Steam train onboard recording advice

Question: Anyone with experience recording onboard trains, more specifically steam engines, care to share their advice and or stories? I might get a chance to record on one soon.
Answer: Have you seen these?
http://sepulchra.com/blog/?p=1785
http://sepulchra.com/blog/?p=1749
http://sepulchra.com/blog/?p=1760
Comment: Thanks @steve urban. The antique machine library is definitely on my must buy list! Great sounding whistles too, I'll have to hit up Michael and see if he'd sell or trade some sounds for them.
Comment: While I'm certain Michael would love the sale, I was thinking more along the lines of the information he had in the posts. I'm certain he'd have more tips if you reached out to him too. In fact, where is @sepulchra?

Steam train onboard recording advice


How to perform a REST request after a node created using rules?

Question: I have a backend service written by Python, which is exposed a JSON api. And I want drupal to perform an HTTP POST/PUT/PATCH/DELETE... request with json data (which is an output of a node) to the backend when a node have been created/modified/deleted.
I think that rules module should do this job. The trigger part and condition part are ok, but I can't find a suitable action part.
I hope to find a module that provides some rule actions, is able to let me define the JSON structure being used (using token etc.), is able to perform an HTTP request(GET/POST/PUT/DELETE) and let me handle the response (notify users or save to a status field).
When I google solutions, I only found two possible modules:

Rules HTTP Client, according to REST request through Actions and Triggers

This module adds an action wrapping of drupal_http_request() to use Rules for making HTTP requests.

But it seems not support authorization (OAuth/HMAC/token/...), and the data has to be HTTP query string (?name=value&name2=value2&...).

Web service client

This is a very powerful module, allows to define a series of actions: transform a node to a data structure and save as a variable, call http request with the variable and save the response as a result variable, handle the result at last. BUT, it only supports GET method (only option), query string, and no HTTP headers.
With these modules, I can work out a backup solution: my backend service may supply an endpoint that handles formed data, or supply an endpoint that receives a node id then make a HTTP request callback to Drupal (with services module).
Do I miss any module that do similar thing? Or is there any better solution?
P.S.: I'm not familiar with PHP, so I don't want to write any PHP code.
Answer: Guzzle is similar to Web Service Client and there is also Web Rules but I assume Guzzle would require some coding. Guzzle is a powerful HTTP client and library and itself can do whatever you want.
The reason there are few user interfaces to what you want is that they're annoying to build and add next to nothing to your client website. The UIs dont make the website any faster, they're just bloat.
This is why Views and ViewsUI are decoupled so you can turn 1 off in production environments.


How do you say "root beer"?

Question: So I'm struggling a bit with the accusatives and saying "root beer" is confusing me a bit. Root is radiko, and beer is biero. Do I say radiko biero, radikon bieron, or radiko bieron? Or is it something completely different?
Comment: The title makes this seem like a vocabulary question, but the body of the question seems to be about grammar. Could you clarify what it is you would like to know?
Comment: You cannot combine two nouns like that. One has to be an adjective.
Answer: I would suggest combining the two into a compound word: either radikbiero or radik-biero (the latter makes the roots clearer). You could also possibly say radika biero, but not radiko biero, since radik' is describing and qualifying biero.
As for accusative forms, adjectives are declined in the same way as the nouns they describe, so the accusative form of radika biero would just be radikan bieron. Only endings change, so the accusative of radik-biero would be radik-bieron.
Answer: An international language will always struggle to express purely national concepts - and regional foods and beverages fall strongly into this category. Root Beer is very much an American phenomenon and has not been widely exported like cola and fanta have been. Consequently, one should not expect Esperanto to have a good expression for this - certainly not one that will resonate with anybody not familiar with American culture and the English language.
You'll find suggestions in bilingual dictionaries such as radikbiero or sasafrasaĵo, but use them with caution - and be prepared to explain what they're supposed to mean. (Maybe even include the regional name "root beer.")
I also found these links useful:
Kiel traduki "root beer"?
http://www.argilo.net/node/73
Kiel traduki "root beer"?
http://argilo.livejournal.com/10203.html?thread=16347
Answer: I'd suggest simply checking Vikipedio for concepts like these. It suggests "Radikbiero".
In a compound word like this, the o just takes an -n in the accusative form:
Radikbiero estas bongusta.
Usonanoj trinkas radikbieron.
As others have said, if it were a concept translated with a noun and an adjective, both the noun and the adjective would take the -n, after the a and the o, respectively:
Radikbiero estas senalkohola trinkaĵo.
Mi preferas senalkoholan trinkaĵon.
Comment: Be careful when using Vikipedio for vocabulary when the article in question is not a well-established article. This one contains the warning *Ĉi tiu artikolo ankoraŭ estas ĝermo.* There is no "discussion" of the article. The edit history seems to be mostly visits from robots - plus a small spelling correction and a small vocabulary correction. In this case, Vikipedio agrees with at least some bilingual dictionaries, but generally, the first place you'll want to check is a published dictionary.
Answer: Root in root beer is not different from solar in solar system: Both are attributes.
In Esperanto, when translating root beer, you add the adjectival affix to the Esperanto words for root. So, root beer is translated as radika biero or radikbiero, in the same way solar system is translated as suna sistemo or sunsistemo.
For the accusative, you add the -n affix to the attribute and the noun. So, the accusative of radika biero is radikan bieron, while the accusative of radikbiero is radikbieron.

How do you say "root beer"?


Netzach, Selah, Vaed - what is the difference between these words?

Question: Eruvin 54a says that it was taught by Rabbi Eliezer ben yaakov that wherever it says Netzach, Selah, or Vaed it means it will remain so forever. "כל מקום שנאמר 'נצח' 'סלה' 'ועד' – אין לו הפסק עולמית" What is the difference between these 3 words?
Comment: http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/kitveyet/betmikra/leperush-2.htm -- different opinions about the translation of the word "Selah"
Comment: Maybe there is no difference and they are synonyms. If you have some reason to assume otherwise, consider editing that into your question.
Comment: @mevaqesh - If there is no difference then why the need for three different words?
Comment: @GershonGold  Just because I could make my writing boringly repetitive by repeatedly reusing the same few words, does not mean that that is a good literary tactic. dibra Torah kil'shon b'nei adam.
Answer: An Explanation of Synonyms in Tana"ch by Rabbi Sh'lomo Aharon Wertheimer (pp. 240-241) differentiates the 3 terms in the following way:
Netzach - continuous existence without change
Sela - continual periodic action, as in day after day or generation after generation (cf. T'hilim 84:5 "אַשְׁרֵי יוֹשְׁבֵי בֵיתֶךָ עוֹד יְהַלְלוּךָ סֶּלָה")
Va'ed - unlimited persistence (qualifying the phrase "בלתי בעל תכלית" from Sefer Ha'ikarim with the adverb "בהתמדה")
It says in the introduction to the section that they basically mean the same thing, and I for one find the differences very hard to pick apart even with the prooftexts here and there. The unchanging aspect of netzach appears to be its main differentiator. I think I can imagine the third one meaning having the capacity to go on infinitely, while the second one is more like having infinite confidence that for any given instantiation of the continued thing there was an instance immediately before it and will be one immediately after it.

