This &quot;new&quot; functionality almost makes me regret buying a new Macbook. How on earth do I turn off the menu showing when the mouse hits the top? It's so incredibly annoying... I went full screen for a reason.
Pretty much every application I use in full-screen (including Firefox, MacVim and the Terminal) have tabs on the top of the screen.  The problem is, when I move my mouse to reach the tabs I'll often accidentally touch the top of the screen, bringing in the OS menu OVER the tabs:    Is there any way to change this behavior? I'd prefer it if the menu bar would stay hidden when I'm using a full-screen app, even if my mouse does touch the top of the screen.
$_SERVER["REMOTE_ADDR"] gives server IP rather than visitor IP Why do we use residuals to test the assumptions on errors in regression? Suppose that we have a model $Y_i = \beta_0 + \beta_1X_{i1} + \beta_2X_{i2} + \dots + \beta_kX_{ik} + \epsilon_i$.  Regression has a number of assumptions, such as that the errors $\epsilon_i$ should be normally distributed with mean zero and constant variance. I have been taught to check these assumptions using a normal QQ plot to test for normality of the residuals $e_i = Y_i - \hat{Y}_i$ and a residuals vs. fitted plot to check that the residuals vary around zero with constant variance.  However, these tests are all on the residuals, not the errors.  From what I understand, the errors are defined as the deviation of each observation from their 'true' mean value. So, we can write $\epsilon_i = Y_i - \mathbb{E}[Y_i]$. These errors cannot be observed by us. *  My question is this: how good of a job do the residuals do in mimicking the errors?   If the assumptions appear to be satisfied on the residuals, does this mean they are satisfied on the errors too? Are there other (better) ways to test the assumptions, like fitting the model to a testing dataset and getting the residuals from there?    * Furthermore, does this not require that the model is specified correctly? That is, that the response really does have a relationship with the predictors $X_1, X_2,$ etc. in the way specified by the model.  If we are missing some predictors (say, $X_{k+1}\ \text{to}\ X_p$), then the expectation $\mathbb{E}[Y_i] = \beta_0 + \beta_1X_{i1} + \beta_2X_{i2} + \dots + \beta_kX_{ik}$ would not even be the true mean, and further analysis on an incorrect model seems pointless.  How do we check whether the model is a correct one? I was just chatting on the Ask Different chat - and the reputation numbers for me and the others chatting don't seem to match any other reputation count I can see on the sites here.  Is there some calculation being made? These numbers are the highest of any other combined reputation I have seen. For me - I'm listed over 10k - but no other aggregate reputation counter I can see is above 8k.  Perhaps I'm unaware how reputation is calculated, but the people there suggested a bug report in case this isn't intended.  (after three lines of text are drawn - a number shows beneath our icons in the left hand side) $\mathbb{R}P^4$ and $\mathbb{R}P^6$ do not admit fields of tangent $2$-planes How to prove $b=c$ if $ab=ac$ (cancellation law in groups)? What is the difference between re.search and re.match? What is the difference between the search() and match() functions in the ?  I've read the  (), but I never seem to remember it.  I keep having to look it up and re-learn it.  I'm hoping that someone will answer it clearly with examples so that (perhaps) it will stick in my head.  Or at least I'll have a better place to return with my question and it will take less time to re-learn it. Find all integer roots of: $x^2(y-1)+y^2(x-1)=1$   Obviously $(2,1)$ and $(1,2)$ are two answers. But I was unable to manipulate the equation algebraically giving a useful form for finding all other possible answers! I also tried to view it as a quadratic equation in terms of $x$, but forming the Delta of that equation didn't help much other than if $y=1$ then certainly Delta would be a square and equation would have answer for $x$... Can cited works hold grammatical positions in sentences? Though I read this style quite often, I was recently told unambiguously by a reviewer that I was NOT supposed to use citations "as if they are objects in a sentence."  The following sentence is an example of what the reviewer considered unacceptable:       We analyzed the data using the Wilmerding method, guided by [12].   The references section might include the following:      [12] Smith, D., Marshawn, J., &amp; Devenshaw, A. 2011. Techniques and   Procedures for Applying the Wilmerding Method.  Prince Publications,   Inc, New York, NY.   The Wilmerding method1 is not a step-by-step algorithm that can be precisely followed as if by a machine, and thus [12] does not provide a step-by-step algorithmic description but rather guidance for using  the method. [12] is a relatively slim but authoritative textbook about how to use the Wilmerding method.  Within this question, for the purpose of discussion, I have intentionally put [12] in grammatical positions where it's an important element of the sentence and the sentence would make less sense without the reference.  Sometimes that seems to be the most efficient way to communicate the intended message.  Is using a reference as a grammatical sentence element like this OK?   Why might this not be considered acceptable?   Should I be rewording those sentences?  Is it enough of a violation to be worth passing the note on to authors of papers I review?   