I got a notification &ldquo;You&rsquo;ve earned the "modular-arithmetic" tag badge&rdquo;. However, when I clicked on it, I got congratulations for the last tag (card-games), for which I&rsquo;d already seen the congratulations; whereas to the right of the congratulations, it says &ldquo;Newest: modular-arithmetic&rdquo;. Here's a screenshot:
When you earn one tag badge, and then don't click "Track the next one" in the tag badge progress tracking box for a while, and then earn a second tag badge, that box continues to show "Congratulations, you earned [the same badge as before]", rather than updating to show that you've actually earned another tag badge since then.  For instance, right now  looks like this:    Even though I  a few weeks ago and then  yesterday, my profile hasn't updated to show the new achievement.  I also didn't get the "cipher" tag badge until after the 3am watershed, even though tag badges usually appear as soon as I visit my profile after earning them (for instance, I earned the "tags" tag badge on meta.SFF.SE today the very instant I clicked on my own profile there after having become eligible for the badge). Even when I went to look at the list of my progress towards different tag badges on Puzzling, which I thought would jog the system into realising I'd actually earned the badge, "cipher" still showed up as 99/100 score even after I'd gone well past 100, until last night when the badge was finally awarded and "cipher" disappeared from my list of badges to track.  TL;DR: if I don't click "Track the next one", my tag badges update slower than they should.  It's a very unimportant bug, but there must be more people than just me who like to see the "Congratulations" thing there for a while and rest on their laurels before moving on to track their progress towards the next milestone.
I've read that it is possible to add a method to an existing object (i.e., not in the class definition) in Python.   I understand that it's not always good to do so. But how might one do this? When running sudo apt-get update I get these following errors:  Err archive.ubuntu.com quantal InRelease Err archive.ubuntu.com quantal-updates InRelease Err archive.ubuntu.com quantal-backports InRelease Err archive.ubuntu.com quantal-security InRelease Err archive.ubuntu.com quantal Release.gpg   Unable to connect to archive.ubuntu.com:http: [IP: 91.189.92.177 80] Err archive.ubuntu.com quantal-updates Release.gpg   Unable to connect to archive.ubuntu.com:http: [IP: 91.189.92.177 80] Err archive.ubuntu.com quantal-backports Release.gpg   Unable to connect to archive.ubuntu.com:http: [IP: 91.189.92.177 80] Err archive.ubuntu.com quantal-security Release.gpg   Unable to connect to archive.ubuntu.com:http: [IP: 91.189.92.177 80] Reading package lists... Done W: Failed to fetch archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/quantal/InRelease   W: Failed to fetch archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/quantal-updates/InRelease   W: Failed to fetch archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/quantal-backports/InRelease   W: Failed to fetch archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/quantal-security/InRelease   W: Failed to fetch archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/quantal/Release.gpg  Unable to connect to archive.ubuntu.com:http: [IP: 91.189.92.177 80] W: Failed to fetch archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/quantal-updates/Release.gpg  Unable to connect to archive.ubuntu.com:http: [IP: 91.189.92.177 80] W: Failed to fetch archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/quantal-backports/Release.gpg  Unable to connect to archive.ubuntu.com:http: [IP: 91.189.92.177 80] W: Failed to fetch archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/quantal-security/Release.gpg  Unable to connect to archive.ubuntu.com:http: [IP: 91.189.92.177 80] W: Some index files failed to download. They have been ignored, or old ones used instead.   I am using Ubuntu 12.04. This is the command I used after installing Ubuntu from window installer. I am sure my laptop is connected to internet. What can I do now? Use integral test to show that Gaussian Integral $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-x^2} \ dx$ converges? There's a question in my book (it's a school-specific textbook) saying:  Use the integral test to show $$\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-x^2} \ dx$$ (the Gaussian Integral) converges.  The integral test says if the integral converges, so does the series. But I have no idea how to represent this as a series, do I need to?   I'm not looking to evaluate it - I've read about it online - but how do I use the integral test here?  