Is there a word for "when there is no story to a series". Where every episode's/movie's story is independent What if I want to convey to someone that you can watch this series from any episode; The series is not in continuation, everything is independent.  is an example for this.  Is there a word for this?
A word for 'independent episodes' When we have a series of episodes where every single episode depends on and develops from the previous, we may call that a sequel, or maybe a continuum.  Now let us say that we have a collection of fables, episodes or anecdotes that have the same characters, the same milieu, and the same themes; yet, this time, the episodes are NOT interdependent. They don't depend on each other in that you can watch/read 'any' one of them be it (in terms of order) from a beginning, medial, or final season, without having to watch/read the previous to understand, appreciate, and enjoy it (the one you're watching/reading). What do we call the 'episode' in this case?   Examples: a sitcom comedy show, or a show like Dr Who. Or, in literature, the novels of Sherlock Holmes.       Is there a specific term to describe the 'independent episodes' of these works?
How to find modulo of large numbers like $9801\! \pmod {\!32}$ It is easy to calculate small examples like $26\pmod {5}$ but how do you calculate examples like $9801 \pmod {32}$ without a calculator. How to upgrade Ubuntu from an ISO image I'm using Ubuntu 10.04 now and want to Upgrade to Ubuntu 11.04. The problem is my net connection is very slow and I can not do a network upgrade from the "Updates Manager".  So, is there a way that I can download the Ubuntu upgrade as an bootable CD image and upgrade from it? Error handling in C code Correct usage of "lest" Which of the followings is/are the correct usage of the word "lest"? How are these different from each other?   ...hesitant to speak out lest he be fired. ...hesitant to speak out lest he'd be fired. ...hesitant to speak out lest he would/will be fired.   P.S. I took point number 1 as the reference for this question from the definition of lest from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Explanatory variables may bias predictions I' m asking this question out of sheer curiosity, my teacher was not able to explain it.   If I'm using logistic regression with categorical variables they are coded like {1,2,3}. I guess it wouldn't change my results if I used {4,5,6}. But what if linearity of coding wasn't kept? (say {4,10,99})? What I deal with is just the way of coding factor variables but is it possible that the statistical inference could be "distorted" this way? Or, worst case scenario, would I be able to draw nonsense conclusions from categorical data just because they are coded in some way? Which are the spec bits in this cache? I have a direct mapped cache of size S with the line size L. The cache is physically indexed and tagged. The physical address is 50 bits, numbered from 0 to 49 (with 0 being the least significant bit). The machine has a word size of 4 bits and the memory is byte-addressable. Which bits of the 50 bits are compared with the address tag? How to effectively deal with Imposter Syndrome and feelings of inadequacy: "I've somehow convinced everyone that I'm actually good at this" is a psychological phenomenon wherein an individual is convinced that they do not deserve the success that they have achieved despite (perhaps extensive) empirical evidence to the contrary.  Some people with imposter syndrome doubt their own ability level. For me, this usually manifests in the thought:  I've somehow convinced everyone into believing that I'm actually good at this.  followed by the horrifying notion that eventually I'll be found out and my world will collapse. I believe that the imposter syndrome is not uncommon in academia. I'm interested to know how other people here have experienced and dealt with it.  In particular, I'm looking for actual tactics that someone might use to combat imposter syndrome.   Why I asked this question: Beyond the obvious reason that this is something I have struggled with for many years and only recently gotten a handle on myself, there's also some evidence that merely realizing that other people experience imposter syndrome helps fellow imposters. As a grad student, I've managed to meet a fair number of people who are in their own struggles with imposter syndrome; however, the tactics and self-trickery that have helped me don't always speak to them and perhaps someone else's methods might. How does Duff's device work? I've read the , and I don't get it. I am really interested, but I've read the explanation there a couple of times and I still don't get it how the Duff's device works.  What would a more detailed explanation be? Legitimate edits of less than 6 characters Removing control chars (including console codes / colours) from script output I can use the "script" command to record an interactive session at the command line.  However, this includes all control characters and colour codes.  I can remove control characters (like backspace) with "col -b", but I can't find a simple way to remove the colour codes.  Note that I want to use the command line in the normal way, so don't want to disable colours there - I just want to remove them from the script output.  Also, I know can play around and try find a regexp to fix things up, but I am hoping there is a simpler (and more reliable - what if there's a code I don't know about when I develop the regexp?) solution.  