Why should people be moral even if there is no incentive or consequence for morality of a lack of?

Question: In my philosophy class we were discussing ethical hedonism, whether the only good in the world is pleasure. My question to you is this: Why should people be moral to each other if their actions have no consequences, and if they have no incentive for themselves to be moral to other people?
Answer: The thing about 'why' questions is that they presume an answer exists, whether or not an answer actually exists. Suppose I answered your question with "You should behave morally because such-and-such reason." That reason would then be an incentive to act morally. But we're operating under the premise that no such incentives exist. Contradiction.
I also object that the very idea of actions without consequences might not even be coherent. An action is something done so as to accomplish a purpose. They are by definition characterized by the intentionality of agents. If there are no consequences, then by the same token there are no actions either.
Comment: Even if the idea is coherent, the question seems to presuppose that actions _with_ consequences (many subtle or minuscule individually but important collectively) can be neglected.  This premise seems shaky indeed.
Comment: This is a little semantic surely. You could attempt an answer to the question based on the common usages of the words, whilst attempting to define your meanings as you go. It's ok to try to find an answer even if there isn't definitely one. If the question is big enough, it's surely imperative.
Answer: You may enjoy reading Alisdair MacIntyre's 1984 After Virtue. His central premise is that morality collapses to Nietzschean power-plays without knowledge about what ought to be—without a telos. The enlightenment rejected any and all role for teleology, which completely undermined morality. The Enlightenment project of finding a 'rational basis' for morality failed completely. On p58 of the third paperback edition:

Hence any argument which moves from premises which assert that the appropriate criteria are satisfied to a conclusion which asserts that 'That is a good such-and-such', where 'such-and-such' picks out an item specified by a functional concept, will be a valid argument which moves from factual premises to an evaluative conclusion. Thus we may safely assert that, if some amended version of the 'No "ought" conclusion from "is" premises' principle is to hold good, it must exclude arguments involving functional concepts from its scope. But this suggests strongly that those who have insisted that all moral arguments fall within the scope of such a principle may have been doing so, because they took it for granted that no moral arguments involve functional concepts. Yet moral arguments within the classical, Aristotelian tradition—whether in its Greek or its medieval versions—involve at least one central functional concept, the concept of man understood as having an essential nature and an essential purpose or function; and it is when and only when the classical tradition in its integrity has been substantially rejected that moral arguments change their character so that they fall within the scope of some version of the 'No "ought" conclusion from "is" premises' principle. That is to say, 'man' stands to 'good man' as 'watch' stands to 'good watch' or 'farmer' to 'good farmer' within the classical tradition. Aristotle takes it as a starting-point for ethical enquiry that the relationship of 'man' to 'living well' is analogous to that of 'harpist' to 'playing the harp well' (Nicomachean Ethics, 1095a 16). … It is only when man is thought of as an individual prior to and apart from all roles that 'man' ceases to be a functional concept.

Whenever you follow moral rules, you are preferring some kinds of possible futures over others. But are these possible futures good for everyone, or merely some subset of the population, in which you may or may not be included? Consider aristocracies, where one's family history largely determines one's opportunities in life. If you don't share the telos of the current moral system, you will be oppressed by those who do share it. In such a society, 'morality' is merely a code-word for doing what benefits a strict subset of society.
You may also benefit from Nicholas Wolterstorff's 2010 Justice: Rights and Wrongs. In the first quarter of the book, he establishes two rival forms of justice/rights:

justice as right structuring of society
justice as individuals having the same rights

The first form is historically earlier (e.g. Greece), and I believe it is this conception to which Enlightenment thinkers objected. For, such a conception allows caste systems and the like. Here's MacIntyre, p60:

The self had been liberated from all those outmoded forms of social organization which had imprisoned it simultaneously within a belief in a theistic and teleological world order and within those hierarchical structures which attempted to legitimate themselves as part of such a world order.

I find MacIntyre's thesis compelling. I think the Enlightenment thinkers threw out the baby with the bathwater: they discarded teleology altogether, instead of merely rejecting the telos of the Church.
Answer: As @DavidH points, if there are no consequences there are no actions. There are no reasons to perform those actions either, and there are no reasons to behave in one way or another if people are not encouraged to do so.
While the answer is technically correct, I don't consider it a good answer because I think it fits a question that is misleading due to its wording. Therefore I'm going to propose a different wording, that leads to a more interesting question and more interesting answers: Should people be moral if there is no explicit incentive for morality?
Now that's a different thing. Should people try to do well to others or the planet (ecology) even if there is no God, government or any Big Brother there to reward them for their good actions?
The answer is yes, for many reasons, but all of them boil down to game theory, at least all the reasons I can speak of.
Basically altruism is an indirect reward that is expected to pay back when properly done, and from which we are benefiting since the moment we are born. So there is a culture of altruism, a tacit agreement that we are interested in preserving, because we get more from it than what we have to pay.
The morals that are to some extent encoded in most of us (possibly in our DNA, except psychopaths) are a way to get through local maximums. An example of a local maximum can be found in the tragedy of the commons, in the prisoner's dilemma, and in most games that are interesting from a game theory perspective.
These tacit agreements provide more utility in their results than the lack thereof, or they should do so to endure. They can also be traditions that should be forgotten because they were once useful and now harmful. E.g. We have now cheap and good contraceptive methods, so maybe some traditions about sex could be broken.
That's why it is important to know the roots for the morals, if they are currently beneficial, and judge critically.
To summarize, to the question, "why should I respect other people if I don't get a cookie for it?" The answer is: because you will promote a culture of respect in which you will live. Also, you never know when you are going to find a psychopath that may be violent, it's usually wise to avoid useless trouble.
I'm also going to add two examples.

You may not take care of the light bulbs in your house, but after some time your future-self will be in the dark for your irresponsibility. This example can be expanded gradually from your house to your planet and beyond.
You may be a tourist in a foreign country and not care about what they think about you, but their prejudices are going to be unavoidable (we are humans) and they are going to use the information about the people from your country that they have seen before. If you all behave well you all will be rewarded indirectly (some people for some other people) and viceversa with the punishments. It's like having a few stocks (that you can't sell) on a big company, the intelligent option is not to harm the company uselessly because its benefit is your benefit to some extent. This can be considered analogously in many other circumstances, not only tourism.
Answer: Morals are your beliefs.. You follow them because they are what you believe in. Not because incentive.
Answer: This is an excellent millenia old question that nobody yet answered to my personal satisfaction. Here's my take on it, which I also don't find satisfactory:
Recall the prisoners' dilemma. A society of selfish people would live by the lowest decision a prisoner could take, and barely survive, if at all. A moral society, where everybody takes the high road, would strive. Therefore it's highly beneficial for the society as a whole to have moral citizens.
The above does not answer, of course, why I should act morally. In fact, in a moral society the one who cheats has a lot to gain, just as in the prisoners' dilemma. Therefore society institute a variety of safeguards against people like that, ranging from laws that threaten consequences when a cheater gets caught to organized religion that promised the consequences afterwards to pop culture with tales about good guys alway prevailing. And yet, these safeguards don't always work: more often than not the top positions in many facets of life get occupied by sociopaths.
And here we come back to the question: what if I am slick enough to avoid human justice, what if I don't believe in divine justice, what if I don't care about the health of the society as a whole, what makes me behave morally?
I guess the answer to that is: nothing. A person like that often becomes a CEO or a successful politician.
Answer: This question actually forms the basis for Plato's Republic.  In that work, Socrates is challenged to prove that it is better to be a good person who is despised by everyone than a bad person whom everyone respects and admires.
Clearly, answering the question is a book-length enterprise for Plato, but his most direct address of the challenge uses a dictator as the example of a well-admired, successful bad person. Although he (the dictator) rules everyone around him with an iron fist, he himself is a prisoner --of his own ungoverned desires.  In this way, he is less free --and ultimately less happy --than the good man, who may be a prisoner of the world, but who is the master of his own soul.
Answer: In fact they would not have to.
Morality has a strong relationship to habit which can easily be broken or altered if need be. Especially when there are no consequences to the actions that morality would avoid.
Also, the question you posed can be quite paradox: why would morality forbid or advise against an action if it had no consequences? Only because of century old habits? Well then change those habits and adjust the morality.
This is what happens all the time.
Comment: Could you provide more sources or explanations on how you came to think that way? As it stands, your answer is more of a comment, really. Also, there are several answers already provided, and one of them has been accepted. If you think you're making another point than everybody before you, please explain why that is so.
Answer: Unless you're talking about a person living in complete isolation there is always some kind of social effect resulting from any action. The idea that a fallible, non-omniscient human could predict the universal effect of a single action is laughable. Even if that person is highly educated, intelligent and wise with the knowledge of all situations our species has encountered in the last 100,000 years there is still a possibility of something new happening.
Much simpler systems exist that are logically impossible to answer (see Godel's theorem, and decidability in computation theory) or very difficult to predict (see chaos and dynamical systems theory). Human nature precludes ignoring what others do, no matter the distance in time and space, because our instinct is to absorb as much information relevant to our survival as possible.


From a mathematical point of view is it optimal in no limit texas hold em to play with more money than less?

