, or at least something that could exist in the natural world. | 2018/01/30 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/103513",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/41106/"
] | Amorphism, if the creature has no vital organs but rather is composed of "full function" non-specialised cells that all do a bit of everything but require a certain critical mass to function as a whole. Then point damage like a bullet wound does little to no damage to the overall organism while cutting it up with a sword reduces individual sections below survival mass killing chunks of it off until the whole no longer has enough cells to grow back. Something like the [Oozes](https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/oozes) of Dungeons and Dragons or Calvin in [Life](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_(2017_film)). Real world examples of amorphic life are the [Sponges](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponge) that have mutable cell functions based on location rather than a fixed function for a given cell. | * **Resist piercing:** Projectile immunity is usually best achieved by avoiding getting pierced. Some ways to shed bullets include:
+ hard surfaces
+ angled surfaces
+ low coefficients of friction
+ active deflection (springy bristle like hairs could provide this, as would orienting body surfaces)
* **Resist momentum:** Projectiles impart momentum and that is the source of damage. Ways to resist imparted momentum are:
+ having a much larger mass
+ "low viscosity" or low yield strength (if we fail at a point then we can't spread the momentum to areas adjacent to the point as easily)
+ mass shedding. Having a skin layer absorb momentum and shear off means we have ablative armor that carries momentum away .
* **Die to bleeding:**
+ Blades would have trouble finding purchase on a surface smooth enough to help deflect bullets. But conversely that may make catching on the non-slick wound easier. Repetitive damage in a single area is generally not good.
+ In a creature with low viscosity overall it would lose internal fluids quickly. To not die from a bullet it would need something like a self-healing skin, porous and highly elastic. So bullets could open a pinhole. But a blade would open a larger wound which would be fatal. Alternatively you could add something like platelets that congeal on contact with air. Larger wounds are just harder to congeal.
+ Extremely hard materials could be brittle (typically a standard trade-off) so the higher impact from a blade or hammer could be enough to break it where a bullet would not. Death by bleeding then just being standard.
+ Extremely large objects absorb the momentum outright and the bullets and blades can only go so deep. But Blades have the potential to hack away chunks of material and dig deeper. Something a bullet has a hard time doing.
Hardness and mass tend to hand-in-hand material wise. So you could go with a tank-like creature. Alternatively something akin to a slime with special skin would work as well. Mix and match if you need protected areas (skull for example). Other options exist as well. |
103,513 | In my story, I want a creature to be immune to bullets, but giving it bulletproof skin seems too obvious. I want it so that you could shoot the creature a few times at its seemingly vital spots (the head, heart, etc.), but it won't die right away and can still escape or attack you. The best way to make sure it dies quickly is by draining most of its blood, which means you have to get close enough to cause a large wound with a bladed weapon.
Yes, I know you can just use a really big gun or explosives to achieve the same effect, but in this scenario, the options are limited to something relatively cheap, lightweight, and doesn't cause a lot of collateral damage. To give you some image, the creature is about as agile, as strong, and as big as a polar bear.
Preferably the reason it's immune to bullets is based on real animals, or at least something that could exist in the natural world. | 2018/01/30 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/103513",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/41106/"
] | Amorphism, if the creature has no vital organs but rather is composed of "full function" non-specialised cells that all do a bit of everything but require a certain critical mass to function as a whole. Then point damage like a bullet wound does little to no damage to the overall organism while cutting it up with a sword reduces individual sections below survival mass killing chunks of it off until the whole no longer has enough cells to grow back. Something like the [Oozes](https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/oozes) of Dungeons and Dragons or Calvin in [Life](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_(2017_film)). Real world examples of amorphic life are the [Sponges](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponge) that have mutable cell functions based on location rather than a fixed function for a given cell. | Backup Organs
-------------
You can make it resistant to most attacks, including bullets, by having redundant vital organs. Combined with a fully shared cardiovascular system and enhanced coagulation, this seems to fit your prerequisites.
* Shooting it will hurt and damage it, but the backup organ will take over, allowing it to flee and fight another day.
* Enhanced coagulation makes sure normal wounds not targeted to drain the blood supply will not result in too much blood loss.
* A fully shared cardiovascular system allows major blood drains to be fatal.
Examples of this exist in nature where certain animals have multiple copies of the same organ. Taking one out vastly reduces their quality of life, but still allows them to survive (Octopi and their three hearts, most insects and their compound eyes etc.). Evolution is as such not a problem, your species would just take existing features and take them to the next level. |
103,513 | In my story, I want a creature to be immune to bullets, but giving it bulletproof skin seems too obvious. I want it so that you could shoot the creature a few times at its seemingly vital spots (the head, heart, etc.), but it won't die right away and can still escape or attack you. The best way to make sure it dies quickly is by draining most of its blood, which means you have to get close enough to cause a large wound with a bladed weapon.
Yes, I know you can just use a really big gun or explosives to achieve the same effect, but in this scenario, the options are limited to something relatively cheap, lightweight, and doesn't cause a lot of collateral damage. To give you some image, the creature is about as agile, as strong, and as big as a polar bear.
Preferably the reason it's immune to bullets is based on real animals, or at least something that could exist in the natural world. | 2018/01/30 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/103513",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/41106/"
] | * **Resist piercing:** Projectile immunity is usually best achieved by avoiding getting pierced. Some ways to shed bullets include:
+ hard surfaces
+ angled surfaces
+ low coefficients of friction
+ active deflection (springy bristle like hairs could provide this, as would orienting body surfaces)
* **Resist momentum:** Projectiles impart momentum and that is the source of damage. Ways to resist imparted momentum are:
+ having a much larger mass
+ "low viscosity" or low yield strength (if we fail at a point then we can't spread the momentum to areas adjacent to the point as easily)
+ mass shedding. Having a skin layer absorb momentum and shear off means we have ablative armor that carries momentum away .
* **Die to bleeding:**
+ Blades would have trouble finding purchase on a surface smooth enough to help deflect bullets. But conversely that may make catching on the non-slick wound easier. Repetitive damage in a single area is generally not good.
+ In a creature with low viscosity overall it would lose internal fluids quickly. To not die from a bullet it would need something like a self-healing skin, porous and highly elastic. So bullets could open a pinhole. But a blade would open a larger wound which would be fatal. Alternatively you could add something like platelets that congeal on contact with air. Larger wounds are just harder to congeal.
+ Extremely hard materials could be brittle (typically a standard trade-off) so the higher impact from a blade or hammer could be enough to break it where a bullet would not. Death by bleeding then just being standard.
+ Extremely large objects absorb the momentum outright and the bullets and blades can only go so deep. But Blades have the potential to hack away chunks of material and dig deeper. Something a bullet has a hard time doing.
Hardness and mass tend to hand-in-hand material wise. So you could go with a tank-like creature. Alternatively something akin to a slime with special skin would work as well. Mix and match if you need protected areas (skull for example). Other options exist as well. | **Self-Regenerative tissue**
your creature has a very fast inmune and regenerative system, making beheading (or very big caliber shots on the head), and thus cutting all neural links, the only way to kill it.
**disclaimer: your creature might have strong bonds to young-adult self destructive women, cigars, muscle cars and alcohol.**
[regeneration by chemical reaction is possible](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/04/160428152117.htm)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/931LF.jpg) |
103,513 | In my story, I want a creature to be immune to bullets, but giving it bulletproof skin seems too obvious. I want it so that you could shoot the creature a few times at its seemingly vital spots (the head, heart, etc.), but it won't die right away and can still escape or attack you. The best way to make sure it dies quickly is by draining most of its blood, which means you have to get close enough to cause a large wound with a bladed weapon.
Yes, I know you can just use a really big gun or explosives to achieve the same effect, but in this scenario, the options are limited to something relatively cheap, lightweight, and doesn't cause a lot of collateral damage. To give you some image, the creature is about as agile, as strong, and as big as a polar bear.
Preferably the reason it's immune to bullets is based on real animals, or at least something that could exist in the natural world. | 2018/01/30 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/103513",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/41106/"
] | What about a dense skeleton?
The skull would protect the brain of course, and you could have a ribcage where the ribs are more tightly packed (or even overlapping dual layer, allowing expansion in both layers but still protecting against vital shots) so that lungs, heart et al are protected. You still need a circulatory system so the idea of large trauma from a blade still works.
Sure, you could get a shot into the arms or legs, but that would not be fatal. Even a stomach wound wouldn't kill the animal immediately meaning that it could still attack you.
It violates the possibility of the brain, heart or lungs being shot, but still provides for firearms to do damage generally, just not in critical areas that would cause immediate death.
This does have some precedent in nature; certain herd animals have hardened skulls, and there are plenty of dinosaurs with hardened skeletons as they used parts of their bodies as clubs, rams or spears. | Redundancy.
Bigger than necessity organs due to evolutionary pressure to survive wounds and duplicated vascularisation with the possibility of closing many veins/arteries if severed.
Wherever you hit, there will be another part of the organ able to take over the function and the blood drain will be minor because the tissue can survive a long time without blood while healing and the arteries are closed or almost closed.
People can live with [literally half their brain missing](http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20141216-can-you-live-with-half-a-brain), make that per design and you can destroy half the head without problems.
Bonus: to kill it you need to severe both vital arteries at one of the few points where they are near each other. |
187,743 | The *New York Times* article of this past July 29th titled, “The D.O. Is In Now:
Osteopathic Schools Turn Out Nearly a Third of All Med School Grads,” features the growing popularity of the Touro College of Osteopathic Medicine in Harlem, Manhattan among would-be doctors, and introduces the following episode:
>
> “Gabrielle Rozenberg, in her second year at Touro, remembers the
> **Ur-moment** that would lead her to this somewhat unconventional path in
> medicine. Growing up on Long Island, she suffered from chronic ear
> infections. Her doctor recommended surgery. But before committing to
> an invasive procedure, her parents took her to a D.O. In several
> visits, he performed some twists and turns of her neck and head, and
> within days the infection cleared up.”
>
> ― *New York Times*, [“The osteopathic branch of medicine is booming”](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/education/edlife/the-osteopathic-branch-of-medicine-is-booming.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&version=HpSumSmallMediaHigh&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0), 29 July 2014
>
>
>
I surmise “Ur-moment” means a decisive or eureka moment in retrospect. But I don’t find this word in any English dictionaries at hand.
Is “Ur-moment” a normal English expression? Isn’t it “Ah! (or something else)-moment”? | 2014/07/30 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/187743",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/3119/"
] | Arguably, no, *Ur-moment* is not a “normal” English expression for most people.
However, it really depends on the company you keep whether it is normal or not. That’s because
*ur-* is indeed a reasonably productive prefix meaning the original version of something in literary and academic registers, and has been such ever since the second half of the 19th century.
It was borrowed from German. You see it in places like [*urtext edition*](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urtext_edition), just as one example, to indicate the original, unabridged text of some work. I for example have scads of musical scores on my shelves all labelled *Urtext*. (OED: *“Urtext* or *urtext*: an original text; the earliest version.”)
Regarding *ur-* in general, the OED says that it is a prefix. . . .
>
> representing German (also MHG., OHG.) *ur-*, denoting ‘primitive, original, earliest,’ as *ur-Hamlet*, *‑origin*, *‑stock*, etc. See also *Urheimat, Urschleim, Ursprache, Urtext.*
>
>
> G. *ursprache* (= primitive language) has been freq. used in recent English philological works.
>
>
>
One thing that makes *Ur-comment* stand out is its capitalization. That’s for the most part of throw-back to its German origin, where all nouns are capitalized. The assimilated version in English is no longer customarily capitalized, as you will see from these OED citations:
>
> * 1864 Max Müller *Lect. Sci. Lang*. (1871) II. 133 ― The most troublesome of all vowels, the neutral vowel, sometimes called *Urvocal*, better *Unvocal*.
> * 1889 Jacobs *Caxton’s Aesop* I. 37 ― Any light he can throw on the Ur-origin of the Fables.
> * 1901 Boas *Kyd’s Wks*. p. xlv, ― The *Ur-Hamlet* may have contained a number of these borrowings.
> * 1926 A. Møller tr. Pedersen’s *Israel* I. i. 245 ― The word *shēm* is found in all Semitic languages and belongs to the absolutely certain ur-semitic components.
> * 1927 A. H. McNeile *Introd. to Study of New Testament* iii. 50 ― It was an *Ur-Evangelium*, a primitive written Gospel, some say in Hebrew, some in Aramaic, on which our Gospels were based.
> * 1937 O. Jespersen *Analytic Syntax* 142 ― Some well-known students of language who even call this [*sc*. ‘S is P’] the ‘urform’ of sentences.
> * 1943 V. Nabokov in *Atlantic Monthly* May 69/2 ― The dreadful vulgarity, the Ur-Hitlerism of those ludicrous but vicious organisations.
> * 1947 Auden *Age of Anxiety* (1948) ii. 46 ― For Long-Ago has been Ever-After since Ur-Papa gave The Primal Yawn that expressed all things.
> * 1949 F. Fergusson *Idea of Theater* i. 26 ― An enactment of the Ur-Myth of the year‐god.
> * 1950 *Psychiatry* XIII. 168/2 ― The concept of ur-language and ur-symbolism is of particular importance in Freud’s thought.
> * 1964 C. S. Lewis *Discarded Image* iv. 54 ― Plato’s ur-Freudian doctrine of the dream as the expression of a submerged wish.
> * 1966 *Punch* 9 Nov. 718/2 ― Above is Leonardo da Vinci’s design for an ur-tank.
> * 1971 *Astrophysics & Space Sci*. X. 363 (*heading*) ― Orientation of galaxies and a magnetic ‘urfield’.
> * 1977 *Listener* 31 Mar. 416/1 ― The importance of the folk example which he [*sc*. Bartók] argued to be one of the ur-sources of music.
> * 1979 *Listener* 14 June 831/1 ― Sir Nikolaus Pevsner’s ur-history, *Pioneers of Modern Design.*
> * 1983 *Sunday Tel*. 13 Mar. 14/6 ― Russell Hoban is an ur-novelist, a maverick voice that is like no other.
>
>
>
Notice how in the fullness of time, it has lost its initial capital. That’s what makes your *Ur-moment* stand out for me: not its existence but its archaic capitalization, which some might consider a trifle “precious” or eye-grabbing.
It does often retain its hyphen, albeit not always. There is some potential for ambiguity without it. For example, *urgent* just means demanding, but an *ur-gent* might be Adam.
So you can think of an *ur-thing* (now probably better spelled *urthing*) as the first one, or the archetype, or the defining moment in this case, the seed that gave rise to everything else. | ***Ur*** in this case refers to *the first*, so Ur-moment means *the first moment*.
This meaning stems from the German [ur-](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ur-), meaning *proto*, or *original*.
Apart from being bit of a fancy way of saying "the first", it is often used to distinguish from a series of like events, the Ur- being the very first of the series. Alternately it refers to the first during a time where the subject is still in a primal form. For example, [***urlanguage***](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/urlanguage) is synonymous with [**proto-language**](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/proto-language#English), an ancestral language whose form greatly differs from its modern decendants. TVTropes also uses the concept of [***Ur Example***](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/UrExample) to refer to the first instance that a certain trope appeared, which is somewhat different from the [***Trope Maker***](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TropeMakers), where the form of the trope is unambiguous.
Incidentally, there is a bit of a misconception that it comes from the ancient Sumerian city of [Ur](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur), well known as one of the most ancient cities in the world. This seems to be a coincidence. |
187,743 | The *New York Times* article of this past July 29th titled, “The D.O. Is In Now:
Osteopathic Schools Turn Out Nearly a Third of All Med School Grads,” features the growing popularity of the Touro College of Osteopathic Medicine in Harlem, Manhattan among would-be doctors, and introduces the following episode:
>
> “Gabrielle Rozenberg, in her second year at Touro, remembers the
> **Ur-moment** that would lead her to this somewhat unconventional path in
> medicine. Growing up on Long Island, she suffered from chronic ear
> infections. Her doctor recommended surgery. But before committing to
> an invasive procedure, her parents took her to a D.O. In several
> visits, he performed some twists and turns of her neck and head, and
> within days the infection cleared up.”
>
> ― *New York Times*, [“The osteopathic branch of medicine is booming”](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/education/edlife/the-osteopathic-branch-of-medicine-is-booming.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&version=HpSumSmallMediaHigh&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0), 29 July 2014
>
>
>
I surmise “Ur-moment” means a decisive or eureka moment in retrospect. But I don’t find this word in any English dictionaries at hand.
Is “Ur-moment” a normal English expression? Isn’t it “Ah! (or something else)-moment”? | 2014/07/30 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/187743",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/3119/"
] | ***Ur*** in this case refers to *the first*, so Ur-moment means *the first moment*.
This meaning stems from the German [ur-](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ur-), meaning *proto*, or *original*.
Apart from being bit of a fancy way of saying "the first", it is often used to distinguish from a series of like events, the Ur- being the very first of the series. Alternately it refers to the first during a time where the subject is still in a primal form. For example, [***urlanguage***](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/urlanguage) is synonymous with [**proto-language**](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/proto-language#English), an ancestral language whose form greatly differs from its modern decendants. TVTropes also uses the concept of [***Ur Example***](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/UrExample) to refer to the first instance that a certain trope appeared, which is somewhat different from the [***Trope Maker***](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TropeMakers), where the form of the trope is unambiguous.
Incidentally, there is a bit of a misconception that it comes from the ancient Sumerian city of [Ur](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur), well known as one of the most ancient cities in the world. This seems to be a coincidence. | The Old Testament city of Ur was a toponym, a place-name. In the story, the character Abraham, himself an originator of the monotheism practice of his tribe upon which the saga is centered, is said himself to originate from the city of Ur.
So, the common understanding of the the usage of an "Ur-moment" would more than likely be a reference to an "origination of an originating event in one place and at time". The capitalization of the phrase adds even more credence to the theory that the source of the usage is from the Old Testament story meme. |
187,743 | The *New York Times* article of this past July 29th titled, “The D.O. Is In Now:
Osteopathic Schools Turn Out Nearly a Third of All Med School Grads,” features the growing popularity of the Touro College of Osteopathic Medicine in Harlem, Manhattan among would-be doctors, and introduces the following episode:
>
> “Gabrielle Rozenberg, in her second year at Touro, remembers the
> **Ur-moment** that would lead her to this somewhat unconventional path in
> medicine. Growing up on Long Island, she suffered from chronic ear
> infections. Her doctor recommended surgery. But before committing to
> an invasive procedure, her parents took her to a D.O. In several
> visits, he performed some twists and turns of her neck and head, and
> within days the infection cleared up.”
>
> ― *New York Times*, [“The osteopathic branch of medicine is booming”](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/education/edlife/the-osteopathic-branch-of-medicine-is-booming.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&version=HpSumSmallMediaHigh&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0), 29 July 2014
>
>
>
I surmise “Ur-moment” means a decisive or eureka moment in retrospect. But I don’t find this word in any English dictionaries at hand.
Is “Ur-moment” a normal English expression? Isn’t it “Ah! (or something else)-moment”? | 2014/07/30 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/187743",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/3119/"
] | ***Ur*** in this case refers to *the first*, so Ur-moment means *the first moment*.
This meaning stems from the German [ur-](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ur-), meaning *proto*, or *original*.
Apart from being bit of a fancy way of saying "the first", it is often used to distinguish from a series of like events, the Ur- being the very first of the series. Alternately it refers to the first during a time where the subject is still in a primal form. For example, [***urlanguage***](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/urlanguage) is synonymous with [**proto-language**](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/proto-language#English), an ancestral language whose form greatly differs from its modern decendants. TVTropes also uses the concept of [***Ur Example***](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/UrExample) to refer to the first instance that a certain trope appeared, which is somewhat different from the [***Trope Maker***](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TropeMakers), where the form of the trope is unambiguous.
Incidentally, there is a bit of a misconception that it comes from the ancient Sumerian city of [Ur](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur), well known as one of the most ancient cities in the world. This seems to be a coincidence. | No, the prefix "ur-" is not a common construction in English, as demonstrated by the quoted writer mis-using it and their editor not noticing. As [tchrist's dictionary quotes explain](https://english.stackexchange.com/a/187750/63503), the "ur-X" is the original X. The common example is the play *Hamlet*. There seems to have been a play about a character called Hamlet floating around for about a decade before Shakespeare wrote his play. This original play is referred to the "ur-Hamlet". The prefix is also used in linguistics, philosophy and mathematical logic and set-theory.
But the writer quoted in the question talks about an "ur-moment": an original moment. The ur-moment would either be the birth of the universe or perhaps the birth or conception of the person who had the ur-moment. The moment of realising that manipulating her neck could allegedly cure ear infections is not an ur-moment but a *eureka moment* (as mentioned in the question). |
187,743 | The *New York Times* article of this past July 29th titled, “The D.O. Is In Now:
Osteopathic Schools Turn Out Nearly a Third of All Med School Grads,” features the growing popularity of the Touro College of Osteopathic Medicine in Harlem, Manhattan among would-be doctors, and introduces the following episode:
>
> “Gabrielle Rozenberg, in her second year at Touro, remembers the
> **Ur-moment** that would lead her to this somewhat unconventional path in
> medicine. Growing up on Long Island, she suffered from chronic ear
> infections. Her doctor recommended surgery. But before committing to
> an invasive procedure, her parents took her to a D.O. In several
> visits, he performed some twists and turns of her neck and head, and
> within days the infection cleared up.”
>
> ― *New York Times*, [“The osteopathic branch of medicine is booming”](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/education/edlife/the-osteopathic-branch-of-medicine-is-booming.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&version=HpSumSmallMediaHigh&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0), 29 July 2014
>
>
>
I surmise “Ur-moment” means a decisive or eureka moment in retrospect. But I don’t find this word in any English dictionaries at hand.
Is “Ur-moment” a normal English expression? Isn’t it “Ah! (or something else)-moment”? | 2014/07/30 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/187743",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/3119/"
] | Arguably, no, *Ur-moment* is not a “normal” English expression for most people.
However, it really depends on the company you keep whether it is normal or not. That’s because
*ur-* is indeed a reasonably productive prefix meaning the original version of something in literary and academic registers, and has been such ever since the second half of the 19th century.
It was borrowed from German. You see it in places like [*urtext edition*](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urtext_edition), just as one example, to indicate the original, unabridged text of some work. I for example have scads of musical scores on my shelves all labelled *Urtext*. (OED: *“Urtext* or *urtext*: an original text; the earliest version.”)
Regarding *ur-* in general, the OED says that it is a prefix. . . .
>
> representing German (also MHG., OHG.) *ur-*, denoting ‘primitive, original, earliest,’ as *ur-Hamlet*, *‑origin*, *‑stock*, etc. See also *Urheimat, Urschleim, Ursprache, Urtext.*
>
>
> G. *ursprache* (= primitive language) has been freq. used in recent English philological works.
>
>
>
One thing that makes *Ur-comment* stand out is its capitalization. That’s for the most part of throw-back to its German origin, where all nouns are capitalized. The assimilated version in English is no longer customarily capitalized, as you will see from these OED citations:
>
> * 1864 Max Müller *Lect. Sci. Lang*. (1871) II. 133 ― The most troublesome of all vowels, the neutral vowel, sometimes called *Urvocal*, better *Unvocal*.
> * 1889 Jacobs *Caxton’s Aesop* I. 37 ― Any light he can throw on the Ur-origin of the Fables.
> * 1901 Boas *Kyd’s Wks*. p. xlv, ― The *Ur-Hamlet* may have contained a number of these borrowings.
> * 1926 A. Møller tr. Pedersen’s *Israel* I. i. 245 ― The word *shēm* is found in all Semitic languages and belongs to the absolutely certain ur-semitic components.
> * 1927 A. H. McNeile *Introd. to Study of New Testament* iii. 50 ― It was an *Ur-Evangelium*, a primitive written Gospel, some say in Hebrew, some in Aramaic, on which our Gospels were based.
> * 1937 O. Jespersen *Analytic Syntax* 142 ― Some well-known students of language who even call this [*sc*. ‘S is P’] the ‘urform’ of sentences.
> * 1943 V. Nabokov in *Atlantic Monthly* May 69/2 ― The dreadful vulgarity, the Ur-Hitlerism of those ludicrous but vicious organisations.
> * 1947 Auden *Age of Anxiety* (1948) ii. 46 ― For Long-Ago has been Ever-After since Ur-Papa gave The Primal Yawn that expressed all things.
> * 1949 F. Fergusson *Idea of Theater* i. 26 ― An enactment of the Ur-Myth of the year‐god.
