Who was the first person condemned to death by a Christian bishop?

Question: I was wondering who was the first person a bishop condemned to death, caused to be condemned to death and such sentence was approved of by said bishop and who was the first such person who was actually executed, as in being physically executed by another person without supernatural involvement, such as seen in the story of Ananias and Sapphira as recounted in the Book of Acts (Acts 5: 1-11).
Comment: @DJClayworth I do not at this time.
Comment: Do you have an example of anyone sentenced to death by a bishop?
Comment: In medieval England, for example, church courts did not have the power to sentence someone to death.
Answer: If a bishop ever publically ordered the execution of someone it would somehow probably be in  connection to the inquisition. However most inquisitors were Dominicans (or Franciscans to a lesser degree). But that said, I am sure there were probably a few bishops who may have been judges in these tribunals. When local clergy were placed in a position to judge such cases, bishops were generally not included and would be given to the lesser clergy.

The Inquisition was a group of institutions within the government system of the Catholic Church whose aim was to combat public heresy committed by baptized Christians. It started in 12th-century France to combat religious dissent, in particular the Cathars and the Waldensians. Other groups investigated later included the Spiritual Franciscans, the Hussites (followers of Jan Hus) and the Beguines. Beginning in the 1250s, inquisitors were generally chosen from members of the Dominican Order, replacing the earlier practice of using local clergy as judges. The term Medieval Inquisition covers these courts up to mid-15th century.
During the Late Middle Ages and early Renaissance, the concept and scope of the Inquisition significantly expanded in response to the Protestant Reformation and the Catholic Counter-Reformation. It expanded to other European countries, resulting in the Spanish Inquisition and Portuguese Inquisition. The Spanish and Portuguese operated inquisitorial courts throughout their empires in Africa, Asia, and the Americas (resulting in the Peruvian Inquisition and Mexican Inquisition). The Spanish and Portuguese inquisitions focused particularly on the issue of Jewish anusim and Muslim converts to Catholicism, partly because these minority groups were more numerous in Spain and Portugal than in many other parts of Europe, and partly because they were often considered suspect due to the assumption that they had secretly reverted to their previous religions. Inquisition (wikipedia)

The actual first bishop who ordered an execution of someone may be almost impossible to name.
Notwithstanding, that historical archives are not always publically available, I am going to say, for the time being, that the first person condemned to death by a bishop was St. Joan of Arc, also known as "The Maid of Orléans". The main judge in her trial was Pierre Cauchon, Bishop of Beauvais, at a time when ecclesiastical trials should have been reserved to the Dominican Order.
At the conclusion of St. Joan D'Arc's trial and condemnation, she was handed over to the secular authorities to be burned at the stack. The civil authorities were English.

The presiding judge was Peter Cauchon, Bishop of Beauvais. He was known even in his lifetime as "Peter the Pig" not only because the French word for pig, cochon, resembled his name, but also it held a definite resemblance to certain aspects of his character. He was a Frenchman, yet he was loyal to the English cause because it offered more opportunities for higher positions and acquiring more wealth. A ready and willing tool in the hands of Jeanne's enemies, Cauchon was the perfect unscrupulous and ambitious man needed for the job. This Judas Iscariot of the fifteenth century was given authority over the trial under the pretext that Compiègne, where Jeanne was captured, lay in his diocese of Beauvais. In his eagerness to make a name for himself, he was willing to take "justice" into his own hands and convict and execute an innocent girl, and for this loathsome act his name will be remembered with shame until the end of time.
On Wednesday, May 30, 1431, the day before Corpus Christi, at seven in the morning, the nineteen-year-old prisoner was told of the verdict of the court. "Will they treat me so horribly?" she sobbed, "Must my body which has never been violated be burned to ashes? I would prefer to be beheaded seven times than to be burned so." She dressed in a long white robe and a hood, and was permitted to make her Confession and receive Communion from a Dominican. That act alone was proof of the injustice of her accusers. If her judges truly believed her to be a heretic and apostate as they had condemned her, surely they would not have allowed her to receive the Holy Eucharist!
When the crowd had dispersed, and the judges had gone from the Old Marketplace, the soldiers set to disposing of the remains from the smoldering fire. At the base of the stake, mid the ashes, was found the noble heart of the Maid, intact and full of blood. In vain the English soldiers tried to burn it with oil, sulfur and charcoal, but the only remaining relic of the brave young Martyr could not be destroyed. "We have burnt a Saint!" exclaimed one of the soldiers. "We are lost." Terrified, they gathered her heart and ashes into a bag, took it to a bridge over the Seine and cast it into the river. Saint Jeanne d' Arc

Following the Retrial of Joan of Arc, Inquisitor-General Jean Bréhal drew up his final summary which describes Joan as a martyr convicted in a trial which violated Church law in pursuit of a secular vendetta. Pope Callixtus III excommunicated Cauchon posthumously in 1457 for his role in Joan's persecution and condemnation.
But then if you consider the pope as the Bishop of Rome, that is a whole different story. The first persons to be directly condemned to death by the Bishop of Rome were the brothers Carlo Carafa (Cardinal) and Giovanni Carafa, Duke of Paliano in 1561.

The first known persons directly ordered to be executed by the a pope himself seems to be the brothers Cardinal Carlo Carafa and Giovanni Carafa, Duke of Paliano, nephews of Paul IV, sentenced to strangulation in prison and beheading, respectively, by Pius IV, as his first public act (March 5, 1561). - Who was the first person ordered executed by a Roman Catholic pope?
Answer: Priscillian, a bishop himself, was tried, condemned to death, and executed on orders of the Roman emperor Maximus in 385. The chief accusser was Ithacius, a rival bishop. Although I don't know if Ithacius desired Priscillian to be killed or if he approved of the killing, he was nevertheless censured by notable Christian figures, such as Martin of Tours, Ambrose, and pope Siricius for taking the matter to civil authorities and the result of having a bishop executed. Ithacius was subsequently removed from being a bishop.
Comment: A bishop that accuses another bishop in a death penalty case is a witness and an accuser. Notwithstanding, he is not the one who condemned a rival bishop to death. That power remained with the **Emperor Maximus, who was acting as judge**. Ithacius  simply presented his case against Priscillian, but it was the Emperor who condemned the rival bishop to death. The bishop Priscillian to was sentenced to death by the sword. **Bishop Ithacius was his chief accuser.**
Comment: @KenGraham Yes, but it conforms to my expanded question as written in the details window below the title of the question. I wasn't sure if I had to add the expanded question in the title because it is kind of long.
Comment: It was a long time ago; the second problem is the written histories which survive are often written by the persecutors who put themselves in a good light and their victims in a bad light; and destroyed the written histories of the persecuted. Christians were the persecuted until 313 when Constantine granted toleration. Soon enough Constantine chose xianity to be the State religion. Con. wanted unity in his Empire.  Sadly Xians agreed idea of state-church & that was The Fall of the church & beginning of oppression of pure-separatist-Xians et al. by the State-church.
Comment: The first to be oppressed were the Donatists (Xians) who wanted the church to be only those who voluntarily wanted to be Xian, & not by coercion.  New Testament idea is a "Called Out" Church (COC), "ecclesia" means "called out", ie from society, a body of people who really want to live for Jesus, leaving others free to choose.  The church-state (CS) punished all who would not be part of CS.  The CS soon begins to include many who do not truly love Jesus/holiness but "worshipped" out of fear/force.  The leaders of the CS then punish the COC leaders.  Donatus Magnus was exiled to Gaul in 347 AD


Why does the ben chocham ask what the mitzvos are if he is a chochom?

Question: Title says it all, if the ben chocham is already wise, as proven from this itself that he asks "what are the adus, chukim and mishpatim..", implying he knows the difference between the three categories of mitzvos, and the gemara in general says this question is being asked by a ben chocham, then why would he need to ask what the specific commandants are? Doesn't he know Torah shebochsav and Torah shebal peh? If not, then what makes him a chochom, and if so, then what is he asking?
Comment: In this context chacham just means smart. He still has a lot to learn.
Comment: Great question.
Comment: "he knows the difference between the three categories of mitzvos" "Doesn't he know Torah shebochsav and Torah shebal peh" I think plenty of people know those three categories without knowing all laws of pesach.
Comment: The mafarshim have different pshatim in the chachams questions.. super deep approaches
Comment: @doubleaa many people know that there is a concept of three categories, but to know which mitzvos fall under which categories one has to know all of the mitzvos
Answer: He's wise enough to know that the Haggadah was set up with a question answer format, so he obliges and asks.
The fact that he knows the answer is irrelevant.
Answer: As per @N.T.
See https://www.sefaria.org/Berakhot.55a?lang=bi

אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אֵין הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא נוֹתֵן חָכְמָה
אֶלָּא לְמִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ חָכְמָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״יָהֵב חׇכְמְתָא
לְחַכִּימִין וּמַנְדְּעָא לְיָדְעֵי בִינָה״. שְׁמַע רַב תַּחְלִיפָא
בַּר מַעְרְבָא וְאַמְרַהּ קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אֲבָהוּ. אָמַר לֵיהּ:
אַתּוּן מֵהָתָם מַתְנִיתוּ לַהּ, אֲנַן מֵהָכָא מַתְנִינַן לַהּ,
דִּכְתִיב: ״וּבְלֵב כׇּל חֲכַם לֵב נָתַתִּי חׇכְמָה״.
On a similar note, Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The Holy One, Blessed be He,
only grants wisdom to one who already possesses wisdom, as it is
stated: "He gives wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to they who know
understanding" (Daniel 2:21). Rav Taḥalifa, from the West, Eretz
Yisrael, heard this and repeated it before Rabbi Abbahu. Rabbi Abbahu
said to him: You learned proof for this idea from there; we learn it
from here: As it is written in praise of the builders of the
Tabernacle: "And in the hearts of all who are wise-hearted I have
placed wisdom" (Exodus 31:6).

