Recently I was talking to my friend in English. He started laughing and I asked him Why you're laughing man?  Someone told me you should say Why are you laughing? and this one is totally wrong.  I got a little bit confused. I know "Why are you laughing?" is correct but I can't wrap my head around it fully that mine is totally wrong.  I represented what I meant through intonation of the sentence and my buddy had no problem understanding it. my question is:  The form I used was totally wrong? and I should stop using it?  I'm guessing in written English this form is wrong and if I use it, it's gonna represent a statement, but in the spoken language, since we have intonation I thought it might be unnecessary to emphasize on being totally grammatically correct for every sentence I'm saying.  Am I wrong?
I was going through some articles about "African American Vernacular English". . . These articles give some examples, but they do not clearly specify hard rules to be followed in AAVE.  First of all, I don't even have strong skills in Standard English, so understanding AAVE seems a lot more difficult for me. I did, however, craft a few sentences in both SE and AAVE to validate what understanding I do have. Are the following conversions correct? You don't have to validate each and every item, but rather guide me with rules that I should follow, but didn't, in the following examples.   What the hell are you all doing here?  —  What the hell y'all doin' here? Hey you! What the hell are you doing man? Stop that nonsense now. Do you get it?  — Hey you! What the hell ya doin’ man? Stop that nonsense now. D'ya get it? Come on, can't you open your mouths?   — Come on, ya can't open your mouths??  Hey, who's out there?  —  Hey, who out there? I know, you're listening to us   — I know, ya listenin’ to us Somebody is out there man. — Somebody out there man. Wow, it's delicious.  — Wow, it delicious. Holy crap, who're these people? — Holy crap, who these people?
How can I find more music similar to the ones I like? We're trying to debug some applications performing broadcast.  What is the difference between the broadcast address 255.255.255.255 and as e.g. reported by ifconfig,  Bcast:192.168.1.255 Allow setuid on shell scripts The setuid permission bit tells Linux to run a program with the effective user id of the owner instead of the executor:  &gt; cat setuid-test.c  #include &lt;stdio.h&gt; #include &lt;unistd.h&gt;  int main(int argc, char** argv) {     printf("%d", geteuid());     return 0; }  &gt; gcc -o setuid-test setuid-test.c &gt; ./setuid-test  1000  &gt; sudo chown nobody ./setuid-test; sudo chmod +s ./setuid-test &gt; ./setuid-test  65534   However, this only applies to executables; shell scripts ignore the setuid bit:  &gt; cat setuid-test2  #!/bin/bash id -u  &gt; ./setuid-test2  1000  &gt; sudo chown nobody ./setuid-test2; sudo chmod +s ./setuid-test2 &gt; ./setuid-test2  1000     Wikipedia :     Due to the increased likelihood of security flaws, many operating systems ignore the setuid attribute when applied to executable shell scripts.   Assuming I'm willing to accept those risks, is there any way to tell Linux to treat the setuid bit the same on shell scripts as it does on executables?  If not, is there a common workaround for this problem? My current solution is to add a sudoers entry to allow ALL to run a given script as the user I want it run as, with NOPASSWD to avoid the password prompt. The main downsides to that is the need for a sudoers entry every time I want to do this, and the need for the caller to sudo some-script instead of just some-script Now that I'm looking into home automation, I'm thinking about automatically cutting off the fridge power from 3am ~ 5am. Given that modern refrigerators are well insulated, it should be able to withstand 2 hours of non powered cooling.  If I proceed with this project, will I see a big reduction in my monthly electrical bill? What counts as an attack? I was looking over the class feature of the 'fiend' patron warlock in 5e. I'm a bit confused on what actions the player needs to take before they can use the 'Hurl Through Hell' ability on an enemy. The PHB states:     Starting at 14th level, when you hit a creature with an attack, you can use this feature to instantly transport the target through the lower planes.   I'm not clear on what an 'attack' means in this context. Does it have to be a physical attack like a sword or crossbow? Do magical attacks like Eldritch Blast that require an attack roll count? What about spells with no attack roll? How do TTL NAND gates work? This is supposed to be a simple NAND gate. I understand how the output is 1 if one of the inputs is zero but if both inputs are 1 then the base of Q1 is supposed to be zero. This is what I don't understand. I know that Q2 and Q3 will be in cut off so the base of Q1 is floating. If that is true, how is it zero then?When A and B are open does current flow through Q2  Q3 via R1 to turn on Q1? Creating volumetric lighting (crepuscular rays) in Cycles (a.k.a. "god rays" and many other names) can be created in Blender Internal by checking the Halo checkbox in the lamp properties box.  How can I create a similar effect using Cycles? How can I replay Apache access logs back at my servers to do real world load testing? I looked at  but I couldn't see how to replay my own existing logs in any of those tools. I have a bug that only occurs under certain load operations which my existing JMeter and AB testing stuff can't reproduce.  