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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
74,413 | As far as I understand it, an illegal contract is void, and the Polish Supreme Court has assessed that EU contract violates the Polish Constitution.
Why is Poland still considered an EU member state? | 2021/11/10 | [
"https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/74413",
"https://law.stackexchange.com",
"https://law.stackexchange.com/users/41629/"
] | As far as the **EU** is concerned, Poland will remain a member until it triggers [Article 50](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_from_the_European_Union#Procedure) and the time limits run out (or a different date is mutually agreed). Article 50 leaves it up to each state to set the constitutional requirements for the Article 50 notification.
Hypothetically, the Polish supreme court could judge itself qualified under the Polish constitution to write and deliver the Article 50 notification, but it has not done so. If that were to happen, the EU would have to decide if they take such a letter by a court rather than a government at face value. The supreme court could also order the government to write the Article 50 notification. If the Polish government were to comply, it would be closer to the expected process.
But politically speaking, neither is a realistic option. The Polish government and their court do not want to leave the EU, they want a maximum of EU subsidies with a minimum of EU interference in their traditional values, and they want to win certain voter groups with their rhetoric. | This is a large question but part of the answer is that not only is EU Law in conflict with the Polish Constitution but the two systems of law disagree as to which system of law has priority.
According to EU Law, EU law is supreme and the courts of Poland are duty bound to disregard the Constitution of Poland where it conflicts with EU law. So on this basis the EU Treaties (what you call the EU contract) is not illegal and Poland is still a member state.
According to the Polish constitution as interpreted by the Polish courts, parts of the EU treaties are contrary to the Polish constitution and therefore the courts of Poland are duty bound to disregard the EU treaties insofar as they conflict with the Polish constitution. As I understand it the Polish courts have not declared the EU treaties completely illegal - just certain parts of them. On this basis Poland is still a member of the EU but just not bound by some of its rules. |
74,413 | As far as I understand it, an illegal contract is void, and the Polish Supreme Court has assessed that EU contract violates the Polish Constitution.
Why is Poland still considered an EU member state? | 2021/11/10 | [
"https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/74413",
"https://law.stackexchange.com",
"https://law.stackexchange.com/users/41629/"
] | Opinions [vary a bit](https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/69329/how-does-the-polish-courts-rejection-of-eu-law-supremacy-differ-from-germanys) on interpreting the Polish court decision.
According to a more strict reading of the Polish court's [announcement](https://trybunal.gov.pl/en/hearings/judgments/art/11662-ocena-zgodnosci-z-konstytucja-rp-wybranych-przepisow-traktatu-o-unii-europejskiej), they haven't declared any parts of the treaties illegal *per se*. They've only declared some CJEU decisions illegal in Poland. Under the treaties, Poland signed up to the acquis, but those decisions were taken after Poland became a member, so they don't fall under the acquis... and arguably the decisions [were a little bit innovative](https://verfassungsblog.de/commission-v-poland-a-stepping-stone-towards-a-strong-union-of-values/) in their interpretation of treaty provisions. (Although the Polish court rejected wholesale the CJEU interpretation of Article 19(1)--it's at most [two decisions](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1023263X19892185) that are involved both taken after 2018.)
Several EU countries (including Germany in *Weiss/PSPP* and Denmark in [*Ajos*](https://verfassungsblog.de/legal-disintegration-the-ruling-of-the-danish-supreme-court-in-ajos/)) reject unbridled supremacy of EU law, to various extent[s]. If you read through the much more numerous articles that have been written about PSPP, you can find
extremely conciliatory ones that speak of judicial dialogue, but [others](https://verfassungsblog.de/germanys-failing-court/) that conclude that the principles put down on paper by the German court "directly contradict the very idea of the European Union". And
a third [kind](https://www.mpifg.de/pu/mpifg_dp/2021/dp21-1.pdf) that applauds PSPP for stemming the never-ending bias that CJEU [supposedly] has towards granting EU institutions more powers. | As far as the **EU** is concerned, Poland will remain a member until it triggers [Article 50](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_from_the_European_Union#Procedure) and the time limits run out (or a different date is mutually agreed). Article 50 leaves it up to each state to set the constitutional requirements for the Article 50 notification.
Hypothetically, the Polish supreme court could judge itself qualified under the Polish constitution to write and deliver the Article 50 notification, but it has not done so. If that were to happen, the EU would have to decide if they take such a letter by a court rather than a government at face value. The supreme court could also order the government to write the Article 50 notification. If the Polish government were to comply, it would be closer to the expected process.
But politically speaking, neither is a realistic option. The Polish government and their court do not want to leave the EU, they want a maximum of EU subsidies with a minimum of EU interference in their traditional values, and they want to win certain voter groups with their rhetoric. |
252,180 | I've been assigned the task of buying a digital certificate for my company to sign our code. We develop applications in the Microsoft space - mostly WPF or Web Based.
I've investigated options and found Comodo to be well priced and responsive, and we're ready to go ahead and purchase a cert through them.. however in the signup form there are various private key options that I'm not too sure about, namely:
1. CSP
* Microsoft Base Cryptographic Provider
* Microsoft Base Smart Card Crypto Provider
* Microsoft Enhanced Cryptographic Provider v1.0
* Microsoft Software Cryptographic Provider
2. Key Size
* 1024
* 2048
* 4096
3. Exportable?
* Yes / No
4. User Protected?
* Yes / No
Just wondering what all of this means, and what the best options are for our requirements? Any advice/ suggestions would be appreciated
thanks heaps
Greg | 2008/10/30 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/252180",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/21969/"
] | For "most purposes" the following options are recommended:
* Microsoft Base Cryptographic Provider
* Key Size: 2048
* Exportable: Yes
* User Protected: Yes
To be honest, I'm not familiar with the different CSPs, but the Base does the job every time for me.
* Key Size makes the keys harder to crack, but more than 2048-bits for a short to medium term key (3-5 years) is ample (IMHO).
* Exportable lets you export the private key/certificate pair - essential for backing it up!
* User Protected means that you must enter a password every time that you want to use the cert - highly recommended to prevent accidental or malicious signing of code with your certificate. | Historically, the "base" cryptographic provider had an artificial limitation on key lengths, and the "enhanced" provider had the limit removed. This allowed Microsoft to comply with US export laws, removing the enhanced provider in certain versions.
Apparently, with the changes to export law, Microsoft has removed the limitation from the base provider, allowing longer key lengths as well (but has kept the name for compatibility) |
252,180 | I've been assigned the task of buying a digital certificate for my company to sign our code. We develop applications in the Microsoft space - mostly WPF or Web Based.
I've investigated options and found Comodo to be well priced and responsive, and we're ready to go ahead and purchase a cert through them.. however in the signup form there are various private key options that I'm not too sure about, namely:
1. CSP
* Microsoft Base Cryptographic Provider
* Microsoft Base Smart Card Crypto Provider
* Microsoft Enhanced Cryptographic Provider v1.0
* Microsoft Software Cryptographic Provider
2. Key Size
* 1024
* 2048
* 4096
3. Exportable?
* Yes / No
4. User Protected?
* Yes / No
Just wondering what all of this means, and what the best options are for our requirements? Any advice/ suggestions would be appreciated
thanks heaps
Greg | 2008/10/30 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/252180",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/21969/"
] | For "most purposes" the following options are recommended:
* Microsoft Base Cryptographic Provider
* Key Size: 2048
* Exportable: Yes
* User Protected: Yes
To be honest, I'm not familiar with the different CSPs, but the Base does the job every time for me.
* Key Size makes the keys harder to crack, but more than 2048-bits for a short to medium term key (3-5 years) is ample (IMHO).
* Exportable lets you export the private key/certificate pair - essential for backing it up!
* User Protected means that you must enter a password every time that you want to use the cert - highly recommended to prevent accidental or malicious signing of code with your certificate. | Regarding "Microsoft Software Cryptographic Provider" - I think that should be "strong" (not "software").
In practice where I work, base gives a 512-bit key length (which is no longer supported or working on MS servers after a recent patch - read on KB2661254). You want at least 1024, but 2048 is a better choice.
Beware: The exportable private key is desired for backing up and/or bringing to another server (and required for signing code/scripts I think), but introduces the possiblility of it falling into the wrong hands, whereupon undesirable scripts could be signed and ran on your servers once you trust that cert! Take great care in where/how you store it and use a strong passphrase!
Double-check: You most likely need the Trusted Root CA Cert (the CA that issued the code signing cert) installed as well as your cert itself in "Trusted Publishers" to get signed PowerShell scripts to run. |
252,180 | I've been assigned the task of buying a digital certificate for my company to sign our code. We develop applications in the Microsoft space - mostly WPF or Web Based.
I've investigated options and found Comodo to be well priced and responsive, and we're ready to go ahead and purchase a cert through them.. however in the signup form there are various private key options that I'm not too sure about, namely:
1. CSP
* Microsoft Base Cryptographic Provider
* Microsoft Base Smart Card Crypto Provider
* Microsoft Enhanced Cryptographic Provider v1.0
* Microsoft Software Cryptographic Provider
2. Key Size
* 1024
* 2048
* 4096
3. Exportable?
* Yes / No
4. User Protected?
* Yes / No
Just wondering what all of this means, and what the best options are for our requirements? Any advice/ suggestions would be appreciated
thanks heaps
Greg | 2008/10/30 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/252180",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/21969/"
] | Historically, the "base" cryptographic provider had an artificial limitation on key lengths, and the "enhanced" provider had the limit removed. This allowed Microsoft to comply with US export laws, removing the enhanced provider in certain versions.
Apparently, with the changes to export law, Microsoft has removed the limitation from the base provider, allowing longer key lengths as well (but has kept the name for compatibility) | Regarding "Microsoft Software Cryptographic Provider" - I think that should be "strong" (not "software").
In practice where I work, base gives a 512-bit key length (which is no longer supported or working on MS servers after a recent patch - read on KB2661254). You want at least 1024, but 2048 is a better choice.
Beware: The exportable private key is desired for backing up and/or bringing to another server (and required for signing code/scripts I think), but introduces the possiblility of it falling into the wrong hands, whereupon undesirable scripts could be signed and ran on your servers once you trust that cert! Take great care in where/how you store it and use a strong passphrase!
Double-check: You most likely need the Trusted Root CA Cert (the CA that issued the code signing cert) installed as well as your cert itself in "Trusted Publishers" to get signed PowerShell scripts to run. |
48,818,328 | I'm looking to add voice commands to an Android App that will be running on a tablet as a kiosk. I don't want the user to have to push a button, because the user is doing something more important (e.g. driving a car, flying a plane, or performing brain surgery) and the command could be completed by a single button push.
I see tutorials describing how to add speech to text and have the user push a button and get the text, but nothing allowing the wake word "Okay, Google" to start the voice recognition (much less a custom wake word).
I looked at using the Google Voice Actions to start with "Okay, Google" and then send something to my app (register an intent), but that has to be trained to one specific user (at least for the tablet I tried it on). I'll have different users every day (maybe more than one a day) and no opportunity for training the device.
I've worked with CMUSphinx and found it to be too unreliable for spotting a wake word.
Is there a way to add "Okay, Google" as a way to start listening to text inside my app? | 2018/02/16 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/48818328",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1876980/"
] | Got it working using PocketSphinx for offline wake work recognition and then I hand the microphone over to IBM's Watson's Speech to Text software that works over the internet and comes back with pretty reliable results. | Unfortunately what you are trying to achieve is not possible. If I understood correctly what your concept: a 3rd party app will awaken the devices and act based on a set of commands (from a security point of view this is very bad).
The closest you can do is follow the Voice Actions Api - <https://developers.google.com/voice-actions/system/> |
217,766 | In German, the word *Fernweh* translates roughly as "farsickness." It denotes the desire to be somewhere other than where you are now. It was coined as an antonym to *Heimweh*, or "homesickness."
Does English have a good word to indicate the feeling of wanting to be somewhere else? | 2014/12/31 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/217766",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/48864/"
] | Depending on the context, *wanderlust* might work for you:
["strong longing for or impulse toward wandering" (M-W)](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wanderlust), depending on how much you associate Fernweh with the act of travelling as opposed to the state of being away from home. | Sometimes I use the phrase "**a travel itch**" when I stay home too long.
It might be described as
* "the feeling someone gets when they've stayed home for too long, knowing there is a lot to do and see elsewhere. |
55,183 | I keep accidentally dragging windows into other workspaces on my Macbook Air running OS X Lion.
Can I disable dragging into other workspaces or make doing so more difficult? | 2012/06/30 | [
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/55183",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/users/19097/"
] | TinkerTool has this option in the Applications tab, Mission Control, Delay when dragging window to adjacent space: Default / Short / No Delay.
No Delay was selected on my computer, but I don't remember if I chose that at some point. I looked into this because I wanted the "windows aero snap" feature, I just found and installed [Cinch by Irradiated Software](http://www.irradiatedsoftware.com/cinch/). The Spaces "swipe" would happen before Cinch was able to do its thing. | With the [Warp pref-pane](http://www.ksuther.com/warp/), you can set a delay and/or require a modifier key(s) to allow a space change. |
15,847,348 | 
Its error log says this I've read in this thread that you need to restart eclipse [Android: failed to convert @drawable/picture into a drawable](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/8874262/android-failed-to-convert-drawable-picture-into-a-drawable) but it didn't work on me my project didn't run what could be the reason why it won't run? It has no problems just error log. | 2013/04/06 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/15847348",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2172594/"
] | There is easy and good tutorial on github.com ,[Here](https://github.com/Himanshulanjewar/LinkedinIntegrationToiOS)
Note:
Make sure to integrate all the classes of Crypto folder
It will work for sure | check for the parameters like consumer and access token etc.
check these links:
<https://apigee.com/console/linkedin>
Have you seen this: <http://www.whitneyland.com/2011/03/iphone-oauth.html>
or this:
<https://github.com/ResultsDirect/LinkedIn-iPhone> |
15,847,348 | 
Its error log says this I've read in this thread that you need to restart eclipse [Android: failed to convert @drawable/picture into a drawable](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/8874262/android-failed-to-convert-drawable-picture-into-a-drawable) but it didn't work on me my project didn't run what could be the reason why it won't run? It has no problems just error log. | 2013/04/06 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/15847348",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2172594/"
] | For personal usage & help others which want a sample app for **LinkedIn** using **OAuth 2.0** protocol, I wrote a client using [OAuth2Client](https://github.com/nxtbgthng/OAuth2Client) which is on GitHub:
<https://github.com/bouzikas/LinkedinOauth2> | check for the parameters like consumer and access token etc.
check these links:
<https://apigee.com/console/linkedin>
Have you seen this: <http://www.whitneyland.com/2011/03/iphone-oauth.html>
or this:
<https://github.com/ResultsDirect/LinkedIn-iPhone> |
15,847,348 | 
Its error log says this I've read in this thread that you need to restart eclipse [Android: failed to convert @drawable/picture into a drawable](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/8874262/android-failed-to-convert-drawable-picture-into-a-drawable) but it didn't work on me my project didn't run what could be the reason why it won't run? It has no problems just error log. | 2013/04/06 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/15847348",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2172594/"
] | This link provides a good starting point for using iOS - LinkedIn with or without a backend server with oauth2:
<https://github.com/jeyben/IOSLinkedInAPI> | check for the parameters like consumer and access token etc.
check these links:
<https://apigee.com/console/linkedin>
Have you seen this: <http://www.whitneyland.com/2011/03/iphone-oauth.html>
or this:
<https://github.com/ResultsDirect/LinkedIn-iPhone> |
2,769,880 | I have the WTP 3.1 plugin installed and have also installed the Glassfish v3 plugin. I am able to register my server.
When I create a dynamic web project, I can see that the maximum dynamic web module version available is 2.5. I then choose the default configuration for Glassfish v3 but, when I look at it JSF, it is not selected by default. When I select it, the maximum version available is 1.2.
I want to use JSF with facelets - does Eclipse support this? I can't seem to find anything helpful on the Eclipse WTP site. | 2010/05/05 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2769880",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/276779/"
] | Java EE 6 / JSF 2.0 is *relatively* new. Most tools are already ready, but Eclipse has to catch up it yet.
The status as far:
* [IntelliJ Ultimate Edition](http://www.jetbrains.com/idea/) was [early](http://blogs.jetbrains.com/idea/tag/jsf-20/) in this. Unfortunately not freeware. *Note: the free Community Edition doesn't provide tools for much of Java EE, let alone JSF*.
* [Netbeans 6.8](http://netbeans.org) came [a bit later](http://netbeans.org/kb/docs/web/jsf20-support.html) almost full Java EE 6 support, including JSF 2.0.
* [Eclipse for Java EE](http://www.eclipse.org/downloads/moreinfo/jee.php) planned to support Facelets in Galileo, but it was cancelled and postponed to the successor [Helios](http://www.eclipse.org/helios/) which is currently in one of its latest Release Candidate stages been released at 24 July 2010. Helios for Java EE will ship with full fledged Java EE 6 support, [including JSF 2.0](http://wiki.eclipse.org/Helios_Requirements).
As of now, it just works fine in Eclipse Ganymede/Galileo when you select JSF 1.2 and uses JSF 2.0 libraries. You'll only miss some code assistance which may be useful for JSF 2.0, but you can write code as good yourself. | Have a read on <http://weblogs.java.net/blog/2009/05/18/using-ide-write-jsf-20-app>
It describe in details on how to setup your eclipse for jsf 2.0 development. |
2,769,880 | I have the WTP 3.1 plugin installed and have also installed the Glassfish v3 plugin. I am able to register my server.
When I create a dynamic web project, I can see that the maximum dynamic web module version available is 2.5. I then choose the default configuration for Glassfish v3 but, when I look at it JSF, it is not selected by default. When I select it, the maximum version available is 1.2.
I want to use JSF with facelets - does Eclipse support this? I can't seem to find anything helpful on the Eclipse WTP site. | 2010/05/05 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2769880",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/276779/"
] | Java EE 6 / JSF 2.0 is *relatively* new. Most tools are already ready, but Eclipse has to catch up it yet.
The status as far:
* [IntelliJ Ultimate Edition](http://www.jetbrains.com/idea/) was [early](http://blogs.jetbrains.com/idea/tag/jsf-20/) in this. Unfortunately not freeware. *Note: the free Community Edition doesn't provide tools for much of Java EE, let alone JSF*.
* [Netbeans 6.8](http://netbeans.org) came [a bit later](http://netbeans.org/kb/docs/web/jsf20-support.html) almost full Java EE 6 support, including JSF 2.0.
* [Eclipse for Java EE](http://www.eclipse.org/downloads/moreinfo/jee.php) planned to support Facelets in Galileo, but it was cancelled and postponed to the successor [Helios](http://www.eclipse.org/helios/) which is currently in one of its latest Release Candidate stages been released at 24 July 2010. Helios for Java EE will ship with full fledged Java EE 6 support, [including JSF 2.0](http://wiki.eclipse.org/Helios_Requirements).
As of now, it just works fine in Eclipse Ganymede/Galileo when you select JSF 1.2 and uses JSF 2.0 libraries. You'll only miss some code assistance which may be useful for JSF 2.0, but you can write code as good yourself. | Use Eclipse with JBoss Tools Plugin. It has support for JSF2 and CDI.
<http://in.relation.to/14750.lace> |
2,769,880 | I have the WTP 3.1 plugin installed and have also installed the Glassfish v3 plugin. I am able to register my server.
When I create a dynamic web project, I can see that the maximum dynamic web module version available is 2.5. I then choose the default configuration for Glassfish v3 but, when I look at it JSF, it is not selected by default. When I select it, the maximum version available is 1.2.
I want to use JSF with facelets - does Eclipse support this? I can't seem to find anything helpful on the Eclipse WTP site. | 2010/05/05 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2769880",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/276779/"
] | Java EE 6 / JSF 2.0 is *relatively* new. Most tools are already ready, but Eclipse has to catch up it yet.
The status as far:
* [IntelliJ Ultimate Edition](http://www.jetbrains.com/idea/) was [early](http://blogs.jetbrains.com/idea/tag/jsf-20/) in this. Unfortunately not freeware. *Note: the free Community Edition doesn't provide tools for much of Java EE, let alone JSF*.
* [Netbeans 6.8](http://netbeans.org) came [a bit later](http://netbeans.org/kb/docs/web/jsf20-support.html) almost full Java EE 6 support, including JSF 2.0.
* [Eclipse for Java EE](http://www.eclipse.org/downloads/moreinfo/jee.php) planned to support Facelets in Galileo, but it was cancelled and postponed to the successor [Helios](http://www.eclipse.org/helios/) which is currently in one of its latest Release Candidate stages been released at 24 July 2010. Helios for Java EE will ship with full fledged Java EE 6 support, [including JSF 2.0](http://wiki.eclipse.org/Helios_Requirements).
As of now, it just works fine in Eclipse Ganymede/Galileo when you select JSF 1.2 and uses JSF 2.0 libraries. You'll only miss some code assistance which may be useful for JSF 2.0, but you can write code as good yourself. | Note, that you can do JSF 2.0 development in Eclipse, but not with as much tool support as might come later.
You can always edit xhtml files directly as XML-files (and have the namespaces registered), and have Glassfish deployments. I've done that, with stock Eclipse 3.5.2 Java EE edition, and the Glassfish plugin. |
2,769,880 | I have the WTP 3.1 plugin installed and have also installed the Glassfish v3 plugin. I am able to register my server.
When I create a dynamic web project, I can see that the maximum dynamic web module version available is 2.5. I then choose the default configuration for Glassfish v3 but, when I look at it JSF, it is not selected by default. When I select it, the maximum version available is 1.2.
I want to use JSF with facelets - does Eclipse support this? I can't seem to find anything helpful on the Eclipse WTP site. | 2010/05/05 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2769880",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/276779/"
] | Use Eclipse with JBoss Tools Plugin. It has support for JSF2 and CDI.
<http://in.relation.to/14750.lace> | Have a read on <http://weblogs.java.net/blog/2009/05/18/using-ide-write-jsf-20-app>
It describe in details on how to setup your eclipse for jsf 2.0 development. |
2,769,880 | I have the WTP 3.1 plugin installed and have also installed the Glassfish v3 plugin. I am able to register my server.
When I create a dynamic web project, I can see that the maximum dynamic web module version available is 2.5. I then choose the default configuration for Glassfish v3 but, when I look at it JSF, it is not selected by default. When I select it, the maximum version available is 1.2.
I want to use JSF with facelets - does Eclipse support this? I can't seem to find anything helpful on the Eclipse WTP site. | 2010/05/05 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2769880",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/276779/"
] | Note, that you can do JSF 2.0 development in Eclipse, but not with as much tool support as might come later.
You can always edit xhtml files directly as XML-files (and have the namespaces registered), and have Glassfish deployments. I've done that, with stock Eclipse 3.5.2 Java EE edition, and the Glassfish plugin. | Have a read on <http://weblogs.java.net/blog/2009/05/18/using-ide-write-jsf-20-app>
It describe in details on how to setup your eclipse for jsf 2.0 development. |
2,769,880 | I have the WTP 3.1 plugin installed and have also installed the Glassfish v3 plugin. I am able to register my server.
When I create a dynamic web project, I can see that the maximum dynamic web module version available is 2.5. I then choose the default configuration for Glassfish v3 but, when I look at it JSF, it is not selected by default. When I select it, the maximum version available is 1.2.
I want to use JSF with facelets - does Eclipse support this? I can't seem to find anything helpful on the Eclipse WTP site. | 2010/05/05 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2769880",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/276779/"
] | Use Eclipse with JBoss Tools Plugin. It has support for JSF2 and CDI.
<http://in.relation.to/14750.lace> | Note, that you can do JSF 2.0 development in Eclipse, but not with as much tool support as might come later.
You can always edit xhtml files directly as XML-files (and have the namespaces registered), and have Glassfish deployments. I've done that, with stock Eclipse 3.5.2 Java EE edition, and the Glassfish plugin. |
123,431 | Is there an enchantment on the room making it unplottable, or did the Marauders never find it? | 2016/03/29 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/123431",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/63676/"
] | **We don't know.**
------------------
Hermione and Ron offer differing (but not necessarily contradictory) explanations for why it's not on the map. Hermione surmises that **unplottability may be one of the charms that the room casts when it's being used by someone who doesn't want to be found** whereas Ron's suggestion is that it may **not be on the map because the Marauders didn't know about it**.
Since we know that the map only shows rooms and passageways that were known to the Marauders (hence the Chamber of Secrets not showing up) there's a distinct possibility that they're both right; that it's not on the map because the Marauders didn't know about it, but that even if they had, they wouldn't have been able to add it to the map because it has its own cloaking spells.
>
> ‘The Room of Requirement!’ said Harry, smacking himself hard on the forehead with Advanced Potion-Making. Hermione and Ron stared at him. ‘That’s where he’s been sneaking off to! That’s where he’s doing … whatever he’s doing! And I bet that’s why he’s been disappearing off the map – come to think of it, I’ve never seen the Room of Requirement on there!’
>
> ‘Maybe the Marauders never knew the Room was there,’ said Ron.
>
> **‘I think it’ll be part of the magic of the Room,’ said Hermione. ‘If you need it to be unplottable, it will be.’**
>
> ‘Dobby, have you managed to get in to have a look at what Malfoy’s doing?’ said Harry eagerly.
