Sci-fi short story about an idealist and a realist I'm looking to find a science fiction short story (I think it was by Asimov but I could be wrong). The story is about 2 characters, one who is an idealist who is opposed to military buildup, and a realist who sees it as necessary. Initially, the idealist is seen as naive and is ignored and the military is expanded. Eventually the military ends up collapsing in some way, and the realist is seen as a villain and the idealist is seen as a hero. However it turns out that the realist was also opposed to the military, but became its head so that he could lead it to collapse intentionally. This is never made public though, so he remains forever a villain in the eyes of history.
A story about a guy who helped humanity by being held in a prison I remember a story I have read buy could not remember the author the name or anything apart from the basic plot. The story is about some future where humanity has to fight with some aliens (not 100% sure). The story tells about a guy who was some kind of activist and who was in a prison two or more times and somehow helped humanity by being held in a prison (can't remember details). I think the story starts by saying that there is a statue in his honor that is not very well known but he did more to help humanity than famous politicians.   The story is most likely written by some famous English-speaking author, though I read it in a translation.
Understanding dummy (manual or automated) variable creation in GLM If a factor variable (e.g. gender with levels M and F) is used in the glm formula, dummy variable(s) are created, and can be found in the glm model summary along with their associated coefficients (e.g. genderM)  If, instead of relying on R to split up the factor in this way, the factor is encoded in a series of numeric 0/1 variables (e.g. genderM (1 for M, 0 for F), genderF (1 for F, 0 for M) and these variables are then used as numeric variables in the glm formula, would the coefficient result be any different?  Basically the question is: does R use a different coefficient calculation when working with factor variables versus numeric variables?  Follow-up question (possibly answered by the above): besides just the efficiency of letting R create dummy variables, is there any problem with re-coding factors as a series of numeric 0,1 variables and using those in the model instead? Trying to make aliases that open the last modified file One thing that I frequently do is edit the most recently modified files, so instead of typing "ls -lr" and then "vim lastfile", I thought I would make some shortcuts in my ~/.bash_profile file:  alias via="vim `ls -rt | tail -1`" alias vib="vim `ls -rt | tail -2 | head -1`" alias vic="vim `ls -rt | tail -3 | head -1`" alias vid="vim `ls -rt | tail -4 | head -1`" alias vie="vim `ls -rt | tail -5 | head -1`"   The problem is that, weirdly enough, these commands don't work.  They open some file that isn't one of the last, or even a file was deleted from the current directory (I wonder if there's some kind of file cache updating issue in the directory.  This occurs on both my local machine and the cluster I work on).  However, if I type vim `ls -rt | tail -1` directly, without using the alias, it works every time. How to prove a finite field is not ordered? I have a set S={0,1}, and the addition and multiplication rules are  \begin{array}{c|cc} +&amp;0&amp;1\\ \hline 0&amp;0&amp;1\\ 1&amp;1&amp;0 \end{array}  \begin{array}{c|cc} *&amp;0&amp;1\\ \hline 0&amp;0&amp;0\\ 1&amp;0&amp;1 \end{array}  It is sure that it is a field. How can I prove this field can be ordered or not? How to Link/Append a data-block using the Python API? I'm searching a way to append a group in Python.  It should behave exactly like the Append function (ShiftF1) works, all objects should be local and editable. The idea is to append a character (with rig etc.) via Python and not Link it (to be able to modify it without making everything local one by one).  Thanks How to make a file (e.g. a .sh script) executable, so it can be run from a terminal solve $T(n)=T(n-1)+T(\frac{n}{2})+n$ Using the recursion tree i tried solving this: $T(n)=T(n-1)+T(\frac{n}{2})+n$; the tree has two parts (branches) one that of $T(n-1)$ and other branch is of $T(\frac{n}{2})$. But as the term T(n-1) reach higher depth, I solved that part of the tree. Finally it resulted in O$(2^n)$ is it correct or is it $O(n^2)$? How can we solve it by substitution method? The first day of the current month in php using date_modify as DateTime object Given the Python function:  def a_method(arg1, arg2):     pass   How can I extract the number and names of the arguments. I.e., given that I have a reference to func, I want the func.[something] to return ("arg1", "arg2").  The usage scenario for this is that I have a decorator, and I wish to use the method arguments in the same order that they appear for the actual function as a key. I.e., how would the decorator look that printed "a,b" when I call a_method("a", "b")? GZip of drive image created by using `dd` command I created yesterday a drive image using GZip.  I opened the 51.3 GiB file named ssd.img.gz to see one icon thats a package of 3.9 GiB, yes, thats THree point Nine Gigabytes in size and has the name of the image as ssd.img  That does not seem right to me, has the image creation worked or not?  