Thanks Solving quadratic equations in modular arithmetic Is there a general way to solve quadratic equations modulo n? I know how to use Legendre and Jacobi symbols to tell me if there's a solution, but I don't know how to get a solution without resorting to guesswork. Some examples of my problems:  $x^2 = 8$ mod 2009 $x^2 + 3x + 1 = 0$ mod 13  Thanks Was it just coincidence that Tahir Mahmood went on stage? In episode 3 of “Bodyguard,” Tahir Mahmood steps onto stage at St. Mary’s college as the Home Secretary is speaking and the two of them, plus others, are blown up by a bomb. In the next episode we discover that the stage had a weight trigger and that his arrival set it off. This heavily implies that whoever asked him to go on stage was affiliated with those who planted the bomb.  We know that Mahmood was sent on stage by advisor Rob Macdonald as part of a scheme, together with other members of the home secretary’s staff, to embarrass her. The audience knows that some of the people in on this scheme have been plotting with the U.K. security services. This, together with interference in video recordings of the event, characteristic of the security services, implicates the security services in the assassination.  In the final episode it is revealed that the bomb had been set by members of an organized crime gang who had gotten the explosives from an Islamic terrorist. A senior member of the police force had been helping them by leaking information. So, were the security services involved? If so, why? If not, who got Mahmood to go up on the stage? Was it just coincidence that he went up there at the right time? Remove a child with a specific attribute, in SimpleXML for PHP Factor 2 in Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle: Which formula is correct? Some websites and textbooks refer to $$\Delta x \Delta p \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}$$ as the correct formula for the uncertainty principle whereas other sources use the formula $$\Delta x \Delta p \geq \hbar.$$ Question: Which one is correct and why?  The latter is used in the textbook "Physics II for Dummies" (German edition) for several examples and the author also derives that formula so I assume that this is not a typing error.  This is the mentioned derivation:     $\sin \theta = \frac{\lambda}{\Delta y}$      assuming $\theta$ is small:      $\tan \theta = \frac{\lambda}{\Delta y}$      de Broglie equation:      $\lambda = \frac{h}{p_x}$      $\Rightarrow \tan \theta \approx \frac{h}{p_x \cdot \Delta y}$      but also:      $\tan \theta = \frac{\Delta p_y}{p_x}$      equalize $\tan \theta$:      $\frac{h}{p_x \cdot \Delta y} \approx \frac{\Delta p_y}{p_x}$      $\Rightarrow \frac{h}{\Delta y} \approx \Delta p_y \Rightarrow \Delta p_y \Delta y \approx h$      $\Rightarrow \Delta p_y \Delta y \geq \frac{h}{2 \pi}$      $\Rightarrow \Delta p \Delta x \geq \frac{h}{2 \pi}$   So: Which one is correct and why? Was drafting an email and my senior wanted to type "Planting saplings is our way of saying we care for our Nature". I felt that's wrong English. Shouldn't it be "we care for Nature"? (it makes it a bit impersonal to remove the 'our', but if 'our nature' isn't right, can the cuteness factor of mentioning 'our nature' be preserved?. Which is correct?) Improving "demonstrate a minimal understanding" close reason How do you start Windows 10 in safe mode? I've been through the Windows 10 upgrade, and am experiencing a recurring "INTERNAL_POWER_ERROR", which is stopping me from logging in.  I'd like to be able to try to boot to safe mode, but it appears that pressing F8 during boot is no longer enough, so how can I boot in safe mode (or any of the other recovery options) on a Windows 10 PC that doesn't let me log on? Prove $\alpha \in R[[x]]$ is a unit iff $a_0 \in R$ is a unit A simple regex search and replacement in php for minifying/compressing javascript? Renormalized mass I am reading Schwarz QFT and I reached the mass renormalization part. So he introduces, after renormalization, a physical mass, defined as the pole of the renormalized propagator, and a renormalized mass which can be the physical mass, but can also take other values, depending on the subtraction schemes used. Are these masses, other than the physical one, observable in any way experimentally, or are they just ways to do the math easier (using minimal subtraction instead of on-shell scheme, for example)?   