Combine \footcite with \citeauthor
Biblatex: Don't show n.d. when no year is given
"Most importantly" or "more importantly"? Which of the following two sentences is more correct?   "A picture says a thousand words, more importantly in a fraction of a second"    OR   "A picture says a thousand words, most importantly in a fraction of a second"   Nothing important, just my own quotes! Do also suggest, if I can put it in a better way to express what I want to. How do I enable auto-login in LightDM? I want user foo to auto-login using LightDM (which has been used by Ubuntu since version 11.10). How would I do that? I have previously saved a copy of /var/lib/mysql/ddms directory ("ddms" is the schema name). Now I installed a new MySQL on a freshly installed Ubuntu 10.04.3 LTS by running apt-get install mysql-server, I believe version 5.1 was installed. After I copy the ddms directory under /var/lib/mysql, some of its tables work fine, these are the tables with an associated set of three files: a .frm file, a .MYD file and a .MYI file.  However, there are two tables with a different set of files: a .frm file and a .ibd file. These two tables didn't show up in the table list in phpMyAdmin. When I look at the error log, it says:  [ERROR] Cannot find or open table ddms/dictionary_item from the internal data dictionary of InnoDB though the .frm file for the table exists. Maybe you have deleted and recreated InnoDB data files but have forgotten to delete the corresponding .frm files of InnoDB tables, or you have moved .frm files to another database? or, the table contains indexes that this version of the engine doesn't support.   Please help with restoring these two tables. Thanks. What is "it" in the following sentence: It is clear that Bob likes doughnuts I am very confused. Unless I am mistaken, I know "it" has to be a noun of some sort, but I am unable to figure out what noun "it" is referring to.   What is "it" in the following sentence:      It is clear that Bob likes doughnuts.   Heres another couple of examples:     It is impossible to fly. Design Review: 3.3V Logic to 12V Logic (Uni-directional and Bi-directional) I'm looking for feedback and improvements on my design below. Specific questions are at the end. I created this as an attempt to answer my own, . From my feedback there, it seems like I needed to be more clear in my requirements. These are screenshots from Eagle. If there's a better way to share, please let me know so I can correct it. Entire board  The overall purpose of this board is to translate between 12V logic, and 3.3V logic. The top portion of the board represents the 12V side. The LEDs are placeholders to indicate whether the 12V signal is HIGH or LOW. In practice, these would be replaced with more , requiring up to 3A. The switches are also placeholders, allowing one to manually turn the 12V signal on and off. They are only for test purposes, the &quot;real&quot; 12V signal would be coming as the output from other relays. The bottom half is the 3.3V side. This will be connected to a  (BBB). The board will connect to 2 output GPIO pins and 2 input GPIO pins of the BBB. Overall, I want to translate the 3.3V I/O from the BBB to the 12V signals on the other side (to control more relays and read their signals). I have designed 3 modules to control both directions individually, and together. 3V3_TO_12V Module  This module converts the 3.3V GPIO output from the BBB to a 12V signal on the other side. When the 3.3V signal is low, the 12V signal is low. When the 3.3V signal is high, the 12V signal is high. To do this, the 3.3V GPIO output is connect to a , which turns a  relay on and off. This switches the 12V power as output of the module to be used elsewhere. 12V_TO_3V3 Module  This module converts a 12V signal to 3.3V signal, to be read by a GPIO input from the BBB on the other side. When the 12V signal is low, the 3.3V signal is low. When the 12V signal is high, the 3.3V signal is high. To do this, the 12V signal simply turns a  relay on and off. This switches the 3.3V power to be read as input by the BBB. DUAL_12V↔3V3 Module  This module combines the previous two modules to create a bidirectional translation. If the 12V side is high, the 3.3V input to the BBB GPIO should be high. If the 3.3V output from the BBB GPIO is high, then the 12V side should be high too. It's similar to a logical OR, if either side is high, the corresponding signal on the other side should be high too. A single 12V signal has to be split into individual input and output signals on the 3.3V side for the BBB. Questions  Is the  and  relay combination overkill for having the BBB GPIO output control the 12V power line? I like the isolation and safety it provides, but it seems too much (in terms of cost and board space) Is there a better solution for the 12V to 3.3V conversion. I like the simplicity of the  relay switching a 3.3V signal, but it takes up lots of room. Does the DUAL_12V↔3V3 Module (which combines each translation direction) even make sense? This seems wasteful to use 2 relays and a high side driver, but I haven't found simpler solution that achieves the same result. Should I add pulldown resistors for the BBB GPIO inputs, or are the internal pulldown resistors good enough?  Any other feedback is welcome. I'm new to electronic design. Help me to get command or ansibile Regex to fetch below details It's been said that .  It the corresponding statement true for typical cryptographic hashes, like MD5, SHA-1, SHA-2 or SHA-3?  For example, would SHA-512 be bijective when hashing a single 512 bit block? JavaScript + Unicode regexes How do you do Impersonation in .NET? Is there a simple out of the box way to impersonate a user in .NET?  So far I've been using  for all my impersonation requirements.  Is there a better way to do it by using .NET Framework?  