What's the best way to review a code before it's committed to the trunk? (SVN)

Question: What's the best way to review a code before it's committed to the SVN trunk? One idea that I am thinking of is to having the developer to commit his code to a branch and then reviewing his code while merging the branch revisions into the trunk. Is this a good practice? If not, what else could be done to review a code before it's committed to the trunk?
Comment: any reason to not review a code **after** it's committed to the trunk?
Comment: @gnat Well, I think it's better to have junior developers commit their code somewhere else and then merge those changes into the trunk by a senior developer after s/he reviews them and makes sure those changes are fine to be in the trunk. You know, a senior developer, after reviewing the code committed directly into the trunk may decide that this code has problems as should be rolled back. We could have prevented this problematic code from being committed into the trunk in the first place. That's the whole idea.
Comment: You could look into some tools like [Crucible](http://www.atlassian.com/software/crucible/overview) that provide support for pre-commit reviews.
Comment: have you tried the other way or this is just guessing?
Answer: There are two schools of though - what you propose or "review before commit". Most of the The differences can be seen as negatives and/or positives. - eg No tracking of changes caused by a review - do you want to see these as discrete commits, or are you only interested in the final work?
Review before commit - no branching required (although it can done if desired), must give reviewers access to working folders. Code can be changed during and after review with no tracking. Corrections caused by the review do not appear in the repository.
Review After Commit (on a branch)  - Need to spin a branch for each review (although this may be in the workflow already). Code submitted for review cannot be changed without tracking of the changes. Someone has to merge the reviewed branches, and keep track of whats been reviewed and what hasn't.
It largely depends on the team culture and experience. Whats you trust model, what it the main purpose for reviews?  I personally prefer review after commit, as it allows changes as a result of review to be tracked. We now use Git and Gerrit as they provide a nice balance between the two options.
Comment: Constant branch creation and repeated merging is a detraction that far outweighs potentially (and irrevocably) polluting trunk. Generally the prime directive for version control is "don't break the build". If you can do that, there's no real harm in checking in, and everything else is just an adjustment after the fact.
Comment: Review after commit on a branch works well with using feature branches: you start a new branch for each new feature or bug fix. When it's completed and passed review, it gets merged to trunk. This way the trunk only contains complete, reviewed changes. Since feature branches are short lived, the merges are generally trivial. The other advantage is that the trunk only contains complete features and fixes - anything half baked will exist only on a branch.
Answer:
Before committing run 'svn diff' to generate a patch file.
Send patch file to reviewer who applies it to a clean copy of the trunk.
Reviewer goes over changes using difference viewer of choice.
Reviewer performs build and runs tests.
If all goes well tell developer they can check their changes. If
there are problems the developer goes back to step 1.
Answer: There's the ideal world, and then there's the real world.
In the ideal world, all your code is tested, so you can be sure that anything that gets checked in will either work or you'll know it's broken because it fails one or more tests. Plus, anyone not so experienced will be paired with someone who is experienced, so code reviewing is done on-the-fly (you commit as you go).
In the real world, things are different. Business wants that change live now and will tell you, with a perfectly straight face, that yes, you'll get time to clean up the code and add test cases later. You probably won't have time to code review everything and the percentage of code that is covered by tests continually decreases. The main reason for code review is for junior developers to learn from senior developers (when there's time for that) by having a more experienced person look over changes and suggest "better ways of doing things (TM)". You'll have senior developers just committing unreviewed code. Branching just for a code review and then merging is a huge waste of time. One way to overcome this problem is to declare a regular weekly 2-hour (or so) team meeting where you pick one or two recent changes people worked on at short notice and get their authors to "present" their approach by looking at the code together on a projector or something This can lead to some interesting discussions (typically goes off-topic quite a bit) but generally improves everyone's understanding of how to do it right. Plus the pressure of possibly having to present your code makes some people do it better ;-)
Or you might be lucky and get to work in a real-world environment where it's not so hectic, programmers are actually appreciated for what they do instead of abused, and there's time to do everything right. In which case my answer would be: try some of the different methods suggested in answers here and see which one fits your team and the way you work best.
Comment: +1 for the weekly review idea. I might have to try this one
Comment: @JamieTaylor: Well, it's a bit of a compromise - obviously, if you (and your dev team) have the time, I'd recommend full code reviews instead. But it's a good way of sharing knowledge within the team.
Answer: Branches should work OK, based on my experience of using them in pre-commits reviews at prior job.
Note back then, we were using pre-commit reviews only for critical patches to production release candidate code, so there weren't much branches (routine changes were passed through post-commit reviews).
Since you seem to be going to use pre-commit reviews for all the changes, you might need to manage large amount of branches. If you expect developer to make one "reviewable" change per week on average, you'll end up having about 50 branches every year for every developer in team. If you are using smaller chunks of work - like ones taking 1, 2, 3... days - multiply 50 by 2, 3, 5... accordingly.
Below are few other considerations to take into account if you want it best way.
1. handling cases when delayed review blocks code needed for other team members
Establish, monitor and resolve conflicts related to code review deadlines. Per my recollection of pre-commit reviews to routine changes I dealt with in one of the past projects, reasonable deadline is about 3 days and time to start worrying about is when review isn't completed more than 1 day after submission.
For comparison, at post-commit reviews these requirements are much more relaxed (I'm using 2 weeks deadline and start worrying after 1 week) - but since you target pre-commit reviews, this is probably not interesting.
2. merge conflicts when submitting reviewed code
What to do if commit for reviewed code is blocked by conflicting changes committed by someone else while code was waiting for review?
Couple of options to consider are

roll-back to beginning and require developers to re-implement and re-review the change
For that case you might need to address a negative impact on team morale this might (will!) have.
pass the responsibility of merge to other team member ("merge master")
For that case, you will also need to decide whether merges per se should go through pre-commit review or not - and if yes, then what to do in case if that merge in turn meets another conflict.
ignore changes done to reviewed code at the stage of merge
For that case you might need to address a negative impact on team morale related to the fact that code committed differs from one that was reviewed.
invent a way to avoid conflicts
Straightforward approach is to allow only one developer at time to modify particular set of files - although this won't protect you from the kind of changes that don't modify files directly, but impact them through internal API changes. You might also find out that this kind "pessimistic locking" makes system-wide changes and deep refactoring quite troublesome.

For comparison, there would be no issues of that kind in post-commit reviews (since these deal with code that is already merged by definition) - but since you target pre-commit reviews, this is probably not interesting.
3. load developer who is waiting for review
Establish an explicit policy for whether developer who submitted review should switch to new task or do something else (like eg chasing reviewer).
For comparison, post-commit reviews hardly need explicit policy (since it's natural to proceed to next task after you committed code and taking into account that review deadline is a week or two) - but since you target pre-commit reviews, this is probably not interesting.
Answer: Any piece of development that needs a review would have to be in a separate branch.  So, the branch should already exist before the time comes for review.  Then the step would need to be:

Review
Revise (possibly)
loop back to Review (possibly)
Merge into trunk

Merging is the difficult bit.  The longer the branch stays independent, the harder it is going to be to merge it back into the trunk.  (It might also be harder to test.)
Cross-merging is a possible solution.  Before merging into the trunk (step 4, or even earlier, say before step 3 or step 1), merge the trunk into the branch.  The developer can do it and test it.  Then the branch catches up with the trunk and it becomes easier to merge it into the trunk.  Merging into the trunk is best done by you, or whoever is in charge of the trunk.
Some people try rebase instead of cross-merge.  Some people argue that rebase is evil.  That is another debate.


How can I balance an enemy that my players might encounter at different levels?

