which one is correct sentence?
"The train will leave" vs. "is going to leave" vs. "leaves" vs. "is leaving"
small limits in the pointed category of a category with all small limits In Hovey, Model Categories, he says that given a category $\mathcal{C}$ with a small limits and colimits, if we form the category of pointed objects ,i.e. the category with objects as morphisms $*\rightarrow A$ where * is the terminal object, then this category $\mathcal{C}_*$also has all small limits and colimits.  To prove this, for any Functor $F:J\rightarrow \mathcal{C}_* $ where $J$ is small we compose it with the forgetful functor $\mathcal{C}_* \rightarrow \mathcal{C}$ and take the limit here. My question is how will this give a limit in $\mathcal{C}_*$? we will get an object in the category, but how do we get the arrow from $*$ to that object? What is a 'rollback'? What is a 'rollback' on Stack Exchange sites? I have seen this mentioned but I do not understand the term. Please note: This post is not a sandbox for performing rollbacks. Please do not perform rollbacks on this post without valid reason. If you want to try out a few rollbacks, do it  instead.   See also   in the Help Center How can I check the actual size used in an NTFS directory with many hardlinks? On a Win7 NTFS volume, I'm using cwrsync which supports --link-dest correctly to create "snapshot" type backups. So I have:  z:\backups\2010-11-28\cygdrive\c\Users\... z:\backups\2010-12-02\cygdrive\c\Users\...   The content of 2010-12-02 is mostly hardlinks back to files in the 2010-11-28 directory, but there are a few new or changed files only in 2010-12-02. On linux, the 'du' utility will tell me the actual size taken by each incremental snapshot. On Windows, explorer and du under cygwin are both fooled by hardlinks and shows 2010-12-02 taking up a little more space than 2010-11-28.   Is there a Windows utility that will show the correct space acutally used? Does scaling lead to weak convergence to the null function? Let $f\in L^p(\mathbb{R}^d)$, with $1&lt;p&lt;\infty$. Is it true that    $$\lambda^{\frac{d}{p}}f(\lambda x ) \rightharpoonup 0\quad \text{ weakly in }L^p\text{ as }\lambda\to+\infty?$$   One has the easy case for $f\in L^{p-\epsilon}\cap L^p$. This condition allows the use of Hölder's inequality as follows (here $\frac{1}{p}+\frac{1}{p'}=1$ and $\phi$ is a continuous function with compact support):  $$\begin{split}\left\lvert \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} \lambda^{\frac{d}{p}} f(\lambda x)\phi(x)\, dx\right\rvert&amp; \le \lambda^{\frac{d}{p}}\lVert f(\lambda x)\rVert_{L^{p-\epsilon}}\lVert \phi\rVert_{L^{(p-\epsilon)'}} \\  &amp;= \lambda ^{\frac{d}{p}- \frac{d}{p-\epsilon} } \lVert f\rVert_{L^{p-\epsilon}}\lVert\phi\rVert_{L^{(p-\epsilon)'}}\to 0. \end{split} $$ But what happens if that condition is removed? I carried out an explicit check on the standard example of a function $f$ that belongs to $L^2(\mathbb{R})$ and does not belong to $L^{2-\epsilon}(\mathbb{R})$ for any $\epsilon &gt; 0$, namely  $$f(x)=\begin{cases} 0 , &amp; x&lt;2 \\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{x}\log x}, &amp; x \ge 2\end{cases}.$$ Taking $\phi=\chi_{[a, b]}$ with $2&lt;a&lt;b$ one has  $$\left \lvert \int_{\mathbb{R}} \lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}f(\lambda x)\phi(x)\, dx \right\rvert  = \dfrac{  \int_{\lambda a }^{\lambda b} \frac{dy}{\sqrt{y}\log(y)} } {\lambda^{\frac{1}{2}}}, $$ and an application of l'Hôpital's rule shows that the right hand side tends to $0$ as $\lambda \to \infty$. This implies weak convergence to $0$ by a standard density argument.   This seems to point towards an affirmative answer to the question in the gray box. The origin of the value of speed of light in vacuum Meaning, why is it the exact number that it is? Why not 2x10^8 m/s instead of 3? Does it have something to do with the mass, size or behavior of a photon? To be clear, I'm not asking "how we determined the speed of light". I know there isn't a clear answer, I'm really looking for the prevailing theories. Content Type field on NewForm.aspx I have a custom list and I am using content types to add items to the list. I am using OOTB forms for new and edit items. One field that I see on the EditForm.aspx is the one that I hope I get on the NewForm.aspx also and it is the Content Type field. It is shown in the following screenshot. Do you know how to add that field on the NewForm.aspx page also?    Thanks. Ubuntu 18.04: switch back to /etc/network/interfaces Starting sometime around Ubuntu 18.04, the Ubuntu devs stopped using the classic /etc/init.d/networking and /etc/network/interfaces method of configuring the network and switched to some thing called . This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. Is it possible to remove netplan and use the correct /etc/network/interfaces method for configuring the network? What is the smallest positive integer $n$, such that there exist positive integers $a$ and $b$, with $b$ obtained from $a$ by a rearrangement of its digits, so that   $a – b = 11\dots 1$ (The number of '$1$'s equal to $n$)?   Is there any example that can satisfy the equation? Possible Duplicate:          Please, look at the picture?    