From which is evident that being wise-hearted is a prerequisite to, and not the same thing as, wisdom.
Answer: Welcome to the site Josh, and thank you for your great question - looking forward to seeing you around more!
The first thing that comes to mind is the Mishna in Avos (4:1)

בֶּן זוֹמָא אוֹמֵר, אֵיזֶהוּ חָכָם, הַלּוֹמֵד מִכָּל אָדָם - Ben Zoma
said:Who is wise? He who learns from every man,

The wise son is the one who shows he wants to learn. He's not embarrassed to ask, and is looking to learn from whoever can teach him.
Answer: Most reishonim (based off Rashi )learn that the chacham is asking why do we eat the Chagiga before the Pesach if the Pesach is the main mitzva. Therefore the Pesach should be eaten first.


2 Kings 23:26 Is the reference to Manasseh to the king of Judah or a people?

Question: If it is the king referred to, why him specifically?  He wasn't the only king who sacrificed his sons to Molech.  Ahaz is reported in 2 Kings 16:3 to also have "passed his son thru the fire".  Manasseh had repented.  Ahaz had not.  If Manasseh is a people, is the reference to Manasseh actually Judah, as Ephraim is a reference to the Northern Territory (Israel)?
Answer: (NRSV) 2 Kings 23:26 Still the Lord did not turn from the fierceness of his great wrath, by which his anger was kindled against Judah, because of all the provocations with which Manasseh had provoked him. 27 The Lord said, "I will remove Judah also out of my sight, as I have removed Israel; and I will reject this city that I have chosen, Jerusalem, and the house of which I said, My name shall be there."
One thing to pay attention to is that the anger is against Judah. Manasseh did repent (2 Chronicles 33:13), Josiah did restore the temple and renewed the covenant between Judah and God (2 Chronicles 34:29-33), but Josiah literally died while ignoring God (2 Chronicles 35:22 But Josiah would not turn away from him, but disguised himself in order to fight with him. He did not listen to the words of Neco from the mouth of God, but joined battle in the plain of Megiddo.).
The reality is that none followed God perfectly, and Josiah was the one bright spot in a long line of degenerative Kings of Judah. Israel (Northern Kingdom) incurred God's wrath earlier because they degenerated earlier. Judah took longer to arrive at the same conclusion, but ultimately changed as their kings did. If Josiah had not sought to follow God, Judah would have stayed as corrupt as they were before his reign.
One perspective to remember when studying the Bible is that God's view isn't linear like ours is. He knows and sees what is to come, so His decisions are based on more than what's immediately available in the text/timeline. So His anger was at Judah's continued rejection of Him, before and after the reign of Josiah, in spite of the fact that Manasseh (the King) had repented.
2 Chronicles 36:15 The Lord, the God of their ancestors, sent persistently to them by his messengers, because he had compassion on his people and on his dwelling place; 16 but they kept mocking the messengers of God, despising his words, and scoffing at his prophets, until the wrath of the Lord against his people became so great that there was no remedy.
Answer: 2 Kings 23:26 Is the reference to Manasseh to the king of Judah or a people?
Both. Manasseh sinned against the Lord and the people of Manasseh also sinned against the Lord.
If it is the king referred to, why him specifically?
Josiah was a good king. Manasseh was a bad king just before him. By pointing to Manasseh, it also points to the bad kings before him. It is not just him.
If Manasseh is a people, is the reference to Manasseh actually Judah, as Ephraim is a reference to the Northern Territory (Israel)?
Yes, it is a literary device called synecdoche.


why is the z transform transfer function 1/(z-1) called an integrator?

Question: I am reading up on delta sigma modulators and there this term $\frac{1}{z-1}$ that appears repeatedly and is referred to as an "integrator".  Why is this so ?
Answer: There are a couple reasons.  One is that $(1-z^{-1})$ represents $x[n]-x[n-1]$ which is a finite difference over a very small period of time.  and that is an approximation to a differentiator.  The reciprocal is
$$ \frac{1}{1-z^{-1}} = \frac{z}{z-1} $$
which is the inverse operator.  We normally call the inverse operation of differentiation, we call that "integration".
Another reason is simply to implement that term as a transfer function of a tiny little LTI system:
$$ \frac{Y(z)}{X(z)} = \frac{1}{z-1} = \frac{z^{-1}}{1-z^{-1}} $$
or
$$ Y(z)(1 - z^{-1}) = Y(z) - Y(z) z^{-1} = X(z) z^{-1} $$
that translates to
$$ y[n] - y[n-1] = x[n-1] $$
or
$$ y[n] = y[n-1] + x[n-1] $$
so the current output sample is the previous output added to the (slightly delayed) input.  the output is an accumulation of the input.  similarly an integral of an input $x(t)$ is an accumulation of that input until the present time $t$.
i would say a better representation of a discrete-time integrator is $\frac{z}{z-1}$.  that would correspond to
$$ y[n] = y[n-1] + x[n] $$
Comment: Can you please elaborate how the term x(n-1) lead to x(n) in the final output equation ? Note: I am not able to comment on your post since I dont have enough reputation.
Comment: The final equation is $$ y[n] = y[n-1] + x[n] $$ and that comes from a transfer function of $$H(z) = \frac{Y(z)}{X(z)} = \frac{z}{z-1} = \frac{1}{1-z^{-1}} $$  that results in $$ Y(z)(1-z^{-1}) = X(z) $$ which is the same as $$ Y(z) = z^{-1} Y(z) + X(z) $$
Answer: Robert's explanation is nice. Although, for finite difference, []−[−1] translates to  [+1]−[], which translates to X(z).z^(-1) - X(z) = X(z).{(1-z)/z}. And for the case of actual differentiation, the finite difference will generally be divided by sampling period T. Those other expressions from text books eg. z/(z-1) tend to get lost in translation, which is a life story of lots of teachings in many subjects.
Answer: Note $\frac{z}{z - 1}$ does not have constant phase of $90$ degrees, like a continuous integrator has.
The bilinear integrator $\frac{z + 1}{z - 1}$ has $90$ degree phase across the whole frequency range. This is used in mapping continuous $s$-transform filters to discrete $z$-transform filters. It can be extended in an infinite series that converges on the continuous integrator.


Ethics of answering exam and/or test questions

Question: The daily list of questions I see here seems to be distinctly of the homework/other assignment type variety, ranging from a measly school level to graduate level. To me these questions look (almost) uniquely identifiable. While logistically it would be a nightmare to "police" meticulously the cheaters, should not the community take the stance that such questions be not answered? Or would the whole SE collapse without the homework/assignment exercises cohort of users?
Comment: See [this](http://meta.math.stackexchange.com/questions/19288/moderators-not-having-a-uniform-response-to-flags-about-potentially-graded-assig).
Comment: @PedroTamaroff but you say don't flag competition questions from your quote, but in fact, MSE shuts down all ongoing competition questions until after the competition has ended. Isn't that quote and MSE actions in direct conflict with each other?
Comment: @Dustin That's not something I said. It is merely a quote I found relevant to the discussion.
Answer: All right, I have read @Pedro Tamaroff's leads and I see this is a contentious issue. May I suggest then some middle ground: Surely not being paranoid, surely not sitting there explicitly catching the cheaters, but exercising prudence in answering those almost uniquely identifiable homework questions. Otherwise, this looks overwhelmingly like a school homework site. I am of course aware that one can have a philosophical stance that a small piece of real gold takes a lot of ore to distil...
P.s. Needless to say, cheaters mostly cheat on themselves, but they also create, at least immediate unfair situation to their peers. I have a personal vendetta on this one: Many of my peers who copied my papers and homework in my undergraduate days (should I say they were outright pathetic in their academic performance) hold much better positions than I today. So cheating pays. No?
Comment: I think the last comment on personal vendetta is just off-topic, and is better removed.
Comment: Thaks @dustin. It is fairly easy to determine for those who care to. You look into a fairly positively correlated scatter plot of homework scores and test scores. Then you look for the outliers -- high homework scores vs low test scores. Simple my dear Watson.
Comment: @PedroTamaroff the "vendeta" part is to show that there are real issues involved in the issues discussed. It is not entirely "I am sitting on the clouds and could care less" point of view, but illustrates why people care about this issue. It is often more valuable than the question itself.
Comment: If you're gonna assess people's worth by professional accomplishments, then maybe cheating pays. But, if you ask me, 'success' as it is portrayed in american movies, does not adequately encompass the concept of success.
Comment: Sorry @PedroTamaroff but I have a distinct feeling that you brought the drama in, where there was none.
Comment: Some times cheaters get caught as well, see [here](http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1169278/probability-that-the-median-of-three-numbers-is-in-a-certain-range#comment2389381_1169278). However, MSE still wont stop the question. Now that professor just needs to determine who it was.
Comment: @Rado The comment is off topic because you cannot possibly know these people are more successful than you because they have cheated. It's a shot in the dark that brings only drama to the discussion.


Port forwarding with 0.0.0.0, any threat?

