My sock is having some layout issues My sock account tried to add a comment, which it obviously can't since it doesn't have much reputation (yet).  The 'error notification' lacks a nice font and is positioned too far to the right:        The missing layout is also a problem with the same tool tips on various places, like the log in screen.  Can this be fixed? My sock says pretty please.
The comment pop-up is too far away When you click the add a comment button when you don't have enough rep, you get a pop-up saying that you need more rep in able to comment. Except, it is too far away and users might be confused for a while before realizing the pop-up is on the other side of the page:     Clearly, that is very inconvenient for a lot of people, like me. Can we move the pop-up to be right next to the add a comment button?
Our DM keeps interrupting our long rests In the latest campaign, we're still around the third level, but every single night we've spend in the wild so far, we were interrupted by hard combat encounters (as in DMG-worded "hard"), forcing us to use our resources (like HP, spell slots, Ki, once-per-day stuff) and not restoring any of those lost the previous days. I feel like the , as it lasts four to six rounds, so we usually say that we'd like to resume our rest but the answer is always "you've been interrupted, your rest is over, you can't restart any until dusk". So the only real long rests we could have always were in town.  We've always used watch-turns, and being interrupted in the first night of the campaign, we now always spend one hour to find a safe place to rest and we make that intent very clear to the DM. But yet, kobolds, goblins, ghouls and gnolls always find us in the middle of the night, but never when we travel for ten hours during the day (which is comparable to "fast travel" in his own word). Once on the second day in the wild, we were faced to a deadly encounter (as in DMG-worded "deadly") which we survived only by fleeing. And we're kind of forced to get back to the deadly encounter, which is more than one day away from the nearest town.  We're five players and I'm the only one with PnP RPG experience... from ten years ago. I don't remember being this resourceless. We asked if it was a survival campaign and the answer was that it was only a normal introduction campaign found on the Internet that he spiced up a bit. We've also asked if we did anything wrong and the answer was that we followed the normal story.  The DM is mastering his second campaign (the first one is still ongoing, but with veteran players). The DM also plays a lot of survival campaigns as a player.  Is this situation normal? If yes, why? If not, what should I say to the DM?  Note that I'm fully aware of the "long rest" rule as written on page 186 of the PHB. This is why I encouraged my team to say that we resume our rest. (thanks Bloodcinder) Is there a catchall function somewhere that works well for sanitizing user input for SQL injection and XSS attacks, while still allowing certain types of HTML tags? OpenLayers low resolution and/or shifts in QGIS print composer? I'm having trouble with the OpenLayers Plugin of Qgis and the map composer:  If I create an OSM-background layer and if I want to export this, the OSM-Layer looks perfectly all right in the normal qgis program window. But in the map composer and after export the layer has shifted relatively to my other shape layers (EPSG:32633 - WGS 84 / UTM zone 33N).  The second thing is that the output resolution of the exported osm-layer is very, very poor.   A really bad way of getting around this whole trouble would be to increase the screen resolution and make a screenshot of the map composition window of qgis. But I don't think this would be very professional. It also would cause a lot of pain :)   I'm using Qgis 1.8.0-Lisboa under Linux. The openlayers plugin is version 0.92. how to get rid of arm64 in apt W: Invalid 'Date' entry in Release file /var/lib/apt/lists/_var_cuda-repo-8-0-local_Release N: Skipping acquire of configured file 'non-free/binary-arm64/Packages' as repository 'http://repository.spotify.com stable InRelease' doesn't support architecture 'arm64' E: Failed to fetch http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/xenial/main/binary-arm64/Packages  404  Not Found [IP: 91.189.88.161 80] E: Failed to fetch http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/xenial-updates/main/binary-arm64/Packages  404  Not Found [IP: 91.189.88.161 80] E: Failed to fetch http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/xenial-backports/main/binary-arm64/Packages  404  Not Found [IP: 91.189.88.161 80] E: Failed to fetch http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/xenial-security/main/binary-arm64/Packages  404  Not Found [IP: 91.189.88.161 80] E: Some index files failed to download. They have been ignored, or old ones used instead.   After I installed Jetpack for Jetson tx1, my ubuntu constantly tries to fetch arm updates. Is there a way to disable this?  EDIT:   $dpkg --print-architecture amd64  $dpkg --print-foreign-architectures i386 arm64   I see that arm64 is included in foreign architectures. How do I remove it? Show that every nonzero integer has balanced ternary expansion? "Software Updater" & "Software & Updates" not working I havent used my Ubuntu for quite a long time.  Today, when I booted Ubuntu (14.04 LTS), the software updater and Software &amp; Updates (from Settings) are not working.  The software updater's window will show up for around 1 sec, but it will close automatically. Software &amp; Updates is never shown, no matter how many times I click the icon. Note that neither of them show any error message.  Those 2 features were working perfectly the last time I used Ubuntu. I want to do some system upgrade and update.  