Futures hedging for FX

Question: What is the risk that occurs if an investor hedges a short OTC foreign exchange forward sale with a long exchange traded foreign exchange futures with different maturities. And how can the residual risk be hedged?
Answer:
What is the risk that occurs if an investor hedges a short OTC foreign
  exchange forward sale with a long exchange traded foreign exchange
  futures with different maturities.

Counter-party risk.  If the OTC counter party defaults on its obligation to deliver (this means the main leg of the trade has gone in your favor) you are left with the exchange traded part that is in a regulated account being marked-to-market with a loss.
Different maturities gives you an obvious risk.  When the hedge expires you are left with you short forward contract uncovered.

And how can the residual risk be hedged?

The residual risk for #1 could be hedged with a CDS that you enter into with 3rd party but then you are exposed to the risk of them defaulting on their obligation as well.  It also cuts into your profit margin.  For #2, just roll your futures contract to the next expiry.  This will also cut into your profit margin--assuming the futures curve is in contango.
Instead of having an fx forward with a hedge you may consider just reducing the size of the fx forward trade in the first place.  This may not be an option for you but if it is it gets rid of the need to hedge and reduces the counter-party risk.  Oftentimes an easier, less complex (and always overlooked) way to reduce exposure is to reduce the size of a base position rather than to hedge and re-hedge and re-hedge a position that is clearly uncomfortably large in size.
Comment: The futures markets are open every day. It seems to me you could enter a futures contract that expires after the desired date, but exit the position on the day you want (i.e. before futures expiry).
Comment: @noob2 I was thinking the same thing but I didn't think that was the intention of the OP.  Obviously, if it was then my second point above should not be a concern.

Futures hedging for FX


Thailand Visa On Arrival for Indians when not traveling directly from India

Question: I know that Thailand provides Visa On Arrival facility for Indians. But, I will be traveling from Jakarta, Indonesia to Bangkok, Thailand, and then staying in Thailand for 1 day. My question is am I still valid for Visa On Arrival even though I am not directly traveling from India?
Comment: It's your citizenship that counts, not where you're arriving from
Answer: Yes. You will get visa on arrival based on the citizenship, not the country where I am coming from. I have successfully obtained the VOA when coming from Cambodia.
PS: The visa on arrival fees is waived till April 30, 2019.
Comment: Thanks for your response. Can you tell how much time will it take in the Airport to get Visa on Arrival. I want to inquire about that because my flight will land late in the night. And also, will it help if I fill the Visa On Arrival form online beforehand and just give that form when I arrive in Bangkok?
Comment: It will take around 15 minutes. You need to show your return ticket, proof of funds of 20,000 Thai Bhat (they accepted an ATM slip) and accomodation. Also need a photo of specific size.

Yes, you can ask and fill arrival form beforehand, if possible.


When you shoot flash through an umbrella, does it change the color of the flash light?

Question: Does the umbrella cloth (or whatever material it is made of) act as a filter and modify the original color temperature of flash?
Answer: Most umbrellas I've seen are white or silver to maintain whatever color is directed at it. So if you gel your flash it should be relatively unaffected by the umbrella. However, if your umbrella is a different color, then that would affect the color of the light hitting your subject.
Or think of it this way, the umbrella material is often like those 5-in-1 reflectors. Silver on one side and gold on the other for certain effects, or a scrim to soften the light, but maintain the natural color for the scene.
Comment: Silver is not neutral and will 'cool' the color of the flash.
Comment: I don't have a silver umbrella handy to test this out, but referencing a blog post on [B&H](http://www.bhphotovideo.com/insights/blogs/photography/infographic-effects-various-light-modifiers-subject.html) they look pretty close to me. For the OP, an easy way to test this would be eliminate the ambient light, shoot at a wall with bare bulb and again with the modifier, both with fixed WB (probably set to flash) and compare the results. Or use the WB correction tool (the eyedropper in LR) and see if they correct to the same values.
Answer: Short answer: It can, depending on the color of the umbrella.
If the umbrella is a neutral color then the color of the flash will be unaffected. Neutral would include black, grey, and white. The various wavelengths of light that the flash emits will all be absorbed by the umbrella in equal measure. If the umbrella is any other color, such as gold or silver, then certain frequencies of light emitted by your flash will be absorbed in greater amounts than others, and the color of the flash will be modified. This is the case whether shooting through the umbrella or reflecting off of it and is also the case for any other maetrial the light passes through or bounces off of, such as walls or ceilings.
Answer: I think it can vary by the quality of the umbrella too; more expensive umbrellas often use better fabrics that avoid altering the colour of the lightsource, whereas cheaper umbrellas can alter the colour because of cheaper fabric used. Obviously this isn't a hard and fast rule, but if you're choosing an umbrella, it's worth bearing in mind
Comment: i don't see how the quality or cheapness of the fabric would alter the color, as long as it is neutral in color


Sight Reading is Hard for Classical Music

Question: I find it is very hard for me to sight read some pieces like beethoven appassionata or pathatique or even some of Chopin nocturnes. it is hard to sight read them for me both hands together.
I have to sight with a slow speed then I can do with the normal speed after I memorize those pieces.
Any tips to improve...Will be really appreciated? I feel I reached a level with sight reading and I can not exceed it.
Comment: The *first* time you see the music you are sight-reading. Every time after that you are not sight-reading - you're just reading.
Comment: In general, I'd grab a Royal Conservatory of Music syllabus or something like that--any piece that syllabus categorizes as Grade 9 or above is hard to sight-read. I know for a fact that Beethoven's Pathetique and Appassionata Sonatas are Grade 10 or above in the RCM syllabus. A tip--I recommend listening to recordings of the piece before sight-reading it--I find that makes sight-reading easier.
Answer: Sight reading is a skill involving hand-eye coordination (like hitting a baseball thrown your way at 90mph). It takes practice. Much (if not all) classical music is composed to sound good; how easy it is to play is of less (but not zero) importance. Music practice is to some extent a matter of knowing how certain patterns in music (written on the page) map to muscle actions (fingers on the keys). Knowing more patterns makes playing things easier. Thus practicing scales, scales in octaves, scales in sixths, scales in thirds, etc. Knowing a bit of theory helps as one can use theory to fairly well guess what will come next. A knowledge of the style of a particular composer (or group of composers) all helps.
One learns to sight read by sight reading.
Comment: The quickest (but most brutal) way to learn to sight read is to play in an ensemble with other people. Then you can't take the soft option of "playing slowly and memorizing the music" - you have to "JFDI" as best you can (Google that acronym if you don't know it - warning, you might find one of the words offensive!) If your problem is "speed reading," find a group who like playing music that isn't fiendishly difficult but has lots of notes - the Mendelssohn chamber works with piano, for example.
Answer: I'm late to the party, but here are a few modest tips from my years as a piano teacher:

When practicing, vary the difficulty of the music you are playing.  Find the level of music at which you can sight-read nearly perfectly (ideally from a leveled book or a set of exercises), and use that music as one of the ways that you push yourself.  As the exercises progress, so should you.
Much of the challenge of sight-reading, particularly when you are beginning, comes from being unable to see patterns quickly.  When you are learning music, and have come to understand a pattern, (such as a left hand 1-5-3 pattern in this simplified Habanera) try playing around with it.  Use different chords, play it in different keys, and generally spend some time experimenting with it.  The idea is that, the next time you encounter a similar pattern, you will not have to spend nearly as much mental energy reading it; you will be able to glance at the measure ahead of you for some basic information, and otherwise keep your attention on other challenges.
Slowing down is quite important in order to dissect, discover, and understand what the composer has done.  Once you have understood some portion of music, I am of the school of thought that it is better to play small chunks of the music at full speed than to continue to play through slowly.  This accomplishes a few things for you: first, by not permitting yourself to go overly slowly, you are forcing yourself to work at reading speeds.  Additionally, the actual motions that your hand makes for slow work are truly different than the motions that it makes for fast, nimble work.  Thus, when you practice slowly, you are often not even practicing the correct hand-work.

Important caveat to #3: don't get into the habit of just playing through badly.  If you are making a lot of mistakes, go back to carefully inspecting the music.  You should be seeking the kinds of musical patterns and voice motions that will allow you to better remember the music.  You will know you are doing a good job if you can come back and play the piece with very few mistakes.  Also, this is not a play-through; this sort of labor is truly mental work, and can often be done away from the piano itself.  As luck would have it, the kinds of things you will notice while examining the music extremely closely are exactly the sorts of patterns that will help you later when sight-reading, so this will become a virtuous cycle.
Answer: You're not really MEANT to be able to sight-read pieces like the Beethoven 'appassionata', though some experienced players do have amazing skills in that department!   Just keep sight-reading lots of easier stuff, keep doing whatever it takes to master the hard stuff.  You WILL progress, I promise.


Ways to authenticate mobile phone number

Question: I am making a mobile application for Android and IOS with accounts that are linked to mobile phone numbers. I have looked into SMS authentication but it is relatively expensive for the type of app I am making. I have a textbox that asks for a phone number and I need a way to verify that the entered number is the correct phone number. Is there any alternative ways to verify a mobile phone number?
Comment: I'm not sure this is a UX question. You've already decided on the User Experience - they verify via mobile. It sounds more like you're looking for a technical solution to it.
Comment: @JonW Isn't the way the user must authenticate their phone number part of the user experience? The user experience will be affected by how the phone number is verified.
Answer:
let people login via facebook or other social platforms that already have verified phone numbers
let users text a unique code, or give a missed call to particular phone number
notifications might help, if you want to verify device
Answer:
Is there any alternative ways to verify a mobile phone number?

There are ways to verify that a phone number is valid, but in your case you also want to verify that the phone number belongs to the user. There's no way to verify that without sending some sort of confirmation code via text or call, and having your user confirm that code in your application.
Comment: Yeah. Want to confirm the number? Call it.


