Should I capitalize a contraction at the beginning of a sentence? In the following sentence:     'cause I know what you been doing on your weekends, girl.   Should the "c" in cause be capitalized or does the fact that the first two letters have been replaced by an apostrophe mean that it stays lower case?
Should initial e's after h-dropping be capitalized? A new Victorian-set British novel begins sentences containing h-dropping with lower-case e's, as in " 'e took my money, 'e did." This seems incorrect but I'm at a loss to find the rule.
Subspace of Noetherian space still Noetherian My very simple Greasemonkey script is not running? How to search a string in the list of answers added by me on Stack Overflow? I am able to view all the answers given by me and questions asked by me, but not able to search a string in them?  Currently I have no other choice than clicking each ques/ans link manually (very hectic) ? Geometry with Trigonometry Session ID from scheduled jobs Here's the scenario.  I have a remote application which is invoked from an HTTP callout.  In this callout, I am passing the session ID.  The application can then do its stuff without needing a username and password.  However, I want to be able to invoke the application from a scheduled job, and getsessionid() returns null in this case.  Is there any way around this?  I am trying very hard to avoid storing sfdc usernames and passwords on my remote server, and I want to avoid the hassle of using oAuth with all the complications of client secrets, etc. I just picked up a copy of Windows 7 Pro OEM for install on my computer.  Guy at the store said the only real difference between OEM and standard retail box was tech support.  However, the outside of the box has this big warning that says "The software must be installed with an OPK"?  What is the OPK?  Is it really necessary?  The MS site about it seemed to say it was optional.  EDIT:  BTW - I'm just an individual tinkerer, and not a System Builder Company Employee.  I should have made that clear.  I've used sysprep in a professional setting in the past, so I'm somewhat familiar with its concepts. I opened a can of sliced black olives for my pizza and only used half. I put the leftovers into a sealed container with the liquid and put it in the fridge. Under those conditions how long will the olives last? Is there a better way to store leftover olives? Is there a better way to do optional function parameters in JavaScript? I've always handled optional parameters in JavaScript like this:  function myFunc(requiredArg, optionalArg){   optionalArg = optionalArg || 'defaultValue';    // Do stuff }   Is there a better way to do it?  Are there any cases where using || like that is going to fail? Why too many capacitors in parallel for Vdd supply net? Can't we just add all to replace with one big capacitor? If $I = \langle 2\rangle$, why is $I[x]$ not a maximal ideal of $\mathbb Z[x]$, even though $I$ is a maximal ideal of $\mathbb Z$? Dealing with bundle/omnibus/list-of-questions question that consists of rather distinct questions I have looked at the various help pages but I couldn't find a clear guideline for the following issue: often enough someone will ask in the same post (i.e. in the same SE-question) a whole bunch of questions (in the plain English sense of the word), which while may be about the same topic are nevertheless sufficiently distinct that each may require several paragraphs of text to answer adequately.   I can see an upside for leaving related questions grouped together from the asker's perspective: "there's a thread (on SE) answering all my questions about topic T!" On the other hand, from the perspective of organizing questions by having a clear heading/title for each (actual) question and so forth, i.e. from the perspective of SE being a fairly structured database of Q&amp;As instead of being a more like a collection of forum threads "I'm confused about topic T", the omnibus question-list approach seems clearly sub-optimal.  The omnibus approach also makes the issue of accepting answers (and perhaps reviewing such actions) difficult: if two different users give replies to different parts/sub-sets of the question-list, which one is the most adequate one? Even upvoting all partial answers seems iffy because it actually penalizes the user(s) who provides(s) the most complete answer to the question-list: since a user can only give at most one upvote to another user's answer, if user X provides answers to A &amp; B in the same SE-answer, he can only get at most one upvote from user Y, whereas if these were two different SE-answers, he could get two upvotes from user Y.  So, given the above problems, which I think are real enough, is there anything in the SE system addressing list-of-questions question splitting? Book: Handful of children kept in a school as political mythological prisoners How does Cantor's diagonal argument work? I'm having trouble understanding Cantor's diagonal argument.  Specifically, I do not understand how it proves that something is "uncountable".  My understanding of the argument is that it takes the following form (modified slightly from the  article, assuming base 2, where the numbers must be from the set $ \lbrace 0,1 \rbrace $):  \begin{align} s_1 &amp;= (\mathbf{0},1,0,\dots)\\ s_2 &amp;= (1,\mathbf{1},0,\dots)\\ s_3 &amp;= (0,0,\mathbf{1},\dots)\\ \vdots &amp;= (s_n \text{ continues}) \end{align}  In this case, the diagonal number is the bold diagonal numbers $(0, 1, 1)$, which when "flipped" is $(1,0,0)$, neither of which is $s_1$, $s_2$, or $s_3$.  My question, or misunderstanding, is: When there exists the possibility that more $s_n$ exist, as is the case in the example above, how does this "prove" anything?  