What is the meaning and usage of the word "beknownst"?

Question: I've used "beknownst" and "unbeknownst" a couple times but I never really bothered to look it up until now. But it's not in most of the online dictionaries websites I frequent. I'm under the impression that this word is old school; if so, is it still appropriate to use? Or am I better off using some other word that means the same thing?
Comment: Unbeknownst is a beautiful word.
Answer: Technically there is no such word as 'beknownst' other than as a back-formation of 'unbeknownst' (unbeknown exists and in fact pre-dates unbeknownst. Beknown also exists). It is rather old-fashioned which is probably why some online dictionaries don't list it.
They have essentially been superceded by 'known' and 'unknown', which have equivalent meanings. Nevertheless it is not uncommon to hear:

Unbeknownst to me, my wife had already bought the same present.

Or the like. It is perfectly appropriate to use.
Comment: Of course there is such a word 'beknownst' - and has been for centuries, even if it's now archaic. A few people today may imagine they're "re-coining" it by back-formation from the other archaic word they're more familiar with, but your assertion that somehow *"technically" there is no such word* is just plain wrong.
Comment: @Fixee 'usage: The standard spelling is supersede rather than supercede. The word is derived from the Latin verb supersedere but has been influenced by the presence of other words in English spelled with a c, such as intercede and accede. The c spelling is recorded as early as the 16th century; although still generally regarded as incorrect, it is now entered without comment in some modern dictionaries.' TIL, thanks!
Comment: Good description and example and I agree perfectly appropriate word to use. But downvoting as I agree with @FumbleFingers that asserting that there is technically no such word as "beknownst" is just plain wrong. Reference would be helpful when you're making absolute statements such as that. kiamlaluno's answer should be the accepted one.
Comment: Superseded, not superceded.
Answer: beknownst is an archaic word, as it is beknown; the meaning of beknown is known.
The word that is used in Modern English is unbeknown (or unbeknownst), which has its origin from beknown.

unbeknown |ˌənbəˈnoʊn| (also unbeknownst)
  adjective [ predic. ] (unbeknown to)
  without the knowledge of someone: unbeknown to me, she made some inquiries.
ORIGIN middle 17th century: from un- (not) + archaic beknown (known).
Answer: Unbeknownst is strictly an adverb may not be benoted as much as unknown since unknown is a noun and an adjective.
However, it is hardly "archaic" ... I eathly found samples of being in magazines and books in the last decade.

The beverage industry has long supported groups such as Keep America
  Beautiful (the group famously known for its " crying Indian " ads)
  that emphasize individual responsibility for Utter collection but
  which, unbeknownst to most consumers, work behind the scenes to
  oppose and defeat bottle recycling bills. … E: The Environmental
  Magazine, 2011

And it is benoted much more than unbeknown: Ngram (Sorry, I couldn't get it to load here.)
Comment: Why do you say it is strictly an adverb? Many dictionaries list it as an adjective; for example: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/unbeknownst, http://www.thefreedictionary.com/unbeknownst
Comment: @herisson: it's possible that "unbeknownst" can function in an adjectival phrase but not get used as a simple adjective (e.g. "an unbeknownst person"). MW's example doesn't use it simply, and doing so feels odd to me (again, "an unbeknownst person"). That might be why AnWulf stated it's strictly an adverb.
Answer: 'Beknownst', not archaic at all. Abbreviated from, 'as be known to me'. To simply use known in its stead would cause the confusion as to 'known to whom?'. To imply that it should be understood that one would be referring to oneself is vulgarity.
Comment: This was, by far, the most accurate and knowledgeable of the answers listed. Beknownst is a much more accurate way of describing Yourself as Centre, but not necessarily in 3rd Person.


Map $\{ z=x+iy : |x|\geq y \}$ with a branch cut on the negative imaginary axis from $[-i,0]$ to the unit disc

Question: I have a conformal map that I've been having problems with.

Map the set $\{ z=x+iy : |x|\geq y \}$ with a branch cut on the negative imaginary axis from $[-i,0]$ to the unit disc.

I've tried a few things but the branch cut keeps messing me up.
Answer: The interior of your domain consists of all points $z=x+iy$ which satisfies one of the three conditions: (i) $x>0$ and $y<x$, (ii) $x=0$ and $y<-1$, or (iii) $x<0$ and $y<-x$.
First map $z$ to $w=iz$. This will rotate your picture counterclockwise by $90^\circ$. Then map $w$ to $\tau=w^{4/3}$. This will close the open sector, and your domain will be mapped to the complex plane minus a cut from $\tau=1$ along the real axis to $\tau=-\infty$. Then map $\tau$ to $\zeta=\sqrt{\tau-1}$, which will send your domain to the right half plane $\Re(\zeta)>0$. Finally map $\zeta$ to ${1-\zeta \over 1+\zeta}$, which will map your domain to the unit disc.
Answer: The region has two rays emanating from the origin as its boundary. One of the rays is in the $i+i$ direction, and the other is in the $-1+i$ direction. This boundary needs to become the boundary of the disc. The region under discussion is the region below these rays. We will do what we need to do to "straighten" out the rays into a vertical line, so that exponentiation will turn them into the boundary of the disc.
Multiply $z$ by $i$, so that the boundary rays are now in the $-1\pm i$ directions. Raise $z$ to the $2/3$ power, using the negative real axis as a branch cut for cube root. Now the boundary rays are the imaginary axis, and the region has nonnegative real parts. Negate $z$, so that the region has nonpositive imaginary parts. And lastly, exponentiate to get the unit disc with its interior.
So all together,
$$z\mapsto \exp(-(iz)^{2/3})$$
where the branch cut for the cube root is the negative real axis. Now, this makes the branch cut for the entire map the positive imaginary axis, which is the opposite of what you asked for. Can you modify this approach?
Comment: What about the "branch [?] cut on the negative imaginary axis from $[-i,0]$"? I think the two sides of this cut also want to make it onto the boundary of the disc.
Comment: @ChristianBlatter A branch cut will put the closed edge on one or of the sides, and leave an open edge on the other side. After the transformation, this ripped seam can glue back together inside the disc, say along a radius. I'll add the full answer now, I just wanted to give OP a chance to think about it more.
Comment: @ChristianBlatter Tougher than I thought! I take it back.
Comment: Seeing Per Manne's answer, I think I misunderstood the nature of the desired branch cut. It's just supposed to be a slit, not an entire ray.


Is there a way to keep my iPhone from receiving calls/texts/alerts while listening to music?

Question: I like to listen to music on my iPhone when running, but it's really annoying for the music to be interrupted by calls/texts/alerts. I know I can put it in airplane mode, but that will keep me from using the GPS to track my mileage through apps like RunKeeper. Is there another way to "silence" calls/texts/alerts and just have them show up as missed when I'm finished listening to music?
Comment: It's called iPod Touch ;)
Answer: Coming in iOS 6, you'll have the option to set "Do Not Disturb" mode in the device's Settings.  DND allows you to block out a time window where calls and alerts will be silenced.
You can optionally configure it to allow calls from "favorites" or repeated calls to still come through.
Comment: DND is one of those features that doesn't sound too interesting until you try it. Then you wonder how you lived without it. Kinda like Swype.
Answer: If you have a GSM phone, you can just pop out the SIM card. You've now got a GPS capable iPod touch while you run.
If you normally have notifications coming in over WiFi networks that your phone might join during the run, optionally turn WiFi off to be safe.

If you don't have service through a SIM, getting rid of everything but the voice call interruption is easy. Most carriers will let you forward your voice calls temporarily - say to google voice if you are into a free solution. Combine the two and you have your solution.
All of these work in the Settings App:
In Sound:

Set the Ringer and Alerts volume to zero
Set Change with Buttons to OFF
Set Vibrate to OFF when Silent

In General -> Network

Set Cellular Data to OFF

At this point when you have the side switch to silent, only an incoming call should silently pause your music. You can then press any hardware button to get right back to the music. Not exactly what you ask, but the best you can do without modifying the iOS software.
Comment: I'm able to achieve the ability you describe in this answer (only incoming calls silently pausing music) by just setting vibrate off when silent, and siding the switch to silent. Works great as I'll frequently listen to a podcast while going to sleep.
Answer: Before iOS6 the short answer is no. The iPhone's and iOS flexibility in certain aspects is really (sometimes for the good) small. iOS doesn't support the old traditional "modes" where you could set your old phone in "meeting" or "some name" and then set the ringtones for each individual mode, and even silence and turn off vibrate. I remember an old Nokia phone almost 10 years ago was capable of doing this :)
Your other bet (albeit an annoying one) would be to setup a "silence" ringtone and turn off vibration, but I believe your music will be "paused" while the phone is ringing while there's a cross fade from your music to the ring tone.
The drawback is that you'll have to put them back after your session.
Your other alternative is to Jailbreak the phone and seek Cydia repositories and other "unknown sources" to find something like this (which I'm sure exists out there).
Answer: The easiest solution I can think of is just to forward your calls. On my AT&T phone, I can do this right from the settings app — send them to another number (Google Voice is a good suggestion, though make sure GVoice won't just send the call right back to your iPhone!) I think I remember reading that CDMA phones don't support this automatic forwarding feature because the network doesn't support it. This was pre-Sprint days, so it may have only been a Verizon limitation. At any rate, I'm sure there's some way to turn on call forwarding through the Verizon website or by calling into your non-visual voicemail or something.
Comment: Interesting thought - can I turn it off and on pretty quickly? I obviously wouldn't want to turn call forwarding on forever, just for a couple hours at a time. And I'd want to be able to turn it off right away when I'm finished listening to music too. Thanks!
Comment: Yes, it's fast. It took me less than 10 seconds just now, and that included trying to remember where the setting was (Settings -> Phone -> Call Forwarding). It will remember the last number you forwarded to, so after the first setup, you just need to navigate there and toggle a switch. There's also a handy icon in the status bar to remind you forwarding is on.
Answer: Note sure why nobody has mentioned this: Just switch your phone to SILENT on the side.