Not Booting: One short beep at first and one more after all device checks

Question: There is the correct one short beep before POST (which is the expected behavior as per the motherboard manual). The problem is once it says it has found the HDD etc, it gives one more short beep and thats it. Blank black screen and no booting.
I even tried with an invalid boot device (with no boot record in it) and still the same result. It does not even give a boot failure message.
Is there any way to correctly diagnose the issue. I mean is there a way to make it display more info about the error. As of now, i am unable to even figure out which part is faulty.
I checked the RAMs (tested with one RAM stick) to ensure its not memory related. I have checked in BIOS and it is detecting the HDDs and optical drives correctly, its also detecting the installed RAM correctly. I also cleared the CMOS ram and tried, all in vain!
And most importantly, it has been booting without issues till yesterday!
Can anyone shed some light on how i can make it more verbose about the error?
Info:

MB: Asus M5-A88-V EVO
Proc: AMD Phenom X4
RAM: Corsair XMS3 4G (2Gx2)
Answer: Unfortunately, the motherboard's manual is not very informative:

I would guess that two beeps might mean that the keyboard is not detected. Try with a different keyboard perhaps?


Fruit on seedling apple trees

Question: I was reading an article on another website about seedling apple trees. It stated that a seedling apple could bear fruit as soon as 3 to 4 years, but that it might take another few years before the fruit is edible. I thought that once a seedling bore, the fruit on it was a true representation of any future fruit it would bear. Does anyone have any information about this?
Comment: "edible" as enough large and sweet. On first fruiting year you will get late, non ripen and small fruits
Comment: Should be palatable and not edible
Answer: The genus Malus is extremely variable, which means that the seedlings of any given apple will not resemble either parent; I've read that 95% of seedlings that make it to maturity will be rather inedible. When John Chapman roamed early America, spreading seeds everywhere, he was planting trees for cider - "hard" cider, actually, since beer wasn't really available back then.
You'll have another issue with your seedling, too - size. It's not on any dwarfing rootstock, so it could get huge - or not. Size is variable, too.
So, regarding your seedling have "edible" apples at any time, the odds are low. And the first apples will be the same flavor as later ones. What you read may have confused the advice given to people who plant young, grafted, seedlings: remove the apples from the tree for the first two years or so to help the tree build a better root system, with no competition for resources from the fruit.
Here's an interesting BBC article on where the wild apples are:
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20160523-kazakhstans-treasure-trove-of-wildly-flavoured-apples
Comment: It's about 25% chance of an edible apple and not 5%.  See https://gardening.stackexchange.com/questions/22591/how-can-i-grow-seedlings-from-commercial-apples/22593#22593
Comment: Graham - Please see this link: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/real-johnny-appleseed-brought-applesand-booze-american-frontier-180953263/. Also, 'The Botany of Desire' has some excellent facts on wild vs. domesticated apples. I think that a single study with 148 seeds (from how many different trees?) is hardly a reliable source. That being said, Golden Delicious are, indeed, part of some of the better crosses in apple history, so perhaps they're more likely to produce sweet apples.

Fruit on seedling apple trees


Light fixture, power source and range vent fan & light wired together?

Question: I removed a light fixture to find this wiring in box.  4 sets of 12/2 wires coming into ceiling box for light fixture.  One is power, one goes to switch for light fixture.  Other two go to an exhaust vent over stove.  There is a light switch and fan switch on vent.  When looking closer at wiring, I noticed that there was a ground wire with a green wire nut that was 'on' the wire.  I.E. someone put a hole in end of wire nut, and ran wire through wire nut. I don't believe this ground wire was attached to any other wires, seemed loose in box when I pulled on it.  Ground wire comes from either vent light or vent fan. Additionally, light fixture white wire is wired together with black wires from power source and vent light and fan.  Then when checking switch, there is only the white wire attached, black wire has been twisted around the white wire.  After taking light fixture down, I lost power to the vent fan and light.  Never seen anything like this before.
Comment: Did the light fixture switch actually control the light fixture before you took it apart?
Answer: The green wire nut with the hole in the tip is normal.  Green wire nuts are the same size as red, except they have a hole in the tip.  That's why they're color coded green, to tell you that.  And they're for exactly that use.
All ground wires should be connected to each other, and also to any appliances or devices and also the metal box if metal.
The switch is what's called a switch loop.  It's an older style one with /2 cable (black, white) and no red.   In a switch loop, the white wire should be used as always-hot and tied in with the blacks.  The white wire is chosen to be always-hot so it's more obvious when you're checking it with a voltage tester.   It should also be marked with tape to indicate the white wire is a hot, this step is often overlooked.
It sounds like the other cables in the box carry onward power to other devices, e.g. the hood.
It would help to have photos of what is going on in those boxes.


sitemap for users not search engines

Question: I used simple XML sitemap module to create a sitemap for search engines but now I need one sitemap for visitors.
Can I create this manually instead of using a module because the site already has too many modules?
I was thinking to create a basic page and just add the links there one by one.
Is this a good way?
Comment: There is a HTML Sitemap module that does exactly this.
Answer: There is a module that does what you want, and it isn't XML Sitemap but just Sitemap:
https://www.drupal.org/project/sitemap

This module provides a site map that gives visitors an overview of
  your site. It can also display the RSS feeds for all blogs and
  categories.
Drupal generates the RSS feeds automatically but few seems to be aware
  that they exist.
The site map can display the following items:

A message to be displayed above the site map.
Any books.
Any menus that will be displayed fully expanded.
Any vocabularies, with all the terms expanded. Optionally with term depth, node counts, and RSS feeds.
A syndication block, the "more" link goes to the site map.

Then:

because the site already has too many modules?

There is really no way to quantify this for you. There isn't necessarily a module limit, your limit is defined by the limits of your hosting space. The performance impact of adding the Sitemap module, vs spending hours doing it yourself (to reach the same point but with 10x the maintenance) is negligible, especially since you can cache it in Drupal and use things like Varnish or Memcache if your host supports it (if not, find an updated host!). You will be fine.
Comment: Thank you very much, I appreciate the help. I'll ask the host.
Answer: Depends on how often your site changes and who makes the changes.
If it's a single person and that person can remember to add new pages to the site map then manual is probably OK.
If you have non-technical people adding pages to the site, chances are that they will not update the map just add it to the menu.
With a module, the sitemap can be automatically updated as the things change.
Remember changes can also include things like page or menu titles that feed into the site map.
Answer: Easiest way perhaps using the Main menu block and displaying them at the sitemap page's content region.
If you already have the Menu Block installed, it'll give you more flexibility configuring how deep to expand the shown menus as well.
Then you can simply style the menu block with CSS.

sitemap for users not search engines


Use one filter for multiple sharepoint lists

Question: Can I define one list filter, and connect it to two lists on one web part page? I have two seperate lists on a page, both containing the 'author' column. Now, I want to add a filter to de page, so you can select one specific author, and so that both lists only show items from that author. Is that possible in SP 2010?
Answer: Yes this can be done.  Look into Filter Web Parts and connecting the filter to your list web parts on the web part page.
An example is to add a filter web part to the page and then connect it to the two list web parts on that page.  There are a couple of filter web parts so you may need to play to see which one fits your needs best.
Here is information on the Filter Web Parts: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/sharepoint-foundation-help/work-with-filter-web-parts-HA101794720.aspx
Here is a basic article on connecting the web parts: http://www.mssharepointtips.com/tip.asp?id=1034


The meaning of ירך

Question: I'm unclear as to the meaning of the word ירך that appears in Vayishlach, in 32:26. What's the precise meaning of ירך often translated as hip, thigh, loin, gird etc. Which body part, bone or muscle is it? And what was Yaakov's injury? P.s. Is there any spiritual, symbolic or figurative meaning to ירך?
Comment: Is there a particular usage of the word that raised the question? It looks like you've looked up some translations but found them unsatisfactory. The question (even the simple part) would be greatly improved by giving more context. The word can mean a body part if it is referring to a person or an animal, or a structural element if it is artifice, or a general area in a more abstract/geographical context.
Comment: **There are no "precise" meanings in Hebrew Torah words in general**. Each word can have several translations, ideas and meanings based on its use in a verse.
Comment: Shavuah Tov. Contrary to what Al Berko says, it doesn't mean there isn't a precise meaning according to Torah. Rather, that depending upon the specific context that you are looking at, it may have a specific meaning. And therefore, the precise place within the Torah that you are looking at is relevant.
Comment: To help keep it on-topic, I edited in a usage in the Torah. Since you specify Vayishlach in the tags, I picked one of the two pesukim that use it. I picked this one specifically because A) there should be more literature on it by virtue of it being a prohibition, expanding potential answers to include Poskim as well as Mefarshim, and B) to counter Al Berko's claim that words are sometimes translated differently from translation to translation, this one has an actual, practical application and therefore it's not just a matter of theory for what it means.
Comment: @WAF It's just that I wondered where Yaakov was strucked, and what his injury was; as he could still wrestle, walk but limped.
Comment: @DonielF I changed my question as it wasn't about the context you refered to.
Answer: Rashi (ibid) describes the verse as follows:

ויגע בכף ירכו. קוּלִית הַיָּרֵךְ הַתָּקוּעַ בְּקַּלְבּוּסִית קָרוּי כַּף, עַ"שֵׁ שֶׁהַבָּשָׂר שֶׁעָלֶיהָ כְּמִין כַּף שֶׁל קְדֵרָה:
ויגע בכף ירכו HE TOUCHED THE HOLLOW OF HIS THIGH — The upper thigh-bone that is sunk in the hip is called כף because the flesh on it (on this bone) has the form of the hollow part of a pot-ladle (כף).

So the יֶרֶךְ seems to be the femur - which was dislocated from the acetabulum, as Shadal explains.
The Medrash Shir HaShirim Rabbah 3:6 brings 3 opinions:

וַתֵּקַע כַּף יֶרֶךְ יַעֲקֹב, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר וְרַבִּי בֶּרֶכְיָה, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר שִׁיְּעָא, רַבִּי בֶּרֶכְיָה בְּשֵׁם רַבָסָא סִדְּקָהּ כְּדָג. רַבִּי נַחְמָן בַּר יַעֲקֹב אָמַר פֵּרְקָהּ מִמְּקוֹמָהּ, הֵיאַךְ מָה דְאַתְּ אָמַר (יחזקאל כג, יח): וַתֵּקַע נַפְשִׁי מֵעָלֶיהָ.