Question: I set up on our company's firewall (fortigate100d) a port forwarding to one of our Internal services.
As we don't have a static public IP I used 0.0.0.0 as an external IP so the remote users can access the internal service through a DDNS service which will handle IP changes.
The question is: does making 0.0.0.0 as an external IP, exposes our internal services or even the firewall to potential threats.
Answer: In a default scenario (one internal, one external network) this will not harm you! You are using PAT so the rule is still bound to a specific port and does not put your network in danger.
If you have more then one external network attached you might have to think about it again. In that case you whould have to decide if the forwarding rule should be applied to both or just one external network.
Comment: what is exactly the threat in case of more then one external network ?
Answer: With Fortigate devices, you can map your Virtual IPs to an interface.
I strongly suggest you to map your port forwarding object (Virtual IP) to your WAN interface, instead of any which is the default value.
I also suggest you to explicitly specify Incoming Interface and Outgoing Interface in your firewall policies.
If you properly map your object to the good interface and specify the two interfaces in your policy, you should not have any issue.
Comment: I'm not sure this answers the question. Or if it does, the connection is not clear.
Comment: I'm just trying to explain how to configure this to minimize the threat in that case. It does not answer the question in a general case, but in that particular situation


"Reviewer" badge cannot be selected as the "Next Badge"

Question: Why aren't the reviewer or steward badges shown or selectable as "next badge" on the user activity page? They are shown among the help-center badges.
Comment: (i) When I read the title I thought "I haven't heard of the 'Bug Reviewer'  badge -- what's that one for?". (ii) This might get more traction on meta.SE
Comment: Instead of an update, consider posting an answer quoting the reply you got on meta.SE and then accepting this answer.
Comment: @amoeba OK, done. Now, why did I do that? What difference does that make?
Comment: @Glen_b Bug; Reviewer...
Comment: I'd likely have said "Bug$:$ *Reviewer* badge ..."
Comment: Yeah, unfortunately it doesn't work in titles. But you can always do $\textit{Reviewer}$ or `Reviewer`. The point was really about the colon rather than the semi-colon
Comment: @Glen_b Gee, you are fast.
Comment: Too much to do to be slow
Comment: @Glen_b BTW, I used a semicolon because it means "that is" as opposed to a colon that means "list" although you are correct in the sense that a colon looks better.
Comment: Not much :-) but now the thread is marked green as containing an accepted answer. This is pleasing to the eye.
Answer: Quite a few badges aren't in the tracking list. (There are about 15 badges I don't have but only 4 show up that I can choose between for tracking)
Some of those at least will probably be for reasons of overhead (it would be too hard to keep doing the calculation every time you load your profile).
Some will be absent because you don't really "progress" toward them.
Some will be absent because they're already shown elsewhere. The reviewer progress is shown in information under the "review" menu item / review queues (e.g. https://stats.stackexchange.com/review/close/stats shows close-reviewer badge progress, https://stats.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/stats shows suggested-edit reviewer badge progress and so on)
So I expect that they don't show up because you're already getting a display that's "tracking" them elsewhere.
Comment: Carl a lot of people here are from some other area "by formal training" -- including several of our top users (who goes to university to try to be a statistician? Most of us end up there almost by accident). I think there's no issue saying "colleague".
Comment: Yes, I know. But, it annoyed me that it is not consistent. (+1)
Comment: I'm curious to know what happens after I get those last 4 badges I can track. Soon it will be down to three.
Comment: Interesting question. I hope it doesn't cause an error. Let me know if you can remember when you get them all.
Comment: Are you going for `peer pressure`? That's the one I'm tracking. (It's not clear I'll ever get legendary...)
Comment: @gung So you are. If that question was to me, I had no trouble getting `peer pressure`, all I had to do was try to clarify AIC. Since it is clear as mud to begin with, and there are armed camps within the AIC community, and an anti-BIC sub group, the mud slinging was immediate. Glen_b doesn't seem to have `peer pressure` either. Ah, you haven't lived until your colleagues throw mud at you. Wait one, *colleagues* can I even use that word? I am not a statistician by formal training. Maybe *kindred spirits.*
Comment: @gung Peer pressure is one of the four I can track (I am a single downvote off being able to delete the post in question and get it -- but nobody has given the third downvote on the post in several years. It didn't occur to me that tracking it might act as a signal. I should do that).  I'm just a few edits shy of Illuminator so I have been tracking that. I'll change that shortly. However, you appear to have deleted your few answers with fewer than 0 points so there wouldn't be much point in tracking that one for you.
Comment: @Glen_b, itching for a downvote? What post ;-)?
Comment: @gung If you're inclined, you can find it by sorting my answers by votes and going to the last page. It deserves deletion; I only kept it around so that it might get the third downvote first. If you want to get it you have to leave a post with a downvote or two on it undeleted. And then wait. If you delete *all* the posts that garner downvotes there's no way to get -3. Well, outside posting something terrible deliberately I guess, but I can't bring myself to that.
Comment: @Carl if there was ever a bug with getting all trackable badges it would have been hit on StackOverflow dozens of times.  My guess is they considered what to do with any empty list when they first wrote it.
Comment: @Glen_b, I'm [on record](http://meta.stackexchange.com/q/189444/187282) stating that `Peer Pressure` is a badge people shouldn't want to get. But I'm willing to downvote you, if it will make you happy.
Comment: @gung Hey, if you deleted that one you could get peer pressure you know... :P .... I wouldn't have thought about it but I had a post on -2 anyway, so I figured there was little harm in waiting to see if someone would delete it. If you find the post worth a downvote, by all means do so, but I'm not going to ask you to (nor even directly link it, though it's easily found); asking for votes - even a single downvote - would be abusive I think.
Comment: I have no interest in deleting that (I'm not sure if it works for questions anyway); I put a lot of effort into raising the issue, researching it, laying out my arguments cogently, etc. That clearly isn't valued on MSE. The comments are mostly obnoxious, & the primary answer is a complete non-sequitur. Perhaps someday someone will bother to actually think about what I said, but I'm not holding my breath.
Comment: It was meant as a joke (poking fun at myself, in fact); I can see the care that went in.
Answer: Note also, as suggested, I asked this question on SE meta, and the answer there was

These badges are intentionally not available in the badge progress selector because they would require additional UI to select which queue you wanted to track which is simply not worth implementing at this time given that you can easily track these in each queue respectively.


View internal Storage use

Question: I'd like to view use the meager internal storage on my HTC Evo.  The phone is rooted, and I have used Link2SD to move apps to the SD card.  I am also using DiskUsage by Ivan Voyosluk to monitor use of storage.  The DiskUsage app, however, does not seem to make a clear distinction between internal storage and external.  It appears it may be calculating the total by following the symlinks onto the SD card.  I'd like to know how much internal storage is actually being consumed by my apps.  I am continuing to run into the problem of running out of my meager internal storage while there is a huge amount of unused space on on my SD card.
Answer: Several helpful apps are mentioned in the answers to What can I do to manage my phone's internal storage? Guess the question and its answers would be useful/interesting to you anyhow.
Apart from that, there are also our useful command line utilities, which you can execute in a terminal (either via adb shell, or using a terminal app):

df: stands for "disk free", but also shows the used space. Is not interested in files or symlinks, just operates on the entire partition. So this should list you up how much space is used/free on each storage.
du: a close relative, "disk used". Is not interested in "divisions" such as partitions or directories by default (that can be dealt with via parameters), but checks "anything below". It doesn't follow symlinks, which might prove useful to you – as will the parameter -s (summary). Without that parameter, each directory would be listed up with the space consumed; with -s only a summary of all space used below the current location will be printed.

You will find several other useful commands in our command-line tag-wiki. For your low memory, you also might want to visit our insufficient-memory tag-wiki.

View internal Storage use


How can I conceal the underside of roof sheathing with protruding roofing nails?

Question: I just had a new roof done and as you can see, they used long nails which protruded through the plywood and splintered the wood. I cannot afford to have someone scrape and paint the whole underside of the carport. Can I just have someone spray the whole thing as a quick fix?
Comment: FYI, it's normal (and required by shingle manufacturers) that roofing nails protruded like that for suitable grip. The mistake the roofers made was in not informing you of this before they began considering your painted ceiling, which is a matter of professionalism and not technique.
Answer: I had the same situation one time and the carpenters just put a sheathing over it to hide everything.  The sheathing was no thicker that wood paneling and finished very nicely after painting.
Answer: The same thing happened to me once. At first I was unhappy because the nails poked though, but then as vin944 stated, its proper for them to protrude through. I talked to the roofers and they gave me some 1/4 in. sheathing. I laid them all out flat on the driveway, painted them, then nailed them up with some help. It looked much better and gave it a finished look.


Are there any disadvantage to fuel efficient tires?

Question: I'm in need of new tires and I saw some fuel efficient/low rolling resistance tires. Is there any disadvantage to this type of tire?
Answer: Any tyre design is a balance between cost, grip, longevity, water displacement and rolling resistance. Change one, and chances are you'll adversely affect the others...
Personally, I would always put grip and water displacement (which affects wet grip) above all the others on a priority list. The difference between those "fuel efficient" tyres and normal ones will probably be only a couple more miles per gallon, but if they don't grip as well, don't last as long or cost more to buy, that small saving will quickly vanish...
Answer: TRB Special Report 286
2006 report (free PDF) by Transportation Research Board of National Academy of Science in response to request of the U.S. Congress concludes that there is no evidence that any marginal trade off in traction (possibly necessary to achieve lower rolling resistance) would make significant difference in safety, and as long as tyre conforms to UTQG (Uniform Tire Quality Grading) system (grade A wet traction rating for most passenger cars).
Same thing with tread wear. Two tyres of comparable UTQG wear rating, would get comparable mileage within the same operating conditions. As long ratings are similar, and reduced rolling resistance clearly achieved not by reducing initial tread depth.
Given those two being equal in comparing to regular tyre, and average mileage driven, at the low estimate of 1% fuel economy improvement (6 U.S. gallons per year), automobilist should see his extra investment returned within first year.
Conclusion
For the average driver seeking replacement tyres it makes sense to go after LRR ones, provided same UTQG ratings (or similar international standards). A lot of OEMs already use those tyres at the factory (including popular models, e.g. 2010 Ford Fusion), so direct replacements should be fine.
Information on rolling resistance is not (yet) required to be explicitly stated on the tyre or its packaging but should be easily available via spec sheet through the dealer or manufacturer (roughly, 10% improvement in RR translates in 1–2% improvement in fuel-economy).
That said, proper tyre inflation and maintenance are still important as ever both for safety and fuel economy.
Additional Information
Note on RR specification. TireRack.com tech article states:
Tire Rolling Resistance Force is measured in pounds or kilograms of resistance. Comparing Rolling Resistance Force provides a direct way to compare tires of the same size, as well as offers an accurate means of comparing differently sized tires to one another.
Tire Rolling Resistance Coefficient is calculated by dividing the measured rolling resistance force by the tire size's prescribed load during the test. Comparing Rolling Resistance Coefficients only allows comparing tires within a single size. Tire Rolling Resistance Coefficient does not allow comparing different sized tires.
General tips on tyre maintenance, and how to read sidewall markings (including UTQG ratings) could be found in NHTSA tyre safety brochure. For some general information on recent advances in tyre technology see this article from "The Economist". See Wikipedia article on LRR tyres for more information and some tyre ratings from Consumer Reports.
Answer: It depends a little on your driving style and the typical conditions in your area.
If you get a lot of rain, snow or ice, or you like to drive or corner at speed - don't use them. Go for high grip tyres. You are better off playing it safe than cheap.
If you live somewhere dry, with little traffic, and like to drive slowly - they could be good for you, but won't save you a huge amount. You might be better off just inflating your tyres by a couple of extra psi - this will reduce rolling resistance.
Answer: Some thing I have noticed about fuel efficient tires is they generate a lot of static electricity in cold dry climates.It can get so bad that most times I touch my key to the door prior to getting out.
Comment: I remember that making the news back awhile ago.  There was a bit of an uproar when the new style fuel-efficient tires first came out.  People were very unhappy about getting zotted every time they got out of the car.