>
>
> Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
>
>
>
We do know that it doesn't show up at other times (if we presume that Harry has looked at the map other than when Malfoy is in it) suggesting that Hermione may be wrong that it's only *unplottable when needed*, more likely it's **unplottable at all times.** | I think the Marauders couldn't draw the room of requirement because the room would change shape and size according to the people who use it. It could be a broom cupboard like when Fred and George are hiding from Flich, or a perfect place for the DA, which is very different in size |
147,918 | The spell [Detect Thoughts](https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/detect-thoughts) has the following limitation on potential targets:
>
> You can't detect a creature with an Intelligence of 3 or lower or one that doesn't speak any language.
>
>
>
An [Intellect Devourer](https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/intellect-devourer) meets the Intelligence requirement, but does an [Intellect Devourer](https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/intellect-devourer) speak a language? The languages part of its stat block reads:
>
> **Languages** Deep Speech understands but can't speak, Telepathy 60 ft.
>
>
>
This seems cut and dry: it says right there that it knows Deep Speech but cannot speak. But I feel that the situation is not that straightforward.
This situation seems similar to a wizard with their tongue cut out. With no tongue, they cannot speak. They have the mental ability to speak, but they lack the physical ability to do so without some magical or mechanical help.
I feel that an [Intellect Devourer](https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/intellect-devourer) is in the same situation. When it uses its Body Thief ability to control a victim, it can speak through their mouth - as confirmed by an official D&D 5e product:
>
> It's confirmed by [Meloon Wardragon](https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/meloon-wardragon)'s stat block in *Waterdeep: Dragon Heist* (p. 210). His languages are shown as "Common, Deep Speech, Telepathy 60 ft." It does not contain the "but can't speak" portion found in the intellect devourer's stat block, but does contain the Deep Speech and Telepathy from the intellect devourer, which makes clear that the stats shown are for the infested version of Meloon.
>
>
>
The intellect devourer possesses the mental ability to speak, but its natural form lacks the physical means of doing so without the help of a host body.
So does [Detect Thoughts](https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/detect-thoughts) work against an [Intellect Devourer](https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/intellect-devourer)? | 2019/05/12 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/147918",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/50745/"
] | Possibly
========
It is reasonable some creatures can think in words without being able to speak it (like a muted wizard) and there might be creatures that understand words magically without thinking in them (a golem *might* be an example), and it'd be reasonable to allow the spell to work on the former, but not the latter.
That said, the meaning of the word 'speak' can be ambiguous. Depending on how mechanical or actual the word's use is, it could mean that a mute wizard is not a valid target, or that a parrot is a valid target.
Sadly, the RAW is silent on this, at least from what I've found.
**So, ask your DM.**
Or possibly customer service or one of the Twitter accounts that sometimes give rules clarifications. | By Strict Raw: No
=================
The Intellect Devourer cannot "speak" and instead communicates via telepathy.
>
> ### Telepathy
>
>
> Telepathy is a magical ability that allows a monster to communicate mentally with another creature within a specified range. The contacted creature doesn't need to share a language with the monster to communicate in this way with it, but it must be able to understand at least one language. A creature without telepathy can receive and respond to telepathic messages but can't initiate or terminate a telepathic conversation.
>
>
>
Since Telepathy is not strictly stated as speaking, nor is it described as a form of speech. I would even further point that since telepathy doesn't require both subjects to know each other's language to work, just that they know "a" language, you aren't necessarily speaking in words in telepathy.
The more fluffy way of describing this then is that you cannot read the Thought Devourer's thoughts because its method of thinking is too foreign to your own.
My personal thoughts as a DM:
=============================
This would need to be ruled on a case by case basis. I think it makes sense you cant read an Intellect Devourer's thoughts. They are likely not language based, and are very foreign to how "we" think.
I would apply some older versions of D&D Detect Thoughts. The Intellect Devourer, while you wouldn't be able to locate it, you could pick up some of its surface emotions/instincts. You could tell if it's hunting something. You could tell if it is angry. Things like that.
At the same time though, the very strict raw definition also means if a wizard cuts out his larynx, he cant be targeted, because he "cannot speak", which is just kind of nonsense.
So the key here is to really understand that RAW is never something that you as a player or DM should follow blindly. Instead it's generally a "talk to your DM and see what they are okay with" type deal. In this case, you made a pretty sound argument for me to allow at least some level of thought detection in my games. |
62,439 | Usually when you have shared folder or a drive on a network location, it's browsable through Microsoft Windows Network. This is however painfully slow. Often when the computer or network location cannot be found, it takes ages before you get an error message and regain control over windows explorer.
Most of the time when I accidentally click on a location that is not connected (because I clicked a shared folder from a server at work while at home) I can sit and wait till the error message.
Is there a way to make the process faster? Like cutting down a timeout or make it look for the folders/drives/computers in the background in stead of holding up explorer?
**Comment on answers:**
*@bua:
This option requires me to use a different explorer to browse. Is there something I can do while using normal explorer?*
*@Dani:
This won't help me to browse between network folder/computers. Only speed up using shortcut folders. But then again, when this folder is not available, the hold of explorer is still there.* | 2009/10/29 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/62439",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/15892/"
] | One simplest way is to use [Total commander](http://www.ghisler.com/) or [FreeCommander](http://www.freecommander.com/index.htm) (an open source alternative) to explore Your PC/laptop/NFS or even FTP server.
This will certainly speed-up your work, and wont block your explorer when accidentally clicking on shared folders. | If your on Windows 7 I would recommend mapping a drive to a FTP service. That will be faster. |
331,839 | Why is it said that BitTorrent is faster, partly, because it transfers random pieces of a file instead of transferring it from start to finish in a contiguous/linear fashion?
---
**EDIT:** But why do they *have* to be 'random'? Why not a more predictable 'semi-contiguous' transfer in which one peer gives you the first half, and the second peer the other half? This would theoretically reduce overhead. | 2011/09/04 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/331839",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/53514/"
] | The key is that you are getting the file from several sources (peers) at the same time rather than from one source.
If you have a file that's split into 10 parts and takes 100 seconds to download from 1 server then theoretically you can get the file from 10 peers in 10 seconds (plus some overheads) as each peer can deliver it's part in 10 seconds. In practice it will take longer as each peer won't be perfect, and you'll probably hit your bandwidth limit (but you get the idea).
As you have to reassemble the file anyway you don't have to fetch the pieces in order. So if you only have 5 peers with each delivering 2 parts these can be random parts of the file. | Regarding the edit asking why they have to be random: Let's say that torrents were changed to only download the first block that the downloader doesn't already have, thus guaranteeing a contiguous transfer.
I then share a 100MB file. 10 people connect and each downloads 50MB before I go offline.
These people are then screwed, because they all have the first half of the file, while only I have the second half. Until I make it available again, they can't complete the download.
Instead, with the blocks being transferred in a random order as is actually the case, each of these 10 people has a different set of blocks, so they can trade among themselves in order to complete their downloads without needing me to be around.
Even better, though, because each of them has a different set of blocks, each of them can download from *all* of the others to fill in the gaps in their copy. Your edit alluded to the idea of starting from a random point in the file and downloading contiguously from that point, but that would increase the amount of overlap from one downloader's copy to the next (if Alice starts at the beginning of the file and Bob starts 10% into it, then there's 40% of the file that they both have and only 10% unique to each of them that they can trade without me reconnecting to make the rest available). Downloading in a random order maximizes the uniqueness of each downloader's set of blocks held, thus maximizing the ability of downloaders to start trading among themselves and maximizing the odds of it being possible for them to assemble a complete copy if no seeds are available.
A single contiguous download may (or may not, depending on conditions) be better for *you*, but downloading in random order is better for the network as a whole. |
331,839 | Why is it said that BitTorrent is faster, partly, because it transfers random pieces of a file instead of transferring it from start to finish in a contiguous/linear fashion?
---
**EDIT:** But why do they *have* to be 'random'? Why not a more predictable 'semi-contiguous' transfer in which one peer gives you the first half, and the second peer the other half? This would theoretically reduce overhead. | 2011/09/04 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/331839",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/53514/"
] | Regarding the edit asking why they have to be random: Let's say that torrents were changed to only download the first block that the downloader doesn't already have, thus guaranteeing a contiguous transfer.
I then share a 100MB file. 10 people connect and each downloads 50MB before I go offline.
These people are then screwed, because they all have the first half of the file, while only I have the second half. Until I make it available again, they can't complete the download.
Instead, with the blocks being transferred in a random order as is actually the case, each of these 10 people has a different set of blocks, so they can trade among themselves in order to complete their downloads without needing me to be around.
Even better, though, because each of them has a different set of blocks, each of them can download from *all* of the others to fill in the gaps in their copy. Your edit alluded to the idea of starting from a random point in the file and downloading contiguously from that point, but that would increase the amount of overlap from one downloader's copy to the next (if Alice starts at the beginning of the file and Bob starts 10% into it, then there's 40% of the file that they both have and only 10% unique to each of them that they can trade without me reconnecting to make the rest available). Downloading in a random order maximizes the uniqueness of each downloader's set of blocks held, thus maximizing the ability of downloaders to start trading among themselves and maximizing the odds of it being possible for them to assemble a complete copy if no seeds are available.
A single contiguous download may (or may not, depending on conditions) be better for *you*, but downloading in random order is better for the network as a whole. | Most responses don't seem to be answering your question.
**BitTorrent is not faster.**
It's actually *slower* because of the overhead of connecting to multiple sources.
The real difference in practice however, is you are downloading from many sources that can **potentially add up** to be faster than what a website could give you. Many web servers are under heavy loads or are otherwise speed-limited so you don't suck them dry.
The fact that BitTorrent transfers the file in a seemingly random order has no direct affect on its speed.
In regards to your edit, the **pieces are not random!** They are prioritized based on rarity: a rare piece needs to become less rare as fast as possible so it is not lost if the source that has it suddenly leaves. It has to do with availability, not speed. |
331,839 | Why is it said that BitTorrent is faster, partly, because it transfers random pieces of a file instead of transferring it from start to finish in a contiguous/linear fashion?
---
**EDIT:** But why do they *have* to be 'random'? Why not a more predictable 'semi-contiguous' transfer in which one peer gives you the first half, and the second peer the other half? This would theoretically reduce overhead. | 2011/09/04 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/331839",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/53514/"
] | It should be said that this depends entirely on the file in question, amount of peers and speed of the non bittorent source.
You will never download faster than the maximum download bandwidth of your connection, and if you are downloading from a place with enough bandwidth, it will be faster than using Bittorrent.
However, as internet speeds are getting faster and faster, we are getting to the point where (smaller) websites and hosts can not keep up.
For example, when I was looking around at colocation prices up in London a few months ago, I was quoted absolutely terrible prices for a 5Mb connection. If I was to take this, it would serve the majority of people well.
However, on the same line, if I was to host a few 500Mb files, and everyone had Cable (50Mb) or fast ADSL2+ (24Mb) lines, you would notice that my server would not be able to serve up speed that fast to you...
... however, if I was to offer you the same file through Bittorrent and there were 200 people, each giving just 30Kb/s, that would equal 5.8Mb/s (and, many people have much faster upload speed than that!).... and now, if I was to run Bittorrent on my server and offer the same file, it would mean that there is a total of 10.8Mb/s downloadable - much more than I could provide through that 5Mb/s pipe on my own.
Bittorrent is very much a numbers game, you have to have enough people uploading with enough bandwidth... Because of extra steps involved such as integrity checking (and the fact that you **should** upload back), it is hard for it to ever beat direct downloading from a good site with enough bandwidth, but, for many smaller sites - it is brilliant or even larger sites who simply want to save money off their bandwidth bill. | It's an availability issue. If you have to download contiguously, then you're dependent on people hosting more of the file than you. Every person with less of the file than you, will be unable to send you any data.
If chunks are randomly distributed, the number of hosts you can download from will be higher, therefore you'll download the file faster. |
331,839 | Why is it said that BitTorrent is faster, partly, because it transfers random pieces of a file instead of transferring it from start to finish in a contiguous/linear fashion?
---
**EDIT:** But why do they *have* to be 'random'? Why not a more predictable 'semi-contiguous' transfer in which one peer gives you the first half, and the second peer the other half? This would theoretically reduce overhead. | 2011/09/04 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/331839",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/53514/"
] | The key is that you are getting the file from several sources (peers) at the same time rather than from one source.
If you have a file that's split into 10 parts and takes 100 seconds to download from 1 server then theoretically you can get the file from 10 peers in 10 seconds (plus some overheads) as each peer can deliver it's part in 10 seconds. In practice it will take longer as each peer won't be perfect, and you'll probably hit your bandwidth limit (but you get the idea).
As you have to reassemble the file anyway you don't have to fetch the pieces in order. So if you only have 5 peers with each delivering 2 parts these can be random parts of the file. | Most responses don't seem to be answering your question.
**BitTorrent is not faster.**
It's actually *slower* because of the overhead of connecting to multiple sources.
The real difference in practice however, is you are downloading from many sources that can **potentially add up** to be faster than what a website could give you. Many web servers are under heavy loads or are otherwise speed-limited so you don't suck them dry.
The fact that BitTorrent transfers the file in a seemingly random order has no direct affect on its speed.
In regards to your edit, the **pieces are not random!** They are prioritized based on rarity: a rare piece needs to become less rare as fast as possible so it is not lost if the source that has it suddenly leaves. It has to do with availability, not speed. |
331,839 | Why is it said that BitTorrent is faster, partly, because it transfers random pieces of a file instead of transferring it from start to finish in a contiguous/linear fashion?
---
**EDIT:** But why do they *have* to be 'random'? Why not a more predictable 'semi-contiguous' transfer in which one peer gives you the first half, and the second peer the other half? This would theoretically reduce overhead. | 2011/09/04 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/331839",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/53514/"
] | It should be said that this depends entirely on the file in question, amount of peers and speed of the non bittorent source.
You will never download faster than the maximum download bandwidth of your connection, and if you are downloading from a place with enough bandwidth, it will be faster than using Bittorrent.
However, as internet speeds are getting faster and faster, we are getting to the point where (smaller) websites and hosts can not keep up.
For example, when I was looking around at colocation prices up in London a few months ago, I was quoted absolutely terrible prices for a 5Mb connection. If I was to take this, it would serve the majority of people well.
However, on the same line, if I was to host a few 500Mb files, and everyone had Cable (50Mb) or fast ADSL2+ (24Mb) lines, you would notice that my server would not be able to serve up speed that fast to you...
... however, if I was to offer you the same file through Bittorrent and there were 200 people, each giving just 30Kb/s, that would equal 5.8Mb/s (and, many people have much faster upload speed than that!).... and now, if I was to run Bittorrent on my server and offer the same file, it would mean that there is a total of 10.8Mb/s downloadable - much more than I could provide through that 5Mb/s pipe on my own.
Bittorrent is very much a numbers game, you have to have enough people uploading with enough bandwidth... Because of extra steps involved such as integrity checking (and the fact that you **should** upload back), it is hard for it to ever beat direct downloading from a good site with enough bandwidth, but, for many smaller sites - it is brilliant or even larger sites who simply want to save money off their bandwidth bill. | Most responses don't seem to be answering your question.
**BitTorrent is not faster.**
It's actually *slower* because of the overhead of connecting to multiple sources.
The real difference in practice however, is you are downloading from many sources that can **potentially add up** to be faster than what a website could give you. Many web servers are under heavy loads or are otherwise speed-limited so you don't suck them dry.
The fact that BitTorrent transfers the file in a seemingly random order has no direct affect on its speed.
In regards to your edit, the **pieces are not random!** They are prioritized based on rarity: a rare piece needs to become less rare as fast as possible so it is not lost if the source that has it suddenly leaves. It has to do with availability, not speed. |
331,839 | Why is it said that BitTorrent is faster, partly, because it transfers random pieces of a file instead of transferring it from start to finish in a contiguous/linear fashion?
---
**EDIT:** But why do they *have* to be 'random'? Why not a more predictable 'semi-contiguous' transfer in which one peer gives you the first half, and the second peer the other half? This would theoretically reduce overhead. | 2011/09/04 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/331839",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/53514/"
] | It should be said that this depends entirely on the file in question, amount of peers and speed of the non bittorent source.
You will never download faster than the maximum download bandwidth of your connection, and if you are downloading from a place with enough bandwidth, it will be faster than using Bittorrent.
However, as internet speeds are getting faster and faster, we are getting to the point where (smaller) websites and hosts can not keep up.
For example, when I was looking around at colocation prices up in London a few months ago, I was quoted absolutely terrible prices for a 5Mb connection. If I was to take this, it would serve the majority of people well.
However, on the same line, if I was to host a few 500Mb files, and everyone had Cable (50Mb) or fast ADSL2+ (24Mb) lines, you would notice that my server would not be able to serve up speed that fast to you...
... however, if I was to offer you the same file through Bittorrent and there were 200 people, each giving just 30Kb/s, that would equal 5.8Mb/s (and, many people have much faster upload speed than that!).... and now, if I was to run Bittorrent on my server and offer the same file, it would mean that there is a total of 10.8Mb/s downloadable - much more than I could provide through that 5Mb/s pipe on my own.
Bittorrent is very much a numbers game, you have to have enough people uploading with enough bandwidth... Because of extra steps involved such as integrity checking (and the fact that you **should** upload back), it is hard for it to ever beat direct downloading from a good site with enough bandwidth, but, for many smaller sites - it is brilliant or even larger sites who simply want to save money off their bandwidth bill. | Say you send two people to the grocery store to pick up a list of items. You give them each the exact same list. However, one of them must pick up the items in the exact order they appear on the list. The other may pick up the items in any order they please. Which do you think will finish first? |
331,839 | Why is it said that BitTorrent is faster, partly, because it transfers random pieces of a file instead of transferring it from start to finish in a contiguous/linear fashion?
---
**EDIT:** But why do they *have* to be 'random'? Why not a more predictable 'semi-contiguous' transfer in which one peer gives you the first half, and the second peer the other half? This would theoretically reduce overhead. | 2011/09/04 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/331839",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/53514/"
] | The key is that you are getting the file from several sources (peers) at the same time rather than from one source.
If you have a file that's split into 10 parts and takes 100 seconds to download from 1 server then theoretically you can get the file from 10 peers in 10 seconds (plus some overheads) as each peer can deliver it's part in 10 seconds. In practice it will take longer as each peer won't be perfect, and you'll probably hit your bandwidth limit (but you get the idea).
As you have to reassemble the file anyway you don't have to fetch the pieces in order. So if you only have 5 peers with each delivering 2 parts these can be random parts of the file. | It's an availability issue. If you have to download contiguously, then you're dependent on people hosting more of the file than you. Every person with less of the file than you, will be unable to send you any data.
If chunks are randomly distributed, the number of hosts you can download from will be higher, therefore you'll download the file faster. |
331,839 | Why is it said that BitTorrent is faster, partly, because it transfers random pieces of a file instead of transferring it from start to finish in a contiguous/linear fashion?
---
**EDIT:** But why do they *have* to be 'random'? Why not a more predictable 'semi-contiguous' transfer in which one peer gives you the first half, and the second peer the other half? This would theoretically reduce overhead. | 2011/09/04 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/331839",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/53514/"
] | It's an availability issue. If you have to download contiguously, then you're dependent on people hosting more of the file than you. Every person with less of the file than you, will be unable to send you any data.
If chunks are randomly distributed, the number of hosts you can download from will be higher, therefore you'll download the file faster. | Torrents aren't always faster, but when they are, one reason is network entropy. A connection of any duration (the download of a large file) may degrade over time, as random, uncontrollable factors affect the transmission of packets, such as router overloading and other problems between you and the server. More errors mean more retransmissions of packets, and this situation tends to worsen over time. Torrents make many smaller connections, across many routing pathways, a strategy that can, under the right circumstances reduce errors and lost or damaged packets, and seems to be faster, especially as the number of seeds and peers increase. |
331,839 | Why is it said that BitTorrent is faster, partly, because it transfers random pieces of a file instead of transferring it from start to finish in a contiguous/linear fashion?
---
**EDIT:** But why do they *have* to be 'random'? Why not a more predictable 'semi-contiguous' transfer in which one peer gives you the first half, and the second peer the other half? This would theoretically reduce overhead. | 2011/09/04 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/331839",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/53514/"
] | The key is that you are getting the file from several sources (peers) at the same time rather than from one source.
If you have a file that's split into 10 parts and takes 100 seconds to download from 1 server then theoretically you can get the file from 10 peers in 10 seconds (plus some overheads) as each peer can deliver it's part in 10 seconds. In practice it will take longer as each peer won't be perfect, and you'll probably hit your bandwidth limit (but you get the idea).
As you have to reassemble the file anyway you don't have to fetch the pieces in order. So if you only have 5 peers with each delivering 2 parts these can be random parts of the file. | Torrents aren't always faster, but when they are, one reason is network entropy. A connection of any duration (the download of a large file) may degrade over time, as random, uncontrollable factors affect the transmission of packets, such as router overloading and other problems between you and the server. More errors mean more retransmissions of packets, and this situation tends to worsen over time. Torrents make many smaller connections, across many routing pathways, a strategy that can, under the right circumstances reduce errors and lost or damaged packets, and seems to be faster, especially as the number of seeds and peers increase. |
331,839 | Why is it said that BitTorrent is faster, partly, because it transfers random pieces of a file instead of transferring it from start to finish in a contiguous/linear fashion?
---
**EDIT:** But why do they *have* to be 'random'? Why not a more predictable 'semi-contiguous' transfer in which one peer gives you the first half, and the second peer the other half? This would theoretically reduce overhead. | 2011/09/04 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/331839",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/53514/"
] | Most responses don't seem to be answering your question.
**BitTorrent is not faster.**
It's actually *slower* because of the overhead of connecting to multiple sources.
The real difference in practice however, is you are downloading from many sources that can **potentially add up** to be faster than what a website could give you. Many web servers are under heavy loads or are otherwise speed-limited so you don't suck them dry.
The fact that BitTorrent transfers the file in a seemingly random order has no direct affect on its speed.
In regards to your edit, the **pieces are not random!** They are prioritized based on rarity: a rare piece needs to become less rare as fast as possible so it is not lost if the source that has it suddenly leaves. It has to do with availability, not speed. | Say you send two people to the grocery store to pick up a list of items. You give them each the exact same list. However, one of them must pick up the items in the exact order they appear on the list. The other may pick up the items in any order they please. Which do you think will finish first? |
5,746 | If I have two [Parallel Lives](https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Parallel%20Lives), and I have a [Doomed Traveler](https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Doomed%20Traveler) that just died, how many Spirit tokens would I put into play? | 2011/12/16 | [
"https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/5746",
"https://boardgames.stackexchange.com",
"https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/users/1326/"
] | Four.
For each instance of Parallel Lives (or Doubling Season) in play, double each instance of a token that would enter play.
Parallel Lives' effect is a replacement effect. It replaces "Put X creature tokens into play under your control" with "Put 2X creature tokens into play under your control."
Thus, two Parallel Lives' would quadruple tokens, three would be eight times, and four would be sixteen. Effectively, for each token placement, replace every token with two tokens for each instance of Parallel Lives.
Appropriate comp rules:
>
> 614.5. A replacement effect doesn't invoke itself repeatedly; it gets only one opportunity to affect an event or any modified events that may replace it.
>
>
> Example: A player controls two permanents, each with an ability that reads "If a creature you control would deal damage to a creature or player, it deals double that damage to that creature or player instead." A creature that normally deals 2 damage will deal 8 damage -- not just 4, and not an infinite amount.
>
>
>
EDIT: Relevant Oracle text mentioned by @AlexP:
>
> **9/22/2011** - If you control two Parallel Lives, then the number of tokens created is four times the original number. If you control three, then the number of tokens created is eight times the original number, and so on.
>
>
> | "If an [EFFECT] would put one or more tokens onto the battlefield [INSTEAD]"
This wording seems confusing. The act of doubling is an effect of the enchantment, therefore to the wording, two Parallel Lives on the field would seem to loop as one would trigger the other into infinite creatures:
The initial spell/effect has you put a creature onto the field.
Parallel Lives (A) has you put an additional token onto the field.
Parallel Lives (B) triggers the same time as (A) resulting in four.
* Going by the text, it seems that it shouldn't end there.
Assuming Parallel Lives (A) would react to (B) having placed tokens
Assuming Parallel Lives (B) would react to (A) having placed a token
"Whenever" vs "If" would have made this card infinite with just the two, as that word is what typically is used to denote potential for an infinite cycle to occur.
If you need proof of the concept go buy two mirrors and put them edge to edge at a 90 degree angle and place an object at the center or place them exactly facing each other with an item in the center. This denotes "Whenever an item appears, create a duplicate of that item," but two mirrors would also catch the appearance of the mirrored appearance.
This is to say the wording didn't covey the comprehensive ruling in simple enough vocabulary/structure, so that is what most player would potentially default to in lack of comprehensive rules to refer to -going on the card text alone. It is understandable to mistake it as a continuous engine. |
55,274 | Why will the resulting force lines of two positive point charges be like this:
I would expect this:
 | 2013/02/27 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/55274",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | Not only can but you should. Goldstein is a great book. Good mixture between math and ideas. | You can, certainly, it is a good book. But there are many other good books that you might also appreciate, with more advanced math. E.g. the "classics"
V. I. Arnold, Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Vol. 60, Springer, 1989
R. Abraham and J.E. Marsden, Foundations of Mechanics, AMS Chelsea Publishing, 2008.
J.E. Marsden, T.S. Ratiu, Introduction to Mechanics and Symmetry: A Basic Exposition of Classical Mechanical Systems, Springer, 1999.