Music and Podcasts will still play, but it will stop your phone from interrupting the music/podcast to alert you about phone calls, texts and emails. I do it all the time and it works a charm.
Answer: In iOS7 You can now use Do Not Disturb mode to both prevent unwanted notifications and calls/alerts etc, and unlike in iOS6 you can choose to have this setting effective whether or not the phone is unlocked, meaning that if a call comes in while you have the Music apps open to select a new playlist etc, you can still avoid the disturbance if you choose.
Settings > Do Not Disturb > Silence: Always/Only while iPhone is locked
Answer: Just flip the volume switch on the side to off.  It works for music and podcast apps.  I can now listen to them and not have the volume go down.
Answer: I use the do not disturb mode during my workouts. Works also on long road trips or bike rides when I don't want to have my music paused.
Answer: The RIGHT answer is to flip the silent switch on the side of the phone.
Comment: [Be nice](http://apple.stackexchange.com/help/behavior) is one of the expectations here. You could rephrase your answer to be a concise and helpful one.
Answer: Go into settings and switch to aeroplane mode!! No calls or texts what so ever will come through yet you can listen to music.
The only problem is, you can't get Internet using this option so if your using a gps then this option is no good for you.
Comment: Thanks for the suggestion - I actually included this option in my question and said that it works to shut off calls but won't allow me to use GPS tracking like Runkeeper.
Answer: I recently learned, and personally tested with my iPhone 4, if you go into your Settings, then turn on Airplane Mode, it will stop your phone from receiving phone calls and text messages. You will be able to retrieve voicemails and text messages when you turn the Airplane Mode back to the Off position. If you want to have access to WiFi capabilities like GPS, maps, email, etc. turn your WiFi on in Settings. It's right underneath the Airplane Mode feature. Of course, if you have any APPS that have push notifications on, it will effect the volume of your iPod. To remedy that just change your Notifications to the Off position in Settings. All 3 of these features are in Settings, all next to each other at the very top. So it makes it very easy and convenient.
Comment: Welcome to SE. By the way, GPS is not a Wifi capability. Wifi can be and is used in iPhone to help locate a device when in range of Wifi, but apps like RunKeeper will primarily run on GPS (Global Positioning Service). The OP actually mentioned that they would rather not use Airplane mode because that effectively disables GPS.


How can I change which file manager dropbox opens with by default?

Question: I installed Xubuntu on a new laptop I got, and this being my first time using xfce, I accidentally told my dropbox folder to open with nautilus (coming from ubuntu) and not thunar. Now it will not allow me to open the folder via the task bar. Is there any way to tell it to use thunar instead?
Answer: Dropbox is integrated with Nautilus, however, there is a hack from the Crunchbang Wiki that works around this. Create a script, /bin/nautilus:
#!/bin/bash
exec thunar ~/Dropbox
exit 0
so that dropbox's requests for a file manager are passed to Thunar.
There is also a plugin, Thunar Dropbox that provides the context menus for dropbox in Thunar (Copy Public Link etc.).
Answer: Another solution would be to allow the script to accept the binaries requested location to open. Move /usr/bin/nautilus aside and create a new script as  /usr/bin/nautilus and add the following;
#!/bin/bash

/usr/bin/caja $@

This will allow the script to open a path given after the command.  Note that this script replaces the nautilus binary, so if ever needed move your script aside and move back the original binary nautilus to re-enable the original nautilus.


When does the second half of an NBA game start?

Question: I'm from Europe so it's hard for me to stay awake for the whole match, so I'm asking how much in total with commercials and time-outs, when does second half tip off?
Answer: On average, NBA games will take a total of 2 hours and 15 minutes. You can expect the second half to start around 1 hour and 15 minutes after the tip off.
E.g. Game tips off at 7:30, 1st half will end around 8:30, 15 minute halftime, and 2nd half will start around 8:45.
Here is a Forbes article which has the average duration of games over the last few seasons: https://www.forbes.com/sites/shlomosprung/2018/12/11/nba-games-are-longer-this-year-and-the-league-is-ok-with-that-stressing-game-flow-as-more-important/#27276fbb2503


What does "play 2nd time only" mean?

Question: I am very new to music theory and I just want justification on what "play 2nd time only" means. Does it mean that the instrument does not play it the 1st time, and then does play it the 2nd time, right?
Comment: It's not always easy to make a simple easily understood direction, but here, it's worked perfectly, because you translated it exactly! That's good !
Comment: You have answered your own question correctly. Some_Guy expands the answer further.
Answer: In short, it means exactly what it says: only play the second time around
Often this is used when a different texture is wanted the second time round, sometimes for the second repeat of a few bars (which will have a repeat sign) or sometimes for a whole verse or the whole piece even (which might not bother to include the repeat signs if it's obvious from context).
3 reasons you might have this:
1) for a verse that has a sparse accompaniment the first time round, and on the second time you want a fuller accompaniment (e.g. starting with just a piano and voice, and on the second time the whole band/the string section comes in too, very common)
2) In jazz arrangements, you often get horn stabs that only come the second time round on a solo section, or that have more instruments the second time round in order to produce a buildup effect
3) In all types of music, you might have a section that repeats, but the second time round there's a lead up into the next section (colloquially often called an "upbeat" although technically this has a slightly more specific meaning).  You might find this in Brass band music, big band music, jazz arrangements, theatre music etc.  You could write this as a first and second time bar in a repeat, but if the first time bar would be empty and the second one not, often it's easier (and saves space on the page) to just write "second time only" above the notes rather than bothering to have an empty first time bar.
Answer: Yes, you're right. This is probably somewhere in the vicinity of a repeat sign:

(source)
Terms in music notation are often in Italian, but sometimes plain English is used as well. It needs to be short, because one needs to read it fast while playing the music, so don't look for subtleties; there are none.
Answer: This is a common way to avoid writing an entire section of music twice due to one small difference. Say for example you have two verses that are nearly identical but because the melody is slightly different the second time due to a slight lyric difference or there is a small fill the second time your options are to write the entire section twice or write it once, use a repeat, and mark the thing that only happens the second time with a little note to the player.
It is very common that the lead into the next section is different when you repeated so there is a special "second ending" type of repeat that you may encounter as well.
Comment: Actually, "2nd time only" is frequently found in the common part (in your case the first 3 bars, and there is probably another instrument group, which plays "1st time only", so even despite the repetition the sound of the whole ensemble will be different.

What does “play 2nd time only” mean?


Voice over sibilance

Question: Hi people, I've been recording voice over dialogue for a cooking show and have never encountered so much sibilance problems. I hate what auto deessers do to a track and haven't the time to scrub them manually. any advice on dealing with sibilance on the way in, mic placement tec. ?
cheers
Answer: +1 on Mike's suggestion regarding lavs. If you're using stand mounted mics though, try placing the mic capsule above the mouth (cheek bone height) and slightly to the side. Obviously, still aimed at the mouth. The point is to get it out from in front of it.
A quick fix for you in post...
Create a duplicate track of the DX with your de-esser on it. Set it so that it controls that sibilance well, even when it's at its worst. Yes, the rest of the track will probably sound awful, but that's why you do this on a duplicate track. Now kill the volume of that duplicate track (negative infinity, don't mute it). When you hit a spot where the sibilance is needs to be controlled in your original/primary DX track, put in a quick crossfade between the processed and unprocessed tracks. Fast, simple, and avoids overfiltering the rest of your track.
Another favorite, though more time consuming, trick of mine is to de-ess using RX2. Use "spectral repair" and "attenuate" the offending sibilance. You can get far better sounding results that way.
Comment: i'll often use spectral repair to lose whistley esses.  just circle the whistle, put spectral repair into attenuate/vertical mode, and they go away seamlessly.  De essers don't deal with whistles well AT ALL.
Comment: @Rene - exactly!
Comment: Great!
It would be also handy to comp it from a second playlist, right?
Answer: If you are using personal clip on mics, providing they are omni, turn them upside down so they are facing down rather than up with help sibilance.
As to de-essers, there are de-essers and de-essers. A lot of the de-essers are wide band so when a sibilance is detected they gain reduce the whole freq range. Good de-esses can be configured to just reduce the sibilance frequencies and so sound so much much natural. Plug-in wise I would look at the Waves, Sonnox and the new FabFilter Pro-DS one is rapidly becoming my go to de-esser.
Answer: Great tips Shaun!  I have also heard of people getting good results out of RX2. (Which is on sale!)
Answer: I've never had satisfactory results with plugins.
In addition to mic selection, placement and a pop shield I think the best method is to just go through the material in an audio editor with a spectral view (I use Soundtrack Pro) and reduce the volume of offending frequencies.
You have much more control this way and don't end up with artefacts all over the place and people sounding like they're underwater.
A little time consuming but well worth it for the results.
Answer: I've found sibilance to be accentuated on recordings of dialogue inside hard-surfaced rooms, such as a tiled bathroom or kitchen for example.
I would look at ways to baffle the space you're recording in (it's probably got a hard-surfaced counter and tiles and a nice big metal cooking pot to reflect on), and I think this could be a good way to start hunting down your problem.
What type of microphone are you using?
I find that the CMIT-5U from Schoeps has some pretty smooth sibilance to it.
Also, make sure if you're using a lav, that the HF boost isn't on if it's outside the guy's shirt...
Just a couple thoughts I can give without knowing what type of mic, acoustics, etc. you're dealing with. Can you give a little more info?

