Why does "I would enjoy to [verb]?" sound so awkward? I was journalling, and I typed the following:     I would love to learn how to program in Haskell and Rust.   But then I realized that "love" is too strong a word. It's only true that I would enjoy learning to program in Haskell and Rust, but it's not true that I would love doing it.  So, I replaced the word "love" with "enjoy":     I would enjoy to learn how to program in Haskell and Rust.   But then I realized that this sounds awkward to my English-as-my-first-language ears.  But, it seems like the verbs "to enjoy" and "to love" should work the same? They do work the same in the following:        I enjoy line dancing.   I love line dancing.      But they don't seem to work the same in the following:        I enjoy to line dance. [this sounds awkward]   I love to line dance.      Is there a grammatical reason that "I enjoy to line dance" sounds so awkward to me?    Edit (after I accepted that this question is an exact duplicate of a different question) :  I might note that the following does sound fine to my ears, though:     I would enjoy very much to tell my boss that he can go f*** himself! I hate him so much!
Why is `enjoy to [verb]` incorrect I can say:     I love to read. I hate to read.   But it must be:     I enjoy to read. I enjoy reading.   What is enjoy so different?
Reset post score to 0 on migration In the  library, they are overloading the () operator.  Is this a convention in C++? For callbacks, etc.?  I have seen this in code of a co-worker (who happens to be a big Boost fan). Of all the Boost goodness out there, this has only led to confusion for me.  Any insight as to the reason for this overload? Let's say I have a node type "Article" which has a field "File" which is set to handle public files. A lot of articles and files get added.  Now the specs suddenly change and the "Article" will move behind a login and therefore also the attached files must be changed to be not publicly accessible anymore.  I already found out  pretty easily by reimporting the manually updated field.storage.node.field_file.yml config. But: this only affects new files that will be added after the switch. It doesn't work for existing files. They still are accessible publicly. Many thousand existing files would need to be manually reuploaded to also make them private.  Does anybody of you have solved that in D8 before? If so, then how?  As all I can think of right now is to programmatically query all "Article" nodes, then foreach through all nodes, get the files, temporarily store them somewhere else, empty the field out, then try to reupload the files programmatically (probably my next question) and then resave each node.  Does that sound reasonable? Or can you think of any other approach that might work here (in D8)? Is 225.225.225.128 a valid subnet mask? Can I look at the upgrade log after a distribution upgrade? I've upgraded to Ubuntu 12.04 and did it . I didn't look at the "packages to remove" section before clicking next - I've done Ubuntu upgrades many times and assumed it was just the normal set of obsolete library packages etc. But I do tend to watch the terminal text go by and see what it's doing, and I saw it removing a number of packages I wanted. I guess these are packages that aren't on the CD that can't co-exist with the new Ubuntu.  Anyway, I want to find which packages have been removed. So does the update log get saved somewhere?  Then I can start doing some grepping on it and then reinstall the packages I did want. Can wizards really cast spells in armor? Make it cost more to downvote without comment; make it hurt to leave a crap comment Possible Duplicate:    In the spirit of &quot;encouraging&quot; people to leave comments on downvoting, I would propose that if someone downvotes without a comment, I propose a heavy point tax, say 3x the current point cost for a downvote. If he or she downvotes and leaves a comment, then it costs the current amount. If someone leaves a crap comment (to avoid the &quot;charge&quot;) they get a painful spank (100 points gone or whatever the community decides) if and only if:  The comment is flagged Three (five? whatever) moderators agree it is crap  Common complaints Or, why my proposal is different.  &quot;  a &quot;   No it isn't. I specifically address the issue of leaving garbage comments to avoid the downvote tax, unlike the other proposals.   &quot;Some people want to leave anonymous (down)votes.&quot;  I understand that some might be fearful of retaliation. Is retaliation a real problem or a &quot;what if&quot; conjecture? (Where's the data?) What if we try it for 3-6 months and then circle back to see how well it works?  If a user starts retaliating against another user, they will be dealt with as are all other problem users. Nothing else is anonymous - asking questions, answering questions, editing questions, leaving comments, etc. and there is a clear benefit. What is the benefit to the community for having anonymous voting? I would argue &quot;none.&quot; Even though some people might want to leave anonymous questions, answer anonymously or anonymously edit a question, it is not allowed, because it is not good for the community.   &quot;But this will discourage downvoting&quot;  I agree, and I think that's a good thing, which goes to the philosophy of the site: promote good questions and answers. If a question or answer is poor, few will up-vote it. If is is really poor, it will get flagged and . If someone really wants to downvote, no one is stopping him or her. Just as we want quality questions and answers, we need quality voting.   It will require too much work to implement  Maybe. Let's ask if it is worth the effort. What benefit does anonymous, no-comment downvoting add to the site? It certainly doesn't allow the author to improve. What benefit would owned, commented downvoting add? It would hopefully allow authors to improve and discourage drive-by downvoting. Would me (or someone else) submitting a patch alleviate this complaint?   Jeff (or Joel) thinks this is a stupid feature, and you're stupid for suggesting it.  &quot;&quot; Is this a true statement?    