Where did the idea of a neutrino come from?

Question: Exactly what paper by W. Pauli introduced the idea for the existence of a neutrino and how was its existence confirmed experimentally (who did that and in what paper)?
Answer: Pauli didn't publish the idea--- it seems to be in a private correspondence with Meitner, according to Wikipedia. Enrico Fermi named the particle and published the four-fermion interaction theory of beta decay in 1934, in this article:
E. Fermi "Versuch einer theorie der $\beta$-strahlen" I.Z. Physik 88,161 (1934)
I found a quick review of the history here:http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/779702/files/CERN-ARCH-PBC-328-5.pdf (there are some confusing editing bloopers in the layout).
The detection of the neutrino is well documented on Wikipedia, because it won the detecting team the 1995 Nobel, and I don't have anything to add to that. The documentation on the earlier history is more scant.
The prehistory of this affair is Bohr's reluctance to accept energy conservation as fundamental. He thought of energy conservation as a thermodynamic statistical law in the 1920s, and was willing to throw it away in order to get quantum theory to make sense. One of the paradoxes of early quantum theory is that you can have a spread out quantum of light, which passes over many atoms. Then the photon must be absorbed by one and only one atom, by conservation of energy. But locality seems to imply that if an atom over here can absorb the photon, and an atom over there can absorb the photon, then if they cannot signal, they can both absorb the same photon. I am not sure that Bohr would have said it this way in 1924, I don't think he believed in photons yet. He would have talked about a classical electromagnetic field washing over many atoms, and the response going at the speed of light, but the absorption being quantum, so the energy cannot be conserved.
In modern quantum mechanics, this is not true, because you have a global wavefunction which means that the different atoms absorb the photon in different Everett branches, or, if you prefer, the absorption of the photon collapses the wavefunction nonlocally to prevent the absorption somewhere else. But in 1924, all this was two years in the future, and Kramers Bohr and Slater proposed that energy is just not conserved, and that atomic transitions are governed by something similar to a semiclassical electromagnetic field interacting with a quantum atom. This description only gives energy conservation on average, because the same electromagnetic field can dump energy into far away atoms at once, and in the semi-classical electromagnetic field approximation, you ignore the quantum structure of the field, so if the field represents a single photon, that single photon can be absorbed by different atoms. This is now interpreted as saying that single photons are not well described by a semiclassical field, but that wasn't BKS's interpretation.
Heisenberg's 1925 quantum theory put an end to BKS, and restored energy conservation. This was a major motivation for Heisenberg--- he knew he was on the right track when he realized that the interpreting energy as the Hamiltonian matrix makes energy conserved. Bohr was very unhappy with the fate of his theory, which really was the first coherent attempt at a description of photons and atoms, and deserved more recognition. It was attacked by Einstein, and it died even before Matrix mechanics. In Feynman's 1950's book on quantum electrodynamics, he shows how far you can take the semi-classical field idea, that you can reproduce all of quantum electrodynamics just from semi-classical fields interacting with particles, so long as at the end you understand that the semiclassical calculations are only guidelines for getting the proper Feynman rules for single photons. I think this type of presentation is descended from BKS (although it is quantum mechanically correct of course, and it is ab-initio, as was Feynman's way).
The detection and confirmation that the electrons in nuclear beta decay can come out with any energy less than the maximum possible, by Meitner and collborators, led Bohr to revive the earlier discredited statistical conservation of energy. This idea was now much less motivated than before, and Pauli decided that there is just something carrying away the extra energy.
Pauli had a publication aversion, for some reason, and tended to write things in letters. This is a great pity, because his published papers are so good. I couldn't find the neutrino letter online, and I don't read German anyway. The Fermi paper is probably the best source for the early ideas, but this theory is replaced by the V-A theory in the 1950s.
The paper I linked to suggests that Pauli didn't want to publish a four-Fermi theory because he knew that this theory would have terrible perturbation theory infinities. He does write that Fermi's theory leads to terrible infinities at higher order of perturbations, but this is a property shared by all quantum field theories in a non-covariant formalism.
Now we know that Fermi type theories are nonrenormalizable in 4d, but if you attribute this view to the 1930's Pauli, I think it is an anachronism. Even quantum electrodynamics is infinite at one loop, after all, and the order of the divergence was only established to be logarithmic by Weisskopf in the 1940s. In the 1930s, people weren't sure exactly how it blew up, but probably they expected a power law, like the self-energy in classical electrodynamics. The divergence in quantum electrodynamics is only softened to a log because of the contributions of positrons, and it is important to have a relativistically invariant formulation to know the exact divergence order, because you don't get the right answer if you separate positron and electron contributions.
Answer: According to the German Wikipedia, the neutrino was first suggested by Pauli in a private letter on December 4th 1930. The Letter is available in the CERN archives, although, unfortunately, it is in German. A link to the PDF is here.
The first paragraph basically mentions that in order to explain the continuous spectrum of beta decay, Pauli suggests the existence of a neutral spin 1/2 particle obeying the exclusion principle inside the nucleus. He calls the particle "neutron" and according to him, it should roughly have the same mass as the electron, but certainly not higher than 1% of the proton mass. Later he mentions that this may seem like a cheap trick to explain the spectrum, but in such desperate times one should examine all possible solutions to a problem. Wikipedia does not give any source as to wether this really is the first suggestion of the existence of the neutrino.
Again, according to Wikipedia, in 1956 Cowan and Reines confirmed the existence of a particle with the right properties. They published their result in 'Science' and the paper is available for free here.


Where does the fan keeping score tradition in baseball come from?

Question: Many people go to games and manually keep track of the runs, hits, errors?  Does this come from years of tradition from times when scoreboards were not around at the park?
Answer: One could say this is based on tradition, but there is more to it than this. Most people who keep track of the score, write down a lot more information about the game; and not just the number of the runs scored. This way they can have a detailed data about things such as types of pitches and stolen bases during the game. Otherwise you would need to wait for the game to finish and then check for the stats.
It also helps you to focus more on the game, and you will also be able to look at the data for a game that you have attended any time you want (having a database of your own), or checking for players stats.


How to bone lamb breast

Question: I've got a recipe that calls for a boned lamb breast. Unfortunately, the lamb my wife got from the butcher is not boned, so I need to remove the bones myself. However, I can't find any guidance on how to do this. Before I dive in and probably ruin a perfectly good lamb breast, can anyone offer any tips?
Comment: Breast? Can you be more specific about the cut of meat you have. It may be a terminology thing, but I'm not familiar with lamb _breast_.
Comment: Breast is the belly of the lamb. It's a British term. It's a tough, cheap cut requiring long slow cooking. It is usually boned to allow stuffing.
Comment: Well I'm English and I'm not familiar with that term at all, but that's probably a gap in my knowledge!
Comment: Perfectly common term in the US of A, too.
Answer: Breast of lamb (or veal) is what would be called the belly on a pig -- it's the relatively thin and flat layer of muscle and fat surrounding the ribcage. As such, the bones that you have are in fact ribs, and they're quite easy to remove from the remainder of the meat. Because of the muscle that's between the bones, connecting them, they can be treated as their own layer. All you have to do is free that whole layer from the layer that is just meat. Really, this sounds more complicated than it is.
Lay the breast flat on a board, with the bones on top, ends towards you. Use your boning/filet knife, narrow-bladed slicer, or even a paring knife.
To set yourself up for the cut you'll use for the majority of this process, you need to get the first bone (the one on the side opposite your knife hand) free. With the knife held vertically, cut along the outer edge of that bone, trying to not go deeper than the bone. Just disconnect that side from the meat.
Now, holding the blade parallel to the board, get right under the end of the bone with the tip of the knife. Make a small cut across the breadth of the bone. Ideally the face of the blade should be making contact with the underside of the  bone as you cut -- not cutting into the bone, but taking as much meat as possible. Don't sweat it, though: whatever's left attached to the ribs will make a very nice stock.
Make small but smooth cuts further in along the bone, digging out a little slit underneath it. Once you're two or three inches in, move to the next bone in line, and separate it in the same way. You've now got a corner that you can lift up to make it easier to get your knife in there.
Go back to the first bone, and pull up on that corner. Now make your cuts diagonal to the lines of the bones, so that you're separating the first bone further along than the second. Keep the blade parallel to the board, and don't try to do too much at once -- go long but not deep, slicing lightly along the whole underside crease right where the bone and meat are connected, to a quarter inch or so depth. Readjust your grip on the top half, and make another cut.
(If you have a big enough board and table, you might find it easier to turn the breast so the corner you're working from is pointed towards you at this point.)
Repeat that cut all the way across the breast, and keep using your free hand to lift the top part away as you cut. This obviously gives you a better view, but it also actually assists the separation. The meat and the bones are less well-connected to each other than the meat is to itself -- when you put the join under tension, it wants to come apart.
Depending on the size of your slab, once you've got more than a few bones free, constantly lifting the top half may start to be cumbersome. At that point, you can completely separate some of those bones and set them aside -- just cut vertically along the meat between two of them.
That's all there is to it. Turn those ribs into something tasty, too!
Answer: If I'm correct, the cut you have should resemble a rack of ribs. If this is the case, you should be able to simply push the bones out, perhaps with a bit of loosening with a small sharp knife.
I assume you need it boned to facilitate stuffing, but on the off chance it's not, you could just slow-cook the lamb for 4 or 5 hours by which point the bones will just pull easily out of the meat.

How to bone lamb breast


Is it safe to have no TOS or PP?