Rabbi Eliezer says he שִׁיְּעָא - (unclear what this word means. In the Targum of  Ezekiel 13:12 it is used to mean coat or smear (a surface), so possibly he peeled it off? ), Rabbi Brechia says he split it open (the acetabulum, I assume) like a  fish, while Rabbi Nachman bar Yaakov that he dislocated it (the femur, I assume.)
In later verses we see that it probably has something to do with the Sciatic nerve, as we don't eat the Sciatic nerve in commemoration of this incident.
Multiple commentators explain that - since the angel couldn't overcome him - he wanted to check if Yaakov was an angel, as angels don't have joints. By dislocating his hip, he proved he was human.
Others explain that he wanted to maim him so that he would be disqualified to do the Temple Services - the right he had purchased from Esav, The Ba'al Haturim brings both:

ויגע בכף ירכו לראות אם הוא מלאך כמותו אם היו לו קפיצים שהמלאכים אין להם קפיצים. א''נ לפוסלו מן העבודה לפי שקנה מעשו הבכורה שבהן העבודה: בכף ירכו בגימטריא לפוסלו מכהונה:

I recall he went for the hip to try prevent him from having more children; though I can't find any source for this and then it couldn't (medically) be the actual hip, but something else in the hip area.
Answer: Partial answer: In modern spoken Hebrew at least, the ירך is the part of your leg between the hip and the ankle. So, ירך means thigh. I think but am not certain that this is the only intended meaning as far back as the bible:

וַיַּךְ אוֹתָם שׁוֹק עַל-יָרֵךְ, מַכָּה גְדוֹלָה

Judges 15, verse 8. Translation (by me):

And he beat them thigh-over-calf, a great beating

I'm guessing perhaps you were thinking about the strange traslation this got in the King James bible:

And he smote them hip and thigh with a great slaughter

As for the spiritual part, someone more Jewish and spiritual than myself miight add to this answer. Remember, though, this particular mention regards the body-builder "spirituality" of Samson, a person who would whack people to death with the side of a Donkey's face; send foxes with burning tails to burn up Philistine villages' fields; and other such "spiritual" activities...

The meaning of ירך


How do i install Libreoffice 3.4?

Question: I read that it has better GTK+ integration,is faster and java has been minimized . so i wanted to try it .
How do i install it ?
A PPA would be preferable.
Answer: LibreOffice 3.4.3 for Natty was released 7 Oct 2011.
The standard LibreOffice ppa should be used to update - see linked question on how to install.
For those that like to live on the bleeding edge, there are .deb files you can download directly from the LibreOffice website here.  Obviously, these will be vanilla LibreOffice and therefore probably will not include any stuff the ubuntu packagers also add.

Linked Question:

Will LibreOffice 3.4 be included in an update?
Answer: Visit the PPA's overview page in Launchpad. click this link https://launchpad.net/~libreoffice/+archive/ppa
Step 2: Use the Display sources.list entries drop-down box to select the version of Ubuntu you're using.
Step 3: You'll see that the text-box directly below reads something like this:
deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/libreoffice/ppa/ubuntu YOUR_UBUNTU_VERSION_HERE main
deb-src http://ppa.launchpad.net/libreoffice/ppa/ubuntu YOUR_UBUNTU_VERSION_HERE main
Copy those lines.
Step 4: Open a terminal and type:
sudo nano /etc/apt/sources.list
This will open a text editor containing the list of archives that your system is currently using. Scroll to the bottom of the file and paste the lines you copied in the step above.
Save the file and exit the text editor.
Step 5: Back on the PPA's overview page, look for the Signing key heading. You'll see something like:
1024R/72D340A3
Copy the portion after the slash but not including the help link; e.g. just 72D340A3.
Step 6: Now you need to add that key to your system so Ubuntu can verify the packages from the PPA. In your terminal, enter:
sudo apt-key adv --keyserver keyserver.ubuntu.com --recv-keys 72D340A3
Replace 72D340A3 with whatever you copied in the step 5.
This will now pull down the PPA's key and add it to your system.
Step 7: Now, as a one-off, you should tell your system to pull down the latest list of software from each archive it knows about, including the PPA you just added:
sudo aptitude update
sudo aptitude install libreoffice
Now you're ready to start libreoffice
Comment: the ppa does not have 3.4 :(
Comment: The repository can be enabled with one command which takes care of the signing key too: `sudo add-apt-repository ppa:libreoffice/ppa`
Comment: The v.3.4 has just become stable today. It will be added to the PPA soon (that PPa is for stable releases, so betas won't be added to it).
Answer: Follow this instructions --you have to download DEB packages until they update the official PPA.
http://www.unixmen.com/software/1755-libreoffice-340-is-released-installation-instructions-for-ubuntu-fedora-debian

How do i install Libreoffice 3.4?


Where did the custom of dancing with flags during worship originate?

Question: I'm trying to get some background about the custom of dancing with flags during worship. I come from eastern Europe and I have seen many "trends" that came from the west (especially from charismatics). When did the churches start to dance with flags, and why?
Here is a concrete example.
Comment: @Steve it's about dancing to worship Jesus Christ. Does it sound better?
Comment: This question appears to be off-topic because it is not about Christianity, but dancing.
Answer: In American Christianity, specifically black or African American churches, "praise dancing" is a cultural norm practiced all over the United States, generally in more progressive churches.  It is also referred to as Liturgical Dance(a).
Generally, the practice involved playing gospel ballads or other popular black gospel music from contemporary black gospel artist.  Brightly colored flags, scarves, and shawls are used and artist, usually young women, dance using ballet-like movements, in unison with the music being played as a form of worship and praise toward God.
Historically, Liturgical Dance is ancient, tracing back to even ancient Israel as noted in passages like 2 Samuel 6, albeit, this is David and many did condemn him for his expressive worship.  However, in the middle ages, according to professor Paul Dilley at the University of Iowa, the Dance of the Savior, a liturgical dance, was probably used in some "churches and martyr shrines".  In addtion, Dilley states that a "dance scene in a Coptic text from the Qasr el-Wizz monastery suggests that ritual dance enjoyed a place in established, orthodox Christianity..."
Regardless, it is probably not possible to establish an exact reference to the beginnings of such practices in the American church.  Theologically, it is forbidden by some denominations, including some that are primarily African American, because it is consider too liberal or sensual(b).

(a) Based on my personal experience growing up and being involved in the Progressive Baptist Convention and other independent and other affiliated black churches primarily in and around the Washington DC Metropolitan Area.
(b) As an example of why this practice is not accepted, see There is Never a Good Reason For Liturgical Dance
Comment: I am wondering how the Grecian culture influence the dance as an art of worship in the young christian churches. What I mean is [Dionysian Mysteries](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysian_Mysteries).
Comment: Welcome to the site. We are glad you decided to participate. Here are some meta posts about this site to help you learn how we do it here: [What Christianity.StackExchange is (and more importantly, what it isn't)](http://meta.christianity.stackexchange.com/q/1379) and [How we are different than other sites](http://meta.christianity.stackexchange.com/q/1808) Please also take the [tour] and see the [help]. I hope to see you post again soon. Please also keep in mind that I and other users are willing to help you, so ask us anything if you need help.
Answer: Perhaps I am wrong... since I have to consider that the sister of Moses, Miriam and also even David danced before the Lord. However, personally it troubles me when I have to stand and watch these females in their latex leotards and bright colored translucent swirling and twirling scarves and capes as they go wreathing to the floor in a half or a fully prostrate position. They wave their scarves in huge twirling motions as the scarves fill the air above and around them. They prance up and down the aisles of the church twirling and swirling their scarves. Delicately and sensually if you will and at times almost seductively. Then they begin sinking to the floor folding their leotard legs beneath them... bowing their head to the floor. They might stay in that position for awhile... all the while each of the 4 to 6 females are doing different moves at different times as the "spirit" moves them. Is it an individually inspired demonstration of art? or is it indeed holy worship? or down right distraction for some of us! I find it very distracting from the move of the Holy Spirit during the altar call, or praise and worship service. I can't help but wonder what thoughts go through the minds of the men present.
It has always been my opinion and conviction that nothing should over ride or distract from the ministering of the word of God or from the worship of our Heavenly Father. To me these women are making such a spectacle of themselves drawing everyone's attention to them and their dance moves and colorful sensual scarves. All eyes are on them... instead of praying, praising, worshiping, heading to the altar, listening to the minister or whatever else that should be taking priority of their attention. Seems to me these girls, ladies, women... whatever are putting on their own show drawing everyone's attention on them and the rest of the congregation has been made a captive audience... captive that is unless they just get up and walk out.
If they want to dance they need to take lessons and put on their own recitals where the audience is knowingly attending to watch them perform. It is a performance. If they want to "worship" in this manner, do it at home in their prayer closet.
I personally know of young women who want to participate in this practice. I do not even believe they are born again. The fruits they are baring are not fruits of the spirit but fruits of carnality. Yet they are drawn to this activity and want to take part. They are starved for attention and want to dress up and dance around the church. Lovely, pretty but not Holy in my opinion.
Come on people... wake up!! This is not a holy dance. I have been in Pentecost my entire life of 74 years. I come from old line Pentecost. I have seen so many non-scriptural fads come and go in the church. Some are downright disgraceful and some even demonic. Why can't we worship and function as the New Testament Churches did? Why do so many follow the leader... bark like a dog or cluck like a chicken, brae like a goat, or laugh until they cannot stand up. Laughing and appearing like idiots, staggering and falling over each other. How ridiculous... what a mockery in the house of God.
Yet in 74 years I have seen people dance a little jig if you please when the spirit comes over them. I've seen them unable to stand on their feet. I've seen people slain under the power of the Holy Spirit. I have seen people flung across the altar in a manner no human could control as demons were cast out or an anointing or pronounced over them.
I once heard a sermon about the 3 Generations of Pentecost.
First Generation... had the real thing.
Second Generation... inherited it.
Third Generation... faked it.
My God how far have we fallen. Give me the real thing or nothing at all. Praise His Holy Name!
Answer: Interestingly, 50 or more years ago many conservative and evangelical churches in the West were quite legalistic about a number of activities and behaviors they considered to be "worldly" and potentially sinful. Social dancing was one of them. Notice I say social dancing, not celebratory dancing or the kind of dancing you have observed in some churches (including charismatic churches), which is likely an expression of worship in which men and women, and boys and girls, do not even touch each other!
As many of these churches evolved, so to speak, they realized that legalism was not only unnecessarily offensive to many of the young people growing up in the church but also to the people these churches were trying to reach for Christ. Legalistic attitudes started to relax a bit. Churches started to realize that celebratory dancing as an expression of the uninhibited worship of God is not the same as social dancing. In other words, the two things (i.e., social dancing and celebratory dancing) are "apples and oranges"--two completely different things.
By the way, social dancing seems to have evolved, sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse. Ballroom dancing seems to be having an upsurge in popularity. The senior pastor from my Christian church even takes ballroom dancing lessons with his wife! Among the young people in Generations X and Y, however, dancing varies from mosh pit gyrations to "dirty dancing," complete with grinding and what can be described as simulated sex acts! This "dancing" is definitely not in any way celebratory or worshipful. Far from it!
In many churches in the West today, and perhaps elsewhere, dancing of the kind that King David performed, as recorded in 2 Samuel, has become more common in the last decade or two:

"David, dressed in a linen priestly vest, danced with all his strength before the LORD.
  This is how David and the entire house of Israel brought up the LORD's chest with shouts and trumpet blasts" (vv.14-15).