To show the problem:   spl62 tmp: script Script started, file is typescript spl62 lepl: ls add-licence.sed  build-example.sh  commit-test         push-docs.sh add-licence.sh   build.sh          delete-licence.sed  setup.py asn              build-test.sh     delete-licence.sh   src build-doc.sh     clean             doc-src             test.ini spl62 lepl: exit Script done, file is typescript spl62 tmp: cat -v typescript Script started on Thu 09 Jun 2011 09:47:27 AM CLT spl62 lepl: ls^M ^[[0m^[[00madd-licence.sed^[[0m  ^[[00;32mbuild-example.sh^[[0m  ^[[00mcommit-test^[[0m         ^[[00;32mpush-docs.sh^[[0m^M ^[[00;32madd-licence.sh^[[0m   ^[[00;32mbuild.sh^[[0m          ^[[00mdelete-licence.sed^[[0m  ^[[00msetup.py^[[0m^M ^[[01;34masn^[[0m              ^[[00;32mbuild-test.sh^[[0m     ^[[00;32mdelete-licence.sh^[[0m   ^[[01;34msrc^[[0m^M ^[[00;32mbuild-doc.sh^[[0m     ^[[00;32mclean^[[0m             ^[[01;34mdoc-src^[[0m             ^[[00mtest.ini^[[0m^M spl62 lepl: exit^M  Script done on Thu 09 Jun 2011 09:47:29 AM CLT spl62 tmp: col -b &lt; typescript  Script started on Thu 09 Jun 2011 09:47:27 AM CLT spl62 lepl: ls 0m00madd-licence.sed0m  00;32mbuild-example.sh0m  00mcommit-test0m         00;32mpush-docs.sh0m 00;32madd-licence.sh0m   00;32mbuild.sh0m          00mdelete-licence.sed0m  00msetup.py0m 01;34masn0m              00;32mbuild-test.sh0m     00;32mdelete-licence.sh0m   01;34msrc0m 00;32mbuild-doc.sh0m     00;32mclean0m             01;34mdoc-src0m             00mtest.ini0m spl62 lepl: exit  Script done on Thu 09 Jun 2011 09:47:29 AM CLT This question is asked in various forms here but the question boils down to:  I know shrinking a database is risky. In this case, I've removed so much data and I'll never use it again.   How can I shrink my database? What files do I shrink?  What should my considerations be while doing this?  Should I do anything after? What if it is a large database? Can I shrink it in smaller increments? I have a machine running Ubuntu which I SSH to from my Fedora 14 machine. I want to forward X from the Ubuntu machine back to Fedora so I can run graphical programs remotely. Both machines are on a LAN.  I know that the -X option enables X11 forwarding in SSH, but I feel like I am missing some of the steps.  What are the required steps to forward X from a Ubuntu machine to Fedora over SSH? Markdown change: Intra-word emphasis now works There are tons of questions I could maybe post this as an answer to, but before choosing the best one, I'll just post this as an announcement question that can be linked elsewhere. The short story From now on, intra-word emphasis is possible in our Markdown version. That means you can now write  The &quot;V&quot; is for Model**View**Controller. That's un*fricking*believable.  and it renders like this:  The &quot;V&quot; is for ModelViewController. That's unfrickingbelievable.  This only works for asterisks, not for underscores. It works in posts and comments. The reasons There are two big reasons for this. For one thing, this is more or less the behavior of , which we eventually . &quot;More or less&quot; because CommonMark's emphasis behavior is still in flux, and supports a few things that we don't support yet, but at least with this change we're closer. The other reason is languages that don't even have the concept of &quot;words separated by spaces&quot;. See  and  for two examples. This change allow posts in those languages to emphasize words without having to resort to HTML tags. To use an example from the first linked post,  **北京**和**上海**是直辖市。   now renders like this:  北京和上海是直辖市。  Possible issues In the 99% cases, this should only make things better; I've only found very few posts where this change causes unintended bolding/italicizing. And even in those cases, note that the rendered versions of questions and answers are not re-rendered until a post is edited, so this will not affect anything in posts retroactively. Unlike posts, comments are rendered , so this immediately applies to all comments. In most cases this doesn't change anything or actually fixes things. Should you discover a rare case where this breaks an important comment badly, we can always edit it to fix. There's one side effect that I'd like to mention: If you find a great quicksort implementation on GitHub that has a bug that causes a crash when sorting Windows versions, and the author doesn't want to fix it, you may be inclined to say  f**k this s**t   (i.e., &quot;fork this sort&quot;). With intraword emphasis, this would however look like this:  fk this st  So you would have to escape the asterisks (one of them would actually be enough). I'm not worried about this case too much, since if you must put censor-worthy words into a post, you might as well have to jump through a little hoop. Some details This being Meta, there are probably lots of people interested in a more detailed description of the new behavior (don't feel bad if you're not one of them; just skip this section). Here are the major rules regarding intraword-emphasis:  As mentioned, it only applies to asterisks, not underscores. Underscores  this restriction was in place at all; asterisks are much less of a problem.  If a single or double asterisk is supposed to be interpreted as intra-word emphasis, it cannot have punctuation on one side; it actually must be inside a word. An example of an edge case this solves is  It's a web*-based solution. *see Wikipedia for a definition of &quot;web&quot;  where the asterisks after &quot;web&quot; could cause unintended italicizing if there was a second asterisk in the same paragraph somewhere.  For italics, the &quot;inside a word&quot; part of rule 2 is even a bit stricter. For bolding, any word or digit character is allowed; for italics, digits don't work either. That's because the asterisk is often used as a multiplication symbol, so  The game worked in 320200 and 640480 resolution.  