Upgrading Ubuntu after official support period has ended

Question: I am using Ubuntu 10.10, for which the official support period is over. When running the upgrade manager, I also cannot see the option to upgrade to a newer version, are you aware of any alternatives for upgrading.
Answer: Make sure that the Update Manager notifies you for any new version and not just for LTS versions.
You can do this by going to the settings (found at the bottom of the page) and in the "Notify me of a new Ubuntu Version" choose "For Any New Version"
Comment: I suspect this is why.  Of course, the proper action to take with this may be just to wait until the end of the month and then upgrade directly to 12.04 !
Answer: There are many ways to upgrade, these steps found at https://help.ubuntu.com/community/NattyUpgrades
1- Open the Update Manager application from the System → Administration menu.
2- In Update Manager, click the Settings... button, and enter your password to start the Software Sources application.
3- Select the sub menu Updates from the Software Sources application.
4- Check the "Release upgrade - Show new distribution releases" drop down to make sure "Normal releases" is selected, and change it if otherwise.
Close the Software Sources application and return to Update Manager.
5- In Update Manager, click the Check button to check for new updates.
6- If there are any updates to install, use the Install Updates button to install them, and press Check again after that is complete.
A message will appear informing you of the availability of the new release.
7- Click Upgrade.
8- Follow the on-screen instructions.

This link also lists a way to upgade from an alternate cd, https://help.ubuntu.com/community/NattyUpgrades
1- Download the alternate installation CD from http://releases.ubuntu.com/natty/
2-Burn the ISO to a CD and insert it into the CD-ROM drive of the computer to be upgraded.
3- If the ISO file is on the computer to be upgraded, you could avoid wasting a CD by mounting the ISO as a drive with a command like:
sudo mkdir -p /media/cdrom
sudo mount -o loop ~/Desktop/ubuntu-11.04-alternate-i386.iso /media/cdrom

4- A dialog will be displayed offering you the opportunity to upgrade using that CD.
Follow the on-screen instructions.
5- If the upgrade dialog is not displayed for any reason, you may also run the following command using Alt+F2:
gksu "sh /media/cdrom/cdromupgrade"

Also there is this way, from http://www.unixmen.com/how-to-upgrade-from-ubuntu-1010-to-ubuntu-1104-natty-desktop-a-server/
1- Press Alt+F2 and type in update-manager -d
2- Now follow these steps : First check for updates, then Install them, and finally click Upgrade and follow the on-screen instructions.
Answer: One option you have is to back up your data and do a fresh install of the newest ubuntu os and then restore your data
but its wierd that the update manager does not show that natty is available(i also use 10.10 and it still shows that natty is available.screenshot below)
Comment: Strange, I do not see this anymore since a week or so. I tried to play with the settings of the update manager, but still, nothing.


How did Itachi awaken his Mangekyou Sharingan?

Question: If Itachi didn't kill Shisui, how did he really awaken his Mangekyou Sharingan?
Answer: The Mangekyou Sharingan is activated once its user experiences great loss, especially of someone close to him.
This means that Itachi did not have to kill Shisui in order for the Mangekyou to activate. What is most important for the activation is that the user feels the loss, which causes their brain to release a special kind of chakra that affects their optic nerves (chapter 619), thus awakening the Sharingan, and the Mangekyou, depending on what 'level' you were before, and on how much loss you have experienced. The more loss you experience, the more powerful the Sharingan gets.
Probably, just witnessing Shisui's death to protect the village was traumatic enough for Itachi to awaken his Mangekyou.
Also, if you remember, Sasuke's Mangekyou activated when Itachi died. He did not kill him either, but witnessing his death, even though he hated him, was traumatic enough to activate it.
Comment: @MadaraUchiha: C'mon... He didn't kill him. He wouldn't be able to, even if he had wanted to. Itachi died only because he was both sick and not going hard on Sasuke.
Comment: He kinda did kill Itachi, but the eyes awakened only after he learned the truth about him.
Comment: Isn't that the same way Madara Uchiha awakened his Mangekyou? If you see in Chapter 625, you can see that his Mangekyou is awakened. I feel that it is because of the loss of his brother, who is Hashirama in the scenario.
Answer: That may be true, but that's not how Sasuke got his Mangekyou Sharingan. In the episodes following the fight, we learn that Itachi implanted his Mangekyou powers (Amaterasu, etc.) into Sasuke. Those powers activated when Sasuke looked at Madara's Sharingan; as Madara explained, Itachi made the abilities self-activate when they came into contact with Madara's Sharingan. This was because Itachi did not want Madara and Sasuke to meet, in order to prevent Madara from telling Sasuke the truth about Itachi.


Why is this tree refusing to shed its dead leaves?

Question: There's this tree I've been noticing (not sure what it's called) and throughout the whole winter it has held onto its leaves that went dry in fall even under windy/rainy conditions. Since leaves dont rejuvenate themselves, how will it produce new leaves for the next season? Will they eventually fall somewhere around spring or is one supposed to remove them by hand to make room for the newer set of leaves to follow?
Comment: Whilst this may be a case of marcescence, this tree might instead be dead...check by peeling back a little of the bark or skin on the branches with your fingernail to see what its like inside - if its moist and greenish,its alive, if its brown and dry, it isn't. Check near the base too...
Comment: Note I do not say to cut the tree in any way, as mentioned in an answer below - just scrape back a small bit of bark, or the outer surface, with a fingernail to check.
Comment: It might be easier to identify once it comes into leaf too...
Comment: @bamboo_ it's good that you pointed that out. I did go back to check on the tree this morning and well, it seems to be very much alive apart from a few dead twigs and branches so i guess its a marcescence (dont even know how to pronounce it) as mentioned in one of the answers. I guess all that's left is identifying the tree. I've looked up marcescence on the internet and the list is rather small so it shouldn't be that hard.
Answer: This is called Marcescence.
Some species of trees retain their old leaves longer than others, and young trees may retain them longer than old trees. In the UK, "copper beech" trees (with naturally brown or purple coloured leaves even in summer) which are sometimes used for ornamental hedges often retain the old leaves right through the winter.
It may be a defence against animals eating the tree branches in winter, if the old leaves are not so edible as the branches themselves.
You don't have to do anything to remove the leaves. New leaves will grow from new buds on the branches. The old leaves will fall off on their own, eventually.
The Wikipedia link has a picture showing new leaves on an oak tree, before the old leaves have fallen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcescence#/media/File:Marcescence_on_Quercus_rubra.jpg
Comment: Thanks for this! I've got an oak that does this and was always curious. Glad to know it's not an issue since it's helpful for the local birds to find shelter in the winter.
Comment: Not just copper beech - beeches in general do this and are sometimes used for privacy hedging as they block the view all year round
Comment: @ChrisH yes the beech hedge in my garden does this, and looking at it I would say this was a beech tree.
Comment: @alephzero_ thanks alot. I didn't think there would be a type amoung trees to hold onto their old leaves. It's kinda in a way an evergreen but with fall colours providing shade all year round. Do you think they should planted more then their more famous cousin deciduous?
Comment: @WendyG_ i did wanna find the name of the tree in the photos so i googled beech trees, more specifically the leaves of a beech tree and the shape of the leaves had me thinking differently as they had a sort of teeth like appearance to the edges which i dont find with the leaves on this tree.
Answer: The tree is probably dead, as @Bamboo has pointed out in a comment. The reason for this conclusion is that the leaves are dull, dry, and curled. In normal growth the leaf expands, does its job of keeping metabolism going and at the end of the growing period forms an abscission layer at the base of the leaf stalk. This allows the leaf to fall leaving a sealed wound that will retain moisture and be resistant to disease. In this case normal growth was interrupted before the abscission layer could be formed, so the leaves did not fall but remain stuck. The leaves reacted by curling up to conserve as much of the existing moisture as possible, but failed to pull in water to replace what it was losing.
In the case of leaves designed to healthily remain on over the winter, as with evergreens and exceptions to the general rule of leaves falling early, the leaves remain turgid and bright, swollen little balloons that retain their shape and lustre much longer into the following year.
There could be many reasons for the sudden interruption of water to the plant: bark girdling at the base, planting too late into the season, drought, poison such as watering with high salt water. I'm sorry to bear bad news possibly; follow the recommendation to cut into some twigs and see if you see some green or an alternative  test would be to simply bend over a twig and see how far you can distort it before it breaks. If it bends smoothly and springs back my reasoning is wrong. Let's think positively.
Comment: The dead appearance can come from stresses like you described, but the ultimate indicator of tree death is the lack of any buds. If there are buds, the tree could still live. It's hard to tell from these photos, but it looks like there are still some buds.
Comment: Judging from the rest of the ground in the picture, this doesn't look like a place where a tree (or anything else) would grow.  It could have been planted in hopes it would grow, or planted in a container and not watered.  It really does look dead.
Comment: @JPhi1618 `It could have been planted in hopes it would grow` - Yes. In some cultures people plant trees ON graves so that the living tree will continue "praying" for the soul of the deceased. And it provides shade for the grave (such trees are never meant to overgrow the grave)
Comment: My full beech hedge does this every year please see @ale answer
Comment: @colin beckingham_Thanks alot. Thats good observation and it would make an excellent answer had this been a deciduous tree which I've confirmed it not to be as per your advise. It's alive. Secondly, your reasoning for the tree being rather dead is based on the dull curled up appearance of the leaves. Perhaps you had a certain species in mind but while i was reading up on the term "marcescence", i came across leaves that had a very similar apperance to the leaves in the photos. I'll leave a link below.https://www.michigannatureguy.com/blog/2017/04/03/marcescence/


Do I get more cards if my hand is empty at the end of my turn?