Michael Spivak's new book on mechanics (Spivak, Physics for Mathematicians. Mechanics I, 2010) seems to be great, too. See <http://mathpop.com/mechanics1.htm>. |
9,170,663 | The Github issue tracker is not quite cutting the mustard for our (open-source, but professionally developed) project: it has the bizarre and crippling\* restriction that non-owners can't assign labels or users to issues.
So we need a new issue tracker. We don't need a lot, but labels (for components, and to distinguish subprojects) and user assignation are pretty important. Integration with Github would be a real bonus, as would nice ease of use. It has to be hosted, and preferably free-as-in-beer (or at the very least, have no per-developer charge).
Is there anything that fits this bill? Pivotal Tracker looks nice but is more of an agile work tracker than an issue/bug tracker. Trying Lighthouse now, but Github integration (if possible) could be fiddly.
\* Crippling because giving someone "ownership" status gives them the ability to delete the entire repository: issue permissions and code permissions are not distinguished. | 2012/02/07 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/9170663",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/263268/"
] | FogBugz is free for up to two users and [supports GitHub](http://blog.fogcreek.com/fogbugz-github-integration/). Pivotal Tracker is free if you leave your project public (not sure if that's possible) and it supports GitHub. Jira is $10 and connects to [GitHub](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5421647/how-do-i-connect-github-to-jira). | You may want to take a look at [Brightlight](http://www.brightlightapp.com), it allows you to assign administrators and then they in turn can assign sub members to projects.
At the minute there is no Github integration but if you are willing to keep the issue tracking separate then it may be worth trying. It means that users won't be able to delete the Github repository. |
9,170,663 | The Github issue tracker is not quite cutting the mustard for our (open-source, but professionally developed) project: it has the bizarre and crippling\* restriction that non-owners can't assign labels or users to issues.
So we need a new issue tracker. We don't need a lot, but labels (for components, and to distinguish subprojects) and user assignation are pretty important. Integration with Github would be a real bonus, as would nice ease of use. It has to be hosted, and preferably free-as-in-beer (or at the very least, have no per-developer charge).
Is there anything that fits this bill? Pivotal Tracker looks nice but is more of an agile work tracker than an issue/bug tracker. Trying Lighthouse now, but Github integration (if possible) could be fiddly.
\* Crippling because giving someone "ownership" status gives them the ability to delete the entire repository: issue permissions and code permissions are not distinguished. | 2012/02/07 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/9170663",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/263268/"
] | You may want to take a look at [Brightlight](http://www.brightlightapp.com), it allows you to assign administrators and then they in turn can assign sub members to projects.
At the minute there is no Github integration but if you are willing to keep the issue tracking separate then it may be worth trying. It means that users won't be able to delete the Github repository. | Try EzSDLC, <http://encodesoft.com/?page_id=77>
This is very simple and lightweight
It however does not support GITHUB |
9,170,663 | The Github issue tracker is not quite cutting the mustard for our (open-source, but professionally developed) project: it has the bizarre and crippling\* restriction that non-owners can't assign labels or users to issues.
So we need a new issue tracker. We don't need a lot, but labels (for components, and to distinguish subprojects) and user assignation are pretty important. Integration with Github would be a real bonus, as would nice ease of use. It has to be hosted, and preferably free-as-in-beer (or at the very least, have no per-developer charge).
Is there anything that fits this bill? Pivotal Tracker looks nice but is more of an agile work tracker than an issue/bug tracker. Trying Lighthouse now, but Github integration (if possible) could be fiddly.
\* Crippling because giving someone "ownership" status gives them the ability to delete the entire repository: issue permissions and code permissions are not distinguished. | 2012/02/07 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/9170663",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/263268/"
] | FogBugz is free for up to two users and [supports GitHub](http://blog.fogcreek.com/fogbugz-github-integration/). Pivotal Tracker is free if you leave your project public (not sure if that's possible) and it supports GitHub. Jira is $10 and connects to [GitHub](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5421647/how-do-i-connect-github-to-jira). | Try EzSDLC, <http://encodesoft.com/?page_id=77>
This is very simple and lightweight
It however does not support GITHUB |
13,884 | I want to learn how can I protect my PC from getting hacked in order to protect myself from cyberbullying. There is an intruder who has hacked my system over the last 4 years.
He has hacked my all emails, websites I log on to and whatever when it is related to me being online. He has a team of friends and has professional links all over the world.
When I make an email from another computer, I don't know how he comes to know about it but he knows my minute credentials of my account information.
When I go on certain websites my internet suddenly disconnects. I have to connect and reconnect my modem at least 200 times a day.
Even if I choose to take legal action on him,he would be locked up for some 6 months in a prison,but I have other plans for him(sorry for openly threatening).
I haven't used any of my emails (except reading) from last 3 years,he knows every website I visit on and that is how he uses me.
And I know all this, because he has accepted all these things over our chat.
Someone has advised me that I will have to become hacker to prevent myself. Is there any way I can consult a good security expert or an institution,where would I find it.
I live in India. | 2012/04/17 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/13884",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/5576/"
] | 1. format your system
2. get an Antivirus and Firewall
3. secure all your wifi networks
4. make a new email address or change EVERY detail in your email account especially password and security questions. Your password needs to be strong.
5. file a complaint with your local police office
6. Don't share any details with anyone.
7. stop doing drugs. | You really do not need to hire security professional in this situation. Since this "hacker" has accessed your email account[s], bank login, and knows what websites you visit then he either has infected one of your computers with a trojan/backdoor/keylogger or has hacked into your wifi and is sniffing your traffic. Answer these questions for me:
1. What type of security do you have on your wireless network?
2. Is your firewall active on all of your computers?
3. Do you have a commercial antivirus installed and actively monitoring/protecting your computers?
I really do not know what sort of problem you are facing without knowing the answers to these questions so if you would please respond to them I can help ypu better. There really is no need to learn (in detail) hacking in order to mitigate threats. |
13,884 | I want to learn how can I protect my PC from getting hacked in order to protect myself from cyberbullying. There is an intruder who has hacked my system over the last 4 years.
He has hacked my all emails, websites I log on to and whatever when it is related to me being online. He has a team of friends and has professional links all over the world.
When I make an email from another computer, I don't know how he comes to know about it but he knows my minute credentials of my account information.
When I go on certain websites my internet suddenly disconnects. I have to connect and reconnect my modem at least 200 times a day.
Even if I choose to take legal action on him,he would be locked up for some 6 months in a prison,but I have other plans for him(sorry for openly threatening).
I haven't used any of my emails (except reading) from last 3 years,he knows every website I visit on and that is how he uses me.
And I know all this, because he has accepted all these things over our chat.
Someone has advised me that I will have to become hacker to prevent myself. Is there any way I can consult a good security expert or an institution,where would I find it.
I live in India. | 2012/04/17 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/13884",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/5576/"
] | From the information you provided, far from being specific, your problems can be caused by several issues.
* **Email and web application credentials** - The best suggestion here is to change **all** your passwords and use strong ones. A service like [LastPass](https://lastpass.com/) can help you using only un-guessable and un-brutable passwords. For further information about password strength, I suggest reading a couple of SE questions ([ONE](https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/144/how-long-should-the-password-be) and [TWO](https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/6095/xkcd-936-short-complex-password-or-long-dictionary-passphrase)).
* **Bank details** - More information about the matter would have been helpful in troubleshooting this one, but I think it's still a case of stolen credentials.
* **"He knows everything!"** - Depending on the information he has, this can be the result of stolen credentials (think email, Facebook or any other social application were you might have shared those information with trusted people). He may also have a keylogger or a backdoor installed on your system; I suggest you format your computer and install a proper antivirus ([AVG Free](http://free.avg.com/) worked fine for me) and run scans periodically. Keep your software up-to-date, as there are plenty of public exploits which can be easily used.
* **Sudden disconnections** - I have a hard time thinking how an attacker can exploit this (except annoying the victim), so I won't speculate about its causes. If it is indeed caused by your "enemy", the previous sugegstions should work for this problem aswell.
If you still don't feel safe, a couple more suggestions.
* **Cryptography is your friend** - Make a [TrueCrypt](http://www.truecrypt.org/) volume with a strong password and store there all your sensitive files. Use [GPG](http://www.gnupg.org/) when you need to share sensitive files or information with other people.
* **Good sense goes a long way** - Don't download and install from untrusted sources. Install browser plugins to stop the execution of unwanted scripts. *Never put online any information you don't mind sharing.* | You really do not need to hire security professional in this situation. Since this "hacker" has accessed your email account[s], bank login, and knows what websites you visit then he either has infected one of your computers with a trojan/backdoor/keylogger or has hacked into your wifi and is sniffing your traffic. Answer these questions for me:
1. What type of security do you have on your wireless network?
2. Is your firewall active on all of your computers?
3. Do you have a commercial antivirus installed and actively monitoring/protecting your computers?
I really do not know what sort of problem you are facing without knowing the answers to these questions so if you would please respond to them I can help ypu better. There really is no need to learn (in detail) hacking in order to mitigate threats. |
13,884 | I want to learn how can I protect my PC from getting hacked in order to protect myself from cyberbullying. There is an intruder who has hacked my system over the last 4 years.
He has hacked my all emails, websites I log on to and whatever when it is related to me being online. He has a team of friends and has professional links all over the world.
When I make an email from another computer, I don't know how he comes to know about it but he knows my minute credentials of my account information.
When I go on certain websites my internet suddenly disconnects. I have to connect and reconnect my modem at least 200 times a day.
Even if I choose to take legal action on him,he would be locked up for some 6 months in a prison,but I have other plans for him(sorry for openly threatening).
I haven't used any of my emails (except reading) from last 3 years,he knows every website I visit on and that is how he uses me.
And I know all this, because he has accepted all these things over our chat.
Someone has advised me that I will have to become hacker to prevent myself. Is there any way I can consult a good security expert or an institution,where would I find it.
I live in India. | 2012/04/17 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/13884",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/5576/"
] | 1. format your system
2. get an Antivirus and Firewall
3. secure all your wifi networks
4. make a new email address or change EVERY detail in your email account especially password and security questions. Your password needs to be strong.
5. file a complaint with your local police office
6. Don't share any details with anyone.
7. stop doing drugs. | Something that you might consider is that a person (for all intents and purposes) really only needs to be able to access your email in order to be able to access virtually everything else that you are registered with. This is especially the case if you have only one email address for everything.
Also, some email providers (I know Yahoo, for sure was this way in the past and probably still is) get "hacked" constantly. There is really no hacking involved in the sense you are familiar with. The security measures to reset the email password involve using some handy security question that is supposed to be personal. With as much information as people post around the internet nowadays, you can find the answers to most peoples' security questions without much effort. So every time you change the password, they simply use the reset tool and change it right back to whatever they like.
You should really secure your wireless network though (you can google it by the make and model of your router, if you are able to find that) |
13,884 | I want to learn how can I protect my PC from getting hacked in order to protect myself from cyberbullying. There is an intruder who has hacked my system over the last 4 years.
He has hacked my all emails, websites I log on to and whatever when it is related to me being online. He has a team of friends and has professional links all over the world.
When I make an email from another computer, I don't know how he comes to know about it but he knows my minute credentials of my account information.
When I go on certain websites my internet suddenly disconnects. I have to connect and reconnect my modem at least 200 times a day.
Even if I choose to take legal action on him,he would be locked up for some 6 months in a prison,but I have other plans for him(sorry for openly threatening).
I haven't used any of my emails (except reading) from last 3 years,he knows every website I visit on and that is how he uses me.
And I know all this, because he has accepted all these things over our chat.
Someone has advised me that I will have to become hacker to prevent myself. Is there any way I can consult a good security expert or an institution,where would I find it.
I live in India. | 2012/04/17 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/13884",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/5576/"
] | From the information you provided, far from being specific, your problems can be caused by several issues.
* **Email and web application credentials** - The best suggestion here is to change **all** your passwords and use strong ones. A service like [LastPass](https://lastpass.com/) can help you using only un-guessable and un-brutable passwords. For further information about password strength, I suggest reading a couple of SE questions ([ONE](https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/144/how-long-should-the-password-be) and [TWO](https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/6095/xkcd-936-short-complex-password-or-long-dictionary-passphrase)).
* **Bank details** - More information about the matter would have been helpful in troubleshooting this one, but I think it's still a case of stolen credentials.
* **"He knows everything!"** - Depending on the information he has, this can be the result of stolen credentials (think email, Facebook or any other social application were you might have shared those information with trusted people). He may also have a keylogger or a backdoor installed on your system; I suggest you format your computer and install a proper antivirus ([AVG Free](http://free.avg.com/) worked fine for me) and run scans periodically. Keep your software up-to-date, as there are plenty of public exploits which can be easily used.
* **Sudden disconnections** - I have a hard time thinking how an attacker can exploit this (except annoying the victim), so I won't speculate about its causes. If it is indeed caused by your "enemy", the previous sugegstions should work for this problem aswell.
If you still don't feel safe, a couple more suggestions.
* **Cryptography is your friend** - Make a [TrueCrypt](http://www.truecrypt.org/) volume with a strong password and store there all your sensitive files. Use [GPG](http://www.gnupg.org/) when you need to share sensitive files or information with other people.
* **Good sense goes a long way** - Don't download and install from untrusted sources. Install browser plugins to stop the execution of unwanted scripts. *Never put online any information you don't mind sharing.* | Something that you might consider is that a person (for all intents and purposes) really only needs to be able to access your email in order to be able to access virtually everything else that you are registered with. This is especially the case if you have only one email address for everything.
Also, some email providers (I know Yahoo, for sure was this way in the past and probably still is) get "hacked" constantly. There is really no hacking involved in the sense you are familiar with. The security measures to reset the email password involve using some handy security question that is supposed to be personal. With as much information as people post around the internet nowadays, you can find the answers to most peoples' security questions without much effort. So every time you change the password, they simply use the reset tool and change it right back to whatever they like.
You should really secure your wireless network though (you can google it by the make and model of your router, if you are able to find that) |
13,884 | I want to learn how can I protect my PC from getting hacked in order to protect myself from cyberbullying. There is an intruder who has hacked my system over the last 4 years.
He has hacked my all emails, websites I log on to and whatever when it is related to me being online. He has a team of friends and has professional links all over the world.
When I make an email from another computer, I don't know how he comes to know about it but he knows my minute credentials of my account information.
When I go on certain websites my internet suddenly disconnects. I have to connect and reconnect my modem at least 200 times a day.
Even if I choose to take legal action on him,he would be locked up for some 6 months in a prison,but I have other plans for him(sorry for openly threatening).
I haven't used any of my emails (except reading) from last 3 years,he knows every website I visit on and that is how he uses me.
And I know all this, because he has accepted all these things over our chat.
Someone has advised me that I will have to become hacker to prevent myself. Is there any way I can consult a good security expert or an institution,where would I find it.
I live in India. | 2012/04/17 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/13884",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/5576/"
] | 1. format your system
2. get an Antivirus and Firewall
3. secure all your wifi networks
4. make a new email address or change EVERY detail in your email account especially password and security questions. Your password needs to be strong.
5. file a complaint with your local police office
6. Don't share any details with anyone.
7. stop doing drugs. | From the information you provided, far from being specific, your problems can be caused by several issues.
* **Email and web application credentials** - The best suggestion here is to change **all** your passwords and use strong ones. A service like [LastPass](https://lastpass.com/) can help you using only un-guessable and un-brutable passwords. For further information about password strength, I suggest reading a couple of SE questions ([ONE](https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/144/how-long-should-the-password-be) and [TWO](https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/6095/xkcd-936-short-complex-password-or-long-dictionary-passphrase)).
* **Bank details** - More information about the matter would have been helpful in troubleshooting this one, but I think it's still a case of stolen credentials.
* **"He knows everything!"** - Depending on the information he has, this can be the result of stolen credentials (think email, Facebook or any other social application were you might have shared those information with trusted people). He may also have a keylogger or a backdoor installed on your system; I suggest you format your computer and install a proper antivirus ([AVG Free](http://free.avg.com/) worked fine for me) and run scans periodically. Keep your software up-to-date, as there are plenty of public exploits which can be easily used.
* **Sudden disconnections** - I have a hard time thinking how an attacker can exploit this (except annoying the victim), so I won't speculate about its causes. If it is indeed caused by your "enemy", the previous sugegstions should work for this problem aswell.
If you still don't feel safe, a couple more suggestions.
* **Cryptography is your friend** - Make a [TrueCrypt](http://www.truecrypt.org/) volume with a strong password and store there all your sensitive files. Use [GPG](http://www.gnupg.org/) when you need to share sensitive files or information with other people.
* **Good sense goes a long way** - Don't download and install from untrusted sources. Install browser plugins to stop the execution of unwanted scripts. *Never put online any information you don't mind sharing.* |
23,402 | In a few months I will be moving across the US with 2 cats (The female is introverted and will slink away to hide when the unexpected happens. The male is a lot more outgoing, but can be unexpectedly skittish.)
At the moment I am debating between flying and driving them. My assumption of the pro's and cons of each type of trip are:
**Fly**
* Pro: Shorter duration: 2 flights over 7 hours
* Con: Higher stress environment: noisy, bustling airports and planes
* Con: Once the trip starts, it cannot be stopped.
* Con: More expensive: Need 1 booked person and $125 per cat
**Drive**
* Pro: Lower stress: It's just like a really long trip to the vet
* Pro: Can take a time out from traveling if needed.
* Pro: Cheaper: Just Gas and hotel rooms
* Con: A much longer duration: 26 hours of driving spread over 3 days
My assumption is that the driving will suck for me (but I have the time to do it), but will be better for the cats (they can better handle the lower level but longer duration stress).
Is this a valid assumption about the levels of stress of each type of trip, and in general how cats react to such stress?
Note that while [Travelling with cat by plane](https://pets.stackexchange.com/q/5641/13984) is great for tips on that mode of transportation, my question is more about comparing flying with driving.
And [Is it feasible to take cat on a 1400 mile, 21+ hour road trip?](https://pets.stackexchange.com/q/7629/13984) is great for the driving part.
---
**Update**
After speaking to our vet (who knows our cats and their personalities) we have decided to go with the flying option.
Our vet will also prescribe anti-anxiety drugs for the trip (even though the airlines say not to dose the cats up), and has recommended that we do multiple trials of the drugs well prior to the flights in order to gauge how much of the drug is needed on the day. | 2019/01/06 | [
"https://pets.stackexchange.com/questions/23402",
"https://pets.stackexchange.com",
"https://pets.stackexchange.com/users/13984/"
] | It essentially depends on your cats personality, I traveled quite a few times with mine and it was always a big deal by plane but fine by car(almost no stress as she had more space and we could more easily interact with her).
The plane was really noisy and the personel always asked to put her on the floor but when she had no eye contact with us it was always more stressfull | My skittish cat tolerated both a cross country drive and a cross country flight similarly. So, I'd pick the one that works better for you. If you include car wear-and-tear the two costs might be similar. A couple ideas if you choose driving: Give the cats a perch to look out the window and give them a cozy hiding spot like a foot well. For safety keep them away from the drivers feet. If a cat hates your motel or friends house then them stay in the car overnight. |
121,712 | Senior management at my company are talking about possibly introducing hot desking\*, which might be introduced at the same time as an office move planned in a few months. The new location will be large enough to accommodate the company size; there will be enough desks for everyone, space is not a problem.
What problems does hot desking strive to solve, apart from not having enough desks?
Does it actually solve those problems?
---
\*From [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_desking): *"Hot desking is an office organization system which involves multiple workers using a single physical work station or surface during different time periods. The "desk" in the name refers to an office desk being shared by multiple office workers on different shifts as opposed to each staff member having their own personal desk."*
---
*Update*
Etiquette is: I select only one answer, but several answers here answer this question; there are several other excellent answers. | 2018/10/29 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/121712",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/22880/"
] | There is another case to consider, layoffs. This does not seem to be a problem at your company, as there are enough desks for employees. But consider one where 100% of desks are utilized and there is 20% spillover into conference rooms and such at times. A reduction in staff will be less noticed by existing employees as all desks are already over-allocated.
This also helps by de-personalizing space. That desk is where "John" a loyal employee of 20years used to work. So no stigma associated with certain spaces(cursed desk), and no nostalgic remembrance. | I work in an office which uses hotdesks.
My office is a services company where most of the people will be working on client location. People comes to office when there is no project assigned to them or they have to work in non client work.
This works well, as the other scenario where each employee is assigned a fixed work place will cause huge waste of space.
The same company's office in another country where majority works from office doesn't have hot desk policy and is assigned a fixed desk.
TL;DR. It only works well for companies where a significant percentage of employees work remotely. |
121,712 | Senior management at my company are talking about possibly introducing hot desking\*, which might be introduced at the same time as an office move planned in a few months. The new location will be large enough to accommodate the company size; there will be enough desks for everyone, space is not a problem.
What problems does hot desking strive to solve, apart from not having enough desks?
Does it actually solve those problems?
---
\*From [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_desking): *"Hot desking is an office organization system which involves multiple workers using a single physical work station or surface during different time periods. The "desk" in the name refers to an office desk being shared by multiple office workers on different shifts as opposed to each staff member having their own personal desk."*
---
*Update*
Etiquette is: I select only one answer, but several answers here answer this question; there are several other excellent answers. | 2018/10/29 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/121712",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/22880/"
] | Hotdesking doesn't solve any problems, no matter whether the office is too small or not.
I've worked at a company that had 20-40% fewer seats than employees. Battles for chairs cost us (and company...) plenty of time. It was a drama. The most important part of the day was ensuring you had a chair.
Your company is probably expecting to grow. This could explain why they want to introduce the system now.
Or maybe they just want people to "network more". But that's not the way to achieve that. | As others have already said, it solves little if any problems, but there is one situation that I have experienced where at least can be helpful.
That is the 24/7 business. Any business which has people in the offices 24/7, i.e. upto 3x8hr shifts. This is common in a call centre environment, but can also exist in other environments too, depending on the company.
I can't tell you if your company is thinking to use this or not, but it's an 'advantage' of hot desking - as long as you only ever have 1/3rd of your total workforce working, you only ever need desks for 1/3rd too. |
121,712 | Senior management at my company are talking about possibly introducing hot desking\*, which might be introduced at the same time as an office move planned in a few months. The new location will be large enough to accommodate the company size; there will be enough desks for everyone, space is not a problem.
What problems does hot desking strive to solve, apart from not having enough desks?
Does it actually solve those problems?
---
\*From [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_desking): *"Hot desking is an office organization system which involves multiple workers using a single physical work station or surface during different time periods. The "desk" in the name refers to an office desk being shared by multiple office workers on different shifts as opposed to each staff member having their own personal desk."*
---
*Update*
Etiquette is: I select only one answer, but several answers here answer this question; there are several other excellent answers. | 2018/10/29 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/121712",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/22880/"
] | If some employees are not regularly at that office (e.g. mostly-remote workers), a hot desking system allows the desk space to be used more efficiently. I believe this was the original reason for the system; it allows the company to save on office space that goes unused. Also, if a worker has multiple office locations, s/he might not need a dedicated space at all of them; hot-desking can help accommodate.
When there is a consultant or consulting team coming in and regularly working at the client site, it is easier for them to work with the regular staff in a hot-desking arrangement, on the days when the consultants are in.
On days when there are several people out (e.g. popular times of the year to take holidays), the ones who are in can sit closer together for collaboration instead of feeling like the place is a ghost town.
If people are on teams that change relatively often, or on multiple teams, they can have the close desk proximity to one team while they are working with that team, and then easily change when working with a different team (e.g. a different day or a different week) without disruption of moving offices.
If people aren't allowed to keep things at the desk, it also makes for a tidier workspace and reduces the probability that an important paper will get buried under a mound of others on someone's desk.
Of course, hotdesking introduces new challenges such as the time cost of getting things set up every day and having to access a closet or cubby for the things one might otherwise keep in/at/on a desk. However, forcing people to get up and walk around more might also reduce healthcare costs and associated loss in productivity from the health issues caused by long constant sitting.
If there aren't actually enough desks for the staff who show up on a given day, competition is likely to burn resources and staff are unlikely to have the space they need to be most effective. | Proponents of hot-desking (who usually prefer other terms like "unassigned seating") often argue that it encourages collaboration/networking within the organisation. For instance, [this blog post](http://blog.turningart.com/flexible-workspaces-what-they-are-and-why-you-need-them) says:
>
> An article around workplace design in the Harvard Business Review
> collected performance data ... and found that “face-to-face
> interactions are by far the most important activity in an office.”
> Moreover, their data suggests that creating chance encounters and
> unplanned interactions, a design concept Steve Jobs pioneered at
> Pixar, improves performance. By instituting unassigned desks and
> communal work areas, employees are more likely to move throughout the
> day, which facilitates interaction and collaboration between employees
> who might have minimal interaction otherwise.