Question: I noticed the other time a friend of mine went to a casino and bought in 100 dollars for a 1-2 table. Other players had heavier buy ins. I have received two opposing arguments. One says that buying in more (like say $1000) is more optimal because it gives you more leverage if you were to get a monster hand, but on the downside you are unable to all-in on a "strong" hand if you don't want to take on too much downside risk. Are these truly strong tradeoffs which nullify the utility of having a higher buy in as opposed to a smaller one or not?
Comment: Dont forget you can mark my answer as accepted if you feel it answered your question
Answer: It is very hard to give a clear mathematical answer to this question because there are so many factors involved, such as your skill level, the dynamics of the table you are playing and the amount of money others have on the table.
I'll try and give some intuitive pointers on how to decide how much to buy in for.
1) If you are comfortable playing an aggressive style (calling down hands with drawing potential based on implied odds, bluffing and semi-bluffing in the right spots and so on) and the rest of the table isn't going to match you in aggression,  you should buy in higher than the table average.
2) If the rest of the table is also showing aggression, you can bring higher than the average buy in and try to be more patient and pick your spots for showing aggression more carefully.
3) If you are not very aggressive in general and like to wait for killer hands before making a move you can buy in somewhat low. It is usually advisable to buy in at least 25-30 big blinds, so that you will have some pay off when you hit the big hands.
Some additional clarifications:
In 1) and 2) I would advise relatively high buy ins for a couple of reasons. If you play as in 1), your stack will be subject to random swings because you are taking more risk and you will lose a few pots every now and then. However, since the rest of the table isn't showing as much aggression, you can recover easily if you have a big stack.
In 2) you need a stack bigger than the table average because you want to capitalize on the big hands when they come your way and extract as much as possible from the other players. Having a big stack also means you can extend the betting till the river and therefore increase bet sizes in a natural progression each round. In both cases, there is no benefit to buying in more than the table leader because you can't win any more money than what he has.
In 3), you are the novice player and therefore don't want to have prolonged betting through to the river card. If you have a small stack and wait for good hands, chances are you are all in either pre-flop or on the flop and you have a good chance of doubling up when the odds are in your favor. You won't have to make difficult decisions on later streets and if you bust out, you can buy in again for a small amount and continue.
As I mentioned before all of this is based more on intuitive than mathematical reasoning. I'm not aware of any mathematical treatment of this question and this seems to the next best thing.
Comment: So besides the aggression level points...if I understand what you are saying for 3: with a small stack you might be able to play more all in hands with better than 50/50 chances to double up and rebuy in small if you bust out whereas with a large stack you face higher risks following because you'll be elegible to call more money to stay in so you only follow the really strong hands but that offsets how often you actually play a hand?
Comment: @PalaceChan - Yes. Case 3 is what I have in mind for novice players who might not see the benefit of a large stack because they will then be forced to make tough decisions on later streets for larger amounts, which can lead to higher losses in case of a wrong decision.
Comment: I would appreciate it if the downvoter would explain their action.
Answer: The optimal and maximally exploitative strategies are different for different stack sizes, so it is possible that one player's personal strategy might be more successful at one stack size and not at another.  For example, if someone is always willing to put all their chips in with just a good one pair hand, he is better off playing with a shorter stack than a larger one, simply because he will therefore lose less money the times he has one good pair and his opponent has something better.  With a sufficiently short stack size, the strategy of never folding a good pair is good; but with lots of chips left to bet, it is a disasterous strategy.
It is also true that in multiway pots, it is theoretically more desirable to have a shorter stack than the rest of the table if everyone is equally skilled.  The reason is that the shorter stack will often be able to profitably remain in a hand and realize his full pot equity, while a larger stack might be forced to fold and forfeit his share of the pot's equity because of the threat of another large stack's future betting.  In practice, however, this is rarely a major concern.
My understanding is that if you are playing in a game of weak players who are deviating far from the optimal strategy and have very large stacks of chips in front of them, then in practice, you will be able to exploit their mistakes for larger amounts in absolute dollars by playing a reasonably good strategy with a large buy-in that matches theirs than by playing an absolutely maximally exploitative strategy with a much smaller buy-in.
The basic idea is that if you buy-in for \$100 and are good enough to increase your stack 10% per hour, on average, then you would win roughly \$10/hour.  Now suppose you buy-in for \$1000 but are only good enough to increase your stack 3% per hour, on average.  Then you would still win roughly \$30/hour.  Of course, your risk would be much higher and you would have to have a larger bankroll to handle the variance in the game.
Comment: "The reason is that the shorter stack will often be able to profitably remain in a hand and realize his full pot equity, while a larger stack might be forced to fold and forfeit his share of the pot's equity because of the threat of another large stack's future betting. In practice, however, this is rarely a major concern." is it really not a major concern? I'd imagine it would be...how is it not?
Comment: Because the situation almost never comes up, and even when it does, the hand that folds usually has very little pot equity.
Answer: In practice it is rare to have a situation where one players has an edge over others with X money on the table, (atleast for x>30BB) but not with say 2X.
However some players are somewhat good with 20BB (which usually is the minimum you can have), but totally crap at say 100BB and they run off once they double their money. 20BB does not depend on postflop skills. Mathematically it doesnt have an answer, because with perfect strategy its a breakeven game.
Generally one can say, the deeper your stack is, the more postflop play and more room for strategy and n'th level thinking. This is because you can put in more money in the pot without mathemathically comitting your entire stack. You almost never see a 3bet river or 5bet preflop with normal buyins.
Comment: Downvotes explain? I honestly want to understand your misunderstanding.


Reading CAN messages through UART to OBD-II Board and MATLAB Toolbox

Question: I want to read/write CAN messages. I have MATLAB in my laptop which has a Vehicle Network Toolbox which supports reading/writing CAN messages. I have my hardware OBD-II to UART board, FTDI and OBD-ii cable. Please tell me how to get data from OBD-ii to MATLAB(Vehicle Network Toolbox). Is it supported?
Comment: what OBD-II to UART board are you using?
Comment: Sparkfun manufactured. Im able to send general PIDs which can be viewed on hyperterminal on computer. But now i want to read CAN messages which will be regularly displayed through MATLAB's vehicle Network Toolbox. I want to how to set it up
Answer: CAN bus is actually a fairly complex protocol, similar to USB in many ways.  However, your OBD-II to FTDI adapter is probably just implementing the OBD-II part of this protocol, which is pretty simple (after all, they are converting it to a serial interface).
Use the serial communication tools built into MATLAB to do this (e.g., to communicate ASCII to a serial port like COM1).
They could convert the OBD-II messages to serial in any number of ways, but the ELM327 chip family's method is by far the most common.  For this the spec is here (http://elmelectronics.com/DSheets/ELM327DS.pdf), check out the section called "OBD commands".  It is a very simple interface, you request a PID and it replies with the value.
Comment: I've obtained all the basic data like Speed, RPM etc through general PIDs/OBD Commands. I used hyperterminal on my laptop to view the returned data. But now i want to see the CAN messages. I got to know Vehicle Network Toolbox in MATLAB can read/write CAN data. So i want to know how to interface MATLAB with UART Board to view live CAN data.
Comment: @user3098378 You need more advanced hardware to do this.  The protocol is called Unified Diagnostic Services.  https://www.mathworks.com/products/vehicle-network/supported/can-interfaces.html


Famous scientists in the Nazi party

Question: Can anyone give a list of famous scientists in the Nazi Party? Is there a complete list?
Comment: You can see [Mathematicians Under the Nazis](https://books.google.it/books?id=Xa8CNCyohBQC) by Sanford L. Segal (2003).
Comment: See also Saunders Mac Lane, [Mathematics at Göttingen under the Nazis](http://www.ams.org/notices/199510/maclane.pdf), Notices of the AMS (1995).
Comment: I cannot believe that the contribution by the world-famous physicist Professor Friedwardt Winterberg has been removed from this thread.
Answer: The most famous mathematicians who were the members of NSDAP are Ludwig Bieberbach and Oswald Teichmüller.
Answer: The mathematician who would have been famous had he not been a member of the SS / Nazi Party and died in a POW camp is, I think, Gerhard Gentzen. He invented/rigourously described natural deduction and sequent calculus but is well written out of the history
In philosophy circles, in debates between analytic philosophers (logic) and continental philosophers, sometimes there are discussions about who was worse — Heidegger or Frege. Frege died before WW2 so Heidegger is worse. These questions are related to which philosophy — analytical or continental — is the easiest misused for bad goals
But, if Gentzen was known, the question would be between Heidegger or Gentzen and the question could have a different answer.
I have a book on natural deduction (Logic by Paul Tomassi) it mentions lot of people involved in its development, but Gentzen is missing.
Answer: Philip Lenard, who with Stark founded the Deutsche Physik movement.
There are also examples of scientists who claimed to be "nominal members only": Wernher von Braun comes to mind (even if he admitted knowing about the slave labor used to construct the V-2 rockets); he was not only a member of the Nazi party but also of the SS.
Comment: Here is more on "[Deutsche Physik](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Physik)". And Pascual Jordan also comes to mind when speaking about famous German physicists in the NSDAP.
Comment: Allegedly, his membership cost him the Nobel prize in physics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascual_Jordan
Comment: @JanPeterSchäfermeyer this just proves how the nobel Prize is a political tool.
Answer: After the Second World War, Operation Paperclip was started to bring certain top German scientists to America. Many of these had worked on military applications for the Nazis (developing rockets etc.), and some may have been involved with the Nazis in other capacities as well.
A short list of the more famous scientists includes

Wernher von Braun
Kurt Tank - designed many German aircraft during WWII
Eberhard Rees
There are others listed here.

Note added by Danu to remove confusion caused by the initial wording of this post: After the war, Operation Paperclip continued for many years, as an effort to bring German scientists to the USA to prevent them from being recruited by the Soviets in the Cold War. In this context, many others were brought to the USA, though there is no direct tie to any possible World War II activities.
Further, there was a list called the Osenberg List. During the war, the Germans needed to recall all PhDs, scientists, etc, from active military service as they needed help developing new weaponry. The identified intellectuals were first politically cleared and then listed on the Osenberg List. I looked around and couldn't seem to find a copy of the Osenberg List, but it seems like that list is what you want.
Answer: He introduced groupoids and did some work on quadratic forms and quaternions, but I don't think he is considered a famous scientist: Heinrich Brandt. However, he was a very active Nazi, being a member of some Nazi organisations and most notably, he was a Förderndes Mitglied der SS. (According to German Wikipedia, referencing Harry Waibel, Diener vieler Herren: Ehemalige NS-Funktionäre in der SBZ/DDR (2011) p. 51.)
Answer: To be really honest, all university professors who remained in office in Germany after 1933 collaborated in one way or another with the regime. This goes for big shots like Planck, Heisenberg, Schrödinger, and others.
Comment: [Schrödinger](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_Schr%C3%B6dinger#Middle_years) certainly did not collaborate with the Nazi regime, nor did [Fritz Strassmann](http://db.yadvashem.org/righteous/family.html?language=en&itemId=4043022) who hid a Jewish woman in his flat.
Comment: The question is about NSDAP members, not supporters of Hitler's regime or members of Hitlerjugend (which was mandatory for 'Aryan' youth). Many academicians pledged loyalty, https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bekenntnis_der_deutschen_Professoren_zu_Adolf_Hitler, but even not all of those were or became party members. Notably, the mathematician Helmut Hasse signed the pledge and later applied for party membership, but it was denied to him due to his Jewish ancestry.
Comment: According to this logic, all  Soviet scientists of 1930-1950 collaborated with Stalin??
Comment: @AlexandreEremenko: Maybe. In Germany all professors were required to pledge allegiance to Hitler. Otherwise they were sacked. Quite a few retired to avoid giving the oath.
Comment: I'm not sure this is entirely correct, at least according to John Cornwell's *Hitler's Scientists*.

