Christopher Columbus discovered America and was the Indians' best friend. He helped the Indians win their war against Frederick Douglass and freed the Hebrews from Napoleon…   This is a part from the famous surrealistic speech by Mr. Garrison from the TV series South Park (quoted according the comic version). I would like to ask why "to" is omitted before the verb "win". Does it have dealings with the differences between American English and British English?
Which one of this two sentences is correct?   I need you to help me do this job I need you to help me to do this job   Can you also provide me some explanation?
Using a singular or plural verb after "and/or" If the subject of a sentence is separated by "and/or", should the verb be pluralized, as with "and", or agree with the rightmost subject, as with "or"? For example:     His co-workers and/or his boss was at fault.   vs.     His co-workers and/or his boss were at fault. Can I speed up iCloud photo sync between iPhone and Macbook? I have an iPhone 5 running iOS 9.1 and a Macbook Pro running Yosemite.  Both devices are set up to sync photos to and from iCloud.  When I take a photo on the iPhone (for further processing on the Macbook), it takes an inordinate amount of time until the photo shows up in the Macbook's photos library - sometimes up to 10-20 minutes. Sometimes it seems to work faster if I quit the Photos app on both devices, and start it again.  I often end up sending myself photos through E-Mail because it's quicker. That seems ridiculous!  Is there a way to force a sync on the iPhone, or to speed up the process some other way? Revolution of Koch Snowflake Why is dark matter the best theory available to explain missing mass problems? Why is dark matter the best theory to explain the missing mass problem?    Why is dark matter mathematically necessary to explain the missing mass problem?    On a side not I believe dark matter is definately intuitive the next logical step in physics is to accept the fact the direct observations can not always be the determining factor in the acceptance of a theory.  Positivism is not going to be the only driving force in physics forevermore.    One theory that seems almost as good is the supersymmetric particle. What determination which are actually detectible and how would we distinguish the differences between the two?    References:   . How to install specific Ubuntu packages, with exact version? I want to setup a new virtual machine with some specified packages (name and version), that are provided.  For example apache2 in version 2.2.20-1ubuntu1 with all dependencies. Even if there is a new version of this package on the servers this one should be installed.  The solution has to work/scale with multiple (n) "setups". Another virtual machine might need an older version of apache2.  I currently know of some possibilities that install the exact packages, but do not scale that good:   Copy all required *.deb to every virtual machine manually and enter: dpkg -i ... -> Could work, but it is very error prone. (Manual scripts etc.) Create and use a new Ubuntu repository for each setup. -> Does not work because I would need n repositories. Setup the machine once and copy the VM / create a snapshot. -> Does not work because I would need to store n VMs.   My problem could be labeled as patch management, but I do not want to update my packages to the current version. My goal is to install old packages. jQuery autocomplete tagging plug-in like StackOverflow's input tags? Proving $\mathbb{Q}$ isn't homeomorphic to $\mathbb{Z}$ Uniform distribution on the surface of unit sphere USB-C Dongles killing Wifi on 2016/2017 MacBooks – Who’s to blame? I recently switched from my beloved MacBook Pro Retina (Late 2013) i5 2.6/16/512 to MacBook Pro (2017) Non-TB i5 2.3/16/512.  I purchased what from the build-quality looked like a good USB-C-to-DisplayPort cable with 4k/60Hz support, just to run into the very problem the Logicboard repair guru Louis Rossmann had described in : As soon as you plug in the USB-C dongle, the (2.4 GHz) Wifi stops working despite full antenna signal. Unplug the USB-C connector and you are immediately back in the game.  