pointers-inline meaning?
what is/are the purpose(s) of inline?
I am a relatively recent graphic design graduate. I have been working at a small printing house for about two years, but will soon be interviewing for a different position in another city.  My question is about what to include in my design portfolio. When I was in school, my professors all insisted that work included in a portfolio should be 100% original: my original photography, my original logos, my original layout, my original written content etc. However, at my current office, we rely heavily on client-supplied logos, type content, and photography—and stock photography (shutterstock, etc).  What do other designers include in their portfolios? Has anyone else had this issue and can I reasonable include these more recent projects in my portfolio if I label them appropriately (something like "layout design")? How can I make a directory on the desktop?  I tried cd /desktop command but it gives an error  no such file or directory.  What's the correct command? Creating node shapes I am currently learning how to use TikZ/PGF to make some figures for a project report, and so I have a question:     Is there is a practical way of making a particular object into a node?   The object I have in mind is shown in the Figure below. I want the object to consist in the big circle, the two circular arcs, the label and anchors at north, south, east and west. The dotted lines are simply there to indicate that I am going to have paths going out of these points, which is why I need the anchors there.     I include the source, in the case that it is useful to anyone.  \begin{tikzpicture} \draw[help lines, gray, dotted] (-2,-2) grid (2,2);  \begin{scope}[shift={ (0,0) } ]     \begin{scope}[rotate=90]         \draw[thick] (-1,0) arc[start angle=-90, delta angle=90, %                               x radius=1, y radius=1] -- (0,1) %NW                      (0,-1) arc[start angle=180, delta angle=-90, %                                    x radius=1, y radius=1] -- (1,0); %SE         \draw[gray] (0,0) circle (1);     \end{scope} % Anchor replacements     \node(N1)       at (0,1)    {};     \node(S1)       at (0,-1)   {};     \node(E1)       at (1,0)    {};     \node(W1)       at (-1,0)   {}; % Label     \node(Crossing number) at (0,0) {1}; \end{scope}  \path[thick, gray, dotted] [ out=90,   in=270]     (N1.center) edge (0,2) [ out=180,  in=0]       (W1.center) edge (-2,0) [ out=270,  in=90]      (S1.center) edge (0,-2) [ out=360,  in=180]     (E1.center) edge (2,0); \end{tikzpicture}   PS. I have had a look at the Manual, but I could not find a description of how to do this. Modify all bash commands through a program before executing them I am trying to create a program which require such feature. The flow will be like:   User enter a bash command User hit the enter My script will get command, current directory,.. as variables. Program can optionally modify the command. Modified command will get executed normally.   Is there any way to do this?  Note: I need this for my personal use, I am not going to distribute this program. This is something I just realised I don't entirely know the answer to, so I'm going to ask it here as I think it's interesting.  In most non-scientific writing on depth of field, diagrams generally show camera and subjects as being perfectly parallel, e.g.    However, is this a more accurate representation of the focal plane?    Are there ways to optically alter the shape of the focal plane?  Note: Obviously these diagrams are two dimensional, but I'm assuming in the second diagram the shape would be spherical with the sensor at the center. Prove that if b is coprime to 6 then $b^2 \equiv 1 $ (mod 24) Let $\gcd(b,6) = 1$. Prove that $b^2 \equiv 1 $ (mod 24).  Now I have that as $\gcd(b,6) = 1$, we know that  $3\nmid b $ and $2\nmid b$ (else the GCD would be 3 or 2 resp.)  So as $2\nmid b$, $b$ must be odd. Hence $b^2$ is also odd.  