How can I call the hiring manager when I don't have his number?

Question: I got a job offer today that I would like to accept. My manager called and left a voice message. He gave quite a few details and said to call him back on his cellphone. But he stuttered and mumbled and it sounded like he said 11 digits, not 10. I tried all combinations I could think of but they were not his number. I can call the number of the branch I have been in contact with. How exactly should I proceed and how exactly should I word this? It's kind of abrasive to tell my manager "you mumbled when you left me a message" before the first day.
Comment: Seriously ...? Call the company switchboard and ask for him.
Comment: doesn't your voice mail tell you what number called?
Comment: Do you have his email adress ? Or a business card ?
Comment: Look up in a company directory maybe or a "Contact Us" page on the site?
Comment: It happens when someone will leave their cell number but call from an office phone. Rendering the call log useless in this case. I would just dial the number back or call the company asking for this individual's number.
Comment: @njzk2 it sounds like the manager called from his work phone and wants a call back on his cell phone
Comment: @KevinL yes that's what happened
Answer: Quite simple really - the polite (ahem) thing in this kind of situation is to blame a third party who will never care or have to answer for it ;)
e.g. The line was breaking up as he spoke the number so you couldn't quite make it out.
Comment: Why would you even lie here in the first place? You can just say, "I'm sorry, I had trouble understanding the number that he left over voicemail." It's 100% true, and it's not blaming anyone or being rude. There's no need to lie and say the line was breaking up when it wasn't... if I were the hiring manager and I didn't think the line was breaking up, I would even get confused and possibly annoyed that you had to lie for something silly like this.
Comment: I agree with @Mehrdad and I'm surprised how many upvotes this answer has when it basically says, **"Lie in your first conversation with the hiring manager you want a job from."**  (Or your first conversation with his secretary.)  [There's no need to lie.](http://workplace.stackexchange.com/a/78169/47537)  None at all.
Comment: This is the easiest way
Comment: @HarrisWeinstein It was a voice mail so unless he was listening in and not picking up it would have been difficult.
Comment: This does raise the question of why they didn't ask the manager to repeat themselves in the first place.
Comment: "just replay the voice message"
Comment: @SpehroPefhany Ah, missed that part.
Comment: Every voicemail system tells you the number that left the call. Pretty simple. Or, you call the company and ask for the person by name. Don't just ignore it and then play stupid later - you'll screw yourself out of a job.
Answer: There is no need to make up excuses or blame anyone.
Call the main number of the plant, ask for the manager by name, and eventually talk to him that way.  When you talk to him just say "Sorry, I didn't get your cell number from the message.".  It happens.  There is no need to bring up that you think the reason was that he mumbled.  It's irrelevant anyway.  If you get his voicemail, just say the same thing in the message.
Remember, he wants to hire you and have you get back to him.  He would have liked you to call on his cell phone, but that didn't work out.  That really shouldn't be a big deal.  There should be nothing wrong with work-related communication via his work phone.
Perhaps he knows he'll be out of the office, and won't get the message for a while.  Send him email also.  If he has a secretary, leave a message that way too.  With all those, he'll find out you tried to get back to him soon enough.  He's certainly not going to figure you gave up on the company and offer the job to someone else before checking his voicemail and email.
You are overthinking this.
Comment: This may backfire if you're looking to get a job transcribing phone numbers from answer machine messages.
Comment: @SnakeDoc there any number of reasons why the voice mail envelope might be useless here. The most plausible to me is that he might have left the message from a different phone line, perhaps his office line, before going out the door. There are voice mail systems that make the caller ID info unavailable or useless. And there certainly are phone systems (and likely cell carriers too) that provide worthless caller ID.
Comment: If he has a secretary, the secretary almost certainly has his cellphone number. You can explain to the secretary that the manager left a voicemail with his cellphone number, but that it was garbled, and ask the secretary for the correct cellphone number. You may have to demonstrate to the secretary that you have most of his cellphone number, as the secretary may have instructions not to give out the cell phone number.
Comment: @David OP already failed that job test. Voicemail systems tell you the calling number before or after playing the message, or sometimes by pressing "5" to get envelope information.
Comment: @RBerteig That may be true, but you're making this up in the context of this question - OP didn't say they checked any of these very common ways to get the callback number.
Comment: @SnakeDoc in the UK many switchboards are withheld numbers.
Answer: Email or call the work number of the manager. Failing that, call the company's main number and ask for contact details (or request a call back).
It's not unusual that voicemails are garbled, and people often don't repeat phone numbers when leaving a message (I often have to listen to a VM three or four times before I get the number written down).
Answer: Have you tried different ways to contact him? for example you can find him on Linkedin or just google his name and you might find his direct contact.
Answer:
I can call the number of the branch I have been in contact with.

This.

You don't have to turn this into a big deal or into some veiled insult.
Just say: Hey Bob, for some reason the voicemail recording cut out for a second when you were saying your number so I had to call through the main switchboard. Do you think you can give me your direct line one more time so I can get it down on paper?
See, it's the voicemail's fault. Darn technology. Oh well.
Answer: Doesn't your voicemail system allow you to call back?

Press 1 to delete
Press 2 to repeat
Press 3 to save
Press 4 to dial back
Comment: This should probably be a comment rather than an answer. An answer typically doesn't require clarification or ask a question of the asker.
Comment: This also isn't a good answer, since those numbers are dependent on the provider (I've never even seen one that uses these particular numbers) and they may not necessarily provide such a function anyways.
Comment: @ChrisG it seems like a rhetorical question to me - though it could have been rewritten as "If your voicemail system allows you to call back the number, use that option."
Answer: Tell your manager the truth: he has mumbled. If this manager cares about his self-development he will thank you for the feedback and he will try to be clearer next time over the phone.
edit: If he gets angry because of the criticism then it is not the manager you want to work for anyway.
As for the part how to contact him: simply call the company and explain the situation.
Comment: And if he does not, you come of as disrespectful and start on a wrong foot with your new boss, who may still be generally a good boss and a good person.
Comment: It is only OP's assumption that the manager stuttered and mumbled, but in reality OP probably has no idea what was going on  at the other end of the call.  To use that assumption to put the blame on the manager for the missed phone number is a horrible way to get started.
Comment: How is a good boss good if they can't deal with reasonable critique?


Warranted Atheist Belief

Question: Is there anything like a satire or serious response to Alvin Plantinga's Warranted Christian Belief for Naturalism / atheism / agnosticism..... something along the flavor of the title?
Comment: Why would you think there would? The thesis at its core is that belief in God is a type of "basic belief" which doesn't depend on other beliefs for its validity. This is in response to the claim that belief in God requires proof ("warrant") from other beliefs one has about the world...
Comment: Maybe to word that another way, Plantinga's claim is that belief in God deserves a seat at the table (in a context where many empiricists and naturalists don't think it does). So then the usual response from many is "no, it doesn't deserve a seat" rather than "we deserve a seat at this table too" under the title "warranted atheist belief" or something like that. (if anything, such a response would strengthen the validity of his position).
Comment: @virmaior I agree that many skeptics do speak the way you claim (i.e. they say "Theists cannot have warrant in their beliefs").  But to answer you question, "Why would you think there would [be a book on Warranted Agnostic Belief]?"  Why not?  It seems WCB might have motivated a response..... Plantinga's EAAN states that atheists (who accept evolution) cannot have warranted beliefs.  I was wondering if there has been any good responses to this.
Comment: Nothing has changes in my assessment of this question. I don't understand why -- except as parody -- someone would author something called warranted agnostic belief or describe their view in those terms. Can you explain why you think such a thing would exist on its own merits?
Comment: As a serious response to Plantinga's EAAN.... he says that on materialism with evolution the probability of our beliefs being true is very low; therefore, even if atheistic materialism is true, we could not have warrant for our beliefs.  I agree that something could exist like this as parody or satire,.... but I'm more curious if anyone has given a good response.  I think the best I've heard is that knowledge is a sort of spandrel.

