Good introduction to all things game dev?

Question: I saw a lot of books which cover specific topics, but is there a book or a recommendation of a few books which covers the basic of everything involved in making a game? I know this would only cover the basics, but that would be a good starting point to later read more into specific topics.
Comment: [Windows Game Programming for Dummies](http://www.amazon.com/Windows-Programming-Dummies-Andr%C3%A9-LaMothe/dp/0764503375)!
Answer: If you're about C++ game development then..
Steve Rabin's Introduction to Game Development 2nd Edition.
Mike McShaffrey's Game Coding Complete 3rd Edition.
Gregory and Lander's Game Engine Architecture.
If you just want an overview of general game development (non C++ specific) then might be better to look elsewhere...
Answer: The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses - as making games isn't only about programming.
Comment: It isn't about programming at all. Which isn't a criticism; that is one of the best books on game design. But, like, fyi.
Answer: start with flash, there are plenty of resourcces and some really good books:
http://www.emanueleferonato.com - some good beginner code but the structure and efficency of the code is sometimes bad, but its a good and fast start
also this will probably have better code
http://www.amazon.com/ActionScript-3-0-Game-Programming-University/dp/0789747324/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1302401359&sr=8-1
I skimmed it, it was fairly basic but an excellent start.
http://www.lynda.com/ActionScript-3-tutorials/projects-game-development/366-2.html
a video guide into game development. It depends on your style of learning, if you like just looking at a source code and using that as a starting point, I would recommend the books, but if you're new to programming the video tutorial guide will be great help for you.
finally after getting all that done you'll have a good understanding of object oriented programming, after which you should read:
http://www.amazon.ca/ActionScript-3-0-Design-Patterns-Programming/dp/0596528469
Design Patters will help you effectively create bigger games, and allow you to better transfer your skills to other languages. Don't need to read everything but make sure you read the chapters on inheritance, polymorphism, factory design patterns, and model view component.
However, you decide to learn make sure you actually program the code and not just read or watch it. Pick a sample game you want to learn every 2 weeks and really try to understand the code, where you don't have to reference the book too much - if you get stuck don't look at the ans in the book but try and googleing it, being a good googler and understanding how to read the documents for you language is really helpful. If you do those within maybe the next 5-10 months you should be able to make those games within 2 days (the logic at least) - but at that point you should move the the next plateau
I would then recommend moving onto C# creating games on XNA for xbox live and windows 7. Its a very good game development platform, and will be some good books on it in the next few months (xna just got updated so a lot of material online is still outdated), C# is a lot like as3 so don't spend too much time on it, just get comfortable with the language make a few games then move on.
I would say make a java game next for android, but if you think you're ready learn some C++. But before moving to C++ read: http://www.amazon.com/Data-Structures-Algorithms-Developers-Development/dp/1584504951/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1301897090&sr=1-2 get a good familiarity with algorithms and data structures.
P.S game programming and programming in general are frustrating so don't be demotivated every must go through that battlefield; if you find yourself really feeling comfortable and able to make games/app without much problem you need to move to harder material, because its a trap!


Can powers grant summoned creatures a "Basic Attack"?

Question: Can powers that grant a basic attack, like many of the Warlord powers, be used to grant an attack to a summoned creature?  If so, what does the summoned creature use for its basic attack?
Inspired by Conjuration, Summoning, Pet rules?
Answer: The summoned creature is a valid target of such effects however it has no inherent ability to use basic attacks so the end result is not favorable for you.
The attacks allowed to each summoned creature are as listed for each power.  Currently I am aware of none that grant basic attacks.  Summoned creatures are not granted any basic attacks by default.  Basic attacks are indicated like this  for Melee basic attacks and like this  for Ranged basic attacks.
The Rules Compendium states on p120 in the Commanding the Creature section that, "The Summoned Creature has no actions of its own...The Summoning power determines the special commands that the summoned creature can receive and gives an action type for each command."
Compare Basic Attacks to Opportunity Attacks.
Opportunity Attacks, like Basic Attacks (as Simon notes) are also granted to all creatures (RC p246).  There are many summoned creatures that are explicitly granted Opportunity attacks.  See Phantasmist Stalker for one example, its Opportunity Attack is identical to its normal attack.
From this you can infer that Summoned Creatures do not have Opportunity Attacks by default.  Hence they should have no Basic Attacks as well.
Comment: What I like about this answer is that it is consistent with the rules as written, and unlike my answer, which I believe is also consistent with the rules as written, it doesn't produce the "what damage does the summoned creature's basic attack inflict" problem.
Comment: Thanks, I wasn't 100% convinced of the answer, but I was close. On a reread, I think I have it locked up.  Edit coming.
Answer: As I read Dragons#385, pg54, it talks about intrinsic nature, with respect to the summoned monsters in that particular book. Also, looking at the 'Summon Dretch' It states that this monster, if left uncommanded, attacks or charges, and uses it's listed attack in place of a melee basic attack.
This brings about the notion that a summon monster can charge, which is a basic attack. Furthermore, from reading the monster manual, there are a lot of monster that do not have opportunity attacks listed, but it is assumed that they can preform such basic actions.
It is true that a summoned creature has no action on it's own but a Warlord's Direct the Strike, gives the ally an action. Besides the rules for Basic Attacks clearly states that these are At-Will's that everyone can use regardless of class.
The only issue I see if that the monster would have to make that attack through the caster's strength (for melee basic).
Comparing Basic Attack to Opportunity Attacks:
There are a few Artificer summons that list opportunity attacks. I would argue that those opportunity attacks are not basic attacks. The opportunity attacks listed for summoned monsters have added effects such as Marking or to ensure that the Artificer uses Intelligence instead of Strength for opportunity attacks.
Comment: If I'm not mistaken, every summon that has an attack that would normally require a Basic Melee or Ranged (such as charging and opportunity attacks) explicitly list something they can use -because- they cannot use basic attacks as written.  Of course, a summon that can charge or op-attack explicitly without a relevant power that it can use for that attack would be what would disprove that (of which I can think of no examples)
Answer: If a Power lists target as ally then yes, as summoned creatures count as allies.
If the power lists creature as target then yes, as summoned creatures count.
Answer: In the definition of Basic Attack in the Rules Compendium (p238-239), it indicates that basic attacks are powers that everyone can use, though it is possible to read that sentence as applying only to player characters. Later in the definition the RC states that effects can allow creatures to make basic attacks, and unless they have a power that counts as a basic attack they make Melee Basic Attacks or Ranged Basic Attacks.
I would interpret this to mean that a creature lacking it's own basic attack power, can use the core basic attack powers, and so a summoned creature granted a basic attack could use the standard ones.
As for what stats do they use? Page 121 of the RC indicates that the summoner makes the check using the summoner's game statistics (but without temporary bonuses or penalties).
So the warlord grants a basic attack to the druid's fierce boar, the druid can make a Str vs AC, [W] + Str damage melee attack for the boar.
And still we have to wonder what damage dice to use if the attack hits.
The best I can answer there, is that you should either treat the attack as unarmed, and do d4 damage, or use the damage dice normally used by the summoned creature, in this example d8. I don't see rules supporting either, so I would suggest it's up to the DM
Answer: Actually, summons by virtue of not being actual creatures but rather pseudo-creatures that must be given special commands to do anything, I don't think would benefit from the warlord's business. Its not that they can't have basic attacks, but rather they cannot take an action without being commanded to do so (unless specifically written on the power).
It goes something along the lines of - Commanding the creature: The summoned creature has no actions of its own. You spend actions to control it. But I do not have the page reference or full text, regardless the question should be answered by the summoning keyword or the power proper, not by whimsy extrapolation.


Install apache2-mod-mono-2.10

Question: I am trying to install mod-mono for apache so that I can run C# asp.net websites from my server. The project I have is a .net 4 project.
When I go into yast and select apache2-mod-mono for install it then says there is a problem that needs resolving. The problem is:

nothing provides libc.so.6(GLIC_2.11)(64bit) needed by
  mono-core-2.10.1-32.1.x86_64

Yast suggests the solutions are either:

do not install apache2-mod-mono
break mono-core by ignoring some of its dependencies.

I assume if I select break mono-core by breaking it dependencies that mono isn't going to work correctly anyway so this isn't really a solution.
How do I get around this issue.
I am running openSUSE 11.2 (x86_64)
Answer: Check this askubuntu topic on /lib/libc.so.6 missing(?). Maybe it's the same way here. Check where is mono-core-2.10.1-32.1.x86_64 looking for libc.so.6 and find, locate or whatever for libc.so.6.
Maybe it's already on your computer and you just need to update
ld.so.conf or create symlink.
(I assume you are on x86_64 system)

Install apache2-mod-mono-2.10


Is it worth while to learn Awk?