Question: What do I do if I have zero cards left in my hand at the end of my turn?  Do I wait until the end of my turn then draw the usual one card at the beginning of my next turn or do I draw a new seven card hand?
Comment: I just wonder: what makes you think that you would be drawing a new seven card hand?
Comment: @murgatroid99, I have seen it before in "lunchroom Magic," where grade-school students play during their extremely short lunch breaks (during which they also need to eat!), and drawing a full hand when you empty it speeds up the game. It breaks card balance in half, certainly, but it does make the game faster.
Comment: @murgatroid99 Some games do have mechanics like that, including I think some simple playing card games as well as board games that were designed with the idea that everyone should always have something to do (cards in hand). It's a common enough notion that someone [asked about Munchkin too](http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/13870/do-i-draw-a-new-hand-if-i-start-my-turn-without-any-card).
Comment: If a game doesn't want you to run out of cards, it usually has you top off your hand. ("If you have fewer than X card, draw until you have X.") The only time MTG has you draw is at the start of the game, one card in the Draw step, and when you are instructed to by effects.
Comment: Cosmic Encounter has you refill when you're empty [or don't have any of a certain type of card]. Because card trading is possible, sometimes giving away your entire hand can be beneficial both to you and the person receiving it.
Comment: Yu-Gi-Oh The Forbidden Memories also had this feature, because game play was focused on combining several cards from the hand each turn.
Answer: When you get to your draw step, you must draw a single card, unless some effect lets you draw more or less. If you attempt to draw a card when your library is empty, you lose the game.
Even if your hand is empty, the rules remain the same, and you still only draw one.
Here is how the comprehensive rules states it.

The draw step is the third step of the beginning phase.

Draw Step
504.1. First, the active player draws a card. This turn-based action doesn't use the stack.
504.2. Second, any abilities that trigger at the beginning of the draw step and any other abilities that have triggered go on the stack.
504.3. Third, the active player gets priority. Players may cast spells and activate abilities.
Comment: I think it is important to add to this answer that there aren't any other steps or phases when the rules say that you draw cards. The main confusion in the question seems to be about drawing extra cards from an empty hand.
Answer: Rule is you draw 1 card during draw and 1 card only. You only draw more cards if you are instructed by a card to do so.
Answer: During casual games with my friends we draw 3 cards during our draw step instead of 1 because that's how my brother taught me to play Yu-Gi-Oh (we played that before I found mtg) and it sort of transferred over to MTG in my head all my friends thought it was better then only drawing 1 so we use that.
However if you play in an official game then that's a big no-no.
Comment: This answer is a house rule and will not apply to 99.99% of places where magic is played.


Any Advice Getting into  Mixing & Mastering?

Question: Hi all, Happy February lol! I recently entered the graduate sound design program at the Savannah College of Art & Design after studying radio production in Undergrad. I know it's graduate school, but the sound/audio industry is so broad I'm trying to narrow down where I want focus my career in the near future. I got into the whole audio thing because of my love of music and one of the things I would love to get into is music mixing and mastering. I'm wondering if anyone has any ideas about learning more about that/getting into that industry outside of the academic environment. I've been looking into internships but they don't seem to be as common as, say, a post-house. Any advice helps, take care!
Answer: I got my start recording and mixing music.
Get an internship at a studio in New York or LA. Learn under a pro mixer, it's really the only way to go about it without chasing your tail for 10 years learning things the hard way.
Also, the person I apprenticed under started out going to where local bands rehearsed (rehearsal stages, garages, etc.) and practiced miking them. It's easier to practice miking and recording this way as opposed to doing free albums for new bands because you don't constantly have band members begging for you to turn them up.


How do I properly file state income taxes for a 1099-B that has an out-of-state address?

Question: I have a brokerage account with my old address on it from a different state (New York) than my current residence.  Therefore the 1099-B and 1099-DIV were issued with the old address on it and I assume the tax information was sent to New York State's tax offices.  Since I was not a resident of New York during the year, I do not rightfully owe New York any taxes for these gains.  Can I just ignore this and file the taxes in my state of residence or do I have to fill out a New York return and adjust the income to $0?
Comment: was there a year where you filled part year with NY state and your new state?
Comment: @mhoran_psprep No, I didn't bother doing that last year because my capital gains were so small, my taxes were low enough that it wasn't worth it.
Answer: You can ignore it. If they contact you with questions - you explain that you were not a NY resident and they're not entitled for anything.
They may want to audit your residency status, but there's nothing much you can do to avoid this if they want to do it.


Could the Gospel of Matthew be dependent on Luke's Gospel?

Question: Why is it that a possible Gospel dependency order of Mark-Luke-Matthew without requiring 'Q' is considered particularly unlikely, when compared to other possible solutions to the synoptic problem? Do any respected NT scholars favor (or give credence) to this solution?
Answer: In my understanding, the key arguments put forward for the order Mark > Luke > Matthew (i.e., for "Matthean posteriority") are:

the literary observation that Matthew appears to collect, collate, and develop traditions found in Luke (e.g., what appears in Matt 5-7 in the "Sermon on the Mount" is found at various points, and in a more "primitive" form at various places in Luke);
at points in the "double tradition" (the common "Matthew-Luke" material) Luke's version appears to be older than Matthew's; and
Matthew's "theology" appears to resonate with features of later documents (John's gospel, the Didache), making it post-date Luke.

These broad categories have finer subdivisions in the specialist literature (see below). On the other hand, arguments against this ordering include:

Matthean elements in the double tradition point towards his priority over Luke (and this order has had a recent advocate in Mark Goodacre, and see the critique of Goodacre's proposal by John Kloppenborg);
it negates any kind of influence of "oral" traditions on the synoptics, and requires our texts to be explained solely in terms of literary dependence (which is thought to be unlikely by many); and
Matthew's schematic organization is a general tendency, and does not necessarily display a selective systematization of Lukan material.

Further Reading
The two main scholars who espouse this view are:

Martin Hengel (giant of 20th C. NT scholars) in an appendix to his The Four Gospels and the One Gospel of Jesus Christ (T & T Clark, 2000) (n.b. this is not a "full blown" version of the hypothesis, as he still allows for other sources); and
Ronald V. Huggins, "Matthean Posteriority: A Preliminary Proposal", Novum Testamentum 34/1 (1992): 1-22 (not so well-known, but published in one of the premier NT academic journals).