So to clarify, I do NOT accept the responses on YouTube which treat Plantinga as a joke.  Such videos are rife with fallacies and are not charitable.
Comment: So then really what you're looking for is a philosophical response to EAAN?
Comment: That was just one of many things put in WCB.    So yes a response to that....  but many other points as well.
Comment: Er, so what you mean by "Warranted Agnostic Belief" is a definitive book-length response to WCB from an agnostic / atheistic perspective?
Comment: Something like that....  or any sort of response.  Book length ideally.  I've also read Graham Oppy's "arguing about gods" however  this didn't really address the issue of warrant (in my opinion)
Answer: Here are a few, taken from Alvin Plantinga's "Warranted Christian Belief":

How can you believe in something that's supposedly infinite, all-powerful, etc etc etc which a finite being like you obviously can't even understand? (p. 35)
What evidence could be available to support your supernaturalist belief?  (p. 37, footnote)
The problem of evil is so problematic, there's no way we could know anything about God in the presence of such contradicting thoughts. (p. 63)
By what basis can you claim that any belief is properly basic?  Is "some beliefs are properly basic" a properly basic belief?  Where will the causal chain end?
That's not really a good belief: you're mistaken.  Or you're deluded.  Or you're foolish.  Or you just aren't skeptical enough. (p. 96)
Some Christian doctrines (like the incarnation and the trinity) are illogical.  You are merely suspending disbelief in impossibilities. (p. 102)
You aren't enlightened enough: Christian belief is the basis of oppression and slavery, as Nietzsche taught us. (p. 117)
Freud was right: the point of religion is to form nasty little man-worshiping cults.  That's where you are right now. (p. 118)
Marx was right: religion is a perversion of true things about the world.  You are wrecking the world with religion. (p. 121)
Rousseau was right: religion isn't about virtue, it's about fear and hedonism. (p. 122)
Comment: I'm revisiting this question (now almost 6 months later), and I would appreciate a little more context because all you did was throw quotes at me from WCB.  Are you saying that Plantinga's WCB is itself a book on Warranted Agnostic Belief?
Comment: @Clclstdnt Based on comparison with the actual book, he is providing his own satire/response to different parts of WCB, which I think indicates a "no" to the actual question. These are not quotations from the book.

Warranted Atheist Belief


What are the purposes of Reply messages in Lamport Algorithm for Mutual Exclusion?

Question: After reading Lamport Algorithm for Mutual Exclusion, I can not understand the purposes of reply messages. I think they are not necessary because the assumption of the algorithms is that all messages are delivered in order and no message is lost. In addition to that, the algorithm uses Lamport logical clock, so the requests will always be processed in order.
Answer: I believe the purpose is to fulfill the first condition of entering the critical section (site $S_i$ must receive a message from all other sites with timestamp greater than its own request) in case some other site never requests to enter the critical section.
If $S_i$ sends a critical section request to $S_j$, but $S_j$ never requests the critical section and doesn't send a reply, $S_i$ will never receive a message from $S_j$ thus causing it to wait forever to enter the critical section. In this scenario, $S_i$ cannot know for sure that $S_j$ does not have a pending request with a timestamp lower than $S_i$'s request.


The Philosophy of War and Value Judgement

Question: With the war in Ukraine, I think a field has been opened up for studying the philosophy of war deeper. First of all, I would like to state that I oppose the war in Ukraine and Russian government's aggressive measurements at full of my heart and although it seems like my question is related to the current wars, it is not. I want to get to the very bottom of the idea of opposing any wars. Many supporters of anti-war movements actually support the idea, without any questions, that all people lives are equal. What I mean by is that, for example, many of them would argue that war doesn't benefit who get into the war but benefit only a small minority. There is something that this idea offers us. Every person is equal, and I don't have to die for other people. Although it seems like obvious statement, I do not know how someone can actually  can confirm this idea with applying philosophy. It just looks like a premise that people like to believe. On the other side, one can believe that "all people are not equal in value," so wars in theory, as the more valuable ones can use the more worthless ones in any kinds of endeavor, is not wrong. As I said, I am talking about wars in theory, I do not talk about wars in reality where the oppressors' ideology is much more different. How can people may actually philosophically argue that all people lives are equal?, and if it just a premise that people would like to believe, why others should not choose believe its counterpart, which theoretically may justify war and killing people?
Comment: It could be argued that we already divide the "human race into the 'more valuable' and 'less valuable' ones". This can be seen perhaps in the way some countries respond differently to the plight of Ukrainians than to Africans or Syrians or Middle Eastern peoples for example. Also, we already typically deem (or at least, treat) people from our own nations as more valuable than people from other nations. We often treat people we are related to, or work with, or worship with, or play sport with, as more valuable than others. These prioritisations are evident across societies and cultures.
Comment: Hi there! It sounds like the essence of your question is to query an argument against war that uses the premise that all lives are equal.  Could I ask what reading you have done that has led you to this initial argument?
Comment: Your first step would have to be reading up on the whole strand of discussion kicked off by Walzer and his writings on just wars. You need to know what you argue against. Basically, if wars prevent more death and suffering, how can you argue against war as long as there is death and suffering?
Comment: @PaulRoss My essence of the question is actually to query an argument against "anti-war believers" who uses the premise that all lives are equal, so nobody should kill each other and we should not fight for anything. On the other hand, if we would like to acknowledge some lives are more valuable than others, then the interests of "more valuable people" would be more important than the less valuable ones, which can justify war in theory.
Comment: @PhilipKlöcking OK, I will look at Walzer and his writings. Maybe, I demonstrated my opinion as I argue against war, but I'm into that. I'm saying that if we take the premise of all people are not equal to each other instead of all people are equal in value to each other, then killing a less valuable person can be seen as normal as killing a chicken. We, as humans most of us, see killing a chicken or another type of animal as normal and not so cruel because we think and have a premise that we're more valuable than them. So, it is normal to kill them for our benefits.
Comment: Why don't we create the same perception by dividing human race into the more valuable and less valuable ones? If such a perception occurs, it would be considered normal for some people to die in war, as if chickens were killed before they are eaten by people.
Comment: @Futilitarian, can we support this idea like we support the idea of killing chicken for our benefits? For instance, when we look at other animals, although we contacted with them a long time, we argue that we're superior than them due to "our nature." Can we also say that while comparing a human to another? Can being biological superior than other human being make superior one more valuable? When I mean biologically superior, im not just talking about strength of the human body but intelligence, resistance to human diseases etc.
Comment: Check out the [Veil of Ignorance, or 'Original Position'](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_position#Criticisms), in which "you are asked to consider which principles you would select for the basic structure of society, but you must select as if you had no knowledge ahead of time what position you would end up having in that society". The link also contains criticisms of the concept.
Comment: @Xemorphy What exactly is your position here or what are you arguing for or against? Like sure you can adopt a, most likely false, philosophy of racism, chauvinism, nationalism, fascism however you want to call it and that would be undoubtedly anti-pacifist but that's not something new is it? Neither would that be categorized as a "just war" it would be majorly unjust. On the contrary opposition to such a system would be the morally just one. So where are you going with that?
Answer: Most of the world views war through the prism of Just war theory - at least to the extent that the political discourse and the existing body of the international world are grounded in this view. Pacifism, despite being based on a sound belief that all human lives are equally valuable, has somewhat of a bad reputation due its impractical nature, which has historically resulted in dire consequences - notably, the pacifist non-opposition to Nazism.
Just war is intended to protect people's lives
On the one hand, Just war can be viewed as a practical way of protecting valuable human lives, which would be destroyed, if the aggressor is not opposed (jus ad bellum - right to go to war). It also codifies the necessity of protecting human lives during the war - e.g., one cannot target civilians or retaliate against them, one cannot mistreat the prisoners of war or combatants that are rendered harmless (e.g., paratroopers in air, shipwrecked sailors, etc. - jus in bello, right conduct in war.)
Enemy combatants ("bad guys") have less rights
On the other hand, prosecuting a just war does mean that some lives are considered less valuable than others - notably those of the combatants for the aggressor's side, who are considered legitimate targets. This is firmly anchored in public discourse - e.g., the foreign volunteers who part to Ukraine in order to kill Russians are praised as heros; on the other hand, Westerners who a few years ago went to Syria to fight on the side of Daesh/Isis were treated as war criminals/terrorists, and their countries of citizenship were often reluctant to assist them in repatriation or saving them from execution.
State/Social/Common interest above individual ones
What might seem more problematic is that one's own combatants often go to fight against their own free will. This is usually justified by the public/national interest - an acceptable explanation in a communist or fascist state, but a one that contradicts to the principles of liberal democracy. In public discourse the moral dilemma is usually avoided via glorifying the combatants, praising their sacrifice, and giving as an example those who enlist to fight on voluntary basis. As an example, it is not uncommon to hear these days that Ukrainians are willing to fight and die for their country - whether true or not, this claim certainly relieves the conscience of the westerners calling Ukraine to fight to the bitter end, rather than cutting a deal with Russia.
Collateral damage
Finally, the non-combatants "accidentally" killed while targeting combatants are discarded as collateral damage. The phrase tries to diminish what in reality might be rather high death toll - equal or exceeding the number of combatants killed.
Other approaches to war
Besides Just war and Pacifism, one could also cite Realist approach: it agrees with Pacifism that war is inherently immoral, but makes a different conclusion - that while in war one is not restricted by moral principles. It is probably a fair guess the powerful of this world, regardless of which side they are on, are realists, reserving the just war rhetoric for general public... but this is a guess, based on certain assumptions about the human nature - trying to prove it would inevitably border on conspiracy theories.
Yossarianism (after the name of the protagonist of Catch-22) - putting self-preservation, protecting one's family and friends above the interests of country/nation is another approach, closely related in pacifism, but more grounded in individual liberty. Indeed, pacifism is arguably shooting itself in leg by pretending to care about every individual... but without real bothering that the individual's own opinion may differ.
Comment: Roger Vadim did you happen to take part in my sokka is a war criminal for false flag discussions? XD
Comment: @BCLC Your comment is rather cryptic. Do you disagree with any specific point in my answer? Perhaps you understand question differently from me?
Answer: First of all the primary position of pacifism is a general rejection of violence based on the believes that every human life is valuable and that violence causes more problems than it solves.
And based on empirical evidence that's not all wrong. Look at any war in human history and they all come with tremendous suffering on all sides and negative effects from that can last for generations. That includes environmental damage like how parts of the battlefields of WWI are still uninhabitable, how it's completely normal for Germans to find unexploded WWII bombs with almost every larger construction site in a bigger city, how Egypt is apparently still home to 23 million landmines due to wars in the 70s.
That includes social rifts between countries, within countries and may cause larger or smaller conflicts that go on for decades after the official war has ended. That includes trauma both for combatants and civilians, like massive increases in rape, hunger, crime, dehumanizing propaganda and practice, fear for your life and living on survival instincts disregarding all the moral guidelines you once cherished can all have devastating consequences for victims and perpetrators.
Violence is obviously not a good argument and either breaks people, mentally and physically and/or triggers violent reactions as anything to avert violence seems permissible when you're existentially threatened. Thereby perpetuating violence and causing even more harm. And once you created a precedent for "might makes right" it's hard to go back to a non-violent interaction, because a lot of trust is broken and rebuilding it takes time.
Of course some people might think that you can just "win" a war. But how does that look like, again violence is not a convincing argument. Like the U.S. had won several wars after WWII just to again "lose" them because the war never ended it just took on a more asymmetric approach which often was more effective and even more insidious. On the other hand if you just want to "wipe out" an enemy in it's entirety than you a) have to make your own soldiers drop all morality that they would be accustomed to in your normal society, like don't kill unarmed people, women, children etc. and b) the other side as well as their allies and anybody who would not want to drop these concepts will oppose you with literally everything they've got. Making it again nasty for everyone involved.
On the other hand non-violence is theoretically possible and even beneficial. Like not having wars means not wasting resources needlessly, starving people, traumatizing generations, killing people. There are a lot of upsides not to have war and it's not unimaginable for that to happen.
So yeah most people and states adopted a view of at least conditional pacifism where they generally argue that violence is not good and that it needs to be reduced or eliminated.
Now practically speaking while there are a lot of good arguments for it to be eliminated entirely there are unfortunately always those who see violence not as an evil but as a tool. Broadly speaking violence is a form of coercion and any form of government that isn't completely mutual (which would be a question of definition as to whether that would still be a government) is using coercive means. They often tend to use less, or at least less overt means of coercion and ideally the coercion is regulated and complies with generally agreed upon rules, but there are always people who don't want or even can't agree with the rules and so the application of them ends up being coercion and violence.
Which leads to the problem of absolute pacifism and that is that a universal rejection of violence would also reject the resistance of the oppressed giving the perpetrator free reign to do whatever they like apart from a moral condemnation that comes with little to no repercussions.
Now ideally the moral condemnation and the moral argument would be enough to convince them and the lack of arms would indicate the lack of a necessity for an armed conflict and the option to resolve a conflict peacefully.
The problem is unfortunately that it requires that the other side WANTS to resolve the conflict peacefully. Like diplomacy, negotiations, meetings and whatnot are very effective if both sides agree to meet each other on eye-level and resolve conflicts peacefully. But if one side doesn't treat the other as equal and instead wants to overpower them, then this approach comes to it's limits. So it's less that pacifism treats equality as a given (it might also do that, but that's a different point), but it's a requirement for pacifism. The elimination of violence ultimately needs an elimination of conflict and/or non-violent means to resolve conflict and ultimately you won't be able to manage that without treating each other as equal. Sure you can overpower your enemy but that only means that they continue to view you as their enemy and your order as unjust and oppressive and they would be right in doing so. So that isn't peace it's a frozen conflict.
Now the crucial problem is, if you deliberately reject the pacifist proposal of a mutually peaceful coexistence or even a cooperation. Then we enter a pretty dark gray area of adhering to pacifism even if the proposal is irredeemably rejected (as absolute pacifism would kind of have infinite patience in that regard) or to (ab)use the first good reason to go to war even so a peaceful resolution of conflict was absolutely possible, but you just WANTED to go to war and were looking for an excuse rather than a reason.
The just war theory, on the other hand, gets rid of the necessity for absolute pacifism but instead argues that there are just causes for going to war and rules that apply when being at war. This get rid of absolute pacifism's defenselessness (though there are already pacifists who would make that exception for themselves) and argues that you are indeed allowed to use violence to fend off violence towards yourself or others or to liberate oneself or others from an injustice. While still somewhat adhering to some of pacifism's ideals often labeling it a "last resort" and while trying to make war less nasty to ease the aftermath.
However in practice a just war is also a war. You also opened pandora's box in terms of justifying violence. On the contrary as it's a way to "justify" violence it's also abused by those who want to fight unjust wars. Like as soon as the idea of a war is floated the government no matter the system is going to lie about the causes, goals, motivations, resistance, morality and whatnot. Like even the Nazis create a false flag attack on themselves to "justify" their invasion of Poland. And the just conduct of war is also something that can rarely be adhered to as there's often no one to control it and the winner of the war could just retroactively declare their conduct to be just. Or use "yeah it's awful but less awful than a prolonged war" as a get out of jail free card. Which isn't even true, first war crimes might prolong the war because you provide propaganda ammunition for the necessity to fight the war and to keep fighting it even beyond a potential official end and on the individual level the victims of war crimes still suffered tremendously maybe even more than a prolonged war would have let them suffer.
So there is a good reason to argue that there is no just war, that individuals within a war are generally incapable to tell whether it's just beyond the immediate moral implication of the actions, which in any and all wars are unjust.
Like if you declare combatants and make them legitimate targets you've already crossed a line that is illegitimate in pretty much all peaceful contexts. And the further you remove the killer from the target the easier it is to simply lie about the status of the target. Like civilian or combatant might just be a misattributed label while in real life it's murder, regardless of the label just more heinous if the person on the receiving end wasn't even aware of the danger. So is that distinction really meaningful to the individual pulling the trigger and could they tell from their action whether they fight a just war? And if they can't how useful is that concept to begin with.
So at best the just war theory is applicable to localized small scale conflicts where you have an international community that supervises the conflict and holds the perpetrators responsible. As soon as it becomes a large scale conflict none of that is enforceable and the sides of the conflict knowing that may give rise to unimaginable horrors.
Though difficult in practice the pacifist is still right, without people volunteering to be soldier or letting themselves be coerced to be one there would be no wars. Like their superiors can shoot them, but that still only means that they are 1 soldier down, it doesn't work large scale, but that is somewhere between extreme courage and insanity.


