What does it mean that "One for All" allows to stockpile power?

Question: In My Hero Academia, they say that the quirk "One for All" allows the user to stockpile power. What does this mean exactly? Does it mean that the current user has the quirks of the previous users? Does it mean that the current user has the added strength, speed, resistance, etc. of the former users combined? Or does it mean he can save strength, speed, resistance, power, etc. when he isn't using it, having it "stockpiled", and using it altogether, at some moment? Or does it have any other meaning?
Answer: It would seem that all the unique users of One For All added their own power in the quirk- stockpile (One For All), as the earlier quirk user (his younger brother) couldn't defeat All For One, but All Might did.
It means that all the previous users had some powers of their own, which they passed down with the powers they had themselves received.
Answer: One For All definition according to MHA wiki

Long ago, a man with a Quirk that could steal and distribute quirks, forcibly gave his seemingly Quirkless little brother a Quirk or "Superpower" that allowed him to use stockpiled power in his body. However, the little brother already had a Quirk with no effect other than that it could transfer a person's Quirk to another. The little brother's Quirk and the Quirk given to him by his older brother merged and became One For All.

Also, All Might said that one for all is a union of two Quirks,

A Quirk that stockpiles power
A Quirk that could be transferred the quirk to others

As you mentioned in your question, Quirk Stockpile is the quirk that stock energy and physical power, people who have Quirk Stockpile don't have a physical limit they can increase their power by constantly working hard. Also, the first user couldn't beat the All For One, but All Might could do it. This means that, One For All quirk is passing the previous users' strength as well. That's why Izuku Midoriya has to work hard to make his body adapt to the power of One For All. The current physical body of Izuku Midoriya cannot use the 100% of One For All.
Answer: While what the answers before have said, the quirk stockpiles the fullest physical abilities of those who held the quirk previously. Though since it is phrased this way we can assume that this the reason All Might is able to react to everything moving at such high speeds is that the quirk also stacks reaction times. Any physical ability is stacked to the fullest ability of that person. Which in theory means it should be exponential. EX: Since All Might can take the full 100% his body is probably stronger than the average persons without it. And more so than the previous holder too. So as the quirk increases in strength, so does the base holders strength, speed, reaction time, hardiness. All that shit.
MANGA SPOILERS
Though this might not be the extent of it. In the newer chapters we see that the previous holders may lay somewhere within the quirk, similar to the avatar being able to communicate to the past avatars. So there could be other things the quirk stacks as well. Willpower, Prediction, Muscle Memory, Ingenuity. Maybe Deku will be able to learn from and speak to the past holders. And maybe there is a secret avatar state we have yet to see ;P. I doubt that last one becoming real, and to be honest I would prefer that Deku be the best by himself. Though personally how I think Deku will become the best hero is that he will unite the heroes together (specifically his classmates and other great heroes) into an Avengers like team. And they together will become the new symbol of peace.
Answer: More new info regarding to what One For All can do coming from the manga, this has just revealed that,

 One for All also transfers the quirks of former users to the current one, as speculated in the body itself of this question one year ago.
Answer: I believe it means that quirks from the past users can be stockpiled and used by the current holder of one for all, in the first chapter of the manga,( I'm not sure if its in the anima) when all might punches the liquid villain, its not that all might is just that strong, its a second quirk that is called " shock wave (page 31).
Answer: So when Deku was out of control once in the manga, these black energy strings stopped him. This is the result of the One For All stockpiling ability after the (5th, 4th, or 3rd I think) user of One For All had an ability called Black whip. When One For All is passed down to a user with a quirk and that user with a who already had a quirk passed it to somebody else without a quirk, the person who previously had no quirk now has One For All and the current users quirk. and then if the new user pass it to someone else, that person will also get the first persons quirk. If someone who already had a quirk gets One For All, that quirk gets embedded in One For All for the users to come.


VPN server in a router

Question: I am new to using and configuring VPNs. I was thinking of setting up my router as an OpenVPN server, but as I understand that is to connect form the outside to my network. However, I want a connection were I can connect to my router securely but also encrypt all the information from my router to my ISP. Is it possible to do this? Do I have to get a VPN service?
Comment: Why do you want to encrypt traffic from your router to your ISP?
Comment: Wait are you asking how to make sure your traffic is encrypted to a website, or to SPECIFICALLY your PHYSICAL Internet Service Provider, and then not any point afterwards?
Comment: @d1str0: I guess that the OP meant *from my router to Internet* (to the ISP and beyond)
Answer: You can do it both ways, by initiating the OpenVPN connection:

from a host on your network or the router, to an OpenVPN server.
You need a server on Internet to connect to. This is a service you usually buy, but not necessarily - it can be a free one, a friend, etc. The traffic from this host (or all hosts if you connect from the router) will be secured, up to the OpenVPN exit point (= the server you connected to)
from a host on Internet, to a server you control (the router, or a server in your network).
You need to set up an OpenVPN server yourself or possibly use a functionality of your router if it has one (some ISPs provide this functionality on their boxes)
Answer: Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't advise running your traffic from a VPN simply due to the performance hit.
The idea of a VPN is this:
YOU >> encrypted traffic >> VPN SERVER >> the server gets data normally to the open internet in behalf of you using their own identity including their IP Address. Its slow because you send the data and the response from websites do not go back directly to you but again through the VPN tunnel.
Your data would not be traceable back to you and you would act as if you are located there (where the VPN is located). If you use a VPN located in USA and you're actually in China, your location & IP would appear as if you are in the USA and you would be able to access files accessed in the States that are blocked in China.
If you setup your own connection I suggest you do it with DD-WRT. But if the VPN Router is located within your home using the same IP, then the point of hiding yourself from the internet or bypassing restricted sites would not apply.
You can also pick from good VPN providers. You have to pick your provider since using their service means you are allowing your data to be "stored" in their servers.
Read more on VPN from ServerFault
Answer: If you want to encrypt all traffic from your network through your ISP, you need to setup your router at a client, not a server.
The client takes traffic and routes it through an encrypted tunnel to the server, where it gets unencrypted and delivered to the destination as if the traffic originated on the server end.  Think of it like having a virtual connection to the server.
So in this situation, you'd need access to a openVPN server for your router to connect to.  That essentially means you need to sign up for a VPN service as you described.
If your router acted as a server, you'd be able to connect to your network from anywhere in the world, and have traffic get to your internal network as if you were at home.

VPN server in a router


Combining 2 patch files that patch a number of files in a directory + resolving conflicts

Question: I have a dir with thousands of files and 2 patch files that apply to the same dir. Each patch file patches 20-30 files in dir or it's subdirs.
If I apply either patch to the common ancestor dir, it succeeds.
But if I apply one patch file followed by the other, it fails because the line numbering has changed after one patch file is applied. (Both patch files store the diff from the common ancestor). Also at some places there are conflicts that I would like to do 3-way merge using some graphical tool like meld.
My goal is to do a 3-way merge from the patch files and then diff this final dir recursively against the common ancestor to create a single patch file.
One way to do it would be creating 2 copies of the common ancestor, applying the different patches to 2 of the copies and then doing a merge using meld. meld would spend a lot of time comparing files that did not change (dir has thousands of files). Is there a better way of doing this?
I would appreciate if you put in exact commands since I'm a linux newbie.
Answer: The latter seems to be a good choice: merging of 2 patched file trees. Except you can optimize process by dropping out unchanged files before merging leaving union of file sets in each patched file tree. However, it makes sense only if it's needed quite often to do.


How did my inner tube get folded in a Z inside the tire?

Question: My rear tire was keep going flat while riding, so I felt around the tire for any punctures or abnormal 'signs' that may be causing the problem.
One area felt too thick, and at first, I thought I just overinflated it and somehow the air got trapped. Later, I ended up pushing my bike into the rocks, and when the tire tread came off, I saw that the inner tube had literally folded up into a 'Z' shape inside the tire. How did this happen? I have never seen anything like this before.
Comment: Either you had the wrong tube or you were running the tire (almost) flat.
Answer: Most likely incorrect tube and tire combo. Check your tube range if it matches the size of your tire. Could also be that you seated the tire incorrectly.
Comment: Like a 29'' tube in a 27.5'' or 26'' tyre.
Answer: This can happen if your tire is underinflated and you use your rear brake a lot. When you brake, the tire drags and moves a little bit around the rim. Since the tube is anchored at the valve stem, it stretches on one side and bunches up on the other.
Comment: That makes sense. My tire was under inflated, and I usually use my rear brake more than my front one. Thanks.


HtmlAgilityPack, using XPath contains method and predicates

Question: HtmlAgilityPack, using XPath contains method
I'm using HtmlAgilityPack and i need to know if a class attribute contains a specific word, now i have this page:

 ....................

I'm doing this:
HtmlDocument doc2 = ...;
List<string> paragraphs = doc2.DocumentNode.SelectNodes("//div[@class = 'yom-mod yom-art-content ']//p").Select(paragraphNode => paragraphNode.InnerHtml).ToList();

But it's too much specific that I need is something like this:
List<string> paragraphs = doc2.DocumentNode.SelectNodes("//div[contains(@class, 'yom-art-content']//p").Select(paragraphNode => paragraphNode.InnerHtml).ToList();

But it don't work, please help me..
Answer: Perhaps the issue is simply that you're missing the closing parenthesis on the contains() function:
//div[contains(@class, 'yom-art-content']//p
                                        v
//div[contains(@class, 'yom-art-content')]//p

List<string> paragraphs =
        doc2.DocumentNode.SelectNodes("//div[contains(@class, 'yom-art-content')]//p")
            .Select(paragraphNode => paragraphNode.InnerHtml).ToList();

As a general suggestion, please explain what you mean when you say things like "it didn't work".  I suspect you're getting an error message that might help track down the issue?
Answer: Instead of using the HAP for this, look into CsQuery that provides jQuery style selectors.
It looks particularly suited for what you are trying to do.