As you'll recall, Michal, Saul's daughter lost respect for David after she observed his uninhibited dance before the Lord, and she reproached him for what was in her opinion undignified behavior for a king. We read in the same chapter:

"As the LORD's chest entered David's City, Saul's daughter Michal was watching from a window. She saw King David jumping and dancing before the LORD, and she lost all respect for him. The LORD's chest was brought in and put in its place inside the tent that David had pitched for it. Then David offered entirely burned offerings in the LORD's presence in addition to well-being sacrifices. When David finished offering the entirely burned offerings and the well-being sacrifices, he blessed the people in the name of the LORD of heavenly forces. He distributed food among all the people of Israel—to the whole crowd, male and female—each receiving a loaf of bread, a date cake, and a raisin cake. Then all the people went back to their homes. David went home to bless his household, but Saul's daughter Michal came out to meet him. "How did Israel's king honor himself today?" she said. "By exposing himself in plain view of the female servants of his subjects like any indecent person would!"  David replied to Michal, "I was celebrating before the LORD, who chose me over your father and his entire family, and who appointed me leader over the LORD's people, over Israel—and I will celebrate before the LORD again! I may humiliate myself even more, and I may be humbled in my own eyes, but I will be honored by the female servants you are talking about!" Michal, Saul's daughter, had no children to the day she died" (vv.16-23, italics are mine).

King David had no problem with his uninhibited worship of God. He likely would have danced naked before the Lord if God's Spirit had prompted him to do so!
Notice what happened to David's critic, Michal: She was unable to bear children during her lifetime. Perhaps there is a lesson in there for us. No one plays and frolics more uninhibitedly than children. Interestingly, Jesus said,

"Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 18:3 NLT, my italics).

In light of Michal's barrenness, we do well to rethink speaking out against the demonstrative and, yes, almost childlike behavior which has at its heart a love for and enthusiasm for our great God.
In conclusion, the relatively new phenomenon you've witnessed in Christian churches is not really new at all; it is centuries old. Uninhibited worship before the Lord, whether it includes dance of all kinds, shouts, musical instruments, banners/flags, lifted hands, drums, mime(!), and so on, is certainly biblical, and if it is done in a spirit of worship and praise, and not simply for its entertainment value, Christian churches do well to encourage the younger generations in particular to be unashamed and un-self-conscious worshipers of the Lord.
Comment: The new phenomenon is not only about dancing, generally it's about going farther in the worship, braking the walls of shame and doing things without worry about what others say. The dance is one of ways.
Answer: This is a fascinating question that is of personal interest.
The earliest use of flags in worship that I'm aware of is in a booklet called "A Sound Of Joy" that was produced by Dave and Dale Garrett from New Zealand in 1982 I believe. Their ministry was called Scripture in Song - older people will remember it! The booklet accompanied a recording of the same name and contained dances to the songs, and some of them used flags. I have the booklet somewhere but can't find it right now. I do not know how much influence it had - I suspect not a lot. The Garretts are still around and have a website (www.davidanddalegarratt.com) so you could contact them to find out where the idea of flags came from.
Another key innovator was a guy called Andy Au who lives in England - I think he was an early adopter of flags, possibly sometime during the 1980s. He has encouraged a lot of people over the years and has travelled internationally. He can be contacted through his organisation Movement In Worship (www.miw.org.uk).
I hope this is of help.
Comment: Welcome to the site. We are glad you decided to participate. Here are some meta posts about this site to help you learn how we do it here: [What Christianity.StackExchange is (and more importantly, what it isn't)](http://meta.christianity.stackexchange.com/q/1379) and [How we are different than other sites](http://meta.christianity.stackexchange.com/q/1808) Please also take the [tour] and see the [help]. I hope to see you post again soon. Please also keep in mind that I and other users are willing to help you, so ask us anything if you need help.
Comment: "Older people". The cheek !!!!!! :-).
If 65 is old then you are right (so I guess you are :-) ).


How can one determine who has the highest score for a specific tag?

Question: This question was prompted by this one and I was wondering who if anyone has the required score in the tag to request the synonym. I checked the tags of some likely suspects but came up empty. I'm wondering if there's a specific moderator tool that would answer this question.
Answer: If you got to a tag's info tab there is a sidebar for the "top answerers" in that tag:

it doesn't tell you each person's outright score, but it will show you who can suggest synonyms (most likely, anyway).
Comment: Excellent. Now if we could just get @geppettvs-dconstanzo to chime in on this we might get it done.
Comment: Or @Takkat for that matter.
Comment: I notice that screencast has also been suggested as a synonym for record although that doesn't make near as much sense to me as recording. Related I could see, but synonymous? I don't think so.
Comment: You can get users' tag scores from their Profile→Tags page. You need to find it manually and the score is upvotes, not reputation... But tedious as that is, it's possible to do the lookup the OP is trying to do. If the top person can't, no mortal user can.


Bike touring and camping

Question: I assume questions about bicycle touring are on topic, as long as we keep to cycling and not camping or journaling. (geoffc put up a separate question up about routing.) Thoughts?
Comment: Those of you who camp, there's now a proposal at Area 51 covering camping: [The Great Outdoors](http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/3659). It's description reads: "Proposed Q&A site for people who love camping, hiking, fishing, hunting, canoeing, kayaking, climbing, and other excursions of outdoorsmanship."
Comment: Also: *Some* camping questions are [on-topic at Travel.SE](http://meta.travel.stackexchange.com/questions/1186/why-is-this-camping-question-considered-off-topic).
Answer: I'd think it would depend on the question. It would be easy to do one that is too broad.
However, I think if you're doing a cross country tour or something you could probably come up with dozens of perfectly legit small scope questions:

What should the front/rear weight ratio should I aim for when I load my panniers?
What kind of tent would fit into my XYZ brand of panniers?
How often should I eat if I'm riding 8 hours per day, every day for 3 months?

Etc.
Comment: Agreed - I think that questions that relate to the mechanics of cycle touring (which will probably blur a bit into generic camping) should be fine. Specifics of routes and places are, currently, off topic.
Answer: I don't think that touring is off topic.
I think that if you want to avoid touring questions you can do so with tags.
Similarly, I have no interest in BMX or doing bike tricks but I don't think that we should block those topics from the site.
Many touring questions will have relevance to commuters who carry loads/gear to work.
Comment: I don't think anyone wants to block questions about touring. I'm [an experienced touring cyclist](http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/neilfein), and have a great interest in topics like camping and tour route planning, but I don't think such things belong here.
Comment: How to carry a touring load, best rigs for touring, how to set up a bike for touring... these all sound on-topic to me.
Answer: Seems like a vote to close basis considering so much planning goes into it. If it sticks to a minimum of talking about equipment and payload seems fair enough.
Answer: It seems to me that we should cover touring questions relating to riding, even if they only relate to riding only a little. I posted a test question about touring load weight distribution. (Of course, I know the answer and my answer is right, but opinions are always welcome.) :)
Since this concerns bike handing and comfort, it seems to me that this should be on-topic, but the community will decide.
A good answer to a question like this would venture an opinion, help clarify the question, and also explain why the poster thinks the answer is correct.
Comment: Heh heh heh... caught!

Seriously, I'm not trying to trap anyone, and I'm not trying to push an agenda. Whatever the community decides is fine. But we need lots of questions to shake this out.

Questions that push at the edges are a good thing. Questions that are off-topic, but just barely, are a good thing because they show us where the borders are.
Comment: And I took the bait!

I agree, and this envelops not only bike handling, comfort, and safety, but load-carrying in general.

Bike touring and camping


Division in paillier cryptosystem

Question: Is division possible in the Paillier Cryptosystem? i.e. given a the cipher-text $C$ of an integer $M$ the plain-text divisor $D$, and only the public key, can one compute the cipher-text of $M/D$ ?
Comment: See https://crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/53257/paillier-homomorphic-encryption-to-calculate-the-means/53311#53311
Answer: Yes (and always).
Given $\mathsf{Enc}(a)$ and $b$, you can compute $\mathsf{Enc}(a \cdot b^{-1} \bmod{n})$ by simply computing $\hat{b}=b^{-1} \bmod{n}$ and $Enc(a)^\hat{b} \bmod{n^2}$.
Paillier encryption is built on the bijeective mapping from $(x,y)\in \mathbb{Z}_n \times \mathbb{Z}_n^*$ to:
$E_{g,n}(x,y)=g^x y^n \bmod{n^2}$.
Generator $g$ is chosen to enforce that $x$ remains in $\mathbb{Z}_n$ (i.e., there exists a $y$ that makes $x$ unique in $\mathbb{Z}_n$). Specifically, it has order $\alpha n$ for a positive $\alpha < \mathrm{LCM}(p-1,q-1)$. A simple optimization is to set $\alpha=1$ by choosing $g=n+1$.
Regardless of variant, in the encryption scheme, $x$ is the message and thus $\mathbb{Z}_n$ is the message space. Contrary to the other answers, this allows $b$ to be generally inverted $\bmod{n}$ (except when 0 or in the negligible case that it is either $p$ or $q$).

