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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
110,870 | In chapter 80, *The Primary*, Neal Stephenson has one of his character describe how the drives of a computer carried through a door (by the police, who where raiding the facility) will have been erased.
Basically, there's an enormous electromagnet around the door frame:
>
> Cantrell is now drawing an elaborate diagram, and has even slowed down, almost to a stop, the better to draw it. It begins with a tall rectangle. Set within that is a parallelogram, the same size, but skewed a little bit downwards, and with a little circle drawn in the middle of one edge. Randy realizes he’s looking at a perspective view of a door-frame with its door hanging slightly ajar, the little circle being its knob. *STEEL FRAME*, Cantrell writes, *hollow metal channels*. Quick meandering scribbles suggest the matrix of wall surrounding it, and the floor underneath. Where the uprights of the doorframe are planted in the floor, Cantrell draws small, carefully foreshortened circles. *Holes in the floor*. Then he encircles the doorframe in a continuous hoop, beginning at one of those circles and climbing up one side of the doorframe, across the top, down the other side, through the other hole in the floor, and then horizontally beneath the door, then up through the first hole again, completing the loop. He draws one or two careful iterations of this and then numerous sloppy ones until the whole thing is surrounded in a vague, elongated tornado. *Many turns of fine wire*. Finally he draws two leads away from this huge door-sized coil and connects them to a sandwich of alternating long and short horizontal lines, which Randy recognizes as the symbol for a battery. The diagram is completed with a huge arrow drawn vigorously through the center of the doorway, like an airborne battering ram, labeled B which means a magnetic field. *Ordo computer room door*.
>
>
> "Wow," Randy says. Cantrell has drawn a classic elementary-school electromagnet, the kind of thing young Randy made by winding a wire around a nail and hooking it up to a lantern battery. Except that this one is wound around the outside of a doorframe and, Randy guesses, hidden inside the walls and beneath the floor so that no one would know it was there unless they tore the building apart. Magnetic fields are the styli of the modern world, they are what writes bits onto disks, or wipes them away. The read/write heads of Tombstone’s hard drive are exactly the same thing, but a lot smaller. If they are fine-pointed draftsman’s pens, then what Cantrell’s drawn here is a firehose spraying India ink. It probably would have no effect on a disk drive that was a few meters away from it, but anything that was actually carried through that doorway would be wiped clean. Between the pulse-gun fired into the building from outside (destroying every chip within range) and this doorframe hack (losing every bit on every disk) the Ordo raid must have been purely a scrap-hauling run for whoever organized it – Andrew Loeb or (according to the Secret Admirers) Attorney General Comstock’s sinister Fed forces who were using Andy as a cat’s paw. The only thing that would have made it through that doorway intact would have been information stored on CD-ROM or other nonmagnetic media, and Tombstone had none of that.
>
>
>
Would this actually work? | 2014/05/01 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/110870",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/45702/"
] | There's really two parts to your question, which I'm going to answer separately. First of all, the explicit question:
Could a huge electromagnetic coil erase a hard drive carried through it?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure it could. That's pretty much what a [degausser](http://degaussers.eu/what-is-a-degausser.asp) does, and these things are routinely used to erase magnetic media, including hard drives.
OK, with that out of the way, let's move on to the *implied* question:
Could you actually do that, without the person carrying the drive noticing?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on some quick research, my conclusion is: **no way in hell.**
To quickly and reliably degauss a hard drive, you [apparently need](http://whitakerbrothers.hubpages.com/hub/degaussing-machines) a magnetic field strength on the order of 15,000 Gauss (= 1.5 Tesla). Even if we assume that the Ordo hard drives were old and maybe specifically selected for low coercivity, we're still talking several thousand Gauss *at least*.
[For comparison](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_%28magnetic_field%29), the field strength inside a typical [MRI scanner](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_resonance_imaging) is also around 1.5 Tesla, while the field *at the surface* of a modern [neodymium–iron–boron (Nd2Fe14B) rare earth magnet](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neodymium_magnet) — basically, the strongest permanent magnet you can get — is around 1.25 Tesla.
Thus, someone walking through Stephenson's "degausser door" with a bunch of hard drives would experience something similar as if they tried carrying them through an MRI coil — or holding them while standing right next to a humongous door-sized Nd2Fe14B magnet slab.
Now, if you've ever played with neodymium magnets, you'll know that even tiny ones are damn hard to pry off any ferromagnetic objects they touch. To quote the Wikipedia page I linked to above:
>
> "Neodymium magnets larger than a few cubic centimeters are strong enough to cause injuries to body parts pinched between two magnets, or a magnet and a metal surface, even causing broken bones."
>
>
>
As for MRI scanners, there's a reason why the first *and* last thing they check, when you go and have an MRI scan, is that you have nothing potentially ferromagnetic on or *in* your body. The reason is that *anything* ferromagnetic that gets too close to an active MRI magnet is likely the get torn off your hands and violently slammed against the magnet. This [has been known to happen](http://www.wired.co.uk/magazine/archive/2010/09/start/mri-fatal-attraction) to pretty much any wholly or partially ferromagnetic object you'd care to imagine, from [wheelchairs](http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/9555780.Wheelchair_flung_across_room_by_MRI_scanner_s_magnets/), [office chairs](//www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uzJPpC4Wuk) and [floor polishers](http://web.archive.org/web/20110423211334/http://mrimetaldetector.com/blog/tag/floor-polisher/) to [scissors](http://web.archive.org/web/20120303154714/http://mrimetaldetector.com/blog/2010/07/not-magnet-safe-scissors/), [oxygen bottles](http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92745) (which killed a small child) and even [pistols](http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/01/03/dont-bring-a-gun-near-an-mri/) (which, yes, went off when it hit the scanner).
So, let's imagine what'll happen to your hapless policeman, as he's walking towards the magnetized door carrying a stack of hard drives. The first thing he's likely to notice, while still several meters away, is that something's pulling at the drives he's carrying (since they have a lot of ferromagnetic metal in the casing, and even some pretty strong magnets inside). If he's not careful, the drives might slip out of his hands and fly through the air towards the door, slamming against the door jamb with enormous force (and, yes, likely getting pretty well wiped in the process).
The next thing he might notice, if that's not enough to make him stay well away from the door, is that the same force is also tugging at his badge, gun, zipper, belt buckle, the screwdriver in his pocket that he used to open the servers and extract the hard drives, and anything else metallic that he might have on him. If he's not careful, and keeps approaching the door, those items might either get pulled out of his pockets, or they might simply get drawn to the door and *pull him along* with them. If he's lucky, the only thing getting pinched between the door and the objects is his clothing. If he's not...
Of course, that's all assuming that, when the magnet turned on, it didn't immediately turn any nearby chairs, tables, computer equipment and miscellaneous office supplies into [flying missiles](http://www.falckproductions.com/resouces/mri-safety/mri-hazards-missile-effect-electronics-and-implants/), with potentially lethal consequences to anyone standing between such an object and the door. Or that the intense magnetic field didn't simply mess up the unlucky officer's [pacemaker](http://www.mayoclinic.org/medical-professionals/clinical-updates/cardiovascular/new-protocols-allow-mri-selected-pacemaker-patients), as it would surely do to any cell phones or other electronic equipment they might be carrying. | Yes.
It is definitely possible to erase a hard drive with a strong enough magnetic field. Machines called "degaussers" exist only to erase hard drives in this manner, specifically without removing the drive platters (disks) from an enclosure.
Most degaussers appear to be rated at 8000-10000 Gauss. At the top end, then, degausser can produce a flux density (AKA field strength) of 1 Tesla - or about the same as in a loudspeaker ([thanks, Wikipedia!](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_%28magnetic_field%29)). By comparison, this averages to about half that of typical MRI scanners.
So, yes it would be possible. The possible side-effects in the vicinity might be interesting, it may be that it would have been obvious to the officers raiding the building. |
110,870 | In chapter 80, *The Primary*, Neal Stephenson has one of his character describe how the drives of a computer carried through a door (by the police, who where raiding the facility) will have been erased.
Basically, there's an enormous electromagnet around the door frame:
>
> Cantrell is now drawing an elaborate diagram, and has even slowed down, almost to a stop, the better to draw it. It begins with a tall rectangle. Set within that is a parallelogram, the same size, but skewed a little bit downwards, and with a little circle drawn in the middle of one edge. Randy realizes he’s looking at a perspective view of a door-frame with its door hanging slightly ajar, the little circle being its knob. *STEEL FRAME*, Cantrell writes, *hollow metal channels*. Quick meandering scribbles suggest the matrix of wall surrounding it, and the floor underneath. Where the uprights of the doorframe are planted in the floor, Cantrell draws small, carefully foreshortened circles. *Holes in the floor*. Then he encircles the doorframe in a continuous hoop, beginning at one of those circles and climbing up one side of the doorframe, across the top, down the other side, through the other hole in the floor, and then horizontally beneath the door, then up through the first hole again, completing the loop. He draws one or two careful iterations of this and then numerous sloppy ones until the whole thing is surrounded in a vague, elongated tornado. *Many turns of fine wire*. Finally he draws two leads away from this huge door-sized coil and connects them to a sandwich of alternating long and short horizontal lines, which Randy recognizes as the symbol for a battery. The diagram is completed with a huge arrow drawn vigorously through the center of the doorway, like an airborne battering ram, labeled B which means a magnetic field. *Ordo computer room door*.
>
>
> "Wow," Randy says. Cantrell has drawn a classic elementary-school electromagnet, the kind of thing young Randy made by winding a wire around a nail and hooking it up to a lantern battery. Except that this one is wound around the outside of a doorframe and, Randy guesses, hidden inside the walls and beneath the floor so that no one would know it was there unless they tore the building apart. Magnetic fields are the styli of the modern world, they are what writes bits onto disks, or wipes them away. The read/write heads of Tombstone’s hard drive are exactly the same thing, but a lot smaller. If they are fine-pointed draftsman’s pens, then what Cantrell’s drawn here is a firehose spraying India ink. It probably would have no effect on a disk drive that was a few meters away from it, but anything that was actually carried through that doorway would be wiped clean. Between the pulse-gun fired into the building from outside (destroying every chip within range) and this doorframe hack (losing every bit on every disk) the Ordo raid must have been purely a scrap-hauling run for whoever organized it – Andrew Loeb or (according to the Secret Admirers) Attorney General Comstock’s sinister Fed forces who were using Andy as a cat’s paw. The only thing that would have made it through that doorway intact would have been information stored on CD-ROM or other nonmagnetic media, and Tombstone had none of that.
>
>
>
Would this actually work? | 2014/05/01 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/110870",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/45702/"
] | **In Theory...but Not In Reality**
It's one of those ideas that is possible in theory but impractical in practice.
Hard drives in computers are surrounded by a metal case of the drive, then the metal case of the computer. Even if you specifically got a non-metal case there is still some shielding there.
To generate a magnetic field strong enough to reliably have the effect of wiping all the data at the range you need to wipe it at you would also affect other things - such as for example the metal on clothing/equipment of the people going into and out of the room and the metal in the computer itself.
People would notice their police badge flying off long before they tried taking a computer through the door.
If you want to self destruct your data then applying something directly to the drive is a much easier way to do it, although with modern forensic techniques even that requires a certain amount of care and attention.
Note that causing some corruption to the drives is much easier than wiping them. Destroying a few sectors might cause your computer to stop working but a lot of the data on that drive will still be readable. | Yes.
It is definitely possible to erase a hard drive with a strong enough magnetic field. Machines called "degaussers" exist only to erase hard drives in this manner, specifically without removing the drive platters (disks) from an enclosure.
Most degaussers appear to be rated at 8000-10000 Gauss. At the top end, then, degausser can produce a flux density (AKA field strength) of 1 Tesla - or about the same as in a loudspeaker ([thanks, Wikipedia!](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_%28magnetic_field%29)). By comparison, this averages to about half that of typical MRI scanners.
So, yes it would be possible. The possible side-effects in the vicinity might be interesting, it may be that it would have been obvious to the officers raiding the building. |
110,870 | In chapter 80, *The Primary*, Neal Stephenson has one of his character describe how the drives of a computer carried through a door (by the police, who where raiding the facility) will have been erased.
Basically, there's an enormous electromagnet around the door frame:
>
> Cantrell is now drawing an elaborate diagram, and has even slowed down, almost to a stop, the better to draw it. It begins with a tall rectangle. Set within that is a parallelogram, the same size, but skewed a little bit downwards, and with a little circle drawn in the middle of one edge. Randy realizes he’s looking at a perspective view of a door-frame with its door hanging slightly ajar, the little circle being its knob. *STEEL FRAME*, Cantrell writes, *hollow metal channels*. Quick meandering scribbles suggest the matrix of wall surrounding it, and the floor underneath. Where the uprights of the doorframe are planted in the floor, Cantrell draws small, carefully foreshortened circles. *Holes in the floor*. Then he encircles the doorframe in a continuous hoop, beginning at one of those circles and climbing up one side of the doorframe, across the top, down the other side, through the other hole in the floor, and then horizontally beneath the door, then up through the first hole again, completing the loop. He draws one or two careful iterations of this and then numerous sloppy ones until the whole thing is surrounded in a vague, elongated tornado. *Many turns of fine wire*. Finally he draws two leads away from this huge door-sized coil and connects them to a sandwich of alternating long and short horizontal lines, which Randy recognizes as the symbol for a battery. The diagram is completed with a huge arrow drawn vigorously through the center of the doorway, like an airborne battering ram, labeled B which means a magnetic field. *Ordo computer room door*.
>
>
> "Wow," Randy says. Cantrell has drawn a classic elementary-school electromagnet, the kind of thing young Randy made by winding a wire around a nail and hooking it up to a lantern battery. Except that this one is wound around the outside of a doorframe and, Randy guesses, hidden inside the walls and beneath the floor so that no one would know it was there unless they tore the building apart. Magnetic fields are the styli of the modern world, they are what writes bits onto disks, or wipes them away. The read/write heads of Tombstone’s hard drive are exactly the same thing, but a lot smaller. If they are fine-pointed draftsman’s pens, then what Cantrell’s drawn here is a firehose spraying India ink. It probably would have no effect on a disk drive that was a few meters away from it, but anything that was actually carried through that doorway would be wiped clean. Between the pulse-gun fired into the building from outside (destroying every chip within range) and this doorframe hack (losing every bit on every disk) the Ordo raid must have been purely a scrap-hauling run for whoever organized it – Andrew Loeb or (according to the Secret Admirers) Attorney General Comstock’s sinister Fed forces who were using Andy as a cat’s paw. The only thing that would have made it through that doorway intact would have been information stored on CD-ROM or other nonmagnetic media, and Tombstone had none of that.
>
>
>
Would this actually work? | 2014/05/01 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/110870",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/45702/"
] | **Possibly**.
[Degaussing](http://www.dataerasure.com/degauss.php) is the process of destroying data on a hard drive using an electromagnetic field, so there's some scientific basis to the idea. Assuming the electromagnet was sufficiently strong and there was no or very little shielding around the hard drive - which, if you were building a large electromagnet around a doorway specifically for this purpose, you could make sure was the case - then it could in theory be used to destroy a standard hard disk drive.
There'd be no *guarantee* that all of the data would be destroyed, the drive would almost certainly be unusable afterwards, and you couldn't ever switch to solid state drives. | Agree with all comments above about the required strength, and the likely side effects if it were a DC degausser. But I got to thinking - if it were an AC degausser instead, you'd have lots of erasure events per second. Plus, you'd get metal objects wiggling back and forth instead of being yanked around. Do it at a pretty high frequency, and you'd be able to make a short pulse. Maybe short enough to not be noticed. But the timing would be important. Probably there'd be a loud humming, and maybe even sparks! |
110,870 | In chapter 80, *The Primary*, Neal Stephenson has one of his character describe how the drives of a computer carried through a door (by the police, who where raiding the facility) will have been erased.
Basically, there's an enormous electromagnet around the door frame:
>
> Cantrell is now drawing an elaborate diagram, and has even slowed down, almost to a stop, the better to draw it. It begins with a tall rectangle. Set within that is a parallelogram, the same size, but skewed a little bit downwards, and with a little circle drawn in the middle of one edge. Randy realizes he’s looking at a perspective view of a door-frame with its door hanging slightly ajar, the little circle being its knob. *STEEL FRAME*, Cantrell writes, *hollow metal channels*. Quick meandering scribbles suggest the matrix of wall surrounding it, and the floor underneath. Where the uprights of the doorframe are planted in the floor, Cantrell draws small, carefully foreshortened circles. *Holes in the floor*. Then he encircles the doorframe in a continuous hoop, beginning at one of those circles and climbing up one side of the doorframe, across the top, down the other side, through the other hole in the floor, and then horizontally beneath the door, then up through the first hole again, completing the loop. He draws one or two careful iterations of this and then numerous sloppy ones until the whole thing is surrounded in a vague, elongated tornado. *Many turns of fine wire*. Finally he draws two leads away from this huge door-sized coil and connects them to a sandwich of alternating long and short horizontal lines, which Randy recognizes as the symbol for a battery. The diagram is completed with a huge arrow drawn vigorously through the center of the doorway, like an airborne battering ram, labeled B which means a magnetic field. *Ordo computer room door*.
>
>
> "Wow," Randy says. Cantrell has drawn a classic elementary-school electromagnet, the kind of thing young Randy made by winding a wire around a nail and hooking it up to a lantern battery. Except that this one is wound around the outside of a doorframe and, Randy guesses, hidden inside the walls and beneath the floor so that no one would know it was there unless they tore the building apart. Magnetic fields are the styli of the modern world, they are what writes bits onto disks, or wipes them away. The read/write heads of Tombstone’s hard drive are exactly the same thing, but a lot smaller. If they are fine-pointed draftsman’s pens, then what Cantrell’s drawn here is a firehose spraying India ink. It probably would have no effect on a disk drive that was a few meters away from it, but anything that was actually carried through that doorway would be wiped clean. Between the pulse-gun fired into the building from outside (destroying every chip within range) and this doorframe hack (losing every bit on every disk) the Ordo raid must have been purely a scrap-hauling run for whoever organized it – Andrew Loeb or (according to the Secret Admirers) Attorney General Comstock’s sinister Fed forces who were using Andy as a cat’s paw. The only thing that would have made it through that doorway intact would have been information stored on CD-ROM or other nonmagnetic media, and Tombstone had none of that.
>
>
>
Would this actually work? | 2014/05/01 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/110870",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/45702/"
] | **In Theory...but Not In Reality**
It's one of those ideas that is possible in theory but impractical in practice.
Hard drives in computers are surrounded by a metal case of the drive, then the metal case of the computer. Even if you specifically got a non-metal case there is still some shielding there.
To generate a magnetic field strong enough to reliably have the effect of wiping all the data at the range you need to wipe it at you would also affect other things - such as for example the metal on clothing/equipment of the people going into and out of the room and the metal in the computer itself.
People would notice their police badge flying off long before they tried taking a computer through the door.
If you want to self destruct your data then applying something directly to the drive is a much easier way to do it, although with modern forensic techniques even that requires a certain amount of care and attention.
Note that causing some corruption to the drives is much easier than wiping them. Destroying a few sectors might cause your computer to stop working but a lot of the data on that drive will still be readable. | I agree that **some** hard drives could be "erased" with the described electromagnet. However, if the hard drive is "magnetically shielded," then it is highly unlikely. If a "high enough" (> 50,000 hertz) frequency is used, the presence of the electromagnet should not be "humanly" detectable. |
110,870 | In chapter 80, *The Primary*, Neal Stephenson has one of his character describe how the drives of a computer carried through a door (by the police, who where raiding the facility) will have been erased.
Basically, there's an enormous electromagnet around the door frame:
>
> Cantrell is now drawing an elaborate diagram, and has even slowed down, almost to a stop, the better to draw it. It begins with a tall rectangle. Set within that is a parallelogram, the same size, but skewed a little bit downwards, and with a little circle drawn in the middle of one edge. Randy realizes he’s looking at a perspective view of a door-frame with its door hanging slightly ajar, the little circle being its knob. *STEEL FRAME*, Cantrell writes, *hollow metal channels*. Quick meandering scribbles suggest the matrix of wall surrounding it, and the floor underneath. Where the uprights of the doorframe are planted in the floor, Cantrell draws small, carefully foreshortened circles. *Holes in the floor*. Then he encircles the doorframe in a continuous hoop, beginning at one of those circles and climbing up one side of the doorframe, across the top, down the other side, through the other hole in the floor, and then horizontally beneath the door, then up through the first hole again, completing the loop. He draws one or two careful iterations of this and then numerous sloppy ones until the whole thing is surrounded in a vague, elongated tornado. *Many turns of fine wire*. Finally he draws two leads away from this huge door-sized coil and connects them to a sandwich of alternating long and short horizontal lines, which Randy recognizes as the symbol for a battery. The diagram is completed with a huge arrow drawn vigorously through the center of the doorway, like an airborne battering ram, labeled B which means a magnetic field. *Ordo computer room door*.
>
>
> "Wow," Randy says. Cantrell has drawn a classic elementary-school electromagnet, the kind of thing young Randy made by winding a wire around a nail and hooking it up to a lantern battery. Except that this one is wound around the outside of a doorframe and, Randy guesses, hidden inside the walls and beneath the floor so that no one would know it was there unless they tore the building apart. Magnetic fields are the styli of the modern world, they are what writes bits onto disks, or wipes them away. The read/write heads of Tombstone’s hard drive are exactly the same thing, but a lot smaller. If they are fine-pointed draftsman’s pens, then what Cantrell’s drawn here is a firehose spraying India ink. It probably would have no effect on a disk drive that was a few meters away from it, but anything that was actually carried through that doorway would be wiped clean. Between the pulse-gun fired into the building from outside (destroying every chip within range) and this doorframe hack (losing every bit on every disk) the Ordo raid must have been purely a scrap-hauling run for whoever organized it – Andrew Loeb or (according to the Secret Admirers) Attorney General Comstock’s sinister Fed forces who were using Andy as a cat’s paw. The only thing that would have made it through that doorway intact would have been information stored on CD-ROM or other nonmagnetic media, and Tombstone had none of that.
>
>
>
Would this actually work? | 2014/05/01 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/110870",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/45702/"
] | Agree with all comments above about the required strength, and the likely side effects if it were a DC degausser. But I got to thinking - if it were an AC degausser instead, you'd have lots of erasure events per second. Plus, you'd get metal objects wiggling back and forth instead of being yanked around. Do it at a pretty high frequency, and you'd be able to make a short pulse. Maybe short enough to not be noticed. But the timing would be important. Probably there'd be a loud humming, and maybe even sparks! | I agree that **some** hard drives could be "erased" with the described electromagnet. However, if the hard drive is "magnetically shielded," then it is highly unlikely. If a "high enough" (> 50,000 hertz) frequency is used, the presence of the electromagnet should not be "humanly" detectable. |
110,870 | In chapter 80, *The Primary*, Neal Stephenson has one of his character describe how the drives of a computer carried through a door (by the police, who where raiding the facility) will have been erased.
Basically, there's an enormous electromagnet around the door frame:
>
> Cantrell is now drawing an elaborate diagram, and has even slowed down, almost to a stop, the better to draw it. It begins with a tall rectangle. Set within that is a parallelogram, the same size, but skewed a little bit downwards, and with a little circle drawn in the middle of one edge. Randy realizes he’s looking at a perspective view of a door-frame with its door hanging slightly ajar, the little circle being its knob. *STEEL FRAME*, Cantrell writes, *hollow metal channels*. Quick meandering scribbles suggest the matrix of wall surrounding it, and the floor underneath. Where the uprights of the doorframe are planted in the floor, Cantrell draws small, carefully foreshortened circles. *Holes in the floor*. Then he encircles the doorframe in a continuous hoop, beginning at one of those circles and climbing up one side of the doorframe, across the top, down the other side, through the other hole in the floor, and then horizontally beneath the door, then up through the first hole again, completing the loop. He draws one or two careful iterations of this and then numerous sloppy ones until the whole thing is surrounded in a vague, elongated tornado. *Many turns of fine wire*. Finally he draws two leads away from this huge door-sized coil and connects them to a sandwich of alternating long and short horizontal lines, which Randy recognizes as the symbol for a battery. The diagram is completed with a huge arrow drawn vigorously through the center of the doorway, like an airborne battering ram, labeled B which means a magnetic field. *Ordo computer room door*.
>
>
> "Wow," Randy says. Cantrell has drawn a classic elementary-school electromagnet, the kind of thing young Randy made by winding a wire around a nail and hooking it up to a lantern battery. Except that this one is wound around the outside of a doorframe and, Randy guesses, hidden inside the walls and beneath the floor so that no one would know it was there unless they tore the building apart. Magnetic fields are the styli of the modern world, they are what writes bits onto disks, or wipes them away. The read/write heads of Tombstone’s hard drive are exactly the same thing, but a lot smaller. If they are fine-pointed draftsman’s pens, then what Cantrell’s drawn here is a firehose spraying India ink. It probably would have no effect on a disk drive that was a few meters away from it, but anything that was actually carried through that doorway would be wiped clean. Between the pulse-gun fired into the building from outside (destroying every chip within range) and this doorframe hack (losing every bit on every disk) the Ordo raid must have been purely a scrap-hauling run for whoever organized it – Andrew Loeb or (according to the Secret Admirers) Attorney General Comstock’s sinister Fed forces who were using Andy as a cat’s paw. The only thing that would have made it through that doorway intact would have been information stored on CD-ROM or other nonmagnetic media, and Tombstone had none of that.
>
>
>
Would this actually work? | 2014/05/01 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/110870",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/45702/"
] | There's really two parts to your question, which I'm going to answer separately. First of all, the explicit question:
Could a huge electromagnetic coil erase a hard drive carried through it?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure it could. That's pretty much what a [degausser](http://degaussers.eu/what-is-a-degausser.asp) does, and these things are routinely used to erase magnetic media, including hard drives.
OK, with that out of the way, let's move on to the *implied* question:
Could you actually do that, without the person carrying the drive noticing?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on some quick research, my conclusion is: **no way in hell.**
To quickly and reliably degauss a hard drive, you [apparently need](http://whitakerbrothers.hubpages.com/hub/degaussing-machines) a magnetic field strength on the order of 15,000 Gauss (= 1.5 Tesla). Even if we assume that the Ordo hard drives were old and maybe specifically selected for low coercivity, we're still talking several thousand Gauss *at least*.
[For comparison](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_%28magnetic_field%29), the field strength inside a typical [MRI scanner](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_resonance_imaging) is also around 1.5 Tesla, while the field *at the surface* of a modern [neodymium–iron–boron (Nd2Fe14B) rare earth magnet](//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neodymium_magnet) — basically, the strongest permanent magnet you can get — is around 1.25 Tesla.
Thus, someone walking through Stephenson's "degausser door" with a bunch of hard drives would experience something similar as if they tried carrying them through an MRI coil — or holding them while standing right next to a humongous door-sized Nd2Fe14B magnet slab.
Now, if you've ever played with neodymium magnets, you'll know that even tiny ones are damn hard to pry off any ferromagnetic objects they touch. To quote the Wikipedia page I linked to above:
>
> "Neodymium magnets larger than a few cubic centimeters are strong enough to cause injuries to body parts pinched between two magnets, or a magnet and a metal surface, even causing broken bones."
>
>
>
As for MRI scanners, there's a reason why the first *and* last thing they check, when you go and have an MRI scan, is that you have nothing potentially ferromagnetic on or *in* your body. The reason is that *anything* ferromagnetic that gets too close to an active MRI magnet is likely the get torn off your hands and violently slammed against the magnet. This [has been known to happen](http://www.wired.co.uk/magazine/archive/2010/09/start/mri-fatal-attraction) to pretty much any wholly or partially ferromagnetic object you'd care to imagine, from [wheelchairs](http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/9555780.Wheelchair_flung_across_room_by_MRI_scanner_s_magnets/), [office chairs](//www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uzJPpC4Wuk) and [floor polishers](http://web.archive.org/web/20110423211334/http://mrimetaldetector.com/blog/tag/floor-polisher/) to [scissors](http://web.archive.org/web/20120303154714/http://mrimetaldetector.com/blog/2010/07/not-magnet-safe-scissors/), [oxygen bottles](http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92745) (which killed a small child) and even [pistols](http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/01/03/dont-bring-a-gun-near-an-mri/) (which, yes, went off when it hit the scanner).
So, let's imagine what'll happen to your hapless policeman, as he's walking towards the magnetized door carrying a stack of hard drives. The first thing he's likely to notice, while still several meters away, is that something's pulling at the drives he's carrying (since they have a lot of ferromagnetic metal in the casing, and even some pretty strong magnets inside). If he's not careful, the drives might slip out of his hands and fly through the air towards the door, slamming against the door jamb with enormous force (and, yes, likely getting pretty well wiped in the process).
The next thing he might notice, if that's not enough to make him stay well away from the door, is that the same force is also tugging at his badge, gun, zipper, belt buckle, the screwdriver in his pocket that he used to open the servers and extract the hard drives, and anything else metallic that he might have on him. If he's not careful, and keeps approaching the door, those items might either get pulled out of his pockets, or they might simply get drawn to the door and *pull him along* with them. If he's lucky, the only thing getting pinched between the door and the objects is his clothing. If he's not...
Of course, that's all assuming that, when the magnet turned on, it didn't immediately turn any nearby chairs, tables, computer equipment and miscellaneous office supplies into [flying missiles](http://www.falckproductions.com/resouces/mri-safety/mri-hazards-missile-effect-electronics-and-implants/), with potentially lethal consequences to anyone standing between such an object and the door. Or that the intense magnetic field didn't simply mess up the unlucky officer's [pacemaker](http://www.mayoclinic.org/medical-professionals/clinical-updates/cardiovascular/new-protocols-allow-mri-selected-pacemaker-patients), as it would surely do to any cell phones or other electronic equipment they might be carrying. | I agree that **some** hard drives could be "erased" with the described electromagnet. However, if the hard drive is "magnetically shielded," then it is highly unlikely. If a "high enough" (> 50,000 hertz) frequency is used, the presence of the electromagnet should not be "humanly" detectable. |
110,870 | In chapter 80, *The Primary*, Neal Stephenson has one of his character describe how the drives of a computer carried through a door (by the police, who where raiding the facility) will have been erased.
Basically, there's an enormous electromagnet around the door frame:
>
> Cantrell is now drawing an elaborate diagram, and has even slowed down, almost to a stop, the better to draw it. It begins with a tall rectangle. Set within that is a parallelogram, the same size, but skewed a little bit downwards, and with a little circle drawn in the middle of one edge. Randy realizes he’s looking at a perspective view of a door-frame with its door hanging slightly ajar, the little circle being its knob. *STEEL FRAME*, Cantrell writes, *hollow metal channels*. Quick meandering scribbles suggest the matrix of wall surrounding it, and the floor underneath. Where the uprights of the doorframe are planted in the floor, Cantrell draws small, carefully foreshortened circles. *Holes in the floor*. Then he encircles the doorframe in a continuous hoop, beginning at one of those circles and climbing up one side of the doorframe, across the top, down the other side, through the other hole in the floor, and then horizontally beneath the door, then up through the first hole again, completing the loop. He draws one or two careful iterations of this and then numerous sloppy ones until the whole thing is surrounded in a vague, elongated tornado. *Many turns of fine wire*. Finally he draws two leads away from this huge door-sized coil and connects them to a sandwich of alternating long and short horizontal lines, which Randy recognizes as the symbol for a battery. The diagram is completed with a huge arrow drawn vigorously through the center of the doorway, like an airborne battering ram, labeled B which means a magnetic field. *Ordo computer room door*.
>
>
> "Wow," Randy says. Cantrell has drawn a classic elementary-school electromagnet, the kind of thing young Randy made by winding a wire around a nail and hooking it up to a lantern battery. Except that this one is wound around the outside of a doorframe and, Randy guesses, hidden inside the walls and beneath the floor so that no one would know it was there unless they tore the building apart. Magnetic fields are the styli of the modern world, they are what writes bits onto disks, or wipes them away. The read/write heads of Tombstone’s hard drive are exactly the same thing, but a lot smaller. If they are fine-pointed draftsman’s pens, then what Cantrell’s drawn here is a firehose spraying India ink. It probably would have no effect on a disk drive that was a few meters away from it, but anything that was actually carried through that doorway would be wiped clean. Between the pulse-gun fired into the building from outside (destroying every chip within range) and this doorframe hack (losing every bit on every disk) the Ordo raid must have been purely a scrap-hauling run for whoever organized it – Andrew Loeb or (according to the Secret Admirers) Attorney General Comstock’s sinister Fed forces who were using Andy as a cat’s paw. The only thing that would have made it through that doorway intact would have been information stored on CD-ROM or other nonmagnetic media, and Tombstone had none of that.
>
>
>
Would this actually work? | 2014/05/01 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/110870",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/45702/"
] | **Possibly**.
[Degaussing](http://www.dataerasure.com/degauss.php) is the process of destroying data on a hard drive using an electromagnetic field, so there's some scientific basis to the idea. Assuming the electromagnet was sufficiently strong and there was no or very little shielding around the hard drive - which, if you were building a large electromagnet around a doorway specifically for this purpose, you could make sure was the case - then it could in theory be used to destroy a standard hard disk drive.
There'd be no *guarantee* that all of the data would be destroyed, the drive would almost certainly be unusable afterwards, and you couldn't ever switch to solid state drives. | Yes.
It is definitely possible to erase a hard drive with a strong enough magnetic field. Machines called "degaussers" exist only to erase hard drives in this manner, specifically without removing the drive platters (disks) from an enclosure.
Most degaussers appear to be rated at 8000-10000 Gauss. At the top end, then, degausser can produce a flux density (AKA field strength) of 1 Tesla - or about the same as in a loudspeaker ([thanks, Wikipedia!](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_%28magnetic_field%29)). By comparison, this averages to about half that of typical MRI scanners.
So, yes it would be possible. The possible side-effects in the vicinity might be interesting, it may be that it would have been obvious to the officers raiding the building. |
35,626 | As I prepare for fall around here (USDA zone 8a, max low ~10f, average low ~45f) I long for a greenhouse to bet overwinter some of our showy pots, and perhaps get a jump on some annuals and veggies as next spring rolls around. It's no small task to add a greenhouse to our property (plus I have to check local building codes to see if it's possible to locate it where I want it. I'm happy though because it gives me lots of time to plan and budget. I foresee something with a rigid frame, about 8 ft x 12 ft. I have power and water close by.
I'm wondering what systems people would suggest I install? Are there some basic ones I should have (say a heater, and auto ventilation)? Maybe some add ons I should consider? Stuff I probably should avoid? | 2017/09/26 | [
"https://gardening.stackexchange.com/questions/35626",
"https://gardening.stackexchange.com",
"https://gardening.stackexchange.com/users/16406/"
] | Easy as can be. Seeds are not some magical movie monster that cannot be killed.
Put them in a pan, bake at 250°F / 120°C (or higher, but that should be adequate) for an hour, they should be good and dead.
Or - wrap in aluminum foil, place in fire, cover with coals (if you don't want them in your oven/house) You could also do the foil wrap and then put them in your oven if merely containing them will keep you happy. | Oh shoot. If you are looking at dried seeds it is way too late to do anything at all about deactivating those seed. Sorrryyy. The best time to stop weeds is before the plant is able to flower or shortly after the seeds germinate. Baby plants easily killed.
This plant is a biennial...yes? So easy to eradicate by 'weed wacking' using a line trimmer on less than the highest rotation...talk about that later. Or using a hula hoe. Or using a chunk of tarp and scooting around on the surface smooshing baby weeds. Get the chunk of tarp fitted with slots so you can secure the tarp to your feet just enough to hold. Change foot slots and scoot around some more.
Trust me, I'd do this at night where no one can watch!
If there are areas such as gravel driveways or paths, you can use garden strength vinegar, I think it is called 'weed block'...changes the pH to ACID where no plants can germinate much less grow. Nothing grows. To make the soil usable again you lime it and bring the pH back up. |
35,626 | As I prepare for fall around here (USDA zone 8a, max low ~10f, average low ~45f) I long for a greenhouse to bet overwinter some of our showy pots, and perhaps get a jump on some annuals and veggies as next spring rolls around. It's no small task to add a greenhouse to our property (plus I have to check local building codes to see if it's possible to locate it where I want it. I'm happy though because it gives me lots of time to plan and budget. I foresee something with a rigid frame, about 8 ft x 12 ft. I have power and water close by.
I'm wondering what systems people would suggest I install? Are there some basic ones I should have (say a heater, and auto ventilation)? Maybe some add ons I should consider? Stuff I probably should avoid? | 2017/09/26 | [
"https://gardening.stackexchange.com/questions/35626",
"https://gardening.stackexchange.com",
"https://gardening.stackexchange.com/users/16406/"
] | You could always just dig a hole and throw them all in (and bury them). Seeds planted too deeply are known not to sprout above the soil, if at all. If it's Morning Glory, you might consider another option.
Another alternative is throwing them in the trash.
If you can't get rid of them and don't want to dig a hole (or bake/boil/burn them), you can always put them all in the same spot (so you'll only have weeds in a tiny area).
Don't forget that some birds eat weed seeds (the seeds aren't all bad); I'm not sure about your particular kind of weed. | Oh shoot. If you are looking at dried seeds it is way too late to do anything at all about deactivating those seed. Sorrryyy. The best time to stop weeds is before the plant is able to flower or shortly after the seeds germinate. Baby plants easily killed.
This plant is a biennial...yes? So easy to eradicate by 'weed wacking' using a line trimmer on less than the highest rotation...talk about that later. Or using a hula hoe. Or using a chunk of tarp and scooting around on the surface smooshing baby weeds. Get the chunk of tarp fitted with slots so you can secure the tarp to your feet just enough to hold. Change foot slots and scoot around some more.
Trust me, I'd do this at night where no one can watch!
If there are areas such as gravel driveways or paths, you can use garden strength vinegar, I think it is called 'weed block'...changes the pH to ACID where no plants can germinate much less grow. Nothing grows. To make the soil usable again you lime it and bring the pH back up. |
73,248 | If I want to say that there are two people and each one of them is found in other side of the house. What is the correct way to say it?
>
> 1) There are two people in each side of the house
>
>
> 2) There are two people in each side**s** of the house
>
>
>
And by the way (in the same topic), are the two following sentences equal to the previous two - in the aspect of the meaning?
>
> 1) There is one person in each side of the house.
>
>
> 2) There is one person in each sides of the house.
>
>
> | 2015/11/14 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/73248",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/12430/"
] | *Two people on each side* means *two people on this side and two people on that side*—four people in all (if there are two sides).
What you mean is *one person on each* side, one on this side and one on that.
If you have not already explained that two sides are involved, you need to say so explicitly:
>
> There is one person on each of the two sides. *OR*
> There are two people, one on each of the two sides.
>
>
> | *Each* is used before a singular noun and a singular verb/pronoun is used for it.
>
> Each **item** **consists** of 10 questions. (if there are two items, there are 20 questions)
>
>
> Each of these people **has** some useful talent.
>
>
> Each component can be replaced separately if **it** breaks.
>
>
>
As the comments point, you're considering each item individually. Then:
>
> There is one person on each side
>
>
> |
291,559 | I read this book called Practical Electronics for Invetors,and it says that one of the ways to increase magnetic field strenght of solenoid is to increase the current or increase the number of turns.
That got me thinking,why do induction heaters and induction coupled plasma use small number of turns and high current? Why not increase the number of turns and then decrease the current so there is less problem with coil overheating?
I played with online solenoid magnetic field strenght calculator,and as I kept increasing number of turns it kept giving stronger magnetic field without increasing current.So logicaly that extra energy must come by voltage right? I mean energy doesnt just magicaly appear out of nowhere,and since the current stays the same,it must mean that solenoid with more turns needs higher voltage,is that correct?
Can I avoid heat problems by using solenoid that have large number of turns so I can power it with high voltage low current instead of low voltage high current that conventional solenoid with small number of turns would require?
edit : I want to say big thanks for all of you who came here to help me,I didnt expect so much help so fast,this ElectronicsEngineering section seems friendliest of all stackexchange sections I tried,I love you all <3 | 2017/03/10 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/291559",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/141377/"
] | Especially considering size and weight, I'd use a PIC 10F200 microcontroller. It has a oscillator built in, and needs no other components other than a bypass cap to drive a LED. It can also run from a reasonably wide voltage range, including 3.7 V.
The internal oscillator is good to a few percent. The instruction cycle rate is 1 MHz driven by that oscillator. At 1-5 kHz, you have a minimum of 200 cycles per blink period, or 100 cycles per blink phase. That's plenty to do a little counting to decide when to toggle the LED state.
The output pins can source or sink a few mA, and you can gang three of them together to get more current capability to drive the LED directly with a resistor in series to set the current. | Once you started actually talking about your problem, it became clear that you were indeed asking an xy question. The question you really want answered, is "How can I identify a drone by blinking its orientation lights?" or even better, "I'd like to identify a drone by blinking its orientation lights. What should I be thinking about?". Although the latter is a bit vague, I agree.
With that in mind, it's clear that blinking the orientation lights at 1 to 5 kHz will not do you any good. If you're looking at it with your eyes, kHz is way beyond visual fusion rate, so there's no way your eye can distinguish between drones with different flash rates. If you're looking at it with a camera, 1 to 5 kHz is far beyond the frame rate you'll get with any reasonable camera. To identify a 5 kHz flash rate from camera footage requires a minimum of 10,000 frames per second, and that is hardly standard kit.
All things considered, it would seem your best bet is to point a telescope at it with a very high-sensitivity detector and a frequency detection circuit. Such a detector would require a very narrow bandpass filter at the LED wavelength.
So, rather than insisting that what you want to know is how to flash an LED, you need to start thinking about just exactly what you want to do from a system viewpoint, and determine if you CAN identify a drone by flashing its LEDs. Only after you've done your system calculations should you start worrying about how to do it. |
291,559 | I read this book called Practical Electronics for Invetors,and it says that one of the ways to increase magnetic field strenght of solenoid is to increase the current or increase the number of turns.
That got me thinking,why do induction heaters and induction coupled plasma use small number of turns and high current? Why not increase the number of turns and then decrease the current so there is less problem with coil overheating?
I played with online solenoid magnetic field strenght calculator,and as I kept increasing number of turns it kept giving stronger magnetic field without increasing current.So logicaly that extra energy must come by voltage right? I mean energy doesnt just magicaly appear out of nowhere,and since the current stays the same,it must mean that solenoid with more turns needs higher voltage,is that correct?
Can I avoid heat problems by using solenoid that have large number of turns so I can power it with high voltage low current instead of low voltage high current that conventional solenoid with small number of turns would require?
edit : I want to say big thanks for all of you who came here to help me,I didnt expect so much help so fast,this ElectronicsEngineering section seems friendliest of all stackexchange sections I tried,I love you all <3 | 2017/03/10 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/291559",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/141377/"
] | Especially considering size and weight, I'd use a PIC 10F200 microcontroller. It has a oscillator built in, and needs no other components other than a bypass cap to drive a LED. It can also run from a reasonably wide voltage range, including 3.7 V.