>
>
>
However, this isn't an entirely accurate characterisation of [the HBR article that it cites](https://hbr.org/2014/10/workspaces-that-move-people). That article notes that different solutions work for different workplaces, and discusses a case study where hot-desking gave very poor results:
>
> Companies must have an understanding of what they’re trying to achieve
> (higher productivity? more creativity?) before changing a space. For
> example, what worked at the pharma company didn’t work at a large
> furniture manufacturer that transformed its headquarters from classic
> cubicles to an open-plan office in which approximately 60% of the
> workforce had unassigned seating ... The company had hypothesized that
> fewer desks and a smaller footprint would move people closer together,
> increasing the likelihood of interaction. Unassigned seating would
> make interaction between people in different groups more likely. Such
> interaction did increase, by 17%—but energy levels (the number of
> individuals’ encounters during the day) dropped by an average of 14%.
> This suggests that the space simply reshuffled stationary workers
> rather than creating movement. Someone from marketing might bump into
> new people because their temporary desks happened to be close by, but
> none of them were leaving their workstations once they got there. **As a
> result, team communication dropped by 45%. The company saved money on
> space by reducing the number of fixed workstations, but both revenue
> and productivity plummeted.**
>
>
>
My workplace moved to hot-desking a couple of years back. Although this kind of unplanned interaction was mentioned as one of the benefits, I don't think it's substantially increased. People tend to prefer sitting in a familiar place, so most of us now alternate between two or three standard locations. Moreover, because accommodation is coordinated at workgroup level, each workgroup ends up with its own "home zone" so even though we shuffle round a bit, we're still sitting with the same people.
One complication here is that we moved to about 30% teleworking at the same time as we adopted hot-desking, and obviously teleworking reduces unplanned interactions. |
121,712 | Senior management at my company are talking about possibly introducing hot desking\*, which might be introduced at the same time as an office move planned in a few months. The new location will be large enough to accommodate the company size; there will be enough desks for everyone, space is not a problem.
What problems does hot desking strive to solve, apart from not having enough desks?
Does it actually solve those problems?
---
\*From [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_desking): *"Hot desking is an office organization system which involves multiple workers using a single physical work station or surface during different time periods. The "desk" in the name refers to an office desk being shared by multiple office workers on different shifts as opposed to each staff member having their own personal desk."*
---
*Update*
Etiquette is: I select only one answer, but several answers here answer this question; there are several other excellent answers. | 2018/10/29 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/121712",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/22880/"
] | Hotdesking doesn't solve any problems, no matter whether the office is too small or not.
I've worked at a company that had 20-40% fewer seats than employees. Battles for chairs cost us (and company...) plenty of time. It was a drama. The most important part of the day was ensuring you had a chair.
Your company is probably expecting to grow. This could explain why they want to introduce the system now.
Or maybe they just want people to "network more". But that's not the way to achieve that. | Proponents of hot-desking (who usually prefer other terms like "unassigned seating") often argue that it encourages collaboration/networking within the organisation. For instance, [this blog post](http://blog.turningart.com/flexible-workspaces-what-they-are-and-why-you-need-them) says:
>
> An article around workplace design in the Harvard Business Review
> collected performance data ... and found that “face-to-face
> interactions are by far the most important activity in an office.”
> Moreover, their data suggests that creating chance encounters and
> unplanned interactions, a design concept Steve Jobs pioneered at
> Pixar, improves performance. By instituting unassigned desks and
> communal work areas, employees are more likely to move throughout the
> day, which facilitates interaction and collaboration between employees
> who might have minimal interaction otherwise.
>
>
>
However, this isn't an entirely accurate characterisation of [the HBR article that it cites](https://hbr.org/2014/10/workspaces-that-move-people). That article notes that different solutions work for different workplaces, and discusses a case study where hot-desking gave very poor results:
>
> Companies must have an understanding of what they’re trying to achieve
> (higher productivity? more creativity?) before changing a space. For
> example, what worked at the pharma company didn’t work at a large
> furniture manufacturer that transformed its headquarters from classic
> cubicles to an open-plan office in which approximately 60% of the
> workforce had unassigned seating ... The company had hypothesized that
> fewer desks and a smaller footprint would move people closer together,
> increasing the likelihood of interaction. Unassigned seating would
> make interaction between people in different groups more likely. Such
> interaction did increase, by 17%—but energy levels (the number of
> individuals’ encounters during the day) dropped by an average of 14%.
> This suggests that the space simply reshuffled stationary workers
> rather than creating movement. Someone from marketing might bump into
> new people because their temporary desks happened to be close by, but
> none of them were leaving their workstations once they got there. **As a
> result, team communication dropped by 45%. The company saved money on
> space by reducing the number of fixed workstations, but both revenue
> and productivity plummeted.**
>
>
>
My workplace moved to hot-desking a couple of years back. Although this kind of unplanned interaction was mentioned as one of the benefits, I don't think it's substantially increased. People tend to prefer sitting in a familiar place, so most of us now alternate between two or three standard locations. Moreover, because accommodation is coordinated at workgroup level, each workgroup ends up with its own "home zone" so even though we shuffle round a bit, we're still sitting with the same people.
One complication here is that we moved to about 30% teleworking at the same time as we adopted hot-desking, and obviously teleworking reduces unplanned interactions. |
121,712 | Senior management at my company are talking about possibly introducing hot desking\*, which might be introduced at the same time as an office move planned in a few months. The new location will be large enough to accommodate the company size; there will be enough desks for everyone, space is not a problem.
What problems does hot desking strive to solve, apart from not having enough desks?
Does it actually solve those problems?
---
\*From [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_desking): *"Hot desking is an office organization system which involves multiple workers using a single physical work station or surface during different time periods. The "desk" in the name refers to an office desk being shared by multiple office workers on different shifts as opposed to each staff member having their own personal desk."*
---
*Update*
Etiquette is: I select only one answer, but several answers here answer this question; there are several other excellent answers. | 2018/10/29 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/121712",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/22880/"
] | There are too many unknowns to answer your question. But, from experience, I can give a couple of examples where hot desking makes sense:
At my current place of employment, most departments don't use hot desking -- since most people work from the office. Except for our largest department: customer care. Customer care works 24/7/365, which many agents only working between 24 and 32 hours a week. We'd need a few more offices if everyone had their own desk.
I used to work for a company where its employees would spend most of their time at customers. Sometimes, I wouldn't be in the office for several months in a row. We did have a few desks to host people who would be in the office, but there weren't enough desks to seat everyone at the same time.
My spouse works at a place where everyone has a 3 or 4 day workweek. The office is small, and putting in enough desks for everyone would violate health and safety rules. Hot desking solves this problem.
Whether any of the situations described above apply to your company, I cannot deduce from your question. | Proponents of hot-desking (who usually prefer other terms like "unassigned seating") often argue that it encourages collaboration/networking within the organisation. For instance, [this blog post](http://blog.turningart.com/flexible-workspaces-what-they-are-and-why-you-need-them) says:
>
> An article around workplace design in the Harvard Business Review
> collected performance data ... and found that “face-to-face
> interactions are by far the most important activity in an office.”
> Moreover, their data suggests that creating chance encounters and
> unplanned interactions, a design concept Steve Jobs pioneered at
> Pixar, improves performance. By instituting unassigned desks and
> communal work areas, employees are more likely to move throughout the
> day, which facilitates interaction and collaboration between employees
> who might have minimal interaction otherwise.
>
>
>
However, this isn't an entirely accurate characterisation of [the HBR article that it cites](https://hbr.org/2014/10/workspaces-that-move-people). That article notes that different solutions work for different workplaces, and discusses a case study where hot-desking gave very poor results:
>
> Companies must have an understanding of what they’re trying to achieve
> (higher productivity? more creativity?) before changing a space. For
> example, what worked at the pharma company didn’t work at a large
> furniture manufacturer that transformed its headquarters from classic
> cubicles to an open-plan office in which approximately 60% of the
> workforce had unassigned seating ... The company had hypothesized that
> fewer desks and a smaller footprint would move people closer together,
> increasing the likelihood of interaction. Unassigned seating would
> make interaction between people in different groups more likely. Such
> interaction did increase, by 17%—but energy levels (the number of
> individuals’ encounters during the day) dropped by an average of 14%.
> This suggests that the space simply reshuffled stationary workers
> rather than creating movement. Someone from marketing might bump into
> new people because their temporary desks happened to be close by, but
> none of them were leaving their workstations once they got there. **As a
> result, team communication dropped by 45%. The company saved money on
> space by reducing the number of fixed workstations, but both revenue
> and productivity plummeted.**
>
>
>
My workplace moved to hot-desking a couple of years back. Although this kind of unplanned interaction was mentioned as one of the benefits, I don't think it's substantially increased. People tend to prefer sitting in a familiar place, so most of us now alternate between two or three standard locations. Moreover, because accommodation is coordinated at workgroup level, each workgroup ends up with its own "home zone" so even though we shuffle round a bit, we're still sitting with the same people.
One complication here is that we moved to about 30% teleworking at the same time as we adopted hot-desking, and obviously teleworking reduces unplanned interactions. |
121,712 | Senior management at my company are talking about possibly introducing hot desking\*, which might be introduced at the same time as an office move planned in a few months. The new location will be large enough to accommodate the company size; there will be enough desks for everyone, space is not a problem.
What problems does hot desking strive to solve, apart from not having enough desks?
Does it actually solve those problems?
---
\*From [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_desking): *"Hot desking is an office organization system which involves multiple workers using a single physical work station or surface during different time periods. The "desk" in the name refers to an office desk being shared by multiple office workers on different shifts as opposed to each staff member having their own personal desk."*
---
*Update*
Etiquette is: I select only one answer, but several answers here answer this question; there are several other excellent answers. | 2018/10/29 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/121712",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/22880/"
] | If some employees are not regularly at that office (e.g. mostly-remote workers), a hot desking system allows the desk space to be used more efficiently. I believe this was the original reason for the system; it allows the company to save on office space that goes unused. Also, if a worker has multiple office locations, s/he might not need a dedicated space at all of them; hot-desking can help accommodate.
When there is a consultant or consulting team coming in and regularly working at the client site, it is easier for them to work with the regular staff in a hot-desking arrangement, on the days when the consultants are in.
On days when there are several people out (e.g. popular times of the year to take holidays), the ones who are in can sit closer together for collaboration instead of feeling like the place is a ghost town.
If people are on teams that change relatively often, or on multiple teams, they can have the close desk proximity to one team while they are working with that team, and then easily change when working with a different team (e.g. a different day or a different week) without disruption of moving offices.
If people aren't allowed to keep things at the desk, it also makes for a tidier workspace and reduces the probability that an important paper will get buried under a mound of others on someone's desk.
Of course, hotdesking introduces new challenges such as the time cost of getting things set up every day and having to access a closet or cubby for the things one might otherwise keep in/at/on a desk. However, forcing people to get up and walk around more might also reduce healthcare costs and associated loss in productivity from the health issues caused by long constant sitting.
If there aren't actually enough desks for the staff who show up on a given day, competition is likely to burn resources and staff are unlikely to have the space they need to be most effective. | Hotdesking solves the problem of having a happy workforce who can come in to work every day to a familiar, comfortable environment and get down to productive pursuits aided by the dependability of a consistent routine. Thank goodness!
Honestly, it might seem petty, but I'd be out — I rely on a routine and a predictable work environment and the instigation of hotdesking would entirely throw me off my game, for no benefit. |
121,712 | Senior management at my company are talking about possibly introducing hot desking\*, which might be introduced at the same time as an office move planned in a few months. The new location will be large enough to accommodate the company size; there will be enough desks for everyone, space is not a problem.
What problems does hot desking strive to solve, apart from not having enough desks?
Does it actually solve those problems?
---
\*From [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_desking): *"Hot desking is an office organization system which involves multiple workers using a single physical work station or surface during different time periods. The "desk" in the name refers to an office desk being shared by multiple office workers on different shifts as opposed to each staff member having their own personal desk."*
---
*Update*
Etiquette is: I select only one answer, but several answers here answer this question; there are several other excellent answers. | 2018/10/29 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/121712",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/22880/"
] | If the company offers different areas, it might help you to get the right environment. Their could be quiet places where any noise should be avoided, like in a library. Other areas could allow some talk. In meeting rooms, phone booths, collaboration rooms (which cannot be booked in advance) distractions to others can be avoided.
Depending on the work you have to do, you choose your place. If you have to concentrate for a longer time, go to the quiet places. If you have to talk to other team members, go to somewhere else. If you have a phone call or a spontaneous discussion with two co-workers, choose the phone booth or a collaboration room. | >
> What problems does hot desking strive to solve, apart from not having
> enough desks?
>
>
>
Management inferiority complex. Also, consultants need of a new car.
Many of these projects are buzzword bingo bullshit dreamed up by some consulting company after a short study of the workplace environment, and those profits only need to last (or seem to last) until the manager is promoted to his next position and the same consulting company can come back in with a new plan.
There are, of course, circumstances in which sharing desks is appropriate, as outlined by, e.g. Dmitry in his answer.
In a regular office setting, however, hot-desking is one of those consulting non-solutions. I've worked as a consultant, we always had one eye out for the follow-up business. No solution was ever intended to be permanent. |
121,712 | Senior management at my company are talking about possibly introducing hot desking\*, which might be introduced at the same time as an office move planned in a few months. The new location will be large enough to accommodate the company size; there will be enough desks for everyone, space is not a problem.
What problems does hot desking strive to solve, apart from not having enough desks?
Does it actually solve those problems?
---
\*From [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_desking): *"Hot desking is an office organization system which involves multiple workers using a single physical work station or surface during different time periods. The "desk" in the name refers to an office desk being shared by multiple office workers on different shifts as opposed to each staff member having their own personal desk."*
---
*Update*
Etiquette is: I select only one answer, but several answers here answer this question; there are several other excellent answers. | 2018/10/29 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/121712",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/22880/"
] | If some employees are not regularly at that office (e.g. mostly-remote workers), a hot desking system allows the desk space to be used more efficiently. I believe this was the original reason for the system; it allows the company to save on office space that goes unused. Also, if a worker has multiple office locations, s/he might not need a dedicated space at all of them; hot-desking can help accommodate.
When there is a consultant or consulting team coming in and regularly working at the client site, it is easier for them to work with the regular staff in a hot-desking arrangement, on the days when the consultants are in.
On days when there are several people out (e.g. popular times of the year to take holidays), the ones who are in can sit closer together for collaboration instead of feeling like the place is a ghost town.
If people are on teams that change relatively often, or on multiple teams, they can have the close desk proximity to one team while they are working with that team, and then easily change when working with a different team (e.g. a different day or a different week) without disruption of moving offices.
If people aren't allowed to keep things at the desk, it also makes for a tidier workspace and reduces the probability that an important paper will get buried under a mound of others on someone's desk.
Of course, hotdesking introduces new challenges such as the time cost of getting things set up every day and having to access a closet or cubby for the things one might otherwise keep in/at/on a desk. However, forcing people to get up and walk around more might also reduce healthcare costs and associated loss in productivity from the health issues caused by long constant sitting.
If there aren't actually enough desks for the staff who show up on a given day, competition is likely to burn resources and staff are unlikely to have the space they need to be most effective. | >
> Employees in such workplaces use existing offices **only occasionally or for short periods of time**, which leaves offices vacant.
>
>
>
Pulled right from your wikipedia page. I think this is important as "hot desking" is meant for workers to share the same desk, but at *different* times. Like maybe a call center job or something.
I think it's important to know when you'll be in the office and when the next person will be in the office. I'd hope your company would schedule different time slots for each of the desks rather than having everyone fight for space.
I believe it comes down to saving money and resources. They'd only have to manage one workstation and just your account rather than managing multiple workstations.
I think it's important depending on what industry you're in. Are you a call center? Or traditional office? Hard to determine from your question. |
121,712 | Senior management at my company are talking about possibly introducing hot desking\*, which might be introduced at the same time as an office move planned in a few months. The new location will be large enough to accommodate the company size; there will be enough desks for everyone, space is not a problem.
What problems does hot desking strive to solve, apart from not having enough desks?
Does it actually solve those problems?
---
\*From [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_desking): *"Hot desking is an office organization system which involves multiple workers using a single physical work station or surface during different time periods. The "desk" in the name refers to an office desk being shared by multiple office workers on different shifts as opposed to each staff member having their own personal desk."*
---
*Update*
Etiquette is: I select only one answer, but several answers here answer this question; there are several other excellent answers. | 2018/10/29 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/121712",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/22880/"
] | I am not a fan of the hot desk principle, but here are a few reason why people might be for it:
1. Tidier working area. If people can't keep their belongings at
their desk, the desks are typically clutter free
2. Fresh perspective. Some people actually think differently when
they are moved around. I don't, but I know people who claim where
they sit affect them
3. Collaboration with new people. Depending on your field, this may
encourage to work with more people than before and it could cause a
rise in productivity
Again, I am not for hot desking; these are just reasons I have heard in the past. | >
> What problems does hot desking strive to solve, apart from not having
> enough desks?
>
>
>
Management inferiority complex. Also, consultants need of a new car.
Many of these projects are buzzword bingo bullshit dreamed up by some consulting company after a short study of the workplace environment, and those profits only need to last (or seem to last) until the manager is promoted to his next position and the same consulting company can come back in with a new plan.
There are, of course, circumstances in which sharing desks is appropriate, as outlined by, e.g. Dmitry in his answer.
In a regular office setting, however, hot-desking is one of those consulting non-solutions. I've worked as a consultant, we always had one eye out for the follow-up business. No solution was ever intended to be permanent. |
121,712 | Senior management at my company are talking about possibly introducing hot desking\*, which might be introduced at the same time as an office move planned in a few months. The new location will be large enough to accommodate the company size; there will be enough desks for everyone, space is not a problem.
What problems does hot desking strive to solve, apart from not having enough desks?
Does it actually solve those problems?
---
\*From [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_desking): *"Hot desking is an office organization system which involves multiple workers using a single physical work station or surface during different time periods. The "desk" in the name refers to an office desk being shared by multiple office workers on different shifts as opposed to each staff member having their own personal desk."*
---
*Update*
Etiquette is: I select only one answer, but several answers here answer this question; there are several other excellent answers. | 2018/10/29 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/121712",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/22880/"
] | There are too many unknowns to answer your question. But, from experience, I can give a couple of examples where hot desking makes sense:
At my current place of employment, most departments don't use hot desking -- since most people work from the office. Except for our largest department: customer care. Customer care works 24/7/365, which many agents only working between 24 and 32 hours a week. We'd need a few more offices if everyone had their own desk.
I used to work for a company where its employees would spend most of their time at customers. Sometimes, I wouldn't be in the office for several months in a row. We did have a few desks to host people who would be in the office, but there weren't enough desks to seat everyone at the same time.
My spouse works at a place where everyone has a 3 or 4 day workweek. The office is small, and putting in enough desks for everyone would violate health and safety rules. Hot desking solves this problem.
Whether any of the situations described above apply to your company, I cannot deduce from your question. | The problem hot-desking is trying to solve is **exactly** "not having enough desks". I used to work for a consulting company where I would spend 95% of time at the customers' and maybe 5% at the office. The office could only accommodate maybe 20% of all consultants, but there was never a shortage of seats so hot desking totally made sense.
Another use case for hot-desking is when a significant share of employees wear several hats at a time. If 100 people spend 50% of their time at the office and another 50% of time in a lab, it's tempting to organize 50 office desks and 50 lab desks instead of 100. The downside is that sometimes a most of people have to do the same kind of work (end-of-year reports and such) and suddenly half of the employees have to do office work at the lab with poor Internet and no printers.
Employers who claim that hot-desking is introduced to solve a different problem than the lack of desks are usually hiding unpopular reasons (saving costs at the expense of worse working conditions) under cool slogans about team cohesion and agility. |
700,404 | I'm trying to pass ViewData to my asp.net mvc masterpage for an mvc usercontrol that I keep on a masterpage. For example, I created a dropdownlist of names as an mvc usercontrol and I put that in my masterpage.
The problem I am running into is passing the ViewData to the masterpage. I found this article from Microsoft which has a decent solution but I was wondering if there are other "better" solutions out there. The thing I don't like about the solution in the link is that I have to change every controller to inherit from a new controller class.
<http://www.asp.net/learn/MVC/tutorial-13-cs.aspx>
**Edit**: The problem I am looking at is the fact that if I place a user control in my masterpage that relies on ViewData, I have to **REPEATEDLY** include that ViewData for every single page that uses said masterpage. It's possible the solution in the link above is the best solution but I was hoping there were other alternatives. | 2009/03/31 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/700404",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/66478/"
] | For what it's worth, I am using the method from that tutorial in a current project and it works very well.
What you can also do, if it is data that is somewhat static (like a menu that doesn't change much), is to put the object on the cache so your database isn't called for every controller initialisation. | I don't quite get your problem...
>
> The problem I am looking at is the fact that if I place a user control in my masterpage that relies on ViewData, I have to REPEATEDLY include that ViewData for every single page that uses said masterpage.
>
>
>
Well yeah... of course you do. If you have a usercontrol in your master page then of course you're going to have to pass the required data for that usercontrol for every action & view that uses that masterpage.
It's not like you have to repeat yourself if you are just inheriting from a base controller.
Is your issue the fact that some controllers have actions that both do and don't call views that derive from that particular masterpage? So therefore if you are implementing a base controller, the actions that don't use that particular masterpage will still have the viewdata for it...? (If all that makes sense ;-) |
700,404 | I'm trying to pass ViewData to my asp.net mvc masterpage for an mvc usercontrol that I keep on a masterpage. For example, I created a dropdownlist of names as an mvc usercontrol and I put that in my masterpage.
The problem I am running into is passing the ViewData to the masterpage. I found this article from Microsoft which has a decent solution but I was wondering if there are other "better" solutions out there. The thing I don't like about the solution in the link is that I have to change every controller to inherit from a new controller class.
<http://www.asp.net/learn/MVC/tutorial-13-cs.aspx>
**Edit**: The problem I am looking at is the fact that if I place a user control in my masterpage that relies on ViewData, I have to **REPEATEDLY** include that ViewData for every single page that uses said masterpage. It's possible the solution in the link above is the best solution but I was hoping there were other alternatives. | 2009/03/31 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/700404",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/66478/"
] | The master page already has access to the ViewData. If you want strongly typed access to it, you need to do two things:
1. Put the master page stuff in a base class (e.g. CommonViewData)
2. Have you master page inherit from the generic ViewMasterPage<> class:
" %> | I think the solution suggested does work but not the ideal solution. If we put the code in the BaseController constructor it is going to be called even for Action methods which does not have a MasterPages (e.g Post methods and Ajax methods).
I think a better solution(not ideal) is to call Html.Action method in the Master page. |
700,404 | I'm trying to pass ViewData to my asp.net mvc masterpage for an mvc usercontrol that I keep on a masterpage. For example, I created a dropdownlist of names as an mvc usercontrol and I put that in my masterpage.
The problem I am running into is passing the ViewData to the masterpage. I found this article from Microsoft which has a decent solution but I was wondering if there are other "better" solutions out there. The thing I don't like about the solution in the link is that I have to change every controller to inherit from a new controller class.
<http://www.asp.net/learn/MVC/tutorial-13-cs.aspx>
**Edit**: The problem I am looking at is the fact that if I place a user control in my masterpage that relies on ViewData, I have to **REPEATEDLY** include that ViewData for every single page that uses said masterpage. It's possible the solution in the link above is the best solution but I was hoping there were other alternatives. | 2009/03/31 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/700404",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/66478/"
] | The master page already has access to the ViewData. If you want strongly typed access to it, you need to do two things:
1. Put the master page stuff in a base class (e.g. CommonViewData)
2. Have you master page inherit from the generic ViewMasterPage<> class:
" %> | I don't quite get your problem...
>
> The problem I am looking at is the fact that if I place a user control in my masterpage that relies on ViewData, I have to REPEATEDLY include that ViewData for every single page that uses said masterpage.
>
>
>
Well yeah... of course you do. If you have a usercontrol in your master page then of course you're going to have to pass the required data for that usercontrol for every action & view that uses that masterpage.
It's not like you have to repeat yourself if you are just inheriting from a base controller.
Is your issue the fact that some controllers have actions that both do and don't call views that derive from that particular masterpage? So therefore if you are implementing a base controller, the actions that don't use that particular masterpage will still have the viewdata for it...? (If all that makes sense ;-) |
2,700,826 | I am currently working on an application in WPF/C# for personal use. I am not a "classically trained" programmer. Simply a hobbyist that likes to code in his spare time. Is there any accepted approach to the progression of application development? I. E.; Make it work, add fault tolerance, create a gui, then performance optimization. Or maybe should I design the entire GUI first? Basically I am going to start a new project soon and would like to have some sort of "every program needs this" checklist. | 2010/04/23 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2700826",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/242131/"
] | If this is something you're doing as a hobby, you can choose any development methodology you want.
Typically, for commercial development, there's some form of prototype made first (for WPF, SketchFlow with Blend is fantastic for this). This is typically required since you most often need to "sell" the concept, either to a client, management, etc.