Famous scientists in the Nazi party


Canon 18-135mm macro capability vs 100mm macro lens

Question: I have a Canon 550d, and intend to take insect/flower closeup/macro shots. But I am not sure what the difference is between the Canon 18-135 lens vs a Canon 100mm Macro lens in terms of their macro capabilities. I mean, why wouldn't the 18-135mm (at 100 mm) be equivalent to the 100mm macro lens?
Comment: possible duplicate of [What is a macro lens?](http://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/2149/what-is-a-macro-lens)
Answer: Short answer is you won't be able to get close enough to your subject to produce a 1:1 replica of the subject on your camera's sensor.
While both lenses might hit that 100mm angle, only a macro lens will allow you to get a few inches from the tip of the lens to your subject.
Bear in mind the minimum focal distance is from the subject THROUGH the lens to your sensor plate. On Nikons this location is indicated with a circle with a line through it on the side of the camera. Not sure about Canons.
Back to that 1:1 bit, this means the image on the sensor is the same size as the object in real life when taken at the minimum focal distance from the subject. Then when you view the image on your screen, it becomes huge.
Answer: The problem is minimum focus distance.  A lens normally can't focus on something really close to it.  Your 18-135 lens can only focus on things that are around .4 meters away.  The 100mm macro on the other hand can focus on something at .3 meters.  This may not seem like a lot, but, it is enough that the maximum magnification of the lens is 1/4 that of a true macro lens.
In other words, without a macro lens, you have to take the photo from further away and thus the object is much smaller in the frame.  A macro lens lets you get closer to the object and make it larger in the frame.
Comment: Beat me by 2 seconds!
Comment: @Dakine83 I think you actually beat me.  I'm not sure though.  I had the new answer notification as my page refreshed.


Chinese/English/Pinyin Books For Young Adult Readers

Question: I'm looking for some medium level Chinese books to read. Most of the books I can find in Chinese are aimed at more fluent speakers or for the very beginners but I'd like somewhere in between. Ideally the book would have Chinese and Pinyin, or English as well, but any recommendations are welcome! Thank you! :)
Comment: Quick point that it's Pinyin (拼音), not "pinying". I'm also not sure how much luck you'll have, given that pinyin really is only meant to be only a tool for learning it (and computer input), so it's generally used for children, and chinese learners. Of the two, children are much more common..
Answer: Kindle books in Chinese, and Clavis Sinica texts, already have pinyin and English available as electronic look-up.   Both formats have a good variety of things already available.
Furthermore, even a low-tech computer user like me can learn to make Kindle files, or Clavis Sinica files, from pretty much any Chinese text you find on-line.  So you can use this to read classic poets, or 20th century works now in the public domain like The True Story of Ah Q, or any number of things archived on various sites on line.
You can make such a book, or shorter article, out of pretty much any Chinese text on-line.  Note this kind of file conversion is legal when the text itself free to reproduce.  Pirated texts of works under copyright are another matter.
Answer: When I was at university there were books that had the English version alongside the Chinese version. This was either the complete Chinese text plus the complete English version or one page Chinese one page English. However, in my own experience these are not very common.
Another option is to get something which you are familiar with and then buy the Chinese version, for example Harry Potter.
This is how I progressed past this level; I got my hands on the Chinese primary school student books. Pinyin is available up to the 5th book 第五册. If you study hard and learn everything up to the 5th book you will also be ready to stop using pinyin.
You can get scans of the textbooks online.
Answer: You can try books from the chinese Wuxia genre which discusses adventures with martial arts and kung fu fighting and is generally aimed for young adult to the early adult years but can also be enjoyed by a general audience. These books usually have some more in-depth content in them but are usually suitable for medium-level readers and are pretty interesting too. I believe you can find pinyin versions for them too as they're very popular in China.
https://www.goodreads.com/shelf/show/wuxia
Comment: Maybe at least you need to provide an example. "Popular" doesn't mean we can find the pinyin versions. Colin's comment seems more viable.
Answer: 根据你的描述,你的中文水平应当停留在中国的小学五、六年级左右。对于绝大多数受过义务教育的中国人来说是并不需要拼音辅助阅读的,因此你所寻找的"medium level Chinese books"通常只能在是一些小学课本及其辅助用书。


How can I Mine Monero using a Processor in Memory PCIe Card?

Question: Where can I find out more (enough) about Processor in Memory (PIM) Mining (Monero and a few suitable other Cryptocurrencys) on a PCIe Card?
One example of such a Card is the Micron D480 Automata Processor: http://www.micronautomata.com/hardware
PIM (also Processing in Memory) is a Processor tightly coupled to memory, similar to a Processor with a huge Cache.
Quote from this Interview:http://www.techradar.com/news/computing-components/processors/comparing-micron-s-automata-processor-to-gpgpu-fpga-and-classic-co-processors-1238086
"... the Automata Processor is designed to address a class of problems for which neither CPUs or GPGPUs are well suited. For problems that are based on massive parallelism and require the random, comparison based operations often associated with applications in bioinformatics, pattern recognition, data analytics and image processing the Automata Processor is likely a superior solution.".
...
"Although GPGPUs are certainly more 'parallel' than CPUs, GPGPUs still fall far short of the fine grained parallelism that is found in the Automata Processor. In the AP, tens of thousands of small analysis engines (we call them STEs) are used to create individual thread execution units that are assigned to analyze a data stream.".
...
"Although the Automata Processor is considered Turing complete, it would likely not be a good choice to use for implementation of large scale Boolean logic circuits. The Automata Processor was designed from the ground up to enable highly parallel comparison and routing operations.".
The D480 does 1536K STEs (per Clk?) and it's FPGA does         270,000 LEs / 101,620 ALMs with 17Mb embedded memory and 4GB DDR3 SDRAM, per board.
Is there a reason PIM, possibly the example above, could not be used for Cryptomining? - I did Search and this Board is years old (with the concept of PIM being much older).
A second example (I discovered after hours more Searching) of using a "Dataflow Engine Technique" is the Maxeler MPC-C series Node: https://www.maxeler.com/products/mpc-cseries/ .
A 1U MPC-C series machine is a server-class HPC system with 12 Intel Xeon CPU cores, up to 192GB of RAM for the CPUs and multiple dataflow compute engines closely coupled to the CPUs. Each node typically provides the compute performance of 20-50 standard x86 servers, while consuming around 500W, dramatically lowering the cost of computing ...".
It has some Software available that is called the Maxeler/HybridMiner: https://libraries.io/github/maxeler/HybridMiner and the Maxeler Bitcoin-miner https://github.com/maxeler/Bitcoin-Miner both which run on the Node and accelerate part of the work (not sure it's much more than an accelerator but these Devices do hundreds of trillions of operations on millions of memory locations - so like a million Core GPU, but it's PIM).
If I had more Reputation I would add the new Tag: memory-mining .
Basically a Developer Board is available from Micron and they have DIMM compatible Modules (if your Computer knew how to use this kind of Memory Stick) that just plug in (see image). Maxeler's is a 1U Rack.
Thanks for your replies and answers.
Edit July 24 2017:
I found an Article on Wccftech with a Slide that shows AMD is investigating PIM: http://wccftech.com/xbox-one-may-be-getting-a-new-apu-based-on-amds-polaris-architecture/ .
Slide dated 2014 from an AMD Zen Raven Ridge Article by Khalid Moammer dated Jan 1 2016
It would be speculative to assume that this is going to be a Threadripper styled APU - but that seems what the Article is putting out there (the name Threadripper wasn't known back then).

Update: December 5, 2017
Hewlett-Packard Enterprise shows off The Machine Project in this video: https://youtu.be/T-C3OraHu1w .
In-memory compute, photonic fabric intercommunication, small form factor.

Video "Hardware and Software Architecture of The Machine": https://youtu.be/S--Kgseuy0Q .

Update: 26 Mar, 2018:
Teledyne e2v has announced the Qormino® QT1040-4GB, a Quad core QorIQ™ T1040 processor (PowerPC e5500) tightly coupled with 4GB of DDR3L SDRAM.
Expect this trend to continue as more powerful processors become tightly coupled with ever increasing amounts of faster memory.

YouTube video: The Qormino® QT1040-4GB
Answer: You'd have to create a mining program specifically targeting the PiM PCIe card (using the manufacturers SDK).


How can a primary's winner be declared with 0% reporting?

Question: The Maryland primary was today. I just did a Google and I'm seeing that Clinton and Trump have been declared winners with 0% reporting.

 How is that possible? I understand projections but at this point are they going solely off projections or is there real data backing those "winner" declarations?
Answer: It's based on pre-election polling, demographics, exit polls, absentee ballots, unofficial voting tabulation, and any other influential political issues. They then use a combination of political science and statistical analysis to make the call.
See: AP and
CNN.
Comment: I gave you the tick, but would you mind expanding your answer a little more, by adding a sentence to explain each item (i.e. exit polls - these are surveys that are done as people are exiting the polls, asking them who they voted for) etc.?
Comment: Right I'm just asking you explain the different options you listed
Comment: It's kind of hard to expand my answer because the given way an outlet chooses to call the race is ultimately what they think is best.
Answer: If there's zero votes reported, computers may just choose the "default" candidate (frontrunners Trump and Clinton) as the winner and have them win all the delegates.
Comment: [Tonight we divide by zero](https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjepson/3151222824)


Books with images after removing the images

Question: I know that drawn pictures are not permissible in islam but i read a book which has pictures so i erase those pictures and then read the book. Is it wrong for me to do so? It should be noted that i read history books and i read them mainly because i find them very interesting, informative as well as fun to read. Additionally i also intend to study history in university. Secondly, is it permissible to read books which have a picture only on their cover so i just remove that picture and then i read the book. Lastly, i read both of these types of books by downloading them free from the internet but that is obviously wrong but this is a different case because if i actually purchase these books wouldn't i be encouraging the use of pictures. On the other hand if i download them for free i am not promoting the use of images.
Answer: You need a clarification...
Drawing pictures is prohibited not looking at drawn pictures. These are two different cases.
That's absolutely if these drawn pictures are not containing something already prohibited like women ; or else looking at it would be prohibited.
Comment: Ok thanks thats what i wanted to know, but now the question arises that is it permissible to give money and buy these books because then i would be promoting the use of images right so should i just download them free from the internet?
Comment: But wait, if drawing pictures is haram than so is looking at these drawn pictures right?


