A little bit of context, I read the sentence below after the system - a computer application - has been subject to a certain kind of update:     The system will be able to not create a record of that movement   anymore.   I think they are trying to stress the new behavior of the system compared to the previous one, hence that sentence construction.  Firstly, would it sound better if we changed the sentence for something like this where we get rid of the split infinite:     The system will be able not to create a record of that movement   anymore.   At least for me that sentence construction seems a little bit odd and something an English native speaker would not say, do you agree with me or is it perfectly acceptable?
This is one thing that keeps bugging me, and maybe there's a direct answer. Grammatically, which one is more correct of these two?  Does it make a difference?  I tried not to do that. I tried to not do that.
I've been playing the game a while now and have ranked up considerably. I'm wondering if there is any way to change to a different Google account and still keep all of my Pokemon/items etc, as I stupidly used my university gmail account when I first downloaded the app (which will be automatically deleted in September).   Is there any way to transfer my trainer/Pokemon/items etc to a different Google account? How does quantum trapping with diamagnets work? I just saw  demonstration by someone from a Tel Aviv University lab.  What they achieved there is mind blowing. I myself own a levitron that uses the Hall effect to levitate a magnet, the problem with that is the magnet must always be flat facing the Hall effect base, any unbalance will wreck the levitation. But in the case of the video you can see that he isn't constrained by such things, the disk can levitate and stay still at whatever angle and orientation. Instead of being levitated, the disk is simply being held still.   How does this happen? He referred to this as quantum trapping, but I've little idea about what that is....  Also, what material is the base in these demos? Is the circular track in the demonstration magnetic? I assume this is so. Is there any conceivable way for this technology to make objects levitate on any surface? It'd be nice to see reputation updates in the app, as we get on both the desktop and mobile sites.  Mock-up of how this would look:        Other possible icon states:        While I understand reputation is shown in the feed, it's a bit unwieldy, and has no notification.   With this feature implemented, the feed could arguably lose both reputation and inbox items, and be left with the interesting questions that fill it up. This would make for a much more consistent UX across app and desktop. d'Alembert-like functional equation: $f(x+y)+g(x-y)=\lambda f(x)g(y)$ What is glue stretching? I had a question about dynamic vspaces () and there was a hint I should use a stretchable glue. Searching with Google didn't give me a helpful answer.  I would be glad, if someone can explain it and give me a simple example to understand how it works. If $\int_0^1 f(x)x^n \ dx=0$ for every $n$, then $f=0$. How to remove Ubuntu and put Windows back on? What graduation gown should a PhD-holder wear when later receiving a Master's in another field? Seriously, I had not noticed e.g. Jeff's edit  had he not also retagged my question. Prove $ \sin(A+B)\sin(A-B)=\sin^2A-\sin^2B $ How would I verify the following double angle identity. $$ \sin(A+B)\sin(A-B)=\sin^2A-\sin^2B $$ So far I have done this. $$ (\sin A\cos B+\cos A\sin B)(\sin A\cos B-\cos A\sin B)  $$But I am not sure how to proceed. AllureRestAssured , how to ignore logging headers I am using rest-assured and allureRestAssured for testing api given().header(&quot;Content-Type&quot;, &quot;application/json&quot;)                 .header(&quot;key&quot;, key()).filter(new AllureRestAssured())                 .body(body.toString())                 .post(baseURI);  Problem here is its logged headers also , which contains auth key , which I dont want to be exposed in report generated , how can I ignore that . In Ruby on Rails, how do I format a date with the "th" suffix, as in, "Sun Oct 5th"? As it is common with people from my country, I have an immense difficulty with prepositions in English, especially with the use of in and on.   When the preposition indicates the position of the object it is a bit easier to decide which one to use, but as it requires thinking from me, I still say things like "I put the bill in the fridge", "my pencil is on my bag", etc, even though if I think about it, I would know how to say it correctly.  Of course, even in those cases where the preposition indicates position the decision is not always clear, as is the case for example with "on the bus" (you are not on top of the bus, you are inside the bus) or "he is in bed" (you are not inside the bed, you are on top of your bed).  Other cases are even less clear, and I believe there is no real rule to decide what should be said; the person should just know it. Two examples are "in a bad mood", "you are on my mind".  