After asking a question, I may be interested in quick responses and react on comments quickly. So I leave the tab open. But I always need to check back to the tab to see whether there's a "something has been added" note somewhere, either a comment to the question, or a new answer or a comment update on an answer I already read. Couldn't this also be shown in the page title so I don't need to switch tabs all the time while I'm reading something else?
Background  Recently  was implemented. With this feature the amount of questions with new activity is shown in parenthesis at the beginning of the page title, e.g.     (2) Meta Stack Overflow   means that MSO has two questions with new activity since the user last viewed it.   this feature is unrelated to inbox updates. Here is an example to illustrate this:    Even though there are two inbox messages in this screenshot this is not reflected by the page title. The page title is currently only sensitive to questions with new activity.  Suggestion  I suggest that the page title also reflects inbox updates. For the screenshot above this would mean that the page title shows that there are two inbox updates and two questions with new activity.  I am not sure what format is best for showing this. For chat * in the page title is used to show that there are messages directed at you which is similar in meaning to inbox updates. However, * if is placed after the number in parenthesis to denote inbox updates there might be confusion as there is no connection between the number in parenthesis and * like in chat. Thus, one might prefer another format such as one of the following (all are meant to reflect the status of the screenshot above):      * (2) Meta Stack Overflow     2* (2) Meta Stack Overflow     [2] (2) Meta Stack Overflow     2i 2q  Meta Stack Overflow     (2/2)  Meta Stack Overflow     (2|2)  Meta Stack Overflow    For the alternatives without an explicit hint of which number refers to what it might be best to place the number for questions with new activity first as it will in most cases be greater. This will to a greater degree avoid combinations such as "(0/2)" which may be confused zero of two.  An advantage of the suggested feature is that if the user has a browser tab with a Stack Exchange site then they will be instantly notified of inbox updates. They do not need to focus a tab with a Stack Exchange site to know if there are inbox updates, they merely have to check the relevant page titles among their tabs.  A disadvantage of the suggested feature is that it might be experienced as verbose. I suggest that it is implemented such that it is as unobtrusive as possible while still being informative. Think of a situation where a user has   one Meta Stack Overflow tab with two inbox updates relating to Meta Stack Overflow and two questions with new activity, and one Super User tab with one inbox updates relating to Super User and three questions with new activity.   Then the sum of the inbox notification in the page titles should be local to sites and not global. The page titles for the tabs above should be something like the following pair:      2i 2q  Meta Stack Overflow     1i 3q  Super User
Anvil, extra lines thingies In a PHP5 class, when does a private constructor get called? Let's say I'm writing a PHP (>= 5.0) class that's meant to be a singleton.  All of the docs I've read say to make the class constructor private so the class can't be directly instantiated.  So if I have something like this:  class SillyDB {   private function __construct()   {    }    public static function getConnection()   {    } }   Are there any cases where __construct() is called other than if I'm doing a   new SillyDB()    call inside the class itself?    And why am I allowed to instantiate SillyDB from inside itself at all? How do I remove repeated elements from ArrayList? I have an ArrayList&lt;String&gt;, and I want to remove repeated strings from it. How can I do this? Before we launched our website, we had set up a "coming soon" page and google picked up the title and description from its contents. So the description in the search results said:     Coming soon! Visit example.org for updates.   It's been a few weeks since we launched our website. We've even created a sitemap and submitted it to Google. In Google Search Console, the pages have been crawled and all the pages are appearing as expected on Google, EXCEPT the homepage which is still not updated! The title and description of the homepage in google search results still says "coming soon.".***  I checked on bing too, but it appears to be fine there.  All other pages seem to be indexed fine on Google. I don't even have any crawl errors in my reports. So what seems to be the problem? I've already waited for 2 weeks. Is $\frac{x^2+x}{x+1}$ a polynomial?  Fist question can be: on which field/ring or etc? In basic, let's take over $\mathbb R$.  