Fork Bomb: Why Piping Output Into Another Copy of Fork Bomb works if no Output is returned?
How does a fork bomb work?
What to do if I can't get a visa to attend a conference that accepted my paper? My work got accepted into a very good category in a very good conference in my field. Due to complicated visa issues it will be very hard for me to attend that conference.   If I don't attend the conference they are certainly going to remove my work from the proceedings.  I am worried I won't be able to claim any sort of achievement if I don't attend this conference.  Can I still add it to my CV and specify that my work got accepted in this conference in a very good category? How to add a confirm dialog to a command button? Convert string to Title Case with JavaScript How do I prove that $S^n$ is homeomorphic to $S^m \Rightarrow m=n$? This is what I have so far:  Assume $S^n$ is homeomorphic to $S^m$. Also, assume $m≠n$. So, let $m&gt;n$.  From here I am not sure what is implied. Of course in this problem $S^k$ is defined as:  $S^k=\lbrace (x_0,x_1,⋯,x_{k+1}):x_0^2+x_1^2+⋯+x_{k+1}^2=1 \rbrace$ with subspace topology. Uses of the definite article (the) in generic noun phrases Your answer is in another castle: when is an answer not an answer? I think we can all agree, this sucks:  If you've been around a little while, you've probably encountered hundreds of answers like this in various forums, some of them even marked as &quot;The Answer&quot; by well-meaning1 forum admins looking to close a thread. We could try to enumerate the commonly-observed problems with it...  Link is probably broken If link isn't broken, it's spam If link isn't spam, it's to some broadly-related resource that the answerer found by pressing &quot;I'm feeling lucky&quot; when googling the question's title.  ...but the real issue here is that we don't know! Even if the link was originally pointing directly to the most awesomeest answer ever for exactly the question being asked, there's nothing in the answer itself to even hint at what direction we're being pointed in. Strip the markup, and this is what you're left with:  i think you should take The tutorial HERE! This will help you a lot  Is there even one tiny speck of information there? No. Even the title of the page being linked to would have provided something to go on, but that was entirely too much work. So let me be clear: this sort of response is not an answer. If you see this, flag it. Moderators, if you see it flagged, delete it. There's really only one valid exception to this rule, and that's when the question is:  Suggest me some tutorials where i can learn quick.  Don't get me wrong, it's still a bad answer - but when the question is kinda asking for bad answers this is to be expected. Close or flag the question and move on - this is much more efficient than hanging around to babysit it by deleting every crap answer that inevitably shows up. If you're still reading, you're probably getting really bored by now. &quot;Gee, Shog - answers that contain ZERO information are terrible, horrible, very-bad things? What shocking revelations will you share next?&quot; Yeah. It's really simple... Except, . See, the problem is that once you step away from black-and-white &quot;answers / doesn't answer&quot; decision-making, things get... Interesting. And all those other answers with links in them See, this is an answer:  And so is this:  Yes, they're both very short, and yes, they contain links. But strip the markup, and you still get at least a little bit of useful information. Does that mean these answers should forever hang around the site? No, not necessarily - if it turns out they're just not that useful, they should probably still be removed - or at very least, down-voted so that they rank below other answers. Just remember: if the text of the post contains an honest attempt at answering the question, then it is an answer - so don't flag it otherwise, and if you do, don't complain if your flag gets declined. Answers &amp; Apples If you're still confused, forget about answers. Think about apples instead:  Answers are just like that, but less tasty in pies.  1 By which I mean to say, &quot;criminally lazy&quot; Provide an easily discoverable way to get the full URL to an answer , clicking &quot;link&quot; &quot;share&quot; for anwers yields a short (traceable) URL in the &quot;share a link to this answer&quot; dialog, such as †:  These short URLs show no clue about the linked question whatsoever. Also, when different people use a short URL for the very same post, then the user id suffix makes those be different URLs for a browser. Such links will then not be shown as visited‡. I know how to get URLs that have a proper slug. But as I see  pop up on these sites (where referrals ), I assume many others just don't realize full URLs would be better for use on these sites themselves? Or many don't want to do the little effort to get the full URL? So: can we please have an easy way to get the full URL as well, in a way that is easily found for those who don't know about the different links? (Currently for questions, clicking &quot;link&quot; has the same effect. But then one can also right-click the title, or take the URL from the location bar, to get the full human-readable URL. Once, Jeff .)  † The short links for answers are not (yet) [automatically converted][6] into a clickable question title either, unlike links such as `https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/74274/privacy-leak-in-permalink#75963`, which renders as https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/74274/privacy-leak-in-permalink#75963 But I guess that will change soon.  ‡ On Meta the CSS for posts doesn't indicate such difference anyway, which is a different issue. Prove that $371\cdots 1$ is not prime Prove that $371\cdots 1$ is not prime.   