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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
27,472,158 | This is a naive question, but in the tutorials I have seen so far is not spelled clearly.
If I build a interpreter on top a high-level language (not C, C++, etc) and this have a garbage collector... is necessary to also make one for the interpreter itself?
And if the answers is yes... it must be the same kind of the host? (ie: If the host is mark-sweep, the interpreter too?), or is possible to leverage the host and let it manage all of this?
The selection of host make a difference? I plan to use F#/.NET, but is the same for Java and others? | 2014/12/14 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/27472158",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/53185/"
] | The memory management of the interpreted language can piggy-back on the memory management of the host, but if you are implementing a non-toy interpreter, you may need to use *[weak pointers](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_reference)* for the administrative references from the host to values of the interpreted world that should be garbage-collected if there are no references to them left in the interpreted world.
If you are implementing a toy interpreter, no one may even notice if you use strong pointers for administrative references from the host world to the interpreted world. In this case, I would recommend you don't bother: weak pointers, as a feature, are available in all sufficiently advanced memory-managed languages, but the details differ and their use is always tricky. [Bruno Haible's survey](http://www.haible.de/bruno/papers/cs/weak/WeakDatastructures-writeup.html) provides a picture of all the varieties. In his survey, this use of weak pointers falls under “Global garbage collection: Allow garbage collection to work across process boundaries, or across a Lisp - C/C++/Java foreign interface boundary”, except that the foreign interface boundary is between the host language and the interpreted language. | In general, no. But you might have exceptions, e.g. because the memory semantics of the interpreted language is different of the memory semantics of the language you are coding the interpreter in.
As an example, some languages are garbage collecting threads or tasks. If you code your interpreter for such a language in Java, you'll need to GC the tasks by yourself.
You probably want some weak hash tables. |
553,953 | Find the collector current in Fig 2.
Assume:
* The base current is negligible
* Si diode.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/UjIWL.jpg)
---
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/NeYKO.jpg)
I have solved it, but I don't know if it's right or wrong.
Furthermore I have considered Ic=Ie+Ib which in wrongly written. | 2021/03/18 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/553953",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/279175/"
] | 20V / (10k+10k) minus diode drops is approx 1mA . This means all Si diodes will be 0.6V not 0.7 @1mA
Therefore the two 10k voltage divider gives;
Vb= -10V + 2x0.6. = -8.6V which controls the emitter voltage.
Thus Ve = -8.6 - 0.6 = - 9.2V.
Now you can compute Ie which = Ic within 1% for hFE >100. | Given problem shows no connection to the collector line.
If the diagram is correct current in emitter is 1 mA
This can be taken as base current. If β is(Ic/Ib) given we can find Ic. Say β=150 then Ic= 150 mA.
 |
553,953 | Find the collector current in Fig 2.
Assume:
* The base current is negligible
* Si diode.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/UjIWL.jpg)
---
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/NeYKO.jpg)
I have solved it, but I don't know if it's right or wrong.
Furthermore I have considered Ic=Ie+Ib which in wrongly written. | 2021/03/18 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/553953",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/279175/"
] | Assume that the collector is connected to a potential such that the transistor is in active mode (eg. grounded). Assume junctions have 0.7V across them.
The current through the 10K resistors and diodes is (20V-1.4V)/20K = 0.93mA (so far so good)
So the base voltage is 10.7V above the -20V rail and therefore the emitter is at 10.0V above the -20V rail so the emitter current is ~10.0V/4.7K = 2.1mA.
Since base current is said to be negligible, collector current is also 2.1mA. Doing a quick simulation with real parts:
[](https://i.imgur.com/ttzR6kt.png)
We can see that that's quite accurate.
If the -20V rail was much lower (say -3V) the exact magnitude of the Vbe and diode drops would be far more important, but here most of the voltage is dropped across the 10K resistors. | 20V / (10k+10k) minus diode drops is approx 1mA . This means all Si diodes will be 0.6V not 0.7 @1mA
Therefore the two 10k voltage divider gives;
Vb= -10V + 2x0.6. = -8.6V which controls the emitter voltage.
Thus Ve = -8.6 - 0.6 = - 9.2V.
Now you can compute Ie which = Ic within 1% for hFE >100. |
553,953 | Find the collector current in Fig 2.
Assume:
* The base current is negligible
* Si diode.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/UjIWL.jpg)
---
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/NeYKO.jpg)
I have solved it, but I don't know if it's right or wrong.
Furthermore I have considered Ic=Ie+Ib which in wrongly written. | 2021/03/18 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/553953",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/279175/"
] | Assume that the collector is connected to a potential such that the transistor is in active mode (eg. grounded). Assume junctions have 0.7V across them.
The current through the 10K resistors and diodes is (20V-1.4V)/20K = 0.93mA (so far so good)
So the base voltage is 10.7V above the -20V rail and therefore the emitter is at 10.0V above the -20V rail so the emitter current is ~10.0V/4.7K = 2.1mA.
Since base current is said to be negligible, collector current is also 2.1mA. Doing a quick simulation with real parts:
[](https://i.imgur.com/ttzR6kt.png)
We can see that that's quite accurate.
If the -20V rail was much lower (say -3V) the exact magnitude of the Vbe and diode drops would be far more important, but here most of the voltage is dropped across the 10K resistors. | Given problem shows no connection to the collector line.
If the diagram is correct current in emitter is 1 mA
This can be taken as base current. If β is(Ic/Ib) given we can find Ic. Say β=150 then Ic= 150 mA.
 |
38,728 | I recently set up my company (C-Corp). In order to complete the stock purchase agreement, I had to deposit a check in the company's bank account addressed to the company.
What I did: *I walked into my company's bank's local branch with the check filled out and addressed properly, gave it to the frontwoman telling her I needed to deposit this in the company's account as part of the stock purchase agreement. I am unsure as to whether she understood, given that she just added the deposit to the company's account with no special note (The note for deposits seen online).*
Note: I did keep a copy of the check for my own papers as well as the company's'.
**My question is:** Did I do it properly? Should I now complete the stock purchase agreement paperwork, listing the date of the purchase?
*Just to make it clear: I used my own check.* | 2019/04/03 | [
"https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/38728",
"https://law.stackexchange.com",
"https://law.stackexchange.com/users/20211/"
] | Take a look at this:
<https://medium.com/rough-draft-ventures/a-rough-draft-of-the-legal-basics-part-3-issuing-equity-to-the-founders-important-tax-and-ab93ce623517>
It is up to the company to make the rules about it's stock, so you should put rules in writing if you intend to have more investors. Pay attention to the part of the article that talks about transferring intellectual property in exchange for shares. I think that is the best way to do it for you, if it applies to your business. | What you are doing is far more elaborate than would be customary and it sounds like you are misunderstanding the obligations that apply to you.
When you form a corporation, normally you simply set up a corporate bank account, issue shares to yourself, put money in the corporate bank account, and note in organizational minutes that X shares were issued in exchange for $Y as a contribution to capital.
A stock purchase agreement between a corporation and its sole shareholder would be an unusual way to handle this and I've never seen anyone actually do that, although I suppose that there is nothing actually improper about it. |
110,841 | Sometimes, I need to check how many pixels an area takes on the screen.
Does someone know of a utility for Windows that would let me click somewhere on the screen, drag 'n drop to the lower right hand-side of the area, and show the width/height in pixels of the selected area?
Thank you. | 2010/02/19 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/110841",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/3906/"
] | Not built for this purpose but quite a number of screen capture tools do that.
E.g. [FastStone capture](http://www.faststone.org/FSCaptureDetail.htm), [MWSnap](http://www.mirekw.com/winfreeware/mwsnap.html), [!Quick Screen Capture](http://www.etrusoft.com/product.htm) etc etc | You can try [MB ruler](http://www.markus-bader.de/MB-Ruler/index.htm). In coordinate system mode it does what you need.
Another screen measuring tool that comes to mind is [Screen Calipers](http://www.iconico.com/caliper/). |
110,841 | Sometimes, I need to check how many pixels an area takes on the screen.
Does someone know of a utility for Windows that would let me click somewhere on the screen, drag 'n drop to the lower right hand-side of the area, and show the width/height in pixels of the selected area?
Thank you. | 2010/02/19 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/110841",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/3906/"
] | [**PicPick Tools - All-in-one Design Tools**](http://picpick.wiziple.net/)
PicPick is an all-in-one software for software developers, graphic designers and home user.
It has an intuitive interface and simple, elegant operation. After starting the software, you simply select one of the tool from the PicPick Tools trayicon menu when you want.
It features a powerful capture tool, image editor, color picker, color palette, **pixel ruler**, protractor, **crosshair**, whiteboard and etc. You can use all these tools freely.... | Not built for this purpose but quite a number of screen capture tools do that.
E.g. [FastStone capture](http://www.faststone.org/FSCaptureDetail.htm), [MWSnap](http://www.mirekw.com/winfreeware/mwsnap.html), [!Quick Screen Capture](http://www.etrusoft.com/product.htm) etc etc |
110,841 | Sometimes, I need to check how many pixels an area takes on the screen.
Does someone know of a utility for Windows that would let me click somewhere on the screen, drag 'n drop to the lower right hand-side of the area, and show the width/height in pixels of the selected area?
Thank you. | 2010/02/19 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/110841",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/3906/"
] | Not built for this purpose but quite a number of screen capture tools do that.
E.g. [FastStone capture](http://www.faststone.org/FSCaptureDetail.htm), [MWSnap](http://www.mirekw.com/winfreeware/mwsnap.html), [!Quick Screen Capture](http://www.etrusoft.com/product.htm) etc etc | [Greenshot](https://getgreenshot.org) shows sizes too while taking a screenshot:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/xO2an.png) |
110,841 | Sometimes, I need to check how many pixels an area takes on the screen.
Does someone know of a utility for Windows that would let me click somewhere on the screen, drag 'n drop to the lower right hand-side of the area, and show the width/height in pixels of the selected area?
Thank you. | 2010/02/19 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/110841",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/3906/"
] | Not built for this purpose but quite a number of screen capture tools do that.
E.g. [FastStone capture](http://www.faststone.org/FSCaptureDetail.htm), [MWSnap](http://www.mirekw.com/winfreeware/mwsnap.html), [!Quick Screen Capture](http://www.etrusoft.com/product.htm) etc etc | This method should work with all Windows versions to date. It works in 2021.
1. Size the window desired to measure.
2. Screen capture the active window.
3. Paste into a fresh, blank Paint instance.
4. Save the image file, jpg is convenient.
5. Read properties/details of the jpg.
6. You will have the dimensions of the current window size.
I mark, fold, and trim a sheet of copy paper to save the best common dimensions.
Next time I have the sheet overlay and I size the target window behind it.
Hope that helps. |
110,841 | Sometimes, I need to check how many pixels an area takes on the screen.
Does someone know of a utility for Windows that would let me click somewhere on the screen, drag 'n drop to the lower right hand-side of the area, and show the width/height in pixels of the selected area?
Thank you. | 2010/02/19 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/110841",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/3906/"
] | [**PicPick Tools - All-in-one Design Tools**](http://picpick.wiziple.net/)
PicPick is an all-in-one software for software developers, graphic designers and home user.
It has an intuitive interface and simple, elegant operation. After starting the software, you simply select one of the tool from the PicPick Tools trayicon menu when you want.
It features a powerful capture tool, image editor, color picker, color palette, **pixel ruler**, protractor, **crosshair**, whiteboard and etc. You can use all these tools freely.... | You can try [MB ruler](http://www.markus-bader.de/MB-Ruler/index.htm). In coordinate system mode it does what you need.
Another screen measuring tool that comes to mind is [Screen Calipers](http://www.iconico.com/caliper/). |
110,841 | Sometimes, I need to check how many pixels an area takes on the screen.
Does someone know of a utility for Windows that would let me click somewhere on the screen, drag 'n drop to the lower right hand-side of the area, and show the width/height in pixels of the selected area?
Thank you. | 2010/02/19 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/110841",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/3906/"
] | You can try [MB ruler](http://www.markus-bader.de/MB-Ruler/index.htm). In coordinate system mode it does what you need.
Another screen measuring tool that comes to mind is [Screen Calipers](http://www.iconico.com/caliper/). | [Greenshot](https://getgreenshot.org) shows sizes too while taking a screenshot:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/xO2an.png) |
110,841 | Sometimes, I need to check how many pixels an area takes on the screen.
Does someone know of a utility for Windows that would let me click somewhere on the screen, drag 'n drop to the lower right hand-side of the area, and show the width/height in pixels of the selected area?
Thank you. | 2010/02/19 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/110841",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/3906/"
] | You can try [MB ruler](http://www.markus-bader.de/MB-Ruler/index.htm). In coordinate system mode it does what you need.
Another screen measuring tool that comes to mind is [Screen Calipers](http://www.iconico.com/caliper/). | This method should work with all Windows versions to date. It works in 2021.
1. Size the window desired to measure.
2. Screen capture the active window.
3. Paste into a fresh, blank Paint instance.
4. Save the image file, jpg is convenient.
5. Read properties/details of the jpg.
6. You will have the dimensions of the current window size.
I mark, fold, and trim a sheet of copy paper to save the best common dimensions.
Next time I have the sheet overlay and I size the target window behind it.
Hope that helps. |
110,841 | Sometimes, I need to check how many pixels an area takes on the screen.
Does someone know of a utility for Windows that would let me click somewhere on the screen, drag 'n drop to the lower right hand-side of the area, and show the width/height in pixels of the selected area?
Thank you. | 2010/02/19 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/110841",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/3906/"
] | [**PicPick Tools - All-in-one Design Tools**](http://picpick.wiziple.net/)
PicPick is an all-in-one software for software developers, graphic designers and home user.
It has an intuitive interface and simple, elegant operation. After starting the software, you simply select one of the tool from the PicPick Tools trayicon menu when you want.
It features a powerful capture tool, image editor, color picker, color palette, **pixel ruler**, protractor, **crosshair**, whiteboard and etc. You can use all these tools freely.... | [Greenshot](https://getgreenshot.org) shows sizes too while taking a screenshot:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/xO2an.png) |
110,841 | Sometimes, I need to check how many pixels an area takes on the screen.
Does someone know of a utility for Windows that would let me click somewhere on the screen, drag 'n drop to the lower right hand-side of the area, and show the width/height in pixels of the selected area?
Thank you. | 2010/02/19 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/110841",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/3906/"
] | [**PicPick Tools - All-in-one Design Tools**](http://picpick.wiziple.net/)
PicPick is an all-in-one software for software developers, graphic designers and home user.
It has an intuitive interface and simple, elegant operation. After starting the software, you simply select one of the tool from the PicPick Tools trayicon menu when you want.
It features a powerful capture tool, image editor, color picker, color palette, **pixel ruler**, protractor, **crosshair**, whiteboard and etc. You can use all these tools freely.... | This method should work with all Windows versions to date. It works in 2021.
1. Size the window desired to measure.
2. Screen capture the active window.
3. Paste into a fresh, blank Paint instance.
4. Save the image file, jpg is convenient.
5. Read properties/details of the jpg.
6. You will have the dimensions of the current window size.
I mark, fold, and trim a sheet of copy paper to save the best common dimensions.
Next time I have the sheet overlay and I size the target window behind it.
Hope that helps. |
22,961 | I have a core 2 laptop with 4gb of ram. I use the machine for browsing, network stuff and simple programming. (I use this machine to host a small ftp and web server semi-occasionally.)
Would there be any benefit to having a swap partition? My understanding is that with that much memory, there would be no need to have a swap for my mediocre usage. In fact, the kernel will be forced to use my ram, which will be faster.
Is this correct? | 2009/06/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/22961",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/8614/"
] | Think of an application's working set as comprising two parts: the data it is holding in its own address space and the data it is accessing from files. The first must be held in RAM or in swap for correctness, the second can be correctly retrieved from disk or fileserver and need only be cached in RAM for performance.
Apologies that I have no empirical evidence for this, but I have always assumed that there is a performance benefit from being able to page out data in the first category that's no longer part of the working set so that less data from the second category need be fetched from disk or network. | I have an old server running with 4GB of RAM, and the swap on it is 4GB and a small amount of it gets used. Rarely, but it does get used. If you can't spare 4GB for the swap, I would upgrade the hard disk. |
22,961 | I have a core 2 laptop with 4gb of ram. I use the machine for browsing, network stuff and simple programming. (I use this machine to host a small ftp and web server semi-occasionally.)
Would there be any benefit to having a swap partition? My understanding is that with that much memory, there would be no need to have a swap for my mediocre usage. In fact, the kernel will be forced to use my ram, which will be faster.
Is this correct? | 2009/06/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/22961",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/8614/"
] | There is benefit. Whether you need it is up for debate. At a minimum, swap gives you a safety net in case something happens that is unexpected. Your system will swap instead of starting to have programs crash or killed from OOM. | Think of an application's working set as comprising two parts: the data it is holding in its own address space and the data it is accessing from files. The first must be held in RAM or in swap for correctness, the second can be correctly retrieved from disk or fileserver and need only be cached in RAM for performance.
Apologies that I have no empirical evidence for this, but I have always assumed that there is a performance benefit from being able to page out data in the first category that's no longer part of the working set so that less data from the second category need be fetched from disk or network. |
22,961 | I have a core 2 laptop with 4gb of ram. I use the machine for browsing, network stuff and simple programming. (I use this machine to host a small ftp and web server semi-occasionally.)
Would there be any benefit to having a swap partition? My understanding is that with that much memory, there would be no need to have a swap for my mediocre usage. In fact, the kernel will be forced to use my ram, which will be faster.
Is this correct? | 2009/06/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/22961",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/8614/"
] | No. If for some reason you later decide you have to have swap you can create a file and tell the OS to use that file on your file system for swap space. | In essentiality, what swap gives you is protection against burst memory consumption - if some application of yours decides to allocate too much memory for your system's good (memory consumption approaches total available memory), what you are going to get is termination of the said application or (best case) or termination of other applications (not good at all), either way, in 99% cases, the application will not get to do whatever it was going to do. With swap, there is a possibility, that the said application will do whatever it intended to do, release the memory and the normal operation will be resumed. With no swap there is no such possibility. Can you really not spare 4Gb of your hard drive for swap? We definitely DO have swap enabled on our systems even though they have at the very least 32Gb RAM.
Generally, what is your problem with swap? The only "real" downside I see is, that you are shaving some gigabytes off of your usable disk space, but thats all there is about it. Or am I missing something? |
22,961 | I have a core 2 laptop with 4gb of ram. I use the machine for browsing, network stuff and simple programming. (I use this machine to host a small ftp and web server semi-occasionally.)
Would there be any benefit to having a swap partition? My understanding is that with that much memory, there would be no need to have a swap for my mediocre usage. In fact, the kernel will be forced to use my ram, which will be faster.
Is this correct? | 2009/06/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/22961",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/8614/"
] | >
> In fact, the kernel will be forced to use my ram, which will be faster. ?
>
>
>
*Maybe*, most likely no - modern operating systems are intelligent (well, sane) about using available RAM - even old ones are pretty good. On all the linux machines I've used, the swap count stays at 0 bytes until it's required - there's no reason the OS would use swap unless it's forced too..
The issue only arrises when you run out of physical memory..
* Without any swap-space, the system tends to freeze for a few minutes, the [OOM-killer](http://linux-mm.org/OOM_Killer) (out-of-memory) kicks in and starts killing processes until there is enough free memory for the main bits of the system to function..
* With swap-space, the application that's caused the swap'ing might slow down a bit (a good indication it's reaching the physical memory limitations), and.. nothing, it just carries on.. | I have an old server running with 4GB of RAM, and the swap on it is 4GB and a small amount of it gets used. Rarely, but it does get used. If you can't spare 4GB for the swap, I would upgrade the hard disk. |
22,961 | I have a core 2 laptop with 4gb of ram. I use the machine for browsing, network stuff and simple programming. (I use this machine to host a small ftp and web server semi-occasionally.)
Would there be any benefit to having a swap partition? My understanding is that with that much memory, there would be no need to have a swap for my mediocre usage. In fact, the kernel will be forced to use my ram, which will be faster.
Is this correct? | 2009/06/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/22961",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/8614/"
] | There is benefit. Whether you need it is up for debate. At a minimum, swap gives you a safety net in case something happens that is unexpected. Your system will swap instead of starting to have programs crash or killed from OOM. | I have an old server running with 4GB of RAM, and the swap on it is 4GB and a small amount of it gets used. Rarely, but it does get used. If you can't spare 4GB for the swap, I would upgrade the hard disk. |
22,961 | I have a core 2 laptop with 4gb of ram. I use the machine for browsing, network stuff and simple programming. (I use this machine to host a small ftp and web server semi-occasionally.)
Would there be any benefit to having a swap partition? My understanding is that with that much memory, there would be no need to have a swap for my mediocre usage. In fact, the kernel will be forced to use my ram, which will be faster.
Is this correct? | 2009/06/09 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/22961",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/8614/"
] | Suspend-to-disc also requires enough swap to save the contents of memory into (it might use compression depending on settings and version).
As it's a laptop, you may want to use suspend-to-disc. | I have an old server running with 4GB of RAM, and the swap on it is 4GB and a small amount of it gets used. Rarely, but it does get used. If you can't spare 4GB for the swap, I would upgrade the hard disk. |
281,098 | >
> India’s concern is that **if it takes** a decision that irks Generals in Myanmar, China **would** get closer to the junta and use the opportunity to hurt India’s interests in Myanmar.
>
>
>
I studied that **would** is used in subjunctive or hypothetical sentences. But here, Is the first part of the sentence “India’s concern is that **If it takes a decision**” hypothetical? I don’t think so. Then why would is used in later part? | 2021/04/10 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/281098",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/105168/"
] | >
> India’s concern is that if it takes a decision that irks Generals in Myanmar, China would get closer to the junta and use the opportunity to hurt India’s interests in Myanmar.
>
>
>
Q. But here, Is the first part of the sentence “India’s concern is that If it takes a decision” hypothetical? I don’t think so. Then why would is used in later part?
---
**Making hypotheses**
A. The above is a conditional sentence. "***if** it takes a decision....China **would** get"* and also a hypothetical one. Therefore it should have been written as "***if** it made/took a decision....China **would** get"*
**hypothetical** [C.E.D.](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/hypothetical?q=%20hypothetical); adjective; imagined or **suggested but not necessarily real or true**:
>
> (Some conditional clauses are like hypotheses, so we use past tense forms).
> We use past tense forms to make suggestions about what might happen in the future:
>
>
>
Example
>
> If we invited John, Mary would bring Angela.
> Ref [British Council](https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/english-grammar-reference/verbs-in-time-clauses-and-if-clauses)
>
>
> | The first part of the sentence “India’s concern is that if it makes a decision” IS hypothetical. India might make a certain decision, or it might not. So "China would" (or "could") is appropriate. You could use "China will . . ."
(Also, "makes a decision" instead of "takes a decision" would be more common.) |
3,928,720 | If I attach to a application's process and debug, then stop debugging, and recompile a dependent assembly, is it possible to add logic to my application which does an unload/re-load to that assembly such that I'll be able to re-attach to the process and debug again without re-starting? | 2010/10/13 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3928720",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/398546/"
] | I suppose technically it might be possible, if your code were written to load the assembly dynamically (like a plugin assembly), but even then it'd only work if no classes/resources from the assembly had been used. So, for all realistic purposes, no: what you launch is what you're running.
That said, what you're trying to attempt sounds pretty close to what edit-and-continue does in Visual Studio. Have you tried that? Why do you need to recompile the assembly in the first place? | You could try [Shadow Copy Cache](http://blogs.msdn.com/b/junfeng/archive/2004/02/09/69919.aspx).
I know it from its use in NUnit, where you can change your test\tested code without restarting the NUnit GUI. |
378,225 | [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7ywSb.jpg)
I am using an wired mouse Logitech 300s (As seen in the screenshot)
Whenever I move the mouse from edge to edge of the mouse pad, the cursor only moved about slightly over 1/2 of the way on the monitor.
I really want the mouse cursor move a longer distance. Is there any way I can fine tune it?
EDIT:
Add screen shot of Mouse pane in System Preferences
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/NtduS.png) | 2019/12/23 | [
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/378225",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/users/3428/"
] | Go to System Preferences - Mouse. Click on the "Point and Click" tab. In the middle of this pane is a slider for Tracking Speed. By moving the slider to the right to make it faster will do what you want. See the image below.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/KSl1L.jpg) | I can use the G8 button on the mouse to switch to "Productivity" profile. The light on the side will change to blue, and the mouse will travel longer distance when moving from side to side.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/xq3Y4.png) |
85,818 | So I've started finishing my basement. First thing is to put LED recessed lights in. I'm going to string 4-6 LEDs together......problem is the ceiling is fixed and I don't feel like tearing the whole thing down to do the wire. My basement is made up of two sections....both 13x30. So picture two giant rectangular rooms side by side, separated by a cinder block wall. One side has a finished ceiling, one does not. So basically I have to somehow string the wire from the one side, to the unfinished side, go a coupe, feet, and head back to where the next light will be.
I can't crawl from one side to the other and grab the wiring. What's the best way? Get one of those fish poles from Lowes? | 2016/03/05 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/85818",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/48855/"
] | If the joists are going the right way, yes get some poles. If they're not, you're cutting open the ceiling anyway.
I live where you have to use EMT conduit so I would ultimately get more use out of a flexible fish tape, and I could make it hop down a ceiling cavity well enough for this purpose, but if you live in plastic land you might get more use out of a set of poles and find them to be ideal. | Since you have an unfinished side, fishing/feeding out to the finished side's new or re-used holes is all you need to do & no damage anywhere to the finished ceiling. The most desired execution would be to do lights in both rooms & even activate them all on 1 switch.
Otherwise, you just need a junction box. Preferably in the middle or further of the unfinished ceiling's span (i.e. 7' from cinder block wall) for possible future light replication on this side. Therefore, wires to the finished side don't have to be "lengthened".
You'd run/fish individual feed lines out of the junction box to each of the finished side's newly hole sawed fixture or light-box holes. The only other thing you'd have to drill is the cinder block from the unfinished side. If there's no insulation above the ceiling you may be able to just feed the lines themselves out to the holes.
In the future the junction box would be removed & each new light box on the unfinished side would become a combination of a pass-through daisy chain junction box for the finished side's lights & the daisy chain of the new unfinished side's lights. |
85,818 | So I've started finishing my basement. First thing is to put LED recessed lights in. I'm going to string 4-6 LEDs together......problem is the ceiling is fixed and I don't feel like tearing the whole thing down to do the wire. My basement is made up of two sections....both 13x30. So picture two giant rectangular rooms side by side, separated by a cinder block wall. One side has a finished ceiling, one does not. So basically I have to somehow string the wire from the one side, to the unfinished side, go a coupe, feet, and head back to where the next light will be.
I can't crawl from one side to the other and grab the wiring. What's the best way? Get one of those fish poles from Lowes? | 2016/03/05 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/85818",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/48855/"
] | I'm not exactly clear on what the site looks like, or what your plan is. I'm picturing something like this
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/AJoKR.jpg)
Where purple are joists, yellow are the proposed lights, and black is the walls.
In this situation, I see three options.
Fish the cable
==============
The first option is to fish the cable in from the unfinished side, similar to this.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HvkxG.jpg)
With this approach, you're wasting a bunch of wire (which isn't cheap).