Why zero correlation does not necessarily imply independence

Question: If two variables have 0 correlation, why are they not necessarily independent? Are zero correlated variables independent under special circumstances ?  If possible, I am looking for an intuitive explanation, not a highly technical one.
Comment: Correlation is a measure of linear dependence (association).  it is possible for two random variables to be uncorrelated but nonlinearly dependent.
Comment: Zero correlation implies independence if the variables are multivariate normal. This is not the same as each variable being normal - see [here](http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/162547/why-is-pearsons-%CF%81-only-an-exhaustive-measure-of-association-if-the-joint-distri/162576#162576) for some scatterplots of zero-correlated but dependent normal variables (each variable is individually normal)
Comment: Intuitive explanation  -> http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/444408/zero-correlation-does-not-imply-independence
Comment: Correlation (unqualified) could include rank correlation, etc., for which monotonic dependence is the issue, and so forth.
Comment: For outlook, I would recommend you to see Wikipedia "distance correlation" as a measure of independence.
Comment: [Covariance and independence](http://stats.stackexchange.com/q/12842/22228) is a near-duplicate of this question, and something that gets closer to "Are zero correlated variables independent under special circumstances" might be [For which distributions does uncorrelatedness imply independence](http://stats.stackexchange.com/q/74410/22228) or [Uncorrelatedness implies independence under some condition?](http://stats.stackexchange.com/q/35952/22228) More generally, see [What is the relationship between orthogonal, correlation and independence?](http://stats.stackexchange.com/q/171324/22228)
Comment: Related: https://stats.stackexchange.com/q/85363/119261
Answer: Correlation measures linear association between two given variables and it has no obligation to detect any other form of association else.
So those two variables might be associated in several other non-linear ways and correlation could not distinguish from independent case.
As a very didactic, artificial and non realistic example, one can consider $X$  such that $P(X=x)=1/3$ for $x=-1, 0, 1$ and $Y=X^2$. Notice that they are not only associated, but one is a function of the other. Nonetheless, their correlation is 0, for their association is orthogonal to the association that correlation can detect.
Comment: I was looking for evidence of random variances being uncorrelated yet dependent however none of the direct answers to my question revealed intuitive facts. your answer, on the other hand, gives me a very good angle to think about it, thanks a lot!
Comment: @stucash my pleasure! It was an old counter example I learnt
Answer: There is a generalized lack of rigor in the use of the word "correlation" for the simple reason that it can have widely differing assumptions and meanings. The simplest, loosest and most common usage is that there is some vague association, relationship or lack of independence between a static pair of random variables.
Here, the default metric referred to is usually the Pearson correlation, which is a standardized measure of pairwise, linear association between two continuously distributed variables. One of the Pearson's commonest misuses is to report it as a percentage. It is definitely not a percentage. The Pearson correlation, r, ranges between -1.0 and +1.0 where 0 means no linear association. Other not so widely recognized issues with using the Pearson correlation as the default is that it is actually quite a stringent, non-robust measure of linearity requiring interval-scaled variates as input (see Paul Embrechts' excellent paper on Correlation and Dependency in Risk Management: Properties and Pitfalls here: https://people.math.ethz.ch/~embrecht/ftp/pitfalls.pdf).
Embrechts notes that there are many fallacious assumptions about dependence that begin with assumptions of the underlying structure and geometric shape of these relationships:

These fallacies arise from a naive assumption that dependence
  properties of the elliptical world also hold in the non-elliptical
  world

