I’ve entered into a sugar daddy arrangement, but this is entirely new to me. I’ve read many things about scams and not to give out my bank account login. Well I was stupid and gave it out but as of now and without my sugar daddy knowing I completely changed the login and security questions. I’ve contacted my bank as well. The only thing is I’m not sure if it’s a scam or not. He paid my phone bill completely and appears serious about our arrangement. I haven’t sent him anything at all and he’s been very kind of me.
Someone is offering to pay me in a sort of sugar daddy/sugar baby arrangement. They want to make online deposits to me, and they're asking me for my online banking username and password. Is that information alone enough for them to be able to take my money out of my account, or am I safe?
How do you make numbered equations in latex? I would like to put in a code that automatically assigns a number to the equations in my documents preferably aligned on the right hand side.   How can I go about this?   \documentclass[a4paper,11pt]{article} %\documentclass[a4paper,11pt]{scrartcl} \usepackage{amsmath}  \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}  \begin{document}  $$\ddot{\underline{\mathbf{r}}} = \frac{d{^2}\underline{\mathbf{r}}}{dt^2}= 0$$.  \end{document} Where can I find information about upcoming special issues in a field of study? C# compiler error: "cannot have instance field initializers in structs" In PHP (>= 5.0), is passing by reference faster? In PHP, function parameters can be passed by reference by prepending an ampersand to the parameter in the function declaration, like so:  function foo(&amp;$bar) {     // ... }   Now, I am aware that this is not designed to improve performance, but to allow functions to change variables that are normally out of their scope.  Instead, PHP seems to use Copy On Write to avoid copying objects (and maybe also arrays) until they are changed. So, for functions that do not change their parameters, the effect should be the same as if you had passed them by reference.  However, I was wondering if the Copy On Write logic maybe is shortcircuited on pass-by-reference and whether that has any performance impact.  ETA: To be sure, I assume that it's not faster, and I am well aware that this is not what references are for. So I think my own guesses are quite good, I'm just looking for an answer from someone who really knows what's definitely happening under the hood. In five years of PHP development, I've always found it hard to get quality information on PHP internals short from reading the source. More often that I like to admit I look for a file that contains some strings.  Currently I do:  grep -rl string1 | xargs grep -l string2 | xargs grep -l string3   Is there a tool that does this prettier?  This greps for string1 or string2 or string3.   grep -rl -e string1 -e string2 -e string3   I want files that contain string1 and string2 and string3 but not necessarily on the same line.  Maybe one of the modern greps (ag/ack/rg/sift) can do this? Can I fetch the value of a non-standard CSS property via Javascript? I am trying to read a custom (non-standard) CSS property, set in a stylesheet (not the inline style attribute) and get its value. Take this CSS for example:  #someElement {   foo: 'bar'; }   I have managed to get its value with the currentStyle property in IE7:  var element = document.getElementById('someElement'); var val = element.currentStyle.foo;   But currentStyle is MS-specific. So I tried getComputedStyle() in Firefox 3 and Safari 3:  var val = getComputedStyle(element,null).foo;   ...and it returns undefined. Does anyone know a cross-browser way of retreiving a custom CSS property value?  (As you might have noticed, this isn't valid CSS. But it should work as long as the value follows the correct syntax. A better property name would be "-myNameSpace-foo" or something.) Extra space between lines (gb4e) I am using gb4e.sty to provide inter-linear language glossing. This works well, but I want to get wider spacing between lines when sentences have 2 or more lines like this;   Here is my source code:  \documentclass{article} \usepackage{times} \usepackage{gb4e} \noautomath \let\eachwordone\it \setlength{\glossglue}{10pt plus 2pt minus 1pt}  \begin{document} \begin{exe} \ex \gll mukasi monosugoka jii atama=no an wanrjoku=no an samurai=ga utan=bee=cjo\\ old.days very good head=NOM exist strength=NOM exist samurai=NOM existed=HSY=ASS\\ \trans `Once upon a time, there was a samurai with a smart brain and strength.' \end{exe} \end{document}   Does anyone have a solution to this problem? Completeness and Incompleteness Through browsing questions asked in the past about Godel's completeness and imcompleteness theorems, I've come to see that the sense of completeness in both of the theorems are different. However, I can't see how they are different!   Does this distinction boil down to that of truth and proof? Is it the case that the completeness theorem talks about the relationship between truth and proof, while the incompleteness theorems only relate to provability?  