Thanks for reading. Overall reputation scores are headed nowhere but up.  Pretty soon there will be thousands of mods.  What to do?  Thoughts on possibilities:   Thousands of mods is fine.  Carry on. Adjust the threshold values for high-level SO privileges. Do a straight-up inflation adjustment.  You had x rep, then at the turn of the year we applied the Consumer Rep Index to all scores, now you have (x / inflation) rep. Implement a rep decay mechanism, so that inactivity sheds some of the overall rep that's built up. How do I create this crease effect on glass? How to prevent unification when animating in photoshop? I am trying to create an animated gif where text drops down and smashes into the background and cracks it. Whenever I try and transform it though, the transformation is applied to all frames. How do I prevent this? I'm using Adobe Photoshop CS6 (64-bit) $a+1,a-1$ invertible for nilpotent element Given a ring $R$ (with unity), prove that if $a \in R$ is nilpotent, then $a+1,a-1$ are both invertible.   Suppose $a^n=0$. Then $1=1-a^n=(1-a)(1+a+\ldots+a^{n-1})$, so $1-a$ is invertible.  If $n$ is odd we can use $1+a^n=(1+a)(1-a+\ldots+a^{n-1})$.  But what if $n$ is even? How do I remove old kernel versions to clean up the boot menu? Every time I install a new Linux kernel, it gets left in the grub_config, making the boot menu longer each time.    I know I can manually search through the installed packages and remove them.  Does Ubuntu provide any easier way to clean them up or keep them from showing in the boot list? Can I switch the alt and ctrl keys on my keyboard? Is there any advantage to using pedal straps over clipless pedals? Other than not having to buy special biking shoes, is there any clear advantage to using pedal straps over clipless (aka clip-in or step-in) pedals? Weird display on screen before swipe lock Samsung Galaxy s6 edge plus Why does Lang describe a field as a union and compositum of its subfields in this manner? I am reading Serge Lang's Algebra, revised 3rd edition, and on page 226, the author makes the following definitions and observations:   If $E,F \subset L$, the compositum of $E$ and $F$ in $L$ is defined to be the smallest subfield of $L$ containing both $E$ and $F$. It is denoted $EF$. If $k \subset E$ and $\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_n \in E$, then $k(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_n)$ is defined to be the smallest subfield of $E$ containing $k$ and $\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_n$. Observe that $$ E = \bigcup k(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_n), $$ where the union is taken over all finite families $\{ \alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_n \}$ of elements of $E$. The compositum of an arbitrary family of subfields of a field $L$ is defined as the smallest subfield of $L$ containing all fields in the family. $E$ is finitely generated over $k$ if there is a finite family $\{ \alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_n \}$ of elements of $E$ such that $E = k(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_n)$. Observe that $E$ is the compositum of all its finitely generated subfields over $k$.   My question is regarding the two observations (point nos. 3 and 6). It appears to me that it is enough to take union (and compositum) over all subfields generated by a single element. For example for point no. 3, I can write $$ E = \bigcup_{\alpha \in E} k(\alpha) $$ because $E$ is clearly contained in the RHS, and each $k(\alpha)$ is contained in $E$ and hence so is the union, implying that $E$ contains the RHS. Similarly for point no. 6.  So, why does Lang emphasise to take the union and compositum over all finitely generated subfields? Is there some perspective that he wishes to emphasise that I am missing? Any help in understanding this will be appreciated. Totally real Galois extension of given degree Let $n≥1$ be an integer. I would like to prove (or disprove) the existence of a subfield $K \subset \Bbb R$ such that $K/\Bbb Q$ is Galois and has degree $n$.   It is easy to construct such a subfield for $n=2^k$: one  take $K=\Bbb Q(\sqrt 2, \sqrt 3, \sqrt 5, ..., \sqrt{p_k})\;$ where $p_k$ is the $k$-th prime number.  I found that the irreducible polynomial $x^3-6x+2 \in \Bbb Q[X]$ (Eisenstein's criterion with $p=2$) has three real roots, so its splitting field $K$ satisfies my conditions for $n=3$. Then I'm done with $n=3\cdot 2^k$ thanks to compositum of fields.  , a Galois extension of odd degree must be . In all cases, I don't know how to construct, in general or in particular cases ($n$ prime for instance), such a totally real Galois extension $K/\Bbb Q$ of degree $n$.  Thank you for your help! Is there offside when the ball deflects off an opponent? I was refereeing a 10 year old's junior game today and this situation happened. The home team's defender attempted to  pass from their own half to their forward who was in an offside position beyond the halfway line.  I was going to blow the whistle but the ball deflected off an away defender and then went to the originally offside attacker who put the ball wide.  I viewed this as onside at the time because the ball struck the away team player, however now I think it was offside because at the time of pass, the home player was offside.  Is this offside or not? 529 plan withdrawal penalties My son is a freshman this year.  We live in and he attends school in California.  We pulled out the first $ from our Utah 529 plan.  I had the money deposited in my account since I paid the registration and dorm &amp; meal plan.  Our friend has a son a year ahead and he has the exact same 529 plan.  He warned me that he got hit with a small tax penalty when he withdrew the money to his account and not to an account in his son's name.  I called the 529 administrator and they said it shouldn't matter either way.  Other online blogs agree.  They say the only difference is that my son would get the tax forms and have to file if it went to his account. Nevertheless, my friend did get a penalty.  Any clarity would be appreciated! Is there an efficient way to copy text from a PDF without the line breaks?