Embrechts points to copulas as a much wider class of dependence metrics used in finance and risk management, of which the Pearson correlation is just one type.
Columbia's Statistics department spent the academic year 2013-2014 focused on developing deeper understandings of dependence structures: e.g., linear, nonlinear, monotonic, rank, parametric, nonparametric, potentially highly complex and possessing wide differences in scaling. The year ended with a 3 day workshop and conference that brought together most of the top contributors in this field (http://datascience.columbia.edu/workshop-and-conference-nonparametric-measures-dependence-apr-28-may-2).
These contributors included the Reshef Brothers, now famous for a 2011 Science paper Detecting Novel Associations in Large Data Sets http://www.uvm.edu/~cdanfort/csc-reading-group/reshef-correlation-science-2011.pdf that has been widely criticized (see AndrewGelman.com for a good overview, published simultaneously with the Columbia event: http://andrewgelman.com/2014/03/14/maximal-information-coefficient). The Reshefs addressed all of these criticisms in their presentation (available on the Columbia conference website), as well as a vastly more efficient MIC algorithm.
Many other leading statisticians presented at this event including Gabor Szekely, now at the NSF in DC. Szekely developed his distance and partial distance correlations. Deep Mukhopadhay, Temple U, presenting his Unified Statistical Algorithm -- a framework for unified algorithms of data science -- based on work done with Eugene Franzen http://www.fox.temple.edu/mcm_people/subhadeep-mukhopadhyay/. And many others. For me, one of the more interesting themes was wide leverage and use of Reproducing Kernel Hilbert Space (RKHS) and the chi-square. If there was a modal approach to dependence structures at this conference, it was the RKHS.
The typical intro statistics textbooks is perfunctory in its treatment of dependence, usually relying on presentations of the same set of visualizations of circular or parabolic relationships. More sophisticated texts will delve into Anscombe's Quartet, a visualization of four different datasets possessing similar, simple statistical properties but hugely differing relationships:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anscombe%27s_quartet
One of the great things about this workshop was the multitude of dependence structures and relationships visualized and presented, going far beyond the standard, perfunctory treatment. For instance, the Reshefs had dozens of thumbnail graphics that represented just a sampling of possible nonlinearities. Deep Mukhopadhay had stunning visuals of highly complex relationships that looked more like a satellite view of the Himalayas. Stats and data science textbook authors need to take note.
Coming out of the Columbia conference with the development and visualization of these highly complex, pairwise dependence structures, I was left questioning the ability of multivariate statistical models to capture these nonlinearities and complexities.
Comment: I just came across this excellent and exhaustive discussion of measures of association on Quora:  https://www.quora.com/Correlation-can-measure-only-the-linear-relationship-between-variables-What-are-the-methods-for-measuring-non-linear-relationships-between-two-variables
Comment: This is a great paper that talks about independence test using a binary classifier https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.06545
Comment: From an etymological point of view, co-relation is the relationship between two variables. Independence between two variables is a relationship bt two variables. Then they are synonyms. If you could calculate any possible correlation, then it could be understood as an independence test.
Answer: It depends on your exact definition of "correlation", but it isn't too hard to construct degenerate cases. "Independent" could mean something like "no predictive power, at all, ever" just as much as "linear correlation".
Linear correlation, for example, would not indicate dependence on $y= \sin(2000x)$ if the domain of $x$ was $[0,1)$.
Answer: An intuitive example would be a circle. I have two variables $X$ and $Y$. And they are satisfy the equation
$$X^2+Y^2=1$$
Now, $X$ and $Y$ are definitely not independent to each other, because given $X$ we can calculate $Y$ and vice versa. But their person correlation coefficient is $0$. This is because it only captures the linear relationship between two variables.
Answer: Basically, dependence of Y on X means the distribution of values of Y depends on some way of the value of X. That dependence can be on the mean value of Y (the usual case presented in most of the answers) or whatever other characteristic of Y.
For example, let X be 0 or 1. If X = 0 then let Y be 0, if X= 1 let Y be -1, 0 or 1 (same probability). X and Y are uncorrelated. On mean, Y doesn't depend on X because whatever value is X, the mean of Y is 0. But clearly the distribution of values of Y depends on X value. In this case, for example, the variance of Y is 0 when X=0 and > 0 when X=1, thus there is, at least, a dependence on variance, i.e. there is a dependence.
So, linear correlation only show a type of dependence on mean (linear dependence), that in turn is only a special case of dependence.
Answer: Adding to @Marcelo Ventura and  @Mike Hunter great answers, and the reference to a great discussion around this on Quora.
An important point (implicit) is made in here and in the quora thread. Although correlation is a linear measure, it does not exclusively mean it can only quantify the relationship between linearly dependent variables.
Arguably an equally important factor is whether there is a monotone relationship between variables. As stated on minitab

In a monotonic relationship, the variables tend to move in the same relative direction, but not necessarily at a constant rate. In a linear relationship, the variables move in the same direction at a constant rate.

This means if we have non-monotone related variables we can observe a zero correlation even though they are not independent
To illustrate this say for example we have a $f(x) = x^2$, using python to evaluate the function
If we look at $x$ in $[0, 50)$, we find that $f(x)$ has a monotone relationship with $x$, as a result we observe the correlations to be close to 1:
import numpy as np
import seaborn as sns

x = np.arange(0, 50, 1)
f = lambda x: x ** 2
y = f(x)
sns.scatterplot(x, y)

# Get correlations using scipy
from scipy.stats import pearsonr, spearmanr
pearsonr(x, y)[0]
spearmanr(x, y)[0]

Pearson Correlation: 0.967
Spearman Correlation: 0.999...

Now if we look at $x$ in $[-25, 25)$, we find $f(x)$ no longer has a monotone relationship with $x$, the correlations are thus close to zero as expected:
x = np.arange(-25, 25, 1)
y = f(x)
sns.scatterplot(x, y)
pearsonr(x, y)[0]
spearmanr(x, y)[0]

Pearson Correlation: -0.077
Spearman Correlation: -0.059
Answer: Zero correlation does not imply independence for multiple reasons. One of these is possible is that two variables could be dependent on a third causing correlation.
Comment: Welcome to Cross Validated! If that third variable causes there to be correlation between the first two, then aren't the first two variables correlated?


Is it ok for matured son to see mother's back during treatment

Question: If a person's mother is having back pain and she request him to apply medicine and massage a little. Is it ok for the son to do it?
Answer: It would be better if it is done by her husband or a female. However if they are not available it is also permitted for a mahram male to do it.

عن جابر، أن أم سلمة، استأذنت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم في الحجامة فأمر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أبا طيبة أن يحجمها قال: حسبت أنه قال: كان أخاها من الرضاعة، أو غلاما لم يحتلم
It was narrated from Jabir that Umm Salamah asked the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) for permission for cupping, and the Prophet (ﷺ) told Abu Taibah to treat her with cupping.
He said: "I think he said: 'He was her brother through breastfeeding, or a young boy who had not reached puberty."'
— Muslim

Also note that some do not consider the back to be 'awrah with respect to mahrams. e.g. the Shafi'is only consider the 'awrah of a mahram female to be the area between the navel to the knees based on the hadith.
Answer: I want to add something to UmH's answer.
You can put a sheet of cloth to act as barrier between your eye and your mother's back,the same way a funeral is given bathing. Wear gloves if required.


Threat modelling - including threats one cannot mitigate?

Question: When threat modelling, should you include the threats a system cannot mitigate?
If so, where should you stop? It could be very time-consuming to list all the threats one cannot mitigate.
Answer: While I think Jonah B covered things pretty well. Just to be more direct.
I would say "Yes", certainly.
Risks you cannot mitigate are as important as any other risk.
Residual risk is the important measure. This is the risk that remains after mitigation. You take all of the residual risks into account when working out the overall risk. Where there is no mitigation, the residual risk is the same as the initial risk.
Then, as Jonah says, you need to have an open discussion within the organisation about the residual risks and what they mean to the business. You also need to understand the risk appetite. How much risk will the organisation want to carry? This needs all organisational risk to be managed holistically of course.
UPDATE: Where should you stop? When the risks are irrelevant.
This also depends on who you are doing the modelling for. Senior and C-level people will only want the big ticket items that impact the business as a whole. Project Managers will want anything that could impact project delivery. Service managers want risks that will impact live running, SLA's etc.
If you are modelling a system change that will improve an organisations bottom line by $2m pa, you may be interested in risks that might have a monitory impact of a few hundred dollars in a year - unless they also have some other important impact such as customer trust or legal issues.
There is no single, one-size-fits-all solution for risk management.
Comment: This is good, and seems implicitly scoped to things being developed for local use, rather than shipping a product?
Comment: Thanks. Feel free to upvote! ;) Not really scoped as you say. The principles of risk management are the same no matter what development or delivery approach you have. It applies absolutely as much to product selection as to bespoke development.
Comment: If you can't mitigate them, then how is it relevant?  (I include insurance in the set of mitigations.)
Comment: @AdamShostack: because the residual risk is what you either have to carry or walk away from. Everyone takes risks. By understanding them and the potential imacts, you can tilt the odds in your favour
Answer: It depends why you cannot mitigate them and what you'd get from writing them down.  You certainly want to find categories, rather than listing individual threats.
For example, it may be that you cannot defend against root. If it keeps coming up, write it down and move on by pointing at it when the next variation comes up.  Writing it down is useful because it lets you get out of ratholes.  You want to write down the category ("Root wins" vs "1. root can change this config file; 2. root can stop this process...")
It may be that you have a slew of threats because you're taken a dependency on some rev of (say) Ubuntu which includes a lot of attack surface, in which case writing it down may help someone who can authorize moving off Ubuntu to a smaller distro.
A list of threats you cannot address can be useful as part of your security documentation (MSFT does this with "10 immutable laws of security") to manage relations with customers and bug finders.
Answer: It depends on the context, audience, etc. In general, scope is important, and at any particular scope there should be an understanding of the impact of significant unmitigated threats.
At the level of the business or organization, significant unmitigated threats can be signals to get out of a particular area of practice, or to get additional business insurance, or to hire, or to take some other strategic action.
At the level of systems, significant unmitigated threats can suggest areas of architectural improvement.
At the level of an application, significant unmitigated threats scoped to the application should generally get on the backlog.
Applications change frequently, so threats at that level contribute to application change. Systems and businesses change more slowly; threats on those levels don't need to be constantly revisited.
Answer: There is a definite value in including threats you cannot mitigate. Threat mitigation is just one way in which a threat can be handled. The risks posed by threats can be:

Avoided (eg. not having the feature that creates the vulnerability)
Transferred (eg. insurance)
Mitigated
Accepted

In order to choose the correct way to handle the risk that the threat poses you need to know about the threat (ie. that it exists) and what impact it might have on your system.
Another reason why it is important to include threats that cannot be mitigated is because those threats can potentially be used as an enabler for a different threat to your system (which you might be able to mitigate).