Then I'm not sure where to take it from here? Maybe I've gone down the wrong path to start with, and should be looking more along the lines of the Chinese Remainder Theorem? I'm not sure. Mouse acceleration seems to be on by default, and I can't find anywhere in the launcher settings or the in game settings to turn it off.  It's very annoying as it makes it feel as if the mouse is lagging. Is there any way to turn it off? How to change the shadow color in Blender Cycles? Should we improve time to first byte or Page Speed Insights score for SEO? Google posted last summer that "page speed" will impact the search result rankings also on mobile devices. But I think there is a little confusion about the term "page speed".  The test tool which Google offers is called "Page Speed Insights". Many people we are talking with, are thinking that the overall score of this tool for a particular site for example Desktop: 46/100 and Mobile: 45/100 is used for the ranking algorithm.  BUT I found a very interesting article in German language which states that only the TTFB (time to first byte) value is used and this should be optimized not all suggestions which "Page Speed Insights", further called PSI offers. Here is the link to the German article:   In short terms it says that a very large site in this case "The New York Times" has a low overall score of Mobile:41 and Desktop:45. As they are used to sell reader memberships they should  offer a great user experience. So, they should optimize their site. But when I call this site it is amazing fast. The overall PSI score does not reflect this behaviour. But when I believe this article the TTFB for this site is perfect. Also when I call it here from Austria it states 0.881sec.  I really like to know on which value we should focus our work for optimization not to fall in the ranking. Because as many of you already said it is not useful to implement all suggestions from the PSI site for one domain.  So, it would be real  if you could clarify things here or post links to official posts from Google. What I found about this, Google always is talking about "page speed" but what exactly is this? Is there a limit to the number of Power Armor sets you can keep? I've seen videos of some folks having several armor sets (4 is the most I've seen so far) standing about on their settlement. I'm wondering if having too many would cause some sets to disappear. They're not like guns/items that you can safely store in settlement crates, the suits kind of just... stand around. (I know there's the extra step of taking out the fusion cores, so that NPC's don't use them.)  Is there a limit to the number of Power Armor sets you can keep? Clearly if $\lambda$ is an eigenvalue of $A$ then $p(\lambda)$ is an eigenvalue of $p(A)$ where $p$ is a polynomial. And there are cases where $A$ may have eigenvalues other than these.   Is there a general rule for finding all eigenvalues of $p(A)$? Does it depend on the field from which the elements of $A$ are taken? Are their any partial solutions to this problem? Difference between $(this) and event.target? For $n$ a positive integer, let us write $\zeta_n = e^\frac{2 \pi i}{n}$, a primitive $n$th root of unity. It is clear that, if $m$ divides $n$, then we have an inclusion of cyclotomic fields $$ \mathbb{Q}(\zeta_m) \subseteq \mathbb{Q}(\zeta_n).$$ On the other hand, these inclusions are not always strict. For example, since $\zeta_3  = \frac{1+i \sqrt{3}}{2}$ and $\zeta_6 = \frac{-1 + i \sqrt{3}}{2}$, we have $$\mathbb{Q}(\zeta_3) = \mathbb{Q}(\zeta_6) = \mathbb{Q}(i\sqrt{3}).$$ Does this sort of thing happen infinitely often, or are there just some coincidences among small numbers? If this continues, is there some way to know when a particular inclusion of cyclotomic fields is strict? Why do eukaryotic organisms have introns in their DNA? We touched on introns and exons in my bio class, but unfortunately we didn't really talk about why Eukaryotes have introns. It would seem they would have to have some purpose since prokaryotes do not have them and they evolved first chronologically, but I could easily be wrong. Did the junk sections of DNA just evolve there by some sort of randomness