Did Paul think in Hebrew?

Question: I recently posted a question here regarding a passage in Romans citing a verse in Habakkuk. My understanding is that in this and (all?) other references to Hebrew scripture Paul cites the LXX (although he changes it, here and elsewhere) rather than translating the Hebrew himself. He was clearly fluent in Aramaic (Acts 22) and I presume read Hebrew.  Can we assume that he had in mind the Hebrew scripture, (and that this was similar enough to the Masoretic text we have) so that the Hebrew text is a useful source for us to understand Paul's intended meaning?
Comment: Galatians 3:16 would suggest that he did not think in Hebrew.
Comment: Thanks for bringing that text in; I wasn't familiar with this issue. But as pointed out in [one of the comments on your question](http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/8835/how-to-save-paul-from-the-galatians-3-seed-vs-seeds-argument-blunder), the "singular in form but plural (or singular-collective) in meaning" in the Hebrew of Gen 13:15 seems to me similar in the LXX due to the context (although based on his comment maybe Daи disagrees?), so I'm not sure that indicates he was thinking of or neglecting either one particularly
Answer: We can be sure that Paul also spoke Hebrew fluently. First up, Mishnaic Hebrew was a living language in first century Judea and well-known even among the common people. Along with that, even though modern translations use "Aramaic" when referring to the language spoken in Judea (such as there in Acts 22:2 and 21:40), the Greek reads, "...in the Hebrew language" (tae Hebraidi dialectow). There was a Greek word for Aramaic (Suristi), it was known and used by Jews (Josephus Antiquities 10:8 and many other places, Letter of Aristeas 11, and the Epilogue to Job in the Septuagint), but is never used in the New Testament. Since the ancients were capable of distinguishing the two languages (and often did), that they use the word Hebrew in Acts strongly suggests they really mean Hebrew and not Aramaic.
The event you reference in Acts shows us also that the language is Hebrew by the crowd's reaction. They became very quiet. Israelites were raised with a reverence for the Hebrew language. It was called "the tongue of Torah," "the tongue of angels," "the tongue of Heaven," and, most importantly, "the holy tongue" (Sifre to Deuteronomy 333; BT Shabbat 115a; Bava Batra 82a; Hagigah 16a, etc.; Bereshit Rabba 18:4; Kohelet Rabba 7:8, etc.).
That Paul, a Pharisee trained by Gamaliel (Acts 22:3), would not know Hebrew is unthinkable. Gamaliel was the Nasi of the Pharisees and Av bet Din of the Sanhedrin (BT Shabbat 15a). That means he was head of the Pharisees and co-chair of the Sanhedrin (with the High Priest being the other co-chair). Gamaliel was the first of only seven rabbis to be given the honorific Rabban (our teacher, meaning that he was recognized as the greatest teacher of his generation).
It is this association with Gamaliel that leads to Paul's love of the Septuagint. Like his grandfather Hillel (Soferim 16:9), Gamaliel loved the Septuagint. Gamaliel even said that Greek was the only language into which the Torah could be perfectly translated (Sotah 49b; cf. Berachot Rabbah 36:8; Devarim Rabbah 1:1; Megillah 1:8). Paul is like Gamaliel not only in his use of Greek but in how he uses it. Paul employs the same techniques of interpretation that can be seen in Hillel and Gamaliel1.
Since Gamaliel had taught Paul that the Septuagint was a good translation, and Paul's letters were written to people who spoke Greek as their primary tongue, using the Septuagint instead of translating the Hebrew himself makes perfect sense. He expects at least some of them will check it out. Therefore, he needs to use a version that they will have access to.
Even though he wrote in Greek, Paul uses Hebrew idioms. For example in Philippians 3:21, Paul uses the Hebrew Genitive, that is using an abstract noun in place of an adjective of quality. There, Paul compares "our lowly body" (literally "the body of our lowliness") to "his glorious body" (literally "the body of his glory"). Paul also uses the Hebrew idiom "son" followed by a genitive in such places as 1 Thessalonians 5:5 "people who belong to the light" (literally "sons of light"), and Colossians 1:13 "his dear son" (literally "the son of his love").
So, yes, we can conclude that Paul had in mind the Hebrew Scriptures. Assuming that it is close enough to the Masoretic for our purposes is a safe assumption (for the most part. Naturally, there are differences but textual criticism is another topic.).

1 Jeremias, J., "Paulus als Hillelit," in Neotestamentica et Semitica (E.E. Ellis and M. Wilcox, eds).  Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1969, pp. 88-94). See also Waverly Nunnally's article "Gamaliel" in Eerdman's Dictionary of the Bible, pp. 481-482.
Comment: A fascinating read on these and other Hebraisms of the NT authors: http://www.bible-researcher.com/hebraisms.html (There is one reference here to Acts 20 (within a "we" section) using asyndeton - I didn't know this was a Hebraism either, but if so I guess we have to allow that Luke was so steeped in the rhetoric of his Jewish friends that he adopted some of the style as his own. The attributive genitive is more of a syntax issue, though, and I'll trust your suggestion that it's specifically Hebrew enough to be absent from this part. I'll be looking, though!)
Comment: sorry for the nitpicky edit, I figured you wouldn't mind. Awesome answer!
Comment: @Daи, not a problem at all. I just had to be careful because I was adding a paragraph on Hebrew idioms when I got the message that it had been edited. I probably would have completely missed the edit you made.
Comment: whoops! Glad it worked out.
Comment: Thanks, this is very helpful! But even Luke (who, I assume, was not thinking in Hebrew, but feel free to correct me) uses the attributive ("Hebrew") genitive (16:9, 18:6, Acts 9:15 - this last one works in English! "vessel of choice"), so it seems like it was just part of their Greek. I had learned it as attributive and didn't even realize the Hebrew derivation until I read this. The "sons of..." construction may be more specifically a Hebrew idiom.
Comment: @Susan, you're right, Luke was a gentile and did not think in Hebrew, but his writing style is very interesting. Luke and the first part of Acts are written in a style like the Septuagint. The last part of Acts is different, much more like a native Greek would write. Luke's sources for the Gospel and Acts (before he was converted) were Jews and would have expressed their accounts to him in Hebrew style. But when Luke was present-an eyewitness-the text reads like a native. Good catch!
Answer: Paul was probably a diaspora Jew and, if we accept the Acts account (Acts 9:11), came from the city of Tarsus. While the diaspora Jews of Babylon retained Aramaic as their first language, the Jews of the Greek-speaking world abandoned Aramaic and spoke Greek as their first language. Mark Avrum Ehrlich says (Encyclopedia of the Jewish Diaspora, page 9) that in the west - the Greek-speaking Mediterranean world - the Jews wrote and spoke only Greek. The assumption is that even a bilingual Greek-speaking person would probably think in this, his first language.
As a well educated man, Paul may have spoken other languages such as Aramaic. In this respect, it is worth noting that Philo of Alexandria, a Jewish near-contemporary, never wrote in Aramaic and does not appear to have known either Aramaic or Hebrew. Paul invariably uses the Greek Septuagint, rather than the Hebrew scriptures which very few diaspora Jews could have read.
In Acts 22:3, Paul says that he learnt at the feet of Gamaliel.  Raymond E. Brown says in An Introduction to the New Testament, pages 425-6, that the claim that Paul was brought up in Jerusalem and educated by Gamaliel probably needs qualification. Paul's letters do not suggest that Paul had seen Jesus during the public ministry or at the crucifixion, and so implicitly cast doubt on Paul's continuous presence in Jerusalem in the years 26-30/33. Brown also says that because Paul shows no evidence of knowing the Hebrew scriptures, there must be considerable doubt whether he was really educated in Jerusalem, by Gamaliel or any other rabbi.
Although Acts 22:2 says that Paul spoke to the people in the Hebrew language, we have to assume that the author meant the Aramaic language, since the people would not have understood what he was saying if he spoke in Hebrew. Orville Boyd Jenkins ('Hebrew Usage in the First Century') says that the strong weight of evidence, and the prevailing opinion among both biblical and "secular" scholars seems to be that Hebrew had fallen out of general use much earlier, as a language of common, general use. He says it is likely some or all of the priestly class still spoke Hebrew in their own circles, and  perhaps some of the Pharisees in Jerusalem. However, Paul was speaking to a mob, not just a few elite members of the priesthood; in danger of his life, he would have spoken in Aramaic, the one language that all the Jews in Jerusalem would understand. Thus it can not be assumed that Paul could either read or speak Hebrew.  Paul's first language was Greek, so we should say that Paul must also have thought in Greek.
Fr. Brown has raised serious doubts about whether Paul was ever taught by Gamaliel and we also know that Paul only used the Septuagint for the allusions in his epistles, so the weight of evidence is that Paul had not learnt the Hebrew scriptures. If he had known the Hebrew scriptures, he must at times have used material from the LXX unconcerned that a Jew accustomed to the Hebrew scriptures would have considered those citations erroneous. His intended meaning can not be found in the Masoretic texts.

Did Paul think in Hebrew?


How do we see different colours?