> * 1950 *Psychiatry* XIII. 168/2 ― The concept of ur-language and ur-symbolism is of particular importance in Freud’s thought.
> * 1964 C. S. Lewis *Discarded Image* iv. 54 ― Plato’s ur-Freudian doctrine of the dream as the expression of a submerged wish.
> * 1966 *Punch* 9 Nov. 718/2 ― Above is Leonardo da Vinci’s design for an ur-tank.
> * 1971 *Astrophysics & Space Sci*. X. 363 (*heading*) ― Orientation of galaxies and a magnetic ‘urfield’.
> * 1977 *Listener* 31 Mar. 416/1 ― The importance of the folk example which he [*sc*. Bartók] argued to be one of the ur-sources of music.
> * 1979 *Listener* 14 June 831/1 ― Sir Nikolaus Pevsner’s ur-history, *Pioneers of Modern Design.*
> * 1983 *Sunday Tel*. 13 Mar. 14/6 ― Russell Hoban is an ur-novelist, a maverick voice that is like no other.
>
>
>
Notice how in the fullness of time, it has lost its initial capital. That’s what makes your *Ur-moment* stand out for me: not its existence but its archaic capitalization, which some might consider a trifle “precious” or eye-grabbing.
It does often retain its hyphen, albeit not always. There is some potential for ambiguity without it. For example, *urgent* just means demanding, but an *ur-gent* might be Adam.
So you can think of an *ur-thing* (now probably better spelled *urthing*) as the first one, or the archetype, or the defining moment in this case, the seed that gave rise to everything else. | The Old Testament city of Ur was a toponym, a place-name. In the story, the character Abraham, himself an originator of the monotheism practice of his tribe upon which the saga is centered, is said himself to originate from the city of Ur.
So, the common understanding of the the usage of an "Ur-moment" would more than likely be a reference to an "origination of an originating event in one place and at time". The capitalization of the phrase adds even more credence to the theory that the source of the usage is from the Old Testament story meme. |
187,743 | The *New York Times* article of this past July 29th titled, “The D.O. Is In Now:
Osteopathic Schools Turn Out Nearly a Third of All Med School Grads,” features the growing popularity of the Touro College of Osteopathic Medicine in Harlem, Manhattan among would-be doctors, and introduces the following episode:
>
> “Gabrielle Rozenberg, in her second year at Touro, remembers the
> **Ur-moment** that would lead her to this somewhat unconventional path in
> medicine. Growing up on Long Island, she suffered from chronic ear
> infections. Her doctor recommended surgery. But before committing to
> an invasive procedure, her parents took her to a D.O. In several
> visits, he performed some twists and turns of her neck and head, and
> within days the infection cleared up.”
>
> ― *New York Times*, [“The osteopathic branch of medicine is booming”](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/education/edlife/the-osteopathic-branch-of-medicine-is-booming.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&version=HpSumSmallMediaHigh&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0), 29 July 2014
>
>
>
I surmise “Ur-moment” means a decisive or eureka moment in retrospect. But I don’t find this word in any English dictionaries at hand.
Is “Ur-moment” a normal English expression? Isn’t it “Ah! (or something else)-moment”? | 2014/07/30 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/187743",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/3119/"
] | Arguably, no, *Ur-moment* is not a “normal” English expression for most people.
However, it really depends on the company you keep whether it is normal or not. That’s because
*ur-* is indeed a reasonably productive prefix meaning the original version of something in literary and academic registers, and has been such ever since the second half of the 19th century.
It was borrowed from German. You see it in places like [*urtext edition*](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urtext_edition), just as one example, to indicate the original, unabridged text of some work. I for example have scads of musical scores on my shelves all labelled *Urtext*. (OED: *“Urtext* or *urtext*: an original text; the earliest version.”)
Regarding *ur-* in general, the OED says that it is a prefix. . . .
>
> representing German (also MHG., OHG.) *ur-*, denoting ‘primitive, original, earliest,’ as *ur-Hamlet*, *‑origin*, *‑stock*, etc. See also *Urheimat, Urschleim, Ursprache, Urtext.*
>
>
> G. *ursprache* (= primitive language) has been freq. used in recent English philological works.
>
>
>
One thing that makes *Ur-comment* stand out is its capitalization. That’s for the most part of throw-back to its German origin, where all nouns are capitalized. The assimilated version in English is no longer customarily capitalized, as you will see from these OED citations:
>
> * 1864 Max Müller *Lect. Sci. Lang*. (1871) II. 133 ― The most troublesome of all vowels, the neutral vowel, sometimes called *Urvocal*, better *Unvocal*.
> * 1889 Jacobs *Caxton’s Aesop* I. 37 ― Any light he can throw on the Ur-origin of the Fables.
> * 1901 Boas *Kyd’s Wks*. p. xlv, ― The *Ur-Hamlet* may have contained a number of these borrowings.
> * 1926 A. Møller tr. Pedersen’s *Israel* I. i. 245 ― The word *shēm* is found in all Semitic languages and belongs to the absolutely certain ur-semitic components.
> * 1927 A. H. McNeile *Introd. to Study of New Testament* iii. 50 ― It was an *Ur-Evangelium*, a primitive written Gospel, some say in Hebrew, some in Aramaic, on which our Gospels were based.
> * 1937 O. Jespersen *Analytic Syntax* 142 ― Some well-known students of language who even call this [*sc*. ‘S is P’] the ‘urform’ of sentences.
> * 1943 V. Nabokov in *Atlantic Monthly* May 69/2 ― The dreadful vulgarity, the Ur-Hitlerism of those ludicrous but vicious organisations.
> * 1947 Auden *Age of Anxiety* (1948) ii. 46 ― For Long-Ago has been Ever-After since Ur-Papa gave The Primal Yawn that expressed all things.
> * 1949 F. Fergusson *Idea of Theater* i. 26 ― An enactment of the Ur-Myth of the year‐god.
> * 1950 *Psychiatry* XIII. 168/2 ― The concept of ur-language and ur-symbolism is of particular importance in Freud’s thought.
> * 1964 C. S. Lewis *Discarded Image* iv. 54 ― Plato’s ur-Freudian doctrine of the dream as the expression of a submerged wish.
> * 1966 *Punch* 9 Nov. 718/2 ― Above is Leonardo da Vinci’s design for an ur-tank.
> * 1971 *Astrophysics & Space Sci*. X. 363 (*heading*) ― Orientation of galaxies and a magnetic ‘urfield’.
> * 1977 *Listener* 31 Mar. 416/1 ― The importance of the folk example which he [*sc*. Bartók] argued to be one of the ur-sources of music.
> * 1979 *Listener* 14 June 831/1 ― Sir Nikolaus Pevsner’s ur-history, *Pioneers of Modern Design.*
> * 1983 *Sunday Tel*. 13 Mar. 14/6 ― Russell Hoban is an ur-novelist, a maverick voice that is like no other.
>
>
>
Notice how in the fullness of time, it has lost its initial capital. That’s what makes your *Ur-moment* stand out for me: not its existence but its archaic capitalization, which some might consider a trifle “precious” or eye-grabbing.
It does often retain its hyphen, albeit not always. There is some potential for ambiguity without it. For example, *urgent* just means demanding, but an *ur-gent* might be Adam.
So you can think of an *ur-thing* (now probably better spelled *urthing*) as the first one, or the archetype, or the defining moment in this case, the seed that gave rise to everything else. | No, the prefix "ur-" is not a common construction in English, as demonstrated by the quoted writer mis-using it and their editor not noticing. As [tchrist's dictionary quotes explain](https://english.stackexchange.com/a/187750/63503), the "ur-X" is the original X. The common example is the play *Hamlet*. There seems to have been a play about a character called Hamlet floating around for about a decade before Shakespeare wrote his play. This original play is referred to the "ur-Hamlet". The prefix is also used in linguistics, philosophy and mathematical logic and set-theory.
But the writer quoted in the question talks about an "ur-moment": an original moment. The ur-moment would either be the birth of the universe or perhaps the birth or conception of the person who had the ur-moment. The moment of realising that manipulating her neck could allegedly cure ear infections is not an ur-moment but a *eureka moment* (as mentioned in the question). |
187,743 | The *New York Times* article of this past July 29th titled, “The D.O. Is In Now:
Osteopathic Schools Turn Out Nearly a Third of All Med School Grads,” features the growing popularity of the Touro College of Osteopathic Medicine in Harlem, Manhattan among would-be doctors, and introduces the following episode:
>
> “Gabrielle Rozenberg, in her second year at Touro, remembers the
> **Ur-moment** that would lead her to this somewhat unconventional path in
> medicine. Growing up on Long Island, she suffered from chronic ear
> infections. Her doctor recommended surgery. But before committing to
> an invasive procedure, her parents took her to a D.O. In several
> visits, he performed some twists and turns of her neck and head, and
> within days the infection cleared up.”
>
> ― *New York Times*, [“The osteopathic branch of medicine is booming”](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/education/edlife/the-osteopathic-branch-of-medicine-is-booming.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&version=HpSumSmallMediaHigh&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0), 29 July 2014
>
>
>
I surmise “Ur-moment” means a decisive or eureka moment in retrospect. But I don’t find this word in any English dictionaries at hand.
Is “Ur-moment” a normal English expression? Isn’t it “Ah! (or something else)-moment”? | 2014/07/30 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/187743",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/3119/"
] | No, the prefix "ur-" is not a common construction in English, as demonstrated by the quoted writer mis-using it and their editor not noticing. As [tchrist's dictionary quotes explain](https://english.stackexchange.com/a/187750/63503), the "ur-X" is the original X. The common example is the play *Hamlet*. There seems to have been a play about a character called Hamlet floating around for about a decade before Shakespeare wrote his play. This original play is referred to the "ur-Hamlet". The prefix is also used in linguistics, philosophy and mathematical logic and set-theory.
But the writer quoted in the question talks about an "ur-moment": an original moment. The ur-moment would either be the birth of the universe or perhaps the birth or conception of the person who had the ur-moment. The moment of realising that manipulating her neck could allegedly cure ear infections is not an ur-moment but a *eureka moment* (as mentioned in the question). | The Old Testament city of Ur was a toponym, a place-name. In the story, the character Abraham, himself an originator of the monotheism practice of his tribe upon which the saga is centered, is said himself to originate from the city of Ur.
So, the common understanding of the the usage of an "Ur-moment" would more than likely be a reference to an "origination of an originating event in one place and at time". The capitalization of the phrase adds even more credence to the theory that the source of the usage is from the Old Testament story meme. |
6,431 | What is the difference between *make decision* and *take decision*? When to use the one and when the other? | 2010/12/08 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6431",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/2668/"
] | I disagree with other answers that this is simply regional variation, with no difference in meaning. While I'm sure there are regional variations, and certainly the core meaning is the same, to me (native southern UK) the meanings are definitely slightly different:
* The phrase "making a decision" is the more common phrase. It can refer to the actual moment where a course of action is chosen (and just that moment), but also sometimes to the whole process leading up to it (where one might undertake research, have discussions, think and so on, in order to prepare oneself for the decision itself): "The committee took several months to make a decision."
* The phrase "taking a decision", by contrast, only refers to the decisive moment itself, and not to the process leading up to it. It has more formal connotation, and an implication that the decision will have serious consequences, and that the person deciding will be responsible for them; it has a sense of finality about it.
Some examples may help clarify:
* I haven't made a decision about where to go on holiday. (Informal, consequences not serious, nobody's going to hold me to account.)
* The president took the decision to invade Elbonia.
* Bob was fired because he took the decision to outsource the call centre to Mars.
* The decision-making process took a number of weeks: the engineers did the research and made recommendations, but it was the manager who took the final decision.
In support of this position it is worth using Google to search for ["take a decision"](http://www.google.co.uk/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=site%3anews.bbc.co.uk+%22take+a+decision%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=2fb1b9b17983bff3) and ["make a decision"](http://www.google.co.uk/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=site%3anews.bbc.co.uk+%22make+a+decision%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=2fb1b9b17983bff3) on the BBC News website. The former are (at time of writing) all about formal decisions (by governments, official bodies, international committees etc); the latter - once quotes from US politicians are filtered out - mostly about personal or informal decisions, and about the decision process rather than any decision being taken:
* "The Arab leaders should take a decision to stop negotiating..."
* "But, as a public consultation into UK future energy needs begins, he said it was time to take a decision on nuclear."
* "I usually sleep on it, relax and then make a decision which is usually the correct decision."
* "It's not to say that if you've got to make a decision you should make it in a fraction of a second - that is daft."
* "When we make a decision, we are supposed to consciously analyse the alternatives and carefully weigh the pros and cons." | Per se, there appears to be no difference in meaning.
Even so, "taking a decision" is common in British parlance, whereas "making a decision" is more common in the US.
Refer [BetterWritingSkills](http://www.betterwritingskills.com/articles/take-decisions.txt) for more information. |
6,431 | What is the difference between *make decision* and *take decision*? When to use the one and when the other? | 2010/12/08 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6431",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/2668/"
] | For US English only: Make a decision. Take a position.
A decision is something that is formed through a process. It is put together, or made.
A position is something that is finished. The world "position" itself suggests a specific, stable place to which one has moved, or taken.
One makes a decision to take a position. | It is more **Make** a decision more than **take** a decision. Even under pressure, you never take a decision. You make it. Even though time is restrictive, you evaluate the situation and make your final decision, regardless of the time limit. A level of mental evaluation has taken place thus calculations for the final decision has been **made**.
You also have to take into account that take is usually connected with theft. He took my money, we took the bank, I took his life etc.
Make a decision has been established for many years and functions correctly. Do not confuse it with take and spoil your English. |
6,431 | What is the difference between *make decision* and *take decision*? When to use the one and when the other? | 2010/12/08 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6431",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/2668/"
] | I disagree with other answers that this is simply regional variation, with no difference in meaning. While I'm sure there are regional variations, and certainly the core meaning is the same, to me (native southern UK) the meanings are definitely slightly different:
* The phrase "making a decision" is the more common phrase. It can refer to the actual moment where a course of action is chosen (and just that moment), but also sometimes to the whole process leading up to it (where one might undertake research, have discussions, think and so on, in order to prepare oneself for the decision itself): "The committee took several months to make a decision."
* The phrase "taking a decision", by contrast, only refers to the decisive moment itself, and not to the process leading up to it. It has more formal connotation, and an implication that the decision will have serious consequences, and that the person deciding will be responsible for them; it has a sense of finality about it.
Some examples may help clarify:
* I haven't made a decision about where to go on holiday. (Informal, consequences not serious, nobody's going to hold me to account.)
* The president took the decision to invade Elbonia.
* Bob was fired because he took the decision to outsource the call centre to Mars.
* The decision-making process took a number of weeks: the engineers did the research and made recommendations, but it was the manager who took the final decision.
In support of this position it is worth using Google to search for ["take a decision"](http://www.google.co.uk/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=site%3anews.bbc.co.uk+%22take+a+decision%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=2fb1b9b17983bff3) and ["make a decision"](http://www.google.co.uk/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=site%3anews.bbc.co.uk+%22make+a+decision%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=2fb1b9b17983bff3) on the BBC News website. The former are (at time of writing) all about formal decisions (by governments, official bodies, international committees etc); the latter - once quotes from US politicians are filtered out - mostly about personal or informal decisions, and about the decision process rather than any decision being taken:
* "The Arab leaders should take a decision to stop negotiating..."
* "But, as a public consultation into UK future energy needs begins, he said it was time to take a decision on nuclear."
* "I usually sleep on it, relax and then make a decision which is usually the correct decision."
* "It's not to say that if you've got to make a decision you should make it in a fraction of a second - that is daft."
* "When we make a decision, we are supposed to consciously analyse the alternatives and carefully weigh the pros and cons." | making a decision is something you have engineered; taking a decision is something that is put before you (active versus passive). |
6,431 | What is the difference between *make decision* and *take decision*? When to use the one and when the other? | 2010/12/08 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6431",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/2668/"
] | Actually, I think the difference between the two is the final action.
Making a decision implies something you have decided in your mind. The action to implement that decision may or may not have happened.
Taking a decision implies that the action to implement the decision has happened.
That's my two cents worth. | making a decision is something you have engineered; taking a decision is something that is put before you (active versus passive). |
6,431 | What is the difference between *make decision* and *take decision*? When to use the one and when the other? | 2010/12/08 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6431",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/2668/"
] | Per se, there appears to be no difference in meaning.
Even so, "taking a decision" is common in British parlance, whereas "making a decision" is more common in the US.
Refer [BetterWritingSkills](http://www.betterwritingskills.com/articles/take-decisions.txt) for more information. | Actually decisions deal with options. You may have several options to choose from at which time you may choose an option. Hence I may request that you choose or pick an option. Obviously when you pick an option you are taking that corse of action. As you can see when you pick you decide to take. Even though making a decision is more common the logical reasoning leads one to take a decision to use take versus make. Once you decide the corse of action to take in deciding to use "take" the usage will feel more natural . |
6,431 | What is the difference between *make decision* and *take decision*? When to use the one and when the other? | 2010/12/08 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6431",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/2668/"
] | Make decision is the common form used in English.
>
> I want to think about it a bit longer before I make a decision.
>
>
>
But take decision is used in British English. It means "making an important or formal decision".
>
> I fully accept the decision taken by the committee.
>
>
> | It is more **Make** a decision more than **take** a decision. Even under pressure, you never take a decision. You make it. Even though time is restrictive, you evaluate the situation and make your final decision, regardless of the time limit. A level of mental evaluation has taken place thus calculations for the final decision has been **made**.
You also have to take into account that take is usually connected with theft. He took my money, we took the bank, I took his life etc.
Make a decision has been established for many years and functions correctly. Do not confuse it with take and spoil your English. |
6,431 | What is the difference between *make decision* and *take decision*? When to use the one and when the other? | 2010/12/08 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6431",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/2668/"
] | For US English only: Make a decision. Take a position.
A decision is something that is formed through a process. It is put together, or made.
A position is something that is finished. The world "position" itself suggests a specific, stable place to which one has moved, or taken.
One makes a decision to take a position. | Actually decisions deal with options. You may have several options to choose from at which time you may choose an option. Hence I may request that you choose or pick an option. Obviously when you pick an option you are taking that corse of action. As you can see when you pick you decide to take. Even though making a decision is more common the logical reasoning leads one to take a decision to use take versus make. Once you decide the corse of action to take in deciding to use "take" the usage will feel more natural . |
6,431 | What is the difference between *make decision* and *take decision*? When to use the one and when the other? | 2010/12/08 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6431",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/2668/"
] | I disagree with other answers that this is simply regional variation, with no difference in meaning. While I'm sure there are regional variations, and certainly the core meaning is the same, to me (native southern UK) the meanings are definitely slightly different:
* The phrase "making a decision" is the more common phrase. It can refer to the actual moment where a course of action is chosen (and just that moment), but also sometimes to the whole process leading up to it (where one might undertake research, have discussions, think and so on, in order to prepare oneself for the decision itself): "The committee took several months to make a decision."
* The phrase "taking a decision", by contrast, only refers to the decisive moment itself, and not to the process leading up to it. It has more formal connotation, and an implication that the decision will have serious consequences, and that the person deciding will be responsible for them; it has a sense of finality about it.
Some examples may help clarify:
* I haven't made a decision about where to go on holiday. (Informal, consequences not serious, nobody's going to hold me to account.)
* The president took the decision to invade Elbonia.
* Bob was fired because he took the decision to outsource the call centre to Mars.
* The decision-making process took a number of weeks: the engineers did the research and made recommendations, but it was the manager who took the final decision.
In support of this position it is worth using Google to search for ["take a decision"](http://www.google.co.uk/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=site%3anews.bbc.co.uk+%22take+a+decision%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=2fb1b9b17983bff3) and ["make a decision"](http://www.google.co.uk/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=site%3anews.bbc.co.uk+%22make+a+decision%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=2fb1b9b17983bff3) on the BBC News website. The former are (at time of writing) all about formal decisions (by governments, official bodies, international committees etc); the latter - once quotes from US politicians are filtered out - mostly about personal or informal decisions, and about the decision process rather than any decision being taken:
* "The Arab leaders should take a decision to stop negotiating..."
* "But, as a public consultation into UK future energy needs begins, he said it was time to take a decision on nuclear."
* "I usually sleep on it, relax and then make a decision which is usually the correct decision."
* "It's not to say that if you've got to make a decision you should make it in a fraction of a second - that is daft."
* "When we make a decision, we are supposed to consciously analyse the alternatives and carefully weigh the pros and cons." | Actually decisions deal with options. You may have several options to choose from at which time you may choose an option. Hence I may request that you choose or pick an option. Obviously when you pick an option you are taking that corse of action. As you can see when you pick you decide to take. Even though making a decision is more common the logical reasoning leads one to take a decision to use take versus make. Once you decide the corse of action to take in deciding to use "take" the usage will feel more natural . |
6,431 | What is the difference between *make decision* and *take decision*? When to use the one and when the other? | 2010/12/08 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6431",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/2668/"
] | I disagree with other answers that this is simply regional variation, with no difference in meaning. While I'm sure there are regional variations, and certainly the core meaning is the same, to me (native southern UK) the meanings are definitely slightly different:
* The phrase "making a decision" is the more common phrase. It can refer to the actual moment where a course of action is chosen (and just that moment), but also sometimes to the whole process leading up to it (where one might undertake research, have discussions, think and so on, in order to prepare oneself for the decision itself): "The committee took several months to make a decision."
* The phrase "taking a decision", by contrast, only refers to the decisive moment itself, and not to the process leading up to it. It has more formal connotation, and an implication that the decision will have serious consequences, and that the person deciding will be responsible for them; it has a sense of finality about it.
Some examples may help clarify:
* I haven't made a decision about where to go on holiday. (Informal, consequences not serious, nobody's going to hold me to account.)
* The president took the decision to invade Elbonia.
* Bob was fired because he took the decision to outsource the call centre to Mars.
* The decision-making process took a number of weeks: the engineers did the research and made recommendations, but it was the manager who took the final decision.
In support of this position it is worth using Google to search for ["take a decision"](http://www.google.co.uk/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=site%3anews.bbc.co.uk+%22take+a+decision%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=2fb1b9b17983bff3) and ["make a decision"](http://www.google.co.uk/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=site%3anews.bbc.co.uk+%22make+a+decision%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=2fb1b9b17983bff3) on the BBC News website. The former are (at time of writing) all about formal decisions (by governments, official bodies, international committees etc); the latter - once quotes from US politicians are filtered out - mostly about personal or informal decisions, and about the decision process rather than any decision being taken:
* "The Arab leaders should take a decision to stop negotiating..."
* "But, as a public consultation into UK future energy needs begins, he said it was time to take a decision on nuclear."
* "I usually sleep on it, relax and then make a decision which is usually the correct decision."
* "It's not to say that if you've got to make a decision you should make it in a fraction of a second - that is daft."
* "When we make a decision, we are supposed to consciously analyse the alternatives and carefully weigh the pros and cons." | Actually, I think the difference between the two is the final action.
Making a decision implies something you have decided in your mind. The action to implement that decision may or may not have happened.
Taking a decision implies that the action to implement the decision has happened.
That's my two cents worth. |
6,431 | What is the difference between *make decision* and *take decision*? When to use the one and when the other? | 2010/12/08 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/6431",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/2668/"
] | making a decision is something you have engineered; taking a decision is something that is put before you (active versus passive). | It is more **Make** a decision more than **take** a decision. Even under pressure, you never take a decision. You make it. Even though time is restrictive, you evaluate the situation and make your final decision, regardless of the time limit. A level of mental evaluation has taken place thus calculations for the final decision has been **made**.
You also have to take into account that take is usually connected with theft. He took my money, we took the bank, I took his life etc.
Make a decision has been established for many years and functions correctly. Do not confuse it with take and spoil your English. |
914,970 | I am having a file on S3
Example: test-company/upload/abc.txt
I want to upload this abc.txt to my EC2 in php
Do anybody having any idea please share it with example.. | 2009/05/27 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/914970",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | I've used [amazon-s3-php-class](https://github.com/tpyo/amazon-s3-php-class) which works great.
Zend Framework also has [AWS support](http://framework.zend.com/manual/en/zend.service.amazon.s3.html)
though you can't use it with Europe until ZF 1.8.2 is released. (Due to a bug in 1.8.1 that has been fixed in svn now) | I've used a linux utility called [s3cmd](http://s3tools.org/s3cmd). I guess you could easily call this command line utility from PHP. |
914,970 | I am having a file on S3
Example: test-company/upload/abc.txt
I want to upload this abc.txt to my EC2 in php
Do anybody having any idea please share it with example.. | 2009/05/27 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/914970",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | I've used [amazon-s3-php-class](https://github.com/tpyo/amazon-s3-php-class) which works great.