Junction and fish
=================
This option involves installing junction boxes in the unfinished side, then feeding the lights from the junctions like this.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/jcH44.jpg)
This method saves some wire. Though it leaves junction boxes in the unfinished side, that must remain accessible. Which could be a problem if you ever want to finish that side.
Flexible drill bit
==================
The last option is to buy a flexible drill bit and positioning tool, and go in a straight line. The holes you cut in the ceiling for the new lights, should give you enough room to get the flex bit into position. Once all the holes are bored, fish a single cable straight through. Leave a loop of cable at each fixture, to give you enough cable to hook up the light.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/reWK0.jpg) | Since you have an unfinished side, fishing/feeding out to the finished side's new or re-used holes is all you need to do & no damage anywhere to the finished ceiling. The most desired execution would be to do lights in both rooms & even activate them all on 1 switch.
Otherwise, you just need a junction box. Preferably in the middle or further of the unfinished ceiling's span (i.e. 7' from cinder block wall) for possible future light replication on this side. Therefore, wires to the finished side don't have to be "lengthened".
You'd run/fish individual feed lines out of the junction box to each of the finished side's newly hole sawed fixture or light-box holes. The only other thing you'd have to drill is the cinder block from the unfinished side. If there's no insulation above the ceiling you may be able to just feed the lines themselves out to the holes.
In the future the junction box would be removed & each new light box on the unfinished side would become a combination of a pass-through daisy chain junction box for the finished side's lights & the daisy chain of the new unfinished side's lights. |
85,818 | So I've started finishing my basement. First thing is to put LED recessed lights in. I'm going to string 4-6 LEDs together......problem is the ceiling is fixed and I don't feel like tearing the whole thing down to do the wire. My basement is made up of two sections....both 13x30. So picture two giant rectangular rooms side by side, separated by a cinder block wall. One side has a finished ceiling, one does not. So basically I have to somehow string the wire from the one side, to the unfinished side, go a coupe, feet, and head back to where the next light will be.
I can't crawl from one side to the other and grab the wiring. What's the best way? Get one of those fish poles from Lowes? | 2016/03/05 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/85818",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/48855/"
] | For conduit, fish tape is choice. But for residential remodeling, PEX is so much better! I've used 3/4" and 1/2" PEX pipe many times as fish tape for electrical remodeling (1/2" is usually preferable). I prefer PEX to fish tape because you can move PEX side to side in the wall void; the stiffness allows you to push PEX more quickly; it doesn't get hung up as easily as fish tape; it's easier to feel an obstruction than fish tape; plus, you don't have to roll it back up; and it's way cheaper than a roll of fish tape or a special pole. To use PEX, just put the cable inside the end of the pipe (a few inches) and then tape it (it's much faster than attaching wire to fish tape). Also you can cut PEX to length. For example, an 8' section of pipe will also act kind of like a measuring stick (you'll know when the pipe is at the top of the wall). | Since you have an unfinished side, fishing/feeding out to the finished side's new or re-used holes is all you need to do & no damage anywhere to the finished ceiling. The most desired execution would be to do lights in both rooms & even activate them all on 1 switch.
Otherwise, you just need a junction box. Preferably in the middle or further of the unfinished ceiling's span (i.e. 7' from cinder block wall) for possible future light replication on this side. Therefore, wires to the finished side don't have to be "lengthened".
You'd run/fish individual feed lines out of the junction box to each of the finished side's newly hole sawed fixture or light-box holes. The only other thing you'd have to drill is the cinder block from the unfinished side. If there's no insulation above the ceiling you may be able to just feed the lines themselves out to the holes.
In the future the junction box would be removed & each new light box on the unfinished side would become a combination of a pass-through daisy chain junction box for the finished side's lights & the daisy chain of the new unfinished side's lights. |
13,389,260 | Is there a way to detect what prevents an app from running in a non-elevated state? When we run our application with elevated permissions it operates without any problems. Running in a non-elevated state prevents the application from starting.
Are there any tricks to detecting what might be preventing the app from running non-elevated?
Our application does not write data to a protected folder, i.e. program files. | 2012/11/14 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/13389260",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1824935/"
] | You can view the exceptions it threw in Windows Event Viewer (not the most efficient method) or wrap the whole program with an exception handler that displays or logs the exception info (a better approach if you have the luxury of being able to edit and build the project). Once you have the exception it shouldn't be too much trouble finding the operations where you have insufficient privileges. | You should log errors to a file (or to the console, or whatever you like) to see which instruction is causing the problem. You could also detect the error in debug, but for this VS must not be running as admin.
Anyway, the most common cause is that you're trying to write to a directory which is writable only with elevated privileges (e.g. Program Files, Windows...), or a registry key in any hive other than HKEY\_CURRENT\_USER. |
26,841,988 | In my work I encountered a situation where the right theoretical architectural solution is to call an EJB deployed on JBoss 4.3 (Java EE 5) running on JRE 1.6, from a Wildfly 8.1 (Java EE 7) instance, running on JRE 1.8.
Is this possible? What problems can I come across?
The question is about compatibility of
* Application Servers
* Runtimes
* Specifications and standards
I know there is workaround using Web-Services. If possible, please attach some link to compatibility table or some other resources. | 2014/11/10 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/26841988",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1383041/"
] | Unfortunately the ability to call EJBs between application servers is very badly specified (read, not at all).
The problem is that in order to call a remote EJB you'd need a client library. This client library contains many classes that are normally part of an application server. This works perfectly when the client is a Java SE application, but causes major issues when the client is another Java EE application server (as many classes are clashing then).
The only exception is when the two application servers are the exact same make and version, since no client library at all is needed then.
So in general what you're trying to do already doesn't work, but since you're using JBoss it absolutely doesn't work. JBoss is notoriously bad in being able to call EJBs from other versions of JBoss. Much has been written about this, and many attempts have been made to workaround it, but as far as I know it never really worked.
Theoretically this could have been fixed in the EJB spec a long time ago, but EJB is more or less being decommissioned (its features re-implemented using other specs) so quite understandably there's very little impetus to fix anything here. | You mentioned the JRE versions while you didn't mention what was the JDK version used to compile both the service and the client codes.
As a rule, higher JRE version can run any compiled code using lower or similar JDK version. Same rule for code inter communication using client stubs. Higher versions can call lower versions while opposite is not possible. So, if the generated client stub was using JDK1.7 or 1.8 it won;t be possible to be called using JRE1.6 and you will get this error java.lang.UnsupportedClassVersionError: Bad version ...
So, there is no problem as long you compile code in at most JDK1.6 |
26,841,988 | In my work I encountered a situation where the right theoretical architectural solution is to call an EJB deployed on JBoss 4.3 (Java EE 5) running on JRE 1.6, from a Wildfly 8.1 (Java EE 7) instance, running on JRE 1.8.
Is this possible? What problems can I come across?
The question is about compatibility of
* Application Servers
* Runtimes
* Specifications and standards
I know there is workaround using Web-Services. If possible, please attach some link to compatibility table or some other resources. | 2014/11/10 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/26841988",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1383041/"
] | Unfortunately the ability to call EJBs between application servers is very badly specified (read, not at all).
The problem is that in order to call a remote EJB you'd need a client library. This client library contains many classes that are normally part of an application server. This works perfectly when the client is a Java SE application, but causes major issues when the client is another Java EE application server (as many classes are clashing then).
The only exception is when the two application servers are the exact same make and version, since no client library at all is needed then.
So in general what you're trying to do already doesn't work, but since you're using JBoss it absolutely doesn't work. JBoss is notoriously bad in being able to call EJBs from other versions of JBoss. Much has been written about this, and many attempts have been made to workaround it, but as far as I know it never really worked.
Theoretically this could have been fixed in the EJB spec a long time ago, but EJB is more or less being decommissioned (its features re-implemented using other specs) so quite understandably there's very little impetus to fix anything here. | [This Stackoverflow answer](https://stackoverflow.com/a/26162850/132374) claims that it's possible for Wildfly to invoke EJB's in JBoss 5, so hopefully that would work for JBoss 4 also. Best of luck! |
83,715 | In the chapter electromagnetic waves I was introduced with the concept of displacement current inside a capacitor. Since the region inside the capacitor is a dielectric there is no charge carriers in it. Then, what constitutes displacement current if it flows over there?
I know that it is a type of electric current formed by changing electric field.Conduction current involves flowing electrons and there is no electrons capable of moving about in a dielectric. But, then what is actually happening when we say displacement current? | 2013/11/07 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/83715",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/23742/"
] | First, the displacement current is a result of time varying electric field (not magnetic field), that is clear to see from Amperes law:
One way of interpreting the above equation is to say that the conduction current density (the first term in right hand side) and displacement current density (the second term in right hand side) generate a curly magnetic field. It is true that displacement current is not described by moving charges, but it was called a current because it generates the same phenomena as conduction current does, hence it is called a current.
To understand how it works physically, let us think of a capacitor driven by time varying source as shown in the following figure. The left plate is connected to the positive terminal of a time varying voltage source, the right plate is connected to negative terminal or ground if you wish. The two plates are separated by a dielectric material that doesn’t allow the charges to move into it.
One way of interpreting the displacement current is, when the positive voltage terminal is biased, the positive charges (conventionally) are driven away from it. That means they get away (**move as current**) as far as they can, until they stop in the left plate of the capacitor where they see an open circuit. As positive charges accumulate at the left plate, they give rise to field E that penetrates the dielectric and is seen by positive charges in the right plate. The positive charges in the right plate are repelled by the electric field, so they move (**as current**) until they make it to the negative terminal or ground. Hence the current in the circuit is continuous without the need of positive charges to penetrate the dielectric. Their electric field did the job!!
Final two remarks, the first is, we know that electrons are the ones who move so the direction of motion is reversed, still the argument I explained earlier holds for electrons. The second is, if you make the separation between the plates so big such that the electric field at one side is NOT seen by the charges in the other plate, that is no longer a capacitor. It will act as an open circuit with means no current will flow what so ever (That argument doesn’t apply to very high frequencies).
Hope that helped | Displacement current is not formed by a changing magnetic field. Rather, it is due to a changing electric field (between the two plates of a capacitor, maybe). |
333,498 | I've written a batch script which copies of some files in the CommonAppData folder (C:\ProgramData) to the logged in User's Local AppData. What I would like to do is to execute this script for every user every time they login. I found many articles talking about the execution of batch files on startup but I would like to know how to do the same on each login.
I've a written a batch file and copied it in :
>
> C:\Windows\System32\GroupPolicy\User\Scripts\Logon
>
>
>
But it does not seem to be working. | 2011/11/22 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/333498",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/101735/"
] | Sounds like you want [Logon scripts](http://support.microsoft.com/kb/556007) | In case it is needed at home or something small you could put it in the Startup folder of the user, it get executed each time the user enters the system.
It is simple, but I like to keep things like that. |
333,498 | I've written a batch script which copies of some files in the CommonAppData folder (C:\ProgramData) to the logged in User's Local AppData. What I would like to do is to execute this script for every user every time they login. I found many articles talking about the execution of batch files on startup but I would like to know how to do the same on each login.
I've a written a batch file and copied it in :
>
> C:\Windows\System32\GroupPolicy\User\Scripts\Logon
>
>
>
But it does not seem to be working. | 2011/11/22 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/333498",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/101735/"
] | Sounds like you want [Logon scripts](http://support.microsoft.com/kb/556007) | Put your batch/script file in:
C:\windows\system32\GroupPolicy\User\Scripts\Logon
Note: no spaces in the filename use \_ or - instead
ie: map\_drive.bat or map-drive.bat not: map drive.bat
Once complete open gpedit.msc
Select user configuration->windows settings->scripts
Double click on Logon
Select add and browse to your batch/script file
Make sure you click "Apply" or your changes will not be saved. |
133,432 | The [treasure vault](https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/adventures/rot/death-to-the-wyrmspeakers#11TreasureVault) described on page 44 of *Rise of Tiamat* mentions:
>
> This area is guarded by 2 **wraiths** and 4 **specters**.
>
>
>
It mentions that the wraiths are warriors who pledged their souls, okay, fine, two wraiths. But then it mentions that
>
> The specters are the reanimated souls of three cultists who died here and of three yuan-ti that died exploring the ruins.
>
>
>
I'm not a mathematician by trade, but I'm fairly certain that adds up to 6 specters. So which one is correct? The first text or the second?
A developer answer or an official errata if it exists would be preferable. | 2018/10/11 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133432",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/10921/"
] | 2 Wraiths and 4 Specters is correct
===================================
1. Nothing precludes 6 people turning into 4 monsters
-----------------------------------------------------
Maybe two of them aren't important enough to get their own "body" (excuse the lack therof). Maybe some of them fused into each other to create a total of four specters. Or maybe something killed some of them (such as the yuan ti that were exploring). It doesn't really matter the exact cause, because there's no conservation of energy law for turning cultists / snakes into specters.
2. The xp cost lines up for a deadly adventure with 6 creatures
---------------------------------------------------------------
The party should start the adventure around level 7, and there's one milestone between the start and now. That brings us up to level 8. Hard XP for four level-8 characters is 5600 and Deadly is 8400. XP spent for 2 wraiths and 4 specters is 8800, close enough; whereas XP spent for an additional 2 specters is 12000, WAY over. Even if the party were level-9 at this point, that would still be 2500xp over budget.
3. Lastly, and leastly, devs make mistakes.
-------------------------------------------
It is entirely possible (I will say nothing of the probability) that it was supposed to say "two and two" or "one and three" or whatever and whoever was writing missed it. OR, if it *is* a mistake, I find it most likely that an earlier revision had 6 specters and they forgot to change the text.
---
Addendum: WotC Support says "2 wraiths, 4 specters"
---------------------------------------------------
I emailed [Wizards of the Coast's support team](https://support.wizards.com/hc/en-us). I hadn't used it before; kinda a mixed bag.
>
> Thank you for reaching out to Wizards of the Coast Customer Support, Based on the challenge ratings in the Dungeon Master's Guide it appears the 2 wraiths and 4 specters would be the appropriate encounter rather than 2 wraiths and 6 specters per the additional text. Again, The final word on any additions or other modifications to the encounter would be entirely at the DM's discretion. Thank you again for playing Dungeons & Dragons, we hope you and your party enjoy the remainder of the Rise of Tiamat!
>
>
> | Though there isn't an official answer that I can find I do have a possible answer and what I would say to a PC that somehow divined wondering where they're from.
It is possible that 2 of the specters were killed before the adventurers got there. Potentially the three cultist specters were animated then the yuan-ti killed two of the cultist specters but were in turn killed. therefor leaving us with one cultist specter and three yuan-ti specters.
Sorry that there is no official word on the topic but I would say use the 4 not the 6 because specific beats general. The text says specifically 4 and we are implying 6 from the flavor text. |
133,432 | The [treasure vault](https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/adventures/rot/death-to-the-wyrmspeakers#11TreasureVault) described on page 44 of *Rise of Tiamat* mentions:
>
> This area is guarded by 2 **wraiths** and 4 **specters**.
>
>
>
It mentions that the wraiths are warriors who pledged their souls, okay, fine, two wraiths. But then it mentions that
>
> The specters are the reanimated souls of three cultists who died here and of three yuan-ti that died exploring the ruins.
>
>
>
I'm not a mathematician by trade, but I'm fairly certain that adds up to 6 specters. So which one is correct? The first text or the second?
A developer answer or an official errata if it exists would be preferable. | 2018/10/11 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133432",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/10921/"
] | 2 Wraiths and 6 Specters is correct
===================================
1. Three risen dead don't turn into a single specter
----------------------------------------------------
The wraith ability "Create Specter" specifically creates one specter per one dead humanoid. While you can rule as you wish, for me personally it is intuitive that souls are on a 1-to-1 basis. There's never been a case of a "fused" ghost that I can remember.
2. The room is big enough that it makes sense
---------------------------------------------
As you can tell by reading the legend, the room is actually represented by tiles of 10 square feet rather than 5, meaning the treasure room is a 30ft-square (or a 6x6 grid, if you prefer). 8 monsters and some PCs is just fine. As an addendum I should remind that this is actually just Diderius' bedroom so it's fine if it's cramped for so many people to fight in it.
3. This room was so deadly that the entire cultist group failed to clear it
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The cultists went through other doors and fought undead guardians but didn't mark anything so clearly and adamantly as this one, with "DANGER" written on it and spiking it shut.
>
> They were so thoroughly terrified by the slaughter that they left a retinue of devils on watch duty just in case the undead guardians burst out.
>
>
>
Story-wise, this room was deadly to a party much larger than the adventurers' one, and it would be dishonest to dial it down (or fudge if you will) for the sake of PCs. This room is quite literally marked for the PCs not to go into it, and they should pay the price if they ignore the warning.
4. This room is not vital to the dungeon
----------------------------------------
They can skip this room entirely, it's more of a bonus challenge with bonus rewards. Even if they go in, they can leave if they don't want to fight the pack of CR 1 creatures. Apparently the undead didn't follow the cultists out.
5. Encounter difficulty calculations are *wildly* inaccurate
------------------------------------------------------------
While you may think the encounter is beyond deadly due to XP costs, you'd be surprised at how effective player characters are. A single mummy lord encounter is even deadlier than 2 wraiths + 6 specters, XP-wise, but you'll find he may not even get to play his turn before he dies. Specters are CR 1 enemies and can be taken out in their entirety by a couple of fireballs. The undead horde may be crippled by an averagely successful Turn Undead. Nothing about the composition of the undead suggests this encounter is actually hard.
6. The encounter is more than just the undead
---------------------------------------------
It seems to me that the author knew how underwhelming the encounter is to the PCs (combat-wise), that he explicitly reminds us
>
> to have the devils attack the party when they come up the stairs, completing the combat portion of this encounter.
>
>
> | Though there isn't an official answer that I can find I do have a possible answer and what I would say to a PC that somehow divined wondering where they're from.
It is possible that 2 of the specters were killed before the adventurers got there. Potentially the three cultist specters were animated then the yuan-ti killed two of the cultist specters but were in turn killed. therefor leaving us with one cultist specter and three yuan-ti specters.
Sorry that there is no official word on the topic but I would say use the 4 not the 6 because specific beats general. The text says specifically 4 and we are implying 6 from the flavor text. |
133,432 | The [treasure vault](https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/adventures/rot/death-to-the-wyrmspeakers#11TreasureVault) described on page 44 of *Rise of Tiamat* mentions:
>
> This area is guarded by 2 **wraiths** and 4 **specters**.
>
>
>
It mentions that the wraiths are warriors who pledged their souls, okay, fine, two wraiths. But then it mentions that
>
> The specters are the reanimated souls of three cultists who died here and of three yuan-ti that died exploring the ruins.
>
>
>
I'm not a mathematician by trade, but I'm fairly certain that adds up to 6 specters. So which one is correct? The first text or the second?
A developer answer or an official errata if it exists would be preferable. | 2018/10/11 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133432",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/10921/"
] | 2 Wraiths and 4 Specters is correct
===================================
1. Nothing precludes 6 people turning into 4 monsters
-----------------------------------------------------
Maybe two of them aren't important enough to get their own "body" (excuse the lack therof). Maybe some of them fused into each other to create a total of four specters. Or maybe something killed some of them (such as the yuan ti that were exploring). It doesn't really matter the exact cause, because there's no conservation of energy law for turning cultists / snakes into specters.
2. The xp cost lines up for a deadly adventure with 6 creatures
---------------------------------------------------------------
The party should start the adventure around level 7, and there's one milestone between the start and now. That brings us up to level 8. Hard XP for four level-8 characters is 5600 and Deadly is 8400. XP spent for 2 wraiths and 4 specters is 8800, close enough; whereas XP spent for an additional 2 specters is 12000, WAY over. Even if the party were level-9 at this point, that would still be 2500xp over budget.
3. Lastly, and leastly, devs make mistakes.
-------------------------------------------
It is entirely possible (I will say nothing of the probability) that it was supposed to say "two and two" or "one and three" or whatever and whoever was writing missed it. OR, if it *is* a mistake, I find it most likely that an earlier revision had 6 specters and they forgot to change the text.
---
Addendum: WotC Support says "2 wraiths, 4 specters"
---------------------------------------------------
I emailed [Wizards of the Coast's support team](https://support.wizards.com/hc/en-us). I hadn't used it before; kinda a mixed bag.
>
> Thank you for reaching out to Wizards of the Coast Customer Support, Based on the challenge ratings in the Dungeon Master's Guide it appears the 2 wraiths and 4 specters would be the appropriate encounter rather than 2 wraiths and 6 specters per the additional text. Again, The final word on any additions or other modifications to the encounter would be entirely at the DM's discretion. Thank you again for playing Dungeons & Dragons, we hope you and your party enjoy the remainder of the Rise of Tiamat!
>
>
> | The contradiction can be resolved without ignoring or changing any of the statements. Here is a breakdown of the 4 specters that fits all the information provided:
>
> 1 specter which is the reanimated soul of a yuan-ti that died exploring the ruins, 1 specter which is the reanimated soul of a cultist who died here, and 2 specters which are the reanimated souls of yuan-ti who were also cultists who died here while exploring the ruins.
>
>
>
That said, I haven't read that adventure so there might be a reason that the two groups can't overlap in this way, and this is also only "logic" that satisfies the provided conditions rather than something specifically indicated somewhere.
An alternative interpretation which also fits the provided statements:
>
> There are 6 specters, but two of them aren't guarding the area. It would be up to you which two those are and what they are doing instead.
>
>
> |
133,432 | The [treasure vault](https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/adventures/rot/death-to-the-wyrmspeakers#11TreasureVault) described on page 44 of *Rise of Tiamat* mentions:
>
> This area is guarded by 2 **wraiths** and 4 **specters**.
>
>
>
It mentions that the wraiths are warriors who pledged their souls, okay, fine, two wraiths. But then it mentions that
>
> The specters are the reanimated souls of three cultists who died here and of three yuan-ti that died exploring the ruins.
>
>
>
I'm not a mathematician by trade, but I'm fairly certain that adds up to 6 specters. So which one is correct? The first text or the second?
A developer answer or an official errata if it exists would be preferable. | 2018/10/11 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133432",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/10921/"
] | 2 Wraiths and 6 Specters is correct
===================================
1. Three risen dead don't turn into a single specter
----------------------------------------------------
The wraith ability "Create Specter" specifically creates one specter per one dead humanoid. While you can rule as you wish, for me personally it is intuitive that souls are on a 1-to-1 basis. There's never been a case of a "fused" ghost that I can remember.
2. The room is big enough that it makes sense
---------------------------------------------
As you can tell by reading the legend, the room is actually represented by tiles of 10 square feet rather than 5, meaning the treasure room is a 30ft-square (or a 6x6 grid, if you prefer). 8 monsters and some PCs is just fine. As an addendum I should remind that this is actually just Diderius' bedroom so it's fine if it's cramped for so many people to fight in it.
3. This room was so deadly that the entire cultist group failed to clear it
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The cultists went through other doors and fought undead guardians but didn't mark anything so clearly and adamantly as this one, with "DANGER" written on it and spiking it shut.
>
> They were so thoroughly terrified by the slaughter that they left a retinue of devils on watch duty just in case the undead guardians burst out.
>
>
>
Story-wise, this room was deadly to a party much larger than the adventurers' one, and it would be dishonest to dial it down (or fudge if you will) for the sake of PCs. This room is quite literally marked for the PCs not to go into it, and they should pay the price if they ignore the warning.
4. This room is not vital to the dungeon
----------------------------------------
They can skip this room entirely, it's more of a bonus challenge with bonus rewards. Even if they go in, they can leave if they don't want to fight the pack of CR 1 creatures. Apparently the undead didn't follow the cultists out.
5. Encounter difficulty calculations are *wildly* inaccurate
------------------------------------------------------------
While you may think the encounter is beyond deadly due to XP costs, you'd be surprised at how effective player characters are. A single mummy lord encounter is even deadlier than 2 wraiths + 6 specters, XP-wise, but you'll find he may not even get to play his turn before he dies. Specters are CR 1 enemies and can be taken out in their entirety by a couple of fireballs. The undead horde may be crippled by an averagely successful Turn Undead. Nothing about the composition of the undead suggests this encounter is actually hard.
6. The encounter is more than just the undead
---------------------------------------------
It seems to me that the author knew how underwhelming the encounter is to the PCs (combat-wise), that he explicitly reminds us
>
> to have the devils attack the party when they come up the stairs, completing the combat portion of this encounter.
>
>
> | The contradiction can be resolved without ignoring or changing any of the statements. Here is a breakdown of the 4 specters that fits all the information provided:
>
> 1 specter which is the reanimated soul of a yuan-ti that died exploring the ruins, 1 specter which is the reanimated soul of a cultist who died here, and 2 specters which are the reanimated souls of yuan-ti who were also cultists who died here while exploring the ruins.
>
>
>
That said, I haven't read that adventure so there might be a reason that the two groups can't overlap in this way, and this is also only "logic" that satisfies the provided conditions rather than something specifically indicated somewhere.
An alternative interpretation which also fits the provided statements:
>
> There are 6 specters, but two of them aren't guarding the area. It would be up to you which two those are and what they are doing instead.
>
>
> |
133,432 | The [treasure vault](https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/adventures/rot/death-to-the-wyrmspeakers#11TreasureVault) described on page 44 of *Rise of Tiamat* mentions:
>
> This area is guarded by 2 **wraiths** and 4 **specters**.
>
>
>
It mentions that the wraiths are warriors who pledged their souls, okay, fine, two wraiths. But then it mentions that
>
> The specters are the reanimated souls of three cultists who died here and of three yuan-ti that died exploring the ruins.
>
>
>
I'm not a mathematician by trade, but I'm fairly certain that adds up to 6 specters. So which one is correct? The first text or the second?
A developer answer or an official errata if it exists would be preferable. | 2018/10/11 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133432",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/10921/"
] | 2 Wraiths and 4 Specters is correct
===================================
1. Nothing precludes 6 people turning into 4 monsters
-----------------------------------------------------
Maybe two of them aren't important enough to get their own "body" (excuse the lack therof). Maybe some of them fused into each other to create a total of four specters. Or maybe something killed some of them (such as the yuan ti that were exploring). It doesn't really matter the exact cause, because there's no conservation of energy law for turning cultists / snakes into specters.
2. The xp cost lines up for a deadly adventure with 6 creatures
---------------------------------------------------------------
The party should start the adventure around level 7, and there's one milestone between the start and now. That brings us up to level 8. Hard XP for four level-8 characters is 5600 and Deadly is 8400. XP spent for 2 wraiths and 4 specters is 8800, close enough; whereas XP spent for an additional 2 specters is 12000, WAY over. Even if the party were level-9 at this point, that would still be 2500xp over budget.
3. Lastly, and leastly, devs make mistakes.
-------------------------------------------
It is entirely possible (I will say nothing of the probability) that it was supposed to say "two and two" or "one and three" or whatever and whoever was writing missed it. OR, if it *is* a mistake, I find it most likely that an earlier revision had 6 specters and they forgot to change the text.
---
Addendum: WotC Support says "2 wraiths, 4 specters"
---------------------------------------------------
I emailed [Wizards of the Coast's support team](https://support.wizards.com/hc/en-us). I hadn't used it before; kinda a mixed bag.