Question: I have coded my own forums from the ground up. I have tried my best to make my code as secure as possible and encrypting everything I can. I want to use this forum for a Minecraft server. I have one concern however.... I would like to setup this forum now but having no TOS or Privacy Policy has put me off. Will having none of either cause me any legal trouble in the unlikely event of a data leakage?
Thanks
Comment: see [What are some good resources for generating privacy policies and terms of use?](http://webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/216/what-are-some-good-resources-for-generating-privacy-policies-and-terms-of-use)
Comment: Do I really need one though?
Answer: If you use Adsense ads on your site, you are required by Google to have a privacy policy per the Adsense terms of service.  From http://support.google.com/adsense/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=48182:

AdSense publishers must have and abide by a privacy policy that discloses that third parties may be placing and reading cookies on your users' browsers, or using web beacons to collect information as a result of ad serving on your website.
Answer: Why you don't generate one with one of the free tools available??, may take no more than half an hour, google for privacy policy generator. Kudos for coding your own forums, sometimes reinventing the wheel is good. !
Answer: That depends on the country you live in. The country the server is in which hosts your site. If your country doesn't have strict privacy policy laws you don't need them. It's your server and anyone accessing it does at their own risk that you being the owner can do whatever you want with the data. The EFF has a good article on how bloggers (forums) are safe from most legal action when other people are the ones posting on your site.
https://www.eff.org/issues/bloggers/legal/liability/230
Comment: Ah thanks! Its hosted by 000Hosting... So it would be American.  Thanks!
Answer: If you collect, store and use any personal data (email address, first name etc.) from your forums, you will need a privacy policy.
ToS are a plus if you want to prevent abuses, explain guidelines on using your forums etc. These pages are usually listed separately.
Automattic (of WordPress) made their privacy policy available under Creative Commons:
http://automattic.com/privacy/
Or, you can use a generator:
http://termsfeed.com/privacy-policy/generator/

Is it safe to have no TOS or PP?


What is the difference between artificial intelligence (AI) and swarm intelligence?

Question: I understand that when we try to implement swarm intelligence, it basically has multiple independent units communicating and with each other. What I am unsure of is if swarm intelligence an extension of artificial intelligence or if it is a discipline in and of itself.
Answer: I would call it a subset of AI. It's artificial intelligence but using a more decentralized model.
Comment: It's definitely AI. It's much like [agent based systems](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-agent_system). Also, [wikipedia relates it to artificial intelligence](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swarm_intelligence).
Answer: I've used Swarm Intelligence in my thesis and I'm studying AI in my master. I would say that AI is a huge field and Swarm Intelligence would intersect both AI - multi-agent system - and Operations Research - optimization - fields.
Answer: swam intelligence is based less on the learning and who currently has the needed information. For example an Full AI may learn and know things on its own. You give it some infomation and it stores it the best way it can. In SI when a node does not know something it asks the other nodes if they know. If the other nodes dont know then that node is forced to figure out what to do. If another node then comes around asked the same question then the node that learned it before just returns the answer. In some cases the swam has to work togetahter to learn "bigger" things but that is really based on how the swam is setup.
Answer: I propose that Swarm Intelligence is both Artificial Intelligence and a subfield of Artificial Intelligence.
Swarm Intelligence as a subfield implies (through action) that intelligent systems can cluster and work alone as clusters, solving problems, where each subsystem within each cluster depends on peer systems to solve an ultimate problem.
Artificial Intelligence, if you follow the concept Minsky described the human brain by in "Society of Mind," is a bunch of swarms and/or problem-solving systems coming together to solve 'big' problems.  The subsystems in each swarm solve small problems (which may be analyzing obstructions and figuring out if help is needed); the swarm solves the problems each subsystem encountered via analyses.
I think the difference between Swarm Intelligence and Artificial Intelligence exists relative to the complexity of the system being gauged for intelligence.  For example:  Take one bee (the insect) and show it a meadow full of flowers.  The bee can look at the set of flowers and realize that it doesn't have the capacity to carry all the nectar from the meadow back to its hive.  That realization, in itself, can be looked at as intelligence ('artificial' if the bee was man-made).  When the bee goes back to its hive and asks other bees to help it with the acquisition of the nectar, the other bees will agree.  Once they all reach the meadow and disperse evenly among the flowers, if they all share the same problem and are working for the same cause--which may be to make a cup of honey--each bee is part of one large intelligence.  So the swarm of bees was an intelligence on its own.
That's what I assume, but correct me if I'm wrong in my assumption.
Comment: Not all AI solutions that I've seen have a swarm of subsystems (in fact, "swarm" solutions are the minority of what I've seen). For example, I've seen pathfinding algorithms that are implemented as a single graph traversal. No swarms involved.
Comment: @FrustratedWithFormsDesigner I know, but the collective intelligence is what **can** create one intelligence.  That's where I'm getting at in my post.


Connections between properties of a group and local symmetries of its Cayley graph

Question: Hi everyone,
Let $\Gamma$ be a finitly generated group.
Does someone know of a connection between properties of $\Gamma$ to local symmetries of its Cayley graph?
More specificly, what can one learn about $\Gamma$ by looking at the group of isometries of the ball of radius n centered at e (the identity element) in the Cayley graph (reguarding the word length metric)?
Answer: I think there is very little that can be said, even when $\Gamma$ is finite.  Obviously
any automorphism of $\Gamma$ that fixes the connection set of the Cayley graph gives
rise to an automorphism of the ball of radius $n$ about $e$; hence if the ball is
asymmetric then there is no automorphism of $\Gamma$ that fixes the connection set.
(There can be automorphisms of the Cayley graph that do not arise from automorphisms of the group, but I cannot see that these are relevant to your question.)
To get a result of the type you are asking about, you would need to assume that $2n$
is larger than the girth (or your ball would be a "regular" tree, and tell you nothing
about the group). But now the balls of radius $n$ will be complex structures, and it
is getting difficult to even formulate a result.
The balls do provide information about the spectrum of the adjacency operator, but it
is not clear how to relate this to the group structure in general.
In the finite case there is a lot of work devoted to studying automorphism groups of Cayley
graphs, but I am not aware of any results of the type you describe.


Are fuel system cleaners (like Gumout) worth using regularly?

Question: Are fuel system cleaners (like Gumout) worth using regularly?
Comment: please read http://meta.mechanics.stackexchange.com/questions/3/making-a-site-for-professionals
Answer: Unless you've got an extraordinary circumstance or legitimate reason for using it, don't. Chances are the usage will temporary make the symptoms subside, only to return again later.
The way I see it, if your vehicle required it you would find it listed in the recommended maintenance items list in your owner's manual.
I think another side to this question is first you need to answer how old is the vehicle, how many miles on it, have you had it regularly maintained (why do you need the cleaner in the first place)?
So back to my first point, if you desperately need to try it, go for it, otherwise figure out what your issue really is before dumping chemicals into your gas tank.
Answer: Although this isn't a scientific test, from experience I've found that using Gumout or Berrymans B-12 (which is much cheaper but very effective) every 3,000 miles has been fairly effective at keeping my engine cleaner.
I've confirmed this because last year when changing the oil on my fathers car, I decided to run SeaFoam (another excellent fuel system cleaner -- although it's $9 a can so I save it for oil change time) through my father's Ford Thunderbird intake. It's a fairly common use of Seafoam as it's a pretty simple DIY thorough cleaning of your car's fuel system which is much more thorough than just adding the fluid through the fuel tank.
After adding the Seafoam, I ran the car for a test drive and literally a massive plume of smoke was shooting out of the car's exhaust like it was a drag racer. The smoke actually was all of the gunk in the fuel intake system, which was being removed by the SeaFoam.
Now, after doing the Thunderbird, I did the same procedure on my Toyota Avalon which I've been adding Gumout or B-12 (depends on what's on sale) every 3,000 miles and when I did the Seafoam run, after a small plume of smoke for a few seconds, my car's exhaust literally was clean.
Now, your mileage might vary based on your driving style and car type, however at the least have a look at Seafoam because it's used all the time for the crankshaft, fuel intake, and fuel system -- and on virtually all car forums that's the cleaner of choice.
For routine (every 3,000 miles) cleanings, I'd just add a can of Berrymans B-12 (usually costs $3 a can) or go with Gumout if it's on sale. Just make sure it's the fuel system cleaner and not fuel injector cleaner as the latter allows deposits to build up after adding it.
Still, despite the success story, I will point out that if you're having fuel system problems of a serious nature (i.e. the check engine light, misfiring, very clogged injectors, etc) going to a mechanic is a must.
Comment: I dont think the smoke from seafoam indicates any "cleaning" . Check out this video where a guy tests seafoam with a clean engine. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO_UIVRT7uM
Answer: From my own exp, Gumout is among the WORST product on the world that I've ever used. The price, on the other hand, is dirty cheap but you always get what you pay for.
You can read more details about gumout injector cleaner here: http://fuelinjectorcleanerreviews.com/gumout-fuel-system-cleaner-review/


Muting technique and exercises

Question: I have been practicing muting for some days. However, I am not finding myself very comfortable with it. I use my right hand placed on the strings while the left had lightly placed over the fret. Is this the correct way to do it? Also, are there some exercises which I can follow to improve?
Answer: There are both palm-muting and muting.
Palm muting is what's normally used in metal punk and rock which gives a different sound. This is used by playing the notes/chords normally with your left hand why holding your right hands palm on the strings while picking. Try playing a chord until you find the right spot and right pressure for your hand.
Normal muting is done with your left hand and is used a lot in funk,jazz (and all other styles too) and gives a rhythmic feel to it. This is done by lifting your fretting hand a bit and just lightly touch the strings so they don't vibrate.
So you shouldn't need to adjust both hands for this!
Comment: More on the funk style: it is quite common to use both hands for this as well. I certainly do. The idea is to introduce two rhythm patterns and let them interweave.
Comment: Cool, never seen that before , I googled it and found some pretty cool licks. The both hands can also be used when playing some fast runs (in metal for example) but I guessed the OP was trying to learn the basics of muting!
Answer: It depends on what the goal of your muting is. My guess is that you're playing in a rock setting and feel you're too sloppy, because ringing notes are causing strange results through your distortion. I say this because when playing clean and especially playing acoustic, the ringing notes are part of the sound, and the heightened attack makes it clear which note is the melody note.
If this is the case, the question isn't really about muting, it's about playing clean and fast. The muting of the previous notes gets to be a side effect of getting to the next note. Crank up the gain so you can hear where your problem areas are, take it slow and get it clean, then work it up closer to production speed. Getting your technique together with that one exercise, whatever it may be, will get your picking hand, fretting hand and ears on the same page when it comes to more general playing.
If I misunderstand, explain more specifically what you're trying to do and we can give more specific suggestions.
Answer: Muting could be tricky to teach as it depends on applying just the right amount of pressure in just the right place. It's something that I've managed to improve by just doing it a lot.
For the right (picking) hand I rest the heel of my hand just in front of the bridge. For the fretting hand I just release the pressure a little.
Try playing the same chord or riff with and without muting until you find the optimal pressure.
Answer: I mostly mute strings with my fretting hand.  As practice try fretting only a single note while strumming all six strings.  Look at videos of SRV to see how he can strike all 6 strings forcefully yet only fret a single note.
Also, good guitar technique is developed in years, not days.  Keep at it.