Question:
Why do different wave lengths cause electrons to behave(?) differently, causing us to see different colors?
What is happening at the quantum level which causes the colour black to absorb all of the wavelengths of white light?
Why is it that a black can of soft drink will heat up more than a white one?
How does the energy, while passing through different colours, increase the temperature differently?
Answer: You have asked too many questions. Here are the answers
First you need to understand that light is nothing but electromagnetic wave, there is nothing like color associated with any light. Color is completely a phenomena of your eye. When you see objects you just receives light reflected or refracted from those objects which is perceived by your eye as color.  Eye contains three types cells (cones) red,blue, green, these are activated by different wavelengths of light in different way and generate different colors you see.
Your second question
I think every object in universe in thermal equilibrium both absorbs and emits radiation continuously. When you see a black object, that object is actually absorbing radiation in visible spectrum but must be emitting radiation of some other  wavelengths. It is not just absorbing all the radiation, if it were, its temperature will go on increasing and it will never attain thermal equilibrium. This process of absorbing and emitting radiation occurs because of charged matter present (mainly electrons). Electromagnetic field of electromagnetic radiation accelerates these charged particles and accelerated charged particles emit electromagnetic radiation. You might want to read more about black body radiation to understand more about it.
Comment: I suppose question was - what's different between those three types of cones?  What makes one "activated" by certain light while the other not.

How do we see different colours?


Would a Karaite be required to undergo conversion?

Question: If a Karaite who knows that his mother is Jewish (Karaite) wanted to join the Orthodox Jewish Community - would he be required to undergo a conversion?
Comment: I assume you mean someone with a Jewish mother?
Comment: Are Karaites different from other classes of ba'al teshuva?
Comment: Today there are approximately 30,000 Karaites with some 25,000 Karaites in Israel, 2,500 in the US, and smaller communities in France, Switzerland, Turkey, England, and elsewhere. The main Karaite centers in Israel are located in Ramla, Ashdod, Ofakim, Beersheba, Moshav Ranen, Moshav Masliah, with smaller communities in Jerusalem, Bat Yam, and Arad. The main Karaite center in the US is in San Francisco, which has the only active Karaite synagogue in North America.at this point they have intermarried some with the Palestinian who live with them in Israel and other host countries
Comment: No, I think he assumes Karite parents.
Comment: I want to correct a comment made above which claimed that "the only active Karaite synagogue in North America" is in San Fransisco. That is incorrect. The OTHER active Kariate community and synagogue is in Albany, New York. See this link: http://www.orahsaddiqim.org/ This link also contains tons of information about Karaite beliefs and prayer customs. Of note, they ask if rabbinites require conversion to Judaism in order to marry Karaites. The answer is the same
Answer: Rema (Even Haezer 4:37, citing Beis Yosef) says of the Karaites "they are all possible mamzerim, and they should not be accepted if they want to return [to Rabbanite Judaism]." (Interestingly, Rambam, Hil. Mamrim 3:3, seems to disagree: he advocates trying to help them do teshuvah.)
It seems that there is some dispute about this nowadays, though. This Wikipedia article mentions the views of R. Eliyahu Bakshi-Doron, R. Ovadiah Yosef and others as encouraging marriages between Karaites and Rabbanite Jews, though it also mentions unnamed "Ashkenazi Haredi scholars" who consider them non-Jews and would require their conversion (though of course this would also dispose of the "possible mamzerus" issue).
Answer: A Jew does not convert when allegiances are switched within the various Jewish movements.  A Karaite Jew with a Karaite Jewish mother will have no problems becoming an Orthodox Jew if he seeks to observe as a Sephardic Orthodox Jew. This statement is made on the basis of a statement by the Orthodox Sephardic Chief Rabbi of Netanya, Rabbi David Chelouche, who in an article in the Jerusalem Post entitled "Laying Down the Oral Law" on May 22, 2007 said: "Rabbi David Chayim Chelouche, the chief rabbi of Netanya, agrees. "A Karaite is a Jew," says Chelouche, who has written a great deal about the Karaites. "We accept them as Jews and every one of them who wishes
to come back [to mainstream Judaism] we accept back. (There was once a question about whether Karaites needed to undergo a token circumcision in order to switch to rabbinic Judaism, but the rabbinate agrees today that it is not necessary.) He cautions, however, that the
acceptance of Karaites as Jews should not be confused with acceptance of their practice of excluding the Oral Law. "A person cannot make his own Torah," he says.
Comment: Welcome to the site and thanks for your perspective. If you register your username, you will gain access to more site features.
Answer: They are largely intermarried, so I think they would likely need to convert.
However, everything they do for lifecycle events is invalid in Halachah. Therefore, it is just as easy to speculate that the vast majority of those from an uninterrupted Jewish line (without conversion) are Mamzerim, as it is that the vast majority of those who come from anyone who converted under Karaite processes is not Halachically Jewish.
It would be nearly impossible to determine the lineage of anyone, and even a just-in-case conversion might therefore be iffy, though I'm no expert.
Comment: +1. But re "They are largely intermarried": the question was assuming that some Karaite knows he's Jewish (somehow). I'll grant, though, that the last point of your answer is relevant to this comment.
Comment: Yeah, it's pretty tricky. I'm not sure when a just-in-case conversion works or what it accomplishes vis-a-vis Mamzeruth, etc.
Comment: Ashkenazim view them as Mamzerim, Sephardim do not.
Answer: It seems according to the Radvaz 1:73 that a man who wants to marry a Jewish woman who was previously a karaite and now accepts all the derabbanans is allowed. He held that their(karaites) kiddushin is not a kiddushin at all and the problem of mamzerut does not apply.
He ends off saying that in Egypt they had a mass conversion of Karaites and they were known to have very good yichus and even more so the chashuv families married into their families.
Answer: I recently had a discussion with several Orthodox rabbis about what would be required for them to be comfortable performing a wedding between a Rabbanite and a Karaite. In addition to checking to make sure that the Karaite individual was Karaite Jewish for several generations, none of them seemed to require anything amounting to a conversion. At least one required that the karaite individual accept certain rabbinic Halakha.
The implication seems to be that at least some Orthodox Rabbanites view Karaites (with Karaite lineage) to be Jews, but that (in the rabbinic opinion) Karaites are on the wrong path. In the old days this was called heresy. Implicit in the term heretic, though, is that the individuals is a member of the community, but that the individual holds views that are not commonly accepted. The fact that Karaites were called heretics implies that they were viewed to be Jewish.
I used to serve on the board of directors for the Karaite Jewish University. At that time (several years ago), the Karaite position was that any Jew from any movement can become a karaite without conversion. Of course, Karaites and Rabbanites historically differed on what made someone Jewish (Matrilineal v. Patrilineal). But that is a topic for a different day.
Comment: @shemmy, the community in Albany has ranged 7-12 members, but there is no syngagogue (which was the focus of the statement about there being one synagogue in the United States). The community prays in the home of one of the founders of the community (perhaps the founder).

I hope one day to be able to say that there are significant numbers of karaite synagogues throughout the United States. Sadly, though, there is just one.


What does 工夫(する) mean?

Question: I am aware of the generic English translation: In this case, "device" or "to devise" in English, but this does not really help me out. In what context would you use this word? 例文 would really be appreciated. Thank you!
Comment: +1 I remember when I was studying in Japan, our teacher taught us this word. We asked what 工夫する meant, and she just kept saying "工夫の意味は「device」なので、「する」を付けると動詞になります". None of us knew how to explain that there is no clear verb form of "device" lol
Answer: Usually used when ingenuity is involved. Example sentences (with translations) are available on Space ALC, for example

その映画には、新しい工夫が無数にこらされている。
There is an enormous amount of invention in the film.
ちょっとした工夫を必要とする
require a little ingenuity
Comment: @Ben In my experience, *invented the telephone* would be 電話を発明した rather than 電話を工夫した.
Comment: So would you mostly use 工夫 for describing inventions, like Mr. Bell did with the telephone? 「ベルさんは電話を工夫した。」
Or is it more like "I came up with an idea to improve certain things?"
Answer: It is not an intuitively obvious word but if you look at the following examples you should be able to work out how to use it as verb to devise, contrive or invent:

「新しい方法を—する」|To come up with a new way
これは私が工夫したのです|This is my own invention. / I thought this up myself.
何とか工夫してみましょう|I'll see if I can't come up with something.

What does 工夫（する） mean?


Can Ubuntu be installed on Windows 7 drive that is encrypted with Truecrypt?

Question: I've been looking everywhere.  Truecrypt forums and over the Ubuntu forums.  I have yet to find an answer that comes close to my issue or question.  My computer came with Windows 7 preinstalled so I have no live disc.  The more I get to know Ubuntu the more I grow to love it.  I have tried to install Ubuntu along side Windows 7 on both C and D drives of the encrypted disk.  When I restart truecrypt asks for password like normal then on first go will load ubuntu, but Ubuntu will start then go to a screen with error messages.  Off the top of my head it was on the lines of "network time out" or 'time expired error."  I really am getting sick of Windows.  To much garbage in its being.  Is there anyway to get the installation to run after the whole system is encrypted?  Or will I have to unencrypt, install, then re-encrypt (huge pain in the butt if so for wait time as it writes over)?  Any help on this would be wonderful.  thanks.
Answer: have you seen this howto in the Ubuntu forum?
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=761530
It describes how to setup an dual boot environment with full encryption.


Is using a broken SHA-1 for password hashing secure?

Question: Recently the hashing collision issue of SHA-1 was discovered. Identical hash values for 2 separate PDF files were generated. Does that make SHA-1 any unsafe for using it only for password hashing?. The probability of two different password to match is still negligible, right?
Answer: SHA-1 in itself was never safe for password hashing. The hash algorithm itself doesn't have a work factor parameter nor does it have a salt as input. These are requirements for run-of-the-mill passwords that do not have as much security as a good symmetric key.
For this reason password hash algorithms have been invented, also known as password based key derivation functions (PBKDF). The difference between a password hash and a PBKDF is mainly how the result is used: directly as a password hash to compare with a stored password hash or as symmetric key for input in a symmetric cipher or MAC algorithm.
Well known password hash algorithms are PBKDF2, bcrypt, scrypt and of course the already mentioned Argon2. The latter two also contain options for configuring memory hardness, to overcome hardware based attacks.