wouldn't look right without this restriction.  A minor addition that I made that's only tangentially related to intra-word emphasis is that a sequence of more than three underscores or more than three asterisks will no longer take part in any emphasis. This shouldn't really cause any problems, but fixes some (e.g. the underline in the second blockquote in , while not really visible, is a weird combination of bold and italic underscore characters; after this change, it would just be (more) underscore characters). This behavior also matches CommonMark. What is the meaning of the beta-coefficient for an interaction term in a crossover study? I have asked a similar question here:  I am puzzled by the interpretation for an interaction term. In my data my Y is an interval variable with the health outcome of an experiment. I have used an interaction term in which I have interacted the condition with the predisposition of the subject considering health status at base level. They are both categorical variables (factor variables in R).  Now it gets complicated because the Condition was two treatments: in treatment A subjects got the placebo first and then the real medicine whereas in treatment B they go the real medicine first and the placebo second. All it changes is the order.   Health outcome = a + Condition * Health.Base   I have the worst state of health at the base level as my reference category I find that interaction with the Condition is statistically significant but I am not sure how to interpret this.  I use the lm() function of R (although my design looks more like an ANOVA) and in the output I get the b coefficient in an output that looks like this:  ConditionB:Health.Base.So.and.So         (Beta and p-value) ConditionB:Health.Base.Excellent         (Beta and p-value)   A statistically significant interaction term for those in Excellent health at baseline would mean that they are affected by the Condition B more than Condition A compared to the reference category people (Poor health at baseline). Is this right? What does the beta-coefficient represent?   If I would like to examine for each Health category at the base line separately without comparing to a reference category I would have to code each category as a dummy variable. However, in this case I would compare whether membership to a specific health status at the base line significantly changes between conditions compared to those who belong to the other health statuses at the base line. Is this right? Again, what does the beta-coefficient represent?  Would it be right to assume that the choice of the interaction between the Condition and the dummy variables is easier to interpret?  --- EDIT --- R output:  Call: lm(formula = HealthOutcome ~ Condition * HealthStatus,      data = datA)  Residuals:     Min      1Q  Median      3Q     Max  -1.5957 -0.5942 -0.2640  0.4423  2.4423   Coefficients:                                        Estimate Std. Error t value     Pr(&gt;|t|)     (Intercept)                            2.595652   0.053044  48.934  &lt; 2e-16 *** ConditionCondB                        -0.001449   0.077071  -0.019    0.985     HealthStatusSo.and.So                 -0.331693   0.078094  -4.247  2.35e-05 *** HealthStatusExcellent                 -0.836724   0.092692  -9.027  &lt; 2e-16 *** ConditionCondB:HealthStatusSo.and.So   0.137490   0.110612   1.243    0.214     ConditionCondB:HealthStatusExcellent  -0.199787   0.133943  -1.492    0.136     --- Signif. codes:  0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1  Residual standard error: 0.8045 on 1059 degrees of freedom   (68 observations deleted due to missingness) Multiple R-squared:   0.16, Adjusted R-squared:  0.156  F-statistic: 40.33 on 5 and 1059 DF,  p-value: &lt; 2.2e-16 If $A|B$ and $B|A$ then prove $A=\pm B$ If $A|B$ and $B|A$ then prove $A=\pm B$   So far I have $A|B \iff AX=B$ and $B|A \iff BY=A$ with $X,Y \in \mathbb{Z}$  Not sure how to finish, any help. Why bother with the dual problem when fitting SVM? A 10x10 table filled with 0 to 9 numbers Let me know I have upvotes even after hitting the rep cap When you cap, you don't see any upvotes you get on your profile, therefore, you don't have any update on how your questions / answers are doing unless you look at them manually.   Capping the 200 daily rep is not a reason to stop posting here so could I get notified somehow that my posts are being voted on ? Maybe put a little +X in a different color letting me know that I got these votes but I won't get the reputation for it.   I can go and see in my reputation feed inside my profile and see it :    So I don't see why it wouldn't show up in the feed above.  Maybe putting the feed button green without any +X just like when you aquire a badge. Comparing $\pi^e$ and $e^\pi$ without calculating them How can I  compare (without calculator or similar device) the values of $\pi^e$ and $e^\pi$ ? Bibliography contents (Journal names) not abbreviated even with IEEEabrv I am using the following syntax, with no errors or warnings. However, the journal names are still not abbreviated. I compiled the file numerous times, as well as the bibliography. Everything compiles with no errors.  The syntax:   \bibliographystyle{IEEEtran} \bibliography{IEEEabrv,references}   Additional info: I am using BibDesk and TeXStudio on a macbook.  Do you have any idea what might be the issue? and how to solve it? Thank you.  Edit:  Example entry from the IEEEabrv file:  @STRING{IEEE\_M\_COM        = "{IEEE} Commun. Mag."}   Example entry from my references file:  @article{dai:2015,     Author = {Test, T.},     Journal = {IEEE\_M\_COM },     Month = {September}     }