Zend Framework also has [AWS support](http://framework.zend.com/manual/en/zend.service.amazon.s3.html)
though you can't use it with Europe until ZF 1.8.2 is released. (Due to a bug in 1.8.1 that has been fixed in svn now) | I'd go for the new Zend Framework (1.8) implementation. Haven't really checked it out yet but you can find it at [http://framework.zend.com/](http://framework.zend.com). Docs here: <http://framework.zend.com/manual/en/zend.service.amazon.s3.html> |
914,970 | I am having a file on S3
Example: test-company/upload/abc.txt
I want to upload this abc.txt to my EC2 in php
Do anybody having any idea please share it with example.. | 2009/05/27 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/914970",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | I've used [amazon-s3-php-class](https://github.com/tpyo/amazon-s3-php-class) which works great.
Zend Framework also has [AWS support](http://framework.zend.com/manual/en/zend.service.amazon.s3.html)
though you can't use it with Europe until ZF 1.8.2 is released. (Due to a bug in 1.8.1 that has been fixed in svn now) | There is no method to "upload to EC2" as it is an instance of a virtual server and not a storage service. You would need to put your own service on EC2 in order to upload to it.
You can, however, download from S3 to EC2. Simply run wget or similar on the EC2 instance to pull down the file from S3 bucket URL (with authentication if necessary). |
774,794 | A year ago I advise a user to move off files from e-mail to shared storage as the PST file sizes were a concern and PC was running Outlook slowly.
The 3 PST files have grown when i gave the initial advice from 20GB, 28GB and 14GB to a huge size which is now 48GB, 49GB and 10GB.
Performance of the PC is really suffering and continually hanging in Outlook.
PSTs have been scanned and had all errors corrected with Scan PST.
Have advise user again to move large attachments in emails out of the PST and in to shared server storage.
User is asking how to fix the PC and we have tried everything - sincerely i believe this is an issue with huge file sizes related to large attachments.
1. Has this exceeded the capability of Outlook 2010?
2. Any other recommendations?
3. Any useful links to educate users on file sizes which work well, and
sizes that should be avoided? | 2014/06/29 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/774794",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/194934/"
] | I can only assume they are making changes to the attachments and sending them back and forth to each other via email thus numerous copies of similar data is maintained.
I suggest not doing attachments as much as possible and instead use cloud alternatives. For example, Google Drive. Using Google Drive you may share the same file with numerous people and control what permissions they have. Just announced at Google IO, a business service for unlimited storage for $10/month. Additionally, basic free account still offers several GB for free. For 1.99/month I upgraded to 125gb of google storage.
The only things that will make outlook happy is if you add tons of memory 16gb or more to start and/or either compress or decompress the PST files. It will have to actively decompress it so that could harm performance.
Having more PST files and spreading out the load could also help. Have an archive PST file and anything more than, for example, 1 year old goes in there. In fact, having 1 for each year would be a good idea. Accessing the archives will be slower, but active work will be faster. | Two of your PST files are approaching the preconfigured file size limit in Outlook 2010. You should look into splitting these large PST files into smaller PST files.
<http://support.microsoft.com/kb/982577>
If you're using Exchange Server 2010 or Exchange Server 2013 as your email server you should consider creating an Archive mailbox for the user and importing the PST files into the Archive mailbox. Note that this requires an Enterprise CAL for Exchange (AFAIK). |
3,265,585 | Anybody knows a Editor where i can develop my JS directly in the Browser with a js based Editor?
It would be nice if the code completion is customizable so that you can add own objects and methods, possibly documentation for each method / object.
Code completion is not required for the objects that come with javascript (like window) as we're using Mozilla's JS Framework Rhino.
Thanks in advance
Best Regards
Flexo | 2010/07/16 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3265585",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/393937/"
] | The only browser based JS/page editor that I know of is Mozilla's Bespin, <https://bespin.mozillalabs.com> , but I have no idea if they do code-completion.
There is a JS tool called JSLint from the Crockenator (Douglas Crockford) which you might find helpful, <http://www.jslint.com>. No code-completion, but it lets you write good JavaScript.
My two cents. | [JsFiddle](http://jsfiddle.net) is used in a lot of examples on this site (no code completion). |
3,265,585 | Anybody knows a Editor where i can develop my JS directly in the Browser with a js based Editor?
It would be nice if the code completion is customizable so that you can add own objects and methods, possibly documentation for each method / object.
Code completion is not required for the objects that come with javascript (like window) as we're using Mozilla's JS Framework Rhino.
Thanks in advance
Best Regards
Flexo | 2010/07/16 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3265585",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/393937/"
] | The only browser based JS/page editor that I know of is Mozilla's Bespin, <https://bespin.mozillalabs.com> , but I have no idea if they do code-completion.
There is a JS tool called JSLint from the Crockenator (Douglas Crockford) which you might find helpful, <http://www.jslint.com>. No code-completion, but it lets you write good JavaScript.
My two cents. | I just stumbled across a JavaScript implementation of vi. But that doesn't do autocompletion.
[this one](http://ajaxian.com/archives/byteplug-experimental-online-javascript-editor) claims to do so, though. I know nothing else about it, though. |
3,265,585 | Anybody knows a Editor where i can develop my JS directly in the Browser with a js based Editor?
It would be nice if the code completion is customizable so that you can add own objects and methods, possibly documentation for each method / object.
Code completion is not required for the objects that come with javascript (like window) as we're using Mozilla's JS Framework Rhino.
Thanks in advance
Best Regards
Flexo | 2010/07/16 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3265585",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/393937/"
] | [JsFiddle](http://jsfiddle.net) is used in a lot of examples on this site (no code completion). | I just stumbled across a JavaScript implementation of vi. But that doesn't do autocompletion.
[this one](http://ajaxian.com/archives/byteplug-experimental-online-javascript-editor) claims to do so, though. I know nothing else about it, though. |
27,876 | Let say that the Earth's Moon was knocked out of orbit and landed on the Earth with some damage but not world ending. Would Earth's atmosphere envelop to include the Moon? Would the moon sink into the Earth? What would happen? | 2018/10/03 | [
"https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/27876",
"https://astronomy.stackexchange.com",
"https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/users/15415/"
] | To this point, this is purely theoretical. We have no solid evidence of islands of stability. They may or may not exist to begin with. It's hard to speculate on the methods of creating something we don't even know exists.
That said, currently, the heaviest elements found in nature appear to be synthesized in the mergers of neutron stars. It might be possible that a similar process could create even heavier elements. It's possible that some of the discovered transuranic elements we've discovered might be formed in such mergers, however their half-lives are so short that they break down before they're detectable. If there are stable transuranic elements, then they might be formed in this manner, but we've never seen any evidence of them. Me might not know what to look for, but so far we've detected no suggestions of such elements.
Another option is the accretion disks of black holes. It is believed that nucleosynthesis occurs in accretion disks, and one could speculate that there may be conditions in accretion disks that could make it possible.
But without any evidence of the islands of instability, this is entirely conjecture. | The relatively well known process that is believed to produce most heavy atoms in the universe is the ["r-process"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-process). The wikipedia page mentions s
>
> . It has been suggested that multiple nuclear explosions would make it possible to reach the island of stability, as the affected nuclides (starting with uranium-238 as seed nuclei) would not have time to beta decay all the way to the quickly spontaneously fissioning nuclides at the line of beta stability before they absorbed more neutrons in the next explosion, thus providing a chance to reach neutron-rich superheavy nuclides like copernicium-291 and -293 which should have half-lives of centuries or millennia.
>
>
>
It's not clear (at least from this source) whether this could also happen in a supernova or a neutron star collision, or whether other processes like photodissociation might destroy the large nuclei before they reach this putative island of stability. If they did reach it, it might be quite hard to detect:
1. Presumably only a small proportion of the nuclei would become that heavy
2. No one really expects the isotopes on the [island to actually](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_of_stability) be stable, just to be more stable than "nearby" isotopes.
3. Since we don't have samples of these elements on Earth, we don't have accurate spectra that might enable us to detect them in space. |
10,832 | On my way back to home while traveling, I missed asr prayer. Now I am at home and praying full prayers. How should I pray qaza of my asr prayer, two rakats or four? When `Magrib` time started, I was in travel.
Options are
* Since, I am not traveling, I should pray full for asr.
* Since, I missed two rakats of asr, I should pray two rakats.
Both point of view seems valid to me. Not that it matters much (its only two rakats), but is there any guidance available in Quran or hadith ? | 2014/01/19 | [
"https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/10832",
"https://islam.stackexchange.com",
"https://islam.stackexchange.com/users/225/"
] | Well the question is: Have you been traveling at 'Asr time if so and you didn't reach your home before maghrib time you have to do qaza' for 2 raka'a as you had the right to pray qasr!
If you haven't been traveling (having the status of a musafir) at 'Asr time of course you should do the full 4 raka'a.
And once you arrive at home you should also see if you can catch up maghrib etc.
If you pray qaza' you pray the same length or number of raka'at you should have done the prayer if you did it at time. qaza' is just repeating prayer 1:1 as if it was at time! So you must consider your status!
Acoording to these 2 fatwas [1](http://www.al-eman.com/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%81%D8%AA%D8%A7%D9%88%D9%89/%D9%82%D8%B6%D8%A7%D8%A1%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B5%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%A9%20%D9%81%D9%89%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%81%D8%B1/i8658&rs&p7) [2](http://www.al-islam.com/Content.aspx?pageid=1135&ContentID=1588) this is the opinion of the Maliki and Hanafi Madhab while Shafi'i and Hanbali (this is quoted in the following [fatwa](https://www.islamweb.net/ar/fatwa/179453)) say if you returned to your place (home) you will have to do qada' (qaza) for 4 raka'a prayer as usual no matter if it was a qaza' for qasr or not!
And Allah knows best! | Responding to your question has two answers by two options
1. If you were traveling and you heard the `magrib` adhan in your car, you have to read your qaza salat by 2 rak'ats.
2. If you were travelling and you heard maqrib adhan in your city or at the city gate you have to read your qaza by 4 rak'ats. |
10,832 | On my way back to home while traveling, I missed asr prayer. Now I am at home and praying full prayers. How should I pray qaza of my asr prayer, two rakats or four? When `Magrib` time started, I was in travel.
Options are
* Since, I am not traveling, I should pray full for asr.
* Since, I missed two rakats of asr, I should pray two rakats.
Both point of view seems valid to me. Not that it matters much (its only two rakats), but is there any guidance available in Quran or hadith ? | 2014/01/19 | [
"https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/10832",
"https://islam.stackexchange.com",
"https://islam.stackexchange.com/users/225/"
] | Well the question is: Have you been traveling at 'Asr time if so and you didn't reach your home before maghrib time you have to do qaza' for 2 raka'a as you had the right to pray qasr!
If you haven't been traveling (having the status of a musafir) at 'Asr time of course you should do the full 4 raka'a.
And once you arrive at home you should also see if you can catch up maghrib etc.
If you pray qaza' you pray the same length or number of raka'at you should have done the prayer if you did it at time. qaza' is just repeating prayer 1:1 as if it was at time! So you must consider your status!
Acoording to these 2 fatwas [1](http://www.al-eman.com/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%81%D8%AA%D8%A7%D9%88%D9%89/%D9%82%D8%B6%D8%A7%D8%A1%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B5%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%A9%20%D9%81%D9%89%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%81%D8%B1/i8658&rs&p7) [2](http://www.al-islam.com/Content.aspx?pageid=1135&ContentID=1588) this is the opinion of the Maliki and Hanafi Madhab while Shafi'i and Hanbali (this is quoted in the following [fatwa](https://www.islamweb.net/ar/fatwa/179453)) say if you returned to your place (home) you will have to do qada' (qaza) for 4 raka'a prayer as usual no matter if it was a qaza' for qasr or not!
And Allah knows best! | If you reach home, you are no more in a traveller status and should offer the complete prayer.
The Qasr option facilitates the traveller with a shortened prayer to complete the salah on time and not to keep this pending until he reaches home to avail the Qasr prayer.
Allah Knows the best.
May Allah guide and show us the right path. Aameen. |
75,232 | Are there any tutorials with examples on [Bitcoin Script](https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script): from basics to complex scripts? | 2018/05/16 | [
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/75232",
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com",
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/users/83165/"
] | Got these informative resources:
* <https://blockgeeks.com/guides/best-bitcoin-script-guide/>
* <https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-guide#p2pkh-script-validation>
* <https://github.com/bitcoinbook/bitcoinbook/blob/develop/book.asciidoc>
* <https://davidederosa.com/basic-blockchain-programming/>
* <https://programmingblockchain.gitbooks.io/programmingblockchain/content/>
* <http://www.righto.com/2014/02/bitcoins-hard-way-using-raw-bitcoin.html>
* <http://www.samlewis.me/2017/06/a-peek-under-bitcoins-hood/>
* <https://blog.bitjson.com/bitauth-ide-write-and-debug-custom-bitcoin-scripts-aad51f6e3f44> | Here's a bitcoin script 101 tutorial
<https://bitcoindev.network/bitcoin-script-101/> |
15,679 | The so-called **wind turbine syndrome** has received quite a bit of attention of late. For example, on [How Stuff Works](http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/wind-turbines-health.htm):
>
> Until recently, there were three main issues regarding the possible downsides of wind power: bird and bat deaths, cost, and disrupting the appearance of natural landscapes. But a new objection to wind power has popped up in the past few years, resting on the research of a few scientists. **The latest argument states that wind power endangers the health of people who live near windmills.** Some people call this theory "wind-turbine syndrome." Although the extent of the phenomenon is unknown, there does seem to be something to it.
>
>
>
The explanation includes harm from infrasound and noise-related sleep loss, as discussed here:
>
> It's understood that some people who live in close proximity to wind turbines experience sleep disturbances, headaches and concentration problems. These symptoms and others could be explained as the effects of infrasound as well as constant humming and vibrations.
>
>
>
Others argue that there is no evidence of any harm, for example:
>
> A study, [Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects](http://www.canwea.ca/pdf/talkwind/Wind_Turbine_Sound_and_Health_Effects-Executive_Summary.pdf), was conducted in 2009 by a panel of medical professionals from the US, Canada, Denmark, and UK. The study concluded, “There is no evidence that the audible or sub-audible sounds [including infrasound] emitted by wind turbines have any direct adverse physiological effects.”
>
>
> A [new study published by the Bavarian Environment Agency](http://www.lfu.bayern.de/umweltwissen/doc/uw_117_windkraftanlagen_infraschall_gesundheit.pdf) in Germany in 2012 has concluded similarly to the previous. The study – ‘Wind turbines: does infrasound affect health?’ concludes that wind turbines do not generate infrasound at a level that would damage human health. Wind energy structures generate infrasound that is far below normal human hearing and perception; this is why it does not cause any damage to people.
>
>
>
Is there any merit to the complaint that wind turbines harm health? | 2013/04/04 | [
"https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/15679",
"https://skeptics.stackexchange.com",
"https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/users/1792/"
] | Wind turbines are perfectly safe for Humans.
You your self brought two credible sources. And there is [this](http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/much-angst-over-wind-turbines-is-just-hot-air-20111220-1p3sb.html#ixzz1hAXpQb9z) article by
>
> Simon Chapman is professor of public health at the University of Sydney. He has no financial associations with any wind energy company.
>
>
>
who references the British Acoustics Bulletin:
>
> The British Acoustics Bulletin has just published what is now the 10th independent review of the evidence on wind farms causing annoyance and ill health in people. And for the 10th time it has emphasised that annoyance has far more to do with social and psychological factors in those complaining than any direct effect from sound or inaudible infrasound emanating from wind turbines.
>
>
> A few extracts give the flavour: "the degree of annoyance is only slightly related to noise level"; "the fact that someone was complaining was mainly determined by the personality of the individual"; "fear of the noise source can increase annoyance"; and "adverse feelings . . . were influenced by feelings of lacking control, being subjected to injustice, lacking influence, and not being believed".
>
>
> Two factors repeatedly stand out. The first is being able to see wind turbines, which increases annoyance particularly in those who dislike or fear them.
>
>
> The second factor is whether people derive income from hosting turbines, which miraculously appears to be a highly effective antidote to feelings of annoyance and symptoms.
>
>
>
And
>
> Complaining about wind farms appears confined largely to parts of Australia, Canada, the US, Britain and New Zealand. And these complaints have accelerated in the past five years, despite turbines having been operational in many locations for more than 20 years.
>
>
> This contagious "wind turbine syndrome" - a condition not recognised by any international disease classification system and which appears not once in any title or abstract in the massive US National Library of Medicine's PubMed database - appears to be spread by the vector of anti-wind farm activist groups.
>
>
>
Also, from [here](http://www.energymatters.com.au/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=3577)
>
> the South Australia's Environment Protection Authority has released a report showing infrasound levels at homes near wind turbines is no greater than what is experienced elsewhere.
>
>
>
The study can be read [here](http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/xstd_files/Noise/Report/infrasound.pdf), and a direct quote from it:
>
> It is clear from the results that the infrasound levels measured at the two residential
> locations near wind farms (Location 8 near the Bluff Wind Farm and Location 9 near
> Clements Gap Wind Farm) are within the range of infrasound levels measured at
> comparable locations away from wind farms. Of particular note, the results at one of the
> houses near a wind farm (Location 8) are the lowest infrasound levels measured at any of
> the 11 locations included in this study.
>
>
> This study concludes that the level of infrasound at houses near the wind turbines
> assessed is no greater than that experienced in other urban and rural environments, and
> that the contribution of wind turbines to the measured infrasound levels is insignificant in comparison with the background level of infrasound in the environment.
>
>
> | This issue is currently being debated in Denmark.
There are some **possible** [1] health risks regarding **low-frequency** sounds generated by wind turbines. (*Possible* meaning that there is no scientific report yet to prove a casual link between symptoms reported by the neighbours to big wind turbines and the generated noise).
*(More references can be found at the last page of the petition [2] made by Danish Society for Work and Environment medicine (sorry for the bad translation - in Danish its: "Dansk Selskab for Arbejds- og Miljømedicin") - in which they ask the goverment for more inquiry into the official noise-limits that are deemed as "safe" for people. )*
It seems that the noise-problem is related to the big wind-turbines (2MW+) that produce more low-frequency sounds then smaller turbines. We are talking about frequencies from 20 to 200 Hz. Those are the frequencies that most houses are not sufficiently insulated from. If the level exceeds 20 dB(A) (inside the house) it can induce several (stress-related) symptoms [3][4]:
* headaches
* dizziness
* nausea
* palpitations
* irritability
* concentration problems
* memory problems
* other symptoms, like irregularities in female menstrual cycle, etc.
Note that the sound level above the safety threshold are only seen in houses less then 3KM from BIG wind turbines.
There is currently a report contracted by the Danish ministry of Health [5]. (I will update this answer when there are any new developments in the matter).
---
Sources:
1. <http://www.ft.dk/samling/20101/almdel/epu/bilag/227/987243.pdf> - a report made *for* Danish Health Ministry for the Danish Parliment - in Danish
2. <http://www.dr.dk/NR/rdonlyres/909F351F-914A-4F21-869F-35CA11143EF6/3729341/Dasam_hoeringssvarvindmoellernov2011.pdf> (in Danish)
3. <http://foens.dk/megamoeller/?page_id=77> (in Danish)
4. Wind Turbine syndrom: a book by Nina Pierpont MD, ph.d
5. (Danish) <http://www.tvsyd.dk/artikel/205008:Er-vindmoeller-sundhedsskadelige>? |
376,580 | I tried to use a different folder for the resource packs so I could store them elsewhere and then use a symbolic link to the resource pack folder but Minecraft doesn't see zip files within the symbolic linked directory.
This wouldn't really be relevant, except that I am in the process of stitching a bunch of resource packs together so its nice to be able to test them after I make an edit. | 2020/10/11 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/376580",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/259623/"
] | **Maybe.**
Here are your options as I see them:
**Persuade your in-laws to let you install Steam on their computer.**
Pros:
* Probably the most straightforward solution.
* Doesn't cost any money.
Cons:
* You have to convince your in-laws to go along with it.
* You have to log into Steam on someone else's computer, which is a minor security risk. Make sure you have enabled Steam Guard, don't reuse your Steam password on any other sites, and be sure to log out when you're done.
* You might have trouble hooking the computer to the TV, unless they're right next to each other.
**Try to run it on your laptop.**
Pros:
* Jackbox is not the most technically demanding series of games. Your laptop might handle it just fine, even if it's got a weak graphics chipset.
* Doesn't cost any money (assuming you already own a laptop).
* You can test it in advance to make sure it will play well, and pick a different solution if it doesn't.
Cons:
* Doesn't generalize to more demanding games.
* Requires you to bring your laptop, which might be inconvenient.
* If you have a really weak laptop, Jackbox might not run on it.
**Use a cloud gaming service such as GeForce Now**
Pros:
* Can be used to stream to any computer regardless of computing power.
Cons:
* Usually requires installing client software, which your in-laws might disapprove of (so use the laptop instead).
* Requires a strong internet connection with low latency. Usually performs better over a wired connection. For a game like Jackbox, this might not be such a big deal if you don't mind a little bit of lag.
* Costs money.
* You probably can't test your in-laws' internet in advance.
**Use [Steam Remote Play](https://store.steampowered.com/remoteplay#anywhere)**
Pros:
* Can be used to stream to any computer or Android/iOS device regardless of computing power.
* Doesn't cost any money.
Cons:
* Requires installing client software.
* Requires a strong internet connection for both your home computer and the device you want to use as a client.
* Your home computer must be turned on and running Steam, or else you must have some means of remotely turning it on when you want to play.
* You [may have to adjust your home router's settings](https://help.steampowered.com/en/faqs/view/0689-74B8-92AC-10F2#networkports). Testing these settings may require leaving your home and using a different internet connection.
**Purchase a gaming laptop or a Nintendo Switch**
Pros:
* This gives you greater flexibility the next time you need to travel.
* The Switch has a lot of first-party exclusives, unlike other consoles. As a result, it is a good companion device for PC gamers (in my opinion).
Cons:
* Costs money.
* The Switch does in fact *have* at least some Jackbox games available on it, but you would need to buy them again. | You can stream *Jackbox* games through Steam or even run them natively on a very weak laptop without a discrete GPU in my experience. You could also stream from a phone or tablet or an Android TV device as an alternative. You could connect the phone to the TV if your phone supports video over USB-C. |
6,693 | I couldn't seem to find this existing question, although it may be somewhere boiled into a two-hand tapping question somewhere else.
I come from electric bass and the Victor Wooten style of two-hand tapping. In his method, he uses a hair scrunchie to mute the strings on the other side of the tap. To explain what I mean, fret a string at the twelfth fret and then pluck either side of the string. Then note that both tones ring out when you tap that fret percussively.
I used a similar method on bass, but the problem was this also mutes open strings. I've noted that Antoine DuFour uses a handkerchief which is tied under the strings immediately behind the nut, which he has claimed helps with this, but I've got a suspicion there is another technique or process that you need to perform to mute the strings on the other side of where you are stopping them with either hand.
I have this problem the most on the acoustic guitar, as with electric instruments the pickup is only really working towards magnifying whatever frequency is happening on that side of your hand. On the acoustic, the other pitch very clearly rings out, and I haven't found a way to mute that or get rid of it.
Is there perhaps a type of string material, or some kind of action setting to help with this? Are there videos where people talk about this? I can't seem to find any.
Thanks for any input. | 2012/07/11 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/6693",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/278/"
] | Depending on the type of tapping I use three mechanisms -
* For your Joe Satriani style tapping where you are using no open strings, I pop a handkerchief in at my first or second fret or thereabouts. This kills pretty much everything from that end of the string.
* On an electric guitar I also use a noise gate just to increase the level needed to be audible.
* If I am tapping but may also sound from open strings I use the side of my left hand quite extensively, and for certain passages I bring my right hand over to the nut side of my left hand to damp a specific string as I tap with my left hand. | Mechanically, I can think of two options:
* Put a damper on the fingerboard between the nut and first fret that is so precisely located that the string only contacts it when it is being fretted, but not when open.
* Invent a new type of fret that has some kind of damping material on the nut side of each fret so that the string only vibrates on the bottom side.
Both of these are probably practically impossible due to the standards of modern string action and the physical properties of a vibrating length of string.