I considered posting this on  but it seems more specific to academia than general English usage, and the comment came from a content reviewer rather than a copy editor.   is related but it seems to be more about when to put authors names' in vs. outside of the parentheses in an APA-like style.   The numbered citation style (as opposed to following APA, for example) is required by the venue.  1: Fictionalized for the purpose of this discussion graphics with \setbeamercovered{transparent} With \setbeamercovered{transparent} covered parts of a slide are displayed transparently. If there is a (small) picture among the text, it is shown as it is. Beamer has only this picture, so it shows this picture. My question: How can I give a gray version of the picture to beamer such that in covered parts of a slide, this gray version is used? I updated LyX to 2.3.0-1, and found that LyX was displaying all the "-" characters in Math Mode as "\lyxminus". No such problem occurs when entering outside of Math Mode. LyX also seems to have no problem compiling to TeX, and the PDF output looks normal.  I removed and re-installed LyX, and this issue was still there.   Does anyone have any ideas on what might be going on? I am using Linux Mint 18.2 Sonya.  Note: I previously saw this question ask about the same thing, but the author appears to have deleted their post: Shape of the universe? What is the exact shape of the universe? I know of the balloon analogy, and the bread with raisins in it. These clarify some points, like how the universe can have no centre, and how it can expand equally everywhere in all directions. But they also raise some questions, like if you are on the surface of a balloon and travel in 1 direction, you will eventually return to your starting point, is it possible our universe have this feature?  If it has, or had, would this be a symmetry of sorts ($\psi(x)=\psi(x+R)$), and as such have a conserved quantity associated with it (by Noether)? Assuming "small curled up dimensions" wouldn't these dimensions have this type of symmetry, what are the associated conserved quantities? Is it known exactly what the geometrical shape of the universe is? (on a large scale) (I am not talking about only the observable universe). How does one define the "size" of a dimension, is this scale only applicable to curled up ones? Is it possible to describe to a layman the shape of the universe without resorting to inept analogies? $\pi$ can be represented as $C/D$, and $C/D$ is a fraction, and the definition of an irrational number is that it cannot be represented as a fraction.   Then why is $\pi$ an irrational number? Auto revision summary has wrong plural: "added 1 characters in body" As seen at:           Update: I'm 101% sure the down votes were due to the lack of free hands.    Update 2: likes me, like me not, like me, likes me not... yeah ! Suppose $f$ is entire and $|f(z)| \leq A + B |z|^{3/2}$. Show that $f$ is a linear polynomial.   My attempt: Since $f$ is entire, we know that it has a Taylor series expansion on the circle $|z| = R$, that is $f(z) = \sum_{n = 0}^\infty a_n z^n$. By using Cauchy's estimate, we can write   $|f^n(0)| \leq \frac{n! M}{R^n}$. Since this holds for any $R&gt;0$, it follows that for $n\geq 2$, $|f^n(0)| \leq 0$. This implies that $f^n(0) = 0$ for $n\geq 2$. Hence $f$ is a polynomial of degree at most $1$.  Edit 1 : On the circle $|z| = R$, $|f(z)|\leq A + B R^{3/2}$.  Thank you very much.  Kindly suggest me if I am wrong? Is there any other apporoach to solve such kind of problems? QGIS - export a project with dependencies If my account is already a member of the administrator group why do some functions on Windows 7 require me to run them as administator? I kind of thought that was implied? Stanley's Enumerative Combinatorics () contains next fact: 1.1.3 Example. Let f(n) be the number of n × n matrices M of $0$’s and $1$’s such that every row and column of M has three 1’s. For example, f(0) = 1, f(1) = f(2) = 0, f(3) = 1. The most explicit formula known at present for f(n) is $$f(n)=6^{-n}{(n!)}^2\sum\frac{(-1)^{\beta}(\beta+3\gamma)!2^\alpha 3^{\beta}}{\alpha!\beta!\gamma!^26^{\gamma}}$$ where the sum ranges over all (n + 2)(n + 1)/2 solutions to α + β + γ = n in nonnegative integers.   I need proof of this fact. (i.e. reference to book or articles that contains proof this fact). Best way to find a point on a circle closest to a given point Given a point (pX, pY) and a circle with a known center (cX,cY) and radius (r), what is the shortest amount of code you can come up with to find the point on the circle closest to (pX, pY) ?  I've got some code kind of working but it involves converting the circle to an equation of the form (x - cX)^2 + (y - cY)^2 = r^2 (where r is radius) and using the equation of the line from point (pX, pY) to (cX, cY) to create a quadratic equation to be solved.  Once I iron out the bugs it'll do, but it seems such an inelegant solution. How do I disable Dunst and go back to notify-osd? I installed i3, which recommends dunst, but I'm not using i3 at the moment, and the dunst notifications don't really fit with Unity. I'd rather not uninstall dunst totally, since I might want to start using it at some point in the future; is there a way to switch back to notify-osd without uninstalling dunst? Wiki-tag edit error is non-descriptive I've been editing some wiki entries on the new Expatriates site, and started to get the following error:    When I go to a normal post, I see what is presumably the proper explanation:    Can the Wiki Tag edit error be updated to show a more meaningful error message?