CsQuery is a jQuery port for .NET 4. It implements all CSS2 & CSS3 selectors, all the DOM manipulation methods of jQuery, and some of the utility methods. The majority of the jQuery test suite (as of 1.6.2) has been ported to C#.


What should I look for in a cookie jar?

Question: I would like to upgrade from the novelty plastic bin I currently use for cookies. What cookie jar features would prevent the cookies from getting stale for the longest amount of time? What shape of jar will allow for storing the most cookies? Is light sensitivity a factor?
Comment: Cookies! (There are hats; I'm allowed to have fun now, right?)
Comment: How long do you keep your cookies in the jar?
Comment: I'd like to extend the life of the cookies to a little over a week. Currently they start getting stale around day 4.
Comment: Do you have a most common *type* of cookie you keep?
Comment: Let's say it's snickerdoodles.
Answer: I've found a cookie jar buying guide on Walmart.com that has some interesting tidbits. For functionality alone, looks like a glass jar should do the job well. Something like this would have an advantageous shape to make cookies easier to reach, and the jar less prone to falling.

One feature you may want to look for specifically would be an hermetic sealing lid, which would help keep moisture in the jar and slow down the drying. Same kind of jar that is often used to store flour, sugar, coffee, beans, etc.

Is light sensitivity a factor?

I don't think it would be, in most cases, unless you kept your cookies in an area that is heavily lit by the sun.
Comment: "I don't think it would be, in most cases, unless you kept your cookies in an area that is heavily lit by the sun." Doesn't glass provide some protection from heat caused by sunlight anyway, due to blocking ultraviolet?
Comment: actually, it turns out ultraviolet is a much smaller proportion of the energy from sunlight than I thought, so it's irrelevant. Sorry.
Comment: It does to an extent, yes. I was more concerned about the heat from the sun, which could affect the texture. I will add clarification!
Comment: Well, more info is better than less, I guess. I still think sunlight would be the very least significant factor, either way :)
Comment: If it's a dry (or moist due to oil, not water) cookie, I wouldn't think that glass would be a problem.  Typically moist things in glass containers are a problem as the water evaporates, then condenses on the inside of the jar.
Comment: The only thing I would add to this answer is that it's important to consider the size of the opening to the jar - so that you can insert and retrieve large cookies without breaking them.
Answer: One thing you can do for anything which goes bad (rancid) due to oxygenation is to spritz into the jar a bit of canned air sold for keyboard cleaning. These cans contain a refrigerant gas which is heavier than air, so even a little bit in a bottle or can of oil keeps the oxygen away from the oil.
It will work with cookies and other things as well since it stays on top of oils, you only need to hit them once. I don't know about cookies...they never last long enough to go stale!
Comment: Hello, and welcome to Stack Exchange. The air in most such "canned air" aerosols is mixed with a [bitterant](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitterant) to keep people from huffing the gas, and there's no way you want that bitterant on your food.

What should I look for in a cookie jar?


If the world were seriously threatened, what would happen to the economy?

Question: Imagine a world exactly like Earth, complete with humans and all. The scientists of this world suddenly discover that, unless drastic measures are taken, all life on Earth will be eradicated. However, there is one (and only one) option that can save the world, if we can get the funding. This plan would cost an exorbitant amount of money, but has a probable chance of being successful. In this situation, what would happen to the costs of the materials necessary for the plan? Would the sellers raise the price due to the increased demand, or would they lower it in order to make saving the world easier?
Comment: Are you intentionally analogizing to the ongoing climate change challenges?
Comment: Nobody will survive, trust me, I'm from that planet and I know the people. Chaos will erupt and established institutions will no longer function.
Comment: Plot twist: The threat was made up in order to steal everyone's money.
Comment: I like the plot twist, but stealing exactly everyone elses money is not a good idea since then everyone else would have an incentive to stop using that guys kind of money and start using something else instead. Just steal a reasonable amount so others still have an incentive to keep using money.
Comment: They would raise prices, but the reason why is the question. On the one hand, people love money. On the other hand, people love destroying the world.
Comment: Answering the summary only without the details in the question body, "it would become less important."
Answer: We can see what happens already.  It happens daily in business.  Let's get to work

However, there is one (and only one) option that can save the world, if we can get the funding.

This phrasing indicates either an absurdly unlikely circumstance, or a partial picture.  It is very unlikely that there is actually only one solution.  For example, let's assume the problem is trivial: "put these 7 numbers in order: 1, 3, 5, 7, 4, 13, 20."  There are many solutions such as

Swap the 5 and the 7.  Then swap the 7 and the 4
Swap the 4 and the 5.  Then swap the 5 and the 7.
Jumble the whole group up, put it through StackSort (read the image's tooltip).  Then go get a drink of water.

And so forth.  The actual number of degrees of freedom in the problem is quite staggering, especially when you consider the question of "what happens next after we succeed?"  Are we thirsty?  Maybe the plans that involved drinking water are good!
What you more likely are describing is a case where there is a hard requirement: thou shalt do X, or the entire planet dies.  There may be many implementations of X which function, although your word choices indicate that most courses of action will not satisfy X.
Thus the goal of every rational actor in this scenario is two fold:

Ensure the survival of the planet
Ensure that, after the planet is saved, their position is as ideal as possible.

Alternatively, in mercenary order of priorities: 1) get paid.  2) live long enough to enjoy getting paid.
Now this works great as long as everyone has perfect information.  However, we don't.  Its entirely possible that we may do our part, but someone else slacks off.  In this case, we may be obliged to do even more work to save the planet, making up for the slackers.  Now we're getting somewhere.  This sounds a lot like a traditional Prisoner's Dilemma.  This is a dilemma where two individuals (we'll call them Alice and Bob) commit a crime.  There's not enough evidence to convict either one, so they are called in for questioning.  There, they are provided with a dilemma:

If you agree to testify against your partner, your testimony plus the evidence will be enough to convict him.  This same deal is being offered to your partner.  We admit, we don't have enough evidence to convict either of you without the other person admitting you two both did it, so here's the deal.  If neither of you testify, we're going to convict both of you on a lesser crime, and give you both 1 year in jail.  If either of you testifies against the other, they can go scott free, while the other person spends 9 years in jail.  If both of you agree to testify, you'll both get convicted, but we'll only sentence you to 3 year.

The logic diagram looks like this
<code>                       Alice
               Quiet          Testifies
              +-------------+--------------+
   Quiet      | Alice: 1yrs | Alice: 0yrs  |
              | Bob:   1yrs | Bob:   9yrs  |
Bob           +-------------+--------------+
   Testifies  | Alice: 9yrs | Alice: 3yr   |
              | Bob:   0yrs | Bob:   3yr   |
              +-------------+--------------+
</code>
The dilemma forms because the best course of action is to both stay quiet.  However, if you both realize this, you have to worry that your partner might try to decrease their own sentence by ratting you out.  Thus, you must be conservative and testify.  The result of the dilemma is that the most rational course of action is to testify, and both of you serve 3 years, even though you could have gotten away with just 1.
We can draw an analogy to our example.  Instead of "Quiet" and "Testify," we can "Conform" to what is best for the planet, or "Defect" and do what is best for us
<code>                       Alice
                     Conform              Defect
              +---------------------+--------------------+
   Conform    | Everyone lives      | Everyone lives     |
              | Everyone is even    | Alice makes money  |
Bob           +---------------------+--------------------+
   Defect     | Everyone lives      | Everyone dies      |
              | Bob makes money     | Everyone is unhappy|
              +---------------------+--------------------+
</code>
Obviously this pattern has more players, but the basic story with two players is enough to understand what is happening.  The correlary to the prisoner's dilemma suggests that everyone gets greedy, then dies.
However, that's not the end of the story for this dilemma.  You see, if it was that simple, being a prosecutor or Attorney General would be a piece of cake!  In reality, this doesn't work.  We find that criminals refuse to snitch on each other with remarkable consistency.  There's clearly a second force going on in the real world!  From talking with criminals, we find the answer is obvious.  A snitch doesn't get very far in the crime world.  If you snitch, you've basically ended your career as a criminal.  Nobody will work with a snitch, and everybody knows it.  So this adjusts the logic of both Alice and Bob in our example.  Both of them know the other person knows that snitches will be brutally punished.  They may avoid a few years of jail time, but the trade isn't worth it.  This knowledge is enough to get both Alice and Bob to conform, refusing to testify against their partner, and both get a year in prison.
Likewise the global "essence" will likely rise up to try to find ways to ensure conformance.  This will likely be in the form of governments putting dramatic pressure on companies to not defect in the name of profit.  Sure, they can defect, but it might be the straw that broke the camel's back, causing the earth to die, and even if someone else did cover for them, they'd be labeled as a profiteering pile of filth and nobody will work with them, nor accept their money.
The real question is not whether there will be defectors, but whether second order effects will creep in.  At some point, when you're leaning on a company to do something "for the common good" rather than "for your own profit," you can lean hard enough that the company gives you the middle finger, and folds up instead.  The challenge for the government is to find ways to put pressure on the companies without causing them to fold up.
There's another related experiment that has been done, involving two parties.  Each party is assigned a random role.  The first party is given two envelopes and some money, say $100.  They are told to divide the money up between the two envelopes.  One is money they will keep, and the other is kept by the second party.  The second party is then permitted to look at the distribution of cash, and make a choice.  They can either take their money, and the first person keeps theirs, or they can refuse it, and the first person gets nothing.
The game theory logic for player one is simple.  The first person's goal is to get as much money as they can, without causing the second player to defect.  If they defect, nobody gets any money.  The second player's logic is theoretically easy: just take the money, you always profit.  However, if the first player knows this, they may only leave $1.
This scenario is not well described in game theory.  You actually need drama theory to make sense of the results.  However, the results are easy to spot.  In America, the most common result was a 50/50 split.  If the first person tried to take more money, such as a 90/10 split, the second person would punish them by making sure nobody gets money.
In some African nations, the result was different.  The first player would choose 90/10, and the second player would accept.  When asked why, the answer would be "because \10 is better than \$0, and if I was in the first player's position, I'd have gotten to have the $90 anyways."  In some groups, the split was actually quite arbitrary.  It was found these groups were known for sharing everything as a group.  It really didn't matter if the split was 50/50 or 90/10, they were going to pool the money later once both parties got back together!
So this is the stage for where your question really ends up.  Large powers like governments will put pressure on the companies to band together and do things for the common good.  The amount of pressure they can put on the companies before they defect depends on the culture.
So now we get back to the original issue of many solutions to the problem.  The more solutions there are, the less pressure will be needed to ensure enough conformance to survive.  As the number of solutions get smaller, more pressure will be needed, causing more companies to defect.  At some point, that can be the end of humanity.  However, we cannot know one way or another without a very lengthy exploration of exactly what scenario we are in, and what solutions present.
Comment: @Sam I'd enjoy entertaining other definitions of rationality, if you have one.  However, the most typical assumptions for rational actors includes self-interest.  I have found that, in my exploration of this kind of problem, other definitions of rationality tend to lead to situations that tend not to occur in real situations.  I'm always open to exploring new definitions I haven't considered though, if you have any recommendations.
Comment: I'd imagine that at some point companies would realize that if everyone dies, their money will be of no use.  First, they won't be alive to spend it.  Second, if they do manage to survive, there will be no one to buy from and everything is essentially free.  So ultimately, I think the scenario will force companies to determine how much money they can afford to lose.  If the world ends up needing more, another round of reflection with tighter constraints.
Comment: @Ethan It is a good extension, but the problem is there is so little agreement as to how to solve the tragedy.  Its an effective tool to realize problems and to start to address them, but not effective at figuring out what to do about it.  Game theory and drama theory are helpful because, if anyone disagrees with me, they're free to use the the tools to come to their own conclusion.
Comment: Don't forget that there have been Prisoner's Dilemma competitions (you bring your strategy, I bring mine, we'll see who wins).  The findings were that under most scenarios "nice" strategies won (both players play nice - not snitching).  Except if the number of turns is known before hand then the "defect" strategies won. http://lesswrong.com/lw/7f2/prisoners_dilemma_tournament_results/
Comment: Actually these scenarios are very different. In the prisoner's dilemma, regardless of what Bob does, Alice's most "rationally self-interested" course of action is to defect. In the "end-of-world" dilemma, if Alice knows Bob is going to defect, she had better conform because otherwise the world ends and she dies. It's only when she expects Bob to conform that she would consider defecting.
Comment: "Thus the goal of every rational actor in this scenario is two fold:

Ensure the survival of the planet
Ensure that, after the planet is saved, their position is as ideal as possible."

By your definition of rationality.
Comment: @DavidStarkey What you describe is actually the Drama Theory solution to this problem.  In Drama Theory, each actor decides upon a description of how they will act, based on the other's choices.  There is then a round of Game Theory where each actor gets to see the other's choices, and they arrive at a result.  Then, drama theory iterates on another round, refining their strategy based on the previous round's results.  Your scenario is an excellent example of that..
Comment: Another example would be the world ending up needing less, and trying to figure out the best way to relax the constraints.  In real situations, both of these will happen simultaneously on several different scales.  Drama Theorists argue that these interactions on many scales are an effective way to model the emergent behavior that one would experience in such a situation.
Comment: I chose to simplify it to the game theory model I used in my answer because Drama Theory complicates things a lot, but I believe that, if you iterate your solution with Drama Theory enough, the result should be very similar to the results from using my artificially simplified goals.
Comment: @CortAmmon quite a few people "rationally" preserve there genes (children) over themselves. Others "rationally" protect assets over themselves. Still others "rationally" protect their ideologies or religions over themselves.
Comment: It may also be worth bringing up Tragedy of the Commons. It may be more applicable than prisoner's dillema, as it's basically an extension of Prisoner's Dilemma to more than two players.
Comment: At least if you know the number of turns then being the first to start defecting does better.
Comment: I love the use of the Prisoner's Dilemma for this.  Because everyone wants the planet to survive.  But many will also try to get rich quick while doing it.  The tournaments of different strategies might give insight into how the drama will all play out.  Perhaps people making more than some predefined limit are immediately executed for the good of the Human species?  Just remember though, in the Real World a defecting Gates/Jobs may be worth more to human survival than 1,000,000 nice average people.
Comment: @Jim2B It's not just about getting rich doing it - there's also the "somebody else is going to spend their money on solving this, and I'll have the benefit for no cost" strategy, which is even trickier. That said, the marketing benefit of Being the Saviour of the World might be enough to tip the balance :P
Comment: @CharlesStaats It becomes muddier when Alice is in a position where it is not 100% crystal clear that her conforming or not decides whether the world ends.  The lack of perfect knowledge offers Alice a surprising number of options to be evaluated.
Answer: In such a situation of dire global emergency, it is entirely likely that governments would switch to a command-economy mode, meaning that if the vendors of the goods necessary to save the world did not voluntarily reduce their profit margins, then governments would take steps to make it a legal necessity for the vendors to supply the goods at cost.
In the event that the vendors attempted to decline to supply the goods entirely, the vendors' businesses could be seized and nationalised, and if necessary any persons with necessary trade secrets could be... compelled by whatever means necessary to divulge those secrets for the good of the entire world.
Comment: @Thomo, I agree, however, do you really think that in the face of global destruction that a majority of governments *won't* cooperate to ensure global survival?  The cheapest way to ensure world survival is to legislate and nationalise without compensation, and any government will be planning for the post-averted-disaster world.  If its a choice between global extinction and treating a small number of people badly, the majority of people will support that
Comment: @Jim2B Yes, which means that it's a balancing act - will the efficiency losses due to the regulated market be offset by the total work volume gained by forcing everyone to do what you want them to do instead of sewing T-shirts and doing haircuts? Total war economies were a disaster for consumers, but shifted enough of total production to war production to improve overall war production, despite some losses. Of course, it helps when you can do enough propaganda to motivate people to work well, and when you keep the owners in charge, partially.
Comment: This would require a coordinated effort from governments worldwide to enforce however, particularly with the large multi-national companies. The USA putting out arrest warrants for a company in China isn't going to do a great deal, especially if the Chinese government is willing to provide generous concessions for the company to protect _them_
After all, it won't be an issue for them if the company and generous host nations survive, but the country threatening legal action doesn't...
Comment: History has shown command economies are less efficient than free market economies.  OTOH, a command economy allows better focusing of effort.
Comment: @Money. Most_ governments would. I can certainly see the majority of Western countries generally banding together, and likewise for other regional areas, but would USA be willing to cede control to China and/or Russia? Or Iran/Syria? And I fully agree that it would be the cheapest. But, is it the most likely given the current political climate? If planning for the post-near-apocalypse, would you not plan to weaken/cripple/destroy your enemies as well? (Personally, I agree with you, I just don't have faith that certain groups wouldn't still vie for power as the world burns)
Answer: Ideally, the suppliers would provide the necessary materials at a reasonable price.
In all likelihood though, given the nature of humanity and the inability of the entire race to work together harmoniously (even if it would mean utter extinction), the price of the necessary components would skyrocket and a very select, very rich stakeholders would more than likely demand exorbitant compensation or concessions as the age old question of "What do I get out of it?" is raised.
More specifically, it would most likely become a case of - "If these scientists can avoid the catastrophe, why should I not monopolize the solution and charge for the privilege? After all, it's only fair that I'm properly compensated for my time and material, and those that really want to be saved will find a way to pay for it?"
I don't hold much hope for humanity.
Comment: +1 for not holding out much hope for humanity (is it just me, or is it getting warmer in here?)
Comment: The price would sky-rocket, which would invite many more competitors, which will ultimately drive the price way below the original price. It's happened many times in the past - for high enough profit margins, the market reaction time can be very fast indeed. As for monopolizing the solution, well... that can only really happen through violence (be it e.g. patents or outright fights). Finally, don't forget that governments print their own money all over the world - worst case scenario, you cause a hyperinflation "paying" for the "overpriced" goods.
Answer: I completely agree with Monty Wild that for a short-term project seizure of resources would be the probable outcome.
Two issues though that might throw a wrench into your 'save-the-world' project:

Since when is there only 1 scientific opinion? I thought there were at least 3: the world is going to end soon - the world is going to end next century - the world is not going to end. Yes, sure, the Flat Earth society (thankfully) gets laughed at, but what about the climate change issues? Does the climate change or does it not? Also, will your population believe the scientists (so that your politicians get the support to push such a large-scale project through)?
As long as your potential DoomsDay is more than two decades away, I think you're pretty much SOL. Humans really aren't good at planning on such long terms; any politician suggesting to seize resources for the next twenty years will get laughed out of office (or at least not reelected). And global cooperation for such a long time seems very unlikely. Putting so many resources into a single project will inevitably effect the population, and there will inevitably be a country where the population revolts and stops contributing. Which will probably trigger a domino-effect amongst the economically weaker countries, and you need to be very, very lucky if it doesn't completely destroy any chances of success.
Comment: I take exception to the second point.  While I agree with the point in aggregate, specific humans are excellent at planning for long-periods of time.  I started diligently working on my own retirement at the age of 22 for a planned retirement at or before 65 (that's 43 years for anyone not counting).  I'm planning to live to at least 90 (meaning I'm really making a plan for 68 years).
Answer: It is in the sellers' interest to not be wiped out by the same issue that will wipe out everyone else so suddenly, so they have no incentive to raise the price beyond the point where the plan would be put into place.  However, if the high demand means their inexpensive way of making something is not sufficient, their costs will increase and their prices will likely also increase.  Finally, if the solution is nonobvious, the society may have a need to offer a strong incentive for the creation of that solution, which could be in the form of a high reward and price paid for a solution.  (The money is pretty meaningless if live on Earth were wiped out, though).
Comment: This is only true if the sellers are sure that they will suffer unless they help. Most likely there will be quite some who think that while everybody else saves the planet, they could make a fat profit.
Comment: The question clearly states "unless drastic measures are taken, all life on Earth will be eradicated."  Does the question you meant to pose have less certain destruction?  Or do the sellers not believe the science (and if that's the case, how/why did they develop the solution)?  If that destruction isn't as reliably known as indicated, the question should be edited to reflect that.
Answer: The climate change analogy suggests that the response would be to deny the problem for as long as possible, and then to ensure that even if everyone else perishes the well-off have enough bunkers and tinned food to survive it.
The World War analogy suggests that there would be some combination of command economy and long-term debt (e.g. the Lend-Lease programme and the Marshall plan). Get the materials first and leave an IOU.
There would undoubtably be profiteering and some inflation of the prices. That's human nature; if, as you've set it out, there's no way the project would not be funded regardless of the cost, market forces don't apply. See for example the Daraprim pricing scandal: rather than the cost being related to production in any way, or ability of people to pay, the makers inflated it hugely.
If you're holding the resource necessary to save the world, the only thing stopping you from demanding all the money in the world for it is the risk that going too far will result in you being expropriated by the government or murdered by an angry mob.
Another example from the real world is Tamiflu and the debate over expropriating it from the patent holders in the event of a potential bird flu pandemic.
A bit depends on the details: is the solution building a single thing in a single place? What opportunities are there for ISS-like international cooperation? Is there a chance that the disaster might be partial, or attenuated so it only affects some part of the world? Could the problem or solution be weaponised? These all affect who gets to profit from and pay for the fix.
Comment: Production costs are only one part of the price of a product, even after you include all the costs that are harder to see (like the capital investments, RnD...). In the end, you try to set your price to maximize profits - that's a balancing act between having a high price to get as much from each of your buyers, and having a low price that attracts more buyers. Market forces always apply, and it's not just about price either. If you force me to sell to you at a price too low, I will decrease production to cut my losses. And you need that - there's probably multiple solutions to the problem.
Answer: Look at our own history for your answer.
First, even in times of war trading still happens. The currency may change, but trading it's self continues. This is even true between enemies at times. So some kind of economy would still exist.
Next look at World War 2 and some of the countries war efforts. In the USA there was an extreme drive for metals. Prices went up, and stuff got hard to find. Propaganda and similar campaigns to "Make it do" arose. Look into how that worked out. There were several lines that people would not cross (Alarm clocks, sliced bread, and beauty products) but many many more that people were willing to give up (canned goods, typewriters, toys, and appliances)
In a "do or die" situation, I would think the same basic principal would unfold, with rationing, propaganda, and and a sense of "For Earth (or what ever the world is called)" people would be willing, at least historically,  to make the daily sacrifices needed to build the anti-dooms-day device.
Answer: Quoting Wikipedia:

In economics, a demand shock is a sudden event that increases or decreases demand for goods or services temporarily.

Unfortunately, that article doesn't give a lot of detail, although it does point to a couple of examples (probably smaller and less dramatic than your hypothetical), and give you a name for your concept that you can use for further reading. It does back up your guess that prices increase; however, price gouging can only really occur if there is a monopoly or near-monopoly on production, and for some reason it's hard for more entrepeneurs to join in (common reasons are regulation like patents or naturally-occurring prohibitive startup costs, like drilling an oil well). Otherwise, competition between producers undercutting each other will continue to keep prices reasonable. Likely if price-gouging did arise, the government would step in and break up monopolies or lower barriers to entry (if possible) to restore competition and drop the prices again.
It may even be the case that as the industry booms, competition intensifies, economies of scale increase, and efficiency of production and investment in industry R&D actually become a higher priority, so that costs and therefore prices actually lower. This is especially likely if previously the market for some resource was pretty niche but has now become a major commodity.
However, it's also plausible that as demand increases, it becomes economically viable to pursue less efficient means of production in the name of increasing total output (suppose you have to mine some ore, and you need a certain level of purity in order for it to be actually worth digging out of the ground; as demand increases, the minimum level of purity that's "worth it" widens out). That would lead to an increase in price, but a reasonable one, since it reflects the increased underlying cost of production to keep pace with demand.
Generally the shift of a bunch of labour and resources into this Big Solution could conceivably draw resources away from general economic activity, which might see a decline in quality of life, or a crash in unstable markets or something equally dramatic. However, macroeconomics can be counterintuitive, and arbitrarily increasing consumption and giving people unproductive busywork has at times been proposed as a solution to some economic problems. I'm not really qualified to comment on that.
The prospect of imminent catastrophe will have direct social and economic impacts as well. Planning for the future now seems like less of a good idea, which makes investment seem like less of a good idea, which may lead to trouble. It's hard to say how people will individually react, and how optimistic or pessimistic they would be, but they could conceivably cause more widespread havoc. All this economist's talk becomes kind of irrelevant if people stop coming to work and start rioting instead and societal order breaks down. You may also find that people will deny that the apocalypse could possibly be happening, or even deny that it should be stopped. But that's more outside the scope of your question.
In short: demand shocks have occurred in the past, and you might want to look them up (I haven't). If competition in production is easy, that will help to mitigate the impact on prices – simply put, as soon as producing unobtanium ore because hugely profitable, mining companies will flood in until it is merely very profitable, and then continue flooding in for as long as it is more profitable than whatever they were doing before, and thus is the equilibrium largely restored. Either way, you might find that the socio-psychological impact of imminent possible doom has a more striking impact on daily life than commodity market prices anyway.


Do Peter and Ender forgive each other in Ender's Game?

Question: Do Peter and Ender forgive each other at the end of Ender's Game? When Peter confesses to Ender, was that his way of forgiving Ender? When Ender wrote the book for Peter, was that his way of forgiving Peter?
Comment: Defining what you mean by "forgiveness" might make this easier to answer.
Comment: That depends on whether you want an answer *just* from the first book or whether you're happy to accept an answer that covers the four and a half million books that Card has written exploring the lives of **every single character** in excruciating detail.
Comment: As @Valorum said, there are five relevant books and one or two short stories that deal with Ender and Peter, very often supplying contradictory information.
Comment: @ibid - Apparently Card is releasing a trilogy of books about Ender's teacher, Miss Pumphrey.
Answer: (Keep in mind that there are many books that are relevant to this, some of them contradictory.)
In my opinion, Ender never forgave Peter, but he did give his understanding.
In other books, Peter, having a strong political hold over Earth, does not allow Ender to come back to land for two reasons- one, for his own political gain, but also for his protection. He had the foresight to understand what was going to happen to all of the other battleschool graduates and sought to protect Ender from that by sending him to Shakespeare. While he was driven by self centered interests as well, there is no denying the fact that he was partially protecting Ender.
(The books do contradict some- At the end of the 1991 version of Ender's Game, in chapter 15, an abbreviated version of Ender in Exile is given. Peter wanted Ender to stay on Earth to act as a pawn for his own political gain. Valentine had to essentially bargain for his freedom.)
One of the main reasons that Ender would have accepted this peace offering (so to say) was the addition of Valentine on the voyage to Shakespeare. Peter could have easily blocked Demosthenes from going, or even revealed who she was. Instead, he allowed her to be with Ender. Instead of acting spitefully and keeping her on Earth, Peter cared for the two of them.
Peter "forgave" Ender when he left Earth without fighting Peter's attempts. One of Peter's greatest fears is being overshadowed by Ender, which is one of the things that spurs him to become Locke and later much more. So, when Ender leaves Earth for Shakespeare, he essentially stops being a threat to Peter (and Peter can continue to use him politically.)
Finally, on the last page of the book, Peter asks Ender to be a Speaker for him. Ender agrees to write it for him. Now, one could argue that Ender only agrees because Peter is an important historical figure and he knew him as a child. However, it's made clear in the previous pages that what happens on Earth has little bearing on Shakespeare or any other worlds Ender is on, so Ender clearly is not very up-to-date on Peter's life. The fact that he is willing to sit and listen to Peter explain everything shows he finds value in telling Peter's story. Ender then wrote a fair, all-telling eulogy in the style of a Speaker. While this doesn't mean forgiveness for the evil he did as a child, it does mean that Ender did not hold some petty contempt within him. Ender viewed Peter fairly, and wrote for him as a man who had done right and wrong, not just bullied him as a child.
Even after his death, Peter continues to torment Ender well through Xenocide and Children of the Mind. I'm going to assume you haven't read those and won't spoil them- however, it is safe to say that both Peter and Valentine continue to have a profound effect on Ender thousands of years later.
Comment: I just wanted to make sure. I know the introduction was added, and Card has talked about revising the last couple chapters probably longer than I've been alive.
Comment: It's been promised *long* before that, since shortly after *Children of the Mind* came out. *Shadows in Flight* was just another of Card's attempts to push it off
Comment: "*At the end of the 1991 version of Ender's Game, in chapter 15, an abbreviated version of Ender in Exile is given*" [the last chapter in the 1991 version is identical to the one in the 1985 version](https://scifi.stackexchange.com/a/107929/55866). (Source: I own both editions) Card never changed the chapter since he originally published it, though he has stated intent to do so. He has also never shared a revised version with his IGMS or UOOTF subscribers. Currently the only revised version available is the one he wrote for the *Ender's Game Alive* audioplay.
Comment: He finally started writing Shadows Alive a few weeks ago, so hopefully that's next.
Comment: Shadows in Flight came out six years ago, so it's about time haha


How to connect to localhost with DSL IP forward

Question: I'm trying to connect to wamp from other computer.
I have a tp-link TD-8811. Is there any way to open my localhost from out
also i dont have a static IP.
Answer: A quick look at the specs for your TP-link device show that it is capable of DMZ and Virtual Server configurations.  Please see here for a Step-by-Step: http://www.tp-link.com/en/article/?faqid=205  I input your model number in the search and came up with this article.  I hope this helps.