There is also an helpful write-up found in a substantial unpublished (student?) essay by Tim Lewis, "Solving the Synoptic Problem For Students?". Mention must also be made of Bartosz Adamczewski, Q Or Not Q?: The So-called Triple, Double, and Single Traditions in the Synoptic Gospels (Peter Lang, 2010) - so far as I'm aware the only recent monograph-length attempt to argue for "Mk > Lk > Mt". Unfortunately, it spawned what has been called "the most negative book review known" in New Testament studies. Caveat lector!
Answer: Let's consider for a moment what the Farrer (Mt used Mk, Lk used Mk and Mt) and Wilke (Lk used Mk, Mt used Mk and Lk) theories suggest that the third evangelist in each case did. (For what it's worth, I would regard Kloppenborg's layered Q as a nuanced form of Wilke: he puts the sayings material in the Lucan order, then adds in some para-Marcan material.)
Under the Farrer hypothesis, what Luke does is relatively simple:
0) Let's ignore the infancy narrative for now – it differs in style and substance from the rest of the Gospel and could well be secondary under any hypothesis.
1) In 3.1-4.15, Luke tries to reconcile Mk and Mt – two baptisms would not work.
2) The Rejection at Nazareth is intentionally displaced.
3) From 4.31-6.16, Luke basically follows Mk 1.21-3.19. This is a reasonable choice – the Matthaean parallels differ substantially in order in this part of the gospel.
4) From 6.17-7.10, Luke follows Mt 5.1-8.13, ignoring the Healing of the Leper (as it has already been used in its Marcan context) and setting to one side a lot of the sayings material. It is dangerous to speculate as to the motives of 1st Century evangelists, but despite the position of the Sermon on the Mount in cultural kudos, I feel a good deal of sympathy for Luke's abbreviation: one would never want to read something that long in church, let alone preach on such a text.
5) In 7.11-35, Luke is showing his intentions again. He brings forward the Inquiry of John the Baptist, as using it in his next Matthaean block would put it after John's death. Then there's some special material (the Widow of Nain's Son) and the deliberately relocated Anointing.
6) In 8.1-9.50, Luke returns to following Mk 4-9. The Great Omission of course occurs in this block, eliminating the duplicate Feeding miracle, Jesus calling a Gentile woman a dog, and the strange observation on sewage.
7) The special incident in the Samaritan village (9.51-56) sits on the most notorious seam in Luke.
8) Immediately, Luke returns to following Matthew. The sayings on following Jesus (Mt 8.18-22/Lk 9.57-62), a blatant skip over material used in its Marcan context, the harvest labourers sayings (Mt 9.37-38/Lk 10.2), a reworked Mission discourse with almost all the Marcan material removed and some sayings set aside, a skip over the relocated Inquiry of John, then those Woes against the Cities (Mt 11.20-24/Lk 10.13-15), a special piece on the Fall of Satan (which is clearly the key to understanding Luke's discourse), Jesus' Thanksgiving to the Father (Mt 11.25-27/Lk 10.21-22), and then the most wonderful piece of Lucan craftsmanship: relocating the Blessed are your Eyes saying from a dangling location in the Parables Discourse once the Marcan material is removed to be a fitting finale to his Mission Discourse.
9) At this point Luke makes another deliberate relocation: the Greatest Commandment, expanded upon with that famous parable and that strange story about Martha (I'm with Caird on that one: it's a warning against self-concern).
10T) First terminal block. Luke begins to re-use the sayings material from other sections. In the terminal blocks before returning to Matthew's order, it is always material transferred from sections 4-5 above (the Sermon and the material following it). In this instance it's the Lord's Prayer and the Ask, Seek, Knock bit.
11) Luke then returns to Matthew's order with the Beelzebul Controversy (Mt 12.22-45/Lk 11.14-26). Luke once more shortens the long discourse, pulling out the Sign of Jonah and Sin against the Spirit material to bracket the next section (12A). As Matthew's conclusion (12.46-50) is Marcan material, Luke creates his own (11.27-28) on a similar theme, perhaps influenced by his clever conclusion to his Mission Discourse.
12A) Luke's non-terminal sections use Matthaean material in a specific order: they draw first from sections 4-5 (Sermon and Sequel), then from sections 15-16 (stretching back from the Eschatological Discourse to the Lost Sheep), then concluding with material from the Mission Discourse. The effect is broadly to refocus didactic and eschatological material on Mission. Lk 11.29-12.12 is the first such section.
12B) This is followed, with a short introduction (Who made me judge?), by another section drawing from the three Matthaean sections in turn (Lk 12.13-53). In this section, Luke betrays his modus operandi: Lk 12.35-38 is paralleled in Mark's Eschatological Discourse, not Matthew's.
12T) The second terminal section (12.54-13.9). Once more, the Matthaean material comes from sections 4-5.
13) The special healing of the woman bent double provides a new scene for rejoining Matthew's order with the non-Marcan part of chapter 13 (the Parables Discourse). After two parables, Luke decides he has had enough. Maybe those tares were too eschatological for his de-eschatologizing programme. I feel somewhat sadder that Luke omitted the ending about things old and new, but I am not a first-century evangelist.
14A) In 13.22-14.33, Luke resumes his pattern of drawing from each of the Matthaean blocks in turn, with short bursts of special material to make it fit together (13.31-33; 14.1-14).
14B) In 14.34-15.32, Luke has now exhausted his stock of sayings from the Mission Discourse. So the saying on salt from the Sermon (complete with ironic "he who has ears to hear, let him hear!"), followed by the Lost Sheep from later in Matthew, is followed by a sort of narrative anaphora: next it's a Lost Coin; then a Lost Son!
14T) If the previous section is Luke at his best, this one is Luke at his worst. It's a terminal block, so the Matthaean material comes from sections 4-5. What it actually consists of is the ethically dubious parable of the shrewd steward by way of an over-long introduction, a morass of left-over sayings that don't really fit together in 16.14-18, then the memorable Rich Man and Lazarus Parable, which would fit much better without the sayings blob. The crassness of the divorce saying's situation is particularly marked; seeing as Luke completely omits Mk 10.2-12, it is tempting to speculate...
15) Luke 17.1-4 is where his two sources finally are at the same point synoptically (Mk 9.42-48/Mt 18.6-22). It's a definite mix of the two, but Luke has been utterly ruthless in his selection of materials. To finish it off, Luke sees Matthew's parable of the Unforgiving Servant (Mt 18.23-35) and instead provides on of Unprofitable Servants (Lk 17.5-10).
16) Luke then takes Matthew's order, but continues to omit material that will occur in the Marcan context. So once Jesus starts journeying towards Jerusalem (Mt 19.1-2/Lk 17.11), everything to midway through Mt 24 has to be skipped. The Healing of the Ten Lepers fills the vacuum. In 17.20-37, Luke then uses the non-Marcan pieces of Matthew's Eschatological Discourse. Whereas Matthew's Discourse then ended with thoroughly eschatological parables of the Virgins, the Talents, and the Sheep and the Goats, Luke replaces these with de-eschatologized parables of the Widow and the Judge and the Tax Collector and the Pharisee.
17) For the remainder of chapter 18, Luke rejoins Mark.
18) In the first half of chapter 19, the seam before the triumphal entry, Luke once more has special material (Zacchaeus). This provides a suitable setting for those Talents/Pounds that he had replaced at the end of the First Eschatological Discourse.
19) Luke once more follows Mark's narrative, with some omissions, from the Triumphal Entry to the end of the (Second) Eschatological Discourse.
20) The Passion Narrative depends on both Mark and Matthew, but most of all exhibits an independent streak, as Luke's theology of the death of Jesus is so different from the other two Synoptics.
The Wilke theory (and its modified "Q" form with a proto-Luke with all the Marcan blocks and the Passion Narrative removed) does not allow such a neat overview of how Matthew wrote his gospel with Mark and Luke/proto-Luke in front of him. The unscrambling of the blocks of Luke's Central Section that do not match Matthew in order is much messier than assembling them from three groups of sayings. Folding the doubletted Mission, Beelzebul, Parables, and Eschatological Discourses in between into single discourses is harder work than Luke using Mark and Matthew in turn. And it beggars belief that with his two main sources agreed in order from the Call of the Disciples to the Feeding of the 5000, he would still have gone his own way and created a curious order with a fronted Sermon, two Marcan strands, and a non-Marcan strand as he did.
So in terms of thinking about how the last evangelist would have written their gospel from two sources, the Farrer order is the easier hypothesis.
Comment: Welcome to Stack Exchange, we are glad you are here.  This is a great first answer and I look forward to reading more of your work.   When you get a chance, be sure to check out the [site tour](http://christianity.stackexchange.com/tour) and read up on how this site is [a little different](http://meta.hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/1808/how-we-are-different-than-other-sites) than other sites around the web.
Answer: You have asked about the order being Mark > Luke > Matthew. My answer below addresses the order of Luke being written before even Mark. This arrangement is called Lukan Priority. It is very much a minority opinion. As you know, the prevailing theory in New Testament studies is Markan Priority. It has the most support among scholars. A minority position (which I hold) is Matthean Priority, that Matthew wrote first then Mark then Luke. I am unaware of any scholar supporting John's Gospel being written first (though some might). A quick search did not turn up anything supporting that stance either.
Brad H. Young defends Lukan Priority, that Luke's Gospel is before even Mark. Young is a member of the Jerusalm School. Lukan Priority is not original with them, a scholar named William Lockton first proposed it. Then Robert Lisle Lindsey began writing on it independently of Lockton (that is, Lindsey had not read Lockton's proposal).
Lindsey also disagreed with the priority of Q. Instead, he proposed a source called A for "Anthology". A differs from Q because A is a full life of Jesus's life, teachings, and actions while Q is a sayings document.
Lindsey hypothesized this arrangement while attempting to translate the Gospel of Mark into Hebrew. He noticed there were many hundreds of times where Luke used a semitic phrase (a phrase that comes from Hebrew or other semitic language) but Mark did not. As it makes more sense for the semitisms to be present in the older documents than the younger, Lindsey formed the following arrangement:

There was an original Hebrew Gospel.
There was a collection of poems, stories, and accounts of Jesus' life. This is called A and was probably in Greek.
There was also a lost Gospel, R, in Greek.
Luke used A and R in compiling his Gospel.
Mark used Luke with little regard for A and no reliance on R.
Matthew used Mark and A but not Luke's Gospel.
Luke and Matthew were unaware of the other's gospels.