Voice over sibilance


Implementing IConsumerTokenManager in DotNetOpenAuth

Question: I'm trying to use DotNetOpenAuth in my ASP.NET MVC application to interact with the LinkedIn API. To persist and retrieve tokens to/from my database I need to implement IConsumerTokenManager in my service layer. Currently I'm retrieving the token secrets for an access token (not a request token) like this:
public string GetTokenSecret(string token)
{
    // Retrieves token secret from database based on the user's username
    string tokenSecret = _db.LinkedInAccounts.GetTokenSecret(HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.Name);
    return tokenSecret;
}

This feels very dirty because I'm having to reference System.Web and HttpContext in my service layer. I really don't want to do this, but I'm having trouble determining another way to retrieve the access token. I could just retrieve it using the access token like so:
string tokenSecret = _db.LinkedInAccounts.GetTokenSecret(token);

But I'm not exactly sure if access tokens will be unique and how this will affect database performance when there are thousands of access tokens stored.
Is this second way the way to go, or is there a better alternative? I really don't want to have to reference System.Web in my service layer.
Thanks!
UPDATE: If anyone faces a similar issue, I ended up injecting the username as a constructor parameter into my implementation of the IConsumerTokenManager using Ninject.
Answer: You should look up the secret based on the passed in token. Not the logged in username. An index set up for that column in your database should make the lookup fast. I suspect your current lookup by username would not be any faster anyway.


Where in the Bible does it say that God is creating a new earth?

Question: I've heard from my parents/grandparents that God is in the process of building a new Earth. Where in the Bible does it say God is creating a new Earth? Why would God build a new Earth? I know it says in the Bible that God loves all of man kind, but didn't he also regret creating man once he saw what they did? Why would he do this?
Comment: [Verse identification questions](http://meta.christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/4199/wheres-the-line-with-the-verse-identification-tag) are now off-topic.
Comment: @GregMcNulty ohhh alright, ill let you know.
Comment: Revelation 21:1-8 maybe? Just a thought - not sure. Also not sure whether this should be seen as literal vs figurative. Also a back-reference to Isaiah 65:17-15 ?
Comment: Marc Gravell has a good point some people eschatology say that there will be a new creation, some maintain re-creation of the current earth. There is many position on this issue.
Comment: @John: What do they think are the characteristics of this new Earth? I think that is more important to know, ask them I am very curious know! thanks
Comment: @GregMcNulty added it to my question
Comment: John I mean ask your parents or whoever is saying this. What does a new earth mean to them??
Comment: @John: I would also imagine they should be able to point it out to you if they believe that. If not, I would question where they are getting this from....
Answer: John, I am providing a fairly 'long answer' as you seem genuinely interested. You have tapped into a long historical theme in the Bible with your question. The first occurrence of the actual words 'new earth' occurs here at around 700 BC:

"Behold, I will create new heavens and a new earth. The former things will not be remembered, nor will they come to mind. (Isaiah 65:17).

This prophecy was made by Isaiah to Judah who would be fallen into captivity by the Babylonian Kingdom (roughly around 500 BC) but would again be saved, just as Moses had delivered them from Egypt. So by what might appear on face-value as a hyperbole, this was a promise to Judah that after they became captive they would also again return to Jerusalem. This return would be like a 'new world'. At least it would be better than the life in Babylon.
However, the language goes far beyond what one might expect from such deliverance and seems 'heavenly' so within old Rabbinic interpretation before Christ these verses were taken to apply to the times of the future Messiah who would restore Israel.  For example this does not seem like something normal on earth:

he who dies at a hundred will be thought a mere youth; he who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed. (Isaiah 65:20).

Here is an example of an Old Rabbi's view from an ancient Midrash before Christ:

But a still more strange application of the verse occurs in the same Midrash (Par. 95, ed. Warsh. p. 170 a), where the opening clauses of it are quoted with this remark: Come and see all that the Holy One, blessed be His Name, has smitten in this world, He will heal in the latter days. Upon which a curious disquisition follows, to prove that every man would appear after death exactly as he had been in life, whether blind, dumb, or halting, nay, even in the same dress, as in the case of Samuel when Saul saw him - but that afterward
  God would heal the diseased. (Life and Times of Jesus, Alfred Edresheim, Appendix X, P1255).

So this Messianic expectation surrounding a 'new world' was that the Messiah would bring all Israelites back to Jerusalem and heal everybody in a sort of utopian society.  This is how they would interpret the next verse:

25 The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox (Isaiah 65:25).

You can feel the heavenly impression of this peaceful image. This added to a Messianic expectation of a truly 'new world'. Besides the life after their return from Babylon was not really so exalted, they did not even have their own independent King, but were vassals of other Kings. Therefore this only increased the Messianic expectation leading up to the time of Jesus from Bethlehem.  The Jews were subject to the Romans at that time.
With this Messianic expectation that a 'new' world would be created, the New Testament picks up on the theme in fulfillment and in prediction of another future fulfillment. First, in the current fulfillment a 'new' world was already created by Christ's death, resurrection and 'coming in power' by his sending the Holy Spirit in Acts 2. This was a 'creation of a new world', or His 'kingdom' and so we call it the new covenant. Those who believe in God are called members of this kingdom and are born again into it, having a 'new life' in this 'new world'. This was like God 'shaking the whole heavens and earth', so that a new heaven and new earth would result from what 'could not be shaken' (See Haggai 2:6).
Second the New Testament also indicates that this 'shaking' is not yet fully accomplished:

10But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare. 11Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives 12as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming. c That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire, and the elements will melt in the heat. 13But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness. (2 Peter 3:10-13)

So your answer your questions: Jesus has made a new world and is still building it, all are welcome to join by placing their faith in Him. Also there will come a time when the whole world will be destroyed by fire at the second coming of Christ to 'judge the living and the dead'.
Regarding why God regretted that he made man after the world had become so filled with sin, it is a anthropomorphism, or personification, of God as though he was a man, in order that we can understand what would otherwise be incomprehensible. In other words God has his own reasons for making man, even knowing they would sin and fall, but as we cannot fully comprehend them, He just wanted us to understand that sinful man is far beyond what his purpose was. Yet no worries, now God has shown us how He planned to kill sin, and kill, death, it was in Christ so that:

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. (John 3:16)

This is both, how God made a new world, and how we can enter into it today.
Comment: Very good answer.  But I'm a little surprised you didn't mention Revelation 21.  "And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea."  Revelation 21:1 (KJV)
Comment: Very detailed answer, i read every word of it. Thank you!
Answer: I completely agree with everything posted thus far.
But might I add, open to discourse, a theory of why, I propose, God planned for and needed sin to take presence. Revelation, as referenced above, and Isaiah both tell us God's plan to destroy this earth and heaven, then create a new earth and heaven void of sin, hurt, violence, and pain. And to note, the Bible teaches us that Gods plan is perfect, and His will, like unto His plan, can never be thwarted by man or anything other. This proves that God had planned for sin to enter into this world and we, as man, had in no way interrupted or caused a change in the course of God's perfect plan, and God, being the omniscient God He is, has a purpose for sin. So why did God purposefully allow for sin to be present, and if God, from the beginning, even before creation, had planned to destroy this earth and heaven with it, why not create that from the get go? Why detour the end result with an earth full of sin?
I propose this, because the Bible tell us, the reasoning to create us as spiritual beings was for companionship. God wanted some company. But God desired for us to want to be His companion; to choose Him. And a choice, true in nature, must be composed of at least 2 options. If only 1 cup is presented in front of you, and you are required to pick up a cup, then the only option you have is to pick up that one cup. Now it could be said you had a free will and made the decision to pick up the cup, but this is only partly true. True, you did possess a free will, but a true choice did not take place. You had to pick up a cup, but only one was presented as an option. At least one other cup must be added to the pool of options to verify a true choice by nature had been made. Simply put, sin is the other cup; is the other option. To clarify, sin, in this case, is the world.
So to conclude up to this point: God planned for sin, God needed sin to allow us to truly choose to become his companion through eternity, and this earth was never meant for utopia. We are here to choose Him; plain and simple. Stated earlier in the post, Revelation and Isaiah prophesy of a new created earth and heaven. This has been God's plan all along. This earth wasn't the final destination, only a detour, to allow his creation an opportunity to choose eternity with Him in the new world. Because remember, if God truly wanted this earth to be the paradise and utopia the new world will be, it would be. That's how much he loves us! He allowed his creation to walk away, a choice of separation.
A choice.
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.


Why did Teddy ask to change the place where the picture was about to be taken?

Question: In the end of Memento (and beginning of its story), Lenny wants to take a picture of Teddy.
Does anybody have a clue why Teddy asked to change the place where the picture was about to be taken?
Would there be any possible hint of who was the murderer of Lenny's wife on the background or scenario?
Feeling intrigued....
Comment: @Tetsujin Well that helps, but it spoils the *fun*.
Comment: A good way to figure out Memento is to watch the chronological version that was released on the DVD Extras
Comment: It's a bit anorak, but watching the cinema release followed by the chronological is nicely palindromic ;)
Comment: Teddy was showing Lenny the corpse of a person he killed thinking it was the guy who destroyed his family and life.
Answer: A different angle would probably have revealed that the two had met before at the Discount Inn. I think Teddy just didn't want him to know this because it would have hindered possible future manipulations of Lenny.


To hear something makes it audible, to see is visible, so what are touch and smell?