For now, I use sudo apt-get update &amp;&amp; sudo apt-get upgrade. This command runs very fast, meaning (I think) my Ubuntu is not updated properly. The update from software updater always has a big size hence the download should be slower.  What should I do?   Can I just uninstall and reinstall both of them? If I can, how to do it?  Just to clarify, I don't want to upgrade my Ubuntu version (I want the LTS one), I just want to upgrade the software/packages I used.  Thanks for your time. Possible Duplicate:                If in a multiple linear regression (enter method) the general model isn't significant (F>.05) but one of the predictors is significant (β&lt;.05), should I consider it as a significant result? Attacks of the MAC construction $\mathcal{H}(m\mathbin\|k)$ for common hashes $\mathcal{H}$? Consider a common practically-collision-resistant hash function $\mathcal{H}$ (e.g. , , , ), perhaps based on the  as are the first three. We define a  $\mathcal{C}$ $$(k,m) \mapsto \mathcal{C}(k,m)=\mathcal{H}(m\mathbin\|k)$$ where $\mathbin\|$ denotes concatenation, $k$ is a secret key (constant, or at least of fixed size), and $m$ is a message (possibly of variable length). Assume that an adversary can (iteratively) submit queries with $m_j$ and obtain $C(k,m_j)$, and wants to obtain $k$ or otherwise compute $C(k,m)$ for some $m\ne m_j$.  That MAC $\mathcal{C}$ is not trivially bad. In particular, if $\mathcal{H}$ was indistinguishable from a random function in the , $\mathcal{C}$ would be secure. And even though $\mathcal{H}$ may have the , it does not turn into a devastating attack on $\mathcal{C}$.  The less impractical generic attack that I see is that if a collision was known for $\mathcal{H}$ with the colliding messages of moderate identical length, it could be deduced countless collisions for $\mathcal{C}$. Hence security is demonstrably not better than collision-resistance of $\mathcal{H}$ (for identical-length messages). We could assume that $k$ is half the size of the result of $\mathcal{H}$, and hope that the security is about  or  or , 280, 2128, 2256 hash rounds for SHA-1, RIPEMD-160, SHA-256, SHA-512.   What are the known attacks against $\mathcal{C}$ (better than the above), and their cost, for each of these common hashes?  Is there hope for an argument that an attack against $\mathcal{C}$ would turn into an attack of similar cost against $\mathcal{H}$, or hint of the contrary?  Update: this  is of interest, but I fail to find that it really answers the present question.  Update 2: I am aware that the construction considered is weaker than , and in particular is vulnerable to collision on $\mathcal H$; I stated that, and that it is thus pointless to have the key wider hopeless to target security against some attacks better than half the hash's size. I'm asking exactly what cryptanalytic attack better than finding a collision on $\mathcal H$ there are. There is room for such an attack only by exploiting a weakness in the structure or/and the round function of a concrete $\mathcal H$. When do I pronounce a non-existent “r” between adjacent vowel sounds? If I say two words consecutively, with the first ending in a vowel sound and the second starting with one, when is it correct to include a non-existent r between those two words?  Examples from phrases I've heard:        I saw (r)a movie   They saw (r)us   Law (r)and order   That's the idea, (r)anyway.      I heard the last one in the movie Edge of Tomorrow yesterday.  Is this grammatically correct? If so, is the omission of the r grammatically incorrect? Are there any rules regarding this? How do I install a .deb file via the command line? You "show" someone a picture. You "---" someone a song? In , we have a verb meaning &quot;to show&quot; corresponding to &quot;to see/to look&quot;, and we have a different verb corresponding to &quot;to hear/to listen&quot;:  inti tara stampa (you look at a picture.) ---- jiena nurilek stampa (I show you a picture) inti tisma' diska (you listen to a song.) ----- jiena nsemmagħlek diska (I 'show' you a song)  In English, do you &quot;show someone a song&quot; (sounds weird to me) or is there a verb that corresponds more directly to the Maltese insemmgħek? Having some trouble proving this:     If $f:\mathbb{R}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is differentiable and $\lim_{x\to \infty } f^\prime(x)=0$ show: $\lim _{x\to \infty } (f(x+1)-f(x))=0$   Attempt: from $\int \lim _{x\rightarrow \infty } f^\prime(x) \mathrm{d}x=0$ we can say that $f^\prime(x)=const$ would we then have to show that  $\lim _{x\to \infty } (f(x+1))$ is also a constant? From there if we show that both are equal then the difference is zero. I am on the right track?  Thank you for the help. Why exactly did the Sorting Hat originally want to put Harry in Slytherin? Foreign key constraint on array member? Suppose I have a table containing job roles:  CREATE TABLE roles (   "role" character varying(80) NOT NULL,   CONSTRAINT "role" PRIMARY KEY (role) );   Suppose I further have a table, users, and each row (a specific user) can have an arbitrary number of job roles:  CREATE TABLE users (   username character varying(12) NOT NULL,   roles character varying(80)[] NOT NULL,   CONSTRAINT username PRIMARY KEY (username) );   I should probably make sure that each member of users.roles[] exists in roles.role.  It seems to me that what I want is a foreign key constraint on each member of users.roles[] such that if references roles.role.  This doesn't seem possible with postgres.  Am I looking at this the wrong way?  