Question: My story revolves around 8 angels that my players must defeat. The thing is I want them to look for them in no particular order. How can I balance an enemy easily in advance, since they may encounter them at any given level, depending on which one they find first?
Comment: JP Has this happened yet?  I'm interested to know what you chose & how it worked out.
Comment: I've noticed that constitution damage equally harms low and high level characters. I think this might help, but it's only vaguely related to be an answer.
Answer: You Can't
Strictly speaking, you can't balance them at all in advance, since the players could not only fight them in any order, but could conceivably fight any number of other things in any order, meaning they could be any level at all when they reach any given angel.
You should build a template for each angel with each of its powers in advance, and possibly mark off some powers as "high level" powers that the angel will only have in certain level ranges. Leave out all the numbers, such as to-hit and damage. Then, when the players reach that angel (you should at least have some forewarning about which angel they'll reach in a given session) fill in the numbers to fit the party's stats.
Comment: I'm sorry, with all the answers below I just don't see how this is right.  There are a lot of examples given that show multiple ways to do this.
Answer: Soulrift has a great answer, but you have some other options.
One option is: don't balance at all.
In some sense this gives the most sense of realism.  If they go after an angel they aren't ready for yet, they will likely be defeated, but if they are smart they will run before they take too many death's or permenant losses (a bit of Deus Ex Machina can help make sure they get away.)
If they go after one that is too powerful for them, they know they have to do something: increase their own power level, better prepare in a way that is tailored to that specific adversary, or bring along help (allies or NPC hirelings.)  That makes it feel real, makes it feel like their adversaries are powerful beings in an organic universe rather than a game piece tailored to challenge them just a bit.
On the other hand, if they go after one that is too easy, they will get an easy win, but done right that can also make them feel awesome.  "We not only beat up this powerful being, we did so without breaking a sweat.  Our enemies should now quake and lesser heroes stare in admiration"  As long as they think it was easy because they upgraded their characters, prepared for the fight, and used the right strategies rather than easy because you nerfed the adversary on purpose then this can be extremely satisfying.
It is even more satisfying if they get beaten, go off and fight other angels and gain a few levels, and then have an easy fight against the one that beat them before.
Then there is the other extreme: Adjust during the fight.
This of course is pure Deus Ex Machina and might even feel like "cheating".  But it involves the least work for you and lets you gauruntee that the fight will be challenging but winnable.
The players don't get to see the enemies character sheet.  If the fight starts to look too easy, you can tack on some powers and add HP.  You can't adjust things like damage or to-hit numbers because the players probably already have a sense of that, but you can adjust HP, spells, power, and (to a degree) equipment freely on the fly.
It would probably seem a bit cheesy, but you can even use the video game trope of having the angel suddenly shift to a more powerful "final form" if they get a complete win too early or its much too easy.  This is slightly less cheesy if you foreshadow the shapeshifting in some way before they encounter the adversary.
On the other hand, if the players are losing, you can cross off some of the powers you originally expected them to have and knock off a bunch of HP
Comment: +1 for realism and killing players who try to kill stuff out of their league ;)
Comment: I would be happy to upvote this as a complete answer if it also included a summary of Soulrift's advice (see https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3326/should-i-be-requesting-people-answer-the-question-independently).
Answer: Some great answers here, especially on ways to handle the mechanics and the work load. As several posters have mentioned, from a plot/in-world mechanics perspective you don't want to give the players the feeling that the universe is tailoring itself to them.
One thought: given that the angels are all related in some way, you could start with all of the angels at a lower level, then have the "essence" of a fallen angel transfer to the remaining ones. Surviving angels might have a boost to HP or strength, or be able to access the fallen angels spells/abilities. This would compound and concentrate as more and more were defeated, and if their powers vary, the combinations could make the later encounters quite formidable. Depending on the effects they witness and the clues you provide, clever players might even look for ways to interrupt those connections to weaken their foes...
Comment: That is an interesting and creative answer.  Of coruse, it depends on the enemy in question being of some sort of supernatural type this would work for and would need to be established ahead of time.
Comment: This will probably take some work but I like this.  My only question is, if they are all angels don't they already have basically the same powers?  So to make it even more impressive, I'd give them each a special ability that most other angels don't have.  Then when they fall the other angels get it too.  Drop the PCs a hint that this is happening and not all angels have the same powers; maybe to use the power of their fallen brother/sister they have to say their name (in celestial)?
Answer: I'd suggest pregenerating each angel at the first level the players might encounter it at, and then add some levels and unique traits over time. As the players level up, so do the angels.
This shouldn't take more than half an hour between sessions every time the PCs level up, and depending on how you set them up (whether they have classes ect.) it could take as little as 5 mins.
Answer: This is really a question of personal preference.  Generally speaking, I let my players know ahead of time that my world is a big place and it's enhabitants are there regardless of the players level.  That means if they decide to go spelunking at lvl 1 and end up in the middle of a Naga's/Hydra's lair/nest/whatever, well that was it's cave and the fact that they intruded on it's liar is something they'll have to deal with.
That said, I like your idea of giving the players a real choice and obviously don't want them to suffer because they arbitrarily went after Angel 7 instead of Angel 2.  The way I would handle this takes a lot more work, but I'm kind of a perfectionist so thats just the price I pay.  I would make all of the Angels at each of the levels they might encounter them.  Yes, I know 8 Angels * X Number of possible Enouter Levels is a lot of work.  But Thats just the main way I would handle it.
2 other good options include:
Cohorts..there's nothing wrong with the Angel's having Cohorts.  They can be rolled up well before the adventure and since they're not directly assigned to an Angel then you can have different cohorts for different ECLs.  While this takes a little more work its not as much as my first option and the Number & Strength of Cohorts an Angel has can be decided right before the encounter..The PCs don't know the difference..which leads me to my last option.
Unless your clues include specific details/names/etc there is no way the players know the difference between Angel 2 or Angel 5..just like they don't know the difference between taking the left path or right path at the fork in road.  So while it doesn't jive 100% with your intent, if time is an issue you could always just switch the names/numbers of the Angels they encounter.  TBH I like this option least, but in a pinch it might have to do if time was an issue.


Login defaults to the wrong domain in certain situations

Question: User authentication fails in certain situations because the domain is incorrect. If my domain is DOMAINA the user would have to enter DOMAINA\username to authenticate correctly. When we designed our farm, our intention was for users within the network to auto authenticate. For the most part, this works. However there are occasions where the defaulted domain is the box name. When users try to authenticate from home, the domain is often incorrect. I wish I had more specifics in terms of a common thread among occurrences. All users are using IE7+.
Is there a way to force the use of a domain when users authenticate from home?
Thanks!
Answer: One option you can explore is using Basic Authentication in IIS. This will allow you to specify the default domain for users logging in. The risk here is that credentials are sent as plain text, so you'll need to make sure you're using a valid SSL cert on the site. I don't know what this would do to the internal users, I think they should still be able to auto-auth as needed.
Comment: Thanks David! I will try this in my test environment.  appreciate the information.


What accounts for the smaller size of open source apps?

Question: I'm new to Ubuntu and i'm amazed that open source alternatives to my Windows apps like GIMP, Amarok, Libreoffice, Cheese etc are so much smaller than their Windows compatriots (MS Office, Photoshop, Youcam etc). Ubuntu has to be the best evolution ever! And the best after all these is that it's completely free
Answer: You mean smaller on disk? Probably thanks to the extensive use of dynamically linked libraries, that are shared between multiple applications. Of course Windows also supports that, but DLLs aren't easily versioned, and the risk of "DLL hell" doesn't encourage sharing.
Answer: There's a number of possible reasons which cannot be valid in general though. The bigger sized software might have more features. Or more cruft. Or both. Or the open source software is just so much more cleverly engineered than its counterpart. Some or all of these may be the reasons in any given case. Or not.
One general reason would be the benefits of centralized software distribution and dependency resolution. In most open source based operating system environments, when a software is installed which depends on other software packages (as is most often the case, e.g. an executable depends on libraries etc.), those dependencies are installed as well - if they haven't been already. So they are installed once, max.
Without centralized software distribution and dependency resolution (e.g. in Windows) such dependencies may often be packaged with the software that needs them. So dependency X may be packaged with software A as well as with B (and C and D and so on) -> same dependencies installed multiple times (or even statically linked into the executable) - just to be on the safe side.
So that might account for some of the differences in size. Surely not all though.


What are good references for Gluten free baking

Question: I have several members of my family who are GF. Baking for them has become a real challenge. I'm looking for good references to learn to understand how to work with this limitation in my baking.  What are good references (online or print) for good GF baked goods?
Comment: Just make the question community Wiki, since it's asking for a list with no right answer.
Comment: I see two people decided they didn't think this question fit well with the site. Can you suggest ways to improve the question to fit better? BTW, gluten-free cooking is a very, very important topic in a cooking site, so, we need to find good ways to encourage such questions here.
Answer: This is a very subjective question. For example: I find the recipes on Gluten-Free Goddess to use excessive Xanthan Gum (bouncy balls do not make good cupcakes). That being said I highly suggest you start with the basics and make your own flour to learn the balance of how different flours effect the texture and flavor of baked goods.
A few good books with recipes (and discussions) about gluten-free flour are:

Gluten-Free Quick and Easy
The Gluten-Free Gourmet Cooks Fast and Healthy

Although I don't have personal experience with The Gluten-Free Gourmet Makes Dessert or The Gluten-Free Gourmet Bakes Bread, I do trust Bette Hagman enough to suggest them as potentially good resources.
There are also a number of gluten-free flour mixes available which can be used as flour replacements in regular recipes to achieve gluten-free results:

Pamela's Baking mix
Arrowhead Mills Gluten-Free flour
King Arthur Gluten-Free Multipurpose Flour

Just a warning: Be careful! Many mixes say that they are 1-to-1 replacements, however they contain baking powder and sugar, so can cause things to go wonky. Additionally you need to understand that most gluten-free flours don't hold moisture as well as typical wheat flour, and you have to replace the elasticity provided by the missing gluten (for some recipes the prepared flour mixtures take care of this for you, however you may still need to tweak things).
While I can suggest that you use meringue to help give cookies structure without having them crumble when picking them up, or that you use apple sauce in cakes to keep them moist. A lot of this kind of information comes from simply understanding the science of cooking (and baking). Suggested reading includes:

On Food and Cooking
BakeWise

Honestly there are a lot of resources out there and google is a great way to find them. If, however, you have specific questions about what went wrong with a recipe this is probably a better forum for that question than this current one.
Comment: Thanks for, the science of cooking suggestions. Looking forward to reading!
Answer: This is an excellent site to learn about gluten free baking:
http://glutenfreegoddess.blogspot.com
I have personally tried many of the recipes and they have been excellent.
Answer: A handful of resources my wife (who is gluten-intolerant) suggested:

Gluten-Free Girl
Gluten Free Gobsmacked
Books by Bette Hagman

One concern my wife mentioned (especially for others who come across this question who may not be aware) about non-gluten-free people preparing food for gluten-free people is the awareness of cross-contamination. If your kitchen is not completely gluten-free, you have to be very careful to segregate anything that may have had exposure to any flour, bread, etc. This includes things like spreads, tubs of butter, and the like that people frequently use with bread.
The best bet is to buy all your ingredients fresh, and keep them in a separate tote or shelf so that they cannot ever get mixed up with potentially-contaminated items. The same goes for baking dishes, utensils, and other food preparation surfaces.
So, if you're making peanut-butter cookies, use a fresh jar of peanut butter. :-)
Answer: I believe it is important to consider that those who are cooking gluten free are often under a considerable amount of pressure to learn new cooking techniques in a short amount of time, as they are working with unfamiliar ingredients.
Finding reliable resources is often difficult.
A supportive and understanding environment is essential on this topic as the complexity of the diet is overwhelming to those who are just starting out.
http://www.livingwithout.com/
The above link is an excellent resource for anyone who is interested in cooking for those with Celiac Disease or Gluten sensitivities.
Often those on a GF diet have multiple food allergies and sensitivities, this resource takes that into consideration, providing a wealth of information and recipes.
The site and magazine offer simple and delicious GF baking recipes. The comprehensive approach on the subject of baking GF made it possible for me once again enjoy fresh baked goods in my own home.
Answer: Yes, this is an old question, but the book's new -- America's Test Kitchen's "How Can It Be Gluten Free".
In the book, they discuss the advantages/disadvantages of different pre-made gluten-free 'flour' mixes (as some worked well as flour replacements for some types of recipes, but not all ... so one good for bread might not be so great for brownies or cookies).  They discuss some of the issues with wheat flour replacements (off tastes, too dense, too crumbly, no browning, overly starchy, etc.) and things you can do to counteract them.  They have a lot of gluten free recipes, including one for making your own flour replacement.
They discuss using different hydration levels to reduce grittiness, adding powdered milk to improve browning, using potato flakes as a binder in recipes instead of bread crumbs. etc.
(I'd list more things, but I gave my copy to a co-worker who's gluten free).