Question: I am decent with bash scripting and I am catching on to regex, and a little sed usage. Is learning awk still worth while with all the alternatives out there. Opinions?
Comment: Worthwhile from what perspective?
Answer: The different alternatives exist, not because each can do the same thing as the other (although this is true for localized cases, or for full programming languages such as Perl), but rather because they can do different things.
sed is not very suitable for processing tabular data, and using pure bash for that is usually more pain than one would like. awk operates almost trivially on tabular data, and can also be used to write smallish state machines. Spend some time looking at the various awk solutions on Stack Overflow for some ideas as to what it can do.
Answer: I use awk all the time and avoid writing or using perl as much as I can. Perl wanted to do too much and became a general purpose language but unfortunately has an horrible and unreadable syntax, IMHO. Maintaining perl scripts that have been written by someone else is a pain and this tend to be true for our own scripts after a while too.
On the other hand, awk has a limited but on purpose scope and works well with it. It interfaces relatively well with shell scripting too, unlike perl.
As for bash being a survivor, I prefer ksh93 if you ask me.
Comment: +1 for using awk to avoid perl.
Answer: I would hardly call Perl "dying", whatever other opinions you may hold about it
Since you made the Awk vs. Perl comparison, you might be interested in looking at the book Minimal Perl. It shows how Perl compares to various Unix/Linux command line utilities. It should give you enough information to make a more informed decision about what to study, regardless of your choice.
Personally, I think there are better choices than Awk, and would only learn it if it was clearly the best choice for my task at hand. But then again, I could say the same about a lot of things...
Comment: +1 for that first line.
Comment: Given that Perl is no longer a language that younger programmers learn and that it is no longer included by default in many linux distributions, while AWK is part of the POSIX spec, can be learned in a day, and shows up regularly in any nontrivial bash scripting, it definitely looks like AWK will outlive perl.
Answer: I still use awk occasionally - though I more frequently use Perl.  If you don't want to learn Perl because you think it is dying (a view I disagree with, but you are entitled to your view), then consider Python instead.  For plain text processing of columnar data, awk is excellent.  For more general work, Perl or Python are excellent.  After that, you are moving into heavy-duty systems programming and maybe C or C++ (or Go, or ...).
Bash is a very powerful shell.  There are still things Perl can do that Bash can't.  I still have to write code that will work  other shells, so I have to be careful with what I use from the Bash feature set.  Knowing it thoroughly will be good - but the other tools have their place too.
So, if you have the time to learn awk moderately well, or it is going to be easy for you because you are already adept at the components (extended regular expressions, C-like syntax), then it is an occasionally useful tool to have available to you.  You might prefer to learn Perl or Python instead, though.
Answer: It depends on your comfort level.
I came to the shell via perl, so I am comfortable with using perl for complicated things.
However I find that the longer I am doing this, I want to do more and more complicated things in shell one-liners rather than deal with the overhead of a "proper" perl script.  I find awk an invaluable tool for doing complicated things.
It never hurts to learn a little of everything, even if it is just enough for you to figure out that this particular tool does not fit into your ways of doing things.

Is it worth while to learn Awk?


How can I log out of Trello and log back into Trello?

Question: I am sharing a computer with a co-worker.  We have two different Trello accounts and we're using the same browser.  I need to log out of Trello so I can log into my own account.
Answer: To logout, click your profile icon at the top right and select "Log Out"
Note: this will log out of all Trello sessions in the browser, so you and your coworker can't be logged in at the same time unless you are using 2 browsers or are browsing incognito.
Answer: You could install another browser (e.g. Firefox or Google Chrome) and use that one to view your Trello-account, your co-worker can use the other browser with his account.
Answer: Another option (that doesn't involve installing another browser) might be to have one of you use your browser's regular session, and the other open a "Private Browsing" session in a new window to log into Trello. This way you can both stay logged into Trello at the same time (if that matters).

Chrome Incognito Mode
Firefox Private Browsing
Internet Explorer InPrivate Browsing


At what age is it appropriate to have a party for a child and invite other kids and parents?

Question: At what age is it appropriate to make a party for a child and invite other kids with their parents to celebrate his birthday?
Answer: I'd say when he's able to answer questions like "Who are your friends?", "Who do you like to play with?", "Who would you like to invite to your birthday party?".
Answer: We did this for my son on his 3rd birthday and most recently for his 4th birthday and he definitely had a blast. My son goes to childcare 4 days a week and he had a great time playing with his friends.
On his second birthday we only had close friends and family and he was definitely too small to have close social bonds with his friends to have a large party.
Something that might also be useful, they are still too small to play party games at this age. We tried this Christmas just gone to play pin the tail on the donkey and pass the parcel, but they just weren't interested.
For both his 3rd and 4th birthday we had a BBQ at a local playground and the kids played together for hours and some didn't even want to go home. The play equipment meant there was no pressure for them to focus on a particular activity they could just enjoy playing.
Comment: +1 for letting kids have their own fun. I see too many parents try to schedule party time things when the kids just want to run around and have fun together.
Answer: Somewhere we read this guideline for small kids' parties, and we've found it a pretty good rule of thumb:
Limit the party to one friend per year of age.
A child turning one can have fun with one friend and a few parents/relatives, but they aren't social enough to appreciate or enjoy a larger group, and things can get overwhelming. As kids get older it's more feasible to include more friends, and the friends' parents won't always stay. Having 7-8 friends for a 7-8 year old party is a lot more fun than having 7-8 two year olds!
Answer: Different approaches may apply in different cultures. But is there any reason not to have a small party and a fuss starting with the 1st birthday? Family will definitely want to be involved and most infants will enjoy the attention and they will enjoy observing the excitement in the faces of the adults around them. Not so many adults that the child is made anxious by the crowd, of course. And one or two small children (these will be the babies and children of family and close friends).
If you happen to have no family or friends with small children, then having no other children is fine for 1st birthday (and maybe 2nd birthday). By 3rd birthday you will want to reach out to a few other families who do have children the same age as yours and invite them, even if they aren't close frinds of yours.
Answer: We just had my son's third birthday party at a Little-Gym-type place, with his friends from school and family. He had a great time, but certainly wouldn't have noticed the difference if we baked him a cake and sang "Happy Birthday" in the house. Four or five is probably a better age to throw a party that will make an impact. Any younger, it's really more about the parents.
Answer: For the first three years we did family parties, with a large extended family there are fewer chances of boredom as there is usually someone to play with.  After we got to pre-school and started having playdates the birthday parties started and these were often kid only affairs, separate from a family party.  Now we do the kid's party and then the family one...although with a summer birthday we'll probably start moving out to playgrounds and parks soon so the kids can have way more running around room.  If you feel the kids are ready for it, then its the right time, but I guess with most things is it depends.  With kid parties you need to provide entertainment, or a place kids can entertain themselves, probably why in the US the party places are popular so you just need to supervise and the party people handle everything.
Answer: Birthday parties are not just for kids to make friends, they're a great way for parents to make new friends also.
We've always invited everybody that we can think of to our children's parties and offered them all good eats. Get your kid enrolled in tball and soccer and meet up with other parents, be sure to see if their interested in attending and invite them to your kids parties.
Your child will learn some valuable social skills by being surrounded with new people all the time.


Mountain Lion on Intel Core 2 duo (2009 macbook pro)

Question: has anyone tested the new Mountain Lion on a 2008/2009 macbook?(aluminium) I've heard that with Lion some problems occured like mac becomes slow, battery life is halved etc. I'd like to know specific problems regarding updating from snow leopard to mountain lion on a 2008/2009 macbook pro with intel core 2 duo and 4GB ram, thanks!
Answer: I've installed Mountain Lion on a Macbook Pro 3,1 (2007). "Over the top", so no clean install.
Specs: 500 HDD, 2GB DDR2 RAM, 2.2 GHz C2D
This is the oldest MBP which supports Lion. And it runs fine. No hiccups so far. It boots as fast as before (~1 min). It sleeps reliably. But I can't comment on the battery life yet.
Comment: Good! As soon as you can tell me something about battery life, please make a comment! Thanks
Answer: Mid 2009 MacBook Pro, 2.26GHz C2D, 8GB RAM. No battery issues. Mail works fine (3.5k emails on exchange), searching the mailbox is lightning fast.
Answer: it seems i have battery problems too after updating sys from snow lepard to m.lion. Have a mid 2009 Macbook Pro core 2 duo and 4 GB Ram. Since i have upgraded i got the message "service battery" at the battery info and during normal usage the battery drains very fast.
Answer: I have a 2009 MacBook Pro with 8GB of RAM. I installed Mountain Lion over a Snow Leopard install.. Mail and Finder seem much faster, but I haven't noticed any battery issues. However, battery life results are impacted by settings like Mail, Messages and Notifications.
Answer: I also have have a 2009 MacBook Pro with 8GB of RAM. The upgrade to ML from SL seems to have boosted my battery life, although the battery indicator does seem to fluctuate more than before. Everything runs very smoothly, which was a pleasant surprise. Safari is exceptionally fast on ML. Dictation also works well around 85% of the time for myself.


Milnor-Bloch-Kato conjecture implies the Beilinson-Lichtenbaum conjecture

Question: Voevodsky reformulated the Milnor-Bloch-Kato conjecture as a change-of-topology morphism from the Zariski to the étale topology of a field with torsion coefficients being an isomorphism.  The Beilinson-Lichtenbaum conjecture is more generally about such an isomorphism for varieties and integer coefficients. How does the former imply the latter (sketch/reference)?
Comment: The Beilinson-Lichtenbaum conjecture is about torsion coefficients.:)
You could have a look at http://www.math.uiuc.edu/K-theory/handbook/1-351-428.pdf
Comment: Also note: when you consider a morphism of topologies, it suffices to verify an isomorphisms of complexes of sheaves at (the corresponding) points. If you have rigidity (or purity), Nisnevich points reduce to fields.
Answer: To go from finite coefficients to integral coefficients, one notes that
rationally, Zariski and etale cohomology agree (this boils down to the fact that higher
Galois cohomology is torsion), and compares the two long exact sequences associated to the short exact sequence of coefficients $\mathbb Z(n) \to \mathbb Q(n) \to \mathbb Q/\mathbb Z(n)$.
One can go up to degree $n+1$ because of (the analog of Hilbert's theorem 90)
that the degree $n+1$ etale cohomology vanishes.
To go from fields to smooth varieties over a field, one compares the local-to-global
spectral sequences
$$ \bigoplus_{x\in X^{(s)}} H^{t-s}(k(x),\mathbb Z/m(n-s)) \Rightarrow H^{s+t}(X,\mathbb Z/m(n))$$
for both theories,
where $x$ runs through the points $x$ of codimension $s$ with residue field $k(x)$.
Answer: From the Handbook of K-Theory (mentioned by Mikhail Bondarko in the above comments):
p. 202, Thomas Geisser:
"In [91], Suslin and Voevodsky show that, assuming resolution of singularities,
the Bloch–Kato conjecture (1.10) implies the Beilinson–Lichtenbaum conjecture
(1.11) with mod m-coefficients; in [34] the hypothesis on resolution of
singularities is removed."
[91] A. Suslin, V. Voevodsky, Bloch–Kato conjecture and motivic cohomology
with finite coefficients. The arithmetic and geometry of algebraic cycles
(Banff, AB, 1998), NATO Sci. Ser. C Math. Phys. Sci., 548 (2000), 117–189.
[34] T. Geisser, M. Levine, The Bloch–Kato conjecture and a theorem of Suslin–
Voevodsky. J. Reine Angew. Math. 530 (2001), 55–103.


