I'm trying to compile a document in overleaf where I need to quote a reviewer comment. The comment has underscores in a word i.e. Number_of_Nodes. For some reason I think the compiler sees the underscores and tries to be helpful by adding $ to enter inline math mode. Firstly, I don't want math mode, and secondly this conflicts with the quote environment. How can I stop this &quot;helpful&quot; behaviour? MWE: \documentclass{article} \begin{document} \begin{quote} \itshape  (Number_of_Nodes_at_step(n)). \end{quote} \end{document}
My issue is that I'm trying to write variable names in italic, but as some of them have underscores in their names, LaTeX assumes that I am writing an equation and it messes up the rest of my document after that point. Here is a sample of my code: As variable \textit{sensor.linear_acceleration} is a matrix  The underscore in linear_acceleration is what makes my whole document math modded, and is a matrix renders as if it was an equation. How can I display that underscore in italic without LaTeX making everything an equation?
Where is the icon used in this dialogue box? Where on my disk can I find the icon used in this dialogue box in OS X？    It may be Security.icns in OS X 10.7.3    I cannot find it in:   /System/Library/CoreServices/CoreTypes/Contents/Resources There are only LockedIcon.icns and UnlockedIcon.icns in this folder who looks like the icon in the dialogue box,the size of the icon in the dialogue box is 128x128px, but LockedIcon.icns and UnlockedIcon.icns is 32x32px.   lockedIcon.icns    So they are not the same icon.   /System/Library/CoreServices/Finder.app/Contents/Resources/ /System/Library/CoreServices/Problem Reporter.app/Contents/Resources /Applications/System Preferences.app/Contents/Resources /Applications/Utilities/Keychain Access.app/Contents/Resources /System/Library/CoreServices/Certificate Assistant.app/Contents/Resources/ Using latexdiff with git Analogue of the Cantor-Bernstein-Schroeder theorem for general algebraic structures The Cantor-Bernstein-Schroeder theorem states that if there are two sets $A$ and $B$ such that there exist injective (alternatively, surjective, assuming choice I think) maps $A \to B$ and $B \to A$, then $A$ and $B$ are in bijection.  It then seems natural to try to strengthen the result to other structures.  If $A$ and $B$ are, say, groups (or rings, modules, etc) such that there are injective homomorphisms from each to the other, then $A$ and $B$ are isomorphic.  I'm wondering if there are any results on this, or if there are known counterexamples.  The theorem for sets alone is nontrivial, so I feel like any results about how it holds for other structures would be quite interesting. Does JPA support mapping to sql views? I'm currently using Eclipselink, but I know now days most JPA implementations have been pretty standardized. Is there a native way to map a JPA entity to a view? I am not looking to insert/update, but the question is really how to handle the @Id annotation. Every entity in the JPA world must have an ID field, but many of the views I have created do not conform to this. Is there native support for this in the JPA or do I need to use hacks to get it to work? I've searched a lot and found very little information about doing this. I want to install selenium webdriver in my Ubuntu 16.04 system for python How do I fill arrays in Java? I know how to do it normally, but I could swear that you could fill out out like a[0] = {0,0,0,0}; How do you do it that way? I did try Google, but I didn't get anything helpful. Automatically updating column in feature class when another column is changed? I have a feature class in a file geodatabase and it contains a field called [curing] in short integer type and another field called [IsPopulated] in short integer as well.  What I want to achieve is to make [IsPopulated] automatically populated with "0" or "1" depending on whether the [curing] column is filled with a numeric value.  "Field Calculator" does not help as it's just a one-off operation and NOT automatic. Computing $ \int_0^{\infty} \frac{ \sqrt [3] {x+1}-\sqrt [3] {x}}{\sqrt{x}} \mathrm dx$ Where $F$,$K$ are two fields. What does the element in the composite field $FK$ look like? All the elements are generated by the elements of $F$ and $K$? (combination of the elements of $F$ and $K$) I think $FK$ is pretty close to the free product of $F$ and $K$; is $FK \subsetneq F*K$? Thank you! I'm not sure if there's already an existing term for this, so I'm inventing my own. (tl;dr: I call them &quot;chameleon questions&quot; because they change every time you submit or edit an answer.  If you're already intimately familiar with the phenomenon, please skip past the first set of bullet points to where I ask for recommendations.)  I think many of us have experienced this on occasion:  You open up a narrow-looking question, usually dealing with some specific error message.  The question probably contains a snippet of sloppy but not quite awful code; code indicating that the author, typically a new/low-rep user, possibly a , doesn't really know what they're doing.  I'm not trying to be condescending here, they're probably very intelligent and hardworking, but in this specific case, they're clearly in way over their head.  However, as a question, it's not really too bad.  The goal and problem are both clearly stated.  The code is formatted (sort of).  Mort was polite and checked their spelling.  The question looks answerable, although from a rep perspective* it's an obvious dead-end, it's had maybe 3 views in the past 30 minutes.  So you decide, you know what, this person took the time to write up the question properly, they deserve an answer, put on your good citizen hat and throw them a bone.  You slog through the ugly code, find the offending line, direct their attention to it and explain why it's wrong and how it needs to be fixed.  Later, they leave a comment saying that yes, that was indeed the problem and your answer helped them fix it (great!).  Oh, but, now there's another problem (uh-oh...). Something else is broken.  After letting out a long sigh, you read the comment and/or edited question, roll up your sleeves, and write up Take 2, hoping that's the end of it.  And of course it's not the end.  Now maybe the error is gone, but it's not doing what it's supposed to.  