It contrasts the first two by example of Rav Sa'adya Ga'on's list of mitzvos in which he refers to the mitzva of tzitzis as "netzach" because the Torah commands it "for their generations", and the mitzva of m'zuza as "sela" because it is "day after day and also at night". This sounds like the opposite of the definitions above, but no further explanation is given.

In the same section, it also lists two other synonyms:
Ad - stretching to remote points in time either backwards or forwards
L'olam - forever (perhaps meaning only into the future?)


Should the winder be able to push forwards on an Olympus OM10 film camera?

Question: My dad has given me his old Olympus OM10 film camera but he isn't sure if it works or not. The winder won't push forward fully but the camera has no batteries in it. Should the winder be able to push forward anyway? Is it most likely broken or does it just need batteries?
Comment: IIRC, all the battery does is power the meter.
Answer:
Is it most likely broken or does it just need batteries?

Try pressing the shutter release button. It could be that the shutter is already set, so the camera just can't be wound any further. If you hear the shutter trip when you press the shutter release button, you'll probably be able to move the film advance lever again.
Another way this can happen is if there's film in the camera and you've reached the end of the roll.
The manual(PDF) also suggests checking whether the self timer is engaged. It does also say to check the batteries, but I don't think a flat battery would actually prevent you from moving the film advance lever. The film advance is a mechanical system, so you mostly want to think about mechanical causes.


How to get to Battambang from Siem Reap?

Question: I have found a route to Battambang from Siem Reap via Phnom Penh. Is that the only way?
Answer:
There are boats between Battambang and Siem Reap, they leave in the morning (around 7am) and take most of the day. You spend several hours on a small river where you can see tons of animals and birds, later you cross Tonle Sap Lake, the last part to Siem Riep is by jeep. It takes a while but its a great ride.
The fruit shakes in Battambang are spectacular, don't miss them.
Edit: I just noticed, that you want to go from Siem Riep to Battambang, not the other way. They boats run in both directions, so the information above still applies.
Comment: I don't remember how much we paid. My Lonely Planet from 2008 lists US$15, by now that may be $20 or more. That's quite expensive for Cambodia because it is only for tourists.
Comment: Great, this seems really interesting. Do you know how much is one way trip? (approximately, just to make me an idea ;)) Thanks!
Comment: AFAIK, these don't run any more, or at least, are seasonal.
Comment: @AnkurBanerjee I did this same ride in June last year, definitely still going
Comment: Just did this in early December - great experience! I think I paid $23
Answer: Yeah - the boats can't run in the dry season.
You can get a taxi from about $30 (depends on your bargaining skills and what stage of the tourist season it is).
There are also inter-city buses that run between the two starting at about $6. Prepare for a long and uncomfortable trip, with lots of stops. The taxi is worth every cent.
The taxi's default speed is fast - you can ask them to drive more slowly, which will add some time to your trip but might help your anxiety levels. You should tip them for this. Also if you make any stops - which I encourage.
Answer: There are also buses operating between Siem Reap and Battambang. They should take around 3 hours. I book it via my hostel (departure times were 8AM or 2PM). I am pretty sure every hotel/hostel can book this for you. Currently (9/2019) the price for a one way ticket is $9.


What is the difference between a site and a web in SharePoint?

Question: What is the difference between a site and a web in SharePoint
Comment: please clarify your question clearly, are you referring to server side object model or any object model? Its ambiguous
Comment: I have trouble understanding why this would be an opinion-based question. The question could've been possibly clarified a bit, but then again I can easily understand why one could have a confusion between these terms, as they seem to be used crisscross. Many people refer to `SPSite`s as sites in a context which includes the use of `web`, as both would be shortened versions of their full name already causing misunderstandings.
Comment: Yeah I disagree with why this was closed too. Very useful question. And excellent answer moe. It was probably closed because he asked the question way too vaguely. should have added more context... but that doesn't make it "opinion based" that is silly.
Answer: An answer from StackOverflow.SE puts it in a nutshell:

   UI Term          API Class Name
   -------          --------------
   Site Collection  SPSite
   Site             SPWeb

This basically means, that when talking about SharePoint's API classes, we refer to site collections as SPSite and to sites as SPWeb. To focus on the API class terms, SPSite would therefore be the parent of a SPWeb, which holds one or many SPWebs.
Also an answer at Getting my head round spsite vs spweb vs anything else dating back +5,5 years would still be valid to give you the overview of SharePoint's architecture.
Answer: In SharePoint Object Model, SPSite(Server Object Model -SSOM) or Site (Client Side Object Model - CSOM) refer to Site collection object while a SPWeb(SSOM) or Web(CSOM) refers to Sub Site Object. Also note that every site collection has a root web, which can be accessed by using site collection object like SPSite.RootWeb or Site.RootWeb(CSOM).
Comment: Also, In the REST API, the root web is called `webId` which certainly helped muddy the waters even more.
Answer: Site represents site collection we can access it using SPSite.
Web represents simple site we can access it using SpWeb.
Hirarchy of sharepoint is SharePoint:                                         Farm->Web Application->Site Collection->Site->List/Library-> List Items
You can check it in detail on link below:
http://www.c-sharpcorner.com/uploadfile/Roji.Joy/difference-between-web-application-site-collection-and-site/


What does "to come undone" actually mean?

Question: I've heard this phrase several times but was given several contradictory interpretations. Please provide an exact meaning of the phase.
Answer: In the literal sense, this refers to something becoming untied, unwrapped, unfastened, etc.  For example:

Be careful with that gift.  If it comes undone, they'll be able to see what is inside.

In the figurative sense, it means that something has either not gone as planned, or has failed in some way.  E.g. a plan can come undone meaning it hasn't worked as expected.  A person can come undone meaning that they have lost their composure or self-control.