When is the best time to ask a website user whether he or she would be likely to recommend it to others?

Question: Analytics of the website of the company I work indicate a 700K+ unique page views per day. I'm curious to know if there is any benefit from asking our visitors the NPS (Net Promoter Score) questions on landing to our website or after a task, page impressions, time on a page, etc.?
Answer: Well - the idea behind doing a NPS survey isn't to get the "best" score. It's to get the "correct" score.
One of the classic ways it's misused is to only ask it in contexts where you are likely to get a more positive outcome.
For example: If you sell a product that tends to break after a week of use you'll get very different NPS scores if you ask before purchase, just after purchase, or a month after purchase.
Likewise in a service industry people will likely forget the interaction if you wait until a few days/weeks afterwards to ask the question.
So really you want to be asking at the point where:

the customer can successfully judge the reality of your offering
the point where they might be recommending/promoting your offering

I'd also strongly consider looking at different cohorts when taking the test. If you group your new customers with your regulars you bias the results since - by definition - regular customers are going to be somewhat happy with your offering otherwise they wouldn't be regular customers.
Answer: I am a practitioner of the behavior model described by BJ Fogg at Stanford University. I can offer a theoretical answer based on applying behavior design .
In a nutshell, a behavior is most likely to be triggered when the actor has the ability to easily perform the action and is motivated to do so.
Motivation is difficult to increase. So the first thing to do is make the behavior easy to perform. (Increase the ability) So, no matter what, offer a sharing tool that makes it really easy to share the site. There are many pre-made sharing tools out there. I leave that up to you.
Different people have different levels of motivation. It sounds like you have analytics that might be able to identify users potentially more motivated to share... Return visitors for example. If you track users, put the share trigger in front of them when they are on the site.
Finally, motivation occurs in waves. If you can identify a time when a visitor is most likely to be in the mood to share, that is the time to introduce the trigger. I think at the end of an article for example is a good time to expose the share tool. I am thinking of the way news sites slide a link to the next article at the bottom of the page... well do that with the share tool instead.
In short. Make sharing really easy to do. Expose a trigger to share to motivated users at a time you think they are most likely to share.
All about behavior design
http://www.behaviormodel.org/
Comment: Good to see another person who is crossing psychology with interaction design :)
Answer: If your company's site provides some product or service, then you can ask your user NPS questions once they have purchased that product/service from using your site. To make it less painful for the user, you can offer some discount or coupons for each reference made by the existing user. If the user is only using your free services, you can offer him paid services for free (or with some discount) for referring your site to their friends.


Updating a List Using SharePoint Designer 2010 - can't find an example of my use case

Question: I have two lists - one administrative with lots of details, and one public with a subset of the information.  There are close to 2000 entries in the list.  The admin list has 3 states, which I track in a column - Adding a new item for assessment (default value), working on a new item (pending) and assessment complete (yes).  When the column goes from default to pending, the Designer workflow copies the current item to the public list.  Got this down, it's easy to do in Designer.  What stumps me is how to perform the second task.  2-3 weeks later the assessment will be complete and the admin will then change the assessment column to "assessment complete" or "yes".  I want Designer to then replace the values in the subset of columns in the public list, with the new information entered in the admin list.  The values can vary, so there isn't a fixed value. The title field will stay the same, but the other fields may or may not change.  If I simply copy again, I get two entries for each item in the public list.  Not what I want.  I simply want the admin list to update the public list with the new values once the assessment field is changed to yes.  I've tried several ways, and can't get this to work.  I am setting the workflow to automatically begin when a list item changes. Any ideas?
Answer: You can take one more column in Public List to put the ID of the Admin List item, a kind of a key... And when "assessment complete" or "yes" status occurs to Public List item, you can get the Admin List Item from the Id and update it instead of copying/adding new item in Admin List...
You can make this column a Lookup column for easy handling, and hide this column to appear on forms.. Hiding column can be done in List Settings -> Advanced Settings -> Turn on Content Types setting [a checkbox]
Then back on List Settings -> Under Content Types -> click Item... Choose your lookup column and make it Hidden!
I hope this helps


How to economically make home-made sushi?

Question: How does one go about purchasing sushi-grade fish without breaking the bank? I know that sushi chefs & restaurants usually buy in bulk. Is there any way to do this individually in a way that is at all economically feasible?
Answer: Sushi does not require fish, sushi is the style of rice preparation (rice, salt, a little rice vinegar, occasionally some kombu). So long as you have the correct preparation of rice, you technically have some form of sushi (you could just throw it in a bowl with some additions on top and have a type of sushi called chirashizushi).
Second, there is no such thing as sushi grade fish - sushi grade literally means the fish has been frozen for over 24 hours to kill any parasites present. Otherwise, just about any clean fish can be used (as always, fresher is better).
As for sushi making, you can use any number of ingredients to make it, you don't specifically need fish. In fact, if you are trying to throw a sushi party or are just hungry for some rolls, this may be a better way to go since you can use what is on hand. Here are some ideas:

Canned eel
a fried egg
a filet of salmon (again, freeze it for 24 hours and then thaw)
Carrot
sweet potato
cucumber
avocado
imitation crab or crab
shrimp
tilapia
lox
cream cheese
squid

When you make it yourself you open up to lots of possibilities and chances to experiment. Since you are looking to do this on an individual level, play around a bit. If you have your heart set on using fish, talk to a good seafood counter and get small portions of fish. If it is 100% fresh, kill clean and store for 24-36 hours in a freezer, then thaw and use. Don't buy in to "sushi grade" fish because it is pure marketing.
Comment: Although talk to your fish counter ... I was on a trip w/ a co-worker, and he asked about fish for sushi, and being a Sunday, they said all of the fish was a day or more old, and couldn't recommend it for eating raw, even with a 24hr freeze.  (and for tamago (egg), I typically do a sweetened omelette rather than a fried egg)
Comment: Good call on the sweetened omelette, I'll have to give it a shot!
Comment: Also worth mentioning -- if you're cooking shrimp to use in sushi, put a skewer or similar between the meat and the shell -- so that when it's cooked, it doesn't curl up ... makes it much easier to use in rolls.
Answer: Most seafood counters will sell you small vacuum sealed portions of frozen fish.
The fish is often frozen on the ship where it is caught and so will be fresher than even if you bought it at the dock.
The freezing will also kill any parasites and is the only prerequisite for the label "sushi grade". See this question: What exactly is "Sushi Grade" fish?
I buy half pound portions of salmon or tuna. You don't get a discount for buying them in bulk but such a small portion will only cost me $3-$5. A half pound of fish will make a lot of sushi.
Answer: If you do not have a good source of fresh (and I mean seriously fresh) fish, then go for frozen, or something like smoked salmon, which goes especially well with avocado or red pepper.  Go for red pepper in a jar, then life really is a breeze.


Baking without a thermometer?

Question: So, I'm staying in a location that has a gas oven with no discernable thermostat, and there are no thermometers in sight (oven, meat, or otherwise). The situation is such that I can't just run out and buy an oven or meat thermometer, and I'm not sure what to do. The people that I'm staying with have requested that I prepare a "traditional american christmas/thanksgiving dinner" (at least to the extent possible given the ingredients on hand and the circumstances). I have a turkey and several side dishes to prepare, and need advice on how to proceed. Any help is much appreciated.
Comment: I assume the oven has *some* sort of scale on it ... unless it's an  Aga, in which case I think you just select the correct compartment.  If they're in the UK, you need to [translate gas mark](http://cooking.stackexchange.com/a/27517/67)
Comment: related : http://cooking.stackexchange.com/q/12263/67 ; the [Leidenfrost effect](http://cooking.stackexchange.com/a/12292/67) could help you find the right temp if you put a pan in the oven and preheat it, test, adjust temp, repeat.
Answer: It sounds like there is only one temperature that you can be absolutely sure of.... that water boils at the local boiling point.   Since you haven't mentioned high altitude cooking, I am going to assume that is close to 212 F / 100 C.  You also haven't said what sides you want to make so I am going to assume the traditional US type ones...
So things like mashed potatoes might be good, since you can boil them.  Similarly, with vegetables.
The turkey is the toughest part, since you have strong constraints:

You don't want it overcooked or it will be dry and unpalatable
You don't want it under cooked for food safety reasons, and under cooked poultry is also nont pleasant
You cannot measure temperature directly in a simple manner

The best approach I can think of is to do a braised turkey recipe.   The braising liquid will mitigate the unreliable heat of the oven if it is too hot; if the braise isn't bubbling slowly, you will know it is too low.
Braised dishes, by their nature are thoroughly cooked and should be quite safe.
You will find multiple recipes by googling "braised turkey recipe".
Root vegetables can be roasted at a wide, wide range of temperatures, and tested for being done based on softening.  The risk is you won't know how long it will take.  So you might precook them, and just reheat them for service, so that you aren't as time critical.
Cranberry sauce as a side is easy, and can be done stovetop without a thermometer.
Good luck.
Answer: The people who live there probably know how to work the oven. Ask them to set it up for baking a cake or a pie. That will probably be somewhere around 350-400. Close enough. Allow about 4 hours to cook the turkey. About 30 min before it's done, put in potatoes, parsnips, onions etc cut up to roast. Then take the bird out after 30 min and turn the oven up a little bit. You're hoping to hit 425, to crisp the veggies. While the bird rests, make the gravy and the cranberry sauce. If you're feeling super showoff, steam some brussels sprouts or green beans.
If the people who live there don't know how to work the oven, and you have time to experiment, figure out what settings you need to get a potato cooked but not crispy in 30 minutes. That's the temperature you want to use for the bulk of it.