or necessity as opposed to an actual evolutionary advantage? Why hasn't evolution stopped us from having introns since they seem to be a 'waste' of time and DNA? Why do prokaryotes not have introns? How to prove this inequality $ x + \frac{1}{x} \geq 2 $ I was asked to prove that:   $$x + \frac{1}{x}\geqslant 2$$  for all values of $ x &gt; 0 $  I tried substituting random numbers into $x$ and I did get the answer greater than $2$. But I have a feeling that this is an unprofessional way of proving this. So how do I prove this inequality? Ubuntu equivalent of system restore? Does it exist? Ubuntu n00b here.  I have created several disasters of the first order already.  I am getting ready to try to install opera - it is a very long and arduous process.  I am afraid - no - I am absolutely certain that I will damage something important.  How do I create a system restore point?  Does such a thing exist? How to show that the determinant of the following $(n\times n)$ matrix  $$\begin{pmatrix} 5 &amp; 2 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; \cdots &amp; 0 \\ 2 &amp; 5 &amp; 2 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; \cdots &amp; 0 \\ 0 &amp; 2 &amp; 5 &amp; 2 &amp; 0 &amp; \cdots &amp; 0 \\ \vdots &amp; \vdots&amp; \vdots&amp; \vdots &amp; \vdots &amp; \vdots &amp; \vdots \\ 0 &amp; \cdots &amp; \cdots &amp; 0 &amp; 2 &amp; 5 &amp; 2 \\ 0 &amp; \cdots &amp; \cdots &amp; \cdots &amp; \cdots &amp; 2 &amp; 5 \end{pmatrix}$$  is equal to $\frac13(4^{n+1}-1)$?    More generally:     How does one compute the determinant of the following  (where the three diagonals are constant)?      $$M_n(a,b,c) = \begin{pmatrix} a &amp; b &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; \cdots &amp; 0 \\ c &amp; a &amp; b &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; \cdots &amp; 0 \\ 0 &amp; c &amp; a &amp; b &amp; 0 &amp; \cdots &amp; 0 \\ \vdots &amp; \vdots&amp; \vdots&amp; \vdots &amp; \vdots&amp; \vdots &amp; \vdots \\ 0 &amp; \cdots &amp; \cdots &amp; 0 &amp; c &amp; a &amp; b \\ 0 &amp; \cdots &amp; \cdots &amp; \cdots &amp; \cdots &amp; c &amp; a \end{pmatrix}$$      Here $a,b,c$ can be taken to be real numbers, or complex numbers.   In other words, the matrix $M_n(a,b,c) = (m_{ij})_{1 \le i,j \le n}$ is such that $$m_{ij} = \begin{cases} a &amp; i = j, \\ b &amp; i = j - 1, \\ c &amp; i = j + 1, \\ 0 &amp; \text{otherwise.} \end{cases}$$  There does not seem to be an easy pattern to use induction: the matrix is not a diagonal  of the type $M = \bigl(\begin{smallmatrix} A &amp; C \\ 0 &amp; B \end{smallmatrix}\bigr)$ (where we could use $\det(M) = \det(A) \det(B)$ for the induction step), and there are no lines or columns with only one nonzero entry, so  gets complicated quickly.  Is there a general pattern that one could use? Or is the answer only known on a case-by-case basis? It's possible to compute the determinant by hand for small $n$:  $$\begin{align} \det(M_1(a,b,c)) &amp; = \begin{vmatrix} a \end{vmatrix} = a  \\ \det(M_2(a,b,c)) &amp; = \begin{vmatrix} a &amp; b \\ c &amp; a \end{vmatrix} = a^2 - bc \\ \det(M_3(a,b,c)) &amp; = \begin{vmatrix} a &amp; b &amp; 0 \\ c &amp; a &amp; b \\ 0 &amp; c &amp; a \end{vmatrix} = a^3 - 2abc \end{align}$$  But there is no readily apparent pattern and the computation becomes very difficult when $n$ gets large. Duplicating a mesh object Changing underline color of LanguageTool in TeXstudio I've recently installed LanguageTool to check grammar and spelling mistakes in TeXstudio. However, I often miss the errors because the gray-bluish underlining makes them hard to spot. Is there a way to change the underlining to a distinctive color, such as red for example?   I checked . It says I have to do some changes to the .languagetool.cfg file, but for some reason this file doesn't appear in File Explorer. Landscape printing from HTML I have a HTML report, which needs to be printed landscape because of the many columns. It there a way to do this, without the user having to change the document settings?  And what are the options amongst browsers.