the sentence "if it so please the gods"
Does this sentence have too many subjunctives?
Is it true that one should not use NSLog() on production code? I was told this a few times in this very site, but I wanted to make sure this is really the case.  I was expecting to be able to sprinkle NSLog function calls throughout my code, and that Xcode/gcc would automatically strip those calls out when building my Release/Distribution builds.  Should I avoid using this? If so, what alternatives are most common between experienced Objective-C programmers? How to run Wireshark on Ubuntu 17.10 I used to run wireshark on ubuntu 17.04 with  ~/$ sudo wireshark   but now (just after update to 17.10) when I write the same I get an error  ~/$ sudo wireshark      QStandardPaths: XDG_RUNTIME_DIR not set, defaulting to '/tmp/runtime-root'     Invalid MIT-MAGIC-COOKIE-1 keyQXcbConnection: Could not connect to display :0 Don't let the association bonus be given away as bounties When a user with at least 200 rep on any Stack Exchange site registers a new account on another SE site, they immediately receive 100 rep on that site as an .  This is a deliberate feature to give users who are already familiar with how the SE platform and community works a bit of an extra boost (e.g. letting them upvote and comment immediately), and it's pretty much working as intended. What's probably not intended is that, currently, this bonus rep can be given away as . In fact, because awarding bounties currently requires only 75 rep, any user with 200+ rep on at least one site can join another site, receive the 100 rep bonus, and immediately award it all as a bounty to another user, without having to earn any actual rep on the site at all.  Not only does this seem contrary to the design intent of bounties (and of the association bonus), but it also seems ripe for potential abuse. (In fact, the only thing stopping a sockpuppet ring from gaining unlimited rep this way is the fact that the bounties would likely be sooner or later noticed by mods.) It's also possible for experienced users to (more or less) accidentally bounty their reputation so low that that they lose access to basic site features that they'd normally have due to the bonus.  Arguably, of course, this is entirely the user's own fault, but it can still be .  Also, this behavior , which currently require 110 rep to answer for users with the association bonus. The fix I'd like to suggest is simple:  If a user has been awarded the association bonus, don't let them award a bounty that would take their rep below 100.  Of course, it would still be possible for users with the bonus to drop below 100 rep via other means, e.g. by having their posts downvoted.  But they wouldn't be able to just give away this baseline rep to other users any more. Why is file transfer speed decreased when copying multiple smaller files? Let's say I'm copying a portable apps directory from PC to an external HDD. An application.exe file is around 4 megabytes in size, but most other files are only tens of kilobytes in size, and most of those files take longer to copy/move than that bigger file having 4 megabytes.  Why is this? I know Americans commonly use &quot;damn&quot; or &quot;damned&quot; to describe things. Sometimes, more appropriately, it's even &quot;darn&quot; or &quot;darned&quot;. For example,  This damn/damned computer is too slow.  However, I can't wrap my head around when to use &quot;damn&quot; and when to use &quot;damned&quot;. Or is only one of them correct? How to permanently set environmental variables Why the galaxies form 2D planes (or spiral-like) instead of 3D balls (or spherical-like)? Question: As we know, (1) the macroscopic spatial dimension of our universe is 3 dimension, and (2) gravity attracts massive objects together and the gravitational force is isotropic without directional preferences. Why do we have the spiral 2D plane-like Galaxy(galaxies), instead of spherical or elliptic-like galaxies?   Input: Gravity is (at least, seems to be) isotropic from its force law (Newtonian gravity). It should show no directional preferences from the form of force vector $\vec{F}=\frac{GM(r_1)m(r_2)}{(\vec{r_1}-\vec{r_2})^2} \hat{r_{12}}$. The Einstein gravity also does not show directional dependence at least microscopically.  