The internal oscillator is good to a few percent. The instruction cycle rate is 1 MHz driven by that oscillator. At 1-5 kHz, you have a minimum of 200 cycles per blink period, or 100 cycles per blink phase. That's plenty to do a little counting to decide when to toggle the LED state.
The output pins can source or sink a few mA, and you can gang three of them together to get more current capability to drive the LED directly with a resistor in series to set the current. | Here is a quick and dirty design using a ZSCT1555 CMOS timer IC as a VCO and PWM to change not only the duty cycle of color from Yellow to Red with battery voltage but also the frequency up to a 2:1 range for an input voltage range of 3.6 to 3.3V .
I chose ~2kHz high to 4kHz when low Vbat and simulated it here with [**Falstad**](http://ZSCT1555), but you may want a slower rate. The output driver toggles between 2 of the 4 existing LEDs changed to Red/Yellow and duty cycle of Red increases as Vbat drops.
There are an infinite number of variations of this including Red Only when below a certain threshold. The 2V zener is actually another LED.
I used a 10Hz triangle wave to simulate Vbat from 3.6 to 3V but it works beyond this range.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ChhNI.jpg) |
291,559 | I read this book called Practical Electronics for Invetors,and it says that one of the ways to increase magnetic field strenght of solenoid is to increase the current or increase the number of turns.
That got me thinking,why do induction heaters and induction coupled plasma use small number of turns and high current? Why not increase the number of turns and then decrease the current so there is less problem with coil overheating?
I played with online solenoid magnetic field strenght calculator,and as I kept increasing number of turns it kept giving stronger magnetic field without increasing current.So logicaly that extra energy must come by voltage right? I mean energy doesnt just magicaly appear out of nowhere,and since the current stays the same,it must mean that solenoid with more turns needs higher voltage,is that correct?
Can I avoid heat problems by using solenoid that have large number of turns so I can power it with high voltage low current instead of low voltage high current that conventional solenoid with small number of turns would require?
edit : I want to say big thanks for all of you who came here to help me,I didnt expect so much help so fast,this ElectronicsEngineering section seems friendliest of all stackexchange sections I tried,I love you all <3 | 2017/03/10 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/291559",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/141377/"
] | Here is a quick and dirty design using a ZSCT1555 CMOS timer IC as a VCO and PWM to change not only the duty cycle of color from Yellow to Red with battery voltage but also the frequency up to a 2:1 range for an input voltage range of 3.6 to 3.3V .
I chose ~2kHz high to 4kHz when low Vbat and simulated it here with [**Falstad**](http://ZSCT1555), but you may want a slower rate. The output driver toggles between 2 of the 4 existing LEDs changed to Red/Yellow and duty cycle of Red increases as Vbat drops.
There are an infinite number of variations of this including Red Only when below a certain threshold. The 2V zener is actually another LED.
I used a 10Hz triangle wave to simulate Vbat from 3.6 to 3V but it works beyond this range.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ChhNI.jpg) | Once you started actually talking about your problem, it became clear that you were indeed asking an xy question. The question you really want answered, is "How can I identify a drone by blinking its orientation lights?" or even better, "I'd like to identify a drone by blinking its orientation lights. What should I be thinking about?". Although the latter is a bit vague, I agree.
With that in mind, it's clear that blinking the orientation lights at 1 to 5 kHz will not do you any good. If you're looking at it with your eyes, kHz is way beyond visual fusion rate, so there's no way your eye can distinguish between drones with different flash rates. If you're looking at it with a camera, 1 to 5 kHz is far beyond the frame rate you'll get with any reasonable camera. To identify a 5 kHz flash rate from camera footage requires a minimum of 10,000 frames per second, and that is hardly standard kit.
All things considered, it would seem your best bet is to point a telescope at it with a very high-sensitivity detector and a frequency detection circuit. Such a detector would require a very narrow bandpass filter at the LED wavelength.
So, rather than insisting that what you want to know is how to flash an LED, you need to start thinking about just exactly what you want to do from a system viewpoint, and determine if you CAN identify a drone by flashing its LEDs. Only after you've done your system calculations should you start worrying about how to do it. |
26,206 | I want my textfield to stand out, because users can work with the rest of the page only after they filled it in. The interface is clean and strict, so I can probably add some color to grab attention. Do you have any suggestions? | 2012/09/27 | [
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/26206",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/users/19210/"
] | Though highlighting as this example below will draw attention to your text field,it is not a very good way since it would just stand out and would disturb the overall flow.
Since you want to allow other users to enter data only after that text field has been filled, you could enable your form validation logic to be such that the other fields are **disabled** until that field is filled correctly.
Another alternative approach is to **hide** the other fields until this field is entered correctly.
Another alternative option is to just get your page to **focus on the required text field** on page load and highlight it. | Any UI control can have the input focus. You can give the input focus to your textbox explicitly when your page is loaded. This way, the user will already see the blinking caret there. You can see this behavior on google.com
Also, most UI controls have a disabled state. When disabled, they are usually grayed out and cannot receive the input focus even if the user clicks on them. If you disable all controls except the first when your page loads, this will also be quite clear. This is very similar to a previous answer (fading out the form), but I think it's a bit better to use the existing disabled state instead of implementing your own using the fade.. |
26,206 | I want my textfield to stand out, because users can work with the rest of the page only after they filled it in. The interface is clean and strict, so I can probably add some color to grab attention. Do you have any suggestions? | 2012/09/27 | [
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/26206",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/users/19210/"
] | I would suggest fading out the rest of the form partially until the user has filled out the required field. This makes it clear that there's more for the user to do on that page, but that the first field (the only one that's shown at full opacity) is the only thing they can interact with yet.
This also allows you to avoid cluttering up the form with extra colors or highlights that may distract the user from the form content itself. | Any UI control can have the input focus. You can give the input focus to your textbox explicitly when your page is loaded. This way, the user will already see the blinking caret there. You can see this behavior on google.com
Also, most UI controls have a disabled state. When disabled, they are usually grayed out and cannot receive the input focus even if the user clicks on them. If you disable all controls except the first when your page loads, this will also be quite clear. This is very similar to a previous answer (fading out the form), but I think it's a bit better to use the existing disabled state instead of implementing your own using the fade.. |
626,230 | Here's an image of my motherboard (from a dell optiplex 740):
Will any of these two intel centrino cards fit in here?
* INTEL CENTRINO ADVANCED-N 6235
(=Mini PCIexpress)
* Intel Centrino Advanced-N 6205 for Desktop IEEE
(=PCI Express x1)
 | 2013/07/31 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/626230",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/242189/"
] | Chromecast acts as an access point when first turned on.
For the initial setup, you install an app on your Android, Windows or mac device, that will find it and connect to the chromecast's AP directly. Then the chromecast scans for nearby access points, allowing you to pick one and enter in its password.
Once this is done, it will connect to that access point instead of acting as its own access point. | You can do this from the chromecast app on an android phone (download from the play store). I haven't figured out any way from PC except factory reset (painful - don't do it). |
626,230 | Here's an image of my motherboard (from a dell optiplex 740):
Will any of these two intel centrino cards fit in here?
* INTEL CENTRINO ADVANCED-N 6235
(=Mini PCIexpress)
* Intel Centrino Advanced-N 6205 for Desktop IEEE
(=PCI Express x1)
 | 2013/07/31 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/626230",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/242189/"
] | Chromecast acts as an access point when first turned on.
For the initial setup, you install an app on your Android, Windows or mac device, that will find it and connect to the chromecast's AP directly. Then the chromecast scans for nearby access points, allowing you to pick one and enter in its password.
Once this is done, it will connect to that access point instead of acting as its own access point. | IF you are using Dual bank router like Linksys E3000 make sure your router is configured to listen on both 20Mhz or 40Mhz .
On your Linksys router configuration page click on the wireless tab -> basic configuration -> select manual. Then on the channel with select Auto(20Mhz or 40Mhz) |
626,230 | Here's an image of my motherboard (from a dell optiplex 740):
Will any of these two intel centrino cards fit in here?
* INTEL CENTRINO ADVANCED-N 6235
(=Mini PCIexpress)
* Intel Centrino Advanced-N 6205 for Desktop IEEE
(=PCI Express x1)
 | 2013/07/31 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/626230",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/242189/"
] | Chromecast acts as an access point when first turned on.
For the initial setup, you install an app on your Android, Windows or mac device, that will find it and connect to the chromecast's AP directly. Then the chromecast scans for nearby access points, allowing you to pick one and enter in its password.
Once this is done, it will connect to that access point instead of acting as its own access point. | Heres how it works:
1. Chromecast fires up, puts out a Wi-Fi signal
2. You connect to this unsecured open Wi-Fi with a smartphone or tablet. You cannot do this with a wired desktop PC.
3. You tell Chromecast the logon credentials of your home broadband Wi-Fi.
4. You and chromecast log of and log back onto the Home Wi-Fi.
5. You go onto the desktop, add the Chromecast extension to Chrome.
6. Tell Chrome wich casting device to use.
Anything you now play in—for example—YouTube will now stream to the TV.
Repeat tomorrow, because it seems to forget everything when not used for a while. |
626,230 | Here's an image of my motherboard (from a dell optiplex 740):
Will any of these two intel centrino cards fit in here?
* INTEL CENTRINO ADVANCED-N 6235
(=Mini PCIexpress)
* Intel Centrino Advanced-N 6205 for Desktop IEEE
(=PCI Express x1)
 | 2013/07/31 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/626230",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/242189/"
] | Heres how it works:
1. Chromecast fires up, puts out a Wi-Fi signal
2. You connect to this unsecured open Wi-Fi with a smartphone or tablet. You cannot do this with a wired desktop PC.
3. You tell Chromecast the logon credentials of your home broadband Wi-Fi.
4. You and chromecast log of and log back onto the Home Wi-Fi.
5. You go onto the desktop, add the Chromecast extension to Chrome.
6. Tell Chrome wich casting device to use.
Anything you now play in—for example—YouTube will now stream to the TV.
Repeat tomorrow, because it seems to forget everything when not used for a while. | You can do this from the chromecast app on an android phone (download from the play store). I haven't figured out any way from PC except factory reset (painful - don't do it). |
626,230 | Here's an image of my motherboard (from a dell optiplex 740):
Will any of these two intel centrino cards fit in here?
* INTEL CENTRINO ADVANCED-N 6235
(=Mini PCIexpress)
* Intel Centrino Advanced-N 6205 for Desktop IEEE
(=PCI Express x1)
 | 2013/07/31 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/626230",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/242189/"
] | Heres how it works:
1. Chromecast fires up, puts out a Wi-Fi signal
2. You connect to this unsecured open Wi-Fi with a smartphone or tablet. You cannot do this with a wired desktop PC.
3. You tell Chromecast the logon credentials of your home broadband Wi-Fi.
4. You and chromecast log of and log back onto the Home Wi-Fi.
5. You go onto the desktop, add the Chromecast extension to Chrome.
6. Tell Chrome wich casting device to use.
Anything you now play in—for example—YouTube will now stream to the TV.
Repeat tomorrow, because it seems to forget everything when not used for a while. | IF you are using Dual bank router like Linksys E3000 make sure your router is configured to listen on both 20Mhz or 40Mhz .
On your Linksys router configuration page click on the wireless tab -> basic configuration -> select manual. Then on the channel with select Auto(20Mhz or 40Mhz) |
9,044,789 | I have hacked my NAS-01g into a debian server and use it to regularly download stock quote and earthquake information from the web. I was on a trip last week and I turned off my sever at home, but when I come back, I can no long gain access to the server. Considering re-configuring the server as very time-consuming, I am thinking of migrating my existing server to cloud.
I have a few requirements here:
* server on 24/7
* use cron to hourly call R to extract data from somewhere, say yahoo finance
* (optional) backup and encrypt my gmail account
* (optional) host django server and I am learning to use it now
I am thinking of using amazon-EC2 or Linode. I have tried amazon-EC2 a bit, but the pricing scheme seems very complicated for me, and I want the server to be as cheap as possible as it is not really that mission critical work. I wonder Linode is simpler for a non-system admin like me.
Hope my question won't be considered as off-topic here.
Thanks in advance. | 2012/01/28 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/9044789",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/373908/"
] | Belongs on ServerFault, but I think Linode is a good candidate. They have monthly plans that don't cost a fortune and you can get a debian install on it. (we just installed one for work and selected Debian, so I'm 100% sure). | Pricing scheme for Amazon is more complicated, but more transparent.
They separate in Machine Hours (EC2 Hours), Data Transfer In/Out and storage.
You can have too Elastic IPs (static IPs) and Load Balancers (LBs).
And you can choose if you want reserved instances (1yr/3yr term) or on-demand instances(more expensive but able to terminate instances whenever you want).
They have their own monthly calculator, you can check it here: <http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html> |
32,128 | Planning on writing a picture sci-fi book about Utopia.
The book will not have a plot (story), sequence or any conclusion. It will have approximately 30 illustrations generally depicting a search for Utopia, accompanied by minimal text for each illustration. Similar to a photo book.
Has anything similar to this been published before?
Could this spur sufficient interest? | 2017/12/23 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/32128",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/28579/"
] | *The Room* is about a man whose love life runs off the rails and ends in a brutal break-up. This is a topic that a *lot* of people are interested in. *La La Land* is about the same theme. *Shrek* seems like that's how it's going to end leading into the final act. I can't begin to list how many breakup songs have hit the top 10 charts.
The reason people don't like *The Room* isn't because the premise of the story is bad. It's because the movie was poorly executed. Honestly, you can probably make a story about any premise you want to. Would you be interested in reading a book about someone learning how to work at a post office? Apparently a lot of people would, because Terry Prachet's novel *Going Postal* is held in high regard. Would you read a book about a bunch of rich, stupid twenty-somethings going to Spain and getting drunk all the time? That's the plot to *The Sun Also Rises*, a cultural touchstone written by Ernest Hemingway. Heck, you can describe *The Room* as being about a spoiled rich guy who has awful relationships and then dies, and that's also the synopsis of *The Great Gatsby*.
Don't worry too much about whether your premise is workable. I contend you can make a good story out of literally any premise. What determines whether people will read your story or not is how well you've executed on your idea. So practice writing a lot, make multiple editing passes on your story, join a writing group, ask friends who can give honest critiques to read your work - do whatever it takes to be certain that your writing is solid, and your story will come alive. | What is interesting to the reader completely depends on the reader (the targeted and reached audience). For instance, people at a library will like different kind of books than people commuting by train.
The only way to know if people find your book interesting is to let people read your book (or parts of it, and then hope it represents the full quality of your book).
Let 10 people rate your book (chapter) on a scale from 0 = most boring stuff I've ever read to 10 = most interesting I've ever read. Let 10 other people rate a book with a similar amount of pages. Don't disclose which is your book. Then perform a T-test between the two groups.
If you're targeting a wide audience use popular narrative techniques. You might look at popular recently publicized books for techniques and constructs.
If you're targeting a niche audience, use in-group language and technical terms. Communicating with an in-group language that is understood by the reader gives a sense of belongingness.
If target audience is only one person writing an interesting book is the easiest. When there are 2 or more persons there will always be disagreement. |
32,128 | Planning on writing a picture sci-fi book about Utopia.
The book will not have a plot (story), sequence or any conclusion. It will have approximately 30 illustrations generally depicting a search for Utopia, accompanied by minimal text for each illustration. Similar to a photo book.
Has anything similar to this been published before?
Could this spur sufficient interest? | 2017/12/23 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/32128",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/28579/"
] | *The Room* is about a man whose love life runs off the rails and ends in a brutal break-up. This is a topic that a *lot* of people are interested in. *La La Land* is about the same theme. *Shrek* seems like that's how it's going to end leading into the final act. I can't begin to list how many breakup songs have hit the top 10 charts.
The reason people don't like *The Room* isn't because the premise of the story is bad. It's because the movie was poorly executed. Honestly, you can probably make a story about any premise you want to. Would you be interested in reading a book about someone learning how to work at a post office? Apparently a lot of people would, because Terry Prachet's novel *Going Postal* is held in high regard. Would you read a book about a bunch of rich, stupid twenty-somethings going to Spain and getting drunk all the time? That's the plot to *The Sun Also Rises*, a cultural touchstone written by Ernest Hemingway. Heck, you can describe *The Room* as being about a spoiled rich guy who has awful relationships and then dies, and that's also the synopsis of *The Great Gatsby*.
Don't worry too much about whether your premise is workable. I contend you can make a good story out of literally any premise. What determines whether people will read your story or not is how well you've executed on your idea. So practice writing a lot, make multiple editing passes on your story, join a writing group, ask friends who can give honest critiques to read your work - do whatever it takes to be certain that your writing is solid, and your story will come alive. | **You really don't know.**
But here's the thing. There are 7.5 billion people on the planet. Let's say that you want to sell 100,000 copies.
That means you only need to be interesting to 1/75000 people.
Your story interests **you**. Are you so special that you find something interesting that 75000 other people **don't**? Maybe. Who knows.
Just write the thing. You have so much ahead of you in that process... and it will so look different at the end from where it's at anyway. Just write it. Don't let fear that 'people won't like it' stand in your way. |
32,128 | Planning on writing a picture sci-fi book about Utopia.
The book will not have a plot (story), sequence or any conclusion. It will have approximately 30 illustrations generally depicting a search for Utopia, accompanied by minimal text for each illustration. Similar to a photo book.
Has anything similar to this been published before?
Could this spur sufficient interest? | 2017/12/23 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/32128",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/28579/"
] | I upvoted the answers about writing for yourself and noting what you find interesting. Go over and make mental note which areas you tend to skim over or feel confused on. Sometimes it take a few cycles of reading, editing and rereading before realizing a section needs to be cut out or changed.
As for the subject or the story. If it interests you, then you're going to enjoy it a lot more and likely put more effort and work into it than if you don't care.
The downside is (at least with me) is that I know so much about my story world so things may be clear in my mind but not clear to anyone outside. I'll gloss over ambiguous areas, things I need further research on to make it convincing, or things over explained, repetitive, etc. That may be when having a friend or some other person reading and giving feedback is helpful.
---
Edited to add, while it might be socially awkward at times, I find talking about my story to other people (anyone willing to listen) helps me get an idea on a number of things:
1. How to get to the point (which helps me clarify in my writing and figure out the main plot/ theme). The first few times I do this, I tend to be all over the place rambling about everything and every little detail. That's a sign I need to figure out the point of the story, the main plot and possibly weed out unnecessary things.
2. Find out which parts interest the listener the most. What times do they seem really engaged or say "Wow that's a really good story."
3. Find out what areas they scratch their head and be like "You've lost me." or "Wow there's a lot going on. or I can't remember who is who and all those names. (this is a problem I'll have to sort out.) | What is interesting to the reader completely depends on the reader (the targeted and reached audience). For instance, people at a library will like different kind of books than people commuting by train.
The only way to know if people find your book interesting is to let people read your book (or parts of it, and then hope it represents the full quality of your book).
Let 10 people rate your book (chapter) on a scale from 0 = most boring stuff I've ever read to 10 = most interesting I've ever read. Let 10 other people rate a book with a similar amount of pages. Don't disclose which is your book. Then perform a T-test between the two groups.
If you're targeting a wide audience use popular narrative techniques. You might look at popular recently publicized books for techniques and constructs.
If you're targeting a niche audience, use in-group language and technical terms. Communicating with an in-group language that is understood by the reader gives a sense of belongingness.
If target audience is only one person writing an interesting book is the easiest. When there are 2 or more persons there will always be disagreement. |
32,128 | Planning on writing a picture sci-fi book about Utopia.
The book will not have a plot (story), sequence or any conclusion. It will have approximately 30 illustrations generally depicting a search for Utopia, accompanied by minimal text for each illustration. Similar to a photo book.
Has anything similar to this been published before?
Could this spur sufficient interest? | 2017/12/23 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/32128",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/28579/"
] | *The Room* is about a man whose love life runs off the rails and ends in a brutal break-up. This is a topic that a *lot* of people are interested in. *La La Land* is about the same theme. *Shrek* seems like that's how it's going to end leading into the final act. I can't begin to list how many breakup songs have hit the top 10 charts.
The reason people don't like *The Room* isn't because the premise of the story is bad. It's because the movie was poorly executed. Honestly, you can probably make a story about any premise you want to. Would you be interested in reading a book about someone learning how to work at a post office? Apparently a lot of people would, because Terry Prachet's novel *Going Postal* is held in high regard. Would you read a book about a bunch of rich, stupid twenty-somethings going to Spain and getting drunk all the time? That's the plot to *The Sun Also Rises*, a cultural touchstone written by Ernest Hemingway. Heck, you can describe *The Room* as being about a spoiled rich guy who has awful relationships and then dies, and that's also the synopsis of *The Great Gatsby*.
Don't worry too much about whether your premise is workable. I contend you can make a good story out of literally any premise. What determines whether people will read your story or not is how well you've executed on your idea. So practice writing a lot, make multiple editing passes on your story, join a writing group, ask friends who can give honest critiques to read your work - do whatever it takes to be certain that your writing is solid, and your story will come alive. | The story must interest YOU
---------------------------
When I started out, I did exactly that: tried to do stuff specifically for others, and well I did not do so well. The material I came up with was... underwhelming. Then I started reading other people's stuff. I quickly realized that the material that interested **THEM** interested me **ME**.
I asked myself that exact same question, followed by *"what am I doing wrong?"* In a moment of frustration, I decided to write something I wanted to, ignoring all the data I read about what people want.
To my surprise, my readers thought it was awesome, fresh, and filled with excitement. By doing something you love, it will come through your writing. Write the story for **YOU** first and foremost... |
32,128 | Planning on writing a picture sci-fi book about Utopia.
The book will not have a plot (story), sequence or any conclusion. It will have approximately 30 illustrations generally depicting a search for Utopia, accompanied by minimal text for each illustration. Similar to a photo book.
Has anything similar to this been published before?
Could this spur sufficient interest? | 2017/12/23 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/32128",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/28579/"
] | *The Room* is about a man whose love life runs off the rails and ends in a brutal break-up. This is a topic that a *lot* of people are interested in. *La La Land* is about the same theme. *Shrek* seems like that's how it's going to end leading into the final act. I can't begin to list how many breakup songs have hit the top 10 charts.
The reason people don't like *The Room* isn't because the premise of the story is bad. It's because the movie was poorly executed. Honestly, you can probably make a story about any premise you want to. Would you be interested in reading a book about someone learning how to work at a post office? Apparently a lot of people would, because Terry Prachet's novel *Going Postal* is held in high regard. Would you read a book about a bunch of rich, stupid twenty-somethings going to Spain and getting drunk all the time? That's the plot to *The Sun Also Rises*, a cultural touchstone written by Ernest Hemingway. Heck, you can describe *The Room* as being about a spoiled rich guy who has awful relationships and then dies, and that's also the synopsis of *The Great Gatsby*.
Don't worry too much about whether your premise is workable. I contend you can make a good story out of literally any premise. What determines whether people will read your story or not is how well you've executed on your idea. So practice writing a lot, make multiple editing passes on your story, join a writing group, ask friends who can give honest critiques to read your work - do whatever it takes to be certain that your writing is solid, and your story will come alive. | If anything kept me awake at night (and some things have) I'd presume it was likely real trouble.
Look for groups or websites online that deal with the topics that interest you. If you can't find any with significant membership, those topics may not be worthy of exploring in book length form.
As far as "observations of life", it depends on the observations. If you find realistic observations or patterns, you can incorporate those into your book. If you plan to teach "life lessons" in your book, I think very few people are interested in that. People read fiction for entertainment, adventure, and the "life lessons" of fiction are pretty much always the same (and in large part aspirational and seldom apply to real life). The good shall prevail, crime does not pay, persevere and you will win, risk it all and you shall not be disappointed, in your darkest hour you can still find a way.
So I'm not going to tell you everything will be all right, just keep writing and hope it will work. The goal of writing fiction should be to entertain an audience, and audiences are pretty predictable. Look at what else is selling, if they don't include the kinds of things that are in your notebook (in the same quantity you hope to infuse your work with what is in your notebook) then chances are high your work will not be a commercial success.
We do like new characters, new heroes, new villains, new settings, and other original and imaginative components. But they will still, like nearly all commercial fiction, fit into the three act structure and teach the standard, well-worn, tried-and-true lessons of fiction that everybody loves to hear again and again. |
32,128 | Planning on writing a picture sci-fi book about Utopia.
The book will not have a plot (story), sequence or any conclusion. It will have approximately 30 illustrations generally depicting a search for Utopia, accompanied by minimal text for each illustration. Similar to a photo book.
Has anything similar to this been published before?
Could this spur sufficient interest? | 2017/12/23 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/32128",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/28579/"
] | Only an outsider can help you. Find someone you can trust to honestly review your work, such as a close friend or relative. Internet critique groups might be helpful.
Be very specific that you want them to read looking for flaws, otherwise they'll just look at the good parts and give you the generic "that's good". Parents are specially prone to this.
After you get one review, get another. And another. 5 or 10 should be a good number. Then look at all those reviews and try to find the parts most of them complained about. Those are the parts you need to worry about fixing right now.
Also, don't oversweat this. When you start to actually write, a lot may change. | The story must interest YOU
---------------------------
When I started out, I did exactly that: tried to do stuff specifically for others, and well I did not do so well. The material I came up with was... underwhelming. Then I started reading other people's stuff. I quickly realized that the material that interested **THEM** interested me **ME**.
I asked myself that exact same question, followed by *"what am I doing wrong?"* In a moment of frustration, I decided to write something I wanted to, ignoring all the data I read about what people want.
To my surprise, my readers thought it was awesome, fresh, and filled with excitement. By doing something you love, it will come through your writing. Write the story for **YOU** first and foremost... |
32,128 | Planning on writing a picture sci-fi book about Utopia.
The book will not have a plot (story), sequence or any conclusion. It will have approximately 30 illustrations generally depicting a search for Utopia, accompanied by minimal text for each illustration. Similar to a photo book.
Has anything similar to this been published before?
Could this spur sufficient interest? | 2017/12/23 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/32128",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/28579/"
] | *The Room* is about a man whose love life runs off the rails and ends in a brutal break-up. This is a topic that a *lot* of people are interested in. *La La Land* is about the same theme. *Shrek* seems like that's how it's going to end leading into the final act. I can't begin to list how many breakup songs have hit the top 10 charts.
The reason people don't like *The Room* isn't because the premise of the story is bad. It's because the movie was poorly executed. Honestly, you can probably make a story about any premise you want to. Would you be interested in reading a book about someone learning how to work at a post office? Apparently a lot of people would, because Terry Prachet's novel *Going Postal* is held in high regard. Would you read a book about a bunch of rich, stupid twenty-somethings going to Spain and getting drunk all the time? That's the plot to *The Sun Also Rises*, a cultural touchstone written by Ernest Hemingway. Heck, you can describe *The Room* as being about a spoiled rich guy who has awful relationships and then dies, and that's also the synopsis of *The Great Gatsby*.
Don't worry too much about whether your premise is workable. I contend you can make a good story out of literally any premise. What determines whether people will read your story or not is how well you've executed on your idea. So practice writing a lot, make multiple editing passes on your story, join a writing group, ask friends who can give honest critiques to read your work - do whatever it takes to be certain that your writing is solid, and your story will come alive. | I upvoted the answers about writing for yourself and noting what you find interesting. Go over and make mental note which areas you tend to skim over or feel confused on. Sometimes it take a few cycles of reading, editing and rereading before realizing a section needs to be cut out or changed.
As for the subject or the story. If it interests you, then you're going to enjoy it a lot more and likely put more effort and work into it than if you don't care.
The downside is (at least with me) is that I know so much about my story world so things may be clear in my mind but not clear to anyone outside. I'll gloss over ambiguous areas, things I need further research on to make it convincing, or things over explained, repetitive, etc. That may be when having a friend or some other person reading and giving feedback is helpful.
---
Edited to add, while it might be socially awkward at times, I find talking about my story to other people (anyone willing to listen) helps me get an idea on a number of things:
1. How to get to the point (which helps me clarify in my writing and figure out the main plot/ theme). The first few times I do this, I tend to be all over the place rambling about everything and every little detail. That's a sign I need to figure out the point of the story, the main plot and possibly weed out unnecessary things.
2. Find out which parts interest the listener the most. What times do they seem really engaged or say "Wow that's a really good story."
3. Find out what areas they scratch their head and be like "You've lost me." or "Wow there's a lot going on. or I can't remember who is who and all those names. (this is a problem I'll have to sort out.) |
32,128 | Planning on writing a picture sci-fi book about Utopia.
The book will not have a plot (story), sequence or any conclusion. It will have approximately 30 illustrations generally depicting a search for Utopia, accompanied by minimal text for each illustration. Similar to a photo book.
Has anything similar to this been published before?
Could this spur sufficient interest? | 2017/12/23 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/32128",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/28579/"
] | **You really don't know.**
But here's the thing. There are 7.5 billion people on the planet. Let's say that you want to sell 100,000 copies.
That means you only need to be interesting to 1/75000 people.
Your story interests **you**. Are you so special that you find something interesting that 75000 other people **don't**? Maybe. Who knows.
Just write the thing. You have so much ahead of you in that process... and it will so look different at the end from where it's at anyway. Just write it. Don't let fear that 'people won't like it' stand in your way. | What is interesting to the reader completely depends on the reader (the targeted and reached audience). For instance, people at a library will like different kind of books than people commuting by train.
The only way to know if people find your book interesting is to let people read your book (or parts of it, and then hope it represents the full quality of your book).
Let 10 people rate your book (chapter) on a scale from 0 = most boring stuff I've ever read to 10 = most interesting I've ever read. Let 10 other people rate a book with a similar amount of pages. Don't disclose which is your book. Then perform a T-test between the two groups.
If you're targeting a wide audience use popular narrative techniques. You might look at popular recently publicized books for techniques and constructs.
If you're targeting a niche audience, use in-group language and technical terms. Communicating with an in-group language that is understood by the reader gives a sense of belongingness.
If target audience is only one person writing an interesting book is the easiest. When there are 2 or more persons there will always be disagreement. |
32,128 | Planning on writing a picture sci-fi book about Utopia.
The book will not have a plot (story), sequence or any conclusion. It will have approximately 30 illustrations generally depicting a search for Utopia, accompanied by minimal text for each illustration. Similar to a photo book.
Has anything similar to this been published before?
Could this spur sufficient interest? | 2017/12/23 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/32128",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/28579/"
] | If anything kept me awake at night (and some things have) I'd presume it was likely real trouble.
Look for groups or websites online that deal with the topics that interest you. If you can't find any with significant membership, those topics may not be worthy of exploring in book length form.
As far as "observations of life", it depends on the observations. If you find realistic observations or patterns, you can incorporate those into your book. If you plan to teach "life lessons" in your book, I think very few people are interested in that. People read fiction for entertainment, adventure, and the "life lessons" of fiction are pretty much always the same (and in large part aspirational and seldom apply to real life). The good shall prevail, crime does not pay, persevere and you will win, risk it all and you shall not be disappointed, in your darkest hour you can still find a way.
So I'm not going to tell you everything will be all right, just keep writing and hope it will work. The goal of writing fiction should be to entertain an audience, and audiences are pretty predictable. Look at what else is selling, if they don't include the kinds of things that are in your notebook (in the same quantity you hope to infuse your work with what is in your notebook) then chances are high your work will not be a commercial success.
We do like new characters, new heroes, new villains, new settings, and other original and imaginative components. But they will still, like nearly all commercial fiction, fit into the three act structure and teach the standard, well-worn, tried-and-true lessons of fiction that everybody loves to hear again and again. | What is interesting to the reader completely depends on the reader (the targeted and reached audience). For instance, people at a library will like different kind of books than people commuting by train.
The only way to know if people find your book interesting is to let people read your book (or parts of it, and then hope it represents the full quality of your book).
Let 10 people rate your book (chapter) on a scale from 0 = most boring stuff I've ever read to 10 = most interesting I've ever read. Let 10 other people rate a book with a similar amount of pages. Don't disclose which is your book. Then perform a T-test between the two groups.
If you're targeting a wide audience use popular narrative techniques. You might look at popular recently publicized books for techniques and constructs.
If you're targeting a niche audience, use in-group language and technical terms. Communicating with an in-group language that is understood by the reader gives a sense of belongingness.
If target audience is only one person writing an interesting book is the easiest. When there are 2 or more persons there will always be disagreement. |
32,128 | Planning on writing a picture sci-fi book about Utopia.
The book will not have a plot (story), sequence or any conclusion. It will have approximately 30 illustrations generally depicting a search for Utopia, accompanied by minimal text for each illustration. Similar to a photo book.
Has anything similar to this been published before?
Could this spur sufficient interest? | 2017/12/23 | [
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/32128",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com",
"https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/28579/"
] | **You really don't know.**
But here's the thing. There are 7.5 billion people on the planet. Let's say that you want to sell 100,000 copies.
That means you only need to be interesting to 1/75000 people.
Your story interests **you**. Are you so special that you find something interesting that 75000 other people **don't**? Maybe. Who knows.
Just write the thing. You have so much ahead of you in that process... and it will so look different at the end from where it's at anyway. Just write it. Don't let fear that 'people won't like it' stand in your way. | If anything kept me awake at night (and some things have) I'd presume it was likely real trouble.
Look for groups or websites online that deal with the topics that interest you. If you can't find any with significant membership, those topics may not be worthy of exploring in book length form.
As far as "observations of life", it depends on the observations. If you find realistic observations or patterns, you can incorporate those into your book. If you plan to teach "life lessons" in your book, I think very few people are interested in that. People read fiction for entertainment, adventure, and the "life lessons" of fiction are pretty much always the same (and in large part aspirational and seldom apply to real life). The good shall prevail, crime does not pay, persevere and you will win, risk it all and you shall not be disappointed, in your darkest hour you can still find a way.
So I'm not going to tell you everything will be all right, just keep writing and hope it will work. The goal of writing fiction should be to entertain an audience, and audiences are pretty predictable. Look at what else is selling, if they don't include the kinds of things that are in your notebook (in the same quantity you hope to infuse your work with what is in your notebook) then chances are high your work will not be a commercial success.
We do like new characters, new heroes, new villains, new settings, and other original and imaginative components. But they will still, like nearly all commercial fiction, fit into the three act structure and teach the standard, well-worn, tried-and-true lessons of fiction that everybody loves to hear again and again. |
10,804 | just a simple question: what does qt in bitcoin-qt stand for? | 2013/05/11 | [
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/10804",
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com",
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/users/4964/"
] | Qt is a cross-platform application and UI framework for developers using C++. It's is used for UI in Bitcoin-Qt. See <http://qt-project.org/> | According to the Wikipedia article:"The toolkit was called Qt because the letter Q looked appealing in Haavard's Emacs font, and "t" was inspired by Xt, the X toolkit" |
720 | I don't remember a hint on the movie how Jason Bourne found the home of [Jarda](http://bourne.wikia.com/wiki/Jarda), the only other living Treadstone assassin. Is it mentioned somewhere or are we just supposed to assume that Bourne simply used his amazing resourcefulness to find him? | 2011/12/30 | [
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/720",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/users/105/"
] | I didn't notice that this was glossed over the first time I watched it, but I see two possible explanations.
1. At the end of *The Bourne Identity*, Jason Bourne briefly had access to some information about Treadstone when he infiltrates a safehouse. He could have found the information there and kept it. (This is a *possible* explanation, but I'm not crazy about it. If this is what the writers had in mind I think they would have alluded to it.)
2. Bourne was regaining some of his memories already by the end of the first film, so it's possible that if he and Jarda had ever worked closely together in the past he just knew where Jarda lived and remembered it. I think this is the more plausible explanation, and it is hinted at in the dialogue.
>
> **Jarda:** Word in the ether was you'd lost your memory.
>
> **Jason Bourne:** You still should have moved.
>
>
>
This seems to indicate that Jarda was counting on Bourne's memory loss to keep him safe. This is probably a bigger plot hole than Bourne suddenly remembering where Jarda lived. I'd think that a trained assassin would make himself disappear once all of his colleagues started turning up dead. | I'm starting to think he didn't lose his memory and it was a plot by Treadstone to set him on a path he never lived. Such as his apartment in Paris. He doesn't remember it because he was never there before. It was all a plot to set him up. |
720 | I don't remember a hint on the movie how Jason Bourne found the home of [Jarda](http://bourne.wikia.com/wiki/Jarda), the only other living Treadstone assassin. Is it mentioned somewhere or are we just supposed to assume that Bourne simply used his amazing resourcefulness to find him? | 2011/12/30 | [
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/720",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/users/105/"
] | I didn't notice that this was glossed over the first time I watched it, but I see two possible explanations.
1. At the end of *The Bourne Identity*, Jason Bourne briefly had access to some information about Treadstone when he infiltrates a safehouse. He could have found the information there and kept it. (This is a *possible* explanation, but I'm not crazy about it. If this is what the writers had in mind I think they would have alluded to it.)
2. Bourne was regaining some of his memories already by the end of the first film, so it's possible that if he and Jarda had ever worked closely together in the past he just knew where Jarda lived and remembered it. I think this is the more plausible explanation, and it is hinted at in the dialogue.
>
> **Jarda:** Word in the ether was you'd lost your memory.
>
> **Jason Bourne:** You still should have moved.
>
>
>
This seems to indicate that Jarda was counting on Bourne's memory loss to keep him safe. This is probably a bigger plot hole than Bourne suddenly remembering where Jarda lived. I'd think that a trained assassin would make himself disappear once all of his colleagues started turning up dead. | There is no explanation. I really cannot see the CIA allowing their Treadstone assets to know each other's addresses. I can see thing giving Bourne's Paris address to Castel and the others when they wanted him dead. But alive? I don't see it. In fact, the movie never hinted that the Treadstone assets worked together. The Professor didn't seem famliar with Bourne when they met in Southern France.
By the way, Jarda was the German asset (from Hamburg) in **"THE BOURNE IDENTITY"**. Manheim was the German asset (from Munich) in **"THE BOURNE SUPREMACY"**. The 2002 film never hinted there was a fifth Treadstone operative, especially since Conklin had made it clear in "IDENTITY" that he wanted all operatives in the program to go after Bourne. |
720 | I don't remember a hint on the movie how Jason Bourne found the home of [Jarda](http://bourne.wikia.com/wiki/Jarda), the only other living Treadstone assassin. Is it mentioned somewhere or are we just supposed to assume that Bourne simply used his amazing resourcefulness to find him? | 2011/12/30 | [
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/720",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/users/105/"
] | I didn't notice that this was glossed over the first time I watched it, but I see two possible explanations.
1. At the end of *The Bourne Identity*, Jason Bourne briefly had access to some information about Treadstone when he infiltrates a safehouse. He could have found the information there and kept it. (This is a *possible* explanation, but I'm not crazy about it. If this is what the writers had in mind I think they would have alluded to it.)
2. Bourne was regaining some of his memories already by the end of the first film, so it's possible that if he and Jarda had ever worked closely together in the past he just knew where Jarda lived and remembered it. I think this is the more plausible explanation, and it is hinted at in the dialogue.
>
> **Jarda:** Word in the ether was you'd lost your memory.
>
> **Jason Bourne:** You still should have moved.
>
>
>
This seems to indicate that Jarda was counting on Bourne's memory loss to keep him safe. This is probably a bigger plot hole than Bourne suddenly remembering where Jarda lived. I'd think that a trained assassin would make himself disappear once all of his colleagues started turning up dead. | I always thought the Treadstone operative who killed Conklin on Abbott's orders in Identity and the Treadstone agent Bourne tracked down in Supremacy were the same guy. I don't understand why they had two different characters in these roles; it would have tied it all together nicely. |
720 | I don't remember a hint on the movie how Jason Bourne found the home of [Jarda](http://bourne.wikia.com/wiki/Jarda), the only other living Treadstone assassin. Is it mentioned somewhere or are we just supposed to assume that Bourne simply used his amazing resourcefulness to find him? | 2011/12/30 | [
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/720",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/users/105/"
] | I didn't notice that this was glossed over the first time I watched it, but I see two possible explanations.
1. At the end of *The Bourne Identity*, Jason Bourne briefly had access to some information about Treadstone when he infiltrates a safehouse. He could have found the information there and kept it. (This is a *possible* explanation, but I'm not crazy about it. If this is what the writers had in mind I think they would have alluded to it.)
2. Bourne was regaining some of his memories already by the end of the first film, so it's possible that if he and Jarda had ever worked closely together in the past he just knew where Jarda lived and remembered it. I think this is the more plausible explanation, and it is hinted at in the dialogue.
>
> **Jarda:** Word in the ether was you'd lost your memory.
>
> **Jason Bourne:** You still should have moved.
>
>
>
This seems to indicate that Jarda was counting on Bourne's memory loss to keep him safe. This is probably a bigger plot hole than Bourne suddenly remembering where Jarda lived. I'd think that a trained assassin would make himself disappear once all of his colleagues started turning up dead. | It took some digging. When they meet each other at the house in Munich Jarda says "word in the ether was that you lost your memory." And Bourne replies "you still should have moved." This implies Bourne has at least some fragmented memories of prior knowledge of Jarda, or maybe that the house is covertly owned by the CIA. We know they've interacted before -- it's hard to tell, but in the flashbacks outside the hotel right before Neski's murder, **it is Jarda who is the driver of the car that Conklin and Bourne are in**. This is further confirmed in the screenplay.
Furthermore, there is some really interesting unused dialogue in the screenplay where Jarda says that he had eventually tracked Bourne to the motorcycle shop that Marie owns at the end of *Identity* to kill Bourne and Marie. Bourne reveals to Jarda that he knew Jarda had found him and so then had evaded Jarda to Goa, only even sparing Jarda's life at Marie's behest. And so it is then implied that unbeknownst to Jarda, Bourne at some point then tracked Jarda back to Jarda's Munich base, which Jarda hadn't moved from by the events in *Supremacy* - hence the "you still should have moved" line. "You still should have moved" and Jarda being the driver on Bourne's first mission are the only bits of all that that are actually included in the film but I think it's enough to make inferences that make sense of this little plot question. |
720 | I don't remember a hint on the movie how Jason Bourne found the home of [Jarda](http://bourne.wikia.com/wiki/Jarda), the only other living Treadstone assassin. Is it mentioned somewhere or are we just supposed to assume that Bourne simply used his amazing resourcefulness to find him? | 2011/12/30 | [
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/720",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/users/105/"
] | There is no explanation. I really cannot see the CIA allowing their Treadstone assets to know each other's addresses. I can see thing giving Bourne's Paris address to Castel and the others when they wanted him dead. But alive? I don't see it. In fact, the movie never hinted that the Treadstone assets worked together. The Professor didn't seem famliar with Bourne when they met in Southern France.