Muting technique and exercises


New Beta Theme Launched

Question: Your site looks a bit different today. Yes, we are getting rid of the 'Sketchy' look and replacing it with a more-polished and finished design for sites in beta.
You can read more about the redesign of our Beta theme on our blog entry.
Please note: This will not affect your "graduation" status in any way. When your site is due for graduation, it will get its final(real) site design and branding.
If you're still seeing the old favicon, please do a hard browser refresh. (Although sometimes it may take Chrome a while to load the new image).
If you see any CSS or styling issues, please report it in this post I created on Meta Stack Overflow. It will be easier for me to track all the bug reports there.
Answer: Thanks for the new theme; it supplied a feature unseen before - the ability to abandon a question you've begun to answer. This allows my meta question on this topic to close.

New Beta Theme Launched


Erase MacBook hard drive without OSX disc

Question: I would like to erase everything on my Mac's hard drive as I'm going to recycle or sell it. Is there a way to do it without OSX disc?
Answer: Target Disk Mode
If the Mac you want to erase supports Target Disk Mode, and you have a second compatible Mac (you need to use either Firewire or Thunderbolt on both), you can use the second Mac to erase the target one. Boot up into Target Disk Mode (hold down T), and the target Mac will appear as an external drive on the second Mac. Then you can run Disk Utility to wipe the drives as per usual.
DBAN
If you can't use Target Disk Mode, you can download DBAN and burn it to a DVD. Boot up using the DVD and you'll be presented with a multitude of options for wiping the drive.
Extract the Hard Drive
The last resort is to open up the Mac and extract the hard drive. You can then use a SATA dock or enclosure to attach it to another computer and wipe it using the tools available (Disk Utility on the Mac, or other tools on Windows). With the exception of the MacBook Air and Retina MacBook Pro, all MacBooks have standard 2.5" SATA drives, so any enclosure that takes SATA will be compatible.
Answer: Download GParted and boot from cd or usb stick (by holding down the key Option immediately after chime sounds at startup).  You can do pretty much anything you want to your drive with GParted.


Can't load vector font in Nuclex Framework

Question: I've been trying to get this to work for the last 2 hours and I'm not getting what I'm doing wrong...
I've added Nuclex.TrueTypeImporter to my references in my content and I've added Nuclex.Fonts & Nuclex.Graphics in my main project.
I've put Arial-24-Vector.spritefont & Lindsey.spritefont in the root of my content directory.
_spriteFont = Content.Load<SpriteFont>("Lindsey"); // works

_testFont = Content.Load<VectorFont>("Arial-24-Vector"); // crashes

I get this error on the _testFont line:
File contains Microsoft.Xna.Framework.Graphics.SpriteFont but trying to load as Nuclex.Fonts.VectorFont.
So I've searched around and by the looks of it it has something to do with the content importer & the content processor. For the content importer I have no new choices, so I leave it as it is, Sprite Font Description - XNA Framework for content processor and I select Vector Font - Nuclex Framework And then I try to run it.
_testFont = Content.Load<VectorFont>("Arial-24-Vector"); // crashes again

I get the following error
Error loading "Arial-24-Vector".

It does work if I load a sprite, so it's not a pathing problem. I've checked the samples, they do work, but I think they also use a different version of the XNA framework because in my version the "Content" class starts with a capital letter.
I'm at a loss, so I ask here.
Edit:
Something super weird is going on. I've just added the following two lines to a method inside FreeTypeFontProcessor::FreeTypeFontProcessor(
    Microsoft::Xna::Framework::Content::Pipeline::Graphics::FontDescription ^fontDescription,
    FontHinter hinter, just to check if code would even get there:
System::Console::WriteLine("I AM HEEREEE");
System::Console::ReadLine();

So, I compile it, put it in my project, I run it and... it works! What the hell?? This is weird because I've downloaded the binaries, they didn't work, I've compiled the binaries myself. didn't work either, but now I make a small change to the code and it works? >_>.
So, now I remove the two lines, compile it again and it works again. Someone care to elaborate what is going on? Probably some weird caching problem!
Comment: This appears to require a close because the issue was unrelated to the framework and instead user error as indicated by the comments link. Voting to close.
Comment: Did you try to clean and rebuild or did you just do an incremental build?
Comment: @RoyT. Yep, also posted on the nuclex forums: http://nuclexframework.codeplex.com/discussions/394286
But I guess this is one of those errors that you fix without knowing what you did and never get again. (I hate those)
Answer: I had exactly same error as you. It was fixed when I cleaned solution and build it again as @Roy T. suggested.
I think that for some reason Content doesn't rebuild correctly without a clean first.


Good introduction to INSPIRE?

Question: Can anyone point me to a good introduction to the INSPIRE directive? I know it's basically WMS 1.3 with added bells and whistles but now I'm back in Europe I should probably find out what they are.
Answer: For French readers, Marc Leobet wrote and published a nice introduction to INSPIRE (Second edition).
See associated post.
Answer: I would say its a bit more than WMS 1.3. I assume you already checked these, but if not have a look at the About Inspire on the Inspire website for a brief overview and also the AGI Inspire Overview Document as starting points
Answer: http://inspire.jrc.ec.europa.eu/index.cfm
Intro to the geospatial
http://inspire.jrc.ec.europa.eu/index.cfm/pageid/2
Answer: Not trying to use this as a forum to promote our own product, but my employer (Safe Software) is holding a webinar on July 21st on Harmonising Your Spatial Data for INSPIRE with FME. The presenter is knowledgeable and so this may be a good introduction to INSPIRE as a whole, whether or not you use our products.

Good introduction to INSPIRE?


Who is the little horn that 'has eyes' and is 'speaking' blasphemous things in Daniel 7?

Question: I will keep the question simple. Who is the little horn that 'has eyes' and is 'speaking' blasphemous things in Daniel 7?
Answer: Antiochus Epiphanes.

Basis
An answer for the 'little horn' rests on which presuppositions the reader is willing to make about the book of Daniel. Having at least one presupposition is inevitable, no matter who you are, and that affects the way one reads the entire book. My presupposition is this: Daniel is about kingdoms, and the author names all of the kingdoms that figure into his visions.

Daniel's apocalyptic themes
The first six chapters, the stories about Daniel and his fellow Jews during their activities in the royal courts of foreign kingdoms (aka, the court tales), establish two themes in union together. First, God controls the rise and fall of kingdoms (Daniel 5.21). Second, it is better to serve this God than submit to pressure or pain to commit idolatry or other sins (Daniel 3.17-18).
By the time these two themes are established after the six stories that illustrate them, the narrative begins to elaborate on the dream from chapter 2. This elaboration comes in the form of Daniel's own dreams and visions, and an angel who interprets their symbolism to Daniel. What we read in chapters 2, 7, 8, 9, and 10-12 are all parallel and complementary descriptions of the same thing: the rise and fall of a series of four kingdoms, the last of which is oppressive toward 'the saints', before that kingdom is in turn overthrown.

Identifying the subject matter
Again, my presupposition is that the author names all of the kingdoms in the series he describes: the first is Babylon (based on 2.36-38), the second is a unified Media and Persia (based on 8.20; 10.20a; 11.2a), and the third is Greece led by Alexander (based on 8.21; 10.20b; 11.2b). To any historian of the ancient near east, what the author is portraying is very clearly the series of kingdoms that held power over the Jewish people: Babylon (605-538 BC),1 then Media-Persia (538-330 BC), then Alexander's Greece (330-323 BC).
This is where most presuppositions diverge, so that the fourth kingdom is thought to be the Roman empire, or the Roman papacy, or Islam, or what-have-you.
The details in Daniel 8 and 11, however, keep the historical context in the line of kings that followed Alexander. Both chapters mention how the king of Greece will suddenly die (as Alexander did), with his empire splitting four ways (an overly simplistic summary, but true enough). This is the fourth kingdom (323-140 BC). Chapter 11 describes the feuding of these successor kings, the Diadochi, in great detail. The series of events in Daniel 11 are easily connected to events that occurred in the fourth, third, and second centuries BC. The 'king of the south' refers to the Ptolemies (south of Israel, in Egypt), while the 'king of the north' refers to the Seleucids (north of Israel, in Syria).