Andy came undone when Ann left him for Steve.
Comment: @orbling - I agree the second sense is more likely the problem, but since he'd heard several conflicting definitions, I wanted to be a bit more explicit.
Comment: I assume the OP was referring to the second sense there, which is derived out of the first.  To mean the plans have fallen apart.
Comment: Quite right.
Answer: In modern English, it is the counterpart of "do up", meaning to fasten (by whatever method - tie, glue, knot, zip, velcro). It is nearly always used literally, but when it is used of a person, it normally means that their clothing has become unfastened.
In older English, it could be used in a more abstract sense, so "I am undone" could mean something like "my life (or my wealth, or my reputation) is ruined". Modern readers often find the phrase amusing, because its modern meaning is so closely related to clothing.
Comment: Good explanation, thanx.
Answer: If a strap or a knot or some other kind of binding comes undone, it opens by accident and no longer binds anything.
If a plan or a scheme or a plot comes undone, it does the same thing. This is a figurative sense that parallels the literal sense.
Answer: Reinforcing what Colin said, "undone" means ruined.  Two cites:

And the posts of the door moved at the
  voice of him that cried, and the house
  was filled with smoke. Then said I,
  Woe is me! for I am undone; because I
  am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell
  in the midst of a people of unclean
  lips: for mine eyes have seen the
  King, the Lord of hosts.
-- Isaiah (KJV) 6:4-5

and

She's come undone
She didn't know what she was headed
  for
And when I found what she was headed
  for
It was too late
-- The Guess Who, "Undun", 1969
Answer: It's hard to explain in clear words, but the concept is clear, undo someone/thing, fall apart someone/thing.
To come undone is like saying something is finally fading away. I think the concept would be something like "to unbecome", but fall apart is very clear.


How can I set up differential thrust for a model airplane?

Question: I have a Taranis Qx7 Radio and built an FT Mighty-Mini Scout which flew great, but now I want to put an extra motor and fly it using differential thrust. My understanding is that it needs to be set up on the Mixers Page on the radio, and also I'm not sure how to wire it up.
Comment: You're saying you'll have each of the two motors you want differential thrust on mapped to two separate channels in your radio?
Answer: Some good info at Flite Test with video content as well. If you can create a "mix" in opentx (which takes some getting used to) you can apply the same methodology to setting this up.  There are lots of video tutorials etc.. for this.  Once you can do mixing on your Taranis, the content below may help.
In the example, they are using a Graupner radio (the same to dislike opentx??), but the idea should be the same.  What you are doing is attaching the thrust of the two motors to the rudder channel input so it will change each motor as you yank the rudder.
Flite Test demo of differential thrust


Who gets the 2 bonus victory points for reaching a new island?

Question: When expanding to an island, would the first person on the new island get 2 bonus victory points?  Or does everybody get 2 bonus points if it is their first expansion on that island?  If the same players gets to 2 different islands first, do they get 2 bonus points for each settlement?
Comment: Welcome to Board & Card Games Stack Exchange! If you haven't already, please check out [the tour](https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/tour). I've edited your question to make it clearer; if you don't like it, feel free to edit it further. We hope you stick around and ask many more great questions like this one!
Answer: Generally speaking, no points are granted for expanding to an island.
That said, some of the scenarios have a special rule that grant points for expanding to an island. For example, scenarios 1, 4, 8 and 9 have the following special rule:

If you build a settlement on a foreign island, you receive a
  Special Victory Point! Take a Catan chit and place it under the
  settlement when you build it. Each player may earn only ONE
  Special Victory Point in this scenario. It does not matter if
  other players have already built settlements on that island.

In those scenarios, every player that builds on an island other than the one on which they started gets 1 bonus point, but only the first time they do so.


Should questions that can be googled be disallowed?

Question: Based on a discussion here and here, should questions that can be googled be disallowed?
Comment: If so, then every question will be off topic once it's asked... The most recent question is [already indexed by google](https://www.google.com/#hl=en&gs_nf=1&tok=Yrgr-hD580fqbJxWTo3KeQ&cp=44&gs_id=1&xhr=t&q=How+come+God+goes+to+the+lower+sky+everyday&pf=p&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&oq=How+come+God+goes+to+the+lower+sky+everyday%3F&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=d8ff4d1896407bb&biw=1600&bih=711). :)
Answer: You should completely remove "This answer is Googleable" from your vocabulary because it is a gross mis-characterization of the issue.
We've experimented with a close reason called general reference to rid some sites of ultra-basic questions — questions that are asked in such a lazy fashion as to be easily findable in references designed to quickly and effortlessly find that information. For example:
Question: What is the Qur'an?
Answer: "Grrr... Why don't you just look it up?!"

closed as [general reference]
  This question is too basic; it can be definitively and permanently answered by a single link to a standard internet reference source designed specifically to find that type of information.

But we have all-but-given up adding this close-reason across the network precisely because of this kind of misunderstanding. People are quick to conflate the problems of
"general reference" questions with "anything that is easily googleable"… and the close hammer starts coming down without thought or understanding behind the prohibition.
There are questions which are simply too trivial to ask. It's not about being too easy or easily googlable… It's about boring to tears the very users you are trying to attract. There's nothing wrong with an intriguing easy question asked with care and forethought of purpose, but you have to stay keenly focused on asking questions as you would ask them to an "expert."
To attract experts, you need people asking interesting and challenging questions. A site where experts are answering your questions will attract a broader audience. But experts will NOT use a site that starts out top-heavy with trite "busy work."
Comment: @HasanKhan There's no shortage of questions on the Internet. The problem is with the quality of the answers. From **[Asking the First Questions](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/07/area-51-asking-the-first-questions/)** *"To attract experts, you need a site where people are asking very interesting and challenging questions, not the basic questions found on every other Q&A site. Remember, the pro sites WILL attract the enthusiasts, but not the other way around!"* So that's where our focus lies.
Comment: StackExchange focus tends to be entirely on attracting experts and less towards serving the purpose of having the site in first place i.e. for people to ask questions.
Comment: @HasanKhan The whole point of the site wasn't to make an encyclopedia of every question you could ever ask about Islam. It's about asking questions, that may or may not be commonly asked, that will attract experts. Once we have the experts, the site shifts into action and begins producing expert questions on Islam. Basically, any level of "difficulty" is allowed, as long as there isn't an entire Wikipedia article on it, or it can be answered in one sentence.
Answer: Personally, I would vote that they should be allowed. Googling for answers on Islam has varying degrees of success (depending on the question). There are far too many single sided articles out there. One of the reasons (I believe) for the existence of this SE site is to allow for multiple viewpoints and answers.
Comment: There are numerous articles that do have multiple viewpoints regarding islamic matters (like shia/sunni opinions) etc..
Comment: @Power-Inside - Yes. And then you have articles written by the fundamentalist fringe, like Al Qaeda sympathizers and the like.
Answer:
(Image source)
Googling may give you an answer, but it may not be a correct answer. With topics other than Islam, there's often enough of a problem with inadvertent misinformation. With Islam, the situation is worse, because there's the potential problem of deliberate misinformation.
Comment: Agree with this. A lot of sites on Islam are not very accurate, unfairly biased, and fail to cite anything. Just because it's "Googleable" doesn't make it a correct answer. It is so bad that even Wikipedia is a more reliable source than most websites.


