I have heard a lot of people tell me that your Meta Game is just as important as playing well. What exactly is the Meta game and how does one go about improving it, or even getting it to begin with?
What is so called meta-game in StarCraft 2?    What other games have this meta-game?
Often I need to recall the different \tracing commands; and a couple of times I stumbled on some webpages that worked fine for me; sadly, I didn't keep them, and my searches don't take me there anymore.   So I thought I'd ask about links to where one can read a list of \tracing commands?   For instance,  mentions:  \tracingall \tracingassigns \tracingcommands \tracinggroups \tracingifs \tracinglostchars \tracingmacros \tracingnesting \tracingonline \tracingoutput \tracingpages \tracingparagraphs \tracingrestores \tracingstats \tracingscantokens   .. but, I'm pretty sure there was something like \tracingboxes (and not so sure if there was something like \tracingglues); yet I cannot find any resources mentioning those. This is a question from Stromberg related to Steinhaus' Theorem:     If $A$ is a set of positive Lebesgue measure, show that $A + A$ contains an interval.   I can't quite see how to modify the Steinhaus proof though. Take the following two lines of code:  for (int i = 0; i &lt; some_vector.size(); i++) {     //do stuff }   And this:  for (some_iterator = some_vector.begin(); some_iterator != some_vector.end();     some_iterator++) {     //do stuff }   I'm told that the second way is preferred. Why exactly is this? What is the correct way to completely remove an application? What's in a name: hyperparameters So in a normal distribution, we have two parameters: mean $\mu$ and variance $\sigma^2$. In the book Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning, there suddenly appears a hyperparameter $\lambda$ in the  regularization terms of the error function.  What are hyperparameters? Why are they named as such? And how are they intuitively different from parameters in general? Is logical implication always determinable from just the given statements? I am reading introductory texts on logic and am having a hard time understanding intuitively logical implication.  Specifically, I am wondering if logical implication can always be determined by two statements, P and Q alone? I'll try to give an example to clarify my question.  For example if the statement P is $x = 2$, and the statement Q is $x^2 &lt; 6$, then determining the truth of P $\Rightarrow$ Q is fairly straightforward:   If $x$ does equal 2, then $4&lt;6$ and Q is true, so $P \Rightarrow Q$ is true. And if $x$ does not equal 2, $P \Rightarrow Q$ is vacuously true.  In this example, with two statements P and Q, I can evaluate the truth/falsity of the statement P implies Q. However, what if the statement Q is changed such that it is now the statement $y = 5$?  So now I am trying to prove from that $$x = 2 \Rightarrow y = 5$$  Here is where things get murky for me. Say $x$ is not equal to 2, then $P \Rightarrow Q$ is vacuously true. But what about when $x$ does equal 2, now the statement Q could be true, but it could also be false, depending on some 'context'.   For example, if I said at the start: "Here are two statements, P and Q. Know that x = 2 and y = 4." Given this 'context', $P \Rightarrow Q$ is false. But if I say "Here are two statements, P and Q. Know that x = 2 and y = 5", then now $P \Rightarrow Q$ is true.  My discomfort here is that I assumed with two statements P and Q, I can determine the truth/falsity of $P \Rightarrow Q$ with just this information. Is this the wrong assumption?  As a secondary question, how can the truthfulness of the statement $P \Rightarrow Q$ be variable, depending on context? I have read on some other questions that implication can be interpreted as a promise. So how could it be that depending on some context the promise is sometimes true but sometimes false? Wouldn't this actually mean the promise is not always consistent and is therefore always false?  Some further information in case it is relevant, I recognise that in the first example, the statement Q is 'dependent' in some way on the statement P, since the object under examination in both statements is $x$, whereas in the second example there are two different objects which I am trying to make a logical connection between, which I am thinking may not be valid for some reason. I also recognise that there is still 'context' in the first example, in that we need information on whether $x$ is equal to 2 or not, however in that case it doesn't matter, since $P \Rightarrow Q$ is always true anyway.  Thanks very much in advance. Since the final Black Hole (BH) had 3 solar masses less of mass than the original binary BH, it seems the 2 BHs lost mass, and with it event surface area, entropy, and information. If that came from inside the BHs it seems that it would be a contradiction of what a BH is --'nothing escapes its event horizon'. Some may say that came from the rotational energy of the pair, but the new BH now seems to have less than the two original ones summed. So, did some of that escape the horizons? Why is there an emission of gamma rays? When a spontaneous radioactive reaction happens, there is an emission of gamma rays (in most cases) What causes this emission? "As a beginner, I am happy that I learned a new thing."  You will recognize this as your DoReMi-s.( at 4:52)  What is the meaning of the "AS" there and when do we use that?  In depth answers would be appreciated.  Similarly:     Do I have your word as a lawman not to shoot me down like a dog in the street?    Can you explain this sentence?   Can I understand it as a lawman wouldn't shoot down people on the street or wouldn't have his word or what? Let $G$ a group with normal subgroups $M,N$ such that $M\cap N=\{e\}$.   i) Show that for every $m\in M$ and for every $n\in N$, $mn=nm$.   ii) If $G$ is generated by $M\cup N$ then $G\cong M \times N$.   