>
> Thank you for reaching out to Wizards of the Coast Customer Support, Based on the challenge ratings in the Dungeon Master's Guide it appears the 2 wraiths and 4 specters would be the appropriate encounter rather than 2 wraiths and 6 specters per the additional text. Again, The final word on any additions or other modifications to the encounter would be entirely at the DM's discretion. Thank you again for playing Dungeons & Dragons, we hope you and your party enjoy the remainder of the Rise of Tiamat!
>
>
> | ~~My guess (for a guess it is) is that there are two Wraiths and four Specters, for a total of 6 specters (lowercase, as a general word for ghosts referring to the 4+2).~~
Is there mention of the Wraiths' background, or is only the Specters explained? If the former, this answer is obviously wrong, but if the latter, this might be it.
What would be a more reasonable difficulty for the intended level+party size at that point? 2 wraiths and 4 or 6 specters? That's also an indication of what's most likely the right answer, though again obfuscated, since you don't know the intended encounter difficulty. |
133,432 | The [treasure vault](https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/adventures/rot/death-to-the-wyrmspeakers#11TreasureVault) described on page 44 of *Rise of Tiamat* mentions:
>
> This area is guarded by 2 **wraiths** and 4 **specters**.
>
>
>
It mentions that the wraiths are warriors who pledged their souls, okay, fine, two wraiths. But then it mentions that
>
> The specters are the reanimated souls of three cultists who died here and of three yuan-ti that died exploring the ruins.
>
>
>
I'm not a mathematician by trade, but I'm fairly certain that adds up to 6 specters. So which one is correct? The first text or the second?
A developer answer or an official errata if it exists would be preferable. | 2018/10/11 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133432",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/10921/"
] | 2 Wraiths and 6 Specters is correct
===================================
1. Three risen dead don't turn into a single specter
----------------------------------------------------
The wraith ability "Create Specter" specifically creates one specter per one dead humanoid. While you can rule as you wish, for me personally it is intuitive that souls are on a 1-to-1 basis. There's never been a case of a "fused" ghost that I can remember.
2. The room is big enough that it makes sense
---------------------------------------------
As you can tell by reading the legend, the room is actually represented by tiles of 10 square feet rather than 5, meaning the treasure room is a 30ft-square (or a 6x6 grid, if you prefer). 8 monsters and some PCs is just fine. As an addendum I should remind that this is actually just Diderius' bedroom so it's fine if it's cramped for so many people to fight in it.
3. This room was so deadly that the entire cultist group failed to clear it
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The cultists went through other doors and fought undead guardians but didn't mark anything so clearly and adamantly as this one, with "DANGER" written on it and spiking it shut.
>
> They were so thoroughly terrified by the slaughter that they left a retinue of devils on watch duty just in case the undead guardians burst out.
>
>
>
Story-wise, this room was deadly to a party much larger than the adventurers' one, and it would be dishonest to dial it down (or fudge if you will) for the sake of PCs. This room is quite literally marked for the PCs not to go into it, and they should pay the price if they ignore the warning.
4. This room is not vital to the dungeon
----------------------------------------
They can skip this room entirely, it's more of a bonus challenge with bonus rewards. Even if they go in, they can leave if they don't want to fight the pack of CR 1 creatures. Apparently the undead didn't follow the cultists out.
5. Encounter difficulty calculations are *wildly* inaccurate
------------------------------------------------------------
While you may think the encounter is beyond deadly due to XP costs, you'd be surprised at how effective player characters are. A single mummy lord encounter is even deadlier than 2 wraiths + 6 specters, XP-wise, but you'll find he may not even get to play his turn before he dies. Specters are CR 1 enemies and can be taken out in their entirety by a couple of fireballs. The undead horde may be crippled by an averagely successful Turn Undead. Nothing about the composition of the undead suggests this encounter is actually hard.
6. The encounter is more than just the undead
---------------------------------------------
It seems to me that the author knew how underwhelming the encounter is to the PCs (combat-wise), that he explicitly reminds us
>
> to have the devils attack the party when they come up the stairs, completing the combat portion of this encounter.
>
>
> | ~~My guess (for a guess it is) is that there are two Wraiths and four Specters, for a total of 6 specters (lowercase, as a general word for ghosts referring to the 4+2).~~
Is there mention of the Wraiths' background, or is only the Specters explained? If the former, this answer is obviously wrong, but if the latter, this might be it.
What would be a more reasonable difficulty for the intended level+party size at that point? 2 wraiths and 4 or 6 specters? That's also an indication of what's most likely the right answer, though again obfuscated, since you don't know the intended encounter difficulty. |
133,432 | The [treasure vault](https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/adventures/rot/death-to-the-wyrmspeakers#11TreasureVault) described on page 44 of *Rise of Tiamat* mentions:
>
> This area is guarded by 2 **wraiths** and 4 **specters**.
>
>
>
It mentions that the wraiths are warriors who pledged their souls, okay, fine, two wraiths. But then it mentions that
>
> The specters are the reanimated souls of three cultists who died here and of three yuan-ti that died exploring the ruins.
>
>
>
I'm not a mathematician by trade, but I'm fairly certain that adds up to 6 specters. So which one is correct? The first text or the second?
A developer answer or an official errata if it exists would be preferable. | 2018/10/11 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/133432",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/10921/"
] | 2 Wraiths and 4 Specters is correct
===================================
1. Nothing precludes 6 people turning into 4 monsters
-----------------------------------------------------
Maybe two of them aren't important enough to get their own "body" (excuse the lack therof). Maybe some of them fused into each other to create a total of four specters. Or maybe something killed some of them (such as the yuan ti that were exploring). It doesn't really matter the exact cause, because there's no conservation of energy law for turning cultists / snakes into specters.
2. The xp cost lines up for a deadly adventure with 6 creatures
---------------------------------------------------------------
The party should start the adventure around level 7, and there's one milestone between the start and now. That brings us up to level 8. Hard XP for four level-8 characters is 5600 and Deadly is 8400. XP spent for 2 wraiths and 4 specters is 8800, close enough; whereas XP spent for an additional 2 specters is 12000, WAY over. Even if the party were level-9 at this point, that would still be 2500xp over budget.
3. Lastly, and leastly, devs make mistakes.
-------------------------------------------
It is entirely possible (I will say nothing of the probability) that it was supposed to say "two and two" or "one and three" or whatever and whoever was writing missed it. OR, if it *is* a mistake, I find it most likely that an earlier revision had 6 specters and they forgot to change the text.
---
Addendum: WotC Support says "2 wraiths, 4 specters"
---------------------------------------------------
I emailed [Wizards of the Coast's support team](https://support.wizards.com/hc/en-us). I hadn't used it before; kinda a mixed bag.
>
> Thank you for reaching out to Wizards of the Coast Customer Support, Based on the challenge ratings in the Dungeon Master's Guide it appears the 2 wraiths and 4 specters would be the appropriate encounter rather than 2 wraiths and 6 specters per the additional text. Again, The final word on any additions or other modifications to the encounter would be entirely at the DM's discretion. Thank you again for playing Dungeons & Dragons, we hope you and your party enjoy the remainder of the Rise of Tiamat!
>
>
> | 2 Wraiths and 6 Specters is correct
===================================
1. Three risen dead don't turn into a single specter
----------------------------------------------------
The wraith ability "Create Specter" specifically creates one specter per one dead humanoid. While you can rule as you wish, for me personally it is intuitive that souls are on a 1-to-1 basis. There's never been a case of a "fused" ghost that I can remember.
2. The room is big enough that it makes sense
---------------------------------------------
As you can tell by reading the legend, the room is actually represented by tiles of 10 square feet rather than 5, meaning the treasure room is a 30ft-square (or a 6x6 grid, if you prefer). 8 monsters and some PCs is just fine. As an addendum I should remind that this is actually just Diderius' bedroom so it's fine if it's cramped for so many people to fight in it.
3. This room was so deadly that the entire cultist group failed to clear it
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The cultists went through other doors and fought undead guardians but didn't mark anything so clearly and adamantly as this one, with "DANGER" written on it and spiking it shut.
>
> They were so thoroughly terrified by the slaughter that they left a retinue of devils on watch duty just in case the undead guardians burst out.
>
>
>
Story-wise, this room was deadly to a party much larger than the adventurers' one, and it would be dishonest to dial it down (or fudge if you will) for the sake of PCs. This room is quite literally marked for the PCs not to go into it, and they should pay the price if they ignore the warning.
4. This room is not vital to the dungeon
----------------------------------------
They can skip this room entirely, it's more of a bonus challenge with bonus rewards. Even if they go in, they can leave if they don't want to fight the pack of CR 1 creatures. Apparently the undead didn't follow the cultists out.
5. Encounter difficulty calculations are *wildly* inaccurate
------------------------------------------------------------
While you may think the encounter is beyond deadly due to XP costs, you'd be surprised at how effective player characters are. A single mummy lord encounter is even deadlier than 2 wraiths + 6 specters, XP-wise, but you'll find he may not even get to play his turn before he dies. Specters are CR 1 enemies and can be taken out in their entirety by a couple of fireballs. The undead horde may be crippled by an averagely successful Turn Undead. Nothing about the composition of the undead suggests this encounter is actually hard.
6. The encounter is more than just the undead
---------------------------------------------
It seems to me that the author knew how underwhelming the encounter is to the PCs (combat-wise), that he explicitly reminds us
>
> to have the devils attack the party when they come up the stairs, completing the combat portion of this encounter.
>
>
> |
8,264,105 | I Want to build website which containt map on homepage like <http://maps.burningsilicon.net/> . But i confuse how to build it and what tools which i should use.
Anyone can help me ? give me suggesstion please.. | 2011/11/25 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/8264105",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/775618/"
] | Google Maps API: <http://code.google.com/apis/maps/index.html> | I would start by checking out either Google Maps or Bing Maps. They each have APIs available and thorough documentation for how to embed on a website. They are also free to use. |
5,505,256 | I want to add information in the additional information tab of the product page, but can't figure out from where it picks the data. | 2011/03/31 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/5505256",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/686406/"
] | Check out the product attributes in the backend. You can configure existing and/or new product attributes and make them (optionally) show up in this section. Make sure the attributes have "Visible on Product View Page on Front-end" set to Yes. | 1)First create the attribute as per your requirement
2)Assign this to default attribute set then save.
3)go to attribute and make visible(from drop down) your recently created attribute.
4)fill some value in the attribute(you created) for your selected product .
5)Again go to the attributes select your attribute then select yes or no to " Visible on Product View Page on Front-end " and "Used in Product Listing" depending your need.
If you need more help please inform.. |
361,654 | This s a newbie question.
When receiving serial data from a microcontroller by a PC program I need the microcontroller to be nearby and it needs to be connected to a USB port and send the data via this USB port to the PC program.
But I want to send and test a PC program by a virtual port program which sends data to a specified port without a microcontroller is around. So one can test the received data by a PC program without an actual device sending data to the PC.
How is it done? Is there such emulator program electrical engineers use?
I know how to use hyperTerminal but it is used for sending or receiving data from a real device like a microcontroller. | 2018/03/14 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/361654",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/161776/"
] | I have used Com0COM
But, there is nothing wrong with getting two USB serial adaptors and connecting them with a null-modem plug. (from the same place that sells the usb-serial).
The Com0COM / Virtual serial port can take 10x longer to actually get working sometimes, and you just wish you had used wires (which are also a cross-platform solution)
If you are using binary data, Realterm may be more useful than hyperterm. It is good for sending your test data, and displaying binary data.
If your task is along the data collection lines, then you might consider making your program capture serial data to file, and process data from the file. This makes development very easy, and when there are problems, it is very easy to debug as the serial comms has always been captured in a file. | I did development without the final hardware by simply connecting two USB<->UART cables together. A piece of software was connected to the first port, another software module to the second.
I also did that with USB<->RS-485 cables to simulate a bus with many devices.
It saved me countless debug hours, because it was much easier to compile and run 3 instances of the communication code simulating the device network, than to flash and set up 3 boards.
The communication code had an abstraction layer so that it could run on a PC and on a microcontroller. |
361,654 | This s a newbie question.
When receiving serial data from a microcontroller by a PC program I need the microcontroller to be nearby and it needs to be connected to a USB port and send the data via this USB port to the PC program.
But I want to send and test a PC program by a virtual port program which sends data to a specified port without a microcontroller is around. So one can test the received data by a PC program without an actual device sending data to the PC.
How is it done? Is there such emulator program electrical engineers use?
I know how to use hyperTerminal but it is used for sending or receiving data from a real device like a microcontroller. | 2018/03/14 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/361654",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/161776/"
] | I have used Com0COM
But, there is nothing wrong with getting two USB serial adaptors and connecting them with a null-modem plug. (from the same place that sells the usb-serial).
The Com0COM / Virtual serial port can take 10x longer to actually get working sometimes, and you just wish you had used wires (which are also a cross-platform solution)
If you are using binary data, Realterm may be more useful than hyperterm. It is good for sending your test data, and displaying binary data.
If your task is along the data collection lines, then you might consider making your program capture serial data to file, and process data from the file. This makes development very easy, and when there are problems, it is very easy to debug as the serial comms has always been captured in a file. | Well, if you need to use 2 programs to access the same COM port or 2 COM ports to the program, then you need a [serial splitter](https://www.serial-splitter.com/) for such actions. You need to choose either split or join.
You create virtual COM ports and can create the connection you need and use the terminal to check the correctness of data transfer.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PQzrE.jpg) |
7,814 | On the Ryanair website, I came across an FAQ entry on [whether parachutes are allowed on planes](http://www.ryanair.com/en/questions/can-i-bring-a-parachute). (So I presume it must be asked frequently enough to be added to the FAQ page of a major low-cost airline.)
What is the legality of this in US, UK/EU - are you allowed to carry a parachute on an airplane past security or will it be confiscated / passenger pulled out for screening? Any licenses or such that are required, as with guns? | 2012/06/18 | [
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/7814",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/users/108/"
] | The TSA actually has [a section devoted to this](http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/assistant/editorial_1147.shtm) on their website:
>
> You may bring skydiving rigs with and without Automatic Activation
> Devices (AAD) as carry-on or checked luggage.
>
>
> Typically, a rig will move through the checked luggage or carry-on
> security screening process without needing physical inspection.
> However, TSA security officers have a duty to thoroughly inspect any
> item that raises suspicion. If security officers determine that they
> need to open a rig to inspect it, you must be present and will be
> allowed to assist. For this reason, we encourage skydivers to add at
> least 30 minutes to the airline's recommended arrival window when they
> are traveling with their parachutes.
>
>
>
Fox News also has [an article on strange carry-on items](http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2012/04/22/surprising-things-can-take-on-plane/) which mentions it, along with pot-bellied pigs and monkeys...:
>
> Skydivers need to add 30 minutes to their arrival time because
> although you can carry on your skydiving rigs, with and without
> Automatic Activation Devices (AAD), security may choose to open a rig
> to inspect it. You must be present and will be allowed to assist with
> the inspection.
>
>
>
Of course, given the pressurisation issues of a cabin, the speed of the plane, and other factors involved in an emergency, the odds of you being able to use it **successfully** are extremely ... small... | A separate answer because it's more a discussion about the facts and anecdotes from actual skydivers who have taken their rigs on board.
[Today I learned you can take your own personal parachute on commercial flights as long as it meets certain requirements](http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/l9fzw/til_you_can_take_your_own_personal_parachute_on/)
TL;DR - yes you can, as long as certain aspects are inspected and the smoke cannisters / flares are removed. |
7,814 | On the Ryanair website, I came across an FAQ entry on [whether parachutes are allowed on planes](http://www.ryanair.com/en/questions/can-i-bring-a-parachute). (So I presume it must be asked frequently enough to be added to the FAQ page of a major low-cost airline.)
What is the legality of this in US, UK/EU - are you allowed to carry a parachute on an airplane past security or will it be confiscated / passenger pulled out for screening? Any licenses or such that are required, as with guns? | 2012/06/18 | [
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/7814",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/users/108/"
] | The TSA actually has [a section devoted to this](http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/assistant/editorial_1147.shtm) on their website:
>
> You may bring skydiving rigs with and without Automatic Activation
> Devices (AAD) as carry-on or checked luggage.
>
>
> Typically, a rig will move through the checked luggage or carry-on
> security screening process without needing physical inspection.
> However, TSA security officers have a duty to thoroughly inspect any
> item that raises suspicion. If security officers determine that they
> need to open a rig to inspect it, you must be present and will be
> allowed to assist. For this reason, we encourage skydivers to add at
> least 30 minutes to the airline's recommended arrival window when they
> are traveling with their parachutes.
>
>
>
Fox News also has [an article on strange carry-on items](http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2012/04/22/surprising-things-can-take-on-plane/) which mentions it, along with pot-bellied pigs and monkeys...:
>
> Skydivers need to add 30 minutes to their arrival time because
> although you can carry on your skydiving rigs, with and without
> Automatic Activation Devices (AAD), security may choose to open a rig
> to inspect it. You must be present and will be allowed to assist with
> the inspection.
>
>
>
Of course, given the pressurisation issues of a cabin, the speed of the plane, and other factors involved in an emergency, the odds of you being able to use it **successfully** are extremely ... small... | The issue for me has not been one of wanting the parachute with me for safety reasons (what circumstance would require bailing out of a 727 that wouldn't best be served dealing with it in another manner? Yes, the unfortunately obvious scenario comes to mind, but the odds, despite everything, are incredibly low). For me, the primary reason I travel with my rig with me instead of checking it is a simple matter of cost. I have about 5 grand in it. I really don't want to depend on some idiot (i.e. someone not me) to get it to my destination. I've had too many instances of my luggage arriving days after I do, and at least one where, by the time the airline found my luggage, I told them to just send it back to ORL and I'd pick it up there the next day when I returned from my trip (2 week stay in NYC). If I'm travelling with my parachute, it's because I want to use it, not so it can fly all over the US while I wait at my destination.
I've never had delays going through security with my rig. I always check to make sure the AAD is off when I leave home and I pack my hook knife in my checked baggage. While I have had a few quick trips in the past to Rome, Ga where I didn't want to pack a carry-on, I simply left the hook knife at home and kept one at my friends' house to use while jumping there. Normally, security just flips open the covers for my main and reserve and run their chem tests and that's the end of it. I also typically do NOT follow the USPA recommendation and pack my rig in a bag. The bag takes up more space, and I often use as my checked bag and put my clothes in it along with my miscellaneous equipment (the aforementioned hook knife and helmet, altimeter, jumpsuit, etc). However, on light trips, I have put a change of clothing and my gear in the gear bag with the chute. I simply pack it all one one side of the container to make it easier for the TSA to take the rig out if they want to. |
7,814 | On the Ryanair website, I came across an FAQ entry on [whether parachutes are allowed on planes](http://www.ryanair.com/en/questions/can-i-bring-a-parachute). (So I presume it must be asked frequently enough to be added to the FAQ page of a major low-cost airline.)
What is the legality of this in US, UK/EU - are you allowed to carry a parachute on an airplane past security or will it be confiscated / passenger pulled out for screening? Any licenses or such that are required, as with guns? | 2012/06/18 | [
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/7814",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/users/108/"
] | The issue for me has not been one of wanting the parachute with me for safety reasons (what circumstance would require bailing out of a 727 that wouldn't best be served dealing with it in another manner? Yes, the unfortunately obvious scenario comes to mind, but the odds, despite everything, are incredibly low). For me, the primary reason I travel with my rig with me instead of checking it is a simple matter of cost. I have about 5 grand in it. I really don't want to depend on some idiot (i.e. someone not me) to get it to my destination. I've had too many instances of my luggage arriving days after I do, and at least one where, by the time the airline found my luggage, I told them to just send it back to ORL and I'd pick it up there the next day when I returned from my trip (2 week stay in NYC). If I'm travelling with my parachute, it's because I want to use it, not so it can fly all over the US while I wait at my destination.
I've never had delays going through security with my rig. I always check to make sure the AAD is off when I leave home and I pack my hook knife in my checked baggage. While I have had a few quick trips in the past to Rome, Ga where I didn't want to pack a carry-on, I simply left the hook knife at home and kept one at my friends' house to use while jumping there. Normally, security just flips open the covers for my main and reserve and run their chem tests and that's the end of it. I also typically do NOT follow the USPA recommendation and pack my rig in a bag. The bag takes up more space, and I often use as my checked bag and put my clothes in it along with my miscellaneous equipment (the aforementioned hook knife and helmet, altimeter, jumpsuit, etc). However, on light trips, I have put a change of clothing and my gear in the gear bag with the chute. I simply pack it all one one side of the container to make it easier for the TSA to take the rig out if they want to. | A separate answer because it's more a discussion about the facts and anecdotes from actual skydivers who have taken their rigs on board.
[Today I learned you can take your own personal parachute on commercial flights as long as it meets certain requirements](http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/l9fzw/til_you_can_take_your_own_personal_parachute_on/)
TL;DR - yes you can, as long as certain aspects are inspected and the smoke cannisters / flares are removed. |
277,076 | I've not worked with [this connector](http://modernroboticsinc.com/powerpole-extension-cable-kit) in many years. I'm working with a robotics team and these connectors are very long and bulky and take up [more, think] space [than they need to ]. I'm trying to find a shorter or L-shaped version. Have found none, wondering if I missed it or if there is an *engineering reason* why they can't be made that way.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/6hJpG.png) | 2016/12/27 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/277076",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/7236/"
] | They're built that way because they are optimized for 1. Power handling and 2. Cost.
The pins are sheet metal construction (folded from a flat sheet) and typically tin-plated copper. As such cannot rely on a solid core to improve conduction and better materials (e.g. gold) to reduce resistance.
All they have to work with is surface area and since the diameter of the pin must remain small enough to retain strength (it's a rolled up sheet) yet large enough to be manipulated by conventional forming equipment, the only degree of freedom left is the length... ergo the longer pins.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/3DJRn.png) | According to the text you linked to, the connector is rated for 45 A. This requires a fairly large contact surface area between the two parts of the connector. Apparently the designers of this connector chose to make it long and narrow rather than short and wide.
However, it also says the wire is "14 or 16 gauge". According to the first ampacity table I found online, 16 gauge is limited to about 22 A for "chassis wiring" (Different standards might give slightly different ampacities, based on different assumptions about airflow conditions and allowed temperature rise of the wire).
So either the wire is undersized for the connector, or the connector is over-specified for the wire. If your current requirement is less than 25 A, you can almost certainly find a more compact connector able to handle it. |
277,076 | I've not worked with [this connector](http://modernroboticsinc.com/powerpole-extension-cable-kit) in many years. I'm working with a robotics team and these connectors are very long and bulky and take up [more, think] space [than they need to ]. I'm trying to find a shorter or L-shaped version. Have found none, wondering if I missed it or if there is an *engineering reason* why they can't be made that way.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/6hJpG.png) | 2016/12/27 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/277076",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/7236/"
] | They're built that way because they are optimized for 1. Power handling and 2. Cost.
The pins are sheet metal construction (folded from a flat sheet) and typically tin-plated copper. As such cannot rely on a solid core to improve conduction and better materials (e.g. gold) to reduce resistance.
All they have to work with is surface area and since the diameter of the pin must remain small enough to retain strength (it's a rolled up sheet) yet large enough to be manipulated by conventional forming equipment, the only degree of freedom left is the length... ergo the longer pins.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/3DJRn.png) | I have never used the specific connectors you have linked to, but here is a general idea. Connector design depends on largely three things:
1. How much current do the contacts carry. This determines the conductor and contact area. Higher the current, larger the conductor contact area you need. If the area is too small, the contact will have high resistance and start heating up.
2. Voltage and insulation. The voltage between adjacent pins determines the distance and and the insulation between between adjacent connectors: for instance a 5V connector can have pins a few mm apart, not so for a 400V rated connector.
3. Reliability and mating cycles:
Some connectors are designed for repeated plug-and unplug, some are intended to be connected/disconnected infrequently only during install or service, which also determines the size and strength of the connector as a whole.
Based on the criteria you can surely find other connectors, selecting one based on your tradeoffs. |
277,076 | I've not worked with [this connector](http://modernroboticsinc.com/powerpole-extension-cable-kit) in many years. I'm working with a robotics team and these connectors are very long and bulky and take up [more, think] space [than they need to ]. I'm trying to find a shorter or L-shaped version. Have found none, wondering if I missed it or if there is an *engineering reason* why they can't be made that way.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/6hJpG.png) | 2016/12/27 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/277076",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/7236/"
] | According to the text you linked to, the connector is rated for 45 A. This requires a fairly large contact surface area between the two parts of the connector. Apparently the designers of this connector chose to make it long and narrow rather than short and wide.
However, it also says the wire is "14 or 16 gauge". According to the first ampacity table I found online, 16 gauge is limited to about 22 A for "chassis wiring" (Different standards might give slightly different ampacities, based on different assumptions about airflow conditions and allowed temperature rise of the wire).
So either the wire is undersized for the connector, or the connector is over-specified for the wire. If your current requirement is less than 25 A, you can almost certainly find a more compact connector able to handle it. | I have never used the specific connectors you have linked to, but here is a general idea. Connector design depends on largely three things:
1. How much current do the contacts carry. This determines the conductor and contact area. Higher the current, larger the conductor contact area you need. If the area is too small, the contact will have high resistance and start heating up.
2. Voltage and insulation. The voltage between adjacent pins determines the distance and and the insulation between between adjacent connectors: for instance a 5V connector can have pins a few mm apart, not so for a 400V rated connector.
3. Reliability and mating cycles:
Some connectors are designed for repeated plug-and unplug, some are intended to be connected/disconnected infrequently only during install or service, which also determines the size and strength of the connector as a whole.
Based on the criteria you can surely find other connectors, selecting one based on your tradeoffs. |
343,307 | 
[simulate this circuit](/plugins/schematics?image=http%3a%2f%2fi.stack.imgur.com%2fC20tu.png) – Schematic created using [CircuitLab](https://www.circuitlab.com/)
Attaching simplified working to show I've worked it out already, however the answer didn't come easily and I'm struggling to improve on circuit analysis. Also, what textbooks are good for improving?[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/rADlb.jpg) | 2017/12/04 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/343307",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/170914/"
] | You can convert R3, R4 and R5 into an equivalent Y circuit, then just add all the resistances and use good old Ohm's law. | Try Node-Voltage method or graph theory.
I suggest 'Electrical Circuits' (by james w. nilsson) |
36,965 | Got into an argument with someone I know about this. I think "shouldn't of" is incorrect and comes from people typing the phrase the way they're used to pronouncing it.
He believes both are correct. Thoughts guys? | 2011/08/06 | [
"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/36965",
"https://english.stackexchange.com",
"https://english.stackexchange.com/users/11678/"
] | You are very right, Daniel. The correct phrase is "shouldn't have", but because in speech, we tend to pronounce the "'ve" part of "have" only, it could be mistaken for "of". See this [site:](http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/couldof.html)
>
> This is one of those errors typically made by a person more familiar with the spoken than the written form of English. A sentence like “I would have gone if anyone had given me free tickets” is normally spoken in a slurred way so that the two words “would have” are not distinctly separated, but blended together into what is properly rendered “would’ve.” Seeing that “V” tips you off right away that “would’ve” is a contraction of “would have.” But many people hear “would of” and that’s how they write it. Wrong.