Question: As the title states, if sound is audible, light is visible, what is a smell? And what is an object when you touch it?
Answer: Smell is olfactible
Touch is tangible
Comment: _Tangible_ is very common, and _touchable, hearable, seeable_ are possible, though less common, in special contexts. _Olfactable_ is very rare, though it may exist in dictionaries; I think most people, if they reached for a single word (with no pejoration like _stink, reek, smell_), would say "smellable". The [sense verbs](http://english.stackexchange.com/a/105101/15299) don't have all possible terms available.
Comment: Tangible is correct, but it's often used to discuss the concreteness of a concept or feeling. Consider describing a nanobot sitting on the tip of your finger.  Is it "barely tangible" or "barely tactile"? Tangible might carry two meanings: (1) beyond your ability to perceive such a magnificent creation, (2) beyond your ability to perceive it through touch.  Tactile is more clear in this case. //////// I like olfactible if you're cornered into you using it. "She stuck her nose even deeper into the blossoms insisting that beauty is always olfactible." Haha, maybe.
Comment: I would have said "smelly".
Answer: Things capable of being seen are visible, things capable of being heard are audible, things capable of being touched are tangible or palpable, things capable of being smelled are odorous, things capable of being tasted are gustable.
Gustable is rarely used and primarily in technical settings.  The concept is most often expressed as "tastable" when we reach for the concept in common usage.  Because of the "-ible" "-able" endings of the other sensate adjectives, "odorous" is an unexpected form but a perfectly correct expression of the concept (though today most of us are more likely to use "malodorous" to describe a bad smell than to use the word "odorous" itself).
Some prefer "palpable" to "tangible" for things capable of being touched because tangible has slipped into being a synonym for the more general and inclusive "sensible", particularly in the use of the word in the practice of law.
Answer: Another option to Frank H's answer would be
Touch: tactile
Smell: fragrant / pungent / fetid (depends on experience)
Answer: 'Smellable' is a legitimate, though perhaps not a very euphonious adjective. Other alternatives are 'aromatic' and 'odoriferous'.
'Palpable' is the most germane one for touch.
Answer: See - Visible/(Seeable*)
Hear - Audible/(Hearable*)
Smell - Olfactible (used very rare)/Smellable
Taste - Edible (for food)/Potable (for water)/(Tastable*)
Touch - Tangible/Palpable/Tactile/(Touchable*)
*Note: They can be used but word on the first column (except for olfactible) are commonly
used, but smellable is rather used than olfactible
Answer: Remember that some things are tastable or edible.
I would also think that some poorly-defined proprioceptive feelings, like earthquake phenomena, are sensible (in the generic)


Why did Cersei and Jaime not go after the person that knew their secret?

Question: In Game of Thrones S01E01, we see that Jaime and Cersei are aware that Jon Arryn was aware of their "secret". So why didn't they murder him?
Comment: Do we know how much time passed between his knowledge of the secret and his death? They did not straight up murder Ned Stark either...
Comment: It takes a while to plan a murder. Jon Arryn was one of the highest officials of the whole kingdom - it's not easy to murder someone like that, much less get away with it. Panicking and rushing with a "solution" is #1 reason why criminals get caught :)
Comment: @close-voter Uh, no stupid close-reasons please. And please don't delete your automatically generated close-reason comments just because you know they're stupid. If you see behaviour that you deem questionable, feel free to flag it for moderators rather than coming up with non-sense close-reasons against the question. Thank you.
Comment: I rolled back yout title edit. We have a "no spoilers in titles" policy here. I would personally agree that it is not so much a spoiler at all, but members of the community were considering it a spoiler and especially with shows like *Game of Thrones* this can become dangerous territory fast. I think, though, the current title is a reasonable compromise and hope you respect the community's preferences in this regard. Thank you.
Answer: In short, because they did not have to.
Jon Arryn was actively investigating Jaime and Cersei's secret when he met his untimely demise. If they were putting a plan together to murder Jon Arryn based on this knowledge it ended up not making a difference because he was killed anyway.
Look at what happened to Ned Stark: he made the same accusations and was not murdered outright. He was taken into custody and put on trial. Given that Jon Arryn was in the same position, a likely similar route events would have taken place.
The person who was in the way for Jaime and Cersei was not Jon Arryn or Ned Stark, it was Robert Baratheon... and they did have a plan to murder him...
Comment: Case 1) I think the *real murderer* knew of the secret and saw it as an opportunity to start/further his plot.  --- Case 2) That could be possible...
Comment: Case 1: So it seems that the "murderer" did exactly what Cersei and Jamie wanted to do and that too at a perfect timing! The only difference being in the purpose. The murderer's motive had nothing to do with Jon's knowledge of the secret.
Comment: What do you think of this case 2: They were not aware of Jon's knowledge of their secret prior to his death but came to know about it from his last words?


How long to leave a question, in case it becomes on-topic?

Question: The answer to https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/18334/who-is-this-actor-in-picture turned out to be a model - so should it be closed as off-topic - or left open in case he decides to be become an actor later in his career?
Answer: As a general guideline, answers don't make questions off-topic (and neither on-topic), questions do.
This question in particular isn't so much off-topic because the person turned out to not be an actor, but because it failed to provide any kind details or any kind of hint that he even is an actor in the question at all. It is just a "found pic in web, who is?"-question. If he had turned out to be an actor, that wouldn't make the question much better.
So, no. If a question is off-topic an answer doesn't make it on-topic. Likewise if a question is on-topic, an answer can't make it off-topic either.
Answer: Although I'm happy to listen to other opinions, I have to disagree with @Napoleon Wilson on this. These are my dissenting views:
I felt the question should have been closed - but because it was not about a tv or movie star. It was an innocent mistake on the part of the OP. Much like the many identify this that or the other questions on this site, the OP only knew a small amount of information and they wanted to know more.
They thought it was an actor and asked for an answer. The answer was confirmed to be a model, not an actor and thus is no longer within the scope of this site.
But I strongly disagree that it's off-topic. Look at this question from a few days earlier. Or this picture from a long while back.
Now quoting from @Napoeleon Wilson's answer here:

This question in particular isn't so much off-topic because the person
  turned out to not be an actor, but because it failed to provide any
  kind details or any kind of hint that he even is an actor in the
  question at all. It is just a "found pic in web, who is?"-question. If
  he had turned out to be an actor, that wouldn't make the question much
  better.

Not whilst the second link could be argued to show someone in a likely acting scene, there's no way the first link can be shown to hint that it's an actor involved. It's just a random picture from the web effectively (it's actually a fan-made picture). Why were these acceptable (and in the first case upvoted)?
On a final note, I'm really confused by the reason provided under the question for it being shut down:

"Movie identification questions must contain sufficient detail to be
  answerable. For help writing a good identification question, see:
  Identify-This-X Questions. Identification questions without an
  accepted answer will be deleted after 14 days." – Ankit Sharma,
  Napoleon Wilson, iandotkelly

It makes no sense to me to have a question marked as not having sufficient detail to be answerable when it is answered! I could understand shutting it down for being off topic now it's clearly not an actor, but the question is clearly answerable (as my own answer demonstrated)!
Comment: *"I guess what I'm saying is that the rules on Movies & TV aren't always that clear (e.g. when to flag/how to flag/what should stay open). It's not all that consistent"* - Hmm, impossible to disagree with that. *"so I'm just trying to find a happy niché where I know what's what!"* - Me too, yet I for myself try to facilitate that by keeping rules standardized and clear (or strict and pedantic in other people's terms), but I see your point.
Comment: I see that I'm rather one of the more severe opponents to poor ID-questions, especially actor-ID and image-only ones (why I didn't downvote the first link I don't know, though, must have passed under my radar) and I appreciate your views.
Comment: Hey, we can't agree on everything. Whatever the community wants will go, but I thought I oughta share my views at least! :)
Comment: But disregarding the fact if you or the community find this question valid or not, the possibility that an answer magically makes a question on- or off-topic (and thus the general problem of this meta-question) would be a severe problem for the integrity of the whole framework. So once you deem this question valid, your answer cannot change it to be off-topic (as said, the fact that this happened is rather a symptom of the poor quality of the question itself, but that aside). It can only be the question itself that decides about its validity.
Comment: See I disagree. _Usually_ I'd agree, but if someone posts an "identify this person" question, I think that's an _especially unique_ situation. We _could_ say the OP should provide more details, but given how bare most of the "identify this movie" posts are, I think some leeway has to be given. Maybe I'm naivé, but I believe most people will ask for help identifying people they genuinely believe are actors (as opposed to just random Internet questions).
Comment: And ultimately, if the person in the question is NOT an actor/actress, to me it's then off topic. If that question the OP here posted WAS an actor or actress, I wouldn't have had the slightest issue with it and would have left it open.
Comment: Yeah, like said, it isn't a hard rule what is a poor ID question and you are free to see it as on-topic, I guess. But in this case it stays on-topic even after answering. Otherwise exactly the problem of this meta-question arises. Didn't *Ryan Kennedy* maybe star in some commercial one day (or in the future)? How to find out, only take questions as on-topic asking for people that turn out to have an IMDb profile?
Comment: I understand that, but if the community wants it to be off-topic then I think _any_ question which asks about the future of a show must be off topic (and there are a loads of those questions on this site). I guess what I'm saying is that the rules on Movies & TV aren't always _that_ clear (e.g. when to flag/how to flag/what should stay open). It's not all that consistent and so I'm just trying to find a happy niché where I know what's what!
Comment: But by the way, *"In future, I don't think I would vote to close a question like this. I feel that was the wrong decision."* - So what? To close or not to close?
Comment: @NapoleonWilson: Lol don't even start! Was having a moral dilemma about what to do. I thought it was wrong to close (having possibly scared the new user away), but on reflection I _would_ close, but only because it turned out to not be an actor. I'll delete that comment now
Comment: *"having possibly scared the new user away"* - I see, that is never a good outcome. But honestly, we should be welcoming, but we are also grown-up people and not in kindergarden. Who is scared away by a close-vote is not fit for the site (or isn't acquainted with it, which isn't inherently bad, only the lack for motivation to get acquainted with it after the close-vote). So sorry, scaring users away is not good, but that isn't driving our decisions about on-topicness. *"but on reflection I would close"* - And I'm glad about that, even if not for "my" reason then at least for "yours". ;-)


Restoring rEFIt on Macbook Air

Question: My Macbook Air dual boots Mac OS X and Ubuntu Precise.  Normally when you turn it on the first thing you see is the rEFIt menu which allows you to select which OS to boot.  If you select Ubuntu then Grub will show up next, though Grub cannot boot Mac OS X.
Last friday I restarted Ubuntu and it skipped straight to Grub.  I've restarted it a few times and it seems that rEFIt will not show up anymore.  How can I fix this so I can boot into Mac OS X again?
Answer:
Hold Command-R while booting.
Quit Utilities.  It will ask you to select a startup disk.  Select Macintosh HD.
Reinstall rEFIt I guess?

Restoring rEFIt on Macbook Air


Why are cereal grains so important to agriculture and civilization?