There are many options for accessing a dynamic IP from outside.
Almost all services that do CNAME aliases for dynamic IPs offer both free and paid services.  I never felt the need to pay for a service that i only used occasionally...  The paid packages are usually geared to make your life easier.
Look at: no-ip.com -or- dyndns.com -or- google: "connect to dynamic ip address" and take your pick from the results.

After all of this is done, I'd seriously consider setting up (as an absolute minimum) a quick and dirty encrypted channel for your security.  Your Router does not support IPsec/VPN, but that doesn't mean that you cannot ssh to your computer (regardless of host/client OS).  There are also port-knocking methods to "speak" to your PC's firewall and instruct it to open your desired data port.  You'll need to forward a few more ports from your router to get this set up, but if you'll achieve a closed system that you can open and close again on demand.
Apologies for the non-howto style of this answer, I hope it helps.


Camping alone in the wilderness in the USA

Question: I want to go camping in the wilderness on my own, without anyone else around for miles. Is that even possible? I know a lot of national parks have designated areas, but surely they can't enforce that over 100s of miles of widerness?
I have done this in the UK, where I could camp deep in the forest for a week with no-one else around.
Comment: Seems like it would be *easier* to do so in the US, with much more land area, and nobody "enforces" your solitude in the UK.
Comment: If you're going to isolate yourself to that degree carry a PLB!
Comment: Of course you can. It's harder in national parks since they have more people, permit requirements, etc. Your best bet is [designated wilderness areas](https://www.wilderness.net/NWPS/stateView?state=CO) where many don't even require a permit (though you should always leave your plan with someone).
Comment: I've been to Forest Service campgrounds in New Mexico that clearly have not been used for an entire summer. Others get used heavily. Obscure out-of-the way places far from people makes for a good start. Just be sure you can get in and get out, and that somebody knows where you'll be in case something happens so they can call for help if you don't get out when planned...
Comment: This is way too broad
Answer: The short answer is Yes, but.
I will confine my answer to the California Sierra, because that is the area I know best.
You can certainly camp for days without seeing anybody, except possibly in the distance, even in Yosemite.  And it is easier to get far away from people in the Eastern Sierra,  starting, for example, from trailheads outside of Bishop, CA.
You will have to leave the trail and go cross country to find this isolation, and a wilderness permit is required for overnight hikes.  If you are off trail, the wilderness permit does not place restrictions on where you can go, or where you must camp, except for restrictions on how far your camp should be from lakes and streams, the elevation at which wood fires are verboten, and perhaps a few other requirements, but they are mostly environmental requirements, and we have never found them onerous or interfering with the desire for isolation.
For example, Humphreys Basin will give you great solitude, plus a multitude of lakes, large, medium and small between 10,000 feet(3,048 meters) and over 12,000 feet in elevation. streams everywhere, a 14,000 foot mountain, and few trails.  Few trails mean few people. You may see a pack train going over Paiute Pass to Golden Trout Lake, but you can steer clear of that.
You may not be literally miles from the nearest person, but the terrain is such that being even one mile from the nearest person gives you the same feeling.
Wyoming and Canada should have even more isolation, but there you may have grizzlies to worry about, whereas the Sierra has only black bears.
Comment: @GodAtum The regs are there for a reason. If you choose to violate the regs and are caught you will suffer the consequences. No different than speeding really. They won't catch most speeders, but you pay for it if you happen to be caught. Having a permit if one is required in such a desolate wilderness as you seek is easy to obtain and cheap (if not free) so there's no real reason not to have one.
Comment: @GodAtum  The rangers range. They take trips into the wilderness, and if they happen upon you, they will ask to see your permit.  If you don't have a permit, or if you are camping too close to a lake or stream, or if you  have an illegal fire, they will give you a citation with a fine.   And of course, make you move or douse your fire.  We have encountered rangers maybe four or five times off-trail, but were obeying the rules, so just had a friendly conversation with them.  I would not advise encountering them without a permit; they take their responsibilities very seriously, as they should.
Comment: @topshot Sloppy writing!  Meant to say that don't have to worry about grizzlies in California.  Fixed the sentence.
Comment: @GodAtum Go to a wilderness area that doesn't require a permit. Even those that do, the permit is normally filled out at the trailhead and likely collected only weekly. I doubt the details are ever entered in a database. I'd suspect it is just aggregated so they have an idea of how many use the trailheads.
Comment: FYI, WY and Canada have grizzlies. Maybe you were trying to say the Sierra doesn't unlike those places?
Comment: Thanks for the detailed reply, that's exactly the info I'm looking for! How on earth do the government enforce permits, if i hide out in the wilderness no-one could find me anyway?
Comment: How would one go "off-grid" and not have your details in a database?
Comment: @tophot I suggest you collect your comments and turn them into an answer.  They seem to be close to what the OP is after.
Answer: Yes this is possible. I think it is fairly easy in the western US especially during the winter if you're willing to work hard. An obvious, albeit extreme example of this is the state of Alaska. Alaska has a population of roughly 740k people and an area of roughly 670k square miles. Clearly in a state this big with a population this sparse a dedicated person could disappear into the wilderness for a long time without seeing anyone. One book you could read about someone doing this with grave consequences is Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer.
In summary to accomplish your goal go to large wilderness areas that aren't frequently visited during times of the year when it is the least popular to visit. Alternatively go somewhere like Alaska that's too big and brutal to be overrun by people.
Comment: Yeah that's exactly what I'm looking for, somewhere no-one will know where I am.
Answer: In the east there is less wild land and more people exploring the natural areas that are available. I'm big on pathless forests, and to find these places I've learned to either seek out privately owned forest properties with welcoming landowners who don't mind my kind of wandering and bushcraft activities, or to go to state forest which is the crux of my answer.
State forests in the east are not as intensively managed, advertised, or visited as state parks. State forests are not quite wilderness in that they are usually managed based on human-defined priorities, be it sustainable timber production, wildlife, recreation, unique areas, or some combination. The wildlife and timber production areas are generally the least obviously tread by humans and the most friendly to your own activities (i.e. you can camp there, following certain rules and conditions). There are also areas designated as different degrees of wilderness such as in the Adirondack Park. You can use those designations and maps to seek out the more wild areas. It could also be worth looking up recreational stats for different areas, as some wilderness areas (e.g. Adirondack High Peaks) are far more visited than some state forest recreation areas.
If in doubt, ask the local environmental agency about location recommendations and what the rules are with camping. In NY, most state forest can be camped on as long as you follow some rules and aren't in specially designated unique areas. In my experience state environmental employees love the outdoors and are happy to help you enjoy nature, so I encourage asking for local tips.
Answer: The parks are quite regulated, and for many you need a permit for back country (random) camping.
The wilderness areas are more liberal.  They like to know where you intend to go.  Note however that in a lot of them the trails have not been maintained for decades.
The national forests are not as spectacular for scenery, but many of them have extensive trails that aren't used a lot.
In Canada I no longer use the National Parks.  The red tape is too extensive, and the fees are expensive.  The trails are well maintained, and too often you will meet someone coming the other way every 15 minutes.
Instead I use Willmore Wilderness Park.  Once you get a day in from the trailhead seeing anyone is rare.  Last summer there were two sections where I found bootprints, and 3 sections where I found horse droppings.  Given the weather either could have been up to a month old. I have never seen a ranger or a conservation officer in Willmore.
Willmore has both bears and wolves.  Both are unaccustomed to people and keep their distance.
Answer: In the US, Designated Wilderness Areas are areas relatively untouched by human influence where users are only allowed on foot and with pack animals. Some areas will have other restrictions, like permit requirements for overnight trips or seasonal fire restrictions. Most are tens of thousands of acres, which is plenty big enough to get out of hearing range of other humans for as long as your supplies hold out.
To camp in these for weeks, look up the local land management office in charge of them and give them a call to learn about access, current conditions and restrictions. They'll know what access points are accessible, what ones are washed out, and which areas you can visit to have the least chance of being seen. The relevant agency can be the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), US Forest Service, or the National Park Service. You'll want the local office, not one in DC. There's a list at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._Wilderness_Areas.
In addition, in the western US, there are huge tracts of unprotected, undeveloped government owned land managed by the BLM that would fit your needs perfectly, but the best places are harder to find through internet searches. If you get to know local outdoorsmen and women, they can give you better direction for specific places that would suit your needs.


How to tell a colleague to wash?