Baking without a thermometer?


Reference request: Stability / instability theory for periodic orbits of partial differential equations

Question: I am looking for references regarding the stability / instability of a periodic solution to a partial differential equation / evolution equation in infinite dimensions. Suppose we have a periodic orbit to a partial differential equation and would like to perturb it, is there some Floquet type criterion or other type of criterion one can use to determine questions such as linear instability implying nonlinear instability etc? Are there papers, review papers, text books etc which focus on the stability of periodic orbits to such equations like reaction diffusion, fluids type equations i.e stability / instability criterion around periodic orbits for infinite dimensional systems / partial differential equations, i.e are there some elementary references / review papers etc regarding extending Floquet theory to PDE's and / or studying the stability around periodic orbits by other methods for infinite dimensional systems. Thank you very much.
Answer: There is a well-established Floquet theory for PDEs, see e.g. the book by Kuchment (Birkhäuser 1993). Concerning your question about (in)stability, you may want to check the Hartman-Grobman theorem.


What makes clerics so strong in D&D 3.5?

Question: I'm just starting a campaign for the first time with a couple of friends, and I've been told that certain classes like cleric are really strong; some people even say they're overpowered. What is it about them that makes them so strong?
Answer: Setting aside the tier system as it is well articulated in other answers, I'll draw from my personal experiences. To summarize:
Some classes reward system mastery more than others. For the expert player, certain patterns in the rules make anything possible. Spellcasting is one of these patterns.
When I've played, both when I've started playing and up to the time I stopped bothering with 3.5, I observed some people having more success at the game due to both more creativity and more options.
Most any class will reward player creativity, to a point carefully delineated (implicitly or explicitly) by the DM. However, it is the especial purview of pure spellcasters who have their spell lists well internalised and understood who can solve an astonishingly large number of problems with "I've got a spell for that."
Now, to be clear, most clerics I've seen played were forced onto the players playing them. As such, they were heal-batteries with little care for the, quite literally, hundreds of possible spell combinations that they could have. Clerics and druids, because they have all spells available can solve most any problem given sufficient in-game prep time and out-of-game research time. Unfortunately, I've played with few clerics willing to do the out of game prep for more than a single level of spells (especially with the need to establish multiple contingent spell lists for situations your DM specialises in). Furthermore, most 3.5 games I've played in have significant plot pressure combined with (what amounts to) in media res openings. Few of the players I've gamed with were fast enough on their feet to swap out spell lists in reaction to their environment in this sort of game.
The literature available online has a significant system mastery bias: in order to contribute to the literature and have that contribution noted the poster must demonstrate capabilities. As this is a well known domain with no innovation, the level of capability required for discourse is quite high.
Your milage, with a new group, will almost certainly not correspond with the theoretical and practical optimisation discussions online. While yes, given a functionally memorised SRD and Spell Compendium, the Cleric (and druid) are astonishingly capable characters. Until that system mastery is intentionally inculcated, players will have a hard time judging and achieving capability and power level.
In my experience, most clerics I've played with were so intimidated by the huge number of spells available that they found their one spell list and stuck with it. While some of the spells on that list could be good (either via other player suggestion or sheer luck), the versatility that marks the expert cleric is almost always absent in this mindset. They know what they can do, and because they know and feel comfortable with their specifically chosen spell list and little else, they certainly won't display the overwhelming strength common to clerics in high system mastery discussions.
While intelligence agencies (and seemingly theoretical optimisers) are required to assess other state actors by their "capabilities, not intentions;" players in the same game are not required to abide by that standard. Therefore, don't worry overmuch about theoretical claims on the net. While they are certainly true, they are only true after a given level of system mastery and desire on the part of the player. For my own case, they were only true after I functionally served an apprenticeship in optimisation.
At the end of the day, optimisation and relative strengths are a function of group intentions, standards, and effective communication. There are plenty of places to do the necessary readings and interact with the necessary people to serve that "optimisation apprenticeship." For a certain type of person, optimisation is a delightful exercise in building to requirements, expressing a wish for personal power, or otherwise exercising validatory psychological experiences.
Comment: Language gets a little high-falutin', but well said.  +1 for essentially "this isn't really a concern for common folks".
Comment: This fits my experience. Playing a cleric in my first real D&D 3.5 game at the moment. Keep looking at the cleric spell lists. I find that swapping out spells if I can anticipate future action or have in-game time to prepare for it is making me significantly more useful to the party as a whole. Since there is another cleric in the party we often see the difference when one has the 'right' spells for whatever happens and the other one, for whatever reason, has not. I'm increasingly willing now to rebuild my prepared spell list every day if necessary.
Answer: You  might want to give a look at this article and its explanation, especially the part relative to tier 1 classes.
Should the links ever go down, it's the famous tier system for 3.5 classes, with the explanation of why each class is in its tier and a detailed explanation of tier 1, where the cleric belongs.

Tier 1: Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing. Often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player. Has world changing powers at high levels. These guys, if played well, can break a campaign and can be very hard to challenge without extreme DM fiat, especially if Tier 3s and below are in the party.