Question: I was looking through a list of foodstuffs and noticed that nuts have far more energy content, fat content and protein content than cereals (relative to their mass). They don't seem to be especially perishable and humans have eaten them forever- but virtually all agricultural civilizations are built on cereal grains (with an honorable mention for starchy root vegetables like yams). Why is this so when there are so many options for foodstuff in the world that one type would become so dominant?
Comment: Nuts producing far less "fruits", and needs a lot of labor to remove them from the shells: there is a reason why they are expensive. They are also limited by their demands for water, long time to grow a tree and so on. Even on XIXth century Europe making nuts orchids was a risky, long term investment.
Comment: How much food can you get from a hectare of land growing wheat, and how much can you get growing walnuts? How much water do you need? (The water requirements are very important. Cereal grasses are very efficient compared to walnut trees.) Is the production of walnuts predictable from year to year? (And anyway, we **do** grow vast amounts of potatoes and legumes besides the cereal grasses.)
Comment: Availability/abundance/resiliency - if the nut tree dies, how long you wait for a replacement? Besides, try to look a bit on the physiology of what happens with the food in human body: sugar - fuel - burn it immediately or transform it in fats (or else you die), fat - energy storage, your body (liver) will need to transform it in glucose for your muscles to burn it (it's Ok if you lose some energy in the transformation, it's a reserve anyway), protein - repair block for your organism, if you get to burn it, something is wrong. Only 200y ago you more were likely to suffer from hunger.
Comment: @Antarctica07 Certainly not.  Even a wild crop like Apios Americana gives yields per acre which are within stabbing distance of other cultivated crops.  With breeding work (and a shift in culture to generate demand) we could have a much greater diversity in our diets.
Comment: @sphennings Correct me if I'm wrong, but the article you linked, while very informative on farming, only asserts that grains have a benefit in economies of scale.  Other foods are hardly mentioned, except for grapes and olives tangentially. Personally, I don't see too much of a difference between a sufficiently general question about historical trends and a question about a realistic fictional world. It isn't as if my question is a request for info about a single real-world region or period.
Comment: Many cultures, for instance ancient Europeans and California Indians, depended on acorns as a staple part of their diet.  I think the critical difference is that acorns (and other nuts) are gathered rather than cultivated (due to the time needed to grow a productive tree), so it's hard for overlords to control the food supply, while grain cultivation and harvest makes it very easy to do so.
Comment: *nuts have far more [...] fat content* - Excess of which lands one in the hospital with gallstones; or, before there were any hospitals, death.
Comment: Another question then, based on all of this discussion, is have humans exhausted the potential of useful plant domesticates? What I mean is that through the course of history, did we eventually make use most every potential useful edible plant foodstuff or are there plants out there that would have made just as good staples as rice or potatoes that we simply never needed to utilize or domesticate for whatever reason?
Answer: Let's look at the walnut, since it's been cultivated for a long time.
If you start with the seed, it will take you 10 years (roughly) to have a tree mature enough to produce fruit, assuming you plant it in an area of rich, deep soil, lots of sun, and long summers. For optimum production, you want not many more than 173 trees per hectare, with each tree producing between 30 and 160 kilos of nuts per year (walnut trees often alternate between productive and less productive years). That gives you between 5,190 and 27,680 kilos per hectare per year. Say on average 16,000 kilos per year.
Barley will get you about 7,000 kilos per year.
Sounds like an easy win for the nuts, right? Well, here's the thing. Barley, like most of the cereals, has a short growing season. It is more drought-resistant, tolerates a greater range of climates and soils than walnut trees, requires less water and, obviously, can produce the first crops in a few months after planting in a a brand-new field. And there's a useful byproduct after threshing: the straw. You can use it to make bricks, to feed animals, as fuel, to make baskets and other containers, as padding and insulation, a whole bunch of uses. You can't do that with the walnut trees, even though the wood is a highly useful commodity, if you want walnuts next year.
Overabundance of walnuts? Well, you're kind of stuck with the trees. No one needs barley? Plant rye. And in some cases, you can get two different harvests out of the same patch of ground in one year, sowing winter grain in the fall that will be ready to harvest in the spring, then plant a new crop to harvest in the fall, doubling your food output.
When you start taking all those things into account, suddenly the walnuts aren't looking like a sure win.
Comment: Some areas (Crete for example) have up to three "growing seasons" per year.
Comment: Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been [moved to chat](https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/131761/discussion-on-answer-by-keith-morrison-why-are-cereal-grains-so-important-to-agr).
Answer: As Keith points out, versatility and yield are a major factor.
So is storage. Grains can be stored for months longer than root vegetables and still be edible (potatoes and such go off much quicker, nuts when dried out over time are less tasty too). They're also usually easier to turn into flour and thus bread or pasta, making them more versatile as ingredients for your food as well (not vital maybe, but variety is the spice of life they say).
And then there's the little factor of warfare. It's far easier after a battle ravaged the land to get your grain production going again than to replant orchards and wait for the trees to grow back. Not an unimportant factor at all. In fact it's so important that one of the worst war crimes (or crimes in general) in ancient Greece was cutting down someone else's olive trees. Only the worst criminals and barbarians would stoop so low, and death was the automatic punishment. Burning down a field of grain was an inconvenience for the owner, cutting down his orchards amounted to a slow death by starvation.
Comment: "It's far easier after a battle ravaged the land to get your grain production going again than to replant orchards and wait for the trees to grow back" Notably, this is what killed off American "hard" cider production after the Prohibition, while allowing beer production to restart nearly unscathed.
Comment: Lots of nuts can store for years in shell.  Storage is a plus for nuts.
Comment: Good answer for what matters replanting and recovering productivity, but it is not just warfare. A pest attacking the field was a lot more common than enemy soldiers.  Since there were no pesticides  back then the farmers were sometimes forced to burn everything to get rid of them.
Answer: Two main considerations:

Even without knowledge of evolution or plant breeding, it is natural for agricultural people to replant the best, most vigorous, tastiest, most productive seeds from last years harvest.  Annual crops are therefore subject to much more rapid breeding work than perennials.  Even in one lifetime, you can perform 20 selections of barley, but only a few selections of walnut (if you are lucky).  The maximum genetic potential of both crops may be similar, but the barley will win the race (and hence win in terms of cultural significance).

Many nut bearing tree species have evolved a strategy of "alternate bearing".  A black walnut may only have a "good year" once every three or four years.  They often synchronize with other local trees:  all of the trees have a "good year" at the same time.  Having low production for several years controls the number of seed predators (such as squirrels).  Then when the masting year comes, there are too many nuts for the low level of seed predators to take them all.  This helps to ensure that some of the nuts will survive.  This is still an issue in commercial pecan and walnut cultivation, although there are more tricks and breeding work being done to overcome this.

Chestnut is fairly unique in that it is naturally quite productive.  It evolved a strategy of putting out bumper crops each year of more perishable nuts (kind of a boom/bust cycle on a much shorter timescale).  Since chestnuts cannot sustain a population of seed predators (they cannot be stored long without molding), they just need to produce an overabundance.  For this reason, they are an annually productive crop without much human breeding work necessary (the squirrels did this breeding work long before we got on the scene).  This overcomes both difficulties listed above with walnut.
In fact, there have been many cultures which have used chestnuts as a caloric staple.  While the squirrel cannot preserve them for storage, we can do so by deliberately drying them.
Comment: @PieterGeerkens Regarding sources for chestnuts as caloric staples: I know of at least to regions where this was the case, both mountainous areas with steep valleys and hillsides which were terraced to hold vast chestnut orchards. Chestnuts were basically the only viable option for crop. One region is Ticino in souther Switzerland (e.g. https://www.ticinotopten.ch/en/specialties/chestnuts-ticino), the other along the Montagne Noir in France (couldn't find sources in English, googling will yield them in French).
Comment: (1) Edit all enhancements of the answer into the body of the answer post. (2) Not all have access to a university library. (Judiciously) include relevant excerpts from the linked post into  the answer body.
Comment: References for your last tow paragraphs? That anecdote seems, *a priori*, wildly improbable to me.
Comment: @PieterGeerkens My memory was not entirely accurate.  I must have read something similar to this:  https://omnilogos.com/chestnuts/.  Will edit with more accurate information.
Comment: Also:  https://www.jstor.org/stable/2662336?seq=4#metadata_info_tab_contents
Answer: I'll say the same as others, with different emphasis.
Nuts (and olives) are extremely capital intensive and very difficult to scale.  If you plant a nut or olive tree, you need to figure out how to eat for the next decade, because it won't produce fruit till then.
If you plant cereal grains, you'll eat this year.  You might forage for half the year, but that's much more realistic than waiting 10 years.
For most of history, food was scarce, and the majority of the population was living at a subsistence level much of the time.  (Aristocrats might have been able to eat nuts, but part of the point of aristocracy is conspicuous consumption).
Combine that with the extreme vulnerability to war/hazard, and nuts are a risky proposition.
Answer: Another reason for grains to win over nuts.
Overall usage and fit in the puzzle. Most of people think there are nuts or grains to be used, actually, we are trying to reinvent the wheel from scratch - the least-waste economy was the reason grains won the race.
After the harvest the people were left with:

Grains
stems
Bran
Stover

Grains went either to food production (flour, beer/whiskey, groat,...) or to feed domestic animals. Stems were used as either construction material (stem-mud bricks), insulation, mattress filling, ground coverage for domestic animals and bran was used to feed the animals or to make food as well. Then stem-muck mixture was spread over stover and ploughed so the fertiliser would go down in the soil.
There was little-to-no waste from grains cycle.
Nuts, on the other hand provide just nuts and shells.
Another reason is the ease of plantation/harvest. The grains could have been just put in the ground and let grow. Harvest was quite simple as well - mow the field with scythes, collect, beat, sieve and mill. It was quite easy to upscale the production. With nuts, the harvesting process is harder to automate and upscale.
Answer: James C. Scott argues in Against the Grain that one key consideration in adoption of grains was actually taxation.
The story goes thus:

people lived off hunting, fishing, horticulture, gathering (including non-domesticated ancestors of our cereal crops) and small scale agriculture

In good climate, this allows actually quite high population denisities in some areas (notably the Tigris/Euphrates area), due to lots of game present

Scott assumes that most groups where not pure farmers or pastoralists or hunter-gatheres, but knew of and practiced several subsistence strategies - as a hedge against bad years and because certain strategies work better at different time of the year - for example huntig during migration season of some animals. If one looks closely at "hunter gatherer" societies in historical times, this pattern is not so rare.