David Flusser (1917-2000), the other founding member of the Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research, also agrees at least in part with this source arrangement. Flusser believed that Hebrew sources predate all three synoptic gospels. Brad Young was his student so it comes as no surprise that Young also supports Lukan Priority. David Bivin and Roy B. Blizzard Jr might also support it.
A very detailed blog series on Lukan Priority (at the very least it raises good questions about Markan Priority) is available here.
Comment: I'm sure the names and facts involved here are relevant, but this answer seems too short on opinion to me. That may seem like an odd complaint, but as someone who is not an expert in this particular issue this answer doesn't help me gain any perspective. Are the scholars mentioned "respected"? Are they in the majority or minority? Is this just a few examples or an exhaustive run-down of the support? Are you able to draw a conclusion to the question title?
Comment: I think I am now likewise inclined. What is the correct remedy at this point?
Comment: @user2754486, I am editing for the requested information. You may see how that fits in later.
Answer: Lots of scholars look for alternatives to the traditional Mark-Q priority, but in my view without success. Dennis R. MacDonald wrote a well-researched thesis in Two Shipwrecked Gospels that Luke knew not only Mark, but also Matthew. That would have caused an even bigger stir among critical scholars than his book, The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark, but after carefully studying his arguments I came away unconvinced. There seems to be no direct link from Matthew to Luke or from Luke to Matthew.
There should be no doubt that Luke is, in part, dependent on Mark as a direct source. The 'Missing Block' alone proves that. Another of the many proofs is put forward by John Dominic Crossan, who demonstrates movement of Markan intercalations from Mark to Luke.  A different set of Markan intercalations flows to Matthew, and this alone makes it highly improbable that the author of Matthew did not rely directly on Mark for much of his narrative. The best explanation for non-Markan agreements between Matthew and Luke remains the hypothetical 'Q' document, although other alternatives as a secondary source remain worth considering.
Not only is Matthew directly dependent on Mark for much of its narrative content, but when Matthew and Luke are in agreement on sayings, they differ with context. For example, Matthew has the Sermon on the Mount, while Luke has the Sermon on the Plain. This is what you would expect if both authors were relying on a common Sayings Gospel (Q) and each had to create his own context for what Jesus said, but not if Matthew was developed from Luke because in this case Matthew could remain true to Luke as he does with Mark. There are many instances where Matthew and Luke have the same sayings and they are in the same sequence, but placed in different contexts. The agreement on sequence confirms that the two authors are working from a written, not oral source text, and this is consistent with Q, and the disagreements on context confirm that the source text is not a narrative. All this leads us away from Mark>Luke>Matthew.
Matthew's Gospel could not be more different than Luke's in respect to the resurrection appearances. It is also very different in respect to the empty tomb, but I accept these differences as theological. Getting back to the resurrection appearances: We know that Mark originally ended at 16:8 with the young man telling the women that Jesus was risen and they fled in terror, telling no one. The authors of Matthew and Luke both wanted to prove that Jesus had risen, which meant they needed resurrection appearances, but of course Mark was not giving them a lead. Matthew has Jesus meet the women and give them a message for the disciples to meet him in Galilee, which the disciples did do. Luke has Jesus meet the two on the road to Emmaus, an implied appearance to Peter and then to the eleven at a meal in the upper room. He then went with them out to Bethany where he rose up to heaven.  I am sure that Luke's resurrection ending is original to the Gospel, so why would the author of Matthew write a  contradictory ending?
There are several clues that Matthew is slightly older than Luke. One of them, noticed by critical scholars, is its place on the continuum of progressive antisemitism. It is more antisemitic than Mark (which is more so than Paul) but less antisemitic than Luke, with John quite scathing of Jews in general, not just of the Pharisees etc as in the earlier gospels. because of this and other clues, Matthew is generally dated at least ten years before Luke,making dependence on Luke impossible.
Comment: @David: I have added additional paragraphs to flesh out the arguments against Mark>Luke>Matthew. I hope this helps.


Leave out search results older than two years by default

Question: One thing I don't like about Google Search is that it often includes results that are very very old. Is there a way to permanently turn off old results, like block all results older than two years? If I ever wanted to search for older results too, mind you this is rare, there would be a feature for temporarily turning them on again.
Answer: I don't think you can permanently block older results but you can certainly limit the results to whatever date range you want.
Click "Search tools" in the bar at the top of the results, then select what you want.  Default is "Any time".
Comment: As close as it gets maybe. A save feature there would be perfect. Maybe _someone_ can make a browser add-on in the meantime.
Answer: This is possible with Opera (or another browser that allows you to specify/edit search engine URLs). Simply put, you just need to add "&as_qdr=y2" (without quotes) to the URL.
Detailed instructions for Opera:

Click the Opera button -> Settings -> Preferences
Click Search tab
Double-click Google
Click Details >>
Add "&as_qdr=y2" (without quotes) to the end of the Address field
Click OK twice and you're done

Anytime you search from anywhere in Opera, you'll only see results from the last 2 years.


Is a straight spine/spinal posture during seated meditation critical?

Question: I notice, in images of monks and lay people in seated meditation, that many of these various persons appear to be using very poor posture, e.g. slumped and not erect. Written instructions and video instructions often recommend adherence to a straight spine and/or an erect posture. I think the Buddha simply instructed that one sit, without specific instructions about an erect straight-spine posture. Therefore, I find myself confused and distracted regarding "correct" posture. My breathe seems to be more natural and relaxed if I "slump" just a bit and dispense with the "straight spine". Although, I've also noticed that when I notice that my attention to the breathe has wavered I have gravitated into a more pronounced "slump"! SO, what is most acceptable and correct?
Thanks for any advice that is offered :)
Comment: Posture is more or less important depending on the type of meditation. In Zazen straight spine is important for example. What type of meditation are you practicing? Knowing that will help to get you usable answers. :)
Comment: I think I am practicing what Theravada teachers would identify as serenity meditation. I endeavor to sit for one hour daily before sunrise, then again in the evening. For a meditation object I practice attention to the breathe, as evidenced by the sensation of air moving into and out on the nostrils. Attention to the rising and falling of the abdomen is a bit more challenging for me. I am hoping for access concentration so I can have a recognizable indication of success. I have, on rare occasions, experienced or recognized what I think may have been "insight" into impermanence. Thanks :)
Comment: btw, I sit in what I think is a Burmese position, with the right leg on top of the left, the right foot on top of the left calf. My hands are in my lap, with the right hand on my left. I use a buckwheat hull zafu to gain a bit of elevation, so my pelvis can rotate forward just a bit. Sitting for an hour in the morning is usually not a problem for me physically, although trying to sit for an hour in the evening can be a real challenge because of extreme monkey mind, which is very frustrating :-P
Comment: If you are sitting on your own volition, that's a huge success right there!  Don't worry about achieving certain states.  Those will come with time.  And of course your mind is scattered in the evening!  You had the whole day to rile it up! ;-)
Comment: This answer to a previous question may be helpful to you. Best wishes. :) http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/9263/introduction-to-samadhi-meditation/9272#9272
Answer: Don't look at posture as a matter of right and wrong, correct or incorrect.  Ideal posture exists for the sole purpose of helping you develop concentration.  The general idea is that an upright body equals an upright mind.  Slouching is going to cause you to fall into sleepiness.  Your mind will go as slack as your body.
On a more mundane level, if you tend to tilt forward in your sitting, a couple of other things are going to happen.  For one, after about a half an hour, the middle of your back is going to start to hurt.  You might also feel tension in your shoulders as your muscles struggle to keep your body upright.  You might also notice that as you lean forward, you start to restrict air flow.  It's not like this is going to cause you to pass out, but it will be harder to do deep, abdominal breathing.
And remember, this is an ideal.  No one is going to smack you upside the head if your posture goes a little slack (well, unless you are studying at a Rinzai temple!).  Maintaining correct posture is only going to benefit your sitting.


How can I run javascript directly and show the output?