>
>
>
Now, I know the above article is talking about "should of" not "shouldn't of", but where does "shouldn't of" come from? It's a negation of the root mistake! | "Shouldn't've" is a double contraction of "should not" and "shouldn't have." "Shouldn't of" is not correct.
<http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:English_double_contractions> |
37,980 | Currently I am creating a forest scene in the dark, and the trees are shining far away, but when I get close they are fine. I have the shaders set to "Nature/Tree Soft Occlusion [bark/leaves]", but they are still rendering strange far away, but close they are fine.
I tried placing the trees in a folder named "Ambient-Occlusion" like said [here](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12110274/why-do-my-trees-shine-bright-white-in-the-background/12113805#12113805), but no luck. Also fog is turned off. Thanks in advance.
**UPDATE**
When I looked at the trees using the "Render Paths" camera, they appeared red while everything else was green.
**UPDATE 2**
I have tried re-installing the package I downloaded these from, but still no luck.
**UPDATE 3**
I have added some trees manually, and they work fine, but when adding them by painting on the terrain I get the problem.
**FINAL UPDATE**
I tried building the game to see if this had the effect on the .exe, and it didn't. So I just have to ignore when I am debugging it, as it works fine on the build. Thanks for all the help, it just seems like an error with unity. Picture of build:
 | 2012/09/30 | [
"https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/37980",
"https://gamedev.stackexchange.com",
"https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/users/19889/"
] | Turns out that it was rendered fine in the builds of the project, just not in the debugger in unity. I am planning on reporting this as an error on unity's site, as it was messed up in the debugger only, not the game. | I fixed the problem by adding fog with the properties:
* Color: R: 0 G: 0 B: 0 A: 255
* Mode: Exp2
* Density 0.03
I know this doesn't solve the problem, but I wanted to use fog in my game anyway and this was an easy solution. I am not going to accept this as the answer since it doesn't actually solve the question, I just wanted to say what ended up working. Picture:
It also adds that scary/mysterious feel to it, which I am happy about. I would still love to have an actual answer to how to fix this. |
30,069 | I'm trying to solve for the amplitude and frequency of a sinusoid embedded in zero-mean gaussian white noise.
I am supplied a sample file of a 40000 element array. I first took the autocorrelation function in matlab and then took the fft of this to find the power spectral density. From there I was able to find the frequency of the sinusoid due to the peaks. I am unsure how I could go about finding the amplitude, as I am unsure how I can go about normalizing the PSD or Autocorrelation function.
ps this is all done in matlab, thanks! | 2016/04/12 | [
"https://dsp.stackexchange.com/questions/30069",
"https://dsp.stackexchange.com",
"https://dsp.stackexchange.com/users/20513/"
] | If you know you have a single sinusoid in Gaussian noise, then a least squares type parametric estimator might be one method of estimating the amplitude. See [DSP Related](https://www.dsprelated.com/freebooks/sasp/Least_Squares_Sinusoidal_Parameter.html), specifically:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/LPrf9.png) | Use a flat top window and then perform an fft to obtain the peak and its gain, which will be the maximum of the two bins covering the signal. |
122,968 | I have noticed zombies with chainsaws running around the game. They seem to be passive, yet when I shoot them, they come at me and attack visiously. Is there a specific tactic I can use to take these down, or are they supposed to be this hard? | 2013/07/06 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/122968",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/49961/"
] | Each time you or your teammates deal any damage to the enemy creeps (in this case by last hitting them) you slightly help your creep wave to push the lane towards the enemy tower.
The best place to farm is slightly in front of your towers range of attack,so you are close to safety but without tower interfering with the creeps.
To get creeps to fight there you will have to block your creeps movement as much as you can and then actively hit and deny your creeps as soon as they get under 50% HP to help enemy creeps push the lane closer to your tower.
Once you get the creeps to fight in that spot,in order **to maintain that place** each time you hit the enemy creep you should hit or deny one of your creeps too.
This is known as maintaining lane or creep equilibrium.
There is also a chance that some invisible or hiding enemy hero is there trying to get EXP | You often see him doing this when he is laning as a carry.
By doing equal damage to enemy creeps as he does his own creeps, he ensures lane equilibrium, ie. the lane doesn't push in either direction.
The real goal is so that you can continue farming safely, close to your own tower, but just outside of the tower range so that you don't need to compete with the tower for last hits.
Try it in an empty lobby, it's excellent practice and reasonably difficult, aim for ~3900 gold at the 10 minute mark (which is the average gold you would have if you last hit every creep), and keep the wave in control at the point it first meets. |
3,728 | Can someone explain, in plain English, the practical ways FHE and PHE can be leveraged in the cloud? Some interesting (and confusing) links include [this Microsoft Research PDF](http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/148825/ccs2011_submission_412.pdf) and [this Wikipedia entry](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homomorphic_encryption#Fully_homomorphic_encryption).
Questions:
* Is homomorphic encryption considered secure, from a cryptanalysis point of view?
* What operations can/can't be done with FHE/PHE data?
* Considering that some PHE algorithms exist today, and they are apparently fast enough; should they be considered for production use? Please provide some scenarios in which PHE could be used.
Related:
[What Partial Homomorphic Encryption implementations exist and how do I leverage them?](https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/3893/what-partial-homomorphic-encryption-implementations-exist-and-how-do-i-leverage-t) | 2011/05/11 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/3728",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/396/"
] | It is already possible, via end-to-end voting systems like [Helios](http://heliosvoting.org) to publicly store voted ballots in the cloud in an encrypted fashion, so that the public can add them up to confirm the totals, and to also check that their own vote was indeed included in the total. *Without* giving someone a 'receipt' that they can use to sell their vote. Surprising, but true. It's great for low-risk private elections. Note however, that even the inventor of Helios, Ben Adida, [says](http://harvardmagazine.com/2010/05/secret-ballots-verifiable-votes) *“A government election is something that you don’t want to do over the Internet,” citing both the potential for computer viruses to corrupt the voting and the possibility of voter intimidation.*
This is possible since only addition is required, and thus partial homomorphic approaches work. I expect we'll find other interesting cases like this, but real general-purpose computation would require further advances in efficiency.
Note that the "Practical?" paper you reference talks of the size of the ciphertexts in one scheme being on the order of 50 kB. That means that every number (e.g. in a set of medical lab data) is represented by a ciphertext which is 4 orders of magnitude larger.... That makes the cost of the cloud storage rather impractical.
And D.W. writes in a comment above:
>
> In some cases, it may be worse than that: it may be that you have to construct a boolean circuit, and each bit may be represented by some ginormous ciphertext. No, it is not practical today. It is many orders of magnitude away from being economically viable. But it's so darn cool...
>
>
>
My take is that
* Homomorphic encryption is a major advance in theoretical computer science, that could have enormous ramifications for security
* ...or it may remain a beautiful toy, useful only for very restricted problems like election transparency. | How can they be used? Right now? They can't. They're too slow for most/all practical applications. No point in considering homomorphic encryption for production use today -- way too slow.
The hope is that, if we can improve the algorithms to make them a lot faster, someday in the future, it may enable us to run computations in the cloud without trusting the cloud provider. The dream is that we encrypt all our data locally, send the encrypted data up to the cloud provider, the cloud provider can do all the computation we wanted on the data (while it is still in encrypted form), ending up with the final results in encrypted form, and then we can download the results and decrypt them locally. The result is that the cloud provider doesn't get to see our data. That's the dream, anyway, and fully homomorphic encryption has the potential to help us achieve this dream someday -- if cryptographers can figure out how to make it a lot faster. |
3,728 | Can someone explain, in plain English, the practical ways FHE and PHE can be leveraged in the cloud? Some interesting (and confusing) links include [this Microsoft Research PDF](http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/148825/ccs2011_submission_412.pdf) and [this Wikipedia entry](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homomorphic_encryption#Fully_homomorphic_encryption).
Questions:
* Is homomorphic encryption considered secure, from a cryptanalysis point of view?
* What operations can/can't be done with FHE/PHE data?
* Considering that some PHE algorithms exist today, and they are apparently fast enough; should they be considered for production use? Please provide some scenarios in which PHE could be used.
Related:
[What Partial Homomorphic Encryption implementations exist and how do I leverage them?](https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/3893/what-partial-homomorphic-encryption-implementations-exist-and-how-do-i-leverage-t) | 2011/05/11 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/3728",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/396/"
] | Homomorphic encryption is about encryption schemes which allow computing with encrypted value without decrypting them. For instance, given *E(a)* and *E(b)* (the encryption of *a* and *b*), you can compute *E(a+b)* without knowing *a*, *b* nor the decryption key.
Homomorphic encryption schemes are very useful in voting schemes, with the following structure: voters encrypt their votes, the homomorphic property is used to add all votes together, and the result is decrypted (with group decryption by a set of authorities who need to gather together, in a very public way, to perform a decryption). There are several homomorphic encryption schemes, some have been known for decades (e.g. El Gamal). They are efficient, and secure (as secure as asymmetric encryption can be). Note that homomorphic encryption solves the question of anonymous tallying, but that's only a small part of a proper voting scheme (e.g. the voter must also prove that they encrypted a 0 or a 1, not a 20 -- otherwise, they could get 20 votes). Homomorphic encryption can also be used in digital cash systems, there again in order to ensure anonymity or some other properties.
*Fully* homomorphic encryption is a term which was coined when were first found encryption schemes which preserved *two* algebraic operations in a ring structure: namely, given *E(a)* and *E(b)*, you can compute *E(a+b)* and *E(ab)*. It turns out that with those two operations, you can compute just about everything. This is where the "cloud" gets into the picture: the cloud is powerful, but not trustworthy; hence, you could encrypt your data, send it to the cloud which performs the computation you want to do, and then decrypt the result.
Offloading computations to the cloud is, right now, a pure fantasy. The most efficient fully homomorphic encryption schemes currently known, based on a scheme by Gentry (published in 2009), are still very expensive, and the "arbitrary computation" part involves representing the computation as a circuit where *each* logic gate is emulated through its own homomorphic encryption. We are not talking about a 10x slowdown here; rather, we are talking about the whole Amazon EC2 cloud not being able, in a day, to perform homomorphically a computation which would take one second on a single iPhone. So while this is very interesting on a theoretical point of view, it will take a while before anything applicable in practice is discovered. Also, 2009 is quite recent; traditionally, we wait for at least 5 to 10 years before declaring that an asymmetric encryption scheme is "secure". | How can they be used? Right now? They can't. They're too slow for most/all practical applications. No point in considering homomorphic encryption for production use today -- way too slow.
The hope is that, if we can improve the algorithms to make them a lot faster, someday in the future, it may enable us to run computations in the cloud without trusting the cloud provider. The dream is that we encrypt all our data locally, send the encrypted data up to the cloud provider, the cloud provider can do all the computation we wanted on the data (while it is still in encrypted form), ending up with the final results in encrypted form, and then we can download the results and decrypt them locally. The result is that the cloud provider doesn't get to see our data. That's the dream, anyway, and fully homomorphic encryption has the potential to help us achieve this dream someday -- if cryptographers can figure out how to make it a lot faster. |
3,728 | Can someone explain, in plain English, the practical ways FHE and PHE can be leveraged in the cloud? Some interesting (and confusing) links include [this Microsoft Research PDF](http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/148825/ccs2011_submission_412.pdf) and [this Wikipedia entry](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homomorphic_encryption#Fully_homomorphic_encryption).
Questions:
* Is homomorphic encryption considered secure, from a cryptanalysis point of view?
* What operations can/can't be done with FHE/PHE data?
* Considering that some PHE algorithms exist today, and they are apparently fast enough; should they be considered for production use? Please provide some scenarios in which PHE could be used.
Related:
[What Partial Homomorphic Encryption implementations exist and how do I leverage them?](https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/3893/what-partial-homomorphic-encryption-implementations-exist-and-how-do-i-leverage-t) | 2011/05/11 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/3728",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/396/"
] | It is already possible, via end-to-end voting systems like [Helios](http://heliosvoting.org) to publicly store voted ballots in the cloud in an encrypted fashion, so that the public can add them up to confirm the totals, and to also check that their own vote was indeed included in the total. *Without* giving someone a 'receipt' that they can use to sell their vote. Surprising, but true. It's great for low-risk private elections. Note however, that even the inventor of Helios, Ben Adida, [says](http://harvardmagazine.com/2010/05/secret-ballots-verifiable-votes) *“A government election is something that you don’t want to do over the Internet,” citing both the potential for computer viruses to corrupt the voting and the possibility of voter intimidation.*
This is possible since only addition is required, and thus partial homomorphic approaches work. I expect we'll find other interesting cases like this, but real general-purpose computation would require further advances in efficiency.
Note that the "Practical?" paper you reference talks of the size of the ciphertexts in one scheme being on the order of 50 kB. That means that every number (e.g. in a set of medical lab data) is represented by a ciphertext which is 4 orders of magnitude larger.... That makes the cost of the cloud storage rather impractical.
And D.W. writes in a comment above:
>
> In some cases, it may be worse than that: it may be that you have to construct a boolean circuit, and each bit may be represented by some ginormous ciphertext. No, it is not practical today. It is many orders of magnitude away from being economically viable. But it's so darn cool...
>
>
>
My take is that
* Homomorphic encryption is a major advance in theoretical computer science, that could have enormous ramifications for security
* ...or it may remain a beautiful toy, useful only for very restricted problems like election transparency. | Homomorphic encryption is a category of systems; some implementations might be weak, and others might be strong, but it doesn't make sense to talk of the entire category as "weak" or cryptanalyzable.
Partially homomorphic cryptosystems (which used to be called just "homomorphic" before "fully homomorphic" cryptosystems were discovered) have been used in crypto for a while, including, as Neal points out, in my voting system, Helios. In these systems, you can perform one operation, either addition OR multiplication, under the covers of encryption. That lets you do interesting things, like counting individual votes and only decrypting the tally.
Now, when I say "don't use Helios for public-office elections," it's not because of any weakness in homomorphic encryption. That's the strongest part of the system. The problem with online voting is that your desktop client could be compromised by malware, thereby changing your vote before it is encrypted. The homomorphic tallying portion is quite secure, and there are no known attacks against it.
Boneh, Goh, and Nissim designed a more homomorphic cryptosystem in 2005, where you could do any number of additions, followed by one multiplication, followed by any number of additions, before decrypting. That enabled more interesting applications, e.g. my work on Public Mixing (also applicable to voting), where you can shuffle a set of encrypted values in a public operation, without revealing in what order you shuffled them (pretty crazy, when you think about it.)
Fully hommomorphic cryptosystems, where you can do arbitrary additions and multiplications, were thought to be impossible until Gentry's work a couple of years ago. What's meaningful about this category of cryptosystem is that you could fully outsource *any* computation to the cloud without ever revealing plaintext data. For example, if you wanted to perform a full text search of the word "cryptography" on a corpus of text, you could encrypt the corpus, encrypt the word "cryptography", and ship that to another party who would perform the full-text search on fully encrypted data, and return to you the encrypted result, which you could then decrypt to get the answer. The system that does the computation would known *nothing* about the corpus or the search query. Pretty amazing.
But of course, this only makes sense if the process of encrypting, and the process of performing homomorphic operations, is still cheaper on the cloud than doing it yourself in plaintext on your local machine. We're very, very far from that. That said, cryptosystems only get better with time, so maybe we'll see generic homomorphic computation become useful in a few years.
In the meantime, there are probably plenty of specific problems -- not generic computation -- that can be outsourced more securely thanks to homomorphic technology. |
3,728 | Can someone explain, in plain English, the practical ways FHE and PHE can be leveraged in the cloud? Some interesting (and confusing) links include [this Microsoft Research PDF](http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/148825/ccs2011_submission_412.pdf) and [this Wikipedia entry](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homomorphic_encryption#Fully_homomorphic_encryption).
Questions:
* Is homomorphic encryption considered secure, from a cryptanalysis point of view?
* What operations can/can't be done with FHE/PHE data?
* Considering that some PHE algorithms exist today, and they are apparently fast enough; should they be considered for production use? Please provide some scenarios in which PHE could be used.
Related:
[What Partial Homomorphic Encryption implementations exist and how do I leverage them?](https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/3893/what-partial-homomorphic-encryption-implementations-exist-and-how-do-i-leverage-t) | 2011/05/11 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/3728",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/396/"
] | It is already possible, via end-to-end voting systems like [Helios](http://heliosvoting.org) to publicly store voted ballots in the cloud in an encrypted fashion, so that the public can add them up to confirm the totals, and to also check that their own vote was indeed included in the total. *Without* giving someone a 'receipt' that they can use to sell their vote. Surprising, but true. It's great for low-risk private elections. Note however, that even the inventor of Helios, Ben Adida, [says](http://harvardmagazine.com/2010/05/secret-ballots-verifiable-votes) *“A government election is something that you don’t want to do over the Internet,” citing both the potential for computer viruses to corrupt the voting and the possibility of voter intimidation.*
This is possible since only addition is required, and thus partial homomorphic approaches work. I expect we'll find other interesting cases like this, but real general-purpose computation would require further advances in efficiency.
Note that the "Practical?" paper you reference talks of the size of the ciphertexts in one scheme being on the order of 50 kB. That means that every number (e.g. in a set of medical lab data) is represented by a ciphertext which is 4 orders of magnitude larger.... That makes the cost of the cloud storage rather impractical.
And D.W. writes in a comment above:
>
> In some cases, it may be worse than that: it may be that you have to construct a boolean circuit, and each bit may be represented by some ginormous ciphertext. No, it is not practical today. It is many orders of magnitude away from being economically viable. But it's so darn cool...
>
>
>
My take is that
* Homomorphic encryption is a major advance in theoretical computer science, that could have enormous ramifications for security
* ...or it may remain a beautiful toy, useful only for very restricted problems like election transparency. | Homomorphic encryption is about encryption schemes which allow computing with encrypted value without decrypting them. For instance, given *E(a)* and *E(b)* (the encryption of *a* and *b*), you can compute *E(a+b)* without knowing *a*, *b* nor the decryption key.
Homomorphic encryption schemes are very useful in voting schemes, with the following structure: voters encrypt their votes, the homomorphic property is used to add all votes together, and the result is decrypted (with group decryption by a set of authorities who need to gather together, in a very public way, to perform a decryption). There are several homomorphic encryption schemes, some have been known for decades (e.g. El Gamal). They are efficient, and secure (as secure as asymmetric encryption can be). Note that homomorphic encryption solves the question of anonymous tallying, but that's only a small part of a proper voting scheme (e.g. the voter must also prove that they encrypted a 0 or a 1, not a 20 -- otherwise, they could get 20 votes). Homomorphic encryption can also be used in digital cash systems, there again in order to ensure anonymity or some other properties.
*Fully* homomorphic encryption is a term which was coined when were first found encryption schemes which preserved *two* algebraic operations in a ring structure: namely, given *E(a)* and *E(b)*, you can compute *E(a+b)* and *E(ab)*. It turns out that with those two operations, you can compute just about everything. This is where the "cloud" gets into the picture: the cloud is powerful, but not trustworthy; hence, you could encrypt your data, send it to the cloud which performs the computation you want to do, and then decrypt the result.
Offloading computations to the cloud is, right now, a pure fantasy. The most efficient fully homomorphic encryption schemes currently known, based on a scheme by Gentry (published in 2009), are still very expensive, and the "arbitrary computation" part involves representing the computation as a circuit where *each* logic gate is emulated through its own homomorphic encryption. We are not talking about a 10x slowdown here; rather, we are talking about the whole Amazon EC2 cloud not being able, in a day, to perform homomorphically a computation which would take one second on a single iPhone. So while this is very interesting on a theoretical point of view, it will take a while before anything applicable in practice is discovered. Also, 2009 is quite recent; traditionally, we wait for at least 5 to 10 years before declaring that an asymmetric encryption scheme is "secure". |
3,728 | Can someone explain, in plain English, the practical ways FHE and PHE can be leveraged in the cloud? Some interesting (and confusing) links include [this Microsoft Research PDF](http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/148825/ccs2011_submission_412.pdf) and [this Wikipedia entry](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homomorphic_encryption#Fully_homomorphic_encryption).
Questions:
* Is homomorphic encryption considered secure, from a cryptanalysis point of view?
* What operations can/can't be done with FHE/PHE data?
* Considering that some PHE algorithms exist today, and they are apparently fast enough; should they be considered for production use? Please provide some scenarios in which PHE could be used.
Related:
[What Partial Homomorphic Encryption implementations exist and how do I leverage them?](https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/3893/what-partial-homomorphic-encryption-implementations-exist-and-how-do-i-leverage-t) | 2011/05/11 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/3728",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/396/"
] | Homomorphic encryption is about encryption schemes which allow computing with encrypted value without decrypting them. For instance, given *E(a)* and *E(b)* (the encryption of *a* and *b*), you can compute *E(a+b)* without knowing *a*, *b* nor the decryption key.
Homomorphic encryption schemes are very useful in voting schemes, with the following structure: voters encrypt their votes, the homomorphic property is used to add all votes together, and the result is decrypted (with group decryption by a set of authorities who need to gather together, in a very public way, to perform a decryption). There are several homomorphic encryption schemes, some have been known for decades (e.g. El Gamal). They are efficient, and secure (as secure as asymmetric encryption can be). Note that homomorphic encryption solves the question of anonymous tallying, but that's only a small part of a proper voting scheme (e.g. the voter must also prove that they encrypted a 0 or a 1, not a 20 -- otherwise, they could get 20 votes). Homomorphic encryption can also be used in digital cash systems, there again in order to ensure anonymity or some other properties.
*Fully* homomorphic encryption is a term which was coined when were first found encryption schemes which preserved *two* algebraic operations in a ring structure: namely, given *E(a)* and *E(b)*, you can compute *E(a+b)* and *E(ab)*. It turns out that with those two operations, you can compute just about everything. This is where the "cloud" gets into the picture: the cloud is powerful, but not trustworthy; hence, you could encrypt your data, send it to the cloud which performs the computation you want to do, and then decrypt the result.
Offloading computations to the cloud is, right now, a pure fantasy. The most efficient fully homomorphic encryption schemes currently known, based on a scheme by Gentry (published in 2009), are still very expensive, and the "arbitrary computation" part involves representing the computation as a circuit where *each* logic gate is emulated through its own homomorphic encryption. We are not talking about a 10x slowdown here; rather, we are talking about the whole Amazon EC2 cloud not being able, in a day, to perform homomorphically a computation which would take one second on a single iPhone. So while this is very interesting on a theoretical point of view, it will take a while before anything applicable in practice is discovered. Also, 2009 is quite recent; traditionally, we wait for at least 5 to 10 years before declaring that an asymmetric encryption scheme is "secure". | Homomorphic encryption is a category of systems; some implementations might be weak, and others might be strong, but it doesn't make sense to talk of the entire category as "weak" or cryptanalyzable.
Partially homomorphic cryptosystems (which used to be called just "homomorphic" before "fully homomorphic" cryptosystems were discovered) have been used in crypto for a while, including, as Neal points out, in my voting system, Helios. In these systems, you can perform one operation, either addition OR multiplication, under the covers of encryption. That lets you do interesting things, like counting individual votes and only decrypting the tally.
Now, when I say "don't use Helios for public-office elections," it's not because of any weakness in homomorphic encryption. That's the strongest part of the system. The problem with online voting is that your desktop client could be compromised by malware, thereby changing your vote before it is encrypted. The homomorphic tallying portion is quite secure, and there are no known attacks against it.
Boneh, Goh, and Nissim designed a more homomorphic cryptosystem in 2005, where you could do any number of additions, followed by one multiplication, followed by any number of additions, before decrypting. That enabled more interesting applications, e.g. my work on Public Mixing (also applicable to voting), where you can shuffle a set of encrypted values in a public operation, without revealing in what order you shuffled them (pretty crazy, when you think about it.)
Fully hommomorphic cryptosystems, where you can do arbitrary additions and multiplications, were thought to be impossible until Gentry's work a couple of years ago. What's meaningful about this category of cryptosystem is that you could fully outsource *any* computation to the cloud without ever revealing plaintext data. For example, if you wanted to perform a full text search of the word "cryptography" on a corpus of text, you could encrypt the corpus, encrypt the word "cryptography", and ship that to another party who would perform the full-text search on fully encrypted data, and return to you the encrypted result, which you could then decrypt to get the answer. The system that does the computation would known *nothing* about the corpus or the search query. Pretty amazing.
But of course, this only makes sense if the process of encrypting, and the process of performing homomorphic operations, is still cheaper on the cloud than doing it yourself in plaintext on your local machine. We're very, very far from that. That said, cryptosystems only get better with time, so maybe we'll see generic homomorphic computation become useful in a few years.
In the meantime, there are probably plenty of specific problems -- not generic computation -- that can be outsourced more securely thanks to homomorphic technology. |
19,411 | I'm curious to know whether or not the southern States had a realistic chance of winning the Civil War.
I understand they had a large slave force, but I doubt those slaves could've been forced to fight effectively against their own freedom. Also the South likely had very low if any manufacturing capabilities.
Did they have a fighting chance?
If so, at what junctures was the South closest to prevailing and what factors made success a possibility? | 2015/02/15 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/19411",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/10329/"
] | In 2005 the [Advanced Modular Gun Demonstrator](http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2008/07/mil-080707-saic01.htm) test fired 85 miles or 137km and the shells could go 45km high. [One article quotes the barrel pressure at 100,000 psi](http://ww2.dcmilitary.com/dcmilitary_archives/stories/051905/34939-1.shtml) which is absurd. However, it is research equipment, not a practical weapon.
[Here is a presentation about it](http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2005garm/wednesday/coladonato.pdf) that looks so bad I'd think it were a joke if I didn't know better.
That edges out [the Paris Gun](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Gun), which still holds the title of the longest shots fired in anger despite being nearly 100 years old. It fired a 106 kg shell to a range of 130 km and a maximum altitude of 42 km. It was purely a terror weapon, only having the accuracy to hit a city. | See the article about [Project Babylon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Babylon) at Wikipedia.org |
19,411 | I'm curious to know whether or not the southern States had a realistic chance of winning the Civil War.
I understand they had a large slave force, but I doubt those slaves could've been forced to fight effectively against their own freedom. Also the South likely had very low if any manufacturing capabilities.
Did they have a fighting chance?
If so, at what junctures was the South closest to prevailing and what factors made success a possibility? | 2015/02/15 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/19411",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/10329/"
] | It may be the [German V-3](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-3_cannon), with a maximum range of 165 km. [It was destroyed before it could be fired](http://militaryhistorynow.com/2012/10/12/big-shots-historys-largest-cannons-mortars-and-super-guns/), although several experimental models were used in Luxembourg in 1944-1945. After the war, a U.S.-Canadian group revived the V-3, hoping to use it as a cheap weay to launch objects into space. According to [this military history](http://militaryhistorynow.com/2012/10/12/big-shots-historys-largest-cannons-mortars-and-super-guns/) site:
>
> Using a testing facility in the Barbados, the HARP team managed to
> fire a 400-pound non-explosive projectile out over the Atlantic at a
> speed of 8000 mph (that’s Mach 10). The missile also reached an
> altitude of 112 miles (nearly 600,000 feet) – a record for
> highest-flying artillery shot that still stands.
