Some very common parts have standard acronyms on schematics: resistors are usually named R#, capacitors C#, and integrated circuits U#.   Is there a typical standard for these names? If I want my BOM to look "normal" at the end of my design (ie: without any symbols that are weird + unfamiliar to other people looking at it), what should I do?
What prefixes should be used on reference designators for components of various types?  I think we can all agree that "R##" refers to a resistor, "C##" refers to a capacitor, and "L##" refers to an inductor.  Beyond that, it appears to be a mishmash of conventions.    I've seen both "IC" and "U" used for chips.   "Q", "T", and "M" have been used for transistors and MOSFETs.  Ordinarily, "D##" is used for diodes, but LEDs and Zeners get special treatment on some boards.    What standards are available for reference, and who endorses them?  JEDEC, ISO, IEEE, and other standardization bodies are welcome references (though I'd prefer an inexpensive standard), but I'm also curious to see what's used at various companies other than my own.    Edit:  What I'd really like to see is a list in an answer here which complies with the standard (even if it's just a quote).
Why and how can you hear explosions in space in Star Wars? Considering that sound can't travel through vacuum. Name of short sci-fi story involving a musician who is punished for listening to Bach Comparing two logit or probit curves using a single parameter I've conducted a psychological experiment on the same subject, under two different condition. For each condition I've collected the number of correct and wrong answer for each stimulus (number of trials per stimulus = 10; number of stimulus = 15). From the data collected I fitted a psychometric curve (probit or logit curve), and now I want to compare the results.  Consider subject 1: His answers are collected in the following matrices  **COND_1**     correct cnt   Y  N   1   0 10   2   0 10   3   0 10   4   0 10   5   0 10   6   0 10   7   1  9   8   4  6   9   5  5   10  7  3   11  8  2   12  7  3   13 10  0   14 10  0   15 10  0  **COND_2**     correct cnt   Y  N   1   0 10   2   2  8   3   2  8   4   3  7   5   2  8   6   4  6   7   8  2   8  10  0   9   8  2   10 10  0   11  9  1   12 10  0   13 10  0   14 10  0   15 10  0  COND_1.1 &lt;- matrix(c(0, 2, 2, 3, 2, 4, 8, 10, 8, 10, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 8, 8, 7, 8, 6, 2, 0, 2, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0), byrow=F, ncol=2)  COND_1.2 &lt;- matrix(c(0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 7, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 9, 6, 5, 3, 2, 3, 0, 0, 0), byrow=F, ncol=2)  cnt &lt;- seq(from=0, to=1.4, by=0.1)  ddprob.1.1 &lt;- glm(COND_1.1 ~ cnt, family = binomial(link = "probit"))  ddprob.2.1 &lt;- glm(COND_2.1 ~ cnt, family = binomial(link = "probit"))     Observing the plot, you can surely say that performance under condition 2 is better then the performance under condition 1. In fact if you compute some parameters like AUC, p25, p50, p75 (the value of the stimulus at which the number of correct answers are 25%, 50% and 75% each) [threshold parameters], you'll see that:  COND_1      COND_2 AUC    &lt;    AUC p25    &gt;    p25 p50    &gt;    p50 p75    &gt;    p75     Now consider subject 2:  COND_1     correct cnt   Y  N   1   0 10   2   0 10   3   0 10   4   0 10   5   3  7   6   3  7   7   4  6   8   5  5   9   9  1   10  9  1   11 10  0   12 10  0   13 10  0   14 10  0   15 10  0  COND_2     correct cnt   Y  N   1   0 10   2   1  9   3   0 10   4   4  6   5   2  8   6   6  4   7   4  6   8   7  3   9   4  6   10  7  3   11  7  3   12 10  0   13  9  1   14 10  0   15 10  0   COND_1.2 &lt;- matrix(c(0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 3, 4, 5, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 7, 7, 6, 5, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0), byrow=F, ncol=2) COND_2.2 &lt;- matrix(c(0, 1, 0, 4, 2, 6, 4, 7, 4, 7, 7, 10, 9, 10, 10, 10, 9, 10, 6, 8, 4, 6, 3, 6, 3, 3, 0, 1, 0, 0), byrow=F, ncol=2) cnt &lt;- seq(from=0, to=1.4, by=0.1)  ddprob.1.1 &lt;- glm(COND_1.2 ~ cnt, family = binomial(link = "probit")) ddprob.2.1 &lt;- glm(COND_2.2 ~ cnt, family = binomial(link = "probit"))   The plotted curves are shown in the image below.    Can you say what performance is better? Under condition 1 or under condition 2? Extrapolating AUC, p25, p50, p75, you have:  COND_1      COND_2 AUC     &gt;   AUC p25     &gt;   p25 p50     =   p50 p75     &lt;   p75   So my question is: Is there a method to say that a generic curve (logit, probit or whatelse) is HIGHER then another? Is there a method to compare (a single number of "performance") that describe the differences of the two curves? My example shows that AUC, p25, p50, p75 are not good parameters. I'd like to compute a single numeric parameter for each curves, to make a simple t-paired test, extrapolated from the distribution seen. export CLASSPATH=.;../somejar.jar;../mysql-connector-java-5.1.6-bin.jar java -Xmx500m folder.subfolder../dit1/some.xml cd ..   is the above statement for setting the classpath to already existing classpath in linux is correct or not What is the best way to deal with very complex forms? I'm trying to give the best experience to users of a very huge system (like a CRM). It has a lot of forms and much of these have a lot of fields. My doubt is about if I should use a single column form (which raises too much vertical scrolling), or a two columns form (which needs less vertical scrolling and uses more horizontal white space) and a last one with four columns (which has few scrolling and uses almost whole white space to try to keep most of the fields above the fold).  