Given the confusion, I did a sanity check in Mathematica to make sure (I picked small safe primes but you can set them using RandomPrime):
<code>p = 23;
q = 83;
n = p*q;
lam = LCM[p - 1, q - 1];

L[u_] := Quotient[u - 1, n];

Trap[y_] := L[PowerMod[y, lam, n^2]];

g = RandomInteger[{1, n}];
While[GCD[Trap[g], n] != 1, g = RandomInteger[{1, n}]]

Enc[m_] := Module[{r, c},
  r = RandomInteger[{1, n - 1}];
  c = Mod[PowerMod[g, m, n^2]*PowerMod[r, n, n^2], n^2]
  ]

Dec[c_] := Mod[Trap[c]*PowerMod[Trap[g], -1, n], n];

m = RandomInteger[{1, n - 1}];
s = RandomInteger[{1, n - 1}];
si = PowerMod[s, -1, n];
c = PowerMod[Enc[m], si, n^2];
Dec[c] == Mod[m*si, n]
</code>

This answer is the result of a crash course in Paillier. I typically work in the discrete logarithm setting. Feel free to edit if there are any errors (you probably do know more than me).
Comment: @user996522 It depends on how you define "makes sense." If $a/b = c$, then $c \cdot b=a$. It is the same thing here. If you compute $a/b$ under encryption, you will get the encryption of the value $c$ such that $c \cdot b \bmod{n} = a$. You can think of it as "discrete division" akin to a discrete logarithm.
Comment: yes but like mikeazo pointed out, the answer does not make sense if  $b\nmid a$
Answer: In general, no. There are, however, specific conditions that, when met, make it possible.
Working Mod $\phi(N^2)$
If given $D^{-1} \bmod{\phi(N^2)}$, then $\mathcal{E}(M/D)$ can be computed. So the question remains, when is computing $D^{-1} \bmod{\phi(N^2)}$ possible?
It is only possible if $gcd(D, \phi(N^2))=1$. Note that $\phi(N^2)=N\cdot \phi(N)=N\cdot(p-1)\cdot(q-1)$. Since $N=p\cdot q$, $N$ is odd, but $p-1$ and $q-1$ are even. Thus, for any even $D$, $gcd(D, \phi(N^2))\neq 1$. So, $D$ can never be even.
For odd $D$, it will work if the condition I specified holds.
If $D\nmid M$ ($D$ does not divide $M$), even if the $gcd=1$, the result will not necessarily make sense.
So, it will work under a few conditions, but in general it will not.
Update, Working Mod $N$
As PulpSpy points out, one can also work Mod $N$. In that case, $gcd(D,N)=1$ for all $D\neq p,q$ (in most every practical case). So, the math works, but you still have issues in practice when $D\nmid M$.
Comment: Why no? If you just don't care about the remainder, isn't it like a multiplication with the inverse, which can be seen as a constant multiplication, thus able to be homomorphically evaluated by a Paillier encryption circuit?
Answer: One alternative that hasn't been mentioned, which may possibly be of interest, is doing plain old integer division in Paillier. The protocol is non-trivial, but, perhaps surprisingly, can be done somewhat efficiently. There was a paper at FC12:
On Secure Two-party Integer Division [PDF]

Division in paillier cryptosystem


Broken Fence Post Fix?

Question: I have a broken 4x4" fence post at bottom.
Post is in concrete
Wondering the best fix without digging up concrete and doing it all over.
Thanks!
Comment: You might get better answers to this question on the DIY stackexchange site (https://diy.stackexchange.com/) instead of the woodworking site.
Comment: A pic is really vital to help with getting on-point Answers here, if you can't take one of your own find a pic online that shows a similar break (there's bound to be one). Failing either of those two options you need to give a much more complete verbal description, "a broken 4x4 at the bottom" doesn't give prospective respondents nearly enough information. Same deal if you ask the Q again on the DIY site.
Answer: Here are some options for repairing your fence:

Get a $5 metal T-post or two and drive it in the ground near the broken 4x4. You may have to pound the T-post in at an angle to avoid hitting the concrete. Screw the 4x4 to the metal T-post. Easiest, cheapest, and fastest. This is a good temporary solution to a leaning fence.
Temporary brace the fence with 2x4's and detach the broken post from the fence. Using a drill and chisel, remove as much of the broken post from the concrete as possible. Get a new 4x4 post. Carefully measure the hole in the concrete. Use a handplane on the bottom of the new 4x4 post. Shave off about 1/2" from each of the sides so that it will fit in the hole you measured. There is no second chance, so make sure the post is smaller than the hole. Pound the new post into the hole in the cement. Use shims to level the post. Finally, reattach the fence.

Unless the 4x4 broke for a specific reason, like it was hit by a car, it's likely that rot caused the post to fail. If that's the case, it's likely that the other posts are rotten too. Check by stabbing with a screw driver. If the screw driver goes into the wood more then 1/2", it's rotten. Repairing a rotten fence (option #2) is almost certainly not worth it, as another post will likely fail in the near future. If the fence is rotten, it's best to prop it up (option #1) and then take care of it when the weather is more pleasant.
Answer: It really depends on how much "good" post you have to work with above the concrete.
If you have enough to attach another post to what remains of the original post, you could cut off the original post and join a new one to the "stump" using a lap joint or scarf joint, then run a couple bolts through it to hold together.
You should probably orient the joint so that it provides maximum resistance to wind forces exerted against the fence. Posting a picture would be very helpful in this situation.
Comment: Broken just above concrete
Comment: This is a fine answer, so I edited to make it read a bit easier. Though, it is unclear if this question is actually on-topic. While we see if this is the case, there is no reason we can't encourage good answers.
Answer: possibly drill one or more holes in the existing and the replacement then join them together with rebar and epoxy

Broken Fence Post Fix?


I'm divorced and my potential wife has no family; would our marriage be valid with my friends as witnesses?

Question: I am divorced and I am thinking of getting married again. Do I need my parents permission? Also the girl who I want to marry has no family; her mother died 2 years ago and was the only child, her mum's parents are not alive. Also her father left her mother and moved to another country and she has had no contact with him for the past 16 years. She has no other brothers or sisters. She will be moving to my country to marry me. Would my nikkah be valid if I take her to the mosque and get the imam to read nikkah with two of my friends as witnesses?
Answer: Short Answer : Yes
Detailed Answer:
If a person is a Muslim, baaligh (mature), aaqil (sane) and free (not slave), he can be a witness to a Nikah.
There must be at least one man and 2 women, or 2 men as witnesses for the Nikah to be valid. If a dispute takes place regarding the Nikah, then the Shari'ah laws will apply (atleast in Muslim countries).


Microdata vs RFDa

Question: I am wondering whether to use Microdata or RFDa to mark information for search engines on my Webapplication. Google supports and has documentation for both. But i was not able to find a summary comparing both formats and giving suggestion on which one to use.
Comment: RDFa ranks higher in search results, based on my experience.
Answer: Main differences between Microdata and RDFa

Microdata is still a Working Draft (2012-10-25) merely a Working Group Note (2013-10-29). RDFa is a finished Recommendation (2013-08-22) (first Recommendation back in 2008).
Microdata can be used in HTML(5) only. RDFa is markup-independent ("to express structured data in any markup language") and can already be used in HTML 4.01, HTML5, XHTML, ….
Microdata is a relatively new "invention". RDFa is based on the RDF model (RDFa is a RDF serialization format), the foundation of the Semantic Web.
If a Microdata parser stumbles upon an unknown item type (resp. vocabulary), it must not try to make use of it. RDF(a) parsers may try to make use of unknown vocabularies (which may work because vocabularies are typically itself described in RDF, e.g. with RDFS).
Microdata makes it hard (and often impossible) to validly mix several vocabularies for the same content, which is easily possible with RDFa (thanks to its use of prefixes).

Note that almost all vocabularies are designed in/for RDF(a). With Microdata, most users seem to use only the schema.org vocabulary, but this one can be used with RDFa, too.
Some argue that Microdata is easier to understand/use than RDFa. I don't think that it's true, especially not with RDFa Lite, which is sufficient "for most day-to-day needs". You can read the whole RDFa Lite specification in 10-15 minutes.
See also
My answers about

differences between Microdata and RDFa (Stack Overflow)
the future of RDFa and Microdata (Stack Overflow)
RDFa vs. Microdata vs. Microformats (Programmers)
differences between Microdata and Microformats

and

The (somewhat old) HTML Data Guide (W3C Interest Group Note), which "aims to help publishers and consumers of HTML data use it well. With several syntaxes and vocabularies to choose from, it provides guidance about how to decide which meets the publisher's or consumer's needs. It discusses when it is necessary to mix syntaxes and vocabularies and how to publish and consume data that uses multiple formats."
Answer: Choosing which one is better for you is (IMO) somewhat subjective.  Here are a couple factors that may help you to make an informed decision:

RDFa is problematic for non-XHTML web pages (though support appears to be emerging), and has a bit of a learning curve when dealing with nested entities (see the Google example for Address)
Facebook's Open Graph Protocol is RDFa-based

There are likely other factors specific to your situation...
Answer: Google seems to prefer microdata but also seems to It seems they support them all.
Comment: I'm not sure where you're getting that they prefer microdata; they have similar pages for [RDFa](http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=146898) and [microformats](http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=146897)
Comment: I missed those. I only saw them linking to that page in the sidebar and assumed they didn't cover the others out of preference for microdata.
Comment: yeah, their site nav is horrible
Answer: Microformats are much simpler to understand and implement, using additional classes on existing HTML elements (or additional span/div elements where necessary).
RDFa on the other hand is more complex and can be difficult to implement, using attributes like xmlns:v and values like v:Person. Like JasonBirch says it's a little problematic for non-XHTML pages (and as such won't validate, if that matters to you).
Comment: You are comparing **microformats** to RDFa, but this question is about **microdata**.

Microdata vs RFDa


Is composition of measurable functions measurable?