The big question I'm asking myself now: Who is to blame? Is this a design flaw in the current generation MacBooks with improper shielding or is it a design flaw in the various dongles?  I mean the fact that even Apple’s very own USB-C Digital AV Multiport Adapter is causing these WiFi issues (as you can learn from the many horrific ; but AFAIK have been fixed through a ), show that there’s something going horribly wrong. Let $Z_n$ be the set of all $n \times n$ matrices that commute with all $n \times n $ matrices. Show that $$Z_n = \{\lambda I_n \ | \  \lambda \in \mathbb R\}$$  ($I_n$ is the $n \times n$ identity matrix)  I don't know how to use $E_{ij}$ (matrix with $1$ in $(i,j)$ and $0$ elsewhere) and the elementary matrix $P_{ij}$ to prove this question. Can anyone explain it please? Definitions of "linearity" across branches of mathematics or levels of math education Linearity is a ubiquitous concept in mathematics; however, each branch of mathematics appears to have its own definition of what a linear map (function, functional, functor, transformation, form, operator, or whatsoever) is. These different definitions can lead to confusion, especially when people apply conflicting definitions of linearity to the same mathematical object (just  to figure out what I mean).  One of my favorite examples with potential for conflict is the natural logarithm $\ln : \mathbb{R}_{&gt;0} \to \mathbb{R}$, which the majority of people, as I could learn during hot disputations not only  but also with colleagues in my field, regard as clearly non-linear, even though it fully complies with the definition of a linear map from the vector space $\mathbb{R}_{&gt;0}$ to the vector space $\mathbb{R}$ (cf. Definition 4 below). A similar conflict arises analogously for the exponential function $\exp :\mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}_{&gt;0}$.  I do not want to initiate yet another discussion here, about what the right and what the wrong definition of linearity is! Rather, ...  ... I would like to compile a list of existing definitions, to get a better overview of the different uses of the term "linearity" across the different branches of mathematics and levels of education.    Let be begin with the following four, which are certainly far from constituting a complete list. What about bilinear or multilinear forms, linear morphisms and linear functors in category theory, linear metrics, or other concepts of linearity? I am looking forward to see your answers.  At school I was taught that     Definition 1:   A function $f$ is linear if it is of the form $f(x) = ax + b$.   Later I learned that $f(x) = ax + b$ is affine, rather than linear, because     Definition 2:   A function $f$ is linear if it is of the form $f(x) = ax$.   From real analysis and systems theory, I know the following     Definition 3:   A map $f$ is linear if         $f(x + y) = f(x) + f(y)$   $f(a \cdot x) = a \cdot f(x)$.      This definition also applies to the expected value in statistics, as        $\mathrm{E}(X + Y) = \mathrm{E}(X) + \mathrm{E}(Y)$   $\mathrm{E}(a \cdot X) = a \cdot \mathrm{E}(X)$.      In a linear algebra course, I learned for the first time that we must not forget to take into account that the vector-space operations of the domain and the codomain of a map $f$ may be dissimilar. In fact, if $(V, \oplus, \odot)$ and $(W, \boxplus, \boxdot)$ are two $\mathbb{K}$-vector spaces, then     Definition 4:   A map $f : V \to W$ is linear if         $f(x \oplus y) = f(x) \boxplus f(y)$   $f(a \odot x) = a \boxdot f(x)$.         Notice that I deliberately used distinct symbols for the operations in both vector spaces, to emphasize how this definition differs from Definition 3.   Correct me if I am wrong, but this definition should also apply to maps between two modules.    Updates: Got 2,919 PB/s in Ubuntu Terminal I have problem (seems to be trivia) about Ubuntu Terminal. Once my network connection slow down then it (sometimes but very rare to happened) showed some information like this.     I shocked because I have been got 2,919 PB/s. Sorry my mouse block some part of letter 'P' (I actually rush to print screen) but I believe you can recognize it.    