The hair scrunchie (or [Michael Angelo Batio's string dampener](http://www.angelo.com/html/the_mab_string_dampener.html)) are really the only practical options that I know of. In regard to playing open strings, Wooten's approach is to either pay farther up the neck so they aren't necessary or to quickly push the scrunchie back over the nut whenever he needs those notes (something more easily accomplished with a scrunchie than the MAB String Dampener). |
6,693 | I couldn't seem to find this existing question, although it may be somewhere boiled into a two-hand tapping question somewhere else.
I come from electric bass and the Victor Wooten style of two-hand tapping. In his method, he uses a hair scrunchie to mute the strings on the other side of the tap. To explain what I mean, fret a string at the twelfth fret and then pluck either side of the string. Then note that both tones ring out when you tap that fret percussively.
I used a similar method on bass, but the problem was this also mutes open strings. I've noted that Antoine DuFour uses a handkerchief which is tied under the strings immediately behind the nut, which he has claimed helps with this, but I've got a suspicion there is another technique or process that you need to perform to mute the strings on the other side of where you are stopping them with either hand.
I have this problem the most on the acoustic guitar, as with electric instruments the pickup is only really working towards magnifying whatever frequency is happening on that side of your hand. On the acoustic, the other pitch very clearly rings out, and I haven't found a way to mute that or get rid of it.
Is there perhaps a type of string material, or some kind of action setting to help with this? Are there videos where people talk about this? I can't seem to find any.
Thanks for any input. | 2012/07/11 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/6693",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/278/"
] | Mechanically, I can think of two options:
* Put a damper on the fingerboard between the nut and first fret that is so precisely located that the string only contacts it when it is being fretted, but not when open.
* Invent a new type of fret that has some kind of damping material on the nut side of each fret so that the string only vibrates on the bottom side.
Both of these are probably practically impossible due to the standards of modern string action and the physical properties of a vibrating length of string.
The hair scrunchie (or [Michael Angelo Batio's string dampener](http://www.angelo.com/html/the_mab_string_dampener.html)) are really the only practical options that I know of. In regard to playing open strings, Wooten's approach is to either pay farther up the neck so they aren't necessary or to quickly push the scrunchie back over the nut whenever he needs those notes (something more easily accomplished with a scrunchie than the MAB String Dampener). | I haven't tried these yet, but I'm wondering whether they'll fit the bill:
Goody Ouchless Tiny Terry Ponytaile (42 ct):
[http://www.amazon.com/Goody-Ouchless-Tiny-Terry-Ponytailer/dp/B004G57GHK/ref=sr\_1\_19?ie=UTF8&qid=1366081799&sr=8-19&keywords=hair+scrunchies](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/B004G57GHK)
I am guessing on the sizing (diameter, width), based on the examples shown at 3:05 in this instructional YT vid:
Your thoughts? |
6,693 | I couldn't seem to find this existing question, although it may be somewhere boiled into a two-hand tapping question somewhere else.
I come from electric bass and the Victor Wooten style of two-hand tapping. In his method, he uses a hair scrunchie to mute the strings on the other side of the tap. To explain what I mean, fret a string at the twelfth fret and then pluck either side of the string. Then note that both tones ring out when you tap that fret percussively.
I used a similar method on bass, but the problem was this also mutes open strings. I've noted that Antoine DuFour uses a handkerchief which is tied under the strings immediately behind the nut, which he has claimed helps with this, but I've got a suspicion there is another technique or process that you need to perform to mute the strings on the other side of where you are stopping them with either hand.
I have this problem the most on the acoustic guitar, as with electric instruments the pickup is only really working towards magnifying whatever frequency is happening on that side of your hand. On the acoustic, the other pitch very clearly rings out, and I haven't found a way to mute that or get rid of it.
Is there perhaps a type of string material, or some kind of action setting to help with this? Are there videos where people talk about this? I can't seem to find any.
Thanks for any input. | 2012/07/11 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/6693",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/278/"
] | Depending on the type of tapping I use three mechanisms -
* For your Joe Satriani style tapping where you are using no open strings, I pop a handkerchief in at my first or second fret or thereabouts. This kills pretty much everything from that end of the string.
* On an electric guitar I also use a noise gate just to increase the level needed to be audible.
* If I am tapping but may also sound from open strings I use the side of my left hand quite extensively, and for certain passages I bring my right hand over to the nut side of my left hand to damp a specific string as I tap with my left hand. | I was introduced to using a hair band by one of Andy James videos at licklibrary.com. Simply pull over nut of the guitar onto the first fret. Once installed it's easy to add and remove just by sliding it from the top of the neck onto the first fret. It's softly dampens / mutes the open strings but if you intentionally want to play an open note it will still sound. |
6,693 | I couldn't seem to find this existing question, although it may be somewhere boiled into a two-hand tapping question somewhere else.
I come from electric bass and the Victor Wooten style of two-hand tapping. In his method, he uses a hair scrunchie to mute the strings on the other side of the tap. To explain what I mean, fret a string at the twelfth fret and then pluck either side of the string. Then note that both tones ring out when you tap that fret percussively.
I used a similar method on bass, but the problem was this also mutes open strings. I've noted that Antoine DuFour uses a handkerchief which is tied under the strings immediately behind the nut, which he has claimed helps with this, but I've got a suspicion there is another technique or process that you need to perform to mute the strings on the other side of where you are stopping them with either hand.
I have this problem the most on the acoustic guitar, as with electric instruments the pickup is only really working towards magnifying whatever frequency is happening on that side of your hand. On the acoustic, the other pitch very clearly rings out, and I haven't found a way to mute that or get rid of it.
Is there perhaps a type of string material, or some kind of action setting to help with this? Are there videos where people talk about this? I can't seem to find any.
Thanks for any input. | 2012/07/11 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/6693",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/278/"
] | Depending on the type of tapping I use three mechanisms -
* For your Joe Satriani style tapping where you are using no open strings, I pop a handkerchief in at my first or second fret or thereabouts. This kills pretty much everything from that end of the string.
* On an electric guitar I also use a noise gate just to increase the level needed to be audible.
* If I am tapping but may also sound from open strings I use the side of my left hand quite extensively, and for certain passages I bring my right hand over to the nut side of my left hand to damp a specific string as I tap with my left hand. | I haven't tried these yet, but I'm wondering whether they'll fit the bill:
Goody Ouchless Tiny Terry Ponytaile (42 ct):
[http://www.amazon.com/Goody-Ouchless-Tiny-Terry-Ponytailer/dp/B004G57GHK/ref=sr\_1\_19?ie=UTF8&qid=1366081799&sr=8-19&keywords=hair+scrunchies](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/B004G57GHK)
I am guessing on the sizing (diameter, width), based on the examples shown at 3:05 in this instructional YT vid:
Your thoughts? |
6,693 | I couldn't seem to find this existing question, although it may be somewhere boiled into a two-hand tapping question somewhere else.
I come from electric bass and the Victor Wooten style of two-hand tapping. In his method, he uses a hair scrunchie to mute the strings on the other side of the tap. To explain what I mean, fret a string at the twelfth fret and then pluck either side of the string. Then note that both tones ring out when you tap that fret percussively.
I used a similar method on bass, but the problem was this also mutes open strings. I've noted that Antoine DuFour uses a handkerchief which is tied under the strings immediately behind the nut, which he has claimed helps with this, but I've got a suspicion there is another technique or process that you need to perform to mute the strings on the other side of where you are stopping them with either hand.
I have this problem the most on the acoustic guitar, as with electric instruments the pickup is only really working towards magnifying whatever frequency is happening on that side of your hand. On the acoustic, the other pitch very clearly rings out, and I haven't found a way to mute that or get rid of it.
Is there perhaps a type of string material, or some kind of action setting to help with this? Are there videos where people talk about this? I can't seem to find any.
Thanks for any input. | 2012/07/11 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/6693",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/278/"
] | I was introduced to using a hair band by one of Andy James videos at licklibrary.com. Simply pull over nut of the guitar onto the first fret. Once installed it's easy to add and remove just by sliding it from the top of the neck onto the first fret. It's softly dampens / mutes the open strings but if you intentionally want to play an open note it will still sound. | I haven't tried these yet, but I'm wondering whether they'll fit the bill:
Goody Ouchless Tiny Terry Ponytaile (42 ct):
[http://www.amazon.com/Goody-Ouchless-Tiny-Terry-Ponytailer/dp/B004G57GHK/ref=sr\_1\_19?ie=UTF8&qid=1366081799&sr=8-19&keywords=hair+scrunchies](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/B004G57GHK)
I am guessing on the sizing (diameter, width), based on the examples shown at 3:05 in this instructional YT vid:
Your thoughts? |
18,406,266 | I have several databases currently using FluentMigrator and am curious to know how Entity Framework Migrations compare.
Can EF Migrations seed data in migrations and selectively run migration scripts based on environments like FluentMigrator can with tags and profiles?
I am already using EF Database First as the ORM to my application, and I think I read somewhere that EF Migrations are supported for non-Code First EF as well now, but my team has been thinking about refactoring to a Code First approach anyway because of some of the limitations with the Database First approach. So would EF Migrations just make more sense to use rather than have another 3rd party migration framework when going with a code first approach? | 2013/08/23 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/18406266",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1042141/"
] | Entity Framework automatically generates migration files and supports LINQ-to-SQL. FluentMigrations, in contrast, only scripts migrations and doesn't automatically generate migration files. FluentMigrations was developed several years before Entity Framework Code-First. | I don't have any experience with FluentMigrator but after a brief skim of the documentation, it looks like you have to create your migrations manually?
EF will prompt for a migration every time your model changes and the app is run. This makes it kind of easy, but annoying at the same time. Once you've turned on Migrations, any changes to your model that would involve a database change will require a migration. You can modify the migration tho, and it's auto generated. Just watch the "down" version... I've had issues.
Code first is pretty seamless tho. Even handles more complex object models like subclasses. You can even specify how the tables are generated (table for each type, base table and a table for each type, or single table and a type key).
All that to say, if you're gonna always generate c# code to update your database, I'd go with EF's built in migrations. They do most of the work for you. |
64 | The [Good Subjective/Bad Subjective guidelines](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/) talk a lot about what make for great questions and answers for subjective issues, and it primarily falls around Back It Up!: answers need to cite some kind of relevant material (scholarly works, authoritative discussions, relevant personal experience, something), and questions need to be written such that they encourage such answers.
And, of course, Back It Up! applies to objective questions and answers, too, the resources you use for backing those up just may be somewhat different.
So, we need to be pro-active, from the beginning, about demanding that answers Back It Up! This SE, in particular, I think, is closely tied to a lot of speculative fields – as several meta questions have already discussed, there are a number of SE sites that have significant overlap with this one, *but would not accept our kind of question* because of their speculative nature.
Thus, we need a policy, guideline, or at least discussion of what is too speculative, what questions cannot be answered in a way that Backs It Up! The “Primarily Opinion-Based” close reason exists for this, but we as a community have to decide where to draw the line for using it.
We also, as a community, need to enforce backing things up in answers. Everything about this endeavor is, by definition, highly speculative: the only way to be serious about this, to produce good answers, is to minimize, as much as possible, the “pure” speculation. Cite sources, compare to real-world history, sociology, physics, and so on. And flag or downvote answers that don’t. | 2014/09/17 | [
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/64",
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/users/17/"
] | Back It Up! *can* mean real-world history or physics or linguistics
===================================================================
These are valuable fields that can give a fictional world a sense of realism, or at least credibility and verisimilitude. Answers that reference these things are often going to be better than those without them.
Back It Up! can mean *extrapolate* from reality
===============================================
Yes, many of us want to build worlds that are *unrealistic in specific ways* – but we are capable of reasoning how the things we *do* have experience with would react to this change. We can talk about building techniques, weapon technology, different social, ethical, and legal structures, linguistic developments, so on and so forth, to show how a given reaction to something new *fits in with all the things that are still the same.*
Back It Up! can *also* mean personal experience
===============================================
We want to encourage experience worldbuilders – people who have done it, who have put their work out there, have received feedback, who have seen what works and what doesn’t work. How great would it be to have a bestselling author or Hollywood movie director or prime-time television screenwriter answering questions? This is the kind of thing we want to encourage.
So someone could easily decide to Back It Up! not by citing journals or histories, but by talking about their own personal experience: what they have tried and put to the test and seen work or fail. What their fans have received well and what their fans have taken issue with. That would be a phenomenally backed up answer, and gets straight to the heart of the Good Subjective/Bad Subjective guidelines.
But failing to Back It Up! means you’re just guessing
=====================================================
Every answer needs to justify the conclusions it comes to. “This sounds like a neat idea to me” simply *does not fit in well with how the Stack Exchange system works*. It probably is a neat idea. The next guy’s got another neat idea. How do I decide which one to vote for? They’re both neat ideas, so I guess I’ll vote for both? Or maybe just the one I happen to like more, because equal votes to everything make voting pointless. But then my vote is just going to my personal preference, that’s not right.
This is how the system breaks down when answers fail to Back It Up!. This is why we close questions that are Primarily Opinion-Based. It’s not (necessarily) that these are bad or invalid questions, or that these ideas aren’t neat. It’s that *the software that this website is based on is tailored for one specific thing,* and idea-generation *isn’t it.* | I agree with Back It Up!
========================
We're here to answer questions because they don't fall into the asker's realms of expertise when it comes to world-building. (If they already have the knowledge, why would they come to us?) The Back It Up! policy will provide legitimacy to answers in addition to the legitimacy the voting system can provide. Sources will provide more resources for the askers, making our answers better.
However, there will undoubtedly be questions which can be solved with good old logic, sans references. These answers, while not *strictly* conforming to the Back It Up! policy, should be accepted if the logic is sound. Logical answers should also only be accepted when the logic is laid bare, so anyone can follow it. (Otherwise "logic" should be counted as opinion- not sufficiently backed.)
Given this, **I propose the following supplementary guides for closing questions and judging answers:**
* if an expert or principles in a relevant field cannot provide an answer, vote to close / down-vote
* if logic cannot provide an answer, or provided logic has insufficient explanation, vote to close / down-vote
* if personal *world-building* experience cannot conceivably provide an insight, vote to close / down-vote
Thus, if you can't "logic it" or cite something (experts, experience, or principles) for the answer, it's a bad question or answer for this site. |
64 | The [Good Subjective/Bad Subjective guidelines](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/) talk a lot about what make for great questions and answers for subjective issues, and it primarily falls around Back It Up!: answers need to cite some kind of relevant material (scholarly works, authoritative discussions, relevant personal experience, something), and questions need to be written such that they encourage such answers.
And, of course, Back It Up! applies to objective questions and answers, too, the resources you use for backing those up just may be somewhat different.
So, we need to be pro-active, from the beginning, about demanding that answers Back It Up! This SE, in particular, I think, is closely tied to a lot of speculative fields – as several meta questions have already discussed, there are a number of SE sites that have significant overlap with this one, *but would not accept our kind of question* because of their speculative nature.
Thus, we need a policy, guideline, or at least discussion of what is too speculative, what questions cannot be answered in a way that Backs It Up! The “Primarily Opinion-Based” close reason exists for this, but we as a community have to decide where to draw the line for using it.
We also, as a community, need to enforce backing things up in answers. Everything about this endeavor is, by definition, highly speculative: the only way to be serious about this, to produce good answers, is to minimize, as much as possible, the “pure” speculation. Cite sources, compare to real-world history, sociology, physics, and so on. And flag or downvote answers that don’t. | 2014/09/17 | [
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/64",
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/users/17/"
] | I agree with Back It Up!
========================
We're here to answer questions because they don't fall into the asker's realms of expertise when it comes to world-building. (If they already have the knowledge, why would they come to us?) The Back It Up! policy will provide legitimacy to answers in addition to the legitimacy the voting system can provide. Sources will provide more resources for the askers, making our answers better.
However, there will undoubtedly be questions which can be solved with good old logic, sans references. These answers, while not *strictly* conforming to the Back It Up! policy, should be accepted if the logic is sound. Logical answers should also only be accepted when the logic is laid bare, so anyone can follow it. (Otherwise "logic" should be counted as opinion- not sufficiently backed.)
Given this, **I propose the following supplementary guides for closing questions and judging answers:**
* if an expert or principles in a relevant field cannot provide an answer, vote to close / down-vote
* if logic cannot provide an answer, or provided logic has insufficient explanation, vote to close / down-vote
* if personal *world-building* experience cannot conceivably provide an insight, vote to close / down-vote
Thus, if you can't "logic it" or cite something (experts, experience, or principles) for the answer, it's a bad question or answer for this site. | After some brainstorming on chat I think that there are three kinds of questions, that should have different Back It Up policies for answers:
1. **Hard Science questions:** answers should be properly backed up with documentation or scientific articles, and could potentially be posted on specific scientific-subject sites such as perhaps Astronomy, Biology, Chemistry, etc.
2. **Fantastic science** or **pseudoscience:** answers should be backed up by solid reasoning in the way of (citing @MichaelKjörling) "if we were to assume that Thing X exists and works as hypothesized, then it would be possible to use it to perform Miracle Y by doing A, B and C." This form could be used to explain, for example, how a hypothesized type of particle could be used to perform something which cannot presently be done
3. **Pure fantasy:** answers should be reasonable, and can be based on personal experience, readings or whatever other means.
**All** answers must be internally consistent, as well as in line with the asker's specified requirements, whether those are "hard science only" or "magic fairy dust exists that works like this: ...". |
64 | The [Good Subjective/Bad Subjective guidelines](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/) talk a lot about what make for great questions and answers for subjective issues, and it primarily falls around Back It Up!: answers need to cite some kind of relevant material (scholarly works, authoritative discussions, relevant personal experience, something), and questions need to be written such that they encourage such answers.
And, of course, Back It Up! applies to objective questions and answers, too, the resources you use for backing those up just may be somewhat different.
So, we need to be pro-active, from the beginning, about demanding that answers Back It Up! This SE, in particular, I think, is closely tied to a lot of speculative fields – as several meta questions have already discussed, there are a number of SE sites that have significant overlap with this one, *but would not accept our kind of question* because of their speculative nature.
Thus, we need a policy, guideline, or at least discussion of what is too speculative, what questions cannot be answered in a way that Backs It Up! The “Primarily Opinion-Based” close reason exists for this, but we as a community have to decide where to draw the line for using it.
We also, as a community, need to enforce backing things up in answers. Everything about this endeavor is, by definition, highly speculative: the only way to be serious about this, to produce good answers, is to minimize, as much as possible, the “pure” speculation. Cite sources, compare to real-world history, sociology, physics, and so on. And flag or downvote answers that don’t. | 2014/09/17 | [
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/64",
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/users/17/"
] | Back It Up! *can* mean real-world history or physics or linguistics
===================================================================
These are valuable fields that can give a fictional world a sense of realism, or at least credibility and verisimilitude. Answers that reference these things are often going to be better than those without them.
Back It Up! can mean *extrapolate* from reality
===============================================
Yes, many of us want to build worlds that are *unrealistic in specific ways* – but we are capable of reasoning how the things we *do* have experience with would react to this change. We can talk about building techniques, weapon technology, different social, ethical, and legal structures, linguistic developments, so on and so forth, to show how a given reaction to something new *fits in with all the things that are still the same.*
Back It Up! can *also* mean personal experience
===============================================
We want to encourage experience worldbuilders – people who have done it, who have put their work out there, have received feedback, who have seen what works and what doesn’t work. How great would it be to have a bestselling author or Hollywood movie director or prime-time television screenwriter answering questions? This is the kind of thing we want to encourage.
So someone could easily decide to Back It Up! not by citing journals or histories, but by talking about their own personal experience: what they have tried and put to the test and seen work or fail. What their fans have received well and what their fans have taken issue with. That would be a phenomenally backed up answer, and gets straight to the heart of the Good Subjective/Bad Subjective guidelines.
But failing to Back It Up! means you’re just guessing
=====================================================
Every answer needs to justify the conclusions it comes to. “This sounds like a neat idea to me” simply *does not fit in well with how the Stack Exchange system works*. It probably is a neat idea. The next guy’s got another neat idea. How do I decide which one to vote for? They’re both neat ideas, so I guess I’ll vote for both? Or maybe just the one I happen to like more, because equal votes to everything make voting pointless. But then my vote is just going to my personal preference, that’s not right.
This is how the system breaks down when answers fail to Back It Up!. This is why we close questions that are Primarily Opinion-Based. It’s not (necessarily) that these are bad or invalid questions, or that these ideas aren’t neat. It’s that *the software that this website is based on is tailored for one specific thing,* and idea-generation *isn’t it.* | **This site is a site for asking speculative questions**
If there was hard fact to back up a physics question, it would be on Physics.SE. If there was hard evidence on what benefits a Timelord's two hearts gave him, then it would be on Biology.SE.
**That said...**
If you have work that you draw upon or facts that you used to help make an estimate, please share your sources. I am always happy to see a question filled with links to aid in speculation and cause and effect, however I do not believe that this should not be a barrier to someone who has an insight or understanding that they can contribute.
Frankly, I believe that insisting upon sources for speculation and imagination will not only be detrimental to this site, but would *probably kill it*.
Sources:
* Gut feeling |
64 | The [Good Subjective/Bad Subjective guidelines](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/) talk a lot about what make for great questions and answers for subjective issues, and it primarily falls around Back It Up!: answers need to cite some kind of relevant material (scholarly works, authoritative discussions, relevant personal experience, something), and questions need to be written such that they encourage such answers.
And, of course, Back It Up! applies to objective questions and answers, too, the resources you use for backing those up just may be somewhat different.
So, we need to be pro-active, from the beginning, about demanding that answers Back It Up! This SE, in particular, I think, is closely tied to a lot of speculative fields – as several meta questions have already discussed, there are a number of SE sites that have significant overlap with this one, *but would not accept our kind of question* because of their speculative nature.
Thus, we need a policy, guideline, or at least discussion of what is too speculative, what questions cannot be answered in a way that Backs It Up! The “Primarily Opinion-Based” close reason exists for this, but we as a community have to decide where to draw the line for using it.
We also, as a community, need to enforce backing things up in answers. Everything about this endeavor is, by definition, highly speculative: the only way to be serious about this, to produce good answers, is to minimize, as much as possible, the “pure” speculation. Cite sources, compare to real-world history, sociology, physics, and so on. And flag or downvote answers that don’t. | 2014/09/17 | [
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/64",
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/users/17/"
] | **This site is a site for asking speculative questions**
If there was hard fact to back up a physics question, it would be on Physics.SE. If there was hard evidence on what benefits a Timelord's two hearts gave him, then it would be on Biology.SE.
**That said...**
If you have work that you draw upon or facts that you used to help make an estimate, please share your sources. I am always happy to see a question filled with links to aid in speculation and cause and effect, however I do not believe that this should not be a barrier to someone who has an insight or understanding that they can contribute.
Frankly, I believe that insisting upon sources for speculation and imagination will not only be detrimental to this site, but would *probably kill it*.
Sources:
* Gut feeling | After some brainstorming on chat I think that there are three kinds of questions, that should have different Back It Up policies for answers:
1. **Hard Science questions:** answers should be properly backed up with documentation or scientific articles, and could potentially be posted on specific scientific-subject sites such as perhaps Astronomy, Biology, Chemistry, etc.
2. **Fantastic science** or **pseudoscience:** answers should be backed up by solid reasoning in the way of (citing @MichaelKjörling) "if we were to assume that Thing X exists and works as hypothesized, then it would be possible to use it to perform Miracle Y by doing A, B and C." This form could be used to explain, for example, how a hypothesized type of particle could be used to perform something which cannot presently be done
3. **Pure fantasy:** answers should be reasonable, and can be based on personal experience, readings or whatever other means.
**All** answers must be internally consistent, as well as in line with the asker's specified requirements, whether those are "hard science only" or "magic fairy dust exists that works like this: ...". |
64 | The [Good Subjective/Bad Subjective guidelines](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/) talk a lot about what make for great questions and answers for subjective issues, and it primarily falls around Back It Up!: answers need to cite some kind of relevant material (scholarly works, authoritative discussions, relevant personal experience, something), and questions need to be written such that they encourage such answers.
And, of course, Back It Up! applies to objective questions and answers, too, the resources you use for backing those up just may be somewhat different.
So, we need to be pro-active, from the beginning, about demanding that answers Back It Up! This SE, in particular, I think, is closely tied to a lot of speculative fields – as several meta questions have already discussed, there are a number of SE sites that have significant overlap with this one, *but would not accept our kind of question* because of their speculative nature.