If the gravity attracts massive objects together isotropically, and the macroscopic space dimension is 3-dimensional, it seems to be natural to have a spherical shape of massive objects gather together. Such as the globular clusters, or GC, are roughly spherical groupings , as shown in the Wiki picture:     However, my impression is that, even if we have observed some more spherical or more-ball-like , it is more common to find more-planar  such as our ? (Is this statement correct? Let me know if I am wrong.)  Also, such have a look at this more-planar Spiral "galaxy" as this NGC 4414 galaxy:    Is there some physics or math theory explains why the  turns out to be planar-like (or spiral-like) instead of spherical-like?  See also a   p.s. Other than the classical stability of a 2D plane perpendicular to a classical angular momentum, is there an interpretation in terms of the quantum theory of vortices in a macroscopic manner (just my personal speculation)?  Thank you for your comments/answers! I am trying to create a 3d game in unity. I have a cube in unity and I want it to move left or right on swipe . It should move to a distance till where user swipe or take their finger off of a screen. I want it to move fast or the cube should move fast on swipe and cube should flow smooth. Like in the gif there is a circle and the user use their finger to move the circle till wherever the user swipe it and it should be instant and I want my cube to move like that at a distance till where user swipe their finger and it should be instant and fast.  I don't know how to do it. Any help is appreciated! The game  has a very unique intro that I would like to show my friend again for the first time. I'm not sure how to reset all my progress on this game to achieve this though. Any thoughts? We had a quiz in class today where we had to break the ciphertext with the key given, but not the algorithm. Suffice to say that I wasn't able to decrypt it within the allotted time of 12 mins and will probably get a 0% score on the quiz.  So, I was just wondering if there are some kind of standard techniques that are followed when decrypting a simple substitution ciphertext. I  have had no luck getting the buffer tool to accept anything but degrees as units of measure.  I have found lots of stuff saying the layer needs to be reprojected and saved but it hasn't worked at all for me.   Is there a way I could create a buffer without using ftools or at least force the units to meters somehow?  As a workaround I converted meters to degrees (lat) and used that but the final product needs to be as close to reality as possible.  Things I've tried:   setting every unit option I could find to meters (where possible). setting everything to NAD83/Maryland (data is for Washington, DC) and saving it as such (as layers in ESRI shape files). reimporting the reprojected layers setting relevant layers to Google Mercator   The was tried followed by creating a buffer. Many were tried in combination. QGIS 1.7.3 Slackware64 current (qgis from SBo-13.37 repo, tried on multilib and plain 64it with same results) Possible Duplicate:             I faced this issue today when I was replying to a comment posted which used @Transaction annotation.     @Trevor: @Transaction and ... @Transaction   When typing this comment, I got a warning. Difference between UART and RS-232? Most of the time  and UART come together in serial communication theories. Are they both the same? From my readings I concluded UART is a hardware form of the RS-232 protocol. Am I correct? I'm wondering if it makes a difference in interpretation whether only the dependent, both the dependent and independent, or only the independent variables are log transformed.  Consider the case of  log(DV) = Intercept + B1*IV + Error    I can interpret the IV as the percent increase but how does this change when I have   log(DV) = Intercept + B1*log(IV) + Error   or when I have   DV = Intercept + B1*log(IV) + Error   ? How to get the file name from a full path using JavaScript? Why does the sizeof operator return a size larger for a structure than the total sizes of the structure's members? If $\lambda_{max} = n$, then $n\times n$ positive, reciprocal matrix A is consistent At the end of . the author states that  Suppose we have $n \times n$ matrix $A$ having only positive elements and satisfying the property $a_{ij}=1/a_{ji}$ (a matrix satisfying this property is called a reciprocal matrix).  