Question: I'm seated next to a colleague who, apparently, likes to skip shower for some 3-4 days and has a very strong body odor.
How can I tell him to wash more often without being rude? I don't want to take it straight to the HR and if possible I'd like to keep friendly relationship with him, since he's actually has a positive attitude and I think he's good at his job. But the strong smell is killing me.
Comment: A similar question [was asked over at Workplace.SE](https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/621/how-should-i-approach-a-co-worker-on-matters-of-personal-hygiene) a while back, might be some useful information :)
Comment: Two potentially useful questions https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/7207/best-way-to-tell-someone-their-house-stinks & https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/9581/how-to-tell-a-colleague-to-take-care-of-how-he-looks and one possible dup if the fact they are a colleague does not pose a significant difference https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/questions/10545/how-do-i-or-my-husband-tell-my-mother-in-law-she-smells
Comment: Are you the only one who sits next to him? Do you know if other colleagues noticed this as well?
Comment: @RaduMurzea I'm the only one on my side. People across told me about it too, but since it's far away, they don't seem to mind it so much.
Answer: In my opinion, similar to this recent question, the first issue you must address is whether it is appropriate for you to approach your colleague about this issue if you do not have supervisory responsibilities. One thing to be aware of though is that some medical conditions can cause body odour and that it is possible that this person has a medical condition which may be classified as a disability and which may give them protection as a matter of law and/or an organizational policy.. If the person perceived your approach as harassment, you could end up in trouble. This is one reason why I would advise against any kind of direct or indirect approach without consulting HR first.  It may be possible for you to get HR advice without identifying the person in question.
I've had to talk people about their body odour, in my capacity as a manager, and I can guarantee you any such conversation will be embarrassing for both parties and it may alter the dynamics of a relationship. For this reason I would not assume that circumventing HR will allow you to preserve your current relationship with this person.
Comment: @CreativeMagic Yes it is probably unlikely that this is caused by a disability, but sometimes caution is your friend. If I had to address the situation as a manager  I would check with the person if it was related to a medical condition rather than making assumptions.
Comment: You mentioned *"If the person perceived your approach as harassment, you could end up in trouble"*. Do you have any personal experience with someone perceiving a particular approach as harassment landing you or another in trouble? Backing up our answers whenever possible is always a positive.
Comment: Just to address a point: there's no disability, he washes like once a week and the next day there's no smell :)
Answer: How about this:

When you sit near to me I notice this smell, I am not sure what it
  is. Did you maybe eat something with lots of garlic or something
  similar?

That should clearly inform your neighbor that there is some smell and you tell him that you think it's from him - without telling him "wash!".
He should get the message and think about where the smell comes from. And hopefully he reacts to this hint.
I think that is better than involving someone else. Why escalate a problem if you can solve it? At least you can try this approach.
Edit: I like to add a general comment: I think some people really don't know that they have a very intensive smell. I.e. people who use all the time the same deodorant or perfume use after a while more and more because they don't smell it anymore. But other people notice that they smell like they used a whole bottle of that stuff. I guess at least a few of these people would appreciate if someone tell them because obviously they don't notice their "smell" themselves.
Comment: Our site recommends backing up our answers with personal experiences or references whenever possible. Adding this to any of your *"I think"* statements would be a great benefit.
Answer: The sad part is... any form of persuading him to shower more often is going to hurt his feelings... even if you say something like

Hey I found this brand of body soap that is pretty nice and I have an extra bottle. Do you want to try it?

or

This cologne I'm using is pretty refreshing. Want to try?

There are 2 ways to go about it though.
1. Establish an even closer friendship with him first
As we know, best friends or even good friends are more open to each other's criticisms. The 'judging' factor in the friendship and the obligation to constantly 'censor' out certain topics will slowly diminish as the friendship becomes better and closer. When that happens, you can then try to break it to him that he should shower more, NOT because you can't tolerate the smell, but rather that you want him to be more hygienic / healthy, depending on which may be more relevant.
For example, after getting to know him better you know that he falls sick rather easily, or has rashes on his skin that results in him constantly scratching himself, you can take one of those opportunities to tell him in a very subtle way. For example,

Hey, are you okay? You seem to get sick quite a lot. Maybe take nice, warm showers in the morning? They really help with fighting the illnesses.

OR

Do you get a skin rash like this often? If you do maybe you can have a warm shower at night and then apply some aloe vera gel onto your skin. It really helped me with the rash outbreak that I had a couple of months back.

The trick here is to:

Encourage him to shower because of reasons other than his body odor.
(If possible) Try to approach him in a way that makes him feel that you do not know or look past the fact that he skips showers for 3-4 days.

Although this approach takes a while to accomplish (I mean, you can't possibly be BFFs overnight, right?), it is the best way to approach him without him feeling hurt (at all).
2. Solve your problem without him
Alright this approach does not answer your question directly, but it does solve your problem. Instead of asking him to shower, you can do something about it yourself. Buy some peppermint oil / essential oils and bring it to the office. If you can't / don't really want to 'freshen up' the smell of the work environment using the dehumidifier + essential oils method, you can just apply the oil directly to your nose. Helps you stay healthy and get rid of the body odor your colleague is forcefully making you smell.
Other complementing strategies include wearing a cologne to the office (if you aren't already doing so), and maybe brew a cup of coffee and put it beside you, et cetera.
Conclusion
There's no way of making sure he doesn't feel hurt if you directly approach him so instead, deploy option 1 or 2 and maybe you will have a new best friend in the future? Good luck :)
Side note: You can also use a combination of step 1 and 2 together to "relieve the smell of the odor" as you are befriending him and getting to the stage where you can talk about anything under the sun... as said earlier when you reach that stage it would be relatively easier to find opportunities to raise the issue up to him.
Comment: Sorry, but I disagree with your answer. 1) I'm not his friend, we don't really talk (our work is not connected). 2) Why should I try to jump hoops, buying aroma diffusers etc. Have you experienced the smell of unwashed body? You'll need a lot of aroma oil to cancel that smell! :) Sorry, but your answer is just not dealing with reality of the situation.
Comment: Backing up your answer with some personal experiences or references, linking to OP's scenario wherever possible would really help explain where you are coming from and why this is a great solution

How to tell a colleague to wash?


Mean, Expected Value, or Expectation of a Constant?

Question: According to Wikipedia, "the expected value of a constant is equal to the constant itself; i.e., if $c$ is a constant, then $\mathbb E[c] = c$." I am currently having a hard time picturing what this means. If I have a random variable $X$ that represents the number of times a coin lands on heads, then I can see how $\mathbb  E(X)$ is $0.5$. But $\mathbb  E(0.5)$ seems "meaningless." Can someone please explain the significance of the expected value of a constant?
Answer: If it helps your intuition, think of it as a non-random random variable. Something like:
$$
p(y)=\begin{cases}1, &\quad \text{ if } y=c\\
0, &\quad \text{otherwise}
\end{cases}
$$
So then the expected value is
$$
E(Y)=\sum Pr(Y=y)\times y=c\times1=c.
$$
If it's a constant, it can't vary and there's no randomness. So it must be itself, because it cannot be anything else!
Comment: That clears things up. Thanks.
Answer: You are computing the expectation value of the random variable $X$ whose outcome is always the same. Let us focus ourselves to the discrete case, for simplicity. Formally you want to compute the exp. value of the random variable
$$X:(\Omega,P)\rightarrow \operatorname{Im}(X):=\{c\}$$
where $\omega\mapsto X(\omega):=c$ for all $\omega\in\Omega$, with $(\Omega, P)$ finite probability set and $c\in\mathbb R$.
Then
$$P_X(X=c):=P(\{\omega\in\Omega~:X(\omega)=c\})=P(\Omega):=1$$
and
$$\mathbb E[X]:=\sum_{c_i\in\operatorname{Im}(X)}c_i\cdot P_X(X=c_i)=c\cdot P_X(X=c)=c\cdot 1=c.$$
The continuous case is similar, with technical differences.
Answer: I think the key here is to view X as it as: a Random Variable.
When writing E(X), x is a constant, you are assuming X to be the random variable of a constant which in turn means its probability value is 1.


Gap showing between baseboard and shorter-pile carpet

Question: We removed shag carpet and replaced it with a shorter carpet.  Now there is a gap between the baseboard and carpet.  Should we use shoe molding?  If so how do you use it on the stairs with rounded edges?
Answer: I'm assuming that you have a similar set up that I do, I had used inside-corner shoe on my house (instead of quarter-round). In my terrible picture, I've illustrated how I had affixed my trim, running a straight length along the stair, along the riser... The corner is cut at 45 degrees... Then, I ran a piece along the wall, beveled that at 45 degrees (so it doesn't snag), and painted it to match the rest of the trim.
The red is meant to be the trim here:


Programming Mindstorms on a chromebook

Question: I know there is no official way to program NXT/EV3 on a Chromebook.
But a Chromebook can have Ubuntu installed via Crouton in developer mode.
So, is there a relatively painless way to program NXT/EV3 on Ubuntu?
Answer: Update Dec 2016
There is now an app for chromebooks on the chrome store:
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/lego-mindstorms-education/jhnhfnolmcleankdkhfklakpchnccipg?hl=en-US
I have used it to program EV3 version of the bricks. It connects via bluetooth to the EV3 brick (I don't think USB is even supported).  The bluetooth connection can be buggy at times and I've found myself having to re-pair the brick.
The chrome app saves programs in a format (.ev3m format) which is not compatible with the Mac/Windows desktop versions of the programming app.   Attempts to load programs written on Mac/Windows (.ev3 format) will not load in the app.  Suffice to say transferring programs between a chromebook and the desktop version of the EV3 programming software is difficult and perhaps not possible. There may be a way to download the program from the chrome app onto the brick and then pull the software using the 'Memory Browser' tool into the desktop version but I haven't had time to look into it.
My chromebook has only 2 GB of RAM and the program sometimes struggles to load so I recommend at least 4 GB of RAM in your chromebook.
There is a pretty good Q/A article here:
https://education.lego.com/en-us/middle-school/explore/c/ev3-chromebook-faq
Answer: Your best bet1 for EV3 is ev3dev.
For NXT, you should be able to get BricxCC running on Linux.
You can also checkout leJOS and MonoBrick. There is a good change you can get either one of those working on Linux as well.
1: As a core contributor to ev3dev, this may not be entirely objective ;-)
Comment: Windows should not be needed for anything that I suggested.
Comment: ev3dev isn't exactly a Mindstorms IDE, but the Linux link is interesting, thanks. It's disappointing that Windows is still involved though.
Answer: See https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=33517 for latest instructions.
I recently did some testing to get the EV3 software working on Linux using Wine, and actually got it to work! (The EV3 software can also be used to program the NXT) Here are the instructions:
$ sudo add-apt-repository ppa:wine/wine-builds