The moment the first proto states arise, the picture changes somewhat. Cereals (compared to root crops, wild plants, hunting ...) are ideal from the perspective of the tax collector: They are easily surveyed, meaning the tax collector can decide that a field of such-and-such a size should yield so-and-so much grains to be taxed, the farmers are fixed in one place, the grains can be stored in the palace and doled out to pay soldiers and civil servants.
Comment: But this a chicken and egg problem, isn't it? What came first, proto-states or very heavy reliance on grain as food source?
Comment: I have actually read the book, too. But my impression was that some of his points were quite speculative, including his suggestion that grain became so important because it is easily taxable?
Comment: possibly proto states. before states, there where various subsistence strategies which included farming but not heavy reliance on farming. Once farming is established, non farmers can be captured, enslaved and put to work (think of the two exiles of the ancient Jews mentioned in the bible - Egypt and Babylon)
Comment: I agree that his idea is speculative. However Archeology is always about filling the gaps between the finds with reasonable speculation.
Comment: The problem with the theory is that this argument works even better for orchards. And yet, the emphasis still went to grains.
Comment: @KeithMorrison Why? grain stores better than fruit.


How do we know that Gilgamesh was a demigod?

Question: The Wikipedia page suggest that in the epic, Gilgamesh is a demigod of superhuman strength.
How do we know he was a demigod? What makes someone a demigod?
Did he possess some special powers that make him a superhuman?
Answer: In general, English "demigod" refers to a person who is partially divine and partially human. Most typically, this refers to someone who has one divine and one human parent (like Hercules, or the Pandavas), making them 50% divine. But the case of Gilgamesh is slightly different. Rather than being half-divine, Gilgamesh is in fact two-thirds divine.

When the gods created Gilgamesh they gave him a perfect body. Shamash the glorious sun endowed him with beauty, Adad the god of the storm endowed him with courage, the great gods made his beauty perfect, surpassing all others, terrifying like a great wild bull. Two thirds they made him god and one third man.
Epic of Gilgamesh, Prologue

From a mathematical perspective, you can only be two-thirds something if 1.) you have a very finely-crafted family tree extending infinitely far back [i.e. successive binary approximations of 2/3]; or 2.) you have loops in your family tree [which requires time travel, probably]. (This is because 2/3 is not a binary fraction).
So how is it that Gilgamesh was two-thirds divine if born from a divine mother (Ninsun) and a mortal father (Lugalbanda)? I don't know, but there you have it. I can't imagine mathematical accuracy would have been a priority of the Sumerians when they crafted the Epic.
Comment: Lugalbanda was made divine. So by some slightly warped logic, his divinity passes in part to Gilgamesh. This is right in the beginning of Book 1.
Comment: You could do it if you had a divine mother and two fathers, only one mortal.  Then -- gods.  A goddess could have a son with two fathers.
Answer: The definition for demigod differs from culture to culture. But the definition of demigod, which can be used here in the case of Gilgamesh would be "half-god".
Gilgamesh was a Sumerian king who wished to become immortal. Endowed with superhuman strength, courage, and power, he appeared in numerous legends and myths, including the Epic of Gilgamesh.
From Myth Encyclopedia article on Gilgamesh (emphasis mine):

According to legendary accounts, Gilgamesh was the son of the goddess Ninsun and of either Lugalbanda, a king of Uruk, or of a high priest of the district of Kullab.

The fact  that his mother was a goddess and his father, a mortal, suggests than Gilgamesh was a demigod. And his superhuman abilities could have been due the fact that one of his parents was a god. In the Epic, his strength and feats were described as superhuman.
Answer: I read this story and thought about it for many years, and always try to figure out how Gilgamesh with 2/3 God. With his genealogy being a mortal man and mother a goddess. And after much. The only way I could figure out that he was 2/3 God, is that his father was a demigod, either the son of shamash or the son of Adad and his mother the goddess was full blood God and was the daughter of either shamash or Adad. And in this way one of Gilgamesh parents his mother would be 100% God and his father would be 50% God and in Gilgamesh that would make him roughly two-thirds.
And the last and maybe not the most known or common way of making him 2/3 God, it is through genetics like how people who want kids today go pick their partners and the DNA is manipulated to create boys and girls or specific eye colors and things like that. And do these things happen many thousands of years ago if you read the Lost Books of enki and you read the way they described the process in creating humans that we see today, I would explain but it's a in-depth and in detail process and it would take mini paragraphs. But pretty much they were mixing certain Siemens an incubating women's eggs in clay vessels and then putting the eggs and goddesses to carry them. But with this process they explain it is very possible to create a precise genetic specimen. So the first answer is one that may be very well correct and if it isn't that it is this way as explained in this answer.


Maoz Tzur and Chanukah

Question: The piyut Maoz Tzur mentions both Purim and Chanukah.  Why then was it chosen to be said on Chanukah and not Purim? I've tried researching the subject and asking scholars but have not received a satisfactory answer.
Comment: It also mentions Pesach
Comment: Complementary: http://judaism.stackexchange.com/q/4393/3
Comment: It also mentions the exodus from Egypt, the destruction of the first temple and the building of the second. But it *climaxes* with the miracle of hanukkah.
Comment: Hi Sy Katz and welcome to mi.yodeya! It would strengthen/narrow down your question to include the answers scholars have given you that you found unsatisfactory.
Comment: this is a non sourced answer.  In order to know the  purpose of a song, we need to know how it finished. Here there is an evolution through the  four exiles,  the last Yeshua before the end of all "עול" Galuyot is Chashmonayim rebellion.  This song says that know,  after celebrating end of Galut  Yavan,  we pray for the further Yeshua.
Comment: Maybe we should sing each festival's stanza during said festival or the entire poem during all festivals mentioned.
Answer: It isn't known who wrote Maoz Tsur, although some scholars think that it was a 13th century German-speaking Jew named Mordekhai (sorry - only a Wikipedia reference for that one). It makes reference to several stages of Israelite history, and more than one festival:
The second stanza references the slavery in Egypt, the redemption at the time of Moses (although Moses isn't himself mentioned) and the drowning of all of the Egyptians in the sea. This corresponds to Pesach.
The third stanza speaks of the erection of a temple in Jerusalem, and of the fact that even then the Israelites did not experience peace. Due to their having worshipped foreign gods, the temple is destroyed and they are exiled, but brought back to the land of Israel in the time of Zerubbabel. (No festival in this one, but the general theme of persecution => salvation.)
The fourth stanza references the plans of Haman ("the Agagite"), the elevation of Mordekhai ("the Benjaminite") and the hanging of Haman and his sons. This corresponds to Purim.
The fifth stanza makes reference to the festival of Hanukkah: the torments of the Seleucid Greeks, the ascension of the Hasmoneans, the battle over Jerusalem and the miracle of the oil.
Finally, the sixth stanza (in which the first three words serve as an acrostic for חזק) speaks of the messianic era. In doing so, it makes reference to God bringing back "the seven shepherds", which is a reference to Micah 5:4, but also a none-too-subtle allusion to the seven shepherds in Sukkah 52b, who are Seth, Enoch, Methusaleh, Abraham, Jacob, Moses and David. In the Zohar (III:103a-104a), these are the seven visitors on the nights of Sukkot (the ushpizin). Whether the author of this text knew the Zohar or not, it's not unreasonable to suppose that this is a subtle reference to that particular festival too.
So, with references to Pesach, Hanukkah, Purim and Sukkot, why do we sing this on Hanukkah in particular? If there is an historical reason, I do not know it, and I am tempted to point out that if we were to sing it on Purim or Sukkot instead, we'd still be asking this question. (In other words, it may have no greater significance as a Hanukkah song than, say, Chad Gadya has as a Pesach song.)
But that said, consider the first stanza. There, the text explicitly mentions the dedication of the altar (חנכת המזבח), which gives us two references to Hanukkah instead of only one. Since the story of Hanukkah constitutes the latest event spoken of explicitly within the poem (notwithstanding the veiled allusion to crusaders in the final verse), and since it serves as a frame for this text, being mentioned both at its beginning and just before its end, it is therefore also able to function as the time at which the poem itself is set.
Comment: We know his name was Mordecai from the acrostic
Answer: According to Dr. Yossi Baruchi, the key stanza is the last one:

חֲשׂוֹף זְרוֹעַ קָדְשֶׁךָ וְקָרֵב קֵץ הַיְשׁוּעָה
נְקֹם נִקְמַת עֲבָדֶיךָ מֵאֻמָּה הָרְשָׁעָה
כִּי אָרְכָה הַשָּׁעָה וְאֵין קֵץ לִימֵי הָרָעָה
דְּחֵה אַדְמוֹן בְּצֵל צַלְמוֹן הָקֵם לָנוּ רוֹעִים שִׁבְעָה

This stanza alludes to the time of the writing to be circa the Crusades. חֲשׂוֹף זְרוֹעַ קָדְשֶׁךָ וְקָרֵב קֵץ הַיְשׁוּעָה alludes to Raavan's piyut "Elokim Be'ozneinu Sham'anu". נְקֹם נִקְמַת עֲבָדֶיךָ מֵאֻמָּה הָרְשָׁעָה alludes to Av Harachamim, which was composed around the time of the Crusades. כִּי אָרְכָה הַשָּׁעָה וְאֵין קֵץ לִימֵי הָרָעָה alludes also to Raavan's piyut.
The key verse in this key stanza is the last one:

דְּחֵה אַדְמוֹן בְּצֵל צַלְמוֹן הָקֵם לָנוּ רוֹעִים שִׁבְעָה

On this verse, he brings a few explanations:

אדמון - Admon - refers to Esav, who was born "admoni". Esav and Edom in the midrash are references to the Romans and when the Roman Empire converted to Christianity, Esav, Edom and Se'ir became references to Christianity. The gemara in Brachot explains that צלמון - Tzalmon - means "tzalmavet" (the shadow of death), so according to this understanding, the verse is prayer to Hashem asking that He smite the Christians and redeem Am Yisrael.