Chinese Contractions (缩约)

Question: While speaking to Chinese Speakers, I sometimes notice that words are left out of a sentence. I have also read this thread on Chinese Contractions. When longer phrases are shortened in Chinese is this the same thing as a contraction? I know I have heard of this but I cannot seem to recall one at the moment. Are there some common examples of 缩约?
Comment: There is a recent blog post that addresses the issue, with lots of examples and explanations: http://chinesehacks.com/vocabulary/syllable-contractions/
Answer: Some examples would be:

全国人民代表大会 is shortened as "人大"
超級女聲 is shortened as "超女"
中央電視台 is shorten as "央視"
Answer: Actually, when you speak really fast, 缩约 is necessary.
It would be more natural to speak 'duo shao qian' as 'duo ao qian'.
Accent take a crucial part here. People From south china (e.g., Guangdong) speak quite 'clearly', but we don't think it nice or sweet. In fact, it sounds strange.
When longer phrases are shortened in Chinese is this the same thing as a contraction?

No. Contraction is more about a natural way to speak, while shortening a phrases is something like 'LOL' or 'BTW' in english.

Are there some common examples of 缩约?

知道(zhi dao) -> 'zao'
  不知道(bu zhi dao) -> 'bu dao' -----> here, 'zhi' is missed out because it's kind of hard to pronounce.

Something like 'zh' or 'sh' is more likely to be ignored or simplified as 'z' or 's' in real world. BTW, these contractions are not encouraged especially when your Chinese is not that good. It seems to be cute, but it could be confusing and unpredictable somehow.
Comment: This is vary widely depending on the area of China.These examples have strong Guangdong accent.
Comment: I've been wondering for long if zhi dao -> zao really happens. As a southerner, it never happens to my ears that 知道 and 造 becomes indistinguishable from each other. The time duration of /z/ (actually [ts]) in the 'contraction' of 知道 is longer than that in 造. Northerners may just be insensitive to this subtle difference.
Answer: In China, airline names are often shortened. Air China, 中国航空公司, is contracted to 国航. Also some phrases are contracted such as 怎么样(zen ma yang) can be shortened to 咋样(za yang).
Or "what are you saying 说什么(shuo shen me)" can go to "说啥" (shuo sha).

Chinese Contractions (缩约)


Is STP used to prevent all traffic looping or just broadcast and multicast?

Question: Let's say we have 3 switches in a logical triangle, each switch connected to the other two. This provides an opportunity for a loop when multicast or broadcast traffic is traveling here. STP is used to prevent this, deciding on a root bridge which eliminates the redundant path. Problem is, as I see it, one of the possibly shorter paths (given the situation) is cut off. Is this just the way STP works, or is the path blocked only for certain types of offending traffic like multicast or broadcast?
Answer: Actually, STP figures out the least-cost (shortest), loop-free path to the root switch. This is the path used for all traffic not directly attached to the switch. STP uses BPDUs to figure this out.
With your scenario, three switches connected in a triangle, both of the non-root switches will have directly connected links to the root switch, and each link will be the lowest cost to the root switch from each switch. If one of the links is faster than the other, any traffic from the link between the non-root switches will use the switch with the faster link to the root switch.
Answer: It's just the way STP works.
There are alternatives that can avoid these problems but they come with issues of their own.
Answer: STP would block(discard) all traffic not just broadcast or multicast traffic on the blocked(alternate) port.


For those who believe there was no historical Adam and Eve, how does Christianity make sense?

Question: How can Christianity make sense without a literal Adam and Eve? I have heard many Christians (particularly Catholics) try and be conciliatory with modern science by claiming that Adam and Eve were not real people and that Genesis was something along the lines of an allegory. But how does this make sense from a theological perspective? Wasn't the entire point of Christ's atonement to redeem humanity from their fall from grace, which is indeed the fault of humanity precisely because of Adam and Eve? How can the theologically "progressive" Christian  explain the origin of sin, humanity's state of sin, and the purpose of Christ's atonement without resorting to Adam and Eve?
Comment: Those Catholics are wrong, obviously not getting their information on [Christianity StackExchange](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/32608/how-does-the-catholic-church-reconcile-evolution-with-original-sin) (or [the Catechism](http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s2c1p7.htm) for that matter)
Comment: Two resources I would consult if I were to write an answer: 2013 book [Four Views on the Historical Adam](https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/review/four-views-on-the-historical-adam/) and 2014 *Journal of Creation* article [Adam as the protoplast—views from the early church in response to the archetypal view](https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j28_3/j28_3_86-91.pdf).
Comment: More resources: [survey of 86(!) views](https://cdn.ymaws.com/network.asa3.org/resource/dynamic/forums/20150829_143039_10526.pdf) (44 yes, 5 yes but not the first human, 7 maybe, 30 no), [7 impacted doctrines if 'no'](https://www.biola.edu/blogs/good-book-blog/2013/does-a-denial-of-a-historical-adam-impact-other-christian-doctrines), [deficiency of Barth's 'no' position](https://wscal.edu/resource-center/was-adam-historical).  Looks like it's very hard to justify other doctrines without a historical Adam.  The next best is 'yes, but not the first humans' (Walton) or 'maybe' (C.S. Lewis).
Comment: "Does it make sense?" would be a Truth Question, because some Christians would say yes, some no. But because you were mostly focusing on those who teach no historical Adam and Eve, I've edited this to ask for an explanation of that position. If you're wondering why I picked this side of the debate rather than the other, it's because the final sentence was already asking that, so it was the smallest change to bring this question in line with site guidelines.
Answer: For those who believe there was no historical Adam and Eve, how does Christianity make sense?

How can Christianity make sense without a literal Adam and Eve?

In a sense, one can not, at least in the sense that for the average Christian to understand the various aspects of this question, one has to believe that there at least had to be a first man and a first woman. It matters little if we call them Adam and Eve. The paramount belief to hold on to is that there was in the history of humanity, a first man and a first woman, at the beginning of mankind, and that our first parents sinned against God and as a result passed on original sin to all the descendants of humanity.
I enjoy reminding others of Galileo's now famous statement:

"The Bible shows the way to go to heaven, not the way the heavens go", was made by Galileo Galilei (1564- 1642 in his open letter to the Dowager Grand Duchess.

As I just stated, it matters little that we call our first parents Adam and Eve. The thing here to retain is that human race had a first father and mother to make sense of God's salvation for humanity.

What Does Adam Mean?
If you're looking for a name with strong historical significance, you can't go wrong with Adam.
A well-known Hebrew name, Adam means "son of the red Earth." Its meaning comes from the Hebrew word "adamah" meaning "earth," from which Adam is said to be formed. The name also refers to the reddish color associated with human skin. Adam was, of course, pivotal to the Old Testament, being the first man God ever created.
Eve
Meaning & History
From the Hebrew name חַוָּה (Chawwah), which was derived from the Hebrew word חָוָה (chawah) meaning "to breathe" or the related word חָיָה (chayah) meaning "to live". According to the Old Testament Book of Genesis, Eve and Adam were the first humans. God created her from one of Adam's ribs to be his companion. At the urging of a serpent she ate the forbidden fruit and shared some with Adam, causing their expulsion from the Garden of Eden.