This is an homework question for abstract algebra. I think I can prove $i)$. But I have no idea how to prove $ii)$. Can anybody give me a hint for this one ?    Here my proof for i): Let $n \in N$ and let $m\in M$. Let $x=mnm^{-1}n^{-1}$. As $N$ is normal subgroup, $mnm^{-1} \in N$. Therefore $x \in N$.  As $M$ is normal subgroup , $nmn^{-1} \in M$. Since $m\in M$, then $x=m(nm^{-1}n^{-1})\in M$. This implies that $c\in M \cap N$, then $c\in \{e\}$, then $c=e$, and we get $mn=nm$. Ubuntu 16.04.1 has appeared as .rar file. How do I burn it to a disk to use to install Ubuntu? I am interested in using Ubuntu for the fist time, so I went to the Ubuntu download page (), to get the download file. When the file downloaded he file, it appeared in WinRAR, so I cannot burn the file to a DVD. Can anybody point me in the right direction as to how to burn this file to a DVD when the file appears as a WinRAR file? Any help would be great appreciated. Thanks :) Gauss's law not making sense If we have a point charge and outside of it we have a non-conducting Gaussian sphere, then Gauss's law says that the net flux should be zero. I agree that the total field lines coming in are equal to the number of field lines coming out, but isn't it true that the magnitude of the electric field at those segments of the sphere where the field is coming in is greater than those where it is coming out? So when we integrate, wouldn't these areas, having a greater electric field, contribute more to the net flux? I don't see why they would cancel each other out. A lady and a monster A famous problem:  A lady is in the center of the circular lake and a monster is on the boundary of the lake. The speed of the monster is $v_m$, and the speed of the swimming lady is $v_l$. The goal of the lady is to come to the ground without meeting the monster, and the goal of the monster is to meet the lady.  Under some conditions on $v_m,v_l$ the lady can always win. What if these conditions are not satisfied?  Edited: the monster cannot swim. If the conditions are not satisfied, then monster can always perform a strategy such that the lady will not escape the lake. On the other hand this strategy is not desirable for both of them because they do not reach their goals. As there was mentioned, this deals with undecidability of the problem. On the other hand, if you imagine yourself to be this lady/monster, you can be interested in the strategy which is not optimal. What is it? If there are such strategies in the game theory?  Edited2: My question is more general in fact. If we have a game with one parameter $v$ when two players $P_1, P_2$ are enemies and if $v&gt;0$ then for any strategy of $P_2$ the player $P_1$ wins. If $v\leq 0$ then for any strategy of $P_2$ there is a strategy of $P_1$ such that $P_2$ does not win and vice versa. I am interested in this case. From the mathematical point of view as I have understood the problem is undecidable since there is no an ultimate strategy neither for $P_1$ nor for $P_2$. But we are solving somehow these problem IRL. Imagine that you are a lady in this game - then you would like to win anyway even while knowing that your strategy can be covered by the strategy of the monster. On the other hand, the monster knows that if he will cover all strategies of the lady she will never reach the shore and he will never catch her. I mean they have to develop some non-optimal strategies. I hope now it's more clear. Short story about dead soldiers bodies being reused Dynamic Object Intellisense Should searching by default be AND or OR? On my website I have a search bar.  It's powered by Lucene.net.  I have a requirement to make search be a substring case insensitive search, with direct hits appearing before substrings.  What I don't know, however, is when a user searches for a multi-word item--say "Chocolate Milk"--should that be treated under the hood as an AND or OR search?  As an example:  *chocolate* AND *milk*   vs  *chocolate* OR *milk*   The requirement right now is to treat this as an AND, but I'm not sure if that's the right way to go about it.  What would be the best in terms of UX?  I would think the best thing to do would be an OR search, with items containing both keywords appearing before items containing only one of the keywords.  Thoughts?  EDIT: The types of items being searched are medical supplies, with very cryptic names. How to shift EXIF date/time created by time in days, hours, minutes? How can I solve "Be aware that removing the lock file is not a solution and may break your system"? I did: sudo apt-get update  I got this: Reading package lists... Done E: Could not get lock /var/lib/apt/lists/lock. It is held by process 1131 (packagekitd)  N: Be aware that removing the lock file is not a solution and may break your system.  E: Unable to lock directory /var/lib/apt/lists/  I used to just remove the lock file, but I've never seen that note before (did it break my system?)?? What do I do? What is the equivalent of Windows System Properties or Device Manager? I am new to Ubuntu. In Windows, if I want to know my system properties/configuration, I can see it by going to Control Panel and clicking on the System icon. I can also get a detailed list of the hardware detected/installed by going to the Device Manager.  What are the equivalents of these features in Ubuntu, where a user can see his or her system properties and hardware configuration, like RAM, CPU/processor, hard disk capacity, etc.?    Example of Windows System Properties: Is there a constraint that restricts my generic method to numeric types? Can anyone tell me if there is a way with generics to limit a generic type argument T to only:   Int16 Int32 Int64 UInt16 UInt32 UInt64   I'm aware of the where keyword, but can't find an interface for only these types,  Something like:  static bool IntegerFunction&lt;T&gt;(T value) where T : INumeric