Question: We know that if $ f: E \to \mathbb{R} $ is a Lebesgue-measurable function and $ g: \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R} $ is a continuous function, then $ g \circ f $ is Lebesgue-measurable. Can one replace the continuous function $ g $ by a Lebesgue-measurable function without affecting the validity of the previous result?
Comment: Do you mean Borel or Lebesgue measurable? More generally, when we deal with measurability, we always have to give precisions about the involved $\sigma$-algebras.
Comment: Yes, just try out writing it through the definition of the measurability via the inverse of sets
Comment: An equivalent formulation: The inverse image of a Lebesgue measurable set under a Lebesgue measurable function is Lebesgue measurable. Which is not the case in general.
Comment: Please, try to make the title of your question more informative. E.g., *Why does $a<b$ imply $a+c<b+c$?* is much more useful for other users than *A question about inequality.* From [How can I ask a good question?](http://meta.math.stackexchange.com/a/589/): *Make your title as descriptive as possible. In many cases one can actually phrase the title as the question, at least in such a way so as to be comprehensible to an expert reader.*
Answer: Here is the standard example:
Let $f\colon [0,1]\to [0,1]$ be the Cantor–Lebesgue function. This is a monotonic and continuous function, and the image $f(C)$ of the Cantor set $C$ is all of $[0,1]$. Define $g(x) = x + f(x)$. Then $g\colon [0,1] \to [0,2]$ is a strictly monotonic and continuous map, so its inverse $h = g^{-1}$ is continuous, too.
Observe that $g(C)$ measure one in $[0,2]$: this is because $f$ is constant on every interval in the complement of $C$, so $g$ maps such an interval to an interval of the same length. It follows that there is a non-Lebesgue measurable subset $A$ of $g(C)$ (Vitali's theorem: a subset of $\mathbb{R}$ is a Lebesgue null set if and only if all its subsets are Lebesgue measurable).
Put $B = g^{-1}(A) \subset C$. Then $B$ is a Lebesgue measurable set as a subset of the Lebesgue null set $C$, so the characteristic function $1_B$ of $B$ is Lebesgue measurable.
The function $k = 1_B \circ h$ is the composition of the Lebesgue measurable function $1_B$ and and the continuous function $h$, but $k$ is not Lebesgue measurable, since $k^{-1}(1) = (1_B \circ h)^{-1}(1) = h^{-1}(B) = g(B) = A$.
Comment: @man_in_green_shirt no because $1_B^{-1}(1)=B$
Comment: Should the last line read $k^{-1}(B) = (1_B \circ h)^{-1}(B) = h^{-1}(B) = g(B) = A$
Answer: This Wikipedia article may be what you are looking for.
According to the article, a function $ f: \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R} $ is said to be Lebesgue-measurable if and only if for every Borel-measurable subset $ B $ of $ \mathbb{R} $, its pre-image $ {f^{\leftarrow}}[B] $ is a Lebesgue-measurable subset of $ \mathbb{R} $. Therefore, because we are dealing with two different $ \sigma $-algebras of $ \mathbb{R} $ here, the composition of two Lebesgue-measurable functions is not necessarily Lebesgue-measurable. This is precisely what GEdgar and AD. have mentioned.
Answer: As an addition to the other answers, I think it is worth noting that in terms of imitating the relation between a topology and a continuous function when thinking of the relation between a $\sigma$-algebra and a measurable function, we can only go so far as having $g$ Borel measurable.
Let $\mathcal{T}$ be the open sets, $\mathcal{B}$ be the Borel sets and $\mathcal{M}$ be the Lebesgue measurable sets of the real line, respectively. Then we have that $\mathcal{T}\subset\mathcal{B}\subset\mathcal{M}$.
We call $f:E\to\mathbb{R}$ continuous if $f^{-1}(\mathcal{T})\subseteq\mathcal{T}$, Borel measurable if $f^{-1}(\mathcal{T})\subseteq\mathcal{B}$ and Lebesgue measurable if $f^{-1}(\mathcal{T})\subseteq\mathcal{M}$, respectively. Accompanying the inclusions of the classes of sets, we have that every continuous function is Borel measurable and every Borel measurable function is Lebesgue measurable.
It turns out that $f$ is Borel iff $f^{-1}(\mathcal{B})\subseteq\mathcal{B}$, which is analogous to the continuous case, but we don't have $f^{-1}(\mathcal{M})\subseteq\mathcal{M}$ in general for Lebesgue measurable functions $f$. The best we can do is that $f$ is Lebesgue measurable iff $f^{-1}(\mathcal{B})\subseteq\mathcal{M}$.
Consequently if $f$ is Lebesgue measurable and $g$ is Borel measurable, then $g\circ f$ is Lebesgue measurable (just like in the continuous case), and if $f,g$ are both Borel measurable then $g\circ f$ is Borel measurable (again, just like in the continuous case), but if both $f,g$ are Lebesgue measurable we can cook up examples where $g\circ g$ is not Lebesgue measurable. (For the sake of completeness, if $g$ is Lebesgue and $f$ is Borel then $g\circ f$ need not be Lebesgue: in the standard example above f is a homeomorphism).
Comment: To the contrary, it's too strict, even at the syntactic level: indeed, since $\mathcal{B}\subsetneq\mathcal{M}$, $\{f|f^{-1}\mathcal{M}\subseteq\mathcal{M}\}\subsetneq\{f|f^{-1}\mathcal{B}\subseteq\mathcal{M}\}$.
Comment: Hi! Thank you for the explanation, it is a great complement in order to get the thing. Please, can you tell me why the case M to M is not working for lebesgue measurable? Is this a too light restriction for such functions? Are there too many such functions?
Comment: Here is one way to think about this: By the standard example above presented by Mirjam we know that there are homeomorphisms of closed intervals that fail to take a leb-measurable set to another leb-measurable set under preimages. Thus if we defined Lebesgue measurability of $f$ as the requirement that $f^{-1}\mathcal{M}\subseteq \mathcal{M}$, we would have to be content with continuous functions not being measurable; which in the standard way of developing integrals would prohibit one to integrate a continuous function; which in turn means that we would have to let calculus go.
Comment: (There is nothing wrong with letting calculus go per se, though unless you have a better idea the number of your followers will be very limited.)
Answer: This details the Ilya comment:
Yes. In general let $(E_1,\mathcal T_l) ,(E_2,\mathcal T_2),(E_3,\mathcal T_3)$ be three measurable spaces and $f:E_1 \to E_2$ and $g:E_2 \to E_3$ measurables functions.If $X \in \mathcal T_3$, then , by measurability of $g$ we have : $g^{-1}(X) \in \mathcal T_2$ and by measurability of $f$ we have $f^{-1}(g^{-1}(X)) \in \mathcal T_1$. Since $(g \circ f)^{-1} (X)=f^{-1} ( g^{-1}(X))$  we have  :$$\forall X\in \mathcal T_3 \quad (g \circ f)^{-1} (X) \in \mathcal T_1$$
This gives measurability of $g \circ f$
Comment: As A.D. notes, this is probably not what the OP means.  Since he now mentions "Lebesgue measurable function".


Does anyone here use Sony Sound Forge?

Question: It came free with my Sony PCM D50 and was wondering if it is a software people use for sfx editing and sound design. I use Pro tools 9 but this software may be quicker for editing raw soundfx and designing a sound. Your opinion?
Answer: I use soundforge quite alot, AFAIK it's a pretty common tool in game sound design. The reason being that you can play, edit, compare and master multiple single files, either individually or as a batch. It's great for seeing if all you individual footstep sounds or explosions have a similar RMS and tonal constancy, and making tweaks and edits after bouncing from your DAW before putting in game. Also if you bounce e.g. a 2 minute file of whoosh sounds, SF is a great place to sample accurately edit before putting them in game. Looping sounds in SF is also pretty nice.
I also know alot of people who use it for batch dialogue editing and processing for games.
I have never really come across a decent alternative that can do all the things that SF can do, especially in the ability to open view and edit multiple single files at a time.
However having said all that I am not a great fan of the software. It has a habit of crashing and the standard plugins don't sound good.
Getting back to your question, I would say yes it is much quicker for editing raw sound data, e.g. pulling the sounds out and creating new files from them, but any kind of metadata work or processing I would leave to Wave Agent and pro tools.
Comment: I had never seen Wave Agent until you mentioned it there, thanks for that!
Comment: @Joe np glad to be of service :)
Answer: Sound Forge is lightning fast for individual file editing. However, every new release seems to become slower and even more buggy. SF10, the latest, is worst of them all. I actually had to e-mail Sony support asking for a SF8 license because I hated Sound Forge 10 so much (the surprising thing is that they happily gave me that license).
I do like Sound Forge for individual file editing, and I use it a lot - especially (but not exclusively) on dialogue.  It draws wave forms very clearly, so it's perfect for surgical editing. The batch editor is fast as well, although it can be buggy, you kind of need to know how to bypass its quirks. All the things Richard pointed out here earlier are true as well.
On a side note, it may be worth looking into Adobe Audition if you are in the market for a audio editor. It's not as fast as Sound Forge, but you get much better built-in effects and a fantastic resampling engine in return. Moreover, the main reason to get Audition is for its spectral editing tools - quite similar to Izotope RX in fact. Depending on what kind of work you want to do, Audition is the better choice. I own both SF and Audition for this reason. I'd say, Sound Forge works best for fast, basic but important editing, whereas Audition is more of a creative tool which can do some fairly unique things.
Answer: I've touched on Sound Forge a bit and like it a lot, but I know a few guys who reckon something like version 4.5 was the last good one (I forget why). They're using Wavelab nowadays FWIW.
Hope this helps!
Answer: I use Sound Forge 9 quite a lot for initial recording of disc and analog tape transfers--it is easy to set up, and can use ASIO drivers compatible with my Digi 002R interface.  It is OK for general editing, but if you need good crossfade capabilities for editing music, Pro Tools is a better choice.
As Daan Hendriks noted, Sound Forge has suffered from feature bloat with increasing revisions, and Sony has not been good about fixing bugs.  Still, it is a very useful program, fast to use, and will accept a wide range of third-party plug-ins.

Does anyone here use Sony Sound Forge?


How did the Christian movement distinguish itself from Judaism?

Question: Can anyone explain to me how Christianity distanced itself from Judaism and set itself apart?
Comment: Probably started when they began calling a man God.
Comment: Related: [When were the early Christians no longer considered a sect of Judaism?](http://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/33282/when-were-the-early-christians-no-longer-considered-a-sect-of-judaism) which asked **when** while this question is asking **how**.
Comment: Welcome to Christianity.SE! I'd recommend checking out the following posts, which are meant to help newcomers "learn the ropes": [the help page](http://christianity.stackexchange.com/help) and [How we are different than other sites?](http://meta.christianity.stackexchange.com/q/1808/9289#1809).
Comment: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split_of_early_Christianity_and_Judaism
Comment: Primarily by abandoning a negative or hostile attitude towards gentiles.
Answer: In 70 CE, Second Temple Judaism came to an abrupt and traumatic end, with the destruction of the Temple and the enslavement of many leading Jews. Randall Price says in The Secrets of the Dead Sea Scrolls, page 137 (citing Dr. Lawrence Schiffman):

Second Temple Judaism can now be seen as a transition period in which the sectarianism and apocalypticism of the period gradually gave way to rabbinic Judaism, on the one hand, and Christianity, on the other.  Indeed, it is now clear that the Second Temple period was a kind of sorting out process.