By the way, Jarda was the German asset (from Hamburg) in **"THE BOURNE IDENTITY"**. Manheim was the German asset (from Munich) in **"THE BOURNE SUPREMACY"**. The 2002 film never hinted there was a fifth Treadstone operative, especially since Conklin had made it clear in "IDENTITY" that he wanted all operatives in the program to go after Bourne. | I'm starting to think he didn't lose his memory and it was a plot by Treadstone to set him on a path he never lived. Such as his apartment in Paris. He doesn't remember it because he was never there before. It was all a plot to set him up. |
720 | I don't remember a hint on the movie how Jason Bourne found the home of [Jarda](http://bourne.wikia.com/wiki/Jarda), the only other living Treadstone assassin. Is it mentioned somewhere or are we just supposed to assume that Bourne simply used his amazing resourcefulness to find him? | 2011/12/30 | [
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/720",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/users/105/"
] | It took some digging. When they meet each other at the house in Munich Jarda says "word in the ether was that you lost your memory." And Bourne replies "you still should have moved." This implies Bourne has at least some fragmented memories of prior knowledge of Jarda, or maybe that the house is covertly owned by the CIA. We know they've interacted before -- it's hard to tell, but in the flashbacks outside the hotel right before Neski's murder, **it is Jarda who is the driver of the car that Conklin and Bourne are in**. This is further confirmed in the screenplay.
Furthermore, there is some really interesting unused dialogue in the screenplay where Jarda says that he had eventually tracked Bourne to the motorcycle shop that Marie owns at the end of *Identity* to kill Bourne and Marie. Bourne reveals to Jarda that he knew Jarda had found him and so then had evaded Jarda to Goa, only even sparing Jarda's life at Marie's behest. And so it is then implied that unbeknownst to Jarda, Bourne at some point then tracked Jarda back to Jarda's Munich base, which Jarda hadn't moved from by the events in *Supremacy* - hence the "you still should have moved" line. "You still should have moved" and Jarda being the driver on Bourne's first mission are the only bits of all that that are actually included in the film but I think it's enough to make inferences that make sense of this little plot question. | I'm starting to think he didn't lose his memory and it was a plot by Treadstone to set him on a path he never lived. Such as his apartment in Paris. He doesn't remember it because he was never there before. It was all a plot to set him up. |
720 | I don't remember a hint on the movie how Jason Bourne found the home of [Jarda](http://bourne.wikia.com/wiki/Jarda), the only other living Treadstone assassin. Is it mentioned somewhere or are we just supposed to assume that Bourne simply used his amazing resourcefulness to find him? | 2011/12/30 | [
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/720",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/users/105/"
] | There is no explanation. I really cannot see the CIA allowing their Treadstone assets to know each other's addresses. I can see thing giving Bourne's Paris address to Castel and the others when they wanted him dead. But alive? I don't see it. In fact, the movie never hinted that the Treadstone assets worked together. The Professor didn't seem famliar with Bourne when they met in Southern France.
By the way, Jarda was the German asset (from Hamburg) in **"THE BOURNE IDENTITY"**. Manheim was the German asset (from Munich) in **"THE BOURNE SUPREMACY"**. The 2002 film never hinted there was a fifth Treadstone operative, especially since Conklin had made it clear in "IDENTITY" that he wanted all operatives in the program to go after Bourne. | I always thought the Treadstone operative who killed Conklin on Abbott's orders in Identity and the Treadstone agent Bourne tracked down in Supremacy were the same guy. I don't understand why they had two different characters in these roles; it would have tied it all together nicely. |
720 | I don't remember a hint on the movie how Jason Bourne found the home of [Jarda](http://bourne.wikia.com/wiki/Jarda), the only other living Treadstone assassin. Is it mentioned somewhere or are we just supposed to assume that Bourne simply used his amazing resourcefulness to find him? | 2011/12/30 | [
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/720",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/users/105/"
] | There is no explanation. I really cannot see the CIA allowing their Treadstone assets to know each other's addresses. I can see thing giving Bourne's Paris address to Castel and the others when they wanted him dead. But alive? I don't see it. In fact, the movie never hinted that the Treadstone assets worked together. The Professor didn't seem famliar with Bourne when they met in Southern France.
By the way, Jarda was the German asset (from Hamburg) in **"THE BOURNE IDENTITY"**. Manheim was the German asset (from Munich) in **"THE BOURNE SUPREMACY"**. The 2002 film never hinted there was a fifth Treadstone operative, especially since Conklin had made it clear in "IDENTITY" that he wanted all operatives in the program to go after Bourne. | It took some digging. When they meet each other at the house in Munich Jarda says "word in the ether was that you lost your memory." And Bourne replies "you still should have moved." This implies Bourne has at least some fragmented memories of prior knowledge of Jarda, or maybe that the house is covertly owned by the CIA. We know they've interacted before -- it's hard to tell, but in the flashbacks outside the hotel right before Neski's murder, **it is Jarda who is the driver of the car that Conklin and Bourne are in**. This is further confirmed in the screenplay.
Furthermore, there is some really interesting unused dialogue in the screenplay where Jarda says that he had eventually tracked Bourne to the motorcycle shop that Marie owns at the end of *Identity* to kill Bourne and Marie. Bourne reveals to Jarda that he knew Jarda had found him and so then had evaded Jarda to Goa, only even sparing Jarda's life at Marie's behest. And so it is then implied that unbeknownst to Jarda, Bourne at some point then tracked Jarda back to Jarda's Munich base, which Jarda hadn't moved from by the events in *Supremacy* - hence the "you still should have moved" line. "You still should have moved" and Jarda being the driver on Bourne's first mission are the only bits of all that that are actually included in the film but I think it's enough to make inferences that make sense of this little plot question. |
720 | I don't remember a hint on the movie how Jason Bourne found the home of [Jarda](http://bourne.wikia.com/wiki/Jarda), the only other living Treadstone assassin. Is it mentioned somewhere or are we just supposed to assume that Bourne simply used his amazing resourcefulness to find him? | 2011/12/30 | [
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/720",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com",
"https://movies.stackexchange.com/users/105/"
] | It took some digging. When they meet each other at the house in Munich Jarda says "word in the ether was that you lost your memory." And Bourne replies "you still should have moved." This implies Bourne has at least some fragmented memories of prior knowledge of Jarda, or maybe that the house is covertly owned by the CIA. We know they've interacted before -- it's hard to tell, but in the flashbacks outside the hotel right before Neski's murder, **it is Jarda who is the driver of the car that Conklin and Bourne are in**. This is further confirmed in the screenplay.
Furthermore, there is some really interesting unused dialogue in the screenplay where Jarda says that he had eventually tracked Bourne to the motorcycle shop that Marie owns at the end of *Identity* to kill Bourne and Marie. Bourne reveals to Jarda that he knew Jarda had found him and so then had evaded Jarda to Goa, only even sparing Jarda's life at Marie's behest. And so it is then implied that unbeknownst to Jarda, Bourne at some point then tracked Jarda back to Jarda's Munich base, which Jarda hadn't moved from by the events in *Supremacy* - hence the "you still should have moved" line. "You still should have moved" and Jarda being the driver on Bourne's first mission are the only bits of all that that are actually included in the film but I think it's enough to make inferences that make sense of this little plot question. | I always thought the Treadstone operative who killed Conklin on Abbott's orders in Identity and the Treadstone agent Bourne tracked down in Supremacy were the same guy. I don't understand why they had two different characters in these roles; it would have tied it all together nicely. |
2,559,104 | Assume the image is only in black and white.
Is there a software that can generate a matrix representation for the text on the image? | 2010/04/01 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2559104",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/198729/"
] | PKCS#7 is a cryptography standard published by RSA Security in 1993 that deals with data that has cryptography applied to it. Its a standard for how to package data securely. PKCS#7 references the X.509 standard, as the source for certificate formatting.
X.509 is a wide ranging security standards document published in 1998 which includes amongst other things, certificate file formats.
X.509 specifies that certificates should be encoded using the Distinguished Encoding Rules of the ASN.1 (documented in the X.208 and now X.608) standard, first published in 1984.
So, DER says how to encode some strings and numeric source data into a binary format,
X.509 says which data needs to go into a digital certificate, and
PKCS#7 says how that certificate should be used, to digitally sign a message.
---
Privacy Enhanced Mail - some kind of tool released before OpenSSL - needed to pass PKCS#7 "wrapped" data around in email messages that at the time were exchanged on systems that only supported 7 bit ASCII characters - "PEM" created the standard of using Base64 to encoded the X.509 certificates required by PKCS#7, and storing the base64 inside -----BEGIN ???----- -----END ???----- where ??? can be a RSA PRIVATE KEY, PSA PUBLIC KEY, CERTIFICATE etc. | PKCS Components are PKCS#1, PKCS#5, PKCS#7, PKCS#8, PKCS#9, PKCS#10, and PKCS#12, PKCS standards are specifications produced by RSA Laboratories in cooperation with secure-system developers worldwide for the purpose of accelerating the deployment of public-key cryptography.
A user can request a certificate from a Certificate Authority is for that user to send his or her public key in a PKCS#10 object to the CA.Once the request is approved, the CA issues a certificate that is wrapped in a PKCS#7-formatted object.
PKCS#7 defines a standard format for data that has had cryptography applied to it,PKCS#7 specifies only a data format, not the choice of any specific algorithms (X509)
X.509 certificate is a public key packaged with information about the certificate owner and issuer |
3,347,782 | I'm shortly to start on an integration project that will require organisational data (line reporting etc) and starter/leaver events etc. We utilise SAP HCM, but I have no experience of SAP (BizTalk/.NET developer), and I'm still attempting to find the right people to talk to in our organisation about how to interface with SAP.
Sadly (for our organisation anyway!), Stack Overflow is normally quicker :)
So, really I'm looking for an answer to the following;
1. Does SAP HCM expose master employee data "out of the box" via web services. If not, does it require much to expose this on the SAP side?
2. If data is exposed, is it via a pull only model? ie, can SAP be configured to push events?
3. This may be naive, but does a trial version of the SAP stack exist to allow me to explore the options?
Any suggestions would be gratefully received. I know in the past the organisation has had to engage SAP consultants for integration work like this, but (in my naive world I guess) this seems a reasonably simple integration problem?
Regards, Jason | 2010/07/27 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3347782",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/204818/"
] | I'm not familiar with the HCM module specifically, but I can provide some general answers:
1. Generally, standard display functionality of the major business objects (like a User or a Job in the HR world) are exposeed via BAPIs. Assuming your Basis team has ICF (Internet Communication Framework) configured, it is pretty simple to expose a BAPI as a web service.
2. SAP can push data based on events happening in SAP. For example, you could have SAP call a web service in your legacy application whenever a new employee record is created in SAP.
3. According to [this post](http://forums.sdn.sap.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1593682) there is no trial version of HCM. However, here's a few things that might be useful. I haven't used them personally but they look to be worth trying out:
* [SAP Enterprise Services Explorer for Microsoft .NET](http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/index?rid=/library/uuid/10cacdca-b0bb-2a10-77be-d600de4658b7)
* [SAP NetWeaver 7.01 SR1 SP3 Developer Edition](http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/downloads?rid=/library/uuid/70b58216-00e7-2c10-f6a9-c59f3a351b63) | >
> Does SAP HCM expose master employee data "out of the box" via web
> services. If not, does it require much to expose this on the SAP side?
>
>
>
There are very few web service for HR. However, an ABAP function or BAPI can be transformed into a web service using a menu option... if such a function does not exist then it should be simple to create on (a pull solution)
>
> can SAP be configured to push events?
>
>
>
Yes, by several mean. HR operations modifictaion of master data, or administrative operation can generate event that can do anything (update a table, or call a web service)
>
> This may be naive, but does a trial > version of the SAP stack exist to
> allow me to explore the options?
>
>
>
There a a trial stack version available on sdn.sap.com, but this contains only the core, and no specific module like HCM.
Regards
Guillaume
*Additionnal Infos :*
you can easily get informations on an existing user using standards RFC function, such as BAPI\_EMPLOYEE\_GETDATA (to get a list of employee from several criteria), or BAPI\_BANKDETAIL\_GETDETAIL for bank detail. You "just" have to create a wrapper call in your dev. langage
However, this will not give you "events" such as a modification of those bank details, the hiring of a new employee or the firing of a (previous) employee... For this you have to do non-trivial developpement (the simplest : any modification of a master data put the employee id in a table... each day you check the table and import the data currently valid)
Regards |
3,347,782 | I'm shortly to start on an integration project that will require organisational data (line reporting etc) and starter/leaver events etc. We utilise SAP HCM, but I have no experience of SAP (BizTalk/.NET developer), and I'm still attempting to find the right people to talk to in our organisation about how to interface with SAP.
Sadly (for our organisation anyway!), Stack Overflow is normally quicker :)
So, really I'm looking for an answer to the following;
1. Does SAP HCM expose master employee data "out of the box" via web services. If not, does it require much to expose this on the SAP side?
2. If data is exposed, is it via a pull only model? ie, can SAP be configured to push events?
3. This may be naive, but does a trial version of the SAP stack exist to allow me to explore the options?
Any suggestions would be gratefully received. I know in the past the organisation has had to engage SAP consultants for integration work like this, but (in my naive world I guess) this seems a reasonably simple integration problem?
Regards, Jason | 2010/07/27 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3347782",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/204818/"
] | I'm not familiar with the HCM module specifically, but I can provide some general answers:
1. Generally, standard display functionality of the major business objects (like a User or a Job in the HR world) are exposeed via BAPIs. Assuming your Basis team has ICF (Internet Communication Framework) configured, it is pretty simple to expose a BAPI as a web service.
2. SAP can push data based on events happening in SAP. For example, you could have SAP call a web service in your legacy application whenever a new employee record is created in SAP.
3. According to [this post](http://forums.sdn.sap.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1593682) there is no trial version of HCM. However, here's a few things that might be useful. I haven't used them personally but they look to be worth trying out:
* [SAP Enterprise Services Explorer for Microsoft .NET](http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/index?rid=/library/uuid/10cacdca-b0bb-2a10-77be-d600de4658b7)
* [SAP NetWeaver 7.01 SR1 SP3 Developer Edition](http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/downloads?rid=/library/uuid/70b58216-00e7-2c10-f6a9-c59f3a351b63) | The challenge with connecting directly to SAP from another system creates a non scalable architecture - point-to-point interfaces that are affected by changes or issues with both systems. Let's say you try and push out changes to employee data and the target system is not available, well SAP will most likely short dump (throw and error). Now you have to think about a continuous batch job in SAP to try and manage these outages.
SAP have the Netweaver Gateway 2.0, which essentially supercedes a lot of these older style interfaces. The gateway provides an abstraction layer and some form of persistance and recovery mechanism. A golden rule is never hardware systems together directly, rather look at some form of middleware layer in between which provides semanitic and physical abstraction of the systems. |
4,026,399 | We are integrating documentation authored according to DITA. The [DITA Open Toolkit](http://dita.xml.org/wiki/the-dita-open-toolkit) processes all files using java whereas we are looking for a solution that allows us to work with the DITA content on the fly from a C#-based application.
Does anyone know of any .NET projects that are written to work with DITA maps and content? | 2010/10/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4026399",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/23234/"
] | I don't believe there are any Microsoft-made DITA libraries available for .NET.
There was a paper written for SIGDOC 2008 called "Pragmatic DITA on a budget" that refers to generating DITA content from commented C# code. A PDF is available [here.](http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1456536.1456577) This probably isn't quite what you're looking for, but it could be useful...
It might be worth getting in touch with the author about this project. | It's not the cleanest solution in the world, but you could call the DITA Open Toolkit command line tools through `Process`. If you do it right, you can suppress the console window and the user won't know the difference. |
4,026,399 | We are integrating documentation authored according to DITA. The [DITA Open Toolkit](http://dita.xml.org/wiki/the-dita-open-toolkit) processes all files using java whereas we are looking for a solution that allows us to work with the DITA content on the fly from a C#-based application.
Does anyone know of any .NET projects that are written to work with DITA maps and content? | 2010/10/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4026399",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/23234/"
] | I don't believe there are any Microsoft-made DITA libraries available for .NET.
There was a paper written for SIGDOC 2008 called "Pragmatic DITA on a budget" that refers to generating DITA content from commented C# code. A PDF is available [here.](http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1456536.1456577) This probably isn't quite what you're looking for, but it could be useful...
It might be worth getting in touch with the author about this project. | You could use a tool like [IKVM](http://www.ikvm.net/) to turn the java toolkit jars into .net assemblies and then use the toolkit from there. |
4,026,399 | We are integrating documentation authored according to DITA. The [DITA Open Toolkit](http://dita.xml.org/wiki/the-dita-open-toolkit) processes all files using java whereas we are looking for a solution that allows us to work with the DITA content on the fly from a C#-based application.
Does anyone know of any .NET projects that are written to work with DITA maps and content? | 2010/10/26 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/4026399",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/23234/"
] | It's not the cleanest solution in the world, but you could call the DITA Open Toolkit command line tools through `Process`. If you do it right, you can suppress the console window and the user won't know the difference. | You could use a tool like [IKVM](http://www.ikvm.net/) to turn the java toolkit jars into .net assemblies and then use the toolkit from there. |
171,965 | I travelled from outside of Europe to Madrid, Spain via Frankfurt, Germany. As my first point of entry into the Schengen area was Germany my immigration was done there. I had initially planned to stay for 22 days and I told the same to the immigration official. My visa-free stamp says the number 22 next to the date.
However I am loving Spain and I want to extend my trip.
**Can I stay for the full 90 days which are allowed within any 180 day period or do I need to leave within 22 days?**
Also in case I am allowed to stay for the full 90 days, what is the significance of the number "22" which was stamped on the passport. **Are the number of days stamped on the passport to verify that the traveler is actually staying for the length of time which the traveler stated at the time of entry?**
**Are there any negative consequences to staying for more than the amount of time which was stated at the time of entry?** | 2022/01/30 | [
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/171965",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com",
"https://travel.stackexchange.com/users/126408/"
] | Schengen stamps do not show a period of admission. They show only the date of the border crossing. Schengen border officers do not grant a period of admission -- this is controlled only by the terms of the visa in combination with the 90/180 rule, or, for a visa-free visit, by the 90/180 rule alone.
If the number 22 is part of the stamp it's just a coincidence that the stamp's [control number](https://travel.stackexchange.com/a/171939/19400) was 22. If the officer wrote "22" by hand then there's something else unusual going on, but we need more information to know what it might be. | No, that's not the purpose of the entry stamp. There is no record of your initial conversation and no system to track or enforce the purpose or planned length of stay of visa-free visitors (visa applications, on the other hand, are documented in a database). The main things that should be checked when you exit the Schengen area is whether you exceeded the maximum length of stay (90 days in your case) and whether there is an alert about you (arrest, surveillance) or your travel documents (stolen documents).
As @phoog explained, there is no legal concept of a period of admission and it is not up to the border guards you talked to to decide how long you may stay. You can of course be questioned about the nature of your trips, your financial resources, your ties with your country of residence, etc. both when leaving and when re-entering the Schengen area. I would guess that the longer your stay, the more likely you are to attract the interest of border guards, even more so if you make several long stays, but it's not directly related to changing your mind about the length of stay. |
16,353 | >
> (1.1)She turned up at the doorstep of my house in Cornwall. (1.2)No
> way could I have sent her away. (1.3)No way, not me anyway. (1.4)Maybe
> someone had kicked her out of their car the night before. (1.5)"We're
> moving house." (1.6)"No space for her any more with the baby coming."
> (1.7)"We never really wanted her, but what could we have done?
> (1.8)She was a present." (1.9) People find all sorts of excuses for
> abandoning an animal. (1.10)And she was one of the most beautiful dogs
> I had ever seen.
>
>
> (2.1)I called her Goldie. (2.2)If I had known what
> was going to happen I would have given her a more creative name.
> (2.3)She was so unsettled during those first few days. (2.4)She hardly
> ate anything and ***had such an air of sadness about her***. (2.5)There was
> nothing I could do to make her happy, it seemed. (2.6)Heaven knows
> what had happened to her at her previous owner ' s. (2.7)But
> eventually at the end of the first week she calmed down. (2.8)Always
> by my side, whether we were out on one of our long walks or sitting by
> the fire.
>
>
> (3.1)That 's why it was such a shock when she pulled away
> from me one day when we were out for a walk. (3.2)We were a long way
> from home, when she started barking and getting very restless.
> (3.3)Eventually I couldn't hold her any longer and she raced off down
> the road towards a farmhouse in the distance as fast as she could.
>
>
> (4.1)By the time I reached the farm I was very tired and upset with
> Goldie. (4.2)But when I saw her licking the four puppies I started to
> feel sympathy towards them. (4.3)"We didn't know what had happened to
> her," said the woman at the door. (4.4)"I took her for a walk one day,
> soon after the puppies were born, and she just disappeared. (4.5)"She
> must have tried to come back to them and got lost," added a boy from
> behind her.
>
>
> (5.1)I must admit I do miss Goldie, but I've got Nugget
> now, and she looks just like her mother. (5.2)And I've learnt a good
> lesson: not to judge people.
>
>
>
My question is :
How to understand the phrase "about her" in bold? Does it mean "around her" or "related to her"? | 2014/01/24 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/16353",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/2065/"
] | It means "around her." Usually we use about to mean "related to," and I don't recommend using it for "around" (to me it sounds dated and pretentious except in some specific expressions including this author's "she had an air of *\_* about her" where it is metaphorical, and the expression "around and about.") | Usage:
------
This is an adaptable cliche (occasionally called a [snowclone](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowclone)):
>
> **X** have an air of **Y** about them
>
>
>
**X** should be a pronoun, noun, or noun phrase *(examples: "she", "Bob", "the jury deliberations")*.
**Y** should be a nominal form of an adjective *(examples: "sadness", "pretention", "professionalism")*.
### Alternative formation:
It is also used with "there is", without changing the meaning:
>
> There is an air of **X** about **Y**
>
>
>
Meaning:
--------
It is largely just a *poetic* way to say that **X** appears to have characteristics of **Y**. For me it implies that those characteristics were difficult to explain or identify.
Another way to say it would be
>
> **X** shows characteristics of **Y**
>
>
>
e.g.
>
> She showed characteristics of sadness
>
>
> |
313,896 | I'm building a model which predicts the GDP(Quarterly) of my country. I've lots of time-series predictors(~50(Monthly), all continuous, e.g. Index of Industrial Production, etc.) but my dataset size is small(~120). I've tried using ARIMA(5,1,0) on GDP values: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/fa79I.png)
I'm looking for a model which could take into account how predictors affect GDP along with past GDP values.
Should I try using Recurrent Neural Nets on such small dataset?
Also, I used log-transform to account of increasing variance in GDP values, which still hasn't solved the issue completely. Any suggestions on how to solve this would be amazing.
I'm using Python. | 2017/11/15 | [
"https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/313896",
"https://stats.stackexchange.com",
"https://stats.stackexchange.com/users/184863/"
] | Your focal time series and the "predictors" are interrelated. You might as well want to forecast the Index of Industrial Production, using GDP as a "predictor".
The classical approach to such a problem is [Vector Autoregression (VAR)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vector_autoregression), which models - and forecasts - the relationships *between* your series, as well as the time dynamics.
Such problems are the bread and butter of econometricians. I suggest you pick up pretty much any econometric textbook, perhaps looking for one that uses software you are comfortable with, such as Python. | it appears to me that the error variance changed deterministically at two points in time . See <http://docplayer.net/12080848-Outliers-level-shifts-and-variance-changes-in-time-series.html> . I was responsible for seamlessly integrating this along with Intervention Detection into a commercial package that I helped to develop. The implementation was for both ARIMA and Transfer Function (causal) Models.
Whereas the Box-Cox test [When (and why) should you take the log of a distribution (of numbers)?](https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/18844/when-and-why-should-you-take-the-log-of-a-distribution-of-numbers/18852#18852) remedies a linkage between the expected value and the variance, the TSAY test leads to GLS . |
313,896 | I'm building a model which predicts the GDP(Quarterly) of my country. I've lots of time-series predictors(~50(Monthly), all continuous, e.g. Index of Industrial Production, etc.) but my dataset size is small(~120). I've tried using ARIMA(5,1,0) on GDP values: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/fa79I.png)
I'm looking for a model which could take into account how predictors affect GDP along with past GDP values.
Should I try using Recurrent Neural Nets on such small dataset?
Also, I used log-transform to account of increasing variance in GDP values, which still hasn't solved the issue completely. Any suggestions on how to solve this would be amazing.
I'm using Python. | 2017/11/15 | [
"https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/313896",
"https://stats.stackexchange.com",
"https://stats.stackexchange.com/users/184863/"
] | There is a lot of literature on nowcasting in general, and GDP in particular. For instance, check [GDPNow page](https://www.frbatlanta.org/cqer/research/gdpnow.aspx) on FRB Atlanta's web site, where the model description is given too. Below is their 2017 Q4 GPD forecast. As you know the GDP number release will be some time in 2018, i.e. a few months down the road from the time I'm posting my ansqwer.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wlKPa.gif)
Nowcasting is used to estimate the low frequency data based on high frequency predictors. For instance, CPI and Unemployment are released monthly, the interest rates are available either real time or at least daily. You could use these as predictors to estimate GDP between its quarterly releases.
Nowcasting is different from ordinary time series forecasting in that it has no issue with predicting the predictors. For instance, if you were to predict GDP one year ahead, you'd need values of its predictors one year ahead. | it appears to me that the error variance changed deterministically at two points in time . See <http://docplayer.net/12080848-Outliers-level-shifts-and-variance-changes-in-time-series.html> . I was responsible for seamlessly integrating this along with Intervention Detection into a commercial package that I helped to develop. The implementation was for both ARIMA and Transfer Function (causal) Models.
Whereas the Box-Cox test [When (and why) should you take the log of a distribution (of numbers)?](https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/18844/when-and-why-should-you-take-the-log-of-a-distribution-of-numbers/18852#18852) remedies a linkage between the expected value and the variance, the TSAY test leads to GLS . |
313,896 | I'm building a model which predicts the GDP(Quarterly) of my country. I've lots of time-series predictors(~50(Monthly), all continuous, e.g. Index of Industrial Production, etc.) but my dataset size is small(~120). I've tried using ARIMA(5,1,0) on GDP values: [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/fa79I.png)
I'm looking for a model which could take into account how predictors affect GDP along with past GDP values.
Should I try using Recurrent Neural Nets on such small dataset?
Also, I used log-transform to account of increasing variance in GDP values, which still hasn't solved the issue completely. Any suggestions on how to solve this would be amazing.
I'm using Python. | 2017/11/15 | [
"https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/313896",
"https://stats.stackexchange.com",
"https://stats.stackexchange.com/users/184863/"
] | Your focal time series and the "predictors" are interrelated. You might as well want to forecast the Index of Industrial Production, using GDP as a "predictor".
The classical approach to such a problem is [Vector Autoregression (VAR)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vector_autoregression), which models - and forecasts - the relationships *between* your series, as well as the time dynamics.
Such problems are the bread and butter of econometricians. I suggest you pick up pretty much any econometric textbook, perhaps looking for one that uses software you are comfortable with, such as Python. | There is a lot of literature on nowcasting in general, and GDP in particular. For instance, check [GDPNow page](https://www.frbatlanta.org/cqer/research/gdpnow.aspx) on FRB Atlanta's web site, where the model description is given too. Below is their 2017 Q4 GPD forecast. As you know the GDP number release will be some time in 2018, i.e. a few months down the road from the time I'm posting my ansqwer.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wlKPa.gif)
Nowcasting is used to estimate the low frequency data based on high frequency predictors. For instance, CPI and Unemployment are released monthly, the interest rates are available either real time or at least daily. You could use these as predictors to estimate GDP between its quarterly releases.
Nowcasting is different from ordinary time series forecasting in that it has no issue with predicting the predictors. For instance, if you were to predict GDP one year ahead, you'd need values of its predictors one year ahead. |
209,795 | I have a line and point layer. Points are not exactly intersect with line layer. With respect to existing point, how to find the new points which are exactly on the line ? consider buffer distance is provided.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/JYiIR.png) | 2016/09/07 | [
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/209795",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com",
"https://gis.stackexchange.com/users/43581/"
] | You can use the near tool to calculate the perpendicular points on a line :
1. Calculate the distance from points to lines with the [Near tool](http://desktop.arcgis.com/en/arcmap/10.3/tools/analysis-toolbox/near.htm) :
* input features: Points
* near features: Lines
* check "location option" to get near\_x and near\_y
2. Calculate an event layer from near\_x and near\_y
This gives a new point layer with the same id's as the input points, all laying on the line object. You can then use a select between to filter the distance, if you like. | You can use the **[Linear referencing tools](https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/tool-reference/linear-referencing/an-overview-of-the-linear-referencing-toolbox.htm)** to quantify that distance in the other way round, to get all distances possible for all the points you have. You will be free to choose which distance will then suits you best.
Here are the main steps from what I recall :
* Add a unique Id to each line.
* Add a unique Id to each point
* Use the tool "[Create a route](https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/tool-reference/linear-referencing/create-routes.htm)" for your linear entities (they will become Polyline M entities)
* Use the tool : "[Locate Features Along Routes](https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/tool-reference/linear-referencing/locate-features-along-routes.htm)" with you newly created routes and your points layer.
In the produced table, you will have a **Distance field** with the point ID and the line ID. All points located on the line will therefore have a 0 in this field, whereas far points will have some value. You just need to join with the unique ID from each point with this table to quantify the distance for each point and map which ones are on the line for example.
The tools will also allow you to recreate the point on the route via a table where the coordinates on the route will appear. Useful when you need to stick not-snapped points on a nearby line.
Please comment my answer if you need more details or if you're stuck.
* See [tutorial here](http://help.arcgis.com/en/arcgisdesktop/10.0/pdf/linear-referencing-tutorial.pdf) for using those tools. |
147,487 | Whenever I fire a weapon or stomp, my computer emits the new device sound and disables my controller for a split second, meaning I fire a shot or two on an automatic rifle and then return to stance. This only happens with stomp or shooting while zoomed in. It doesn't happen with running, or striking.
Any ideas? | 2013/12/23 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/147487",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/64653/"
] | You might be running into one of the issues mentioned in this article:
<http://kotaku.com/wanna-catch-your-pokemon-in-a-shiny-new-color-in-x-y-1450801224>
For instance, you could be walking into Slow or Normal shaking grass, which could be breaking your chain. | There can be several possible causes for this:
1. Leaving the field you were chaining in.
2. Turning off your game.
3. Using any other key item besides the PokeRadar.
4. Having an egg hatched during your chaining.
5. Running into a wild Pokemon that is not from the PokeRadar. You can use Repels to avoid this.
6. Stepping into a grass patch that is on the border of the grass area. It apparently almost always breaks your chain, unless you reset (use again) the PokeRadar.
7. Stepping into a grass patch which is shaking next to another shaking one. This apparently can break your chain as well.
8. Stepping into a grass patch which shakes differently from the one you were chaining. If that grass patch barely shook, you'll get the message "It seems there is no Pokemon here". It's sometimes difficult to spot those, especially if its behind the head of your character, or behind some obstruction.
9. Stepping into patches that are less than 4 steps away from your original position apparently can break your chain as they tend to hide different Pokemon than the one you're chaining. If you don't have any patch of grass at least 4 steps away,walk 50 steps making sure not to step into any shaking grass (even those which barely shake as these will break your chain as per point 8).
Taken from [here](http://www.reddit.com/r/pokemon/comments/1ot6ex/chaining_tutorial/) and extracted/summarised the relevant parts. |
39,620 | I got introduced to this "Female Buddha" when I was looking name for my friend's daughter.
So what does female Buddha mean?
**Wikipedia :**
>
> [Tara (Buddhism)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tara_(Buddhism))
>
> Tara (Sanskrit: तारा, tārā; Tib. སྒྲོལ་མ, Dölma), Ārya Tārā, or Shayama Tara, also known as Jetsun Dölma (Tibetan language: rje btsun sgrol ma) in Tibetan Buddhism, is an important figure in Buddhism. She appears as a female bodhisattva in Mahayana Buddhism, and as a female Buddha in Vajrayana Buddhism. She is known as the "mother of liberation", and represents the virtues of success in work and achievements. She is known as Tara Bosatsu (多羅菩薩) in Japan, and occasionally as Duōluó Púsà (多羅菩薩) in Chinese Buddhism.
>
>
>
My question is what does this concept mean **is she a person who appeared in past who's name is Tara**?
Or **is it philosophical concept that meditators seen she's appearing?**
Also why this is not exist in **Thervada Buddhism** when statue is in **Bihar** state of **India?**
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/waPVn.jpg) | 2020/07/04 | [
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/39620",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/567/"
] | The Void is sometimes implied differently than other times
in English. Existential descriptioning isn't English's long suit.
Maybe Zen/ Chan discussions of the concept are generally more prominent
overall.
Confusion etc isn't The Void.
In The True Void 'is' Reality. There isn't confusion.
There isn't dukkha. There isn't cloudiness.
There isn't any illusion. There isn't delusion.
In The Void there is nonmisinterpretation.
Attempts to define The Void tend to be circular or inaccurate.
The description of going into it or something isn't vague enough.
The question does a quite good job of nonpigeonholing of it.
Maybe lost something in translation: maybe more at
based on reasonableness, logic is very limited by concrete
things available for its processes & sometimes either cannot conclude
because of insufficient information etc, or comes up with
rather nonsensible conclusions because of the data available.
Buddhism provides guidelines for addressing things which
haven't necessarily become data yet, and how previously
unencountered data can be reasonably addressed. Reasonable
consideration may be more effective than logic only.
The Void mightn't be so like a temporary journey to
someplace or other, real or existential, etc, as cited in the
question. Maybe very nice spots, but they aren't descriptions of
The True Void. Those sound more like heavens or something.
And may be Impermanent.
Consciousnesses arent really so much part of The Void,
consciousnesses are more at heavens etc.
Logical typical word description doesnt do so well with
trying to describe The Void. Despite many people writing books
about it, giving things names etc, The Void is different from
names or groups of words and most reference points. So
fundamental description of The Void which uses words would tend
to be circular/ misleading.
Some things can 'be' without being grounded in ordinary descriptioning.
That's sort of the answer to the question, in language. Which is a very
Good & nicely asked question. | In Buddhism, there is a state called "Nirodha Samapatthi" or Cessation of Perception and feeling. It is said that in this state you are not conscious but the body has not died. The maximum duration of this state is seven days and you emerge from it and understand it as empty. |
39,620 | I got introduced to this "Female Buddha" when I was looking name for my friend's daughter.
So what does female Buddha mean?
**Wikipedia :**
>
> [Tara (Buddhism)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tara_(Buddhism))
>
> Tara (Sanskrit: तारा, tārā; Tib. སྒྲོལ་མ, Dölma), Ārya Tārā, or Shayama Tara, also known as Jetsun Dölma (Tibetan language: rje btsun sgrol ma) in Tibetan Buddhism, is an important figure in Buddhism. She appears as a female bodhisattva in Mahayana Buddhism, and as a female Buddha in Vajrayana Buddhism. She is known as the "mother of liberation", and represents the virtues of success in work and achievements. She is known as Tara Bosatsu (多羅菩薩) in Japan, and occasionally as Duōluó Púsà (多羅菩薩) in Chinese Buddhism.
>
>
>
My question is what does this concept mean **is she a person who appeared in past who's name is Tara**?
Or **is it philosophical concept that meditators seen she's appearing?**
Also why this is not exist in **Thervada Buddhism** when statue is in **Bihar** state of **India?**
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/waPVn.jpg) | 2020/07/04 | [
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/39620",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/567/"
] | >
> **OP:** Whatever is,the question is quite clear: if you can reach a
> state of emptiness , how can you state that Void is not part of a
> higher consciousness (aka God) but it is just Void? If you “feel” the
> Void during meditation and you call it nirodha samapatti for example,
> how do you know that it is just Void instead of being Void before or
> inside another greater Consciousness , which is perceived as Void
> (Sunyata, as the Vedantists think and argue with you) but is higher
> than that simple state of nothing ? (super consciousness pervading
> everything)
>
>
>
I think we should put the record straight here and avoid distorting the original teachings of the Buddha, as found in the Sutta Pitaka. There is no "higher consciousness (aka God)" or "super consciousness pervading everything" or Atman or Brahman in the original teachings of the Buddha.
I understand your premise - if in meditation, you attained a state of void, then there must be some higher consciousness (aka God) that is perceiving it. This higher consciousness is usually attributed to God as the Self or Super Soul (Atman) in Vedanta. This is described in the Hindu text [Bhagavad Gita 13.14](https://asitis.com/13/14.html).
Advaitin gurus would suggest you to ask "Who am I?" and discover that the true "I" is Atman, which is Brahman (God). The Atman is also the Eternal Witness, or the Cosmic Consciousness, the "I" of every self-conscious being. After attaining Self-Realization (where the little ego-self drops away), one would remain existing forever as this one single Eternal Witness or Cosmic Consciousness, that witnesses through every self-conscious being and even witnesses directly without any beings.
What did the Buddha teach?
The self (*atta* or Atma) is the idea or thought that arises out of the inter-operation or inter-working of the five aggregates (form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness). This is similar to how music is created when different parts of a musical instrument works together. See [Lute Sutta](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.205.than.html). How the five aggregates work together is described by [Dependent Origination](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/48/471).
*Sabbe dhamma anatta* ([Dhammapada 279](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.20.than.html#dhp-279)) means that all phenomena (including Nibbana), is not self. If you break a musical instrument into pieces, you won't be able to find music in any of the constituent parts - [Lute Sutta](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.205.than.html). If you look at the five aggregates, you cannot find the self there. The Buddha means here that there is no eternal and permanent core of one's being, that is the self, not even Nibbana.
Rather, the self is an impermanent changing idea, that arises and passes away from moment to moment, depending on the operation of the five aggregates, just as other mentally generated ideas.
And what about consciousness? The Buddha taught the following, from [MN 38](https://suttacentral.net/mn38/en/bodhi):
>
> “Bhikkhus, consciousness is reckoned by the particular condition
> dependent upon which it arises. When consciousness arises dependent on
> the eye and forms, it is reckoned as eye-consciousness; when
> consciousness arises dependent on the ear and sounds, it is reckoned
> as ear-consciousness; when consciousness arises dependent on the nose
> and odours, it is reckoned as nose-consciousness; when consciousness
> arises dependent on the tongue and flavours, it is reckoned as
> tongue-consciousness; when consciousness arises dependent on the body
> and tangibles, it is reckoned as body-consciousness; when
> consciousness arises dependent on the mind and mind-objects, it is
> reckoned as mind-consciousness. Just as fire is reckoned by the
> particular condition dependent on which it burns—when fire burns
> dependent on logs, it is reckoned as a log fire; when fire burns
> dependent on faggots, it is reckoned as a faggot fire; when fire burns
> dependent on grass, it is reckoned as a grass fire; when fire burns
> dependent on cowdung, it is reckoned as a cowdung fire; when fire
> burns dependent on chaff, it is reckoned as a chaff fire; when fire
> burns dependent on rubbish, it is reckoned as a rubbish fire—so too,
> consciousness is reckoned by the particular condition dependent on
> which it arises. When consciousness arises dependent on the eye and
> forms, it is reckoned as eye-consciousness…when consciousness arises
> dependent on the mind and mind-objects, it is reckoned as
> mind-consciousness.
>
>
>
Think about it. How can the silent witness witness anything except through one of these media: eye, ear, nose, tongue, touch or mind? There was never a time, when there was consciousness being aware of something except through the eye, ear, nose, tongue, touch or mind. There is therefore no independent consciousness.
Consciousness is dependent on and conditioned upon these six media. It does not exist independently connecting all beings. The consciousness in every being may be of a similar type, but it's not the same consciousness.
For example, I can say that every candle has a similar flame, but it's not the exact same flame that appears on every candle. Each flame is different.
This is the only consciousness that there is, in the original teachings of the Buddha. There's no super consciousness or higher consciousness.
Also from the same sutta ([MN 38](https://suttacentral.net/mn38/en/bodhi)):
>
> The Blessed One then asked him: “Sāti, is it true that the following
> pernicious view has arisen in you: ‘As I understand the Dhamma taught
> by the Blessed One, it is this same consciousness that runs and
> wanders through the round of rebirths, not another’?”
>
>
> “Exactly so, venerable sir. As I understand the Dhamma taught by the
> Blessed One, it is this same consciousness that runs and wanders
> through the round of rebirths, not another.”
>
>
> “What is that consciousness, Sāti?”
>
>
> “Venerable sir, it is that which speaks and feels and experiences here
> and there the result of good and bad actions.”
>
>
> “Misguided man, to whom have you ever known me to teach the Dhamma in
> that way? Misguided man, have I not stated in many ways **consciousness
> to be dependently arisen, since without a condition there is no
> origination of consciousness**? But you, misguided man, have
> misrepresented us by your wrong grasp and injured yourself and stored
> up much demerit; for this will lead to your harm and suffering for a
> long time.”
>
>
>
The Buddha states unequivocally that consciousness is dependently originated based on conditions. There is no independent standalone permanent consciousness. There's no super consciousness or higher consciousness.
Some people claimed that MN 49 talks about a super consciousness or infinite consciousness, but that turned out to be a mistranslation. The sutta was talking about Nirvana or Nibbana - please see [this answer](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/33750/471).
From [The All Sutta](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html) (also see [this question](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/30382/471)):
>
> "Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I will
> speak."
>
>
> "As you say, lord," the monks responded.
>
>
> The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear &
> sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations,
> intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would
> say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on
> what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable
> to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it
> lies beyond range.
>
>
>
Once again, there's no super consciousness or higher consciousness, outside the range of The All.
Now, what is shunya or shunyata (emptiness or void)? This is not a state of attainment or state of consciousness or state of reality or state of mind in Buddhism.
This is a statement of the fact of reality, by the Buddha in [SN 35.85](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.085.than.html):
>
> Then Ven. Ananda went to the Blessed One and on arrival, having bowed
> down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the
> Blessed One, "It is said that the world is empty, the world is empty,
> lord. In what respect is it said that the world is empty?"
>
>
> "Insofar as it is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self:
> Thus it is said, Ananda, that the world is empty. And what is empty of
> a self or of anything pertaining to a self? The eye is empty of a self
> or of anything pertaining to a self. Forms... Eye-consciousness...
> Eye-contact is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self.
>
>
> "The ear is empty...
>
>
> "The nose is empty...
>
>
> "The tongue is empty...
>
>
> "The body is empty...
>
>
> "The intellect is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self.
> Ideas... Intellect-consciousness... Intellect-contact is empty of a
> self or of anything pertaining to a self. Thus it is said that the
> world is empty."
>
>
>
This is a statement of the fact of reality that absolutely everything is empty of a self (Atman).
Now, what about that which is experienced?
We can talk about two different things which are experienced. One is Nirvana or Nibbana. This can be experienced by the Arahat (one who has become enlightened or awakened, or one who has become liberated from suffering) even outside of meditation.
Nibbana is described in [this answer](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/31737/471) - please see that answer for sutta quotes:
>
> Nibbana is not a thought of the mind, not a concept of the mind,
> not a state of the mind, not a state of consciousness and also not a
> feeling. However, when the mind experiences this Nibbana, which is not
> conditioned, not compounded, not suffering, not impermanent, not
> arising, not ceasing and not changing, it experiences bliss. The mind
> can therefore experience Nibbana, but it cannot feel it or think about
> it.