The above functions can often be configured using a hash function. For instance PBKDF2 requires a secure hash as configuration parameter, and it (kinda) defaults to SHA-1.
As long as SHA-1 doesn't have direct collisions it could still be secure for this purpose. Even if there were collisions, it is unlikely that this would compromise the security of a password database.
Due to the high number of iterations it is even less likely that a password hash is reversed, i.e. that the one-way property of the total hash doesn't hold. This property is of course the most important one for the password hash.
For this reason it's probably OK to keep SHA-1 as configuration parameter for some specific password hash algorithms that require it.

However attacks just get better, never worse. So if possible, even in the above scenario, you should move away from SHA-1 to SHA-2/SHA-3. Or choose a password hash function that doesn't rely on a secure hash at all.
Answer: While you are technically correct and finding pre-images for SHA-1 is still nowhere in sight it would still be prudent and clearer to just not use it.
Possible attacks aside it was never a great choice for hashing passwords anyway. There are more specialized hashes for that with specific properties like being slow to compute and thus slowing down dictionary attacks.
Look at things like Argon2 and the password hashing competition.
Answer: The published attack was a collision attack which does not directly affect the security of password hashing in any reasonable security scenario.  With password hashing we are primarily interested in preimage attacks and we may know a lot about the plain text.
The recent collision didn't actually add much in the way of cryptanalysis we new SHA-1 had weaknesses for several years.
Regardless of any cryptanalytic weakness SHA-1 is less useful for password hashing on account of it being very fast. This makes brute forcing the password which comes from a space far smaller then all possible SHA-1 inputs far easier.
That said, if you use a large salt and apply SHA-1 many times over and over again to slow it down it is fairly secure for password hashing IMHO.
On the flip side there is no advantage to doing this over using bcrypt which was and is the recommded way to hash passwords.
Answer: While there is nothing wrong to use SHA-1 for password hashing (thus short inputs) at the moment (2017) and for the next very few years (by that I mean that you passwords are probably still secure), it is not advised.
The reason for that is the advances in Crypto will make it weaker and weaker. The following graph illustrate the advances in search of Collision.

[source]
We can currently compute collisions on MD5 in a matter of seconds. You can expect this to be the case in the future for SHA-1.
So instead of using a weakened algorithm, you can directly opt for the safe and standard ones (such as SHA-3).
Comment: SHA-1 was never on its own a good function for password hashing.  See Maarten's answer.
Comment: Also, collisions are not a problem for typical password hashing scenarios. So the above graph has little relevance for this problem. I'd expect there to be little practical difference between iterated MD5, SHA1 and SHA256 when you adjust the iteration count to result in the same cost of the defender's system.
Comment: Plus points for the hash image and it's source, minus points for stating "there is nothing wrong to use SHA-1 for password hashing". It's plain wrong. Please read [this](https://security.stackexchange.com/a/31846/55196).


NO PATENT ISSUED AFTER FILING NINE YEARS AGO, WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?

Question: There is no issue date on this patent.  The application was filed in April of 2005, so how long can a person hold an idea that has yet to be patent? Can a person manufacture and sell an item that isn't exact to these specifications if an individual has filed a patent application?
Answer: In most cases, it means no patent will ever issue and the application has gone abandoned.
Addressing some misconceptions - Filing a patent application does not "hold" an idea in any official way. What someone sells need not correspond to their patent application or granted patent at all. Patents are not the right to sell, they are the right to try to stop others.
A reasonable conclusion looking at a published application that old that doesn't have a corresponding patent, is that the application was rejected, at some point the applicant decided not to fight it and it has gone abandoned. Better than a reasonable guess is looking the application up at a corner of the USPTO site called Public PAIR. I looked this application up there and it went abandoned in 2007.
Answer: Till the time patent application (or one of its family members claiming priority eg. continuation patent application) is alive, it is not recommended to manufacture or sell the product that covers features overlapping with the disclosed subject matter and claims.
In this case, parent patent application is abandoned and no other child patent application is claiming priority from this, it will be safe to manufacture or sell the product. But following points need to be checked carefully before proceeding further:

Sometimes there are co-pending and multiple related patent applications (sometimes filed on same date) covering similar subject matter and different claims, it is always better to conduct search of the same inventor or applicant so as to locate any other alive patent application which might not be in the family data but claiming similar features.
In case one of the family members is alive, please be aware that subject matter or claims per se in family members or continuation applications may differ. Also, granted patent may have different claims as compared to original filed patent application.


Can't answer Captcha questions without updated browser

Question: I have a Nokia Lumia 920 with IE 8.1. I can't answer Captcha questions without an updated browser. I have considered updating to IE 10. What should I do? The site suggests Safari, Chrome, Mozilla. Can I even use any of those on my phone (esp. Chrome)?
Comment: As an aside, [Windows Phone 8.1 comes with IE11 on the phone; Windows Phone 8.0 comes with IE10](http://windowsphone.stackexchange.com/a/12808/106). There was no IE8.1
Answer: The best way to solve our problem is: Update your browser, or Change with another ones. I use Lumia 532, and my browser is UC Browser. Until I answer your question, I have no problem with common website/browser problem. Like Error in Captcha, Playing video, etc. Sometimes, captcha error caused by unstable internet connectivity.
Answer: Try browsers like Surfy, Maxthon, etc..

Site suggests Safari, Chrome, Mozilla. Can I even use any if those on
  my phone (esp. Chrome)?

No, you cannot. They are default error pages for IE. And they aren't meant for Windows mobile. Most websites don't make seperate error pages for Windows phone users(unless they have an app on the store).
Answer: WP8.1 comes with IE11, which should support approximately all CAPTCHA systems. However, IE11 support is being phased out of the modern web, so it's possible you've run into something that just doesn't bother supporting it anymore. While IE11 had moderately good standards support at its release, it hasn't received much in the way of functional updates since then (the only notable one that comes to mind is support for HSTS).
Windows 10 Mobile (W10M) comes with Edge, Microsoft's new browser to replace IE. Current versions of Edge support approximately the same web standards as current versions of Chrome or Firefox. While installing current versions of W10M on a Lumia 920 is not supported, it is possible (if you don't mind downloading some "hacking" tools for your phone that will edit its registry).
Note that third-party browser apps for phones are very rarely going to support web pages that the phone's built-in browser doesn't. When you install Chrome or Firefox on a desktop, you are getting a new "layout/rendering engine" (Blink for Chrome, Gecko for Firefox) that has different capabilities than the ones that Windows comes with (Trident for IE, EdgeHTML for Edge). However, on a phone, third-party browser apps are basically just wrappers around the same engine that the phone's built-in browser uses (Trident or EdgeHTML, again). Still, you could give it a try.


Etymology of the term "low key"

Question: I am interested in the etymology of the term "low key" (in the sense of "being restrained"). I found two theories online - one is that it comes from a photography technique often used in noir movies where the "key light" is placed in a low position which causes hushed tones and shadows. This seems to be the more substantiated version (see here and here for example). The other theory is that it arises from the world of music where lower keys sound more restrained (see here). Which of these is the correct etymology? Any references would be much appreciated.
Comment: The Oxford English Dictionary has references for "low key"  going back as far as 1803. This rather rules out the cinematic theory.
Comment: I tried Google Ngram viewer and see a lot of instances of the phrase "low key" even before the era of photography. However, these instances seem to be using the term literally (ex. "but all the conversation is carried on in a low key by the ladies" from A tour in quest of genealogy - a book published in 1811) and not in the idiomatic sense. Since the idiomatic sense has the same shade (hah) of meaning as the literal sense, it is quite possible that the term predates photography. Can anyone throw further light on this question?
Comment: http://etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=low+key mentions the musical theory from 1895
Comment: _Low key_ can be used in reference to painting, in a similar way to how it is used in relation to photography, but I can't find any historical reference to it, suggesting it may have been adopted from photographic terminology and retroactively applied. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_key
Comment: I don't think it's from music.  The idea that one musical key is lower than another makes sense only superficially, but not if you consider it.  Since the sequence of keys repeats as you go up or down the scale no key is lower than any other.  Notes are higher or lower than each other, but not keys.  Further, I have never heard of a consensus among musicians or composers of "restraint" in a sequence of musical keys.
Comment: The term 'low key' in photography (and I believe this was imported from painting) does not relate to the position of a light but to the overall darkness of the image. A "low key" photograph is one where the image is moodily dark whilst a "high key" photograph is one which is light overall.
Answer: The 1857 book Introductory Lessons in Reading and Elocution, found on Google books, has a different use from which the figurative use could very easily follow. Here is the relevant excerpt:

Every person has three keys, or pitches, of the voice, called THE HIGH, THE MIDDLE, and THE LOW KEY.
The HIGH KEY is that which is used in calling to a person at a distance.
The MIDDLE KEY is that which is used in common conversation.
The LOW KEY is that which is used when we wish no one to hear, except the person to whom we speak.

This doesn't appear to refer to just musical pitch, but more to loudness.
(Although pitch is related to loudness.) Metaphorically, doing something low key would thus be doing something so as not to attract any attention to it. This could easily metamorphose into the present meaning.
Comment: Good analysis. But this is origin of a phrase not etymology of a word, which the OP confused.
Comment: Thanks so much for the response Peter. I studied quantum information theory at the University of Michigan and when at first I saw your name and thought to myself it must be a coincidence but sure enough, you are the same Peter Shor that I learned about in class!!! It is an absolute honour and a privilege to interact with you.
Answer: I think that Peter Shor's analysis is very likely the correct one. In support of it, I offer two early instances of "low key" in the sense of low vocal pitch and two early instances of figurative use of "low key." All are drawn from the Elephind newspaper database.
The earliest literal use of "low key" that the Elephind search turns up is from "Interesting Story Extracted from the 'Pioneers'," in the [Vincennes, Indiana] Western Sun (April 12, 1823):

But when aroused by this cry from Louisa, Miss Temple turned, she saw the dog with his eyes keenly set on some distant object, with his head bent near the ground, and his hair actually rising on his body, either through fright or anger. It was most probably the latter for he was growling in a low key and occasionally showing his teeth in a manner that would have terrified his mistress, had she not so well known his good qualities.