The little horn
This brings us to the main question. The culminating events of each section are complementary details of the same historical events. Each section even uses several of the same words or phrases: there is a 'little horn' in chapter 7 and chapter 8, there is a 'desolation' caused by transgression/abomination in chapters 8, 9, and 10-12, as well as halted 'offerings' in the same chapters.
The descriptions of historical events in chapter 11 are too precise to be talking about anyone other than Antiochus Epiphanes.2 The overt parallelism with the dreams and visions makes it certain that he is the 'little horn'.
Critical scholars opine that Daniel was written during or shortly after Antiochus' reign, particularly 170-164 BC. The two themes from the first six chapters are used to illustrate the situation of the author and his fellow Jews: they are under the rule of an evil kingdom and were to resist any coercion to sin, as they saw happening under Antiochus. Further, it seems this was the 'original' interpretation of Daniel just a few decades after it was written (see note 2 below). Whether it became a widely recognized one is another issue, though. As early as the first century, some Jews (like Josephus) thought Daniel was a prophecy about Rome.

Footnotes
1 The critical history doesn't have Babylon take the Jews into exile until 597 BC. However, the first chapter of Daniel dates this to 605 BC, so I'm following the author's understanding of history, since it's his book.
2 The first several chapters of 1 Maccabees, written decades after the Maccabean revolt, make a few direct references to Daniel's descriptions, but does so without saying so. These include references to the 'abomination of desolation' carried out at Antiochus' order (1 Maccabees 1.54, cf. Daniel 11.31), the account of Antiochus' war against Egypt with ships and mounted troops (1 Maccabees 1.17-19, cf. Daniel 11.40), and a somewhat dissimilar description of three of Israel's neighboring countries siding against them (1 Maccabees 5.1-8, cf. Daniel 11.41).
Comment: @MarkEdward-I appreciate your answer, although from my response you can tell I don't agree with your conclusions. BTW-how do you explain the 'eyes'?
Answer: In order to identify the symbolic in Daniel it is interesting to take note of their reception and similarities within the Apocalypse of John along with the fact that according to Matthew (ch.24) Jesus identified events in 1st century Jerusalem with parts of Daniel's prophecy.
This last of the four animals representing political powers (kingdoms) is the most devastating, the Roman, that killed God's anointed and certainly ten thousands, perhaps even hundred thousands of Jews, and destroyed holy city and temple.
The ten horns standing for successive kingdoms could mean those powers that came up after the Roman Empire fell apart. The Kaisers (gr. kaesaros for lat. cæsar) e.g. led the so called Holy Roman Empire up to the 19th century. The title (such as Czar in Russia) was used by different powers for their kings until the 20th century. Roman law formed the basis for the law of most western states up to our days, even the Roman catholic church law is in many of its (non-biblical) aspects derived from there. Republican state constitutions took name and principles from the res publica of ancient Rome. Fascism also borrowed symbols and ideas - its martialism and hybris - from there.
If the ten horns stand for these states after Rome, what is that other different small horn that is speaking arrogantly against God and harassing the holy ones standing for?
When looking into Revelation the ten horns are there. The beastly animal here has traits of all other animals, though, and seven heads, here even more representing a totality of political powers. Where is the different horn? No additional horn but another animal is introduced here (ch.13). With horns like those of a male lamb but a mouth like a dragon's mouth speaking things like the small and different horn did in Daniel's vision.
What things? Here (Revelation 13) forcing the worship of images / idols of political power, there (Daniel 7) changing times and law.
What kind of power is that, different from the others yet having great influence through speech and manipulation?
Towards the end of the visions of Revelation (ch.17) again a wild animal with ten horns appears, here  explicitly representing the kings of the earth. The small horn? Not there, but again something else instead: the infamous whore, mother of whores, being a great city by which she is ruling and deceiving and whoring with the powers of the earth.
Very likely it is about religion, cultic idolatry affiliated with state power, in its different manifestations:

Cesarean cult (for dissenters murderous; comp. Letters of Pliny to Emperor Trajan, ~110 C.E.)
Church authority suppressing freedom, pleasing and at the same time abusing the political powers (e.g. popes ruling arrogantly,  commanding armies, and investing the title of Kaiser during middle ages)
different types of misleading and abusive religious power (comp. motives of / allusions to anti-christ in gospels and letters, e.g. to the disciples in Thessalonich)
Comment: I can follow your argument but the ten has also been argued by many to be components parts of Rome itself, not pieces left over after its fall. Like ten toes on the statue. Still I see your argument and the biblical  thought put into it.
Comment: @Mike. You are right. None of the powers that followed the Roman Empire was as singular in its impact on God's people. In that respect they really rather resembled toes than limbs in their own right.
Comment: about the influence of the Roman Empire on modern society http://www.danxner.com/extramaterials/art003/Final_Project/Influences.htm
Answer: This is one of those questions highly subject to speculation.  As best, one can only off the answer based on their perspective.  Mine is a mild version of Partial-Preterism.

My Answer
Domitian, aka, Titus Flavius Caesar Domitianus Augustus
The 11th Emperor of Rome
Points of Interest
The horns are identified as kings in Daniel 7:24, so we are looking for a king of a kingdom, either present or past.  We find the fulfillment in the past, so a proposed future search seems to be unnecessary.

The horn is a member of the fourth beast (v7), as were the ten before it.
Three horns were uprooted before it (v8,24).
It waged war against God's people and was defeating them (v21).
Blasphemes
Attempted to change set times and laws
God's people given over to it for 3 1/2 years (v25)

Interpretation
This interpretation hinges upon identifying the historic Roman Empire as the fourth beast of Revelation.  Specifically, it began in 31 BC with Caesar Augustus.  Julius Caesar, before him, was during Rome when it was a republic, and is not counted in the list of kings.
Figured this way, Domitian is the 11th king (Emperor / Caesar).  Before him, were his father, Vespasian, and his brother, Titus.  The followed on the wake of a level of unrest in the 'year of the four emperors', 69AD.  The three could be interpreted as the three horns who fell.  Eusebius of Caesarea wrote that Domitian persecuted Christians heavily towards the end of his reign.
Specifically, it was Domitian that attempted to implement wide-spread legal changes and changes to the calendar, at the prophecy predicted.  He also was worshipped as God, and had many temples set up for worship to himself.  He even had a 25' or so statue of himself erected in Ephesus.
Accord with Revelation
This accords with the passage in Revelation 17, speaking of the beast with 7 heads.  Here, overlooking the three short-lived emperors in 69 AD (all of who, it can be said, did not rule in Judea), Domitian is the 8th.  The 7th king would have been Titus, his brother, and remained only a 'short time', reigning 2 years and 3 months.  Domitian, Titus' brother and also Vespasian's son, would have been "one of the seven".
Both of these, when interpreted this way, would accord with a historical interpretation of much of Daniel and the book of Revelation.
Answer: The United States.
To explain this, we first must understand that the Context is Figurative/representitive of another reality, as the 'natural'(historical/grammatical) method applied to this text makes no sense and "does violence to the text"(per J.N. Darby-Father of Dispensationalism).
We also must employ an important rule of Figurative Interpretation:
If the symbol is interpreted in one place in Scripture, then the SAME INTERPRETATION must be applied throughout Scripture(both Old and New Testaments), unless God changes it(gives the same symbol a different meaning).
In Dan. 7:7, Daniel sees,"A fourth Beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great *IRON(*not gold, not silver, not brass) TEETH.
To understand IRON, we turn to Dan. 2:40,"And the FOURTH KINGDOM shall be strong as IRON"-this coincides with Nebuchadnezzar's Statue (vs 33**)"...had legs of IRON**".
Since Figurative "Iron"="Iron", then "Fourth Kingdom"="Fourth beast", and since these kingdoms and beasts are Progressive(one succeeding another), then the 4th Beast HAS TO BE ROME! The Greeks were the 3rd Beast in succession, represented by BRASS, the 2nd Beast was the Mede/Persians(Silver), and Babylon was GOLD-which Daniel indicated was Babylon in Dan. 2:38.(Thou art this head of GOLD.)
The TEN HORNS which came from Rome are the very same TEN HORNS we see in Rev. 12:3, 13:1, and 17:3. The TEN HORNS are interpreted for us in Rev. 17:12,"The ten horns are 10 kings, which have received NO KINGDOM AS YET(during the time of John); but receive power as kings one hour with the beast."  Since the Context is Figurative, the 'one hour' doesn't mean 60 minutes; but it is a relatively short period of time, compared to the rest of the Heads of which the Horns rest on.
These Horns can also be interpreted 'kingdoms', since in Rev. 12:3 they appear "without crowns"; in Rev. 13:1, they appear "with crowns"-signifying their arrival to power.
But back to Dan. 7:8, and 25-26, which are the explanation of it: "...another shall rise after them and subdue 3 Kings" Notice that it didn't say 'entirely remove them', and we see in Revelations, it is the Beast with 7 Heads and TEN HORNS, not '8 horns'.
Therefore, 3 HORNS from the HEAD of ROME were 'subdued' to make room for this 'little horn'. FRANCE, SPAIN, ENGLAND, all former colonies of Rome; now nations in their own right, WERE MOVED(subdued) to make room for this "little horn". The 'little' means 'brief', insignificant(for a season), lesser(in terms of gathering colonies and expanding their rule globally). Compared to the French, British and Spanish Empires, the US is insignificant.
But it is DIVERSE(different) from the others: The US ORIGINATED AS A DEMOCRACY, which none of the other "horns" have done; consequently, it's government is expressed as "The Will Of The People", vs Divine Decree which the other "Horns" originated as. THERE IS NO ONE NATIONALITY GROUP OR RACE, IT IS THE MIXTURE OF ALL RACES AND NATIONALITIES. It is as if to say the "Tower of Babel" being built all over again. There was NO NATURAL GEOLOGICAL BORDERS which 'separate' us; the US occupied a land that was largely barren of people.
The GREAT BOASTS are what distinquish this Horn:,"We will conquer space", "We will conquer disease, poverty, drug abuse, over-population, global warming," etc. WE will adjudicate and resolve all conflicts, including Israel's conflict with it's Arab neighbors and Palestinians. We have exported our goods and entertainment until they become the standard by which all others are measured 'corrupting the earth' as we have progressively lowered the bar of acceptable standards.
The "Names of Blasphemy" are 'Man is god': this is what Jesus was put to death for, Matt. 26:65 spells this out,"...He has spoken blasphemy; what further need we have we of witnesses? Behold, now ye have heard blasphemy". This is after Jesus said,"Hereafter shall ye see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in clouds of heaven."
Secular Humanism is the religion of "Man as god." This has become increasingly the 'religion' of this land-"...Having a 'form' of godliness, but denying the power thereof."(2 Tim. 3:5) We see this in the laws being changed to permit those things God calls evil, and exclude those things God calls good. This is how the "saints are worn out"(Dan. 7:24)
The "spirits of man" identify the 'eyes' of this horn, versus the "Spirits of God" which are the "7 eyes, which are the 7 Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth."(Rev. 5:6). The eyes- "see"(know/understand). Just as God's eyes "see" all and understand all there is, so does this little horn "attempt" to see all, and understand all there is-from man's perspective. It is no accident that the major reasearch, and greatest minds from around the world are brought here, to 'solve' mankind's  problems.
Conclusively, the 'little horn', in this instance represents the United States.