>
>
>
The [Paris Gun](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Gun), which was used in combat in 1918, only had a range of 130 km, but even then it couldn't hit a target smaller than a city, and (according to the same site):
>
> . . . the gunners actually needed to calculate the earth’s rotation when
> aiming the weapon. Simply put, by the time one of the gun’s shells
> returned to earth from its then unprecedented 130,000 foot high flight
> path, the city had moved slightly with the planet’s own rotation.
>
>
> | A [railgun](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun#U.S._Navy_Tests) currently being developed by the US navy is planned to be integrated onto a ship by 2016 (although the reference is from 2010) with an estimated range of 160 km. It's unclear how far the current technology is able to reach given the probable secrecy of the project. The end goal is to eventually reach as far as 370 km. |
19,411 | I'm curious to know whether or not the southern States had a realistic chance of winning the Civil War.
I understand they had a large slave force, but I doubt those slaves could've been forced to fight effectively against their own freedom. Also the South likely had very low if any manufacturing capabilities.
Did they have a fighting chance?
If so, at what junctures was the South closest to prevailing and what factors made success a possibility? | 2015/02/15 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/19411",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/10329/"
] | If you don't care if they were actually used in combat, then the [German V-3 cannons](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-3_cannon) would certainly seem to be in with a shot (pardon the pun), with a projected range of 165km.
If you're including land-based guns that fired straight up, then [Project Harp](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_HARP) had a 'range' of 180km. | In addition to the HAARP projects which are well mentioned above which achieved velocities of Mach 10 at an extraordinary altitude of 300,00 feet there is also speculations concerning a "Project Thor" which drops a tungsten rod straight down from outer space...and is perfectly legal actually.
The theoretical power of such a weapon is quite spectacular. |
19,411 | I'm curious to know whether or not the southern States had a realistic chance of winning the Civil War.
I understand they had a large slave force, but I doubt those slaves could've been forced to fight effectively against their own freedom. Also the South likely had very low if any manufacturing capabilities.
Did they have a fighting chance?
If so, at what junctures was the South closest to prevailing and what factors made success a possibility? | 2015/02/15 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/19411",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/10329/"
] | In 2005 the [Advanced Modular Gun Demonstrator](http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2008/07/mil-080707-saic01.htm) test fired 85 miles or 137km and the shells could go 45km high. [One article quotes the barrel pressure at 100,000 psi](http://ww2.dcmilitary.com/dcmilitary_archives/stories/051905/34939-1.shtml) which is absurd. However, it is research equipment, not a practical weapon.
[Here is a presentation about it](http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2005garm/wednesday/coladonato.pdf) that looks so bad I'd think it were a joke if I didn't know better.
That edges out [the Paris Gun](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Gun), which still holds the title of the longest shots fired in anger despite being nearly 100 years old. It fired a 106 kg shell to a range of 130 km and a maximum altitude of 42 km. It was purely a terror weapon, only having the accuracy to hit a city. | In addition to the HAARP projects which are well mentioned above which achieved velocities of Mach 10 at an extraordinary altitude of 300,00 feet there is also speculations concerning a "Project Thor" which drops a tungsten rod straight down from outer space...and is perfectly legal actually.
The theoretical power of such a weapon is quite spectacular. |
19,411 | I'm curious to know whether or not the southern States had a realistic chance of winning the Civil War.
I understand they had a large slave force, but I doubt those slaves could've been forced to fight effectively against their own freedom. Also the South likely had very low if any manufacturing capabilities.
Did they have a fighting chance?
If so, at what junctures was the South closest to prevailing and what factors made success a possibility? | 2015/02/15 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/19411",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/10329/"
] | If you don't care if they were actually used in combat, then the [German V-3 cannons](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-3_cannon) would certainly seem to be in with a shot (pardon the pun), with a projected range of 165km.
If you're including land-based guns that fired straight up, then [Project Harp](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_HARP) had a 'range' of 180km. | See the article about [Project Babylon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Babylon) at Wikipedia.org |
19,411 | I'm curious to know whether or not the southern States had a realistic chance of winning the Civil War.
I understand they had a large slave force, but I doubt those slaves could've been forced to fight effectively against their own freedom. Also the South likely had very low if any manufacturing capabilities.
Did they have a fighting chance?
If so, at what junctures was the South closest to prevailing and what factors made success a possibility? | 2015/02/15 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/19411",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/10329/"
] | A [railgun](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun#U.S._Navy_Tests) currently being developed by the US navy is planned to be integrated onto a ship by 2016 (although the reference is from 2010) with an estimated range of 160 km. It's unclear how far the current technology is able to reach given the probable secrecy of the project. The end goal is to eventually reach as far as 370 km. | In addition to the HAARP projects which are well mentioned above which achieved velocities of Mach 10 at an extraordinary altitude of 300,00 feet there is also speculations concerning a "Project Thor" which drops a tungsten rod straight down from outer space...and is perfectly legal actually.
The theoretical power of such a weapon is quite spectacular. |
19,411 | I'm curious to know whether or not the southern States had a realistic chance of winning the Civil War.
I understand they had a large slave force, but I doubt those slaves could've been forced to fight effectively against their own freedom. Also the South likely had very low if any manufacturing capabilities.
Did they have a fighting chance?
If so, at what junctures was the South closest to prevailing and what factors made success a possibility? | 2015/02/15 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/19411",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/10329/"
] | It may be the [German V-3](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-3_cannon), with a maximum range of 165 km. [It was destroyed before it could be fired](http://militaryhistorynow.com/2012/10/12/big-shots-historys-largest-cannons-mortars-and-super-guns/), although several experimental models were used in Luxembourg in 1944-1945. After the war, a U.S.-Canadian group revived the V-3, hoping to use it as a cheap weay to launch objects into space. According to [this military history](http://militaryhistorynow.com/2012/10/12/big-shots-historys-largest-cannons-mortars-and-super-guns/) site:
>
> Using a testing facility in the Barbados, the HARP team managed to
> fire a 400-pound non-explosive projectile out over the Atlantic at a
> speed of 8000 mph (that’s Mach 10). The missile also reached an
> altitude of 112 miles (nearly 600,000 feet) – a record for
> highest-flying artillery shot that still stands.
>
>
>
The [Paris Gun](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Gun), which was used in combat in 1918, only had a range of 130 km, but even then it couldn't hit a target smaller than a city, and (according to the same site):
>
> . . . the gunners actually needed to calculate the earth’s rotation when
> aiming the weapon. Simply put, by the time one of the gun’s shells
> returned to earth from its then unprecedented 130,000 foot high flight
> path, the city had moved slightly with the planet’s own rotation.
>
>
> | In 2005 the [Advanced Modular Gun Demonstrator](http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2008/07/mil-080707-saic01.htm) test fired 85 miles or 137km and the shells could go 45km high. [One article quotes the barrel pressure at 100,000 psi](http://ww2.dcmilitary.com/dcmilitary_archives/stories/051905/34939-1.shtml) which is absurd. However, it is research equipment, not a practical weapon.
[Here is a presentation about it](http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2005garm/wednesday/coladonato.pdf) that looks so bad I'd think it were a joke if I didn't know better.
That edges out [the Paris Gun](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Gun), which still holds the title of the longest shots fired in anger despite being nearly 100 years old. It fired a 106 kg shell to a range of 130 km and a maximum altitude of 42 km. It was purely a terror weapon, only having the accuracy to hit a city. |
19,411 | I'm curious to know whether or not the southern States had a realistic chance of winning the Civil War.
I understand they had a large slave force, but I doubt those slaves could've been forced to fight effectively against their own freedom. Also the South likely had very low if any manufacturing capabilities.
Did they have a fighting chance?
If so, at what junctures was the South closest to prevailing and what factors made success a possibility? | 2015/02/15 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/19411",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/10329/"
] | A [railgun](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun#U.S._Navy_Tests) currently being developed by the US navy is planned to be integrated onto a ship by 2016 (although the reference is from 2010) with an estimated range of 160 km. It's unclear how far the current technology is able to reach given the probable secrecy of the project. The end goal is to eventually reach as far as 370 km. | See the article about [Project Babylon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Babylon) at Wikipedia.org |
19,411 | I'm curious to know whether or not the southern States had a realistic chance of winning the Civil War.
I understand they had a large slave force, but I doubt those slaves could've been forced to fight effectively against their own freedom. Also the South likely had very low if any manufacturing capabilities.
Did they have a fighting chance?
If so, at what junctures was the South closest to prevailing and what factors made success a possibility? | 2015/02/15 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/19411",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/10329/"
] | It may be the [German V-3](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-3_cannon), with a maximum range of 165 km. [It was destroyed before it could be fired](http://militaryhistorynow.com/2012/10/12/big-shots-historys-largest-cannons-mortars-and-super-guns/), although several experimental models were used in Luxembourg in 1944-1945. After the war, a U.S.-Canadian group revived the V-3, hoping to use it as a cheap weay to launch objects into space. According to [this military history](http://militaryhistorynow.com/2012/10/12/big-shots-historys-largest-cannons-mortars-and-super-guns/) site:
>
> Using a testing facility in the Barbados, the HARP team managed to
> fire a 400-pound non-explosive projectile out over the Atlantic at a
> speed of 8000 mph (that’s Mach 10). The missile also reached an
> altitude of 112 miles (nearly 600,000 feet) – a record for
> highest-flying artillery shot that still stands.
>
>
>
The [Paris Gun](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Gun), which was used in combat in 1918, only had a range of 130 km, but even then it couldn't hit a target smaller than a city, and (according to the same site):
>
> . . . the gunners actually needed to calculate the earth’s rotation when
> aiming the weapon. Simply put, by the time one of the gun’s shells
> returned to earth from its then unprecedented 130,000 foot high flight
> path, the city had moved slightly with the planet’s own rotation.
>
>
> | See the article about [Project Babylon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Babylon) at Wikipedia.org |
19,411 | I'm curious to know whether or not the southern States had a realistic chance of winning the Civil War.
I understand they had a large slave force, but I doubt those slaves could've been forced to fight effectively against their own freedom. Also the South likely had very low if any manufacturing capabilities.
Did they have a fighting chance?
If so, at what junctures was the South closest to prevailing and what factors made success a possibility? | 2015/02/15 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/19411",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/10329/"
] | It may be the [German V-3](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-3_cannon), with a maximum range of 165 km. [It was destroyed before it could be fired](http://militaryhistorynow.com/2012/10/12/big-shots-historys-largest-cannons-mortars-and-super-guns/), although several experimental models were used in Luxembourg in 1944-1945. After the war, a U.S.-Canadian group revived the V-3, hoping to use it as a cheap weay to launch objects into space. According to [this military history](http://militaryhistorynow.com/2012/10/12/big-shots-historys-largest-cannons-mortars-and-super-guns/) site:
>
> Using a testing facility in the Barbados, the HARP team managed to
> fire a 400-pound non-explosive projectile out over the Atlantic at a
> speed of 8000 mph (that’s Mach 10). The missile also reached an
> altitude of 112 miles (nearly 600,000 feet) – a record for
> highest-flying artillery shot that still stands.
>
>
>
The [Paris Gun](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Gun), which was used in combat in 1918, only had a range of 130 km, but even then it couldn't hit a target smaller than a city, and (according to the same site):
>
> . . . the gunners actually needed to calculate the earth’s rotation when
> aiming the weapon. Simply put, by the time one of the gun’s shells
> returned to earth from its then unprecedented 130,000 foot high flight
> path, the city had moved slightly with the planet’s own rotation.
>
>
> | In addition to the HAARP projects which are well mentioned above which achieved velocities of Mach 10 at an extraordinary altitude of 300,00 feet there is also speculations concerning a "Project Thor" which drops a tungsten rod straight down from outer space...and is perfectly legal actually.
The theoretical power of such a weapon is quite spectacular. |
61,077 | I love the idea of categories. Kind of like applied filters.
I'd love to create my own custom applied filters as new categories, and be able to list those categories on the front page. | 2014/05/28 | [
"https://webapps.stackexchange.com/questions/61077",
"https://webapps.stackexchange.com",
"https://webapps.stackexchange.com/users/254978/"
] | No, you can't create categories with Gmail (yet). You could try the multiple inboxes feature, but it feels a bit primitive compared to tabs.
Multiple Inboxes (MI) is a Gmail Labs feature. It requires switching off the standard category tabs (i.e., only one default inbox view). You can then have custom search results listed above/below/beside this main inbox.
You can have up to 5 filters. The results are separated from other results and the main inbox by headers and a bit of whitespace. You can choose how long the filter lists are; default display is top 9 results per filter.
The filtering used by categories is a bit more complex than what most users can cook up for themselves. So if you want to re-create some of the category tabs using the MI feature it may not work as well, and of course the limit of 5 filters is rather restrictive.
Compared to tabs it may involve much more scrolling as there is no way to quickly view the filter results from the navigation bar/label list.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/jqsiH.png) | The best workaround I found for not being able to create custom categories is to set a filter that automatically applies a label and archives emails from specific senders. I just scroll to the label whenever I need/want to interact with those specific emails and can easily ignore them when I don't. |
61,077 | I love the idea of categories. Kind of like applied filters.
I'd love to create my own custom applied filters as new categories, and be able to list those categories on the front page. | 2014/05/28 | [
"https://webapps.stackexchange.com/questions/61077",
"https://webapps.stackexchange.com",
"https://webapps.stackexchange.com/users/254978/"
] | No, you can't create categories with Gmail (yet). You could try the multiple inboxes feature, but it feels a bit primitive compared to tabs.
Multiple Inboxes (MI) is a Gmail Labs feature. It requires switching off the standard category tabs (i.e., only one default inbox view). You can then have custom search results listed above/below/beside this main inbox.
You can have up to 5 filters. The results are separated from other results and the main inbox by headers and a bit of whitespace. You can choose how long the filter lists are; default display is top 9 results per filter.
The filtering used by categories is a bit more complex than what most users can cook up for themselves. So if you want to re-create some of the category tabs using the MI feature it may not work as well, and of course the limit of 5 filters is rather restrictive.
Compared to tabs it may involve much more scrolling as there is no way to quickly view the filter results from the navigation bar/label list.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/jqsiH.png) | I found this as a workable solution
Using labels as categories/folders
Move emails to label/folder
<https://www.wikihow.com/Move-Mail-to-Different-Folders-in-Gmail>
move all emails from a sender to a folder gmail
<https://www.reddit.com/r/GMail/comments/5i4w3n/can_i_automatically_move_emails_from_a_sender_to/> |
61,077 | I love the idea of categories. Kind of like applied filters.
I'd love to create my own custom applied filters as new categories, and be able to list those categories on the front page. | 2014/05/28 | [
"https://webapps.stackexchange.com/questions/61077",
"https://webapps.stackexchange.com",
"https://webapps.stackexchange.com/users/254978/"
] | The best workaround I found for not being able to create custom categories is to set a filter that automatically applies a label and archives emails from specific senders. I just scroll to the label whenever I need/want to interact with those specific emails and can easily ignore them when I don't. | I found this as a workable solution
Using labels as categories/folders
Move emails to label/folder
<https://www.wikihow.com/Move-Mail-to-Different-Folders-in-Gmail>
move all emails from a sender to a folder gmail
<https://www.reddit.com/r/GMail/comments/5i4w3n/can_i_automatically_move_emails_from_a_sender_to/> |
198,047 | I want to run electric to my wife's She Shed. I am thinking a 60 AMP service is what I want. What type of wire should I use for about 80ft in 1" conduit. Can I use 6-6-6-6 Gray Stranded AL SER Cable ? | 2020/07/19 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/198047",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/120056/"
] | SER cable is no good underground
--------------------------------
NEC 338.12(A) point 2 prohibits the use of type SE (style U or style R, it doesn't matter) cable underground, even when in a conduit/raceway. Besides, you really don't want to be pulling that alligator of a cable down a 1" conduit to begin with, as it won't *fit* very well at all, leaving you calling the electrician in to bail you out. In particular, a typical 6-6-6-6 Al SER cable has an OD of 0.717" or 18.2 mm, which means it takes up 260.5 mm2 of fill area. This *barely* fits into 1" conduits of most conduit types, a bad omen for a multiconductor cable to begin with, and does *not* fit in the worst-case scenario of a 1", Schedule 80 PVC conduit.
Furthermore, 6AWG Al is limited to 50A when landed on the 75°C capable terminations in distribution equipment, *not* the 60A you were hoping for. As a result of all of this, I'd put in 3 6AWG *copper* THHN/THWN wires instead (two blacks and one white), with a bare 10AWG copper ground wire. This takes up a mere 103.4 mm2 of fill area, less than *half* of the space the cable takes up, while being a *far* easier pull through the conduit, and fully Code-legal in this underground application.
Once you get to the shed....
----------------------------
Once you reach the shed, you'll need to install a subpanel there. This is where most folks screw up; they chintz out and put in a tiny panel, thinking that's all their feeder can support or simply looking to shave a few bucks off the project cost, when they're really setting themselves up for an expensive panel swap down the road. Instead, I'd put in a 24-space or 30-space, 100 or 125A, *main breaker* panel. The oversized main breaker in the subpanel is no big deal as it's simply serving as the shutoff switch required for the structure by NEC 225.31, and the extra spaces provide plenty of expansion room for whatever crazy tools your significant other decides to get into.
Because you're putting in a feeder and subpanel, you'll also need to run some 8AWG or 6AWG bare copper from that subpanel to a pair of 8' ground rods driven a minimum of 6-8' apart. This provides natural electricity, such as lightning-induced voltages, a path back to Mother Nature, while the equipment grounding wire in the feeder provides an easy route wayward utility-generated electricity can take to get back to the neutral-ground bond in your main panel and thus back to your utility. As a result of this, you'll need to make sure the bonding screw or strap in your new subpanel is *removed*, or simply left uninstalled to begin with, when you install it.
TORQUE ALL LUGS TO SPEC
-----------------------
Last but not least, 2017 NEC 110.14(D) requires that all breaker and loadcenter/panel lug-type connections be torqued to the labeled torque values using an inch-pound torque wrench or torque screwdriver. Even if your jurisidiction hasn't adopted the 2017 NEC, this is still a good idea anyway, as this Code change was made because of [studies that were done](https://iaeimagazine.org/magazine/2010/07/16/the-difference-between-success-and-failure-how-a-torque-wrench-improves-system-reliability/) that showed that the electrician's office manager (or a DIYer) was as equally unlikely to torque a connection correctly with regular hand tools as the electrician was! | SER rating alone is not approved for burial, even in conduit.
#6 AL even if allowed to be terminated at 75° is only good for 50A, you will need minimum 4-4-4-8 AL, which individual XHHW-2 would fit in 1" conduit, but 1.25 would be advised. |
11,188 | If you are sewing two panels together and then pressing the seam allowance open , when do you serge the edges? Do you serge that end before stitching the two panels together, or do you stitch then serge afterwords. I imagine doing it after has the benefit of getting a smaller open seam, but is much harder to work with under the machine.
 | 2022/07/20 | [
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com/questions/11188",
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com",
"https://crafts.stackexchange.com/users/13248/"
] | If you want to press open the seams, such as the 1st picture on the left, it’s easier to serge all of the edges before sewing the seams.
**The 1st pic shows this order: cut, serge, sew, press open.**
The second pic with the seem serged together, is typically serged after the seem is sewn. Though, it is possible to serge the seem and then straight stitch after.
I have practiced all options for various reasons with different types of fabrics. When serged separately, alterations can be made later. *“Take it in” or “let it out”*
When serged them together, that’s it.
So, for woven fabrics that you want to make alterations to in the future, serge all your edges after cutting, make your pattern markings, then sew and press seems open as you progress through the garment. | It depends on the fabric, the properties of the finished piece and the person sewing the piece.
It's best to serge **each edge independently** if:
* The fabric is slippery, frays extremely quickly or is otherwise hard to handle. Serging each piece gives you more room for errors and to undo seams without undoing the serging.
* The garment is supposed to be worn by different people or by a person with a rapidly changing body (like children or pregnant people). Leaving a big seam allowance gives you the opportunity to adapt the garment to different body shapes.
* The fabric is very thick and you want to avoid bulky seams. Pressing the seam open looks neater in thick fabrics than pressing the seams to one side.
It's best to serge **both pieces together** if:
* You want to finish quickly and save resources. Serging uses up *A Lot* of thread.
* There's little risk of you ever needing to undo the seams.
It's best to serge the edges **after sewing the seams** if:
* You cut with big seam allowances but don't want to leave all that extra fabric in the finished garment. For example if your pattern doesn't fit you 100% and you want to make little alterations before cutting the seam allowance back.
It's best to serge the edges **before sewing the seams** if:
* The fabric frays a lot. You'll want to get that dealt with as soon as possible.
* The finished piece will be very big or heavy and difficult to get under the machine after sewing the seams.
Some situations dictate one order or another, but in most cases it's up to the preference of the person doing the sewing. |
105,781 | What exactly is the difference between **Attack action** and **attack**?
It seems each time a question regarding this pops up, there's always somebody arguing they are not different. I feel there should be a concise and indisputable answer that shows how they are, in fact, different. | 2017/08/23 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/105781",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/36521/"
] | The "Attack action" is a specific action; *attacks* are anything with an attack roll.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
### What is the Attack action?
The "[Actions in Combat](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat#ActionsinCombat)" section of the *Player's Handbook* (PHB, page 192) states (emphasis mine):
>
> When you take your action on your turn, you can take one of the actions presented here, an action you gained from your class or a special feature, **or** an action that you improvise [...]
>
>
>
The use of "or" clearly means that class features and the "action listed here" are distinct actions. The first action listed is "[Attack](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat#Attack)"; the "Attack action" (emphasis mine):
>
> The most common action to take in combat is **the** Attack action [...] With this action, you make one melee or ranged attack.
>
>
>
This, and the above quote, clearly show that the Attack action and attacks are different things. There is only one Attack action, which is why it is defined alongside the other actions such as Dodge, and Hide.
---
### What is an attack?
Regular attacks are defined in the "[Making an Attack](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat#MakinganAttack)" section (PHB, page 194):
>
> If there’s ever any question whether something you’re doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple: if you’re making an attack roll, you’re making an attack.
>
>
>
---
### They are different things
Bringing all this together: the Attack action is a specific action that anybody can take whereas class granted features and abilities, such as the Ranger's Volley, are not Attack actions, but instead their own individual actions even though they may happen to involve attack rolls.
In conclusion: There is the "Attack *action*", which is a specific action and there are "attacks", which are anything involving an attack roll. The easiest way to tell these apart is that one is followed by the word "action" and the other is not.
---
### Capitalization is imperfect, but the phrases are entirely different
As Nitsua60 correctly points out in [his answer](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/105786):
>
> A close reading of the PHB makes clear this is a place where the authors have been very consistent and explicit in differentiating: you'll always see phrases like "make an attack" and "take the Attack action," never "make an Attack" or "take the attack action." See PHB pp. 49, 63, 72, 74, 78, 79, 85, 92, 93, 111, 165, 168, 170, 192, 195, for some examples of their consistent and exacting capitalization." (see their answer below for more details)
>
>
>
Icyfire also correctly points out in [their answer](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/105875) that capitalization isn't perfect; the best way to distinguish between these terms is simply by whether or not the word "attack" is followed by the word "action" (see [their answer](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/105875) for more details).
Another reason capitalization isn't perfect is that many sites, including Roll20, completely butcher the capitalization of the actual rulebooks by capitalizing countless words that were not capitalized originally. This means **capitalization is not something you should rely on for clarity, and instead you should go by whether it says "an attack" or "the attack *action*".**
---
### Miscellaneous further justifications and clarifications
* On the Fighter's [Extra Attack](https://www.dndbeyond.com/classes/fighter#ExtraAttack-196) feature (PHB, page 72):
>
> Beginning at 5th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn....
>
>
>
This helps to showcase the difference between the two. If "attack" and "Attack action" were synonymous and thus making an attack meant taking the Attack action, then the Feature could simply read "You can attack twice, instead of once, on your turn."
This type of reading would also lead to allowing for infinite attacks in a turn - clearly not the intended reading.
**Note:** This feature is not an action nor attack of its own, but a passive feature which activates "whenever you take the Attack action on your turn".
**Also Note:** The reason "Extra Attack" is capitalized is the same reason any feature would be capitalized: because it is a specific/proper phrase/noun.
---
* On various features, such as [Two-weapon Fighting](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat#TwoWeaponFighting) (PHB, page 195):
>
> When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon...
>
>
>
Again if "Attack action" and "attack" were synonymous then this sentence is redundant and could be reduced to "When you attack with a light melee weapon", the fact that it is not reduced further shows that they are two different things.
---
* On spells with attacks:
In order to cast most spells you must use your action to take the "Cast A Spell" action. If "attack" and "Attack action" were the same thing and you were casting, say, [*fire bolt*](https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/fire-bolt), a spell which has an attack roll, then you would have to use the "Cast A Spell" action but then you would have to take the "Attack" action as well (as you are making an attack). This is clearly impossible as you, generally, only have one action per turn.
Thus we can conclude that something having an attack roll does not make it require the "Attack action" or else a consequence would be the inability to cast spells with attack rolls.
---
* On [grappling](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat#Grappling) and [shoving](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat#ShovingaCreature) (PHB 195):
>
> [...] you can use the Attack action to make a special melee attack, a grapple. [...]
>
>
>
>
> Using the Attack action, you can make a special melee attack to shove a creature [...]
>
>
>
These are attacks made using the Attack action and are specifically called out in the rules as being "special". They are special for two reasons. First, they do not involve attack rolls, but are still considered attacks. And second, because they replace attacks made as part of the Attack action, and not just any attack. The best example of this is [opportunity attacks](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat#OpportunityAttacks), which cannot be a grapple or a shove as you are not taking the Attack action but instead a reaction that involves an attack. | Lowercase-a-attack and uppercase-a-Attack are both (defined) game terms.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
An **a**ttack is a bit of action that a character can take: it involves choosing a target, determining modifiers, and resolving the outcome (PHB p.192).\* This may happen:
* as part of the **A**ttack action (*q.v.*): "you make one melee or ranged attack" (PHB 192)
* as part of the Cast A Spell action: *e.g. eldritch blast* "make a ranged spell attack" (PHB 192)
* as part of a class feature: *e.g.* Volley action "use your action to make a ranged attack against any number...." (PHB 93)
* as part of a reaction: *e.g*. Deflect Missiles "spend 1 ki point to make a ranged attack" (PHB 78), Opportunity Attack "use your reaction to make one melee attack" (PHB 195)
* as a bonus action: *e.g.* two-weapon fighting "use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon" (PHB 195), polearm master "use a bonus action to make a melee attack" (PHB 168)
* using a magical item *e.g. Staff of the Adder, Iron Bands of Bilarro* (DMG 203, 177)
* and probably other sources I'm not thinking of.
An **A**ttack is shorthand for "choosing the defined Attack action from among the defined actions I might choose" and *includes* at least one **a**ttack.
\* - except in the cases of Shove and Grapple, which are explicitly called out as exceptions to that "attack roll" <--> "attack" equivalence.
But how do we know?
-------------------
1. A close reading of the PHB makes clear this is a place where the authors have been very consistent and explicit in differentiating: you'll always see phrases like "make an attack" and "take the Attack action," *never* "make an Attack" or "take the attack action." See PHB pp. 49, 63, 72, 74, 78, 79, 85, 92, 93, 111, 165, 168, 170, 192, 195, for some examples of their consistent and exacting capitalization.