Also, in the case of charge renormalization, the explanation was that due to the vacuum polarization, the closer you are to the charge, the more you see of it, so the charge of the particle increases with the momentum you are testing the particle with. However, I am not sure I understand, from a physical point of view, why do you need to renormalize the mass. Is this physical mass (defined as the pole of the renormalized propagator) the same no matter how close you get, or it also changes with energy? And if it changes, what is shielding it at big distances? If $(1), (log_yx), (log_zy), (-15log_xz)$ are in Arithmetic Progression... If $(1), (log_yx), (log_zy), (-15log_xz)$ are in AP then...   (A)$z^3=x$   (B)$x=y^{-1}$   (C)$z^{-3}=y$   (D)$x=y^{-1}=z^3$   (Multiple answers may be correct)   I tried many approaches, one of them being: $1+log_zy=2log_yx$ $log_zz+log_zy=log_yx^2$ $log_z(yz)=log_yx^2$ But the fact that the bases are different is causing the main problem as I don't know how to proceed further. It would be great if anybody could give me a hint for solving such questions. I used sculpting on a plane, and things looks great. However, when I press P to play, the whole ground become a mess. I can see through it in various places, and there are also nasty looking black edges everywhere.  another problem, I made a UV Sphere to display the sky, but when I press , P to play it disappears! Let $f$ be an entire function with $|f(z)|\le 100\log|z|,\forall |z|\ge 2,f(i)=2i, \text{ Then} f(1)=?$  I have no idea how to solve this one!  $g(z)={f(z)\over \log|z|}$ Then Can I say $g$ is constant by Liouville Theorem? This is a  about DNS (Domain Name Service).   If my understanding of the DNS system is correct, the .com registry holds a table that maps domains (www.example.com) to DNS servers.   What is the advantage? Why not map directly to an IP address? If the only record that needs to change when I am configuring a DNS server to point to a different IP address, is located at the DNS server, why isn't the process instant? If the only reason for the delay are DNS caches, is it possible to bypass them, so I can see what is happening in real time? Can I kill an indestructible creature with -X/-X and sufficient damage marked on it? Can I hit a 4/4 indestructible creature with a  (3 damage) and give it -1/-1 with  to kill it? (Does it matter which way around I cast those?)  I read  here and it says, damage is removed in cleanup step, so it should be on the creature still after both spells.     702.12. Indestructible   702.12a Indestructible is a static ability.   702.12b A permanent with indestructible can’t be destroyed. Such permanents aren’t destroyed by lethal damage, and they ignore the state-based action that checks for lethal damage (see rule 704.5g).   702.12c Multiple instances of indestructible on the same permanent are redundant. OR operator in C not working Rate limit suggested edits We need a hard rate limit on suggested edits, to limit the damage someone can do with blasting the review queue with minor edit suggestions.  Case in point:  peppered the site with a whopping 133 tag-only edit suggestions in 2 hours and 15 minutes. That's one edit every minute on average, but towards the end he was entering a new suggestion every 20 seconds. He only stopped because a  drew enough rejections to have him banned from entering more.  If there was a limit to the number of suggested edits you can enter in a time period we could have stopped this guy earlier. No &lt;2k user needs to edit hundreds of tags across that many questions in 2 hours time.  Considerations   There are cases where a retag drive or tag burninate justifies editing a larger number of posts, but I'd be fine if such tasks were limited to people with 2k+ reputation. A retag or burninate job requires a minimal engagement with the community to know when they are justified anyway. The suggested edit review process, by itself, was clearly not enough to stop this barrage. It cannot be seen as a rate limiting measure, at least not as a sufficiently efficient one.  The vast majority of the edits made in the above example were too minor, leaving spelling, grammar and formatting mistakes in the post untouched. The user was going too fast to pay attention to such details anyway. Yet this user has 98 approved edit suggestions, but all but 6 or 7 I'd have rejected as too minor, so the review process itself is broken.   What should be limited   The number of review votes reviewers have is already limited; I burned through 20 reviews in short order just reviewing the suggestions from just this one user. Certainly the number of unreviewed suggestions should be limited to let reviewers catch up with a user like this. I'd say having 20 outstanding suggested edits pending review is plenty. Suggested edits should be made with some consideration; we don't want minor edits, so if you are suggesting more than 20 in an hour (that's 1 every 3 minutes) you are not improving posts anymore, you are gaming the system to gain reputation.