For those who believe In real and historical Adam and Eve, as told in the book of Genesis, the whole idea of a first man and a first woman along with their first sin against God and the consequences that unfolded are clearly understood and believed by most of these Christians.
However, for those Christians who do not hold to the literal sense as explained in the Book of Genesis, is to remember that our first parents committed the first sin, the original sin, that damaged our human nature and left each of us with an inclination towards sin in our very nature.
In order that original sin and evolution be reconciled, it would be necessary that at a certain time in evolution, God infused into a certain natural creature an immortal soul and the gift of intelligence and knowledge of God. This being would be our first parent: Adam. This is what evolutionists accept in order to make original sin understood within a Christian belief system.
For example, Pope Pius XII's teaching in Catholicism can be summarized as follows:

The question of the origin of man's body from pre-existing and living matter is a legitimate matter of inquiry for natural science. Catholics are free to form their own opinions, but they should do so cautiously; they should not confuse fact with conjecture, and they should respect the Church's right to define matters touching on Revelation.

Catholics must believe, however, that humans have souls created immediately by God. Since the soul is a spiritual substance it is not brought into being through transformation of matter, but directly by God, whence the special uniqueness of each person.

All men have descended from an individual, Adam, who has transmitted original sin to all mankind. Catholics may not, therefore, believe in "polygenism", the scientific hypothesis that mankind descended from a group of original humans (that there were many Adams and Eves). - Evolution and the Catholic Church

St. Paul's words can not be altered and will always remain a strong testimony of Divine truth:

11Not only that, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation. 12Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, so also death was passed on to all men, because all sinned. 13For sin was in the world before the law was given; but sin is not taken into account when there is no law. - Romans 5:11-13

Evolution contradicts a literalistic interpretation of Genesis; however, according to Catholicism and most contemporary Protestant denominations, biblical literalism in the creation account is not mandatory. Christians have considered allegorical interpretations of Genesis since long before the development of Darwin's theory of evolution, or Hutton's principle of uniformitarianism. A notable example is St. Augustine (4th century), who, on theological grounds, argued that everything in the universe was created by God in the same instant, and not in six days as a plain reading of Genesis would require.
Modern Catholicism points to a unique special creation applies to humans and not other species:

The position of the Roman Catholic Church on the theory of evolution has changed over the last two centuries from a large period of no official mention, to a statement of neutrality in the early-1950s, to limited guarded acceptance in recent years, rejecting the materialistic and reductionist philosophies behind it, and insisting that the human soul was immediately infused by God, and the reality of a single human ancestor (commonly called monogenism) for all of mankind. The Church does not argue with scientists on matters such as the age of the earth and the authenticity of the fossil record, seeing such matters as outside its area of expertise. Papal pronouncements, along with commentaries by cardinals, indicate that the Church is aware of the general findings of scientists on the gradual appearance of life. Indeed, Belgian priest Georges Lemaître, astronomer and physics professor at the Catholic University of Louvain, was the first to propose the theory of expansion of the universe, often incorrectly credited to Edwin Hubble. In the 1950 encyclical Humani generis, Pope Pius XII confirmed that there is no intrinsic conflict between Christianity and the theory of evolution, provided that Christians believe that the individual soul is a direct creation by God and not the product of purely material forces. Today, many members of the Church support theistic evolution, also known as evolutionary creation. Under Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the International Theological Commission published a paper accepting the big bang of 15 billion years ago and the evolution of all life including humans from the microorganisms that formed approximately 4 billion years ago. The Vatican has no official teaching on this matter except for the special creation of the human soul. The Pontifical Biblical Commission issued a decree ratified by Pope Pius X on June 30, 1909, stating that special creation applies to humans and not other species. - Acceptance of evolution by religious groups

Thus without the sin of Adam, our first parent, there is no original sin or an accurate explication of why there is sin in the world.
Answer: From a personal point of view, it is because the exact interpretation of what the Adam and Eve story really represents has no influence on my day to day life.  I can see that interpretations that posit that Adam and Eve were two people exist, and those that posit that Adam and Eve were a community of (proto) humans exist, and those that posit that is it an allegory of the development of the human condition exist.  None of these actually differ in how I should live my life, therefore it is not required for me to decide with any certainty which explanation I hold to be most accurate.

How can the theologically "progressive" Christian explain the origin of sin, humanity's state of sin, and the purpose of Christ's atonement without resorting to Adam and Eve?

With big confidence intervals.  I know that explanations exist for all these things under the different interpretations, I do not have good reason to accept of reject any and none result in different answers to the immediate questions of "what should I do in situation X".  Given this level of uncertainty and the lack of importance of knowing for certain the correct answer a big confidence interval works for me.
Do note that this is not a case of ignoring the consequences of different interpretations, but of understanding that uncertainty exists.  My priority is to determine which interpretations have an influence on my decisions, and concentrating my efforts on those.  While the different interpretations of Adam and Eve are very interesting, in particular in respect to the rapidly expanding knowledge of human genetic diversity, both in modern humans and archaeological remains, it does not influence my day to day life so I am content to file such interpretations under "interesting but do not need a definitive answer today".
Comment: IOW, you ignore [the consequences](https://answersingenesis.org/death-before-sin/) of accepting Naturalism and its twin spawn Uniformitarianism and Evolutionism, thereby ignoring the foundational incompatibility of these viewpoints? While I find such a position logically bankrupt, humans, it seems, are good at that sort of thing. This answer makes sense; +1. *Definitely* reminds me of [this article](https://creation.com/can-christians-believe-evolution).
Comment: @Matthew Thanks for your comment, I see I was unclear.  I hope it is more obvious now?
Comment: You are avoiding thinking through the implications of Genesis being untrue, as can be seen from phrases like "lack of importance of knowing" and "none of these actually differ in how I should live my life". You are also, apparently (but not surprisingly), unaware that you are doing so. Orwell called this "doublethink", and humans are surprisingly good at it. I didn't find your answer unclear, I found it relevatory and therefore useful.
Comment: FWIW, I don't *recommend* ignoring the fundamental conflict between Christianity and the unholy N/U/E triumvirate; in the long term, it isn't spiritually healthy to allow the foundation of your faith to be so undermined. (At minimum, please read the second article linked in my previous comment.) However, I'd much rather you remain unaware of the logical contradictions in your belief system and remain Christian than fall off the fence in the other direction.
Comment: Who Adam and Eve were and are and their interactions with God are of paramount importance to our identity and well-being. Do we not remember how Malachi foretold that the whole Earth would be utterly wasted if we did not turn our hearts to our fathers?
Answer: OP: "How can the theologically "progressive" Christian explain the origin of sin, humanity's state of sin, and the purpose of Christ's atonement without resorting to Adam and Eve?"
Adam and Eve, whether allegory or factually accurate, is a revelation of man's state from our three-part essence to our two-part essence and, if a born-again Christian, back to our three-part essence.
Originally, we were body, soul, and spirit.  By sinning, our spirit died.  Flesh begets flesh.  Spirit begets spirit, but man can't do that; it comes from God.
The contrast between Christianity and all other religions is the question whether you have a "light", a "spirit", an internal eternal "piece".  Christianity says no, unless you are born again (spirit).  Other religions say yes you do.  The word "namaste" is a manifestation of this.  It means I salute the light in you with the assumption that all people have said light.
So, the origin of sin and humanity's state of sin and its solution is explained whether Adam and Eve actually existed or not.  Somewhere in the way back someone disobeyed, died spiritually, and the best that happened until Christ Jesus was to physically procreate.
Hope that helps.
PS You can find these various themes in the story of Adam and Eve.  For example, God said on the day you sin you die.  But Adam and Eve continued to live another 900 or so years.  They died spiritually on that day of the "apple eating", but continued physically.
Answer:
How can Christianity make sense without a literal Adam and Eve?