Since "little horn" has been used in regards to Antiochus Epiphanes, and I have stated that this Figurative symbol MUST be interpreted the same, unless it is interpreted differently in the text, I will explain how the "little horn" CAN mean Antiochus Epiphanes in Dan. 8:9(NOT IN DAN. 7:8) and also refer to the United States.
To understand this, one must understand the principle of Dual Fulfillment: just as the prophecies of Christ include His 1st time appearance as the Suffering Servant of Isa. 53, and yet also refer to His Coming as King and Lord, reigning in Jerusalem(Zech. 14:3-4), so also the "little horn" must be understood.
The "Little Horn" of Dan. 8:9 comes from one of the 4 Notable Horns; which ARE NOT THE SAME AS 10 HORNS, rather, they come from the 4 Generals(Seleucus, Ptolemy, Cassander, and Lysimachus), that ruled in Alexander the Great's stead, in the dividing of his kingdom. Their kingdoms were North, South, East, and West, and Seleucus was "south and east-towards the Pleasant Land".(vs 9)
Antiochus Epiphanes was indeed a king who 'connived' his way to power(Dan. 11:21), was AGAINST the Holy Covenant(vs 28-he put a statue of Zeus in the wing of the Temple, causing the "Abomination that makes Desolate", commanded all the people to renounce God and worship his pantheon-at the pain of death(this is found in 1 Maccabees). He of course died, after Judas Maccabees and his brothers repeatedly defeated him, casting him out of Judea, where it is reported he went to his death being eaten alive by worms(2 Maccabees)
But this DOES NOT explain the "king" of the time of the end(Dan. 11:36-45), after which in Dan. 12:1, there comes a 'Time of Jacob's Trouble' and everyone that is "written in the book" shall be delivered. This is also referred to when Jesus said,"When you shall see the Abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place*(whoso readeth, let him understand*)(Matt. 24:15)
To Summarize why it CANNOT BE Antichus Epiphanes:
1)Then Jesus got it ALL WRONG!
" When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)
It CANNOT be Antiochus Epiphanes-he died 160+ years prior to Jesus's statement. So it must be someone else, and the key is Dan. 11:37,"..he shall magnify himself above all."
The 'hermeneutic' used to interpret this passage as 'Antiochus Epiphanes' is Covenant Theology. Covenant Theology attempts to 'reconcile' all of God's dealings with men through a simple formula: "Covenant of Works"(Law), and "Covenant of Grace". According to Covenant Theology, after 70AD, we are no more "Under the Law", but under "Grace". Therefore, any fulfillment of God's promises to the Nation of Israel HAD TO BE FULFILLED before 70AD, or they are fulfilled by the 'Israel of God'(Mistakenly called the church). Covenant Theology does not care if the historical timeline(if it is after the 1st Century), or historical evidence doesn't match(Book of Daniel written about 160BC-even though Josephus records Alexander the Great reading it(340BC). It is content with applying this formula and attempts to explain away the obvious fallacies "spiritually"(Where is the division of the mountains in Zech. 14:4, the binding of Satan in Rev. 20:1-3).
The problem is Jesus Himself apparently hadn't consulted them before making His statement.
IF: We are to look forward(and not backward) at a future Abomination that Desolates,
THEN: Antiochus Epiphanes(although a 'type') CANNOT BE the "little Horn".
So then, where do we look?
The 4th Beast of Daniel is obviously Rome-for the above mentioned reasons Covenant
Theology 'had' to make it Greece(Rome being during and after 70AD blows their theory out of the water).
Since the 10 Horns(not 4) are what this little horn comes out of, historically the Roman Colonies(unlike the nations such as Greece, Egypt which preexisted Rome) became nations of their own right. They were crowned(Rev. 13:1), as opposed to the Time of John(Rev. 12:3) when the Heads were crowned.
But you must understand the Mystery of the "Eyes" to make the connection.
The "Eyes" are not the 7 All Seeing Eyes of God seen in Rev. 5:6,

" stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes,
  which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth."

Rather:

"I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn,
  before whom there were three of the first horns
  plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the
  eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things."

These are the "Eyes of Man" which opposes God in all He does.
This "Little Horn" has knowledge-in fact, is the combination of ALL KNOWLEDGE-OF MAN. Yet all he does(changing the seasons and times, boasting and blaspheming) opposes God. The United States is the composite of all the nations of the world, with all their knwoledge. It is an entirely man-made nation, with man-made borders, a man-made system of goverment from it's conception which exalts the Greek Ideal-that man is God!
This is Secular Humanism-it exalts itself "Mankind" over any other force-it doesn't recognize any other. Since this is the "boast" of the little horn" of Dan. 7:8, it is conclusive that the United States is not 'satisfied' with adjudicating the rest of the world's problems, it also wants to "solve" the problems of Israel and their neighbors-by putting in a plan which will divide Jerusalem(read-Road Map for Peace) and leave Jerusalem in the hands of the UN.
This of course will put Israel at the mercy of her enemies, which have sworn to annihilate her. It is then that all the prophecies will be fulfilled, and the Great Battle will take place-of which the Lord will descend with His Armies(Joel 3) and defeat them.
It is amazing in my lifetime how far down the road we have come to fulfilling this prophecy.
Comment: @algiogia The comparison you are making of the 4th Beast of Daniel and the Beast(s) of Revelations is not a valid one, although they encompass many of the same truths. Chapter 7 of Daniel follows a progression of earthly kingdoms: Babylon, Mede/Persian, Greek, Roman. These are kingdoms that followed in progressive order; Daniel himself witnessed the 1st two. When speaking of the Antichrist, one must account for 1) Who he is, 2) Where he ascended, 3) What is his nature and purpose, 4) Where in history does he make his appearance/reappearance. Then one can accurately ascertain the "8th" beast.
Comment: @All-Thank you for your DV's without explanation; however, it would be nice if you could give me the same benefit of a comment you have given other answers. BTW, I'm not 'vindictive'-I won't 'DV' your answers just because You've 'DV'd mine. Thx
Comment: After careful reading of your answer I've changed my vote. The logic is much easier to follow that I first thought, I think I reacted against the polemic style at first (or perhaps the pre-edit version was a lot different idk). I have one particular request: CAPS are almost universally interpreted as shouting on SE, and aren't that helpful as a form of emphasis. I suggest you use one of the many others.
Comment: My only comment here is concerning your statement that the US originated as a Democracy. That is simply not true. The US originated, by the terms of the Constitution for the united States, as  republic, and the people are guaranteed a republican form of government.
Comment: @DrFry-I get it-we were established as a Constitutional Republic. However, the means by which we exercise our will in this republic is through democracy; a Greek Ideal, not founded in God's Word but in the writings of Socrates and Plato. The principle is that the "people", not "God", determine their destiny through their right to vote; either themselves or their elected representitives, and whatever measure is passed(and upheld) becomes the Law of the Land. This is how the "little horn" is diverse from the 1st 3.
Comment: @DrFry-(Cont) Whereas Britain, Spain, France were originally ruled as monarchies-the Divine decree of monarchs was seen God's will being exercised on earth, the US from it's inception was a "Constitutional Republic". The acknowledgement of "God" in our government comes from the faith of our founding fathers-NO WHERE is "God" mentioned in the Constitution. This is because from the inception the Federalists and Anti-Federalists alike saw the imposition of religion as tyranny, and sought to remove the vestiges of a "state religion", while acknowledging one's personal choice in the matter.
Comment: @Tau I agree the little horn cannot be Antiochus and I also agree on the interpretation of the "eyes", but I disagree with Rome being the 4th beast. Revelation 17 says "The beast which was and is not, is himself also the eight and is one of the seven..." referring to the last beast (i.e. the Antichrist). That should be the 4th beast of Daniel. One of the previous kingdom will revive as the last beast, probably a descendant of the Greek kingdom. The "is not", written at the time of the Roman empire, should exclude it is Rome.
Comment: @algiogia To understand the Mystery of Iniquity(Antichrist), as opposed to the Mystery of Godliness(Christ), one must 'begin at the beginning'. There were 2 "Trees" in the Garden- one is the "Christ"-The Tree of Life, the other is the "Antichrist"-The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Both "Trees" become "kingdoms"; 1 is the Kingdom of God, the other is the Kingdom of the Anti-god. And to this very day, BOTH Kingdoms are searching for souls, 1 to save, the other to destroy.