Could someone please elaborate on the sense in which both notions of completeness are different? The function $f(z)=z+\frac{1}{z}$ maps $\Omega$ biholomorphically on the upper plane The question states:     Let $\Omega$ be the upper half plane minus the unit disk. Show that the map $f: z \mapsto z+1/z$ maps $\Omega$ biholomorphically on the upper plane. Describe the preimages of the lines $\mathrm{Im}(z)=\text{a constant}&gt;0$.   So how exactly does one show the mapping is biholomorphic. I'm not sure where I should start, so unfortunately I haven't made any progress Can you forgo your readied action to take an opportunity attack instead? Example:   Player 1 uses the ready action to do something when something happens (unimportant) Goblin, decides to charge across the battlefield and attack Player 2, but happens to cross paths with Player 1 possibly provoking an opportunity attack (here lies my question)   Could Player 1 decide to ignore their readied action and use their reaction to attack the goblin? This would of course take up their reaction so they could no longer take their readied action when it triggers.  If so; let's say it is a fireball that was readied (or any spell), would Player 1 be required to drop the fireball spell? They technically cast it as part of their ready action, but I would understand if this would be a downside to using a reaction before their readied action triggered (maybe this should be another question, but please answer it anyway and tell me if I need to create a separate one so you can answer it there too :P). What is the difference between Θ(n) and O(n)? Sometimes I see Θ(n) with the strange Θ symbol with something in the middle of it, and sometimes just O(n). Is it just laziness of typing because nobody knows how to type this symbol, or does it mean something different? Linux: coloring bash prompt will break carriage return When I try to colorize the bash prompt like this:  export PS1="\e[0;31m[\u@\h \W]\$ \e[m "   it breaks the carriage return (instead of going to a new line when line is full, it starts in the same line and erases the input text).  If I remove the color sequence it works fine. I use Ubuntu 11.10 and terminal (guake has the same bug too). Why does Windows only show about 3.5 GB of my 4 GB of RAM? Cancel a vote so that the tally goes back to zero and not minus Prove that $\lim\limits_{n\to\infty}1 + \frac{1}{1!} + \frac {1}{2!} + \cdots + \frac{1}{n!}\ge\lim\limits_{n\to\infty}(1+\frac{1}{n})^n$ So My professor assigned this question and I am really stuck on part B of the question.  For $n \in \mathbb{N}$ let {$T_n$} = {$1 + \frac{1}{1!} + \frac {1}{2!} + \cdots + \frac{1}{n!}$}.  (a) Prove that {$T_n$} is non-decreasing.  (b) Use {$S_n$} = {$(1+\frac{1}{n})^n$} to prove that {$T_n$} is bounded above and prove that $lim_n(T_n)\ge lim_n (S_n)$   Like I mentioned I can prove part (a) simply by supposing that $T_{n+1} \lt T_n$ then after some algebra concluding the statement is false and than with one other example proving that its not strictly increasing either.  Now for part (b) I have not a slightest clue about how to solve, I assume I will have to use the expanded form of $S_n$ but thats the best I have. So please give me some hints or nudges in the right direction. Outlook, POP and PST handling Essentially I have a client who is on hosted exchange and have decided to use POP3 to download the mail (I don't know why they don't use .OST's but anyway), they rebuilt the machine and backed up their .PST file. Now their Outlook was configured to keep mail downloaded on the server for 14days.  Essentially their current PST is fairly complex, many folders and sub folders and so on. So what is the best way to handle it really - create a new Outlook profile on the rebuilt machine and download the mail via POP into a new .PST then just recreate the folders in the new pst and drag and drop the mail via attaching the backed up .pst, recreating the folders etc?  But is their an easier way to do this, maybe pointing the new account to use the original PST, but then that would download all the mail again from the server to that .PST file.  Any ideas on the best way to handle POP3 account rebuilds from scratch when you have a backed up PST? Image with axis Letter of recommendation from Post-Doc or Professor Does the output bypass capacitor of an LM7805 double as a decoupling capacitor? I'm using a 5v linear regulator (specifically an LM7805) that outputs directly to an ATMEGA328P. According to the  (page 23) input and output bypass capacitors should be used, as seen below, to tame peaks and ensure stability.    It is good practice to also include a decoupling capacitor in front of an IC, in this case an ATMEGA328. Does the 0.1μF capacitor on the output side of the LM7805 act as a decoupling capacitor if the regulator feeds into the IC directly after the output bypass capacitor? If $\int_0^1 f(x)x^n \ dx=0$ for every $n$, then $f=0$.