To make a long story short, a cleric is a full caster, a class that can get access to level 9 spells. While lower level spells often deal with inflicting conditions, removing them or otherwise messing with the numerical aspects of the game, the higher you go the more spells start doing things like asking information to powerful entities, downright killing or returning to life people, mind controlling, dishing out immunities and so on. Up to the point of having any effect, as long as your deity agrees.
While the problem hits the fan only at higher levels, full casters still get their middle-level spells earlier than half-casters such as the Ranger (getting 1st level spells at level 4, 2nd level spells at level 8... when the cleric already casts 4th level spells) and the vast diversity of spells they can ready is extremely powerful from the first levels. This is especially true for those classes who, like the cleric, can change the spells they can cast every day.
At lower levels, the cleric is a caster class that has no problem being a fighter type as well. It has spells that let him overcome his inherent weakness (his medium BAB progression), making him one of the best melee characters in the game.
This gets worse with splatbooks, offering the cleric the possibility to apply the metamagic feat Persist Spell or Quicken Spell to his best buffs for free (spending uses of the otherwise underused Turn Undead ability).
Was this not enough, the first level of cleric is frontloaded with the whole set of class features (access to all the daily uses of Turn Undead and to both domains' related powers, often consisting in bonus feats), making it the best 1-level-dip class according to many.
Comment: I think too much is made about high level spells. They are phenomenally powerful, of course, but many games never see them, and get the incorrect impression that this reality does not apply to them.
Comment: "While the problem hits the fan only at higher levels," is simply not true. Clerics can, as a standard action, accomplish far more than almost any other class can as a standard action, right from level 1. Things are *closer* at that level, but the cleric still has major advantages. By 7th level, *most* other classes cannot meaningfully compete. By high levels, only a handful of classes can even try.
Answer: There are quite a few reasons that Clerics are great. Let's look at some of their class abilities and what they do for you.
Spellcasting
Clerics are full spellcasters, with access to a very large spell list. While not quite as expansive as the Wizard list, spells for every situation going up to extremely powerful stuff are on here. Full spellcasting is the single strongest ability in D&D 3.5, and Clerics have it.
Domains
Domains tie in with a Cleric's deity, and give you some extra powers. Some of these are pretty minor. Some of them are pretty awesome. They include things like a die reroll once a day, the ability to use Turn Undead as Destroy Undead once a day (which can flat out end Undead encounters instantly if used correctly), Freedom of Movement for free, and so on. If you use more than core books, there are some awesome ones.
Domains also give you an extra spell and spell list, including some options that you can't normally get as a Cleric. Chosen correctly, they can add a lot of versatility.
Weapon/Armor Proficiencies
Clerics are proficient with all armor, and with shields. That's a spellcaster in full plate. They're also proficient with Simple Weapons, but there are prestige classes, domains, and races that let you get some or all Martial Weapons as well. That means they have the tools to do physical combat effectively if you want to.
General Stats
Clerics have two good saves — Fortitude and Willpower. Those are the two that matter most. They get d8 hit dice, which is pretty solid. They only get 2 skill points a level (which is bad), but they don't need very many skills to be successful. No problem here.
For attributes, Clerics really need Wisdom, Strength (if focusing on melee combat), Constitution, and Charisma (if trying to focus on Turn Undead). Being able to dump several stats is really helpful in optimizing yourself, and they can get down to needing 2–3 stats to be decent.
Turn Undead
Absurdly effective against Undead, this can end fights instantly. Can also be made to work against some other monster types with spells or domains.
But it gets really awesome if you get the feat Divine Metamagic. That lets you use Turn Undead to spontaneously apply metamagic feats without boosting spell level. Apply it with a really expensive feat like Persistent Spell, and you suddenly take some of your awesome buffs and make them last for an entire day.
This can get silly very quickly.
Prestige Classes
Clerics have access to a long list of good prestige classes, several of which give you bonuses while giving up absolutely nothing in your progression. They're just gravy on the top.
Notice how much awesome is on that list? Now what happens if you put it all together?
Clerics Can Beat Any Situation
There's a popular post with a tier-system for classes, that focuses on how good they are and how many different types of encounters they can handle. Clerics are tier 1 (the highest), because there is pretty much nothing you can throw at them that they don't have a way to handle.
Compare to something like a a Rogue, which is pretty good at a few things, and really weak when facing other things. A Cleric is good, no matter what the situation.
When optimized well, Clerics can even be better at other classes specializations. A person in my campaign right now usually plays Fighters, but wanted something with a bit more oomph. It was simple for me to make him a Cleric that's better at being a Fighter than an actual Fighter... and is also still a full spellcaster. That was done with Persist Spell on Righteous Might and Divine Power, giving this Cleric a Fighter's attack bonus, 10 bonus strength, some bonus constitution, and large size (giving reach). That's not a particularly difficult character to make, and nowhere near the most optimized a Cleric can get.
Oh yeah, and he saves money on gear because he can use spells like Greater Magic Weapon to enchant his own stuff. At level 12 he can turn simple masterwork gear into a +3 sword, +3 armor, and +3 shield. That leaves a lot of gold that can be spent on gear for other abilities. Should he get into trouble in melee, he has a full spellcaster's spell list to fall back on.
Clerics are a class with good proficiencies, good stats, good class features, full spellcasting, and the ability to be super versatile. They're good at pretty much everything, and you can never put them in a situation where they're forced to say "oh, I'm totally helpless and need another class to save me." That is what makes them so good.
Comment: I think you should expand on the spellcasting section. It's far more significant than even all the other sections combined (well, except the last one), and it's the smallest section.
Answer: It's not like this question lacks good answers, but since your experience mirrors mine so well, I'd like to share a story.
I got into my first 3.5 game in college. I'd been playing a heavily modified AD&D through high school, but we had the curious custom of having the DM handle all the rules; I barely know what an attack bonus was. So when I showed up to the group in the tunnels under the dorms, I asked what everyone else was playing to get a sense of what was open, and someone called out that we needed a tank of some kind, someone big and beefy who could defend people. I grabbed a cleric, another player grabbed fighter. We figured tower shields and heavy armor were good for that, right?
We were right. The two of us were pretty capable frontline damage sponges, but while we both absorbed damage about equally (Same armor loadout, and the fighter has only one more hit point each level on average) I could heal and he couldn't. I basically had two or three healing potions a day for free. Even though I was healing him with half my allotment of spells, he started buying healing potions wholesale for moments when I couldn't get to him.
Then came a fight against troop of heavily armored monsters. We quickly figured out the only ones who could touch them were our spellcasters, the wizard and sorcerer. Me and the fighter tried to guard them well, but we were surrounded on enough sides that our spellcasters went down with two of the monsters still standing. We were asking the bard if she had anything offensive, when someone said "Hey wait, clerics can cast damage stuff right? What did you prepare?" Turns out, I had spell damage on par with the mainline spellcasters and hadn't been paying attention. Due to the way you can convert spells to healing, I was stocked with a bunch of offensive spells that simply hadn't been used.
The cleric is very forgiving of mistakes. I hadn't even been thinking about spells until after that fight, but since you can prepare whatever you like, the next session I'd read up on my options and had a few spell lists for different situations. Meanwhile, the wizard had to pay for new spells, and the sorcerer could only change up her selection infrequently. A healbot cleric can turn into a utility mage or an offensive caster with very little notice. Adding splatbooks helps everyone else very slowly; they have to read through different options and make a limited range of choices. Me? Every splatbook we added was a new batch of spells I got for free, that I could try out today and forget about tomorrow.
At high levels of optimization, the cleric can do crazy powerful things. But for people playing for their first time, the cleric is great because you can make mistakes in your build and still do cool things. It's very hard to make a bad cleric. You're a decent tank, a good spellcaster, a decent fighter, and you don't need to plan and optimize to be that way. What makes the cleric strong is how broad their capabilities are, and how little work you have to put into it. As a first-timer, I say go for it. You're not going to be pulling out DMM Persistent Spell cheese or the like, and it will give you a chance to just enjoy the world and story without worrying about power. If you find you need a little more oomph, you can pick it up later. (If you need a panic button, Sanctuary and some Summon Monster spells are a decent fallback.)
Have fun! On an entirely unrelated note, I'm feeling nostalgic and need to go dig up an old character sheet and a sketchbook.
Comment: Very well worded way to explain what is listed in the currently higher score answers. Simply explained through experience such that anyone can understand.
Answer: It's the Spells
There are a lot of other things that are really, really nice for clerics: decent proficiencies and chassis, the existence of Divine Metamagic, Persistent Spell, and other divine and metamagic feats, the various Granted Abilities that you can get from the Domains that you choose. These are all nice. A couple of them (Divine Metamagic chief among them) are fairly overpowered, too. But ultimately, these are not what makes the cleric overpowered. Losing them would not make the cleric not overpowered. Less powerful, true. Without Divine Metamagic, in particular, it's fairly hard to make the cleric "a better fighter than the fighter," though by no means impossible, and the wizard starts to look a bit "strictly superior."
But even in a core-only game, with the armor proficiencies stripped, HD downgraded, Fort save reduced, Granted Abilities removed from Domains, clerics are still overpowered.
And that's because of the spells. Not just high-level spells, either, but spells at every level. Even just in core (actually, especially the core spells), the spells just do too much, are too flexible. It's an almost impossible problem to fix, because you literally need to go through every spell and figure out A. if this one is one of the problematic ones, and B. if so, how to reduce it. That is an enormous amount of work. I have never seen a comprehensive homebrew attempt to do it. Paizo certainly didn't do it, or even try to, in their Pathfinder spin-off. To date, the only 3.5 spin-off I'm aware of to even attempt to do so is Legend, and that was because they simply started from scratch with an almost-entirely overhauled system.
But so long as clerics get the spellcasting they do, with their spells, plus Domain lists to expand their repertoire and pick up some more juicy spells that they missed, they are an overpowered class.
Comment: You say "it's the spells" but don't back that up or have any examples of why cleric spells are better than everyone else's.
Comment: @mxyzplk "Better than everyone else's" wasn't the claim made. 9th-level spells are better than 8th-level spells are better than 7th-level spells, and so on, so all the classes that have higher-level spells soonest are doing better than everyone who doesn't. The cleric isn't particularly better (or worse) than druid or wizard. It's just massively better than rogue or fighter. As for backing up the general claim that spells are incredible, I may look into specific examples to back up the "do too much, are too flexible" assertion. Though I may not, since IgneusJotuun has already done that.
Answer: As others have stated, Clerics are tier 1. What that means is not necessarily that Clerics are easier to play or that they do more damage. The tier system cares as much about versatility (Can you help solve this problem?) as it does power (How hard can you solve this problem?).
A player that is very strong in some areas but cannot help with every area is not first tier heroes. Clerics can help in just about every single aspect of life as an adventurer, and this is a large part of why Clerics are so great.
Clerics help you in battle with:

Buffing you so you can kill more and get killed less.
Beating the stuffing out of anything that needs "redemption" and such.
Healing your party after the battle
Debuffing the enemy so you can kill them easier.
Tanking hits so that the squishy spellcasters don't get killed.