It's important to say that our clients hate scrolling, and they always ask why we don't use the horizontal white space when we present a one column form).  So I'm little bit confused about it, because a lot of UX studies and good practices recommend to do not use/avoid multicolumn forms but the clients most of times ask multi column forms.  Our clients are very used to desktop programs and not everybody is very familiar with web based systems.  Below follows some possibilities I would like to share to illustrate an example of a complex form in the system with the three possibilities I mentioned:    In the example above I'm using the one column form (most recommended in UX studies), but with a very long vertical scroll.    In the second example I tried to reduce vertical space by using two columns.    This is the client's favorite one, 4 columns using white space and trying to keep everything above the fold.   The lengths of fields are based on the average of characters amount for each field.   I would like to know your opinion about the best approach to this case. Manga where the protagonist need to solve girl's quests Can someone tell me the manga in which the protagonist is teleported to an alternative world where he needs to make the girls fall in love with him, then he gains some skills like an invisible sword. Then, when he finishes these &quot;quests&quot;, he will be able to bring one of them to the real world. He has the ability to save and load like checkpoints of games. Perform feature normalization before or within model validation? A common good practice in Machine Learning is to do feature normalization or data standardization of the predictor variables, that's it, center the data substracting the mean and normalize it dividing by the variance (or standard deviation too). For self containment and to my understanding we do this to achieve two main things:   Avoid extra small model weights for the purpose of numerical stability. Ensure quick convergence of optimization algorithms like e.g. Conjugate Gradient so that the large magnitude of one predictor dimension w.r.t. the others doesn't lead to slow convergence.   We usually split the data into training, validation and testing sets. In the literature we usually see that to do feature normalization they take the mean and variance (or standard deviation) over the whole set of predictor variables. The big flaw I see here is that if you do that, you are in fact introducing future information into the training predictor variables namely the future information contained in the mean and variance.  Therefore, I do feature normalization over the training data and save the mean and variance. Then I apply feature normalization to the predictor variables of the validation and test data sets using the training mean and variances. Are there any fundamental flaws with this? can anyone recommend a better alternative? Last month, I was travelling on a backpacking trip across Russia and the Baltic states (Schengen zone). I'm an Indian by nationality. So I had to get the respective single entry visa for Russia and Schengen Europe.  At the border crossing into Estonia by road (at Ivangorod-Narva), I exited the Russian border with an exit stamp (so now I can't go back to Russia since I had a single entry visa). When I was at the immigration checkpoint of Estonia, I was heavily questioned on the intent of my travel to Europe while entering Estonia by road.   Though I finally got into Europe, It got me wondering - what happens if a foreign national is denied entry into a country not at the airport but by land between 2 countries he cannot go into ?  Generally, if you are denied entry at the airport the airline has the obligation to fly you back to your country. But what happens when you are stuck between two countries and you cant get into either ? What happens to you then ? Hello. I was trying to make a bootable flash drive from the startup disk creator, and when I went to erase the flash drive I accidentally erased the wrong drive, a 1TB removable drive. The operation took less than a second and gave no warning. I tried erasing the flash drive and it took about a minute, but it took but a second to erase the 1 TB drive, which is very surprising.  Please help, Gabriel I came across the :    Which states:     $\pi$ Pi      Pi is an infinite, nonrepeating $($sic$)$ decimal - meaning that   every possible number combination exists somewhere in pi.  Converted   into ASCII text, somewhere in that infinite string of digits is the   name of every person you will ever love, the date, time and manner    of your death, and the answers to all the great questions of    the universe.   Is this true? Does it make any sense ? I have a Sony VAIO S series with Windows 8 preinstalled, and I installed Ubuntu 12.10 on a new partition. When the PC boots Grub is display, and I can choose between Windows 8 (didn't worked at the beginning, had to change Grub settings) and Ubuntu 12.10. When I select Ubuntu 12.10 everything is OK, but when I use Windows 8, and I restart Grub isn't displayed anymore (Windows 8 boots immediately).  I booted a Ubuntu 12.10 LiveUSB, used efibootmgr, and found out that Windows 8 (each time it boots) changes EFI default bootloader from Grub to Windows Boot Manager.  