However, this explanation does not explain what Maoz Tzur has to do with Chanukah. Dr. Baruchi explains that the answer to that is hidden in the last verse. He first brings an older suggestion:

"Admon" refers to the German emperor Frederick I, as his other name "Barbarossa" means "red-beard". He was one of the leaders of the Third Crusade. He travelled to the Holy Land through Anatolia and at one point conquered the city of Konya, known at the time as "Ikon", and that is "Tzalmon" - "icon" = "צלמית - tzelem" in Hebrew. Per this understanding, the end of the line is a prayer for the success of the Crusaders' enemy at the time, Saladin and his men - we have no way of knowing whether this was the case (as sources are sketchy on this), but it's possible that he had six generals with him leading his army, which would make seven.

This suggestion, however, is not without problems:
a. The Battle of Iconium was of little importance to the Jews at the time, and highly unlikely that the Jews at the time even heard about it.
b. A short time after the Battle of Iconium, Emperor Barbarossa drowned in the Saleph river and died. If Admon is Barbarossa, we must assume that the author of Maoz Tzur heard of the Battle at Ikon but still hadn't heard of the death of the emperor, which is unlikely, seeing as his death was such a short time afterwards.
c. At that time, there weren't pogroms in Germany. Moreover, according to Rabbi Efraim of Bonn who wrote about the Crusades, it was none other than Barbarossa himself who made sure that there wouldn't be pogroms in Germany.
Therefore, Dr. Baruchi offers his own explanation:

The historical background of the verse is the Council of Clermont. The enthusiastic speeches at the time brought about the First Crusade, and on their way to the east, the Crusaders murdered thousands of Jews. What does this have to do with Chanukah? The Council of Clermont took place during Chanukah. Pope Urban II's infamous speech there was given on the 26th of Kislev, the second day of Chanukah. This may explain why Maoz Tzur was written specifically for Chanukah. Tzalmon likely hints towards Clermont (pronounced in French as Clarmohn): "Cler" means "clear" or "lit with a bright light" and the author of Maoz Tzur changed the "light" in the name to "shadow" (tzel), thus, from Clermon to Tzalmon. Similarly, in the piyut also written during the Crusades, "Elokai Ekra'acha Be'machashev" by Rabbi Shmuel ben Yehudah, it says: ועדו לקרן אפלה - this also refers to Clermont, as the "mont" means "mountain" and so does "קרן - keren", but instead of a mountain of light, it's a mountain of darkness. And also in Raavan's piyut there's a reference to Clermont: "טוב קיוינו והנה אופל ואשמנים...יחדיו נועצו השונאים גוי עז פנים..." - both "ofel" and "ashmanim" mean shadow, however, ashmanim is a very rare word which appears only once in Tanach. It seems that it was chosen because it includes the letters מנ which allude to "mont" from Clermont and the first shadow, the ofel, comes instead of the "Cler".
Therefore, it seems that Admon is Pope Urban II, and he is described here as standing the shadow of the mountain of shadows. Furthermore, the word בצל, rearranged, is צלב, cross, so this may be another reference to the Crusades (מסעי הצלב in Hebrew).

If this is the correct understanding, then we can now find another hint to the Crusades in the first stanza:

לְעֵת תָּכִין מַטְבֵּחַ מִצָּר הַמְנַבֵּחַ.
אָז אֶגְמֹר בְּשִׁיר מִזְמוֹר חֲנֻכַּת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ:

The last line refers to the Ashkenazi customs of Chanukah - אז אגמור - saying Hallel, בשיר מזמור - saying Mizmor Shir Chanukat (Tehillim 30) and חנכת המזבח - reading the portions of the Torah that deal with the sacrifices of the Nessi'im during Chanukat Hamishkan.
The second-to-last line says "מצר המנבח" - the מנבח is a reference to Pope Urban II and the Christians, as durring the Middle Ages the root נבח was often used to refer to Christians (this same root appears in what Rabbi Efraim of Bonn wrote about Barbarossa).
Per this understanding, Dr. Baruchi suggests correcting these last two lines to read:

לְעֵת הֵכִין מַטְבֵּחַ צָּר הַמְנַבֵּחַ
אָז אֶגְמֹר בְּשִׁיר מִזְמוֹר חֲנֻכַּת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ

Meaning: At the time of the "barking" of the vile man (Pope Urban II), we celebrated and continue celebrating Chanukah, despite what he did.
Answer: The song seems to be written for Chanukah. It refers to Chanukas Hamizbeiach in the first line, and has a stanza about Chanukah. In between it also has stanzas about the Egyptian and Babylonian exiles, but those seem to be pointing to a historical pattern as context for the story of Chanukah.
It is interesting that much later, the Maharal used his work on Chanukah (Ner Mitzvah) to discuss all the exiles together.

Maoz Tzur and Chanukah


Can we report a fraudster by their bitcoin wallet address?

Question: I was recently notified by a friend that someone sent her a message (posing as me) on an app asking her to send them some bitcoin so they could make a purchase. Luckily she knew it was not me and let me know right away. I am trying everything to figure out where they swiped my picture from. Since obviously their account is fraudulent, I was wondering if there was at least someone I can report their bitcoin wallet address as being used for fraud? It may not help me, as Im sure the damage is done with them using my picture for a fraud account, but Im hoping maybe this will help to stop them or somehow make it catch up to them
Answer: Nope, sorry, there's no way to do this.  The whole point of Bitcoin is it's censorship resistant, so there's no way to publicly blacklist addresses (although some exchanges have been known to spy on your incoming and outgoing transactions, such as Coinbase which have a TOS that prohibits it, and will threaten to close an account if you send transactions straight to/from a gambling site: https://www.coinbase.com/legal/user_agreement?locale=en).
Plus the user is probably using a new address each time, since you can generate as many as you like there's no need to reuse it.
Comment: I figured this was the case.. But call it wishful thinking.. I just really hate that people always have to try to find a way to scam great new technologies. The blockchain would do much better off without these people, but alas, I understanding it is probably no different than banking or anything else. They win.
Answer: Anyone, including you, can look up the address in a blockchain explorer such as https://blockchain.info/. There, you could find out what else the fraudster is doing with that address (very possibly nothing informative, as explained in the other answer). Specialist police officers have the tools to do the same thing, but with greater sophistication (tracing every bitcoin transaction backwards to the mining origins in all the input coins). So, if blockchain.info shows any transactions at that address, you could try reporting it to the police. A crime has been committed (hacking into your account, false representation…) but good luck trying to explain about magic internet money to the average officer.
Comment: Thats true, I guess I could look it up too and report it, but as you said.. considering there is not much regulation surrounding it all it wouldnt be too successful.
Answer: I am not so sure in that. Many scammers and fraudsters find Bitcoin as a suitable tool for different scams and frauds. But what is the most important thing is the education about it and that is the only way to stop those destroyers of the idea of cryptocurrencies.
Even if Bitcoin is not truly anonymous and is semi-private, I think it is still possible to catch up some addresses. But for officials, that address is not important to do the hard work.


Certificate Path Verification of X509 Certificate

Question: I have the trusted root certificate which I am validating using the self signed key. I also have the intermediate certificate, which i am validating using the root certificate.
Now when i am validating the certificate do i need to trace back the whole chain to validate the certificate?
Or can i say i have done TPC, if i just validate it using the intermediate only(since i have already validated my intermediate with its root before)?
Answer:
Now when i am validating the certificate do i need to trace back the whole chain to validate the certificate?

Not each time, no. You can do some caching, if you like (since root CAs tend to be valid for many years). But I don't think performance gains will be worth the added complexity of the caching idea.
Also: if you plan to honor the expiration dates in the root CA itself, then you have to check these using some other mechanism.
Also: you may have to account for the (unlikely) case of the intermediate CA being revoked.
So, unless you have a good reason not to check each time, then I recommend checking the complete chain from end-entity-certificate (inclusive) up to trust-anchor (inclusive). It's easier to understand.
Answer: Of course, since the X509 is statically signed, you have to check the signature only once.
Comment: Actually, it is incorrect, because there might be circumstances when the trust ends. See @StackzOfZtuff response for more details.


Can i compel miners to privilege my transaction by setting a high gas limit?