Apostle Jeffrey R. Holland gave a seminal answer to this question in his 2015 address titled, "Where Justice, Love, and Mercy Meet":

In our increasingly secular society, it is as uncommon as it is unfashionable to speak of Adam and Eve or the Garden of Eden or of a "fortunate fall" into mortality. Nevertheless, the simple truth is that we cannot fully comprehend the Atonement and Resurrection of Christ and we will not adequately appreciate the unique purpose of His birth or His death—in other words, there is no way to truly celebrate Christmas or Easter—without understanding that there was an actual Adam and Eve who fell from an actual Eden, with all the consequences that fall carried with it.

Denial of the reality of our first parents in the flesh or of their transgression would be a critical error. Adam and Eve were and are real people. Neither the Fall nor Atonement nor animal sacrifice nor repentance are or were a charade, but are literal realities pointing us to the infinite love of the Only Begotten of the Father, and the necessity of complete repentance from all sin. No unclean thing can dwell with God (see Revelation 21:27, 1 Corinthians 6:9, and so on).

I have heard many Christians (particularly Catholics) try and be
conciliatory with modern science

I have too--but "science" is a misnomer. It means "knowledge". We are calling wild and constantly changing speculations and theories "knowledge", while they are anything but.

Wasn't the entire point of Christ's atonement to redeem humanity from
their fall from grace

No, although redemption is eternally essential and crucial to our repairing our relationship with God. Redemption from sin and the Fall is the baseline for salvation (see Isaiah 53). Jesus also commands us to be perfect, even as His Father is perfect (Matthew 5:48). This is far more than becoming clean and redeemed from our sins. Becoming perfect requires far more of us than only keeping His commandments, and it is only possible because of the grace of Christ (See John 17, Matthew 19:21, Philippians 4:13, Romans 8:16-17, etc.). Another modern Apostle, David A. Bednar, spoke of the enabling power of Christ as the oft-overlooked, complementary and connected counterpart to His redeeming power.
Answer: You asked:

How does this make sense from a theological perspective? How can the theologically "progressive" Christian explain the origin of sin, humanity's state of sin, and the purpose of Christ's atonement without resorting to Adam and Eve?

Well... the proper answer is "it doesn't" and "they can't". Not, anyway, if they are to seriously consider the problem. I could point you to this answer to a different question, and also the articles here, here and here for a deeper explanation of why this problem exists, but it seems you are already familiar with the issue.
So... what? Well, the "solution" is to ignore the problem. Some do so out of ignorance, not realizing the extent of the inherent contradiction in believing in both Christianity and Evolutionism (and its necessarily attendant Uniformitarianism). Others perhaps do so willfully; humans are fairly skilled at doublethink. Basically, tell yourself that it doesn't matter, that it doesn't apply to your life right now. And, to be fair, there is some truth in this; I'm not arguing that belief in YEC is necessary to be saved (further reading).
I could also point out that this wouldn't be the only confusing thing about Christianity that (many) Christians accept on faith (the Trinity, anyone?). I could also point out that a child-like faith is seen in some senses as a good thing. The trouble here, however, is that the N/U/E triumvirate is inherently antithetical to Christianity. If one fails to reject it, one has allowed a seed to be planted with the potential to grow and undermine one's faith. Moreover, there is no need to reject a literal Adam and Eve; if one excludes the Naturalist dogma that there is no God, there is actually much scientific support for Biblical Creation. The "theistic evolutionist" denies a part of God's Word, leaving the door open to denying other parts, and essentially has a faith resting upon hollow foundations. The YEC, on the other hand, has a faith firmly planted on the bedrock of revealed truth.
Comment: Having a problem of understanding your answer as to why it is "for  those who believe there was no historical Adam and Eve, how does Christianity make sense?"
Comment: @KenGraham, huh? I'm arguing that *there are no such people*. There are, rather, people that either haven't thought it through, or simply don't *try* to make it make sense. I could cite several other examples of things that don't make sense in Christianity, which doesn't stop people (including myself) believing in them (the Trinity being the most obvious).
Answer: No historical Christian Creed includes a statement such as "I believe in the historical existence of Adam and Eve." So that specific affirmation is not required to affirm one's belief in Christianity. However, a few denominations do require belief in the inerrant verbal inspiration of the Bible. It is hard to imagine a person affirming that doctrine while insisting that Adam and Eve did not exist.
Some Christians indeed interpret "Adam" to mean human beings in general. Whether one believes that all people are literally descended from the literal Adam and Eve or not, one may still believe that everyone sins and that through faith in Jesus one can be saved. The same goes for other doctrines implied in the historical Christian creeds: the Trinity, the Virgin birth, the actual suffering of Jesus, the Resurrection, the forgiveness of sins, everlasting life, etc. Thus, it is clearly possible to deny the existence of Adam and Eve as the actual forebears of humankind and still affirm one's belief in Christianity.
Answer:
Wasn't the entire point of Christ's atonement to redeem humanity from their fall from grace, which is indeed the fault of humanity precisely because of Adam and Eve?