So they not only do damage, take damage, prevent the enemy from enemying you, heal you up afterwards, buff, and debuff all in one package.
That's a lot of versatility when it comes to fighting. Rogues try to sneak ini and do flanking damage to kill things extra hard, but they can't tank. Fighters can tank and spank pretty well, but they don't hit as hard as rogues. They're both susceptible to failing will saves. The Cleric can fail a reflex save and eat some fireball damage, which he can easily tank. The rogue fails a will save and hold person makes him dead. Yay.
In diplomatic situations, their very role of cleric grants them societal respect, and if they worship a Lawful Good God, then that respect is increased, because all the dickish alignments are now impossible. The LG Cleric vouching for the silver tongue bard helps out a lot. Oh, and churches tend to be pretty rich. And clerics can ask for help there, granting the DM plot hooks and ways to help the party if they're stuck.
Oh, looking for clues? Scrying, praying and such are perfectly within the skill list of the cleric.
No matter what you need to do, the Cleric can be very helpful.
And yes, a powergaming cleric might very well choose to be a LG Cleric following a good god for those social bonuses. Being able to say "I am a cleric of a lawful good God so you can trust me." is really useful. Yes, you can't betray the lvl 4 commoner with nothing worth stealing who'd give you ~1xp, but why would you want to? You want to go fight Xn'rzzk, Destroyer of Vowels for epic loot and XP. And world peace of course. I mean, we're LG here, not just murderhobos.
Clerics have tools for every situation. A Bard similarly, have tools for many situations. But their tools just aren't as good as the Clerics'. This is the problem with Bards. They're extremely versatile. But they're not extremely powerful.
And that is why the cleric is so useful.
Now of course you can make a guide to how to make the Fighter suck less. But the fighter will never have the sheer adaptability that the cleric has. (A good start would be to get the Fighter a ridable animal companion of some sort that can smell invisible enemies and also fly. That takes care of two of the worst problems with the fighter.)
And outside of pure in game reasons why Clerics are very powerful, a Cleric also have a lot of soft power within the group. Imagine a stereotypical group, with a Barbarian, Rogue, Wizard and Cleric.
In this group, the Cleric is the one that heals you if you're about to die. If the Cleric hates you, then Cure Moderate Wounds can sometimes fail to materialize. The Cleric is the one that the local peasants trust.
In other words, the Cleric might not be the "leader", but the cleric is the glue that keeps the party together. The rules say that if the god gets angry with the cleric, the cleric loses their powers. This paradoxically gives the cleric veto power over the group when it comes to some choices, because the party doesn't want to lose all the buffs, debuffs, heals, scrying and so on that the cleric brings to the table. So if your group wants to go and be evil somewhere and you're good, you can stop that. Easily.
If your group does the same kind of thing you want to do, why would you want to lead anyway?
Answer: Spellcasters are generally more powerful than martial, particularly at high levels.
Clerics have a number of advantages compared to many spellcasters.
1) Compare their spells (casts/day including domain, spells known (all) and spell selection) to other casters and they do quite well. The advantage over wizard increases as you use more books as clerics know more spells, but wizards know the same number of spells with a wider range to choose from.
2) Divine Metamagic is extremely powerful, particularly persist (DMM persist cleric is incredible in melee), and potentially quicken.
3) Medium BaB, d8 HD, Armour, shield and crossbow proficiencies provide the cleric with noticeable advantages over other casters, particularly at low levels.
Answer: Clerics are pretty tier 1 in standard PHB games, especially at higher levels. They're good for the party early on, but get fantastic later.
Their main Tier 1 suit comes from the other books though. Domains, feats, races and multiclassing all can be broken easily with 1-5 levels in cleric, or pure'ish cleric with a sprinkle to taste attitude. Complete Divine (the cleric's main 3.5 book) has so many broken feats it's stupendous. Be it multi/dual classing with Practised Spellcaster (yay rogue/clerics of Olidammara with Celerity/Anything), to Sacred Healing (multiplicative mass group Charisma healing, post encounter, no silly target limits) to Divine Meta-magic (a full spell list to break where you can, on any given day), it's golden.
Add all the feat-based domains from all the books. Add all the turning feats.
Then even look at the races obtained in some of the books.
My two faves are Illumians from Races of Destiny. A rogue1/cleric of Ollidammar(celerity/anything) 1/rogue the rest, with Uurkrau words, Practised Spellcaster as feat at lvl3, and if I can convince the DM, Wieldskill as a spell. Super-duper expeditious retreat skill bunny rogue. Add cleric levels to taste (mostly to use lvl 2 slots for more wieldskill and expeditious retreat). Can change spell loadout when rogue stuff isn't going to work, and tops out at +6 caster level (unless your other domain adds more). Funny, funny rogue. If it's a psi campaign, drop in a level of Psion, just to take "Up the Walls" as a feat. Make your DM cry about dungeon and city design. Or dump rogue skill points (or possibly cleric skill points, lvl 2 spells ARE awesome at +6 caster lvl) into healing and pick Sacred Healing as your 3rd or 4th feat. High dex/cha rogue/clerics are fun to play, but it just so happens they CAN heal small armies as well. Probably better than a lvl 7-8 pure cleric could normally, just with that one feat. It's a hard choice, you've front loaded combat and utility, should you keep skill bunnying or go as cleric from there on in? Either way is awesome.
The other fave is a Naenhoon Illumian cleric, with extra turning and divine meta-magic along the way. Add meta-magic feats to taste. Your race already broke the magic that broke the class that broke the spell-list. :)
Yep, Tier 1 vanilla, and keeps up with the bad-boys with all the books. So very front loaded at level 1, there's no reason to not splash it. Gets so powerful, there's no reason not to mono-class it, or splash with flavour or prestige as wanted. Plus, it gives great adventure hooks, side quests and RP possibilities anyway. So good. Can be broken so easily.
Answer: The tier system and related materials mentioned by others do a good job of explaining which classes are more powerful than others from a tactical RPG standpoint (i.e. better at killing the monsters, getting the loot, wooing the princess, rewriting the laws of reality, or doing anything else), especially at mid to high levels.  Clerics have another strength, however, and one which I find to be more of a power issue than their mechanical prowess: they are more narratively powerful as well.
The first thing playing into this is class versatility.  This is very different than character versatility in that it refers to the class being able to make a wide variety of different characters rather than a character being able to do a lot of different things.  Fighters are the only other class whose narrative versatility is even close to what Clerics get from their domains.  Clerics are as varied as the Gods they serve and can be lightly armored sneaking thief types or Guts-and-Glory front line tanks or demure robed healers or crazed Undead-leading necromancers or the Avatar: master of all four elements.  It's not that these differences are large changes in power level, it's that these changes make fundamentally different characters who play fundamentally differently.  Most good wizard builds could be any other good wizard build given a personality change and a few days, but Clerics don't have that luxury.  Clerics are who they are and that, ironically, makes the class more powerful.  Members of an all-wizard party can do different things, but members of an all-cleric party can be different things.  But it doesn't stop there.
The second thing that makes Clerics better characters than any other class at low levels is a massive negative aspect: they lose their powers if they violate any of the tenets of their faith, whatever that means.  This forces Clerics to take a larger role in roleplaying, running their in-character responses to situations and NPCs rather than just doing whatever would otherwise make the most mechanical sense.  When a Cleric has to make a decision that rejects the mechanically beneficial option in favor of their God/Principle, they look cool and get more 'screen-time' than the other players do.  In addition to mechanical advantage, many players are interested in having their characters look cool even in tactical games.  Clerics (and Paladins but not really Druids) force narration onto the tactical chassis of a game, and narration is cool (or rather, coolness is a form of narration).  Other classes can certainly have the same kind of cool me-only hooks and contacts and dramatic internal conflict scenes that Clerics get, but they don't have to (again, Paladins are an exception), and so often they don't, especially when played by new players.
Lastly, because, mechanically, their beliefs and actions matter, unlike those of the measly wizard or foolish ranger, the GM is encouraged to bring up situations where their moral judgement is tested, and to contrast them to other members of the same faith.  Stock campaigns frequently have special little things (an interaction with an NPC, a side-quest, an unexpected hurdle, a random low-value piece of treasure) just for characters of the right (or wrong) religion-- which usually means just the Cleric.
In short, the rules force players to make much more unique characters as a Cleric than as most other classes, provide a base around which to form a cool character, and punish players for acting out-of-character if they do so.  Additionally the rules encourage GMs to give more 'screen-time' to Clerics, discuss the Cleric's beliefs and motivations even if the GM doesn't discuss the motivations of other characters, develop NPCs that are more than their stat-blocks for the Cleric to interact with, and put a Cleric in situations where they have to make real, meaningful choices.  Any of this could be true of all the players and the GM anyways, regardless of class, but, if it was, I don't think being 'overpowered' would be a problem anymore.
Answer: For what it's worth; most of the power estimation by analysts is on paper, that is to say, they are comparing what powers each player is granted and pondering potential effects they might have. That's a reasonable exercise, but means little compared to actually playing the classes or DM-ing a party with different classes.
I don't agree with the assertion that clerics are "overpowered", I do think they are one of the most survivable classes and more interesting due to the deep spell choices. They are often my "go to" character at a convention or other one-off game, but that's more from me just trying to be polite and friendly than because I think they are the uber-class.
In the end, the player makes the character and quick wit and good humor are more valuable to me for a fun gaming experience than optimization. With any class, you could find a game breaking combination or feature at some point, but that's why you have a DM.
Comment: 95% of this answer isn't about clerics at all, it's an experience-based (but imprecise) rebuttal of the tier system. Can you be specific about why fighters and clerics are on a similar power level, more than just theorymancing about AC and BAB (which the rest of your answer says isn't relevant)?
Comment: @Wyrmwood What makes a cleric such a survivable class, though? This is the crux of the question. Upvoted answers here have variously provided on-paper ***and*** in-play explanations for what makes them powerful. Since you find them one of the more survivable classes, there's at least _something_ there in your experience about them, but you haven't said what it is that makes them that way.
Answer: This answer will be different from most.  While I am well aware I'm in the minority on this, the "tier system" and the supremacy of spellcasting in 3.5 are not beliefs I agree with.  In my opinion, the belief in these concepts are the result of "sub-optimal" game mastering, not sub-optimal playing or character design, in that most DMs never learn to build encounters and employ tactics that would reign in spellcaster "superiority," allowing casters to run roughshod over non-casting players.  Worse, the common acceptance of the tier system has led many gamemasters to believe this is an unavoidable feature of the 3.5 system, and so not even try to correct it.  Its resulted in a vicious circle of reinforcement that has carried over into Pathfinder and other 3.5 based games.
That said... even by my reckoning, the class features of the cleric are the strongest of any class in the game.  This isn't because clerics can do everything better than everybody else.  If the DM knows what he's doing, a cleric cannot outfight a fighter and he definitely can't outsneak a rogue, at least not reliably or for long.
Clerics do, however, have two edges that push them over the top: armored spellcasting and domain powers.
Despite Mike Mearls' latecomer downplay of it, armored spellcasting is a huge deal in 3.5.  For the most part, to a noncaster, defense is just defense.  It slows down the rate at which you take damage and lets you fight longer before dying.  But to a spellcaster, defense is both defense and offense: it both delays your death AND allows you to finish casting your spells uninterrupted.  Remember also that the ability to wear armor does more than just raise AC; over the course of your career armor gives you ten enhancements and a shield gives you ten more, up to nine of each can be devoted to other defenses than AC.
Armored spellcasting has been a staple of D&D clerics from the beginning, for two excellent metagame reasons: first, the character that heals other characters should be the last to fall, because once he falls no one can heal him.  And, second, to make up for the fact that their spells are generally not directly offensive in nature.
Domain powers, though, were new to 3.5 and were, basically, a bribe to players to make clerics more attractive.  Traditionally, the healer role is less "sexy" to players and those domain powers are the equivalent of two extra feats' worth of power, except these provide abilities feats can't and potentially cut across class lines.  This always struck me as a little much, and it still does.
Comment: This answer relies on the assertion that "any problems anyone sees must be their own fault and cannot possibly be a design deficiency in the system." So far as I can tell, you have made absolutely no attempt to support that claim, no suggestions as to *how* people are "doing it wrong" or evidence to support that it *is* "wrong," demonstrated no method under which the problems described in the tier system disappear when things are done "right." Thus, this answer is *insulting* – if you are going to claim that everyone who disagrees with you is "doing it wrong," *you better back that up.*
Comment: I think this needs some more explanation. In particular: 1) How exactly does a DM "know what they're doing" to stop a Cleric from out-Fightering a Fighter? It's not exactly esoteric stuff required to do it, and you can't stop it without shutting down spellcasting. 2) What do domains have to do with healing roles? The strongest Clerics are *not playing dedicated healers*. They're very strong offensively and can also heal if they need to.
Comment: Epiphanis, please do not respond to comments in your comments. Edit your answer such that it is improved and answers to the comments. It is especially important to provide personal evidence to your claims.
Comment: The DMing issue does rate a lot more explanation-- enough to fill at least one moderately sized book -- but to go into it in  here would be unresponsive to the question asked and would amount to a deconstruction of the tier system and the "Brilliantgameologist" approach to 3.5.  I included what I did to highlight the fact that, even though DON'T subscribe to that school of thought, I still think Clerics are "overpowered," much as I dislike phrasing it in those terms.


