How can I style input file textbox?
Styling an input type="file" button
How to move a window if titlebar is overlapped by Ubuntu menu I need to refer to a model described elsewhere, from a section title, like  \section{Analysis of model X}    One way of referring to a model is to create a new counter, and then write  \section{Analysis of \cref{grandmodelofeverything}}   But now hyperref will complain because of invalid token, and it does not look good in the TOC either, especially since the titles of the sections the describe the models are more descriptive than  \section{Model 1}   They are currently like  \section{Adding the effect from Y processes}   Do I need to invent semi-descriptive long names like "The model by Authors with this modification" or can I live with these quirks? Why is potential energy negative when orbiting in a gravitational field? Helpless after exhausting daily limit for reviewing Suggested Edits I have faced this problem earlier. But today I got to face this problem twice in a span of couple of minutes.. I have unfortunately finished my daily quota of reviewing Suggested Edits. But I want to further edit a post for which an edit has already been suggested by another user having less than 2000 Reputation.  I come across a post and it says that an edit has already been suggested which is pending for Review:   I click on edit (1) and a pop-up of Suggested Edit appears:    However, the problem is this Suggested Edit doesn't thoroughly deal with the post. It just fixes some capitalization and nothing else — no grammar fixes, no sentence restructuring to make it more clear, no code formatting, no dividing it into lists, etc. — in short, perfect candidate to be rejected. (The image for the suggested-edit I have uploaded didn't have those problems - however, there were those problems in the edits that I encountered earlier.) The problem before me is that I am helpless. I can't approve, reject or improve the edit since I have already gone past my daily quota of Reviewing them. Neither can I make the edits to the post since this suggested edit is pending review. I am completely helpless!! Whats the opinion of the community in this matter?  Should we (those with more than 2000 Rep) be able to edit them? Don't count it in our Review Progress obviously - not sure what should be done with the suggested edit already proposed.  Or, Let it be, someone else would come and edit them and other Reviewers would deal with the Suggested Edit appropriately.  Or, Something else.    Note: This might not be much of a problem for Stack Overflow since the Review Queue is very busy here. However, this is a bit of a problem for smaller sites. So, treat it as a question posted at Meta.SE and not so much at Meta.SO.  Dirty Hack: Ah... found a dirty hack to work around this situation. However, this shouldn't be used unless absolutely necessary. Credit goes to  in . To edit a post enter this link in your browser: http://${site_url}/posts/${post_id}/edit. So, to edit this particular post one would enter: http://meta.stackoverflow.com/posts/171129/edit. I repeat, the hack shouldn't be used unless necessary. I don't know anything about Star Trek except for the fact that it's about spaceships.  In  the person only wanted to watch the TV series. I want to watch every movie and TV series there is about Star Trek but I don't know where to start. I found this page on  which is about a time line. Do I need to watch it in this order? Are the movies and TV series related? I am trying to find examples of maps between topological space which are local homeomorphism but not covering maps. Especially, how twisted has to be such a counterexample : can it be a local diffeomorphism between connected manifolds which is not a covering map ?   I found here() a nice proposition which state that a local homeo from a compact space to a connected Hausdorff space is a covering map.   I am interested in all type of counterexamples, from non-Hausdorff spaces to surfaces, to get a better picture of the differences between covering maps and local homeomorphisms.  Thank you ! Series of sequence with terms over series. Prove or give a counterexample to disprove the following statement about series of real numbers:  If $a_k &gt; 0, s_k = a_1 + \cdots + a_k$ and $b_k = a_k/s_k$ then $\sum a_k$ and $\sum b_k$ either both converge or both diverge. Preview on the right please, optionally? I want to remove the URL that gets printed on the bottom of the page.   like:  yomari.com/.../main.php?sen_n   How can it be omitted or prevent from getting printed?  To be more specific, is there any way I can prevent the page URL, date and the page title being printed along, while printing the web page? Can anyone tell me how to judge if a supervised machine learning model is overfitting or not? If I don't have an external validation dataset, I want to know if I can use ROC of 10 fold cross validation to explain overfitting. If I have an external validation dataset, what should I do next? Today I was going through my text book exercise and got hold of the following question.     Let $X$ be a normed linear space with norm $\lVert\cdot\rVert$ and $A$ is a non empty convex subset of $X$ then prove that $\operatorname{Closure}(A)$ is also a convex subset of $X$.   I gave it a try but could not succeed. C++ single template specialisation with multiple template parameters Evaluating $\int\limits_0^{\pi} \frac{dx}{1+2\sin^2x}$ After making u substitution two times, I am getting indefinite integral as $$\int\limits\dfrac{dx}{1+2\sin^2x} = \dfrac{\arctan(\sqrt{3}\tan(x))}{\sqrt{3}}+ C$$  I am stuck at working the bounds because I am getting $0$ but the answer needs to be $\pi/\sqrt{3}$.  