>
>
> Sukha or happiness for an unenlightened person is experienced when
> encountering pleasant feelings (from the six senses) or when
> encountering the cessation of painful feelings (from the six senses).
> But for an arahat, sukha or bliss (in this context) is experienced
> when encountering neutral feelings, no feelings and Nibbana.
>
>
>
That is Nibbana, and not god or Brahman or any kind of Ultimate Reality. It is that which is experienced by the mind, when it is completely free of all fetters and defilements.
The second is *nirodha samapatti*. This is the state beyond the 8 jhana states. This is described on [this page](http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/n_r/nirodha_samaapatti.htm):
>
> 'attainment of extinction' (S. XIV, 11), also called
> *saññā-vedayita-nirodha*, 'extinction of feeling and perception', is the
> temporary suspension of all consciousness and mental activity,
> following immediately upon the semi-conscious state called 'sphere of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception' (s. jhāna, 8). The absolutely
> necessary pre-conditions to its attainment are said to be perfect
> mastery of all the 8 absorptions (jhāna), as well as the previous
> attainment of Anāgāmī or Arahantship (s. ariya-puggala).
>
>
> According to Vis.M. XXIII, the entering into this state takes place in
> the following way: by means of mental tranquillity (samatha) and
> insight (vipassanā) one has to pass through all the 8 absorptions one
> after the other up to the sphere of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception and then one has to bring this
> state to an end. If, namely, according to the Vis.M., the disciple
> (Anāgāmī or Arahat) passes through the absorption merely by means of
> tranquillity, i.e. concentration, he will only attain the sphere of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception, and then come to a standstill;
> if, on the other hand, he proceeds only with insight, he will reach
> the fruition (phala) of Anāgāmī or Arahantship. He, however, who by
> means of both faculties has risen from absorption to absorption and,
> having made the necessary preparations, brings the sphere of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception to an end, such a one reaches
> the state of extinction. Whilst the disciple is passing through the 8
> absorptions, he each time emerges from the absorption attained, and
> regards with his insight all the mental phenomena constituting that
> special absorption, as impermanent, miserable and impersonal. Then he
> again enters the next higher absorption, and thus, after each
> absorption practising insight, he at last reaches the state of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception, and thereafter the full
> extinction. This state, according to the Com., may last for 7 days or
> even longer. Immediately at the rising from this state, however, there
> arises in the Anāgāmī the fruition of Anāgāmiship (anāgāmi-phala), in
> the Arahat the fruition of Arahantship (arahatta-phala).
>
>
> With regard to the difference existing between the monk abiding in
> this state of extinction on the one hand, and a dead person on the
> other hand, M 43 says: "In him who is dead, and whose life has come to
> an end, the bodily (in-and-out breathing), verbal (thought-conception
> and discursive thinking), and mental functions (s. sankhāra, 2) have
> become suspended and come to a standstill, life is exhausted, the
> vital heat extinguished, the faculties are destroyed. Also in the monk
> who has reached 'extinction of perception and feeling'
> (*saññā-vedayita-nirodha*), the bodily, verbal and mental functions have
> been suspended and come to a standstill, but life is not exhausted,
> the vital heat not extinguished, and the faculties are not destroyed."
>
>
>
So, the question comes, who or what experiences *nirodha samapatti*?
The answer is no one and nothing. Why?
If all feeling, perception and consciousness is temporarily suspended, then it is not felt or perceived at all.
The Hindu notion of feeling stillness and bliss in meditation, applies to one or more of the conscious and semi-conscious states of jhana which are below *nirodha samapatti*. There are 8 such [jhana (or dhyana) states](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/gunaratana/wheel351.html) explained in the suttas - 4 lower jhanas called rupa jhanas (or material jhanas) and 4 higher jhanas called arupa jhanas (or immaterial jhanas).
The 4 higher jhanas are the base of boundless space, the base of boundless consciousness, the base of nothingness, and the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception (see [this essay](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/gunaratana/wheel351.html)). I speculate that the perception of all-pervading consciousness mentioned in Vedanta, is probably experienced in the 6th of the 8 jhanas - called the base of boundless consciousness. I also speculate that the perception of voidness may be experienced in the 7th of the 8 jhanas - called the base of nothingness. This is a semi-conscious state.
Ruslan is also right that according to the Buddha, "there are no contemplatives outside of the Buddha's path" ([Dhammapada 254-255](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.18.budd.html#dhp-254)). In my opinion, this is because in other paths, the practitioners are not free from self-view or belief in a self (*[sakkaya-ditthi](https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/sakkaya-ditthi#theravada)*), which is one of the [ten fetters](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetter_(Buddhism)#Sutta_Pitaka%27s_list_of_ten_fetters) ([AN 10.13](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.013.than.html)). | In Buddhism, there is a state called "Nirodha Samapatthi" or Cessation of Perception and feeling. It is said that in this state you are not conscious but the body has not died. The maximum duration of this state is seven days and you emerge from it and understand it as empty. |
39,620 | I got introduced to this "Female Buddha" when I was looking name for my friend's daughter.
So what does female Buddha mean?
**Wikipedia :**
>
> [Tara (Buddhism)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tara_(Buddhism))
>
> Tara (Sanskrit: तारा, tārā; Tib. སྒྲོལ་མ, Dölma), Ārya Tārā, or Shayama Tara, also known as Jetsun Dölma (Tibetan language: rje btsun sgrol ma) in Tibetan Buddhism, is an important figure in Buddhism. She appears as a female bodhisattva in Mahayana Buddhism, and as a female Buddha in Vajrayana Buddhism. She is known as the "mother of liberation", and represents the virtues of success in work and achievements. She is known as Tara Bosatsu (多羅菩薩) in Japan, and occasionally as Duōluó Púsà (多羅菩薩) in Chinese Buddhism.
>
>
>
My question is what does this concept mean **is she a person who appeared in past who's name is Tara**?
Or **is it philosophical concept that meditators seen she's appearing?**
Also why this is not exist in **Thervada Buddhism** when statue is in **Bihar** state of **India?**
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/waPVn.jpg) | 2020/07/04 | [
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/39620",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/567/"
] | The Void is sometimes implied differently than other times
in English. Existential descriptioning isn't English's long suit.
Maybe Zen/ Chan discussions of the concept are generally more prominent
overall.
Confusion etc isn't The Void.
In The True Void 'is' Reality. There isn't confusion.
There isn't dukkha. There isn't cloudiness.
There isn't any illusion. There isn't delusion.
In The Void there is nonmisinterpretation.
Attempts to define The Void tend to be circular or inaccurate.
The description of going into it or something isn't vague enough.
The question does a quite good job of nonpigeonholing of it.
Maybe lost something in translation: maybe more at
based on reasonableness, logic is very limited by concrete
things available for its processes & sometimes either cannot conclude
because of insufficient information etc, or comes up with
rather nonsensible conclusions because of the data available.
Buddhism provides guidelines for addressing things which
haven't necessarily become data yet, and how previously
unencountered data can be reasonably addressed. Reasonable
consideration may be more effective than logic only.
The Void mightn't be so like a temporary journey to
someplace or other, real or existential, etc, as cited in the
question. Maybe very nice spots, but they aren't descriptions of
The True Void. Those sound more like heavens or something.
And may be Impermanent.
Consciousnesses arent really so much part of The Void,
consciousnesses are more at heavens etc.
Logical typical word description doesnt do so well with
trying to describe The Void. Despite many people writing books
about it, giving things names etc, The Void is different from
names or groups of words and most reference points. So
fundamental description of The Void which uses words would tend
to be circular/ misleading.
Some things can 'be' without being grounded in ordinary descriptioning.
That's sort of the answer to the question, in language. Which is a very
Good & nicely asked question. | When I go to sleep, I wake up wanting coffee. I don't remember what happened when I slept, but somehow I wake up wanting coffee. I can even go to sleep thinking "arise at 6am" and I will arise at 6am, and I am still wanting coffee. Is there a super-consciousness there? I don't think so.
Consciousness is bound to choices and I certainly don't remember making any choices while sleeping. Alarm clocks don't make choices, they are conditioned to sound after a certain time. In the same way, I am conditioned to want coffee. I can condition myself to awake at 6am. In all of that, consciousness comes and goes.
>
> [MN102:7.3](https://suttacentral.net/mn102/en/sujato#mn102:7.3): But if any ascetic or brahmin should say this: ‘Apart from form, feeling, perception, and choices, I will describe the coming and going of consciousness, its passing away and reappearing, its growth, increase, and maturity.’
>
>
> [MN102:7.5](https://suttacentral.net/mn102/en/sujato#mn102:7.5): That is not possible.
>
>
> [MN102:7.6](https://suttacentral.net/mn102/en/sujato#mn102:7.6): ‘All that is conditioned and coarse. But there is the cessation of conditions—*that* is real.’
>
>
> [MN102:7.7](https://suttacentral.net/mn102/en/sujato#mn102:7.7): Understanding this and seeing the escape from it, the Realized One has gone beyond all that.
>
>
>
Suffering is conditioned. The Noble EightFold Path is conditioned. May all sentient being condition themselves beyond suffering. *That* would be...super!
---
Regarding "super-consciousness", in MN38, the Buddha corrects the understanding of Sāti.
>
> [MN38:3.5](https://suttacentral.net/mn38/en/sujato#mn38:3.5): “Is it really true, Reverend Sāti, that you have such a harmful misconception: ‘As I understand the Buddha’s teachings, it is this very same consciousness that roams and transmigrates, not another’?”
>
>
>
In particular, he said:
>
> [MN38:5.12](https://suttacentral.net/mn38/en/sujato#mn38:5.12): “Silly man, who on earth have you ever known me to teach in that way? Haven’t I said in many ways that consciousness is dependently originated, since consciousness does not arise without a cause? But still you misrepresent me by your wrong grasp, harm yourself, and make much bad karma.
>
>
>
The Buddha addressed suffering and taught the role of consciousness in that suffering. |
39,620 | I got introduced to this "Female Buddha" when I was looking name for my friend's daughter.
So what does female Buddha mean?
**Wikipedia :**
>
> [Tara (Buddhism)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tara_(Buddhism))
>
> Tara (Sanskrit: तारा, tārā; Tib. སྒྲོལ་མ, Dölma), Ārya Tārā, or Shayama Tara, also known as Jetsun Dölma (Tibetan language: rje btsun sgrol ma) in Tibetan Buddhism, is an important figure in Buddhism. She appears as a female bodhisattva in Mahayana Buddhism, and as a female Buddha in Vajrayana Buddhism. She is known as the "mother of liberation", and represents the virtues of success in work and achievements. She is known as Tara Bosatsu (多羅菩薩) in Japan, and occasionally as Duōluó Púsà (多羅菩薩) in Chinese Buddhism.
>
>
>
My question is what does this concept mean **is she a person who appeared in past who's name is Tara**?
Or **is it philosophical concept that meditators seen she's appearing?**
Also why this is not exist in **Thervada Buddhism** when statue is in **Bihar** state of **India?**
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/waPVn.jpg) | 2020/07/04 | [
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/39620",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/567/"
] | >
> **OP:** Whatever is,the question is quite clear: if you can reach a
> state of emptiness , how can you state that Void is not part of a
> higher consciousness (aka God) but it is just Void? If you “feel” the
> Void during meditation and you call it nirodha samapatti for example,
> how do you know that it is just Void instead of being Void before or
> inside another greater Consciousness , which is perceived as Void
> (Sunyata, as the Vedantists think and argue with you) but is higher
> than that simple state of nothing ? (super consciousness pervading
> everything)
>
>
>
I think we should put the record straight here and avoid distorting the original teachings of the Buddha, as found in the Sutta Pitaka. There is no "higher consciousness (aka God)" or "super consciousness pervading everything" or Atman or Brahman in the original teachings of the Buddha.
I understand your premise - if in meditation, you attained a state of void, then there must be some higher consciousness (aka God) that is perceiving it. This higher consciousness is usually attributed to God as the Self or Super Soul (Atman) in Vedanta. This is described in the Hindu text [Bhagavad Gita 13.14](https://asitis.com/13/14.html).
Advaitin gurus would suggest you to ask "Who am I?" and discover that the true "I" is Atman, which is Brahman (God). The Atman is also the Eternal Witness, or the Cosmic Consciousness, the "I" of every self-conscious being. After attaining Self-Realization (where the little ego-self drops away), one would remain existing forever as this one single Eternal Witness or Cosmic Consciousness, that witnesses through every self-conscious being and even witnesses directly without any beings.
What did the Buddha teach?
The self (*atta* or Atma) is the idea or thought that arises out of the inter-operation or inter-working of the five aggregates (form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness). This is similar to how music is created when different parts of a musical instrument works together. See [Lute Sutta](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.205.than.html). How the five aggregates work together is described by [Dependent Origination](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/48/471).
*Sabbe dhamma anatta* ([Dhammapada 279](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.20.than.html#dhp-279)) means that all phenomena (including Nibbana), is not self. If you break a musical instrument into pieces, you won't be able to find music in any of the constituent parts - [Lute Sutta](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.205.than.html). If you look at the five aggregates, you cannot find the self there. The Buddha means here that there is no eternal and permanent core of one's being, that is the self, not even Nibbana.
Rather, the self is an impermanent changing idea, that arises and passes away from moment to moment, depending on the operation of the five aggregates, just as other mentally generated ideas.
And what about consciousness? The Buddha taught the following, from [MN 38](https://suttacentral.net/mn38/en/bodhi):
>
> “Bhikkhus, consciousness is reckoned by the particular condition
> dependent upon which it arises. When consciousness arises dependent on
> the eye and forms, it is reckoned as eye-consciousness; when
> consciousness arises dependent on the ear and sounds, it is reckoned
> as ear-consciousness; when consciousness arises dependent on the nose
> and odours, it is reckoned as nose-consciousness; when consciousness
> arises dependent on the tongue and flavours, it is reckoned as
> tongue-consciousness; when consciousness arises dependent on the body
> and tangibles, it is reckoned as body-consciousness; when
> consciousness arises dependent on the mind and mind-objects, it is
> reckoned as mind-consciousness. Just as fire is reckoned by the
> particular condition dependent on which it burns—when fire burns
> dependent on logs, it is reckoned as a log fire; when fire burns
> dependent on faggots, it is reckoned as a faggot fire; when fire burns
> dependent on grass, it is reckoned as a grass fire; when fire burns
> dependent on cowdung, it is reckoned as a cowdung fire; when fire
> burns dependent on chaff, it is reckoned as a chaff fire; when fire
> burns dependent on rubbish, it is reckoned as a rubbish fire—so too,
> consciousness is reckoned by the particular condition dependent on
> which it arises. When consciousness arises dependent on the eye and
> forms, it is reckoned as eye-consciousness…when consciousness arises
> dependent on the mind and mind-objects, it is reckoned as
> mind-consciousness.
>
>
>
Think about it. How can the silent witness witness anything except through one of these media: eye, ear, nose, tongue, touch or mind? There was never a time, when there was consciousness being aware of something except through the eye, ear, nose, tongue, touch or mind. There is therefore no independent consciousness.
Consciousness is dependent on and conditioned upon these six media. It does not exist independently connecting all beings. The consciousness in every being may be of a similar type, but it's not the same consciousness.
For example, I can say that every candle has a similar flame, but it's not the exact same flame that appears on every candle. Each flame is different.
This is the only consciousness that there is, in the original teachings of the Buddha. There's no super consciousness or higher consciousness.
Also from the same sutta ([MN 38](https://suttacentral.net/mn38/en/bodhi)):
>
> The Blessed One then asked him: “Sāti, is it true that the following
> pernicious view has arisen in you: ‘As I understand the Dhamma taught
> by the Blessed One, it is this same consciousness that runs and
> wanders through the round of rebirths, not another’?”
>
>
> “Exactly so, venerable sir. As I understand the Dhamma taught by the
> Blessed One, it is this same consciousness that runs and wanders
> through the round of rebirths, not another.”
>
>
> “What is that consciousness, Sāti?”
>
>
> “Venerable sir, it is that which speaks and feels and experiences here
> and there the result of good and bad actions.”
>
>
> “Misguided man, to whom have you ever known me to teach the Dhamma in
> that way? Misguided man, have I not stated in many ways **consciousness
> to be dependently arisen, since without a condition there is no
> origination of consciousness**? But you, misguided man, have
> misrepresented us by your wrong grasp and injured yourself and stored
> up much demerit; for this will lead to your harm and suffering for a
> long time.”
>
>
>
The Buddha states unequivocally that consciousness is dependently originated based on conditions. There is no independent standalone permanent consciousness. There's no super consciousness or higher consciousness.
Some people claimed that MN 49 talks about a super consciousness or infinite consciousness, but that turned out to be a mistranslation. The sutta was talking about Nirvana or Nibbana - please see [this answer](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/33750/471).
From [The All Sutta](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html) (also see [this question](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/30382/471)):
>
> "Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I will
> speak."
>
>
> "As you say, lord," the monks responded.
>
>
> The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear &
> sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations,
> intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would
> say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on
> what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable
> to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it
> lies beyond range.
>
>
>
Once again, there's no super consciousness or higher consciousness, outside the range of The All.
Now, what is shunya or shunyata (emptiness or void)? This is not a state of attainment or state of consciousness or state of reality or state of mind in Buddhism.
This is a statement of the fact of reality, by the Buddha in [SN 35.85](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.085.than.html):
>
> Then Ven. Ananda went to the Blessed One and on arrival, having bowed
> down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the
> Blessed One, "It is said that the world is empty, the world is empty,
> lord. In what respect is it said that the world is empty?"
>
>
> "Insofar as it is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self:
> Thus it is said, Ananda, that the world is empty. And what is empty of
> a self or of anything pertaining to a self? The eye is empty of a self
> or of anything pertaining to a self. Forms... Eye-consciousness...
> Eye-contact is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self.
>
>
> "The ear is empty...
>
>
> "The nose is empty...
>
>
> "The tongue is empty...
>
>
> "The body is empty...
>
>
> "The intellect is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self.
> Ideas... Intellect-consciousness... Intellect-contact is empty of a
> self or of anything pertaining to a self. Thus it is said that the
> world is empty."
>
>
>
This is a statement of the fact of reality that absolutely everything is empty of a self (Atman).
Now, what about that which is experienced?
We can talk about two different things which are experienced. One is Nirvana or Nibbana. This can be experienced by the Arahat (one who has become enlightened or awakened, or one who has become liberated from suffering) even outside of meditation.
Nibbana is described in [this answer](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/31737/471) - please see that answer for sutta quotes:
>
> Nibbana is not a thought of the mind, not a concept of the mind,
> not a state of the mind, not a state of consciousness and also not a
> feeling. However, when the mind experiences this Nibbana, which is not
> conditioned, not compounded, not suffering, not impermanent, not
> arising, not ceasing and not changing, it experiences bliss. The mind
> can therefore experience Nibbana, but it cannot feel it or think about
> it.
>
>
> Sukha or happiness for an unenlightened person is experienced when
> encountering pleasant feelings (from the six senses) or when
> encountering the cessation of painful feelings (from the six senses).
> But for an arahat, sukha or bliss (in this context) is experienced
> when encountering neutral feelings, no feelings and Nibbana.
>
>
>
That is Nibbana, and not god or Brahman or any kind of Ultimate Reality. It is that which is experienced by the mind, when it is completely free of all fetters and defilements.
The second is *nirodha samapatti*. This is the state beyond the 8 jhana states. This is described on [this page](http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/n_r/nirodha_samaapatti.htm):
>
> 'attainment of extinction' (S. XIV, 11), also called
> *saññā-vedayita-nirodha*, 'extinction of feeling and perception', is the
> temporary suspension of all consciousness and mental activity,
> following immediately upon the semi-conscious state called 'sphere of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception' (s. jhāna, 8). The absolutely
> necessary pre-conditions to its attainment are said to be perfect
> mastery of all the 8 absorptions (jhāna), as well as the previous
> attainment of Anāgāmī or Arahantship (s. ariya-puggala).
>
>
> According to Vis.M. XXIII, the entering into this state takes place in
> the following way: by means of mental tranquillity (samatha) and
> insight (vipassanā) one has to pass through all the 8 absorptions one
> after the other up to the sphere of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception and then one has to bring this
> state to an end. If, namely, according to the Vis.M., the disciple
> (Anāgāmī or Arahat) passes through the absorption merely by means of
> tranquillity, i.e. concentration, he will only attain the sphere of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception, and then come to a standstill;
> if, on the other hand, he proceeds only with insight, he will reach
> the fruition (phala) of Anāgāmī or Arahantship. He, however, who by
> means of both faculties has risen from absorption to absorption and,
> having made the necessary preparations, brings the sphere of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception to an end, such a one reaches
> the state of extinction. Whilst the disciple is passing through the 8
> absorptions, he each time emerges from the absorption attained, and
> regards with his insight all the mental phenomena constituting that
> special absorption, as impermanent, miserable and impersonal. Then he
> again enters the next higher absorption, and thus, after each
> absorption practising insight, he at last reaches the state of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception, and thereafter the full
> extinction. This state, according to the Com., may last for 7 days or
> even longer. Immediately at the rising from this state, however, there
> arises in the Anāgāmī the fruition of Anāgāmiship (anāgāmi-phala), in
> the Arahat the fruition of Arahantship (arahatta-phala).
>
>
> With regard to the difference existing between the monk abiding in
> this state of extinction on the one hand, and a dead person on the
> other hand, M 43 says: "In him who is dead, and whose life has come to
> an end, the bodily (in-and-out breathing), verbal (thought-conception
> and discursive thinking), and mental functions (s. sankhāra, 2) have
> become suspended and come to a standstill, life is exhausted, the
> vital heat extinguished, the faculties are destroyed. Also in the monk
> who has reached 'extinction of perception and feeling'
> (*saññā-vedayita-nirodha*), the bodily, verbal and mental functions have
> been suspended and come to a standstill, but life is not exhausted,
> the vital heat not extinguished, and the faculties are not destroyed."
>
>
>
So, the question comes, who or what experiences *nirodha samapatti*?
The answer is no one and nothing. Why?
If all feeling, perception and consciousness is temporarily suspended, then it is not felt or perceived at all.
The Hindu notion of feeling stillness and bliss in meditation, applies to one or more of the conscious and semi-conscious states of jhana which are below *nirodha samapatti*. There are 8 such [jhana (or dhyana) states](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/gunaratana/wheel351.html) explained in the suttas - 4 lower jhanas called rupa jhanas (or material jhanas) and 4 higher jhanas called arupa jhanas (or immaterial jhanas).
The 4 higher jhanas are the base of boundless space, the base of boundless consciousness, the base of nothingness, and the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception (see [this essay](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/gunaratana/wheel351.html)). I speculate that the perception of all-pervading consciousness mentioned in Vedanta, is probably experienced in the 6th of the 8 jhanas - called the base of boundless consciousness. I also speculate that the perception of voidness may be experienced in the 7th of the 8 jhanas - called the base of nothingness. This is a semi-conscious state.
Ruslan is also right that according to the Buddha, "there are no contemplatives outside of the Buddha's path" ([Dhammapada 254-255](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.18.budd.html#dhp-254)). In my opinion, this is because in other paths, the practitioners are not free from self-view or belief in a self (*[sakkaya-ditthi](https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/sakkaya-ditthi#theravada)*), which is one of the [ten fetters](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetter_(Buddhism)#Sutta_Pitaka%27s_list_of_ten_fetters) ([AN 10.13](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.013.than.html)). | When I go to sleep, I wake up wanting coffee. I don't remember what happened when I slept, but somehow I wake up wanting coffee. I can even go to sleep thinking "arise at 6am" and I will arise at 6am, and I am still wanting coffee. Is there a super-consciousness there? I don't think so.
Consciousness is bound to choices and I certainly don't remember making any choices while sleeping. Alarm clocks don't make choices, they are conditioned to sound after a certain time. In the same way, I am conditioned to want coffee. I can condition myself to awake at 6am. In all of that, consciousness comes and goes.
>
> [MN102:7.3](https://suttacentral.net/mn102/en/sujato#mn102:7.3): But if any ascetic or brahmin should say this: ‘Apart from form, feeling, perception, and choices, I will describe the coming and going of consciousness, its passing away and reappearing, its growth, increase, and maturity.’
>
>
> [MN102:7.5](https://suttacentral.net/mn102/en/sujato#mn102:7.5): That is not possible.
>
>
> [MN102:7.6](https://suttacentral.net/mn102/en/sujato#mn102:7.6): ‘All that is conditioned and coarse. But there is the cessation of conditions—*that* is real.’
>
>
> [MN102:7.7](https://suttacentral.net/mn102/en/sujato#mn102:7.7): Understanding this and seeing the escape from it, the Realized One has gone beyond all that.
>
>
>
Suffering is conditioned. The Noble EightFold Path is conditioned. May all sentient being condition themselves beyond suffering. *That* would be...super!
---
Regarding "super-consciousness", in MN38, the Buddha corrects the understanding of Sāti.
>
> [MN38:3.5](https://suttacentral.net/mn38/en/sujato#mn38:3.5): “Is it really true, Reverend Sāti, that you have such a harmful misconception: ‘As I understand the Buddha’s teachings, it is this very same consciousness that roams and transmigrates, not another’?”
>
>
>
In particular, he said:
>
> [MN38:5.12](https://suttacentral.net/mn38/en/sujato#mn38:5.12): “Silly man, who on earth have you ever known me to teach in that way? Haven’t I said in many ways that consciousness is dependently originated, since consciousness does not arise without a cause? But still you misrepresent me by your wrong grasp, harm yourself, and make much bad karma.
>
>
>
The Buddha addressed suffering and taught the role of consciousness in that suffering. |
39,620 | I got introduced to this "Female Buddha" when I was looking name for my friend's daughter.
So what does female Buddha mean?
**Wikipedia :**
>
> [Tara (Buddhism)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tara_(Buddhism))
>
> Tara (Sanskrit: तारा, tārā; Tib. སྒྲོལ་མ, Dölma), Ārya Tārā, or Shayama Tara, also known as Jetsun Dölma (Tibetan language: rje btsun sgrol ma) in Tibetan Buddhism, is an important figure in Buddhism. She appears as a female bodhisattva in Mahayana Buddhism, and as a female Buddha in Vajrayana Buddhism. She is known as the "mother of liberation", and represents the virtues of success in work and achievements. She is known as Tara Bosatsu (多羅菩薩) in Japan, and occasionally as Duōluó Púsà (多羅菩薩) in Chinese Buddhism.
>
>
>
My question is what does this concept mean **is she a person who appeared in past who's name is Tara**?
Or **is it philosophical concept that meditators seen she's appearing?**
Also why this is not exist in **Thervada Buddhism** when statue is in **Bihar** state of **India?**
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/waPVn.jpg) | 2020/07/04 | [
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/39620",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/567/"
] | The Void is sometimes implied differently than other times
in English. Existential descriptioning isn't English's long suit.
Maybe Zen/ Chan discussions of the concept are generally more prominent
overall.
Confusion etc isn't The Void.
In The True Void 'is' Reality. There isn't confusion.
There isn't dukkha. There isn't cloudiness.
There isn't any illusion. There isn't delusion.
In The Void there is nonmisinterpretation.
Attempts to define The Void tend to be circular or inaccurate.
The description of going into it or something isn't vague enough.
The question does a quite good job of nonpigeonholing of it.
Maybe lost something in translation: maybe more at
based on reasonableness, logic is very limited by concrete
things available for its processes & sometimes either cannot conclude
because of insufficient information etc, or comes up with
rather nonsensible conclusions because of the data available.
Buddhism provides guidelines for addressing things which
haven't necessarily become data yet, and how previously
unencountered data can be reasonably addressed. Reasonable
consideration may be more effective than logic only.
The Void mightn't be so like a temporary journey to
someplace or other, real or existential, etc, as cited in the
question. Maybe very nice spots, but they aren't descriptions of
The True Void. Those sound more like heavens or something.
And may be Impermanent.
Consciousnesses arent really so much part of The Void,
consciousnesses are more at heavens etc.
Logical typical word description doesnt do so well with
trying to describe The Void. Despite many people writing books
about it, giving things names etc, The Void is different from
names or groups of words and most reference points. So
fundamental description of The Void which uses words would tend
to be circular/ misleading.
Some things can 'be' without being grounded in ordinary descriptioning.
That's sort of the answer to the question, in language. Which is a very
Good & nicely asked question. | There is a mind state called “void”, but it is not Nibbana. This void is of the mind, when it is void of perceptions, feelings, thinking, everything that makes up what we understand as the Thinking conscious mind. What is left is knowing. But knowing of the void implies that it is not beyond mind. Mind, and consequently, knowing are created. To be in mind is to not be in Nibbana. IOW, you can’t realize Nibbana if you are stuck in mind, but you can experience a state of void. |
39,620 | I got introduced to this "Female Buddha" when I was looking name for my friend's daughter.
So what does female Buddha mean?
**Wikipedia :**
>
> [Tara (Buddhism)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tara_(Buddhism))
>
> Tara (Sanskrit: तारा, tārā; Tib. སྒྲོལ་མ, Dölma), Ārya Tārā, or Shayama Tara, also known as Jetsun Dölma (Tibetan language: rje btsun sgrol ma) in Tibetan Buddhism, is an important figure in Buddhism. She appears as a female bodhisattva in Mahayana Buddhism, and as a female Buddha in Vajrayana Buddhism. She is known as the "mother of liberation", and represents the virtues of success in work and achievements. She is known as Tara Bosatsu (多羅菩薩) in Japan, and occasionally as Duōluó Púsà (多羅菩薩) in Chinese Buddhism.
>
>
>
My question is what does this concept mean **is she a person who appeared in past who's name is Tara**?
Or **is it philosophical concept that meditators seen she's appearing?**
Also why this is not exist in **Thervada Buddhism** when statue is in **Bihar** state of **India?**
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/waPVn.jpg) | 2020/07/04 | [
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/39620",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/567/"
] | >
> **OP:** Whatever is,the question is quite clear: if you can reach a
> state of emptiness , how can you state that Void is not part of a
> higher consciousness (aka God) but it is just Void? If you “feel” the
> Void during meditation and you call it nirodha samapatti for example,
> how do you know that it is just Void instead of being Void before or
> inside another greater Consciousness , which is perceived as Void
> (Sunyata, as the Vedantists think and argue with you) but is higher
> than that simple state of nothing ? (super consciousness pervading
> everything)
>
>
>
I think we should put the record straight here and avoid distorting the original teachings of the Buddha, as found in the Sutta Pitaka. There is no "higher consciousness (aka God)" or "super consciousness pervading everything" or Atman or Brahman in the original teachings of the Buddha.
I understand your premise - if in meditation, you attained a state of void, then there must be some higher consciousness (aka God) that is perceiving it. This higher consciousness is usually attributed to God as the Self or Super Soul (Atman) in Vedanta. This is described in the Hindu text [Bhagavad Gita 13.14](https://asitis.com/13/14.html).
Advaitin gurus would suggest you to ask "Who am I?" and discover that the true "I" is Atman, which is Brahman (God). The Atman is also the Eternal Witness, or the Cosmic Consciousness, the "I" of every self-conscious being. After attaining Self-Realization (where the little ego-self drops away), one would remain existing forever as this one single Eternal Witness or Cosmic Consciousness, that witnesses through every self-conscious being and even witnesses directly without any beings.
What did the Buddha teach?
The self (*atta* or Atma) is the idea or thought that arises out of the inter-operation or inter-working of the five aggregates (form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness). This is similar to how music is created when different parts of a musical instrument works together. See [Lute Sutta](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.205.than.html). How the five aggregates work together is described by [Dependent Origination](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/48/471).
*Sabbe dhamma anatta* ([Dhammapada 279](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.20.than.html#dhp-279)) means that all phenomena (including Nibbana), is not self. If you break a musical instrument into pieces, you won't be able to find music in any of the constituent parts - [Lute Sutta](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.205.than.html). If you look at the five aggregates, you cannot find the self there. The Buddha means here that there is no eternal and permanent core of one's being, that is the self, not even Nibbana.
Rather, the self is an impermanent changing idea, that arises and passes away from moment to moment, depending on the operation of the five aggregates, just as other mentally generated ideas.
And what about consciousness? The Buddha taught the following, from [MN 38](https://suttacentral.net/mn38/en/bodhi):
>
> “Bhikkhus, consciousness is reckoned by the particular condition
> dependent upon which it arises. When consciousness arises dependent on
> the eye and forms, it is reckoned as eye-consciousness; when
> consciousness arises dependent on the ear and sounds, it is reckoned
> as ear-consciousness; when consciousness arises dependent on the nose
> and odours, it is reckoned as nose-consciousness; when consciousness
> arises dependent on the tongue and flavours, it is reckoned as
> tongue-consciousness; when consciousness arises dependent on the body
> and tangibles, it is reckoned as body-consciousness; when
> consciousness arises dependent on the mind and mind-objects, it is
> reckoned as mind-consciousness. Just as fire is reckoned by the
> particular condition dependent on which it burns—when fire burns
> dependent on logs, it is reckoned as a log fire; when fire burns
> dependent on faggots, it is reckoned as a faggot fire; when fire burns
> dependent on grass, it is reckoned as a grass fire; when fire burns
> dependent on cowdung, it is reckoned as a cowdung fire; when fire
> burns dependent on chaff, it is reckoned as a chaff fire; when fire
> burns dependent on rubbish, it is reckoned as a rubbish fire—so too,
> consciousness is reckoned by the particular condition dependent on
> which it arises. When consciousness arises dependent on the eye and
> forms, it is reckoned as eye-consciousness…when consciousness arises
> dependent on the mind and mind-objects, it is reckoned as
> mind-consciousness.
>
>
>
Think about it. How can the silent witness witness anything except through one of these media: eye, ear, nose, tongue, touch or mind? There was never a time, when there was consciousness being aware of something except through the eye, ear, nose, tongue, touch or mind. There is therefore no independent consciousness.
Consciousness is dependent on and conditioned upon these six media. It does not exist independently connecting all beings. The consciousness in every being may be of a similar type, but it's not the same consciousness.
For example, I can say that every candle has a similar flame, but it's not the exact same flame that appears on every candle. Each flame is different.
This is the only consciousness that there is, in the original teachings of the Buddha. There's no super consciousness or higher consciousness.
Also from the same sutta ([MN 38](https://suttacentral.net/mn38/en/bodhi)):
>
> The Blessed One then asked him: “Sāti, is it true that the following
> pernicious view has arisen in you: ‘As I understand the Dhamma taught
> by the Blessed One, it is this same consciousness that runs and
> wanders through the round of rebirths, not another’?”
>
>
> “Exactly so, venerable sir. As I understand the Dhamma taught by the
> Blessed One, it is this same consciousness that runs and wanders
> through the round of rebirths, not another.”
>
>
> “What is that consciousness, Sāti?”
>
>
> “Venerable sir, it is that which speaks and feels and experiences here
> and there the result of good and bad actions.”
>
>
> “Misguided man, to whom have you ever known me to teach the Dhamma in
> that way? Misguided man, have I not stated in many ways **consciousness
> to be dependently arisen, since without a condition there is no
> origination of consciousness**? But you, misguided man, have
> misrepresented us by your wrong grasp and injured yourself and stored
> up much demerit; for this will lead to your harm and suffering for a
> long time.”
>
>
>
The Buddha states unequivocally that consciousness is dependently originated based on conditions. There is no independent standalone permanent consciousness. There's no super consciousness or higher consciousness.
Some people claimed that MN 49 talks about a super consciousness or infinite consciousness, but that turned out to be a mistranslation. The sutta was talking about Nirvana or Nibbana - please see [this answer](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/33750/471).
From [The All Sutta](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html) (also see [this question](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/30382/471)):
>
> "Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I will
> speak."
>
>
> "As you say, lord," the monks responded.
>
>
> The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear &
> sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations,
> intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would
> say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on
> what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable
> to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it
> lies beyond range.
>
>
>
Once again, there's no super consciousness or higher consciousness, outside the range of The All.
Now, what is shunya or shunyata (emptiness or void)? This is not a state of attainment or state of consciousness or state of reality or state of mind in Buddhism.
This is a statement of the fact of reality, by the Buddha in [SN 35.85](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.085.than.html):
>
> Then Ven. Ananda went to the Blessed One and on arrival, having bowed
> down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the
> Blessed One, "It is said that the world is empty, the world is empty,
> lord. In what respect is it said that the world is empty?"
>
>
> "Insofar as it is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self:
> Thus it is said, Ananda, that the world is empty. And what is empty of
> a self or of anything pertaining to a self? The eye is empty of a self
> or of anything pertaining to a self. Forms... Eye-consciousness...
> Eye-contact is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self.
>
>
> "The ear is empty...
>
>
> "The nose is empty...
>
>
> "The tongue is empty...
>
>
> "The body is empty...
>
>
> "The intellect is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self.
> Ideas... Intellect-consciousness... Intellect-contact is empty of a
> self or of anything pertaining to a self. Thus it is said that the
> world is empty."
>
>
>
This is a statement of the fact of reality that absolutely everything is empty of a self (Atman).
Now, what about that which is experienced?
We can talk about two different things which are experienced. One is Nirvana or Nibbana. This can be experienced by the Arahat (one who has become enlightened or awakened, or one who has become liberated from suffering) even outside of meditation.
Nibbana is described in [this answer](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/31737/471) - please see that answer for sutta quotes:
>
> Nibbana is not a thought of the mind, not a concept of the mind,
> not a state of the mind, not a state of consciousness and also not a
> feeling. However, when the mind experiences this Nibbana, which is not
> conditioned, not compounded, not suffering, not impermanent, not
> arising, not ceasing and not changing, it experiences bliss. The mind
> can therefore experience Nibbana, but it cannot feel it or think about
> it.
>
>
> Sukha or happiness for an unenlightened person is experienced when
> encountering pleasant feelings (from the six senses) or when
> encountering the cessation of painful feelings (from the six senses).
> But for an arahat, sukha or bliss (in this context) is experienced
> when encountering neutral feelings, no feelings and Nibbana.
>
>
>
That is Nibbana, and not god or Brahman or any kind of Ultimate Reality. It is that which is experienced by the mind, when it is completely free of all fetters and defilements.
The second is *nirodha samapatti*. This is the state beyond the 8 jhana states. This is described on [this page](http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/n_r/nirodha_samaapatti.htm):
>
> 'attainment of extinction' (S. XIV, 11), also called
> *saññā-vedayita-nirodha*, 'extinction of feeling and perception', is the
> temporary suspension of all consciousness and mental activity,
> following immediately upon the semi-conscious state called 'sphere of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception' (s. jhāna, 8). The absolutely
> necessary pre-conditions to its attainment are said to be perfect
> mastery of all the 8 absorptions (jhāna), as well as the previous
> attainment of Anāgāmī or Arahantship (s. ariya-puggala).
>
>
> According to Vis.M. XXIII, the entering into this state takes place in
> the following way: by means of mental tranquillity (samatha) and
> insight (vipassanā) one has to pass through all the 8 absorptions one
> after the other up to the sphere of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception and then one has to bring this
> state to an end. If, namely, according to the Vis.M., the disciple
> (Anāgāmī or Arahat) passes through the absorption merely by means of
> tranquillity, i.e. concentration, he will only attain the sphere of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception, and then come to a standstill;
> if, on the other hand, he proceeds only with insight, he will reach
> the fruition (phala) of Anāgāmī or Arahantship. He, however, who by
> means of both faculties has risen from absorption to absorption and,
> having made the necessary preparations, brings the sphere of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception to an end, such a one reaches
> the state of extinction. Whilst the disciple is passing through the 8
> absorptions, he each time emerges from the absorption attained, and
> regards with his insight all the mental phenomena constituting that
> special absorption, as impermanent, miserable and impersonal. Then he
> again enters the next higher absorption, and thus, after each
> absorption practising insight, he at last reaches the state of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception, and thereafter the full
> extinction. This state, according to the Com., may last for 7 days or
> even longer. Immediately at the rising from this state, however, there
> arises in the Anāgāmī the fruition of Anāgāmiship (anāgāmi-phala), in
> the Arahat the fruition of Arahantship (arahatta-phala).
>
>
> With regard to the difference existing between the monk abiding in
> this state of extinction on the one hand, and a dead person on the
> other hand, M 43 says: "In him who is dead, and whose life has come to
> an end, the bodily (in-and-out breathing), verbal (thought-conception
> and discursive thinking), and mental functions (s. sankhāra, 2) have
> become suspended and come to a standstill, life is exhausted, the
> vital heat extinguished, the faculties are destroyed. Also in the monk
> who has reached 'extinction of perception and feeling'
> (*saññā-vedayita-nirodha*), the bodily, verbal and mental functions have
> been suspended and come to a standstill, but life is not exhausted,
> the vital heat not extinguished, and the faculties are not destroyed."
>
>
>
So, the question comes, who or what experiences *nirodha samapatti*?
The answer is no one and nothing. Why?
If all feeling, perception and consciousness is temporarily suspended, then it is not felt or perceived at all.
The Hindu notion of feeling stillness and bliss in meditation, applies to one or more of the conscious and semi-conscious states of jhana which are below *nirodha samapatti*. There are 8 such [jhana (or dhyana) states](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/gunaratana/wheel351.html) explained in the suttas - 4 lower jhanas called rupa jhanas (or material jhanas) and 4 higher jhanas called arupa jhanas (or immaterial jhanas).
The 4 higher jhanas are the base of boundless space, the base of boundless consciousness, the base of nothingness, and the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception (see [this essay](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/gunaratana/wheel351.html)). I speculate that the perception of all-pervading consciousness mentioned in Vedanta, is probably experienced in the 6th of the 8 jhanas - called the base of boundless consciousness. I also speculate that the perception of voidness may be experienced in the 7th of the 8 jhanas - called the base of nothingness. This is a semi-conscious state.
Ruslan is also right that according to the Buddha, "there are no contemplatives outside of the Buddha's path" ([Dhammapada 254-255](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.18.budd.html#dhp-254)). In my opinion, this is because in other paths, the practitioners are not free from self-view or belief in a self (*[sakkaya-ditthi](https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/sakkaya-ditthi#theravada)*), which is one of the [ten fetters](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetter_(Buddhism)#Sutta_Pitaka%27s_list_of_ten_fetters) ([AN 10.13](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.013.than.html)). | There is a mind state called “void”, but it is not Nibbana. This void is of the mind, when it is void of perceptions, feelings, thinking, everything that makes up what we understand as the Thinking conscious mind. What is left is knowing. But knowing of the void implies that it is not beyond mind. Mind, and consequently, knowing are created. To be in mind is to not be in Nibbana. IOW, you can’t realize Nibbana if you are stuck in mind, but you can experience a state of void. |
39,620 | I got introduced to this "Female Buddha" when I was looking name for my friend's daughter.
So what does female Buddha mean?
**Wikipedia :**
>
> [Tara (Buddhism)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tara_(Buddhism))
>
> Tara (Sanskrit: तारा, tārā; Tib. སྒྲོལ་མ, Dölma), Ārya Tārā, or Shayama Tara, also known as Jetsun Dölma (Tibetan language: rje btsun sgrol ma) in Tibetan Buddhism, is an important figure in Buddhism. She appears as a female bodhisattva in Mahayana Buddhism, and as a female Buddha in Vajrayana Buddhism. She is known as the "mother of liberation", and represents the virtues of success in work and achievements. She is known as Tara Bosatsu (多羅菩薩) in Japan, and occasionally as Duōluó Púsà (多羅菩薩) in Chinese Buddhism.