But you could be forgiven for thinking "am I really going to hang something on believing they proofread *that* well? (After all, look at the instances of "can make a save" vs. "make a save" vs. "must make a save." It's not at all clear that those would survive the standard I'm setting in point 1.) Luckily, here comes point 2:
2. Consider what it would mean if they *weren't* different. For instance, look at the (roughly) 27 PHB+EEPC spells that require an attack roll. If attack=Attack, then casting a spell with an attack roll means you're Attacking. Which requires taking the Attack action. But you also need to take the Cast a Spell action. Do we believe that the reading "attack spells can only be cast by *haste*d or Action Surging casters" is really the intent?
The reading that "attack" = "Attack" nigh-moots every caster's attack cantrips. There may be arguments for choosing to play a game like that, but it's not the game WotC wrote, best I understand. |
105,781 | What exactly is the difference between **Attack action** and **attack**?
It seems each time a question regarding this pops up, there's always somebody arguing they are not different. I feel there should be a concise and indisputable answer that shows how they are, in fact, different. | 2017/08/23 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/105781",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/36521/"
] | The "Attack action" is a specific action; *attacks* are anything with an attack roll.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
### What is the Attack action?
The "[Actions in Combat](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat#ActionsinCombat)" section of the *Player's Handbook* (PHB, page 192) states (emphasis mine):
>
> When you take your action on your turn, you can take one of the actions presented here, an action you gained from your class or a special feature, **or** an action that you improvise [...]
>
>
>
The use of "or" clearly means that class features and the "action listed here" are distinct actions. The first action listed is "[Attack](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat#Attack)"; the "Attack action" (emphasis mine):
>
> The most common action to take in combat is **the** Attack action [...] With this action, you make one melee or ranged attack.
>
>
>
This, and the above quote, clearly show that the Attack action and attacks are different things. There is only one Attack action, which is why it is defined alongside the other actions such as Dodge, and Hide.
---
### What is an attack?
Regular attacks are defined in the "[Making an Attack](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat#MakinganAttack)" section (PHB, page 194):
>
> If there’s ever any question whether something you’re doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple: if you’re making an attack roll, you’re making an attack.
>
>
>
---
### They are different things
Bringing all this together: the Attack action is a specific action that anybody can take whereas class granted features and abilities, such as the Ranger's Volley, are not Attack actions, but instead their own individual actions even though they may happen to involve attack rolls.
In conclusion: There is the "Attack *action*", which is a specific action and there are "attacks", which are anything involving an attack roll. The easiest way to tell these apart is that one is followed by the word "action" and the other is not.
---
### Capitalization is imperfect, but the phrases are entirely different
As Nitsua60 correctly points out in [his answer](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/105786):
>
> A close reading of the PHB makes clear this is a place where the authors have been very consistent and explicit in differentiating: you'll always see phrases like "make an attack" and "take the Attack action," never "make an Attack" or "take the attack action." See PHB pp. 49, 63, 72, 74, 78, 79, 85, 92, 93, 111, 165, 168, 170, 192, 195, for some examples of their consistent and exacting capitalization." (see their answer below for more details)
>
>
>
Icyfire also correctly points out in [their answer](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/105875) that capitalization isn't perfect; the best way to distinguish between these terms is simply by whether or not the word "attack" is followed by the word "action" (see [their answer](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/105875) for more details).
Another reason capitalization isn't perfect is that many sites, including Roll20, completely butcher the capitalization of the actual rulebooks by capitalizing countless words that were not capitalized originally. This means **capitalization is not something you should rely on for clarity, and instead you should go by whether it says "an attack" or "the attack *action*".**
---
### Miscellaneous further justifications and clarifications
* On the Fighter's [Extra Attack](https://www.dndbeyond.com/classes/fighter#ExtraAttack-196) feature (PHB, page 72):
>
> Beginning at 5th level, you can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn....
>
>
>
This helps to showcase the difference between the two. If "attack" and "Attack action" were synonymous and thus making an attack meant taking the Attack action, then the Feature could simply read "You can attack twice, instead of once, on your turn."
This type of reading would also lead to allowing for infinite attacks in a turn - clearly not the intended reading.
**Note:** This feature is not an action nor attack of its own, but a passive feature which activates "whenever you take the Attack action on your turn".
**Also Note:** The reason "Extra Attack" is capitalized is the same reason any feature would be capitalized: because it is a specific/proper phrase/noun.
---
* On various features, such as [Two-weapon Fighting](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat#TwoWeaponFighting) (PHB, page 195):
>
> When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon...
>
>
>
Again if "Attack action" and "attack" were synonymous then this sentence is redundant and could be reduced to "When you attack with a light melee weapon", the fact that it is not reduced further shows that they are two different things.
---
* On spells with attacks:
In order to cast most spells you must use your action to take the "Cast A Spell" action. If "attack" and "Attack action" were the same thing and you were casting, say, [*fire bolt*](https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/fire-bolt), a spell which has an attack roll, then you would have to use the "Cast A Spell" action but then you would have to take the "Attack" action as well (as you are making an attack). This is clearly impossible as you, generally, only have one action per turn.
Thus we can conclude that something having an attack roll does not make it require the "Attack action" or else a consequence would be the inability to cast spells with attack rolls.
---
* On [grappling](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat#Grappling) and [shoving](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat#ShovingaCreature) (PHB 195):
>
> [...] you can use the Attack action to make a special melee attack, a grapple. [...]
>
>
>
>
> Using the Attack action, you can make a special melee attack to shove a creature [...]
>
>
>
These are attacks made using the Attack action and are specifically called out in the rules as being "special". They are special for two reasons. First, they do not involve attack rolls, but are still considered attacks. And second, because they replace attacks made as part of the Attack action, and not just any attack. The best example of this is [opportunity attacks](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/combat#OpportunityAttacks), which cannot be a grapple or a shove as you are not taking the Attack action but instead a reaction that involves an attack. | Capitalization is a red herring: the real distinction is between "attack" and "Attack action".
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Both of the answers from nitsua60 and Medix2 are correct regarding the nature of the distinction. However, the distinction is between the phrases "Attack action" and the word "attack," not between capitalizations.
For completeness, an Attack action is a type of action that can be taken, defined on PHB 192:
>
> The most common action to take in combat is the Attack action, whether you are swinging a sword, firing an arrow from a bow, or brawling with your fists...
> Certain features, such as the Extra Attack feature of the fighter, allow you to make more than one attack with this action.
>
>
>
Whereas an attack is defined as anything that requires an attack roll (PHB 194):
>
> If there’s ever any question whether something you’re doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple: if you’re making an attack roll, you’re making an attack.
>
>
>
An Attack action can contain an attack, but it can also contain multiple attacks as well as grapples and shoves, among other things. In accordance with its name, using an Attack action uses up your action for the turn. On the other hand, an attack is usually contained within some other attempted thing: a spell, a melee weapon strike, etc.
**Whenever the text is referring to an action, it is explicitly called an Attack action.** Capitalization is not always a reliable way to determine whether or not the text is referring to the action--instead, one has to focus on the context. Attack actions are always written as such, whereas the other kind of attack frequently carries a modifier with it, such as "melee weapon attack" or "spell attack" or such. I have not found an exception to this rule in the PHB.
This is most commonly clear in the MM, where monsters' melee weapon attacks are all capitalized as "Melee Weapon Attack". Clearly these attacks are not attack actions, but they are capitalized as part of the header. If we focused only on the capitalization, we would have to look to context to determine whether it's an Attack action or just an attack.
I realize that this difference might be splitting hairs, but it's useful for resources that are not as careful as the PHB. For example, the official rules in the roll20 compendium or other SRD websites are not always so careful to preserve the capitalizations, but they usually do a good job in preserving the proper wording. Focusing on capitalization rather than terms of art might lead to frequent confusion. |
21,942 | I see that a lot of quants work on high frequency strategies. Mostly used data are prices, volumes.
I wonder, is anybody using data on funds positions, which they have to disclosure quarterly under Securities Exchange Act? I mean 13F-HR and 13F-HR/A forms. | 2015/11/26 | [
"https://quant.stackexchange.com/questions/21942",
"https://quant.stackexchange.com",
"https://quant.stackexchange.com/users/18439/"
] | Yes, there are plenty of people looking at 13F information.
There are even [ETF's with strategies](http://alphaclonefunds.com/) following 13F information for top funds.
There are also [websites](http://whalewisdom.com/) that parse and display this information as well. | There is some interesting work that can be done by looking at the predictive value of filings. Fintel is doing some work around this - you can see a sample of Baker Brothers performance <https://fintel.io/i/baker-bros-advisors-lp> - for more information, see also <https://fintel.io/b/2017-8-24-determining-investor-sentiment-in-industries-by-examining-institutional-funds-flow>
(I am involved with Fintel) |
21,942 | I see that a lot of quants work on high frequency strategies. Mostly used data are prices, volumes.
I wonder, is anybody using data on funds positions, which they have to disclosure quarterly under Securities Exchange Act? I mean 13F-HR and 13F-HR/A forms. | 2015/11/26 | [
"https://quant.stackexchange.com/questions/21942",
"https://quant.stackexchange.com",
"https://quant.stackexchange.com/users/18439/"
] | Yes, there are plenty of people looking at 13F information.
There are even [ETF's with strategies](http://alphaclonefunds.com/) following 13F information for top funds.
There are also [websites](http://whalewisdom.com/) that parse and display this information as well. | Folks are definitely using 13F data for making trading strategies. I [grab it from here](https://sites.google.com/view/sec-form-13f-data-sets/) in .xlsx format and just start analyzing it with other macro-economic data. |
57,033 | [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bO1AV.jpg)
This image, the template for the "Panzer of the Lake" meme, depicts a soldier from an unknown nation looking at what appears to me to definitely be a Panzer. However, no-one seems to know the origins of the image. So, where and when was this image taken, and where was the image originally published? | 2020/03/04 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/57033",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/33851/"
] | ***It's a Panzer IVD of the 31st Panzer Regiment assigned to the 5th Panzer Div. commanded by Lt. Heinz Zobel lost on May 13th, 1940. The "lake" is the Meuse River. The man is a German pioneer.***
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/D5iQh.png)
All credit to finding the Panzer of the Lake goes to [ConeOfArc for coordinating the search](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RO58B6LcTfM&list=WL&index=24), and miller786 and their team for finding the Panzer. Full sources and details are in [Panzer Of The Lake - Meuse River Theory](https://docs.google.com/document/d/14L7qfAXdZ3ekIKKCCneXc5PK3NxJrdhOxBi3Jyrd5Eo/edit#)
The Panzer and the "Lake"
=========================
The photo was taken about [coordinates 50.29092467073664, 4.893099128823844](https://goo.gl/maps/BNsJQnmFcXTUYxju9) near modern Wallonia, Belgium on the Meuse River. The tank was not recovered until much later in 1941. The man is an unnamed German pioneer likely at the time of recovery.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HQD9v.png)
*Comparison of an alternative original photo and the most recent image available of the location (July 2020, Google Street View)*
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dA3g6.png)
On May 12th, 1940 the 31st Panzer Regiment, assigned to the 5th Panzer Division, attempted to capture a bridge over the Meuse River at Yvoir. The bridge was demolished by 1st Lieutenant De Wispelaere of the Belgian Engineers.
>
> Werner Advance Detachment (under Oberst Paul Hermann Werner, commander, 31st Panzer Regiment), which belonged to the 5th Panzer Division, under Rommel’s command... Werner received a message from close support air reconnaissance in the afternoon that the bridge at Yvoir (seven kilometers north of Dinant) was still intact. He (Werner) immediately ordered Leutnant [Heinz] Zobel’s armored assault team of two armored scout cars and one Panzer platoon to head to the bridge at top speed... Belgian engineers under the command of 1st Lieutenant de Wispelaere had prepared the bridge for demolition while a platoon of Ardennes Light Infantry and elements of a French infantry battalion screened the bridge... Although the last soldiers had already passed the bridge, de Wispelaere delayed the demolition because civilian refugees were still approaching... two German armored scout cars charged toward the bridge while the following three Panzers opened fire. De Wispelaere immediately pushed the electrical ignition, but there was no explosion... Wispelaere now left his shelter and worked the manual ignition device. Trying to get back to his bunker, he was hit by a burst from a German machine gun and fell to the ground, mortally wounded. At the same time, the explosive charge went off. After the gigantic smoke cloud had drifted away, only the remnants of the pillars could be seen.
>
>
>
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dMmU6.png)
A few kilometers south at Houx, the Germans used a portion of a pontoon bridge (Bruckengerat B) rated to carry 16 tons to ferry their 25 ton tanks across.
>
> By noon on May 13, Pioniere completed an eight-ton ferry and crossed twenty anti-tank guns to the west bank, however to maintain the tempo of his divisions advance, he needed armor and motorized units across the river. Rommel personally ordered the ferry converted to a heavier sixteen-ton variant to facilitate the crossing of the light Panzers and armored cars. Simultaneously, the Pioniere began construction on a bridge capable of crossing the division’s heavier Panzers and motorized units.
>
>
>
*Major Erich Schnee in “The German Pionier: Case Study of the Combat Engineer’s Employment During Sustained Ground Combat”*
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/LdmBC.jpg)
On the evening of the 13th, Lt. Zobel's tank is crossing. Approaching the shore, the ferry lifts, the load shifts, and the tank falls into the river.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/f7YbE.png)
>
> The panzer IV of Lieutenant Zabel [sic] of the 31. Panzer Regiment of the 5. Panzer-Division, on May 13, 1940, in Houx, as good as underwater except for the vehicle commander’s cupola. Close to the west bank, at the pontoon crossing site and later site of 5. Panzer Division bridge, a 16 tonne ferry (Bruckengerat B) gave way to the approaching shoreline, likely due to the rotating movement of the panzer, which turned right when disembarking (the only possible direction to quickly leave the Meuse’s shore due to the wall created by the rail line). The tank would be fished out in 1941 during the reconstruction of the bridge.
>
>
>
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/UagYm.png)
The Man
=======
Sometime later the photograph was taken of a German pioneer infantryman looking at the tank. Later the tank was recovered and its ultimate fate is unknown.
>
> Available evidence suggests the soldier in the photo is a Pioneer/Tank recovery crew, holding a Kar98k and wearing an EM/NCO'S Drill & Work uniform, more commonly known as “Drillich”.
>
>
> His role is proven by the presence of pontoon ferries on the Meuse river, used by the 5th Panzer Division. That is also proven by his uniform, which, as evidence suggests, was used during work to prevent damage to their standard woolen uniform.
>
>
>
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PEzl0.png)
*German pioneers prepare Panzer IIs for ferry crossing*
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/lud8R.png)
*An early version of the Drillich*
---
My own speculation and research prior to the discovery.
=======================================================
While I can't identify the photo, I can narrow down the tank. I believe it is a Panzer IV D.
It has the [short barrelled 7.5 cm KwK 37](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.5_cm_KwK_37) narrowing it down to a Panzer IV Ausf. A through F1 or a [Panzer III N](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/tanks-2-3/panzer3n/).
Both had very similar turrets, but the Panzer III N has a wider gun mantlet, a more angular shroud, and lacked (or covered) the distinctive angular view ports (I believe they're view ports) on either side of the turret face.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/gt6vR.jpg)
*Panzer III N in Italy 1944*. [source](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/tanks-2-3/panzer3n/panzer-iii-ausf-n-italy-1944/)
This leaves the Panzer IV. The distinctive cupola was added in model B. The external gun mantlet was added in model D.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/BOimo.jpg)
*Panzer IV model C lacking the external gun mantlet*. [source](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/tanks-2-3/panzer-iv/panzer-iv-65pzrg-2/).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/tiIK4.jpg)
*Panzer IV model D in France 1940 with the external gun mantlet and periscope*. [source](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/wp-content/gallery/germany/tanks/panzer-iv/Frankreich_Panzer_IV.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/zmbVR.jpg)
Note the front half of the turret top is smooth. There is a protrusion to the front left of the cupola (I believe it's a periscope sight) and another circular opening to the front right. Finally, note the large ventilation hatch just in front of the cupola.
Model E would eliminate the ventilation hatch and replace it with a fan. The periscope was replaced with a hatch for signal flags.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/MycMf.jpg)
*Panzer IV model E lacking the periscope and ventilation hatch*. [source](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/tanks-2-3/panzer-iv/panzer-iv-31-2/).
Panzer IV model D entered mass production in October 1939 which means it would be too late for Poland, but could have seen service in France, Norway, or the Soviet Union.
---
As for the soldier...
The rifle has a turned down bolt handle, a bayonet lug (missing from late rifles), a distinctive disassembly disc on the side of the stock (also missing from late rifles), no front site hood (indicative of an early rifle), and you can just about make out extra detail in the nose cap (also early). This is likely an early [Karabiner 98k](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karabiner_98k) which is missing its cleaning rod. See [Forgotten Weapons: Evolution of the Karabiner 98k, From Prewar to Kriegsmodell](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knPDsJyCpjI).
---
***UPDATE***
[ConeOfArc](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1_oUtCGIqUMbIyRPeJsSyw) posted a video [*The Search for Panzer of the Lake*](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaRO_dTqO1E&list=WL).
He broke down what he could identify about the solder, probably German.
* German winter style lower.
* German wool tunic.
* M34 Army Standard cap.
* Kar98 rifle missing the cleaning rod.
For the tank he confirms it's a Panzer IV D using similar criteria I used and he found [two additional photos of what appear to be the same tank](https://imgur.com/a/NGvOmMj) claiming to be from the Western front in 1940.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/43hSO.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Tcmqv.jpg)
He then found a [Russian source](https://hitriy-plan.livejournal.com/441311.html) claiming it was found in Romania at the onset of Barbarossa in 1941.
Unfortunately that's all for now. ConeOfArc has put a bounty of $100 US for definitive proof of the tank's location. More detail can be had on ConeOfArc's Discord. | Tank gun itself is short barrelled 7.5cm [KwK 37](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.5_cm_KwK_37), as mentioned in nvoigt comment. This means that the tank is either early [PzKpfw IV](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_IV) (D to F1 versions employed in USSR) , or less likely [PzKpfw III Ausf. N](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_III#Variants_and_production) . However, PzKpfw III Ausf. N usually had [armored skirts](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dragon-Models-Pz-Kpfw-III-Schurzen-2-Pz-Div/dp/B00R0XKKAU) around turret and hull, plus camo pattern painted on. If we assume tank to be Pzkw IV, then it must be either from 1941 or early 1942, because after that long barrelled version of Pzkw IV appeared, and short barrelled versions were either withdrawn or destroyed.
Solider on the picture is even more interesting. Rifle in his hand does not appear to be usual Soviet [Mosin-Nagnat](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosin%E2%80%93Nagant#World_War_II) which has distinctive magazine protrusion near trigger guard. It looks more like German [Kar98k](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karabiner_98k), especially shoulder stock. On the other hand, uniform is rather peculiar, if we could call this attire uniform at all. Side hat could be either Soviet or German since both sides used them. However, Germans in the field usually had helmets, especially in 1941-42 period, so it is a bit more probable that this is Soviet solider rather then German. Uniform confirms this, it doesn't look German at all. Top part could be Soviet [Telogreika](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telogreika), but it doesn't appear to be padded or quilted (I could be wrong on this ) and it appears more like summer then winter Soviet tunic. Pants look like a part of winter uniform, and both Soviets and Germans had similar. However, it should be noted that Germans in the winter of 1941/42 had problems with their supply trains, and often had to resort in using parts of Soviet uniform to keep themselves worm.
Overall, as a probable (not definite) conclusion, I would guess this: Picture is taken in the spring of 1942. Panzer in question tried to go over ice, but the ice was weakened and broke, few days latter warm temperatures melted it completely. Solider in question could be German : he is using German service rifle, but still wears parts of Soviet military uniform acquired last winter in order to survive. His units has seen a lot, as a consequence military discipline is relaxed, soldiers do what they have to do and officers & NCO let them because only few of them remain in the field. Other option, he is a Soviet solider, maybe partisan, and this explains German rifle. In case of partisans, he is wearing various part of either Soviet or German uniforms that he could find. There is a possibility that he is a regular Soviet solider using trophy rifle - again in 1941/42 strict Soviet discipline was relaxed and officer often turned blind eye to violations if the man in question was good fighter. |
57,033 | [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bO1AV.jpg)
This image, the template for the "Panzer of the Lake" meme, depicts a soldier from an unknown nation looking at what appears to me to definitely be a Panzer. However, no-one seems to know the origins of the image. So, where and when was this image taken, and where was the image originally published? | 2020/03/04 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/57033",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/33851/"
] | ***It's a Panzer IVD of the 31st Panzer Regiment assigned to the 5th Panzer Div. commanded by Lt. Heinz Zobel lost on May 13th, 1940. The "lake" is the Meuse River. The man is a German pioneer.***
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/D5iQh.png)
All credit to finding the Panzer of the Lake goes to [ConeOfArc for coordinating the search](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RO58B6LcTfM&list=WL&index=24), and miller786 and their team for finding the Panzer. Full sources and details are in [Panzer Of The Lake - Meuse River Theory](https://docs.google.com/document/d/14L7qfAXdZ3ekIKKCCneXc5PK3NxJrdhOxBi3Jyrd5Eo/edit#)
The Panzer and the "Lake"
=========================
The photo was taken about [coordinates 50.29092467073664, 4.893099128823844](https://goo.gl/maps/BNsJQnmFcXTUYxju9) near modern Wallonia, Belgium on the Meuse River. The tank was not recovered until much later in 1941. The man is an unnamed German pioneer likely at the time of recovery.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HQD9v.png)
*Comparison of an alternative original photo and the most recent image available of the location (July 2020, Google Street View)*
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dA3g6.png)
On May 12th, 1940 the 31st Panzer Regiment, assigned to the 5th Panzer Division, attempted to capture a bridge over the Meuse River at Yvoir. The bridge was demolished by 1st Lieutenant De Wispelaere of the Belgian Engineers.
>
> Werner Advance Detachment (under Oberst Paul Hermann Werner, commander, 31st Panzer Regiment), which belonged to the 5th Panzer Division, under Rommel’s command... Werner received a message from close support air reconnaissance in the afternoon that the bridge at Yvoir (seven kilometers north of Dinant) was still intact. He (Werner) immediately ordered Leutnant [Heinz] Zobel’s armored assault team of two armored scout cars and one Panzer platoon to head to the bridge at top speed... Belgian engineers under the command of 1st Lieutenant de Wispelaere had prepared the bridge for demolition while a platoon of Ardennes Light Infantry and elements of a French infantry battalion screened the bridge... Although the last soldiers had already passed the bridge, de Wispelaere delayed the demolition because civilian refugees were still approaching... two German armored scout cars charged toward the bridge while the following three Panzers opened fire. De Wispelaere immediately pushed the electrical ignition, but there was no explosion... Wispelaere now left his shelter and worked the manual ignition device. Trying to get back to his bunker, he was hit by a burst from a German machine gun and fell to the ground, mortally wounded. At the same time, the explosive charge went off. After the gigantic smoke cloud had drifted away, only the remnants of the pillars could be seen.
>
>
>
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dMmU6.png)
A few kilometers south at Houx, the Germans used a portion of a pontoon bridge (Bruckengerat B) rated to carry 16 tons to ferry their 25 ton tanks across.
>
> By noon on May 13, Pioniere completed an eight-ton ferry and crossed twenty anti-tank guns to the west bank, however to maintain the tempo of his divisions advance, he needed armor and motorized units across the river. Rommel personally ordered the ferry converted to a heavier sixteen-ton variant to facilitate the crossing of the light Panzers and armored cars. Simultaneously, the Pioniere began construction on a bridge capable of crossing the division’s heavier Panzers and motorized units.
>
>
>
*Major Erich Schnee in “The German Pionier: Case Study of the Combat Engineer’s Employment During Sustained Ground Combat”*
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/LdmBC.jpg)
On the evening of the 13th, Lt. Zobel's tank is crossing. Approaching the shore, the ferry lifts, the load shifts, and the tank falls into the river.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/f7YbE.png)
>
> The panzer IV of Lieutenant Zabel [sic] of the 31. Panzer Regiment of the 5. Panzer-Division, on May 13, 1940, in Houx, as good as underwater except for the vehicle commander’s cupola. Close to the west bank, at the pontoon crossing site and later site of 5. Panzer Division bridge, a 16 tonne ferry (Bruckengerat B) gave way to the approaching shoreline, likely due to the rotating movement of the panzer, which turned right when disembarking (the only possible direction to quickly leave the Meuse’s shore due to the wall created by the rail line). The tank would be fished out in 1941 during the reconstruction of the bridge.
>
>
>
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/UagYm.png)
The Man
=======
Sometime later the photograph was taken of a German pioneer infantryman looking at the tank. Later the tank was recovered and its ultimate fate is unknown.
>
> Available evidence suggests the soldier in the photo is a Pioneer/Tank recovery crew, holding a Kar98k and wearing an EM/NCO'S Drill & Work uniform, more commonly known as “Drillich”.
>
>
> His role is proven by the presence of pontoon ferries on the Meuse river, used by the 5th Panzer Division. That is also proven by his uniform, which, as evidence suggests, was used during work to prevent damage to their standard woolen uniform.
>
>
>
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PEzl0.png)
*German pioneers prepare Panzer IIs for ferry crossing*
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/lud8R.png)
*An early version of the Drillich*
---
My own speculation and research prior to the discovery.
=======================================================
While I can't identify the photo, I can narrow down the tank. I believe it is a Panzer IV D.
It has the [short barrelled 7.5 cm KwK 37](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.5_cm_KwK_37) narrowing it down to a Panzer IV Ausf. A through F1 or a [Panzer III N](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/tanks-2-3/panzer3n/).
Both had very similar turrets, but the Panzer III N has a wider gun mantlet, a more angular shroud, and lacked (or covered) the distinctive angular view ports (I believe they're view ports) on either side of the turret face.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/gt6vR.jpg)
*Panzer III N in Italy 1944*. [source](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/tanks-2-3/panzer3n/panzer-iii-ausf-n-italy-1944/)
This leaves the Panzer IV. The distinctive cupola was added in model B. The external gun mantlet was added in model D.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/BOimo.jpg)
*Panzer IV model C lacking the external gun mantlet*. [source](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/tanks-2-3/panzer-iv/panzer-iv-65pzrg-2/).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/tiIK4.jpg)
*Panzer IV model D in France 1940 with the external gun mantlet and periscope*. [source](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/wp-content/gallery/germany/tanks/panzer-iv/Frankreich_Panzer_IV.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/zmbVR.jpg)
Note the front half of the turret top is smooth. There is a protrusion to the front left of the cupola (I believe it's a periscope sight) and another circular opening to the front right. Finally, note the large ventilation hatch just in front of the cupola.
Model E would eliminate the ventilation hatch and replace it with a fan. The periscope was replaced with a hatch for signal flags.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/MycMf.jpg)
*Panzer IV model E lacking the periscope and ventilation hatch*. [source](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/tanks-2-3/panzer-iv/panzer-iv-31-2/).
Panzer IV model D entered mass production in October 1939 which means it would be too late for Poland, but could have seen service in France, Norway, or the Soviet Union.
---
As for the soldier...