I think $\arctan(x)$ is defined in $-\pi/2 \lt x\lt\pi/2$ while making u substitution. However I don't see how to use this observation to my advantage. Can anybody help in getting the answer and understanding whats going on. Thanks ! Why does Ridders' method work as well as it does? I've just read section 9.2.1 in Numerical Recipes Ed. 3 (Press et al. 2007), which describes Ridders' method of root finding. I understand that allowing for some curvature of the function by linearizing three points with an exponential will probably get you a better approximation and more rapid convergence, but I have no idea how they get that it converges quadratically, and the motivation behind choosing an exponential (rather than e.g. a polynomial) is not clear to me.  So, specifically, I'm wondering (1) why linearize with an exponential, and (2) why the method converges quadratically.  I tried looking for Ridders' original paper "A new algorithm for computing a single root of a real continuous function", but the only copy I could find was in a journal that my school's library does not give me free access to.  UPDATE:  I've realized that the fact that an exponential is strictly positive means that weighting the three points with an exponential won't change their signs. Hence, the root of the linearization will have to land inside the original bracket.  Polynomials, rationals, sinusoids, and logarithms all have positive and negative bits, so using them probably runs the risk of getting bad interpolated roots. One of these squared might be usable, but maybe non-monoticity gives some sort of undesirable effect. Since this is a complete list of all simple functions that I am aware of, exponentials seem to be the only easily available weighting function with this property.  A constant function is also technically single-signed and monotone, but it can't be used to linearize stuff. The Lorentz force on a charged particle is perpendicular to the particle's velocity and the magnetic field it's moving through. This is obvious from the equation:  $$ \mathbf{F} = q\mathbf{v} \times \mathbf{B} $$  Is there an intuitive explanation for this behavior? Every explanation I've seen simply points at the equation and leaves it at that.  I can accept mathematically why $\mathbf{F}$ will be perpendicular to $\mathbf{v}$ and $\mathbf{B}$ (assuming the equation is correct, which it is of course). But that doesn't help me picture what's fundamentally going on.  Trying to create an analogy with common experiences seems useless; if I were running north through a west-flowing "field" of some sort, I wouldn't expect to suddenly go flying into the sky.  I'm hoping there's a way to visualize the reason for this behavior without a deep understanding of advanced theory. Unfortunately, my searching for an explanation makes it seem like something one just has to accept as bizarre until several more years of study. Fully charged MacBook Air turns off when power cord removed I have a MacBook Air, 2009, with a recently replaced Apple battery in December 2012. Recently, when power cord comes off, the computer shuts down. Also, it usually will not restart unless power cord is attached. Make ubuntu usb bootable on windows Possible Duplicate:             I know there are a lot of tools to create a bootable usb for ubuntu with windows.  But I'm sure, that there was a possibility in the ubuntu installation directory. I used it some time ago, but I can't find it anymore :(  I think it was a .exe, or a .bat, any case a cmd window has opened, some things were executing and the usb was bootable. And it was in the ubuntu directory!  Is there still the possibility to do that? Does that file exist? I unfortunately can't remember. Using C++ library in C code I have a C++ library that provides various classes for managing data.  I have the source code for the library.  I want to extend the C++ API to support C function calls so that the library can be used with C code and C++ code at the same time.  I'm using GNU tool chain (gcc, glibc, etc), so language and architecture support are not an issue.  Are there any reasons why this is technically not possible?  Are there any gotcha's that I need to watch out for?  Are there resources, example code and/or documentation available regarding this?    Some other things that I have found out:   Use the following to wrap your C++ headers that need to be used by C code.     #ifdef __cplusplus extern "C" {   #endif   //   // Code goes here ...   //   #ifdef __cplusplus   } // extern "C"   #endif    Keep "real" C++ interfaces in separate header files that are not included by C.  Think  here.  Using #ifndef __cplusplus #error stuff helps here to detect any craziness. Careful of C++ identifiers as names in C code Enums varying in size between C and C++ compilers.  Probably not an issue if you're using GNU tool chain, but still, be careful. For structs follow the following form so that C does not get confused.  typedef struct X { ... } X  Then use pointers for passing around C++ objects, they just have to be declared in C as struct X where X is the C++ object.   All of this is courtesy of a friend who's a wizard at C++. How to know if my GPU supports CUDA? How can I know from the terminal or something whether my hardware supports CUDA? Iterate a list as pair (current, next) in Python