Tikkun Olam source

Question: What is the source for the concept that Jews have to practice Tikkun Olam, and where in the classical Jewish sources is this concept defined? It seems people throw this term around a lot in the context of social justice causes. I don't remember seeing anywhere in the Torah or Gemara about this term having that meaning; am I wrong?
Comment: Related: http://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/10136 and its comments.
Answer: The more general sense of "tikkun olam," making the world at large a more G-dly place, comes (although I don't know if the actual phrase does) from the Arizal's description of the spiritual "World of Tohu" that "broke apart" and scattered sparks of G-dliness throughout the cosmos. Every time something in our world is used in serving Hashem, its sparks are "corrected" and uplifted, and the world is brought closer to being a "dwelling-place for Him."
The popular notion that "tikkun olam" means supporting various fashionable "progressive" causes derives from a broadening/distortion of this idea.
Comment: Is there any classical source for this in our regular sources that bring the Arizal. Was the Rebbe sending of SHLUCHIM and outcome of the concept of Tikkun Olam in a sense?
Comment: @simchashatorah, what kinds of sources are you looking for? You can hardly open a page in any book of Chassidus without coming across something about עבודת הבירורים. (A few choice ones are [here](http://www.chabad.org.il/Magazines/Article.asp?ArticleID=3562&CategoryID=923).) As for the shluchim - that is indeed part of this עבודה, but it's more general than that (see some of the examples at that link): every Jew is a shliach of Hashem to perform בירורים anywhere he or she goes.
Comment: Classical sources: try, for starters, Ohr Hachaim. He mentions this concept at, among others, Gen. 28:5, 47:27 and 29, and Deut. 21:11.
Answer: LeTaken Olam b'malchut sha-dai appears in the daily Aleinu, of course.
Tikkun Olam appears as a cause in the Mishna in a very focused sense, for instance Chapter 4 of tractate Gittin cites a number of "public policy enactments", because of Tikkun Olam; most notably, don't pay too much ransom for a kidnapped Jew, or else unfriendly non-Jews will get in the regular habit of kidnapping them. Another tikkun olam enactment mentioned there is Hillel's pruzbul.
Comment: Two points on the first source:  Firstly, the second half of the phrase is lost on those who use this language.  Also, many of the old siddurim have l'saken with a kaf.
Comment: True. M. First demonstrates that the original text of aleinu was לתכן olam, to establish the world under God's sovereignty, which fits the context much better. http://hakirah.org/Vol%2011%20First.pdf
Answer: Gittin 4:2 has a few cases:
בראשונה, היה עושה בית דין במקום אחר ומבטלו; התקין רבן גמליאל הזקן, שלא יהו עושין כן, מפני תיקון העולם.  בראשונה, היה משנה שמו ושמה, שם עירו ושם עירה; התקין רבן גמליאל הזקן, שיהא כותב איש פלוני וכל שם שיש לו, אישה פלונית וכל שם שיש לה, מפני תיקון העולם
Answer: I first read about Tikkun Olam from commentators on works of the Arizal and Zohar, Moshe Chaim Luzatto, Rabbi Avraham Kook. Rebbe Nachman taught and talked about repairing the world. From my understanding of this reading, tikkun olam seems to be the mystical component of mitzvot.
Doing the 613 mitzvot is engaging in Tikkun Olam, and is making the world a better place. Tikkun according to some of the deeper explanations, is why we human beings were created in the first place (our purpose). In order to direct and focus that repair, we received and aggreed to the holy covenant, essentially the manual on how to make the world a better place.
The "sod" very deep  explanations of mitzvot are not in opposition to literal, emotional, ethical and deep spiritual explanations. One of the more beautiful aspects of Jewish thinking (as opposed to dualistic western worldviews) is that all 5 perspectives are correct.  There has been a 'blackout' on sod, kabbalistic explanations (for good and interesting reasons), so not everyone hears this even if they have yeshiva level educations.
Tikkun Olam is the reason in theoretical Kabbalah why anyone would even bother with pursuing enlightenment or understanding or wisdom. It puts the spiritual to good use in a very practical way. It is a perspective for why one does mitzvot, not a 'you must do thus and such'. That level of understanding is what someone earlier referred to as secular greenies and activists.  Agree with the comment that secular peace and justice people may not understand why they are changing the world's diapers, some may, but it doesn't really matter because is still better than not doing anything at all. Poopashuey, we have to drive on the same roads as everyone else, and it affects us all. In this Jewish philosophical system of Lurianic Kabbala, even the secular actions have sacred as well as practical consequences.
EDIT: Specific verses from the sages: Derech HaShem by one of our sages, the RaMChaL, try page 83 http://books.google.com/books?id=Zx4PTan5OO0C&pg=PA61&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=4#v=onepage&q=1%3A5%3A7&f=false
You will see this translated as either "repair" or "rectification".
Rebbe Nachman ~200 years after RamChal spoke of repairing souls. His books aren't online or I'd give you a quote. Here is a dvar Torah with these concepts: http://www.breslov.org/dvar/zmanim/elul1_5762.html
Rectification was addressed by subsequent Chazal where it developed into mussar literature. One would apply repair to their souls first, to develop a clean heart and closeness to G-d, as David HaMelech, Asaph, and the Navim taught. The inner change affects an outer change, otherwise one may sustain spiritual injury. (Unless they're just doing it like a car wash or buying clothes for disaster victims,etc.) This repair of the inner world, accomplished by meditation and prayer and thought, prepares one for living on a higher plane of existence closer to G-d. Tikkun Olam is part of G-d's greater plan of rectification of this entire universe, according to the Sages.
Comment: "~200 years after Ramchal"? Not really; Ramchal passed away in 1746, R. Nachman in 1810. So they're only about two generations apart.
Comment: 1600-1800 is about 200 years. I used the number of the Breslov source.
Answer: When Adam sinned, he "broke" the world. Now that the world as been broken, we must fix it and no longer break it any more.
(מסילת ישרים - Mesillat Yesharim http://www.shechem.org/torah/mesyesh/h1.htm)
והנה על העיקר הזה העירונו זכרונם לברכה במדרש קהלת (רבה, ז) שאמרו, זה לשונם: ראה את מעשה האלהים וגו' (קהלת ז), בשעה שברא הקדוש ברוך הוא את אדם הראשון, נטלו והחזירו על כל אילני גן עדן ואמר לו, ראה מעשי כמה נאים ומשובחים הן, וכל מה שבראתי בשבילך בראתי, תן דעתך שלא תקלקל ותחריב את עולמי. כללו של דבר, האדם לא נברא בעבור מצבו בעולם הזה אלא בעבור מצבו בעולם הבא, אלא שמצבו בעולם הזה הוא אמצעי למצבו בעולם הבא שהוא תכליתו
(Translation - Path of the Just: http://www.shechem.org/torah/mesyesh/1.htm)
When the Holy One Blessed be He created Adam, He took him and caused him to pass before all the trees of the Garden of Eden. He said to him, `See how beautiful and praiseworthy are my works; and all that I have created, I have created for your sake. Take heed that you do not damage and destroy my world.'
Answer: Rabbi Jill Jacobs has a lot to say about the history of this term.  She tends to be upset about the misuse of the term and wrote a book about it.
She talks about the five uses of the term tikun olam:

Aleynu - Eliminate evil and actually establishing a new world order.
Bereshit Rabbah - physically fix Creation
Rabbinic law like Gittin, Pesachim, and Shvi'it - changing untenable laws to fix a broken system
Arizal's writings and other mystical texts - repairing the broken klipot.
1950s America - Social justice work

She comes to the conclusion that no one knows why the term was brought back into parlance each time or how it changed its meaning so many times (note that none of the concepts are much related).
She ends on her own interpretation of its modern origins:

These four strands, though complementary in some ways, also remain in tension with one another in some other important ways.
...
By combining the major themes of these four strands, we come to a definition of tikkun olam as the process of fixing large societal problems, while maintaining a belief that our actions can have a positive effect on the greater human and divine world.