>
>
>
My question is what does this concept mean **is she a person who appeared in past who's name is Tara**?
Or **is it philosophical concept that meditators seen she's appearing?**
Also why this is not exist in **Thervada Buddhism** when statue is in **Bihar** state of **India?**
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/waPVn.jpg) | 2020/07/04 | [
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/39620",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com",
"https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/567/"
] | The Void is sometimes implied differently than other times
in English. Existential descriptioning isn't English's long suit.
Maybe Zen/ Chan discussions of the concept are generally more prominent
overall.
Confusion etc isn't The Void.
In The True Void 'is' Reality. There isn't confusion.
There isn't dukkha. There isn't cloudiness.
There isn't any illusion. There isn't delusion.
In The Void there is nonmisinterpretation.
Attempts to define The Void tend to be circular or inaccurate.
The description of going into it or something isn't vague enough.
The question does a quite good job of nonpigeonholing of it.
Maybe lost something in translation: maybe more at
based on reasonableness, logic is very limited by concrete
things available for its processes & sometimes either cannot conclude
because of insufficient information etc, or comes up with
rather nonsensible conclusions because of the data available.
Buddhism provides guidelines for addressing things which
haven't necessarily become data yet, and how previously
unencountered data can be reasonably addressed. Reasonable
consideration may be more effective than logic only.
The Void mightn't be so like a temporary journey to
someplace or other, real or existential, etc, as cited in the
question. Maybe very nice spots, but they aren't descriptions of
The True Void. Those sound more like heavens or something.
And may be Impermanent.
Consciousnesses arent really so much part of The Void,
consciousnesses are more at heavens etc.
Logical typical word description doesnt do so well with
trying to describe The Void. Despite many people writing books
about it, giving things names etc, The Void is different from
names or groups of words and most reference points. So
fundamental description of The Void which uses words would tend
to be circular/ misleading.
Some things can 'be' without being grounded in ordinary descriptioning.
That's sort of the answer to the question, in language. Which is a very
Good & nicely asked question. | >
> **OP:** Whatever is,the question is quite clear: if you can reach a
> state of emptiness , how can you state that Void is not part of a
> higher consciousness (aka God) but it is just Void? If you “feel” the
> Void during meditation and you call it nirodha samapatti for example,
> how do you know that it is just Void instead of being Void before or
> inside another greater Consciousness , which is perceived as Void
> (Sunyata, as the Vedantists think and argue with you) but is higher
> than that simple state of nothing ? (super consciousness pervading
> everything)
>
>
>
I think we should put the record straight here and avoid distorting the original teachings of the Buddha, as found in the Sutta Pitaka. There is no "higher consciousness (aka God)" or "super consciousness pervading everything" or Atman or Brahman in the original teachings of the Buddha.
I understand your premise - if in meditation, you attained a state of void, then there must be some higher consciousness (aka God) that is perceiving it. This higher consciousness is usually attributed to God as the Self or Super Soul (Atman) in Vedanta. This is described in the Hindu text [Bhagavad Gita 13.14](https://asitis.com/13/14.html).
Advaitin gurus would suggest you to ask "Who am I?" and discover that the true "I" is Atman, which is Brahman (God). The Atman is also the Eternal Witness, or the Cosmic Consciousness, the "I" of every self-conscious being. After attaining Self-Realization (where the little ego-self drops away), one would remain existing forever as this one single Eternal Witness or Cosmic Consciousness, that witnesses through every self-conscious being and even witnesses directly without any beings.
What did the Buddha teach?
The self (*atta* or Atma) is the idea or thought that arises out of the inter-operation or inter-working of the five aggregates (form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness). This is similar to how music is created when different parts of a musical instrument works together. See [Lute Sutta](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.205.than.html). How the five aggregates work together is described by [Dependent Origination](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/48/471).
*Sabbe dhamma anatta* ([Dhammapada 279](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.20.than.html#dhp-279)) means that all phenomena (including Nibbana), is not self. If you break a musical instrument into pieces, you won't be able to find music in any of the constituent parts - [Lute Sutta](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.205.than.html). If you look at the five aggregates, you cannot find the self there. The Buddha means here that there is no eternal and permanent core of one's being, that is the self, not even Nibbana.
Rather, the self is an impermanent changing idea, that arises and passes away from moment to moment, depending on the operation of the five aggregates, just as other mentally generated ideas.
And what about consciousness? The Buddha taught the following, from [MN 38](https://suttacentral.net/mn38/en/bodhi):
>
> “Bhikkhus, consciousness is reckoned by the particular condition
> dependent upon which it arises. When consciousness arises dependent on
> the eye and forms, it is reckoned as eye-consciousness; when
> consciousness arises dependent on the ear and sounds, it is reckoned
> as ear-consciousness; when consciousness arises dependent on the nose
> and odours, it is reckoned as nose-consciousness; when consciousness
> arises dependent on the tongue and flavours, it is reckoned as
> tongue-consciousness; when consciousness arises dependent on the body
> and tangibles, it is reckoned as body-consciousness; when
> consciousness arises dependent on the mind and mind-objects, it is
> reckoned as mind-consciousness. Just as fire is reckoned by the
> particular condition dependent on which it burns—when fire burns
> dependent on logs, it is reckoned as a log fire; when fire burns
> dependent on faggots, it is reckoned as a faggot fire; when fire burns
> dependent on grass, it is reckoned as a grass fire; when fire burns
> dependent on cowdung, it is reckoned as a cowdung fire; when fire
> burns dependent on chaff, it is reckoned as a chaff fire; when fire
> burns dependent on rubbish, it is reckoned as a rubbish fire—so too,
> consciousness is reckoned by the particular condition dependent on
> which it arises. When consciousness arises dependent on the eye and
> forms, it is reckoned as eye-consciousness…when consciousness arises
> dependent on the mind and mind-objects, it is reckoned as
> mind-consciousness.
>
>
>
Think about it. How can the silent witness witness anything except through one of these media: eye, ear, nose, tongue, touch or mind? There was never a time, when there was consciousness being aware of something except through the eye, ear, nose, tongue, touch or mind. There is therefore no independent consciousness.
Consciousness is dependent on and conditioned upon these six media. It does not exist independently connecting all beings. The consciousness in every being may be of a similar type, but it's not the same consciousness.
For example, I can say that every candle has a similar flame, but it's not the exact same flame that appears on every candle. Each flame is different.
This is the only consciousness that there is, in the original teachings of the Buddha. There's no super consciousness or higher consciousness.
Also from the same sutta ([MN 38](https://suttacentral.net/mn38/en/bodhi)):
>
> The Blessed One then asked him: “Sāti, is it true that the following
> pernicious view has arisen in you: ‘As I understand the Dhamma taught
> by the Blessed One, it is this same consciousness that runs and
> wanders through the round of rebirths, not another’?”
>
>
> “Exactly so, venerable sir. As I understand the Dhamma taught by the
> Blessed One, it is this same consciousness that runs and wanders
> through the round of rebirths, not another.”
>
>
> “What is that consciousness, Sāti?”
>
>
> “Venerable sir, it is that which speaks and feels and experiences here
> and there the result of good and bad actions.”
>
>
> “Misguided man, to whom have you ever known me to teach the Dhamma in
> that way? Misguided man, have I not stated in many ways **consciousness
> to be dependently arisen, since without a condition there is no
> origination of consciousness**? But you, misguided man, have
> misrepresented us by your wrong grasp and injured yourself and stored
> up much demerit; for this will lead to your harm and suffering for a
> long time.”
>
>
>
The Buddha states unequivocally that consciousness is dependently originated based on conditions. There is no independent standalone permanent consciousness. There's no super consciousness or higher consciousness.
Some people claimed that MN 49 talks about a super consciousness or infinite consciousness, but that turned out to be a mistranslation. The sutta was talking about Nirvana or Nibbana - please see [this answer](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/33750/471).
From [The All Sutta](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html) (also see [this question](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/30382/471)):
>
> "Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I will
> speak."
>
>
> "As you say, lord," the monks responded.
>
>
> The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear &
> sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations,
> intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would
> say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on
> what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable
> to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it
> lies beyond range.
>
>
>
Once again, there's no super consciousness or higher consciousness, outside the range of The All.
Now, what is shunya or shunyata (emptiness or void)? This is not a state of attainment or state of consciousness or state of reality or state of mind in Buddhism.
This is a statement of the fact of reality, by the Buddha in [SN 35.85](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.085.than.html):
>
> Then Ven. Ananda went to the Blessed One and on arrival, having bowed
> down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the
> Blessed One, "It is said that the world is empty, the world is empty,
> lord. In what respect is it said that the world is empty?"
>
>
> "Insofar as it is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self:
> Thus it is said, Ananda, that the world is empty. And what is empty of
> a self or of anything pertaining to a self? The eye is empty of a self
> or of anything pertaining to a self. Forms... Eye-consciousness...
> Eye-contact is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self.
>
>
> "The ear is empty...
>
>
> "The nose is empty...
>
>
> "The tongue is empty...
>
>
> "The body is empty...
>
>
> "The intellect is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self.
> Ideas... Intellect-consciousness... Intellect-contact is empty of a
> self or of anything pertaining to a self. Thus it is said that the
> world is empty."
>
>
>
This is a statement of the fact of reality that absolutely everything is empty of a self (Atman).
Now, what about that which is experienced?
We can talk about two different things which are experienced. One is Nirvana or Nibbana. This can be experienced by the Arahat (one who has become enlightened or awakened, or one who has become liberated from suffering) even outside of meditation.
Nibbana is described in [this answer](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/31737/471) - please see that answer for sutta quotes:
>
> Nibbana is not a thought of the mind, not a concept of the mind,
> not a state of the mind, not a state of consciousness and also not a
> feeling. However, when the mind experiences this Nibbana, which is not
> conditioned, not compounded, not suffering, not impermanent, not
> arising, not ceasing and not changing, it experiences bliss. The mind
> can therefore experience Nibbana, but it cannot feel it or think about
> it.
>
>
> Sukha or happiness for an unenlightened person is experienced when
> encountering pleasant feelings (from the six senses) or when
> encountering the cessation of painful feelings (from the six senses).
> But for an arahat, sukha or bliss (in this context) is experienced
> when encountering neutral feelings, no feelings and Nibbana.
>
>
>
That is Nibbana, and not god or Brahman or any kind of Ultimate Reality. It is that which is experienced by the mind, when it is completely free of all fetters and defilements.
The second is *nirodha samapatti*. This is the state beyond the 8 jhana states. This is described on [this page](http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/n_r/nirodha_samaapatti.htm):
>
> 'attainment of extinction' (S. XIV, 11), also called
> *saññā-vedayita-nirodha*, 'extinction of feeling and perception', is the
> temporary suspension of all consciousness and mental activity,
> following immediately upon the semi-conscious state called 'sphere of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception' (s. jhāna, 8). The absolutely
> necessary pre-conditions to its attainment are said to be perfect
> mastery of all the 8 absorptions (jhāna), as well as the previous
> attainment of Anāgāmī or Arahantship (s. ariya-puggala).
>
>
> According to Vis.M. XXIII, the entering into this state takes place in
> the following way: by means of mental tranquillity (samatha) and
> insight (vipassanā) one has to pass through all the 8 absorptions one
> after the other up to the sphere of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception and then one has to bring this
> state to an end. If, namely, according to the Vis.M., the disciple
> (Anāgāmī or Arahat) passes through the absorption merely by means of
> tranquillity, i.e. concentration, he will only attain the sphere of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception, and then come to a standstill;
> if, on the other hand, he proceeds only with insight, he will reach
> the fruition (phala) of Anāgāmī or Arahantship. He, however, who by
> means of both faculties has risen from absorption to absorption and,
> having made the necessary preparations, brings the sphere of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception to an end, such a one reaches
> the state of extinction. Whilst the disciple is passing through the 8
> absorptions, he each time emerges from the absorption attained, and
> regards with his insight all the mental phenomena constituting that
> special absorption, as impermanent, miserable and impersonal. Then he
> again enters the next higher absorption, and thus, after each
> absorption practising insight, he at last reaches the state of
> neither-perception-nor-non-perception, and thereafter the full
> extinction. This state, according to the Com., may last for 7 days or
> even longer. Immediately at the rising from this state, however, there
> arises in the Anāgāmī the fruition of Anāgāmiship (anāgāmi-phala), in
> the Arahat the fruition of Arahantship (arahatta-phala).
>
>
> With regard to the difference existing between the monk abiding in
> this state of extinction on the one hand, and a dead person on the
> other hand, M 43 says: "In him who is dead, and whose life has come to
> an end, the bodily (in-and-out breathing), verbal (thought-conception
> and discursive thinking), and mental functions (s. sankhāra, 2) have
> become suspended and come to a standstill, life is exhausted, the
> vital heat extinguished, the faculties are destroyed. Also in the monk
> who has reached 'extinction of perception and feeling'
> (*saññā-vedayita-nirodha*), the bodily, verbal and mental functions have
> been suspended and come to a standstill, but life is not exhausted,
> the vital heat not extinguished, and the faculties are not destroyed."
>
>
>
So, the question comes, who or what experiences *nirodha samapatti*?
The answer is no one and nothing. Why?
If all feeling, perception and consciousness is temporarily suspended, then it is not felt or perceived at all.
The Hindu notion of feeling stillness and bliss in meditation, applies to one or more of the conscious and semi-conscious states of jhana which are below *nirodha samapatti*. There are 8 such [jhana (or dhyana) states](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/gunaratana/wheel351.html) explained in the suttas - 4 lower jhanas called rupa jhanas (or material jhanas) and 4 higher jhanas called arupa jhanas (or immaterial jhanas).
The 4 higher jhanas are the base of boundless space, the base of boundless consciousness, the base of nothingness, and the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception (see [this essay](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/gunaratana/wheel351.html)). I speculate that the perception of all-pervading consciousness mentioned in Vedanta, is probably experienced in the 6th of the 8 jhanas - called the base of boundless consciousness. I also speculate that the perception of voidness may be experienced in the 7th of the 8 jhanas - called the base of nothingness. This is a semi-conscious state.
Ruslan is also right that according to the Buddha, "there are no contemplatives outside of the Buddha's path" ([Dhammapada 254-255](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.18.budd.html#dhp-254)). In my opinion, this is because in other paths, the practitioners are not free from self-view or belief in a self (*[sakkaya-ditthi](https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/sakkaya-ditthi#theravada)*), which is one of the [ten fetters](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetter_(Buddhism)#Sutta_Pitaka%27s_list_of_ten_fetters) ([AN 10.13](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.013.than.html)). |
168,193 | I just got a new wireless printer and I love that it lets me print from any device on my wireless network, even my iPhone. There is, however, one feature that appears to be missing.
When I print from my computer, I can select different print quality settings: "Draft, Normal, Photo, Black & White". I don't seem to be able to do this from my iPhone when using Airprint. I can only click "print", choose my printer, and the item gets printed at whatever settings Apple deems best at that moment.
But what if I want to lower the print quality to save on ink? Or print a photo in black and white? Is there any way to change those settings? | 2015/01/20 | [
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/168193",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/users/110407/"
] | According to Apple, [AirPrint on iPhone](http://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201387) is simplified application.
It only lets you choose the printer and the number of copies, but not print quality etc.. in other words it use the current Printer defaults.
So what can you do?
Log in to the printer's set up page IP address that you need to know it first, but it is something like (192.168. xxx) and change it there. However, this solution will affect all following documents until you change it again. | With iOS 9 AirPrint now has the option to print Black & White.
Screenshot:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/AC6Ga.png) |
168,193 | I just got a new wireless printer and I love that it lets me print from any device on my wireless network, even my iPhone. There is, however, one feature that appears to be missing.
When I print from my computer, I can select different print quality settings: "Draft, Normal, Photo, Black & White". I don't seem to be able to do this from my iPhone when using Airprint. I can only click "print", choose my printer, and the item gets printed at whatever settings Apple deems best at that moment.
But what if I want to lower the print quality to save on ink? Or print a photo in black and white? Is there any way to change those settings? | 2015/01/20 | [
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/168193",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/users/110407/"
] | According to Apple, [AirPrint on iPhone](http://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201387) is simplified application.
It only lets you choose the printer and the number of copies, but not print quality etc.. in other words it use the current Printer defaults.
So what can you do?
Log in to the printer's set up page IP address that you need to know it first, but it is something like (192.168. xxx) and change it there. However, this solution will affect all following documents until you change it again. | Standard Apple answer - "there's an app for that"
I have, no, had the same issue with a Canon printer. In the app store I did a search for 'Airprint' and found a long list of apps from several major manufactures. Downloaded the Canon app and I can now control all the settings when I airprint to my printer. |
16,429,732 | The two things I'd like to do in particular are:
* slice up an individual video into many smaller videos
* Draw basic shapes on top of the video
I would prefer to use python because I already know it and it is well-suited for the rest of the work that is happening around this video. | 2013/05/07 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/16429732",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1481457/"
] | Try [Media Lovin' Toolkit](http://www.mltframework.org/), which has Python bindings. | Maybe OpenCV could help you.
The main project page : <http://opencv.org/>
And the bindings for Python : <https://code.google.com/p/pyopencv/>
Cheers,
K. |
22,522 | I want to make sure I'm understanding how this works. Specifically the term "Sending Port ID" has me very confused.
Consider this diagram, I want to make sure I have root port selection figured out:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/lIZZI.jpg)
The switch on top is the root and all settings are at the defaults.
Both of SW2's ports connected to SW3 are designed because it has the lowest path cost to the root (its the only path to the root).
Here is what I'm unsure of: SW3's 0/4 is the Root Port because the Sending Port ID of 0/1 wins over 0/2
Is this correct? The Port IDs of SW3 have no bearing in the selection it is only the Sending Port ID's of SW2 that matter right? | 2015/09/15 | [
"https://networkengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/22522",
"https://networkengineering.stackexchange.com",
"https://networkengineering.stackexchange.com/users/13362/"
] | you need to understand the next
Spanning-Tree Port Roles
- Root Port (RP) - It is a port on a non-root switch, which is the shortest (the best) path towards the root bridge. (i.e. port 0/4 0/3 in SW3)
- Designated Port (DP) - It is a port that is in the forwarding state. (i.e. port 0/1 0/2 SW2)
- Non-Designated Port (NDP) - It is a port that is in a blocking state in the STP topology.
so your question is about which port in SW3 will be selected as ***Root Port***
As soon as the root has been elected, all non-root switches begin to calculate which port is the best ***(the least cost)*** towards the root bridge. This port will be called the root port.
***What if the Root Cost Path is identical?***
1. Prefer the lowest Root Path Cost.
2. In case of the same Root Path Cost, prefer the lowest Bridge ID of the designated switch (the neighbor that sends BPDUs).
3. In case of receiving BPDUs on multiple ports from the same designated switch (BPDU sender), ***prefer the lowest Port ID (known also as port priority) of the sender***. That parameter has a default value 128 and is configurable.
4. In case of all above are did not resolve the problem, prefer the lowest Port ID of the BPDU sender.
so answer of your question (SW3's 0/4 is the Root Port because the Sending Port ID of 0/1 wins over 0/2)is ***YES***
please make use of this very usful linke [STP](http://ciscoiseasy.blogspot.com.eg/2010/10/lesson-20-spanning-tree-protocol.html) | Some corrections to the above answer. Port-id and port-priority are different. One is configurable. The other is internally set. I'll make an attempt to answer your question below.
There has to be just 1 root port per switch. By definition , this is the port with the lowest **path-cost** to root.
* A path-cost is the sum of all port-costs along a given path. And
port-cost is set by the speed of the link connected to a given
port.
Now lets look at your diagram. SW3 has 2 paths to the root, and both go through SW2. Assuming that both the links out of SW3 are the same speed, the port-cost is identical. So the path cost is the same out of both its ports. Now we need a tie-breaker, cuz we can have only 1 root port.
By default, STP uses the bridge-id of neighboring switch to break the tie. But since the neighboring switch is the same switch here (SW2), STP next uses **port-priority of the neighboring switch** to break the tie. This is something that can be manually configured. But lets say that in your case, its at default, and therefore at the same setting on both switches. So STP falls to something that **has** to be unique. And this final fallback is **the internal port-id**. This is not the same as the interface number (0/1,0/2..) but is an integer that is mapped to the interface number internally. And usually lower interface numbers, are mapped to lower ordered port-ids. |
2,116 | I want to make a rocket 'whooooooooooooooooooosh' sound that can go on FOREVER. I have the sound I like, I just need some protips on making it loop. I've been hacking away at it in Pro Tools, and when I loop it in there, it works, but when I implement it in the game I'm working on, there's a clear loop point. Any idea how I could remedy this? I also saw the Rabbit Ears Audio rocket pack, which would be like, perfect for what I'm doing. If you were taking a sound from a library, what would you do to it to make it something that could loop? | 2010/07/20 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/2116",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/14/"
] | Try it in game. You probably won't notice the loop as it's flying by you. If you do, take that same sample and offset it in another track in Pro Tools. Bounce that down and loop that. That should help remedy it.
If that's really not solving the issue then look for another static track to layer in. Jet airplanes are good for rocket bys.
Be sure that your loop point is at the zero crossing as well. If you game dynamically pitches it (with doppler effects) or you pitch it in game you could induce a pop/click in the loop as well. | surely the way is to seperate construction of the events
the doppler effect is most noticeable when it passes the listener,
so from launch, to close passby, to close away use Michaels awesome rocket sound
then
1. make the constant rocket engine sound
(like you have a mic gaffer-taped to the side of the rocket)
2. apply the doppler via a very long/slow LFO'd filter of the constant rocket sound!
it would take some matching.... and some epic verb!
but who is going to check that it actually goes on FOREVER?
(could you ask them to also check my perpetual motion machine while they are at it?) |
2,116 | I want to make a rocket 'whooooooooooooooooooosh' sound that can go on FOREVER. I have the sound I like, I just need some protips on making it loop. I've been hacking away at it in Pro Tools, and when I loop it in there, it works, but when I implement it in the game I'm working on, there's a clear loop point. Any idea how I could remedy this? I also saw the Rabbit Ears Audio rocket pack, which would be like, perfect for what I'm doing. If you were taking a sound from a library, what would you do to it to make it something that could loop? | 2010/07/20 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/2116",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/14/"
] | Try it in game. You probably won't notice the loop as it's flying by you. If you do, take that same sample and offset it in another track in Pro Tools. Bounce that down and loop that. That should help remedy it.
If that's really not solving the issue then look for another static track to layer in. Jet airplanes are good for rocket bys.
Be sure that your loop point is at the zero crossing as well. If you game dynamically pitches it (with doppler effects) or you pitch it in game you could induce a pop/click in the loop as well. | This may sound simplistic but I'll be glad to share what I've learned from a recent game project earlier this year. Make sure you have clean heads and tails. You may be able to loop well in Pro tools because of the region you selected. But when you play the wav file completely, you may still have some audio at the start and at the end that could and should be trimmed off for a clean loop.
Also, if you're using it for a game and space is an issue then the problem may occur when converting from Wav to MP3 file. If you're broke, like me, then you might not have the DV toolkit yet which allows you to bounce mp3 files. Recently, I used a program/media player called VLC to convert a wav file to mp3. But for some reason, VLC doesn't make a clean conversion, there's always some extra audio at the end and/or beginning of the file. Your best bet then is to use the free program, Audacity, to do your wav to mp3 conversions. Your MP3 files will come out with no extra filler added that would make a clean loop impossible. |
2,116 | I want to make a rocket 'whooooooooooooooooooosh' sound that can go on FOREVER. I have the sound I like, I just need some protips on making it loop. I've been hacking away at it in Pro Tools, and when I loop it in there, it works, but when I implement it in the game I'm working on, there's a clear loop point. Any idea how I could remedy this? I also saw the Rabbit Ears Audio rocket pack, which would be like, perfect for what I'm doing. If you were taking a sound from a library, what would you do to it to make it something that could loop? | 2010/07/20 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/2116",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/14/"
] | hmm... maybe there's a way to combine it with a Shepard tone so the doppler is "continuous" (assuming our perspective is fixed from outside the rocket)
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shepard_tone> | surely the way is to seperate construction of the events
the doppler effect is most noticeable when it passes the listener,
so from launch, to close passby, to close away use Michaels awesome rocket sound
then
1. make the constant rocket engine sound
(like you have a mic gaffer-taped to the side of the rocket)
2. apply the doppler via a very long/slow LFO'd filter of the constant rocket sound!
it would take some matching.... and some epic verb!
but who is going to check that it actually goes on FOREVER?
(could you ask them to also check my perpetual motion machine while they are at it?) |
2,116 | I want to make a rocket 'whooooooooooooooooooosh' sound that can go on FOREVER. I have the sound I like, I just need some protips on making it loop. I've been hacking away at it in Pro Tools, and when I loop it in there, it works, but when I implement it in the game I'm working on, there's a clear loop point. Any idea how I could remedy this? I also saw the Rabbit Ears Audio rocket pack, which would be like, perfect for what I'm doing. If you were taking a sound from a library, what would you do to it to make it something that could loop? | 2010/07/20 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/2116",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/14/"
] | hmm... maybe there's a way to combine it with a Shepard tone so the doppler is "continuous" (assuming our perspective is fixed from outside the rocket)
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shepard_tone> | This may sound simplistic but I'll be glad to share what I've learned from a recent game project earlier this year. Make sure you have clean heads and tails. You may be able to loop well in Pro tools because of the region you selected. But when you play the wav file completely, you may still have some audio at the start and at the end that could and should be trimmed off for a clean loop.
Also, if you're using it for a game and space is an issue then the problem may occur when converting from Wav to MP3 file. If you're broke, like me, then you might not have the DV toolkit yet which allows you to bounce mp3 files. Recently, I used a program/media player called VLC to convert a wav file to mp3. But for some reason, VLC doesn't make a clean conversion, there's always some extra audio at the end and/or beginning of the file. Your best bet then is to use the free program, Audacity, to do your wav to mp3 conversions. Your MP3 files will come out with no extra filler added that would make a clean loop impossible. |
2,116 | I want to make a rocket 'whooooooooooooooooooosh' sound that can go on FOREVER. I have the sound I like, I just need some protips on making it loop. I've been hacking away at it in Pro Tools, and when I loop it in there, it works, but when I implement it in the game I'm working on, there's a clear loop point. Any idea how I could remedy this? I also saw the Rabbit Ears Audio rocket pack, which would be like, perfect for what I'm doing. If you were taking a sound from a library, what would you do to it to make it something that could loop? | 2010/07/20 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/2116",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/14/"
] | if you are into the game industry, check the spec of the audio engine. if you are more into the post production area, check AKAI sampler or Kontakt might be useful. I have successfully use a sound of a food processor to create a sustaining rocket-interior kind of sound using an Akai sampler (S-1000) | surely the way is to seperate construction of the events
the doppler effect is most noticeable when it passes the listener,
so from launch, to close passby, to close away use Michaels awesome rocket sound
then
1. make the constant rocket engine sound
(like you have a mic gaffer-taped to the side of the rocket)
2. apply the doppler via a very long/slow LFO'd filter of the constant rocket sound!
it would take some matching.... and some epic verb!
but who is going to check that it actually goes on FOREVER?
(could you ask them to also check my perpetual motion machine while they are at it?) |
2,116 | I want to make a rocket 'whooooooooooooooooooosh' sound that can go on FOREVER. I have the sound I like, I just need some protips on making it loop. I've been hacking away at it in Pro Tools, and when I loop it in there, it works, but when I implement it in the game I'm working on, there's a clear loop point. Any idea how I could remedy this? I also saw the Rabbit Ears Audio rocket pack, which would be like, perfect for what I'm doing. If you were taking a sound from a library, what would you do to it to make it something that could loop? | 2010/07/20 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/2116",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/14/"
] | surely the way is to seperate construction of the events
the doppler effect is most noticeable when it passes the listener,
so from launch, to close passby, to close away use Michaels awesome rocket sound
then
1. make the constant rocket engine sound
(like you have a mic gaffer-taped to the side of the rocket)
2. apply the doppler via a very long/slow LFO'd filter of the constant rocket sound!
it would take some matching.... and some epic verb!
but who is going to check that it actually goes on FOREVER?
(could you ask them to also check my perpetual motion machine while they are at it?) | This may sound simplistic but I'll be glad to share what I've learned from a recent game project earlier this year. Make sure you have clean heads and tails. You may be able to loop well in Pro tools because of the region you selected. But when you play the wav file completely, you may still have some audio at the start and at the end that could and should be trimmed off for a clean loop.
Also, if you're using it for a game and space is an issue then the problem may occur when converting from Wav to MP3 file. If you're broke, like me, then you might not have the DV toolkit yet which allows you to bounce mp3 files. Recently, I used a program/media player called VLC to convert a wav file to mp3. But for some reason, VLC doesn't make a clean conversion, there's always some extra audio at the end and/or beginning of the file. Your best bet then is to use the free program, Audacity, to do your wav to mp3 conversions. Your MP3 files will come out with no extra filler added that would make a clean loop impossible. |
2,116 | I want to make a rocket 'whooooooooooooooooooosh' sound that can go on FOREVER. I have the sound I like, I just need some protips on making it loop. I've been hacking away at it in Pro Tools, and when I loop it in there, it works, but when I implement it in the game I'm working on, there's a clear loop point. Any idea how I could remedy this? I also saw the Rabbit Ears Audio rocket pack, which would be like, perfect for what I'm doing. If you were taking a sound from a library, what would you do to it to make it something that could loop? | 2010/07/20 | [
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/questions/2116",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com",
"https://sound.stackexchange.com/users/14/"
] | if you are into the game industry, check the spec of the audio engine. if you are more into the post production area, check AKAI sampler or Kontakt might be useful. I have successfully use a sound of a food processor to create a sustaining rocket-interior kind of sound using an Akai sampler (S-1000) | This may sound simplistic but I'll be glad to share what I've learned from a recent game project earlier this year. Make sure you have clean heads and tails. You may be able to loop well in Pro tools because of the region you selected. But when you play the wav file completely, you may still have some audio at the start and at the end that could and should be trimmed off for a clean loop.
Also, if you're using it for a game and space is an issue then the problem may occur when converting from Wav to MP3 file. If you're broke, like me, then you might not have the DV toolkit yet which allows you to bounce mp3 files. Recently, I used a program/media player called VLC to convert a wav file to mp3. But for some reason, VLC doesn't make a clean conversion, there's always some extra audio at the end and/or beginning of the file. Your best bet then is to use the free program, Audacity, to do your wav to mp3 conversions. Your MP3 files will come out with no extra filler added that would make a clean loop impossible. |
13,651 | I have recently read [Ethiopian kids hack OLPCs in 5 months with zero instruction](https://web.archive.org/web/20121223013713/http://dvice.com/archives/2012/10/ethiopian-kids.php) which claims that children who never saw a book before and didn't know how to speak English learned how to use an Android phone and hacked it.
Is this true? The article simply states that they have enabled the camera on the tablet which was previously disabled. Would what the children did really be considered hacking?
The article also states that they began learning English. If someone could verify what is meant by that it would be great. | 2012/11/14 | [
"https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/13651",
"https://skeptics.stackexchange.com",
"https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/users/8106/"
] | The source [MIT Technology Review article](https://www.technologyreview.com/2012/10/29/84908/given-tablets-but-no-teachers-ethiopian-children-teach-themselves/) seems to answer your questions
>
> Earlier this year, OLPC workers dropped off closed boxes containing the tablets, taped shut, with no instruction. “I thought the kids would play with the boxes. Within four minutes, one kid not only opened the box, found the on-off switch … powered it up. Within five days, they were using 47 apps per child, per day. Within two weeks, they were singing ABC songs in the village, and within five months, they had hacked Android,” Negroponte said. “Some idiot in our organization or in the Media Lab had disabled the camera, and they figured out the camera, and had hacked Android.”
>
>
> Elaborating later on Negroponte’s hacking comment, Ed McNierney, OLPC’s chief technology officer, said that the kids had gotten around OLPC’s effort to freeze desktop settings. “The kids had completely customized the desktop—so every kids’ tablet looked different. We had installed software to prevent them from doing that,” McNierney said. “And the fact they worked around it was clearly the kind of creativity, the kind of inquiry, the kind of discovery that we think is essential to learning.”
>
>
>
So, learning English consisted, at least, of learning to sing the Alphabet song.
The hacking consisted of working around an OEM attempt to limit the settings. Whether you consider discovering and using a bug to unlock existing functionality to be "hacking" depends entirely on your definition of "hacking". It is quite different from, say, developing a technique to "jail-break" an iPhone or rebuilding a kernel. | Others, including Negroponte's own associate, have disputed the factual accuracy of his explanation.
>
> At an OLPC summit [and] in conversations with Negroponte’s collaborator Maryanne Wolf ... I heard a quite different story about this experiment. ... Children did exhibit some preliteracy skills (recognizing letters) before the experiment ended, although the hacking that Negroponte referenced was finding the configuration menu and turning on the camera.
>
>
> Morgan G. Ames. *The Charisma Machine : The Life, Death, and Legacy of One Laptop Per Child.* The MIT Press; 2019
>
>
>
The configuration menu was easily accessible from a large icon in the center of the laptop's home screen, as shown here.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/u3SI6.png)
So this is not "hacking" by most definitions of the term. Also, the laptops were taken away before the children were actually able to acquire English; the OLPC project was only implemented at large scale in South America, not in Africa. |
66,165 | Is there any visible progress? Is it now just an academic exercise? Do you believe Perl will continue to evolve with or without Perl 6 or will soon be forgotten? | 2008/09/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/66165",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/9411/"
] | Perl 6 is evolving slowly but steadily. Larry Wall wrote a Parser that can parse all Perl 6 that we know of (which is basically the test suite plus a bit of other code). Rakudo, which is Perl 6 on Parrot, also performs nicely. You can track its progress in the test suite with the charts on [rakudo.de](http://rakudo.de/)
Note that it's a radically new language, and not trivial to implement. I don't expect a usable version before next year, and even then it will take quite some time for any implementation to become as mature as Perl 5 is today (which has had 20 years to develop a stable code base). | I feel like some good things may come from Perl 6 (e.g. parrot), but I'm not counting on ever doing anything with the language.
In the bioinformatics development group where I work, we're encouraging use of Python for new development where Perl would have been the language of choice in the past. Python appears to provide a better path forward for us. |
66,165 | Is there any visible progress? Is it now just an academic exercise? Do you believe Perl will continue to evolve with or without Perl 6 or will soon be forgotten? | 2008/09/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/66165",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/9411/"
] | Please see the Official Perl 6 Wiki to find the latest information:
<http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6/index.cgi?perl_6>
The latest headlines from 2 leading Perl 6 blogs are shown at the bottom of the official Perl 6 wiki home page.
There's lots of other useful information and links there.
For example, recent Perl 6 articles and presentations:
<http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6/index.cgi?perl_6_articles_and_presentations>
The Parrot VM for dynamic languages (to be used by Rakudo/Perl 6) also has an official wiki:
<http://www.perlfoundation.org/parrot/index.cgi?parrot>
Parrot is multi-lingual, so Perl 6 will be able to call modules written in other Parrot languages, and other Parrot languages will be able to call Perl 6 modules compiled to Parrot.
Unlike Perl 5, which is defined by its reference implementation, Perl 6 is defined by its test suite. So there will eventually be other versions of Perl 6 that don't run on the Parrot VM.
Perl 5 is still evolving. Perl 5.10 was a major recent release, which (among many other improvements) also had a few Perl 6 related features. Perl 5.12 is under active development (as Perl 5.11).
Perl 5.12 will have support for calling (and for being called by) Perl 6. Perl 6 should be able to compile the great majority of Perl 5 code -- this is a major priority.
Please see the Official Perl 5 Wiki to find the latest information:
<http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl5/index.cgi?perl_5_wiki> | Slow and late. It has a terminal case of second system disease. When I was a Perl hacker (back in the day), they had been working on Perl 6 for two years. That was 6 years ago. You could build a whole operating system in that time. |
66,165 | Is there any visible progress? Is it now just an academic exercise? Do you believe Perl will continue to evolve with or without Perl 6 or will soon be forgotten? | 2008/09/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/66165",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/9411/"
] | Please see the Official Perl 6 Wiki to find the latest information:
<http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6/index.cgi?perl_6>
The latest headlines from 2 leading Perl 6 blogs are shown at the bottom of the official Perl 6 wiki home page.
There's lots of other useful information and links there.
For example, recent Perl 6 articles and presentations:
<http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6/index.cgi?perl_6_articles_and_presentations>
The Parrot VM for dynamic languages (to be used by Rakudo/Perl 6) also has an official wiki:
<http://www.perlfoundation.org/parrot/index.cgi?parrot>
Parrot is multi-lingual, so Perl 6 will be able to call modules written in other Parrot languages, and other Parrot languages will be able to call Perl 6 modules compiled to Parrot.
Unlike Perl 5, which is defined by its reference implementation, Perl 6 is defined by its test suite. So there will eventually be other versions of Perl 6 that don't run on the Parrot VM.
Perl 5 is still evolving. Perl 5.10 was a major recent release, which (among many other improvements) also had a few Perl 6 related features. Perl 5.12 is under active development (as Perl 5.11).
Perl 5.12 will have support for calling (and for being called by) Perl 6. Perl 6 should be able to compile the great majority of Perl 5 code -- this is a major priority.
Please see the Official Perl 5 Wiki to find the latest information:
<http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl5/index.cgi?perl_5_wiki> | It'll be out by Christmas. ;-) I've heard on podcasts that there there will be some kind of alpha before this Christmas. They were explicit about that but it has been a while since I heard that. |
66,165 | Is there any visible progress? Is it now just an academic exercise? Do you believe Perl will continue to evolve with or without Perl 6 or will soon be forgotten? | 2008/09/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/66165",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/9411/"
] | You should not forget that Perl 5 is being developed in parallel. [5.10](http://perlbuzz.com/2007/12/perl-510-now-available.html) was out not so long ago with new features and additions to the language.
Progress on Perl 6 is slow but steady, PUGS (Perl 6 over Haskell ) has been stalled for a while but Audrey might resume workingon it soon. In the mean while Rakudo (Perl 6 over parrot) is progressing well. Here is a post detailing [various implementations progress](http://perlgeek.de/blog-en/perl-5-to-6/22-state.writeback)
Realistically I would not hold my breath for it but no matter how late it will be I think when it comes out it will still be relevant. | Perl 6 is moving along nicely. Perl 6 is a bit unlike previous Perl's in that Perl 6 is actually a language specification not an implementation of it. The reference implementation on top of Parrot that is the main thrust of the Perl 6 project has been renamed Rakudo and is moving along nicely. The best place I've found for news about it is <http://planetsix.perl.org/>. Currently, as far as I understand it, most of the important features of the language are implemented and they are fleshing out the rest and writing tests. You can download it and test it out a bit. The easiest way seems to be the cygwin version which has been bundled up and made into a cygwin package. |
66,165 | Is there any visible progress? Is it now just an academic exercise? Do you believe Perl will continue to evolve with or without Perl 6 or will soon be forgotten? | 2008/09/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/66165",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/9411/"
] | There is plenty of visible progess. chromatic posts the minutes from the weekly Parrot/Perl 6 conference call to [Use.perl](http://use.perl.org) and [rakudo.org](http://rakudo.org/) each week, you can read [Jonathan Worthington's journal](http://use.perl.org/~JonathanWorthington/journal/), or [Patrick Michaud's journal](http://use.perl.org/~pmichaud/journal), or the various Perl 6 mailing lists. As Mortiz points out, you can see the [daily state of the test suite](http://rakudo.de/).
Recent developments include Larry Wall's finishing off the work to specify the complete grammar, the Rakudo developers adding pre-compiled module support, and Jonathan's multi-level dispatch work.
It's certainly easy to follow the progress, but you probably already knew that you could easily use Google to find out ("perl6 progress" leads to good resources). Perhaps you had another question though, or just want to kick the hornet's nest? | There is now a roadmap for [parrot](https://trac.parrot.org/parrot/roadmap) at least.
There is also a website that [tracks](http://rakudo.de/) the number of tests that the [Rakudo](http://rakudo.org/) implementation passes.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/tHKAn.png)
(source: [rakudo.de](http://rakudo.de/progress.png)) |
66,165 | Is there any visible progress? Is it now just an academic exercise? Do you believe Perl will continue to evolve with or without Perl 6 or will soon be forgotten? | 2008/09/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/66165",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/9411/"
] | You should not forget that Perl 5 is being developed in parallel. [5.10](http://perlbuzz.com/2007/12/perl-510-now-available.html) was out not so long ago with new features and additions to the language.
Progress on Perl 6 is slow but steady, PUGS (Perl 6 over Haskell ) has been stalled for a while but Audrey might resume workingon it soon. In the mean while Rakudo (Perl 6 over parrot) is progressing well. Here is a post detailing [various implementations progress](http://perlgeek.de/blog-en/perl-5-to-6/22-state.writeback)
Realistically I would not hold my breath for it but no matter how late it will be I think when it comes out it will still be relevant. | To the comment that it didn't start until 2005... I suppose it depends on if you count Parrot as Perl6. The original team did, but we didn't get buy in from the "Perl6 Language" folks for years.
We were doing real work on Parrot in 2000-2004 and much of the VM groundwork was there. By 2002 we had continuations, co-routines, a JIT, an intermediate compiler and a dozen languages besides Perl6, including a BASIC interpreter written in Parrot's PIR. By then we could compile and run pretty much any sort of language in the world, short of highly concurrent languages, and our capability far exceeded the needs of Perl6 for an implementation platform.
The VM itself has been capable for years. Perl6 as a language is a different story since it is a very complex beast to parse. That has no reflection on Parrot. It is simply a reflection on the culture of Perl and it is why the rise of other scripting languages has accelerated and Perl5 is in decline and people who once chose Perl5 for new systems implementation moved to Ruby, Python and Groovy, and languages like Java and C# evolved frameworks that make a heavy use of reflection for runtime dispatching.
As much as I love Perl, if a language is so difficult to implement that a production quality compiler cannot be written in less than a decade, something is wrong! C++ is easier to parse and was implemented in a fraction of the time of Per6. That should tell us something. Derek Jones writes in his blog "The Shape of Code" that C++ may have gotten "Too Big to Fail" (<http://shape-of-code.coding-guidelines.com/2008/12/c-goes-for-too-big-to-fail/>). C++ can afford to do that since it got successful first before it got big. Perl6 may be "Too Big to ever Succeed" because the scope was so grandiose that the project has trouble retaining contributors due to the fact that the attention span of the typical contributor is probably 2-3 years, not 10. |
66,165 | Is there any visible progress? Is it now just an academic exercise? Do you believe Perl will continue to evolve with or without Perl 6 or will soon be forgotten? | 2008/09/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/66165",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/9411/"
] | The ability to target other languages to the parrot vm, will make it trivial to make a product using what ever languages you are comfortable with.