Fresh half and half curdles in hot coffee

Question: I have a specific travel mug that I use on occasion that will curdle the creamer. The creamer I used is only a few days old and it only happens in this mug. It's a stainless steel double walled with lid. I have no idea why it does this. When I use a normal mug, I have no issues.
Answer: One possible difference is that when you pour coffee (or any other hot liquid) into a ceramic mug, the liquid cools a fair bit (the heat is "lost" to heating the ceramic cup). The double-walled stainless mug is designed to lose as little heat as possible, and the inner wall has much less thermal mass than the ceramic. So, when you pour the creamer into the stainless cup, the coffee is hotter.
The simplest way to test if this is the case, would be to measure with an accurate thermometer. And the solution, then, would be to allow the coffee to cool some before adding the creamer.
Alternatively, temper in the creamer. To do this, put the creamer in the cup first, then add a little coffee, stir, add a little more coffee, stir, then add the rest. The idea is to slowly heat the creamer up to the coffee's temperature. This should prevent curdling, even if your coffee is near-boiling.
It could be some residue on the cup, but I doubt it, because stainless is fairly easy to clean. Also, it'd be hard to imagine enough residue to curdle the cream without also being very evident in the taste of the coffee. Stainless steel itself is pretty non-reactive, so its probably not a reaction with the coffee or cream.
Answer: Are you by any chance cleaning the mugs differently? If you're using something acidic (vinegar maybe) to clean the stainless mug then it might be residue causing the curdling.


How does adjusting the brightness on my LCD screen affect the photo?

Question: On my DSLR, there is a setting to adjust the LCD screen's brightness level. If I were to turn this setting up (make the LCD brighter), does this affect the quality of the picture? I would assume that something looks nice at a "brighter level", is going to look darker than I expected once I transfer it to the computer. Is there an appropriate method to compensate for modifying the LCD brightness? (maybe turn the exposure down a stop?)
Answer: The LCD brightness is in no way related to the photographs taken by your camera.
It's usually just a way of saving some battery power as well as being able to bring down the brightness in dark locations.
However, it may cause you to think your photo is unexposed when it potentially isn't, if used on a low brightness setting. In this case, it's better to check the histogram. Mine is at the default (halfway) brightness.
Comment: I usually have the opposite problem -- I think my photo is properly exposed, when really it's a stop underexposed. Use the histogram to verify exposure; don't trust your eyes!
Answer: LCD brightness affects your perception of the photo, not the photo.
At worst, a poorly adjusted LCD will cause you to make bad settings decisions. Make your decisions based on data in the histogram to avoid such errors.
The goal when adjusting brightness is that white areas emit as much light as a white object would reflect. This means the LCD should be dimmer in low light, and brighter in bright light.
Proper adjustment is difficult to maintain. It's impossible to perfect without hardware. Just stick to the histogram.
Answer: While LCD brightness setting is not directly linked to exposure, it still may have some effect on resulting photos.
Brighter display uses more current, so the number of photos that can be taken before depleting the battery will go slightly down with a brighter LCD setting.
By using a bright display in dim environment, you will effectively dazzle yourself by looking at it and this will negatively affect your ability to compose (and manually focus) a shot for a short period of time after that.
A display too dim may let some problems (e.g. wrong focus, distracting elements, blur) on photo stay unnoticed; this is especially a problem when using Live View to compose.


Subsites showing on the quick launch bar

Question: I have created some subsites that only one person has access to.  When I log in as different people they see different quick launch sites.  Some see the subsites that they do not have access to some do not.  I would like for people to only see the sites that they have access to.  I am using 2007.  And I do not know much
Answer: This is interesting because the Quick Launch control should apply security trimming to the control.  This would mean the logged in user should only see what they should have rights to see logged in.  My thought is that you have permissions that aren't correct.   I would revisit permissions.   Read only access for users would also make the links appear.  Perhaps we used all authenticated users and added to groups?  Just a thought.  Perhaps test different solutions with a test user.  See if they see links that you didn't give them access to.  If they do than something is very odd.


SQL Server disk design on an ISCSI SAN

Question: Its standard practice to separate log and data files to separate disks away from the OS
(tempdb, backups and swap file also)
Does this logic still make sense when your drives are all SAN based and your LUNS are not carved of specific disk or raid sets -they are just part of the x number of drives on the SAN and the LUN is just space allocation
Answer: Logs and data drives have different data access patterns that are in conflict with each other (at least in theory) when they share a drive.
Log Writes
Log access consists of a very large number of small sequential writes.  Somewhat simplistically, DB logs are ring buffers containing a list of instructions to write data items out to particular locations on the disk.  The access pattern consists of a large number of small sequential writes that must be guaranteed to complete - so they are written out to disk.
Ideally, logs should be on a quiet (i.e. not shared with anything else) RAID-1 or RAID-10 volume.  Logically, you can view the process as the main DBMS writing out log entries and one or more log reader threads that consume the logs and write the changes out to the data disks (in practice, the process is optimised so that the data writes are written out immediately where possible).  If there is other traffic on the log disks, the heads are moved around by these other accesses and the sequential log writes become random log writes.  These are much slower, so busy log disks can create a hotspot which acts as a bottleneck on the whole system.
Data Writes
(updated) Log writes must be committed to the disk (referred to as stable media) for a transaction to be valid and eligible to commit.  One can logically view this as log entries being written and then used as instructions to write data pages out to the disk by an asynchronous process.  In practice the disk page writes are actually prepared and buffered at the time the log entry is made, but they do not need to be written immediately for the transaction to be committed.  The disk buffers are written out to stable media (disk) by the Lazy Writer process (Thanks to Paul Randal for pointing this out) which This Technet article discusses in a bit more detail.
This is a heavily random access pattern, so sharing the same physical disks with logs can create an artificial bottleneck on system performance.  The log entries must be written for the transaction to commit, so having random seeks slowing down this process (random I/O is much slower than sequential log I/O) will turn the log from a sequenital into a random access device.  This creates a serious performance bottleneck on a busy system and should be avoided.  The same applies when sharing temporary areas with log volumes.
The role of caching
SAN controllers tend to have large RAM caches, which can absorb the random access traffic to a certain extent.  However, for transactional integrity it is desirable to have disk writes from a DBMS guaranteed to complete.  When a controller is set to use write-back caching, the dirty blocks are cached and the I/O call is reported as complete to the host.
This can smooth out a lot of contention problems as the cache can absorb a lot of I/O that would otherwise go out to the physical disk.  It can also optimise the parity reads and writes for RAID-5, which lessens the effect on performance that RAID-5 volumes have.
These are the characteristics that drive the 'Let the SAN deal with it' school of thought, althoug this view has some limitations:

Write-back caching still has failure modes that can lose data, and the controller has fibbed to the DBMS, saying blocks have been written out to disk where in fact they haven't.  For this reason, you may not want to use write-back caching for a transactional application, particlarly something holding mission-critical or financial data where data integrity problems could have serious consequences for the business.
SQL Server (in particular) uses I/O in a mode where a flag (called FUA or Forced Update Access) forces physical writes to the disk before the call returns.  Microsoft has a certification program and many SAN vendors produce hardware that honours these semantics (requirements summarised here).  In this case no amount of cache will optimise disk writes, which means that log traffic will thrash if it is sitting on a busy shared volume.
If the application generates a lot of disk traffic its working set may overrun the cache, which will also cause the write contention issues.
If the SAN is shared with other applications (particularly on the same disk volume), traffic from other applications can generate log bottlenecks.
Some applications (e.g. data warehouses) generate large transient load spikes that make them quite anti-social on SANs.