Thus, we need a policy, guideline, or at least discussion of what is too speculative, what questions cannot be answered in a way that Backs It Up! The “Primarily Opinion-Based” close reason exists for this, but we as a community have to decide where to draw the line for using it.
We also, as a community, need to enforce backing things up in answers. Everything about this endeavor is, by definition, highly speculative: the only way to be serious about this, to produce good answers, is to minimize, as much as possible, the “pure” speculation. Cite sources, compare to real-world history, sociology, physics, and so on. And flag or downvote answers that don’t. | 2014/09/17 | [
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/64",
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/users/17/"
] | Back It Up! *can* mean real-world history or physics or linguistics
===================================================================
These are valuable fields that can give a fictional world a sense of realism, or at least credibility and verisimilitude. Answers that reference these things are often going to be better than those without them.
Back It Up! can mean *extrapolate* from reality
===============================================
Yes, many of us want to build worlds that are *unrealistic in specific ways* – but we are capable of reasoning how the things we *do* have experience with would react to this change. We can talk about building techniques, weapon technology, different social, ethical, and legal structures, linguistic developments, so on and so forth, to show how a given reaction to something new *fits in with all the things that are still the same.*
Back It Up! can *also* mean personal experience
===============================================
We want to encourage experience worldbuilders – people who have done it, who have put their work out there, have received feedback, who have seen what works and what doesn’t work. How great would it be to have a bestselling author or Hollywood movie director or prime-time television screenwriter answering questions? This is the kind of thing we want to encourage.
So someone could easily decide to Back It Up! not by citing journals or histories, but by talking about their own personal experience: what they have tried and put to the test and seen work or fail. What their fans have received well and what their fans have taken issue with. That would be a phenomenally backed up answer, and gets straight to the heart of the Good Subjective/Bad Subjective guidelines.
But failing to Back It Up! means you’re just guessing
=====================================================
Every answer needs to justify the conclusions it comes to. “This sounds like a neat idea to me” simply *does not fit in well with how the Stack Exchange system works*. It probably is a neat idea. The next guy’s got another neat idea. How do I decide which one to vote for? They’re both neat ideas, so I guess I’ll vote for both? Or maybe just the one I happen to like more, because equal votes to everything make voting pointless. But then my vote is just going to my personal preference, that’s not right.
This is how the system breaks down when answers fail to Back It Up!. This is why we close questions that are Primarily Opinion-Based. It’s not (necessarily) that these are bad or invalid questions, or that these ideas aren’t neat. It’s that *the software that this website is based on is tailored for one specific thing,* and idea-generation *isn’t it.* | Should we encourage **Back It Up!** Absolutely. Should we enforce it? ***Absolutely not***. And let me explain why.
I'm sure there will be plenty of questions where authors, creators, designers of worlds will want to base their world as close to our own as possible and to make sure that the world they are designing is as realistic as possible. In these cases **Back It Up!** would be beneficial to the answers, ensuring that the best research has gone into sourcing the most accurate answers.
But this site is also about fantasy, fiction and imagination. It's for those who create the impossible within their minds, and then turn that into a world for others to explore. If Terry Pratchett were to come on here and start asking questions about Disc World then it's highly likely any answers would be hypothetical and based in reason and informed decisions rather than verifiable facts. An enforced **Back It Up!** policy simply wouldn't be practical. It would stifle those questions and the health of this site.
So the solution is to encourage users to back up their facts wherever possible, but to enforce a **Back It Up!** policy on a site like this would be detrimental to its growth and potentially exclude a large portion of its membership. |
64 | The [Good Subjective/Bad Subjective guidelines](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/) talk a lot about what make for great questions and answers for subjective issues, and it primarily falls around Back It Up!: answers need to cite some kind of relevant material (scholarly works, authoritative discussions, relevant personal experience, something), and questions need to be written such that they encourage such answers.
And, of course, Back It Up! applies to objective questions and answers, too, the resources you use for backing those up just may be somewhat different.
So, we need to be pro-active, from the beginning, about demanding that answers Back It Up! This SE, in particular, I think, is closely tied to a lot of speculative fields – as several meta questions have already discussed, there are a number of SE sites that have significant overlap with this one, *but would not accept our kind of question* because of their speculative nature.
Thus, we need a policy, guideline, or at least discussion of what is too speculative, what questions cannot be answered in a way that Backs It Up! The “Primarily Opinion-Based” close reason exists for this, but we as a community have to decide where to draw the line for using it.
We also, as a community, need to enforce backing things up in answers. Everything about this endeavor is, by definition, highly speculative: the only way to be serious about this, to produce good answers, is to minimize, as much as possible, the “pure” speculation. Cite sources, compare to real-world history, sociology, physics, and so on. And flag or downvote answers that don’t. | 2014/09/17 | [
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/64",
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/users/17/"
] | Should we encourage **Back It Up!** Absolutely. Should we enforce it? ***Absolutely not***. And let me explain why.
I'm sure there will be plenty of questions where authors, creators, designers of worlds will want to base their world as close to our own as possible and to make sure that the world they are designing is as realistic as possible. In these cases **Back It Up!** would be beneficial to the answers, ensuring that the best research has gone into sourcing the most accurate answers.
But this site is also about fantasy, fiction and imagination. It's for those who create the impossible within their minds, and then turn that into a world for others to explore. If Terry Pratchett were to come on here and start asking questions about Disc World then it's highly likely any answers would be hypothetical and based in reason and informed decisions rather than verifiable facts. An enforced **Back It Up!** policy simply wouldn't be practical. It would stifle those questions and the health of this site.
So the solution is to encourage users to back up their facts wherever possible, but to enforce a **Back It Up!** policy on a site like this would be detrimental to its growth and potentially exclude a large portion of its membership. | After some brainstorming on chat I think that there are three kinds of questions, that should have different Back It Up policies for answers:
1. **Hard Science questions:** answers should be properly backed up with documentation or scientific articles, and could potentially be posted on specific scientific-subject sites such as perhaps Astronomy, Biology, Chemistry, etc.
2. **Fantastic science** or **pseudoscience:** answers should be backed up by solid reasoning in the way of (citing @MichaelKjörling) "if we were to assume that Thing X exists and works as hypothesized, then it would be possible to use it to perform Miracle Y by doing A, B and C." This form could be used to explain, for example, how a hypothesized type of particle could be used to perform something which cannot presently be done
3. **Pure fantasy:** answers should be reasonable, and can be based on personal experience, readings or whatever other means.
**All** answers must be internally consistent, as well as in line with the asker's specified requirements, whether those are "hard science only" or "magic fairy dust exists that works like this: ...". |
64 | The [Good Subjective/Bad Subjective guidelines](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective/) talk a lot about what make for great questions and answers for subjective issues, and it primarily falls around Back It Up!: answers need to cite some kind of relevant material (scholarly works, authoritative discussions, relevant personal experience, something), and questions need to be written such that they encourage such answers.
And, of course, Back It Up! applies to objective questions and answers, too, the resources you use for backing those up just may be somewhat different.
So, we need to be pro-active, from the beginning, about demanding that answers Back It Up! This SE, in particular, I think, is closely tied to a lot of speculative fields – as several meta questions have already discussed, there are a number of SE sites that have significant overlap with this one, *but would not accept our kind of question* because of their speculative nature.
Thus, we need a policy, guideline, or at least discussion of what is too speculative, what questions cannot be answered in a way that Backs It Up! The “Primarily Opinion-Based” close reason exists for this, but we as a community have to decide where to draw the line for using it.
We also, as a community, need to enforce backing things up in answers. Everything about this endeavor is, by definition, highly speculative: the only way to be serious about this, to produce good answers, is to minimize, as much as possible, the “pure” speculation. Cite sources, compare to real-world history, sociology, physics, and so on. And flag or downvote answers that don’t. | 2014/09/17 | [
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/64",
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/users/17/"
] | Back It Up! *can* mean real-world history or physics or linguistics
===================================================================
These are valuable fields that can give a fictional world a sense of realism, or at least credibility and verisimilitude. Answers that reference these things are often going to be better than those without them.
Back It Up! can mean *extrapolate* from reality
===============================================
Yes, many of us want to build worlds that are *unrealistic in specific ways* – but we are capable of reasoning how the things we *do* have experience with would react to this change. We can talk about building techniques, weapon technology, different social, ethical, and legal structures, linguistic developments, so on and so forth, to show how a given reaction to something new *fits in with all the things that are still the same.*
Back It Up! can *also* mean personal experience
===============================================
We want to encourage experience worldbuilders – people who have done it, who have put their work out there, have received feedback, who have seen what works and what doesn’t work. How great would it be to have a bestselling author or Hollywood movie director or prime-time television screenwriter answering questions? This is the kind of thing we want to encourage.
So someone could easily decide to Back It Up! not by citing journals or histories, but by talking about their own personal experience: what they have tried and put to the test and seen work or fail. What their fans have received well and what their fans have taken issue with. That would be a phenomenally backed up answer, and gets straight to the heart of the Good Subjective/Bad Subjective guidelines.
But failing to Back It Up! means you’re just guessing
=====================================================
Every answer needs to justify the conclusions it comes to. “This sounds like a neat idea to me” simply *does not fit in well with how the Stack Exchange system works*. It probably is a neat idea. The next guy’s got another neat idea. How do I decide which one to vote for? They’re both neat ideas, so I guess I’ll vote for both? Or maybe just the one I happen to like more, because equal votes to everything make voting pointless. But then my vote is just going to my personal preference, that’s not right.
This is how the system breaks down when answers fail to Back It Up!. This is why we close questions that are Primarily Opinion-Based. It’s not (necessarily) that these are bad or invalid questions, or that these ideas aren’t neat. It’s that *the software that this website is based on is tailored for one specific thing,* and idea-generation *isn’t it.* | After some brainstorming on chat I think that there are three kinds of questions, that should have different Back It Up policies for answers:
1. **Hard Science questions:** answers should be properly backed up with documentation or scientific articles, and could potentially be posted on specific scientific-subject sites such as perhaps Astronomy, Biology, Chemistry, etc.
2. **Fantastic science** or **pseudoscience:** answers should be backed up by solid reasoning in the way of (citing @MichaelKjörling) "if we were to assume that Thing X exists and works as hypothesized, then it would be possible to use it to perform Miracle Y by doing A, B and C." This form could be used to explain, for example, how a hypothesized type of particle could be used to perform something which cannot presently be done
3. **Pure fantasy:** answers should be reasonable, and can be based on personal experience, readings or whatever other means.
**All** answers must be internally consistent, as well as in line with the asker's specified requirements, whether those are "hard science only" or "magic fairy dust exists that works like this: ...". |
42,980 | I am part of a software development team in a big corporation. The team consists of the manager, several developers and one senior developer. The senior developer position recently became vacant and eveyone wants it, of course.
So I am applying for this position, and so does everyone else in the team. However, I believe that my chances to get that position are quite high. In fact, I have reason to believe that some of those people who make the decision about who gets the position have already decided to favor me.
Currently there is a very good relationship within the team, but the direct competition situation we are now getting placed in is already showing some signs of strain on it. I am worried that when I get the position, the other teammembers will become jealous of me and our relationship could become much worse.
Should I get the position, what can I do to prevent jealousy from the other team members from destroying my relationship with them? | 2015/03/19 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/42980",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/9959/"
] | There are two possible, mutually exclusive outcomes:
1. The aggressiveness dies down as management announces the winner, and everyone reconciles with the outcome and goes back to the grind.
2. The rancor persists.
All you can do is make it clear to everyone that you'll work with the winner, whoever they are, way before the management hands the decision. Keep up the team-oriented working style so that if the winner is you, the team members can see for themselves that the management decision to declare you the winner makes sense, even if they may not like the decision. If the team members believe that you are the least qualified to be the senior developer, the rancor may persist for some time.In which case, you'll have to look for ways to grow into the job and grow into the job. Fast.
I am not sure that getting the staff to like the management decision to declare you the winner should be the goal. Getting them to live with the decision is probably easier to achieve and the more realistic goal. | Jealousy is going to happen and that is not the problem to manage.
If they did not think they deserved the position they would not have applied.
Are they going to respect you as lead developer and work effectively is what you need to manage. If you are not respected in your current role then you will not be respected as lead. As lead facilitate and communicate over making design decisions yourself.
Don't act like you expect to get the position. That will not help harmony. |
42,980 | I am part of a software development team in a big corporation. The team consists of the manager, several developers and one senior developer. The senior developer position recently became vacant and eveyone wants it, of course.
So I am applying for this position, and so does everyone else in the team. However, I believe that my chances to get that position are quite high. In fact, I have reason to believe that some of those people who make the decision about who gets the position have already decided to favor me.
Currently there is a very good relationship within the team, but the direct competition situation we are now getting placed in is already showing some signs of strain on it. I am worried that when I get the position, the other teammembers will become jealous of me and our relationship could become much worse.
Should I get the position, what can I do to prevent jealousy from the other team members from destroying my relationship with them? | 2015/03/19 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/42980",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/9959/"
] | The short answer is that you have to be as dispassionate about the process as possible.
You're assuming they will be jealous. With mature adults, that's not really going to happen. What they will feel is disappointment, and you may even lose one or two in the following months as they see that there is no reasonable expectation of short-term advancement. It will fade, though, as they realize that they haven't lost anything, but rather didn't realize a gain they might have had.
However, you are correct to concern yourself with jealousy. Just remember, jealousy is an emotion, and any emotions you feed into the situation, even positive, only feed theirs. **IF** you are promoted, accept it quietly and graciously with a "Thank you" and a handshake when the manager announces it, and don't dwell on it.
In your first few days, be sure to be obvious about your respect of your team's abilities and contributions, both as a group and as individuals. Don't fawn over them, but a few "Good idea." and "Nice work." responses can go a long way.
There is one more thing in your favor, as well: Senior Developer is kind of a weird position: You have additional responsibility, but not really any additional authority. (Depending on your organization.) Most of the time it works against you, but in this case, it can work for you. You don't have to deal with the employee relations issues as a manager would. If you notice any problems with others' reactions to your promotion, it is not your issue to deal with it. Your manager still has that responsibility.
In fact, having a frank talk with your manager about where he wants you to "stop" managing and refer issues to him is very appropriate in the first couple of days after the promotion. If you're in a large organization, there may even be formal training/documentation. (In a previous company, all the HR policies for supervisors and managers were issued in a big purple binder. We called it, "[The Barney Book](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barney_%26_Friends).") Ask if something like that is available, and read it if it is.
Remember: Emotion feeds on emotion. Don't feed theirs, and any jealousy that crops up should calm down quickly. | There are two possible, mutually exclusive outcomes:
1. The aggressiveness dies down as management announces the winner, and everyone reconciles with the outcome and goes back to the grind.
2. The rancor persists.
All you can do is make it clear to everyone that you'll work with the winner, whoever they are, way before the management hands the decision. Keep up the team-oriented working style so that if the winner is you, the team members can see for themselves that the management decision to declare you the winner makes sense, even if they may not like the decision. If the team members believe that you are the least qualified to be the senior developer, the rancor may persist for some time.In which case, you'll have to look for ways to grow into the job and grow into the job. Fast.
I am not sure that getting the staff to like the management decision to declare you the winner should be the goal. Getting them to live with the decision is probably easier to achieve and the more realistic goal. |
42,980 | I am part of a software development team in a big corporation. The team consists of the manager, several developers and one senior developer. The senior developer position recently became vacant and eveyone wants it, of course.
So I am applying for this position, and so does everyone else in the team. However, I believe that my chances to get that position are quite high. In fact, I have reason to believe that some of those people who make the decision about who gets the position have already decided to favor me.
Currently there is a very good relationship within the team, but the direct competition situation we are now getting placed in is already showing some signs of strain on it. I am worried that when I get the position, the other teammembers will become jealous of me and our relationship could become much worse.
Should I get the position, what can I do to prevent jealousy from the other team members from destroying my relationship with them? | 2015/03/19 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/42980",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/9959/"
] | The short answer is that you have to be as dispassionate about the process as possible.
You're assuming they will be jealous. With mature adults, that's not really going to happen. What they will feel is disappointment, and you may even lose one or two in the following months as they see that there is no reasonable expectation of short-term advancement. It will fade, though, as they realize that they haven't lost anything, but rather didn't realize a gain they might have had.
However, you are correct to concern yourself with jealousy. Just remember, jealousy is an emotion, and any emotions you feed into the situation, even positive, only feed theirs. **IF** you are promoted, accept it quietly and graciously with a "Thank you" and a handshake when the manager announces it, and don't dwell on it.
In your first few days, be sure to be obvious about your respect of your team's abilities and contributions, both as a group and as individuals. Don't fawn over them, but a few "Good idea." and "Nice work." responses can go a long way.
There is one more thing in your favor, as well: Senior Developer is kind of a weird position: You have additional responsibility, but not really any additional authority. (Depending on your organization.) Most of the time it works against you, but in this case, it can work for you. You don't have to deal with the employee relations issues as a manager would. If you notice any problems with others' reactions to your promotion, it is not your issue to deal with it. Your manager still has that responsibility.
In fact, having a frank talk with your manager about where he wants you to "stop" managing and refer issues to him is very appropriate in the first couple of days after the promotion. If you're in a large organization, there may even be formal training/documentation. (In a previous company, all the HR policies for supervisors and managers were issued in a big purple binder. We called it, "[The Barney Book](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barney_%26_Friends).") Ask if something like that is available, and read it if it is.
Remember: Emotion feeds on emotion. Don't feed theirs, and any jealousy that crops up should calm down quickly. | Jealousy is going to happen and that is not the problem to manage.
If they did not think they deserved the position they would not have applied.
Are they going to respect you as lead developer and work effectively is what you need to manage. If you are not respected in your current role then you will not be respected as lead. As lead facilitate and communicate over making design decisions yourself.
Don't act like you expect to get the position. That will not help harmony. |
504,419 | Is there a word or short phrase, which describes or implies the destruction of books or libraries? | 2019/07/09 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/504419",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/244436/"
] | The word you're looking for is **biblioclasm**.
According to [*Burning Books and Leveling Libraries: Extremist Violence and Cultural Destruction*](https://books.google.com.au/books?id=67CWswHay3QC&lpg=PA3&ots=NibyShqIKS&dq=oxford%20english%20dictionary%20%22biblioclasm%22&pg=PA3#v=onepage&q=oxford%20english%20dictionary%20%22biblioclasm%22&f=false), By Rebecca Knuth, it appears in the Oxford English Dictionary:
>
> In the Oxford English Dictionary, *biblioclasm* is defined as "the breaking of books" and cited as first appearing in print in 1864 in a text on religious theory.
>
>
>
After a bit or research I found it on the [Volume I (A-B)](https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.99992/page/n5) of the Oxford English Dictionary, published in 1913:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/R1smJ.png)
The quality is not good, but one can read:
>
> **Biblioclasm** Destruction of books, or of the Bible. **Biblioclast**, a destroyer of books, or of the Bible. (Little more than nonce-words). **1864** T. Griffith *Plea Scripture* The Biblioclasm of the 'higher criticism' **1884** [illegible] Made bonfires of the Maya and Aztec manuscripts.. May these bishops expiate their crimes in the purgatory of biblioclasts.
>
>
>
The etymology would be the famous noun βιβλίον (*little book*, or just *book*) and the less known verb κλάω (*to break*). It's worth mentioning that κλάω can also mean *to destroy*, which is a common meaning in biology, like in *osteoclast*.
---
Note: If you want to coin a new word you can use *bibliopyrosis*, from πῦρ (*fire*). This seems to be completely new, since the [Google search](https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&ei=C0YkXf2oOIfez7sP1aa-gAU&q=bibliopyrosis&oq=bibliopyrosis&gs_l=psy-ab.3...0.0..6017...0.0..0.0.0.......0......gws-wiz.SD6pX8eYadM) returns nothing. | Since *biblioclasm* is basically unheard of in the English language, and *bibliopyrosis* was **literally** unheard of prior to this question, I think the question deserves an answer that will actually be recognized:
>
> ### book burning
>
>
> *noun*
>
>
> : destruction of writing or pictures regarded as politically or socially harmful or subversive or produced by persons whose ideas or acts are so regarded
>
>
>
([Merriam-Webster Dictionary](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/book%20burning))
Despite the use of the word “burning,” *book burning* is used to describe the destruction of books for political purposes regardless of the actual method of destruction. The phrase is an allusion to the infamous book bonfires performed by the Nazis, but of course the large-scale destruction of books for political purposes is vastly older than that. It is widely understood, thanks in part to *Fahrenheit 451* and other media, such as *Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade* which includes a Nazi bonfire. |
504,419 | Is there a word or short phrase, which describes or implies the destruction of books or libraries? | 2019/07/09 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/504419",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/244436/"
] | The word you're looking for is **biblioclasm**.
According to [*Burning Books and Leveling Libraries: Extremist Violence and Cultural Destruction*](https://books.google.com.au/books?id=67CWswHay3QC&lpg=PA3&ots=NibyShqIKS&dq=oxford%20english%20dictionary%20%22biblioclasm%22&pg=PA3#v=onepage&q=oxford%20english%20dictionary%20%22biblioclasm%22&f=false), By Rebecca Knuth, it appears in the Oxford English Dictionary:
>
> In the Oxford English Dictionary, *biblioclasm* is defined as "the breaking of books" and cited as first appearing in print in 1864 in a text on religious theory.
>
>
>
After a bit or research I found it on the [Volume I (A-B)](https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.99992/page/n5) of the Oxford English Dictionary, published in 1913:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/R1smJ.png)
The quality is not good, but one can read:
>
> **Biblioclasm** Destruction of books, or of the Bible. **Biblioclast**, a destroyer of books, or of the Bible. (Little more than nonce-words). **1864** T. Griffith *Plea Scripture* The Biblioclasm of the 'higher criticism' **1884** [illegible] Made bonfires of the Maya and Aztec manuscripts.. May these bishops expiate their crimes in the purgatory of biblioclasts.
>
>
>
The etymology would be the famous noun βιβλίον (*little book*, or just *book*) and the less known verb κλάω (*to break*). It's worth mentioning that κλάω can also mean *to destroy*, which is a common meaning in biology, like in *osteoclast*.
---
Note: If you want to coin a new word you can use *bibliopyrosis*, from πῦρ (*fire*). This seems to be completely new, since the [Google search](https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&ei=C0YkXf2oOIfez7sP1aa-gAU&q=bibliopyrosis&oq=bibliopyrosis&gs_l=psy-ab.3...0.0..6017...0.0..0.0.0.......0......gws-wiz.SD6pX8eYadM) returns nothing. | The term "pulp" is sometimes used to describe recycling already-printed books into fresh proto-paper -- sometimes as a scare tactic.
I've read that some 'vanity' presses have used the threat of pulping unsold books in storage to exact $ from authors (e.g. buy them, pay us more to keep storing them.) But I have no citations of that. |
504,419 | Is there a word or short phrase, which describes or implies the destruction of books or libraries? | 2019/07/09 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/504419",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/244436/"
] | The word you're looking for is **biblioclasm**.
According to [*Burning Books and Leveling Libraries: Extremist Violence and Cultural Destruction*](https://books.google.com.au/books?id=67CWswHay3QC&lpg=PA3&ots=NibyShqIKS&dq=oxford%20english%20dictionary%20%22biblioclasm%22&pg=PA3#v=onepage&q=oxford%20english%20dictionary%20%22biblioclasm%22&f=false), By Rebecca Knuth, it appears in the Oxford English Dictionary:
>
> In the Oxford English Dictionary, *biblioclasm* is defined as "the breaking of books" and cited as first appearing in print in 1864 in a text on religious theory.
>
>
>
After a bit or research I found it on the [Volume I (A-B)](https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.99992/page/n5) of the Oxford English Dictionary, published in 1913:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/R1smJ.png)
The quality is not good, but one can read:
>
> **Biblioclasm** Destruction of books, or of the Bible. **Biblioclast**, a destroyer of books, or of the Bible. (Little more than nonce-words). **1864** T. Griffith *Plea Scripture* The Biblioclasm of the 'higher criticism' **1884** [illegible] Made bonfires of the Maya and Aztec manuscripts.. May these bishops expiate their crimes in the purgatory of biblioclasts.
>
>
>
The etymology would be the famous noun βιβλίον (*little book*, or just *book*) and the less known verb κλάω (*to break*). It's worth mentioning that κλάω can also mean *to destroy*, which is a common meaning in biology, like in *osteoclast*.