Prevent remote desktop users accessing the LAN on Windows Server 2008

Question: We have some users connecting to a Windows Server 2008 box on our network, is there an easy way that I can prevent these users from accessing other computers on the LAN, such that they can only access files on the server.  I'm not very familiar with server administration.
Answer: My suggestion is to use network level isolation by firewall policy.  Namely the design you should use is DMZ.
For instance, if you have a terminal server/remote desktop server that VPN users connect into, it would be best to isolate that terminal server to a subnet off an interface of a firewall where more restrictive policies can take place.
See this diagram, and read about the concept of a DMZ.
Put the dedicated firewall to the task it handles best, being a firewall; and leave your Windows to the task it does best, being a network operating system.
To do this correctly and securely, you have to educate yourself a little more.  :)
Answer: While there are any number of ways to do this the most fundamental way is to simply ensure those users have appropriate permissions. i.e. Don't give them permissions which would allow them to access anything you don't want to access.
Answer: You can use Windows Firewall with Advanced Security to block all outbound traffic to your LAN. If you set this in a Group Policy or Local Policy, non-admin users shouldn't be able to change it.
Note that you'll have to allow, at a minimum, outbound traffic for your RDP sessions.


Estimated Date of Conception

Question: My girlfriend's estimated delivery date is 23 Feb 2016. Our last intercourse was on 7 May 2015. I checked with some expected conception date calculators on the net. They all say that the conception date is between 25 May to 5 Jun. But my girlfriend insists that it's my child. Please can someone tell me if it is possible that intercourse on 7 May 2015 could have an expected delivery date of 23 Feb 2016?
Comment: Welcome to Parenting.SE. What method did the doctor use to calculate the delivery date -- size of fetus, her last period, or something else?
Comment: Doctors use the method is her last date of periods and her periods never comes on time
Comment: Also the gestational age of child in ultrasound is 21.3 weeks on 14 of october. Plz tell me if there any chance that i m father of this child
Comment: I don't think you're going to be able to get a definitive enough answer from online calculators, estimations, and average fetal growth rates -- how certain do you need to be that you're the father, 100%? In that case, the only possible answer is from a paternity test.
Answer: Generally, due date is calculated by one of two things.
One, determining the date of the expectant mother's period prior to likely conception.  If she knows what days her period started on for the last several periods, this will tend to be fairly accurate.
Two, looking at the size of the fetus (and more specifically, certain particular sizes, such as the length, the head circumference, etc.), and estimating how long it has been gestating for, as well as identifying certain fetal characteristics that happen at certain fairly consistent times.  This has varying levels of accuracy depending on when it's used; it tends to get less accurate in the third trimester, but even then the 95% range is 2-3 weeks for most common measurements.
The article "Assessment of Gestational Age by Ultrasound" (MacGregor and Sabbagha, 2008) gives a pretty thorough overview of pre-ultrasound and ultrasound-based measurement techniques, and how accurate they are.  In the 12-26 week period (where she would probably have been at the time, and is now), most of the measurements are less than 2 weeks off 95% of the time, and crown-rump length is off by less than a week 95% of the time.  Combine several measurements, as they do later in that paper linked above, and the usual error is only a few days.

A side note: None of this should be taken to prove or disprove paternity, as has been noted elsewhere.  95% intervals are just that, 95% likelihood; and this all assumes the doctor and/or tech performing the ultrasound and interpreting it didn't make a mistake.  If you're concerned about paternity specifically, there are far more accurate ways of verifying that once the child is born (via genetic testing).
Comment: This is why it's important to know whether the delivery date was calculated by counting from date of last period, or from an ultrasound. Calculation can be fairly off if the mother has an irregular or long (> 28 days) menstrual cycle. It is also possible to have light bleeding at implantation or ["breakthrough bleeding"](http://www.babycentre.co.uk/x553485/is-it-possible-to-be-pregnant-and-still-have-periods) which could be mistaken for a regular period; that could throw the calculated estimate off by weeks.
Comment: Delivery date was calculated by counting from date of last periods and there was always delay in her periods timings
Answer: Looks like the mean and standard deviation for gestation are around 280 days and 13 days respectively. Based on the dates you listed, that would put gestation somewhere around 292 days (probably a day or so less as conception is not immediate.) This is less than one standard deviation from the mean. About 16% of pregnancies last longer than the dates you gave. Seems entirely within the realm of possibility.
Comment: This is true for the total length of gestation, but this isn't really relevant here: we don't actually _know_ the date of birth yet.  The doctor's calculations will be based on other things rather than the length of gestation: in particular, they're using certain details (size of fetus, for example) to determine when the conception likely occurred, and _then_ estimating the due date from that (using 280 days from her last period prior to conception).
Comment: According to last ultrasound the gestational age of child is 21.3 weeks on 14 oct. Is there any chance that i m the father of that child
Comment: why all the conception calculator on the net is always said that conception date is around 2 june. 293 days of gestation is from the first day of last periods. I m really confused plz some body help me out

Estimated Date of Conception


How to determine population from a list of arbitrary jurisdictions (cities, states, counties, et al.)?

Question: I am an aspiring data scientist who's working on a passion project, namely to assign danger-level scores to police departments in the United States.
One specific metric I'm developing results from analyzing data on fatal encounter incidents with police since 2000, including the name of the specific agency involved in the death(s), which I've imported as strings, stripped of qualifiers like "Police Department" (among others), and arranged into a list called dept.
For example, take the first element of the list, "Mendocino County Sheriff's Office", which then becomes "Mendocino County", the geographic area I want to know the population of. This is simple enough with semantic interpretation, i.e.,
jurisdiction = SemanticInterpretation[dept[[1]]]

(* output: Entity["AdministrativeDivision", {"MendocinoCounty", "California",
  "UnitedStates"}] *)

To get the population:
population = AdministrativeDivisionData[jurisdiction, "Population"]

(* output: 87649 people *)

From here it's trivial to calculate my "danger" index for that department and expand to do the calculation for all incidents.
deathCounts = Values[Counts[dept]];
dangerCalc[i_] := Module[{jur, pop, dVal},
   jur = SemanticInterpretation[dept[[i]]];
   pop = QuantityMagnitude[AdministrativeDivisionData[jur, "Population"]];
   dVal = N[deathCounts[[i]]/pop*100];
];

However, I run into problems trying to apply this same process to non-county jurisdictions (testing the first 100 entries). As an example, the second incident is Highland Park (a city). With dept[[2]] being "Highland Park", I get:
danger = {};
For[i = 1, i < 101, ++i, AppendTo[danger, dangerCalc[i]]];

(* output:

...

AdministrativeDivisionData::notent: Highland Park is not a known entity, class, or tag for AdministrativeDivisionData. Use AdministrativeDivisionData[] for a list of entities.

...

*)

This seems to be related to different classifications like "City", etc. I'm a total novice in this area of Mathematica, so I have little to no clue how to handle varying geographic regions uniformly. I had success with Highland Park by testing:
Interpreter["City"][depts[[2]]]

(* output: Entity["City", {"HighlandPark", "Illinois", "UnitedStates"}] *)

Obviously this doesn't fit neatly into my current code, and given the multiplicity of different inputs, I'm unsure how to create a general-handling function accounting for all possibilities.
Mathematica's built-in functions are so numerous, and the semantic interpretation is so sophisticated that I have no idea how to proceed. The "Entity" and other classifiers confuse me conceptually; in plain English, I want to get the population of cities, counties, states, townships, districts, etc. without knowing ahead of time which category each list element belongs to.
Can anyone more knowledgeable than myself suggest a path forward?
Comment: also, btw, hope you don't mind me mentioning: the table `danger` can be more easily written as `Table[dangerCalc[i], {i,100}]`!
Comment: just to clarify: is `dept` a list which contains a string referring to a jurisdiction once for each death in that jurisdiction?
Answer: Try appending " Population" after your strings and let SemanticInterpretation do the work for you?
This seems to work for the two inputs in OP:
SemanticInterpretation["Mendocino County Population"]
SemanticInterpretation["Highland Park Population"]

Out[7]= Quantity[87649, "People"]

Out[8]= Quantity[29767, "People"]


What is the ingredient that gives a sichuan (szechuan) hot pot the mouth numbing experience?

Question: I'm curious if it is from the Sichuan peppercorns.
Comment: Welcome user3338.  Please review our FAQ: http://cooking.stackexchange.com/faq.  Recipe requests, which this read an awful lot like, are off-topic and likely to be closed.  I suggest you find a recipe and then if you have questions about how to fix, adapt, or improve it you can ask a question here for help.  To find a recipe, Google might provide you a good jumping off point: http://www.google.com/search?q=szechuan+hot+pot+recipe+sichuan+pepper.  Sources also say the book "Land of Plenty" by Fuchsia Dunlop will help you.
Comment: I agree with @justkt that this is likely to be closed. The only advice I'd give is that you want to only use the husks of the pepper corns and discard the seeds for the mouth numbing experience. See [this question](http://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/1497/avoiding-grittiness-with-sichuan-peppers)
Comment: Agree with both above. Please be more specific as I can suggest you some technique when you cook. The beet place to look for recipe on google.
Answer: Depending where you live it can be hard to get hold of useful Szechuan pepper. What you want is just the outer shell of fruit, not the contents
Many governments force importers from China to use high heat to sterilise these on import, and most of the active ingredients seems to get whacked during this process
Find the most "Chinese" shop you can, and buy packets that look like they where sealed in China (No local language print or contact detail, only Chinese characters). These hopefully haven't been heat treated and will still be good. Keep it airtight until needed
Sometimes it's labelled "Red Prickly Ash" or "Prickly Ash", or look for this on the label 花椒
To use, lightly dry roast the whole shells and grind into a powder. Then measure the fresh ground powder to match the recipe. It is only a subtle effect compared to Kava or Kawakawa and I think it needs lots of chilli too taste great