I have a user credential set, (username, password, domain name) which represents the identity I need to impersonate. 3D graphics render as though no illumination I want to uninstall VMware Player on my Ubuntu 12.04 LTS system. How should I uninstall it? I've tried different ways to install iTunes, but to no avail. I tried with Wine, but it didn't work. Is it possible to have iTunes on Ubuntu? Give $\ker(\phi)$  for $\phi: \mathbb{Z} \to \mathbb{Z_7}$ such that $\phi(1) = 4$  So the generator of $\mathbb{Z}$ maps to $4$ and $\langle 4 \rangle = \{0,1,2,3,4,5,6\}$ so it has order seven.  so $\ker(\phi) = 7\mathbb{Z}$ because every seventh element will map to the identity under the given map. Is that the correct reasoning? Using global variables in a function How can I create or use a global variable in a function?  If I create a global variable in one function, how can I use that global variable in another function? Do I need to store the global variable in a local variable of the function which needs its access? Regular Expression to split on spaces unless in quotes I would like to use the .Net Regex.Split method to split this input string into an array. It must split on whitespace unless it is enclosed in a quote.  Input:  Here is "my string"&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;it has "six&nbsp;&nbsp;matches"  Expected output:   Here is my string it has six&nbsp;&nbsp;matches   What pattern do I need? Also do I need to specify any RegexOptions? If $p$ is a prime and $p \mid ab$, then $p \mid a$ or $p \mid b$. The proof is already given in the textbook but I tried other way around.   Proof by contradiction: Let's assume that $p$ doesn't divide $a$ and $p$ doesn't divide $b$, but $p$ divides $ab$. So $\gcd(p,a)=1$ and $\gcd(p,b)=1$. Given that we can construct linear combinations   $sp+ta=1$ together with $up+wb=1$. Multiplying the left and the right sides of the equations we get  $spup+spwb+taup+tawb=1$ or $p(sup+swb+tau)+ab(tw)=1 \implies \gcd(p,ab)=1$. This is a contradiction.   Is it rigorous and sound proof? $P(x) = 0$ is a polynomial equation having at least one integer root, where $P(x)$ is a polynomial of degree five and having integer coefficients.  If $P(2) = 3$ and $P(10)= 11$, then prove that the equation $P(x) = 0$ has exactly one integer root.  I tried by assuming a fifth degree polynomial but got stuck after that.  The question was asked by my friend. What is the historic present tense? I learned that the historical present may be used to create an effect of immediacy in narratives. I have a question about the historic present tense. Why don't we use the progressive tense instead of the simple present tense?   ※My English skill is poor, so my question might sound rude. But I don't mean to offend anyone. I'd be glad if someone could reply to my question. Assumed True until proven False. The Curious Case of the Vacuous Truth Given two statements, $P$ and $Q$, and the logical connective, $\implies$, the truth table for $P \implies Q$ is:  $$\begin{array}{ c | c || c | }   P &amp; Q &amp; P\Rightarrow Q \\ \hline   \text T &amp; \text T &amp; \text T \\   \text T &amp; \text F &amp; \text F \\   \text F &amp; \text T &amp; \text T \\   \text F &amp; \text F &amp; \text T  \end{array}$$  Lines one and two are quite clear. What is ambiguous is lines three and four.  One explanation as to why $P \implies Q$ is true when $P$ is false, provided by Velleman goes:     Let $P(x)$ be the statement $x&gt;2$ and $Q(x)$, $x^2 &gt; 4$. When $x=3$, $P$ is true, and $Q(x) = 9$ thus $Q$ is true. If $P(x) = 1$ then $Q(x) = 1$ and they are both false. If $P(x) = -3$ then $Q(x) = 9$ and so the statement is true.   This explanation was quite unsatisfactory to me. Looking at Enderton, we have:     For example, we might translate the English sentence, ”If you're telling the truth then I'm a monkey's uncle,” by the formula ($V \implies M$). We assign this formula the value $T$ whenever you are fibbing. In assigning the value $T$, we are certainly not assigning any causal connection between your veracity and any simian features of my nephews or nieces. The sentence in question is a conditional statement. It makes an assertion about my relatives provided a certain condition — that you are telling the truth — is met. Whenever that condition fails, the statement is vacuously true.      Very roughly, we can think of a conditional formula ($p\implies q$) as expressing a promise that if a certain condition is met (viz., that $p$ is true), then q is true. If the condition $p$ turns out not to be met, then the promise stands unbroken, regardless of $q$.   Though a significant improvement over the Velleman explanation, I still feel uncomfortable with it.  Really, it seems we can conjure up as many silly counter-examples as we like, such as:     If pigs can fly, then I can walk on water.   Though following the above truth table, the implication is that my ability to walk on water is true.  After considering it, it seems to me that $\implies$ is only meaningful when $P$ is true, then we can look at it in relation to $Q$. However, if $P$ is false, then we actually know nothing about the relationship between $P$ and $Q$. This would give a truth table of:  $$\begin{array}{ c | c || c | }   P &amp; Q &amp; P\Rightarrow Q \\ \hline   \text T &amp; \text T &amp; \text T \\   \text T &amp; \text F &amp; \text F \\   \text F &amp; \text T &amp; \text ? \\   \text F &amp; \text F &amp; \text ?  \end{array}$$  where the $?$ denotes that given $P$ we actually don't know anything about $ \implies $.  Thus. one way to clear this up would be to assume that $? = T$. Thus the vacuous truth is a "definition of convenience" in a sense.  The above is my take on the matter.  Could someone provide some clarification on the conditional logical connective? Rotate (group) objects outwards on spherical particle system?