No, that is not the point of Christianity, much less the entire point.
Christ's sacrifice is offered to individuals, not to humanity collectively.
What Adam and Eve did has no effect on your own salvation.
And whether you are personally saved has no effect on anyone else's salvation.
Sin is simply breaking any of God's laws.
As 1 John 3:4 says "… sin is the transgression of the law".
We were all born with a capacity to sin, even Jesus.
Whether that ability to sin was created by Adam and Eve's transgression or inevitably resulted simply from the existence of law may be an interesting theological question, but it is irrelevant in terms of one's salvation or damnation.
Sin is a fact, its origin really doesn't need an explanation.
You have sinned.
It really doesn't matter whether you blame your sin on Adam and Eve for what they did, on God for having created the Law, on Satan for tempting you, on simple human nature, or on some other excuse.
As a result of your sin you will experience permanent death, perpetual non-existence.
It really doesn't matter why you sinned; only that you did sin.
But you, personally and individually, will be offered salvation, either now in this age, or later following the second general resurrection.
You can accept it, or reject it; the choice is yours alone.
Comment: "Yes"... but *why* are humans conceived and born sinful (Psalm 51:5)?***Because of Adam and Eve***. Your answer fails to address the question: "How can the theologically "progressive" Christian explain the origin of sin, humanity's state of sin, and the purpose of Christ's atonement without resorting to Adam and Eve?" Of course, there can *be* no answer to that (as I explained in a deleted answer), but at least Dave's answer explains the approach of ignoring the conflict.
Comment: Why would anyone reject it?
Comment: Sorry, but "What Adam and Eve did has no effect on your own salvation" is patently false. If Adam and Eve had not sinned, we (presumably) wouldn't *need* salvation. (I'm not going to try to imagine a world where Adam and Eve remained perfect, but *Cain* sinned, or some other descendant. Anyway, that's out of scope. Point is, the reason we *need* salvation in the first place is, ultimately, because of Original Sin. Take that away, and something is going to have to change radically.)
Comment: @SpiritRealmInvestigator asks "*Why would anyone reject it?*". Why isn't for me to say. But Luke 12:10 and others speak of an unpardonable sin "*one who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven*". This is a deliberate rejection of God's spirit and salvation. At the end time, those few people that *have* chosen to reject God's spirit will be permanently destroyed.
Comment: @Matthew, Adam and Eve's sin might have led to our current situation, but we are condemned by our own sins, not by theirs. Catholics believe otherwise, having a doctrine of Mary's immaculate conception to prevent Jesus's inheriting a sinful state from Adam and Eve. But most other denominations don't believe in the immaculate conception.
Comment: @Matthew, ignoring the Catholic perspective, saying that humans are born sinful because of Adam and Eve is like saying that humans are born with two eyes because of Adam and Eve.  It isn't necessary to believe in a literal Adam and Even in order to understand how vision works. So why should it be necessary to believe in a literal Adam and Eve to understand that sin is the breaking of God's Law? ¶ I've expanded my answer a little.
Comment: Well... *technically* it isn't. But in order to understand sin, one must understand "*not* sin" (sorry, can't think of a better term), which requires understanding Creation *prior* to The Fall. Which requires a historically-accurate understanding of Genesis 1-3. An Evolutionist has no "Very Good" Creation to contrast with sin and the resulting Curse; no example of what God *intended* and what the New Creation will be like. No understanding that Death is a *consequence* of Sin, since to an Evolutionist, death *must* be "Very Good".
Comment: Let us [continue this discussion in chat](https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/128327/discussion-between-matthew-and-ray-butterworth).


How can I delete my own comment?

Question: I wrote a comment, and now I would like to delete it, but I cannot find how to do this. How can I delete my comment?
Comment: There's an "x" icon when you hover over your comment. Click on it
Comment: Fixed: http://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/336916/4574
Answer: Unfortunately I don't have enough reputation points to leave the comment so this is the only way I can confirm the issue. Someone who has enough reputation points to move the other's answers may remove this 'answer' and put the note in the appropriate place.
I can confirm I am experiencing the very same issue as the original poster explained in his question and again here in his comment. These are the comments where X or delete does not appear on mouse over so I cannot delete my own comments and neither could I edit them during the first 5 minutes after posting.
Here is the screenshot which includes the cursor so it can be seen there is nothing shown on mouse over:

Here is the picture where can be clearly seen the mouseover on other's comment works as expected:

The upvote and flag options do show if I hover the mouse over the comment which is not mine but the options to delete (or edit if there is still enough time left to edit the comment) do not show upon hovering the mouse over my own comments anymore.
Note: Although I don't have too many reputation points I certainly do remember how editing/deleting 'own comments' function worked before.
Edit:
Now, a few hours later, the function is working again:

During the time when it did not work the icon wasn't shown neither with FF nor with Chrome browser.
Comment: It was a bug - see the link under the Q...
Answer: Take a look on this screenshot...
Answer: After your comment there have a small red circle with a cross sign, you can delete your comment using it...
See the image below:
Comment: I still didn't see the red cross mark at the right of my comment. I was wondering whether only certain levels of users can delete their own comments.
Comment: i don't think so,however comment can be deleted

    A user can delete their own comment.

    A moderator can delete anyone's comments.

   Any user with at least 15 reputation can flag a comment, and enough flags can cause the deletion of that comment.

@Cirrus i think you confused with this,please look carefully your comment delete icon..and if you got any useful think from my answer,please up vote it,to upvote user must have more than 15 reputation,you have only 13,so then i'll give upvote your comment :)
Comment: Weird how difficult / impossible it is to delete your own answers.

How can I delete my own comment?


Is a bank statement needed to apply for a German visa if I have an invitation?

Question: I want to know that will it still be necessary for me to sent my bank statement to the Germany embassy for schengen visa , whilst i received a invatation from the one inviting me from Germany ?
Comment: An invitation is trivial to come by, but offers no guarantees that the invited person will return home...
Answer: The bank statements have several purposes. One of them is to show that you have a stable job in your home country. This makes you appear more likely to return home at the end of the visa, and less likely to become an illegal immigrant. This is still necessary if you have an invitation.
Comment: what if im still a student and im just invited by a friend who is working in Germany?
Comment: You have to show that you will go back to your home country. The bank statements are just *one* part of that. It will also help if you have to go home for the final part of your degree. It will hurt if you have just finished your degree and look for a job.


bitcoin recovery when exchange ceases business

Question: I had bitcoins with Coinroom exchange but I see they are gone. They should be independent of the exchange that manages them I assume. How do I recover my bitcoins or get them allocated to another wallet? Thanks, Peter
Comment: If you do not have the private keys for the bitcoin addresses where the bitcoins were stored you never really controlled those bitcoins.  If the exchange is gone, sorry but your bitcoins are gone
Answer:
They should be independent of the exchange that manages them I assume.

Should be
If coinroom was a regulated currency exchange then there might be some financial arrangements they would be required to make by law. There is no indication this was the case. Even if it were the case, people often set up businesses that do not obey the law, through carelessness, incompetence or deliberate criminal intent.
Cold storage
Coinroom may have claimed they kept funds in cold storage but I am not aware of any independent audit of their processes - no one can easily tell whether such claims were true.
Even if they were kept in cold storage - that does not by itself provide any guarantees about how those funds would be disposed of when the business ceases operations.
Not your keys, not your bitcoin.
When you buy BTC at an exchange, you are giving money to someone else that you trust. The exchange owns the BTC not you. What you "own" is a debt whose amount is denominated in BTC.  You have 0 BTC until you use that exchange's facilities to transfer that BTC out of the exchange and into your own standalone wallet - to an address for which only you know and/or control the private-key.