---
Note: If you want to coin a new word you can use *bibliopyrosis*, from πῦρ (*fire*). This seems to be completely new, since the [Google search](https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&ei=C0YkXf2oOIfez7sP1aa-gAU&q=bibliopyrosis&oq=bibliopyrosis&gs_l=psy-ab.3...0.0..6017...0.0..0.0.0.......0......gws-wiz.SD6pX8eYadM) returns nothing. | Just to go in a different direction here: [bowdlerize](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bowdlerize)
to modify by abridging, simplifying, or distorting in style or content. |
504,419 | Is there a word or short phrase, which describes or implies the destruction of books or libraries? | 2019/07/09 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/504419",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/244436/"
] | Since *biblioclasm* is basically unheard of in the English language, and *bibliopyrosis* was **literally** unheard of prior to this question, I think the question deserves an answer that will actually be recognized:
>
> ### book burning
>
>
> *noun*
>
>
> : destruction of writing or pictures regarded as politically or socially harmful or subversive or produced by persons whose ideas or acts are so regarded
>
>
>
([Merriam-Webster Dictionary](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/book%20burning))
Despite the use of the word “burning,” *book burning* is used to describe the destruction of books for political purposes regardless of the actual method of destruction. The phrase is an allusion to the infamous book bonfires performed by the Nazis, but of course the large-scale destruction of books for political purposes is vastly older than that. It is widely understood, thanks in part to *Fahrenheit 451* and other media, such as *Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade* which includes a Nazi bonfire. | The term "pulp" is sometimes used to describe recycling already-printed books into fresh proto-paper -- sometimes as a scare tactic.
I've read that some 'vanity' presses have used the threat of pulping unsold books in storage to exact $ from authors (e.g. buy them, pay us more to keep storing them.) But I have no citations of that. |
504,419 | Is there a word or short phrase, which describes or implies the destruction of books or libraries? | 2019/07/09 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/504419",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/244436/"
] | Since *biblioclasm* is basically unheard of in the English language, and *bibliopyrosis* was **literally** unheard of prior to this question, I think the question deserves an answer that will actually be recognized:
>
> ### book burning
>
>
> *noun*
>
>
> : destruction of writing or pictures regarded as politically or socially harmful or subversive or produced by persons whose ideas or acts are so regarded
>
>
>
([Merriam-Webster Dictionary](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/book%20burning))
Despite the use of the word “burning,” *book burning* is used to describe the destruction of books for political purposes regardless of the actual method of destruction. The phrase is an allusion to the infamous book bonfires performed by the Nazis, but of course the large-scale destruction of books for political purposes is vastly older than that. It is widely understood, thanks in part to *Fahrenheit 451* and other media, such as *Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade* which includes a Nazi bonfire. | Just to go in a different direction here: [bowdlerize](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bowdlerize)
to modify by abridging, simplifying, or distorting in style or content. |
504,419 | Is there a word or short phrase, which describes or implies the destruction of books or libraries? | 2019/07/09 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/504419",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/244436/"
] | The term "pulp" is sometimes used to describe recycling already-printed books into fresh proto-paper -- sometimes as a scare tactic.
I've read that some 'vanity' presses have used the threat of pulping unsold books in storage to exact $ from authors (e.g. buy them, pay us more to keep storing them.) But I have no citations of that. | Just to go in a different direction here: [bowdlerize](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bowdlerize)
to modify by abridging, simplifying, or distorting in style or content. |
14,975,009 | Is it possible to update my google app engine java application without dropping user traffic? | 2013/02/20 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/14975009",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1402576/"
] | AppEngine deploy procedure doesn't put your site nor your data in offline/read only mode. As far as the deploy is implemented your user won't notice any issues (as long as your new code didn't introduced any) | yes u can ..
gae projects allows multiple versions for the same project ,you can have upto 8versions i think ..
say ur application name is abc.com
u can deploy ur project to another version like 2.abc.com
and when ur okay with the version 2.abc.com
you can change that to default in GAE .
Now refering to abc.com will actually refer to 2.abc.com this will not affect any of ur traffic |
36,947 | I want to know if there is a good, handy and especially open source Monitoring Tool for Linux Server. I only have SSH and HTTPS access to the server (I don't have a GUI or physical Access).
My requirements:
* Web Interface for the "Host" System which also can run on Smartphones
* Detailed list of Services of a specific server
* Event-Log capturing(it would be nice if it could easily filter the errors and warnings
* Monitoring of Network, Hardware and special Software(if its running) + Ports(if they are in use)
* Secured Access
* E-Mail alert over an external E-Mail Server
I use Debian 8 Wheezy. | 2016/10/18 | [
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/36947",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/users/26524/"
] | Oni, Ghost Browser lets you isolate browsing Sessions in each tab. You can also assign a different proxy for each tab with new Ghost Proxy Control extension. No messing VMs or anything. Everything is right there in one browser window. More details here: <https://ghostbrowser.com/blog/set-different-proxy-for-each-tab/> | Thinking out of the box *and back in* the best that I know of is to use [Virtual Box](https://www.virtualbox.org/) or VMWare to run multiple operating system instances, each with a browser running, possibly "full screen", in tabs.
* If you use a light Linux install as the base for each OS instance the memory consumption will not be much higher than some browsers. [Damn Small Linux](http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/) for example is 50MB and includes a browser and runs in 128 MB of RAM, [NanoLinux](https://sourceforge.net/projects/nanolinux/) is 14 MB and there are several other tiny distributions.
* You can even get 30 day licenced windows distributions, complete with browsers, from Microsoft for test use.
* Complete isolation of the browsers, cache, cookies, file system, etc.
* Virtual Box is Free & Cross Platorm
* VMWare has some free versions |
36,947 | I want to know if there is a good, handy and especially open source Monitoring Tool for Linux Server. I only have SSH and HTTPS access to the server (I don't have a GUI or physical Access).
My requirements:
* Web Interface for the "Host" System which also can run on Smartphones
* Detailed list of Services of a specific server
* Event-Log capturing(it would be nice if it could easily filter the errors and warnings
* Monitoring of Network, Hardware and special Software(if its running) + Ports(if they are in use)
* Secured Access
* E-Mail alert over an external E-Mail Server
I use Debian 8 Wheezy. | 2016/10/18 | [
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/36947",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/users/26524/"
] | Oni, Ghost Browser lets you isolate browsing Sessions in each tab. You can also assign a different proxy for each tab with new Ghost Proxy Control extension. No messing VMs or anything. Everything is right there in one browser window. More details here: <https://ghostbrowser.com/blog/set-different-proxy-for-each-tab/> | Somiibo is another software that does this as well. You can assign a unique session to each tab which means independent proxies, logins, cache, cookies, and everything. This [proxy browser](https://somiibo.com/platforms/proxy-browser) is free at the moment. |
77,661 | I have a unibody MacBook, late 2008 I think. The optical drive failed and I wondered about adding a second hard disk. Is this simple to do? | 2013/01/13 | [
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/77661",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/users/38485/"
] | I have heard good things about the [Optibay kit](http://www.mcetech.com/optibay/). It provides a mounting bracket for whatever hard drive or SSD you want to put in there.
[This video](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIwMs7ZgFws) shows how to install it in a Mid-2010 MBP, which is close in design to the Unibody MacBook you have. Instructions according to the guy in the video:
1. Remove the bottom panel
2. Disconnect and remove the Wi-Fi/Bluetooth antenna.
3. Disconnect optical drive and put the connector onto the Optibay
4. Put your hard drive into the optibay
5. Follow the steps in reverse to reassemble your computer.
The dangerous parts are when you pop up the delicate connectors with, say, an iPod opening tool. So the Wi-Fi may not work afterwards, and you would be on your own since Apple doesn't support modifications. But overall, it isn't so bad. It looks like an easy fix. | Yes, I've done it with OWC's Data Doubler and it worked extremely well. Check out <http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/drive_bracket/datadoubler/> |
433,834 | I'm based in the UK. I'd like to watch iplayer, 4od, youtube etc on my TV. I've looked at the Roku box, but as far as I can gather this doesn't support youtube or 4od. I don't have cable in my area and don't want to go with Sky.
What options do I have, if any?
**UPDATE**
My TV has an HDMI connection.
If a netbook is the best or only way to do this, which one would you recommend for connecting to my TV? | 2012/06/07 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/433834",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/138698/"
] | Many new LCD TVs have VGA inputs these days. If your netbook happens to have an HDMI output, you could use that. Connecting the netbook to the TV directly is the easiest way. You can run a media center type software such as XBMC if you want a "TV-friendly" interface.
If you use VGA, you'll have to connect your netbook's sound (the audio output jack) to a separate stereo or powered speakers.
If your netbook only has a VGA output, and your TV only has S-Video in or other analog video input, you need to purchase a converter. You need an active converter in this case (something like [this](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/B000S675JU) will not work, I believe it's for a desktop graphics card that is re-using the VGA pins as an analog video output.) | There are some boxes which support Youtube, I've been using boxee box (manufactured by d-link) which has a modded version of xbmc, a full html5 compliant browser and a youtube app. The downside is that it costs about USD 200. |
4,243,513 | 1. According to the java docs of PreparedStatement.setNull: "Note: You must specify the parameter's SQL type". What is the reason that the method requires the SQL type of the column?
2. I noticed that passing java.sql.Types.VARCHAR also works for non-varchar columns. Are there scenarios in which VARCHAR won't be suitable (certain column types or certain DB providers)?
Thanks. | 2010/11/22 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4243513",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/165927/"
] | >
> According to the java docs of
> PreparedStatement.setNull: "Note: You
> must specify the parameter's SQL
> type". What is the reason that the
> method requires the SQL type of the
> column?
>
>
>
For maximum compatibility; as per the specification, there are some databases which don't allow untyped NULL to be sent to the underlying data source.
>
> I noticed that passing
> java.sql.Types.VARCHAR also works for
> non-varchar columns. Are there
> scenarios in which VARCHAR won't be
> suitable (certain column types or
> certain DB providers)?
>
>
>
I don't think that sort of behaviour really is part of the specification or if it is, then I'm sure there is some sort of implicit coercion going on there. In any case, relying on such sort of behaviour which might break when the underlying datastore changes is not recommended. Why not just specify the correct type? | JDBC drivers appear to be moving away from `setNull`. See [Add support for setObject(<arg>, null)](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1938).
My list of databases supporting the more logical behaviour is:
1. Oracle
2. MySQL
3. Sybase
4. MS SQL Server
5. HSQL
My list of databases NOT supporting this logical behaviour is:
1. Derby [Queries with guarded null Parameter fail](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-5629)
2. PostgreSQL [Cannot pass null in Parameter in Query for ISNULL](http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-jdbc/2011-11/msg00110.php) [Suggested solution](http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-jdbc/2011-12/msg00017.php) |
4,243,513 | 1. According to the java docs of PreparedStatement.setNull: "Note: You must specify the parameter's SQL type". What is the reason that the method requires the SQL type of the column?
2. I noticed that passing java.sql.Types.VARCHAR also works for non-varchar columns. Are there scenarios in which VARCHAR won't be suitable (certain column types or certain DB providers)?
Thanks. | 2010/11/22 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4243513",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/165927/"
] | >
> According to the java docs of
> PreparedStatement.setNull: "Note: You
> must specify the parameter's SQL
> type". What is the reason that the
> method requires the SQL type of the
> column?
>
>
>
For maximum compatibility; as per the specification, there are some databases which don't allow untyped NULL to be sent to the underlying data source.
>
> I noticed that passing
> java.sql.Types.VARCHAR also works for
> non-varchar columns. Are there
> scenarios in which VARCHAR won't be
> suitable (certain column types or
> certain DB providers)?
>
>
>
I don't think that sort of behaviour really is part of the specification or if it is, then I'm sure there is some sort of implicit coercion going on there. In any case, relying on such sort of behaviour which might break when the underlying datastore changes is not recommended. Why not just specify the correct type? | When it comes to Oracle it would be very unwise to use varchar2 towards other datatypes. This might fool the optimizer and you could get an bad execution plan. For instance filtering on a date column using a timestamp datatype in your bind, Oracle could end up reading all your rows converting all dates to timestamp, then filtering out the wanted rows.
If you have a index on your date column, it could even get worse (if oracle chose to use it) - doing single reads on your oracle blocks.
--Lasse |
4,243,513 | 1. According to the java docs of PreparedStatement.setNull: "Note: You must specify the parameter's SQL type". What is the reason that the method requires the SQL type of the column?
2. I noticed that passing java.sql.Types.VARCHAR also works for non-varchar columns. Are there scenarios in which VARCHAR won't be suitable (certain column types or certain DB providers)?
Thanks. | 2010/11/22 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4243513",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/165927/"
] | JDBC drivers appear to be moving away from `setNull`. See [Add support for setObject(<arg>, null)](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1938).
My list of databases supporting the more logical behaviour is:
1. Oracle
2. MySQL
3. Sybase
4. MS SQL Server
5. HSQL
My list of databases NOT supporting this logical behaviour is:
1. Derby [Queries with guarded null Parameter fail](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-5629)
2. PostgreSQL [Cannot pass null in Parameter in Query for ISNULL](http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-jdbc/2011-11/msg00110.php) [Suggested solution](http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-jdbc/2011-12/msg00017.php) | When it comes to Oracle it would be very unwise to use varchar2 towards other datatypes. This might fool the optimizer and you could get an bad execution plan. For instance filtering on a date column using a timestamp datatype in your bind, Oracle could end up reading all your rows converting all dates to timestamp, then filtering out the wanted rows.
If you have a index on your date column, it could even get worse (if oracle chose to use it) - doing single reads on your oracle blocks.
--Lasse |
158,763 | How do I go about the above (Flying to Daughter's College Town, Flying Back Together: Booking Roundtrip and One-way?)?
I want to fly to my daughter's city, then have her fly back home with me (seated together).
Thank you! | 2020/08/09 | [
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/158763",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/users/112888/"
] | I don't know which country you are in or which airline you intend to use, but many airlines will allow you to select the seat number during the online booking process. Most of the so-called low-cost airlines charge an extra fee for seat selection. | It is possible on most airlines to "link" two separate reservations that have already been made. This effectively attaches a note to the two separately-booked itineraries saying in effect "these two people are traveling together, please seat them together and don't re-route them onto two separate flights if the original flight is cancelled." In general, you will need to call the airline's customer service line to link two reservations in this way.
That said, it is not clear to me (from reading accounts online) how often these "links" are respected, particularly by automated rebooking systems. It can't hurt to link the reservations, at least, but you may still need to be diligent about seat selection and/or rebookings. |
158,763 | How do I go about the above (Flying to Daughter's College Town, Flying Back Together: Booking Roundtrip and One-way?)?
I want to fly to my daughter's city, then have her fly back home with me (seated together).
Thank you! | 2020/08/09 | [
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/158763",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/users/112888/"
] | Within the US, there isn't round-trip pricing any more on most airlines; the price of a round trip is just the sum of the two one-ways. So you should buy:
* booking #1: a one-way ticket for you from your city to where your daughter is;
* booking #2: two one-way tickets for both of you for the return trip.
On the return trip both of you will be on the same reservation, so you should be able to sit together.
If this isn't a US domestic flight, I'm not sure if there's round-trip pricing, but you can easily get prices for tickets and see if there is or not.
The advantage of doing it this way (as opposed to buying a round-trip for you and a one-way for your daughter) is that if something goes wrong on the second leg the airline will make efforts to keep the two of you on the same plane.
(As it turns out I just got back from a trip within the US exactly like this, and I booked it in the way I described.) | It is possible on most airlines to "link" two separate reservations that have already been made. This effectively attaches a note to the two separately-booked itineraries saying in effect "these two people are traveling together, please seat them together and don't re-route them onto two separate flights if the original flight is cancelled." In general, you will need to call the airline's customer service line to link two reservations in this way.
That said, it is not clear to me (from reading accounts online) how often these "links" are respected, particularly by automated rebooking systems. It can't hurt to link the reservations, at least, but you may still need to be diligent about seat selection and/or rebookings. |
30,353 | The shows Arrow and The Flash take place in Starling City and nearby(?) Central City. My understanding (assumption) is that both shows are filmed in Vancouver, although each show has city shots depicting the (fictional) city where the show takes place. Arrow uses Boston for cityscape shots (no official citation, but I live in Boston and recognize the shots). What city is shown in the Flash's cityscape shots? | 2015/01/25 | [
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/30353",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/users/18402/"
] | The Majority of the externals and locations for the show are filmed in [Portland, Oregon](http://www.portlandmercury.com/BlogtownPDX/archives/2014/05/15/new-extended-trailer-for-cws-the-flash) (particularly the cityscapes).
The studios in which CW films both *The Flash* and *Arrow* are based in [Vancouver](http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/legendsareborn/news/?a=93953), and some minor externals are filmed there as well (anything casual and unimpressive; not to sleight Vancouver, at all!).
[Both shows](http://arrow.wikia.com/wiki/Starling_City) actually construct their cityscapes from a number of stock-footage clips from cities around the world, including Houston, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Los Angeles, Frankfurt (Germany) and Tokyo (Japan).
This site has a [growing list](http://www.ksitetv.com/forums/showthread.php?167647-Where-is-Starling-City) of locations that have been 'spotted' by residents.
DC/WB/CW have a lot of flexibility in creating fictional cities, and as such they can insert establishing shots that are fit for purpose. If they require a scene set in Chinatown, for example, they could simply use stock footage from a street in any number of Chinatowns across the world, or even China itself. They are not spatially or geographically bound to any sort of fidelity... so they can use *whatever they have available/what they desire.* | All of the Cityscapes of The Flash, as far as I have seen, I've seen every one< are shots of Portland Oregon. I know the Skyline, because I've lived there for 50 years. Its funny tho', The round Starlabs building is projected into the shots, and it jumps from one side of the river to the other in other shows. |
30,353 | The shows Arrow and The Flash take place in Starling City and nearby(?) Central City. My understanding (assumption) is that both shows are filmed in Vancouver, although each show has city shots depicting the (fictional) city where the show takes place. Arrow uses Boston for cityscape shots (no official citation, but I live in Boston and recognize the shots). What city is shown in the Flash's cityscape shots? | 2015/01/25 | [
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/30353",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/users/18402/"
] | The Majority of the externals and locations for the show are filmed in [Portland, Oregon](http://www.portlandmercury.com/BlogtownPDX/archives/2014/05/15/new-extended-trailer-for-cws-the-flash) (particularly the cityscapes).
The studios in which CW films both *The Flash* and *Arrow* are based in [Vancouver](http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/legendsareborn/news/?a=93953), and some minor externals are filmed there as well (anything casual and unimpressive; not to sleight Vancouver, at all!).
[Both shows](http://arrow.wikia.com/wiki/Starling_City) actually construct their cityscapes from a number of stock-footage clips from cities around the world, including Houston, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Los Angeles, Frankfurt (Germany) and Tokyo (Japan).
This site has a [growing list](http://www.ksitetv.com/forums/showthread.php?167647-Where-is-Starling-City) of locations that have been 'spotted' by residents.
DC/WB/CW have a lot of flexibility in creating fictional cities, and as such they can insert establishing shots that are fit for purpose. If they require a scene set in Chinatown, for example, they could simply use stock footage from a street in any number of Chinatowns across the world, or even China itself. They are not spatially or geographically bound to any sort of fidelity... so they can use *whatever they have available/what they desire.* | The flash and arrow are both filmed in Vancouver BC. I've seen only Vancouver cityscapes on the flash that I remember. I live in Vancouver and the cityscape here is distinct and I can always recognize it. Star Labs is BC Place in Vancouver. |
30,353 | The shows Arrow and The Flash take place in Starling City and nearby(?) Central City. My understanding (assumption) is that both shows are filmed in Vancouver, although each show has city shots depicting the (fictional) city where the show takes place. Arrow uses Boston for cityscape shots (no official citation, but I live in Boston and recognize the shots). What city is shown in the Flash's cityscape shots? | 2015/01/25 | [
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/30353",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/users/18402/"
] | The Majority of the externals and locations for the show are filmed in [Portland, Oregon](http://www.portlandmercury.com/BlogtownPDX/archives/2014/05/15/new-extended-trailer-for-cws-the-flash) (particularly the cityscapes).
The studios in which CW films both *The Flash* and *Arrow* are based in [Vancouver](http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/legendsareborn/news/?a=93953), and some minor externals are filmed there as well (anything casual and unimpressive; not to sleight Vancouver, at all!).
[Both shows](http://arrow.wikia.com/wiki/Starling_City) actually construct their cityscapes from a number of stock-footage clips from cities around the world, including Houston, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Los Angeles, Frankfurt (Germany) and Tokyo (Japan).
This site has a [growing list](http://www.ksitetv.com/forums/showthread.php?167647-Where-is-Starling-City) of locations that have been 'spotted' by residents.
DC/WB/CW have a lot of flexibility in creating fictional cities, and as such they can insert establishing shots that are fit for purpose. If they require a scene set in Chinatown, for example, they could simply use stock footage from a street in any number of Chinatowns across the world, or even China itself. They are not spatially or geographically bound to any sort of fidelity... so they can use *whatever they have available/what they desire.* | The opening city scene (river running thru the city with several bridges over it) of The Flash series is DEFINITELY Portland, Oregon. That's the Willamette River, Downtown Portland on the left, SE/NE Portland on the right. Scenes on the computer screens and city maps in the backgrounds are also of Downtown Portland. I live and have for over 40 yrs. I always recognize the steel and glass awnings (downtown Portland, Pioneer Square, Pioneer Place, etc). It is a beautiful city with lots of very distinct landscapes, streets, buildings, street signs, back alleys, etc. |
30,353 | The shows Arrow and The Flash take place in Starling City and nearby(?) Central City. My understanding (assumption) is that both shows are filmed in Vancouver, although each show has city shots depicting the (fictional) city where the show takes place. Arrow uses Boston for cityscape shots (no official citation, but I live in Boston and recognize the shots). What city is shown in the Flash's cityscape shots? | 2015/01/25 | [
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/30353",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/users/18402/"
] | The Majority of the externals and locations for the show are filmed in [Portland, Oregon](http://www.portlandmercury.com/BlogtownPDX/archives/2014/05/15/new-extended-trailer-for-cws-the-flash) (particularly the cityscapes).
The studios in which CW films both *The Flash* and *Arrow* are based in [Vancouver](http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/legendsareborn/news/?a=93953), and some minor externals are filmed there as well (anything casual and unimpressive; not to sleight Vancouver, at all!).
[Both shows](http://arrow.wikia.com/wiki/Starling_City) actually construct their cityscapes from a number of stock-footage clips from cities around the world, including Houston, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Los Angeles, Frankfurt (Germany) and Tokyo (Japan).
This site has a [growing list](http://www.ksitetv.com/forums/showthread.php?167647-Where-is-Starling-City) of locations that have been 'spotted' by residents.
DC/WB/CW have a lot of flexibility in creating fictional cities, and as such they can insert establishing shots that are fit for purpose. If they require a scene set in Chinatown, for example, they could simply use stock footage from a street in any number of Chinatowns across the world, or even China itself. They are not spatially or geographically bound to any sort of fidelity... so they can use *whatever they have available/what they desire.* | The cityscape at around 29 to 30 minutes into episode 5 is English Creek in Vancouver. You can see Burnaby Mountain in the background. The bridge in the foreground is also unmistakable.
Later, when he carries Beth out of the city by running on water, you see him run under the Lion's Gate Bridge in Vancouver. Stanley Park is at the left end of the bridge, North Vancouver at the right end.
I haven't lived there for 35 years, but those two scenes are obvious, even at this remove in time.