Why did director Chris Marker use photographs in La jetée?

Question: The movie La jetée is composed from photographs with a voice telling the story. What is the reason he used photographs instead of normal animated pictures? Was his budget too constrained? Or was it some artistic reason?
Comment: Honestly, I think all these "art" styles are no more than really lack of resources (money) or effort to do something better (as live or real as can be).
Answer: Is an experimental film. Chris Marker did it that way due to artistic reasons. In the 60's french directors were pushing the boundaries of film as an art, breaking rules to experiment with filmmaking (check Godard's "À bout de souffle" as another example, using non classic montage).
Answer: I've found several places on the Internet where people claim that Marker could only afford to rent a motion picture camera for one afternoon, and that's why the film has only one moving image in it.  However, I can't find any source for that claim that I would consider "reliable" - where I'd say "Yes, that's definitely someone talking from actual knowledge", as opposed to simply guessing (or passing on something they'd heard elsewhere, with no knowledge of whether it was true).  The fact that so many of the sources who make the claim repeat it word-for-word suggests that it's the sort of ben trovato story which spreads like wildfire because it's so appealing, not because it matches the facts.
But whether the story about Marker's financial constraints is true or false, there's a sense in which it's irrelevant.  At some point Marker faced a choice; at some point he would have said to himself, even if not consciously, "There may be other films you could make, if only you had a bigger budget, or more time, or better equipment - and maybe you really wish you could make those films, but you can't.  The question before you is, do you want to make this film, or not?"
The fact that he went ahead and made the film, means that this was a film he wanted to make.
The most compelling explanation I've yet encountered for why Marker chose to tell the story in this fashion comes from an essay by Landon Palmer on the website "Film School Rejects".
Palmer suggests (I'm simplifying his argument greatly, I'm afraid) that La Jetée is a film about our double-edged relationship with memory:  it's the means by which we visit the past, by which we try to glean the meanings we need from that past.  But we are so often misled in that pursuit, because we can only revisit short, frozen points in time - what lies between those frozen points is what we imagine lies in those gaps, and our reconstruction may be greatly mistaken.
This, of course, describes not only the experience of the protagonist, visiting the past to try and glean meanings from his all-too-short jumps back in time (which are only possible because of his obsessive memory of the death at the airport), but also the experience of the audience watching the movie, piecing together the narrative from the frozen images on the screen.


Is there an app to monitor reputation and new answers/comments?

Question: Is there a desktop app that will alert me when my reputation changes, and when I have a new answer or comment on any of my questions?
Answer: There sure is: StackApplet.
Keep in mind that right now, it is only available for Linux users - but a Windows version is in the works.
Answer: I ve heard the guys at busyfounder.com are preparing an app called busydeveloper that will add github, hackernews and stackoverflow in order to track this kind of data.


Is it possible for the repeated doubling of a non torsion point of an elliptic curve stays bounded in the affine plane?

Question: Let $P=(x_1,y_1)$ be a non torsion point on an elliptic curve $y^2=x^3+Ax+B$.
Let $(x_n,y_n)=P^{2^n}.  x_n,y_n$ are rationals with heights growing rapidly. Can ${x_n}  {y_n}$ stay bounded?
Answer: EDIT: this answer is wrong. I misread the question as looking at the group generated by P, not the points obtained by repeated doubling. I would be OK if the subset of S^1 generated by taking a non-torsion point and repeatedly doubling came arbitrarily close to the origin---but it may not, as the comments below show. As I write, this question is still open. If a correct answer appears I might well delete this one.
Original answer:
"Bounded" in what sense? You mention heights, that's why I ask. But in fact the answer is "no" in both cases. The height will get bigger because of standard arguments on heights. And the absolute values of x_n and y_n will also be unbounded: think topologically! The real points on the curve are S^1 or S^1 x Z/2Z and if the point isn't torsion then the subgroup it generates will be dense in the identity component and hence will contain points arbitrarily close to the identity, which, by continuity, translates to "arbitrarily large absolute value" in the affine model.
Comment: However, $2^n \xi$ doesn't need to meet every neighborhood of the origin if you only assume $\xi$ is irrational. That $\xi$ is irrational just means the "digits" of the binary expansion aren't preperiodic, not that $\xi$ is normal base 2.
Comment: In that case should the ``elliptic logarithm'' of
a rational point have this property then the answer
to the original question would be `yes'. I don't think
this can be the case but proving it suddenly looks
like hard work :-(
Comment: I mean the absolute. Thanks. You've answered my question.
Comment: Kevin,
repeated doubling of a point doesn't produce the subgroup
generated by that point. What is needed is a theorem to the
effect that if $\xi$ is irrational then
the set of $2^n\xi$ in $\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Z}$ meets every
neighbourhood of the origin in $\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Z}$.
I'm sure this is true but can't see an immediate proof.
Comment: @Robin: you're right---I misread the question. Thanks.
Answer: From the discussion above it looks like the answer is yes (EDIT: if you allow real numbers; the OP was unclear, perhaps they wanted a rational point, in which case I'm uncertain.  Does anybody know anything about the binary expansion of complex numbers with rational Weierstrass p-values?). Let the origin of your group be the point at infinity in the curve in $\mathbb{RP}^2$, and pick a topological group isomorphism of $S^1$ to the component of the identity to $S^1\cong \mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Z}$.  The doublings of a point are given by truncating off the first $m$ digits of the base 2 expansion of your point.  Thus the doublings of a point stay bounded if and only if the length of a consecutive string of 0's and 1's in this expansion is bounded above (there are plenty of irrational numbers with this property).
There's a similar answer for putting the origin somewhere else: you can never allow too much of the beginning of the expansion of the point at infinity to show up in the expansion of your point.
Comment: P seems to be rational.


What is the best time of year to go to Disney World to avoid crowds?

Question: When is the least busy time of year for Disney World? When should I go there such that there are the least number of people there?
Answer: We went to Disney this March (beginning of the month) and it was almost empty (5 minute lines for almost every attraction). This was before the school break.
I followed this link that gave me the dates to avoid (see the site for reasons):

February: Presidents Week
Mid-March to Mid-April: Spring Break
May: Memorial Day Weekend
Mid-June through Mid-August
November: Thanksgiving Weekend
December: Christmas through New Year's Day
Comment: Avoid Martin Luther King Jr. Day (varies by year from Jan 15 to 21). I was there and it was really crowded. 120-minute queues.
Answer: The best time, generally, is when kids are still in school.  This won't guarantee a less crowded park, but it helps. This means late Jan/early Feb, as long as you don't go around President's Day, late April/early May, late Sept through early November (though this is also Epcot Wine and Food festival time leading to larger crowds in EPCOT), and early December.
Early December is my favorite, because the parks are all decorated for Christmas, the weather is cooler, there are fewer rides down for maintenance (which usually happens in January-March), and it is usually value season with regards to hotel rates. And the crowds are usually pretty light, because parents are less likely to pull their kids out of school with one to two weeks left before finals.
The one thing to watch with early December is when the Pop Warner Football / Cheerleading championships are. I didn't find that it added to the crowds any, but some people find the large groups of pre-teenagers annoying. I still feel like this isn't enough to knock early December from my top spot, as the other times of the year have their own pitfalls as well (Jan/Feb = maintenance time for lots of rides, May = hot, Sept/Oct = Food & Wine, which would be fun, but is an extra cost and crowded).
You can also check out http://www.touringplans.com, which is a subscription service with TONS of great info like crowd level calendars (they employ a full time statistician), and touring plans to hit as many rides as possible with as little a wait as possible.
Answer: As daybreaker points out, there is no particular season which is completely free of crowds, because even in the middle of February the parks are packed for the half-marathon. Check the calendar at http://www.undercovertourist.com/planning/when-to-visit.html for the specific days you have in mind. For reasons that aren't clear to me, Disney's official site doesn't list scheduled closures far in advance, so consult http://www.wdwinfo.com/wdwinfo/rehab.htm to see if any of your personal E-tickets are going to be closed.
The absolutely smallest crowds are immediately preceding and following a hurricane, but that won't help long-term planning.


How to best clean the inlet vent screen on a microhood?