Although "low key" might refer to a deep (or bass) pitch—treating the growl as a note of music—I think that it more probably signifies low in loudness—a soft but ominous growl.
And from "Parliamentary Portraits," in the Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser (November 9, 1837):

He [Mr. Aglionby] speaks with singular rapidity : I am not sure whether he does not speak a greater quantity in a given time than any member in the house. No reporter could, if he wished, follow the hon. member through his speeches; that, however, for the reasons I have already given, is never attempted. His voice is not strong, but it is clear. It is easier to hear than to follow him. He never raises his voice: he continues in the same low key throughout.

Here, "low key" may refer both to loudness and to pitch, as the latter tends to go up when the former increases.
The earliest figurative use of "low key" is from "A Musical Definition," in the [Leesburg, Virginia] Genius of Liberty (October 23, 1830):

A gentleman, whose real name was George Sharp, but who generally went by the appellation, amongst his musical friends, of G sharp, on entering the company, and looking rather dull, a common friend observed that Mr. G. Sharp, was rather on a low key, that evening.—"O," replied a lady, with a good deal of naivette, "every body knows that G sharp is A flat."

The joke turns on the naive lady's literal interpretation of "low key"—but that interpretation wouldn't be a source of mirth if the common friend hadn't meant "low key" in the sense of "looking rather dull."
From "Jenny Lind in the Concert-Room," in the [Hobart, Tasmania] Courier (December 18, 1847):

The pieces set down for the prima donna were " Quando lascini la Normandia," from "Roberto il Diavolo," " Su l'aria," from "Il Nozze di Figaro;" lastly, the simplest, but most alluring entry in the whole list, was "Swedish melodies—by desire." By the desire of whom we know not; but are quite sure that, whoever they may be, there is not one of the audience who is not ready to return them his very hearty thanks for having suggested the enjoyment these melodies afforded. Those who have witnessed Jenny Lind's dramatic powers pitched, in all probability, their expectations in a low key, when they went to hear her with the stage excitements and opportunities of dramatic expression withdrawn, as they are at a day-light concert. If they did they were they were wise, for during the first performance of the first piece the singer was labouring under a degree of nervousness which extended its effects to her voice. The encore, however, reassured her, and she produced more effect than could have been anticipated.

The sense of "low key" here clearly involves restraint rather than literal quietness, but the writer explicitly frames it as a form of metaphorical voice: "pitched ... their expectations in a low key."
Also of possible interest is this instance from Charles Dickens, The Life and Adventures of Martin Chuzzlewit (1844):

She [Mrs. Gamp] continued to sidle at Mr. Chuffey with looks of sharp hostility, and to defy him with many other ironical remarks, uttered in that low key which commonly denotes suppressed indignation; until the entrance of the tea-board, and a request from Mrs. Jonas that she would make tea at a side-table for the party that had unexpectedly assembled, restored her to herself.

This example is significant because it associates "low key" not simply with low vocal pitch but with the suppression or restraint of the character's natural inclination to express her indignation loudly. As Peter Shor observes, it would be no great leap for this notion of "low key" in the sense of restrained or subdued to emerge from an earlier, more literal use of "low key" in the sense of quiet or low pitched.
Comment: Thanks Sven for the detailed analysis. I agree that it is an easy enough leap from "low pitched" to "subdued" and this is the most likely origin of the phrase.
Answer: The most attractive possible source of the use of 'low key' in the figurative sense of "muted, restrained" is the very early literal use with reference to the low keys of the organ, as pictured here:

These 'low keys' are typically used to produce the underlying bass tones of the melody being played.
The 'key' of this 'low key' is a transferred sense from the earliest literal uses of 'key' in the sense of "an instrument designed to be inserted into a lock and turned" (OED, Old English from around 1000, earliest attestation from Ælfric, Lives of Saints).
Very early uses of 'low key' in this literal sense were in two French dictionaries, published in 1688 and 1719:

Pedale, ...a pedal, or low key of some Organs to be touched with the feet.
The Great French Dictionary. In Two Parts. Miege, Guy, 1688.
PEDAL, Subst. (a low Key of some Organs) ....
Dictionaire Royal, François-Anglois, et Anglois-François, by Abel Boyer et al., 1719.

By at least 1722, 'low key' was in quasi-figurative use referring to "muted, restrained" in the sense of 'low volume, tone or pitch':

A poor Beggar loaded with Wine, and not being able to carry it any further, laid himself down in a Ditch hard by, and fell into a deep Sleep. When this nocturnal Crew came together, the noise they made awak'd him; and he saw by the light of the Moon, that they were all Soldiers, and shew'd an extraordinary Respect to one amongst 'em. He tried to hear what was said, but they speaking in a low key, and there being a great many in the way, and in an open Place, he listned to no purpose.
The Life and Actions of Lewis Dominique Cartouche, Daniel Defoe, 1722. Emphasis mine.

OED supplies an earlier, 1709, attestation of the use of 'low key' referring plainly, if figuratively, to the "pitch or tone" of a voice:

G. Berkeley Ess. New Theory of Vision §46   Men speak in a high or a low key.

Note that evidence from OED suggests that the musical sense of 'low key' appears as early as a1450, although the 'low key' collocation is not attested:

key, n.1 and adj.
  ....
IV. Senses relating to pitch or tone.
17. Music.
†a. A note, a tone; esp. the first or lowest note or tone of a scale or sequence of notes, the keynote. Obs.
  a1450   Musical Treat. in Speculum (1935) 10 262 (MED)   This same rwle may ye kepe betwene Dsolre, Dlasolre, & al oþer base keyys, whan þe countersight goþ low.

Figurative uses in the sense of the "tone or tenor of a piece of writing, situation, etc.; the intensity or force of a feeling or action" (OED key, sense 18a, cross-referenced to low key in the figurative sense of "muted, restrained"), the "pitch or tone of a person's voice" (18b), and the "prevailing range of tones in a painting; the relative intensity of a particular colour scheme" (18c) are not attested until a1530, 1600, and 1713 respectively (OED).

Attractive as the origin story implicating the lower keys of the organ (and likewise the lower, or white, keys of the piano) in the development of use of 'low key' in the later figurative sense of "not elaborate, showy, or intense; muted, restrained; modest" (OED, low key, fig., sense 2, emphasis mine) may be, the more convincing story overall is also more straightforward and plain.
Simply, 'low key' in the specific figurative sense at hand is intrinsically comparative, and developed from the correlated comparative phrase 'lower key'. For its part, 'lower key', as used in the later figurative sense, first (to the best of my knowledge) appeared in two primary contexts in the mid-1600s: the context of religion, and the context of rhetoric. The latter, rhetoric, is in this case an element of religious persuasion by means of the ornamentation of speech or writing, and so partakes so much of the former, the religious context, that the two, although I have here artificially separated them, are perhaps but one context.
The evidence supporting my conclusion is, like the phrase derivation itself, simple and straightforward. Very early uses of 'lower key', and subsequent uses in the intervening years between those early uses and later uses such as those cited by OED from 1941 and after, are in the specific figurative sense (OED sense 2 of 'low-key').  For example, this from the 1657 publication, The Protestants Evidence, by Simon Birckbek:

By this strain of rhetorick Chrysostome (as his manner is) perswadeth the people to come to the Lords Table with no lesse reverence, than if they were to receive a fiery coal (as Esay did in his vision) from one of the glorious Seaphims. Chrysostome had no intent that the bread was transubstantiated, no more than that the Priest was changed into an Angel, or his hand into a pair of tongs, or the body of Christ into a coal of fire; and he useth the same amplification in both the speeches, the same phrase [think you] and at the same time, and to the same people: so that if one be (as certainly it is) a strain of Rhetorick, why not the other also? Sixtus Senensis gives a good rule for interpretation of the Fathers speeches, specially in this argument; (z) The sayings of Preachers are not to be urged in that rigour of their words; for after the manner of Orators, they use to speak many times hyperbolically, and in exesse. ... Now these and the like sayings must be favourably construed, as being improper speeches, rhetoricall strains, purposely uttered to move affections, stirre up devotion, and bring the Sacrament out of contempt, that so the Communicants eyes may not be finally fixed on the outward elements of bread and wine...but to have their hearts elevated and lift up by faith to behold the very body of Christ, which is represented in these mysteries. Otherwise, the Fathers come down to a lower key, when they come to speak to the point, yes or no....
[Bold emphasis mine.]

While in the foregoing passage the sense is, as must be expected from the comparative form of 'lower', "not [as] elaborate, showy, or intense; muted, restrained, modest", the essential sense, stripped of its comparative force, is the same as the later figurative sense.
Additionally, observe that an early figurative sense of 'key' plays into the meaning conveyed to contemporaneous readers and auditors by the foregoing passage from The Protestants Evidence. That figurative sense is specifically religious:

II. Figurative and allusive uses.
3.
a.  [With allusion to Matthew 16:19 (see quot. c1384).] R.C. Church. The spiritual authority believed to have been transmitted from Christ to St Peter, and so to the Pope considered as his successor, as symbolized by the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Also in a wider sense: the power or authority of the Christian Church or its priests.
OED, key, n.1 and adj.

Thus, while the 'key' of 'low key' or 'lower key' remains a transferred sense from the earliest uses (see above), and while the first literal uses certainly influenced the development of the figurative sense of "not elaborate, etc." deployed in the passage from The Protestants Evidence (and elsewhere), as did the later semi-literal uses referring to the physically lower keys of the organ and piano, the immediate progenitor of the figurative sense of "not elaborate, etc." was the very similar earlier figurative use:

18. fig.
a. The tone or tenor of a piece of writing, situation, etc.; the intensity or force of a feeling or action.
a1530   T. Lupset Compend. Treat. Dyenge Well (1534) sig. E.iiii   In this tenor and key sowneth al our holy scripture.
OED, key, n.1 and adj.

As shown by the earliest attestation, from around 1530, this figurative sense of 'key', like the later figurative sense of 'key' in 'lower key' from The Protestants Evidence, appeared in the context of religious persuasion (rhetoric). The influence of music on the development of the figurative "not elaborate, etc." sense, while present in force (much more so than any later uses with reference to the 'key' of light in painting), takes a back seat to the earlier and more general influence of sound, and specifically the relative pitch of sound.
Answer: I believe 'low key' began life as 'low quay'.