Actually, it is $x$ if $x \ne -1$.  Can we say again it is a polynomial, or a near-polynomial or what?   Can we say it is a polynomial over $\mathbb R - \{-1\}$? But there is structure here for $\mathbb R-\{-1\}$.  This question can be academically, not sure, but I want to ask it in the level of primary school, then academically. Giving edit reputation bonus for same user for same post multiple times On Stack Overflow, I saw some users editing the same question multiple times, and getting the 2 point reputation bonus for each time.  I saw it during review of a suggested edit (some months ago, I forgot the question that's why I'm unable to paste the link here). I rejected it and gave the reason in the "Other" reason field.  Most of the time I saw that users first formats the code, and then after approval they edit the title and fix the grammar.  Why is this allowed?  My point is, if an user gained 2 reputation points for a particular edit, then why give another 2 points again for the same post? Because the second edit on same question/answer means that there were some mistakes or misses in their previous edit. Why does my object not show up? This is meant to solve this problem once and for all. What is every reason an object isn't showing up in a render or viewport in when using the cycles render engine? Is "tri-quarterly" a real English word meaning 3 times a year? Is "tri-quarterly" a real English word meaning 3 times a year? Are there any other words that mean 3 times a year? These two exercises I encountered recently seem to develop some type of connection between GCD and LCM I can't quite figure out. Exercise 1:  Find all the numbers $x$ and $y$ such that: $a) \ GCD(x,y)=15, \ LCM(x,y)=150$ $b) \ GCD(x,y)=120 \ LCM(x,y)=1320$ $c) \ GCD(x,y)=100 \ LCM(x,y)=990$  Exercise 2:   Find all the numbers $m,n$ such that $GCD(m,n)=pq , \ LCM(m,n)=p^2qs$  where $p,q,s$ are prime  The first thing that is known to me is that $GCD(x,y) \cdot LCM(x,y)= x \cdot y$ Also $LCM(x,y)$ is at most $x \cdot y$ while $GCD(x,y)$ is at most $\max \{x,y\}$. Last thing is that $GCD(x,y)|LCM(x,y)$. Using all this I tried to solve the first exercise: $a)$ First two obvious pairs are $x=15, y=150$ and $y=15, x=150$. Now neither of the numbers can be bigger than $150$ or smaller than $15$. So we are looking for numbers in the range $15-150$ that satisfy $x \cdot y = 15 \cdot 150$ Another such pair is $(x,y)=(30,75), \ (x,y)=(75,30)$. Similarly for $b)$ we find that the only possible values are permutations of the set {$120,1320$} and in $c)$ since $100$ does not divide $990$ no such numbers exist. Now exercise 2 is what made me think there is actually another connection I'm not quite aware of since now it's about arbitrary prime numbers and the previous method doesn't work anymore. My intuition is that it has something to do with $GCD$ or $LCM$ of the $GCD(x,y), \ LCM(x,y)$ The  was observed, giving us the frequency and amplitude of the event. Because LIGO has two detectors a  could be derived.  But how do these three factors allow for the mass of the black holes and their distance to be calculcated? If the wave strengths are in a square relationship to distance, then couldn't there be an infinite number of other masses and distances which would give the same signals? What's wrong with this experiment showing that either FTL communication is possible or complementarity doesn't hold? The assumptions are:    Alice and Bob have perfectly synchronized clocks Alice and Bob have successfully exchanged a pair of entangled photons   The idea is simply to have Alice and Bob perform the Quantum Eraser Experiment (doesn't need to be the delayed choice).   Alice and Bob agree on a specific time when Bob's photon will be between the "path marker" (which is usually just after the slits) and the detector.  If Alice acts collpasing the wave-function on her photon, the interference pattern will disappear. If not it won't.  Alice and Bob can be spatially separated...  What am I misunderstanding?   The only meaningful difference from this spatially separated quantum eraser experiment to one done on tabletop is that you won't be able to use a coincidence detector, but that is not impeditive to identifying the interference pattern, just will make errors more probable. Which we should be able to deal with a appropriate protocol...  There is a experimental paper with a small amount of citations pointing out to the breaking of complementarity in a very similar setup: How to access the road graph plugin in python? I am developing a few scripts in Python for QGIS 1.8 to automate some geo-tasks and one of them would be to calculate the shortest distance from a hospital to each building in a town.  I would like to take advantage of the already existing Qgis plugin but, as it is a C++ plugin, I am not sure whether it is possible to access it from Python? Is there a binding or a trick for that?  