List of languages with recent activity, or at least tested with latest parrot (as of 2008/09/22):
*taken from [languages/LANGUAGES\_STATUS.pod](http://svn.perl.org/parrot/trunk/languages/LANGUAGES_STATUS.pod)*
* APL
* bf
* Cardinal (Ruby)
* Chitchat (Smalltalk)
* [Cola](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cola_programming_language) (Java)
* Common Lisp
* Eclectus (Scheme)
* ECMAScript
* [HQ9+](http://www.cliff.biffle.org/esoterica/hq9plus.html)
* [Jako](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jako_(programming)) (C/Perl)
* JSON
* [lazy-k](http://homepages.cwi.nl/~tromp/cl/lazy-k.html)
* [lolcode](http://lolcode.com/specs/1.2)
* [Lua](http://www.parrotcode.org/talks/LuaOnParrot.pdf)
* Parrot m4
* [Markdown](http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown)
* NQP (Not Quite Perl)
* [Rakudo](http://rakudo.org)
* Pheme (Lisp-2 compiler inspired by Scheme)
* Pipp (Pipp is Parrot's PHP)
* [PJS](http://users.fulladsl.be/spb1622/pjs/) ([wiki](http://www.perlfoundation.org/parrot/index.cgi?javascript))
* Punie (Perl1)
* regex
* Squaak (Squaak is not Squeak)
* partcl (TCL)
* [unlambda](http://www.madore.org/~david/programs/unlambda/)
* WMLScript Translator | Slow and late. It has a terminal case of second system disease. When I was a Perl hacker (back in the day), they had been working on Perl 6 for two years. That was 6 years ago. You could build a whole operating system in that time. |
66,165 | Is there any visible progress? Is it now just an academic exercise? Do you believe Perl will continue to evolve with or without Perl 6 or will soon be forgotten? | 2008/09/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/66165",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/9411/"
] | To the comment that it didn't start until 2005... I suppose it depends on if you count Parrot as Perl6. The original team did, but we didn't get buy in from the "Perl6 Language" folks for years.
We were doing real work on Parrot in 2000-2004 and much of the VM groundwork was there. By 2002 we had continuations, co-routines, a JIT, an intermediate compiler and a dozen languages besides Perl6, including a BASIC interpreter written in Parrot's PIR. By then we could compile and run pretty much any sort of language in the world, short of highly concurrent languages, and our capability far exceeded the needs of Perl6 for an implementation platform.
The VM itself has been capable for years. Perl6 as a language is a different story since it is a very complex beast to parse. That has no reflection on Parrot. It is simply a reflection on the culture of Perl and it is why the rise of other scripting languages has accelerated and Perl5 is in decline and people who once chose Perl5 for new systems implementation moved to Ruby, Python and Groovy, and languages like Java and C# evolved frameworks that make a heavy use of reflection for runtime dispatching.
As much as I love Perl, if a language is so difficult to implement that a production quality compiler cannot be written in less than a decade, something is wrong! C++ is easier to parse and was implemented in a fraction of the time of Per6. That should tell us something. Derek Jones writes in his blog "The Shape of Code" that C++ may have gotten "Too Big to Fail" (<http://shape-of-code.coding-guidelines.com/2008/12/c-goes-for-too-big-to-fail/>). C++ can afford to do that since it got successful first before it got big. Perl6 may be "Too Big to ever Succeed" because the scope was so grandiose that the project has trouble retaining contributors due to the fact that the attention span of the typical contributor is probably 2-3 years, not 10. | It'll be out by Christmas. ;-) I've heard on podcasts that there there will be some kind of alpha before this Christmas. They were explicit about that but it has been a while since I heard that. |
66,165 | Is there any visible progress? Is it now just an academic exercise? Do you believe Perl will continue to evolve with or without Perl 6 or will soon be forgotten? | 2008/09/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/66165",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/9411/"
] | Please see the Official Perl 6 Wiki to find the latest information:
<http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6/index.cgi?perl_6>
The latest headlines from 2 leading Perl 6 blogs are shown at the bottom of the official Perl 6 wiki home page.
There's lots of other useful information and links there.
For example, recent Perl 6 articles and presentations:
<http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6/index.cgi?perl_6_articles_and_presentations>
The Parrot VM for dynamic languages (to be used by Rakudo/Perl 6) also has an official wiki:
<http://www.perlfoundation.org/parrot/index.cgi?parrot>
Parrot is multi-lingual, so Perl 6 will be able to call modules written in other Parrot languages, and other Parrot languages will be able to call Perl 6 modules compiled to Parrot.
Unlike Perl 5, which is defined by its reference implementation, Perl 6 is defined by its test suite. So there will eventually be other versions of Perl 6 that don't run on the Parrot VM.
Perl 5 is still evolving. Perl 5.10 was a major recent release, which (among many other improvements) also had a few Perl 6 related features. Perl 5.12 is under active development (as Perl 5.11).
Perl 5.12 will have support for calling (and for being called by) Perl 6. Perl 6 should be able to compile the great majority of Perl 5 code -- this is a major priority.
Please see the Official Perl 5 Wiki to find the latest information:
<http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl5/index.cgi?perl_5_wiki> | Perl 5 will continue to be wonderful and available even if Six never comes to fruition. Six invigorated Perl 5, and Perl 5 continues to experience many wonderful new things, such as Moose.
I think Perl 6 will be completed some day and will be good, but for now, I'm a Fiver, and I'm happy like that. |
66,165 | Is there any visible progress? Is it now just an academic exercise? Do you believe Perl will continue to evolve with or without Perl 6 or will soon be forgotten? | 2008/09/15 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/66165",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/9411/"
] | There is plenty of visible progess. chromatic posts the minutes from the weekly Parrot/Perl 6 conference call to [Use.perl](http://use.perl.org) and [rakudo.org](http://rakudo.org/) each week, you can read [Jonathan Worthington's journal](http://use.perl.org/~JonathanWorthington/journal/), or [Patrick Michaud's journal](http://use.perl.org/~pmichaud/journal), or the various Perl 6 mailing lists. As Mortiz points out, you can see the [daily state of the test suite](http://rakudo.de/).
Recent developments include Larry Wall's finishing off the work to specify the complete grammar, the Rakudo developers adding pre-compiled module support, and Jonathan's multi-level dispatch work.
It's certainly easy to follow the progress, but you probably already knew that you could easily use Google to find out ("perl6 progress" leads to good resources). Perhaps you had another question though, or just want to kick the hornet's nest? | The ability to target other languages to the parrot vm, will make it trivial to make a product using what ever languages you are comfortable with.
List of languages with recent activity, or at least tested with latest parrot (as of 2008/09/22):
*taken from [languages/LANGUAGES\_STATUS.pod](http://svn.perl.org/parrot/trunk/languages/LANGUAGES_STATUS.pod)*
* APL
* bf
* Cardinal (Ruby)
* Chitchat (Smalltalk)
* [Cola](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cola_programming_language) (Java)
* Common Lisp
* Eclectus (Scheme)
* ECMAScript
* [HQ9+](http://www.cliff.biffle.org/esoterica/hq9plus.html)
* [Jako](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jako_(programming)) (C/Perl)
* JSON
* [lazy-k](http://homepages.cwi.nl/~tromp/cl/lazy-k.html)
* [lolcode](http://lolcode.com/specs/1.2)
* [Lua](http://www.parrotcode.org/talks/LuaOnParrot.pdf)
* Parrot m4
* [Markdown](http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown)
* NQP (Not Quite Perl)
* [Rakudo](http://rakudo.org)
* Pheme (Lisp-2 compiler inspired by Scheme)
* Pipp (Pipp is Parrot's PHP)
* [PJS](http://users.fulladsl.be/spb1622/pjs/) ([wiki](http://www.perlfoundation.org/parrot/index.cgi?javascript))
* Punie (Perl1)
* regex
* Squaak (Squaak is not Squeak)
* partcl (TCL)
* [unlambda](http://www.madore.org/~david/programs/unlambda/)
* WMLScript Translator |
13,519 | My basic question is: "Do longer tautologies take longer to prove?" But obviously this is underdetermined. If you are allowed an inference rule "Tautological Implication" then any tautology has a 1 line proof.
But let's say we're working in natural deduction, is it true that longer tautologies (tautologies with more letters and connectives in them) take more proof steps?
But this is still not quite a good enough question, since we can add superfluous steps to a proof and still prove the result. So the question is:
In Natural Deduction, is the shortest proof of a tautology related to its length? Or perhaps: does a shorter tautology always admit a shorter proof?
And how robust is this result across different sets of connectives/inference rules? | 2010/12/08 | [
"https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/13519",
"https://math.stackexchange.com",
"https://math.stackexchange.com/users/172/"
] | The size of proofs is almost totally unrelated to the size of the statements they prove (in the worst case).
**Lower Bound: constant size**
The size of the smallest proof for statements of size N is constant. Just make your statements of the form "True or S". (Unless you count the input statement as part of the size, in which case it is linear.)
**Upper Bound: incomputable size**
The size of the largest proof proving a statement of size less than N grows so fast it is not computable from N.
*Proof*
Consider the size of a proof that a Turing Machine does not halt within S steps. Some turing machines run forever but can't be proven to run forever. Suppose you have such a machine M. Proving M doesn't halt before S steps must take more steps as S grows. Otherwise we have a proof for all S and have contradicted ourselves.
Lets call that number-of-steps to proof-size function G. I am going to make one assumption, which is that there is a computable function G' such that G(G'(X)) >= X.
Suppose you have some computable function F you claim is an asymptotic upper bound on proof sizes given the statement size. Then I just generate a sequence of statements where the Nth statement is "M does not halt within G'(N\*F(N)) steps". The statements are all provable (worst case: simulate M in the proof; that's why I assumed G' is computable) and grow in size logarithmically. But the proof sizes grow asymptotically faster than F, which is exponentially faster than F with respect to the statement sizes. So F is not actually an asymptotic upper bound.
Therefore no computable function is an asymptotic upper bound on proof size given the statement size, which means the upper bound is incomputable. | >
> does a shorter tautology always admit a shorter proof?
>
>
>
it seems like there should be a tautology whose statement is longer than fermats last theorem but whose shortest proof is shorter |
343,287 | In recent product announcements, I have noticed a trend that is disturbing to me. Stack Exchange employees are making claims and arguing with users without providing data to back up assumptions. This is leading to both users getting frustrated because it looks like they are being ignored and employees getting frustrated because the users aren't understanding their point of view.
I'm going to provide a few examples, but I want to make it clear that I am *not* calling people out. My goal is to point out the frustration I see building as a high rep user and provide a few suggestions on how all of us can resolve some of these issues. I know that some of the frustration I am seeing is also festering from other recent posts, but I want to focus on posts where the community can provide valuable feedback to improve Stack Overflow, not solve worldly issues.
### Concern 1: Dismissiveness
There are posts throughout this topic of users sharing user scripts to do two things - change the top color and unsticky it. Regardless of the merits of these (and I admit that I am [biased](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/343166/189134) in what I think the outcome should be), the tone coming from employees isn't the greatest. A few examples:
>
> can you please include the votes from all the people who do like the white on white (but because they are OK with it, didn't feel the need to pipe up)? Claiming you and the few hundred upvotes on different posts are representative of the community as a whole is disingenuous at best. - [Oded](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444452_343106)
>
>
>
and
>
> @StevenPenny the reason Pawel didn't respond regarding the color is because if we change the color, we would first need to run additional testing. The team's run multiple usability and A/B tests to ensure usability and effectiveness of the current version. Making it black would make it stand off from the rest of the content more, but a lot of users in this meta post don't want that. We also know that things that don't look like the rest of the site tend to get ignored by more people. [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444215_343106)
>
>
>
Both of these come off as, frankly, insulting. The first is asking for data that even Stack Exchange doesn't have and the second attempts to explain away why something can't be done because of "testing". Personally, I'd be ok with that testing response, if we have been provided more information but as it standings the only hard numbers we have is that top bar clicks increased 143%.
**Suggestion**: It is implied that other metrics were measured and these influenced the decision to build this a certain way. Share some of this with us. Stack Exchange values transparancy. We've come to expect it. Don't shut it out of this process.
>
> We've interviewed a lot of users who had no idea what the items in the topbar were or that we had navigation at the top right-hand side of the page because they were used to landing on the page and scrolling to the answer. By this time everything is off screen. Clicks weren't the only thing that we measured, but they were an important metric for us, especially for unregistered or low-reputation users. We also tracked searches, because we want searching to increase or not decrease since this will likely result in less duplicate questions asked. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444337_343228)
>
>
>
### Concern 2: Forgetting (or appearing to forget) about experienced users
This is round 3 of meta posts and certain messages have been stated by high rep users several times. Again, these are the color and sticky bars. However, that last comment raises an important point that I believe is the heart of this recent discontent: Stack Exchange is focusing on the low-reputation/unregistered/casual users at the expense of improving the product for existing and power users.
Without knowing more about the internal processes that are driving these decisions, I can't offer a decent suggestion other than "don't ignore us", but comments like this from high rep users and your moderators is frustrating to read over and over:
>
> interesting! But I'm not a new user. To me the sticky bar is distracting and contains mostly irrelevant links for me. I never use the Jobs or Tags or Documentation links, and I'll happily use my Home button to go back to the top for the rest. When I am answering I look for the question to get details right, and notifications that distract me from answering are hindering at that point. Please separate the daily power user from the unregistered casual visitor! - [Martijn Pieters](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444416_343228)
>
>
>
This type of concern is casually dismissed with a (paraphrased) "they don't know what they really want".
>
> We've interviewed a lot of new and veteran users, but this is also something that's been asked for on meta and lot of users within this post like. Because some power users don't like something doesn't automatically mean it is a poor design for all power users and we don't care about their needs. Saying things like "tyranny of the casual user majority" may be one of the reasons some people outside this community perceive it as unfriendly to new users. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444532_343228)
>
>
>
This concern is even more obvious when links that were used by experienced users to help new users are completely removed. The help button may not be used by new users (I'm sure there is a stat somewhere about how often it's used, but I can't find one) but it is used by experienced users to point the newer people to help. Comments like this to users trying to help don't make sense. The button was removed for those that can help, but those that don't use it have the button still in place.
>
> i understand that and I'm really sory but please try to consider fact that majority of our users didn't use that help link in top bar. people just don't read help usually so for majority of users this link was simply useless. your effort trying to teach others (and linking to help) is priceless but we still need to consider needs of other users as well. that area in header is very "expensive" and we're trying to keep there only essential and most useful things. but i agree that we, as company, need to do better job at informing users about help. but link in header is not a solution... – [Paweł](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343165/new-top-bar-wheres-the-help-menu-gone#comment444072_343165)
>
>
>
**Suggestion**: Consider your audience. These posts are made on meta, where your experienced and invested users lurk. These are the people that want Stack Overflow to succeed. The suggestions they are offering are to help you. Dismissing them or forgetting about them isn't helpful to either side.
---
Realizing that some of the animosity that exists right now is due to other events, I think these two concerns I've presented can be easily addressed. The community is here to help Stack Overflow grow. We *want* to work with the company and we *want* new and better things. We are engaging you on Meta because you brought the updates to us. Dismissing feedback that was requested is only strengthening a concern some community members have: Stack Overflow is starting to forget about its users. I am *not* saying that you need to listen to everything we say. But, Stack Exchange values transparency and many of us love seeing posts filled with data to back up or refute assumptions. Let's see more of that to argue points. | 2017/02/08 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343287",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/189134/"
] | When people give something their best, and all of it, they tend to stretch pretty thin as what they've built comes under scrutiny and critique. This is because the best they've got creatively and emotionally is still completely invested in that thing they just built.
There's also a rather palpable wave of dissonance that hits you pretty strongly after you emerge from a tool shed full of people that feel that they've built the very best thing they possibly could have, too. But you folks build and ship software, you know this stuff.
To the comments that you've identified as examples in your post, as well as numerous others that were more or less similar, we agree that they weren't our best. For that, we apologize. No one ever *really* intends to come off as dismissive, condescending or belittling as they work to try to make a situation better; I don't think folks realized just how thinly they were stretched and how much that affected their ability to really shape what they were trying to say.
**We will do better.**
To your mention that other things that happened previously might have contributed here, I think that's part of it. The push that we felt had a level of intensity that we don't ordinarily see; I'm actually quite glad that you called this out. We can't ever let bringing the less-than-great out in each other become something that looks like normal. I've been a user since late 2008, I was elected to serve this community in 2011 and to be quite honest, yesterday scared me a little. I was taken back a bit by stuff I saw coming out of us, and stuff coming out of folks that we're ordinarily quite friendly with.
### Let's please take a hard look at all this tension, and decide if it's something that we want to keep.
Yeah, I don't want to keep it either. Here are things we're going to do in order to help that along.
**We have to do a better job of communicating and explaining our goals.**
This means taking time to explain constraints and decisions more clearly so that information can help you better understand our position on something, and help us get more valuable feedback from you.
We can't always just throw data together from our testing system in a manner that would be *close* to rational for other people to consume, but we can take time to explain tests better.
And when we *didn't* do something that you feel we probably should have done, it's important to give our rationale in a manner that's not dismissive. And sometimes that might mean saying scary for-profit words like "More exposure to [thing] is a big priority for us right now, so we really can't move it". We can't always be specific, but vaguely non-dismissive is much better than coming off as rude.
**"Let me explain this to you ..." has to be meant literally.**
Because it's sometimes too easy to say that when what you really mean is *let me tell you why you're wrong*. That line can sometimes be very thin, and very easy to cross, so we all need to make sure to watch for it.
If we say something and pick up that you didn't understand us, our next job is to help you understand us, not just try harder to find ways to get you to agree with it.
**Tagging out**
It's hard to know in advance of just not knowing what you're even trying to accomplish that you've lost sight of whatever it was you were trying to do. This is particularly true in conversations where the sense of urgency to respond quickly is quite elevated, and both parties grow increasingly emotional.
We'll do a better job of just outright saying "*I think I lost total track of what we're trying to achieve here, can you please tell me in a sentence or two what you want me to take back to the team?*" Sometimes that can be *just* enough pause to keep things from getting too hot.
**So ...**
We haven't lost touch, we honestly felt that the reception to this would mostly follow suit with the rest of the tests and interviews we completed, coupled with the support we saw for this early on (granted, before we had more concrete things for you to poke at).
And, well, looking completely bewildered and dumbfounded *kinda* looks like losing touch, but it's a state that's much easier to recover from (we're pretty much there now).
Thank you for bringing this up in the manner that you did. If I can add to or clarify any part of this, I'm happy to do it. | I think that there is a problem here that isn't actually solvable, unfortunately; there is a fundamentally paradox.
People (us) want developers to interact with us and want them to listen to us and consider our thoughts, while not appearing condescending and not dismissing us
*but*
The only way for developers to both do their jobs *and* not get involved in arguments with users is for them to *stop* talking to us.
---
Stack Exchange employs some amazing people. *Amazing*. And what that means is *they know what the heck they're doing*. They know how to design a good website. They know what looks good and what doesn't, and what is usable and what isn't. And, moreover, *they know how to incorporate feedback from a variety of sources* and produce a site that best fits that feedback.
Stack Exchange users, on the other hand, are largely self-selected for a couple of things. We're mostly type-A, smart, and *love* giving feedback to people (a.k.a. telling other people how to do things). That's *why* we're on this site, after all, instead of somewhere else.
What does that mean? That means that we *really* like to tell the developers what we think is best. And when they tell us "Thanks, but we've already thought about this and tested it in a few ways, and we think this is a good way to do it," what do we do? We push back some, and then push back some more. And because they can *never* come up with a solution that is ideal for everyone - and even when they do come up with that ideal solution for you, you often don't know it right away - this pushing *never stops*, even if they do whatever it is the current loudest voice is asking.
Anybody surprised that it ends up with the developers saying some things that they probably shouldn't, or that they should say but get taken out of context? Not me. I'm a human being, and even though I always try to *be nice*, I make mistakes just like anyone else - and so do our developers (who, after all, are selected for being good *developers*, not for being perfect at customer service, though I think they do pretty well on balance).
You tell someone whose *profession* it is to design good websites that they don't know what they're doing, and whine enough that nobody listens to you (when of course what you mean is not "nobody listens to me", but "you didn't do what I told you you should do"), and *of course* they get a bit snippy after a while. I would.
So - I think the only thing that's going to come out of this, and I think it's the right thing, unfortunately, is that SE developers will perhaps spend a bit less time talking to us and interacting in comment threads. We'll still have them, and we'll still talk amongst ourselves about how *sad* it is that nobody listens to us.
And then we'll go back to using Stack Exchange, and in a couple of years the next time they change something, perhaps change the colors to add a bit more contrast, we'll have another few months of complaints.
---
And as a side note: I hope they keep doing things the way they do in terms of making decisions about design the *right* way. I don't like everything about the new site design, but I *do* know that I am not a site designer, and I know *jack* about what actually works. And - more importantly - I do *not* want to have the site designed by the loudest voices. |
343,287 | In recent product announcements, I have noticed a trend that is disturbing to me. Stack Exchange employees are making claims and arguing with users without providing data to back up assumptions. This is leading to both users getting frustrated because it looks like they are being ignored and employees getting frustrated because the users aren't understanding their point of view.
I'm going to provide a few examples, but I want to make it clear that I am *not* calling people out. My goal is to point out the frustration I see building as a high rep user and provide a few suggestions on how all of us can resolve some of these issues. I know that some of the frustration I am seeing is also festering from other recent posts, but I want to focus on posts where the community can provide valuable feedback to improve Stack Overflow, not solve worldly issues.
### Concern 1: Dismissiveness
There are posts throughout this topic of users sharing user scripts to do two things - change the top color and unsticky it. Regardless of the merits of these (and I admit that I am [biased](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/343166/189134) in what I think the outcome should be), the tone coming from employees isn't the greatest. A few examples:
>
> can you please include the votes from all the people who do like the white on white (but because they are OK with it, didn't feel the need to pipe up)? Claiming you and the few hundred upvotes on different posts are representative of the community as a whole is disingenuous at best. - [Oded](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444452_343106)
>
>
>
and
>
> @StevenPenny the reason Pawel didn't respond regarding the color is because if we change the color, we would first need to run additional testing. The team's run multiple usability and A/B tests to ensure usability and effectiveness of the current version. Making it black would make it stand off from the rest of the content more, but a lot of users in this meta post don't want that. We also know that things that don't look like the rest of the site tend to get ignored by more people. [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444215_343106)
>
>
>
Both of these come off as, frankly, insulting. The first is asking for data that even Stack Exchange doesn't have and the second attempts to explain away why something can't be done because of "testing". Personally, I'd be ok with that testing response, if we have been provided more information but as it standings the only hard numbers we have is that top bar clicks increased 143%.
**Suggestion**: It is implied that other metrics were measured and these influenced the decision to build this a certain way. Share some of this with us. Stack Exchange values transparancy. We've come to expect it. Don't shut it out of this process.
>
> We've interviewed a lot of users who had no idea what the items in the topbar were or that we had navigation at the top right-hand side of the page because they were used to landing on the page and scrolling to the answer. By this time everything is off screen. Clicks weren't the only thing that we measured, but they were an important metric for us, especially for unregistered or low-reputation users. We also tracked searches, because we want searching to increase or not decrease since this will likely result in less duplicate questions asked. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444337_343228)
>
>
>
### Concern 2: Forgetting (or appearing to forget) about experienced users
This is round 3 of meta posts and certain messages have been stated by high rep users several times. Again, these are the color and sticky bars. However, that last comment raises an important point that I believe is the heart of this recent discontent: Stack Exchange is focusing on the low-reputation/unregistered/casual users at the expense of improving the product for existing and power users.
Without knowing more about the internal processes that are driving these decisions, I can't offer a decent suggestion other than "don't ignore us", but comments like this from high rep users and your moderators is frustrating to read over and over:
>
> interesting! But I'm not a new user. To me the sticky bar is distracting and contains mostly irrelevant links for me. I never use the Jobs or Tags or Documentation links, and I'll happily use my Home button to go back to the top for the rest. When I am answering I look for the question to get details right, and notifications that distract me from answering are hindering at that point. Please separate the daily power user from the unregistered casual visitor! - [Martijn Pieters](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444416_343228)
>
>
>
This type of concern is casually dismissed with a (paraphrased) "they don't know what they really want".
>
> We've interviewed a lot of new and veteran users, but this is also something that's been asked for on meta and lot of users within this post like. Because some power users don't like something doesn't automatically mean it is a poor design for all power users and we don't care about their needs. Saying things like "tyranny of the casual user majority" may be one of the reasons some people outside this community perceive it as unfriendly to new users. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444532_343228)
>
>
>
This concern is even more obvious when links that were used by experienced users to help new users are completely removed. The help button may not be used by new users (I'm sure there is a stat somewhere about how often it's used, but I can't find one) but it is used by experienced users to point the newer people to help. Comments like this to users trying to help don't make sense. The button was removed for those that can help, but those that don't use it have the button still in place.
>
> i understand that and I'm really sory but please try to consider fact that majority of our users didn't use that help link in top bar. people just don't read help usually so for majority of users this link was simply useless. your effort trying to teach others (and linking to help) is priceless but we still need to consider needs of other users as well. that area in header is very "expensive" and we're trying to keep there only essential and most useful things. but i agree that we, as company, need to do better job at informing users about help. but link in header is not a solution... – [Paweł](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343165/new-top-bar-wheres-the-help-menu-gone#comment444072_343165)
>
>
>
**Suggestion**: Consider your audience. These posts are made on meta, where your experienced and invested users lurk. These are the people that want Stack Overflow to succeed. The suggestions they are offering are to help you. Dismissing them or forgetting about them isn't helpful to either side.
---
Realizing that some of the animosity that exists right now is due to other events, I think these two concerns I've presented can be easily addressed. The community is here to help Stack Overflow grow. We *want* to work with the company and we *want* new and better things. We are engaging you on Meta because you brought the updates to us. Dismissing feedback that was requested is only strengthening a concern some community members have: Stack Overflow is starting to forget about its users. I am *not* saying that you need to listen to everything we say. But, Stack Exchange values transparency and many of us love seeing posts filled with data to back up or refute assumptions. Let's see more of that to argue points. | 2017/02/08 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343287",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/189134/"
] | [Tim has written an excellent answer to this](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343287/concerns-about-recent-stack-exchange-responses-to-users-suggestions/343304#343304) - go read it, please. We *can* do better here, and we're gonna try.
But something sticks in my craw reading this post: this is mostly about design. In fact, most of your quotes are from our design team. I feel that's unfair.
...I've said *many* more dismissive and uncaring things than the designers ever have. **Where's the love, Andy??!**
But more importantly... No one *really* wants this site to be designed based on how voting on meta plays out. For starters, we've all been on the other side of "design by committee" - [it is hell](http://theoatmeal.com/comics/design_hell). But more importantly, the results are always terrible. Design-by-vote kills any hope of consistency, takes focus away from hard problems and pours resources down the multicolor bikeshed drain - and the bikeshed didn't even need a drain.
You're all programmers, you don't need me to tell you any of this, *you've lived it*. And... It's actually kinda nice being on the other side for once, ain't it?
But come on. You know it doesn't work. And you know that *caring* doesn't fix anything either; as nice as it is to have a sympathetic ear, what matters is what gets *done*. When you sit down to triage bug reports, you don't go looking for the one that has the most *votes* - you look for the one that has the biggest *impact*... And ideally, has enough information for you to understand and reproduce the problem.
Right now, there are under a thousand people who can even *see* the designs that've caused so much consternation here. In a few days, there'll be *many thousands* looking at them. **So the design team is scrambling to identify and fix the most critical bugs as fast as they can, before all hell breaks loose.** Again, *tell me* that doesn't sound familiar...
But the design sucks! There's barely any green at all!
------------------------------------------------------
Look, if you want to have an impact on the design here, then focus on *the concrete details* of how it is causing problems. There's no *guarantee* that anything will get fixed, or that it'll get fixed in the way you want... But if you make it easy to triage, you greatly increase the chance that it *will* be fixed. Remember, every minute the designers are here on meta, chewing their fingernails trying to figure out how to write a diplomatic response is a minute they're not actually *fixing* something.
[This is a *great* bug report](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343180/quick-route-from-meta-to-main), because it identifies *exactly* where the original behavior caused problems and made it easy to identify how others would be affected by it. The only comments a designer had to leave there were "we're gonna fix this" and "it's fixed". Also, it has lots of free-hand red arrows. Don't you wish *your* users made bug reports like that? So be the change you want to see in your own disgruntled userbase. | I think that there is a problem here that isn't actually solvable, unfortunately; there is a fundamentally paradox.
People (us) want developers to interact with us and want them to listen to us and consider our thoughts, while not appearing condescending and not dismissing us
*but*
The only way for developers to both do their jobs *and* not get involved in arguments with users is for them to *stop* talking to us.
---
Stack Exchange employs some amazing people. *Amazing*. And what that means is *they know what the heck they're doing*. They know how to design a good website. They know what looks good and what doesn't, and what is usable and what isn't. And, moreover, *they know how to incorporate feedback from a variety of sources* and produce a site that best fits that feedback.
Stack Exchange users, on the other hand, are largely self-selected for a couple of things. We're mostly type-A, smart, and *love* giving feedback to people (a.k.a. telling other people how to do things). That's *why* we're on this site, after all, instead of somewhere else.
What does that mean? That means that we *really* like to tell the developers what we think is best. And when they tell us "Thanks, but we've already thought about this and tested it in a few ways, and we think this is a good way to do it," what do we do? We push back some, and then push back some more. And because they can *never* come up with a solution that is ideal for everyone - and even when they do come up with that ideal solution for you, you often don't know it right away - this pushing *never stops*, even if they do whatever it is the current loudest voice is asking.
Anybody surprised that it ends up with the developers saying some things that they probably shouldn't, or that they should say but get taken out of context? Not me. I'm a human being, and even though I always try to *be nice*, I make mistakes just like anyone else - and so do our developers (who, after all, are selected for being good *developers*, not for being perfect at customer service, though I think they do pretty well on balance).
You tell someone whose *profession* it is to design good websites that they don't know what they're doing, and whine enough that nobody listens to you (when of course what you mean is not "nobody listens to me", but "you didn't do what I told you you should do"), and *of course* they get a bit snippy after a while. I would.
So - I think the only thing that's going to come out of this, and I think it's the right thing, unfortunately, is that SE developers will perhaps spend a bit less time talking to us and interacting in comment threads. We'll still have them, and we'll still talk amongst ourselves about how *sad* it is that nobody listens to us.
And then we'll go back to using Stack Exchange, and in a couple of years the next time they change something, perhaps change the colors to add a bit more contrast, we'll have another few months of complaints.
---
And as a side note: I hope they keep doing things the way they do in terms of making decisions about design the *right* way. I don't like everything about the new site design, but I *do* know that I am not a site designer, and I know *jack* about what actually works. And - more importantly - I do *not* want to have the site designed by the loudest voices. |
343,287 | In recent product announcements, I have noticed a trend that is disturbing to me. Stack Exchange employees are making claims and arguing with users without providing data to back up assumptions. This is leading to both users getting frustrated because it looks like they are being ignored and employees getting frustrated because the users aren't understanding their point of view.
I'm going to provide a few examples, but I want to make it clear that I am *not* calling people out. My goal is to point out the frustration I see building as a high rep user and provide a few suggestions on how all of us can resolve some of these issues. I know that some of the frustration I am seeing is also festering from other recent posts, but I want to focus on posts where the community can provide valuable feedback to improve Stack Overflow, not solve worldly issues.
### Concern 1: Dismissiveness
There are posts throughout this topic of users sharing user scripts to do two things - change the top color and unsticky it. Regardless of the merits of these (and I admit that I am [biased](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/343166/189134) in what I think the outcome should be), the tone coming from employees isn't the greatest. A few examples:
>
> can you please include the votes from all the people who do like the white on white (but because they are OK with it, didn't feel the need to pipe up)? Claiming you and the few hundred upvotes on different posts are representative of the community as a whole is disingenuous at best. - [Oded](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444452_343106)
>
>
>
and
>
> @StevenPenny the reason Pawel didn't respond regarding the color is because if we change the color, we would first need to run additional testing. The team's run multiple usability and A/B tests to ensure usability and effectiveness of the current version. Making it black would make it stand off from the rest of the content more, but a lot of users in this meta post don't want that. We also know that things that don't look like the rest of the site tend to get ignored by more people. [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444215_343106)
>
>
>
Both of these come off as, frankly, insulting. The first is asking for data that even Stack Exchange doesn't have and the second attempts to explain away why something can't be done because of "testing". Personally, I'd be ok with that testing response, if we have been provided more information but as it standings the only hard numbers we have is that top bar clicks increased 143%.
**Suggestion**: It is implied that other metrics were measured and these influenced the decision to build this a certain way. Share some of this with us. Stack Exchange values transparancy. We've come to expect it. Don't shut it out of this process.
>
> We've interviewed a lot of users who had no idea what the items in the topbar were or that we had navigation at the top right-hand side of the page because they were used to landing on the page and scrolling to the answer. By this time everything is off screen. Clicks weren't the only thing that we measured, but they were an important metric for us, especially for unregistered or low-reputation users. We also tracked searches, because we want searching to increase or not decrease since this will likely result in less duplicate questions asked. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444337_343228)
>
>
>
### Concern 2: Forgetting (or appearing to forget) about experienced users
This is round 3 of meta posts and certain messages have been stated by high rep users several times. Again, these are the color and sticky bars. However, that last comment raises an important point that I believe is the heart of this recent discontent: Stack Exchange is focusing on the low-reputation/unregistered/casual users at the expense of improving the product for existing and power users.
Without knowing more about the internal processes that are driving these decisions, I can't offer a decent suggestion other than "don't ignore us", but comments like this from high rep users and your moderators is frustrating to read over and over:
>
> interesting! But I'm not a new user. To me the sticky bar is distracting and contains mostly irrelevant links for me. I never use the Jobs or Tags or Documentation links, and I'll happily use my Home button to go back to the top for the rest. When I am answering I look for the question to get details right, and notifications that distract me from answering are hindering at that point. Please separate the daily power user from the unregistered casual visitor! - [Martijn Pieters](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444416_343228)
>
>
>
This type of concern is casually dismissed with a (paraphrased) "they don't know what they really want".
>
> We've interviewed a lot of new and veteran users, but this is also something that's been asked for on meta and lot of users within this post like. Because some power users don't like something doesn't automatically mean it is a poor design for all power users and we don't care about their needs. Saying things like "tyranny of the casual user majority" may be one of the reasons some people outside this community perceive it as unfriendly to new users. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444532_343228)
>
>
>
This concern is even more obvious when links that were used by experienced users to help new users are completely removed. The help button may not be used by new users (I'm sure there is a stat somewhere about how often it's used, but I can't find one) but it is used by experienced users to point the newer people to help. Comments like this to users trying to help don't make sense. The button was removed for those that can help, but those that don't use it have the button still in place.
>
> i understand that and I'm really sory but please try to consider fact that majority of our users didn't use that help link in top bar. people just don't read help usually so for majority of users this link was simply useless. your effort trying to teach others (and linking to help) is priceless but we still need to consider needs of other users as well. that area in header is very "expensive" and we're trying to keep there only essential and most useful things. but i agree that we, as company, need to do better job at informing users about help. but link in header is not a solution... – [Paweł](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343165/new-top-bar-wheres-the-help-menu-gone#comment444072_343165)
>
>
>
**Suggestion**: Consider your audience. These posts are made on meta, where your experienced and invested users lurk. These are the people that want Stack Overflow to succeed. The suggestions they are offering are to help you. Dismissing them or forgetting about them isn't helpful to either side.
---
Realizing that some of the animosity that exists right now is due to other events, I think these two concerns I've presented can be easily addressed. The community is here to help Stack Overflow grow. We *want* to work with the company and we *want* new and better things. We are engaging you on Meta because you brought the updates to us. Dismissing feedback that was requested is only strengthening a concern some community members have: Stack Overflow is starting to forget about its users. I am *not* saying that you need to listen to everything we say. But, Stack Exchange values transparency and many of us love seeing posts filled with data to back up or refute assumptions. Let's see more of that to argue points. | 2017/02/08 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343287",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/189134/"
] | While I don't believe that it's ever how the responses are *intended* to sound, this is how I *feel* reading some feedback on posts. It's not limited to the post that is the focus of the op.
One trend that stands out to me is the expectation that users will provide rigorous statistics to back up every claim they make. Often it isn't possible to make such an analysis because data hasn't been provided or is difficult to get, even when it's reasonable to assume that it exists somewhere. Responses from employees often lack statistics too, but can convey a tone of "if you don't have any numbers then we'll just assume our version is right".
The response to feedback is that tests show that the change is good. But how are users supposed to run competing tests? There's no way to provide competing statistics, so such a response feels dismissive even if it wasn't intended that way.
A more constructive response would be to add details explaining how a decision was made. The sooner this response can be posted, the less chance it has to get buried in a long, frustrating comment chain. For example, an employee eventually responded to a request for a static top bar with:
>
> majority (like seriously a lot) of our traffic comes from google (both anonymous and loggedin). they very often land in the middle of the page on specific answer (or just quickly scroll down without paying attention to anything we have on top, very often omitting even question itself). so people simply ignore Stack Overflow as a website and everything we offer them, it's more like a place with answers. we're trying to do what's best for users, but we also need something from users because it's the only way this ecosystem may exist. i hope that answer makes sense.
>
>
>
This response is better because it provides insight into the decision, rather than making it feel arbitrary. It points out something that normal users are probably not thinking about. Now they can help brainstorm further solutions that keep this in mind rather than just saying they don't like the change. | I think that there is a problem here that isn't actually solvable, unfortunately; there is a fundamentally paradox.
People (us) want developers to interact with us and want them to listen to us and consider our thoughts, while not appearing condescending and not dismissing us
*but*
The only way for developers to both do their jobs *and* not get involved in arguments with users is for them to *stop* talking to us.
---
Stack Exchange employs some amazing people. *Amazing*. And what that means is *they know what the heck they're doing*. They know how to design a good website. They know what looks good and what doesn't, and what is usable and what isn't. And, moreover, *they know how to incorporate feedback from a variety of sources* and produce a site that best fits that feedback.
Stack Exchange users, on the other hand, are largely self-selected for a couple of things. We're mostly type-A, smart, and *love* giving feedback to people (a.k.a. telling other people how to do things). That's *why* we're on this site, after all, instead of somewhere else.
What does that mean? That means that we *really* like to tell the developers what we think is best. And when they tell us "Thanks, but we've already thought about this and tested it in a few ways, and we think this is a good way to do it," what do we do? We push back some, and then push back some more. And because they can *never* come up with a solution that is ideal for everyone - and even when they do come up with that ideal solution for you, you often don't know it right away - this pushing *never stops*, even if they do whatever it is the current loudest voice is asking.
Anybody surprised that it ends up with the developers saying some things that they probably shouldn't, or that they should say but get taken out of context? Not me. I'm a human being, and even though I always try to *be nice*, I make mistakes just like anyone else - and so do our developers (who, after all, are selected for being good *developers*, not for being perfect at customer service, though I think they do pretty well on balance).
You tell someone whose *profession* it is to design good websites that they don't know what they're doing, and whine enough that nobody listens to you (when of course what you mean is not "nobody listens to me", but "you didn't do what I told you you should do"), and *of course* they get a bit snippy after a while. I would.
So - I think the only thing that's going to come out of this, and I think it's the right thing, unfortunately, is that SE developers will perhaps spend a bit less time talking to us and interacting in comment threads. We'll still have them, and we'll still talk amongst ourselves about how *sad* it is that nobody listens to us.
And then we'll go back to using Stack Exchange, and in a couple of years the next time they change something, perhaps change the colors to add a bit more contrast, we'll have another few months of complaints.
---
And as a side note: I hope they keep doing things the way they do in terms of making decisions about design the *right* way. I don't like everything about the new site design, but I *do* know that I am not a site designer, and I know *jack* about what actually works. And - more importantly - I do *not* want to have the site designed by the loudest voices. |
343,287 | In recent product announcements, I have noticed a trend that is disturbing to me. Stack Exchange employees are making claims and arguing with users without providing data to back up assumptions. This is leading to both users getting frustrated because it looks like they are being ignored and employees getting frustrated because the users aren't understanding their point of view.
I'm going to provide a few examples, but I want to make it clear that I am *not* calling people out. My goal is to point out the frustration I see building as a high rep user and provide a few suggestions on how all of us can resolve some of these issues. I know that some of the frustration I am seeing is also festering from other recent posts, but I want to focus on posts where the community can provide valuable feedback to improve Stack Overflow, not solve worldly issues.
### Concern 1: Dismissiveness
There are posts throughout this topic of users sharing user scripts to do two things - change the top color and unsticky it. Regardless of the merits of these (and I admit that I am [biased](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/343166/189134) in what I think the outcome should be), the tone coming from employees isn't the greatest. A few examples:
>
> can you please include the votes from all the people who do like the white on white (but because they are OK with it, didn't feel the need to pipe up)? Claiming you and the few hundred upvotes on different posts are representative of the community as a whole is disingenuous at best. - [Oded](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444452_343106)
>
>
>
and
>
> @StevenPenny the reason Pawel didn't respond regarding the color is because if we change the color, we would first need to run additional testing. The team's run multiple usability and A/B tests to ensure usability and effectiveness of the current version. Making it black would make it stand off from the rest of the content more, but a lot of users in this meta post don't want that. We also know that things that don't look like the rest of the site tend to get ignored by more people. [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444215_343106)
>
>
>
Both of these come off as, frankly, insulting. The first is asking for data that even Stack Exchange doesn't have and the second attempts to explain away why something can't be done because of "testing". Personally, I'd be ok with that testing response, if we have been provided more information but as it standings the only hard numbers we have is that top bar clicks increased 143%.
**Suggestion**: It is implied that other metrics were measured and these influenced the decision to build this a certain way. Share some of this with us. Stack Exchange values transparancy. We've come to expect it. Don't shut it out of this process.
>
> We've interviewed a lot of users who had no idea what the items in the topbar were or that we had navigation at the top right-hand side of the page because they were used to landing on the page and scrolling to the answer. By this time everything is off screen. Clicks weren't the only thing that we measured, but they were an important metric for us, especially for unregistered or low-reputation users. We also tracked searches, because we want searching to increase or not decrease since this will likely result in less duplicate questions asked. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444337_343228)
>
>
>
### Concern 2: Forgetting (or appearing to forget) about experienced users
This is round 3 of meta posts and certain messages have been stated by high rep users several times. Again, these are the color and sticky bars. However, that last comment raises an important point that I believe is the heart of this recent discontent: Stack Exchange is focusing on the low-reputation/unregistered/casual users at the expense of improving the product for existing and power users.