Google English Creek and Lion's Gate Bridge for images to confirm. |
30,353 | The shows Arrow and The Flash take place in Starling City and nearby(?) Central City. My understanding (assumption) is that both shows are filmed in Vancouver, although each show has city shots depicting the (fictional) city where the show takes place. Arrow uses Boston for cityscape shots (no official citation, but I live in Boston and recognize the shots). What city is shown in the Flash's cityscape shots? | 2015/01/25 | [
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/30353",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/users/18402/"
] | The opening city scene (river running thru the city with several bridges over it) of The Flash series is DEFINITELY Portland, Oregon. That's the Willamette River, Downtown Portland on the left, SE/NE Portland on the right. Scenes on the computer screens and city maps in the backgrounds are also of Downtown Portland. I live and have for over 40 yrs. I always recognize the steel and glass awnings (downtown Portland, Pioneer Square, Pioneer Place, etc). It is a beautiful city with lots of very distinct landscapes, streets, buildings, street signs, back alleys, etc. | All of the Cityscapes of The Flash, as far as I have seen, I've seen every one< are shots of Portland Oregon. I know the Skyline, because I've lived there for 50 years. Its funny tho', The round Starlabs building is projected into the shots, and it jumps from one side of the river to the other in other shows. |
30,353 | The shows Arrow and The Flash take place in Starling City and nearby(?) Central City. My understanding (assumption) is that both shows are filmed in Vancouver, although each show has city shots depicting the (fictional) city where the show takes place. Arrow uses Boston for cityscape shots (no official citation, but I live in Boston and recognize the shots). What city is shown in the Flash's cityscape shots? | 2015/01/25 | [
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/30353",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/users/18402/"
] | The opening city scene (river running thru the city with several bridges over it) of The Flash series is DEFINITELY Portland, Oregon. That's the Willamette River, Downtown Portland on the left, SE/NE Portland on the right. Scenes on the computer screens and city maps in the backgrounds are also of Downtown Portland. I live and have for over 40 yrs. I always recognize the steel and glass awnings (downtown Portland, Pioneer Square, Pioneer Place, etc). It is a beautiful city with lots of very distinct landscapes, streets, buildings, street signs, back alleys, etc. | The flash and arrow are both filmed in Vancouver BC. I've seen only Vancouver cityscapes on the flash that I remember. I live in Vancouver and the cityscape here is distinct and I can always recognize it. Star Labs is BC Place in Vancouver. |
30,353 | The shows Arrow and The Flash take place in Starling City and nearby(?) Central City. My understanding (assumption) is that both shows are filmed in Vancouver, although each show has city shots depicting the (fictional) city where the show takes place. Arrow uses Boston for cityscape shots (no official citation, but I live in Boston and recognize the shots). What city is shown in the Flash's cityscape shots? | 2015/01/25 | [
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/30353",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/users/18402/"
] | The opening city scene (river running thru the city with several bridges over it) of The Flash series is DEFINITELY Portland, Oregon. That's the Willamette River, Downtown Portland on the left, SE/NE Portland on the right. Scenes on the computer screens and city maps in the backgrounds are also of Downtown Portland. I live and have for over 40 yrs. I always recognize the steel and glass awnings (downtown Portland, Pioneer Square, Pioneer Place, etc). It is a beautiful city with lots of very distinct landscapes, streets, buildings, street signs, back alleys, etc. | The cityscape at around 29 to 30 minutes into episode 5 is English Creek in Vancouver. You can see Burnaby Mountain in the background. The bridge in the foreground is also unmistakable.
Later, when he carries Beth out of the city by running on water, you see him run under the Lion's Gate Bridge in Vancouver. Stanley Park is at the left end of the bridge, North Vancouver at the right end.
I haven't lived there for 35 years, but those two scenes are obvious, even at this remove in time.
Google English Creek and Lion's Gate Bridge for images to confirm. |
351,357 | Is there a single-word adjective to describe an office functionary who consistently incorrectly refers paperwork onwards to the wrong internal department in his or her organisation because he or she doesn't realise he or she is wrong? | 2016/10/02 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/351357",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/198944/"
] | It would seem that such an "office functionary\*" is either ***untrained***, or, if they have been trained and maybe even retrained, ***incompetent***. | This would be (wilfully) [***ignorant***](https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/ignorant).
>
> ADJECTIVE
>
> 1 Lacking knowledge or awareness; uneducated or unsophisticated.
>
> *‘In that way, our people can remain ignorant, uneducated and dumb.’*
>
>
>
Reference:
<https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/ignorant>
===
Edit (added definition of *willfully ignorant* from **Wiktionary**):
>
> **[willful ignorance](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/willful_ignorance)** (uncountable)
>
>
> (idiomatic, law) A decision in bad faith to avoid becoming informed
> about something so as to avoid having to make undesirable decisions
> that such information might prompt.
>
>
> |
351,357 | Is there a single-word adjective to describe an office functionary who consistently incorrectly refers paperwork onwards to the wrong internal department in his or her organisation because he or she doesn't realise he or she is wrong? | 2016/10/02 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/351357",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/198944/"
] | It would seem that such an "office functionary\*" is either ***untrained***, or, if they have been trained and maybe even retrained, ***incompetent***. | You’ve been given several functional words.
Here are a few more colorful ones:
>
> ***[airhead](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/airhead):***
>
>
> a mindless or stupid person
>
> ***[scatterbrained](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/scatterbrained):***
>
>
> having the characteristics of a scatterbrain
>
> ***[scatterbrain](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/scatterbrain):***
>
>
> a person who is unable
> to concentrate or think clearly
>
> ***[clueless](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/clueless):***
>
>
> not having knowledge about something : unable to understand something
>
> ***[confused](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/confused):***
>
>
> unable to understand or think clearly
>
>
***Bemused***, ***bewildered***, ***disoriented*** and ***flustered***
are the past participles of
***bemuse***, ***bewilder***, ***disorient*** and ***fluster***,
respectively; they are all approximately synonyms for ***confuse***
(so the ***-ed*** words are all approximately synonyms for ***confused***).
Definitions are all from Merriam-Webster. |
8,079,032 | I'm using the MapKit framework and I have used pins to display the exact address location of the contacts in my addressbook. Till now everything is working fine. But when i click on a pin I need to show the name of the contact, that particular pin represents. Right now I cant figure out a way to do this. | 2011/11/10 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/8079032",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/988871/"
] | Setting the "title" and "subtitle" members of an MKAnnotation should do the job.
You can take a look at the [MKMapView sample for Speedy](http://www.speedyapi.com/index.php/ios-samples) I just wrote. | Search on google : Subclass MKPinAnnotation |
1,516,371 | A similar question was asked [here](http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en/msbuild/thread/9d2e32c2-09bc-445d-9c0c-e5b75b808b34) without any answers. I have a cs project with a reference to MySql.Data.Dll with CopyLocal=true. When I run the msbuild from command line on one computer (Windows 7 64 bit), it works perfectly.
When I run the same MsBuild on another computer (Windows Server 2008 RC2), the DLL is not copied to the output directory. Other copy-local DLLs are copied without a problem, and no error is printed. I do have permissions to access the DLL, and copying it manually works.
Does anyone know why this happens / how to circumvent? | 2009/10/04 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1516371",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/11236/"
] | MySql.Data.Dll may be in the GAC on the Win 2008 RC2 computer and not on the Win7 one, which could explains the different behaviours. | It may not be relevant, but I saw a similar problem to this when I moved a dll out to be handled by a project reference. It'd build fine locally, but wouldn't copy the dll over on the TFS machine. Turns out I had to remove the original reference to the dll itself in the csproj so it knew to copy it over via the project reference.
I can't remember much more about the problem though so it's not much of an answer. |
326,678 | What is the optimal RAID1+RAID5 configuration and why?
My thinking is:
RAID 1 SAS 15k 146GB drives for the OS.
RAID 5 SATA 7.2k 300GB drives for the data.
My opinion is that the OS partition should be as fast as possible, and that the data partition should have a compromise between high storage space and low cost as there will be several HDDs to purchase initially and possibly more if I need to expand the volume.
EDIT--
This is going to be an SBS server for a small business so blistering data throughput isn't as important as cost and efficient utilisation of the HDDs.
It will be running SBS 2011 with at least 15 concurrently connected AD users (SBS allows up to 75 connected users).
There will be a single exchange mailbox store with a 2GB mailbox per user. MSSQL 2008 will be running with at least 1 medium sized database (20 GB).
Sharepoint will be accessed concurrently by at least 5 users. There will also be file storage requirements: one home folder per AD user and I would estimate that each user would store at least 1GB of data in their home folder.
Also a couple of network shares accessed by no more than 2 users at a time.
Finally the server will be used for DHCP, DNS and WSUS.
EDIT--
Oracle is irrelevant. It will be storing files, and some databases under MSSQL. | 2011/11/01 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/326678",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/98079/"
] | Why should the OS partition be fast? Chances are everything that you need from it will be loaded in memory most of the time. The only thing that should be hitting the disk is the pagefile if you leave it on the OS volume. Seems like a waste of money to me.
As for the data volume, we can't answer that for you. You need to size your workload and get an idea of IOPS and throughput. After that it's just simple math to get the best disk configuration. If it's just a few users sharing files on it, then 7.2K drives should be fine for both arrays.
These are, of course, just guesses since you didn't provide any meaningful metrics for us to base a recommendation off of. | It depends on what you want to put in the data partition, Do you want to use the data storage partition for a database ?
The best and fastest solution should be a RAID 1 + 0, unless you are planning to use the data partition with a database server, in that case a RAID 5 could be better.
If you want OS partition as fast as possible with 2 disk, do a RAID 0 (and plan a disaster recovery on a network drive for example), if you can buy other 2 disk you can do a RAID 10 also for the OS . |
4,152 | Every once in a while I miss having the option to write some LaTeX math on SO. E.g. when [talking about automata](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/885411/how-do-i-build-this-finite-automaton). I'm certainly [not the only one](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1106929/find-all-combinations-of-coins-when-given-some-dollar-value/1106968#1106968). And I think the person answering [this question](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1055098/how-do-i-design-the-transition-functions-for-this-pushdown-automaton) would have appreciated it as well. I'm sure there are more examples.
It can be done, look e.g. at the [Physics forums](http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=8997). Multiple solutions exits, either by converting the LaTeX code to an image or MathML.
Since the fields of theoretical computer science and computer programming overlap (formal languages, data structures, ...), and because plenty of users are acquainted with LaTeX, I think it makes sense to provide support for mathematical notation on SO. What do you think? | 2009/07/10 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4152",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/74939/"
] | <http://mathbin.heroku.com> works kind of like a code paste bin for math equations. It has an embed option, but it doesn't work with SO because it uses a `script` tag. It's a quick work around as you don't have to URL encode the LaTeX string. You also have to include the LaTeX string as part of your post in case someone decides to edit it and hit save. | As long as computational geometry and numeric computation are part of the project, LaTeX seems surely a required feature. It is stupid to ask people to generate and upload formula images.
You could place the supporting renderer into separate server that would receive the equation URL-encoded, returning image in response. This probably would allow to use one of existing engines. It took about two days to integrate [JLaTeXMath](http://forge.scilab.org/index.php/p/jlatexmath/) into [my own project](http://ultrastudio.org/en/Help_on_editing) that way. |
4,152 | Every once in a while I miss having the option to write some LaTeX math on SO. E.g. when [talking about automata](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/885411/how-do-i-build-this-finite-automaton). I'm certainly [not the only one](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1106929/find-all-combinations-of-coins-when-given-some-dollar-value/1106968#1106968). And I think the person answering [this question](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1055098/how-do-i-design-the-transition-functions-for-this-pushdown-automaton) would have appreciated it as well. I'm sure there are more examples.
It can be done, look e.g. at the [Physics forums](http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=8997). Multiple solutions exits, either by converting the LaTeX code to an image or MathML.
Since the fields of theoretical computer science and computer programming overlap (formal languages, data structures, ...), and because plenty of users are acquainted with LaTeX, I think it makes sense to provide support for mathematical notation on SO. What do you think? | 2009/07/10 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4152",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/74939/"
] | This is implemented on <http://math.stackexchange.com> -- you can check it out there. It will never be on Stack Overflow, though, as it is an extremely heavy dependency.
Info here:
[TeX math markup is sorely needed](https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2/tex-math-markup-is-sorely-needed) | <http://mathbin.heroku.com> works kind of like a code paste bin for math equations. It has an embed option, but it doesn't work with SO because it uses a `script` tag. It's a quick work around as you don't have to URL encode the LaTeX string. You also have to include the LaTeX string as part of your post in case someone decides to edit it and hit save. |
4,152 | Every once in a while I miss having the option to write some LaTeX math on SO. E.g. when [talking about automata](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/885411/how-do-i-build-this-finite-automaton). I'm certainly [not the only one](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1106929/find-all-combinations-of-coins-when-given-some-dollar-value/1106968#1106968). And I think the person answering [this question](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1055098/how-do-i-design-the-transition-functions-for-this-pushdown-automaton) would have appreciated it as well. I'm sure there are more examples.
It can be done, look e.g. at the [Physics forums](http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=8997). Multiple solutions exits, either by converting the LaTeX code to an image or MathML.
Since the fields of theoretical computer science and computer programming overlap (formal languages, data structures, ...), and because plenty of users are acquainted with LaTeX, I think it makes sense to provide support for mathematical notation on SO. What do you think? | 2009/07/10 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4152",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/74939/"
] | This is implemented on <http://math.stackexchange.com> -- you can check it out there. It will never be on Stack Overflow, though, as it is an extremely heavy dependency.
Info here:
[TeX math markup is sorely needed](https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2/tex-math-markup-is-sorely-needed) | We should look into how mathoverflow did it. They have a very neat integrated solution which I think should be added to all the SO-like sites. |
4,152 | Every once in a while I miss having the option to write some LaTeX math on SO. E.g. when [talking about automata](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/885411/how-do-i-build-this-finite-automaton). I'm certainly [not the only one](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1106929/find-all-combinations-of-coins-when-given-some-dollar-value/1106968#1106968). And I think the person answering [this question](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1055098/how-do-i-design-the-transition-functions-for-this-pushdown-automaton) would have appreciated it as well. I'm sure there are more examples.
It can be done, look e.g. at the [Physics forums](http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=8997). Multiple solutions exits, either by converting the LaTeX code to an image or MathML.
Since the fields of theoretical computer science and computer programming overlap (formal languages, data structures, ...), and because plenty of users are acquainted with LaTeX, I think it makes sense to provide support for mathematical notation on SO. What do you think? | 2009/07/10 | [
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4152",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://meta.stackexchange.com/users/74939/"
] | This is implemented on <http://math.stackexchange.com> -- you can check it out there. It will never be on Stack Overflow, though, as it is an extremely heavy dependency.
Info here:
[TeX math markup is sorely needed](https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2/tex-math-markup-is-sorely-needed) | mimetex would be a great solution. It's rather lightweight and does math pretty well as dynamically generated images. It's also incredibly easy to set up. However, the administrators would need to add it.
See [mimetex](http://www.forkosh.com/mimetex.html)'s website. |
33,288 | Within an application, I've got Secret Keys uses to calculate a hash for an API call. In a .NET application it's fairly easy to use a program like Reflector to pull out information from the assembly to include these keys.
Is obfuscating the assembly a good way of securing these keys? | 2008/08/28 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/33288",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2723/"
] | Probably not.
Look into cryptography and Windows' built-in information-hiding mechanisms (DPAPI and storing the keys in an ACL-restricted registry key, for example). That's as good as you're going to get for security you need to keep on the same system as your application.
If you are looking for a way to stop someone physically sitting at the machine from getting your information, forget it. If someone is determined, and has unrestricted access to a computer that is not under your control, there is no way to be 100% certain that the data is protected under all circumstances. Someone who is determined will get at it if they want to. | I wouldn't think so, as obfuscating (as I understand it at least) will simply mess around with the method names to make it hard (but not impossible) to understand the code. This won't change the data of the actual key (which I'm guessing you have stored in a constant somewhere).
If you just want to make it somewhat harder to see, you could run a simple cipher on the plaintext (like ROT-13 or something) so that it's at least not stored in the clear in the code itself. But that's certainly not going to stop any determined hacker from accessing your key. A stronger encryption method won't help because you'd still need to store the key for THAT in the code, and there's nothing protecting that.
The only really secure thing I can think of is to keep the key outside of the application somehow, and then restrict access to the key. For instance, you could keep the key in a separate file and then protected the file with an OS-level user-based restriction; that would probably work. You could do the same with a database connection (again, relying on the user-based access restriction to keep non-authorized users out of the database).
I've toyed with the idea of doing this for my apps but I've never implemented it. |
33,288 | Within an application, I've got Secret Keys uses to calculate a hash for an API call. In a .NET application it's fairly easy to use a program like Reflector to pull out information from the assembly to include these keys.
Is obfuscating the assembly a good way of securing these keys? | 2008/08/28 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/33288",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2723/"
] | Probably not.
Look into cryptography and Windows' built-in information-hiding mechanisms (DPAPI and storing the keys in an ACL-restricted registry key, for example). That's as good as you're going to get for security you need to keep on the same system as your application.
If you are looking for a way to stop someone physically sitting at the machine from getting your information, forget it. If someone is determined, and has unrestricted access to a computer that is not under your control, there is no way to be 100% certain that the data is protected under all circumstances. Someone who is determined will get at it if they want to. | DannySmurf is correct that you can't hide keys from the person running an application; if the application can get to the keys, so can the person.
However, What you are trying to accomplish exactly?
Depending on what it is, there are often ways to accomplish your goal that don't simply rely on keeping a secret "secret", on your user's machine. |
33,288 | Within an application, I've got Secret Keys uses to calculate a hash for an API call. In a .NET application it's fairly easy to use a program like Reflector to pull out information from the assembly to include these keys.
Is obfuscating the assembly a good way of securing these keys? | 2008/08/28 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/33288",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2723/"
] | Probably not.
Look into cryptography and Windows' built-in information-hiding mechanisms (DPAPI and storing the keys in an ACL-restricted registry key, for example). That's as good as you're going to get for security you need to keep on the same system as your application.
If you are looking for a way to stop someone physically sitting at the machine from getting your information, forget it. If someone is determined, and has unrestricted access to a computer that is not under your control, there is no way to be 100% certain that the data is protected under all circumstances. Someone who is determined will get at it if they want to. | Late to the game here...
The approach of storing the keys in the assembly / assembly config is fundamentally insecure. There is no possible ironclad way to store it as a determined user will have access. I don't care if you use the best / most expensive obfuscation product on the planet. I don't care if you use PDAPI to secure the data (although this is better). I don't care if you use a local OS-protected key store (this is even better still). None are ideal as all suffer from the same core issue: the user has access to the keys, and they are there, unchanging for days, weeks, possibly even months and years.
A far more secure approach would be is to secure your API calls with tried and true PKI. However, this has obvious performance overhead if your API calls are chatty, but for the vast majority of applications this is a non-issue.
If performance is a concern, you can use Diffie-Hellman over asymmetric PKI to establish a shared secret symmetric key for use with a cipher such as AES. "shared" in this case means shared between client and server, not all clients / users. There is no hard-coded / baked in key. Anywhere.
The keys are transient, regenerated every time the user runs the program, or if you are truly paranoid, they could time-out and require recreation.
The computed shared secret symmetric keys themselves get stored in memory only, in SecureString. They are hard to extract, and even if you do, they are only good for a very short time, and only for communication between that particular client (ie that session). In other words, even if somebody does hack their local keys, they are only good for interfering with local communication. They can't use this knowledge to affect other users, unlike a baked-in key shared by all users via code / config.
Furthermore, the entire keys themselves are never, ever passed over the network. The client Alice and server Bob independently compute them. The information they pass in order to do this could in theory be intercepted by third party Charlie, allowing him to independently calculate the shared secret key. That is why you use that (significantly more costLy) asymmetric PKI to protect the key generation between Alice and Bob.
In these systems, the key generation is quite often coupled with authentication and thus session creation. You "login" and create your "session" over PKI, and after that is complete, both the client and the server independently have a symmetric key which can be used for order-of-magnitude faster encryption for all subsequent communication in that session. For high-scale servers, this is important to save compute cycles on decryption over using say TLS for everything.
But wait: we're not secure yet. We've only prevented reading the messages.
Note that it is still necessary to use a message digest mechanism to prevent man-in-the-middle manipulation. While nobody can read the data being transmitted, without a MD there is nothing preventing them from modifying it. So you hash the message before encryption, then send the hash along with the message. The server then re-hashes the payload upon decryption and verifies that it matches the hash that was part of the message. If the message was modified in transit, they won't, and the entire message is discarded / ignored.
The final mechanism needed to guard against is replay attacks. At this point, you have prevented people from reading your data, as well as modifying your data, but you haven't prevented them from simply sending it again. If this is a problem for your application, it's protocol must provide data and both client and server must have enough stateful information to detect a replay. This could be something as simple as a counter that is part of the encrypted payload. Note that if you are using a transport such as UDP, you probably already have a mechanism to deal with duplicated packets, and thus can already deal with replay attacks.
What should be obvious is getting this right is not easy. Thus, use PKI unless you ABSOLUTELY cannot.
Note that this approach is used heavily in the games industry where it is highly desirable to spend as little compute on each player as possible to achieve higher scalability, while at the same time providing security from hacking / prying eyes.
So in conclusion, if this is really something that is a concern, instead of trying to find a securely store the API keys, don't. Instead, change how your app uses this API (assuming you have control of both sides, naturally). Use a PKI, or use a PKI-shared symmetric hybrid if PKI will be too slow (which is RARELY a problem these days). Then you won't have anything stored that is a security concern. |
259,482 | Is there an event that fires when a WCF service gets started or shut down? Hopefully, independent of whether it is self hosted or hosted in IIS? | 2008/11/03 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/259482",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/632/"
] | Sure, the constructor of your object (especially if you are using a Singleton style). Please pardon the shameless self promotion, but I've written two articles on how to get started with a WCF (Net.Tcp) client/server system... The first is non-IIS (to which the service starts on your own terms), the latter is how to modify the first to be hosted in IIS to which my first sentense would apply:
1) [Client Server Programming with WCF](http://www.singingeels.com/Articles/Client_Server_Programming_with_WCF.aspx)
2) [Duplex WCF Services Hosted in IIS Using Net.Tcp](http://www.singingeels.com/Articles/Duplex_WCF_Services_Hosted_in_IIS_Using_NetTcp.aspx) | ServiceHost exposes quite a few events:
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.servicemodel.servicehost_events.aspx>
You could hook into these events by using a custom service behavior:
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.servicemodel.description.iservicebehavior.aspx> |
114,484 | >
> **Possible Duplicate:**
>
> [How important is Domain knowledge vs. Technical knowledge?](https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/51268/how-important-is-domain-knowledge-vs-technical-knowledge)
>
>
>
I often hear from my colleagues and sometimes from interviewers that,
>
> "There is nothing so great in having excellent programming knowledge.
> One must gain the domain knowledge as the 1st priority. If you have a
> good domain knowledge, then writing code for that is not a big deal."
>
>
>
(Here domain knowledge is something related to area you are working in. For example, I work in telecom domain, someone might be in Finance or Pharma or Web development or Embedded and so on.)
I disagree with above passage and think exactly opposite. In my career *till now*, I have seldom missed any deadline for bugfix or feature enhancement. I have kept changing the domains (within telecom) but stuck with learning the programming techniques. Though I might be wrong.
**Questions**:
* Is my current approach correct ?
* Given a choice between domain or programming (with limited time)
which one should be chosen ?
* Is there a good future for a person, who is primarily a very good
coder but not so great in a domain (of course initially) ?
I ask this because, I feel that every domain ultimately boil down to code sea in which one has to dive! | 2011/10/15 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/114484",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/24410/"
] | One could even *define* programming as "mapping domain knowledge to code", so obviously mastering both the domain and coding is mandatory. You have to dive in the code sea, yes, but it's not enough. How could you write the program without knowing what the program is supposed to do? Or, if you know what your program should do, how could you write it if you can't code?
In many cases, the programmer has to know the domain even in more detail than some plain "domain specialist", because the specialist can solve all kind of exceptions and corner cases with his common sense and experience as they turn up, but the programmer has to explicitly handle all those details in the code, before they turn up.
>
> Given a choice between domain or programming (with limited time) which one should be chosen?
>
>
>
At any given moment, the best bet is to improve your weakest point. And, there are easier and harder domains. If you're making mobile phone toy games, then the domain is probably not that hard; the harder part is making the program efficient, portable, good-looking, etc. But if you're making nuclear power plant control program, then it may take years of intensive study to actually master the nuclear physics that your program has to deal with.
>
> Is there a good future for a person, who is primarily a very good coder but not so great in a domain?
>
>
>
You can approach total mastery from either direction, but in the end, you have to master both coding and the domain. | If you wish to remain only a programmer, working for a company, then domain knowledge is not necessary but if you have, it is good. If you are a part of a team and you have a program manager, then he should possess little domain knowledge. In your case, you gain a basic domain knowledge while working on a project. For example, if you are involved in the development of a product in Telecom domain, then after a certain period of time, you do get a basic knowledge of the Telecom Services Provider.
From my experience, if you run a company or is a part of business development process, then definitely you should have a domain knowledge. You should also have a knowledge of your competitors.
Anyhow, you should keep your eyes open because you won't remain a programmer life long. In future you may lead projects.