If not, any further advice would be appreciated! As the base data is OpenStreetMap data stored in a PostGIS DB, I may also try with pgRouting. But the QGIS plugin would be my favourite choice if possible.  PS: this question is close to this one:  but I believe it's still different enough to be worth a new thred. What's the term for design ala "object.method1().method2().method3()"? What's the term for this design?  object.method1().method2().method3()   ..when all methods return *this?  I found the term for this a while ago, but lost it meanwhile. I have no clue how to search for this on google :) Also if anyone can think of a better title for the question, feel free to change it.  Thanks  Update-Gishu: After reading about it, I feel that your question is misleading w.r.t. code snippet provided.. (Feel free to rollback)  Method Chaining  object.method1().method2().method3()   Fluent Interfaces  private void makeFluent(Customer customer) {         customer.newOrder()                 .with(6, "TAL")                 .with(5, "HPK").skippable()                 .with(3, "LGV")                 .priorityRush();     } Aufbau principle in modern quantum theory How to suppress certain .bib fields (e.g. year) only for certain entry types (e.g. inproceedings) Proving that if $A$ is a $8\times 8$ matrix over $\mathbb{R}$ and $A^3=A$, then $A$ is diagonalizable. If $A$ is a $8\times 8$ matrix over $\mathbb{R}$ and $A^3=A$ then prove that $A$ is diagonalizable.   I have got that the minimal polynomial of $A$ may be $x^3-x$ or $x$ or $x(x+1)$ or $x(x-1)$ in the 2nd case it is not possible in the 3rd and 4th cases the matrix will be the identity matrix or identity matrix multiplied by a scalar!  But I cannot reach any further. Array versus List: When to use which? elementary ring proof with composition of functions and addition of functions as operations Consider the set $\mathcal{F}=\lbrace f\mid \mathcal{f}:\Bbb{R}\to\Bbb{R}\rbrace$, in which an additive group is defined by addition of functions and a second operation defined as composition of functions. The question asks to verify that the resulting structure does not satisfy the ring properties.     This is the question 24.10 from Modern Algebra, by Durbin, 4th edition.  So what I have so far is that all of the properties for the additive group (with addition of functions as the operation here) hold, associativity of the composition of functions hold, and that the failure must come from the distributive laws.  My proof of my claim, so far;  $$1\,\,\,\,\,[(\mathcal{f}\circ\mathcal{g})+\mathcal{h}](\mathcal{x})=\cdots=\mathcal{f}(\mathcal{g}(\mathcal{x}))+\mathcal{f}(\mathcal{h}(\mathcal{x})).$$ ...but,  $$2\,\,[(\mathcal{f}\circ\mathcal{g})+\mathcal{h}](\mathcal{x})=$$ $$3\,\,(\mathcal{f}\circ\mathcal{g})(\mathcal{x})+\mathcal{h}(\mathcal{x})=$$ $$4\,\,\,\mathcal{f}(\mathcal{g}(\mathcal{x}))+\mathcal{h}(\mathcal{x}).$$ ...which brings me to my contradiction of the properties of rings that;  $$5\,\,\,[\mathcal{f}\circ(\mathcal{g}+\mathcal{h})](\mathcal{x})\neq[(\mathcal{f}\circ\mathcal{g})+\mathcal{h}](\mathcal{x}).$$  So my question is, is this the correct path to showing the distributive laws are not obeyed when composition is taken as an operation on $\mathcal{F}$? particularly my proceeding from 2 to 3 to 4 is what i feel uncomfortable about, like i may be missing a step in there.  thanks setuid root does not work Objective : Run a program as root (C++ binary). The same as :   And :   ./a.out output:  E: Could not open lock file /var/lib/dpkg/lock - open (13: Permission denied) E: Unable to lock the administration directory (/var/lib/dpkg/), are you root? psurana  //output for "whoami" Look below for the code.   ls -l output:  -rwsrwxr-x 1 root    root    46136 Jun  7 20:13 a.out  The Code :   #include &lt;string&gt; #include &lt;stdlib.h&gt; int main(int argc, char *argv[]){         std::string input = "apt-get install " + std::string(argv[1]);         system(input.c_str());         system("whoami");         return 0; }   Details: : compiled the program and then did chown root:root a.out &amp;&amp; chmod u+s a.out. Please look above for ls -l output.  I still do not get the root privileges and the output for system("whoami") in the code is my own username on the machine.  Reading the two linked questions did not yield me anywhere. :(. both the creator and the owner of the file are root. The setuid bit is set, so it should work. The filesystem is not external either, it is my own machine. How can I make this work? Let $f(x)$ a irreducible polynomial of degree $n$ over a field $F$. Let $g(x)$ be a polynomial in $F[x]$. Prove that every irreducible factor of the composition $f(g(x))$ has a degree which is divisible by $n$.  I don't know even how to begin. I really need help. Thanks