What is the suggested "right" way to handle this? Cannot access to (or find out) main Settings program The suggested edits count at top is incorrect. Multiple browser refreshes did not clear it. Approving/Rejecting review decreases the count, but as you can see the count is incorrect. How to change permission external hard drive in ubuntu 12.04 I want to copy any file to my external hard drive. But always when I tried to do this I have next output:  cp: cannot create regular file /media/NameOfCard/[file]' : Read only file system  I also tried:  sudo chmod -R 775 /media/NameOfCard sudo chmod -R 777 /media/NameOfCard   But the same effect - ... Read only file system  Update:   After mount I have next output:  nazar_art@nazar-desctop:~$ mount /dev/sda1 on / type ext4 (rw,errors=remount-ro) proc on /proc type proc (rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev) sysfs on /sys type sysfs (rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev) none on /sys/fs/fuse/connections type fusectl (rw) none on /sys/kernel/debug type debugfs (rw) none on /sys/kernel/security type securityfs (rw) udev on /dev type devtmpfs (rw,mode=0755) devpts on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,noexec,nosuid,gid=5,mode=0620) tmpfs on /run type tmpfs (rw,noexec,nosuid,size=10%,mode=0755) none on /run/lock type tmpfs (rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev,size=5242880) none on /run/shm type tmpfs (rw,nosuid,nodev) /dev/sdb1 on /media/sdb1 type vfat (rw) binfmt_misc on /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc type binfmt_misc (rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev) gvfs-fuse-daemon on /home/nazar_art/.gvfs type fuse.gvfs-fuse-daemon (rw,nosuid,nodev,user=nazar_art)   Any suggestions?   How to solve this trouble and let permission to copy and delete files to hard drive? (Disclaimer: I've read the  and I do understand that this is bordering on off-topic since it's about consumer devices. However I hope that I've managed to make enough on-topic by asking about why it is the way it is, and what is the explanation from an electromagnetic point of view - in other words, what laws of electricity and what practical considerations have gone into these decisions).  I recently bought a power tool and in its manual I found a few peculiar safety rules. I cannot see why they would be there, although reading up more it seems that they are commonplace. My understanding of electricity is limited (just about enough to be dangerous), so I'm hoping to expand it. :)  The rules are:   Don't use an extension cord longer than 25m. Considering this is an outdoors tool, this limitation is severely restrictive. The best explanation I've seen is that longer cables would simply have too high of a resistance and the tool wouldn't be able to operate at full power. But this argument doesn't convince me. The tool is rated at 2.4kW, and it's meant to be used with 220V AC power source, which means it uses about 11 amps of current. All the extension cords I've ever come across have at least 16A limitation, so there is quite a reserve still. In addition, the power has to travel much, much further to get to my house, and even after the meter it still takes probably close to those same 25m to get to the power outlet. Why only 25m after the outlet? The resistance of the cables isn't that big, is it? Don't daisy-chain extension cords. I suspect this is a variation of the above - don't exceed 25m; every connection adds additional contact resistance; water in the outdoors connections can be a problem - in general, it just adds risk. However, apart from the water in the contacts, the rest seems to me to be practically negligible. Is there really a significant contact resistance? Assuming that the extension cords are in a good shape. Make sure that the power cord is entirely unrolled. This is another odd one. My suspicion is that it has to do with inductive resistance. But is it really that strong? Wherever I've seen people actually wanting to create an electromagnet, it's pretty much hard work. You need a lot of neat, tightly-wound loops of wire. An extension cord has a lot of insulator around it, spacing the wires pretty far apart, and the loops are very chaotic. In addition, if that was a problem, why do  exist? They're used especially when you need a very long extension cord, and you don't need to unroll them completely every time you want to use them. Solved: OK, I was off the mark. The correct answer (also a ) has to do with the wire heating up from being used close to its limits. When coiled together, the temperature can go pretty high and melt the cables. Not fun. Chrome and Firefox cannot add specific URL to home screen I have seen many folks doing this  concluding that shadow from point A on the Moon can travel to point B on the Moon faster than light.  What I fail to understand here (and I am sure I am wrong), is nothing can travel faster than light. I also read about Relativity where Einstein stated that every event happening for you depends on how fast the light gets from where the event is happening to you.  This is my particular problem with this Moon shadow experiment. You cannot make a shadow travel faster than light, because in order for the "disappearance" of light to get to the Moon, it has to travel at light speed.  Here is one way to understand my point. Consider we shine a flashlight on Moon, like the guy in the linked video did, we move the finger across the face of the flashlight, before we moved the finger it was casting the shadow at Point A on Moon, after we finish moving our finger, the shadow is at Point B on the Moon.  When the finger reaches the end of it's moving length, the light waves that have left the flashlight before the finger reached there will have to hit Point B and it will take them a second and a half to get there, and another second and half for us to see that shadow on point B, which makes it 3 seconds + finger moving time for us to actually see the shadow at point B. That means shadow traveled (say) across the diameter of the Moon in 3 seconds.   So. about 3000 Km in ~3 seconds make it 1000 Km per seconds which is very tiny compared to the speed of light. How can these experiments conclude that Shadow could be made to travel faster than light? What is the obvious clue that I am missing here?