Question: Over the years, my microhood has developed a greasy buildup in the inlet vent screens on the underside of the microhood.  They're an aluminum mesh that comes out easily with a label near it saying not to use harsh chemicals or excessive water.  The verbiage stops short of recommending the best way to clean them.
Answer: I ended up using degreaser and it worked better than I thought.
First, remove the vent screens.  In a sink, I sprayed liberal amounts of degreaser on both sides and let sit for a couple minutes.  Spray down with water and repeat cleaning if necessary.  Dry on a towel.  Afterwards, they looked like new.
I guess sometimes the simplest approach is best; don't overthink the situation.
Answer: The best thing would be to look in the manufacturer's instructions which may be online if you don't have it handy.
I don't understand what "excessive water" means other than that it may hold a little water if it's not thoroughly dry and if you try to operate it some will be pulled into the fan which wouldn't be good.
I would take it outside and wash it thoroughly in a pan or bucket of very hot water using some liquid dish detergent (Dawn, for example). Then thoroughly rinse it. Shake as much water out as you can and allow it to dry in the sun for a few hours. Check it carefully before re-installing.
Answer: I used to try and clean my kitchen vent hood and filters with 409 which was a real drudgery and a huge mess. Since, I have discovered the really easy way! There is a product that comes in a box like powdered laundry detergent called "White King Ultra Water Softener & Detergent Booster." I use a bucket large enough to place the filters into, that has about 1 cup (or more) of the White King and very hot water. Literally, within a minute the nasty, greasy goo just rolls off using a very soft brush on both sides. Rinse the filters in clean hot water. You can use a clean bucket of water and White King to wipe down the rest of the hood. I think the White King may be hard to find anymore, and a relative suggested that any of the dishwasher soaps should do the same thing since they're meant to alleviate hard water spots...just be liberal with the soap.


Availability of local train tickets in France

Question: The airplane tickets are easily ordered from travel agency. But what about local transport? I have no idea how to reserve the local transport using online reservation. For instance, I can see that there is a train for my Lyon-Grenoble round-trip in the online registration. Travel agency says that they can reserve tickets for me. Yet, might be the local ticket reservation is a stupid idea in general because local transport travels regularly? Furthermore, plane may be delayed, invalidating your train ticket. Is it better to buy local tickets locally, at the train/bus station when you go?
Comment: In the UK you get screwed if you by tickets locally upon arrivel. They are three times more expensive when you by them on the day itself. (Sample size = 1)
Comment: Quick Google for France Train yields: http://www.bonjourlafrance.com/trains_lyon_part_dieu_train_station_to_grenoble_train_station_109_87.aspx
Comment: Your tags were for France and cities too, so I've updated your question to reflect this - otherwise it'd be far too broad.
Answer: I would not take the train from Lyon Airport to Grenoble. It is not very convenient. However, there is a bus connection between the two cities, operated by Faure Vercors. The buses run hourly between 5h30 and 22h30. The price for a return ticket is 33 EUR and it journey is a roughly 1 hour.
You can safely buy a ticket in advance. If your plane is delayed you can catch a later bus. This is stipulated in their general terms available on the site (in French).
If you do want to take the train go to www.voyages-sncf.com to buy your ticket. Some tickets are refundable or flexible others are not. You will see that during the booking process.
Update
If you decide to go by train, be careful. There is a lot of noise in the answers here.
There is a train station next to the airport. This station is called Lyon Saint-Exupéry TGV. From there you can get direct TGVs to Grenoble. They are not very frequent though and hence not very practical. This is a 1 hour ride. If you want to take a TGV it makes sense to book a ticket in advance. If you buy a flexible ticket you can change it or ask for a refund if ever you miss your train.
There is another station called Lyon Part-Dieu. This station is in the center of Lyon. To get there by public transport from the airport, take the Rhônepexpress tram, as actually indicated by @Davlink. If you buy the tickets online, you can save some money. Have a look at their website and you will see. From the Lyon Part-Dieu station you have to take a regional train (TER) to Grenoble. They are running frequently, one or two per hour. It is not possible to make a reservation on these trains. Buy a ticket at the station and hop on the train. You can of course buy an online ticket beforehand. It just avoids you to queue at the station. Eventually, this option, Tram+TER, takes twice as long as the bus and is twice as expensive.
Answer: If you plan to depart from the airport train station (Lyon Saint-Exupéry TGV), there are no easy connections to Grenoble. This station is served by high-speed trains on a north/south axis and Grenoble is on the east.
You can take the Rhonexpress light rail (a bit expensive) to arrive at Lyon Part-Dieu, the city's main station, 30 minutes later. Rhonexpress tickets are bought at the machines.
From Lyon Part-Dieu, there are trains to Grenoble. In France, there is a rule: TGV have mandatory reservations; day Intercités and TER (regional) are non-reserved. You can use the regional ticket machine directly at this station.
If you do this leg on a TGV, however, you'd better reserve in advance to get better fares since yield management applies on trains with mandatory reservations. Then you can pay online by credit card, note the 6-letter "numéro de dossier" reference, show up at the station and use a yellow vending machine to print your ticket.
Comment: But TGV allows Lyon-Grenoble reservation. Do you mean that they will bring me to another part of the country?
Comment: Davlink is talking about the Lyon Saint-Exupery station, which is next to the airport. From there you can indeed take a direct TGV to Grenoble, but they are not that frequent.
Answer: It depends. Some train companies (Bernhard mentions the UK, I can speak for Germany) are doing something very much like the airlines: regular fares are high, but you can get considerably cheaper tickets that are tied to a specific train and available only in limited contingents that are usually sold out some time in advance.
There are also some train services that always require reservation, while others cannot be reserved at all and others still have optional reservation that guarantees you a seat on otherwise overcrowded trains.
Comment: What you wrote is true, but it does not apply to regional trains in France, most of which have no reservation at all.
Answer: In France regional (local) local trains are non reserved. Outside Paris these trains are called "TER" trains. For these trains advance booking is not needed, as prices are the same weither bought on the spot, or in advance. So you don't need to "book" this, just buy it at the station. A ticket for TER trains allows you to take any train on the route mentioned on the ticket, within the period of validity which is also mentioned on the ticket.
It is only for long distance trains, like the TGV high speed trains, and the "Intercités" that you need to reserve a seat in advance, and where prices can be different based on when you travel and when you book.
Comment: About TER and non-reserved trains : you have to take the departure time into account. There are white and blue periods. White periods are rush times and can be more expensive on some discounted tickets than blue periods.
Answer: Contact the airline company and ask if they participate in a system similar to Rail&Fly offered in Germany by Deutsche Bahn. This system allows you to buy tickets for high speed trains to / from any destination in Germany, following airplane arrival / preceding airplane departure. As delays are possible, these train tickets, naturally, are not bound to a specific time. Depending on distance, these tickets can be quite a bargain.
A quick web search shows up a system in France called tgvair. The TGV in tgvair apparently refers to France's high speed rail service.
Comment: tgvair is only available for flights from Paris.
Comment: @MarcelC. That's what's written in the Wikipedia article, but is that information really up to date? Do you have any official source? Perhaps airline companies have individual deals with SNCF (French railway company). In any case, I would ask the airline company.
Comment: Voilà: http://aide.voyages-sncf.com/toute-laide-vol/je-reserve-mon-voyage/informations-sur-votre-voyage-bagage-assistance/reserver-un-billet-d-avion-avec-un-pre-acheminement-en-train-tgv-air?rfrr=OPTGV_AIR_ColA_question
Comment: @MarcelC. Thanks! Indeed, just Orly (ORY) and Charles De Gaulle (CDG). Furthermore, for each airport the destinations are different.
Answer: On my website loco2.com we sell local train tickets within France. You can choose print-at-home as a delivery option and receive the tickets by email to print off before travel. Here is an example search for Lyon-Grenoble departing in May:
http://loco2.com/journey/lyon-grenoble-5e4ibx
As you can see in the search results table, the journey from Lyon to Grenoble takes just under 90 minutes. The tickets available via the above link have "fully flexible" fare conditions, and so you can use them on any train on the date specified, but you will only have seat reservations for the train you choose.
For the Lyon-Grenoble journey above the prices do not become more expensive, so you can book late without paying more. For other journeys where there are non-flexible/non-refundable tickets available, you can usually save money by booking earlier. The disadvantage of this is that you are then restricted to travelling on one particular train, so you should upgrade to more flexible tickets if required.
There are lots of other websites that sell the same tickets as Loco2, including voyages-sncf.com and TGV Europe, both of which are owned and operated by the French national rail operator, SNCF. Prices on Loco2 are in UK pounds, but apart from that are the same price as booking direct with SNCF for most journeys.
You can of course purchase tickets on the day of travel as well. This will usually be more expensive than booking in advance, and you will need to leave time to purchase the tickets before your train departs.


Mirroring of Apps across servers

Question: We wish to host multiple apps across multiple servers. What we are looking for (ideally) is an existing solution which will work.  For example, normally to do it we'd follow a route (for failover) like:

App is installed on one server along with mysql database
App is also installed on a second server. Rsync is used to mirror the files over to the second server and ensure consistency
MySQL is installed with a Master->Slave setup.
We use a service such as DNS Made Easy which has a DNS failover. If one server goes down it automatically routes traffic to the backup server

We have done the above a few times and generally its fine. The issue I have here is that the above is for one app.  What I would like to look at is how we can manage for multiple apps and if there is a layer (such as VMWare) that has complete mirroring built in at the OS level?   For example how do web hosts currently do it when they ensure that more than one machine is running a bunch of hosted websites. If you were running  hosting and you had 200 clients on a server you would want the same clients across 2 or more servers and want everything mirrored.
Any advice would be much appreciated.
Answer: Have you looked into Load Balancing? It is a layer between the client and the web servers, that determines which web server to use for the client's request:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load_balancing_(computing)

Mirroring of Apps across servers