Question: I'm just doing some testing with JavaScript language feature with no DOM manipulation. So I'm editing a js file and I'm wondering how to simply run it and show the console output? I installed the moll/vim-node plugin, but no idea how to run js code.
Comment: You can try something like `:!node %`. This will shell out to the external `node` program, passing the current filename as an argument. Output will be displayed on the screen, and you can press Enter to dismiss it.
Comment: The comment above by @tommcdo is a good concise solution that satisfied all I had been trying to achieve through more complicated means such as slime, et cetera.
Answer: I think Codi is what you are looking for. It supports JavaScript and some other languages.
Answer: Per this vim wikia entry you could create a shell execution to new buffer script and then extend it to run your code using node.
command! -complete=shellcmd -nargs=+ Shell call s:RunShellCommand(<q-args>)
function! s:RunShellCommand(cmdline)
  let isfirst = 1
  let words = []
  for word in split(a:cmdline)
    if isfirst
      let isfirst = 0  " don't change first word (shell command)
    else
      if word[0] =~ '\v[%#<]'
        let word = expand(word)
      endif
      let word = shellescape(word, 1)
    endif
    call add(words, word)
  endfor
  let expanded_cmdline = join(words)
  botright new
  setlocal buftype=nofile bufhidden=wipe nobuflisted noswapfile nowrap
  call setline(1, 'You entered:  ' . a:cmdline)
  call setline(2, 'Expanded to:  ' . expanded_cmdline)
  call append(line('$'), substitute(getline(2), '.', '=', 'g'))
  silent execute '$read !'. expanded_cmdline
  1
endfunction

command! -complete=file -nargs=* RunJS call s:RunShellCommand('node '.<q-args>)

Then if you run :RunJS % you should get a new buffer with the output of your node.js execution. Optionally you can call things directly using :Shell <cmd>
Answer: No plugin required! You can run node with the shell command :!
Run the entire file with :!/usr/local/bin/node %
Run the current line with :exec '!/usr/local/bin/node' '-e'  shellescape(getline('.'))
Answer: 2021 Update
Later versions of Vim and NeoVim now have terminal support built-in. Use the :term(inal) command to open a new terminal.
Original Answer
I highly recommend https://github.com/Shougo/vimshell.vim for this purpose.
Its a vim plugin that allows you to run a terminal within vim. You can open the terminal in a new tab with
:VimShellTab

or quickfix window with
:VimShellPop

then you can run commands as usual, i.e.
node


What teachings do all schools of Buddhism share?

Question: Among the many schools and traditions, what core teachings are shared by all Buddhists?
Answer: There is an existent reference to the similarities between Theravāda & Mahāyāna which I will cite:
(I think it also applies to Vajrayāna although I may be wrong in this regard.)

Whatever our sects, denominations or systems, as Buddhists we all accept the
  Buddha as our Master who gave us the Teaching.
We all take refuge in the Triple Jewel: the Buddha, our Teacher; the Dhamma, his
  teaching; and the Sangha, the Community of holy ones. In other words, we take
  refuge in the Teacher, the Teaching and the Taught.
Whether Theravada or Mahayana, we do not believe that this world is created and
  ruled by a god at his will.
Following the example of the Buddha, our Teacher, who is embodiment of Great
  Compassion and Great Wisdom, we consider that
  the purpose of life is to develop compassion for all living beings without
  discrimination and to work for their good, happiness and peace; and to develop
  wisdom leading to the realization of Ultimate Truth.
We accept the Four Noble Truths taught by the Buddha, namely, Dukkha, the fact
  that our existence in this world is in predicament, is impermanent, imperfect,
  unsatisfactory, full of conflict; Samudaya, the fact that this state of affairs is due
  to our egoistic selfishness based on the false idea of self; Nirodha, the fact that
  there is definitely the possibility of deliverance, liberation, freedom from this
  predicament by the total eradication of the egoistic selfishness; and Magga, the
  fact that this liberation can be achieved through the Middle Path which is eight-
  fold, leading to the perfection of ethical conduct (sila), mental discipline
  (samadhi) and wisdom (pañña).
We accept the universal law of cause and effect taught in the Paticcasamuppada
  (Skt. pratityasamutpada; Conditioned Genesis or Dependent Origination), and
  accordingly we accept that everything is relative, interdependent and interrelated
  and nothing is absolute, permanent and everlasting in this universe.
We understand, according to the teaching of the Buddha, that all conditioned
  things (samkhara) are impermanent (anicca) and imperfect and unsatisfactory
  (dukkha), and all conditioned and unconditioned things (dhamma) are without self (anatta).
We accept the Thirty-seven Qualities conducive to Enlightenment
  (bodhipakkhiyadhamma) as different aspects of the Path taught by the Buddha
  leading to Enlightenment, namely,

Four Forms of Presence of Mindfulness (Pali: satipatthana; Skt. smrtyupasthana);
Four Right Efforts (Pali. sammappadhana; Skt. samyakpradhana);
Four Bases of Supernatural Powers (Pali. iddhipada; Skt. rddhipada);
Five Faculties (indriya: Pali. saddha, viriya, sati, samadhi, panna; Skt. sraddha, virya, smrti, samadhi, prajna);
Five Powers (bala, same five qualities as above);
Seven Factors of Enlightenment (Pali. bojjhanga; Skt. bobhyanga);
Eight-fold Noble Path (Pali. ariyamagga; Skt. aryamarga).

There are three ways of attaining Bodhi or Enlightenment according to the ability
  and capacity of each individual: namely, as a Sravaka (disciple), as a
  Pratyekabuddha (Individual Buddha) and as a Samyaksambuddha (Perfectly and
  Fully Enlightened Buddha). We accept if as the highest, noblest and most heroic
  to follow the career of a Boddhisattva and to become a Samyksambuddha in order
  to save others. But these three states are on the same Path, not on different paths.
  In fact, the Sandhinirmocana-sutra, a well-known important Mahayana sutra,
  clearly and emphatically says that those who follow the line of Sravaka-yana
  (Vehicle of Disciples) or the line of Pratyekabuddha-yana (Vehicle of Individual
  Buddhas) or the line of Tathagatas (Mahayana) attain the supreme Nirvana by the
  same Path, and that for all of them there is only one Path of Purification
  (visuddhi-marga) and only one Purification (visuddhi) and no second one, and
  that they are not different paths and different purifications, and that Sravakayana
  and Mahayana constitute One Vehicle One Yana (eka-yana) and not distinct and
  different vehicles or yanas.
We admit that in different countries there are differences with regard to the ways
  of life of Buddhist monks, popular Buddhist beliefs and practices, rites and
  rituals, ceremonies, customs and habits. These external forms and expressions
  should not be confused with the essential teachings of the Buddha.

-One Vehicle for Peace by Ven. Walpola Sri Rahula, (December 1–7, 1981)
Comment: Personally, I don't believe in the Four Bases of Supernatural Powers.  AFAIC, there are no supernatural powers.
Comment: I understand. Sometimes they are also translated as Four Steps to Prosperity\Success\Growth. Although in some contexts of the early texts, the word *iddhi* is certainly related to psychic abilities\wonders\miracles.
Answer: As well as the list which is quoted in Unrul3r's answer there are, also, three other lists included on Wikipedia's Basic points unifying Theravāda and Mahāyāna article.

A less canonical list was written by Christmas Humphreys,

In 1945 he drafted the Twelve Principles of Buddhism for which he obtained the approval of all the Buddhist sects in Japan (including the Shin Sect which was not associated with Olcott's common platform) of the Supreme Patriarch of Thailand and leading Buddhists of Sri Lanka, Myanmar, China and Tibet.

Here for example is a link to the Twelve Principles of Buddhism
By Christmas Humphreys.
They include (I summarize, see a reference for the more-complete text):

Self salvation is for any man the immediate task. (Parable of the Arrow)
The first fact of existence is the law of change or impermanence. (Therefore clinging to form causes suffering)
The law of change applies equally to the "soul". (Therefore non-self)
The universe is the expression of law. (Kamma, purifying inner nature, liberation from rebirth, ultimately every form of life will reach enlightenment)
Life is one and indivisible, though its ever-changing forms are innumerable and perishable. (Compassion and harmony)
Life being One, the interests of the part should be those of the whole. (Selfishness is caused by ignorance; the four noble truths)
The Eightfold Path consists of: etc. (The way is to be practised, not just theory: "Cease to do evil, learn to do good, cleanse your own heart: this is the Teaching of the Buddhas")
Reality is indescribable, and a God with attributes is not the final Reality. But the Buddha, a human being, etc. (The Buddha became enlightened and tought that nirvana can be achieved on earth)
From potential to actual Enlightenment there lies the Middle Way, etc.
Buddhism lays great stress on the need of inward concentration etc.
The Buddha said: "Work out your own salvation with diligence". Buddhism knows no authority for truth save the intuition of the individual, and that is authority for himself alone.
Buddhism is neither pessimistic or "escapist", nor does it deny the existence of God or soul, though it places its own meaning on these terms.