Which calculator shows true result and how to prove achieved result? Any way to send a personal message to another user? There has been quite a few times that I wished I could send a message to another user on SO - not ask a question for everyone to see, but just a short message informing them of something or requesting them to do something.  Are there any plans to allow this to happen in the future?  Related: In the begining of "" episode (Star Trek Next Generation 6x16) an Yridian tells Worf, that he has a certain information,      that Worf's father is still alive (apparently not killed in ) and is held in a prison camp on Carraya IV.   Yridian is an information broker and agrees to reveal details (i.e. location) only for a price.      Worf agrees.   How or with what Worf would pay for this? There is no economic factor inside the Federation (no money is being used) and I don't recall anything, Worf would have on board Enterprise, that would have enough value for an information this kind. Take a look at this example schematic:  The chip in question is the  and as you can see power is provided on both sides (with a 100nF cap to smooth noise I guess). Is this strictly required or could you put power into one side and just ignore the other? I know that I have just put power in one side and everything still seems to work fine but I feel uneasy with doing that. I feel that they would not waste pins that could be doing something useful by having an extra pair of power in/out pins. For what purpose does this PIC MCU (and others like it) have multiple power pins? Why don't Muggle-born wizards use Muggle technology to fight Death Eaters? What are review tests (audits) and how do they work? I recently received this rather amusing message while reviewing a user's first post:  Congratulations! This was only a test, designed to make sure you were paying attention. This post has already been removed, but thanks for taking time to leave feedback for the author.   What is the purpose of this test? How does the audit work? What happens if I fail? Why was the system expecting me to negatively review a good post, or positively review a bad post? A review is obviously an audit. Should I report it? Do review audits count toward the Reviewer badge? Do robo-reviewers dream of electric sheep? Can I, as a reviewer, tell authors to get a native English speaker to proofread their paper? I am reviewing a paper for possible publication in a respected journal. The English in the paper is very poor. The authors are clearly not native English speakers. I want to write something to the effect of the following in my review.   I advise the authors to find a native English speaker to proofread the manuscript.    My question: Is this appropriate in a review?  On one hand, I think it is good, constructive advice. The paper would be significantly clearer if someone spent a few hours helping them fix it up. I can try to help them through reviewer comments, but it would be much easier if someone could help them in person. The authors are located in a western English-speaking country, so they should be able to find someone.  On the other hand, I don't want to be "the mean reviewer." I understand that English can be difficult to master for immigrants. Perhaps there is a more diplomatic way of saying this. I am a US citizen and have recently visted the UK  with simply a passport which allowed me to vist for 6months I have heard rumors that I am obligated to stay in the US for a Equal amount of time that I have visited the UK before I am able to return, but I am struggling tour no any proof of this obligation .. Am I missing somthing or is it simply not true I'm trying to get a Schengen Visa from my first port of entry, France. I am trying to book an appointment with the French Consulate in SF, and the URL I am using is the following:   I've been checking this page periodically for the past few weeks, and I always see a dialog that that says "We are currently at full capacity. Please try again later." Their calendar provides no direct option for going to the next month. (Using the in-browser developer tools, I noticed that the button for next month is hidden. Un-hiding it and clicking on the Next Month button displays no available appointments either. I checked all the way until September 2016).  My guess is that there are absolutely no appointments for the next 6 months. Or, more likely, their page isn't functioning properly. I'll be traveling in July. Does anybody have any alternate suggestions to book an appointment? "FTL" Communication with Quantum Entanglement? Can quantum entanglement make sending a message, whether audio, video, or even Morse code, instantaneous between two points (faster than it could travel normally at the speed of light)?  Let me first be clear, my question is not whether a message can travel faster than light. I simply mean whether a message can be generated here and then a copy of that message heard over there sooner than the message would normally be received.  Say a large number of entangled pairs are generated. One half the particles are given to Jack and the opposite ones to Sally. Jack then hops on a ship and travels 8 months to Mars. Sally then manipulates her particles in the form of a message. Do the corresponding opposite particles get manipulated simultaneously so that Jack receives the message instantly instead of the 16 light-minutes for a classically transmitted message? There appears to be a poltergeist in my speakers (no, really) I've no idea if there's a suitable Stack Exchange for poltergeists. It appears to be software, hardware or virus related, so I thought I'd try here, seeing as Ghostbusters is just a film, so I can't call them.  