Tikkun Olam source


Proof a bipartite graph problem

Question: Prove that:
a simple graph is a bipartite graph if and only if lenght of all circuits in graph be even.
(give me answer or hint or idea)
Answer: It is easy to see that if $G$ contains an odd cycle then it is not bipartite since you cannot color and odd cycle with only 2 colors.
So suppose $G$ is a bipartite graph. Consider a BFS tree $T$ of $G$ rooted at some vertex $v \in V(G).$ Color the vertices of $T$ with blue color if they are at odd distance from $v$ in $T$ and with red color otherwise.
Now we claim that this is a proper coloring of $G.$ For if it is not then two blue (or red) vertices are adjacent in $G$ which creates an odd cycle in $G$ since vertices of the same color have equal parity and the additional edge joining two of them makes an odd cycle in $G.$
Edit. If you do not wish to say this is a proper coloring you can rephrase the following part as follows. Let $A$ be the set of all vertices at even distance from $v$ and let $B = V(G)\setminus A.$ We claim that this is a bipartition for $G$. For if it is not then two vertices in $A$ or $B$ are adjacent but this implies there exist an odd cycle since vertices from $A$ (or $B)$ are at distance of equal parity and the additional edge creates a cycle of odd parity.
Comment: can you prove it without coloring and trees?(thank for help)
Comment: You can simply say that vertices at odd distance from $v$ form one bipartition of $G$ and vertices at even distance the other bipartition. Then you use the same argument with the even cycle.
Answer: One direction is very easy. Here's an extended hint for the other direction.
Let $G$ be a graph with no odd cycles. We may as well assume that $G$ is connected; otherwise we just work with the components of $G$ individually. Let $V$ be the vertex set of $G$, and for each $v\in V$ let $N(v)$ be the set of vertices adjacent to $v$.
Pick any vertex $v_0$, and let $V_0=\{v_0\}$. Given $V_n$ for some $n\in\Bbb N$, let $$V_{n+1}=\left(\bigcup_{v\in V_n}N(v)\right)\setminus\bigcup_{k\le n}V_k\;;$$ $V_{k+1}$ is the set of vertices adjacent to $V_n$ that haven't already been put into one of the sets $V_k$.
Now let $V_{\text{odd}}$ be the union of the sets $V_{2k+1}$ and $V_{\text{even}}$ be the union of the sets $V_{2k}$, and show that $V_{\text{odd}}$ and $V_{\text{even}}$ form a bipartition of $V$. To do this, you'll need to show that an edge within one of these two sets would create an odd cycle in $G$.

Proof a bipartite graph problem


"Due diligence" in PCI requirement 12.8.3

Question: Item 12.8.3 from the PCI DSS requires the following:

12.8.3 Ensure there is an established process for engaging service providers including proper due diligence prior to engagement.

What is considered "proper due diligence" in this case?
Answer: 12.8.3 is very ambiguously written, but what it boils down to is that you need to vet your potential service provider. You need to have procedural documentation showing the processes behind vetting a service provider. That part is pretty simple.
As far as what you should do to vet your potential service provider, that's a tough call. (and it's up to you to figure the majority of it out) Risk analysis will have to be done. Look into the reputation of the company and their past history. Ask tough questions related to what you are potentially working with the provider.
Answer: You would really have to ask a lawyer this question.  I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is that the concept is that you should do your best and reasonable effort to ensure that any service providers that will work with the PCI covered information will also be compliant and protect the information to the necessary standards.
Answer: We have just gone through this process. In our case the company requesting we complete these forms was the one providing the service. We asked them what this meant. They said simply that we needed to verbally ask them if they were compliant or check on their web site...anyway, they are listed here... http://www.visaeurope.com/en/businesses__retailers/payment_security/service_providers.aspx


Why use a 1-2 Oblivious Transfer instead of a 1 out of n Oblivious Transfer?

Question: When initiating an oblivious transfer, why would someone use a 1-2 oblivious transfer rather than going for an 1 out of n oblivious transfer? Perhaps a slight time overhead for the extra message encrypts, but with everything as fast as it is these days is that a concern?
Comment: I'm not entirely sure, but I believe you wouldn't. 1-2 was the original idea, and is easy to explain/prove things about -- I believe 1-n or even k-n would be more likely to be used in practice. As with most things in mathematics, you look at the basic case and then generalize out.
Answer: Oblivious transfer is mostly studied as a theoretic construction, as it is an important component in achieving interesting protocols (like secure two-party computation and secure function evaluation).
The interest in 1-2 OT is that it is a minimal definition theoretically, and most results that limit themselves to 1-2 are designed to improve some basic properties (number of rounds) or advanced security properties (full simulatability, plain model, UC-secure, etc), as opposed to being designed for real-life implementations. Although some proposals claim to be "efficient", that typically means they are efficient for the level of security they realize, and this level is usually much higher than something you would need for implementation.
A second reason for the interest in 1-2 OT is that OT is often used to securely evaluate boolean circuits. In this particular application, the circuit in constructed from binary gates have only two outputs: so 1-2 OT suffices. However if gates were replaced with more complicated truth tables or if transfers were batched together, 1-N OT might be of interest.
OT is a primitive that rarely finds its way into an implemented/deployed tool. The only application I know of is two-party computation tools based on Yao's garbled circuits, for which some implementations exist. One example is FairPlay and it its original paper, there is some interesting discussion on the overall efficiency of switching between different types of OT. It does however leave implementing 1-N OT for future work.
A MPC tool was also used to run a Danish beets auction however it did not employ OT. Many two-party or multi-party computations try to avoid using the general construction based on OT since it is very inefficient, the OTs themselves are usually the most expensive part, and typically the jump from two-party to multi-party computation means using a different blueprint based on secret sharing instead of OT.
Answer: the securty of 1-n OT is a function of the security of a 1-2 OT. So in analysis it is easy to use 1-2 OT for security proofs.
A 1-n OT is essentially a multiple run of a 1-2 OT. (somewhat like a byte is made of 8 bits)
So IMO the question is like asking why use bits when you can use bytes for communication. [it depends on the application]


Noncompact sequentially compact space

Question: Have you an example of a noncompact sequentially compact space, without using ordinal?
Comment: Try searching [this web site](http://austinmohr.com/home/?page_id=146).
Comment: @DavidMitra: All the spaces it returns are fundamentally based on the uncountable ordinal $\omega_1$.
Answer: $\newcommand{\supp}{\operatorname{supp}}$Let $A$ be any uncountable index set, for each $\alpha\in A$ let $D_\alpha=\{0,1\}$ with the discrete topology, and let $$X=\left\{x\in\prod_{\alpha\in A}D_\alpha:|\supp(x)|\le\omega\right\}\;,$$ where $\supp(x)=\{\alpha\in A:x(\alpha)=1\}$, the support of $x$. (This is the $\Sigma$-product of the $D_\alpha$'s.)
For $\alpha\in A$ let $B_\alpha=\{x\in X:\alpha\notin\supp(x)\}$; clearly $B_\alpha$ is open in $X$. Since $A$ is uncountable, but each $x\in X$ has countable support, $\{B_\alpha:\alpha\in A\}$ is an open cover of $X$, but it obviously has no countable subcover. Thus, $X$ is not Lindelöf.
Now let $\langle x_n:n\in\omega\rangle$ be any sequence in $X$. Let $S=\bigcup_{n\in\omega}\supp(x_n)$; $S$ is countable, so $K\triangleq\prod_{\alpha\in S}D_\alpha$ is a Cantor set (or a finite discrete space). Let $\pi:X\to K$ be the obvious projection map. The sequence $\langle \pi(x_n):n\in\omega\rangle$ in the compact metrizable space $K$ has a subsequence $\langle \pi(x_{n(k)}):k\in\omega\rangle$ converging to some $p\in K$. Let $x$ be the unique point of $X$ that agrees with $p$ on $S$ and is $0$ on $A\setminus S$; clearly $\langle x_{n(k)}:k\in\omega\rangle$ converges to $x$ in $X$. Thus, $X$ is sequentially compact.
Answer: Here is an idea which I have not completed: Take a non locally compact space, $X$, e.g. the rationals $\mathbb Q$, and take its one-point sequential compactification described in
R. Brown, Sequentially proper maps and a sequential
compactification, J.  London Math Soc. (2) 7 (1973)
515-522.
and written here as $X^+$, which is $X$ with an extra point $\omega$. For the topology on $X^+$, let $S(X)$ be the set of sequences in $X$ with no convergent subsequence. The intuitive idea is that if $s \in S(X)$ is a sequence in $X$ with no convergent subsequence, then $s$ should converge to the extra point $\omega$ of $X^+$.
For the topology on $X^+$: if $U$ is open in $X$ then $U$ is also open in $X^+$,  and $U^+$, the union of $U$ with $\omega$, is open in $X^+$ if and only if every element $S(X)$ is eventually in $U$. (Try this out with $X$ the space of positive integers.)
I am not so clear, though, if this gives a non-compact space when applied to $\mathbb Q$. Any comments?
Comment: What makes you think it wouldn't be first countable?
Comment: So? Actually, I have not studied the relation between this sequential compactification and the Alexandoff compactification.
Comment: Well, second countable sequentially compact spaces are compact. So it seems like a good first check would be to see whether or not the new point $\omega$ has a countable neighborhood basis.
Comment: So it was probably not a good idea to start with a countable space such as $\mathbb Q$!
Comment: Example 3.3 of the paper points out that $\Bbb Q^+$, being sequentially compact and countable, must be compact.

Noncompact sequentially compact space


Delete swap partition

Question: I made a swap partition to install Ubuntu on my MacBook Air 2011, but now I want to clean all the partitions up. However, I can't delete the "swap partition" in Disk Utility. Can anyone help me?
Answer: You should be able to use a tool, such as a GParted Live CD, to delete the swap file partition and resize the OS X partition afterwards.
Per this Apple discussion forum that covered this topic:

I believe that you can do it with a Live GParted CD.
http://gparted.sourceforge.net/livecd.php
Boot with the Live CD in the drive and delete the swap partition. You
  may even be able to resize the OS X partition with GParted afterwards.

Alternately, back up all of your data and applications and wipe/repartition the main drive and install OS X from scratch. Takes a bit longer, but will give you a fresh OS X installation.
Answer: To delete swap partition go to disk utility. Select that partition, and choose erase from top right. From the the format options choose Mac OS Extended (Journaled) and press erase. This will erase everything on that partition. Now go to Apple SSD (or whatever is the hard drive where this partition is), choose partition. In the partition menu on the left hand side there will be all the partitions, choose the swap partition and press the "-" (minus) sign at the bottom. This will delete that partition. Then you can just pull and drag the mac partition to resize it. Hope it helps.

Delete swap partition


How can I fix a small puncture hole in vinyl flooring?