$ sudo apt-get install --install-recommends winehq-devel winbind libntlm0 ttf-mscorefonts-installer winetricks

Make sure the folder ~/.wine32 does not exist.
$ WINEPREFIX=~/.wine32 WINEARCH=win32 wineboot

Choose "No" on any prompts to download gecko or Mono
$ WINEPREFIX=~/.wine32 winetricks

Select the default prefix, and click OK
Select Install a "Windows DLL or Component"
Install all of the vcredist libraries, .NET version 4.0, and IE 8.
Select "Change settings"
Check ddr=gdi, and select OK (this fixes sections of the window turning white)
Click "Cancel" twice to exit winetricks
Download "IE8-WindowsXP-KB2936068-x86-ENU.exe" from the Microsoft website
$ WINEPREFIX=~/.wine32 wine '<location of folder with IE8-WindowsXP-KB2936068-x86-ENU.exe>/IE8-WindowsXP-KB2936068-x86-ENU.exe'

$ WINEPREFIX=~/.wine32 winecfg

In the libraries tab, add an override for "*urlmon.dll", making sure to include the *
Select the override just created, and click "Edit..."
Choose Native, and click OK
Click Apply, then OK
$ WINEPREFIX=~/.wine32 wine '<location of folder with mindstorms installer>/LMS-EV3-WIN32-ENUS-01-01-01-full-setup.exe' (or whatever the filename of the installer is)

Install the software.
Delete the .lnk file on the desktop, it is unnecessary and could cause problems
Double-click the launcher on the desktop.
I have not tested downloading to the brick yet, but creating a new project, adding a block, saving it, and reopening it works.
Hope this helps.  If you have any problems or questions, let me know.
Answer: c4ev3 has an Eclipse CDT Plugin based on GNUARMEclipse so you can do your C/C++ Programming for the EV3 and upload/browse the filesystem without leaving Eclipse.
It works with the stock firmware/OS and comes with an API to access sensors/motors.
You can run it on Windows, Linux and OS X. Also compiles on FreeBSD but didn't test if it actually works.
If you don't want to use Eclipse, you can use the uploader (a simple CLI tool written in C) and the C API separately and integrate them into your build process. The uploader can also generate the menu entries for starting the programs on the EV3 menu, so using another IDE won't keep you from experiencing c4ev3's awesomeness [1].
Doesn't support NXT though.

[1] Might be biased because I wrote part of it.

Programming Mindstorms on a chromebook


Are there any teas that are non-vegan?

Question: I am curious whether there are some teas that are not vegan (do not contain animal product, not even insects, fungal product is fine). I am interested mainly in teas available in European countries, but would appreciate information about any tea that does not fit the criteria. The tea should be non-vegan in itself, not becoming such by the way it is drunk somewhere (eg. adding milk to tea in UK).
Comment: Erica I mean tea as in whatever herbs and stuff you pour hot water over to drink it. @RobertLongson I have never heard of beef tea before, but I believe the name of that one would ring some bells. I am more interested in teas that may appear innocent and still use non-vegan ingredients. That is also why I believe it is on-topic - I am not asking what tea is non-vegan to look for it and try it, but to avoid drinking it by accident and to inform myself about possible products which I considered vegan but may not be such.
Comment: Are you meaning "tea" as in _Camellia sinensis_, or any beverage made by pouring hot water over some leaves (i.e., including herbal teas)?
Comment: beef tea is not vegan. Is this really on-topic for this site though as it's about vegetarianism and veganism rather than things that aren't.
Comment: I can't say I've ever encountered tea with non-vegan ingredients, although it seems companies manage to sneak animal products into just about anything
Answer: Yes, there are a lot of teas (ie mixed infusions sold in tea shops) that are non-vegan and you should check the label and if it's unclear, ask staff for assistance before you buy.
I live in London. There is a nationwide chain of tea (and coffee) stores in the UK, Whittards, that sells a wide range of infusions. I have noticed that several of these products contain dairy. I've seen a few other fancy tea shops spring up with the same types of product, and I found even more non-vegan infusions. It's usually the sweet types; anything with a name like "caramel" or mentioning "creamy" seemed to contain dairy.
Honey is also used quite commonly in tea infusions, though this is more likely to be advertised in the name, thus easier to spot.
Another issue is the use of silk for making upmarket teabags, since unlike paper it does not affect the flavour. Fortunately this is generally advertised as a selling point, but I don't think manufacturers are bound to mention it by any regulation, and you might have to ask about that as well.
Answer: Any non-specified "flavouring", "natural flavouring" ("aroma" in German-speaking countries) is always suspect unless the product is labelled as suitable for veg* - and such are not uncommon in flavoured/"fruit" teas.
Insect contamination is never ever possible to completely preclude in herb-based products. If you are concerned about intentionally added insect products, stay clear of anything coloured with E120/cochineal (not unlikely with tea-like drinks), or using E904/shellac or maybe also E901/beeswax (both would be much less likely). Theoretically, teabag strings could be treated with wax, or casein glues could be used in the bag construction.
Answer: Some teas might be tested on animals, as was the case for Lipton tea products.

Are there any teas that are non-vegan?


How much does a camera move in 1/250 of a second?

Question: Many photographers will tell you that you should always use a tripod for best results. But what if I have the shutter speed set at 1/250 of a second? Just how much would the camera move or shake if I stand still on the ground, legs apart, and hold the camera firmly in my hands with elbows against my body? If we assume that the camera moves 1 mm just as I take the shot, how much would this, really affect the resulting image? Aren't they all just being over-dramatic?
Comment: The shutter speed needed to avoid motion blur will depend on the focal length of the lens.  With a telephoto lens even a slight movement translated to very visible shake in the viewfinder.  The *guideline* I've seen most frequently is to use a shutter speed 1/2f with a lens of focal length f.  Thus with a 30mm lens 1/60 s should be rather safe to use.
Comment: At least 70km... 280km/s divided by 4. https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/4493/how-fast-is-earth-moving-through-the-universe Probably it is not relevant to the question, but it reminds you that this mean: Depends.
Comment: Do an experiment. Stand still on the ground legs apart… etc. Now, hold a broomstick firmly as you can and align the far end with something just beyond the tip. Can you hold it steady or does it wander? The same thing is true for a long lens. The centre of the image tends to wander in the same way.
Answer: Camera motion is usually measured in terms of angular size or arc: that is, how many degrees, minutes, seconds of arc the optical axis moves during the time the shutter is open. How much the same amount of motion affects the image is also determined by the angular size of the Field of View (FoV) yielded by a particular focal length and film/sensor size.
For the example in your question: At 1/250 second using good handheld techniques the amount of blur will depend upon the FoV. If you are using a wide angle lens such as one with an 18mm focal length, there will probably be very little detectable blur. If, on the other hand, you use a 600mm focal length there will probably be significant blur, especially if you are using an APS-C camera that reduces the FoV to the equivalent of a 900mm or so lens mounted on a 35mm format camera. The reason for this is that the same objects at the same distance from the camera cover over 1,000 times as many pixels using a 600mm lens as they do using an 18mm lens! (33.33*33.33=1,111.11)
Back in the days of 35mm film, the general rule of thumb was to use a shutter speed no slower than 1/focal length when hand holding the camera. This assumed a print display size of 8x10 inches viewed at a distance of 10 inches by a person with 20/20 vision. With digital sensors that are typically smaller, the crop factor (sometimes called the focal length multiplier which is a term that is more than a bit misleading) must be applied as well (1.5x for Nikon APS-C, 1.6x for Canon APS-C cameras). This still assumes the same viewing conditions, however. If you're going to view sections of the image at 100% on your computer monitor, then even the slightest blur that isn't detectable in an 8x10 at 10" will be evident.
Comment: @jrista When viewed on a monitor at 100% there would be no difference, but they would not be the same when translated to standard size and viewing distance, where pixels for both would be much smaller than the smallest distinguishable blur. If both sensors have the same pixel pitch then the smaller sensor requires more magnification to print at the same size as the higher resolution image from the FF sensor. As the answer makes clear, the crop factor assumes standard display size/distance.
Comment: While use of the crop factor is a useful generalization, as pixel pitch has continued to shrink considerably, deriving the angular measure of a given pixel relative to the focal length used is probably a more accurate way to determine blur. The amount of blur from camera shake at 600mm would technically be the same, regardless of form factor, if both FF and APS-C sensors used the same small pixels.
Answer: Background
The excellent lensrentals.com blog had an interesting article about this not so long ago.
Linked in the article is an Android app to measure just how much you shake the camera while holding it. Try it out for yourself.
Some of their results are (emphasis and formatting mine):

What we found is actually quite interesting.

First, people are generally exceptional at controlling for linear movement (up and down, side to side, and forward and back).
We are about ten times worse at controlling for yaw and pitch (the way your head turns when you shake your head "no" or nod your head "yes").
We are about roughly four times worse at controlling for steering wheel-type rotation, which you can fix with any horizon tool on your computer.

Weight also doesn't matter much.
Holding the camera to your face (DSLR) is much more stable than holding it with the arms outstretched (Point and Shoot-Camera).
Amplitude of shake reduces with frequency. In other words, a high frequency shake will move less than a lower frequency shake.

What does this all mean for your question

Basic physics tells us that there are two important things to the effect of camera shake on your image: Focal length and shutter speed.