If its largest eigenvalue $\lambda_{max}$ is equal to $n$, then the matrix $A$ satisfies the property (consistency property) $a_{ij} a_{jk} = a_{ik}$ where $i,j,k=1,2,...,n$.  I'm not convinced this theorem is true. Could anyone help? When do you use Quantum Mechanics? Given a problem, how does one know whether to use quantum mechanics or classical mechanics?   Take for example electron scattering from a nucleus. The electrons are given a wavefunction in this case. Why not use the classical approach? Application of Liouville's Theorem Let $f(z)$ be an entire function such that $$|f(z)|&lt;\frac{1}{|\text{Im}(z)|},\qquad z\in\Bbb C-\Bbb R.$$ The question asked me to prove that $f(z)=0$. At least looking at it, it really seems to have an application of Liouville's theorem lurking around somewhere, but I haven't found it.   My thoughts first led me to think about doing this by contradiction and using Picard's little theorem. So, I've considered a strip containing the real axis (say of width $2$ for simplicity). This will imply the complement maps into the unit disk, which implies that this strip has to map almost everywhere else on the complex plane. Now, on the imaginary axis, I know that $f(z)$ will vanish as $z\to\infty$, and this seems like it might be useful. I'm sort of under the impression $f(z)$ might have an essential singularity at $\infty$, which would mean $f(1/z)$ has an essential singularity at $0$. Either way, it of course can't have a pole at $\infty$ because of $f(z)$ vanishing on the imaginary axis, and if it is a removable singularity, it must be $0$, which still gives the solution. Therefore, I think it must have something to do with $f(z)$ having an essential singularity at $\infty$.   I was hoping to combine this with the above inequality and deduce a contradiction, but I haven't thought of one yet.   Any hints or suggestions? I'm studying for a prelim. exam, so this isn't homework.  Update: So, in the spirit of searching methods using the essential singularity at $z=0$, we have $$\left|f\left(\frac{1}{z}\right)\right|\leq\frac{1}{\left|\text{Im}\left(\frac{1}{z}\right)\right|}=\frac{|z|^2}{|y|}.$$ Thus, for $|y|&gt;1$, we have $$\left|f\left(\frac{1}{z}\right)\right|&lt;|y|\left|f\left(\frac{1}{z}\right)\right|&lt;|z|^2.$$ Thus, if I can show that $|f(1/z)|$ is a polynomial, we'll know it can't have an essential singularity at the origin, concluding my proof. I'm working through Exercise 40 from section 1.2.3 of Knuth's The Art of Computer Programming volume 1, but am finding myself unable to produce a rigorous proof, and the one  is suspect and not quite clear enough (for me, at least) in some of the steps; in particular, how to "[identify] the $k$th order coefficient in [the] two polynomials."  The problem is this: given a Vandermonde matrix $[x_j^i]_n$, show that the inverse is given by  $$ [b_{ij}]_n = \left[ \frac{    \sum_{\substack{1 \leq k_1 &lt; \dotsc &lt; k_{n-j} \leq n\\k_1,\dotsc,k_{n-j} \neq i}} (-1)^{j-1} x_{k_1} \dotsc x_{k_{n-j}} }{    x_i \prod_{\substack{1 \leq k \leq n\\k \neq i}} (x_k - x_i) } \right]_n\text{.} $$  The author gives a hint by stating that the sum in the above numerator is just the coefficient of $x^{j-1}$ in the polynomial $(x_1-x)\dotsc(x_n-x)/(x_i-x)$; and he gives an intermediate result showing the explicit multiplication of the matrix and its inverse as  $$    \sum_{1 \leq t \leq n}b_{it}x_j^t    =    \frac{       x_j \prod_{\substack{1 \leq k \leq n\\k \neq i}} (x_k - x_j)    }{       x_i \prod_{\substack{1 \leq k \leq n\\k \neq i}} (x_k - x_i)    }    =    \delta_{ij}\text{.} $$  The only other hint as to the type of solution he was expecting is a reference to A. de Moivre's The Doctrine of Chances, 2nd edition, pp. 197-199, which deals with polynomial recurrence relations and difference products (available ).  At the least, I was just hoping someone could either verify the proof is correct at proofwiki and possibly fill in exactly how one identifies the $k$th order coefficient in the proof; or perhaps explain a proof strategy as to what steps to take where the intermediate result is obtained at some point before the final result.  Thanks so much for any help.