Question: When I was installing mini blinds in my new house, a pair of needle nose pliers fell out of my tool belt and landed nose first into the vinyl floor below.  It left a very small pin sized hole in the floor, you would only notice it if you were looking for it.
Normally I would ignore something like this but my wife is rather upset about it and wants me to fix it if possible.
If there were some kind of plasticized shiny brown goo that I could just dab there then it would completely disappear, but I am unaware of such a material that would be appropriate (the floor is multiple shades of brown).
I don't think replacing a whole square section of vinyl is an appropriate fix for such a small area of damage either and the patch will probably be more noticeable than the hole.  Do you guys have any ideas on how I can McGuyver this floor repair?
Answer: A dab of caulking might do it. Look for your color at your local hardware store.


Is it easy to brew a high gravity beer with the braumeister?

Question: I'm only reading from other brewers who are brewing with the Speidel Braumeisterthat they it is very difficult, maybe even impossible, to brew beers with high alcohol levels. Is that true?
Answer: I have some friends that have the 50 liter version (about 15 gallons) and I know they've brewed a couple of RIS and other strong beers, so it's definitely not impossible, however I don't think it's as easy as some other setups.
They had to perform two separate mashes due to the large amount of grain. Each mash had 10.5 kg (about 23lb) of grain in order to hit 1.094 OG. Efficiency was around 70%.
Answer: It depends on what you're looking to do.
I've seen the 20L system handle ~1.070-ish beers without trouble. That's a reasonably big beer, though many people ignore the included instructions and start doing things like sparging to get there.
If you want to go much above that, however, I get the impression that you'll need to shrink your batch size or use an extract of some sort to supplement after the mash.


Mirror of local Calabi-Yau

Question: What is the mirror manifold of the total space of the bundle $O(-1)\oplus O(-1)$ over $P^1$? I have tried to find the answer on the web but failed. Is there a good reference for this? Thanks.
Comment: Try googling "resolved conifold" and "deformed conifold".
Answer: The physicists (see e.g.  this paper of Aganagic and Vafa) will write the mirror as a threefold $X$ which is an affine conic bundle over the holomorphic symplectic surface $\mathbb{C}^{\times}\times \mathbb{C}^{\times}$ with discriminant a Seiberg-Witten curve $\Sigma \subset \mathbb{C}^{\times}\times \mathbb{C}^{\times}$. In terms of the affine coordinates  $(u,v)$ on $\mathbb{C}^{\times}\times \mathbb{C}^{\times}$, the curve $\Sigma$ is given by the equation
$$
\Sigma : \ u + v + a uv^{-1} + 1 = 0,
$$
and so $X$ is the hypersurface in $\mathbb{C}^{\times}\times \mathbb{C}^{\times} \times \mathbb{C}^2$ given by the equation
$$
X : \ xy = u + v + a uv^{-1} + 1.
$$
From geometric point of view it may be more natural to think of the mirror not as an affine conic fibration over a surface but as an affine fibration by two dimensional quadrics over a curve. The idea will be to start with the Landau-Ginzburg mirror of $\mathbb{P}^{1}$, which is $\mathbb{C}^{\times}$ equipped with the superpotential $w = s + as^{-1}$ and to consider a bundle of affine two dimensional quadrics on $\mathbb{C}^{\times}$ which degenerates along a smooth fiber of the superpotential, e.g. the fiber $w^{-1}(0)$. In this setting the mirror will be a hypersurface in $\mathbb{C}^{\times}\times \mathbb{C}^{3}$ given by the equation
$$
xy - z^2 = s + as^{-1}.
$$
Up to change of variables this is equivalent to the previous picture but it also makes sense in non-toric situations. Presumably one can obtain this way the mirror of a Calabi-Yau which is the total space of a rank two (semistable) vector bundle of canonical determinant on a curve of higher genus.
Answer: I think this is a stubborn case which does not fit into the
general picture.  For example, if you use the standard toric
procedure to try to construct a differential equation for
the log periods of the mirror, then try to find the GW
invariants from the solutions (in this case, to recover the famous 1/d^3
formula), then it won't quite work.  There are various
adjustments you can make, based on knowing the answer ahead of time, and I once saw a paper (sorry,
I forget where or by whom) which tried to make sense
of all this, but I don't think there is a good general
picture of this case.  I would check Klemm's written
record for some guidance.
Answer: Try Patrick Clarke's paper Duality for Toric Landau-Ginzburg Models, which contains a general procedure for determining mirrors of (not necessarily compact) toric varieties (with superpotential, or without (i.e. with superpotential = 0)).
Answer: In some sense the answer is $T^*S^3$.
Look at http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0211098v1

Mirror of local Calabi-Yau


When was the first occurrence of Jesus being used as a name?

Question: I would suspect that Jesus himself was the first to have the name "Jesus", but was there anyone before him with the same name? In other words, was the name completely unique when the Angel Gabriel told Mary to name her son "Jesus" or had the name been bestowed to someone else before? Today, the name is not rare (especially in some cultures), but was it so back then also?
Comment: How is this a question about Christianity?
Comment: @Flimzy Well, where else would it go?
Answer: Well, to be accurate, are you asking about the Greek name Ἰησοῦς (English transliteration: Iēsous), or the actual Anglicized (English) name, "Jesus"? Or, are you referring to his likely Hebrew/ Aramaic name, יֵשׁוּעַ (English transliteration: Yeshu'a)?
I suspect you're probably talking about his Hebrew/ Aramaic name since that was what he would have been named --- and that is the name that actually has relevance to the phrase, "...he shall save his people from their sins."
So, who was the first to be called יֵשׁוּעַ? Well, I can tell you who was the first to be named יֵשׁוּעַ in the Tanakh, but you must understand that the Tanakh does not record the name of every Israelite who has ever been born. So, there may have been people named יֵשׁוּעַ even before the first one to possess that name as recorded in the Tanakh. In any case, the first one to be named יֵשׁוּעַ in the Tanakh (if I am not mistaken) is recorded in Ezra 2:2:

who came with Zerubbabel, Jeshua, Nehemiah, Seraiah, Reelaiah, Mordecai, Bilshan, Mispar, Bigvai, Rehum, Baanah. The number of the men of the people of Israel: (JPS Translation)

There was an early Hebrew variant of the name יֵשׁוּעַ, it being יְהוֹשׁוּעַ (English transliteration: Yehoshu'a). This was the name of the one we known in English as "Joshua son of Nun." Both the names יֵשׁוּעַ and יְהוֹשׁוּעַ were transliterated into the Greek Septuagint by the proper name Ἰησοῦς.
Compare Nehemiah 8:17:

יֵשׁוּעַ בִּן־נוּן
Ἰησοῦ υἱοῦ Ναυη

with 1 Kings 16:34:

יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן-נוּן
Ιησου υἱοῦ Ναυη

For this reason, the KJV translators mistook "Jesus" for "Joshua" in Acts 7:45:

Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drave out before the face of our fathers, unto the days of David;