**Edited**
And also, highly scalable products are possible only when you have excellent domain knowledge. |
114,484 | >
> **Possible Duplicate:**
>
> [How important is Domain knowledge vs. Technical knowledge?](https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/51268/how-important-is-domain-knowledge-vs-technical-knowledge)
>
>
>
I often hear from my colleagues and sometimes from interviewers that,
>
> "There is nothing so great in having excellent programming knowledge.
> One must gain the domain knowledge as the 1st priority. If you have a
> good domain knowledge, then writing code for that is not a big deal."
>
>
>
(Here domain knowledge is something related to area you are working in. For example, I work in telecom domain, someone might be in Finance or Pharma or Web development or Embedded and so on.)
I disagree with above passage and think exactly opposite. In my career *till now*, I have seldom missed any deadline for bugfix or feature enhancement. I have kept changing the domains (within telecom) but stuck with learning the programming techniques. Though I might be wrong.
**Questions**:
* Is my current approach correct ?
* Given a choice between domain or programming (with limited time)
which one should be chosen ?
* Is there a good future for a person, who is primarily a very good
coder but not so great in a domain (of course initially) ?
I ask this because, I feel that every domain ultimately boil down to code sea in which one has to dive! | 2011/10/15 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/114484",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/24410/"
] | Excellent question.
A programmer does not need domain knowledge. A *good*, well-rounded programmer should have the ability to interpret domain-specific requirements and obtain domain knowledge to solve problems, but in my opinion should promptly forget that information.
You have a choice - do you want to be a subject matter expert, or a technical expert?
If you want to work at one company, or stick to a specific industry, then gather that domain knowledge and climb the rungs. You'll soon shift from being a programmer to being someone who works with the rest of the business, liasing between management / marketing (who have business requirements) and the technical team (who just know how to translate technical problems into code). You'll be the guy who sees the requirements document and thinks "Hey, they forgot about scenario X when the moon is in the seventh house and Jupiter aligns with Mars". You are a **subject matter expert**.
If you want to have core technical skills, you avoid domain knowledge and keep growing your technical skills. This doesn't mean you should be belligerent and refuse to learn. It just means that gathering this knowledge is not your core focus. There are enough technical challenges in software engineering without focusing on business knowledge if you choose to pursue them. Become a solution architect; drive your organisations technical capabilities. You are a **technical expert**.
It's a legitimate choice. I choose technical expert every time. It means I can work anywhere, and never be sidetracked into work I don't want to do. | If you wish to remain only a programmer, working for a company, then domain knowledge is not necessary but if you have, it is good. If you are a part of a team and you have a program manager, then he should possess little domain knowledge. In your case, you gain a basic domain knowledge while working on a project. For example, if you are involved in the development of a product in Telecom domain, then after a certain period of time, you do get a basic knowledge of the Telecom Services Provider.
From my experience, if you run a company or is a part of business development process, then definitely you should have a domain knowledge. You should also have a knowledge of your competitors.
Anyhow, you should keep your eyes open because you won't remain a programmer life long. In future you may lead projects.
**Edited**
And also, highly scalable products are possible only when you have excellent domain knowledge. |
114,484 | >
> **Possible Duplicate:**
>
> [How important is Domain knowledge vs. Technical knowledge?](https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/51268/how-important-is-domain-knowledge-vs-technical-knowledge)
>
>
>
I often hear from my colleagues and sometimes from interviewers that,
>
> "There is nothing so great in having excellent programming knowledge.
> One must gain the domain knowledge as the 1st priority. If you have a
> good domain knowledge, then writing code for that is not a big deal."
>
>
>
(Here domain knowledge is something related to area you are working in. For example, I work in telecom domain, someone might be in Finance or Pharma or Web development or Embedded and so on.)
I disagree with above passage and think exactly opposite. In my career *till now*, I have seldom missed any deadline for bugfix or feature enhancement. I have kept changing the domains (within telecom) but stuck with learning the programming techniques. Though I might be wrong.
**Questions**:
* Is my current approach correct ?
* Given a choice between domain or programming (with limited time)
which one should be chosen ?
* Is there a good future for a person, who is primarily a very good
coder but not so great in a domain (of course initially) ?
I ask this because, I feel that every domain ultimately boil down to code sea in which one has to dive! | 2011/10/15 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/114484",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/24410/"
] | One could even *define* programming as "mapping domain knowledge to code", so obviously mastering both the domain and coding is mandatory. You have to dive in the code sea, yes, but it's not enough. How could you write the program without knowing what the program is supposed to do? Or, if you know what your program should do, how could you write it if you can't code?
In many cases, the programmer has to know the domain even in more detail than some plain "domain specialist", because the specialist can solve all kind of exceptions and corner cases with his common sense and experience as they turn up, but the programmer has to explicitly handle all those details in the code, before they turn up.
>
> Given a choice between domain or programming (with limited time) which one should be chosen?
>
>
>
At any given moment, the best bet is to improve your weakest point. And, there are easier and harder domains. If you're making mobile phone toy games, then the domain is probably not that hard; the harder part is making the program efficient, portable, good-looking, etc. But if you're making nuclear power plant control program, then it may take years of intensive study to actually master the nuclear physics that your program has to deal with.
>
> Is there a good future for a person, who is primarily a very good coder but not so great in a domain?
>
>
>
You can approach total mastery from either direction, but in the end, you have to master both coding and the domain. | Domain knowledge is good but this is not the responsibility of the programmer. It is the responsibility of business analyst, systems analyst, data modeler, software testers, software architects and sometimes the project manager. Each of these categories require different level of domain knowledge.
The programmer is not supposed to gather or formulate requirements. He/she is supposed to understand requirements and implement these requirements, at least that is in the case in large institutions.
The reason for my argument is that business domain knowledge includes business functions, laws, regulations, interface policies with other businesses, business agreement between organizations, and lots of other details never discussed with developers. Also, programming is not a light skill to acquire and maintain. For example, You can't expect someone to know banking compliance rules, regulations, and OOP.
Nevertheless, a programmer who has worked in a bank for 10 years, would indeed know about banking products and banking system architecture more than a programmer who works for a Telco. This knowledge, makes that programmer more appealing to banking jobs, specially if the new environment uses the same software as the the job seeker environment (for example, same CRM or Credit Card Processing application). In oil companies in Canada, specifically, they usually ask for Oil & Gas expertise from developers - I never been able to justify that.
Domain knowledge allow a programmer to move to other careers if he/she so wishes but defining and documenting domain knowledge is not obvious without a certification, courses or a degree.
In my opinion, the core and foremost important qualification of a programmer should be the technical knowledge in his specialty stack. |
114,484 | >
> **Possible Duplicate:**
>
> [How important is Domain knowledge vs. Technical knowledge?](https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/51268/how-important-is-domain-knowledge-vs-technical-knowledge)
>
>
>
I often hear from my colleagues and sometimes from interviewers that,
>
> "There is nothing so great in having excellent programming knowledge.
> One must gain the domain knowledge as the 1st priority. If you have a
> good domain knowledge, then writing code for that is not a big deal."
>
>
>
(Here domain knowledge is something related to area you are working in. For example, I work in telecom domain, someone might be in Finance or Pharma or Web development or Embedded and so on.)
I disagree with above passage and think exactly opposite. In my career *till now*, I have seldom missed any deadline for bugfix or feature enhancement. I have kept changing the domains (within telecom) but stuck with learning the programming techniques. Though I might be wrong.
**Questions**:
* Is my current approach correct ?
* Given a choice between domain or programming (with limited time)
which one should be chosen ?
* Is there a good future for a person, who is primarily a very good
coder but not so great in a domain (of course initially) ?
I ask this because, I feel that every domain ultimately boil down to code sea in which one has to dive! | 2011/10/15 | [
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/114484",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/users/24410/"
] | Excellent question.
A programmer does not need domain knowledge. A *good*, well-rounded programmer should have the ability to interpret domain-specific requirements and obtain domain knowledge to solve problems, but in my opinion should promptly forget that information.
You have a choice - do you want to be a subject matter expert, or a technical expert?
If you want to work at one company, or stick to a specific industry, then gather that domain knowledge and climb the rungs. You'll soon shift from being a programmer to being someone who works with the rest of the business, liasing between management / marketing (who have business requirements) and the technical team (who just know how to translate technical problems into code). You'll be the guy who sees the requirements document and thinks "Hey, they forgot about scenario X when the moon is in the seventh house and Jupiter aligns with Mars". You are a **subject matter expert**.
If you want to have core technical skills, you avoid domain knowledge and keep growing your technical skills. This doesn't mean you should be belligerent and refuse to learn. It just means that gathering this knowledge is not your core focus. There are enough technical challenges in software engineering without focusing on business knowledge if you choose to pursue them. Become a solution architect; drive your organisations technical capabilities. You are a **technical expert**.
It's a legitimate choice. I choose technical expert every time. It means I can work anywhere, and never be sidetracked into work I don't want to do. | Domain knowledge is good but this is not the responsibility of the programmer. It is the responsibility of business analyst, systems analyst, data modeler, software testers, software architects and sometimes the project manager. Each of these categories require different level of domain knowledge.
The programmer is not supposed to gather or formulate requirements. He/she is supposed to understand requirements and implement these requirements, at least that is in the case in large institutions.
The reason for my argument is that business domain knowledge includes business functions, laws, regulations, interface policies with other businesses, business agreement between organizations, and lots of other details never discussed with developers. Also, programming is not a light skill to acquire and maintain. For example, You can't expect someone to know banking compliance rules, regulations, and OOP.
Nevertheless, a programmer who has worked in a bank for 10 years, would indeed know about banking products and banking system architecture more than a programmer who works for a Telco. This knowledge, makes that programmer more appealing to banking jobs, specially if the new environment uses the same software as the the job seeker environment (for example, same CRM or Credit Card Processing application). In oil companies in Canada, specifically, they usually ask for Oil & Gas expertise from developers - I never been able to justify that.
Domain knowledge allow a programmer to move to other careers if he/she so wishes but defining and documenting domain knowledge is not obvious without a certification, courses or a degree.
In my opinion, the core and foremost important qualification of a programmer should be the technical knowledge in his specialty stack. |
172,853 | Assuming the process isn't double-blind, do you often look at other work by an author out of curiosity, and do you think this should influence your decision on a paper? | 2021/07/31 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/172853",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/138811/"
] | >
> As a reviewer, is it appropriate to look up other work by an author and factor that into your decision?
>
>
>
**No, this is not appropriate.**
I would argue that this is one of the exact things double-blind review is supposed to prevent. In the context of double-blind reviewing I have heard the following scenarios / arguments, all of which I feel are invalid:
* *"If the authors have a history of writing bad papers, I should be more critical."* No, you shouldn't. You should judge the paper in front of you, not previous papers the authors have written.
* *"If the authors are more famous than me, I am nervous that my criticism may be wrong."* Uh oh. If you are unsure, don't criticize. If you *are* sure, criticize even if the authors are the most famous in your field. And don't worry, even the best researchers (and their students) get things wrong.
* *"If the authors have a history of academic misconduct, I should be more critical (e.g., not give them the benefit of doubt if data is not entirely provided)."* I understand the sentiment here, but I would argue that you are overstepping your role as reviewer once you start judging the trustworthiness of researchers as people, and then apply different standards to the manuscript based on your assessment. Given that much reviewing in the sciences in practice operates on a certain basis of trust, and given that we also know that a minority is abusing this trust, there is likely a level where we need to take prior behavior into account, but individual paper reviewers are almost certainly not the people who should be making these decisions.
* *"If the authors are presenting many similar papers (or many papers building on top of each other), we should rather reject to prevent salami slicing"*: Ultimately, if a paper would have sufficient contribution if written by somebody else, it should also have sufficient contribution if written by the same authors. Conversely, if the contribution is very minor in comparison to existing work it should be rejected independently of who exactly wrote said earlier work. | Indirectly yes as I like to read or browse through some papers in the bibliography, which often contains papers by the submitting authors. This is pure intellectual curiosity, is independent of the review style (single or double blind): I often discover (or rediscover) unknown, unfamiliar or forgotten interesting papers.
I will also sometimes quickly read recent papers of the author (or group) to understand how the current submission is different from previous work. I did this more regularly in the past because, when I was associate editor, I was regularly floored by the amount of self-plagiarism and duplication in some of the submissions I had to handle (the journal had access to a specialized plagiarism detection software). Now I am more selective with my reviews and the journals I tend to review for usually check ahead of me for plagiarism, but I still do this on occasions.
Of course if I suspect (or detect) plagiarism it will influence my report. |
172,853 | Assuming the process isn't double-blind, do you often look at other work by an author out of curiosity, and do you think this should influence your decision on a paper? | 2021/07/31 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/172853",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/138811/"
] | >
> As a reviewer, is it appropriate to look up other work by an author and factor that into your decision?
>
>
>
**No, this is not appropriate.**
I would argue that this is one of the exact things double-blind review is supposed to prevent. In the context of double-blind reviewing I have heard the following scenarios / arguments, all of which I feel are invalid:
* *"If the authors have a history of writing bad papers, I should be more critical."* No, you shouldn't. You should judge the paper in front of you, not previous papers the authors have written.
* *"If the authors are more famous than me, I am nervous that my criticism may be wrong."* Uh oh. If you are unsure, don't criticize. If you *are* sure, criticize even if the authors are the most famous in your field. And don't worry, even the best researchers (and their students) get things wrong.
* *"If the authors have a history of academic misconduct, I should be more critical (e.g., not give them the benefit of doubt if data is not entirely provided)."* I understand the sentiment here, but I would argue that you are overstepping your role as reviewer once you start judging the trustworthiness of researchers as people, and then apply different standards to the manuscript based on your assessment. Given that much reviewing in the sciences in practice operates on a certain basis of trust, and given that we also know that a minority is abusing this trust, there is likely a level where we need to take prior behavior into account, but individual paper reviewers are almost certainly not the people who should be making these decisions.
* *"If the authors are presenting many similar papers (or many papers building on top of each other), we should rather reject to prevent salami slicing"*: Ultimately, if a paper would have sufficient contribution if written by somebody else, it should also have sufficient contribution if written by the same authors. Conversely, if the contribution is very minor in comparison to existing work it should be rejected independently of who exactly wrote said earlier work. | One of your jobs as reviewer is to determine the novelty of the work. For that you should acquaint yourself with what was known prior to it (if you are not already very familiar with the field), both due to the work of the same author and of others. To that end it can be useful to browse the author's earlier work.
It would *not* be ethical to let your judgement of the author's earlier work influence your opinion on the quality of the work under review just following the "logic" that the previous work was "meh", so this can't be any good either, or that this is such a famous author that the work under review must surely be great. |
232,925 | >
> **Possible Duplicate:**
>
> [Is there a way to open a bookmark in the sidebar in Firefox without clicking on the bookmark in the bookmarks toolbar?](https://superuser.com/questions/30874/is-there-a-way-to-open-a-bookmark-in-the-sidebar-in-firefox-without-clicking-on-t)
>
>
>
For example, I would like to open my Google calendar (set to open on FireFox sidebar) by Ctrl-Cmd-C.
Thanks. | 2011/01/13 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/232925",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/59765/"
] | No need of a Firefox add on. Just right click any bookmarks select properties and add keyword there. Now you can open your favourite site by just entering the keyword in the address bar. This post will help
<https://web.archive.org/web/20121010000427/http://browserland.com/how-to/how-to-assign-keywords-to-bookmarks-in-firefox/>
But with this solution you cannot use CTRL,cmd etc.., I hope this is the closest solution to this problem!!! | Probably this add-on might help you: [iMacros for Firefox](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/3863/) |
232,925 | >
> **Possible Duplicate:**
>
> [Is there a way to open a bookmark in the sidebar in Firefox without clicking on the bookmark in the bookmarks toolbar?](https://superuser.com/questions/30874/is-there-a-way-to-open-a-bookmark-in-the-sidebar-in-firefox-without-clicking-on-t)
>
>
>
For example, I would like to open my Google calendar (set to open on FireFox sidebar) by Ctrl-Cmd-C.
Thanks. | 2011/01/13 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/232925",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/59765/"
] | Probably this add-on might help you: [iMacros for Firefox](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/3863/) | Have you looked at all-in-one sidebar?
<https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/all-in-one-sidebar/>
I have not used this in years but according to the description, it has embeddable webpages in the sidebar and configurable shortcuts.
>
> * open Bookmarks, History, Downloads, Add-ons, Page Info, Page Source, and Error Console in the sidebar
> * fully customizable toolbar at the left side of the browser
> * quickly show/hide the sidebar and the toolbar with a thin switch
> * toggle the sidebar by clicking or just by mouse movements
> * all panels are optimized for displaying in the sidebar (including slim lists)
> * place the sidebar on the left or on the right side of the browser
> * configure the behavior at the browser start or in fullscreen mode
> * MultiPanel for opening webpages in the sidebar, amongst other features
> * configurable shortcuts and additional buttons
> * third-party add-ons are supported
> * can be extensively customized
>
>
>
However I don't know if you can assign a shortcut to open the sidebar without a CMD/Ctrl/ etc. |
232,925 | >
> **Possible Duplicate:**
>
> [Is there a way to open a bookmark in the sidebar in Firefox without clicking on the bookmark in the bookmarks toolbar?](https://superuser.com/questions/30874/is-there-a-way-to-open-a-bookmark-in-the-sidebar-in-firefox-without-clicking-on-t)
>
>
>
For example, I would like to open my Google calendar (set to open on FireFox sidebar) by Ctrl-Cmd-C.
Thanks. | 2011/01/13 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/232925",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/59765/"
] | No need of a Firefox add on. Just right click any bookmarks select properties and add keyword there. Now you can open your favourite site by just entering the keyword in the address bar. This post will help
<https://web.archive.org/web/20121010000427/http://browserland.com/how-to/how-to-assign-keywords-to-bookmarks-in-firefox/>
But with this solution you cannot use CTRL,cmd etc.., I hope this is the closest solution to this problem!!! | Have you looked at all-in-one sidebar?
<https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/all-in-one-sidebar/>
I have not used this in years but according to the description, it has embeddable webpages in the sidebar and configurable shortcuts.
>
> * open Bookmarks, History, Downloads, Add-ons, Page Info, Page Source, and Error Console in the sidebar
> * fully customizable toolbar at the left side of the browser
> * quickly show/hide the sidebar and the toolbar with a thin switch
> * toggle the sidebar by clicking or just by mouse movements
> * all panels are optimized for displaying in the sidebar (including slim lists)
> * place the sidebar on the left or on the right side of the browser
> * configure the behavior at the browser start or in fullscreen mode
> * MultiPanel for opening webpages in the sidebar, amongst other features
> * configurable shortcuts and additional buttons
> * third-party add-ons are supported
> * can be extensively customized
>
>
>
However I don't know if you can assign a shortcut to open the sidebar without a CMD/Ctrl/ etc. |
13,707,337 | I have a file that I want a normal user to be able to run. For example
./file argument1 argument2 arguement3
However, I want to restrict the user so that is the ONLY thing he can do. I don't want him to be able to access any other folders or files, basically run that file and that is it. I have heard of rbash but wasn't sure on the security etc.
I can put the file in each users home directory if that helps. | 2012/12/04 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/13707337",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1372896/"
] | If you are just looking for a safe way to give your user a program to be executed, Unix and Linux already provide this feature by default.
Just put the executable file in the user's home directory (having the user being the "owner" of the file).
A Unix/Linux user (and any program executed on behalf of this user) cannot access other user's directories/files (in particular, he/she cannot access the stuff that belongs to "root").
This approach is usually considered more than safe for most applications.
If your needs go behind this line, you can use chroot to "jail" your executable program. See here:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chroot>
This technique is often used to jail a possibly dangerous program that runs on the machine while exposed on the Net (a HTTP or FTP server, for example). | The hard part is that you would have to make sure that ever filesystem resource (file/dir) has permission signature ending with 0 (e.g. 750), meaning that read, write, execute is never left permitted to [`other`](http://www.zzee.com/solutions/unix-permissions.shtml) (someone who is not the owner or belongs to the group associated with that filesystem element). Then, you would add that user who belongs to no groups and make him the owner of that file in his home directory.
If there is a better way, I would like to know. |
2,662 | I am currently in the last interview stages with two companies, **A** and **B**. I reached a stage with company **A** where they are already willing to write me an offer. I have completed three phone interviews with company **B** (the last one **four days** ago), and I would like to notify their recruiter that I have a competing offer and hopefully **encourage** them to "*move a bit faster*".
How can I politely communicate to the recruiter of company **B** that, if they are interested in me, they would need to "speed up" the process? Is this a good idea in general? What language could I use for this?
Also, if the recruiter of Company **B** asks the name of Company **A**, is it OK if I say I am not comfortable sharing that information? Would that hurt me? | 2012/07/19 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/2662",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/630/"
] | I think it would be fine to say:
>
> Hi Recruiter!
>
>
> How are things going? Have you heard from Company B yet? I just wanted to let you know that I am receiving competing offers and I **must** respond to them within *n* days.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
> roseck
>
>
>
I don't think you have to tell them who the competing offers are from. | I have noticed that the moment you mention something about competing offers, the focus of the recruiter shifts to the details of the offers that you may have.
They try to coerce you to tell them about it stating that they would match it.
That might not be what you intended and it becomes a bit uneasy at times. |
2,662 | I am currently in the last interview stages with two companies, **A** and **B**. I reached a stage with company **A** where they are already willing to write me an offer. I have completed three phone interviews with company **B** (the last one **four days** ago), and I would like to notify their recruiter that I have a competing offer and hopefully **encourage** them to "*move a bit faster*".
How can I politely communicate to the recruiter of company **B** that, if they are interested in me, they would need to "speed up" the process? Is this a good idea in general? What language could I use for this?
Also, if the recruiter of Company **B** asks the name of Company **A**, is it OK if I say I am not comfortable sharing that information? Would that hurt me? | 2012/07/19 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/2662",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/630/"
] | I think it would be fine to say:
>
> Hi Recruiter!
>
>
> How are things going? Have you heard from Company B yet? I just wanted to let you know that I am receiving competing offers and I **must** respond to them within *n* days.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
> roseck
>
>
>
I don't think you have to tell them who the competing offers are from. | If this is a third party recruiter then yes. That recruiter is working for you. So letting the recruiter know he needs to get an answer can help. If the company needs more time they will tell the recruiter that. And the recruiter will navigate the protocols for you.
Otherwise, it depends on what your reason for pushing is. If you just want to compare offers then pushing them will probably not hurt. After all if the company decides not to make an offer then the result is the same as if you just took the offer from company A.
If you are wanting to work for Company B and Company A is willing to sit on the offer I would give company B as much time as you can. I would continue to probe company B to see what the status is once a week to make sure that you are still being considered.
When you are ready to commit to A then, I would contact the recruiter at company B and let him know that you have a company that intends to extend you an offer in the next few days. You are interested in working with company B but unless you have an offer from them to consider you will be accepting the offer. Worst case Company B wishes you well in your career with Company A. |
2,662 | I am currently in the last interview stages with two companies, **A** and **B**. I reached a stage with company **A** where they are already willing to write me an offer. I have completed three phone interviews with company **B** (the last one **four days** ago), and I would like to notify their recruiter that I have a competing offer and hopefully **encourage** them to "*move a bit faster*".
How can I politely communicate to the recruiter of company **B** that, if they are interested in me, they would need to "speed up" the process? Is this a good idea in general? What language could I use for this?
Also, if the recruiter of Company **B** asks the name of Company **A**, is it OK if I say I am not comfortable sharing that information? Would that hurt me? | 2012/07/19 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/2662",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/630/"
] | I have noticed that the moment you mention something about competing offers, the focus of the recruiter shifts to the details of the offers that you may have.
They try to coerce you to tell them about it stating that they would match it.
That might not be what you intended and it becomes a bit uneasy at times. | If this is a third party recruiter then yes. That recruiter is working for you. So letting the recruiter know he needs to get an answer can help. If the company needs more time they will tell the recruiter that. And the recruiter will navigate the protocols for you.
Otherwise, it depends on what your reason for pushing is. If you just want to compare offers then pushing them will probably not hurt. After all if the company decides not to make an offer then the result is the same as if you just took the offer from company A.
If you are wanting to work for Company B and Company A is willing to sit on the offer I would give company B as much time as you can. I would continue to probe company B to see what the status is once a week to make sure that you are still being considered.
When you are ready to commit to A then, I would contact the recruiter at company B and let him know that you have a company that intends to extend you an offer in the next few days. You are interested in working with company B but unless you have an offer from them to consider you will be accepting the offer. Worst case Company B wishes you well in your career with Company A. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.