If you're anything like me, your patience is now starting to wear thin. It's lousy code and you didn't volunteer to help them rewrite their whole app.  And of course, the question still only has 12 views, and nobody has upvoted either the question or your answer, including the person you're helping, so this is turning out to be a genuinely thankless task in all respects.  Welcome to &quot;Family Tech Support&quot;, Web 2.0 Edition.   * Which is of course just an arbitrary number that none of us care about. Not really, anyway. Not very much, at least.  So, here's where I get to my question.  At this point, do you:  Leave a comment, stating as politely as possible that you've done your best to help them answer the original question they asked, and if they have a new problem then they should start a new question?  (I did this once, and actually ended up with an accept, but I felt kind of guilty afterwards, I don't think anybody answered their 2nd question).  Bite the bullet and edit your answer a 3rd, 4th, 5th time, however many times it takes to resolve their issue, knowing full well that they may not even remember to accept the answer once you're done? (I may work for free on SO, but that doesn't mean my time is worthless.)  Just abandon the question, hoping that it will force Mort to start thinking for himself?  Something else?   I've tried all three of the above and none of them ever quite feel right. I do want to help, but at the same time there are a lot more &quot;lucrative&quot; questions I could be answering. And I don't mind spending a lot of time on an answer either, if the question is interesting or important to me, but debugging is dull work. I'd prefer not to reference specific questions here; I'm pretty sure that this is a shared experience, and my objective isn't to point fingers at &quot;misbehaving&quot; members.  I'm more looking for some practical advice on how to dig myself out of these pits of despair. Anybody have any other ideas? Why are Grothendieck's and Hartshorne's definitions of quasi-coherence equivalent? 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? So i've been working on a Page Object Model framework for a large web application for our current company. It's the first time i've made my own framework and implemented the page object model. Im using Ruby w/Capybara and Selenium-Webdriver for my language/driver of choice.  Currently i've divided each page (or obvious "section of the site") into a class file. This class file has methods for just about everything (or an API of sorts). The problem i've ran into is that I am literally writing a method for every single thing....and i've came across 2 ways people seem to do this:  Lets pretend for a section/page of the site is a widget creation form, the widget has a name/description and some sort of "type" dropdown. Also a save button to save the widget.  Option A (Which is what i've done so far): Make a method for each element (the save button, called save_widget, all the different inputs, etc...)  Option B: Have getter and setter methods for each element, then a larger method which uses these private getter and setter methods.   With Option A my test scripts end up being longer, and honestly not much different than using selenium calls themselves.   Option B would probably call one method (Such as create_widget which would pass in multiple items which that method would call all the smaller getter/setter methods). This would make the test script MUCH shorter and more abstracted. However the getter/setter methods would probably take more actual writing for the page objects themselves (but possibly easier to maintain).  Is there a certain style that favors one over the other? The more I think about it the more Option B seems better...but I wonder if in this case abstraction is a good thing. In  is a proof of Stirling's formula.  I really like most of it, but at a crucial step he uses the integral identity  $$n! = \int_{0}^{\infty} t^n e^{-t}  dt$$  , coming from the Gamma function.  I have a mathematical confession to make: I have never "grokked" this identity.  Why should I expect the integral on the right to give me the number of elements in the symmetric group on $n$ letters?    (It's not that I don't know how to prove it.  It's quite fun to prove; my favorite proof observes that it is equivalent to the integral identity $\int_{0}^{\infty} e^{(x-1)t}  dt = \frac{1}{1 - x}$.  But if someone were to ask me, "Yes, but why, really?" I would have no idea what to say.)  So what are more intuitive ways of thinking about this identity?  Is there a probabilistic interpretation?  What kind of random variable has probability density function $\frac{t^n}{n!} e^{-t}$?  (What does this all have to do with Tate's thesis?)  As a rough measure of what I'm looking for, your answer should make it obvious that $t^n e^{-t}$ attains its maximum at $t = n$.  Edit:  The kind of explanation I'm looking for, as I described in the comments, is similar to  of the beta integral. Why does space expansion not expand matter? Why does the Taylor expansion of $e^x$ satisfy exponential properties? How are Anonymous inner classes used in Java? Convert file contents to lower case I have temp file with some lower-case and upper-case contents.  Input  Contents of my temp file:  hi Jigar GANDHI jiga   I want to convert all upper to lower.  Command  I tried the following command:  sed -e "s/[A-Z]/[a-z]/g" temp   but got wrong output.  Output  I want it as:  hi jigar gandhi jiga   What needs to be in the substitute part of argument for sed? Math Induction Proof: $(1+\frac1n)^n < n$ Last night I took some night sky shots, and I've noticed that with long exposure times (15s, 30s) the time it took to store the images in the camera memory card (jpeg) took roughly as long?  The actual file size is fairly small at 1 to 3MB per file.  Any idea why this is? If $f'(c)$ exists then $\lim_{x\to c} f(x)=f(c)$ If $f'(c)$ exists then $\lim_{x\to c} f(x)=f(c)$   My attempt is below. Did I do wrong? Since I don't really understand it. I thought $f'(x) = f'(c)$ so $f'(x)-f'(c)=0$. Am I on the right track? Many thanks!  \begin{align} f(x)-f(c)&amp;=\frac{f(x)-f(c)}{x-c}\cdot(x-c) \\ \lim_{x\to c}[f(x)-f(c)]&amp;=\lim_{x\to c}\left[\frac{f(x)-f(c)}{x-c}\cdot(x-c)\right] \\ \lim_{x\to c}[f(x)-f(c)]&amp;=0 \\ \lim_{x\to c} f(x)&amp;=f(c) \end{align}