I can't say that "all schools share these teachings" but apparently, at least, these teachings are compatible with all the schools'.
Comment: I would quibble only with the idea that Reality is incomprehensible. Its true nature would be beyond conceptual fabrication, but this is not the same thing. I'd say it's not such a clear -cut issue. A minor issue here though. .
Comment: Thanks, apparently that was my transcription error:it should be "indescribable" (though I'm not sure how that's compatible with the doctrine of the Pali suttas, which seems to me to describe it at some length).
Comment: 'Indescribable' seems correct. 'Describable only by negation' might be more accurate since negative description abound. But 'incomprehensible' I would never endorse. Nice answer though and +1 anyway.
Answer: I'd say nothing, there are so many sects, that you can find any Buddhism that lacks one element or the other.

Meditation (less common, matra and mudra)
The Historical Buddha. In some forms of Buddhism, the historical Buddha is not so important.
Monasticism and renunciation.
Philosophical bent that cares about topics like identity, change and it's application towards dealing with suffering.

But right off the top of my head, Shin de-emphasizes meditation, SGI deemphasizes monasticism, the Buddha of, say the Lotus Sutra, isn't really the same guy as the Buddha of the early Pali texts, and traditional lay Buddhism doesn't involve much philosophy.
The phrase that comes to mind when I'm reading about yet another sect or school of Buddhism, is "recognizable Buddhism."
Answer: The common teachings of all Buddhists are:
• The ordinary lot of human beings is to be suffering from a delusion about the real nature of the universe;
• A method for dispelling this delusion was originated by someone called "The Buddha" who employed it to purpose;
• Buddhism offers to teach the adherent this method so as to cease being subject to the delusion.
Other than these rudiments, all other teachings are variably composed, and supposed literal or metaphorical in their application of instruction. They amount to catechisms of formal doctrine without common confidence or consistency as to their meaning.
Answer: There might be many school with many different ideas, some following the Buddha and serving the Dhamma and Vinaya, some using it as base for own ideas. Once the Buddha was asked by his former foster mother, Ven Gotami, in regard of how to recognize whether teachings are Dhamma-Vinaya (the name the Buddha gave his founded religion) or not. He answered:

"Gotamī, the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to dispassion, not to passion; to being unfettered and not to being fettered; to shedding and not to accumulating; to modesty and not to self-aggrandizement; to contentment and not to discontent; to seclusion and not to entanglement; to aroused energy and not to laziness; to being unburdensome and not to being burdensome': You may definitely hold, 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher's instruction.'"

Possible supportive Introdution to Dhamma-Vinaya.
Maybe worthy to think about is, that certain definitions like such as Buddhism and what might count as such... the standards as well as the orientation, are for the most later development, now also strong dominated by lay people and many various ideas and objectives behind.
The lesser the bound and regard torward the ancestor, elders and leaders, to more it goes astray and it, by time, becomes more and more difficult to find common ground, common objectives and common ways. Lucky if finding a paricular Sangha (monastic disciples) of common offiliation which carries on the heritage. It's worthy to note that the Buddha gave the surviving of the truth and way to it, Dhamma-Vinaya, at least more importance than unity, although he gave very concerning the best tools to handle unity and give into it.

[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma and not meant for commercial purpose or other low wordily gains by means of trade and exchange.]
Answer: In all seriousness, i think the common teaching in both the meaning & expression is; "there once lived a man from Sakyan clan who achieved something special and it was very good"
There is no consensus on what he actually achieved.
I guess there is also consensus on him having some magical powers in general and it all having to do with some kind of meditation.


Does the amount of breathing (holding breath/breathing fast) affect the calories burned during a workout (not heavylifting)?

Question: Why I even think it could have any effect: maybe when the body has deficit of the oxygen, the burning reaction modifies to burn more sugar/fat/whatever (i.e. instead of burning each molecule completely it is burning them just up to a certain point and go over to the next)? (have heard something like that but would like to have some solid facts :)
If there is any difference, how much is it, is it worth to think about during workouts?
Comment: My point was mostly that your question is built on some kind of assumption from which you hypothesize a certain outcome. However, if the assumption itself doesn't hold, then you wouldn't have to ask the question. So I'm wondering, why did you expect this to matter (or not), because then the answer should explain you why that was wrong and teach you something :-)
Comment: I see, well I guess you could say that the assumption was that since there are several ways to breath, presumably letting in more/less air into the system during the exercise, the body must have some ways of variating the burning processes, and that those variations could affect the efficiency of the process also in terms of consumed fuel.
Comment: If that were true, do you expect taking deeper breaths would result in burning more calories too?
Comment: Well I am not expecting anything, I am asking how it is.
Comment: Then what did you expect to do with the answer, if not change your workout?
Comment: Well I simply meant that I couldn't answer your question because it is the same question that I have asked, so I don't know the answer.
Answer: Quite simply, no.  In order to understand why, you have to understand the metabolic pathways used in exercise.  If there are slight differences in the amount of calories burned, it is due merely to the difference in energy needed to move the lungs.
Essentially, your muscles use Adenosine Triphosphate (ATP) to perform their work.  The different metabolic pathways all result in generating ATP.  The three major pathways are:

Oxidative: The result of aerobic activity.  Fatty acids are converted to ATP with lactic acid as a byproduct in the presence of oxygen.  This can last for minutes to hours.
Glycolytic: The result of anaerobic activity.  Glycogen and lactic acid combine to create ATP in the absence of oxygen.  This can last for seconds to minutes.
Phosphagen: The result of very high intensity activity.  ATP and Creatine Phosphate (CP) are quickly depleted to handle sudden high intensity activity.  This can only last for seconds.

Only one of those pathways uses oxygen.  It should be noted that the metabolic pathways are listed in order of the amount of Calories burned for that type of activity.  While aerobic activity burns a higher percentage of fat during activity, the energy demands are fairly low and there is no "afterburn" associated with that activity.  It should also be noted that the metabolic pathways are cumulative.  You are still operating oxidatively even when you are predominantly operating in the glycolytic manner.  The anaerobic pathways, while they burn more carbs immediately, they also require more Calories.  When you finally come to rest, the body has to replenish the energy from somewhere.  In the absence of food, this means the body has to burn fat to create glycogen--which is what the "afterburn" of high intensity interval training comes from.
Comment: Nope.  It has nothing to do with the amount of oxygen in your blood (which is affected by breathing).  It has everything to do with the metabolic processes to meet the demands you are placing on your body.  Heavy exertion means metabolism without oxygen--even if your blood-oxygen levels are saturated.
Comment: @Cray ventilation is more about getting rid of CO2 from your body than getting O2 into it. Therefore, the demand is driven by how much energy you burn and how much CO2 this produces as a by product. You are partially correct that creating an anearobic (without oxygen) situation, you could force your body to burn energy more inefficiently. However, this is only required for athletes who have to perform in energy deprived situations and want to push the limit.
Comment: No, its rather that you can't keep doing that forever, because at some point you're no longer able to get rid of the CO2 and you'll start to built up so much lactate acid (a residual of burning energy anaerobically) that you're simply no longer able to perform. So you have to strike a balance between limiting your oxygen built-up and the acidification of your muscles, which is what the body does automagically if you perform (sub)maximally. So instead of artificially limiting your oxygen uptake, simply push yourself harder (but make sure its part of a training program)
Comment: Wouldn't this mean that taking in less air during an exercise does indeed burn more calories because the body is forced to use the 2 latter ways, and as you wrote, they require more calories? (because the energy depleted during that has to be replenished from burning fat (i.e. calories?)) (Or do you mean that this whole "use stored energy/then replenish by breaking fats later" breaks even to almost exactly the same amount of fats burned as the oxidative pathway does, when it is using the energy from burning directly? (hope that makes sense)
Comment: This is one of the major differences between sprinting and marathoning.
Comment: Ivo, could you explain more the "However, this is only required for athletes who have to perform in energy deprived situations and want to push the limit." part? Does it burn more "fuel" per J of energy produced or not?
Comment: Alright, that last one nailed it :)


Is Ash technically the Pokemon Champion of Alola like Steven?

Question: In Pokémon Sun Moon anime, now that Pokémon League Champion is Ash and there are no Elite Four, does this make Ash the Pokemon Champion of Alola?
Comment: According to a [dutch newsoutlet](https://nos.nl/artikel/2301960-ash-ketchum-na-22-jaar-eindelijk-pokemon-master.html) he is now a pokemon master.
Answer: Yes, Ash is now considered a Pokemon champion of Alola like Steven.
However, Ash already was a 'champion' before becoming the champion of Alola, the champion of Orange Islands.
However his victory on Orange Islands is often disregarded due to the unconventional 5 gym battles without Elite Four, a Champion, or a Conference.
As mentioned on the Pokemon fan Wiki the following is required to become a champion

A Pokémon Champion is a trainer who has beaten a region's Gym Leaders (in Alola's case, all 7 trials and totem Pokemon), Elite Four, and the previous Champion.
Answer:
 Yes, He is one of the regional champions now because this was the first league of Alola region. He is now the one step closer to
 become a Pokemon master. He will get the official invitation for the
 next champion's league tournament where he will battle against the
 regional champions. If he wins then he will be considered as a Pokemon
 master by the world.
Comment: I am not asking asking whether he is pokemon master I am asking he is regional champion like Steven stone in honen.