The longer the focal length, the more will angular movement (that's the movement relevant here) have an affect. If you rotate by one degree during the shutter opening time, the movement will be half as bad as rotating two degrees. Obvious, isn't it?
The 1/focal_length rule comes in here, because we first have to convert the focal length into viewed-angle through the lens.
The longer you open the shutter, the more time will your camera have to move. Here, a twice as long shutter period will not cause a blur twice as bad. To realise this, look at the chart shown in the linked blog. The Frequency-Amplitude curve is decaying with approximately a negative exponential. But as a first approximation, it is probably fine to say double shutter time means double the blur.
You can also learn to keep particularly still. Many photographers borrow ideas from military snipers. There is some technique involved on how to best hold your camera and then some more technique on how to breath and when to press the shutter button during your breathing cycle.
tl;dr

The more reach your lens has the shorter the shutter time has to be.
The 1/focal_length means taking the focal length (in 35mm equivalent) and divide 1 by it, gives you approximately the required shutter time. If you are shooting 30mm-50mm on APS-C, approximate even further and know that everything down to 1/60s will be fine, and you can go down to 1/30s. If you want to go down to 1/10s you have to watch your breathing and take a few pictures in burst mode.
If you want a specific answer to your parameters (you should include focal length), I would suggest trying it out. See how low you can go with the shutter.
Comment: @Stan, that is a standard (internet) acronym meaning "Too long, didn't read" and I use it to signalise the summary. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/TL;DR
Comment: Above heading: tl,dr ? I feel stoopid. What does it mean, please?
Answer: It really depends on several factors including the focal length and how steady you are.  If you are very steady, it is fully possible to get sharp photos by hand at shorter focal length even down to the 1/60 or 1/30 range, particularly if you have an image stabilizing lens.  At longer focal lengths with less steady hands, it can become a problem even around 1/250.
The problem isn't distance traveled (which only the most recent built in image stabilization technologies even try to deal with), but rather angular changes in the direction the camera is facing.  We are pretty good at holding something still in terms of position, but far less so at keeping it pointed in the same direction.  This is mostly because of how low tolerances are.  When you are shooting a photo at super-telephoto lengths, very, very small changes in angle of the lens cause radical shifts in the image.
Optical image stabilization attempts to counter for this by using a floating lens element that is stabilized by gyros to maintain it's orientation and compensate for changes in angle of the lens, but there is still a limit to how much they can do before either a) introduces a noticeable and unacceptable lag in intentional panning, b) an unacceptable amount of weight and power consumption or c) simply goes outside the area that the lens is able to see and thus looks at the inside of the lens instead of the outside world.
Tripods are certainly the most steady, but monopods have a major impact on stability as well as it prevents you from having to support the full weight of the camera and gives a third point of stability (your two feet and the monopod).  I'm pretty steady, but shooting with a monopod, I can shoot 1/60 second shots at 200mm without issue while using the optical image stabilizer.  Doing that handheld would require considerable focus in addition to very steady hands.
Without any support, the 1/focal length rule is a decent guideline, but there can be a lot of variation from person to person (I've heard a range of 1/focal length to 1/(5*focal length)), so experimenting with your capabilities is still the best bet.  But the general answer is no, you don't need to use a tripod for everything.  It often won't even significantly improve your shot as long as blur isn't an issue for the shots you are shooting.  Shooting 1/250, I'd rarely bother with a tripod unless I needed it for something like a panorama.
Answer: It depends on the lens and camera you are using in addition to other factors.
If you are using a wide-angle lens then there would be no blur but if you're using a telephoto lens having focal length greater than 250 mm (provided there is no image stabilisation on the lens) then the shutter speed of 1/250 will most likely produce a blurred image.
In addition to telephoto lens camera also plays a significant role in this , if you're using a APS-C sensor sized camera then due to the crop factor , the resultant focal length will be original focal length * crop factor , for example, for canon aps-c cameras crop factor is 1.6x so a 250mm focal length will become 400 mm and therefore on shooting with 400mm focal length at 1/250 s the image will most likely be blurred (as defined in 1/focal length rule).
Image Stabilisation also plays a significant role in this , some lenses provide image stabilisation (vibration reduction for nikon) upto 4 stops , so upto 4 less stops of shutter speed can be used to shoot the image , but it is still risky . So , it is best to shoot with a tripod as much as you can
Other factors are also there such how steady you can keep your hands which vary from people to people and which also depends on the weight of lens (as telephoto lens are usually heavy) and telephoto lens are more prone to this as slight angular variation can cause blurred images.
Answer: I use my Point-and-Shoot[PNS] camera at 1/60th of a sec with not much blur. I start getting blur at over 1/40th to 1/30th secs. I can post a few photos as proof if what I said seems totally bonkers.
Edit:
PNS is point-n-shoot. Nothing official, just a way of saying it.
And regarding people being over-dramatic about sharpness and stuff ...
"There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept."
a great man once said :)
Comment: It doesn't sound bonkers, but it doesn't really answer the question. :)
Comment: If your focal length is moderate (zoomed to around a "normal" field of view, and your subject isn't moving, and you're not scrutinizing too closely, this seems completely reasonable.
Comment: Yes , your right , but i didn't assume the OP was asking for a more "mathematical" point of view. In that case , my bad.
Comment: PNS lens quality generally is strong enough to deter most people from zooming to much. Your answer was spot on. And yes , i generally dont zoom unless i have to.
Comment: Please define PNS, and answer the question.
Comment: sony cybershot wx-150 : a point and shoot camera. takes real nice photos i might add. regarding the answer , im sorry i dont have a mathematical one if thats what your looking for. But as @mattdm rightly said , it depends on a lot of factors. asking "how much" is pretty vauge under the circumstances.
Comment: PNS == point-and-shoot, I assume. But it's certainly not a standard abbreviation.
Comment: thank you :) i hope you wont mind me taking the liberty to undo the the bold edit . shouting out a subtle point ruins its essence.. (i feel.)
Answer: It's not an issue at 1/60 or faster, but at slower exposures it can be, and even at faster ones if there are high-contrast points in the scene, like small sources of light against a dark background, which leave obvious motion trails that detract from their shape.
When taking a freehand shot using the trigger on the camera, the main problem is that the button press and subsequent recoil add motion to the camera just before the moment of image acquisition.
To reduce trigger-induced camera movement during exposure when taking a freehand shot, without a tripod and external trigger, I use a short self-timer. The two second delay between the button push and image acquisition allows the camera to settle down to its regular background motion caused by the trembling of your hands.
You can reduce this background motion by keeping your wrists rigid, while remaining as relaxed as possible. The idea is that your hand, camera and forearm constitute a single, more or less rigid pendulum. This pendulum is fairly massive, and so it oscillates with a fairly low frequency. You only have to exercise maximal control over unwanted motion during the actual moment of exposure. By counting down along with the self timer, you know exactly when that moment comes.
With practice you can take decent low-light pictures down to 1/20 or so. Slower speeds than around 1/20 require stabilization.
Answer: There was an interesting experiment at dpreview looking at the impact of mirror slap as well as mirror lockup where only the shutter induces camera motion. This was done on a tripod at 1/500th sec. using a Canon 1DsIII and 5DsR and 70-200 ISM II lens w/o image stabilization (as is done on a tripod). It examined camera motion by looking at the reduction in MTF at 55 L/mm. On the 5DsR attenuation from both mirror slap and shutter reduced MTF from .55 to .3 along the vertical axis where the bulk of the camera motion occurs. With mirror lockup the reduction was a much less significant amount of .57 to .48.
The post indicates that the camera motion from this test approximately doubles at 1/250 th of a sec and continues to increase down to about 1/15 th sec when it starts improving because the motion on the tripod ramps down.
It would be interesting to see how handholding and stabilization affects this but it would likely be worse and highly variable. Probably one should take a set of 10 ore more images and look at the statistics.
Here's the link
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56681755
Answer: The old rule to use a shutter speed of 1/f was always rubbish.  It makes a sharp image possible, but it does not guarantee it. My hands are as steady as those of a brain surgeon, but I need to use 1/250s with a 50mm lens to be sure that there is no Camera shake, and with long telephotos 1/1000s is my minimum.
If you are hand-holding then a better rule is to use the fastest shutter speed compatible with the DOF you want.
As a last resort you crank up the ISO setting, because more digital noise is a lot less horrible (and a lot easier to reduce in post-processing) than the blur of camera shake.
Comment: To be fair, that's why it's called a _rule of thumb_, and not a _formula_. Quoting from the accepted answer, "the **general** rule of thumb was to use a shutter speed **no slower than** 1/focal length" (emphasis mine). Worded that way, the 1/ƒ rule (more of a guideline) is a _lower bound_ to the shutter speed, not a precise required value.


Who discovered the phase kickback trick?

Question: Was it David Deutsch? Can you say who was the first paper to mention the phase kickback trick?
Answer: The phase kickback trick appears in this paper:

Richard Cleve, Artur Ekert, Chiara Macchiavello, Michele Mosca. Quantum Algorithms Revisited. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A, 454(1969): 339-354, 1998.

The authors credit Alain Tapp for independently discovering the same improvement to Deutsch's algorithm that results from using this trick. (Deutsch's original algorithm, which did not make use of the phase kickback trick, was in fact not deterministic; the algorithm we now typically call Deutsch's algorithm is actually the improved version proposed in the above paper.)
Answer: As to "who discovered/invented the quantum phase estimation algorithm," in his 2011 lecture at Keio University describing the linear equations algorithm, at about the 18 minute mark Lloyd claims that it was inherent in the works of Von Neumann.
That reminds me of the argument that "Gauss discovered the Fast Fourier Transform 160 years before Cooley and Tukey."