I'm not going mad, and this isn't a joke.  There's what appears to be a radio stream coming out of my speakers, except I can only hear it when the volume knob is turned down to the min setting whilst the speakers are on, which makes no sense. Sometimes it's French, which also makes little to no sense.  The speakers are Logitech 5.1s, I forget the model number, and I'm running XP 64bit. If that makes a difference.  I'd suspect it could be some sort of crazy virus, but I've been randomly killing processes whilst the poltergeist is active and it hasn't killed it, so I'm not sure about that.  Once again, I'm perfectly sane and this really isn't a joke. Perhaps other people have had this problem but have been too afraid of the reaction to ask anyone (please don't have me committed to an insane asylum).  Googling for strange noises coming from speakers didn't really get me anywhere. Has anyone heard of a virus that can do this and affect the volume controls on the hardware in that way? UFW Allows 22 for IPv4 and IPv6 but SSH Disconnects When Enabling sudo ufw disable followed by sudo ufw enable kicks me out of SSH  DMESG reports  [UFW BLOCK] IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=30:........ SRC=192.168.1.me DST=192.168.1.server LEN=52 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=128 ID=15776 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=55640 DPT=22 WINDOW=253 RES=0x00 ACK URGP=0  I can log back in without having to change rules via the console (UFW still enabled).  This started after upgrading Xenial (16.04) from kernel 4.4 to 4.15 (HWE). Upgrading to 18.04.1 did not solve the issue.  Versions:   iptables v1.6.1 ufw 0.35 4.15.0-29-generic #31-Ubuntu Ubuntu 18.04.1 LTS   UFW status verbose is (some rules were omitted, but they are all ALLOW)  Logging: on (low) Default: deny (incoming), allow (outgoing), disabled (routed) New profiles: skip  To                         Action      From --                         ------      ---- 22                         ALLOW IN    Anywhere 22 (v6)                    ALLOW IN    Anywhere (v6)   Why is this happening, or at least, how to revert to the expected behavior?  I looked at , and I am not sure it applies, but here's /etc/ufw/before.rules  # # rules.before # # Rules that should be run before the ufw command line added rules. Custom # rules should be added to one of these chains: #   ufw-before-input #   ufw-before-output #   ufw-before-forward #  # Don't delete these required lines, otherwise there will be errors *filter :ufw-before-input - [0:0] :ufw-before-output - [0:0] :ufw-before-forward - [0:0] :ufw-not-local - [0:0] # End required lines   # allow all on loopback -A ufw-before-input -i lo -j ACCEPT -A ufw-before-output -o lo -j ACCEPT  # quickly process packets for which we already have a connection -A ufw-before-input -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A ufw-before-output -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT -A ufw-before-forward -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT  # drop INVALID packets (logs these in loglevel medium and higher) -A ufw-before-input -m conntrack --ctstate INVALID -j ufw-logging-deny -A ufw-before-input -m conntrack --ctstate INVALID -j DROP  # ok icmp codes for INPUT -A ufw-before-input -p icmp --icmp-type destination-unreachable -j ACCEPT -A ufw-before-input -p icmp --icmp-type source-quench -j ACCEPT -A ufw-before-input -p icmp --icmp-type time-exceeded -j ACCEPT -A ufw-before-input -p icmp --icmp-type parameter-problem -j ACCEPT -A ufw-before-input -p icmp --icmp-type echo-request -j ACCEPT  # ok icmp code for FORWARD -A ufw-before-forward -p icmp --icmp-type destination-unreachable -j ACCEPT -A ufw-before-forward -p icmp --icmp-type source-quench -j ACCEPT -A ufw-before-forward -p icmp --icmp-type time-exceeded -j ACCEPT -A ufw-before-forward -p icmp --icmp-type parameter-problem -j ACCEPT -A ufw-before-forward -p icmp --icmp-type echo-request -j ACCEPT  # allow dhcp client to work -A ufw-before-input -p udp --sport 67 --dport 68 -j ACCEPT  # # ufw-not-local # -A ufw-before-input -j ufw-not-local  # if LOCAL, RETURN -A ufw-not-local -m addrtype --dst-type LOCAL -j RETURN  # if MULTICAST, RETURN -A ufw-not-local -m addrtype --dst-type MULTICAST -j RETURN  # if BROADCAST, RETURN -A ufw-not-local -m addrtype --dst-type BROADCAST -j RETURN  # all other non-local packets are dropped -A ufw-not-local -m limit --limit 3/min --limit-burst 10 -j ufw-logging-deny -A ufw-not-local -j DROP  # allow MULTICAST mDNS for service discovery (be sure the MULTICAST line above # is uncommented) -A ufw-before-input -p udp -d 224.0.0.251 --dport 5353 -j ACCEPT  # allow MULTICAST UPnP for service discovery (be sure the MULTICAST line above # is uncommented) -A ufw-before-input -p udp -d 239.255.255.250 --dport 1900 -j ACCEPT  # don't delete the 'COMMIT' line or these rules won't be processed COMMIT   PS: I didn't expect this to "fix" the issue but just for reference I changed the port SSHD listens on (and the corresponding rule) and the problem persists.