The passage is not referring to the Lord Jesus, but rather, Joshua son of Nun (Yehoshu'a bin Nun), the successor of Moshe, who brought the Israelites into the promised land.
As an aside, the Hebrew/ Aramaic names יֵשׁוּעַ and יְהוֹשׁוּעַ are actually quite common in the Jewish culture. For example, you can see many people by those names in the Talmud.
Answer: When was Jesus name first used?
HEBREW BIBLE
285-246 B.C. Septuagint was the GREEK Old Testament official translation of the Old Testament.  The 2nd century B.C. the Old Testament was translated into Greek. This translation is known as the Septuagint.
325 A.D. Constantine held the Council of Nicaea.
360 A.D. Codex Sinaiticus Greek New Testament was written after the Council of Nicaea.  This was only used to produce the Latin Vulgate Bible.  On 1859, the Codex Sinaiticus was discovered in Egypt, in the Monastery of Saint Catherine, by the Leipzig archaeologist Constantin von Tischendorf. The Codex Sinaiticus is an ancient handwritten copy of the Greek Bible, and alongside the Codex Vaticanus, it is the finest Greek text of the New Testament. Also including much of the Old Testament, it is an inestimably important document in the history of Christianity. The Codex was written sometime in the 4th century (between 325 A.D. and 360 A.D.), and is an Alexandrian text-type manuscript.
382 A.D. [Latin Vulgate Bible translated by St. Jerome] the translation was largely the work of St. Jerome, who was commissioned by Pope Damasus I. St. Jerome translated Greek into Latin.  This means the original 285-246 B.C. Septuagint was translated into Latin in 382 A.D.
After 382 A.D. the following bibles were translated from the 382 A.D. Latin Vulgate Bible rather than the original Greek and Hebrew. Latin word Iesus was used.  The correct word should be Iesous which is Greek. The correct word should be Joshua which is English.
1395 A.D. Wycliffe Greek Bible, 1514 A.D. Erasmus-Greek New Testament, 1525 A.D. Tyndale's New Testament, 1534 A.D. Tyndale Bible, 1540 A.D. The Great Bible also called Cranmer, 1568 A.D. The Bishops' Bible, 1587 A.D. The Geneva Bible, and 1611 A.D. King James Version translated from 80% of 1525 A.D. Tyndale's Bible which was translated from the 382 A.D. Latin Vulgate Bible. James II of England (1633-1701) was indeed the last Catholic monarch of England.  James was driven from the throne by Protestants.  England passed a law stating that no Catholic can hold office again.
1638 A.D. King James English used both Latin and English to create the English bible version.  This was a translation from the 1611 Kings James which was a translation from the Latin Vulgate Bible. Latin word Iesus was used.  The correct word should be Iesous which is Greek. The correct word should be Joshua which is English. The 1638 A.D. King James English texts all literally have the name JESUS in these two places, though the contexts refer to the man Joshua. In Hebrews 4:8 we read: "For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day." Likewise in Acts 7:45 we have: "Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drove out before the face of our fathers, unto the days of David."
In 1604, Robert Cawdrey published the first English dictionary, the letter "J" was added to create the modern English alphabet we know today.   The 1611 King James Bible written in English did not use the letter "J" instead used Latin words.  If Jesus name was used before 1611 why was the name Jesus not used in the 1611 King James Bible? This would only mean that the English did not accept the "J" until after 1611 and before 1638 A.D. or the name Jesus was not used until after 1611 A.D.
One possible answer to how "J" was used to create the name Jesus is someone took the Latin word Iesus and added "J" to create the name Jesus.  The problem is the use of the Latin word and not the Greek word.  The second problem this had to take place after 1604 A.D. The third problem is that the 1611 A.D.  King James Bible used the Latin word Iesus not Jesus.
However the 1638 A.D. King James Bible used Jesus' name.  We know the Latin did not use the letter "J" until the 18th Century or 100 years after 1638 A.D. King James Bible used Jesus' name.  King James I of England authorized the Protestant translation of the King James Version and chose to continue the anti-Catholic policies.
As you can see the only original Greek text was used to produce the Latin Vulgate Bible and after that all  Bibles were translated from the Latin Vulgate Bible using both English and Latin words. As you can clearly see the Name Jesus cannot be used in the English Bibles except when adding the English letter "J" to the Latin word Iesus.
The 1638 King James Bible translated the Latin word Iesus into the English word Jesus.  The problem translating the Latin word Iesus into English as Jesus before 1701 A.D. is that there was no "J" in the Latin alphabet.  After 1701 A.D. the Latin word Iesus became the English word Jesus. The only "J" was used by the English and this would mean that Jesus name was made up by the English about 100 years earlier.
Asking bibleinfo.com for comments, they replied by saying.  "I have no problem with those who want to try to pronounce the Hebrew and Greek equivalent of the names commonly translated Jesus. The name commonly transliterated Jesus in the Greek is Iasous.  I have no problem with those who want to try to pronounce the Greek equivalent of the names commonly translated Jesus. The problem comes with contentions, accusations, and strife that results from those who insist on making an issue out of pronunciation rather than meaning". The problem is that the word iasous was never used in the old or new testament.
"The problem comes with contentions, accusations, and strife that results from those who insist on making an issue out of pronunciation rather than meaning".
One way was by translation, which tries to capture the meaning of a word, but in the process, loses the sound.
The other way was by transliteration, which tries to capture the sound of the Hebrew word, but in the process, loses the meaning. Translating the Latin word Iesus by using "J" to make the English word Jesus loses the meaning.
A Latin person with the name Iesus meets an English person and he calls Iesus Jesus.  A Greek person with the name Iesous meets an English person and he calls Iesous Joshua. Pronunciation and meaning does not change the name or meaning.  However, a Latin person with the name Iesus meets an English person and he calls Iesus Joshua.  A Greek person with the name Iesous meets an English person and he calls Iesous Jesus. Pronunciation and meaning does change name and meaning. The Latin word Iesus was used only after 282 A.D. when the Greek word Iesous should have been used.
If being right means I am contentious then I am contentious.  If making an accusation that is true then I have made a true accusation.  If I am being strife and insist on making an issue on the correct name, the issue is true and has merit.  I am only making an issue with the name and this does not change anything other than the name and the meaning in the bible.
All scripture are by inspiration of God. [2 Timothy 3:16 KJB] If all scriptures are inspired by God, then why was the Latin word Iesus being used and not the Greek word Iesous.  For nothing is secret, neither anything hid, that shall not be known. [Luke 8:17 KJB]  The secret no longer is hidden and this was inspired by God.
Comment: This is a bit hard to follow. Also the first third doesn't seem relevant to the rest of the answer. I see the one source to bibleinfo.com, but that is not particularly helpful. Do you have a source that supports all the info you're saying? For example, you name a lot of dates, but no source. +1 for now.
Comment: fredsbend the grinch basically all bibles were translated from the Latin Vulgate Bible and the use of the Latin word Iesus was used and not the Greek work Iesous.feel free to contact me at firstname.lastname@example.com


Is it possible to upgrade a Mac Mini to OS X Lion?

Question: I read that the upgrade to OS X Lion is not intended for Mac Minis, is this true?
Is there a way to upgrade a Mac Mini with an Intel CPU to OS X Lion?
Answer: Yes, you can update a Mac Mini to Mac OS Lion.
What you heard was incorrect, Mac Mini's are upgradable, just like any other Mac. Lion requires a Core 2 duo processor and 2 GB memory to run, so any Mac produced after circa 2007 will be fine.
Comment: I edited your question, since the OP's question title is the opposite of his question, I think it's better to make you answer the title, which is what people will most likely read.
Answer: This depends on the exact CPU in your Mac mini. As stated on http://www.apple.com/macosx/how-to-buy/ "[y]our Mac must have an Intel Core 2 Duo, Core i3, Core i5, Core i7, or Xeon processor to run Lion".
Since the 2006 Mac mini Models, however, shipped with a Intel Core processor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_mini_with_Intel_Core#Specifications_2), it is not possible to install Lion on these machines.
An easy way to find out whether this applies is to select "About this Mac" in the Apple menu. There, you can see whether you have a supported processor.


Einstein's special relativity beyond the speed of light

Question: Could someone with access to this paper, which claims to have new transformations between frames with relative motion faster than light which are supposedly consistent with special-relativity, say what the new transformations are and why they might make sense?
Comment: Permalink: http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2012.0340
Answer: First, the existing theory: we know that special relativity is based on the Lorentz transformations, which for uniform relative motion in the $x$ direction take the form
$$\begin{align}
x' &= \frac{x + vt}{\sqrt{1 - v^2/c^2}} &
t' &= \frac{t + vx/c^2}{\sqrt{1 - v^2/c^2}}
\end{align}$$
Now, suppose you arbitrarily choose one particular reference frame $\mathcal{R}$ to be a rest frame. The Lorentz transformation allows you to connect $\mathcal{R}$ to any other frame moving with respect to $\mathcal{R}$ with a relative velocity $v < c$, and because all such transformations form a group, all these frames can be similarly connected to each other. The transformations also connect all reference frames which move with respect to $\mathcal{R}$ with a relative velocity $v > c$ to each other, but those frames are not connected to $\mathcal{R}$ by the Lorentz transformation. The paper by Hill and Cox investigates the possibility of an extension to the set of Lorentz transformations that can be used to go between (in some sense) these two connected components of the set of all possible frames.
The motivating idea is that the velocity transformation law,
$$u' = \frac{u + v}{1 + uv/c^2}$$
is not singular at $v = c$. This means (they argue) that you can meaningfully calculate the velocity of an object in two reference frames which are in relative motion faster than light.

As the graph shows, a velocity calculated this way will always be faster than light itself, i.e. $v > c \implies u' > c$. This prevents objects from crossing the light speed "barrier," just as special relativity does.
The velocity transformation law extended to $v\to\infty$ gives $u'u = c^2$ (actually they use this argument backwards, starting from $u'u = c^2$ at $v\to\infty$). This implies that the "extended Lorentz" transformation they are looking for should reduce to $x' = \pm ct, t' = \pm x/c$ in the limit of infinite relative velocity. Working from these conditions and from the equations
$$\begin{align}
\frac{\mathrm{d}x}{\mathrm{d}v} &= \frac{-t}{1 - v^2/c^2} &
\frac{\mathrm{d}t}{\mathrm{d}v} &= \frac{-x/c^2}{1 - v^2/c^2}
\end{align}$$
(though I don't understand where they get those from), they come up with the new transformations
$$\begin{align}
x' &= \pm\frac{x + vt}{\sqrt{v^2/c^2 - 1}} &
t' &= \pm\frac{t + vx/c^2}{\sqrt{v^2/c^2 - 1}}
\end{align}$$
which relate velocities measured in frames with relative velocity $v > c$. They then go on to show some counterintuitive results involving combination of such velocities.
A simple way to understand what they are proposing is as follows: Lorentz transformations can be extended to $v > c$ by using $\frac{c}{v}$ in place of $\frac{v}{c}$ for superluminal relative velocities.
This extension to special relativity seems to make sense, at least in the sense that it is mathematically consistent, but it doesn't really have any physical applications as far as I can tell. It does provide a way to analyze events from the viewpoints of multiple observers with relative velocities greater than $c$, but special relativity tells use that no such observers can be made to exist (because nothing can be boosted past the speed of light), and I don't see that this new work does anything to change that.
TL;DR I think this work is interesting but not useful. I'm not sure if that was clear from what I originally wrote.
Answer: This is a trick that works in 2 dimensions, because the metric is
$$ ds^2 = dt^2 - dx^2 $$
Which under a sign change, interchanges x and t. So if you have the ordinary Lorentz transformation
$$ t' = t \cosh(\alpha) - x \sinh(\alpha) $$
$$ x' = x \cosh(\alpha) - t \sinh(\alpha) $$
You can combine it with the two metric sign-reversing symmetry operation
$$ t' = x $$
$$ x' = \pm t $$
$$ ds'^2 = - ds^2 $$
to produce an extended group with space and time interchangable. This is all they are doing. It works in 2d, because x and t are both 1 dimensional and the null directions are in 45 degree lines with the same topology relative to the t and x axis. This trick doesn't work in 3+1 d, because there are a different number of space dimensions, so the lightcones surround the t axis, but they don't surround the x axis.
This trick is not physically useful, beyond picking out the pure right-moving theories in 2d as special (and the pure left-moving theories too). These theories are special because they are preserved under certain of these space-time reflections too.
This idea is not physics, but it is a cute 2d oddity. A more interesting 2d oddity is covered in this question: Why does the Lorentz transformation in special relativity have to be like this?.
Answer: For information how the transformations look like see the answer by David.
Regarding physical meaning:
Let us call the boost with velocity $v$ (one space dimension) $L(v)$. Then for $v>c$ $L(v)^{-1}\ne L(-v)$, but $L(v)L(-v)=-1$. Thus if you could reach velocities $v>c$ you could reverse time. Physically this is… questionable, it would violate causality including all the known paradoxa. And those transformations cannot be a symmetry of our universe (superluminal travellers wouldn't obey the same laws of physics) because of the known parity violations. The largest subgroup of transformations of this group without time reversal (in fact the largest subgroup for which there is any pair of events with definite time ordering in every reference frame) is the Lorentz group without time reversal. And indeed there is no way to extend the Lorentz group without this so called "violation of causality", see this paper.