John Dominic Crossan agrees, saying in The Birth of Christianity, page xxxiii, that it is not really accurate to say that Christianity eventually broke away from  Judaism. He goes on:

It is more accurate to say that, out of that matrix of biblical Judaism and that maelstrom of late Second-Temple Judaism, two great traditions eventually emerged: Christianity and rabbinic Judaism. Each claimed exclusive continuity with the past, but in truth each was as great a leap and as valid a development from that common ancestry as was the other.  They are not child and parent; they are two children of the same mother.

Christianity and rabbinic Judaism were picking up the pieces in 70 CE and, although competitors for the hearts and minds of those who had followed the former Second Temple Judaism, it was in the interests of neither to attack the other. In its early days, Christianity did not choose to distinguish itself from rabbinic Judaism, with Christians regularly attending the synagogues set up and controlled by rabbinic Judaism. It was eventually rabbinic Judaism that initiated the break, banning Christians from the synagogues in the 90s of the first century, probably in response to the increasing anti-Jewish rhetoric of the Christian movement and the refusal of gentile Christians to undergo circumcision. John Shelby Spong says, in Born of a Woman, page 65, the liturgy of the synagogues was reformulated by 85 CE to attack heretics, and the Christian Jews were finally expelled.
Everett Ferguson says in Backgrounds of Early Christianity, page 461-2, Gemaliel's grandson, Rabban Gamaliel II (active 80-120), introduced into the Eighteen Benedictions, the curse which effectively excommunicated Christians:

"Let the Nazarenes and the heretics perish as in a moment, let them be blotted out of the book of the living and let them not be written with the righteous."
Answer: How did Christian movement distinguish itself from Judaism?
Early Christians did not try to distinguish themselves as a movement. They had hopes that the rest of the Jews would accept Jesus as their Savior. Such attempts at "branding" are more consistent with modern marketing techniques.
The early church was entirely made up of Jews. They were sort of under siege in Jerusalem. Jewish leaders had declared a type of excommunication for anyone following Jesus that probably included economic sanctions.

John 9:22  These words spake his parents, because they feared the
  Jews: for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess
  that he was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue.
Acts 2:44-45  And all that believed were together, and had all things
  common;   And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all
  men, as every man had need.

The sanctions against Christians did not end and eventually other Christians had to sent money to support the Christians in Jerusalem.

1 Corinthians 16:1-3  Now concerning the collection for the saints, as
  I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye.   Upon
  the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as
  God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.   And
  when I come, whomsoever ye shall approve by your letters, them will I
  send to bring your liberality unto Jerusalem.

When Paul (who was an apostle to the gentiles) first came to a new town, he would preach to the Jews first.

Acts 13:41-42  Behold, ye despisers, and wonder, and perish: for I
  work a work in your days, a work which ye shall in no wise believe,
  though a man declare it unto you.  And when the Jews were gone out of
  the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be
  preached to them the next sabbath.

Christianity spread in the early church because the Father drew men to respond to Jesus.

John 6:44  No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me
  draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

The core of Judaism is the law and the law was not in opposition to Christianity, it was a stepping stone.

Galatians 3:24  Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us
  unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

For the first 100 years most people saw Christianity as a sect of Judaism. Both Judaism and Christianity were sporadically persecuted until around 300 AD. Christianity grew as it did because the Father drew people to Jesus. In the next 100 years what was called Christianity became a mixture of political and religious organizational systems which claimed authority over anyone calling themselves Christian.
Once Christianity was mixed with political and religious systems, coercive force was made available. Those who wielded such force could make Christianity distinguishable by killing anyone who resisted being called a Christian.
Even to this day it is difficult to distinguish between Biblical Christianity and organizational or systems Christianity. When Christianity was in social favor, many people would claim to be Christian. As Christianity falls into social disfavor, it will become a much smaller group.
Comment: Nice answer, history agrees with you, Christians were Jews.  The followers of Jesus believed they were going to evolve Judaism not create a new religion.
Comment: Christianity was comprised of both Jews and Gentiles from the start. Christ shared the gospel with the Samaritan woman in John 4, who shared the gospel with her Samaritan village. Christ also cast demons out of a man sent them into a swine herd. I don't think Jews would have herds of swine; they're not kosher. In Acts, there's the centurion that Peter preached to, and the Roman jailer who Paul baptized in Acts 17. As for Constantine ending Rome's persecution, there was no big shift in doctrine, and church and state didn't always get along.
Answer: Within the time period covered by the New Testament itself, and extending forward from that period historically, Christianity set itself apart from Judaism in two primary ways:

Accepting Jesus Christ as the promised Messiah, a claim that was and still is explicitly rejected by the main body of Judaism.
Rejecting observance of the Torah or Law of Moses as binding upon Christians.

Accepting Christ as the promised Messiah
This took place within the lifetime of Jesus, as recorded in the Gospels. Establishing this belief is one of the primary purposes of the Gospels--especially the Gospel of Matthew, which opens with these words:

This is the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah the son of David, the son
  of Abraham. (Matthew 1:1, NIV)

This verse is more commonly translated as "the genealogy of Jesus Christ . . . ." However, the Greek word Χριστός (Christos) is used as a translation of the Hebrew word מָשִׁיחַ (mashiyach). Both of them mean "anointed," i.e. anointed as a king or priest, but usually used of an anointed king. Wherever we read "Christ" in English Bibles, it is designating Jesus as the Messiah, or Anointed One.
In addition to consistently referring to Jesus as the Christ, or Messiah, the Gospels also contain explicit statements of his position as the Messiah. For example:

"But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"
Simon Peter answered, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living
  God."
Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not
  revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven."
  (Matthew 16:15-17)

In addition, by making the Messiah "the Son of God," and divine, the early followers of Christ violated Jewish teachings about the nature of God:

For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he
  breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father,
  making himself equal with God. (John 5:18)
"We are not stoning you for any good work," they replied, "but for
  blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God." (John 10:33)

This became the primary issue at Jesus' trial in front of the Sanhedrin:

The high priest said to him, "I charge you under oath by the living
  God: Tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God." (Matthew 26:63)

When Jesus answered in the affirmative (using a common locution meaning "yes"), the Sanhedrin sentenced him to death for blasphemy.
In this encounter, as in others, the Jewish authorities explicitly rejected the claim of Jesus and his disciples that he was the Messiah. This remains the position of Judaism to this day (aside from Messianic Jews, who are not considered Jews by the main bodies of Judaism).
According to the Gospel narratives, even within Gospel times themselves the Jewish leaders excluded from the synagogue, and by implication declared non-Jewish, anyone who accepted Jesus as the Messiah:

The Jewish leaders . . . already had decided that anyone who
  acknowledged that Jesus was the Messiah would be put out of the
  synagogue. (John 9:22)

The belief that Jesus was the Christ, or Messiah, then, was the key point on which followers of Christ, or Christians, distinguished themselves from Judaism, and the key point on which Judaism originally rejected Christianity as Jewish.
Rejecting observance of the Torah or Law of Moses
Jesus did not explicitly require his followers to reject the ritual Law of Moses. In some cases, he even instructed people to observe those rituals. For example, after healing a man of leprosy, Jesus commanded him:

"See that you don't tell anyone. But go, show yourself to the priest
  and offer the gift Moses commanded, as a testimony to them." (Matthew
  8:4)

However, on a number of occasions Jesus incurred the wrath of the Jewish leaders by violating their ritual laws. Here is one well-known example:

Going on from that place, he went into their synagogue, and a man with
  a shriveled hand was there. Looking for a reason to bring charges
  against Jesus, they asked him, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?"
He said to them, "If any of you has a sheep and it falls into a pit on
  the Sabbath, will you not take hold of it and lift it out? How much
  more valuable is a person than a sheep! Therefore it is lawful to do
  good on the Sabbath."
Then he said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." So he stretched it
  out and it was completely restored, just as sound as the other. But
  the Pharisees went out and plotted how they might kill Jesus. (Matthew
  12:9-14)

It could be quibbled that there was not an explicit law in the Torah, or Law of Moses, forbidding healing on the Sabbath. However, Jesus did explicitly nullify various commandments that were clearly stated in the Torah. For example:

"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.'
  But I tell you, do not resist an evil person." (Matthew 5:38-39)

This nullified a law given not once, but at least three times in the Torah:

But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for
  eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn,
  wound for wound, bruise for bruise. (Exodus 21:23-35)
Anyone who injures their neighbor is to be injured in the same manner:
  fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth. The one who has
  inflicted the injury must suffer the same injury. (Leviticus 24:19-20)
The judges must make a thorough investigation, and if the witness
  proves to be a liar, giving false testimony against a fellow
  Israelite, then do to the false witness as that witness intended to do
  to the other party. You must purge the evil from among you. The rest
  of the people will hear of this and be afraid, and never again will
  such an evil thing be done among you. Show no pity: life for life, eye
  for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot. (Deuteronomy
  19:18-21)

And Jesus was very explicit about rejecting a law embodied in the Mosaic Law in his response to a question about divorce:

Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your
  hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning."
  (Matthew 19:8)

After Jesus' death, the issue of whether Christians must observe the Law of Moses became a full-blown debate among the early Christian Apostles and believers.
The Jewish-born Christians in Jerusalem, traditionally believed to be led by James, the brother of Jesus, held that the body of followers of Christ must observe Jewish law.
But the Apostles who were evangelizing among the gentiles, notably Paul, Barnabas, and Peter, argued that Christ had fulfilled the Law, and that Christ had sent them to spread the Gospel to the gentiles, and that therefore observance of the ritual laws and behavioral codes of the Torah, or Law, was not necessary for Christians. (See also Peter's vision of a sheet containing all kinds of animals in Acts 10:9-23)
This is the real force, in its historical context, of Paul's statement:

We maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works
  of the law. (Romans 3:28)

In Paul's letters (as in the Septuagint, which Paul relied upon heavily), the Greek word νόμος (nomos), "law," is commonly used as a translation of the Hebrew word תּוֹרָה (towrah), "Torah, Law," referring to the Law of Moses as set out in the first five books of the Hebrew Bible: Genesis through Deuteronomy. In most cases, it should be capitalized in translation as "Law" in order to indicate this meaning.
That is why, in Paul's discussions of being saved by faith apart from the works of the Law, he commonly refers to "circumcision"--as he does in the verses following that oft-quoted statement in Romans 3:28:

Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too?
  Yes, of Gentiles too, since there is only one God, who will justify
  the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same
  faith. Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather,
  we uphold the law. (Romans 3:29-31)