The rifle has a turned down bolt handle, a bayonet lug (missing from late rifles), a distinctive disassembly disc on the side of the stock (also missing from late rifles), no front site hood (indicative of an early rifle), and you can just about make out extra detail in the nose cap (also early). This is likely an early [Karabiner 98k](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karabiner_98k) which is missing its cleaning rod. See [Forgotten Weapons: Evolution of the Karabiner 98k, From Prewar to Kriegsmodell](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knPDsJyCpjI).
---
***UPDATE***
[ConeOfArc](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1_oUtCGIqUMbIyRPeJsSyw) posted a video [*The Search for Panzer of the Lake*](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaRO_dTqO1E&list=WL).
He broke down what he could identify about the solder, probably German.
* German winter style lower.
* German wool tunic.
* M34 Army Standard cap.
* Kar98 rifle missing the cleaning rod.
For the tank he confirms it's a Panzer IV D using similar criteria I used and he found [two additional photos of what appear to be the same tank](https://imgur.com/a/NGvOmMj) claiming to be from the Western front in 1940.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/43hSO.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Tcmqv.jpg)
He then found a [Russian source](https://hitriy-plan.livejournal.com/441311.html) claiming it was found in Romania at the onset of Barbarossa in 1941.
Unfortunately that's all for now. ConeOfArc has put a bounty of $100 US for definitive proof of the tank's location. More detail can be had on ConeOfArc's Discord. | I just wish to add a few things to this discussion
1: The tank is definitely a short-barreled Panzer IV, meaning that the soldier is definitely German or a very very lost Soviet
2: The Germans wore white trousers and a white shirt during training or leisure. He maybe a soldier who, due to unfortunate circumstances, or material shortages is wearing a cobbled together uniform. |
57,033 | [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bO1AV.jpg)
This image, the template for the "Panzer of the Lake" meme, depicts a soldier from an unknown nation looking at what appears to me to definitely be a Panzer. However, no-one seems to know the origins of the image. So, where and when was this image taken, and where was the image originally published? | 2020/03/04 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/57033",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/33851/"
] | ***It's a Panzer IVD of the 31st Panzer Regiment assigned to the 5th Panzer Div. commanded by Lt. Heinz Zobel lost on May 13th, 1940. The "lake" is the Meuse River. The man is a German pioneer.***
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/D5iQh.png)
All credit to finding the Panzer of the Lake goes to [ConeOfArc for coordinating the search](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RO58B6LcTfM&list=WL&index=24), and miller786 and their team for finding the Panzer. Full sources and details are in [Panzer Of The Lake - Meuse River Theory](https://docs.google.com/document/d/14L7qfAXdZ3ekIKKCCneXc5PK3NxJrdhOxBi3Jyrd5Eo/edit#)
The Panzer and the "Lake"
=========================
The photo was taken about [coordinates 50.29092467073664, 4.893099128823844](https://goo.gl/maps/BNsJQnmFcXTUYxju9) near modern Wallonia, Belgium on the Meuse River. The tank was not recovered until much later in 1941. The man is an unnamed German pioneer likely at the time of recovery.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HQD9v.png)
*Comparison of an alternative original photo and the most recent image available of the location (July 2020, Google Street View)*
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dA3g6.png)
On May 12th, 1940 the 31st Panzer Regiment, assigned to the 5th Panzer Division, attempted to capture a bridge over the Meuse River at Yvoir. The bridge was demolished by 1st Lieutenant De Wispelaere of the Belgian Engineers.
>
> Werner Advance Detachment (under Oberst Paul Hermann Werner, commander, 31st Panzer Regiment), which belonged to the 5th Panzer Division, under Rommel’s command... Werner received a message from close support air reconnaissance in the afternoon that the bridge at Yvoir (seven kilometers north of Dinant) was still intact. He (Werner) immediately ordered Leutnant [Heinz] Zobel’s armored assault team of two armored scout cars and one Panzer platoon to head to the bridge at top speed... Belgian engineers under the command of 1st Lieutenant de Wispelaere had prepared the bridge for demolition while a platoon of Ardennes Light Infantry and elements of a French infantry battalion screened the bridge... Although the last soldiers had already passed the bridge, de Wispelaere delayed the demolition because civilian refugees were still approaching... two German armored scout cars charged toward the bridge while the following three Panzers opened fire. De Wispelaere immediately pushed the electrical ignition, but there was no explosion... Wispelaere now left his shelter and worked the manual ignition device. Trying to get back to his bunker, he was hit by a burst from a German machine gun and fell to the ground, mortally wounded. At the same time, the explosive charge went off. After the gigantic smoke cloud had drifted away, only the remnants of the pillars could be seen.
>
>
>
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dMmU6.png)
A few kilometers south at Houx, the Germans used a portion of a pontoon bridge (Bruckengerat B) rated to carry 16 tons to ferry their 25 ton tanks across.
>
> By noon on May 13, Pioniere completed an eight-ton ferry and crossed twenty anti-tank guns to the west bank, however to maintain the tempo of his divisions advance, he needed armor and motorized units across the river. Rommel personally ordered the ferry converted to a heavier sixteen-ton variant to facilitate the crossing of the light Panzers and armored cars. Simultaneously, the Pioniere began construction on a bridge capable of crossing the division’s heavier Panzers and motorized units.
>
>
>
*Major Erich Schnee in “The German Pionier: Case Study of the Combat Engineer’s Employment During Sustained Ground Combat”*
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/LdmBC.jpg)
On the evening of the 13th, Lt. Zobel's tank is crossing. Approaching the shore, the ferry lifts, the load shifts, and the tank falls into the river.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/f7YbE.png)
>
> The panzer IV of Lieutenant Zabel [sic] of the 31. Panzer Regiment of the 5. Panzer-Division, on May 13, 1940, in Houx, as good as underwater except for the vehicle commander’s cupola. Close to the west bank, at the pontoon crossing site and later site of 5. Panzer Division bridge, a 16 tonne ferry (Bruckengerat B) gave way to the approaching shoreline, likely due to the rotating movement of the panzer, which turned right when disembarking (the only possible direction to quickly leave the Meuse’s shore due to the wall created by the rail line). The tank would be fished out in 1941 during the reconstruction of the bridge.
>
>
>
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/UagYm.png)
The Man
=======
Sometime later the photograph was taken of a German pioneer infantryman looking at the tank. Later the tank was recovered and its ultimate fate is unknown.
>
> Available evidence suggests the soldier in the photo is a Pioneer/Tank recovery crew, holding a Kar98k and wearing an EM/NCO'S Drill & Work uniform, more commonly known as “Drillich”.
>
>
> His role is proven by the presence of pontoon ferries on the Meuse river, used by the 5th Panzer Division. That is also proven by his uniform, which, as evidence suggests, was used during work to prevent damage to their standard woolen uniform.
>
>
>
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PEzl0.png)
*German pioneers prepare Panzer IIs for ferry crossing*
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/lud8R.png)
*An early version of the Drillich*
---
My own speculation and research prior to the discovery.
=======================================================
While I can't identify the photo, I can narrow down the tank. I believe it is a Panzer IV D.
It has the [short barrelled 7.5 cm KwK 37](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.5_cm_KwK_37) narrowing it down to a Panzer IV Ausf. A through F1 or a [Panzer III N](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/tanks-2-3/panzer3n/).
Both had very similar turrets, but the Panzer III N has a wider gun mantlet, a more angular shroud, and lacked (or covered) the distinctive angular view ports (I believe they're view ports) on either side of the turret face.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/gt6vR.jpg)
*Panzer III N in Italy 1944*. [source](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/tanks-2-3/panzer3n/panzer-iii-ausf-n-italy-1944/)
This leaves the Panzer IV. The distinctive cupola was added in model B. The external gun mantlet was added in model D.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/BOimo.jpg)
*Panzer IV model C lacking the external gun mantlet*. [source](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/tanks-2-3/panzer-iv/panzer-iv-65pzrg-2/).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/tiIK4.jpg)
*Panzer IV model D in France 1940 with the external gun mantlet and periscope*. [source](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/wp-content/gallery/germany/tanks/panzer-iv/Frankreich_Panzer_IV.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/zmbVR.jpg)
Note the front half of the turret top is smooth. There is a protrusion to the front left of the cupola (I believe it's a periscope sight) and another circular opening to the front right. Finally, note the large ventilation hatch just in front of the cupola.
Model E would eliminate the ventilation hatch and replace it with a fan. The periscope was replaced with a hatch for signal flags.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/MycMf.jpg)
*Panzer IV model E lacking the periscope and ventilation hatch*. [source](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/tanks-2-3/panzer-iv/panzer-iv-31-2/).
Panzer IV model D entered mass production in October 1939 which means it would be too late for Poland, but could have seen service in France, Norway, or the Soviet Union.
---
As for the soldier...
The rifle has a turned down bolt handle, a bayonet lug (missing from late rifles), a distinctive disassembly disc on the side of the stock (also missing from late rifles), no front site hood (indicative of an early rifle), and you can just about make out extra detail in the nose cap (also early). This is likely an early [Karabiner 98k](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karabiner_98k) which is missing its cleaning rod. See [Forgotten Weapons: Evolution of the Karabiner 98k, From Prewar to Kriegsmodell](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knPDsJyCpjI).
---
***UPDATE***
[ConeOfArc](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1_oUtCGIqUMbIyRPeJsSyw) posted a video [*The Search for Panzer of the Lake*](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaRO_dTqO1E&list=WL).
He broke down what he could identify about the solder, probably German.
* German winter style lower.
* German wool tunic.
* M34 Army Standard cap.
* Kar98 rifle missing the cleaning rod.
For the tank he confirms it's a Panzer IV D using similar criteria I used and he found [two additional photos of what appear to be the same tank](https://imgur.com/a/NGvOmMj) claiming to be from the Western front in 1940.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/43hSO.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Tcmqv.jpg)
He then found a [Russian source](https://hitriy-plan.livejournal.com/441311.html) claiming it was found in Romania at the onset of Barbarossa in 1941.
Unfortunately that's all for now. ConeOfArc has put a bounty of $100 US for definitive proof of the tank's location. More detail can be had on ConeOfArc's Discord. | The rifle looks to be a Finnish Sako m39, so this could be in Finland, as the Germans did send some tanks and such to the Finns when they fought the soviets. |
57,033 | [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bO1AV.jpg)
This image, the template for the "Panzer of the Lake" meme, depicts a soldier from an unknown nation looking at what appears to me to definitely be a Panzer. However, no-one seems to know the origins of the image. So, where and when was this image taken, and where was the image originally published? | 2020/03/04 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/57033",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/33851/"
] | ***It's a Panzer IVD of the 31st Panzer Regiment assigned to the 5th Panzer Div. commanded by Lt. Heinz Zobel lost on May 13th, 1940. The "lake" is the Meuse River. The man is a German pioneer.***
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/D5iQh.png)
All credit to finding the Panzer of the Lake goes to [ConeOfArc for coordinating the search](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RO58B6LcTfM&list=WL&index=24), and miller786 and their team for finding the Panzer. Full sources and details are in [Panzer Of The Lake - Meuse River Theory](https://docs.google.com/document/d/14L7qfAXdZ3ekIKKCCneXc5PK3NxJrdhOxBi3Jyrd5Eo/edit#)
The Panzer and the "Lake"
=========================
The photo was taken about [coordinates 50.29092467073664, 4.893099128823844](https://goo.gl/maps/BNsJQnmFcXTUYxju9) near modern Wallonia, Belgium on the Meuse River. The tank was not recovered until much later in 1941. The man is an unnamed German pioneer likely at the time of recovery.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HQD9v.png)
*Comparison of an alternative original photo and the most recent image available of the location (July 2020, Google Street View)*
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dA3g6.png)
On May 12th, 1940 the 31st Panzer Regiment, assigned to the 5th Panzer Division, attempted to capture a bridge over the Meuse River at Yvoir. The bridge was demolished by 1st Lieutenant De Wispelaere of the Belgian Engineers.
>
> Werner Advance Detachment (under Oberst Paul Hermann Werner, commander, 31st Panzer Regiment), which belonged to the 5th Panzer Division, under Rommel’s command... Werner received a message from close support air reconnaissance in the afternoon that the bridge at Yvoir (seven kilometers north of Dinant) was still intact. He (Werner) immediately ordered Leutnant [Heinz] Zobel’s armored assault team of two armored scout cars and one Panzer platoon to head to the bridge at top speed... Belgian engineers under the command of 1st Lieutenant de Wispelaere had prepared the bridge for demolition while a platoon of Ardennes Light Infantry and elements of a French infantry battalion screened the bridge... Although the last soldiers had already passed the bridge, de Wispelaere delayed the demolition because civilian refugees were still approaching... two German armored scout cars charged toward the bridge while the following three Panzers opened fire. De Wispelaere immediately pushed the electrical ignition, but there was no explosion... Wispelaere now left his shelter and worked the manual ignition device. Trying to get back to his bunker, he was hit by a burst from a German machine gun and fell to the ground, mortally wounded. At the same time, the explosive charge went off. After the gigantic smoke cloud had drifted away, only the remnants of the pillars could be seen.
>
>
>
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dMmU6.png)
A few kilometers south at Houx, the Germans used a portion of a pontoon bridge (Bruckengerat B) rated to carry 16 tons to ferry their 25 ton tanks across.
>
> By noon on May 13, Pioniere completed an eight-ton ferry and crossed twenty anti-tank guns to the west bank, however to maintain the tempo of his divisions advance, he needed armor and motorized units across the river. Rommel personally ordered the ferry converted to a heavier sixteen-ton variant to facilitate the crossing of the light Panzers and armored cars. Simultaneously, the Pioniere began construction on a bridge capable of crossing the division’s heavier Panzers and motorized units.
>
>
>
*Major Erich Schnee in “The German Pionier: Case Study of the Combat Engineer’s Employment During Sustained Ground Combat”*
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/LdmBC.jpg)
On the evening of the 13th, Lt. Zobel's tank is crossing. Approaching the shore, the ferry lifts, the load shifts, and the tank falls into the river.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/f7YbE.png)
>
> The panzer IV of Lieutenant Zabel [sic] of the 31. Panzer Regiment of the 5. Panzer-Division, on May 13, 1940, in Houx, as good as underwater except for the vehicle commander’s cupola. Close to the west bank, at the pontoon crossing site and later site of 5. Panzer Division bridge, a 16 tonne ferry (Bruckengerat B) gave way to the approaching shoreline, likely due to the rotating movement of the panzer, which turned right when disembarking (the only possible direction to quickly leave the Meuse’s shore due to the wall created by the rail line). The tank would be fished out in 1941 during the reconstruction of the bridge.
>
>
>
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/UagYm.png)
The Man
=======
Sometime later the photograph was taken of a German pioneer infantryman looking at the tank. Later the tank was recovered and its ultimate fate is unknown.
>
> Available evidence suggests the soldier in the photo is a Pioneer/Tank recovery crew, holding a Kar98k and wearing an EM/NCO'S Drill & Work uniform, more commonly known as “Drillich”.
>
>
> His role is proven by the presence of pontoon ferries on the Meuse river, used by the 5th Panzer Division. That is also proven by his uniform, which, as evidence suggests, was used during work to prevent damage to their standard woolen uniform.
>
>
>
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PEzl0.png)
*German pioneers prepare Panzer IIs for ferry crossing*
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/lud8R.png)
*An early version of the Drillich*
---
My own speculation and research prior to the discovery.
=======================================================
While I can't identify the photo, I can narrow down the tank. I believe it is a Panzer IV D.
It has the [short barrelled 7.5 cm KwK 37](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.5_cm_KwK_37) narrowing it down to a Panzer IV Ausf. A through F1 or a [Panzer III N](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/tanks-2-3/panzer3n/).
Both had very similar turrets, but the Panzer III N has a wider gun mantlet, a more angular shroud, and lacked (or covered) the distinctive angular view ports (I believe they're view ports) on either side of the turret face.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/gt6vR.jpg)
*Panzer III N in Italy 1944*. [source](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/tanks-2-3/panzer3n/panzer-iii-ausf-n-italy-1944/)
This leaves the Panzer IV. The distinctive cupola was added in model B. The external gun mantlet was added in model D.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/BOimo.jpg)
*Panzer IV model C lacking the external gun mantlet*. [source](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/tanks-2-3/panzer-iv/panzer-iv-65pzrg-2/).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/tiIK4.jpg)
*Panzer IV model D in France 1940 with the external gun mantlet and periscope*. [source](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/wp-content/gallery/germany/tanks/panzer-iv/Frankreich_Panzer_IV.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/zmbVR.jpg)
Note the front half of the turret top is smooth. There is a protrusion to the front left of the cupola (I believe it's a periscope sight) and another circular opening to the front right. Finally, note the large ventilation hatch just in front of the cupola.
Model E would eliminate the ventilation hatch and replace it with a fan. The periscope was replaced with a hatch for signal flags.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/MycMf.jpg)
*Panzer IV model E lacking the periscope and ventilation hatch*. [source](https://www.worldwarphotos.info/gallery/germany/tanks-2-3/panzer-iv/panzer-iv-31-2/).
Panzer IV model D entered mass production in October 1939 which means it would be too late for Poland, but could have seen service in France, Norway, or the Soviet Union.
---
As for the soldier...
The rifle has a turned down bolt handle, a bayonet lug (missing from late rifles), a distinctive disassembly disc on the side of the stock (also missing from late rifles), no front site hood (indicative of an early rifle), and you can just about make out extra detail in the nose cap (also early). This is likely an early [Karabiner 98k](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karabiner_98k) which is missing its cleaning rod. See [Forgotten Weapons: Evolution of the Karabiner 98k, From Prewar to Kriegsmodell](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knPDsJyCpjI).
---
***UPDATE***
[ConeOfArc](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1_oUtCGIqUMbIyRPeJsSyw) posted a video [*The Search for Panzer of the Lake*](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaRO_dTqO1E&list=WL).
He broke down what he could identify about the solder, probably German.
* German winter style lower.
* German wool tunic.
* M34 Army Standard cap.
* Kar98 rifle missing the cleaning rod.
For the tank he confirms it's a Panzer IV D using similar criteria I used and he found [two additional photos of what appear to be the same tank](https://imgur.com/a/NGvOmMj) claiming to be from the Western front in 1940.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/43hSO.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Tcmqv.jpg)
He then found a [Russian source](https://hitriy-plan.livejournal.com/441311.html) claiming it was found in Romania at the onset of Barbarossa in 1941.
Unfortunately that's all for now. ConeOfArc has put a bounty of $100 US for definitive proof of the tank's location. More detail can be had on ConeOfArc's Discord. | The rifle is almost certainly a K98 Mauser - one giveaway is the silver grommet on the stock halfway between the trigger and butt plate. A rod would slide through that grommet in a rack of K98's to lock them in the rack when not in use. Most K98's have that grommet, while that particular locking method isn't used much outside of the Mauser.
It is possible, though not guaranteed, that the solder is from Finland, during the [Continuation War](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuation_War#:%7E:text=The%20Continuation%20War%20was%20a%20conflict%20fought%20by,the%20Finnish%20Front%20of%20the%20Great%20Patriotic%20War.), when Finland sought to reclaim territory it had lost in 1940 from the Soviet invasion. In the few photos of Finn soldiers during that conflict, they tend to wear caps instead of helmets. In the wiki article, a Finn officer is seen with a Soviet officer after an armistice was reached in 1944, and the cap in the photo looks a lot like the cap that Finn officer is wearing.
Germany did supply some arms to Finland during this second conflict to take some of the pressure off of their own efforts, which would account for the Mauser rifle and even the Panzer 4... by 1942, Germany changed over to the longer barreled 75mm cannon to better combat the T34, and the few tanks they did send to Finland would likely have been the now obsolete short barreled 75mm equipped tanks. |
57,033 | [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bO1AV.jpg)
This image, the template for the "Panzer of the Lake" meme, depicts a soldier from an unknown nation looking at what appears to me to definitely be a Panzer. However, no-one seems to know the origins of the image. So, where and when was this image taken, and where was the image originally published? | 2020/03/04 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/57033",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/33851/"
] | Tank gun itself is short barrelled 7.5cm [KwK 37](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.5_cm_KwK_37), as mentioned in nvoigt comment. This means that the tank is either early [PzKpfw IV](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_IV) (D to F1 versions employed in USSR) , or less likely [PzKpfw III Ausf. N](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_III#Variants_and_production) . However, PzKpfw III Ausf. N usually had [armored skirts](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dragon-Models-Pz-Kpfw-III-Schurzen-2-Pz-Div/dp/B00R0XKKAU) around turret and hull, plus camo pattern painted on. If we assume tank to be Pzkw IV, then it must be either from 1941 or early 1942, because after that long barrelled version of Pzkw IV appeared, and short barrelled versions were either withdrawn or destroyed.
Solider on the picture is even more interesting. Rifle in his hand does not appear to be usual Soviet [Mosin-Nagnat](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosin%E2%80%93Nagant#World_War_II) which has distinctive magazine protrusion near trigger guard. It looks more like German [Kar98k](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karabiner_98k), especially shoulder stock. On the other hand, uniform is rather peculiar, if we could call this attire uniform at all. Side hat could be either Soviet or German since both sides used them. However, Germans in the field usually had helmets, especially in 1941-42 period, so it is a bit more probable that this is Soviet solider rather then German. Uniform confirms this, it doesn't look German at all. Top part could be Soviet [Telogreika](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telogreika), but it doesn't appear to be padded or quilted (I could be wrong on this ) and it appears more like summer then winter Soviet tunic. Pants look like a part of winter uniform, and both Soviets and Germans had similar. However, it should be noted that Germans in the winter of 1941/42 had problems with their supply trains, and often had to resort in using parts of Soviet uniform to keep themselves worm.
Overall, as a probable (not definite) conclusion, I would guess this: Picture is taken in the spring of 1942. Panzer in question tried to go over ice, but the ice was weakened and broke, few days latter warm temperatures melted it completely. Solider in question could be German : he is using German service rifle, but still wears parts of Soviet military uniform acquired last winter in order to survive. His units has seen a lot, as a consequence military discipline is relaxed, soldiers do what they have to do and officers & NCO let them because only few of them remain in the field. Other option, he is a Soviet solider, maybe partisan, and this explains German rifle. In case of partisans, he is wearing various part of either Soviet or German uniforms that he could find. There is a possibility that he is a regular Soviet solider using trophy rifle - again in 1941/42 strict Soviet discipline was relaxed and officer often turned blind eye to violations if the man in question was good fighter. | I just wish to add a few things to this discussion
1: The tank is definitely a short-barreled Panzer IV, meaning that the soldier is definitely German or a very very lost Soviet
2: The Germans wore white trousers and a white shirt during training or leisure. He maybe a soldier who, due to unfortunate circumstances, or material shortages is wearing a cobbled together uniform. |
57,033 | [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bO1AV.jpg)
This image, the template for the "Panzer of the Lake" meme, depicts a soldier from an unknown nation looking at what appears to me to definitely be a Panzer. However, no-one seems to know the origins of the image. So, where and when was this image taken, and where was the image originally published? | 2020/03/04 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/57033",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/33851/"
] | Tank gun itself is short barrelled 7.5cm [KwK 37](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.5_cm_KwK_37), as mentioned in nvoigt comment. This means that the tank is either early [PzKpfw IV](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_IV) (D to F1 versions employed in USSR) , or less likely [PzKpfw III Ausf. N](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_III#Variants_and_production) . However, PzKpfw III Ausf. N usually had [armored skirts](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dragon-Models-Pz-Kpfw-III-Schurzen-2-Pz-Div/dp/B00R0XKKAU) around turret and hull, plus camo pattern painted on. If we assume tank to be Pzkw IV, then it must be either from 1941 or early 1942, because after that long barrelled version of Pzkw IV appeared, and short barrelled versions were either withdrawn or destroyed.
Solider on the picture is even more interesting. Rifle in his hand does not appear to be usual Soviet [Mosin-Nagnat](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosin%E2%80%93Nagant#World_War_II) which has distinctive magazine protrusion near trigger guard. It looks more like German [Kar98k](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karabiner_98k), especially shoulder stock. On the other hand, uniform is rather peculiar, if we could call this attire uniform at all. Side hat could be either Soviet or German since both sides used them. However, Germans in the field usually had helmets, especially in 1941-42 period, so it is a bit more probable that this is Soviet solider rather then German. Uniform confirms this, it doesn't look German at all. Top part could be Soviet [Telogreika](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telogreika), but it doesn't appear to be padded or quilted (I could be wrong on this ) and it appears more like summer then winter Soviet tunic. Pants look like a part of winter uniform, and both Soviets and Germans had similar. However, it should be noted that Germans in the winter of 1941/42 had problems with their supply trains, and often had to resort in using parts of Soviet uniform to keep themselves worm.
Overall, as a probable (not definite) conclusion, I would guess this: Picture is taken in the spring of 1942. Panzer in question tried to go over ice, but the ice was weakened and broke, few days latter warm temperatures melted it completely. Solider in question could be German : he is using German service rifle, but still wears parts of Soviet military uniform acquired last winter in order to survive. His units has seen a lot, as a consequence military discipline is relaxed, soldiers do what they have to do and officers & NCO let them because only few of them remain in the field. Other option, he is a Soviet solider, maybe partisan, and this explains German rifle. In case of partisans, he is wearing various part of either Soviet or German uniforms that he could find. There is a possibility that he is a regular Soviet solider using trophy rifle - again in 1941/42 strict Soviet discipline was relaxed and officer often turned blind eye to violations if the man in question was good fighter. | The rifle looks to be a Finnish Sako m39, so this could be in Finland, as the Germans did send some tanks and such to the Finns when they fought the soviets. |
57,033 | [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bO1AV.jpg)
This image, the template for the "Panzer of the Lake" meme, depicts a soldier from an unknown nation looking at what appears to me to definitely be a Panzer. However, no-one seems to know the origins of the image. So, where and when was this image taken, and where was the image originally published? | 2020/03/04 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/57033",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/33851/"
] | Tank gun itself is short barrelled 7.5cm [KwK 37](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.5_cm_KwK_37), as mentioned in nvoigt comment. This means that the tank is either early [PzKpfw IV](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_IV) (D to F1 versions employed in USSR) , or less likely [PzKpfw III Ausf. N](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_III#Variants_and_production) . However, PzKpfw III Ausf. N usually had [armored skirts](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dragon-Models-Pz-Kpfw-III-Schurzen-2-Pz-Div/dp/B00R0XKKAU) around turret and hull, plus camo pattern painted on. If we assume tank to be Pzkw IV, then it must be either from 1941 or early 1942, because after that long barrelled version of Pzkw IV appeared, and short barrelled versions were either withdrawn or destroyed.
Solider on the picture is even more interesting. Rifle in his hand does not appear to be usual Soviet [Mosin-Nagnat](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosin%E2%80%93Nagant#World_War_II) which has distinctive magazine protrusion near trigger guard. It looks more like German [Kar98k](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karabiner_98k), especially shoulder stock. On the other hand, uniform is rather peculiar, if we could call this attire uniform at all. Side hat could be either Soviet or German since both sides used them. However, Germans in the field usually had helmets, especially in 1941-42 period, so it is a bit more probable that this is Soviet solider rather then German. Uniform confirms this, it doesn't look German at all. Top part could be Soviet [Telogreika](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telogreika), but it doesn't appear to be padded or quilted (I could be wrong on this ) and it appears more like summer then winter Soviet tunic. Pants look like a part of winter uniform, and both Soviets and Germans had similar. However, it should be noted that Germans in the winter of 1941/42 had problems with their supply trains, and often had to resort in using parts of Soviet uniform to keep themselves worm.