I want to simply give the tool access_logs and have it play them back, either faster or at the same speed. Two logos in beamer after certain frame I am making a presentation which is devided in two parts. The first part is about experiments held in instute A and the second part is about experiments held in instute A and institute B.  Is it possible to add a second logo in a beamer presentation after a certain frame?  Let's say that this is a previous slide    This is a next slide Vi on Linux: show ^M line endings for DOS-format files On Solaris, if you open a file in vi that has Windows line endings, this shows up as ^M at the end of every line.  On Linux, vi is cleverer and understands the Windows file format, and does not display ^M.  Is there a setting to make Linux vi behave the same as Solaris in this respect?  A common problem for us is copying a shell script off a (Windows) dev box and forgetting to dos2unix it, and then being confused when it doesn't work properly. On Solaris the problem is obvious as soon as you vi the file, but not on Linux.  Thanks. What was Tauriel doing during the events of The Lord of the Rings movies? [Yes, The Hobbit movies are nonsense. But how could I call myself a fantasy fan if I didn't demand my nonsense be as logical as possible?]  Tauriel is presented as a highly-skilled fighter and a combatant for the side of good. Despite this, she apparently did nothing during Sauron's war on the free peoples.  Was she somehow     still mourning Killi, after all these decades?   Was she dead? Or is there another reason she didn't participate? There are various articles on Hearthstone opening strategy which suggest it's a bad idea to use early-game spells and summons to damage your opponent directly, and that you should instead save them for minion removal.  An example: your starting hand contains an Elven Archer, a 1-cost 1/1 minion that does a point of damage when summoned. I've seen it advised that if going first, with that card in your hand, you should not play it, but save it for minion removal.  Another example:  Going second against a Rogue with a 2-cost 2/1 Loot Hoarder, Deathrattle: draw a card in your hand. The advice was not to play it and save the coin, because on her second turn, the Rogue can generate a dagger and kill the Hoarder.   I understand why, in most circumstances, it's better to remove a minion than damage the enemy. What's bugging me about these particular opening examples is why they're a better idea than doing nothing and ending the turn.  In both cases, you've wasted a point of mana, and the chance to take the initiatve. By having a minion on the board first, you can use the following turn to attack with that minion, possibly removing an enemy summon and leaving you clear to summon onto an empty board.   The Loot Hoarder one I find particularly puzzling. If the Rogue gets a dagger and kills it, you still have the initative, you've forced the Rogue to make what's possibly a suboptimal turn-2 play, you've done 2 damage to the Rogue and you got a card into the bargain. Sounds like a pretty good use of the coin to me.  What am I missing here? Word for "scary thing that's about to occur"? I have the feeling I'm forgetting a very simple word. But anyway, is there a word for that? Example:     The [...] that haven't occurred yet are the most scary ones. How can I use "." as the delimiter with String.split() in java "some " vs. "some of " Some of rules can be the same for most websites.   vs.     Some rules can be the same for most websites.   I think I want to say     Some of these rules can be the same for most websites. How do I use F3 to get my coordinates when my laptop makes F3 a special key? See code:   var file1 = "50.xsl"; var file2 = "30.doc"; getFileExtension(file1); //returns xsl getFileExtension(file2); //returns doc  function getFileExtension(filename) {     /*TODO*/ } Questions with declarative forms have the same meaning as their interrogative counterparts or not? Simulating a Brownian Excursion using a Brownian Bridge? In the movie, there's one scene that seems very strange to me.  First, the point:  When the team gets in the first level, they find out that Fischer has a militarized subconscious. After they freak out, and argue about it, they also find out that they can't die, otherwise they'd get stuck in limbo.  So, when Eames says that he won't go further, Cobb states that, since the first level sedative will last a week they would be killed. They needed to go on to the next levels as fast as possible, so the combined multi-level kick would make them wake up.  Here's the point: The plan was the multi-level kick would wake them up before the sedative was off     Ariadne: ...is ten years! Who would wanna be stuck in a dream for ten years?   Yusuf: Depends on the dream.    Arthur: So, once we've made the plant, how do we go out? Hope you have something more elegant in mind than shooting me in the head?    Cobb: A kick.    ...   Arthur: Are we going to feel a kick with this kind of sedation?   Yusuf: Well, that's the clever part. I customize the sedative to leave inner ear function unimpaired. That way, however deep the sleep, the sleeper still feels falling, or tipping.     Now, the question:  When they finish the job, they perform the kicks   The van hits the water Arthur detonates the elevator Eames explodes the fortress   But they don't wake up. They are back in the drowned van. So, as far as I could understand, they still had to sit and wait for the first level's week to end.  (We see Fischer talking to his godfather)  Why didn't they wake up with the kicks, as it was planned? And how did they managed not to get killed by Fischer's projections after they got out of the Van?