The whole of Romans 3, and the Epistle to the Romans generally, is an extended argument in the debate with the Jerusalem Christians over whether followers of Christ must observe the Jewish law. That law was commonly referred to as "circumcision," since being circumcised was (and still is) the physical sign and symbol that a person was (and is) an observant Jew.
This debate led to a meeting recounted in Acts 15:1-35, which church historians have dubbed the "Council of Jerusalem," believed to have taken place around 50 AD. Here was the issue under dispute, as related at the beginning of its narrative account in Acts 15:

Certain people came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the
  believers: "Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught
  by Moses, you cannot be saved." This brought Paul and Barnabas into
  sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were
  appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to
  see the apostles and elders about this question. (Acts 15:1-2)

And the issue is stated again in verse 5:

Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees
  stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to
  keep the law of Moses." (Acts 15:5)

From the ensuing debate, the following decision emerged and was promulgated to the non-Jewish believers:

Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth
  what we are writing. It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not
  to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: You are
  to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of
  strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to
  avoid these things. (Acts 15:27-29)

This established definitively that Christians would not be required to be circumcised and observe all of the ritual and behavioral codes of the Torah, though a few prohibitions made in the Mosaic Law were still enjoined upon believers as things they would "do well to avoid."
Since that time, it has been the accepted belief and practice of nearly all Christian denominations and sects that it is not necessary for Christians to observe the ritual and behavioral codes enjoined in the Torah, or Law of Moses.
This became a second fundamental division between Christianity and Judaism.
Judaism as a religion is defined primarily by its observance of the Torah or Law of Moses, and of the body of rabbinical law that has grown up around the Law of Moses.
By declaring that Christians need not observe the Law of Moses and the accompanying rabbinical laws that are binding upon Jews, the early Apostles, and following them Christianity as a whole, decisively split from Judaism and became a whole new religion rather than a sect of Judaism.
Answer: Christianity distinguished itself from Rabbinic Judaism in believing that Jesus is messiah, and in particular a lawgiver "greater than Moses" and therefore with the authority to change the Laws of Moses.  That sort of thinking undermines Judaism, and therefore is unthinkable to Jews of any time.
Answer: Christianity distinguished itself from Rabbinic Judaism by maintaining a priesthood, an altar, and a sacrifice commemorating (i.e. making present) Jesus' sacrifice each time the Divine Liturgy was celebrated. (See the prayers in the Divine Liturgy of St. James, of St. John Chrysostom, and of St. Basil). After the Temple was destroyed, Judaism kept none of those things either literally or symbolically.
See the Epistle to the Hebrews by St. Paul (first century, included in the New Testament), 'The Dialogue with Trypho' by Justin Martyr (second century), and the Epistle of Barnabas (second century) for more information.


Django WSGI application in a subdirectory?

Question: Recently, I wanted to put one of my WSGI applications into a subdirectory, so that the other directories that cointain various scripts would work as before. In order to do that, I added the following directive to my httpd.conf in global namespace (also tried to put it in the VirtualHost, which gave the same effects):
WSGIScriptAlias /hello/ /var/www/hello/hello.wsgi

Then, I ran django-admin startproject hello. After reloading Apache configs, I can confirm that http://localhost/hello/ points to a Django "welcome" screen. Then, I edited hello/urls.py to add the following line in the urlpatterns tuple:
url(r'^hello/', 'hello.views.home'),

Next, I created hello/views.py with the following contents:
from django.http import HttpResponse

def hello(request):
    return HttpResponse("Hello world")

Unfortunately, when I try to visit http://localhost/hello/hello, I get a standard Apache 404 message and the following entry in the error log:
[Mon Dec 23 19:49:44 2013] [error] [client 188.8.131.52] Target WSGI script not found or unable to stat: /var/www/hello/hello.wsgihello

Note the hello.wsgihello. The second hello is the text that appears after /hello/ in the URL. For http://localhost/hello/unknown, it would be hello.wsgiunknown. Here's my hello.wsgi:
import os
import sys

os.environ['DJANGO_SETTINGS_MODULE'] = 'hello.settings'

path = '/var/www/hello'
if path not in sys.path:
    sys.path.append(path)

import django.core.handlers.wsgi
application = django.core.handlers.wsgi.WSGIHandler()

Did I do something wrong? How do I fix it?
Answer: The file syntax in /var/www/hello/hello.wsgi confused me. Apparently, if one points to /var/www/hello/hello.wsgi/ instead, the configuration works fine.


Are questions about equipment off topic?

Question: There have been a few questions about knives, and these seem on topic but a question about an ice cream maker part, is this on or off topic?  and for what reason?
Comment: FWIW, the question was a little bit more broad in scope than just an ice cream maker part - he's asking about general compatibility of Kitchen Aid mixer attachments, of which there are many (the ice cream maker was the first example, but he also mentions a slicer/shredder and a food grinder). The initials confuse this more than is necessary; shame I can't edit...
Answer: It's not fair to expect every member (especially new members) to understand such subtle differences between on-topic equipment and off-topic equipment.  If some kitchen appliances are considered on topic (stoves, ovens, mixers, food processors, slow cookers, etc.) then all kitchen appliances should be on topic.
The only difference I can really see between an ice cream maker and a crock pot is that an ice cream maker has a highly-specialized purpose.  But that's not a very good or reliable distinction because the gray area is pretty big - a crêpe pan is obviously not the most versatile piece of equipment, but I think almost everyone here would agree that it's a good fit for this site.
There are a few things I dislike about the linked question.  Specifically:

It's not just about a specific type of equipment, but a specific model.  This limits the audience considerably, and a large number of similar posts might set the stage for a never-ending stream of "which appliance is better, X or Y?" type questions.
It's not about the use of the equipment but rather acquisition and assembly, which is starting to drift pretty far away from questions that will teach people how to be better cooks (which is, after all, the goal of the site, right?).
It's relative to a specific geographical area - two of them, actually - which makes it a candidate for closing as Too Localized.  However, the areas are pretty broad (Europe and USA) and this doesn't seriously shrink the audience.  Unless we started getting inundated with similar questions, I would hold off on the TL vote for now.

Of the above three points, probably the second is the most important.  Right now, though, I just don't think it's a strong enough point to move the question into off-topic territory.  It's a question that, IMO, is unlikely to get answered very quickly on a site like this, but it's still a valid question.
As far as I'm concerned, questions about kitchen equipment are on topic - as long as they meet the other criteria (i.e. not subjective/argumentative), which this one does.  I've even listed this as one of the on-topic subjects for the FAQ.  If you agree (or disagree), you should vote accordingly.
Comment: +1 - I couldn't have written it better myself
Comment: Hey Aaronut. I've always thought this was one of your rather uncharacteristically nebulous answers. :) Would you mind clarifying it with more specific examples of what _is_ appropriate within the realm of "questions about kitchen equipment are on topic"? e.g. http://meta.cooking.stackexchange.com/q/773/60
Comment: @hobodave: As both this question and the one you link to reference *specific* questions and ask if those *specific* questions are on/off-topic, I'd prefer to have a separate topic addressing the general issue (a FAQ, like the recipe scope question).
Comment: Ah, I didn't pay attention to the body of this question, just the title. That makes sense.
Answer: I think all kitchen equipments are related to the purpose of this site hence should be allowed. There is also this discussion here on meta.
Answer: I think there is a big difference between asking "What kind of knife makes  easier?" and "What attachments for this particular equipment works overseas?"
I would vote the first on-topic and the second off-topic.
Comment: I tend to agree, the question seems too localised for my liking.


Can I cross the U.S. Canadian border multiple times on tourist visa?

Question: My sister is visiting from Egypt. She will have a Canadian and American tourist visa. We will be taking the Alaska cruise. My husband and I (US citizens) were planning on meeting her in Vancouver where she flies in to, do a bit of sight seeing there and then drive back to Seattle to hop on the ship. After the cruise, we were wanting to Drop her off at Vancouver to catch her flight. Can my sister go back and forth across the border multiple times by road and ship over a matter of 10 days?
Comment: It's a multiple entry visa.
Comment: You should add the extra information, crucial in this case, to the actual question because comments can be ephemeral and are not always read.
Comment: Sorry, is this question really "Is someone with a multiple -entry visa allowed to enter the country multiple times on that visa?"
Answer: You mention in a comment that "It's a multiple entry visa."  Assuming you mean the Canadian visa is the multiple-entry one, then what you're proposing is OK.  She will arrive in Vancouver, you will drive her to the US (her only entry to that country), and then by some unspecified means she will return to Vancouver (her second entry to Canada).
You mentioned going across the border by ship too.  If it's an Alaska cruise leaving from Seattle, will the ship actually make port in Canada?  If it does, you may want to make sure that both visas permit multiple entry.
Comment: Well then you are definitely good to go.
Comment: Actually, the U.S. visa does not need to be multiple-entry, because after the first entry, subsequent entries can be done using automatic revalidation, without needing a visa, since it was a less than 30 day trip to Canada.
Comment: Yes both her visas will be multiple entry visas.


Accessing networked computers by hostname?

Question: I have computer with a host of DumbServer. When I try to connect to http://DumbServer or use DumbServer in Putty, it doesn't work. If I use the IP address, everything is fine. How do I set it up so that DumbServer works without having to add the entry into the hosts file for every computer?
Answer: Add a record to your local DNS server.
Answer: Do you have an internal DNS server? If so, you'll need to add 'DumbServer' as an A record in one of your DNS zones, pointing the IP address to the IP of that server.
If you add the record to a DNS zone which matches a DNS suffix configured on your computers, you will be able to address the computer using simply http://DumbServer (rather than http://DumbServer.domain.tld)
If you don't, I do believe that with an OpenDNS account, you can configure an alias for 'DumbComputer', which would be resolved (by OpenDNS) to its internal IP. This would, however, require you to point all your computers to the OpenDNS servers.
Answer: You can use DNSMasq, e.g.: http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/DNSMasq_as_DHCP_server

An added advantage is that DNSMasq can intelligently add DHCP leases to its DNS database, providing local name lookups for any DHCP client, static or dynamic.

Cheers
Answer: Easy answer, just add an entry to your C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc\hosts file.  This will allow applications on your workstation (and only your workstation) to use the server's name instead of it's IP address.
Less easy answer, add an entry to your DNS.  Others have already posted answers on how to go about that.