How do I change this in Windows 8? I read something about bcdedit, but it does not work or I don't know how to use it... Is "guy" gender-neutral? It seems like to deleted too much files by rm -r and now I have the error of "the system is running a low-graphic mode" in Ubuntu and I have to work in Windows because of that.  However I can load it in recovery mode. I need to copy the files from Downloads folder to a flash drive. Downloads folder has them as I can see by ls command.   When I plug in a flash drive, there will be some messages saying that everything is ok (as I understood) and it's plugged. But when I go to /media/my_name and do ls then I don't see anything. I don't see anything in /run/media/my_name either(I'm not sure if should though).  I can't connect to the Internet for some reason. Ubuntu was installed by wubi.exe file.  How do I save the content of my Downloads folder to a flash drive? I am running a fresh install of Linux Mint Nadia (14). I am following the instructions on Vagrant  but have gotten stuck on the . It seems the Vagrant box cannot connect outside and so I can't install anything using either Chef or Puppet.  In the basic Vagrant resolve.conf contains nameserver 10.0.2.3. But with that set I can't ping us.archive.ubuntu.com.  If I change it to 8.8.8.8 then I can ping us.archive.ubuntu.com but it does not stay set, and after a reboot it changes back to 10.0.2.3 - so provisioning fails again.  Ideally I would like for 10.0.2.3 to work on my setup. Failing that I would like a way to permanently change resolv.conf so that I can do provisioning. House wiring and grounding. How do you retrofit an old house and ground it? A contractor looked at our house and told me that you can't fix a house (with old wiring) that has some outlets that are not grounded.  He said that you can go on YouTube and search the internet and it will tell you that you can.  He says that the only way to properly fix and ground everything is to do a whole house rewire.  Is he correct?  If, theoretically, you have an old house that has no ground whatsoever, can you run a grounding wire from the panel to all of the outlets to fix this?  updated  We have BX/AC wiring. And also apparently we have "...old-style AC (BX) with cloth insulated wires in a paper overall wrap under the spiral armor (no bonding tape)" Courtesy of @ThreePhaseEel. Find the remainder of $\dfrac{2^{2014}}{7}$   I am new to the modular arithmetic, Any suggestions to solve this question? Amy: What day is it today?    Tom: It's Monday. Hmm... I like Monday.   Amy: What do you have today?   Tom: We have math, science and art.What about you?   Amy: We have English and P.E. What do you have tomorrow?    Tom: We have art and P.E.tomorrow.    Amy: Oh, great.      I can understand that "What about you" means "What do you have today?"  But I wonder whether "What about you" is an elliptical sentence. If it is, what is the full sentence? If it isn't, how to parse this structure? How do I challenge an audit failure? I've run through Both SO and Meta searches for an answer, as well as reviewing the , and I cannot find a canonical process to challenge an audit failure.  I can find discussions of the single-choice "I Understand" topic that appear unresolved, in that no solution presently exists.  The particular question in point is .  Despite the number of up-votes, I feel that this quite clearly falls into a common closure category: "Here's my problem; how do I write the program?"  Compare this to   I also failed review on the first link I posted above, .  This looks like a case of code review, rather than SO.  I don't want to get rid of audits; I've learned good things from some of my failures, especially at the start.  However, in the past few weeks, a majority of my failures have been highly questionable, and I've drawn more than one suspension from those that are outright wrong by current standards.  If we have a challenge mechanism, please point me in the right direction.  Otherwise, it's simply not worth the annoyance any more, and I'll drop back to merely comments and answers. It looks as if the 10k-tools flagged post list is b0rken.  Next to the review link in the toolbar there is a flag counter showing there are 10 flags to be reviewed:    Clicking on that flag counter leads to an empty page:        The moment I visit that page (through clicking on the flags counter, or by going to the review queue first then clicking on Tools, selecting the flags tab if not already selected), the flags counter disappears from the toolbar:    but after a while (half an hour, an hour?) the flag count re-appears in the toolbar.  Either the counter is wrong (presumably taken from a Redis cache somewhere) or the 10k flag review page is falling over every time someone tries to load it.  This at first appeared to happen only on Meta, on Stack Overflow the flags page has plenty to review. However, there are now  on Stack Overflow. Why is the atmosphere transparent in the visible spectrum? One of the great 'coincidences' in physics is that the Sun happens to shine most brightly at exactly the wavelengths our eyes can see; it's an easy explanation that our eyes evolved to make the most out of what was available.  However, this spectral window is also , with Rayleigh scattering and the ozone layer protecting us from the UV and strong water vapour absorption in the IR until way into the radio range.  My question is: is this a coincidence? Were there geological factors that made it so? Or is it just lucky chance? (I also notice other planets in our neighbourhood weren't quite so lucky.) Or had atmospheric absorption been different our eyes would have tuned to whatever spectral window were brighter as a whole?