Could Mars Rovers be lighter or faster if they didn't have to be tested on Earth?

Question: Watching this video of Perserverance being tested on Earth, it occurred to me that requiring it to stand, drive, climb, etc. under 1g is, in some sense, overkill. Could this (or other) rovers be made more capable or less massy if it was not required to support itself on Earth at all? Has this ever been considered?
Comment: The rover also has to survive the launch process
Comment: Where else are you going to test it?
Comment: @DanPichelman true, but not standing on its wheels
Comment: I continue to be dismayed at questions which include "has this ever been considered" after 30 years of painstaking design, analysis, testing, reliability tradeoffs have been done by massive teams of expert engineers.
Comment: @SolomonSlow - if speaking of Mars - it's technically entry, right, rather than re-entry - Since it's not coming from Mars ;)
Comment: The ultimate optimization parameter is "overall mission cost vs expected science return". Lighter spacecraft means more effort and cost for development phase. I know that JWST assembly was plagued by damages of its fragile structure. For example the heat shield was teared couple of times.
Comment: launch... _and_ reentry and landing and some form of deployment.
Comment: Taking the time and expense to do a full testing of equivalent hardware/software here on earth in worst-case conditions is a lot less expensive than the cost of a failed mission due to an unforeseen issue that could have been caught with full testing before launch.
Answer: The video shows only tests within the clean room on smooth clean test floors. The vibration test at first should simulate the conditions during launch.
Drive tests on a simulated Martian rough and dirty surface on Earth (see JPL Mars Yard) are not done with the version built for the Mars surface. The flight-ready version is built in a clean room and only leaves it to be transported to the launchpad.
For drive tests on Earth, special test versions are built. A drive test version is built without a Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator and not with the full set of scientific equipment. So, a lot of the mass of the Mars rover is not there for the 1-g tests.
The structure of the rover needs some factor of safety to survive the launch at several g as well as the entry to the Martian atmosphere, the parachute unfolding and the landing with the sky crane. Driving on Mars probably induces far from the highest structural loads the rover needs to endure.
Comment: @CourageousPotato Thanks for editing and the link to JPL Mars Yard.
Answer: Faster?  No.  The speeds of all Mars rovers so far have been limited by the navigation software or the available electrical power, not by physical capability.  Spirit and Opportunity were both physically capable of driving more than 2000 meters per day, but rarely actually traveled more than 60.  Curiosity is capable of moving 2200 meters per day, but can only navigate at 200 meters per day.
Lighter?  Maybe a little, but not much.  Most of the mass goes into non-structural elements such as batteries, solar panels, and instruments, structural elements where the major stresses don't come from gravity (instrument arms), or structural elements where gravity can be compensated for during testing (wheels and suspension).  About the only thing that needs to carry Earth gravity at all times during testing is the body of the rover.
Comment: … which also needs to carry the impact load of landing. (Unless you put some kind of strut under it, which then prevents it from driving off the platform. So, you need the strut retractable, which is just one more thing to go wrong, and a very stupid way to get yourself stuck.)
Answer: Speed is not the issue, but navigation.
If would be better if a mapping-satellite were placed in polar orbit over Mars, to produce a precise topographical map; along with some GPS-type satellites.
This would allow the rovers to find their Waze.
Comment: In response to your answer:
I disagree that mapping satellites or GPS are the solution here. The Curiosity rover already has great local area mapping through its Object Avoidance Cameras surrounding the rover, so the operators use the close-up 3D maps derived from this for navigation. While more mapping satellites would help with long-term route planning, local navigation is what affects speed. The true upper bounds on Curiosity's speed are the risk of damage from going fast, the limits of the local mapping, and the onboard power usage.
Comment: Welcome to Space Exploration Stack Exchange! Your first answer here is correct, but it is lower on information than we prefer. Please try to reference specific objects, missions, technologies, etc, and cite sources! The best answers expand beyond qualitative statements and include some original analysis.
Comment: A mapping satellite wouldn't help.  The best Earth-based satellites have a resolution of around 7 cm, or in other words, the sorts of obstacles that the rovers are trying to avoid show up as one or two pixels on the map, and only if the area was photographed at the correct time of day.
Comment: @Mark 'Earth-based' satellites, you say?  Well good thing Mars' atmosphere is much thinner, with much fewer clouds.  Mars' lower diameter and gravity would let a satellite orbit much closer to its ground than with Earth.  So I'd expect an order of magnitude or two better clarity of maps.  Directed lidar may even be possible.  Though it would make more sense for the rover to do it's own sensing.
Comment: @BillyC., if you're looking down at the Earth, the atmosphere isn't much of an issue.  The limiting factor is mirror size -- to get your "two orders of magnitude" resolution increase, you'd need to go from a 2.5-meter primary mirror to a 250-meter primary mirror, or go from orbiting at 500 km to orbiting at 5 km.  (Or combine the two, giving a 25-meter mirror 50 km up.)  See [diffraction limit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffraction-limited_system).


Does sottapana have perfect morality (sila)?

Question: Someone told me the other day that a Sotapanna has perfect morality, particularly five precepts. I think I did read somewhere a Sotapanna has perfect morality but I forget the source. Can someone refer me to any source that says a Sotapanna has perfect sila?
Answer: No, just an Arahat has such. But a Streamwinner has what is called "virtue pleasing and praised by the wise". Not capable to make grave faults and lead deliberate misconduct. In affect he/she is still able to conduct unskillful deeds, but would not hide it and leave them covered, would confess them quick, be ashamed and intent to correct.
(You may find the wish after resources, there where you lead the discussion and try to argue on other place.)
[Note: This is a gift of Dhamma, not meant for commercial use or other lower wordily gains by ways of exchange or trade]
Answer: IMHO introducing the abstraction of "virtues pleasing to Noble Ones" to me seems to be intended to avoid enumeration and getting into explaining how his sila actually works.
In example there is a difference between states that will arise for a lay and monstatic sotapanna, Cula-Sotapanna is different from Normal Sotapanna, Solitary Sotapanna will not have the same Range of Potential experiences compared to a Sotapanna who lives with others, as the sense of respect for the robe or a cultivated sense of shame out of respect for the teacher would be instilled more in the former, a Sotapanna surrounded by the Sangha will lead a different life than a Sotapanna surrounded by Wrong View Ordinary Folk, a Sotapanna with Strong Faculties will make different decisions one with weaker, a combination of these and other factors (latent defilement etc) make one up ones behavior.
In a similar fashion The Aggregates and States of Consciousness which delineate into mental, verbal and physical action are explained in more detail when we look to Abhidhamma and Teachings on the nature of experience and Behavior in general and in Regards to the state of a Sotapanna n particular.
What is impossible is also stated in the Impossible Sutta where the things a Sotapanna cannot do are listed, there is also a list that comes with The Ratana Sutta, Them not killing or wanting others to get killed is from Dhammapada, this is what ive seen in the Canon, Sutta Pitaka and the Abhidhamma.
It is stated in the Sutta Pitaka (Sutta called Recital is at least one instance), where it is stated "Five impossibles, to wit, for an Arahant intentionally to take life, or to take what is not given, so as to amount to theft, or to commit sexual offences, or to lie deliberately, or to spend stored up treasures in worldly enjoyments, as in the days before he left the world."
This was never said about a Sotapanna.
The argument for them being unable to break the 5 precept is based on the verses saying "when a Sotapanna has "eliminated/stilled/calmed(common translations)" the five fearful animosities and easily attains the 4 rupa jhanas then he can be proclaim himself to be a Stream Winner. In those verses it is not said that one becomes a sotapanna when one does not break precepts. It says that "when these have been stilled/eliminated in one (presumably he already is, that is the most face up logical interpretation), it is also not specified if it is dealing with a Sotapanna who knows the Cessation or the Cula-Sotapanna, it seems natural to assume that it means both if anything (but this is a different topic). There is also an ambiguous statement in the Buddhagosa s Visuddhimagga that kind of implies that they can do no wrong action.
Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw was also convinced that a Sotapanna would not break the 5 precepts. Venerable Ladi Sayadaw afaik said he was not sure but leaned towards agreeing with Mahasi Sayadaw.
Ven. Nanavira was raising criticism against the view of Perfect Sila in his time, so it has been criticised for at least some decades and as far as i am concerned the view was never properly defended and is held as orthodoxy by quite a few.
I also have the impression that some Famous Ajahns could be capitalizing on keeping the five precepts and teaching that the Sotapannas dont break the five precepts, because that actually implies that a monastic sotapanna could get involved in some shady stuff outside of the 5 precepts for example and still be perceived as a Saint by layity. It is easier to keep 5 precepts for some people than to become enlightened id assume.
The view i think could also be formed if there was like a Streak of very sober Sotapannas for some time and a view that all Sotapannas are like that couldve formed. These are my thoughts on it fwiw.
A few things other things whch set them apart from Ordinary Folk are that they can do wrong action knowing it as bad with right view and cant do wrong action and hold wrong view about it, they can restrain themselves on account of Right View, there is no such possibility for an ordnary person. So rather than speculating about what they cant do one should focus on that view thing that they got imho.
Answer: Since a Sotapanna does not have perfect mindfulness & wisdom, it is impossible a Sotapanna has perfect morality. However, a Sotapanna has intimate deep insight into the nature of craving & attachment, therefore a Sotapanna fully abides by the precepts via wisdom but may occasionally lapse in relation to trifling deeds, such as killing a mosquito or lacking perfect speech suitable for each situation.
Comment: Voted down because is refuted by Dhammapada: According to the story of hunters wife when questioned on the matter of her Sila the Blessed One is said to have said that (from imperfect memory) "Sotapannas do not kill or wish beings to die".