Overall, as a probable (not definite) conclusion, I would guess this: Picture is taken in the spring of 1942. Panzer in question tried to go over ice, but the ice was weakened and broke, few days latter warm temperatures melted it completely. Solider in question could be German : he is using German service rifle, but still wears parts of Soviet military uniform acquired last winter in order to survive. His units has seen a lot, as a consequence military discipline is relaxed, soldiers do what they have to do and officers & NCO let them because only few of them remain in the field. Other option, he is a Soviet solider, maybe partisan, and this explains German rifle. In case of partisans, he is wearing various part of either Soviet or German uniforms that he could find. There is a possibility that he is a regular Soviet solider using trophy rifle - again in 1941/42 strict Soviet discipline was relaxed and officer often turned blind eye to violations if the man in question was good fighter. | The rifle is almost certainly a K98 Mauser - one giveaway is the silver grommet on the stock halfway between the trigger and butt plate. A rod would slide through that grommet in a rack of K98's to lock them in the rack when not in use. Most K98's have that grommet, while that particular locking method isn't used much outside of the Mauser.
It is possible, though not guaranteed, that the solder is from Finland, during the [Continuation War](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuation_War#:%7E:text=The%20Continuation%20War%20was%20a%20conflict%20fought%20by,the%20Finnish%20Front%20of%20the%20Great%20Patriotic%20War.), when Finland sought to reclaim territory it had lost in 1940 from the Soviet invasion. In the few photos of Finn soldiers during that conflict, they tend to wear caps instead of helmets. In the wiki article, a Finn officer is seen with a Soviet officer after an armistice was reached in 1944, and the cap in the photo looks a lot like the cap that Finn officer is wearing.
Germany did supply some arms to Finland during this second conflict to take some of the pressure off of their own efforts, which would account for the Mauser rifle and even the Panzer 4... by 1942, Germany changed over to the longer barreled 75mm cannon to better combat the T34, and the few tanks they did send to Finland would likely have been the now obsolete short barreled 75mm equipped tanks. |
57,033 | [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bO1AV.jpg)
This image, the template for the "Panzer of the Lake" meme, depicts a soldier from an unknown nation looking at what appears to me to definitely be a Panzer. However, no-one seems to know the origins of the image. So, where and when was this image taken, and where was the image originally published? | 2020/03/04 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/57033",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/33851/"
] | The rifle is almost certainly a K98 Mauser - one giveaway is the silver grommet on the stock halfway between the trigger and butt plate. A rod would slide through that grommet in a rack of K98's to lock them in the rack when not in use. Most K98's have that grommet, while that particular locking method isn't used much outside of the Mauser.
It is possible, though not guaranteed, that the solder is from Finland, during the [Continuation War](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuation_War#:%7E:text=The%20Continuation%20War%20was%20a%20conflict%20fought%20by,the%20Finnish%20Front%20of%20the%20Great%20Patriotic%20War.), when Finland sought to reclaim territory it had lost in 1940 from the Soviet invasion. In the few photos of Finn soldiers during that conflict, they tend to wear caps instead of helmets. In the wiki article, a Finn officer is seen with a Soviet officer after an armistice was reached in 1944, and the cap in the photo looks a lot like the cap that Finn officer is wearing.
Germany did supply some arms to Finland during this second conflict to take some of the pressure off of their own efforts, which would account for the Mauser rifle and even the Panzer 4... by 1942, Germany changed over to the longer barreled 75mm cannon to better combat the T34, and the few tanks they did send to Finland would likely have been the now obsolete short barreled 75mm equipped tanks. | I just wish to add a few things to this discussion
1: The tank is definitely a short-barreled Panzer IV, meaning that the soldier is definitely German or a very very lost Soviet
2: The Germans wore white trousers and a white shirt during training or leisure. He maybe a soldier who, due to unfortunate circumstances, or material shortages is wearing a cobbled together uniform. |
57,033 | [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bO1AV.jpg)
This image, the template for the "Panzer of the Lake" meme, depicts a soldier from an unknown nation looking at what appears to me to definitely be a Panzer. However, no-one seems to know the origins of the image. So, where and when was this image taken, and where was the image originally published? | 2020/03/04 | [
"https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/57033",
"https://history.stackexchange.com",
"https://history.stackexchange.com/users/33851/"
] | The rifle is almost certainly a K98 Mauser - one giveaway is the silver grommet on the stock halfway between the trigger and butt plate. A rod would slide through that grommet in a rack of K98's to lock them in the rack when not in use. Most K98's have that grommet, while that particular locking method isn't used much outside of the Mauser.
It is possible, though not guaranteed, that the solder is from Finland, during the [Continuation War](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuation_War#:%7E:text=The%20Continuation%20War%20was%20a%20conflict%20fought%20by,the%20Finnish%20Front%20of%20the%20Great%20Patriotic%20War.), when Finland sought to reclaim territory it had lost in 1940 from the Soviet invasion. In the few photos of Finn soldiers during that conflict, they tend to wear caps instead of helmets. In the wiki article, a Finn officer is seen with a Soviet officer after an armistice was reached in 1944, and the cap in the photo looks a lot like the cap that Finn officer is wearing.
Germany did supply some arms to Finland during this second conflict to take some of the pressure off of their own efforts, which would account for the Mauser rifle and even the Panzer 4... by 1942, Germany changed over to the longer barreled 75mm cannon to better combat the T34, and the few tanks they did send to Finland would likely have been the now obsolete short barreled 75mm equipped tanks. | The rifle looks to be a Finnish Sako m39, so this could be in Finland, as the Germans did send some tanks and such to the Finns when they fought the soviets. |
644,132 | We have multiple ESXi servers managed by a vCenter; is there a way to get a list of all the snapshots in all the VMs? | 2014/11/13 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/644132",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/1980/"
] | Even if an answer has been accepted, I'd like to point you to [check\_vmware\_snapshots](http://labs.consol.de/lang/en/nagios/check_vmware_snapshots/).
It's a Nagios / Icinga *plugin, to check the age and count for VM snapshots in a VMWare ESXi/vSphere environment.*
It depends on Perl / VMware::VIRuntime from "VMware-vSphere-CLI-5.5.0", so no PowerCLI or -shell this time. :-) | Unfortunately the thick client for Vcenter hasn't had this feature ever since 6.0 I believe but here's another option if you want to do it easily in a GUI. In 6.0 or 6.5 launch the vcenter web client (flash version). On the left side (navigator window) select either vcenter, a data center, or a cluster then select to view VMs. On the right hand side to the left of the "filter" box there's a small square icon (hovering over it says "Show and hide quick filters". click that square icon, then click "has snapshot" then click "yes". Your view will now display only VMs with snapshots. Enjoy! |
644,132 | We have multiple ESXi servers managed by a vCenter; is there a way to get a list of all the snapshots in all the VMs? | 2014/11/13 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/644132",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/1980/"
] | Grrr... VMware snapshots. If I had my way, they'd only exist for backup purposes and for testing changes.
You can view the space consumed by snapshots (*which is probably what you're really interested in knowing*) by using the "Storage Views" tab at the cluster level in your vSphere client.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/YuXqg.png)
Start there, then drill down to the individual VMs. The entries that have values in Bytes (B) essentially mean that there are no snapshots. | This worked for me in vSphere 6.7 (Web Client):
===============================================
* Go to storage, and click the datastore
* Click the files tab
* Type "snap" in the file search box
* It will list the snapshot files, and you can determine the VMs based on the snapshot file name. |
4,706 | [Is this statement on doing a PhD in Germany as a foreigner accurate for mathematics?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/144960/7734) was closed for being primarily opinion-based. It actually failed to be closed in the close queue, [receiving three *leave open* votes](https://academia.stackexchange.com/review/close/84975), and was only closed from votes cast outside the queue.
While this question is on a series of claims, which would make an opinionated answer, it asks for their correctness, which is mostly objective. Most answers to this question (including one by me) do focus on this factual correctness and why such anecdotal claims are problematic. While there is still some subjectivity left, I would consider this a case of [good subjective](https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/) and it the question and most of its answers are arguably less subjective than many on this site.
I therefore propose to reopen it. (I cannot push this question to the reopen queue, because my vote would immediately reopen it.) | 2020/04/25 | [
"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4706",
"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734/"
] | I lean towards thinking that the question should remain closed, though I could see it going either way.
The question has some positives and some negatives. On the positive side, it inspired answers with excellent information. On the negative side, it is fairly broad, argumentative, and calls for opinions.
In an ideal world, I would suggest that it remain closed (as too broad), and replaced by multiple separate questions, where each question asks about the accuracy of one factual claim.
Currently, the question comes off to me as "here's a long rant I read, is it really true?". The text we're asked to respond to contains both factual claims and judgements/conclusions/opinions, without separating the two out. Because of the mix of the two, I don't know how to answer the question ("is this really the case?") objectively. One can respond to the factual claims objectively, but responding to the opinions and conclusions seems like it calls for opinions.
Ideally, I think it would be more constructive to separate out the specific factual claims made in that argument, and then ask specifically about each of those in a separate question, and leave judgements and advice and opinions out of it, and then ask people who answered with concrete evidence to answer those individual questions. That's in an ideal world where doing all of that work is feasible and successfully leads to all the information being preserved in separate questions. I don't know whether that will actually happen.
I should also share a personal bias: I tend to be wary of posts with a strongly-expressed argumentative position, that ask us to respond to that position; I'm not sure they make a great prompt for a great question. So, it's possible I might be reacting to that aspect of the question as much as anything. It probably shouldn't affect the decision of whether to close or not, but it probably does affect me.
That's just my view. I don't see this as clear-cut. I can understand how people would come to different views. For instance, given the outstanding information contained in the answers, I could appreciate a view that the positives outweigh the negatives. I could also appreciate a view that says that Academia.SE regularly deals with calls for opinions and advice, and as long as they are supported by evidence, that is acceptable. | The question is about someone's opinion, but the answer (which is no, the opinion overgeneralizes) is not opinion. So technically it is not off-topic.
I suggest down-voting the question for trolling. It is implausible that someone experienced with PhD programs in Germany would make the claims stated in the question, that overgeneralizes that severely, unless they were trolling, immature, or excessively angry. |
4,706 | [Is this statement on doing a PhD in Germany as a foreigner accurate for mathematics?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/144960/7734) was closed for being primarily opinion-based. It actually failed to be closed in the close queue, [receiving three *leave open* votes](https://academia.stackexchange.com/review/close/84975), and was only closed from votes cast outside the queue.
While this question is on a series of claims, which would make an opinionated answer, it asks for their correctness, which is mostly objective. Most answers to this question (including one by me) do focus on this factual correctness and why such anecdotal claims are problematic. While there is still some subjectivity left, I would consider this a case of [good subjective](https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/) and it the question and most of its answers are arguably less subjective than many on this site.
I therefore propose to reopen it. (I cannot push this question to the reopen queue, because my vote would immediately reopen it.) | 2020/04/25 | [
"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4706",
"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734/"
] | I would suggest that we **edit and reopen.**
I suspect some of the close votes may have been induced by the vague title and long quote. It seems almost like a "writing prompt," which may have rubbed people the wrong way. Editing may address this concern.
But it is clearly an interesting question. While there are subjective elements (and German academia is a big place), I think academics familiar with the German system could provide "expert analysis" of the claims. So, it seems at least as answerable as many of our questions.
**Edit:** I have taken a stab at editing the question. | The question is about someone's opinion, but the answer (which is no, the opinion overgeneralizes) is not opinion. So technically it is not off-topic.
I suggest down-voting the question for trolling. It is implausible that someone experienced with PhD programs in Germany would make the claims stated in the question, that overgeneralizes that severely, unless they were trolling, immature, or excessively angry. |
4,706 | [Is this statement on doing a PhD in Germany as a foreigner accurate for mathematics?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/144960/7734) was closed for being primarily opinion-based. It actually failed to be closed in the close queue, [receiving three *leave open* votes](https://academia.stackexchange.com/review/close/84975), and was only closed from votes cast outside the queue.
While this question is on a series of claims, which would make an opinionated answer, it asks for their correctness, which is mostly objective. Most answers to this question (including one by me) do focus on this factual correctness and why such anecdotal claims are problematic. While there is still some subjectivity left, I would consider this a case of [good subjective](https://stackoverflow.blog/2010/09/29/good-subjective-bad-subjective/) and it the question and most of its answers are arguably less subjective than many on this site.
I therefore propose to reopen it. (I cannot push this question to the reopen queue, because my vote would immediately reopen it.) | 2020/04/25 | [
"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4706",
"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734/"
] | I would suggest that we **edit and reopen.**
I suspect some of the close votes may have been induced by the vague title and long quote. It seems almost like a "writing prompt," which may have rubbed people the wrong way. Editing may address this concern.
But it is clearly an interesting question. While there are subjective elements (and German academia is a big place), I think academics familiar with the German system could provide "expert analysis" of the claims. So, it seems at least as answerable as many of our questions.
**Edit:** I have taken a stab at editing the question. | I lean towards thinking that the question should remain closed, though I could see it going either way.
The question has some positives and some negatives. On the positive side, it inspired answers with excellent information. On the negative side, it is fairly broad, argumentative, and calls for opinions.
In an ideal world, I would suggest that it remain closed (as too broad), and replaced by multiple separate questions, where each question asks about the accuracy of one factual claim.
Currently, the question comes off to me as "here's a long rant I read, is it really true?". The text we're asked to respond to contains both factual claims and judgements/conclusions/opinions, without separating the two out. Because of the mix of the two, I don't know how to answer the question ("is this really the case?") objectively. One can respond to the factual claims objectively, but responding to the opinions and conclusions seems like it calls for opinions.
Ideally, I think it would be more constructive to separate out the specific factual claims made in that argument, and then ask specifically about each of those in a separate question, and leave judgements and advice and opinions out of it, and then ask people who answered with concrete evidence to answer those individual questions. That's in an ideal world where doing all of that work is feasible and successfully leads to all the information being preserved in separate questions. I don't know whether that will actually happen.
I should also share a personal bias: I tend to be wary of posts with a strongly-expressed argumentative position, that ask us to respond to that position; I'm not sure they make a great prompt for a great question. So, it's possible I might be reacting to that aspect of the question as much as anything. It probably shouldn't affect the decision of whether to close or not, but it probably does affect me.
That's just my view. I don't see this as clear-cut. I can understand how people would come to different views. For instance, given the outstanding information contained in the answers, I could appreciate a view that the positives outweigh the negatives. I could also appreciate a view that says that Academia.SE regularly deals with calls for opinions and advice, and as long as they are supported by evidence, that is acceptable. |
1,158,439 | As a programmer I'm all in favour of the agile methodology, we all know it makes sence, however how do you sell this to a third party ?.
The work we do is generally fixed price and it is usual for us to only have a high level view of the requirements when we quote as it is often a competitive situation. We often find that when we win a contract and get to look at the detail the features grow in scope. While we do have a mechanism for managing this scope creep it is not robust and transparent enough which commonly results in us conceding days.
The agile methodology may say there is no such thing as scope creep, however in the real world we all know there is. When a customer asks you to provide a solution, at a fixed price and time scale (which they always will), and then change the goal posts mid-project that is scope creep. At the end of their budget they will quite likely to be left with something different then they originally intended and which may not fully meet their original requirements. At that point they’re going to come back and argue that they've not got what they paid for - the only protection we have against that is a spec that lays out exactly what they're going to get up front that we can deliver against, clearly not the agile way.
I know people will say the customer should be kept informed at all times as to what they're getting and what's being moved out of scope blah blah blah...- however in the REAL world as far as I can see you'll always get a customers who will then say at the end - this isn't what you promised to deliver / we've paid for. How do we manage that situation?. | 2009/07/21 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1158439",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | This is where some of the concepts of SCRUM pay off.
1. The business leader MUST be involved with every step of the process.
2. Picking which stories make a particular sprint MUST be done with the business leader.
3. Don't do anything in a sprint that is not scheduled for that sprint without adding it to the sprint backlog chart for that sprint. It's good to show things that were added to a sprint in a different color. That way you can see the original plan (hopefully on schedule) and the additions (what causes the delay).
4. Produce something that "could go to production" in each sprint. The business will see that it's getting something for their money. They can also adjust future sprints based on what they see. Each sprint makes a good stopping point.
-- EDIT --
Hmmm. Maybe a DVD of the video Ray suggested (or [this one](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5k7a9YEoUI)) should be included in the project proposal. It might make the difference when trying to get the job to begin with. The customer should know how your group works BEFORE they hire you. It will make your company stand out as more than just a "body shop".
If you ARE a "body shop"...
1. You probably won't be able to wield much control over how the project goes. You'll be collecting the hours.
2. If you see the project going badly, start dropping hints to the client "If MY company were running this project...". You may get the next project! | Maintain a burndown chart of the project.
When they see it, they will get it. They will know the projects velocity and they will ***see*** the implications of scope creep. They may also see the value of ***scope reduction*** by pruning low priority items.
Burndown charts is a way keeping you and your customer informed. Once you both see the Big Picture, you can negotiate how to move ahead--fairly.
This [video](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LPYNhUMTLo) is a good case study. |
1,158,439 | As a programmer I'm all in favour of the agile methodology, we all know it makes sence, however how do you sell this to a third party ?.
The work we do is generally fixed price and it is usual for us to only have a high level view of the requirements when we quote as it is often a competitive situation. We often find that when we win a contract and get to look at the detail the features grow in scope. While we do have a mechanism for managing this scope creep it is not robust and transparent enough which commonly results in us conceding days.
The agile methodology may say there is no such thing as scope creep, however in the real world we all know there is. When a customer asks you to provide a solution, at a fixed price and time scale (which they always will), and then change the goal posts mid-project that is scope creep. At the end of their budget they will quite likely to be left with something different then they originally intended and which may not fully meet their original requirements. At that point they’re going to come back and argue that they've not got what they paid for - the only protection we have against that is a spec that lays out exactly what they're going to get up front that we can deliver against, clearly not the agile way.
I know people will say the customer should be kept informed at all times as to what they're getting and what's being moved out of scope blah blah blah...- however in the REAL world as far as I can see you'll always get a customers who will then say at the end - this isn't what you promised to deliver / we've paid for. How do we manage that situation?. | 2009/07/21 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1158439",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | You cannot do agile project without customer buy-in.
And you won't have customer buy-in to your preferred approach if they don't understand why their approach is flawed.
You have to educate the customer about software development challenges and methodologies.
Even if it's time consuming and not guaranteed to succeed.
(Or you can go with the flow and try to develop software with fixed schedule and fixed budget and growing scope which we all know is impossible, but that will only lead to problems you described above.) | Maintain a burndown chart of the project.
When they see it, they will get it. They will know the projects velocity and they will ***see*** the implications of scope creep. They may also see the value of ***scope reduction*** by pruning low priority items.
Burndown charts is a way keeping you and your customer informed. Once you both see the Big Picture, you can negotiate how to move ahead--fairly.
This [video](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LPYNhUMTLo) is a good case study. |
1,158,439 | As a programmer I'm all in favour of the agile methodology, we all know it makes sence, however how do you sell this to a third party ?.
The work we do is generally fixed price and it is usual for us to only have a high level view of the requirements when we quote as it is often a competitive situation. We often find that when we win a contract and get to look at the detail the features grow in scope. While we do have a mechanism for managing this scope creep it is not robust and transparent enough which commonly results in us conceding days.
The agile methodology may say there is no such thing as scope creep, however in the real world we all know there is. When a customer asks you to provide a solution, at a fixed price and time scale (which they always will), and then change the goal posts mid-project that is scope creep. At the end of their budget they will quite likely to be left with something different then they originally intended and which may not fully meet their original requirements. At that point they’re going to come back and argue that they've not got what they paid for - the only protection we have against that is a spec that lays out exactly what they're going to get up front that we can deliver against, clearly not the agile way.
I know people will say the customer should be kept informed at all times as to what they're getting and what's being moved out of scope blah blah blah...- however in the REAL world as far as I can see you'll always get a customers who will then say at the end - this isn't what you promised to deliver / we've paid for. How do we manage that situation?. | 2009/07/21 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1158439",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | This is where some of the concepts of SCRUM pay off.
1. The business leader MUST be involved with every step of the process.
2. Picking which stories make a particular sprint MUST be done with the business leader.
3. Don't do anything in a sprint that is not scheduled for that sprint without adding it to the sprint backlog chart for that sprint. It's good to show things that were added to a sprint in a different color. That way you can see the original plan (hopefully on schedule) and the additions (what causes the delay).
4. Produce something that "could go to production" in each sprint. The business will see that it's getting something for their money. They can also adjust future sprints based on what they see. Each sprint makes a good stopping point.
-- EDIT --
Hmmm. Maybe a DVD of the video Ray suggested (or [this one](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5k7a9YEoUI)) should be included in the project proposal. It might make the difference when trying to get the job to begin with. The customer should know how your group works BEFORE they hire you. It will make your company stand out as more than just a "body shop".
If you ARE a "body shop"...
1. You probably won't be able to wield much control over how the project goes. You'll be collecting the hours.
2. If you see the project going badly, start dropping hints to the client "If MY company were running this project...". You may get the next project! | You cannot do agile project without customer buy-in.
And you won't have customer buy-in to your preferred approach if they don't understand why their approach is flawed.
You have to educate the customer about software development challenges and methodologies.
Even if it's time consuming and not guaranteed to succeed.
(Or you can go with the flow and try to develop software with fixed schedule and fixed budget and growing scope which we all know is impossible, but that will only lead to problems you described above.) |
1,158,439 | As a programmer I'm all in favour of the agile methodology, we all know it makes sence, however how do you sell this to a third party ?.
The work we do is generally fixed price and it is usual for us to only have a high level view of the requirements when we quote as it is often a competitive situation. We often find that when we win a contract and get to look at the detail the features grow in scope. While we do have a mechanism for managing this scope creep it is not robust and transparent enough which commonly results in us conceding days.
The agile methodology may say there is no such thing as scope creep, however in the real world we all know there is. When a customer asks you to provide a solution, at a fixed price and time scale (which they always will), and then change the goal posts mid-project that is scope creep. At the end of their budget they will quite likely to be left with something different then they originally intended and which may not fully meet their original requirements. At that point they’re going to come back and argue that they've not got what they paid for - the only protection we have against that is a spec that lays out exactly what they're going to get up front that we can deliver against, clearly not the agile way.
I know people will say the customer should be kept informed at all times as to what they're getting and what's being moved out of scope blah blah blah...- however in the REAL world as far as I can see you'll always get a customers who will then say at the end - this isn't what you promised to deliver / we've paid for. How do we manage that situation?. | 2009/07/21 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1158439",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | This is where some of the concepts of SCRUM pay off.
1. The business leader MUST be involved with every step of the process.
2. Picking which stories make a particular sprint MUST be done with the business leader.
3. Don't do anything in a sprint that is not scheduled for that sprint without adding it to the sprint backlog chart for that sprint. It's good to show things that were added to a sprint in a different color. That way you can see the original plan (hopefully on schedule) and the additions (what causes the delay).
4. Produce something that "could go to production" in each sprint. The business will see that it's getting something for their money. They can also adjust future sprints based on what they see. Each sprint makes a good stopping point.
-- EDIT --
Hmmm. Maybe a DVD of the video Ray suggested (or [this one](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5k7a9YEoUI)) should be included in the project proposal. It might make the difference when trying to get the job to begin with. The customer should know how your group works BEFORE they hire you. It will make your company stand out as more than just a "body shop".
If you ARE a "body shop"...
1. You probably won't be able to wield much control over how the project goes. You'll be collecting the hours.
2. If you see the project going badly, start dropping hints to the client "If MY company were running this project...". You may get the next project! | >
> a spec that lays out exactly what they're going to get up front that we can deliver against
>
>
>
is a fairy tale. Never seen one, never will. The only thing it is is a creator of a lose-lose situation. The first thing to do is to start naming things by their real name. A fairy tale is a fairy tale, even if it is called a spec |
1,158,439 | As a programmer I'm all in favour of the agile methodology, we all know it makes sence, however how do you sell this to a third party ?.
The work we do is generally fixed price and it is usual for us to only have a high level view of the requirements when we quote as it is often a competitive situation. We often find that when we win a contract and get to look at the detail the features grow in scope. While we do have a mechanism for managing this scope creep it is not robust and transparent enough which commonly results in us conceding days.
The agile methodology may say there is no such thing as scope creep, however in the real world we all know there is. When a customer asks you to provide a solution, at a fixed price and time scale (which they always will), and then change the goal posts mid-project that is scope creep. At the end of their budget they will quite likely to be left with something different then they originally intended and which may not fully meet their original requirements. At that point they’re going to come back and argue that they've not got what they paid for - the only protection we have against that is a spec that lays out exactly what they're going to get up front that we can deliver against, clearly not the agile way.
I know people will say the customer should be kept informed at all times as to what they're getting and what's being moved out of scope blah blah blah...- however in the REAL world as far as I can see you'll always get a customers who will then say at the end - this isn't what you promised to deliver / we've paid for. How do we manage that situation?. | 2009/07/21 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1158439",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1/"
] | You cannot do agile project without customer buy-in.
And you won't have customer buy-in to your preferred approach if they don't understand why their approach is flawed.
You have to educate the customer about software development challenges and methodologies.
Even if it's time consuming and not guaranteed to succeed.
(Or you can go with the flow and try to develop software with fixed schedule and fixed budget and growing scope which we all know is impossible, but that will only lead to problems you described above.) | >
> a spec that lays out exactly what they're going to get up front that we can deliver against
>
>
>
is a fairy tale. Never seen one, never will. The only thing it is is a creator of a lose-lose situation. The first thing to do is to start naming things by their real name. A fairy tale is a fairy tale, even if it is called a spec |
3,482,575 | What is the minimal Javascript to embed twitter feed into my html ? | 2010/08/14 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3482575",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/420259/"
] | There are [many ways](http://net.tutsplus.com/articles/10-awesome-ways-to-integrate-twitter-with-your-website/) to integrate Twitter on your website. [Widgets](http://twitter.com/widgets) are particularly easy to add. | You could do worse than this simple YUI Gallery widget:
<http://yuilibrary.com/gallery/show/twitter-status> |
3,482,575 | What is the minimal Javascript to embed twitter feed into my html ? | 2010/08/14 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3482575",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/420259/"
] | There are [many ways](http://net.tutsplus.com/articles/10-awesome-ways-to-integrate-twitter-with-your-website/) to integrate Twitter on your website. [Widgets](http://twitter.com/widgets) are particularly easy to add. | [Tweet! By Sea of Clouds](http://tweet.seaofclouds.com/) is a very simple jQuery powered Twitter feed. [Juitter is also good](http://juitter.com/) and simple to integrate. |
3,482,575 | What is the minimal Javascript to embed twitter feed into my html ? | 2010/08/14 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3482575",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/420259/"
] | [Tweet! By Sea of Clouds](http://tweet.seaofclouds.com/) is a very simple jQuery powered Twitter feed. [Juitter is also good](http://juitter.com/) and simple to integrate. | You could do worse than this simple YUI Gallery widget:
<http://yuilibrary.com/gallery/show/twitter-status> |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.