Question: I'm trying to send ether to a contract that has a fixed gas price, so I want to know if I can incentive miners to accept my transaction before someone else's by setting a high gas limit. Do miners work this way (ie. if there are two transactions to choose from, both doing the same thing for the same gas price, can they choose the higher gas limit one and make more eth by mining it?), or is the amount of gas used fixed based on the transaction data, opcode, etc.?
Comment: For a short answer: yes Check out here for more info :https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/questions/8962/how-to-speed-up-transaction-confirmation-time
Comment: This link does not answer my question, it just says that setting a high gas price will incentivize miners. My question is how to incentivize when the gas price is capped.
Answer: Yes, you can prioritise your transaction over others by offering a higher transaction fee (transaction fee = gas value * gas price).
Miners tend to prefer transactions that carry a higher transaction fee and will therefore prioritise such a transaction over others regardless of the type of transaction and what the transaction entails.
Some smart contracts have maximum gas limits set on a method level and would reject txns that exceed this limit.
Comment: Doesn't look right. Firstly, transaction fee = gas consumed * gas price. Miners can't know the gas consumed until they've executed the tx. Secondly, a transaction offering a low gas price but is lengthy could cost more than a quick value transfer with a high gas price. You can fit more low-gas transactions into a particular gas limit than you can high-gas limit  transactions (obviously). Thirdly, the gas _price_ can be so low as to cause an expected loss for a miner (due to uncle-ing and stales). Thus, you're shooting yourself in the foot twice by prioritizing on high transaction fees.
Comment: Agreed that the transaction fee is only 'potential' and not guaranteed but generally miners tend to prefer txns with a higher potential fee. Similar question - https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/a/13055/15853 and https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/a/6111/15853 sheds light on the default impl for Geth and Parity
Comment: Both of those links run counter to what you wrote in your answer: they both state that price is prioritized first, not fee, by default (and, in fact, the second answer states that low gas limit is considered an alternative strategy in Parity -- but not what you suggest, which is high gas limit). The low gas limit makes sense to me for some cases such as when you want to maximize number of transactions to clear a backlog. The other strategies for Parity seem dominant to a "higher transaction fees-first" (which can't cheaply be evaluated) strategy for any of the metrics I can think of.
Answer: I had never heard of the term "fixed gas price" and was about to answer that there is no such thing. Then I started thinking that a contract may check the gas price with tx.gasprice and revert transactions which don't fit some desired gas price value and it might even make some sense.
The more I think about it the more it might make sense for example for ICOs which want equal treatment for all participants.
If you can't use gas price as incentive for the miners there isn't basically anything you can do as gas price is supposed to be the incentive. Setting a different gas limit will not give the miners any more income - it's just the upper bound for gas usage in your transactions and it doesn't change anything for the miners unless the transaction runs out of gas. I assume you want your transaction to go through so it doesn't make sense to set too low gas limit but setting it too high won't help you incentivize the miners.
The only thing I can think of on how to improve your chances is to send multiple transactions (with different nonces) and preferably even from different nodes. In this case you have to be prepared that all of the txs go through at some point. This is typically not a very viable option.


NDC - SETID Mapping

Question: I am interested in connecting the NDC data (brand_name, labeler etc.) to the FDA Label data (SET_ID). However, I'm struggling to find a dataset that would contain the mapping between the NDC code and the SET ID. Is there a crosswalk connecting the two?
Answer: The openFDA NDC dataset will contain a SPL Set ID value in the openfda.spl_set_id element for most of the drugs. Here is a random example:
curl https://api.fda.gov/drug/ndc.json?search=packaging.package_ndc:57664-798-99 | grep -C 2 spl_set_id

NDC - SETID Mapping


car won't start when putting the key in the ignition

Question: I own a 2004 Ford Explorer. It has a brand new battery, but when you turn the key in the ignition nothing happens. The lights comes on and the radio works but nothing else happens. All the dash board lights comes on. When my husband gets underneath and touch the starter it turns over but still won't start.
Comment: When you say "nothing happens" do you hear even a click? If not then it is likely an electrical component that is failing. Since it turned over after your husband tapped the starter then I would probably rule out the ignition switch and suspect that its the solenoid on the starter that is failing.
Comment: It appears this is an abandoned question...Latasha, did you and your husband ever resolve this ignition/starter issue?
Answer: This could be a whole lot of things. I'm going to guess that the check engine light is on (and / or On and blinking...)
If so, we're going to need to see the stored OnBoard Diagnostics version 2 (OBDII) codes.  The only way to get those on your car is with an OBDII reader.  (either via a purchase at your local autoparts store, or online somewhere, or borrow one from a mechanic friend.)  In some areas your local autoparts store will read the code for you for free, but obviously that won't work if your car doesn't start.
If there is no check engine light, this sounds like an electrical issue.  I'm guessing you've likely got a fuse or solenoid out somewhere.  My recommendation there is to check all fuses in the vehicle, both underneath the drivers area of the instrument panel and under the hood...  You can find a directory to all fuses in your owners guide.
Another recommendation: Purchase a Haynes or Chilton's service manual for your vehicle.  They cost around $30 for your vehicle and its money well spent.  In this case they provide a complete wiring diagram, so you can determine which relay or other area of the car could cause this fault.  They have a decent 'fault' tree so you can troubleshoot the now start defect in a systemic way.
And what lead you to replace the battery in this car in the first place?  Has the car been started even once since the battery has been replaced?


Is it possible for a parasitic wasp to alter the behaviour of its host after emerging from it?

Question: I know that parasitic wasp larvae can live for a long time inside their live host (eg. caterpillar), but I always thought that they kill the host when they eventually get out of it. But I've seen a film, where it's shown that not only can a caterpillar survive the emergence of a wasp larva, but also the parasites infect the host with some kind of virus that changes the behaviour of the caterpillar to protect the wasp's pupa. Is it possible and common among parasitic wasps? What species of wasps and viruses cause such effect?
Comment: Are you asking about *parasites* (i.e not lethal to host) or *parasitoids* (i.e. host killing) insects? In the question, the distinction seems to be muddled.
Answer: The species of wasp in the video you link to is Cotesia glomerata. Furthermore, there is at least one other species, Glyptapanteles, which parasitizes other caterpillar species in the same way and induces the same behaviour in its host.
I'm not sure which virus it is.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14053-zombie-caterpillars-controlled-by-voodoo-wasps.html?feedId=online-news_rss20
Is it possible? Of course, you have an example! Though, there is a small caveat. Some of the offspring sacrifice themselves to induce the behavioral change after the rest of the brood has emerged.
Is it common among parasitic wasps? No. While injecting offspring into host species is a common theme for parasitic wasps, and while there are a handful which somehow induce behavioral changes in the host animals - continuing the manipulation after leaving the host animal is extremely rare among parasites in general.
Comment: Thanks! It's even more fascinating, because of altruistic motive (unless polyembryony was common among Glyptapanteles so that all larvae in one host will be genetically the same). I ask if such change in behaviour is possible, because I don't completely trust the information in popular science sources. I would accept your answer, but first I'd like to wait, maybe someone will find anything about that mysterious virus.
Answer: In the study by Whitfield 1990 (1) I found the information that the parasitic wasp from family Ichneumonidae have interesting symbiotic viruses called polydnaviruses. This virus stay as provirus in the wasps genome and is transmitted vertically between subsequent generations of parasitoid. It does not harm the wasp and it is transmitted to the wasps hosts (usually caterpillar). The virus does not replicate in the caterpillar, but alter it's physiology: supress immune response and metamorphosis and increases the amount of nutrients in caterpillars hemolymph.
Still, I have not found any references about this kind of virus altering the behaviour of the caterpillar after the emergence of wasps larvae.
[1] Whitfield, J. B. (1990). Parasitoids, Polydnaviruses and Endosymbiosis. Parasitology Today, 6(12), 381-384. (free PDF)
Answer: Another example is the wasp species Dinocampus coccinellae, which lays its eggs inside certain species of ladybug/ladybird - most notably the "twelve-spotted lady beetle" (Coleomegilla maculata). It also infects the "seven spot" ladybird.
(I'll stick with "ladybird" instead of "ladybug" for the remainder of this post.)
This is actually very similar to the Glyptapanteles example in the most-upvoted answer so far. (Though I would like to point out that OP's video in fact does not in fact show Glyptapanteles, but the extremely similar Cotesia glomerata.) In this case, though, only one egg is laid inside the host, and the wasp larva is nothing like as small relative to its host as the Cotesia and Glyptapanteles larvae were.
The wasp larva, after emerging from its ladybird host, spins a cocoon underneath the ladybird, between its legs, and pupates. Unlike Cotesia, this wasp larva needs to use its own silk and spin its own cocoon. The hard-shelled ladybird is trapped on top of the wasp pupa, rather like an armoured shelter. While mostly immobile, if potential predators/hyperparasites come close, the ladybird will thrash out at them with its limbs. I'm not sure if this is to attack them directly, or to deter them from coming close, or both.
Since no other larvae are left behind in the host, Dinocampus coccinellae must be using some other means to influence its behaviour after emergence. A virus, the "D. coccinellae paralysis virus", is injected by the adult wasp at the time the egg is oviposited. As well as suppressing the ladybird's immune system, it infects the ladybird's brain and may explain one or both of:

The ladybird's general immobility after the larva emerges
The ladybird's thrashing out at potential predators that may attack the larva.

The virus replicates rapidly but for unknown reasons doesn't spread to the beetle's brain until just before the larva emerges from her belly. At first the virus seems to build up harmlessly in brain cells, but as soon as the larva breaks out, these cells burst open, unleashing destruction all around them.
The researchers suggest that the beetle's own immune system may be responsible for this damage. They discovered that crucial immune genes are suppressed while the larva lives within the ladybug, but then reactivate after the larva emerges. The researchers speculate that the beetle's revived immune system discovers and attacks DCPV-infected cells. The self-inflicted brain damage could temporarily paralyze the beetle just when the newly vulnerable wasp larva needs protection.

Also:

DcPV is stored in the oviduct of parasitoid females, replicates in parasitoid larvae and is transmitted to the host during larval development.

If I understand correctly, this virus is not one of the so-called "polydnaviruses" injected by other species of parasitic wasp.
For some reason, the wasp prefers to parasitize female ladybird hosts, although I think it will still use male hosts in a minority of cases.
Sources:

Dheilly Nolwenn M. et al. (2015). Who is the puppet master? Replication of a parasitic wasp-associated virus correlates with host behaviour manipulation. Proc. R. Soc. B vol 282 issue 1803:
http://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.2773
Maure F et al. (2011). The cost of a bodyguard. Biology Letters volume 7 issue 6: http://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2011.0415
Davis D.S., Stewart S.L., Manica A. and Majerus M.E.N. (2006). Adaptive preferential selection of female coccinellid hosts by the parasitoid wasp Dinocampus coccinellae (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). Eur. J. Entomol., 103(1), 41-45. doi: 10.14411/eje.2006.006.

See also:

https://www.naturespot.org.uk/species/dinocampus-coccinellae
https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-earth/biological-warfare-parasitic-wasp-uses-a-virus-to-control-its-host
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/02/wasp-virus-turns-ladybugs-zombie-babysitters
Comment: Great job (+1). (I have the same suggestions for improvement that I made on your other answer and did a little tidying up of the formatting for your sources.)