For example:  \begin{align} s_0 &amp;= (1,0,0,\mathbf{0},\dots)\ \ \textrm{ (...the wikipedia flipped diagonal)}\\ s_1 &amp;= (\mathbf{0},1,0,\dots)\\ s_2 &amp;= (1,\mathbf{1},0,\dots)\\ s_3 &amp;= (0,0,\mathbf{1},\dots)\\ s_4 &amp;= (0,1,1,\mathbf{1},\dots)\\ s_4 &amp;= (1,0,0,\mathbf{1},\dots)\ \ \textrm{ (...alternate, flipped } s_4\textrm{)}\\ s_5 &amp;= (1,0,0,0,\dots)\\ s_6 &amp;= (1,0,0,1,\dots)\\ \vdots &amp;= (s_n \text{ continues}) \end{align}  In other words, as long as there is a $\dots \text{ continues}$ at the end, the very next number could be the "impossible diagonal number", with the caveat that it's not strictly identical to the "impossible diagonal number" as the wikipedia article defines it:     For each $m$ and $n$ let $s_{n,m}$ be the $m^{th}$ element of the $n^{th}$ sequence on the list; so for each $n$,      $$s_n = (s_{n,1}, s_{n,2}, s_{n,3}, s_{n,4}, \dots).$$      ...snip...      Otherwise, it would be possible by the above process to construct a sequence $s_0$ which would both be in $T$ (because it is a sequence of 0s and 1s which is by the definition of $T$ in $T$) and at the same time not in $T$ (because we can deliberately construct it not to be in the list). $T$, containing all such sequences, must contain $s_0$, which is just such a sequence. But since $s_0$ does not appear anywhere on the list, $T$ cannot contain $s_0$.      Therefore $T$ cannot be placed in one-to-one correspondence with the natural numbers. In other words, it is uncountable.   I'm not sure this definition is correct, because if we assume that $m = (1, \dots)$, then this definition says that "$s_n$ is equal to itself"&mdadsh;there is no "diagonalization" in this particular description of the argument, nor does it incorporate the "flipping" part of the argument, never mind the fact that we have very clearly constructed just such an impossible $T$ list above.  An attempt to correct the "diagonalization" and "flipping" problem:  $$s_n = (\lnot s_{m,m}, \lnot s_{m,m}, \dots) \quad \text{where $m$ is the element index and} \quad\begin{equation}\lnot s_{m,m} = \begin{cases}0 &amp; \mathrm{if\ } s_{m,m} = 1\\1 &amp; \mathrm{if\ } s_{m,m} = 0\end{cases}\end{equation}$$  This definition doesn't quite work either, as we immediately run in to problems with just $s_1 = (0),$ which is impossible because by definition $s_1$ must be $ = (1)$ if $s_1 = (0)$, which would also be impossible because...   Or more generally, with the revised definition there is a contradiction whenever $n = m$, which would seem to invalidate the revised formulation of the argument / proof.  Nothing about this argument / proof makes any sense to me, nor why it only applies to real numbers and makes them "uncountable". As near as I can tell it would seem to apply equal well to natural numbers, which are "countable".  What am I missing? $\mbox{rank}(A)=1$ implies $\det(A+I)=\mbox{trace}(A)+1$ This problem comes from exercise from my lecturer  Let $A$ be a square matrix such that $\mbox{rank}(A)=1$. Prove that $\det(A+I)=\mbox{trace}(A)+1$.  ($I$ is the identy matrix)  I usually haven't any idea in solving linear algebra problem. Extending from two classes This is what my  looks like when it first loads:    But if we unselect math.SE, we get a y-axis rescaling mess:    I'm using Firefox. I'm in China, so many things involving Google and Imgur are blocked, and I use  to stop the browser attempting to load unloadable Google objects.  I'm hoping other users can check whether or not this issue is localized to my system, and if it's not just me, here's the bug report. Is it allowed/desirable to post code snippets? Instead of asking a question I would love to share the one or other code snippet I have created that is too small to make a full article on e.g. CodeProject.com or CodePlex.com.  Question: Would it be a good idea to post it as a Stack Overflow question? Or are there any other suggestions how to share it?  (Of course I could post it on my own weblog and then twitter about it, but I would love to put it in more of a programming context) I am reading Velleman's "How to Prove it", and in one example he proves  $\neg \exists x P(x)  \implies \forall x \neg P(x)$    in the following way:    Suppose $\neg \exists x P(x)$. Let x be arbitrary. Suppose $P(x)$. Since we have a specific $x$ for which P(x) is true, it follows that $\exists x P(x)$, which is a contradiction. Therefore $\neg P(x)$. Since $x$ was arbitrary, we can conclude that $\forall x \neg P(x)$, so $\neg \exists x P(x)  \implies \forall x \neg P(x)$    What makes me confused is the line in bold text, that is "Suppose $P(x)$". The reason is that he writes that he is doing proof by contradiction, but $P(x) \not\iff \neg\forall x \neg P(x)$. He is not treating all possible cases where $\forall x \neg P(x)$ is false by assuming $P(x)$, does he? So how can this be a valid proof by contradiction?    Edit: I deleted my first example since it was clearly not representative for the problem.  Edit 2: So the thing that I am opposing I guess is that $\neg \forall x \neg P(x)$ is not $P(x)$. And from what I have undestood, a proof by contradiction should use the negation of the consequent which I do not think that Velleman does. How do I load an mp4 video with multiple audio tracks into blender? I've recently started using OBS multiplatform to record game play. I currently have it set to record sounds on 2 different tracks. The first for system sounds (like gamesound, mumble, etc.) and the second to record the mic.  I am able to switch between tracks when I play the unedited video using VLC, but when I load the mp4 into blender, I only get track 1.  Did I do something wrong, or does blender vse not support multiple tracks?  Blender after loading mp4:  VLC video information:   UPDATE  For now, it seems like the solution will be to use an external tool to get the second audio track and import it into blender afterwards. A  has been logged with the Blender bug reporting tool.  UPDATE 2  The bug report has been closed/archived with the gist being "not a bug". It has been added to the . If you are looking to have support for multiple audio tracks, I would suggest looking at other video editing software until Blender adds support for this feature. Prime ideal and nilpotent elements