To use Windows and Ubuntu on one computer, which should I install first?

Question: I understand it's possible to install Ubuntu first, and later Windows or to install Windows first, and then Ubuntu, but assuming I have the freedom to do either, which is the better, easier, and more reliable installation order?
Comment: Minor note: if you are trying to install preview versions of windows (the developer windows 8 preview, for example), it can be pretty hard either way around. With windows 7 etc, I'd agree with the current "windows first" answers, out of personal taste.
Answer: It is significantly easier to install Ubuntu after installing Windows. The Windows installation process has no option for installation alongside another operating system, so doing so involves manually resizing partitions and fiddling with your master boot record. While this is certainly doable, the process is less "on rails" and leaves more room for user error.
Installing Ubuntu second is as simple as the following screen:
Comment: It'd be cool if you also add something on partitions to make your answer complete. Windows uses up the whole hard drive for NTFS if you let it install its defaults (see also my less popular answer [here](http://askubuntu.com/a/18138/3940)).
Answer: I would say installing Windows first is the way to go. That way, Ubiquity can handle the partition resizing for you and there's no need to resort to some sort of hack to get your GRUB menu back.
Answer: Did you consider virtualization ?
You'll have no more risk to wreck your Windows install. And you can run both OS at the same time.
If you just need an execution environment for command line unix tools (programming), virtualization is great. Compatibility is absolute.
You can use Virtualbox which is free, or vmware server, which is also free.
As for myself, I'm doing web development with ubuntu server 10.4 LTS virtualized with vmware/Win7. I'm a huge fan of this solution.
Answer: I agree with the above, if you absolutely must dual boot, install Windows first for the reasons given, but there is another way, install Ubuntu, then create a VM for your Windows install in Virtualbox.
Once you realize that you haven't used Windows for over a year, simply delete the VM and free up the space.
Answer: I've gotta chime in here. I've managed dual/triple/quad boot systems for many years. After all I've experienced what I've discovered is that if you can afford and manage the technical process of installing two drives into your computer that will be the best way to have dual boot. It's pretty simple when you think about it.
Install two harddrives, doesn't matter what speed or size they are. They can vary. However they still must meet the minimal requirements of each operating system (greater than 4gb which is ultra common these days).
Doesn't matter which OS you install first, but the key is to only have one drive powered up when installing the OS's. So lets say you choose to do Windows first. You will unplug the other drive that will be used for Linux. This way during boot there is no way that Windows can detect that there is another drive. After installing windows onto that drive, do the exact opposite. Unplug the windows drive (obviously power down your machine between harddrive configuration), and plug in your linux drive. Commence installation of Linux and there will be no way for Linux to know about your Windows drive and viola. Two independent boot records and two independent installations. No messy boot loader stuff that can fail on you. No messy partitions that can fall apart. No trying to manage two different file systems on the same physical disk.
Now for the extra technical part. When you plug both your drives back in the motherboard will have a setting as to which drive it should try to boot from (go into your Bios to adjust this). Which ever OS you plan to use more often is the drive you want to set as default (mine is currently Windows Xp, but I have win7 and Ubuntu 10.04 on there as well). When I want to boot into a different OS I simply hit F11 (this will vary from motherboard to motherboard, but usually each motherboard has a way of booting from a different device at boot time, you shouldn't need to go into the Bios everytime to adjust this) and up comes a boot menu. I simply pick which Drive I want to boot and viola! Multi-OS machine with out boot loaders and partitions.
With linux you can even just straight up take your harddrive out and pop it in another machine with different hardware and there is a good chance Linux will be smart enough to adjust it's hardware settings to match the new machine.
Good lucK!
Answer: Using Windows nagware "OSL200" ($24.90 to bypass the nag), you can install Windows 7 anytime. I always make the first partition (<20GB) of the hard disk available for Windows. The many 'buntus (gparted, or other partition managers) allows you to 'move' your other partitions anywhere,anytime, provided you don't multi-task the Linux operating system too much.
Windows also has other boot-assistants (Boot-us 3.0.2, Gag4.10, Plop Boot Manager 5.0, Smart Boot Manager & many others), but I have no consistent success with these.
On my Desktop replacement (HP Pavilion DV7), each of my two HDDs has a 20GB Win Primary partition.On each I have one Primary partition (10GB) at the end of the two HDDs for soft-RAID0, which only Linux allows.
All other partitions: DATA, ARCHIVES, multiple Linux-op-systems, ... are in the Extended Partition on each drive. All DATA, ARCHIVES are Win7-NTFS compressed partitions. All others are EXT4.
After the Windows nagware, I have about 10 to 16 operating systems from which to boot. This includes all the 'backports' of the latest installed operating systems. The 'buntu op sys's will kernel-update (if you permit it), but also allow access to previous kernels.
Occasionally one of my 'buntus allows install of Grub2, which then somehow lets me bypass Windows OSL2000. But then I 'realtime' install another Linux variant, which then removes the Grub2 setup.
Comment: What do you mean when you say you "'realtime' install another Linux variant"? Why would installing another GNU/Linux operating system *automatically remove* GRUB?


Creating symbology for multiple attributes within the same feature class in ArcMap 10

Question: I'm struggling to find a way to take a single point feature class that has multiple attributes that I want as feature layers with unique symbology.  Let's call these attributes Depth1 and Depth2.  A key point here is I want to apply a lyr setting to automate the symbology of each layer and it seems what may be the best way of doing this is in the properties of an output in model builder you can add a lyr file to use as symbology.  But I'm not sure how I can get these two attributes as new layers using model builder and then default to correct attribute for the symbology for each (ie. Depth1 for first layer & Depth2 for the 2nd layer).  Any ideas?  Let me know if I need to explain any of this better.
Comment: As far as I can tell from your description, I think you will need 2 lyr files.
Answer: From your description it sounds like you could use Apply Symbology From Layer tool from the Data Management toolbox. The field names for your input feature layers need to be stable -- meaning the field to use for unique symbols in layer1 will always be Depth1, layer2 ...Depth2 and so on. You'll need a source layer file for each kind of symbology you wish to apply.
If you've already tried this route and it doesn't work, we'll need more specifics about you're attempting to do in order to help.
Answer: Since you're dealing with depths, a different and natural approach would be to vary transparency according to the depth. To do this

add a Transparency field to your feature class (short integer).
Use field calculator to fill the values (0-100) based on depths, e.g. 'DEPTH' LIKE '-100' = 75, 'DEPTH' LIKE '-200' = 50, etc...
(Alternatively convert the depths to percentages with something like (100 * ([OldField] - <OldField Minimum>)) / (<OldField Maximum> - <OldField Minimum>) [ref])
in Arcmap symbology for the feature class pick a single colour, then use the Advanced button at lower right to apply transparency for each feature based on the Transparency field.

I'm not at my computer now so can't verify, but a niggling though tells me this might only be available for polygons, in which case you'd need to buffer your points first to use it.
Answer: I'm not sure whether Model Builder allows this level of logical control ("for iteration 1 use field 1, for iteration 2 use field 2", etc).
A Python script may be the better option as it will certainly allow you to handle this. If you search on something like "arcgis python if statement" it should give you some ideas of how to get started.


Is the Nikon D4's advertised frame rate for 14-bit capture?

Question: Question about the the advertised 10 frames per second speed for the Nikon D4. Is this frame rate for 14-bit or 12-bit. If it is 10 frames/sec at 12-bit, what is frame rate at 14-bit. Reason I ask is that for my D3X, the 14-bit frame rate is only about 2frames per second max while the "specified" frame rate is ~5 frames/sec and is not advertized as the 12-bit rate
Answer: The dpreview page for Nikon D4 mentions that the camera can shoot 9-11 fps. Considering 11 fps is the absolute maximum, but it can go as low as 9 fps, we can conclude that the Nikon D4 can in fact shoot at about 9 fps when capturing 14 bits/pixel. This is because the processor takes longer to write the increased amount of information to the memory (14 bits per pixel as opposed to 12 bits). However, you can push the camera's burst rate by switching to 12 bits/pixel, which will yield around 11 fps, according to dpreview.
Do bear in mind, however, that 14 bits/pixel can write values up to four times as high as 12 bits/pixel; it will mostly translate into better shadow area-quality, because the shadow pixels which generally get less exposed will have greater detail. This is simply due to the fact that the value in each pixel can vary more freely with 14 bits, hence it is able to store more accurate information.
So now there's a decision to make: better shadow quality or higher burst rate? It shall be dependent on each particular situation.
For a more detailed explanation on 14 vs. 12-bit recording, go to this explanation, which briefly describes the pros and cons of each setting over the other.


Which side of a web page should a side menu go on?