However, if you're doing this on your own, you have the freedom to do things any way you wish. One comment, however. I would, personally, not thing of "fault tolerance" as separate from "making it work", however, since "fault tolerance" comes with testing, and unit testing as you go is much more effective... | This is a huge topic that will probably garner a lot of opinions, so I'll chime in with this: Test-driven development. Try reading about it, and make the effort to incorporate it into your development strategy as soon as possible. TDD is the one thing I wish I had known when I started writing software years ago. It makes a world of difference in the quality of the stuff you put out. |
2,700,826 | I am currently working on an application in WPF/C# for personal use. I am not a "classically trained" programmer. Simply a hobbyist that likes to code in his spare time. Is there any accepted approach to the progression of application development? I. E.; Make it work, add fault tolerance, create a gui, then performance optimization. Or maybe should I design the entire GUI first? Basically I am going to start a new project soon and would like to have some sort of "every program needs this" checklist. | 2010/04/23 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2700826",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/242131/"
] | There's really no "every program needs this" list, because there's absolutely nothing that *every* program needs.
Some advice, though: don't "make it work", then "add fault tolerance". Defensive programming and accounting for errors should be a continuing part of development. It's much simpler (and usually more effective) if you account for errors and unexpected input *when* you're writing a piece of code rather than after it's done.
As far as whether or not to make the GUI first, answer this question: is the most important aspect of the program *what it does* or *what it looks like*? That's a serious question that, honestly, can vary from application to application (though it's usually the former that's more important).
If functionality is more important, model your information in code and get some basic "business logic" (a term of art that represents the non-visual logic in the application that carries out the rules and operations that are fundamental to the purpose of the program) in place, then create a GUI that interacts well with it.
If the GUI is genuinely more important, create it first and model data objects and business logic around the GUI.
I would advise you to *peruse* [this Wikipedia article](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems_Development_Life_Cycle). It's pretty heady (as most technical Wikipedia articles are), but it provides some good links and will give you a rough idea of how the progression of software development and maintenance moves in the "real world". | I try and take a look at my audience for the application. Then I'll create some use cases where I try and figure out what and why my application should even be built. Sometimes evaluating what you're writing and why you stumble across a lot of ideas that might shape the way you architect the application.
From there you can do as others suggest and put more importance on areas of focus. |
2,700,826 | I am currently working on an application in WPF/C# for personal use. I am not a "classically trained" programmer. Simply a hobbyist that likes to code in his spare time. Is there any accepted approach to the progression of application development? I. E.; Make it work, add fault tolerance, create a gui, then performance optimization. Or maybe should I design the entire GUI first? Basically I am going to start a new project soon and would like to have some sort of "every program needs this" checklist. | 2010/04/23 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2700826",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/242131/"
] | There's really no "every program needs this" list, because there's absolutely nothing that *every* program needs.
Some advice, though: don't "make it work", then "add fault tolerance". Defensive programming and accounting for errors should be a continuing part of development. It's much simpler (and usually more effective) if you account for errors and unexpected input *when* you're writing a piece of code rather than after it's done.
As far as whether or not to make the GUI first, answer this question: is the most important aspect of the program *what it does* or *what it looks like*? That's a serious question that, honestly, can vary from application to application (though it's usually the former that's more important).
If functionality is more important, model your information in code and get some basic "business logic" (a term of art that represents the non-visual logic in the application that carries out the rules and operations that are fundamental to the purpose of the program) in place, then create a GUI that interacts well with it.
If the GUI is genuinely more important, create it first and model data objects and business logic around the GUI.
I would advise you to *peruse* [this Wikipedia article](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems_Development_Life_Cycle). It's pretty heady (as most technical Wikipedia articles are), but it provides some good links and will give you a rough idea of how the progression of software development and maintenance moves in the "real world". | This is a huge topic that will probably garner a lot of opinions, so I'll chime in with this: Test-driven development. Try reading about it, and make the effort to incorporate it into your development strategy as soon as possible. TDD is the one thing I wish I had known when I started writing software years ago. It makes a world of difference in the quality of the stuff you put out. |
2,700,826 | I am currently working on an application in WPF/C# for personal use. I am not a "classically trained" programmer. Simply a hobbyist that likes to code in his spare time. Is there any accepted approach to the progression of application development? I. E.; Make it work, add fault tolerance, create a gui, then performance optimization. Or maybe should I design the entire GUI first? Basically I am going to start a new project soon and would like to have some sort of "every program needs this" checklist. | 2010/04/23 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2700826",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/242131/"
] | I'd say first of all, as simple as it sounds, write (either on paper or in your head) what the app is actually going to do. (Most businesses can't even do this part!)
Knowing that, sketch on paper what you think the screens will look like.
For example, say you're writing a home budget program and you want a drop down for accounts, and a grid for transactions, etc. Knowing what the GUI looks like will help tremendously.
Then fill in the details. | What has worked for me in the past is the following (high level) sequence:
1. Understand and record the requirements (who, what and when) - use-cases, feature list, flowcharts, service level requirements - whatever works for you (I am partial to use-cases though).
2. Understand and record the design (how) - class diagrams, sequence diagrams, screen designs, API specifications - start high level and drill down (could start development before complete drill down)
3. Implement - start with API/stubs and unit tests, then fill in the code, update unit tests and execute unit tests as you go.
4. System test - test the components operating together and fix defects. Don't forget about performance testing (check that you have met your service level requirements from step 1).
5. Package, deploy and enjoy. |
2,700,826 | I am currently working on an application in WPF/C# for personal use. I am not a "classically trained" programmer. Simply a hobbyist that likes to code in his spare time. Is there any accepted approach to the progression of application development? I. E.; Make it work, add fault tolerance, create a gui, then performance optimization. Or maybe should I design the entire GUI first? Basically I am going to start a new project soon and would like to have some sort of "every program needs this" checklist. | 2010/04/23 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2700826",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/242131/"
] | If this is something you're doing as a hobby, you can choose any development methodology you want.
Typically, for commercial development, there's some form of prototype made first (for WPF, SketchFlow with Blend is fantastic for this). This is typically required since you most often need to "sell" the concept, either to a client, management, etc.
However, if you're doing this on your own, you have the freedom to do things any way you wish. One comment, however. I would, personally, not thing of "fault tolerance" as separate from "making it work", however, since "fault tolerance" comes with testing, and unit testing as you go is much more effective... | I try and take a look at my audience for the application. Then I'll create some use cases where I try and figure out what and why my application should even be built. Sometimes evaluating what you're writing and why you stumble across a lot of ideas that might shape the way you architect the application.
From there you can do as others suggest and put more importance on areas of focus. |
2,700,826 | I am currently working on an application in WPF/C# for personal use. I am not a "classically trained" programmer. Simply a hobbyist that likes to code in his spare time. Is there any accepted approach to the progression of application development? I. E.; Make it work, add fault tolerance, create a gui, then performance optimization. Or maybe should I design the entire GUI first? Basically I am going to start a new project soon and would like to have some sort of "every program needs this" checklist. | 2010/04/23 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2700826",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/242131/"
] | If this is something you're doing as a hobby, you can choose any development methodology you want.
Typically, for commercial development, there's some form of prototype made first (for WPF, SketchFlow with Blend is fantastic for this). This is typically required since you most often need to "sell" the concept, either to a client, management, etc.
However, if you're doing this on your own, you have the freedom to do things any way you wish. One comment, however. I would, personally, not thing of "fault tolerance" as separate from "making it work", however, since "fault tolerance" comes with testing, and unit testing as you go is much more effective... | What has worked for me in the past is the following (high level) sequence:
1. Understand and record the requirements (who, what and when) - use-cases, feature list, flowcharts, service level requirements - whatever works for you (I am partial to use-cases though).
2. Understand and record the design (how) - class diagrams, sequence diagrams, screen designs, API specifications - start high level and drill down (could start development before complete drill down)
3. Implement - start with API/stubs and unit tests, then fill in the code, update unit tests and execute unit tests as you go.
4. System test - test the components operating together and fix defects. Don't forget about performance testing (check that you have met your service level requirements from step 1).
5. Package, deploy and enjoy. |
2,700,826 | I am currently working on an application in WPF/C# for personal use. I am not a "classically trained" programmer. Simply a hobbyist that likes to code in his spare time. Is there any accepted approach to the progression of application development? I. E.; Make it work, add fault tolerance, create a gui, then performance optimization. Or maybe should I design the entire GUI first? Basically I am going to start a new project soon and would like to have some sort of "every program needs this" checklist. | 2010/04/23 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2700826",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/242131/"
] | There's really no "every program needs this" list, because there's absolutely nothing that *every* program needs.
Some advice, though: don't "make it work", then "add fault tolerance". Defensive programming and accounting for errors should be a continuing part of development. It's much simpler (and usually more effective) if you account for errors and unexpected input *when* you're writing a piece of code rather than after it's done.
As far as whether or not to make the GUI first, answer this question: is the most important aspect of the program *what it does* or *what it looks like*? That's a serious question that, honestly, can vary from application to application (though it's usually the former that's more important).
If functionality is more important, model your information in code and get some basic "business logic" (a term of art that represents the non-visual logic in the application that carries out the rules and operations that are fundamental to the purpose of the program) in place, then create a GUI that interacts well with it.
If the GUI is genuinely more important, create it first and model data objects and business logic around the GUI.
I would advise you to *peruse* [this Wikipedia article](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems_Development_Life_Cycle). It's pretty heady (as most technical Wikipedia articles are), but it provides some good links and will give you a rough idea of how the progression of software development and maintenance moves in the "real world". | What has worked for me in the past is the following (high level) sequence:
1. Understand and record the requirements (who, what and when) - use-cases, feature list, flowcharts, service level requirements - whatever works for you (I am partial to use-cases though).
2. Understand and record the design (how) - class diagrams, sequence diagrams, screen designs, API specifications - start high level and drill down (could start development before complete drill down)
3. Implement - start with API/stubs and unit tests, then fill in the code, update unit tests and execute unit tests as you go.
4. System test - test the components operating together and fix defects. Don't forget about performance testing (check that you have met your service level requirements from step 1).
5. Package, deploy and enjoy. |
2,700,826 | I am currently working on an application in WPF/C# for personal use. I am not a "classically trained" programmer. Simply a hobbyist that likes to code in his spare time. Is there any accepted approach to the progression of application development? I. E.; Make it work, add fault tolerance, create a gui, then performance optimization. Or maybe should I design the entire GUI first? Basically I am going to start a new project soon and would like to have some sort of "every program needs this" checklist. | 2010/04/23 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2700826",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/242131/"
] | I'd say first of all, as simple as it sounds, write (either on paper or in your head) what the app is actually going to do. (Most businesses can't even do this part!)
Knowing that, sketch on paper what you think the screens will look like.
For example, say you're writing a home budget program and you want a drop down for accounts, and a grid for transactions, etc. Knowing what the GUI looks like will help tremendously.
Then fill in the details. | This is a huge topic that will probably garner a lot of opinions, so I'll chime in with this: Test-driven development. Try reading about it, and make the effort to incorporate it into your development strategy as soon as possible. TDD is the one thing I wish I had known when I started writing software years ago. It makes a world of difference in the quality of the stuff you put out. |
2,700,826 | I am currently working on an application in WPF/C# for personal use. I am not a "classically trained" programmer. Simply a hobbyist that likes to code in his spare time. Is there any accepted approach to the progression of application development? I. E.; Make it work, add fault tolerance, create a gui, then performance optimization. Or maybe should I design the entire GUI first? Basically I am going to start a new project soon and would like to have some sort of "every program needs this" checklist. | 2010/04/23 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2700826",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/242131/"
] | I'd say first of all, as simple as it sounds, write (either on paper or in your head) what the app is actually going to do. (Most businesses can't even do this part!)
Knowing that, sketch on paper what you think the screens will look like.
For example, say you're writing a home budget program and you want a drop down for accounts, and a grid for transactions, etc. Knowing what the GUI looks like will help tremendously.
Then fill in the details. | I try and take a look at my audience for the application. Then I'll create some use cases where I try and figure out what and why my application should even be built. Sometimes evaluating what you're writing and why you stumble across a lot of ideas that might shape the way you architect the application.
From there you can do as others suggest and put more importance on areas of focus. |
2,700,826 | I am currently working on an application in WPF/C# for personal use. I am not a "classically trained" programmer. Simply a hobbyist that likes to code in his spare time. Is there any accepted approach to the progression of application development? I. E.; Make it work, add fault tolerance, create a gui, then performance optimization. Or maybe should I design the entire GUI first? Basically I am going to start a new project soon and would like to have some sort of "every program needs this" checklist. | 2010/04/23 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2700826",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/242131/"
] | I'd say first of all, as simple as it sounds, write (either on paper or in your head) what the app is actually going to do. (Most businesses can't even do this part!)
Knowing that, sketch on paper what you think the screens will look like.
For example, say you're writing a home budget program and you want a drop down for accounts, and a grid for transactions, etc. Knowing what the GUI looks like will help tremendously.
Then fill in the details. | The development lifecycle varies a lot. Variance is due to project size, team size, timeline, etc...
For small hobby projects, I usually follow this approach:
1. Specs: this could be a half page typed about what I think I'm doing, and maybe some diagrams to make it more clear.
2. Plan: Usually a document where I outline what I think major milestones will be, such as "complete proof of concept", "basic gui", "system logging", "successful CRUD operations"
3. Code: Try to meet the first milestone in 2., then possibly re-evaluate 2. Continue until project is done, or I get bored / distracted by something else (usually shinier than whatever I'm working).
This last step may also involve sub-steps such as data modelling (if it's a database app) or graphics design for icons (if the GUI needs fancy icons). |
109,458 | I've been reading through other posts about such megastructures and they're getting me part of the way to my destination. Wanted to see about a few specific options my imagination has latched onto.
The original concept is a tower, an arcology with a 1 km base level (willing to taper it as it gets higher if necessary), reaching to at least 8 km altitude.
Assume that available power is not an issue.
One idea is: Blocks, rectangular or triangular prisms, containing powerful electromagnets that are the 'mortar'. I liked this option because the society is ancient, and a blocky look fits the aesthetic better, masking the futurism. I realize it is power inefficient. Would such a thing work on this scale?
Thanks!
EDIT to reflect excellent comments:
Trying to avoid elegant solutions such as Space Fountain, Space Elevator, etc. We want to solve the issue of structural stability with brute force as much as possible. Would a system like this hold up versus gravity, bending and torque at high altitudes? | 2018/04/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/109458",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49674/"
] | without moving their own body is the tricky part, that requires severing the signals to the body which is not something down easily or lightly. or course sticking them in a big sensory dep tank and letting them move is an option.
Eventually we will be able to do what you want, but we are talking the level of printing a body from scratch levels of tech. A level of tech where a severed spine is as easy to deal with as getting a tattoo today.
You would have to spend weeks of not months just having your synaptic pattern mapped by an AI just so the inputs can match what your body already does. It is possible this could be done while you go about your everyday life however. This in and of itself could have utility in diagnosing sensory and other abnormalities, it is possible such deep interaction with an AI might become commonplace, It has already been proposed as as way to integrate humans and computer most successfully. | Using some logic from Ghosts of Onyx from the Halo series, a rebel general manages to attach a disruption collar to a set of spartan armor which halts all commands to the suit basically rendering them immobile. Perhaps the same could be applied.
What I would propose is a motorized suit that is linked to the helmet. This product is, unfortuantely, less of just a helmet and instead a fully enclosed, articulated and motorized suit. It would have to be fully enclosed in order to create the immersion necessary to feel more in the simulation. The suit would take data from both the user and the simulation. It would allow freedom of movement within the limitation of the simulation. The suit would instead translate interactions by using the motors (or hydraulics or any method of artificial locomotion). An example would be walking into a wall. the suit would limit the range of motion the user has at the moment they interact with the object. Another, more dynamic example would be wrestling with an opponent stronger than the user. The suit would simulate this by actively resisting or even moving the body in the same direction as the simulation dictates the opponent would push it.
To increase immersion, the inside of the suit could be lined with numerous small hydraulic pistons on the inside, nothing dangerous or large but just enough to jab someone inside. For example, walking into a table edge would cause 1 or a set of the pistons to strike you at or near that location causing a real sensation of discomfort. It would help discourage the user from making the same mistake as the simulation now contains real life consequences.
To help with climate or other sensory inputs, a mesh could be worn beneath said suit that can produce both heat and cold sensations. Depending on the intricacy of the suit being worn, it could simulate temperatures in specific places only. This would only apply to things like the user sticking their hand into a fire in the simulation or taking a plunge into water.
>
> they would control their own body, without also moving their own body.
>
>
>
This part would be difficult with this suggestion as it would require a range of motion. Though perhaps creating some sort of suspension device attached to a suit would allow this.
Though, if I may add some pros and cons to the suspended suit suggestion
**PROS**
* allow for non invasive feedback from the system in terms of trauma or resistance
* allow unmodified personnel access to the simulator
* reduce the amount of time needed for tedious tasks (cleaning ports, maintaining ports)
* reduce need for surgeries to maintain any implants (should be none with this method or minimal)
* total system failure or feedback would most likely not kill the user (feedback levels allowing of course)
**CONS**
* requires an area for range of motion
* Possible suspension devices hampering motion
* increased device maintenance
* requires a fully enclosed, possibly air tight helmet for full VR immersion (may lead to suffocation for failures)
Edited for clarity. |
109,458 | I've been reading through other posts about such megastructures and they're getting me part of the way to my destination. Wanted to see about a few specific options my imagination has latched onto.
The original concept is a tower, an arcology with a 1 km base level (willing to taper it as it gets higher if necessary), reaching to at least 8 km altitude.
Assume that available power is not an issue.
One idea is: Blocks, rectangular or triangular prisms, containing powerful electromagnets that are the 'mortar'. I liked this option because the society is ancient, and a blocky look fits the aesthetic better, masking the futurism. I realize it is power inefficient. Would such a thing work on this scale?
Thanks!
EDIT to reflect excellent comments:
Trying to avoid elegant solutions such as Space Fountain, Space Elevator, etc. We want to solve the issue of structural stability with brute force as much as possible. Would a system like this hold up versus gravity, bending and torque at high altitudes? | 2018/04/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/109458",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49674/"
] | **Yes but...**
You would need to install quite a lot of ports on the head of a person, because You need to connect directly to a lot of nerves, both on the facial side (eyes, nose, everything in mouth) and at the base of the skull, to the spinal cord.
THEN You would need a lot of work to decode that person's signalling scheme. Unfortunately, it seems our brains dont use the same 'coding pages' if you will - for example, the information about blue color is encoded by a different signal in my brain and in yours.
THEN You would somehow need to take over control of stuff that our conscious brain oversees or directly controls - You dont want muscles controlling the bladder suddenly letting go.
Unfortunately, this technology is much farther than we would like. | [Functional MRI](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_magnetic_resonance_imaging) allows noninvasive measurement and characterization of brain activity. With high resolution one could map and characterize brain activity corresponding to various voluntary activities. This is not science fiction; described here (in 2012) is a device that uses brain fMRI to generate letters and spell words.
<https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982212005751>
So controlling something with your mind noninvasively: yes.
What about feedback directly to your brain. This could be accomplished with [transcranial magnetic stimulation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcranial_magnetic_stimulation). Magnetic fields are used to produce current in a nerve, replicating the effect of that nerve firing. I googled to see if this technique had ever produced hallucinations in a person (as one would expect if a sensory nerve were stimulated in absence of inputs from the sensory organ). These folks propose that ball lightning is a product of exactly this phenomenon, occurring naturally. !
<https://www.technologyreview.com/s/418887/magnetically-induced-hallucinations-explain-ball-lightning-say-physicists/>
So efferent and afferent nerve control is possible with near future precise magnetic technology.
The problem then is moving the remote without moving your body. That can be accomplished with mid 1900s technology. Paralytics are routinely used to prevent muscular motion in persons on a ventilator because of illness or surgery. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuromuscular-blocking_drug>
It is upsetting to be paralyzed while not sedated as occasionally happens by accident. You can be paralyzed, awake, and feel pain. For purposes of the scenario in the OP I think paralytics (and respiratory support with a ventilator - you are paralyzed!) would serve. |
109,458 | I've been reading through other posts about such megastructures and they're getting me part of the way to my destination. Wanted to see about a few specific options my imagination has latched onto.
The original concept is a tower, an arcology with a 1 km base level (willing to taper it as it gets higher if necessary), reaching to at least 8 km altitude.
Assume that available power is not an issue.
One idea is: Blocks, rectangular or triangular prisms, containing powerful electromagnets that are the 'mortar'. I liked this option because the society is ancient, and a blocky look fits the aesthetic better, masking the futurism. I realize it is power inefficient. Would such a thing work on this scale?
Thanks!
EDIT to reflect excellent comments:
Trying to avoid elegant solutions such as Space Fountain, Space Elevator, etc. We want to solve the issue of structural stability with brute force as much as possible. Would a system like this hold up versus gravity, bending and torque at high altitudes? | 2018/04/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/109458",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49674/"
] | Easy peasy. Basically, you want lucid dreaming with an I/O interface.
(Note: If I can dodge work enough I will try to find the New Scientist sources for this to add to the answer later, but I have read articles on all these three points recently)
You simply need to rig up a brain interface into the optic nerve. There is recent technology that can show a grainy but identifiable image of what someone is looking at simply by measuring brain waves; that gives you the output part.
The input part you'll have to handwave, but it's not too much of a stretch to come up with something that can trigger specific images.
As for the immobile part, that's exactly what the body does naturally during REM dream sleep. So simply plug in your I/O helmet, trigger the body's natural REM state to immobilise your muscles, boot up the lucid dream for the world you want, and voila!
This addresses the comments I've seen here a few times - about the difficulty of immobilising muscles, and about fast/fine control; I have incredibly vivid, occasionally lucid and almost always sci-fi dystopian dreams, and I can confirm that I can walk, run, jump, fly, fight, drive vehicles, fly planes etc etc etc and all without falling out of bed, and I'm pretty sure everyone else here can too :) | Using some logic from Ghosts of Onyx from the Halo series, a rebel general manages to attach a disruption collar to a set of spartan armor which halts all commands to the suit basically rendering them immobile. Perhaps the same could be applied.
What I would propose is a motorized suit that is linked to the helmet. This product is, unfortuantely, less of just a helmet and instead a fully enclosed, articulated and motorized suit. It would have to be fully enclosed in order to create the immersion necessary to feel more in the simulation. The suit would take data from both the user and the simulation. It would allow freedom of movement within the limitation of the simulation. The suit would instead translate interactions by using the motors (or hydraulics or any method of artificial locomotion). An example would be walking into a wall. the suit would limit the range of motion the user has at the moment they interact with the object. Another, more dynamic example would be wrestling with an opponent stronger than the user. The suit would simulate this by actively resisting or even moving the body in the same direction as the simulation dictates the opponent would push it.
To increase immersion, the inside of the suit could be lined with numerous small hydraulic pistons on the inside, nothing dangerous or large but just enough to jab someone inside. For example, walking into a table edge would cause 1 or a set of the pistons to strike you at or near that location causing a real sensation of discomfort. It would help discourage the user from making the same mistake as the simulation now contains real life consequences.
To help with climate or other sensory inputs, a mesh could be worn beneath said suit that can produce both heat and cold sensations. Depending on the intricacy of the suit being worn, it could simulate temperatures in specific places only. This would only apply to things like the user sticking their hand into a fire in the simulation or taking a plunge into water.
>
> they would control their own body, without also moving their own body.
>
>
>
This part would be difficult with this suggestion as it would require a range of motion. Though perhaps creating some sort of suspension device attached to a suit would allow this.
Though, if I may add some pros and cons to the suspended suit suggestion
**PROS**
* allow for non invasive feedback from the system in terms of trauma or resistance
* allow unmodified personnel access to the simulator
* reduce the amount of time needed for tedious tasks (cleaning ports, maintaining ports)
* reduce need for surgeries to maintain any implants (should be none with this method or minimal)
* total system failure or feedback would most likely not kill the user (feedback levels allowing of course)
**CONS**
* requires an area for range of motion
* Possible suspension devices hampering motion
* increased device maintenance
* requires a fully enclosed, possibly air tight helmet for full VR immersion (may lead to suffocation for failures)
Edited for clarity. |
109,458 | I've been reading through other posts about such megastructures and they're getting me part of the way to my destination. Wanted to see about a few specific options my imagination has latched onto.
The original concept is a tower, an arcology with a 1 km base level (willing to taper it as it gets higher if necessary), reaching to at least 8 km altitude.
Assume that available power is not an issue.
One idea is: Blocks, rectangular or triangular prisms, containing powerful electromagnets that are the 'mortar'. I liked this option because the society is ancient, and a blocky look fits the aesthetic better, masking the futurism. I realize it is power inefficient. Would such a thing work on this scale?
Thanks!
EDIT to reflect excellent comments:
Trying to avoid elegant solutions such as Space Fountain, Space Elevator, etc. We want to solve the issue of structural stability with brute force as much as possible. Would a system like this hold up versus gravity, bending and torque at high altitudes? | 2018/04/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/109458",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49674/"
] | Easy peasy. Basically, you want lucid dreaming with an I/O interface.
(Note: If I can dodge work enough I will try to find the New Scientist sources for this to add to the answer later, but I have read articles on all these three points recently)
You simply need to rig up a brain interface into the optic nerve. There is recent technology that can show a grainy but identifiable image of what someone is looking at simply by measuring brain waves; that gives you the output part.