So my first question is whether there is really no rule to help me. The second question refers to two of the cases where I still don't know whether to use in or on:   good luck on/in your exam in/on the list   The last one is especially important to me, as I have asked a number of native speakers, and each time I get a different answer. The only consensus seems to be the case where you say "on top of the list". Apart from that, some people will say that I should say "his name is in the list" whereas others think I should say "his name is on the list". And yeah, a couple of people did tell me that I can use either.  Can someone help me? Singular information matrix error in lrm.fit in R I am running an ordinal logistic regression in R and running into trouble when I include dummy variables.  My model works great with my first set of predictors.  Next I want to add dummy variables for each of the years represented in my dataset.    I created the dummy variables with car:recode in this manner (one statement like this for each of the 11 years)  fsd$admityear2000 &lt;- recode(fsd$ApplicationYear ,"2000=1;else=0")   The lrm model is specified as follows  library(Design) ddist&lt;- datadist(fsd) options(datadist='ddist') m4 &lt;- lrm(Outcome ~ relGPA + mcAvgGPA + Interview_Z + WorkHistory_years + GMAT + UGI_Gourman + admityear1999 + admityear2000 + admityear2001 + admityear2002 + admityear2003 + admityear2004 + admityear2005 + admityear2006 + admityear2007 + admityear2008 + admityear2009, data=fsd)   (sorry for all of the other random variables, but I don't want to introduce confusion by changing my code)  I get the error  singular information matrix in lrm.fit (rank= 22 ).  Offending variable(s): admityear2009 admityear2000 admityear1999  Error in lrm(Outcome ~ relGPA + mcAvgGPA + Interview_Z + WorkHistory_years +  :    Unable to fit model using “lrm.fit”   I understand that including all options of a dummy variable over-defines the model, but I get the error whether I include all 11 years or just 10.  I found a suggestion  to set the penalty parameter of lrm to a small positive value.  Setting it to 1 or 5 changes the error such that it only names one of the variables as offending.  The error doesn't go away even with penalty=100.  I'm pretty new to R, but loving the freedom so far.  Thanks for any help!  Responses and Lessons   Factors are awesome and I can't believe I didn't notice them earlier. Man that cleans up my code a lot.  Thanks! My DV, 'Outcome' is indeed ordinal and after making it a factor(), I also made it ordered(). The str() command is also awesome and this is what my data now looks like (with some of the non-relevant variables omitted)   output:  str(fsd)      Outcome      : Ord.factor w/ 3 levels "0"&lt;"1"&lt;"2" relGPA       : num   mcAvgGPA     : num  admitschool  : Factor w/ 4 levels "1","2","3","4" appyear      : Factor w/ 11 levels "1999","2000",..    both lrm() and polr() now run successfully, and they both deal with appyear by dropping some values of the factor.  lrm() drops 1999, 2000, and 2001 while polr() just drops 1999 and 2000.  lrm() gives no warnings while polr() says "design appears to be rank-deficient, so dropping some coefs."  This is an improvement, but I still don't understand why more than one value needs to be dropped. xtabs shows that there isn't full seperation right?   output:  xtabs(~fsd$appyear + fsd$Outcome)            fsd$Outcome fsd$appyear    0    1    2        1999 1207  123  418        2000 1833  246  510        2001 1805  294  553        2002 1167  177  598        2003 4070  158 1076        2004 2803  106 1138        2005 3749  513 2141        2006 4429  519 2028        2007 6134  670 1947        2008 7446  662 1994        2009 4411   86 1118 “Screen overlay detected” dialog? Turned off everything, doesn't work I started receiving the “Screen overlay detected” dialog when trying to change apps settings.  Tried to turn off all "draw over other apps" as it says here - , first without system and then with, but it still doesn't work.  Then, I restored apps to original settings and it just made a bigger mess, dialog continue appearing. Any way to go back to previous settings???  Thanks! When I have my external monitor hooked up, I access it by mousing off the left hand side of my Macbook display. Can I switch this so that I can access the external by mousing off to the right of My Macbook display?   The reason I ask, is my monitor is on the right side of my macbook, and it's unintuitive to mouse left to get to a screen on the right. Is the distribution of an Ito diffusion at time t absolutely continuous wrt Lebesgue measure? How to configure an app to run correctly on a machine with a high DPI setting (e.g. 150%)? Hartshorne's Algebraic Geometry defines an $\mathcal O_X$-module $\mathscr F$ to be quasi-coherent if there is an open affine cover $(U_i=\operatorname{Spec} A_i)_{i\in\mathcal I}$ of $X$ such that each $\mathscr F\rvert_{U_i}$ is isomorphic to the sheaf of modules $\widetilde{M_i}$ associated to some $A_i$-module $M_i$. It is later proved that this is equivalent to the statement that for any open affine $U=\operatorname{Spec} A\subseteq X$, there exists an $A$-module $M$ with $\mathscr F\rvert_U\cong\widetilde M$.  On the other hand, Grothendieck's Éléments de Géométrie Algébrique defines $\mathscr F$ to be quasi-coherent if every point $x\in X$ admits an open neighborhood $U\subseteq X$ such that $\mathscr F\rvert_U$ is isomorphic to the cokernel of a morphism of free $\mathcal O_U$-modules.  Now I wonder how those definitions are equal. I tried proving it by myself, but both directions seem quite nontrivial to me... Any hints? Thunar files view, date format "today, yesterday"