Even on a large SAN separate log volumes are still recommended practice.  You may get away with not worring about layout on a lightly used application.  On really large applications, you may even get a benefit from multiple SAN controllers.  Oracle publish a series of data warehouse layout case studies where some of the larger configurations involve multiple controllers.
Put responsibility for performance where it belongs
On something with large volumes or where performance could be an issue, make the SAN team accountable for the performance of the application.  If they are going to ignore your recommendations for configuration, then make sure that management are aware of this and that responsibility for system performance lies in the appropriate place.  In particular, establish acceptable guidelines for key DB performance statistics like I/O waits or page latch waits or acceptable application I/O SLA's.
Note that having responsibility for performance split across multiple teams creates an incentive to finger-point and pass the buck to the other team.  This is a known management anti-pattern and a formula for issues that drag out for months or years without ever being resolved.  Ideally, there should be a single architect with authority to specify application, database and SAN configuration changes.
Also, benchmark the system under load.  If you can arrange it, secondhand servers and direct-attach arrays can be purchased quite cheaply on Ebay.  If you set up a box like this with one or two disk arrays you can frig with the physical disk configuration and measure the effect on performance.
As an example, I have done a comparison between an application running on a large SAN (an IBM Shark) and a two-socket box with a direct attach U320 array.  In this case, £3,000 worth of hardware purchased off ebay outperformed a £1M high-end SAN by a factor of two - on a host with roughly equivalent CPU and memory configuration.
From this particular incident, it might be argued that having something like this lying around is a very good way to keep SAN administrators honest.
Comment: Just happened to read this from a link you put in another answer. This part of you answer is wrong "Data items are written to the data disks by the log reader. This consumes log entries and writes the data items out to disk." Data page writes are performed by the checkpoint and lazy-writer processes in the buffer pool, and have nothing at all to do with log reader processes. Data page writes also do not generate log records.
Comment: Is that a cut'n'paste or THE BEST ANSWER EVER ON SERVERFAULT!!!!!! :)
Comment: No, I'm just a quick typist ;-}
Comment: You are the man.
Comment: Well spotted.  I've updated the article to fix it.
Answer: I'm assuming that the Equallogic tag and the content of the request means that you are tallking about an Equallogic SAN. What follows is specifically about Equallogic and it does not apply to other SAN types.
With Equallogic arrays the specific disks used for volumes can't be specified as precisely as they can with, say, EMC Clariion arrays so the approach has to be a bit different.
Equallogic architecture is very automated and dynamic. Its basic building block is the array unit not RAID packs\groups within an array as seen in other SANs. Each array is entirely configured for RAID 5, 6, 10 or 50 although this does not imply that there is only one RAID group per array, you just never get to decide or interact with them at that level. You put arrays into Storage pools and your pools then belong to a Storage Group. The Storage Group has a cluster\virtual ip-address that you use as the iSCSI Discovery target for all volumes within that group - the EQL Group management software and host MPIO stack handles the ip level rediredection needed to actually route to the most appropriate port on the individual arrays when requesting blocks of data but that is something you have little or no ability to control.
Storage volumes are assigned from the total free space in each pool. All volumes within a pool are spread across all arrays in that pool (well up to a max of 4 separate arrays) in order to distribute network IO across the total number of network interfaces (2-4 per Eql array depending on model) and IO across as many controllers  as possible. The Equallogic management software monitors volume\array performance over time and dynamically optimizes the distribution of blocks across the member arrays. In general unless you know what you are doing you should put all arrays in a single pool and let it do its thing just remember to ensure that you configure your high speed disks (SAS 10k\15k) with RAID 10, medium speed with RAID 50 or 5 in order to ensure that the optimization process actually chooses the real high performance drives. It may take quite a few days (7+) to actually get to an optimum state but in general it should hit a balanced distribution quite fast as it immediately distributes volumes over as many arrays as it can (again up to 4) when they are initially created.
To a rough approximation you will have somewhere between 2500-5000 IOPs per PS array depending on drive type and RAID type. If you provide enough total IOPs then the automated management process should eventually give you good performance even if you simply lump all volumes into a single pool.
However if you want to guarantee that your logs, databases, temp stores, OS drives etc are actually isolated from each other you can do a couple of things. Firstly you can define a RAID preference for a volume which will guarantee that the specific volume is always stored only on arrays of that RAID type (if they are present in the pool the volume belongs to). Secondly you can define tiered storage pools that only contain arrays that deliver the various grades of performance you require for that particular tier and then distribute your volumes into the appropriate pools. The health warning that comes with this approach is that you will generally need a lot of arrays for this to actually deliver better overall performance - that may be less important to you than guaranteeing the performance on your critical volumes though so it is often still the best choice. Dell's reference architecture for Oracle DB's uses one pool with 2 RAID 10 arrays for Data, Voting disk and the OCR, and a separate pool with a single RAID 5 array for the Flash Recovery Area.
At all points in time with Equallogic you should ask yourself if the decisions you are making with regard to enforced partitioning are going to provide better aggregate performance for your volumes in terms of available network interfaces, disk spindles and controllers. If you can't answer that then opt for the minimum number of pools and leave it handle the details or get an Equallogic specialist in to do a real design. If you only have one array then there is nothing you can do in terms of separating volumes.
Answer: We store our DBs on single SAN boxes but with separate data, log and backup LUNs, each on different disk groups, tiered by speed - with have our logs on RAID 10 15Krpm LUNs, data on RAID 1 10/15krpm LUNs and backup onto RAID 5 7.2krpm LUNs. We also present logs and data through different controllers on the same SAN.
Answer: Great question!
First take a look at Brent Ozar's "Steel Cage BlogMatch" debate on this issue.
At our company, for most servers, we put Data and Logs on the same SAN drive, and leave it up to the SAN team to make sure everything works right.
I'm starting to think this isn't the best strategy, especially for higher-volume servers. The underlying problem is that I really have no way to verify that the SAN team is really doing anything more than slapping together enough drives for the space we need. We don't run IO benchmarks against the SAN drives from our side or anything, we kind of just assume that they are "doing their job" (adjusting for performance as well as space), which is probably a bit naive.
My other thought is that the kind of access that data vs logs need is different. I'll try to find the article I read recently that was talking about how the two different drive types really should be optimized in very different ways (I think one needed optimization for sequential writes, the other needed optimization for random reads, something like that.)
Answer: In short, yes, you would create separate volumes for SQL Server data files, log files, and TempDB data and log files.
Since you tagged your question with Equallogic, please read through the free Dell Reference Architecture Guide: Deploying Microsoft® SQL Server® with Dell™ EqualLogic™ PS5000 Series Storage Arrays (registration required) before designing your solution. Often you'll find that guidance on specific configurations can differ significantly from generic advice.
Answer: I would agree with BradC (+1) in terms of performance.  Generally, a good SAN would have more raw I/O than you could expect to use.
It's still a good idea to separate out your BACKUPs from your live system (Obvious I know, but if I had a £1 for every time I see this...)
Also, keeping the tempdb away from the log files is recommended.  The SAN guy's tent to roll their eyes at you when you start wanting "different buckets" (technical term) for Logs, Data and Temp, but if you tell them it's so you can gauge the different amount of data IO going to each area and get them to show you their fancy performance graphs!
Just double/double check that the SAN guy's have set it up right for you.  If you want RAID 10 then insist on it (I did) even though they kept saying their RAID 5 has no performance penalty.
(For "file based" operations, RAID 5 is fine.  For intensive writes, as soon as you fill up the write buffer your screwed!)
Comment: +1 for social engineering the storage nerds.
Answer: Be aware of all the blending of terms here aswell..
Generally, and very basic:

Array = a pool of disks in a RAID setting (like RAID5)
Volume = a portion of an array presented to the host on the SAN with a LUN

You can have several volumes on the same array, wich is something to remember when you are doing high-grade optimizations discussed in this thread.
The key is what several others have mentioned (don't forget it), seperate the data/log/backup on different drive spindles, not just separate volumes.
Edit: and Helvick above gave you a -great- answer about Equallogic SANs!

SQL Server disk design on an ISCSI SAN


How can I make my enemies flee?

Question: The "But You Can't Hide" achievement requires that you kill 100 enemies while they are running away. How can I make enemies flee in order to get the achievement?
Answer: The simplest way to get this achievement as a demon hunter is to get into melee range of the ranged demons and enemies you find (this includes Succubi, Skeletal Archers, and others). They'll run to stay away, so you can simply kill them while they run.
No need to get fear on hit equipment. It's an alternative, but getting specific equipment just for an achievement may be a waste of gold.
It's probably better to do this while on Normal (I got it without even trying on act III), since these monsters rarely go without the company of melee hitters, and getting into melee range of those on Nightmare or higher difficulties may be a suicide.
Answer: Or you can pair with a Witch Doctor that uses Horrify and have him/her fear while you dps!
Witch Doc's Horrify Skill
Answer: Melee weapons, helms, and offhand items* can have the % chance to fear on hit affix. Stack it as high as you can to get this achievement quickly. You can probably find some of these items pretty easily on the auction house.
* Use your browser search function for the word "fear"
Answer: You'll need to use an item that causes Fear on hit, or an ability that causes Fear, such as Elemental Arrow with the Screaming Skull rune.
Answer: Fallen will also run whenever any monster dies near them, despite them being melee.  Really, no special effort is required for this achievement as long as you're playing a Demon Hunter:  You'll get enough runners by the end of normal difficulty.

How can I make my enemies flee?


Can I buy equipment and weapons or can they only be acquired as drops or quest rewards?

Question: I am a lvl 10 Arms Warrior. I was wondering if it is possible to buy equipment and weapons from a shop?  Or is the only way to get new items by doing quests and getting drops from monsters?
Comment: With the revamp of all of the low level zones you should get pretty solid gear for every slot as you level through the zones just by completing quests (Added bonus, several of the zones are also really fun now!).
Answer: Yes. You can buy items from shop. While in Stormwind you can press 'm' to show map and then select to show you vendors. If you are looking for Heavy Armor, which I think you do, you can check the Stormwind Heavy Armor Vendor.
However, at your level it's not likely to find better armor in shops than what you get from completing quests(until later when you will have faction vendors). Also, you might check out the Stormwind auction house where you might find some good stuff.
From level 15, some of the best gear you can get, will be looted from dungeons (try RDF).
Other than this, most likely you will find Blacksmiting a very good profession for your Warrior. Professions help you a lot to gear up to lvl 85. Hope this helps in a way. If you have any other questions feel free to ask.
PS: You seem new to WOW so maybe try some of the guides out there, they really help a lot.
Answer: One thing to consider when looking to buy gear is how long you will be wearing that gear.  At level 10 (and really sub 50), you'll be leveling pretty quickly, so you'll naturally come across better gear due to your increased level, higher level quests and instances.
Honestly, at level 10, I'd do another 5 levels or so of quests and then start hitting up the Dungeon Finder.  Instance drops are usually significantly better than most quest rewards or random drops and usually better than stuff you can buy from vendors or on the auction house.
The only items that I typically look to buy at low levels are the odd slots - neck, rings, trinkets, since there aren't many drops of those in 1-60 content.
Answer: Realistically speaking, to generalize points somewhat highlighted by the other answers, there is absolutly no point to buying any generic (White Name Color) item from any vendor, ever.
The items sold by such vendors are both ridiculously overpriced and sup-par to any item you will get either from a quest reward or from a dungeon drop.
I've personally played WoW since before it was released (I played the open beta) and the only time I've seen it as a good idea to buy white vendor items is when I make a new character, and can give said character large amounts of gold from my other characters. At that point money is not an issue and buying the character a full set of gear right off the bat speeds up my early leveling a bit until I reach the minimum level to start whatever dungeon I choose to start.
Brandon does have a good point in that sometimes you can find items from vendors that are otherwise rare as drops until higher levels, ie: neck peices , trinkets ect. Those would be pretty much the only exception to the rule.
Auction House purchases are also exceptions to this rule, as they are not 'vendors', but rather a hyped up trading system between players.
Keep in mind as brandon said, that you will be leveling very quickly, so quickly in fact that spending a large amount of money on ANYTHING before your at least level 60 or so is a waste of time, as you will be replacing your gear on a rather constant basis, so everything is pretty much a 'hold-me-off-until' type of item.