Without knowing more about the internal processes that are driving these decisions, I can't offer a decent suggestion other than "don't ignore us", but comments like this from high rep users and your moderators is frustrating to read over and over:
>
> interesting! But I'm not a new user. To me the sticky bar is distracting and contains mostly irrelevant links for me. I never use the Jobs or Tags or Documentation links, and I'll happily use my Home button to go back to the top for the rest. When I am answering I look for the question to get details right, and notifications that distract me from answering are hindering at that point. Please separate the daily power user from the unregistered casual visitor! - [Martijn Pieters](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444416_343228)
>
>
>
This type of concern is casually dismissed with a (paraphrased) "they don't know what they really want".
>
> We've interviewed a lot of new and veteran users, but this is also something that's been asked for on meta and lot of users within this post like. Because some power users don't like something doesn't automatically mean it is a poor design for all power users and we don't care about their needs. Saying things like "tyranny of the casual user majority" may be one of the reasons some people outside this community perceive it as unfriendly to new users. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444532_343228)
>
>
>
This concern is even more obvious when links that were used by experienced users to help new users are completely removed. The help button may not be used by new users (I'm sure there is a stat somewhere about how often it's used, but I can't find one) but it is used by experienced users to point the newer people to help. Comments like this to users trying to help don't make sense. The button was removed for those that can help, but those that don't use it have the button still in place.
>
> i understand that and I'm really sory but please try to consider fact that majority of our users didn't use that help link in top bar. people just don't read help usually so for majority of users this link was simply useless. your effort trying to teach others (and linking to help) is priceless but we still need to consider needs of other users as well. that area in header is very "expensive" and we're trying to keep there only essential and most useful things. but i agree that we, as company, need to do better job at informing users about help. but link in header is not a solution... – [Paweł](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343165/new-top-bar-wheres-the-help-menu-gone#comment444072_343165)
>
>
>
**Suggestion**: Consider your audience. These posts are made on meta, where your experienced and invested users lurk. These are the people that want Stack Overflow to succeed. The suggestions they are offering are to help you. Dismissing them or forgetting about them isn't helpful to either side.
---
Realizing that some of the animosity that exists right now is due to other events, I think these two concerns I've presented can be easily addressed. The community is here to help Stack Overflow grow. We *want* to work with the company and we *want* new and better things. We are engaging you on Meta because you brought the updates to us. Dismissing feedback that was requested is only strengthening a concern some community members have: Stack Overflow is starting to forget about its users. I am *not* saying that you need to listen to everything we say. But, Stack Exchange values transparency and many of us love seeing posts filled with data to back up or refute assumptions. Let's see more of that to argue points. | 2017/02/08 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343287",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/189134/"
] | TLDR:
I agree there's an issue here, though I'm not sure it's entirely on the team *or* even remotely intended. Some of this feels like users provoking the team, and some of it feels like poor word choice or other language related issues. While there's definitely some things here that need fixed, there are also some things that I think we all should try to keep an open mind about.
---
As a user who has seen a lot of the frustration you've mentioned, let me give my two cents, and a couple suggestions of my own.
### This isn't entirely on the team.
While I agree that this has, at least in my perception, become something of an issue lately, I also feel this isn't entirely on the team.
Sometimes, users just bring up their concerns in an aggressive manner. While it may be argued that this is a result of the user feeling like they're not being listened to, the fact that the user comes off as antagonizing and aggressive can really make the situation worse.
For example, the post the first two comments you use to illustrate the point feels very strongly worded towards the employees. Yes, that seems to be a result of the user feeling they're being ignored. Yes, the employees still could have responded better. However, I feel that in this situation, fault lays on both the user and the employees who could have responded better. When tension is high, it's very easy to fall into these situations.
While I have no immediate examples, nor the time to look for them, I have seen this in other recent situations: Users getting more aggressive or antagonistic, which in turn starts the team toward getting more riled up. In response, the user or more users get more heated, and things start to escalate from there. This kind of tension can make it very hard to feel like you're being appreciated or that your point is being listened to. It's a vicious cycle, but not one that is solely the fault of the employees.
**Suggestion:** We as users need to strive not to start off with accusing the team of not listening. Even if we have evidence they may not be listening, we need to try to assume the best, or try to word our request in such a way that it invites open discussion. Aggressive or antagonistic language is only going to raise the tension and make a good discussion harder.
### Some of this seems to be an issue with the choice of wording or the result of a language difference.
>
> @StevenPenny the reason Pawel didn't respond regarding the color is because if we change the color, we would first need to run additional testing. The team's run multiple usability and A/B tests to ensure usability and effectiveness of the current version. Making it black would make it stand off from the rest of the content more, but a lot of users in this meta post don't want that. We also know that things that don't look like the rest of the site tend to get ignored by more people.
>
>
>
This comment feels to me like an *attempt* to explain the team's decision about the color, but it also feels like it just misses the mark. I can certainly see where one would find this comment to be dismissive or insulting, though I don't find it to be that way myself. I think if the comment had been worded slightly differently, or if Kurtis had more room for a better explanation, this comment wouldn't be in the list of examples.
It's also worth noting that Kurtis' next comment on that answer helps point to the fact the team isn't trying to be dismissive, and that the changes requested might well be made later:
>
> Because we don't answer immediately does not mean we're not listening. It's possible we launch with white and continue to test iterations. [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week/343106?noredirect=1#comment444216_343106)
>
>
>
This extra comment really does, in my mind, help show that the team *is* listening, and either may be wording things in such a way that people are misinterpreting them, or (as I believe and Tim's answer seems to indicate) the team was overwhelmed and trying to respond to everything, leading to responses given with high tension that are long and may leave out important information. Such information could include, as in this example, that the team is open to testing a different color after the first release. The addition of this comment, which immediately follows the previous one, makes the first comment feel a lot more useful to me.
Now, consider this example:
>
> i understand that and I'm really sory but please try to consider fact that majority of our users didn't use that help link in top bar. people just don't read help usually so for majority of users this link was simply useless. your effort trying to teach others (and linking to help) is priceless but we still need to consider needs of other users as well. that area in header is very "expensive" and we're trying to keep there only essential and most useful things. but i agree that we, as company, need to do better job at informing users about help. but link in header is not a solution...
>
>
>
As the user this was directed at originally, it *did* feel dismissive. However, it didn't upset me or make me angry, it just felt... Off. In contrast, Tim's comment following this one felt a lot better: It offered an alternative that fit the team's goals and *hopefully* would fit the case I described.
However, I feel like this example is more of a language based thing. It feels like Pawal was trying to explain the team's reasoning *rather than* dismiss my use case. It may have been that Pawal did not at that moment have an alternative to offer. Rereading it the next day, it still feels dismissive, but I can also see how Pawal was trying to explain why the team was catering to the majority in this instance. If the majority of the users who don't *need* the help center (aka "experienced" or "high-rep" users) don't ever use it, then that space is really better used other ways, and this comment was attempting to explain that *this* was the reasoning.
And let's keep in mind that *users* can cause the same thing. Consider this exchange on this question:
>
> As the person Pawal's "help link" comment was directed at, I do want to say that it felt incredibly dismissive and like my concerns, as a frequent Meta goer and someone who honestly tries to help new users who come to Meta with questions, just didn't matter. Tim's response on the same post, offering an alternative that did fit what the team wanted to do while still giving me something more usable felt a lot better and pretty quickly made me feel more like my opinion wasn't just being dismissed because "that's how SO wants it." Comments like Tim's feel much more inviting and open. – Kendra
>
>
> @Kendra, we never want users to feel dismissed. FWIW, I don't want to speak for Pawel, but I think at least some of the tonal difference you're seeing may be a language issue. Pawel's English is great for a non-native speaker, but I can see places where the phrasing may come off as less collaborative than Tim or I might. – [Jaydles♦](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343287/concerns-about-recent-stack-exchange-responses-to-users-suggestions#comment444657_343287)
>
>
>
I had hoped, in my comment, to word it in such a way to make clear that I don't blame Pawal for the comment I mentioned, and to make clear that I wasn't angry or upset. *However,* there just was not nearly enough space in the comment to make that clear, and I decided rather than edit/delete the comment, I would expand it into this answer.
**Suggestion:** Remember that everyone is human, and no one is perfect. Intentions can be misconstrued, poor word choice can be used, and well-intended comments can be misread and misinterpreted. If you see a comment that looks or feels off, from anyone, consider (politely!) pointing out to the author how it can come across. Hopefully, they can either clarify or delete/edit/whatever the statement to try to keep things calm and on track.
### Some of these really do just feel like writing off what we say.
>
> We've interviewed a lot of new and veteran users, but this is also something that's been asked for on meta and lot of users within this post like. Because some power users don't like something doesn't automatically mean it is a poor design for all power users and we don't care about their needs. Saying things like "tyranny of the casual user majority" may be one of the reasons some people outside this community perceive it as unfriendly to new users.
>
>
>
This comment really does just feel like a dismissive write off of what's been said, at least out of context. It feels like a weak justification of why something is right, regardless of what the user involved says.
This comment *could be improved,* using a suggestion from the question: Back it up with data. How many of these users were interviewed? What percent agreed with what the employee said? What percent agreed with what the user said?
This could raise additional questions or concerns: Was the sample size even large enough? Was the "interview" organized well? How/when was this interview conducted? How were users chosen for this interview? What defined the "new users" and the "veteran users" in this interview? Can the annonymized results of these interviews be published for the world to see, or was this done in such a way that the results are too tied to their respondents?
In the end, this is one of those comments that just really needs more backup. Otherwise, it will always feel like a "he said, she said" kind of remark.
I have no suggestions for this case, aside from what's already been stated in the question. | I think that there is a problem here that isn't actually solvable, unfortunately; there is a fundamentally paradox.
People (us) want developers to interact with us and want them to listen to us and consider our thoughts, while not appearing condescending and not dismissing us
*but*
The only way for developers to both do their jobs *and* not get involved in arguments with users is for them to *stop* talking to us.
---
Stack Exchange employs some amazing people. *Amazing*. And what that means is *they know what the heck they're doing*. They know how to design a good website. They know what looks good and what doesn't, and what is usable and what isn't. And, moreover, *they know how to incorporate feedback from a variety of sources* and produce a site that best fits that feedback.
Stack Exchange users, on the other hand, are largely self-selected for a couple of things. We're mostly type-A, smart, and *love* giving feedback to people (a.k.a. telling other people how to do things). That's *why* we're on this site, after all, instead of somewhere else.
What does that mean? That means that we *really* like to tell the developers what we think is best. And when they tell us "Thanks, but we've already thought about this and tested it in a few ways, and we think this is a good way to do it," what do we do? We push back some, and then push back some more. And because they can *never* come up with a solution that is ideal for everyone - and even when they do come up with that ideal solution for you, you often don't know it right away - this pushing *never stops*, even if they do whatever it is the current loudest voice is asking.
Anybody surprised that it ends up with the developers saying some things that they probably shouldn't, or that they should say but get taken out of context? Not me. I'm a human being, and even though I always try to *be nice*, I make mistakes just like anyone else - and so do our developers (who, after all, are selected for being good *developers*, not for being perfect at customer service, though I think they do pretty well on balance).
You tell someone whose *profession* it is to design good websites that they don't know what they're doing, and whine enough that nobody listens to you (when of course what you mean is not "nobody listens to me", but "you didn't do what I told you you should do"), and *of course* they get a bit snippy after a while. I would.
So - I think the only thing that's going to come out of this, and I think it's the right thing, unfortunately, is that SE developers will perhaps spend a bit less time talking to us and interacting in comment threads. We'll still have them, and we'll still talk amongst ourselves about how *sad* it is that nobody listens to us.
And then we'll go back to using Stack Exchange, and in a couple of years the next time they change something, perhaps change the colors to add a bit more contrast, we'll have another few months of complaints.
---
And as a side note: I hope they keep doing things the way they do in terms of making decisions about design the *right* way. I don't like everything about the new site design, but I *do* know that I am not a site designer, and I know *jack* about what actually works. And - more importantly - I do *not* want to have the site designed by the loudest voices. |
343,287 | In recent product announcements, I have noticed a trend that is disturbing to me. Stack Exchange employees are making claims and arguing with users without providing data to back up assumptions. This is leading to both users getting frustrated because it looks like they are being ignored and employees getting frustrated because the users aren't understanding their point of view.
I'm going to provide a few examples, but I want to make it clear that I am *not* calling people out. My goal is to point out the frustration I see building as a high rep user and provide a few suggestions on how all of us can resolve some of these issues. I know that some of the frustration I am seeing is also festering from other recent posts, but I want to focus on posts where the community can provide valuable feedback to improve Stack Overflow, not solve worldly issues.
### Concern 1: Dismissiveness
There are posts throughout this topic of users sharing user scripts to do two things - change the top color and unsticky it. Regardless of the merits of these (and I admit that I am [biased](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/343166/189134) in what I think the outcome should be), the tone coming from employees isn't the greatest. A few examples:
>
> can you please include the votes from all the people who do like the white on white (but because they are OK with it, didn't feel the need to pipe up)? Claiming you and the few hundred upvotes on different posts are representative of the community as a whole is disingenuous at best. - [Oded](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444452_343106)
>
>
>
and
>
> @StevenPenny the reason Pawel didn't respond regarding the color is because if we change the color, we would first need to run additional testing. The team's run multiple usability and A/B tests to ensure usability and effectiveness of the current version. Making it black would make it stand off from the rest of the content more, but a lot of users in this meta post don't want that. We also know that things that don't look like the rest of the site tend to get ignored by more people. [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444215_343106)
>
>
>
Both of these come off as, frankly, insulting. The first is asking for data that even Stack Exchange doesn't have and the second attempts to explain away why something can't be done because of "testing". Personally, I'd be ok with that testing response, if we have been provided more information but as it standings the only hard numbers we have is that top bar clicks increased 143%.
**Suggestion**: It is implied that other metrics were measured and these influenced the decision to build this a certain way. Share some of this with us. Stack Exchange values transparancy. We've come to expect it. Don't shut it out of this process.
>
> We've interviewed a lot of users who had no idea what the items in the topbar were or that we had navigation at the top right-hand side of the page because they were used to landing on the page and scrolling to the answer. By this time everything is off screen. Clicks weren't the only thing that we measured, but they were an important metric for us, especially for unregistered or low-reputation users. We also tracked searches, because we want searching to increase or not decrease since this will likely result in less duplicate questions asked. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444337_343228)
>
>
>
### Concern 2: Forgetting (or appearing to forget) about experienced users
This is round 3 of meta posts and certain messages have been stated by high rep users several times. Again, these are the color and sticky bars. However, that last comment raises an important point that I believe is the heart of this recent discontent: Stack Exchange is focusing on the low-reputation/unregistered/casual users at the expense of improving the product for existing and power users.
Without knowing more about the internal processes that are driving these decisions, I can't offer a decent suggestion other than "don't ignore us", but comments like this from high rep users and your moderators is frustrating to read over and over:
>
> interesting! But I'm not a new user. To me the sticky bar is distracting and contains mostly irrelevant links for me. I never use the Jobs or Tags or Documentation links, and I'll happily use my Home button to go back to the top for the rest. When I am answering I look for the question to get details right, and notifications that distract me from answering are hindering at that point. Please separate the daily power user from the unregistered casual visitor! - [Martijn Pieters](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444416_343228)
>
>
>
This type of concern is casually dismissed with a (paraphrased) "they don't know what they really want".
>
> We've interviewed a lot of new and veteran users, but this is also something that's been asked for on meta and lot of users within this post like. Because some power users don't like something doesn't automatically mean it is a poor design for all power users and we don't care about their needs. Saying things like "tyranny of the casual user majority" may be one of the reasons some people outside this community perceive it as unfriendly to new users. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444532_343228)
>
>
>
This concern is even more obvious when links that were used by experienced users to help new users are completely removed. The help button may not be used by new users (I'm sure there is a stat somewhere about how often it's used, but I can't find one) but it is used by experienced users to point the newer people to help. Comments like this to users trying to help don't make sense. The button was removed for those that can help, but those that don't use it have the button still in place.
>
> i understand that and I'm really sory but please try to consider fact that majority of our users didn't use that help link in top bar. people just don't read help usually so for majority of users this link was simply useless. your effort trying to teach others (and linking to help) is priceless but we still need to consider needs of other users as well. that area in header is very "expensive" and we're trying to keep there only essential and most useful things. but i agree that we, as company, need to do better job at informing users about help. but link in header is not a solution... – [Paweł](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343165/new-top-bar-wheres-the-help-menu-gone#comment444072_343165)
>
>
>
**Suggestion**: Consider your audience. These posts are made on meta, where your experienced and invested users lurk. These are the people that want Stack Overflow to succeed. The suggestions they are offering are to help you. Dismissing them or forgetting about them isn't helpful to either side.
---
Realizing that some of the animosity that exists right now is due to other events, I think these two concerns I've presented can be easily addressed. The community is here to help Stack Overflow grow. We *want* to work with the company and we *want* new and better things. We are engaging you on Meta because you brought the updates to us. Dismissing feedback that was requested is only strengthening a concern some community members have: Stack Overflow is starting to forget about its users. I am *not* saying that you need to listen to everything we say. But, Stack Exchange values transparency and many of us love seeing posts filled with data to back up or refute assumptions. Let's see more of that to argue points. | 2017/02/08 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343287",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/189134/"
] | When people give something their best, and all of it, they tend to stretch pretty thin as what they've built comes under scrutiny and critique. This is because the best they've got creatively and emotionally is still completely invested in that thing they just built.
There's also a rather palpable wave of dissonance that hits you pretty strongly after you emerge from a tool shed full of people that feel that they've built the very best thing they possibly could have, too. But you folks build and ship software, you know this stuff.
To the comments that you've identified as examples in your post, as well as numerous others that were more or less similar, we agree that they weren't our best. For that, we apologize. No one ever *really* intends to come off as dismissive, condescending or belittling as they work to try to make a situation better; I don't think folks realized just how thinly they were stretched and how much that affected their ability to really shape what they were trying to say.
**We will do better.**
To your mention that other things that happened previously might have contributed here, I think that's part of it. The push that we felt had a level of intensity that we don't ordinarily see; I'm actually quite glad that you called this out. We can't ever let bringing the less-than-great out in each other become something that looks like normal. I've been a user since late 2008, I was elected to serve this community in 2011 and to be quite honest, yesterday scared me a little. I was taken back a bit by stuff I saw coming out of us, and stuff coming out of folks that we're ordinarily quite friendly with.
### Let's please take a hard look at all this tension, and decide if it's something that we want to keep.
Yeah, I don't want to keep it either. Here are things we're going to do in order to help that along.
**We have to do a better job of communicating and explaining our goals.**
This means taking time to explain constraints and decisions more clearly so that information can help you better understand our position on something, and help us get more valuable feedback from you.
We can't always just throw data together from our testing system in a manner that would be *close* to rational for other people to consume, but we can take time to explain tests better.
And when we *didn't* do something that you feel we probably should have done, it's important to give our rationale in a manner that's not dismissive. And sometimes that might mean saying scary for-profit words like "More exposure to [thing] is a big priority for us right now, so we really can't move it". We can't always be specific, but vaguely non-dismissive is much better than coming off as rude.
**"Let me explain this to you ..." has to be meant literally.**
Because it's sometimes too easy to say that when what you really mean is *let me tell you why you're wrong*. That line can sometimes be very thin, and very easy to cross, so we all need to make sure to watch for it.
If we say something and pick up that you didn't understand us, our next job is to help you understand us, not just try harder to find ways to get you to agree with it.
**Tagging out**
It's hard to know in advance of just not knowing what you're even trying to accomplish that you've lost sight of whatever it was you were trying to do. This is particularly true in conversations where the sense of urgency to respond quickly is quite elevated, and both parties grow increasingly emotional.
We'll do a better job of just outright saying "*I think I lost total track of what we're trying to achieve here, can you please tell me in a sentence or two what you want me to take back to the team?*" Sometimes that can be *just* enough pause to keep things from getting too hot.
**So ...**
We haven't lost touch, we honestly felt that the reception to this would mostly follow suit with the rest of the tests and interviews we completed, coupled with the support we saw for this early on (granted, before we had more concrete things for you to poke at).
And, well, looking completely bewildered and dumbfounded *kinda* looks like losing touch, but it's a state that's much easier to recover from (we're pretty much there now).
Thank you for bringing this up in the manner that you did. If I can add to or clarify any part of this, I'm happy to do it. | While I don't believe that it's ever how the responses are *intended* to sound, this is how I *feel* reading some feedback on posts. It's not limited to the post that is the focus of the op.
One trend that stands out to me is the expectation that users will provide rigorous statistics to back up every claim they make. Often it isn't possible to make such an analysis because data hasn't been provided or is difficult to get, even when it's reasonable to assume that it exists somewhere. Responses from employees often lack statistics too, but can convey a tone of "if you don't have any numbers then we'll just assume our version is right".
The response to feedback is that tests show that the change is good. But how are users supposed to run competing tests? There's no way to provide competing statistics, so such a response feels dismissive even if it wasn't intended that way.
A more constructive response would be to add details explaining how a decision was made. The sooner this response can be posted, the less chance it has to get buried in a long, frustrating comment chain. For example, an employee eventually responded to a request for a static top bar with:
>
> majority (like seriously a lot) of our traffic comes from google (both anonymous and loggedin). they very often land in the middle of the page on specific answer (or just quickly scroll down without paying attention to anything we have on top, very often omitting even question itself). so people simply ignore Stack Overflow as a website and everything we offer them, it's more like a place with answers. we're trying to do what's best for users, but we also need something from users because it's the only way this ecosystem may exist. i hope that answer makes sense.
>
>
>
This response is better because it provides insight into the decision, rather than making it feel arbitrary. It points out something that normal users are probably not thinking about. Now they can help brainstorm further solutions that keep this in mind rather than just saying they don't like the change. |
343,287 | In recent product announcements, I have noticed a trend that is disturbing to me. Stack Exchange employees are making claims and arguing with users without providing data to back up assumptions. This is leading to both users getting frustrated because it looks like they are being ignored and employees getting frustrated because the users aren't understanding their point of view.
I'm going to provide a few examples, but I want to make it clear that I am *not* calling people out. My goal is to point out the frustration I see building as a high rep user and provide a few suggestions on how all of us can resolve some of these issues. I know that some of the frustration I am seeing is also festering from other recent posts, but I want to focus on posts where the community can provide valuable feedback to improve Stack Overflow, not solve worldly issues.
### Concern 1: Dismissiveness
There are posts throughout this topic of users sharing user scripts to do two things - change the top color and unsticky it. Regardless of the merits of these (and I admit that I am [biased](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/343166/189134) in what I think the outcome should be), the tone coming from employees isn't the greatest. A few examples:
>
> can you please include the votes from all the people who do like the white on white (but because they are OK with it, didn't feel the need to pipe up)? Claiming you and the few hundred upvotes on different posts are representative of the community as a whole is disingenuous at best. - [Oded](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444452_343106)
>
>
>
and
>
> @StevenPenny the reason Pawel didn't respond regarding the color is because if we change the color, we would first need to run additional testing. The team's run multiple usability and A/B tests to ensure usability and effectiveness of the current version. Making it black would make it stand off from the rest of the content more, but a lot of users in this meta post don't want that. We also know that things that don't look like the rest of the site tend to get ignored by more people. [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444215_343106)
>
>
>
Both of these come off as, frankly, insulting. The first is asking for data that even Stack Exchange doesn't have and the second attempts to explain away why something can't be done because of "testing". Personally, I'd be ok with that testing response, if we have been provided more information but as it standings the only hard numbers we have is that top bar clicks increased 143%.
**Suggestion**: It is implied that other metrics were measured and these influenced the decision to build this a certain way. Share some of this with us. Stack Exchange values transparancy. We've come to expect it. Don't shut it out of this process.
>
> We've interviewed a lot of users who had no idea what the items in the topbar were or that we had navigation at the top right-hand side of the page because they were used to landing on the page and scrolling to the answer. By this time everything is off screen. Clicks weren't the only thing that we measured, but they were an important metric for us, especially for unregistered or low-reputation users. We also tracked searches, because we want searching to increase or not decrease since this will likely result in less duplicate questions asked. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444337_343228)
>
>
>
### Concern 2: Forgetting (or appearing to forget) about experienced users
This is round 3 of meta posts and certain messages have been stated by high rep users several times. Again, these are the color and sticky bars. However, that last comment raises an important point that I believe is the heart of this recent discontent: Stack Exchange is focusing on the low-reputation/unregistered/casual users at the expense of improving the product for existing and power users.
Without knowing more about the internal processes that are driving these decisions, I can't offer a decent suggestion other than "don't ignore us", but comments like this from high rep users and your moderators is frustrating to read over and over:
>
> interesting! But I'm not a new user. To me the sticky bar is distracting and contains mostly irrelevant links for me. I never use the Jobs or Tags or Documentation links, and I'll happily use my Home button to go back to the top for the rest. When I am answering I look for the question to get details right, and notifications that distract me from answering are hindering at that point. Please separate the daily power user from the unregistered casual visitor! - [Martijn Pieters](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444416_343228)
>
>
>
This type of concern is casually dismissed with a (paraphrased) "they don't know what they really want".
>
> We've interviewed a lot of new and veteran users, but this is also something that's been asked for on meta and lot of users within this post like. Because some power users don't like something doesn't automatically mean it is a poor design for all power users and we don't care about their needs. Saying things like "tyranny of the casual user majority" may be one of the reasons some people outside this community perceive it as unfriendly to new users. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444532_343228)
>
>
>
This concern is even more obvious when links that were used by experienced users to help new users are completely removed. The help button may not be used by new users (I'm sure there is a stat somewhere about how often it's used, but I can't find one) but it is used by experienced users to point the newer people to help. Comments like this to users trying to help don't make sense. The button was removed for those that can help, but those that don't use it have the button still in place.
>
> i understand that and I'm really sory but please try to consider fact that majority of our users didn't use that help link in top bar. people just don't read help usually so for majority of users this link was simply useless. your effort trying to teach others (and linking to help) is priceless but we still need to consider needs of other users as well. that area in header is very "expensive" and we're trying to keep there only essential and most useful things. but i agree that we, as company, need to do better job at informing users about help. but link in header is not a solution... – [Paweł](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343165/new-top-bar-wheres-the-help-menu-gone#comment444072_343165)
>
>
>
**Suggestion**: Consider your audience. These posts are made on meta, where your experienced and invested users lurk. These are the people that want Stack Overflow to succeed. The suggestions they are offering are to help you. Dismissing them or forgetting about them isn't helpful to either side.
---
Realizing that some of the animosity that exists right now is due to other events, I think these two concerns I've presented can be easily addressed. The community is here to help Stack Overflow grow. We *want* to work with the company and we *want* new and better things. We are engaging you on Meta because you brought the updates to us. Dismissing feedback that was requested is only strengthening a concern some community members have: Stack Overflow is starting to forget about its users. I am *not* saying that you need to listen to everything we say. But, Stack Exchange values transparency and many of us love seeing posts filled with data to back up or refute assumptions. Let's see more of that to argue points. | 2017/02/08 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343287",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/189134/"
] | [Tim has written an excellent answer to this](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343287/concerns-about-recent-stack-exchange-responses-to-users-suggestions/343304#343304) - go read it, please. We *can* do better here, and we're gonna try.
But something sticks in my craw reading this post: this is mostly about design. In fact, most of your quotes are from our design team. I feel that's unfair.
...I've said *many* more dismissive and uncaring things than the designers ever have. **Where's the love, Andy??!**
But more importantly... No one *really* wants this site to be designed based on how voting on meta plays out. For starters, we've all been on the other side of "design by committee" - [it is hell](http://theoatmeal.com/comics/design_hell). But more importantly, the results are always terrible. Design-by-vote kills any hope of consistency, takes focus away from hard problems and pours resources down the multicolor bikeshed drain - and the bikeshed didn't even need a drain.
You're all programmers, you don't need me to tell you any of this, *you've lived it*. And... It's actually kinda nice being on the other side for once, ain't it?
But come on. You know it doesn't work. And you know that *caring* doesn't fix anything either; as nice as it is to have a sympathetic ear, what matters is what gets *done*. When you sit down to triage bug reports, you don't go looking for the one that has the most *votes* - you look for the one that has the biggest *impact*... And ideally, has enough information for you to understand and reproduce the problem.
Right now, there are under a thousand people who can even *see* the designs that've caused so much consternation here. In a few days, there'll be *many thousands* looking at them. **So the design team is scrambling to identify and fix the most critical bugs as fast as they can, before all hell breaks loose.** Again, *tell me* that doesn't sound familiar...
But the design sucks! There's barely any green at all!
------------------------------------------------------
Look, if you want to have an impact on the design here, then focus on *the concrete details* of how it is causing problems. There's no *guarantee* that anything will get fixed, or that it'll get fixed in the way you want... But if you make it easy to triage, you greatly increase the chance that it *will* be fixed. Remember, every minute the designers are here on meta, chewing their fingernails trying to figure out how to write a diplomatic response is a minute they're not actually *fixing* something.
[This is a *great* bug report](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343180/quick-route-from-meta-to-main), because it identifies *exactly* where the original behavior caused problems and made it easy to identify how others would be affected by it. The only comments a designer had to leave there were "we're gonna fix this" and "it's fixed". Also, it has lots of free-hand red arrows. Don't you wish *your* users made bug reports like that? So be the change you want to see in your own disgruntled userbase. | I've just sort of accepted that the things that would make my life easier and better, both as a regular user and a moderator (on Workplace) are lower priority than the things that Stack Exchange wants to pursue.
We also have different interests. I want a website that easily enables me to see, answer, and interact with high quality content.
Stack Exchange needs to make money.
I find nearly no value in documentation or careers even though SE dumps a lot of time into it, both community manager and development. The navigation changes arguably are making SE harder to use for me.
There are many fairly straightforward feature requests which would make things better for me but are things that SE chooses other things to spend their time/development efforts towards building.
My similar frustrations to how SE interacts with me as a regular user and moderator become much smaller when I realized the fundamental reason is they don't care about the same things I do.
*shrug* |
343,287 | In recent product announcements, I have noticed a trend that is disturbing to me. Stack Exchange employees are making claims and arguing with users without providing data to back up assumptions. This is leading to both users getting frustrated because it looks like they are being ignored and employees getting frustrated because the users aren't understanding their point of view.
I'm going to provide a few examples, but I want to make it clear that I am *not* calling people out. My goal is to point out the frustration I see building as a high rep user and provide a few suggestions on how all of us can resolve some of these issues. I know that some of the frustration I am seeing is also festering from other recent posts, but I want to focus on posts where the community can provide valuable feedback to improve Stack Overflow, not solve worldly issues.
### Concern 1: Dismissiveness
There are posts throughout this topic of users sharing user scripts to do two things - change the top color and unsticky it. Regardless of the merits of these (and I admit that I am [biased](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/343166/189134) in what I think the outcome should be), the tone coming from employees isn't the greatest. A few examples:
>
> can you please include the votes from all the people who do like the white on white (but because they are OK with it, didn't feel the need to pipe up)? Claiming you and the few hundred upvotes on different posts are representative of the community as a whole is disingenuous at best. - [Oded](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444452_343106)
>
>
>
and
>
> @StevenPenny the reason Pawel didn't respond regarding the color is because if we change the color, we would first need to run additional testing. The team's run multiple usability and A/B tests to ensure usability and effectiveness of the current version. Making it black would make it stand off from the rest of the content more, but a lot of users in this meta post don't want that. We also know that things that don't look like the rest of the site tend to get ignored by more people. [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444215_343106)
>
>
>
Both of these come off as, frankly, insulting. The first is asking for data that even Stack Exchange doesn't have and the second attempts to explain away why something can't be done because of "testing". Personally, I'd be ok with that testing response, if we have been provided more information but as it standings the only hard numbers we have is that top bar clicks increased 143%.
**Suggestion**: It is implied that other metrics were measured and these influenced the decision to build this a certain way. Share some of this with us. Stack Exchange values transparancy. We've come to expect it. Don't shut it out of this process.
>
> We've interviewed a lot of users who had no idea what the items in the topbar were or that we had navigation at the top right-hand side of the page because they were used to landing on the page and scrolling to the answer. By this time everything is off screen. Clicks weren't the only thing that we measured, but they were an important metric for us, especially for unregistered or low-reputation users. We also tracked searches, because we want searching to increase or not decrease since this will likely result in less duplicate questions asked. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444337_343228)
>
>
>
### Concern 2: Forgetting (or appearing to forget) about experienced users
This is round 3 of meta posts and certain messages have been stated by high rep users several times. Again, these are the color and sticky bars. However, that last comment raises an important point that I believe is the heart of this recent discontent: Stack Exchange is focusing on the low-reputation/unregistered/casual users at the expense of improving the product for existing and power users.
Without knowing more about the internal processes that are driving these decisions, I can't offer a decent suggestion other than "don't ignore us", but comments like this from high rep users and your moderators is frustrating to read over and over:
>
> interesting! But I'm not a new user. To me the sticky bar is distracting and contains mostly irrelevant links for me. I never use the Jobs or Tags or Documentation links, and I'll happily use my Home button to go back to the top for the rest. When I am answering I look for the question to get details right, and notifications that distract me from answering are hindering at that point. Please separate the daily power user from the unregistered casual visitor! - [Martijn Pieters](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444416_343228)
>
>
>
This type of concern is casually dismissed with a (paraphrased) "they don't know what they really want".
>
> We've interviewed a lot of new and veteran users, but this is also something that's been asked for on meta and lot of users within this post like. Because some power users don't like something doesn't automatically mean it is a poor design for all power users and we don't care about their needs. Saying things like "tyranny of the casual user majority" may be one of the reasons some people outside this community perceive it as unfriendly to new users. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444532_343228)
>
>
>
This concern is even more obvious when links that were used by experienced users to help new users are completely removed. The help button may not be used by new users (I'm sure there is a stat somewhere about how often it's used, but I can't find one) but it is used by experienced users to point the newer people to help. Comments like this to users trying to help don't make sense. The button was removed for those that can help, but those that don't use it have the button still in place.
>
> i understand that and I'm really sory but please try to consider fact that majority of our users didn't use that help link in top bar. people just don't read help usually so for majority of users this link was simply useless. your effort trying to teach others (and linking to help) is priceless but we still need to consider needs of other users as well. that area in header is very "expensive" and we're trying to keep there only essential and most useful things. but i agree that we, as company, need to do better job at informing users about help. but link in header is not a solution... – [Paweł](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343165/new-top-bar-wheres-the-help-menu-gone#comment444072_343165)
>
>
>
**Suggestion**: Consider your audience. These posts are made on meta, where your experienced and invested users lurk. These are the people that want Stack Overflow to succeed. The suggestions they are offering are to help you. Dismissing them or forgetting about them isn't helpful to either side.
---
Realizing that some of the animosity that exists right now is due to other events, I think these two concerns I've presented can be easily addressed. The community is here to help Stack Overflow grow. We *want* to work with the company and we *want* new and better things. We are engaging you on Meta because you brought the updates to us. Dismissing feedback that was requested is only strengthening a concern some community members have: Stack Overflow is starting to forget about its users. I am *not* saying that you need to listen to everything we say. But, Stack Exchange values transparency and many of us love seeing posts filled with data to back up or refute assumptions. Let's see more of that to argue points. | 2017/02/08 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343287",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/189134/"
] | When people give something their best, and all of it, they tend to stretch pretty thin as what they've built comes under scrutiny and critique. This is because the best they've got creatively and emotionally is still completely invested in that thing they just built.
There's also a rather palpable wave of dissonance that hits you pretty strongly after you emerge from a tool shed full of people that feel that they've built the very best thing they possibly could have, too. But you folks build and ship software, you know this stuff.
To the comments that you've identified as examples in your post, as well as numerous others that were more or less similar, we agree that they weren't our best. For that, we apologize. No one ever *really* intends to come off as dismissive, condescending or belittling as they work to try to make a situation better; I don't think folks realized just how thinly they were stretched and how much that affected their ability to really shape what they were trying to say.
**We will do better.**
To your mention that other things that happened previously might have contributed here, I think that's part of it. The push that we felt had a level of intensity that we don't ordinarily see; I'm actually quite glad that you called this out. We can't ever let bringing the less-than-great out in each other become something that looks like normal. I've been a user since late 2008, I was elected to serve this community in 2011 and to be quite honest, yesterday scared me a little. I was taken back a bit by stuff I saw coming out of us, and stuff coming out of folks that we're ordinarily quite friendly with.
### Let's please take a hard look at all this tension, and decide if it's something that we want to keep.
Yeah, I don't want to keep it either. Here are things we're going to do in order to help that along.
**We have to do a better job of communicating and explaining our goals.**
This means taking time to explain constraints and decisions more clearly so that information can help you better understand our position on something, and help us get more valuable feedback from you.
We can't always just throw data together from our testing system in a manner that would be *close* to rational for other people to consume, but we can take time to explain tests better.
And when we *didn't* do something that you feel we probably should have done, it's important to give our rationale in a manner that's not dismissive. And sometimes that might mean saying scary for-profit words like "More exposure to [thing] is a big priority for us right now, so we really can't move it". We can't always be specific, but vaguely non-dismissive is much better than coming off as rude.
**"Let me explain this to you ..." has to be meant literally.**
Because it's sometimes too easy to say that when what you really mean is *let me tell you why you're wrong*. That line can sometimes be very thin, and very easy to cross, so we all need to make sure to watch for it.
If we say something and pick up that you didn't understand us, our next job is to help you understand us, not just try harder to find ways to get you to agree with it.
**Tagging out**
It's hard to know in advance of just not knowing what you're even trying to accomplish that you've lost sight of whatever it was you were trying to do. This is particularly true in conversations where the sense of urgency to respond quickly is quite elevated, and both parties grow increasingly emotional.
We'll do a better job of just outright saying "*I think I lost total track of what we're trying to achieve here, can you please tell me in a sentence or two what you want me to take back to the team?*" Sometimes that can be *just* enough pause to keep things from getting too hot.
**So ...**
We haven't lost touch, we honestly felt that the reception to this would mostly follow suit with the rest of the tests and interviews we completed, coupled with the support we saw for this early on (granted, before we had more concrete things for you to poke at).
And, well, looking completely bewildered and dumbfounded *kinda* looks like losing touch, but it's a state that's much easier to recover from (we're pretty much there now).
Thank you for bringing this up in the manner that you did. If I can add to or clarify any part of this, I'm happy to do it. | [Tim has written an excellent answer to this](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343287/concerns-about-recent-stack-exchange-responses-to-users-suggestions/343304#343304) - go read it, please. We *can* do better here, and we're gonna try.
But something sticks in my craw reading this post: this is mostly about design. In fact, most of your quotes are from our design team. I feel that's unfair.
...I've said *many* more dismissive and uncaring things than the designers ever have. **Where's the love, Andy??!**
But more importantly... No one *really* wants this site to be designed based on how voting on meta plays out. For starters, we've all been on the other side of "design by committee" - [it is hell](http://theoatmeal.com/comics/design_hell). But more importantly, the results are always terrible. Design-by-vote kills any hope of consistency, takes focus away from hard problems and pours resources down the multicolor bikeshed drain - and the bikeshed didn't even need a drain.
You're all programmers, you don't need me to tell you any of this, *you've lived it*. And... It's actually kinda nice being on the other side for once, ain't it?
But come on. You know it doesn't work. And you know that *caring* doesn't fix anything either; as nice as it is to have a sympathetic ear, what matters is what gets *done*. When you sit down to triage bug reports, you don't go looking for the one that has the most *votes* - you look for the one that has the biggest *impact*... And ideally, has enough information for you to understand and reproduce the problem.
Right now, there are under a thousand people who can even *see* the designs that've caused so much consternation here. In a few days, there'll be *many thousands* looking at them. **So the design team is scrambling to identify and fix the most critical bugs as fast as they can, before all hell breaks loose.** Again, *tell me* that doesn't sound familiar...
But the design sucks! There's barely any green at all!
------------------------------------------------------
Look, if you want to have an impact on the design here, then focus on *the concrete details* of how it is causing problems. There's no *guarantee* that anything will get fixed, or that it'll get fixed in the way you want... But if you make it easy to triage, you greatly increase the chance that it *will* be fixed. Remember, every minute the designers are here on meta, chewing their fingernails trying to figure out how to write a diplomatic response is a minute they're not actually *fixing* something.
[This is a *great* bug report](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343180/quick-route-from-meta-to-main), because it identifies *exactly* where the original behavior caused problems and made it easy to identify how others would be affected by it. The only comments a designer had to leave there were "we're gonna fix this" and "it's fixed". Also, it has lots of free-hand red arrows. Don't you wish *your* users made bug reports like that? So be the change you want to see in your own disgruntled userbase. |
343,287 | In recent product announcements, I have noticed a trend that is disturbing to me. Stack Exchange employees are making claims and arguing with users without providing data to back up assumptions. This is leading to both users getting frustrated because it looks like they are being ignored and employees getting frustrated because the users aren't understanding their point of view.
I'm going to provide a few examples, but I want to make it clear that I am *not* calling people out. My goal is to point out the frustration I see building as a high rep user and provide a few suggestions on how all of us can resolve some of these issues. I know that some of the frustration I am seeing is also festering from other recent posts, but I want to focus on posts where the community can provide valuable feedback to improve Stack Overflow, not solve worldly issues.
### Concern 1: Dismissiveness
There are posts throughout this topic of users sharing user scripts to do two things - change the top color and unsticky it. Regardless of the merits of these (and I admit that I am [biased](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/343166/189134) in what I think the outcome should be), the tone coming from employees isn't the greatest. A few examples:
>
> can you please include the votes from all the people who do like the white on white (but because they are OK with it, didn't feel the need to pipe up)? Claiming you and the few hundred upvotes on different posts are representative of the community as a whole is disingenuous at best. - [Oded](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444452_343106)
>
>
>
and
>
> @StevenPenny the reason Pawel didn't respond regarding the color is because if we change the color, we would first need to run additional testing. The team's run multiple usability and A/B tests to ensure usability and effectiveness of the current version. Making it black would make it stand off from the rest of the content more, but a lot of users in this meta post don't want that. We also know that things that don't look like the rest of the site tend to get ignored by more people. [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444215_343106)
>
>
>
Both of these come off as, frankly, insulting. The first is asking for data that even Stack Exchange doesn't have and the second attempts to explain away why something can't be done because of "testing". Personally, I'd be ok with that testing response, if we have been provided more information but as it standings the only hard numbers we have is that top bar clicks increased 143%.
**Suggestion**: It is implied that other metrics were measured and these influenced the decision to build this a certain way. Share some of this with us. Stack Exchange values transparancy. We've come to expect it. Don't shut it out of this process.
>
> We've interviewed a lot of users who had no idea what the items in the topbar were or that we had navigation at the top right-hand side of the page because they were used to landing on the page and scrolling to the answer. By this time everything is off screen. Clicks weren't the only thing that we measured, but they were an important metric for us, especially for unregistered or low-reputation users. We also tracked searches, because we want searching to increase or not decrease since this will likely result in less duplicate questions asked. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444337_343228)
>
>
>
### Concern 2: Forgetting (or appearing to forget) about experienced users
This is round 3 of meta posts and certain messages have been stated by high rep users several times. Again, these are the color and sticky bars. However, that last comment raises an important point that I believe is the heart of this recent discontent: Stack Exchange is focusing on the low-reputation/unregistered/casual users at the expense of improving the product for existing and power users.