Question: Many websites have side menus and I seem some have the side menu on the right and some on the left.
Which side is better?
Comment: Better for which purpose?
Comment: I agree with Ignacio. We need more detail.
Comment: better for the users and better for sales.
Answer: For me, although I don't always like it, I think having the navigation that's important, on the left because this is where people look first. This might be the main menu or some kind of sub menu to navigate between sections of the website. On the right you can include another column of "menu" type stuff, like additional information or links to other related content (like SE sites). Also, having the menu on the left helps people to see the menu when they are using a smaller screen that doesn't fit all the content as browsers usually show the left side against the left.
Along the top if also another common location, which leaves the width of the site more wide open. It also ensure that users will see it first no matter the size of their screen.
Answer: People tend to read more to the left and click more to the right. The left sidebar is better suited for navigation, the right sidebar is better suited for advertising & other widgets.
Comment: +1 because I observe this behavior as well
Answer: Not only are the majority of users "left to right" language users, the majority of those are right handed, using their mouse with their right hand. I believe that from the neutral position of 'mouse hand straight ahead', greater angular movement is available to the left than to the right. Therefor the left margin is a better Fitts's target for most users. (Try it.)
Edit: Also, it turns out that Web users spend 69% of their time viewing the left half of the page and 30% viewing the right half. Jakob Nielsen's conclusion:"Keep navigation  all the way to the left"
Comment: The Nielsen link is gold in this context. To quote him again: "You deviate from conventional layout at your peril."
Answer: I've seen many places where you roll over one menu option, and it expands to reveal a sub menu. If this is the case, it makes sense that it should expand to the right, to be more natural to the reader (assuming they read left-to-right). If it needs to expand to the right, then it's best to anchor it to the left of the page.
If your readers read right-to-left, then it probably makes more sense to put it on the right side.
Answer: It depends on what you want your users to see first. People are used to left side menus for navigation inside the content sections. If the menus are not related to the content then right-top would be a better position.
Answer: In left-to-right languages, you want the most important elements on the left.  If this includes your navigation elements, that is where they should go.  Reversed for right-to-left languages, of course.
Answer: I used to be of the opinion that the menu should go on the left, until I read a piece that changed my mind. (May have been from http://www.alistapart.com/ but I can't find it with a quick search.)
The piece suggested that when people are reading a block of writing on your site, their eyes need to easily be able to find the start of the next line of text.
If the readers have any trouble with finding the start of the line (say, because of similar text in a menu near the start of the line), their reading will be interrupted (albeit only briefly). These interruptions might not be perceptable to the reader, but they do have a negative effect.
The trick is to keep the lefthand margin of your actual writing "clean" of debris and distraction, optimizing the readers experience.
On AListApart they do this by having just a graphic to the left of the text, plus lots of whitespace. Menus and other sidebars are to the right.
StackExchange sites to this too, by only having graphics and large text to the left of the questions, nothing that looks like paragraph text.
Other sites (including my own) keep the margin clean by keeping the lefthand side clear, putting navigation above or to the right.
Answer: According to the study "When Left Might Not Be Right" published in Journal of Usability Studies either side will work.


Maximum of a product of a polynomial with positive coefficients and a finite sum of exponentials with negative coefficients on $[0,+\infty)$

Question: Prove or disprove that
$$
f(x)=\left(\sum_i a_i x^i\right)\left(\sum_j b_j e^{-\lambda_j x}\right)
$$
where $\forall i, a_i>0$, $\forall j, b_j>0,\lambda_j>0$, and both sums are finite,
has a unique maximum on $[0,+\infty)$.
Answer: Some experimenting with Wolfram|Alpha disproves the claim. For example, the function $f(x)=(1+3x^2+\frac{1}{2000}x^8)\mathrm{e}^{-x}$ has more than one local maximum. (As a simple calculation should show.)
Intuition suggests that a function of the form $f(x)=p(x)e^{-x}$ (where $p$ is a polynomial with nonnegative coefficients) may have any finite number of local maxima. (Except for $0$, as it always does have a maximum.) This is because $x^k$ will at first grow faster than the exponential function, so by multiplying it with a small positive number, we should be able to construct a function $x\mapsto a_k x^ke^{-x}$ that is very close to $0$ on some interval of the form $[0,A]$, then achieves a maximum and then returns close to zero again. So by summing such functions we should be able to achieve any positive number of maxima we like. (I haven't written the proof of this though, this is just an idea.)
Answer: @DejanGovc has already succinctly disproved the statement by counterexample.
This little exposition concerns itself with some concepts, tips and techniques for treating any particular case you might encounter, and how to know whether it has extrema and how to find them with the least pain. Also, I consider the more general case that $p(x)$ is any real polynomial, and I provide an explicit example of a function $f$ with any number $k$ of distinct points having maxima (in fact, the same global maximum).
If there are several exponential terms $b_j\,e^{-\lambda_j\,x}$, the term with the lowest value of $\lambda_j$ will dominate the other terms as $x\rightarrow\infty$: the other terms will be negligable by comparison. So let us analyze the case of just a single exponential term $be^{-\lambda x}$, the dominant term, in depth, and assume for the moment that the dominated terms are left out. Since we thus only have one exponential term, let us assume without loss of generality that its coefficient is $b=1$ (this loses no generality because we could multiply it into $p(x)$ as a factor.)
If $f(x)=p(x)e^{-\lambda x}$ for any polynomial $p(x)\in\mathbb{R}[x]$ with real coefficients (positive or negative), then
$$
f\,'(x)=\left[p'(x)-\lambda p(x)\right]e^{-\lambda x}
$$
so that
$$
\text{sign}\left(f\,'(x)\right)=
\text{sign}\left[p'(x)-\lambda p(x)\right].
$$
For $\lambda > 0$, we know the asymptotic behavior as $x\rightarrow\infty$: $f(x)\rightarrow0$. This is because the exponential function dominates (grows more quickly than) any polynomial. On the graph, this is a horizontal asymptote along the positive $x$ axis. The quantity $e^{-\lambda x}$ in the expression for $f(x)$ is also called a decay factor. Without this factor, we would just take the global maximum of the polynomial $p(x)$ on the positive real number line, which we could determine from the critical points of $p$ and a determination of the sign changes of $p'(x)$. The local maxima (and minima) will be at sign changes from $+$ to $-$ ($-$ to $+$), with the endpoint $x=0$ also needing to be checked. Then, evaluating the function $p(x)$ at each change in sign in $p'(x)$, we could determine the global extrema on $[0,\infty)$. For $f(x)$, the decay factor not only changes where the critical points lie (as described above), but it also discounts the values of $f(x)$, relative to $p(x)$, by the ever diminishing decay factor, making it harder and harder for (nonzero) local extrema to be global extrema as $x$ increases, since both will tend closer toward the asyptotic value of zero.
Some other observations that might be of use are that:

the zeros of $f\,'$ will include any roots of $p$ of multiplicity greater than unity, but will also include new roots lying between those of $p$ and those of $p'$ (does anyone know of a good citation for this?)
$f$ need not have any global maximum; for example, take $p(x)=-(x^2+1)$
$f$ has a global maximum iff it has a nonnegative value on $[0,\infty)$
$f$ need not have a unique global maximum; for example, take $p(x)=-\prod_{i=1}^k(x-x_i)^2$ for $k > 1$ distinct roots $\{x_i\}_{i=1}^k$. If you graph this, it lies in the fourth quadrant, with $k$ equal global maxima touching (and an asymptote along) the positive $x$-axis.

Lastly, note that, over over $\mathbb{C}$, every polynomial factors into linear factors, and that if $p(x)$ has real coefficients, then its complex roots must come in conjugate pairs of equal multiplicity (corresponding to powers of quadratic factors irreducible over $R$).
Now if the factorization over $\mathbb{C}$ is
$$
p(x)=\prod_{i=1}^k(x-x_i)^{n_i}
$$
then
$$
\frac{p'(x)}{p(x)}=\sum_{i=1}^k \frac{n_i}{x-x_i}
$$
so that
$$
\frac{f'(x)}{f(x)}=
\frac{p'(x)}{p(x)}-\lambda=
-\lambda+\sum_{i=1}^k \frac{n_i}{x-x_i}.
$$
Expanding this partial fraction representation
and finding the roots of the denominator
will find the "new" roots of $f\,'$,
or critical points of $f$, mentioned above.
This should not be such a great surprise
if one has done enough of these types of problems,
and demonstrates the utility of the logarithmic derivative.
Going back to the general case of $d > 1$ exponential (decay) terms, let us suppose that
$$
f(x)=p(x)g(x)
\qquad\text{for}\qquad
g(x)=\sum_{j=1}^d b_j\,e^{-\lambda_j\,x}
$$
where $\lambda_1 < \cdots < \lambda_d$
(so that the first term of $g$ dominates
for $x$ large enough). Then
$$
g(x)=e^{-\lambda_1\,x}\sum_{j=1}^d b_j\,e^{\lambda_1-\lambda_j\,x}
$$
where the first summation term is constant,
and each subsequent term decays at a faster rate.
Similarly, its derivative is
$$
g'(x)=e^{-\lambda_1\,x}\sum_{j=1}^d b_j\,\lambda_j\,e^{\lambda_1-\lambda_j\,x}
$$
and its logarithmic derivative is
$$
\frac{g'}{g}=
\frac{
\sum_{j=1}^d b_j\,\lambda_j\,e^{\lambda_1-\lambda_j\,x}
}{
\sum_{j=1}^d b_j\,           e^{\lambda_1-\lambda_j\,x}
}
\qquad\text{(which }\rightarrow\lambda_1\text{ as }x\rightarrow\infty\text{)},
$$
both of which are never zero when $\forall j~b_j > 0$.
Finally, then, using the product rule
$$f\,'=\left(pg\right)'=pg'+p'g\,,$$
the logarithmic derivative of $f$
in this general case is
$$
\frac{f'}{f}=
\frac{p'}{p}+
\frac{g'}{g},
$$
for whose roots we would require an iterative
rootfinding technique such as Newton's method
or whatever our computer has implemented.
But we can say that these "new" roots will occur
somewhere in the vicinity of wherever
(i.e., whatever $x$ values make)
$$
\frac{p'}{p}<-G
\qquad\text{or}\qquad
p'(x)+G\,p(x) < 0
\qquad\text{for}\qquad
G=\inf\frac{g'}{g} > 0,
$$
which can be found procedurally and graphically.
In the exceptional case that all $\lambda_i$
were integral multiples of $\lambda_1$,
we would be able to considerably simplify this
by observing that $g(x)=h\left(e^{-\lambda_1\,x}\right)$
for $h(t)=\sum_{j=1}^d b_j\,t^{\lambda_j/\lambda_1}$
a polynomial in $\mathbb{R}^+[t]$.
If all of this seems terribly capricious,
please note that similar reasoning and techniques
are routinely found in the context of
Laplace transforms in signal processing
and likelihood calculations in probability.