The input part you'll have to handwave, but it's not too much of a stretch to come up with something that can trigger specific images.
As for the immobile part, that's exactly what the body does naturally during REM dream sleep. So simply plug in your I/O helmet, trigger the body's natural REM state to immobilise your muscles, boot up the lucid dream for the world you want, and voila!
This addresses the comments I've seen here a few times - about the difficulty of immobilising muscles, and about fast/fine control; I have incredibly vivid, occasionally lucid and almost always sci-fi dystopian dreams, and I can confirm that I can walk, run, jump, fly, fight, drive vehicles, fly planes etc etc etc and all without falling out of bed, and I'm pretty sure everyone else here can too :) | Very unlikely, to outright impossible.
Preramble: The retina of the eyes actually is part of your central nervous system, so this is not about 'just' interdicting the central-nervous system (CNS) /peripheral-nervous system PNS switchover (which in itself is not like a plug-in situation)
Sometime in the future, we will be able to cut a small peripheral nerve (say part of one finger) and both fake the incoming information and use the outgoing information in a way that will approach the natural usage of this sense/motor pathway. This would lead to better prosthetics.
We can also 'listen' in on a nerve-fibre without cutting it, and decode the signal, so we might be able to steer something without levers, just by having it listen in on nervous impulses directed to some muscle groups. Anesthesising those msucles would mean we do not even move all the while.
Completely hijacking a nerve fibre without cutting it or otherwise physically interacting with it is, and will always be impossible, though. The fibres are far to small and tightly packed to achieve the kind of electrical field strength neccessary by remote means. TMS (Transcranial magnetic stimulation) currently can scramble signals in **one** "tight" spot of about one inch diameter - this still is several orders of magnitude too many cells to achieve anything but the most general effects. MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging aka the Tube) can, in very specific setups, sample down to a cubic millimetre (that's reading, not writing) - which also is several orders of magnitude too many cells.
Both of those methods only take care of the electrical side of nerve interaction - this will only do for peripheral nerves - centrally there is alot of chemistry involved, too. No remote sampling will give you the current concentration of transmitters and hormones present at specific synapses on specific neurons (remember: the neurons are not key here, it is their connections, the synapses, that do the magic - and there are sometimes hundreds of those to every neuron.
To sum up: This level of VR-immersion would require contact to every nerve-fibre involved - Handwavium-Nanobots are a must, or you remove the brain from the cranium - both techniques would not achieve full immersion either as a lot of dependencies are (not exactly hardwired, but let's say firmware-d) to the senses - see several psychiatric cases where people no longer believed that their arm actually belonged to them - sense of self is a very precarious thing, and not remotely well understood (on that note: it's so badly understood right now, that you might as well handwave a particular brain area (posterior parietal would be a good place to start) that governed self-image and make it both easy to manipulate and easy to reset - then you could exclude the real sensory input/output, and include some synthetic i/o. Thereby the whole technical impossibility of realistically shaping nervous i/o would vanish because whatever was presented would 'feel' natural - the aspect of making sense of that i/o would still remain, though. Imagine feeling a sormth in your flavjet (entirely normal) but (inexplicably to you) having no idea where and what that is, how to respond and --oops, you died.
The brain is very pliable, though: Supposing the input/output was loosely resembling the way it works in usual humans, it might be possible to raise a child (or its brain) from foetal stages onwards in a synthetic environment, thereby giving the brain enough time to grow into understanding and reliably interacting with that i/o. |
109,458 | I've been reading through other posts about such megastructures and they're getting me part of the way to my destination. Wanted to see about a few specific options my imagination has latched onto.
The original concept is a tower, an arcology with a 1 km base level (willing to taper it as it gets higher if necessary), reaching to at least 8 km altitude.
Assume that available power is not an issue.
One idea is: Blocks, rectangular or triangular prisms, containing powerful electromagnets that are the 'mortar'. I liked this option because the society is ancient, and a blocky look fits the aesthetic better, masking the futurism. I realize it is power inefficient. Would such a thing work on this scale?
Thanks!
EDIT to reflect excellent comments:
Trying to avoid elegant solutions such as Space Fountain, Space Elevator, etc. We want to solve the issue of structural stability with brute force as much as possible. Would a system like this hold up versus gravity, bending and torque at high altitudes? | 2018/04/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/109458",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49674/"
] | Very unlikely, to outright impossible.
Preramble: The retina of the eyes actually is part of your central nervous system, so this is not about 'just' interdicting the central-nervous system (CNS) /peripheral-nervous system PNS switchover (which in itself is not like a plug-in situation)
Sometime in the future, we will be able to cut a small peripheral nerve (say part of one finger) and both fake the incoming information and use the outgoing information in a way that will approach the natural usage of this sense/motor pathway. This would lead to better prosthetics.
We can also 'listen' in on a nerve-fibre without cutting it, and decode the signal, so we might be able to steer something without levers, just by having it listen in on nervous impulses directed to some muscle groups. Anesthesising those msucles would mean we do not even move all the while.
Completely hijacking a nerve fibre without cutting it or otherwise physically interacting with it is, and will always be impossible, though. The fibres are far to small and tightly packed to achieve the kind of electrical field strength neccessary by remote means. TMS (Transcranial magnetic stimulation) currently can scramble signals in **one** "tight" spot of about one inch diameter - this still is several orders of magnitude too many cells to achieve anything but the most general effects. MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging aka the Tube) can, in very specific setups, sample down to a cubic millimetre (that's reading, not writing) - which also is several orders of magnitude too many cells.
Both of those methods only take care of the electrical side of nerve interaction - this will only do for peripheral nerves - centrally there is alot of chemistry involved, too. No remote sampling will give you the current concentration of transmitters and hormones present at specific synapses on specific neurons (remember: the neurons are not key here, it is their connections, the synapses, that do the magic - and there are sometimes hundreds of those to every neuron.
To sum up: This level of VR-immersion would require contact to every nerve-fibre involved - Handwavium-Nanobots are a must, or you remove the brain from the cranium - both techniques would not achieve full immersion either as a lot of dependencies are (not exactly hardwired, but let's say firmware-d) to the senses - see several psychiatric cases where people no longer believed that their arm actually belonged to them - sense of self is a very precarious thing, and not remotely well understood (on that note: it's so badly understood right now, that you might as well handwave a particular brain area (posterior parietal would be a good place to start) that governed self-image and make it both easy to manipulate and easy to reset - then you could exclude the real sensory input/output, and include some synthetic i/o. Thereby the whole technical impossibility of realistically shaping nervous i/o would vanish because whatever was presented would 'feel' natural - the aspect of making sense of that i/o would still remain, though. Imagine feeling a sormth in your flavjet (entirely normal) but (inexplicably to you) having no idea where and what that is, how to respond and --oops, you died.
The brain is very pliable, though: Supposing the input/output was loosely resembling the way it works in usual humans, it might be possible to raise a child (or its brain) from foetal stages onwards in a synthetic environment, thereby giving the brain enough time to grow into understanding and reliably interacting with that i/o. | [Functional MRI](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_magnetic_resonance_imaging) allows noninvasive measurement and characterization of brain activity. With high resolution one could map and characterize brain activity corresponding to various voluntary activities. This is not science fiction; described here (in 2012) is a device that uses brain fMRI to generate letters and spell words.
<https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982212005751>
So controlling something with your mind noninvasively: yes.
What about feedback directly to your brain. This could be accomplished with [transcranial magnetic stimulation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcranial_magnetic_stimulation). Magnetic fields are used to produce current in a nerve, replicating the effect of that nerve firing. I googled to see if this technique had ever produced hallucinations in a person (as one would expect if a sensory nerve were stimulated in absence of inputs from the sensory organ). These folks propose that ball lightning is a product of exactly this phenomenon, occurring naturally. !
<https://www.technologyreview.com/s/418887/magnetically-induced-hallucinations-explain-ball-lightning-say-physicists/>
So efferent and afferent nerve control is possible with near future precise magnetic technology.
The problem then is moving the remote without moving your body. That can be accomplished with mid 1900s technology. Paralytics are routinely used to prevent muscular motion in persons on a ventilator because of illness or surgery. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuromuscular-blocking_drug>
It is upsetting to be paralyzed while not sedated as occasionally happens by accident. You can be paralyzed, awake, and feel pain. For purposes of the scenario in the OP I think paralytics (and respiratory support with a ventilator - you are paralyzed!) would serve. |
109,458 | I've been reading through other posts about such megastructures and they're getting me part of the way to my destination. Wanted to see about a few specific options my imagination has latched onto.
The original concept is a tower, an arcology with a 1 km base level (willing to taper it as it gets higher if necessary), reaching to at least 8 km altitude.
Assume that available power is not an issue.
One idea is: Blocks, rectangular or triangular prisms, containing powerful electromagnets that are the 'mortar'. I liked this option because the society is ancient, and a blocky look fits the aesthetic better, masking the futurism. I realize it is power inefficient. Would such a thing work on this scale?
Thanks!
EDIT to reflect excellent comments:
Trying to avoid elegant solutions such as Space Fountain, Space Elevator, etc. We want to solve the issue of structural stability with brute force as much as possible. Would a system like this hold up versus gravity, bending and torque at high altitudes? | 2018/04/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/109458",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49674/"
] | Easy peasy. Basically, you want lucid dreaming with an I/O interface.
(Note: If I can dodge work enough I will try to find the New Scientist sources for this to add to the answer later, but I have read articles on all these three points recently)
You simply need to rig up a brain interface into the optic nerve. There is recent technology that can show a grainy but identifiable image of what someone is looking at simply by measuring brain waves; that gives you the output part.
The input part you'll have to handwave, but it's not too much of a stretch to come up with something that can trigger specific images.
As for the immobile part, that's exactly what the body does naturally during REM dream sleep. So simply plug in your I/O helmet, trigger the body's natural REM state to immobilise your muscles, boot up the lucid dream for the world you want, and voila!
This addresses the comments I've seen here a few times - about the difficulty of immobilising muscles, and about fast/fine control; I have incredibly vivid, occasionally lucid and almost always sci-fi dystopian dreams, and I can confirm that I can walk, run, jump, fly, fight, drive vehicles, fly planes etc etc etc and all without falling out of bed, and I'm pretty sure everyone else here can too :) | without moving their own body is the tricky part, that requires severing the signals to the body which is not something down easily or lightly. or course sticking them in a big sensory dep tank and letting them move is an option.
Eventually we will be able to do what you want, but we are talking the level of printing a body from scratch levels of tech. A level of tech where a severed spine is as easy to deal with as getting a tattoo today.
You would have to spend weeks of not months just having your synaptic pattern mapped by an AI just so the inputs can match what your body already does. It is possible this could be done while you go about your everyday life however. This in and of itself could have utility in diagnosing sensory and other abnormalities, it is possible such deep interaction with an AI might become commonplace, It has already been proposed as as way to integrate humans and computer most successfully. |
109,458 | I've been reading through other posts about such megastructures and they're getting me part of the way to my destination. Wanted to see about a few specific options my imagination has latched onto.
The original concept is a tower, an arcology with a 1 km base level (willing to taper it as it gets higher if necessary), reaching to at least 8 km altitude.
Assume that available power is not an issue.
One idea is: Blocks, rectangular or triangular prisms, containing powerful electromagnets that are the 'mortar'. I liked this option because the society is ancient, and a blocky look fits the aesthetic better, masking the futurism. I realize it is power inefficient. Would such a thing work on this scale?
Thanks!
EDIT to reflect excellent comments:
Trying to avoid elegant solutions such as Space Fountain, Space Elevator, etc. We want to solve the issue of structural stability with brute force as much as possible. Would a system like this hold up versus gravity, bending and torque at high altitudes? | 2018/04/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/109458",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49674/"
] | Easy peasy. Basically, you want lucid dreaming with an I/O interface.
(Note: If I can dodge work enough I will try to find the New Scientist sources for this to add to the answer later, but I have read articles on all these three points recently)
You simply need to rig up a brain interface into the optic nerve. There is recent technology that can show a grainy but identifiable image of what someone is looking at simply by measuring brain waves; that gives you the output part.
The input part you'll have to handwave, but it's not too much of a stretch to come up with something that can trigger specific images.
As for the immobile part, that's exactly what the body does naturally during REM dream sleep. So simply plug in your I/O helmet, trigger the body's natural REM state to immobilise your muscles, boot up the lucid dream for the world you want, and voila!
This addresses the comments I've seen here a few times - about the difficulty of immobilising muscles, and about fast/fine control; I have incredibly vivid, occasionally lucid and almost always sci-fi dystopian dreams, and I can confirm that I can walk, run, jump, fly, fight, drive vehicles, fly planes etc etc etc and all without falling out of bed, and I'm pretty sure everyone else here can too :) | [Functional MRI](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_magnetic_resonance_imaging) allows noninvasive measurement and characterization of brain activity. With high resolution one could map and characterize brain activity corresponding to various voluntary activities. This is not science fiction; described here (in 2012) is a device that uses brain fMRI to generate letters and spell words.
<https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982212005751>
So controlling something with your mind noninvasively: yes.
What about feedback directly to your brain. This could be accomplished with [transcranial magnetic stimulation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcranial_magnetic_stimulation). Magnetic fields are used to produce current in a nerve, replicating the effect of that nerve firing. I googled to see if this technique had ever produced hallucinations in a person (as one would expect if a sensory nerve were stimulated in absence of inputs from the sensory organ). These folks propose that ball lightning is a product of exactly this phenomenon, occurring naturally. !
<https://www.technologyreview.com/s/418887/magnetically-induced-hallucinations-explain-ball-lightning-say-physicists/>
So efferent and afferent nerve control is possible with near future precise magnetic technology.
The problem then is moving the remote without moving your body. That can be accomplished with mid 1900s technology. Paralytics are routinely used to prevent muscular motion in persons on a ventilator because of illness or surgery. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuromuscular-blocking_drug>
It is upsetting to be paralyzed while not sedated as occasionally happens by accident. You can be paralyzed, awake, and feel pain. For purposes of the scenario in the OP I think paralytics (and respiratory support with a ventilator - you are paralyzed!) would serve. |
109,458 | I've been reading through other posts about such megastructures and they're getting me part of the way to my destination. Wanted to see about a few specific options my imagination has latched onto.
The original concept is a tower, an arcology with a 1 km base level (willing to taper it as it gets higher if necessary), reaching to at least 8 km altitude.
Assume that available power is not an issue.
One idea is: Blocks, rectangular or triangular prisms, containing powerful electromagnets that are the 'mortar'. I liked this option because the society is ancient, and a blocky look fits the aesthetic better, masking the futurism. I realize it is power inefficient. Would such a thing work on this scale?
Thanks!
EDIT to reflect excellent comments:
Trying to avoid elegant solutions such as Space Fountain, Space Elevator, etc. We want to solve the issue of structural stability with brute force as much as possible. Would a system like this hold up versus gravity, bending and torque at high altitudes? | 2018/04/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/109458",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49674/"
] | Very unlikely, to outright impossible.
Preramble: The retina of the eyes actually is part of your central nervous system, so this is not about 'just' interdicting the central-nervous system (CNS) /peripheral-nervous system PNS switchover (which in itself is not like a plug-in situation)
Sometime in the future, we will be able to cut a small peripheral nerve (say part of one finger) and both fake the incoming information and use the outgoing information in a way that will approach the natural usage of this sense/motor pathway. This would lead to better prosthetics.
We can also 'listen' in on a nerve-fibre without cutting it, and decode the signal, so we might be able to steer something without levers, just by having it listen in on nervous impulses directed to some muscle groups. Anesthesising those msucles would mean we do not even move all the while.
Completely hijacking a nerve fibre without cutting it or otherwise physically interacting with it is, and will always be impossible, though. The fibres are far to small and tightly packed to achieve the kind of electrical field strength neccessary by remote means. TMS (Transcranial magnetic stimulation) currently can scramble signals in **one** "tight" spot of about one inch diameter - this still is several orders of magnitude too many cells to achieve anything but the most general effects. MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging aka the Tube) can, in very specific setups, sample down to a cubic millimetre (that's reading, not writing) - which also is several orders of magnitude too many cells.
Both of those methods only take care of the electrical side of nerve interaction - this will only do for peripheral nerves - centrally there is alot of chemistry involved, too. No remote sampling will give you the current concentration of transmitters and hormones present at specific synapses on specific neurons (remember: the neurons are not key here, it is their connections, the synapses, that do the magic - and there are sometimes hundreds of those to every neuron.
To sum up: This level of VR-immersion would require contact to every nerve-fibre involved - Handwavium-Nanobots are a must, or you remove the brain from the cranium - both techniques would not achieve full immersion either as a lot of dependencies are (not exactly hardwired, but let's say firmware-d) to the senses - see several psychiatric cases where people no longer believed that their arm actually belonged to them - sense of self is a very precarious thing, and not remotely well understood (on that note: it's so badly understood right now, that you might as well handwave a particular brain area (posterior parietal would be a good place to start) that governed self-image and make it both easy to manipulate and easy to reset - then you could exclude the real sensory input/output, and include some synthetic i/o. Thereby the whole technical impossibility of realistically shaping nervous i/o would vanish because whatever was presented would 'feel' natural - the aspect of making sense of that i/o would still remain, though. Imagine feeling a sormth in your flavjet (entirely normal) but (inexplicably to you) having no idea where and what that is, how to respond and --oops, you died.
The brain is very pliable, though: Supposing the input/output was loosely resembling the way it works in usual humans, it might be possible to raise a child (or its brain) from foetal stages onwards in a synthetic environment, thereby giving the brain enough time to grow into understanding and reliably interacting with that i/o. | without moving their own body is the tricky part, that requires severing the signals to the body which is not something down easily or lightly. or course sticking them in a big sensory dep tank and letting them move is an option.
Eventually we will be able to do what you want, but we are talking the level of printing a body from scratch levels of tech. A level of tech where a severed spine is as easy to deal with as getting a tattoo today.
You would have to spend weeks of not months just having your synaptic pattern mapped by an AI just so the inputs can match what your body already does. It is possible this could be done while you go about your everyday life however. This in and of itself could have utility in diagnosing sensory and other abnormalities, it is possible such deep interaction with an AI might become commonplace, It has already been proposed as as way to integrate humans and computer most successfully. |
109,458 | I've been reading through other posts about such megastructures and they're getting me part of the way to my destination. Wanted to see about a few specific options my imagination has latched onto.
The original concept is a tower, an arcology with a 1 km base level (willing to taper it as it gets higher if necessary), reaching to at least 8 km altitude.
Assume that available power is not an issue.
One idea is: Blocks, rectangular or triangular prisms, containing powerful electromagnets that are the 'mortar'. I liked this option because the society is ancient, and a blocky look fits the aesthetic better, masking the futurism. I realize it is power inefficient. Would such a thing work on this scale?
Thanks!
EDIT to reflect excellent comments:
Trying to avoid elegant solutions such as Space Fountain, Space Elevator, etc. We want to solve the issue of structural stability with brute force as much as possible. Would a system like this hold up versus gravity, bending and torque at high altitudes? | 2018/04/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/109458",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49674/"
] | Very unlikely, to outright impossible.
Preramble: The retina of the eyes actually is part of your central nervous system, so this is not about 'just' interdicting the central-nervous system (CNS) /peripheral-nervous system PNS switchover (which in itself is not like a plug-in situation)
Sometime in the future, we will be able to cut a small peripheral nerve (say part of one finger) and both fake the incoming information and use the outgoing information in a way that will approach the natural usage of this sense/motor pathway. This would lead to better prosthetics.
We can also 'listen' in on a nerve-fibre without cutting it, and decode the signal, so we might be able to steer something without levers, just by having it listen in on nervous impulses directed to some muscle groups. Anesthesising those msucles would mean we do not even move all the while.
Completely hijacking a nerve fibre without cutting it or otherwise physically interacting with it is, and will always be impossible, though. The fibres are far to small and tightly packed to achieve the kind of electrical field strength neccessary by remote means. TMS (Transcranial magnetic stimulation) currently can scramble signals in **one** "tight" spot of about one inch diameter - this still is several orders of magnitude too many cells to achieve anything but the most general effects. MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging aka the Tube) can, in very specific setups, sample down to a cubic millimetre (that's reading, not writing) - which also is several orders of magnitude too many cells.
Both of those methods only take care of the electrical side of nerve interaction - this will only do for peripheral nerves - centrally there is alot of chemistry involved, too. No remote sampling will give you the current concentration of transmitters and hormones present at specific synapses on specific neurons (remember: the neurons are not key here, it is their connections, the synapses, that do the magic - and there are sometimes hundreds of those to every neuron.
To sum up: This level of VR-immersion would require contact to every nerve-fibre involved - Handwavium-Nanobots are a must, or you remove the brain from the cranium - both techniques would not achieve full immersion either as a lot of dependencies are (not exactly hardwired, but let's say firmware-d) to the senses - see several psychiatric cases where people no longer believed that their arm actually belonged to them - sense of self is a very precarious thing, and not remotely well understood (on that note: it's so badly understood right now, that you might as well handwave a particular brain area (posterior parietal would be a good place to start) that governed self-image and make it both easy to manipulate and easy to reset - then you could exclude the real sensory input/output, and include some synthetic i/o. Thereby the whole technical impossibility of realistically shaping nervous i/o would vanish because whatever was presented would 'feel' natural - the aspect of making sense of that i/o would still remain, though. Imagine feeling a sormth in your flavjet (entirely normal) but (inexplicably to you) having no idea where and what that is, how to respond and --oops, you died.
The brain is very pliable, though: Supposing the input/output was loosely resembling the way it works in usual humans, it might be possible to raise a child (or its brain) from foetal stages onwards in a synthetic environment, thereby giving the brain enough time to grow into understanding and reliably interacting with that i/o. | Using some logic from Ghosts of Onyx from the Halo series, a rebel general manages to attach a disruption collar to a set of spartan armor which halts all commands to the suit basically rendering them immobile. Perhaps the same could be applied.
What I would propose is a motorized suit that is linked to the helmet. This product is, unfortuantely, less of just a helmet and instead a fully enclosed, articulated and motorized suit. It would have to be fully enclosed in order to create the immersion necessary to feel more in the simulation. The suit would take data from both the user and the simulation. It would allow freedom of movement within the limitation of the simulation. The suit would instead translate interactions by using the motors (or hydraulics or any method of artificial locomotion). An example would be walking into a wall. the suit would limit the range of motion the user has at the moment they interact with the object. Another, more dynamic example would be wrestling with an opponent stronger than the user. The suit would simulate this by actively resisting or even moving the body in the same direction as the simulation dictates the opponent would push it.
To increase immersion, the inside of the suit could be lined with numerous small hydraulic pistons on the inside, nothing dangerous or large but just enough to jab someone inside. For example, walking into a table edge would cause 1 or a set of the pistons to strike you at or near that location causing a real sensation of discomfort. It would help discourage the user from making the same mistake as the simulation now contains real life consequences.
To help with climate or other sensory inputs, a mesh could be worn beneath said suit that can produce both heat and cold sensations. Depending on the intricacy of the suit being worn, it could simulate temperatures in specific places only. This would only apply to things like the user sticking their hand into a fire in the simulation or taking a plunge into water.
>
> they would control their own body, without also moving their own body.
>
>
>
This part would be difficult with this suggestion as it would require a range of motion. Though perhaps creating some sort of suspension device attached to a suit would allow this.
Though, if I may add some pros and cons to the suspended suit suggestion
**PROS**
* allow for non invasive feedback from the system in terms of trauma or resistance
* allow unmodified personnel access to the simulator
* reduce the amount of time needed for tedious tasks (cleaning ports, maintaining ports)
* reduce need for surgeries to maintain any implants (should be none with this method or minimal)
* total system failure or feedback would most likely not kill the user (feedback levels allowing of course)
**CONS**
* requires an area for range of motion
* Possible suspension devices hampering motion
* increased device maintenance
* requires a fully enclosed, possibly air tight helmet for full VR immersion (may lead to suffocation for failures)
Edited for clarity. |
109,458 | I've been reading through other posts about such megastructures and they're getting me part of the way to my destination. Wanted to see about a few specific options my imagination has latched onto.
The original concept is a tower, an arcology with a 1 km base level (willing to taper it as it gets higher if necessary), reaching to at least 8 km altitude.
Assume that available power is not an issue.
One idea is: Blocks, rectangular or triangular prisms, containing powerful electromagnets that are the 'mortar'. I liked this option because the society is ancient, and a blocky look fits the aesthetic better, masking the futurism. I realize it is power inefficient. Would such a thing work on this scale?
Thanks!
EDIT to reflect excellent comments:
Trying to avoid elegant solutions such as Space Fountain, Space Elevator, etc. We want to solve the issue of structural stability with brute force as much as possible. Would a system like this hold up versus gravity, bending and torque at high altitudes? | 2018/04/13 | [
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/109458",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com",
"https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/users/49674/"
] | [Functional MRI](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_magnetic_resonance_imaging) allows noninvasive measurement and characterization of brain activity. With high resolution one could map and characterize brain activity corresponding to various voluntary activities. This is not science fiction; described here (in 2012) is a device that uses brain fMRI to generate letters and spell words.
<https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982212005751>
So controlling something with your mind noninvasively: yes.