Without knowing more about the internal processes that are driving these decisions, I can't offer a decent suggestion other than "don't ignore us", but comments like this from high rep users and your moderators is frustrating to read over and over:
>
> interesting! But I'm not a new user. To me the sticky bar is distracting and contains mostly irrelevant links for me. I never use the Jobs or Tags or Documentation links, and I'll happily use my Home button to go back to the top for the rest. When I am answering I look for the question to get details right, and notifications that distract me from answering are hindering at that point. Please separate the daily power user from the unregistered casual visitor! - [Martijn Pieters](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444416_343228)
>
>
>
This type of concern is casually dismissed with a (paraphrased) "they don't know what they really want".
>
> We've interviewed a lot of new and veteran users, but this is also something that's been asked for on meta and lot of users within this post like. Because some power users don't like something doesn't automatically mean it is a poor design for all power users and we don't care about their needs. Saying things like "tyranny of the casual user majority" may be one of the reasons some people outside this community perceive it as unfriendly to new users. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444532_343228)
>
>
>
This concern is even more obvious when links that were used by experienced users to help new users are completely removed. The help button may not be used by new users (I'm sure there is a stat somewhere about how often it's used, but I can't find one) but it is used by experienced users to point the newer people to help. Comments like this to users trying to help don't make sense. The button was removed for those that can help, but those that don't use it have the button still in place.
>
> i understand that and I'm really sory but please try to consider fact that majority of our users didn't use that help link in top bar. people just don't read help usually so for majority of users this link was simply useless. your effort trying to teach others (and linking to help) is priceless but we still need to consider needs of other users as well. that area in header is very "expensive" and we're trying to keep there only essential and most useful things. but i agree that we, as company, need to do better job at informing users about help. but link in header is not a solution... – [Paweł](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343165/new-top-bar-wheres-the-help-menu-gone#comment444072_343165)
>
>
>
**Suggestion**: Consider your audience. These posts are made on meta, where your experienced and invested users lurk. These are the people that want Stack Overflow to succeed. The suggestions they are offering are to help you. Dismissing them or forgetting about them isn't helpful to either side.
---
Realizing that some of the animosity that exists right now is due to other events, I think these two concerns I've presented can be easily addressed. The community is here to help Stack Overflow grow. We *want* to work with the company and we *want* new and better things. We are engaging you on Meta because you brought the updates to us. Dismissing feedback that was requested is only strengthening a concern some community members have: Stack Overflow is starting to forget about its users. I am *not* saying that you need to listen to everything we say. But, Stack Exchange values transparency and many of us love seeing posts filled with data to back up or refute assumptions. Let's see more of that to argue points. | 2017/02/08 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343287",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/189134/"
] | While I don't believe that it's ever how the responses are *intended* to sound, this is how I *feel* reading some feedback on posts. It's not limited to the post that is the focus of the op.
One trend that stands out to me is the expectation that users will provide rigorous statistics to back up every claim they make. Often it isn't possible to make such an analysis because data hasn't been provided or is difficult to get, even when it's reasonable to assume that it exists somewhere. Responses from employees often lack statistics too, but can convey a tone of "if you don't have any numbers then we'll just assume our version is right".
The response to feedback is that tests show that the change is good. But how are users supposed to run competing tests? There's no way to provide competing statistics, so such a response feels dismissive even if it wasn't intended that way.
A more constructive response would be to add details explaining how a decision was made. The sooner this response can be posted, the less chance it has to get buried in a long, frustrating comment chain. For example, an employee eventually responded to a request for a static top bar with:
>
> majority (like seriously a lot) of our traffic comes from google (both anonymous and loggedin). they very often land in the middle of the page on specific answer (or just quickly scroll down without paying attention to anything we have on top, very often omitting even question itself). so people simply ignore Stack Overflow as a website and everything we offer them, it's more like a place with answers. we're trying to do what's best for users, but we also need something from users because it's the only way this ecosystem may exist. i hope that answer makes sense.
>
>
>
This response is better because it provides insight into the decision, rather than making it feel arbitrary. It points out something that normal users are probably not thinking about. Now they can help brainstorm further solutions that keep this in mind rather than just saying they don't like the change. | I've just sort of accepted that the things that would make my life easier and better, both as a regular user and a moderator (on Workplace) are lower priority than the things that Stack Exchange wants to pursue.
We also have different interests. I want a website that easily enables me to see, answer, and interact with high quality content.
Stack Exchange needs to make money.
I find nearly no value in documentation or careers even though SE dumps a lot of time into it, both community manager and development. The navigation changes arguably are making SE harder to use for me.
There are many fairly straightforward feature requests which would make things better for me but are things that SE chooses other things to spend their time/development efforts towards building.
My similar frustrations to how SE interacts with me as a regular user and moderator become much smaller when I realized the fundamental reason is they don't care about the same things I do.
*shrug* |
343,287 | In recent product announcements, I have noticed a trend that is disturbing to me. Stack Exchange employees are making claims and arguing with users without providing data to back up assumptions. This is leading to both users getting frustrated because it looks like they are being ignored and employees getting frustrated because the users aren't understanding their point of view.
I'm going to provide a few examples, but I want to make it clear that I am *not* calling people out. My goal is to point out the frustration I see building as a high rep user and provide a few suggestions on how all of us can resolve some of these issues. I know that some of the frustration I am seeing is also festering from other recent posts, but I want to focus on posts where the community can provide valuable feedback to improve Stack Overflow, not solve worldly issues.
### Concern 1: Dismissiveness
There are posts throughout this topic of users sharing user scripts to do two things - change the top color and unsticky it. Regardless of the merits of these (and I admit that I am [biased](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/343166/189134) in what I think the outcome should be), the tone coming from employees isn't the greatest. A few examples:
>
> can you please include the votes from all the people who do like the white on white (but because they are OK with it, didn't feel the need to pipe up)? Claiming you and the few hundred upvotes on different posts are representative of the community as a whole is disingenuous at best. - [Oded](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444452_343106)
>
>
>
and
>
> @StevenPenny the reason Pawel didn't respond regarding the color is because if we change the color, we would first need to run additional testing. The team's run multiple usability and A/B tests to ensure usability and effectiveness of the current version. Making it black would make it stand off from the rest of the content more, but a lot of users in this meta post don't want that. We also know that things that don't look like the rest of the site tend to get ignored by more people. [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444215_343106)
>
>
>
Both of these come off as, frankly, insulting. The first is asking for data that even Stack Exchange doesn't have and the second attempts to explain away why something can't be done because of "testing". Personally, I'd be ok with that testing response, if we have been provided more information but as it standings the only hard numbers we have is that top bar clicks increased 143%.
**Suggestion**: It is implied that other metrics were measured and these influenced the decision to build this a certain way. Share some of this with us. Stack Exchange values transparancy. We've come to expect it. Don't shut it out of this process.
>
> We've interviewed a lot of users who had no idea what the items in the topbar were or that we had navigation at the top right-hand side of the page because they were used to landing on the page and scrolling to the answer. By this time everything is off screen. Clicks weren't the only thing that we measured, but they were an important metric for us, especially for unregistered or low-reputation users. We also tracked searches, because we want searching to increase or not decrease since this will likely result in less duplicate questions asked. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444337_343228)
>
>
>
### Concern 2: Forgetting (or appearing to forget) about experienced users
This is round 3 of meta posts and certain messages have been stated by high rep users several times. Again, these are the color and sticky bars. However, that last comment raises an important point that I believe is the heart of this recent discontent: Stack Exchange is focusing on the low-reputation/unregistered/casual users at the expense of improving the product for existing and power users.
Without knowing more about the internal processes that are driving these decisions, I can't offer a decent suggestion other than "don't ignore us", but comments like this from high rep users and your moderators is frustrating to read over and over:
>
> interesting! But I'm not a new user. To me the sticky bar is distracting and contains mostly irrelevant links for me. I never use the Jobs or Tags or Documentation links, and I'll happily use my Home button to go back to the top for the rest. When I am answering I look for the question to get details right, and notifications that distract me from answering are hindering at that point. Please separate the daily power user from the unregistered casual visitor! - [Martijn Pieters](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444416_343228)
>
>
>
This type of concern is casually dismissed with a (paraphrased) "they don't know what they really want".
>
> We've interviewed a lot of new and veteran users, but this is also something that's been asked for on meta and lot of users within this post like. Because some power users don't like something doesn't automatically mean it is a poor design for all power users and we don't care about their needs. Saying things like "tyranny of the casual user majority" may be one of the reasons some people outside this community perceive it as unfriendly to new users. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444532_343228)
>
>
>
This concern is even more obvious when links that were used by experienced users to help new users are completely removed. The help button may not be used by new users (I'm sure there is a stat somewhere about how often it's used, but I can't find one) but it is used by experienced users to point the newer people to help. Comments like this to users trying to help don't make sense. The button was removed for those that can help, but those that don't use it have the button still in place.
>
> i understand that and I'm really sory but please try to consider fact that majority of our users didn't use that help link in top bar. people just don't read help usually so for majority of users this link was simply useless. your effort trying to teach others (and linking to help) is priceless but we still need to consider needs of other users as well. that area in header is very "expensive" and we're trying to keep there only essential and most useful things. but i agree that we, as company, need to do better job at informing users about help. but link in header is not a solution... – [Paweł](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343165/new-top-bar-wheres-the-help-menu-gone#comment444072_343165)
>
>
>
**Suggestion**: Consider your audience. These posts are made on meta, where your experienced and invested users lurk. These are the people that want Stack Overflow to succeed. The suggestions they are offering are to help you. Dismissing them or forgetting about them isn't helpful to either side.
---
Realizing that some of the animosity that exists right now is due to other events, I think these two concerns I've presented can be easily addressed. The community is here to help Stack Overflow grow. We *want* to work with the company and we *want* new and better things. We are engaging you on Meta because you brought the updates to us. Dismissing feedback that was requested is only strengthening a concern some community members have: Stack Overflow is starting to forget about its users. I am *not* saying that you need to listen to everything we say. But, Stack Exchange values transparency and many of us love seeing posts filled with data to back up or refute assumptions. Let's see more of that to argue points. | 2017/02/08 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343287",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/189134/"
] | When people give something their best, and all of it, they tend to stretch pretty thin as what they've built comes under scrutiny and critique. This is because the best they've got creatively and emotionally is still completely invested in that thing they just built.
There's also a rather palpable wave of dissonance that hits you pretty strongly after you emerge from a tool shed full of people that feel that they've built the very best thing they possibly could have, too. But you folks build and ship software, you know this stuff.
To the comments that you've identified as examples in your post, as well as numerous others that were more or less similar, we agree that they weren't our best. For that, we apologize. No one ever *really* intends to come off as dismissive, condescending or belittling as they work to try to make a situation better; I don't think folks realized just how thinly they were stretched and how much that affected their ability to really shape what they were trying to say.
**We will do better.**
To your mention that other things that happened previously might have contributed here, I think that's part of it. The push that we felt had a level of intensity that we don't ordinarily see; I'm actually quite glad that you called this out. We can't ever let bringing the less-than-great out in each other become something that looks like normal. I've been a user since late 2008, I was elected to serve this community in 2011 and to be quite honest, yesterday scared me a little. I was taken back a bit by stuff I saw coming out of us, and stuff coming out of folks that we're ordinarily quite friendly with.
### Let's please take a hard look at all this tension, and decide if it's something that we want to keep.
Yeah, I don't want to keep it either. Here are things we're going to do in order to help that along.
**We have to do a better job of communicating and explaining our goals.**
This means taking time to explain constraints and decisions more clearly so that information can help you better understand our position on something, and help us get more valuable feedback from you.
We can't always just throw data together from our testing system in a manner that would be *close* to rational for other people to consume, but we can take time to explain tests better.
And when we *didn't* do something that you feel we probably should have done, it's important to give our rationale in a manner that's not dismissive. And sometimes that might mean saying scary for-profit words like "More exposure to [thing] is a big priority for us right now, so we really can't move it". We can't always be specific, but vaguely non-dismissive is much better than coming off as rude.
**"Let me explain this to you ..." has to be meant literally.**
Because it's sometimes too easy to say that when what you really mean is *let me tell you why you're wrong*. That line can sometimes be very thin, and very easy to cross, so we all need to make sure to watch for it.
If we say something and pick up that you didn't understand us, our next job is to help you understand us, not just try harder to find ways to get you to agree with it.
**Tagging out**
It's hard to know in advance of just not knowing what you're even trying to accomplish that you've lost sight of whatever it was you were trying to do. This is particularly true in conversations where the sense of urgency to respond quickly is quite elevated, and both parties grow increasingly emotional.
We'll do a better job of just outright saying "*I think I lost total track of what we're trying to achieve here, can you please tell me in a sentence or two what you want me to take back to the team?*" Sometimes that can be *just* enough pause to keep things from getting too hot.
**So ...**
We haven't lost touch, we honestly felt that the reception to this would mostly follow suit with the rest of the tests and interviews we completed, coupled with the support we saw for this early on (granted, before we had more concrete things for you to poke at).
And, well, looking completely bewildered and dumbfounded *kinda* looks like losing touch, but it's a state that's much easier to recover from (we're pretty much there now).
Thank you for bringing this up in the manner that you did. If I can add to or clarify any part of this, I'm happy to do it. | TLDR:
I agree there's an issue here, though I'm not sure it's entirely on the team *or* even remotely intended. Some of this feels like users provoking the team, and some of it feels like poor word choice or other language related issues. While there's definitely some things here that need fixed, there are also some things that I think we all should try to keep an open mind about.
---
As a user who has seen a lot of the frustration you've mentioned, let me give my two cents, and a couple suggestions of my own.
### This isn't entirely on the team.
While I agree that this has, at least in my perception, become something of an issue lately, I also feel this isn't entirely on the team.
Sometimes, users just bring up their concerns in an aggressive manner. While it may be argued that this is a result of the user feeling like they're not being listened to, the fact that the user comes off as antagonizing and aggressive can really make the situation worse.
For example, the post the first two comments you use to illustrate the point feels very strongly worded towards the employees. Yes, that seems to be a result of the user feeling they're being ignored. Yes, the employees still could have responded better. However, I feel that in this situation, fault lays on both the user and the employees who could have responded better. When tension is high, it's very easy to fall into these situations.
While I have no immediate examples, nor the time to look for them, I have seen this in other recent situations: Users getting more aggressive or antagonistic, which in turn starts the team toward getting more riled up. In response, the user or more users get more heated, and things start to escalate from there. This kind of tension can make it very hard to feel like you're being appreciated or that your point is being listened to. It's a vicious cycle, but not one that is solely the fault of the employees.
**Suggestion:** We as users need to strive not to start off with accusing the team of not listening. Even if we have evidence they may not be listening, we need to try to assume the best, or try to word our request in such a way that it invites open discussion. Aggressive or antagonistic language is only going to raise the tension and make a good discussion harder.
### Some of this seems to be an issue with the choice of wording or the result of a language difference.
>
> @StevenPenny the reason Pawel didn't respond regarding the color is because if we change the color, we would first need to run additional testing. The team's run multiple usability and A/B tests to ensure usability and effectiveness of the current version. Making it black would make it stand off from the rest of the content more, but a lot of users in this meta post don't want that. We also know that things that don't look like the rest of the site tend to get ignored by more people.
>
>
>
This comment feels to me like an *attempt* to explain the team's decision about the color, but it also feels like it just misses the mark. I can certainly see where one would find this comment to be dismissive or insulting, though I don't find it to be that way myself. I think if the comment had been worded slightly differently, or if Kurtis had more room for a better explanation, this comment wouldn't be in the list of examples.
It's also worth noting that Kurtis' next comment on that answer helps point to the fact the team isn't trying to be dismissive, and that the changes requested might well be made later:
>
> Because we don't answer immediately does not mean we're not listening. It's possible we launch with white and continue to test iterations. [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week/343106?noredirect=1#comment444216_343106)
>
>
>
This extra comment really does, in my mind, help show that the team *is* listening, and either may be wording things in such a way that people are misinterpreting them, or (as I believe and Tim's answer seems to indicate) the team was overwhelmed and trying to respond to everything, leading to responses given with high tension that are long and may leave out important information. Such information could include, as in this example, that the team is open to testing a different color after the first release. The addition of this comment, which immediately follows the previous one, makes the first comment feel a lot more useful to me.
Now, consider this example:
>
> i understand that and I'm really sory but please try to consider fact that majority of our users didn't use that help link in top bar. people just don't read help usually so for majority of users this link was simply useless. your effort trying to teach others (and linking to help) is priceless but we still need to consider needs of other users as well. that area in header is very "expensive" and we're trying to keep there only essential and most useful things. but i agree that we, as company, need to do better job at informing users about help. but link in header is not a solution...
>
>
>
As the user this was directed at originally, it *did* feel dismissive. However, it didn't upset me or make me angry, it just felt... Off. In contrast, Tim's comment following this one felt a lot better: It offered an alternative that fit the team's goals and *hopefully* would fit the case I described.
However, I feel like this example is more of a language based thing. It feels like Pawal was trying to explain the team's reasoning *rather than* dismiss my use case. It may have been that Pawal did not at that moment have an alternative to offer. Rereading it the next day, it still feels dismissive, but I can also see how Pawal was trying to explain why the team was catering to the majority in this instance. If the majority of the users who don't *need* the help center (aka "experienced" or "high-rep" users) don't ever use it, then that space is really better used other ways, and this comment was attempting to explain that *this* was the reasoning.
And let's keep in mind that *users* can cause the same thing. Consider this exchange on this question:
>
> As the person Pawal's "help link" comment was directed at, I do want to say that it felt incredibly dismissive and like my concerns, as a frequent Meta goer and someone who honestly tries to help new users who come to Meta with questions, just didn't matter. Tim's response on the same post, offering an alternative that did fit what the team wanted to do while still giving me something more usable felt a lot better and pretty quickly made me feel more like my opinion wasn't just being dismissed because "that's how SO wants it." Comments like Tim's feel much more inviting and open. – Kendra
>
>
> @Kendra, we never want users to feel dismissed. FWIW, I don't want to speak for Pawel, but I think at least some of the tonal difference you're seeing may be a language issue. Pawel's English is great for a non-native speaker, but I can see places where the phrasing may come off as less collaborative than Tim or I might. – [Jaydles♦](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343287/concerns-about-recent-stack-exchange-responses-to-users-suggestions#comment444657_343287)
>
>
>
I had hoped, in my comment, to word it in such a way to make clear that I don't blame Pawal for the comment I mentioned, and to make clear that I wasn't angry or upset. *However,* there just was not nearly enough space in the comment to make that clear, and I decided rather than edit/delete the comment, I would expand it into this answer.
**Suggestion:** Remember that everyone is human, and no one is perfect. Intentions can be misconstrued, poor word choice can be used, and well-intended comments can be misread and misinterpreted. If you see a comment that looks or feels off, from anyone, consider (politely!) pointing out to the author how it can come across. Hopefully, they can either clarify or delete/edit/whatever the statement to try to keep things calm and on track.
### Some of these really do just feel like writing off what we say.
>
> We've interviewed a lot of new and veteran users, but this is also something that's been asked for on meta and lot of users within this post like. Because some power users don't like something doesn't automatically mean it is a poor design for all power users and we don't care about their needs. Saying things like "tyranny of the casual user majority" may be one of the reasons some people outside this community perceive it as unfriendly to new users.
>
>
>
This comment really does just feel like a dismissive write off of what's been said, at least out of context. It feels like a weak justification of why something is right, regardless of what the user involved says.
This comment *could be improved,* using a suggestion from the question: Back it up with data. How many of these users were interviewed? What percent agreed with what the employee said? What percent agreed with what the user said?
This could raise additional questions or concerns: Was the sample size even large enough? Was the "interview" organized well? How/when was this interview conducted? How were users chosen for this interview? What defined the "new users" and the "veteran users" in this interview? Can the annonymized results of these interviews be published for the world to see, or was this done in such a way that the results are too tied to their respondents?
In the end, this is one of those comments that just really needs more backup. Otherwise, it will always feel like a "he said, she said" kind of remark.
I have no suggestions for this case, aside from what's already been stated in the question. |
343,287 | In recent product announcements, I have noticed a trend that is disturbing to me. Stack Exchange employees are making claims and arguing with users without providing data to back up assumptions. This is leading to both users getting frustrated because it looks like they are being ignored and employees getting frustrated because the users aren't understanding their point of view.
I'm going to provide a few examples, but I want to make it clear that I am *not* calling people out. My goal is to point out the frustration I see building as a high rep user and provide a few suggestions on how all of us can resolve some of these issues. I know that some of the frustration I am seeing is also festering from other recent posts, but I want to focus on posts where the community can provide valuable feedback to improve Stack Overflow, not solve worldly issues.
### Concern 1: Dismissiveness
There are posts throughout this topic of users sharing user scripts to do two things - change the top color and unsticky it. Regardless of the merits of these (and I admit that I am [biased](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/343166/189134) in what I think the outcome should be), the tone coming from employees isn't the greatest. A few examples:
>
> can you please include the votes from all the people who do like the white on white (but because they are OK with it, didn't feel the need to pipe up)? Claiming you and the few hundred upvotes on different posts are representative of the community as a whole is disingenuous at best. - [Oded](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444452_343106)
>
>
>
and
>
> @StevenPenny the reason Pawel didn't respond regarding the color is because if we change the color, we would first need to run additional testing. The team's run multiple usability and A/B tests to ensure usability and effectiveness of the current version. Making it black would make it stand off from the rest of the content more, but a lot of users in this meta post don't want that. We also know that things that don't look like the rest of the site tend to get ignored by more people. [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444215_343106)
>
>
>
Both of these come off as, frankly, insulting. The first is asking for data that even Stack Exchange doesn't have and the second attempts to explain away why something can't be done because of "testing". Personally, I'd be ok with that testing response, if we have been provided more information but as it standings the only hard numbers we have is that top bar clicks increased 143%.
**Suggestion**: It is implied that other metrics were measured and these influenced the decision to build this a certain way. Share some of this with us. Stack Exchange values transparancy. We've come to expect it. Don't shut it out of this process.
>
> We've interviewed a lot of users who had no idea what the items in the topbar were or that we had navigation at the top right-hand side of the page because they were used to landing on the page and scrolling to the answer. By this time everything is off screen. Clicks weren't the only thing that we measured, but they were an important metric for us, especially for unregistered or low-reputation users. We also tracked searches, because we want searching to increase or not decrease since this will likely result in less duplicate questions asked. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444337_343228)
>
>
>
### Concern 2: Forgetting (or appearing to forget) about experienced users
This is round 3 of meta posts and certain messages have been stated by high rep users several times. Again, these are the color and sticky bars. However, that last comment raises an important point that I believe is the heart of this recent discontent: Stack Exchange is focusing on the low-reputation/unregistered/casual users at the expense of improving the product for existing and power users.
Without knowing more about the internal processes that are driving these decisions, I can't offer a decent suggestion other than "don't ignore us", but comments like this from high rep users and your moderators is frustrating to read over and over:
>
> interesting! But I'm not a new user. To me the sticky bar is distracting and contains mostly irrelevant links for me. I never use the Jobs or Tags or Documentation links, and I'll happily use my Home button to go back to the top for the rest. When I am answering I look for the question to get details right, and notifications that distract me from answering are hindering at that point. Please separate the daily power user from the unregistered casual visitor! - [Martijn Pieters](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444416_343228)
>
>
>
This type of concern is casually dismissed with a (paraphrased) "they don't know what they really want".
>
> We've interviewed a lot of new and veteran users, but this is also something that's been asked for on meta and lot of users within this post like. Because some power users don't like something doesn't automatically mean it is a poor design for all power users and we don't care about their needs. Saying things like "tyranny of the casual user majority" may be one of the reasons some people outside this community perceive it as unfriendly to new users. - [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week#comment444532_343228)
>
>
>
This concern is even more obvious when links that were used by experienced users to help new users are completely removed. The help button may not be used by new users (I'm sure there is a stat somewhere about how often it's used, but I can't find one) but it is used by experienced users to point the newer people to help. Comments like this to users trying to help don't make sense. The button was removed for those that can help, but those that don't use it have the button still in place.
>
> i understand that and I'm really sory but please try to consider fact that majority of our users didn't use that help link in top bar. people just don't read help usually so for majority of users this link was simply useless. your effort trying to teach others (and linking to help) is priceless but we still need to consider needs of other users as well. that area in header is very "expensive" and we're trying to keep there only essential and most useful things. but i agree that we, as company, need to do better job at informing users about help. but link in header is not a solution... – [Paweł](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343165/new-top-bar-wheres-the-help-menu-gone#comment444072_343165)
>
>
>
**Suggestion**: Consider your audience. These posts are made on meta, where your experienced and invested users lurk. These are the people that want Stack Overflow to succeed. The suggestions they are offering are to help you. Dismissing them or forgetting about them isn't helpful to either side.
---
Realizing that some of the animosity that exists right now is due to other events, I think these two concerns I've presented can be easily addressed. The community is here to help Stack Overflow grow. We *want* to work with the company and we *want* new and better things. We are engaging you on Meta because you brought the updates to us. Dismissing feedback that was requested is only strengthening a concern some community members have: Stack Overflow is starting to forget about its users. I am *not* saying that you need to listen to everything we say. But, Stack Exchange values transparency and many of us love seeing posts filled with data to back up or refute assumptions. Let's see more of that to argue points. | 2017/02/08 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343287",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/189134/"
] | TLDR:
I agree there's an issue here, though I'm not sure it's entirely on the team *or* even remotely intended. Some of this feels like users provoking the team, and some of it feels like poor word choice or other language related issues. While there's definitely some things here that need fixed, there are also some things that I think we all should try to keep an open mind about.
---
As a user who has seen a lot of the frustration you've mentioned, let me give my two cents, and a couple suggestions of my own.
### This isn't entirely on the team.
While I agree that this has, at least in my perception, become something of an issue lately, I also feel this isn't entirely on the team.
Sometimes, users just bring up their concerns in an aggressive manner. While it may be argued that this is a result of the user feeling like they're not being listened to, the fact that the user comes off as antagonizing and aggressive can really make the situation worse.
For example, the post the first two comments you use to illustrate the point feels very strongly worded towards the employees. Yes, that seems to be a result of the user feeling they're being ignored. Yes, the employees still could have responded better. However, I feel that in this situation, fault lays on both the user and the employees who could have responded better. When tension is high, it's very easy to fall into these situations.
While I have no immediate examples, nor the time to look for them, I have seen this in other recent situations: Users getting more aggressive or antagonistic, which in turn starts the team toward getting more riled up. In response, the user or more users get more heated, and things start to escalate from there. This kind of tension can make it very hard to feel like you're being appreciated or that your point is being listened to. It's a vicious cycle, but not one that is solely the fault of the employees.
**Suggestion:** We as users need to strive not to start off with accusing the team of not listening. Even if we have evidence they may not be listening, we need to try to assume the best, or try to word our request in such a way that it invites open discussion. Aggressive or antagonistic language is only going to raise the tension and make a good discussion harder.
### Some of this seems to be an issue with the choice of wording or the result of a language difference.
>
> @StevenPenny the reason Pawel didn't respond regarding the color is because if we change the color, we would first need to run additional testing. The team's run multiple usability and A/B tests to ensure usability and effectiveness of the current version. Making it black would make it stand off from the rest of the content more, but a lot of users in this meta post don't want that. We also know that things that don't look like the rest of the site tend to get ignored by more people.
>
>
>
This comment feels to me like an *attempt* to explain the team's decision about the color, but it also feels like it just misses the mark. I can certainly see where one would find this comment to be dismissive or insulting, though I don't find it to be that way myself. I think if the comment had been worded slightly differently, or if Kurtis had more room for a better explanation, this comment wouldn't be in the list of examples.
It's also worth noting that Kurtis' next comment on that answer helps point to the fact the team isn't trying to be dismissive, and that the changes requested might well be made later:
>
> Because we don't answer immediately does not mean we're not listening. It's possible we launch with white and continue to test iterations. [Kurtis Beavers](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343103/help-test-the-new-top-nav-phase-3-testing-runs-this-week/343106?noredirect=1#comment444216_343106)
>
>
>
This extra comment really does, in my mind, help show that the team *is* listening, and either may be wording things in such a way that people are misinterpreting them, or (as I believe and Tim's answer seems to indicate) the team was overwhelmed and trying to respond to everything, leading to responses given with high tension that are long and may leave out important information. Such information could include, as in this example, that the team is open to testing a different color after the first release. The addition of this comment, which immediately follows the previous one, makes the first comment feel a lot more useful to me.
Now, consider this example:
>
> i understand that and I'm really sory but please try to consider fact that majority of our users didn't use that help link in top bar. people just don't read help usually so for majority of users this link was simply useless. your effort trying to teach others (and linking to help) is priceless but we still need to consider needs of other users as well. that area in header is very "expensive" and we're trying to keep there only essential and most useful things. but i agree that we, as company, need to do better job at informing users about help. but link in header is not a solution...
>
>
>
As the user this was directed at originally, it *did* feel dismissive. However, it didn't upset me or make me angry, it just felt... Off. In contrast, Tim's comment following this one felt a lot better: It offered an alternative that fit the team's goals and *hopefully* would fit the case I described.
However, I feel like this example is more of a language based thing. It feels like Pawal was trying to explain the team's reasoning *rather than* dismiss my use case. It may have been that Pawal did not at that moment have an alternative to offer. Rereading it the next day, it still feels dismissive, but I can also see how Pawal was trying to explain why the team was catering to the majority in this instance. If the majority of the users who don't *need* the help center (aka "experienced" or "high-rep" users) don't ever use it, then that space is really better used other ways, and this comment was attempting to explain that *this* was the reasoning.
And let's keep in mind that *users* can cause the same thing. Consider this exchange on this question:
>
> As the person Pawal's "help link" comment was directed at, I do want to say that it felt incredibly dismissive and like my concerns, as a frequent Meta goer and someone who honestly tries to help new users who come to Meta with questions, just didn't matter. Tim's response on the same post, offering an alternative that did fit what the team wanted to do while still giving me something more usable felt a lot better and pretty quickly made me feel more like my opinion wasn't just being dismissed because "that's how SO wants it." Comments like Tim's feel much more inviting and open. – Kendra
>
>
> @Kendra, we never want users to feel dismissed. FWIW, I don't want to speak for Pawel, but I think at least some of the tonal difference you're seeing may be a language issue. Pawel's English is great for a non-native speaker, but I can see places where the phrasing may come off as less collaborative than Tim or I might. – [Jaydles♦](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/343287/concerns-about-recent-stack-exchange-responses-to-users-suggestions#comment444657_343287)
>
>
>
I had hoped, in my comment, to word it in such a way to make clear that I don't blame Pawal for the comment I mentioned, and to make clear that I wasn't angry or upset. *However,* there just was not nearly enough space in the comment to make that clear, and I decided rather than edit/delete the comment, I would expand it into this answer.
**Suggestion:** Remember that everyone is human, and no one is perfect. Intentions can be misconstrued, poor word choice can be used, and well-intended comments can be misread and misinterpreted. If you see a comment that looks or feels off, from anyone, consider (politely!) pointing out to the author how it can come across. Hopefully, they can either clarify or delete/edit/whatever the statement to try to keep things calm and on track.
### Some of these really do just feel like writing off what we say.
>
> We've interviewed a lot of new and veteran users, but this is also something that's been asked for on meta and lot of users within this post like. Because some power users don't like something doesn't automatically mean it is a poor design for all power users and we don't care about their needs. Saying things like "tyranny of the casual user majority" may be one of the reasons some people outside this community perceive it as unfriendly to new users.
>
>
>
This comment really does just feel like a dismissive write off of what's been said, at least out of context. It feels like a weak justification of why something is right, regardless of what the user involved says.
This comment *could be improved,* using a suggestion from the question: Back it up with data. How many of these users were interviewed? What percent agreed with what the employee said? What percent agreed with what the user said?
This could raise additional questions or concerns: Was the sample size even large enough? Was the "interview" organized well? How/when was this interview conducted? How were users chosen for this interview? What defined the "new users" and the "veteran users" in this interview? Can the annonymized results of these interviews be published for the world to see, or was this done in such a way that the results are too tied to their respondents?
In the end, this is one of those comments that just really needs more backup. Otherwise, it will always feel like a "he said, she said" kind of remark.
I have no suggestions for this case, aside from what's already been stated in the question. | I've just sort of accepted that the things that would make my life easier and better, both as a regular user and a moderator (on Workplace) are lower priority than the things that Stack Exchange wants to pursue.
We also have different interests. I want a website that easily enables me to see, answer, and interact with high quality content.
Stack Exchange needs to make money.
I find nearly no value in documentation or careers even though SE dumps a lot of time into it, both community manager and development. The navigation changes arguably are making SE harder to use for me.
There are many fairly straightforward feature requests which would make things better for me but are things that SE chooses other things to spend their time/development efforts towards building.
My similar frustrations to how SE interacts with me as a regular user and moderator become much smaller when I realized the fundamental reason is they don't care about the same things I do.
*shrug* |
11,878 | I've searched online for this, to no avail. In a dispute where attorneys are involved on one or both sides, what is an attorney signalling, in terms of legal strategy (i.e. beyond the literal meaning of "unsubstantiated"), in using the phrase "no reason to believe", particularly in the face of overwhelming substantiating evidence, as in the following example:
>
> "We have no reason to believe that the allegations presented here are true."
>
>
> | 2016/07/22 | [
"https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/11878",
"https://law.stackexchange.com",
"https://law.stackexchange.com/users/3341/"
] | Caveat: I am not a lawyer. It seems to me that the attorney using the phrase, "We have no reason to believe that the allegations presented here are true," is not only saying that the allegations are not true, but that all the evidence supporting the allegations are not true. Of course one has to allow for the possibility that the attorney using the phrase "no reason to believe," may have been doing so more as a hackneyed phrase, trying to give his position emphasis, rather than as part of a statement of logic in which reasons [i.e., evidence] support conclusions [i.e., allegations]. JMHO | If you use the phrase "I have no reason to believe ..." In the face of *any* evidence that should give you a reason to believe this is known in law, as in general life, as a "lie".
However, what is compelling evidence to you may not be compelling to someone else with whom you have a dispute (or indeed, an arbitrator). Never overlook the possibility that you could be dead wrong.
Of course, the specific quote given, *may* be a concession that *some* of the allegations are true: just not *all* of them. |
11,878 | I've searched online for this, to no avail. In a dispute where attorneys are involved on one or both sides, what is an attorney signalling, in terms of legal strategy (i.e. beyond the literal meaning of "unsubstantiated"), in using the phrase "no reason to believe", particularly in the face of overwhelming substantiating evidence, as in the following example:
>
> "We have no reason to believe that the allegations presented here are true."
>
>
> | 2016/07/22 | [
"https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/11878",
"https://law.stackexchange.com",
"https://law.stackexchange.com/users/3341/"
] | That phrase does not signal anything strategic beyond the obvious: an intent to dispute the allegations.
Although the existence of the suggests that there is probably *some* reason to believe the allegations, the phrase is being used nearly literally. | If you use the phrase "I have no reason to believe ..." In the face of *any* evidence that should give you a reason to believe this is known in law, as in general life, as a "lie".
However, what is compelling evidence to you may not be compelling to someone else with whom you have a dispute (or indeed, an arbitrator). Never overlook the possibility that you could be dead wrong.
Of course, the specific quote given, *may* be a concession that *some* of the allegations are true: just not *all* of them. |
11,878 | I've searched online for this, to no avail. In a dispute where attorneys are involved on one or both sides, what is an attorney signalling, in terms of legal strategy (i.e. beyond the literal meaning of "unsubstantiated"), in using the phrase "no reason to believe", particularly in the face of overwhelming substantiating evidence, as in the following example:
>
> "We have no reason to believe that the allegations presented here are true."
>
>
> | 2016/07/22 | [
"https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/11878",
"https://law.stackexchange.com",
"https://law.stackexchange.com/users/3341/"
] | Caveat: I am not a lawyer. It seems to me that the attorney using the phrase, "We have no reason to believe that the allegations presented here are true," is not only saying that the allegations are not true, but that all the evidence supporting the allegations are not true. Of course one has to allow for the possibility that the attorney using the phrase "no reason to believe," may have been doing so more as a hackneyed phrase, trying to give his position emphasis, rather than as part of a statement of logic in which reasons [i.e., evidence] support conclusions [i.e., allegations]. JMHO | That phrase does not signal anything strategic beyond the obvious: an intent to dispute the allegations.
Although the existence of the suggests that there is probably *some* reason to believe the allegations, the phrase is being used nearly literally. |
10,397 | When I consider my own existence with respect to time I can imagine three possibilities:
(1) **Time extends infinitely into the past.** In this case, how can the present, with me in it, exist, since there would be an infinite period of time that existed before the present. That seems illogical.
(2) **Time had a starting point from which everything in our universe evolved to the present (t=1).** That possibility would require something (God) to start the clock ticking (t=0). But in this case we're back to square 1 with the problem of an infinite past. So the only possibility that makes sense to me is a third possibility
(3) **Where time is some sort of abstraction in human consciousness that we need in order to relate cause and effect.** | 2014/03/24 | [
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/10397",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/users/5538/"
] | I will attempt to present the stance of physicist [Julian Barbour](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Barbour), who presented a compelling answer to this question in a lecture I saw him give in Oxford ([this lecture](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5rExaKLEoU)).
He is firmly *not* in the camp of the latter viewpoint in your title, but I wouldn't necessarily put him in the former camp either. He puts his view of time in terms of the [primary/secondary quality distinction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary/secondary_quality_distinction) and refers to Galileo, who in 1623 classified attributes such as color and sound as secondary characteristics of matter that are perceiver-dependent. Rather than photons entering eyes or vibrations entering ears, in the case of time we have our perception of the *successiveness* of events streaming through the system we know as consciousness. These progressions correspond with an increase in system complexity, with all consciousnesses experiencing a flow of time along a line of increasing complexity.
All in all a fascinating viewpoint that I've hardly done justice here. After the lecture, he recommended that people watch [this video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKsNraFxPwk) for a more in-depth look (assuming they didn't want to read *[The End of Time](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_Time_%28book%29)* or any of his papers) so I will pass that along as well.
Lastly, I'll add something because it made me laugh and because it is bound to come up if you consider the implications of this position: When someone asked him what all this means about free will, he said “I'm not sure it matters much. It *feels* free anyway, and I'm excited to find out what I'll do next.” | Summations in math are completely true irregardless of "time" so the question itself has no meaning. Yes there is "time" but like gravity "it exists but doesn't mean all that much" until you start talking vast distances (say between Planets.) Yes, "time mattered" when your average speed of travel was at best 4mph across rough terrain going from say Philadelphia to Boston.
But once you fly an SR-71 from LA to New York in 45 minutes time really doesn't matter all that much.
It mattered a lot in the Railroad business as you didn't want two trains travelling on the same tracks in opposite directions "at the same time." But "speed of travel" (time) has been solved by aircraft. Our "modern age" is very much defined by "being put in a hurry" though which perhaps can be explained by the difficult distances "travel" encountered in North America when going by land to anywhere. ("Time is money.")
This was never really true in Great Britain or Germany though as the terrain, distances and History favored those "with all the time in the World."
Americans were in a hurry...there was gold in California and silver in Nevada. "To get it you had to get there...and fast" apparently... |
10,397 | When I consider my own existence with respect to time I can imagine three possibilities:
(1) **Time extends infinitely into the past.** In this case, how can the present, with me in it, exist, since there would be an infinite period of time that existed before the present. That seems illogical.
(2) **Time had a starting point from which everything in our universe evolved to the present (t=1).** That possibility would require something (God) to start the clock ticking (t=0). But in this case we're back to square 1 with the problem of an infinite past. So the only possibility that makes sense to me is a third possibility
(3) **Where time is some sort of abstraction in human consciousness that we need in order to relate cause and effect.** | 2014/03/24 | [
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/10397",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/users/5538/"
] | You've presented a false dichotomy: just because something is a "mental construct" doesn't mean that it can't also be a real property of the physical universe.
Take length as an example. "Length," as such, doesn't exist physically. It's not something you can see or touch. Nevertheless, it is a real quality of physical objects--it exists "out there" and not just in our heads. In this respect, length is like any other *measure*--it's an abstraction in the sense that it does not exist in and of itself, but it nevertheless describes real qualities of physical objects.
Time is no different. The more you understand of physics, the less sense it makes to think of time "extending" in any direction. Time isn't a medium, it's a *measure*, and what it measures is **change.** As for what change itself is, well...that's still an [unanswered question!](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretations_of_quantum_mechanics) | 3 is correct. Time is a abstraction, a filing system used to arrange events and memories into a logical system of cause and effect.
Per relativity, space and time are not discrete entities, but a single construct called spacetime. Saying something is X km long is equal to saying it is Y seconds long. All units of time are based on and can be reduced to measures of distance.
Time is a mental construct used to make sense of movement. Movement produces the sensation and experience of time, not the other way around. |
10,397 | When I consider my own existence with respect to time I can imagine three possibilities:
(1) **Time extends infinitely into the past.** In this case, how can the present, with me in it, exist, since there would be an infinite period of time that existed before the present. That seems illogical.
(2) **Time had a starting point from which everything in our universe evolved to the present (t=1).** That possibility would require something (God) to start the clock ticking (t=0). But in this case we're back to square 1 with the problem of an infinite past. So the only possibility that makes sense to me is a third possibility
(3) **Where time is some sort of abstraction in human consciousness that we need in order to relate cause and effect.** | 2014/03/24 | [
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/10397",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com",
"https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/users/5538/"
] | Time as you perceive it is naturally a mental construct, but it seems to correspond to an element of reality.
"In a complete theory there is an element corresponding to each element of reality. A sufficient condition for the reality of a physical quantity is the possibility of predicting it with certainty, without disturbing the system" - [EPR](http://journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev.47.777)
However, we know reality is absurd
"The theory of quantum electrodynamics describes Nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept Nature as She is - absurd." - [Feynman](http://www.abebooks.com/book-search/title/qed-the-strange-theory-of-light-and-matter/first-edition/)
So there you have it, a fourth possibility that time corresponds to an element of reality and absurdly continues infinitely into the past.
Other people here proposed to view time as the domain of integers or as an axis of real numbers, but how is causality represented in such an analogy? | (1) is a little too loaded or existential of a question. If we shoot a classical arrow through the air, we can slice up each moment of its flight time into infinitely many infantecimal moments. In a sense, time extends infinitely into the present moment. What is "continuous" motion but the mathematical model of the rational number? In one second, there are an uncountable number of fractional sub-seconds; to say it another way, you can split 1.000...0 into an infinite number of fractions.
The concept of "infinite" is an abstract mental construct. By very definition, "infiniteness" cannot be measured. By that admission, it might be tempting to conclude it is a fabrication. It might be an idea that only exists inside the human mind. Another one of our 'constructs' to provide order and explanation to what we describe as "uncountable" processes and rules of logic.
That doesn't mean it doesn't exist or isn't correct, there's more than enough scholarly work to suggest it is a natural and 'real' thing either. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.