Other than that i agree
Comment: The story of the hunter is not from the Dhammapada. You need to distinguish between the Dhammapada and the ridiculous commentaries that were written hundreds of years later. The hunter story is a commentary rather than a teaching of the Buddha.
Comment: I see your point, however i dont hold the view that they are wrong or true. Not a big fan of Buddhagosa in general tho.
Comment: I see your point, however i dont hold the view that they are wrong or true.  There is a good chance that it is more or less true tho, maybe it was said, in referrence to what exactly and to what extent is still unclear so one can not do much with it.
Answer: buddha summed in jaggikāvasathasutta, which you require (but still no translated version in enlish, why?):

sujātā ānanda upāsikā    kālakatā    tiṇṇaṃ    saññojanānaṃ   parikkhayā   sotāpannā avinipātadhammā niyatā sambodhiparāyanā.
Ānanda,  dead Sujātā-upāsikā already ceased 3 saṃyojana (sakkāya-diṭṭhi, vicikicchā, sīla-bataparāmāsa), she is sotāpanna, would not fall from sotāpanna state, and is sure of enlightenment (higher level) in the future.

The translation trick:
Pāli translation (by saṃyojana context's sequence) of first 3 saṃyojana that are destroyed by sotāpanna should be:

Micchādiṭṭhi causes vicikicchā and sīlabataparāmāsa.

The explanation:
Misunderstanding the  relativity (causes and effects) causes doubting the relativity and causes doing wrong physical verbal&bodily actions (kāya&vacī-viññatti-cittajarūpa) that cause low-quality resultant-minds&kammaja-rūpa, such as hell realm, etc.
The  relativity in buddhism is paṭiccasamuppāda (the  dependent origination). Micchādiṭṭhi is in every passion step (avijjā, taṇhā, upādāna) of paṭiccasamuppāda, see the reference sutta the the end of this answer.
The example:
While a child who can do multiplication and addition but he understand only the additive rule of the mathematics. When he receive problem test sheet "3+3x3" and he misunderstood "I can do", then he write the wrong answer "18" because he wrongly thought '(3+3)x3' but it must be '3+(3x3)'. He may doubt "should I multiply  first or add first?". In the end, the teacher gave him fail for that answer.
You can see that whole misunderstood, wrong answer, wrongly thought, doubt, and fail come from Misunderstanding the  relativity.
The reference:
In samanupassanāsutta showed avijjā-upādāna  co-nascently cause (sahajāta-paccaya) diṭṭhi-upādāna (diṭṭhupādāna, sīlabatupādāna, attavādupādāna), taṇhā, vedanā, phassa, etc. So, this sutta showed micchādiṭṭhi is in every passion step of paṭiccasamuppāda (the dependent origination):

(sakkāya-diṭṭhi-upādāna:)'Intentions from self, or an intending self, or in self intentions, or in intentions self.' Reflect.
...
The ordinary person touched (phassa) by ignorance (avijjā-upādāna) and feeling (vedanā) in accordance, it occurs to him 'I be (by bhava-taṇhā)', or 'This is my (by upādāna) self (maybe by attavāda),' or 'I will be,' or 'I will not be (by vibhava-taṇhā),' or 'I will be material,' or 'I will be immaterial,' or 'I will be perceptive,' or 'I will be not perceptive (saññā),' or 'I will be neither perceptive nor non-perceptive.'
(Above quote paragraph included diṭṭhupādāna, sīlabatupādāna, and attavādupādāna automatically, because of previous quote which appear before this quote in the same sutta. So buddha use "the ordinary person" instead of "ariyasāvako". But in the other paṭiccasamuppāda sutta maybe not auto include those 3 upādāna, because the buddha may taught to sotāpanna-ariyasāvaka, or above, who perfectly and completely ceased those 3 upādāna.)

So, you can see whole dhamma which I quoted above in 1st-3rd pañcaverabhayasutta:

I

The householder Anāthapiṇḍika (sotāpanna) approached the Blessed One, worshipped and sat on a side.

...

"Householder, when the five dreadful fears are appeased and if you are endowed with the four factors of one who has entered the stream (sotāpanna) of the Teaching and if you wisely see and penetrate the right path, if you desire, could declare, 'I have destroyed births in hells, in animal wombs, in the sphere of ghosts and birth in loss, evil states and in decrease. I have entered the stream of the Teaching, would not fall from there and am sure of enlightenment (higher level) in the future.'

...

"Householder, a destroyer of living things is in fear of having destroyed living things in this life and he dreads and fears the next and experiences mental unpleasantness and displeasure. Someone abstaining from destroying living things is appeased from this dread and fear.

... one who has taken the not given ... one misbehaving sexually ... one telling lies ... one taking intoxicating drink... (5 sīla)
II

"Here householder, the noble disciple has unwavering faith in the Blessed One ... the Blessed One's Teaching ... The disciple monks ... perfect virtues desired by the noble ones... (vicikiccha-saṃyojana cessation)

III
... the noble disciple wisely considers this same depandent origination (paṭiccasamuppāda)...

"Such as on account of ignorance arise determinations...

So, buddha summed in jaggikāvasathasutta, which you require (but still no translated version in enlish, why?):

sujātā ānanda upāsikā    kālakatā    tiṇṇaṃ    saññojanānaṃ   parikkhayā   sotāpannā avinipātadhammā niyatā sambodhiparāyanā.
Ānanda,  dead Sujātā-upāsikā already ceased 3 saṃyojana (sakkāya-diṭṭhi, vicikicchā, sīla-bataparāmāsa), she is sotāpanna, would not fall from sotāpanna state, and is sure of enlightenment (higher level) in the future.
Comment: it is good that you found that one, it is certainly very important as it is consistent with Nandiya and the Uposattha Sutta where The Perfect in Knowledge and Behavior seemingly tells Ariya Savakas to keep the basic Precepts.
By any chance do you have a better a than publicly available english translation of the Seven Suns Discourse by any chance?
Comment: Also they will say Anathapindika was not Ariyan when this discourse was given is my guess. This is what they do, explaining away things by commentary even if it runs contrary to logic, Abhidhamma and bunch of Discourses.
Comment: @Inb4dead You can see in the path of purification, RECOLLECTION OF PAST LIVES, around page 408. It is not the same sutta. But it is about 7 sun, too. I am not sure for the quality of this translation because my english is terrible. But it can be a choice for you. https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/PathofPurification2011.pdf
Comment: 2/3. Also, I knew that someone so bias toward commentary, because they never read commentary directly. So, we should give them chance to understand the commentary.
Comment: 3/3. Another, for about Anathapindika: I understand your regards. However, Sotāpanna state of anāthapiṇṭika was already specified in sutta. When buddha often use "ariyasāvaka" in the context of variant sutta  with someone. It means that one is ariya. Because buddha specify that ariya to practice himself continue from his ariya's current state. The westerner can't understand this pāli word relativity, so they fabricate stories "it not appeared in tipitaka", although it appeared clearly.
Answer: It is correct that a stream-winner will not not break the five precepts. On the other hand, that is not one and the same as perfect morality.
As an example, from Mahasi Sayadaw's Manual of Insight:

Out of the ten "wrongs," wrong view, false speech, wrong action and
  wrong livelihood are abandoned by the first path. Wrong thought,
  slanderous speech and harash speech are abandoned by the third path.