EDIT    based on answer given to me, and I got similar info then, I'd like to add more clearly new image after.    Can someone explain it to me?  Best Regards! Short expression to convey "but consider the source" 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 Let $a, b, \&amp; \, m$ be integers. Prove that if $2a + 3b \geq 12m + 1$, then $a \geq 3m + 1$ or $b \geq 2m + 1$.   My Attempt: I don't conceive apace how to contrive, from the one inequality in the antecedent, the two inequalities in the consequent. So a proof by contraposition may be more facile. The contrapositive is: $\text{If }  \color{Green}{a &lt; 3m + 1} \; \&amp; \; \color{#0073CF}{b &lt; 2m + 1}, \text{ then } 2a + 3b &lt; 12m + 1 \tag{*}.$  From $(*)$, $\color{Green}{2a} + \color{#0073CF}{3b} &lt; \color{Green}{6m + 2} \; + \;\color{#0073CF}{6m + 3} = 12m +5$. But this doesn't prove $(*)$.     Given Solution:  Assume that $a &lt; 3m+1$ and $b &lt; 2m+1.$ Since a and b are integers, $a ≤ 3m$ and $b ≤ 2m.$ Therefore, $2a + 3b ≤ 2(3m) + 3(2m) = 12m &lt; 12m+ 1,$ as desired. $\blacksquare$   What went wrong in my attempt? I understand the given solution but I persisted with the more natural and direct green and blue, instead of deviating to weak inequalities. Shouldn't both solutions work?  Source: Problem 4.19 on P102 (related to P90, Result 4.8) of Mathematical Proofs, 2nd ed by Chartrand et al.    $\large{\text{Supplement to Cameron Buie and pritam's Answers :}}$  What overriding, catholic lessons can be extrapolated from this example to generalise about inequalities?   Moreover, in order to circumvent the problem here (ie the loss of information from the weaker inequalities), should I always start with the strictest inequality? If so, should I always rework any weak inequality into the equivalent strict inequality?   For example, define $r \in \mathbb{R} $ and $n \in \mathbb{Z}$ and $g(...) \neq h(...)$. Then $ f(r) &lt; h(r) \require{enclose}      \enclose{updiagonalstrike}{\iff} f(r) \leq g(r).$ But $ f(n) &lt; h(n) \text{ MAY OR MAY NOT }\iff f(n) \leq g(n).$ This is an example from Munkres's Topology (Example 4 in Section 22 titled &quot;The Quotient Topology&quot;, 2nd edition).  Example 4: Let $X$ be the closed unit ball $$\{ x \times y \mid x^2 + y^2 \le 1\}$$ in $\mathbb{R}^2$, and let $X^{\ast}$ be the partition of $X$ consisting of all the one-point sets $\{ x \times y \}$ for which $x^2 + y^2 &lt; 1$, along with the set $S^1= \{ x \times y \mid x^2 + y^2 = 1 \}$. Typical saturated open sets in $X$ are pictured by the shaded regions in the figure below. One can show that $X^{\ast}$ is homeomorphic with the subspace of $\mathbb{R}^3$ called the unit 2-sphere, defined by $$S^2 = \{ x \times y \times z \mid x^2 + y^2 + z^2 =1 \}.$$  I am confused about two points in the example.  Problem 1: About the saturated open sets in $X$. In the example, the typical ones are pictured by the shaded regions ($U, V$) in the figure. However, I am not sure whether the boundaries (visually, by picture) of $U$ and $V$ are included. Particularly, there are two boundaries for $U$. Are they both contained in $U$? And why? Problem 2: How to show that $X^{\ast}$ is homeomorphic with $S^2$? What is the mapping between them?  The following is my understanding:  Solution to problem 1: For $V$, the boundary is not included. For $U$, the outer boundary is included, while the inner one not. Is this solution right? On this site I see hundreds if not a thousand questions being asked about issues with a Wireless LAN adapter not being detected/recognized by Ubuntu. Some mainstream adapters appear to be utterly broken in Linux support, while others just require some simple steps to get it to work.  The options to get it to work appear to be infinitely huge and I have no clue where to get started!  What is considered 'best practice'? What order of things to try is most efficient in terms of time, effort and imposes minimal risk to my Ubuntu installation? Please help me save time and guide me what to do, step by step. Orthogonal complement examples Could the change from an edit be displayed in a side-by-side display How can I increment a date by one day in Java?