Quay, [...], has its origin in the Proto-Celtic language. Before it changed to its current form under influence of the modern French quai, its Middle English spelling was key, keye or caye. This in turn also came from the Old North French cai (Old French chai), both roughly meaning "sand bank". The Old French term came from Gaulish caium, ultimately tracing back to the Proto-Celtic *kagio- "to encompass, enclose". Modern cognates include Welsh cae "fence, hedge" and Cornish ke "hedge". [7]

This is a reference to a two-tier dock system created for the shipping industry to deal with low and high tides. The normal (high tide) level would be the main quay, and to access to ships during low-tide would be via steps and/or a 'low quay'.
According to stevedores and dockers (stevedores work on the ships during loading/unloading of cargo, dockers on the dock), working the 'low quay' could be dangerous work, and certainly more difficult than working high tides.
Popular culture romantized 'low quay' into a ground for illicit activity - out of sight and the incoming tide could remove evidence from the scene, and gradually the meaning morphed into what is known as 'low key' today.
Answer: I can't fully answer this question, but I wanted to pass along two early examples.
First from the The Westminster Magazine, Or, The Pantheon of Taste, volume 4, (1776):

"It is very plain," continued he, "that you have never been married, and are totally unacquainted with the artifices of the sex, or you would with half an eye have seen through all this."
"Why," replied I, in the same low key, "I do see that she is almost worn to a skeleton..."

In volume 5 (1777) of the same magazine there is:

The approach of the Chaplain and his Lady to pay their compliments, put a stop to the above conversation, carrie on in a low key, with a number of significant nods, shrugs, and other supplemental graces.

More literally, and much earlier (1597), the term "low key" is used in A plaine and easie introduction to practicall musicke set downe in forme of a dialogue.  One of the four uses of the term in this book is:

Now must you diligentlie marke that in which of all these compasses you make your musicke, you must not suffer any part to goe without the compasse of his rules, except one note at the most aboue or below, without it be vpon an extremity for the ditties sake or in notes taken for Diapasons in the base. It is true that the high and lowe keyes come both to one pitch, or rather compasse, but you must vnderstand that those songs which are made for the high key be made for more life, the other in the low key  with more grauetie and staidnesse, so that if you sing them in contrarie keyes, they wil loose their grace and wil be wrested as it were out of their nature: for take an instrument, as a Lute Orphadrion, Pandorae or such like, being in the naturall pitch, and set it a note or two lower it wil go much heauier and duller, and far from that spirit which it had before, much more being foure notes lower then the naturall pitch.

Note also that in some of the 1597 examples "low" is spelled "lowe".
Answer: The are several literary  usages of the expression "low key" from the early 19th century,  prior to the figurative 1895 usage suggested by Etymonline. They all refer to tones, sounds, music.
Keynote, in the musical sense, is from the late 18th century:

also key-note, "lowest note of a musical scale, basis of a tonal key, the tonic," 1776.

The photography sense appears to be a later usage as suggested by The Dictionary of American Slang:

[in adjective sense, a technical term in photography, "with tones lying in the gray scale," found by 1907]

This leads me to think that the origin is mush more   likeky from the music sense rather that from the photography one.
Answer: So far as I can tell, the term low-key dates from near the turn of the 20th century. The n-gram of its usage shows that it likely first began to be used in the 1700's. A search of uses during this time period shows that usage during this time period seems to be split between two meanings of key we still use today: a key on (for example) a piano, and key referring to a musical term for the tonal base of a piece of music. In the context, this tends to be used figuratively and applied to the tone of the subject's voice while speaking.
Moving on to the next century, we find a great deal of books on oration. These tend to include more references to "speaking in a low key."
The first reference I could find which uses the term nearly in the way you describe was from 1899, in an introduction written by Arlin Turner to the book Strong Hearts by George Washington Cable. In this case my opinion is that he is still making reference to the style of speaking in a low key.
The next example I found was from 1912 and is used nearly exactly the same way as you describe in the question. Other works in the same time period still seem to be using the term in reference to pitch, not lighting, so it's my opinion that this term evolved from the description of one's tone of voice. I did not find any evidence in my brief research to lighting.
Answer: It is unlikely that the compound term "low key" emerged independently, but is derived from "key" and was later quantified with the modifier "low". As the earliest definitions (Google) indicates the term was used to convey "holding together of other parts" and retains the meaning (in part) as a ranking of importance or relevance, I think that the modifier "low" was evolved to differentiate degree.
My advice is that references to photography and music are more literal than the history you seek and that finding references to the root, key, proceeded by any modifier would better indicate the origin of the term's usage in the context you seek.

Etymology of the term "low key"


Is a home (primary residence) purchase a form of investment in macroeconomics?

Question: From Wikipedia, investment in macroeconomics is the purchase of goods that are not consumed within a short amount of time (say 3 years). In this sense, home purchase seems to be a form of investment. However, as per my understanding, investment should also involve purchasing new capital goods, which seems to me that primary residence does not qualify. I'm quite confused here: do we consider homes which are only used by their owners as investment, even if these homes are newly built?
Answer: Home construction is a form of investment, home purchase is not. There's an important macro difference between creating the capital asset (construction) and transferring it (purchase).
Regarding whether a newly built home occupied by its owner counts as investment— yes, because it is a capital asset that produces a stream of housing services. There's more detail on how this fits into GDP in this answer.
Comment: Thanks for your answer. Do you mean that creating capital assets is a form of investment but transferring is not? Thus, FedEx purchasing new trucks is not investment but truck assembling is a form of investment?
Comment: When A buys a house from B, this is investment by A, but it is also negative investment by B of the same amount (the sale price), and so for the economy as a whole nets to zero.  It might have a different net effect if A and B were in different countries, for example an existing house-boat being moved across the border


On JIRA, can I have a column in my agile board based on a filter and not (only) on a status?

Question: I want to create a board with different columns, but all of them have the same status, but belong to different "teams". So I'd like to have a column for each team. Is it possible to create a column based on a filter/query and not only on a status?
Answer: No, I don't believe that is possible. Furthermore, I don't see how it could be.
Consider the situation where you have two separate 'filter-columns', and a given story fits both filters. What would happen? Would it show up twice?
As an alternative, you could just add more statuses - 'In Progress Team A', 'In Progress Team B', etc. Simplest thing to do from there is just to include two statuses in each column, and each Team will drag theirs to the correct one when they move it. There might also be a way to automate it based on workflow and currently logged-in user.
Comment: To add to this, another thing you can do is use JQL queries for your swimlanes. For example, I recently built a board to track a cross team project and each swimlane is set to show "project = 'projectname'" so I can see each teams progress all on the same board. Just configure your board, go to swimlanes, and set the type to "Queries" and add your filter.
Answer: For exactly this situation, JIRA offers quick filters for Agile Board. What I do is add these filters according to the team and then you see the status for each of the team.
This can be accessed by

Which will take you to board configuration where you can add Quick Filters.

Now the filter is visible on the top of the board.
For more detail, please refer Atlassian Documentation


Web part not displayed for newly created forms

Question: I have a big/empty sharePoint list with 152 columns. New forms were designed for new/edit/display through SharePoint designer. But none of them was displaying, while the old default forms are displaying without any issue.
Please see below for the error message display on the webpage

The new forms are also displaying when a part of the columns/fields are deleted from the newly created forms (not from the list, only the codes for displaying them are deleted), then all the rest can be displayed. This led me to think that there might be some size limitation on the form which does not allow web part to be displayed properly. Any suggestions/solutions?
Answer: Fist of all, you may try the proposed solutions here:

SharePoint Web Part Error: "Unable to display this web part..."
Unable to display this Web Part. To troubleshoot the problem, open this Web page in a Microsoft SharePoint

If non them worked, maybe it means that you are overcoming the column limits, here you have the column limits:

SharePoint 2010: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc262787(v=office.14).aspx#Column
SharePoint 2013: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc262787(v=office.15).aspx#Column
Comment: Thank you for the answers. Now, I am pretty sure it is related to the XSLT transforming time, but we don't have SharePoint server on our site, so, I still have the question about how to tweak the settings.


Can one Shecht with a Wire

Question: Can one ritually slaughter with a wire? Why or why not? The Talmud says that any implement may be used, so according to that a wire would be fine. Are there any technical problems that would invalidate a wire?
Answer: No, a wire would not be a good shechita knife, because when it's cutting, it goes entirely under the neck, which is a problem of חלדה, "tunneling." חלדה is one of the five main halachos of shechita. See שמלה חדשה 24:9 et seqq for more info.
To borrow an illustration of חלדה from a previous answer of mine, this is not חלדה, but if the circled area goes under the skin, that is חלדה. There is no way to cut with a wire without the wire being buried under the skin of the neck.

(click for larger image; image not to scale)
Additionally, like 6591 points out, דרסה will be an issue here; I don't see a way to use a wire to cut without using excessive downward force.
Comment: Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been [moved to chat](http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/25946/discussion-on-answer-by-shokhet-can-one-shecht-with-a-wire).
Answer: Drisa is the problem that comes to mind.
A sharp object that cuts by slicing when moved across the animals neck is allowed.
Drisa is cutting through pressure applied in a downward force. Using a cheese cutter or the like would render the animal a niveila. Unfit to eat and Tamei.
Comment: why cant you move (slicing) with a very sharp and smooth string across
Comment: If a non standard wire would be used, that can be mentioned and addressed.
Answer: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shechita under The five forbidden techniques when using a halaf (sakin) to slaughter animals
the only problem that i see that is hard to avoid is (from above)

חלדה Haladah (digging or burying) - The knife must be drawn over the throat so that it is visible while shechita is being performed. It must not be stabbed into the neck or buried by fur, hide, or feathers in the case of a bird. Haladah occurs if the shochet either accidentally cuts into the animal's throat so deeply that the entire width of the knife disappears in the wound, uses a knife that is too short so that the end disappears in the wound, or if a foreign object falls over the knife so the shochet loses sight of the incision.

and you will need to hold the string "knife" with both hands since the use of something like the frame of the "Fret Saw" might also be considered Haladah since the string will not be seen when looking at if from the side of the frame
PS
also there might be a problem of it not being considered a knife as simla chadosho 8.4 were it can be understood that a knife as short as the width of a pigeons neck is not considered a knife and even if you do the cutting motion it is considered that you are making a hole

Can one Shecht with a Wire