I tried mathematical induction in order to prove this, but I am stuck.  My partial answer:  To be proved is that $37\underbrace{111\cdots 1}_{n\text{ ones}}$ is never prime for $n\geq 1$. Let $P(n)$ be the statement that $37\underbrace{111\cdots 1}_{n\text{ enen}}$ is not prime.  For $n=1$, we can write $371=7\cdot 53$, and therefore $P(1)$ is true. Let $P(k)$ be true for $k&gt;1$. Then we now have to prove that $P(k+1)$ is true.  I found that $37\underbrace{111\cdots 1}_{k\text{ ones}}$ can be written as $37\cdot 10^k+10^{k-1}+10^{k-2}+\cdots +10^0$ and that $37\underbrace{1111\cdots 1}_{k+1\text{ ones}}$ can be written as $37\cdot 10^{k+1}+10^{k}+10^{k-1}+\cdots+10^0$.  I think I'm pretty close to the answer know, but I don't know how to proceed. I was googling unsuccessfully.   I've created Aura components without any problem, but I can't figure out how enabled this:     I'm trying to enable that feature in a Dev Winter 15. Sole minimal element: Why not also the minimum? A minimal element (any number thereof) of a partially ordered set $S$ is an element that is not greater than any other element in $S$.  The minimum (at most one) of a partially ordered set $S$ is an element that is less than or equal to any other element of $S$.    Let's consider the power set $\mathcal P (\{x,y,z\})$ together with the binary relation $\subseteq$.  The Hasse diagram shows what element(s) we're looking for:    It's easy to see that:   $\emptyset$ is a minimal element $\emptyset$ is the minimum   Now if we remove $\emptyset$ and consider $\mathcal P (\{x,y,z\})\setminus \emptyset$ instead, we get the following:   $\{x\}$, $\{y\}$ and $\{z\}$ are minimal elements there is no minimum   (1) We know that a minimum is unique and it is always the only minimal element.  (2) And from the example above, it seems that, if a sole minimal element exists, it is always the minimum.  But I read that (2) is false. Why? So, I'm working with OpenGL (I'm not exactly sure of the version), and I want to do an old-style lighting setup by essentially drawing a black rectangle over the screen, and drawing white circles over the areas that should be lit. I already have the rectangle and the circles, but I can't figure out how to make it so that the white circles are transparent when applied to the black areas. Any ideas? I tried to use blending modes, but it still evades me...  EDIT: Here's the code that I'm using (Python).  view_buf = Buffer(GL_INT, 4) glGetIntegerv(GL_VIEWPORT, view_buf) view = view_buf.to_list() if hasattr(view_buf, "to_list") else view_buf.list  glDisable(GL_DEPTH_TEST)  glDisable(GL_LIGHTING)  glEnable(GL_BLEND)  if logic.lights['smooth']:     glEnable(GL_LINE_SMOOTH)  # # Make sure we're using smooth shading instead of flat # glShadeModel(GL_SMOOTH)  # Setup the matrices  glMatrixMode(GL_PROJECTION) glPushMatrix() glLoadIdentity() gluOrtho2D(0, view[2], 0, view[3]) glMatrixMode(GL_MODELVIEW) glPushMatrix() glLoadIdentity()  #glAlphaFunc(GL_GREATER, 0.5)  glColor4f(0.0, 0, 0, 0.75)  glBegin(GL_QUADS);                              # Draw Black screen glVertex2d(0.0, 0.0); glVertex2d(view[2], 0.0); glVertex2d(view[2], view[3]); glVertex2d(0.0, view[3]); glEnd()  glColor4f(1, 1, 1, 1)  degtorad = 3.14159/180.0   glBlendFunc(GL_ZERO, GL_SRC_ALPHA)  def DrawCircle(x, y, radius, fill = 1, step = 11):      glVertex2f(x, y)      if fill:         glBegin(GL_TRIANGLE_FAN)     else:         glBegin(GL_LINE_LOOP)      for a in range(0, 360, step):         angle = degtorad * a         glVertex2f(x + (sin(angle) * radius), y + (cos(angle) * radius))      glEnd()   #for layer in range(len(logic.lights['layers'])): #   size =  for light in logic.lights['points']:     DrawCircle(light[0][0] * view[2], (1 - light[0][1]) * view[3], light[1], step = light[2])     if logic.lights['smooth']:         DrawCircle(light[0][0] * view[2], (1 - light[0][1]) * view[3], light[1], 0, light[2])  # Reset the state glPopMatrix() glMatrixMode(GL_PROJECTION) glPopMatrix() Is there a formal proof for the superposition theorem? Does the order of declaration matter in Java/C#? In C++ I can't use a method if I declare it after the calling method.    Does this order matter in other languages like Java or C#? Equivalent definitions of convexity for $f\in\mathcal C^1(\mathbb R^n)$ I noticed many identical questions on this site relating to equivalent definitions of convexity, see for example , , , , , ,  and there might be more. So I wanted to create a &quot;big list&quot; of equivalent definitions of convex functions, I will start with some equivalent definitions and post my proofs in my answer below. Feel free to add any other equivalent definitions. This question can then serve as an abstract duplicate. Claim. Let $n\in\mathbb N$ and $f\in\mathcal C^1(\mathbb R^n)$. Then the following are equivalent:  $f$ is convex, i.e. $f(\lambda x_1 + (1-\lambda x_2))\le\lambda f(x_1)+(1-\lambda)f(x_2)$ for all $\lambda\in[0,1]$ and $x_1,x_2\in\mathbb R^n$. For all $x,y\in\mathbb R^n$, $\langle\nabla f(x)-\nabla f(y),x-y\rangle\geq0$. For every $x,y\in\mathbb R^n$, $f(y)\geq f(x)+\langle y-x,\nabla f(x)\rangle$. How do I create a villager with custom trade offers? How can I count the number of records that have a unique value in a particular field in ROR? Why pendulum does not follow SHM for larger angular displacement? Considering an ideal case(neglecting drag of air, damping etc.), a pendulum follows SHM if the angular displacement is small (upto 10 degrees). But, for large angular displacement(more than 10 degree), it does not follow SHM. Why? What force cause the pendulum not to follow SHM? Make locking posts more granular Javascript add leading zeroes to date Portrait for phone, landscape for Tablet (Android-Layout)