What about feedback directly to your brain. This could be accomplished with [transcranial magnetic stimulation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcranial_magnetic_stimulation). Magnetic fields are used to produce current in a nerve, replicating the effect of that nerve firing. I googled to see if this technique had ever produced hallucinations in a person (as one would expect if a sensory nerve were stimulated in absence of inputs from the sensory organ). These folks propose that ball lightning is a product of exactly this phenomenon, occurring naturally. !
<https://www.technologyreview.com/s/418887/magnetically-induced-hallucinations-explain-ball-lightning-say-physicists/>
So efferent and afferent nerve control is possible with near future precise magnetic technology.
The problem then is moving the remote without moving your body. That can be accomplished with mid 1900s technology. Paralytics are routinely used to prevent muscular motion in persons on a ventilator because of illness or surgery. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuromuscular-blocking_drug>
It is upsetting to be paralyzed while not sedated as occasionally happens by accident. You can be paralyzed, awake, and feel pain. For purposes of the scenario in the OP I think paralytics (and respiratory support with a ventilator - you are paralyzed!) would serve. | Using some logic from Ghosts of Onyx from the Halo series, a rebel general manages to attach a disruption collar to a set of spartan armor which halts all commands to the suit basically rendering them immobile. Perhaps the same could be applied.
What I would propose is a motorized suit that is linked to the helmet. This product is, unfortuantely, less of just a helmet and instead a fully enclosed, articulated and motorized suit. It would have to be fully enclosed in order to create the immersion necessary to feel more in the simulation. The suit would take data from both the user and the simulation. It would allow freedom of movement within the limitation of the simulation. The suit would instead translate interactions by using the motors (or hydraulics or any method of artificial locomotion). An example would be walking into a wall. the suit would limit the range of motion the user has at the moment they interact with the object. Another, more dynamic example would be wrestling with an opponent stronger than the user. The suit would simulate this by actively resisting or even moving the body in the same direction as the simulation dictates the opponent would push it.
To increase immersion, the inside of the suit could be lined with numerous small hydraulic pistons on the inside, nothing dangerous or large but just enough to jab someone inside. For example, walking into a table edge would cause 1 or a set of the pistons to strike you at or near that location causing a real sensation of discomfort. It would help discourage the user from making the same mistake as the simulation now contains real life consequences.
To help with climate or other sensory inputs, a mesh could be worn beneath said suit that can produce both heat and cold sensations. Depending on the intricacy of the suit being worn, it could simulate temperatures in specific places only. This would only apply to things like the user sticking their hand into a fire in the simulation or taking a plunge into water.
>
> they would control their own body, without also moving their own body.
>
>
>
This part would be difficult with this suggestion as it would require a range of motion. Though perhaps creating some sort of suspension device attached to a suit would allow this.
Though, if I may add some pros and cons to the suspended suit suggestion
**PROS**
* allow for non invasive feedback from the system in terms of trauma or resistance
* allow unmodified personnel access to the simulator
* reduce the amount of time needed for tedious tasks (cleaning ports, maintaining ports)
* reduce need for surgeries to maintain any implants (should be none with this method or minimal)
* total system failure or feedback would most likely not kill the user (feedback levels allowing of course)
**CONS**
* requires an area for range of motion
* Possible suspension devices hampering motion
* increased device maintenance
* requires a fully enclosed, possibly air tight helmet for full VR immersion (may lead to suffocation for failures)
Edited for clarity. |
478,455 | I have some software running on my AWS cloud and I would like to be able to offer this software package as an on-premise solution so that anyone can configure it on their own servers. What would be the best way to make this process as painless as possible?
For some background, we're running node.js on an Amazon Linux server. We're using a couple of open source NPM packages in addition to our custom code. We're also using MongoDB as a session store and redis as a cache. It's all in one instance for now, but the solution we would provide would have mongodb and redis each on its own server, as well as a Haproxy load balancer server in front of multiple application servers. We use EBS to store our MongoDB data. | 2013/02/13 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/478455",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/121839/"
] | This is really a product development question more than a system administration one.
That said, pretty much what [ceejayoz said](https://serverfault.com/questions/478455/what-would-be-the-best-method-to-provide-my-server-environment-as-a-software-pac#comment530866_478455): Provide it as either a consulting service or a pre-built appliance.
My choice for this would be either a physical or VMWare appliance that has your software installed on an operating system you are comfortable managing, and is sold completely hands-off for the customer: Your team would have to manage the systems end-to-end.
As you scale up this could include "rack-in-a-box" solutions, where you sell your customer an integrated environment in a self-contained rack (all they do is provide power and a network drop to get it into their environment), or solutions where you provide a VMWare cluster implementing the equivalent of the rack-in-a-box. | For such a complex system I would look into provisioning and configuration tools.
You have dozens of choices for the former, and [Puppet](https://puppetlabs.com/puppet/puppet-open-source/) and [cfengine](http://cfengine.com) are two typical examples of the latter.
Don't expect full automation to be an easy task. If you don't expect to produce many copies of the system and to manage them more or less manually you could to with some "bootstrap" bash script to run on freshly-installed systems... |
348,764 | Ok, i have done a bunch of asp as well as asp.net right when it came out. A friend is starting a non profit organization and he wants me to put together a site for him. I figured i would kill 2 birds with one stone and look to freshen up my skills on the latest that the web has to offer in asp.net, web 2.0, etc.
The site requirements are pretty simple:
1. Organization mission statement
2. Users ability to register
3. Photos, content
4. Blog posts
5. Ability to donate directly on the site (maybe through paypal)
So my questions is what are the best tools to start here given its going to be hosted on windows ASP.net platform 3.5. Any other frameworks that i should be looking at.
Where is the best place to start?
I could easily build the site just putting a table together and a bunch of static pages but i figured if it made sense to utilize and help freshen my skills, it would be worth the efforts of the learning curve.
Feel free to suggest any other items that i haven't listed. | 2008/12/08 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/348764",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/4653/"
] | Have a look at ASP.Net MVC and JQUERY also take a look at S#Arp as a nice platform to build your site upon. It setups ASP.Net MVC, with nHibernate and has really good guidance on a good DDD structure. | In case you've overlooked it, [The AJAX Control Toolkit](http://www.codeplex.com/AjaxControlToolkit) -
>
> addresses three needs. First it gives website developers a place to get components to make their web applications spring to life, second it gives a set of great examples for those wishing to write client-side code, and third it is a place for the best script developers to get their work highlighted.
>
>
>
For an open source functioning CMS system, look at N2. [N2](http://n2cms.com/) is a lightweight CMS framework to help you build great web sites that anyone can update. The user interface is intuitive and empowering. The developer story is something quite exquisite. |
277 | [This](https://hardwarerecs.stackexchange.com/q/643/155) question asks for general feedback of a build and (possibly, if it comes to it) recommendations for computer hardware.
The question itself could be considered on-topic since it leads to recommendations, but what about questions that strictly ask for feedback on a current or future build? Does the *recommendation* part of our name extend to this realm or should we restrict anything that involves this?
It hasn't happened yet, but I'm sure there will be instances in the future where people want some opinions on their builds. "Opinions" in this case would essentially mean we provide facts about errors in compatibility or something like that. This, then, could possibly lead to hardware recommendations.
So would this situation fit within our current scope? | 2015/10/13 | [
"https://hardwarerecs.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/277",
"https://hardwarerecs.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://hardwarerecs.meta.stackexchange.com/users/155/"
] | >
> asks for general feedback of a build
>
>
>
This sounds too broad. I think your description, combined with the last paragraph of the question being discussed, definitely makes the question to broad.
>
> Are there any other improvements I could take, or is what I have good enough for my current use, and changing anything would be a waste of money?
>
>
>
"Any other improvements" is asking for a wide range of potential upgrades. The build could use an SSD (as the current answer suggests), it could get more RAM (as the OP mentions), a new video card and more.
---
Regarding opinions on builds, that's essentially what this question is already. It's asking what can be improved across the entire machine. It's not asking for specific components. I don't think questions about builds is going to work here. They are too broad.
However, if a user wants to upgrade a component - say they want to replace their current video card with a new one. That is a question waiting to happen. If they have it narrowed down to what they want the new card to be able to handle (certain games, certain applications, certain programming tasks, etc), but don't know what will work with their current motherboard, that is a recommendation type question. | I did follow the rules on asking questions, such as "What should I improve for X use case?" I even followed a recommendation mentioned in the tour: "Specific issues with hardware recommendations"
For example: [this question](https://hardwarerecs.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/127/are-why-get-an-x-what-good-is-x-questions-allowed?rq=1) shows a quote from the moderators that shows I asked a proper question. I gave a set of parts, a proposed change, a definite use case and I asked if I missed anything. I could edit out the section where I state "anything else I could change", because I don't wish to change anything else (I already know SSDs are a good boost, and I already have a couple installed)
As for specific components, I state "I'm debating upgrading to a 9xx series card, and increasing the memory to 32GB" both statements are very specific about what is being done, and that's what I'm asking. I can edit the question to just that scope, or I can split the question into two different ones asking if it's valid to upgrade the GPU and another asking if going to 32GB is worth the price.
Too summarize, I gave specific components I currently have, defined my use case, gave potential changes, and asked if they are really needed. Also, I edited my question and removed the things that made it opinion based. |
84,535 | Has Imgur stopped giving direct file links to images uploaded?
I can't see a direct file link to this image: [http://imgur.com/t9k8SyT](https://imgur.com/t9k8SyT)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DhNKB.png)
(I know that the Stack Exchange website still integrates with Imgur, and gets a direct link, but I'm not asking about that.) | 2015/09/17 | [
"https://webapps.stackexchange.com/questions/84535",
"https://webapps.stackexchange.com",
"https://webapps.stackexchange.com/users/6642/"
] | The link is in the "Share this image" menu on the right, just click "More"
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/W4pj2.png) | I couldn't find the direct link either. I found it by going to my user all images, then clicking on the image.
<http://joshdance.imgur.com/all/>
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/0Gzy8.png)
Which is really weird because it didn't used to be this hard. |
84,535 | Has Imgur stopped giving direct file links to images uploaded?
I can't see a direct file link to this image: [http://imgur.com/t9k8SyT](https://imgur.com/t9k8SyT)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DhNKB.png)
(I know that the Stack Exchange website still integrates with Imgur, and gets a direct link, but I'm not asking about that.) | 2015/09/17 | [
"https://webapps.stackexchange.com/questions/84535",
"https://webapps.stackexchange.com",
"https://webapps.stackexchange.com/users/6642/"
] | The link is in the "Share this image" menu on the right, just click "More"
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/W4pj2.png) | The current solution is to you take the link they give you e.g.
[http://imgur.com/RbjftAX](https://imgur.com/RbjftAX) <-- not the link you ultimately want but you'll eventually get there
then in your browser get the image address e.g. in chrome right click the image and click 'copy image address'
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PWWpw.png)
Then you can paste the address in the browser window
[http://i.imgur.com/RbjftAX.png](https://i.imgur.com/RbjftAX.png)
The link might not come immediately - if you do it too soon it comes up as some url with the word 'blob' in it. but if you do it again i.e. having waited a moment, then it will come. |
84,535 | Has Imgur stopped giving direct file links to images uploaded?
I can't see a direct file link to this image: [http://imgur.com/t9k8SyT](https://imgur.com/t9k8SyT)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DhNKB.png)
(I know that the Stack Exchange website still integrates with Imgur, and gets a direct link, but I'm not asking about that.) | 2015/09/17 | [
"https://webapps.stackexchange.com/questions/84535",
"https://webapps.stackexchange.com",
"https://webapps.stackexchange.com/users/6642/"
] | The current solution is to you take the link they give you e.g.
[http://imgur.com/RbjftAX](https://imgur.com/RbjftAX) <-- not the link you ultimately want but you'll eventually get there
then in your browser get the image address e.g. in chrome right click the image and click 'copy image address'
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PWWpw.png)
Then you can paste the address in the browser window
[http://i.imgur.com/RbjftAX.png](https://i.imgur.com/RbjftAX.png)
The link might not come immediately - if you do it too soon it comes up as some url with the word 'blob' in it. but if you do it again i.e. having waited a moment, then it will come. | I couldn't find the direct link either. I found it by going to my user all images, then clicking on the image.
<http://joshdance.imgur.com/all/>
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/0Gzy8.png)
Which is really weird because it didn't used to be this hard. |
26,411,865 | i've just started an 'advanture' with windows phone. I want to write some app but i need something like Local DataBase. What should i use ? i can't find any solution. I tried local database but it's not available on WP 8.1, i also found a tutorial about working with json but this tutorial was also out of date and it's not working with 8.1. I just want to write a little tiny app based on DataBase with one table which i can read from and write into. Could You please send me a link to article which gonna solve my problem ?
Thanks in advance. | 2014/10/16 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/26411865",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/3423291/"
] | I guess you are talking about Windows Phone Universal 8.1, right? Local database is only supported on WP7, WP8 and WP8.1 Silverlight (but no universal!). Two alternatives come to my mind.
1. SQLite: This is kind of the standard for many mobile apps and is also available for Windows Phone 8.1 Universal. You can find a good tutorial on that [here](http://blog.tpcware.com/2014/04/universal-app-with-sqlite-part-1/) (just in case you are referring to WP8.1 Silverlight then you can find one of my tutorials [here](http://www.brainchest.net/sqlite-in-windows-phone-8-1-silverlight/)). However, setting up SQLite in Windows Phone is kind of tricky as you need to make sure to include the right nuget packages. SQLite is non-managed code. What'll you'll loose is compile as AnyCPU. For the emulator you have to use x86, to deploy your app to the device/marketplace you need to build for ARM. I was moving in my existing app from local database to SQLite and it took me ~5 long evenings to get it running.
2. iBoxDB: As I don't necessarily need a relational database like SQLite I tried out iBoxDB which you can find [here](http://www.iboxdb.com/). It took me just 3 hours to include it in my project as it is just one nuget package and very easy to set up. The downside here is that their documentation could be better. They have a huge sample file included which helps to understand how it works plus the info that you can find on their website. So far, this really works well and I can compile using AnyCPU again as it is completely managed code. But as I said, it depends on whether you really need a relational database with tables and such or whether it is ok for you to just save the objects somewhere. Btw. it also contains indexes so performance is no issue. | SQLite for the database, SQLite-net for the ORM
All details are here <http://developer.nokia.com/community/wiki/How_to_use_SQLite_in_Windows_Phone> |
157,540 | Update: [The commission has been disbanded and has 90 days to leave NJ, and it is only a matter of time before they leave NY as well.](https://www.joc.com/port-news/longshoreman-labor/international-longshoremen%E2%80%99s-association/appeals-court-backs-new-jersey-exit-waterfront-commission_20200608.html)
---
I know an individual who is trying to get a labor job in NYC. This particular industry has in the past been associated with organized crime, and now is trying very hard to prevent that from happening again. It's a good union job, & part of the hiring process has involved multiple drug tests (urine, then a few weeks later hair), a background check, information on household members, etc. I don't think this is necessarily unreasonable, but it's escalated quite a bit - with the running joke by current employees being that it'd be easier to get a job with the FBI. One individual was denied a position because they determined his family is "connected," while the guy's brother is a Supreme Court Judge.
They've completely dissected his life, and are asking such bizarre questions and making unbelievable jumps: Do you know John Smith? No? Well, before your father worked at his current place of employment, John Smith worked there. How'd your father find out about the job? Do you know anyone who participated in XYZ? No? What about [friend's brother's friend]? Do you know anyone who was *accused* of participating in XYZ crime? No? Well your neighbor was and you were at his BBQ last summer. How well do you know him? Have you been in their house? Do you know their parents?
The whole process has taken months, and they keep calling my friend in for follow-up interviews. During this time they record sessions, have a lawyer present, make him swear under oath, and threaten sue if they determine he is providing any false information. They've asked the names of his parents, grandparents, aunts & uncles, name of spouses & ex-spouses. More recently they've also asked for copies of the license of his parents and their cell phone/landline numbers.
My friend is being compliant because it's a good job & he has nothing to hide, but it seems they're going to do background checks on his parents also. Who knows what his parents' friends' cousins' neighbor was accused of 40 years ago! It seems like a witch hunt. Are these legal hiring practices? | 2020/04/24 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/157540",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/66650/"
] | I believe that I would take up this matter with either the State or the US Department of Labor.
Your friend might also find it more expedient to engage an *attorney* who is a specialist in matters of labor law. Because, "these are the people who *really know."* Internet discussion groups can only go so far. Sometimes, you need a professional. This might well be one of those times. Go ahead and buy a few hours of his or her time. Get *answers.*
>
> For what it's worth, I met "my personal attorney" several decades ago when he helped us with a problematic estate. Today he is my trusted and trustworthy *counselor* about pretty-much everything. "Let me Ask Tom." *Well* worth his hourly rate. *"Tom* ***knows."*** (Plus: he loves to collect "lawyer jokes!")
>
>
> | Your friend is having a joke at your expense and it is getting more outrageous the longer it lasts. |
157,540 | Update: [The commission has been disbanded and has 90 days to leave NJ, and it is only a matter of time before they leave NY as well.](https://www.joc.com/port-news/longshoreman-labor/international-longshoremen%E2%80%99s-association/appeals-court-backs-new-jersey-exit-waterfront-commission_20200608.html)
---
I know an individual who is trying to get a labor job in NYC. This particular industry has in the past been associated with organized crime, and now is trying very hard to prevent that from happening again. It's a good union job, & part of the hiring process has involved multiple drug tests (urine, then a few weeks later hair), a background check, information on household members, etc. I don't think this is necessarily unreasonable, but it's escalated quite a bit - with the running joke by current employees being that it'd be easier to get a job with the FBI. One individual was denied a position because they determined his family is "connected," while the guy's brother is a Supreme Court Judge.
They've completely dissected his life, and are asking such bizarre questions and making unbelievable jumps: Do you know John Smith? No? Well, before your father worked at his current place of employment, John Smith worked there. How'd your father find out about the job? Do you know anyone who participated in XYZ? No? What about [friend's brother's friend]? Do you know anyone who was *accused* of participating in XYZ crime? No? Well your neighbor was and you were at his BBQ last summer. How well do you know him? Have you been in their house? Do you know their parents?
The whole process has taken months, and they keep calling my friend in for follow-up interviews. During this time they record sessions, have a lawyer present, make him swear under oath, and threaten sue if they determine he is providing any false information. They've asked the names of his parents, grandparents, aunts & uncles, name of spouses & ex-spouses. More recently they've also asked for copies of the license of his parents and their cell phone/landline numbers.
My friend is being compliant because it's a good job & he has nothing to hide, but it seems they're going to do background checks on his parents also. Who knows what his parents' friends' cousins' neighbor was accused of 40 years ago! It seems like a witch hunt. Are these legal hiring practices? | 2020/04/24 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/157540",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/66650/"
] | This seems like an XY problem- you don't want the legal answer, you to know how your friend should deal with this.
Legal or not, this practice is not normal and is a major red flag. While extensive background checks exist in certain industries, they are usually outsourced to proper agencies with legal oversight.
Considering some of the information you mentioned, especially the part about family members' IDs, this sounds like a scam.
Even if this job was legitimate, it's not worth jumping through hoops for. Instead, your friend should spend the time they would have spent on this riggamarole to apply to other companies. | Your friend is having a joke at your expense and it is getting more outrageous the longer it lasts. |
47,408,924 | I have a spreadsheet with all invoices which include vendor number, around 9000 rows. Most of those invoices are for a handful of vendors.
I want to get the vendors exist in the column and copy them in another sheet, but in real time. As I am trying to make an automated sheet, so no need to advance filter them every time.
Any ideas?
Thanks | 2017/11/21 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/47408924",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/8978329/"
] | you can do it using no filtering and exclusion of duplicates in Data menu by dedicating 2 service columns(SC):
say you have your vendor names stored in column 5 and first SC in column 4 while second in column 3
1) first SC formula **"=iferror(if(countif(RC5;RC5:R1C5)>1;0;row());"")"**
2) second SC formula **"=iferror(rank(RC4;C4;1);"")"**
say you need your list of unique vendors in th same sheet... then you get a numbered list from 1 to number of supposed vendors + several.
3) a column next to this list contains formula "=vlookup(RC[-1];C3:C5:;3;false)"
in the end you have an online list of unique vendor names | You can try to use [Filter Views (Difference Between Filters vs FilterViews)](https://support.google.com/docs/answer/3540681?co=GENIE.Platform%3DDesktop&hl=en).
Also Check [here (Filter Views in Google Sheets)](https://sites.google.com/a/york.ac.uk/workingwithdata/google-sheets/filter-views) |
22,544,638 | 1. I am upgrading rails 3.0.20 to rails 4.0 (current ruby version 1.8.7), how important is it for me to build unit testing into my application before starting the update? Integration testing? Acceptance testing? End to end testing?
2. Are ALL of these ABSOLUTELY crucial to incorporate before starting my updates?
3. How about if I focus on upgrading rails from 3.0 to 3.2 first (as per my employer's request)? Would any of these tests become less "necessary" and could be temporarily put aside? (given that the difference between rails 3.0 to 3.2 is not as large and significant as the difference to rails 4.0)
Note that my company's app has been working smoothly for a couple of years (without any testing mechanisms whatsoever), and updating to rails 3.2/4.0 is of HIGHER priority than incorporating testing into the app at this point in time, thus proceeding with the rails upgrade without creating any tests would currently be preferred.
Any insights, advice, warnings, would be greatly greatly appreciated. I am a novel programmer and was asked to take on this upgrading rails project on my own. | 2014/03/20 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/22544638",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/3443173/"
] | I agree with the comment that testing is always important. There should be tests in any case, never mind about when upgrading rails.
I would recommend having tests in place before doing anything else. It could save you a lot of hassle later. Quoted from the rails 4 release notes:
"If you're upgrading an existing application, it's a great idea to have good test coverage before going in."
In the end, I suppose it's up to your employer as they're paying you, but if they want to make you upgrade rails without an automated test suite you need to make it clear to them that they will likely be opening themselves up to various problems/bugs. Do they have any thorough manual quality control (human testers)? (I don't know if you were just referring to automated tests when you said they have no testing mechanisms.)
In any case, how painful the upgrade is depends on the app. Things like its size and the rails features it uses would be a factor. If you don't have extensive knowledge of the app's code base, it's going to be more difficult to know the implications of the differences in the rails versions and writing tests would be a good way to get to know the codebase!
You mentioned that the current version of ruby being used is 1.8.7. This means you'll need to upgrade ruby too, because rails 4 requires at least ruby 1.9.3.
Have you looked at the release notes for the versions of rails you'll be upgrading through/to? They contain information about changes that have been made and pointers on the upgrade process. They recommend the upgrade path 3.0 -> 3.1.x -> 3.2.x -> 4.0.x
<http://guides.rubyonrails.org/3_1_release_notes.html>
<http://guides.rubyonrails.org/3_2_release_notes.html>
<http://guides.rubyonrails.org/4_0_release_notes.html>
This seems to be where the upgrade guide for 3.2 -> 4.0 actually is (linked to from the 4.0 release notes), and it also contains the upgrade guides from the 3.1 and 3.2 release notes:
<http://guides.rubyonrails.org/upgrading_ruby_on_rails.html#upgrading-from-rails-3-2-to-rails-4-0> | Basically I went through the upgrade without any integrated testing.
I had to manually check the functionality of the site is working, about 90% was working fine and the rest I had to catch.
Most issues involved gem compatibility, some had to do with JS libraries that I choose to include in the application.js file in my assets folder.
If your app is of moderate size and you can spend a week or so testing it yourself manually, I wouldn't worry about having any integrated testing, as important as it is to have. |
14,783 | Now that I've reached 25K, I'm not really interested in the next level: 100K is too far off and too much trouble for a T-shirt and a mug...
So I've been giving away all my rep above 25K (sort of) to:
* Original answers
* Interesting answers
* Answers that helped me in the past
* Answers that took a lot of work, but got few upvotes.
* ...
The question is:
*Will I trigger any limit that will take away any of my rep without my explicit consent if I keep doing this for the next couple of years?* | 2015/12/06 | [
"https://meta.askubuntu.com/questions/14783",
"https://meta.askubuntu.com",
"https://meta.askubuntu.com/users/344926/"
] | I do this all the time, mostly to help out people who might have been buried in the noise.
You can only do three bounties at a time, and due to the time restrictions it makes it tough to do bulk bounties. The "interest" from my old answers ends up making up for it.
I find that it can be just as challenging to find good questions to bounty as it is to answer them; it's a pretty fun way to help people out, good luck! | Nope. [Just ask Jorge Castro](https://askubuntu.com/users/235/jorge-castro?tab=bounties&sort=offered). |
76,025 | I am a software developer at a large company. I was recently moved from the project I was hired on to to another project. Part of this was because the development work on my old project was drying up. I basically had my choice of project to move on to because I was very successful on my old project. I got special recognition awards and had a very positive performance review. I picked this project because the managers came highly recommended and the work seemed interesting.