Secure Encrypted Chat Protocol

Question:
Possible Duplicate:
Is there a way to negotiate a secret between 2 parties with no prior knowledge?

Imagine two clients who want to establish a secure connection over a server. Both clients have a trustworthy public key from the server, so they can establish a secure connection to the server. If the clients would now exchange public keys, the server could obviously do a man-in-the-middle-attack. Is there any way to prevent this? (So that, if the establishment of the connection succeeds, the clients are guaranteed to have a secure channel and the server cannot eavesdrop.)
Comment: So the answer is pretty much: It's impossible, that is, there is no known method. (Without cheesy things like waiting a constant amount of time.)
Answer: Sounds like you could probably do a Diffie Hellman to create a temporary session key and use that to symmetrically-encrypt the communications.
Comment: Please include in your answer why the server is now prevented to do a man-in-the-middle-attack. :)

Secure Encrypted Chat Protocol


Squeeze/Lenny compilation : Library Link error

Question: I've got a problem here : I have a C++ Library ("DataTsBroad") and a C++ Test app ("DataTsBroadTest"), to test it.
Actually, the Lib and the Test app are both compiled an a Debian Lenny.
Now, i want to continue to compile my Test app on a Debian Lenny (customer constraint), but I would compile my lib on a Squeeze or a Wheezy to work on the last Debian releases.
So, I successfully compiled my Lib on a Squeeze, But, after, when I try to compile my Test app with this Lib on the Lenny, it fails!
There is a Link Error:

Linking CXX executable DataTsBroadTest
    /home/nis/pezierg/test/ProductMak/Export/DataTsBroad/L64/Release/libDataTsBroad64.so:
    undefined reference to `std::ctype::_M_widen_init() const@GLIBCXX_3.4.11'
    collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
    make[2]: *** [DataTsBroadTest] Error 1
    make[1]: *** [CMakeFiles/DataTsBroadTest.dir/all] Error 2
    make: * [all] Error 2

The problem is certainly due to ostream C++ Lib, I tried to comment all it's uses in my Lib and it works.
But how can I really fix the problem?
Answer: The problem seems to come from use a different version of Glibc: you compiled the library on Squeeze and the application on Lenny (with the lib from Squeeze).
Take a look to the output of:
ldd /home/nis/pezierg/test/ProductMak/Export/DataTsBroad/L64/Release/libDataTsBroad64.so


How do I use passive insight checks?

Question: On page 26 of the DMG, it describes a passive insight check and gives an example of using it in a social encounter. Could you help me with it and how to use it? Step by step would be appreciated
Comment: characters generally do not 'use' their passive incite. It is passive after-all. It is a target number for DM's NPC skill checks. From whose perspective are you asking from? gm or pc?
Comment: You might find some use in http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13891/passive-perception-question?rq=1 which asks for help with passive perception.
Comment: http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/16461/how-to-roll-perception-checks-for-characters-who-arent-actively-looking?lq=1 also looks at the perception variant of passive observation
Comment: GM? I don't really understand passive checks at all could you help, from the dm's perspective :)
Answer: The passive insight check is not something that is rolled or actively used. It is more like armor class or a reflex defense, a number which the opponent must beat to successfully deceive the character. As such, there is no retrying, just as there is no retrying an armor class or reflex defense.
It is, from a gameplay perspective, a tool to speed up the game and reduce randomness. It's basically the assumption that a character takes 10 on their insight checks on these situations. Beyond that, it assists the DM because calling for insight checks is a sure way to make the PCs realize something is up.
It's the same deal with passive perception, except that's used to stealth rather than deception.
Answer: You've missed a key element in a "passive insight" check — they aren't rolled. You compare the character's Passive Insight score to the difficulty of the check, and determine whether they succeed or not based on that. Applying a penalty wouldn't have any effect at all; future "checks" would still fail, only by a greater amount.
Now, you could apply a small bonus if you chose, reflecting greater exposure to the stimulus. But, at that point, you'd be better off rolling.
Answer: Generally I would have the players passive insights in front of me and if one of them would automatically be able to tell if somebody was acting oddly or lying, then I would give those players a little extra information.
For example, the basic description:
"As you approach, a figure comes up to the bars of the cage and pleads with you to let him free.  The figure is a female elf, dressed in tattered rags, and seems to have been beaten."
If a player had a very high passive insight, I might tell that player the additional:
"The way in which the figure moves appears unnatural, as if the elf is not comfortable with its body"
I wouldn't have somebody "use" their passive insight.  It's more a tool for me to determine how much information to give out without the character making an active check.
Answer: From a GMs perspective:
Passive insight is the DC for any subterfuge (bluff & intimidate) checks made against the PC.
It is the PC's defense against social attacks. Much the way AC is the defense against weapon attacks.
If your NPC is trying to lie to a PC, you roll a Bluff of your NPC against the PC's passive insight. If your bluff does not exceed the PC's insight, you should hint to the PC that something the NPC just said does not sound right.
Comment: Thanks :) is it like a skill check but without the roll or DC
Answer: One of the game design goal of things like passive insight (and passive perception) is to allow the DM to adjudicate scenarios where knowledge of the insight (or perception) test would grant the players knowledge that their characters should not.
Imagine a scenario where the characters are approached by an NPC with a story of woe, that in actual fact is a fabrication to try and lure the characters into a trap.
The NPC needs to make a bluff check, but if, as the DM you call for an insight check to oppose the bluff role, you tip your hand to the players that there is something for their characters to discern.
Enter the passive insight score.

If the NPC's bluff is lower than one of the players passive insight, you can clue them in that something might be afoot by telling them that something doesn't ring true ... with the expectation that they will now try rolling insight.
If the NPC's bluff is higher than everyone in the parties passive insight, none of the characters note anything unusual, though a suspicious player may think to try to roll insight.

As other answers have noted, in order to make this flow most naturally, as the DM you'll want to know the passive insight of your players in advance, and thus avoid having to break out of role play to ask for their characters' stats.
Answer: Passive Insight and Passive Perception are based on your Insight and Perception skills. D&D thought it would be helpful to calculate Insight and Perception as passive skills because when NPCs are lying or when enemies are trying to sneak up on you, your DM would benefit from knowing the Difficulty Class of sneaking up or of lying to the whole party. Also perception is used to look for loot, traps or other details when roaming around dungeons or... any place really.
These passive skills are about how PC perceive their surroundings.
In these cases the 'Passive Skills' have a +10 bonus: the +10 'bonus' is actually an average of the roll the game assumes you make. The game assumes then player rolled a d20 and scored a 10. That is the reason of why these 'skill checks' aren't rolled by your players... and from a perspective of D&D being story, this allows more continuity for when a DM is telling you where are you, what do you see, how are the people around you, what are the npcs saying...
It's all about your DM not being to obvious when asking for perception checks or insight checks, you'll know something is going up. These passive skills help with the suspense and pace! Hope this helps!

How do I use passive insight checks?


Why choose dark navbars?

Question: Been reading about Google's new dark navbar over at ReadWrite. It's funny that ReadWrite, as well as StackExchange, has chosen a dark navbar as well.
Why this trend to choose dark navbars?
Comment: I would disagree with the closure. It's possible to answer the question in terms of visual hierarchy / contrast / etc. This is a visual design answer.
Comment: I've flagged this for closing, as it isn't really possible to answer this question unless a Google employee visits us.
Comment: @adrianh - at the time of the close vote, the question was explicitly about Google's decision, not general trends. Those sorts of question are not on-topic.
Answer: Nav bars need to stand out and be visually distinct. Many if not most sites have a light background with a dark foreground (text); to give a good contrast, a dark navbar on a lighter site is a no-brainer.
Look at the Read Write page and try to imagine a light nav bar; it'd either be clashy (few light colors would work there) or hard to see (white/gray). In addition, black goes with (almost) anything, so it's a good safe choice. Adding colors is always a risk in a design, but adding white and black can generally be done in most color schemes without messing them up.
Answer: I'd say it's a fairly common design choice due to the constraints of the media - rather than a trend.
What do you want a navigation bar to do:
1) You want people to find it easily when they need to navigate
2) You want it to get out of the way visually when people are focussing on the content.
3) In the case of sites like Google, where you have a common bar across multiple services, you want something that's not going to clash visually with different brands / colour schemes / etc.
Since most people present content dark-on-light then (1) and (2) will probably drive you to a navigation bar that's more likely to be light-on-dark so it's obvious what's content and what's nav bar.
(3) is probably going to drive you to neutral colours / greys that avoid colour scheme clashes.
Since most browser chrome is grey, you'll probably want to go for a pretty dark background to clearly separate your navigation from browser navigation / bookmark bars / etc due to (1).
So the design constraints drive you towards a dark grey / black bar.
Answer: Could it not be just for visual design's sake and differentiation (Branding)?
Answer: I recently designed a site with a top strip navbar. I tried lots of different values and colors. I really found that the darker colors anchored the page more effectively than the lighter colors.

Why choose dark navbars?