Yes the drives have data and an operating system on it.  Should I have used cat instead? only I did and it kept on saying that it had nothing to do.  Would using the | zip instead be a better option?    ** EDIT **  The command used was:  mark@zotac:~$ sudo -l Enter password:&lt;entered password to get in to root&gt; root@zotac:~# dd if=/dev/sda | gzip -c &gt; "/media/mark/Seagate External Drive/ssd.img.gz   the terminal spent the best part of 10 Hours at building the image, something in itself that I also found suspect, why so log when copying the files to a folder that I wanted, some 40GiB took 45 minutes...  The source drive /dev/sda had no mounted partitions.     ** EDIT **  Just to clarify, I am trying to make an image of the drive to back up later if things go wrong with a repair, the drive itself needs to be a file on a drive as the target drive partition is using almost all of the drive, the partitions can't be resized on it without formatting it and I am not about to lose 1.4TB of data.   So the dd if=/dev/sda of=/&lt;target&gt; isn't what I need, what I do need is an image of the drive that I can restore the image from to the drive should the repair go wrong.  So what command do I use, dd or cat? Why does | zip keep telling me it has nothing to do when used with cat but no error or warning with dd "wait on" or "wait for"? Officials are waiting on autopsy results for Oscar-winning actor Philip Seymour Hoffman. New York police suspect a drug overdose, possibly heroin.   I am curious about the preposition on in the sentence, because I usually say "wait for" instead of "wait on". Does it still have the same meaning if I change on to for? Just as follows:     Officials are waiting for autopsy results for Oscar-winning actor Philip Seymour Hoffman. New York police suspect a drug overdose, possibly heroin. I am always really hesitant to mess around with $IFS because it's clobbering a global.   But often it makes loading strings into a bash array nice and concise, and for bash scripting, conciseness is hard to come by.   So I figure it might be better than nothing if I try to "save" the starting contents of $IFS to another variable and then restore it immediately after i am done using $IFS for something.   Is this practical? Or is it essentially pointless and I should just directly set IFS back to whatever it needs to be for its subsequent uses? IList vs IEnumerable for Collections on Entities When I have entities in my domain with lists of things, should they be exposed as ILists or IEnumerables? E.g. Order has a bunch of OrderLines. Is there a word for saying "um" or "uh", etc, during speaking?  Or a word for "um" and "uh", etc? Frobenius element in cyclotomic extension Let $K=\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_m)$. Then if $p\nmid m$ is any odd prime, how i can show that Frobenius map is $(p,K/\mathbb{Q})(\zeta_m)=\zeta_m^p$.  We know, if $P$ is a prime above $p$   $$(p,K/\mathbb{Q})(x) \equiv x^p (\mbox{mod } P) \quad\forall x \in \mathbb{Z}_K$$  Thanks! WordPress twenty eleven sidebar on Pages I am using 2011 theme, any how I managed to get sidebar on single.php pages by installing child theme,  But now I want sidebar on pages,  How do I get it? I am solving a series of ODE, such that each DE is equal to some degree of term that I'm expanding to. For instance, one DE is this:  $\xi^r\partial_r g_{rr}+2g_{tt}\partial_t\xi^t=\mathcal{O}(r)$  $g_{ii}$ are given, from metric, but that's not important. I need to assume that the solution (since I'm looking for components of $\xi^\mu$, which is a vector with components $\xi^t,\xi^r,\xi^\phi$) is given with power series of the form:  $\xi^\mu=\sum\limits_{n}\xi^\mu_n(t,\phi)r^n$, and this is to be seen as expansion around $1/r$ (expansion around $r=\infty$).  Now when I plug this in the ODE I get this  $\frac{2}{l^2}\sum_n\xi^r_nr^{n+1}+2\sum_n\xi^t_{n,t} r^n+\frac{2}{l^2}\sum_n\xi^t_{n,t}r^{n+2}=\mathcal{O}(r)$, where   $\xi^\mu_{n,i}$   is the derivative with the respect to i-th component.   What troubles me is, how to expand this? Do I set n=0,-1,-2,... until my $\mathcal{O}(r)$ terms cancel each other out? Or?  I'm kinda stuck :\ Variance of sum of $k$ randomly drawn numbers from $1,...,n$. How to solve this limit: $\lim\limits_{x\to0}\frac{(1+x)^{1/x}-e}x$? I tried to evaluate $$\lim_{x\to0}\frac{(1+x)^{1/x}-e}x$$but all my efforts were in vain . L'Hospital rule becomes very complicated. I have a list of requirements for a program, but I don't know what program meets these criteria. That's about general-purpose software, for example, not a programming IDE or statistical workbench, questions about which would certainly go to respective sites.  Is this question appropriate on Stack Overflow? Where should I ask about it? On Super User or elsewhere? Who is doing the normalization of wave function in the time evolution of wave function? In the Schrödinger equation, at any given time $t$ we should jointly add another sub equation, like $$||\psi_t(x)|| = 1$$ where $\psi_t(x) = \Psi(x,t)$, and then try to solve the two equations simultaneously. Why not? I know it does not yield, but I am always baffled, who is doing the normalization of the wave function? Observers, the system, the measuring process, God?