Fast forward 5 months: Apparently, upper management was not satisfied with the progress that was made on the most recent build of a product I was not involved in producing and that is having a trickle down effect, mostly on me, because I'm the "new" guy. I am pretty incessantly being called into status meetings, on top of sending weekly status emails. I keep being told that I need to ask questions when I need help (I do) and every time I say "I need to talk to X person about this" they interpret that as "I am not getting the help that I need". I honestly know my stuff. I don't constantly need help but it feels like they seem to think I do. Because of the nature of the work that I am doing, my boss's boss doesn't sit with us in our area. She has a stake in this development work but it feels like she is projecting her insecurities on to me, even though I assure her that I am on schedule, adequately tasked, etc. This is really negatively affecting my morale and causing me a lot of stress.
How can I convince my boss's boss that she can trust me to do the job she hired me for?
**Update:** I figured I would give an update post to this. I feel I didn't explain this very well (I was writing emotionally), but the criticism of the work I was receiving was based on work that had been delivered three months before my hiring. But either way, I realized via several performance meetings that there was a culture and expectation clash in that group and that I wasn't doing work that I wanted to be doing. So with the blessings of my former supervisor, I swapped groups and I am enjoying it. | 2016/09/15 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/76025",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/36041/"
] | You need to get all of this out in the open.
I would try to set up a meeting with your boss and your boss' boss, the person who's having the problem with you. I would also pull in a coworker who has an understanding of your role in the specific problematic build.
In that meeting you need to discuss specifics.
* Your concern about perception by the senior manager and why.
* Ask what her concerns are and discuss them frankly. That's why you bring the coworker in who can back you up as to what you do on a day-to-day basis.
* Assure her that you're not behind and that you do all the things you said in your question.
* **Ask her what specifically you can do to allay her concerns**
The old saying "perception is reality" is unfortunately true, at least in the minds of those perceiving. You need to focus on changing that perception. I know you are (or you wouldn't be asking). But I think that it also needs to be addressed directly and she can be frank with you. It might not be pleasant and you may not hear what you want to hear but at least you'll know. Most good managers appreciate someone who sees a problem and addresses it head-on. Perhaps she'll recognize that's what you're trying to do. | When sharing your status instead of saying "I need to talk to X person about this" say "This afternoon I am meeting with PersonX about this. I expect after that meeting I will be able to complete the task." This identifies that you know where your gap is, have a plan in place to resolve it, and have a realistic timeframe to complete.
When you have the next meeting you should be able to report that you met with Person X and have either completed the task, have a timeframe for completing the task, or have found a new block. If you have new blocking issue that you have already planned to address that block then communicate that as well, if you have not solved the block then share the issue.
When you just say I need to talk with this person but do not communicate that you have already set something up, then the assumption is you need help getting that person to work with you. These things happen sometimes that person is working on something that is a high priority to them and they are unwilling to break to help with a non-priority issue. That is where your PM's can help by making that a priority appropriately. I even had one job where everyone dumped tasks on me because I was willing to just do them. My manager found out and said that unless the priority came from them I was not to take on any tasks from others. |
76,025 | I am a software developer at a large company. I was recently moved from the project I was hired on to to another project. Part of this was because the development work on my old project was drying up. I basically had my choice of project to move on to because I was very successful on my old project. I got special recognition awards and had a very positive performance review. I picked this project because the managers came highly recommended and the work seemed interesting.
Fast forward 5 months: Apparently, upper management was not satisfied with the progress that was made on the most recent build of a product I was not involved in producing and that is having a trickle down effect, mostly on me, because I'm the "new" guy. I am pretty incessantly being called into status meetings, on top of sending weekly status emails. I keep being told that I need to ask questions when I need help (I do) and every time I say "I need to talk to X person about this" they interpret that as "I am not getting the help that I need". I honestly know my stuff. I don't constantly need help but it feels like they seem to think I do. Because of the nature of the work that I am doing, my boss's boss doesn't sit with us in our area. She has a stake in this development work but it feels like she is projecting her insecurities on to me, even though I assure her that I am on schedule, adequately tasked, etc. This is really negatively affecting my morale and causing me a lot of stress.
How can I convince my boss's boss that she can trust me to do the job she hired me for?
**Update:** I figured I would give an update post to this. I feel I didn't explain this very well (I was writing emotionally), but the criticism of the work I was receiving was based on work that had been delivered three months before my hiring. But either way, I realized via several performance meetings that there was a culture and expectation clash in that group and that I wasn't doing work that I wanted to be doing. So with the blessings of my former supervisor, I swapped groups and I am enjoying it. | 2016/09/15 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/76025",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/36041/"
] | It's been five months, by now you should be on top of things, you should be able to produce rough timeframes, you should stop thinking it's other people's responsibility to produce everything because they've been there longer.
So get a grip on your job, on the code base, on what is satisfactory and what needs work and become more self-reliant. And stop walking in to meetings looking like you need help, because that is the impression you're giving. Don't assume they don't trust you because of what happened 5 months ago. They're being careful and you're not allaying their paranoia. | When sharing your status instead of saying "I need to talk to X person about this" say "This afternoon I am meeting with PersonX about this. I expect after that meeting I will be able to complete the task." This identifies that you know where your gap is, have a plan in place to resolve it, and have a realistic timeframe to complete.
When you have the next meeting you should be able to report that you met with Person X and have either completed the task, have a timeframe for completing the task, or have found a new block. If you have new blocking issue that you have already planned to address that block then communicate that as well, if you have not solved the block then share the issue.
When you just say I need to talk with this person but do not communicate that you have already set something up, then the assumption is you need help getting that person to work with you. These things happen sometimes that person is working on something that is a high priority to them and they are unwilling to break to help with a non-priority issue. That is where your PM's can help by making that a priority appropriately. I even had one job where everyone dumped tasks on me because I was willing to just do them. My manager found out and said that unless the priority came from them I was not to take on any tasks from others. |
76,025 | I am a software developer at a large company. I was recently moved from the project I was hired on to to another project. Part of this was because the development work on my old project was drying up. I basically had my choice of project to move on to because I was very successful on my old project. I got special recognition awards and had a very positive performance review. I picked this project because the managers came highly recommended and the work seemed interesting.
Fast forward 5 months: Apparently, upper management was not satisfied with the progress that was made on the most recent build of a product I was not involved in producing and that is having a trickle down effect, mostly on me, because I'm the "new" guy. I am pretty incessantly being called into status meetings, on top of sending weekly status emails. I keep being told that I need to ask questions when I need help (I do) and every time I say "I need to talk to X person about this" they interpret that as "I am not getting the help that I need". I honestly know my stuff. I don't constantly need help but it feels like they seem to think I do. Because of the nature of the work that I am doing, my boss's boss doesn't sit with us in our area. She has a stake in this development work but it feels like she is projecting her insecurities on to me, even though I assure her that I am on schedule, adequately tasked, etc. This is really negatively affecting my morale and causing me a lot of stress.
How can I convince my boss's boss that she can trust me to do the job she hired me for?
**Update:** I figured I would give an update post to this. I feel I didn't explain this very well (I was writing emotionally), but the criticism of the work I was receiving was based on work that had been delivered three months before my hiring. But either way, I realized via several performance meetings that there was a culture and expectation clash in that group and that I wasn't doing work that I wanted to be doing. So with the blessings of my former supervisor, I swapped groups and I am enjoying it. | 2016/09/15 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/76025",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/36041/"
] | First off, move forward... do not focus on the past and try to defend yourself but treat this as a learning experience and figure out what lessons you've learned. A failure, or perception of failure is often prime opportunity to impress people. You must learn, adapt, and move forward.
Second, it sounds like your expectations are either not well-defined or have not been communicated very effectively. You seem to be capable and have a since of urgency; so I'd suggest talking to your boss about how you are doing and what is expected of you right now.
Lastly, when giving time estimates always double what you have in mind. Events rarely go as planned, especially when relying on input from others and giving yourself this extra time will allow for you to compensate for hiccups.
Also don't communicate your problems unless they are actually problems. Your management most likely is more interested that you have a plan and path to achieve your goal. | When sharing your status instead of saying "I need to talk to X person about this" say "This afternoon I am meeting with PersonX about this. I expect after that meeting I will be able to complete the task." This identifies that you know where your gap is, have a plan in place to resolve it, and have a realistic timeframe to complete.
When you have the next meeting you should be able to report that you met with Person X and have either completed the task, have a timeframe for completing the task, or have found a new block. If you have new blocking issue that you have already planned to address that block then communicate that as well, if you have not solved the block then share the issue.
When you just say I need to talk with this person but do not communicate that you have already set something up, then the assumption is you need help getting that person to work with you. These things happen sometimes that person is working on something that is a high priority to them and they are unwilling to break to help with a non-priority issue. That is where your PM's can help by making that a priority appropriately. I even had one job where everyone dumped tasks on me because I was willing to just do them. My manager found out and said that unless the priority came from them I was not to take on any tasks from others. |
76,025 | I am a software developer at a large company. I was recently moved from the project I was hired on to to another project. Part of this was because the development work on my old project was drying up. I basically had my choice of project to move on to because I was very successful on my old project. I got special recognition awards and had a very positive performance review. I picked this project because the managers came highly recommended and the work seemed interesting.
Fast forward 5 months: Apparently, upper management was not satisfied with the progress that was made on the most recent build of a product I was not involved in producing and that is having a trickle down effect, mostly on me, because I'm the "new" guy. I am pretty incessantly being called into status meetings, on top of sending weekly status emails. I keep being told that I need to ask questions when I need help (I do) and every time I say "I need to talk to X person about this" they interpret that as "I am not getting the help that I need". I honestly know my stuff. I don't constantly need help but it feels like they seem to think I do. Because of the nature of the work that I am doing, my boss's boss doesn't sit with us in our area. She has a stake in this development work but it feels like she is projecting her insecurities on to me, even though I assure her that I am on schedule, adequately tasked, etc. This is really negatively affecting my morale and causing me a lot of stress.
How can I convince my boss's boss that she can trust me to do the job she hired me for?
**Update:** I figured I would give an update post to this. I feel I didn't explain this very well (I was writing emotionally), but the criticism of the work I was receiving was based on work that had been delivered three months before my hiring. But either way, I realized via several performance meetings that there was a culture and expectation clash in that group and that I wasn't doing work that I wanted to be doing. So with the blessings of my former supervisor, I swapped groups and I am enjoying it. | 2016/09/15 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/76025",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/36041/"
] | It's been five months, by now you should be on top of things, you should be able to produce rough timeframes, you should stop thinking it's other people's responsibility to produce everything because they've been there longer.
So get a grip on your job, on the code base, on what is satisfactory and what needs work and become more self-reliant. And stop walking in to meetings looking like you need help, because that is the impression you're giving. Don't assume they don't trust you because of what happened 5 months ago. They're being careful and you're not allaying their paranoia. | You need to get all of this out in the open.
I would try to set up a meeting with your boss and your boss' boss, the person who's having the problem with you. I would also pull in a coworker who has an understanding of your role in the specific problematic build.
In that meeting you need to discuss specifics.
* Your concern about perception by the senior manager and why.
* Ask what her concerns are and discuss them frankly. That's why you bring the coworker in who can back you up as to what you do on a day-to-day basis.
* Assure her that you're not behind and that you do all the things you said in your question.
* **Ask her what specifically you can do to allay her concerns**
The old saying "perception is reality" is unfortunately true, at least in the minds of those perceiving. You need to focus on changing that perception. I know you are (or you wouldn't be asking). But I think that it also needs to be addressed directly and she can be frank with you. It might not be pleasant and you may not hear what you want to hear but at least you'll know. Most good managers appreciate someone who sees a problem and addresses it head-on. Perhaps she'll recognize that's what you're trying to do. |
76,025 | I am a software developer at a large company. I was recently moved from the project I was hired on to to another project. Part of this was because the development work on my old project was drying up. I basically had my choice of project to move on to because I was very successful on my old project. I got special recognition awards and had a very positive performance review. I picked this project because the managers came highly recommended and the work seemed interesting.
Fast forward 5 months: Apparently, upper management was not satisfied with the progress that was made on the most recent build of a product I was not involved in producing and that is having a trickle down effect, mostly on me, because I'm the "new" guy. I am pretty incessantly being called into status meetings, on top of sending weekly status emails. I keep being told that I need to ask questions when I need help (I do) and every time I say "I need to talk to X person about this" they interpret that as "I am not getting the help that I need". I honestly know my stuff. I don't constantly need help but it feels like they seem to think I do. Because of the nature of the work that I am doing, my boss's boss doesn't sit with us in our area. She has a stake in this development work but it feels like she is projecting her insecurities on to me, even though I assure her that I am on schedule, adequately tasked, etc. This is really negatively affecting my morale and causing me a lot of stress.
How can I convince my boss's boss that she can trust me to do the job she hired me for?
**Update:** I figured I would give an update post to this. I feel I didn't explain this very well (I was writing emotionally), but the criticism of the work I was receiving was based on work that had been delivered three months before my hiring. But either way, I realized via several performance meetings that there was a culture and expectation clash in that group and that I wasn't doing work that I wanted to be doing. So with the blessings of my former supervisor, I swapped groups and I am enjoying it. | 2016/09/15 | [
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/76025",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com",
"https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users/36041/"
] | It's been five months, by now you should be on top of things, you should be able to produce rough timeframes, you should stop thinking it's other people's responsibility to produce everything because they've been there longer.
So get a grip on your job, on the code base, on what is satisfactory and what needs work and become more self-reliant. And stop walking in to meetings looking like you need help, because that is the impression you're giving. Don't assume they don't trust you because of what happened 5 months ago. They're being careful and you're not allaying their paranoia. | First off, move forward... do not focus on the past and try to defend yourself but treat this as a learning experience and figure out what lessons you've learned. A failure, or perception of failure is often prime opportunity to impress people. You must learn, adapt, and move forward.
Second, it sounds like your expectations are either not well-defined or have not been communicated very effectively. You seem to be capable and have a since of urgency; so I'd suggest talking to your boss about how you are doing and what is expected of you right now.
Lastly, when giving time estimates always double what you have in mind. Events rarely go as planned, especially when relying on input from others and giving yourself this extra time will allow for you to compensate for hiccups.
Also don't communicate your problems unless they are actually problems. Your management most likely is more interested that you have a plan and path to achieve your goal. |
122,557 | I want to express "something has benefits/advantages. But they manifest only when certain conditions hold or under certain restrictions or certain prices have to be paid".
Is there any terms/expressions/sentences for this? | 2013/08/14 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/122557",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/23529/"
] | The main phrase that springs to mind is *if you want roses, you must have thorns*, or as [Anne Bronte](http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/roses) put it:-
>
> “But he who dares not grasp the thorn Should never crave the rose.”
>
>
>
or somewhat less poetically *you get owt for nowt unless it's for thy sins*. | I would just say "potential benefits/advantages". |
122,557 | I want to express "something has benefits/advantages. But they manifest only when certain conditions hold or under certain restrictions or certain prices have to be paid".
Is there any terms/expressions/sentences for this? | 2013/08/14 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/122557",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/23529/"
] | Not necessarily referring to your first qualification (a benefit), but a generalization of such a circumstance:
[latent](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/latent): present and capable of emerging or developing but not now visible, obvious, active, or symptomatic
So possibly a latent benefit. | I would just say "potential benefits/advantages". |
321,253 | In the Library Of Congress web page there is this section:
>
> How to Pre-Register Online
>
> It is possible to pre-register online by
> completing a simple Web form **(this can be done up to two weeks prior to visiting the Library of Congress in person)**. You will still need to report to the Reader Registration Station and present your valid identification. Once your ID has been verified, Library staff will take an identification photo, have you provide a digitized signature, and give you your card.
>
>
>
In this example, what does "up to two weeks prior to visiting the library" mean?
Does it mean that, if I am heading to the library on the 15th of March, should I do the pre-registration between 1st to 15th of March, or does that means that I need to do it before 1st of March? | 2022/08/19 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/321253",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/160734/"
] | I see the reason for your confusion.
It is potentially ambiguous; but I think any native English speaker would read it as *[up to two weeks] prior* rather than *up to [two weeks prior]*. | It means you need to do it before March 1st. You can do it in any time in February or perhaps in January.
It does not specify how far in advance you can do it. |
321,253 | In the Library Of Congress web page there is this section:
>
> How to Pre-Register Online
>
> It is possible to pre-register online by
> completing a simple Web form **(this can be done up to two weeks prior to visiting the Library of Congress in person)**. You will still need to report to the Reader Registration Station and present your valid identification. Once your ID has been verified, Library staff will take an identification photo, have you provide a digitized signature, and give you your card.
>
>
>
In this example, what does "up to two weeks prior to visiting the library" mean?
Does it mean that, if I am heading to the library on the 15th of March, should I do the pre-registration between 1st to 15th of March, or does that means that I need to do it before 1st of March? | 2022/08/19 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/321253",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/160734/"
] | I see the reason for your confusion.
It is potentially ambiguous; but I think any native English speaker would read it as *[up to two weeks] prior* rather than *up to [two weeks prior]*. | The way the sentence is written, it could have either meaning. The ambiguity hinges on how the starting point of "*up to*" is understood.
The structure *[ "up to" + object ]* implies a continuous span from some understood point to the object. The object here is "two weeks prior to visiting...", but the starting point, the "from" isn't specified. The reader of the website is expected to understand that there's only one possible "from" time, but that's not the case.
It could mean, "(From zero days) up to two weeks prior to visiting...", where the "up to" span is **a length of time of two weeks**. In this case, March 1st is the first day you can register online.
But it could also mean, "(From now) up to two weeks prior to visiting...", where the "up to" span is **a period of time from now until two weeks before you visit**. In this case March 1st is the last day you can register online.
I couldn't venture a guess which the correct meaning is because I don't know the nature of the building and how many visitors it accepts. Bottom line: phone or email them more than two weeks before you visit and ask them. |
204,410 | Is the following sentence grammatically correct?
>
> Do you know why this works this way?
>
>
>
It looked a bit suspicious to me, so I googled it — to find only four results. If the sentence above is incorrect, would you suggest alternatives? Maybe, "Do you know why does this work this way?" | 2014/10/24 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/204410",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/10291/"
] | "Why this works this way" is a dependent noun clause. "Why does this work this way?" is an interrogative sentence. You're not asking why thing works. You're asking a different question "Do you know" about the fact "why this works". Interrogative sentences are inverted, which explains the word order difference. The noun clause is *not* inverted, since it's not interrogative.
Change the words up for something simpler, and it will be obvious:
"Do you know why the wood burns"?
"I know what he likes".
The awkwardness you're perceiving in the original has more to do with the repeated "this" than the clause structure. | While I can't think of a specific grammatical rule that is being violated, the sentence does suffer from an ambiguous clause. In common usage, "this" is used as the subject of a clause when spoken aloud, and is commonly followed by a clarification question.
For example-
"Did you move this?" "Move what?"
Since the reader cannot ask for clarification, the sentence should either be written "Do you know why it works this way?" or "Do you know why (Name the object in question) works this way?" This gives the reader context. For me it is a stylistic and clarity issue. |
19,171,046 | Does anyone know how I can receive an MMS through Twilio? I checked online and found software to receive an SMS but not an MMS, since it's a new feature. The number I have is MMS-enabled. If I can receive it through an app, on email, anything would help. | 2013/10/03 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/19171046",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/2690257/"
] | Twilio evangelist here.
As long as your Twilio phone number is MMS-enabled you can receive MMS messages with it. Twilio currently offers MMS-enabled Twilio phone numbers in Canada and MMS-enabled Twilio short codes in the US.
If someone sends an MMS to your Twilio phone number or short code, Twilio is going to make an HTTP request to the Messages URL you have configured for your phone number. That request is going to include a bunch of parameters:
<https://www.twilio.com/docs/api/twiml/sms/twilio_request>
For each media element included in the MMS message, the Twilio request will include a MediaUrl parameter that has a URL you can use to grab the media element.
Hope that helps. | If you have a twilio number, and it is indeed MMS enabled, you should first verify that it is actually getting where its supposed to go. Not only does the twilio number need to support MMS, whatever number you are sending needs to as well.
After you send a test MMS to your twilio number, log into you account and check the message log - if you don't see it there, one of your numbers isn't supported.
<https://www.twilio.com/user/account/log/sms>
if you can't see the message in the log, no code is going to help.
If the message is indeed making it to your twilio number, then this is the relevant documentation on how to receive MMS in your app:
<https://www.twilio.com/docs/api/rest/message> |
43,089 | I'm looking for a chart showing the minimum length a runway can be for various aircraft to land and take off.
Does something like this exist? | 2017/08/20 | [
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/43089",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com",
"https://aviation.stackexchange.com/users/21549/"
] | Such table would not be useful at all. As the required runway length varies with the aircraft weight, pressure altitude, temperature, aircraft configuration, runway slope, condition (wet, dry), wind, etc.
Examples:
* A 7000-foot runway can handle a 747, but listing the 747 under aircraft that can takeoff from 7000' runways does not say how big the weight penalty will be.
* A 7000' runway at sea-level is longer than 7000' at a high altitude airport.
I'm afraid you won't find such list.
---
Related:
* [For designing a runway, what are the largest cargo airplanes in use?](https://aviation.stackexchange.com/q/41144/14897)
* [How can a Boeing 747 takeoff from Princess Juliana 7,546 ft runway?](https://aviation.stackexchange.com/q/40951/14897) | Aircraft manufacturers issue the manual of aircraft characteristics of each type of aircraft. The reference documents provide airlines, MROs, airport planners and operators with the general dimensions of the aircraft, the necessary information for ramp, servicing operations or maintenance preparation. Minimum length for take-off and landing often include in it.
Here is the link for the documents for several major Airliner manufacturer:
* [Airbus](http://reference%20documents%20provide%20airlines,%20MROs,%20airport%20planners%20and%20operators%20with%20the%20general%20dimensions%20of%20the%20aircraft,%20as%20well%20as%20the%20necessary%20information%20for%20ramp,%20servicing%20operations%20or%20maintenance%20preparation.)
* [Boeing](http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/plan_manuals.page)
* [Bombardier](https://customer.aero.bombardier.com/)
* [Embraer](https://www.embraercommercialaviation.com/media-downloads/#51-apm) |
23,576 | Primarily asking this question because of that new TV show "Revolution". I remember reading this novel back in the 80's about a mysterious monolith that renders all electronics in the world inoperable. The novel never explains where the monolith came from, only how civilization adjusted. | 2012/09/18 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/23576",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/8850/"
] | The premise of the show reminded me of [Robert Silverberg's "The Alien Years"](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/006105111X). Although that novel is not about a monolith, but rather about an alien invasion.
>
> Fifteen feet tall, the Entities land in cities across Earth. Ignoring
> humankind, they wall themselves in impenetrable enclaves, enslaving a
> few willing collaborators with their telepathic PUSH. Then they plunge
> humans into a new Dark Age without electricity, allowing us to
> live--but no longer as a dominant species.
>
>
> But a few refuse to submit to fate, including the Carmichael family,
> whose patriarch, an aging colonel devoted to resistance, will inspire
> a daring new generation of dissidents. United in spirit, these diverse
> rebels--an aging hippie, a cold-blooded Muslim assassin, a prodigal
> son, and a renegade hacker--will carry on the colonel's legacy as they
> attempt to kill the mysterious Prime Entity and free the planet.
>
>
> | I thought of the [2001: A Space Odyssey](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001%3a_A_Space_Odyssey_%28film%29) but that's a movie. So I would assume you mean the [Novel](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001%3a_A_Space_Odyssey_%28novel%29) of the same name or the short story it was based upon [The Sentinel](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sentinel_%28short_story%29) by Arthur C. Clarke.
But I don't remember it rendering electronics inoperable. |
23,576 | Primarily asking this question because of that new TV show "Revolution". I remember reading this novel back in the 80's about a mysterious monolith that renders all electronics in the world inoperable. The novel never explains where the monolith came from, only how civilization adjusted. | 2012/09/18 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/23576",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/8850/"
] | Perhaps it might have been *[Fade-Out](http://www.patricktilley.co.uk/fadeout/index.php)* by [Patrick Tilley](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Tilley)?
>
> Alien Day
>
>
> The date was Friday, the third of August. For some people the day was just beginning. For others it was the end of another perfectly normal day. Then right across the world every ground and airborne radar screen went haywire
>
>
> This time it had really happened. An alien spacecraft was in orbit around planet Earth. And nine weeks later civilization was on the edge of a total breakdown more devastating than any nuclear war or natural disaster
>
>
>
This is a mildly unlikely match because the effect of the alien arrival is to disrupt all radio communication (thus the title, Fade-Out, referring to a radio communication concept) rather than to disable all electricity. | The premise of the show reminded me of [Robert Silverberg's "The Alien Years"](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/006105111X). Although that novel is not about a monolith, but rather about an alien invasion.
>
> Fifteen feet tall, the Entities land in cities across Earth. Ignoring
> humankind, they wall themselves in impenetrable enclaves, enslaving a
> few willing collaborators with their telepathic PUSH. Then they plunge
> humans into a new Dark Age without electricity, allowing us to
> live--but no longer as a dominant species.
>
>
> But a few refuse to submit to fate, including the Carmichael family,
> whose patriarch, an aging colonel devoted to resistance, will inspire
> a daring new generation of dissidents. United in spirit, these diverse
> rebels--an aging hippie, a cold-blooded Muslim assassin, a prodigal
> son, and a renegade hacker--will carry on the colonel's legacy as they
> attempt to kill the mysterious Prime Entity and free the planet.
>
>
> |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.