How do I recover my bitcoins

Creditors of a failed business
When you gave money to the business in Poland, you would, if prudent, have made a note of the registered company (if any), its address, registration details and it's owners and managers names etc. You could then find out the legal status of the company and if it has been placed into any insolvency process by company regulators in Poland. If so, you might be able to register as a creditor in any winding up proceedings.
Debt recovery, breach of contract etc.
You gave some money to a business in Poland. The way to recover money from a business in Poland is to engage a lawyer in Poland and see if a prosecution is possible under Polish law. This is likely to be expensive. It will take a long time (compare MtGox) there is no guarantee that this process will be successful.
Recovering stolen money
If you believe a crime was committed, you could report the crime to your local police. I wouldn't hold out too much hope of recovering your money, especially if you are not a resident of Poland.
Answer: If you send your bitcoin to an exchange and their website say they have no more, then they are lost, you should contact them.
How did you assume those are independant, do you have a cold wallet with a private key ?


Is it ok to have different size tires on my MTB?

Question: I got a used Mongoose Excursion MTB, and it came with a 26x2.10 front tire and a 27.5 rear tire. Is this suitable? Will it ride normally? And what's the reason for different sizes?
Comment: @Criggie: I can find it with all kinds of wheel sizes on the internet. 24", 26", 27.5", 29". Seems to be some generic Walmart BSO.
Comment: It would really really help if you made a photo of your whole bike and then the detail of each tyre.
Comment: Don't trust the labels - try measuring the rims with a tape measure, and you should get an idea if each is closer to 584mm or 559mm across.   A photo might help too.
Comment: The first rule of tire sizes is that inch sizes do not represent any physical dimension of the tire or rim
Comment: Also, a quick web search suggests the Mongoose Excursion is a 24" wheel when sold originally, but PO may have done some frankensteining.
Answer: I don't think you could mount a 584mm (27.5") tyre on a 559mm (26") rim and have it stay on. If you somehow managed to mount and inflate it, it sounds dangerous and could fail catastrophically at any moment.
Are the rims a different diameter as well?
Mullet mountain bikes (different wheel diameters in the front and rear) are a thing, but usually you'd have the larger wheel in the front.
Answer: This is a very unusual setup. There have been a few MTBs over the years that have used a bigger wheel in front, eg 29/27.5, 26/24, or even 26/20. I've never heard of a mountain bike set up with a bigger wheel in back. Looking this bike up online, it looks like it is sold with 24", 27.5", or 29" wheels front and rear, and the 24" and 29" are sold with disc-brake front, v-brake rear; the 27.5" is sold with v-brakes front and rear.
You said you bought this used. I can imagine that it originally had 27.5" wheels front and rear, the previous owner lost or wrecked the front wheel, and replaced it with a 26". Do the front brakes work? If not, I would be cautious with this bike, since your front brakes do most of the work (and who knows what else is wrong with it). Handling also will not be as intended.
As to the different tire widths, that's not a huge deal as long as everything fits. People have chosen different widths intentionally, but if my hypothesis is correct that someone replaced the front wheel with whatever was available, that doesn't apply here.
Comment: I suspected as much. I hate to hear you wound up with a lemon. You could replace the front wheel with one that's the correct size, but you might wind up spending more on the wheel than the bike is worth.
Comment: No the front brakes don't work. The linear pull brake pads don't line up correctly to the rim as they're supposed to no matter how I adjust the pads. I'm guessing it's due to incorrect tire and rim size. The frame is meant to have 27.5 wheels so the brake mounts are relative to that size. It doesn't feel sturdy at all when riding. Very bouncy shaky and feels like it's going to fall apart lol! It was a very cheap bike. Thinking garbage can is best place for it..
Comment: It's a shame you're missing a 27.5" wheel, because 26" rim brake wheels can be obtained much more easily2nd hand
Answer:
Is this suitable?

Will it ride normally?

If the tires are staying on the rim with full air pressure (correct air pressure should be indicated on the side of the tire) and holding air then it's OK.
The bike should ride normally.

what's the reason for different sizes?

There are cases where a bicycle maker will put different size wheels on a bike and claim a performance benefit. All the mountain bikes I've seen with different size wheels put a 24 inch wheel on the back and a 26 inch wheel on the front*.
I've never seen a bike maker put a 26 inch wheel on the front and a 27.5 inch wheel on the back. It's probably something a previous owner did just because a 27.5 tire on hand at the time. Or maybe a previous owner trashed the original wheel and replaced it with a different one of slightly different size.
EDIT: And, I hear from reputable sources that some bike makers have recently used other combinations of wheel sizes. All of them larger in front than in back.
I was able to find a Walmart listing for the Mongoose Excursion. One version of the bike came with 26 inch wheels and another version that came with 27.5
Nothing was listed with mixed wheel sizes.
It is possible that the factory ran out of one wheel size and substituted the other wheel size just to keep the line moving.
Comment: 26 front and 24 back? you are about 10 years late with that statement. modern mullet bikes use 29 front and 27.5 back, while some freeriders like at rebull rampage prefer 27.5 front and 26 in the back
Comment: @reciprocallettuce I have edited my answer to include your information.
Answer: Riding with different sized wheels in the front and rear
There's nothing wrong with this at all. Usually, people who ride different size wheels will put a larger wheel on the front to help roll over bumps. The only potential problem with a bigger wheel in the rear is that it'll shift your weight over the handlebars a bit, but it probably won't even be noticeable at the small size difference that you appear to have. You might have problems if you did something really weird like putting a child's tricycle wheel on the front with an adult-sized wheel in the back, but I wouldn't worry about it.
Reading your tire sizes
As has been indicated in the comments, you can't really trust the labels on mountain bike tires. The cycling industry has used a number of different sizing schemes over the years and no one really uses the ISO standard sizing scheme very well (which is the only real standard that we have).
You might see some numbers in smaller print on the tires that represent the ISO standard size, which is also the rim size measured in millimeters, probably in the 500-600 range. If it's there, it's probably the truest measure of your tire and rim size.
Typically a 26" tire mounts on a 559mm rim. 27.5" is used relatively rarely, but typically mounts on a 584mm rim. There are definitely exceptions to the 26" tire sizing and probably exceptions to the 27.5" tire sizing.
Your best bet
If you really want to know what you're riding and whether or not everything is compatible, measure the rims with a tape measure. There's a pretty good chance that one or both of your rims is either 559mm or 584mm. You won't be able to get a perfect measurement, but you'll be able to get close enough to say it's one or the other. If something seems way off, consult Sheldon Brown's tire sizing chart. It's the most definitive guide to tire sizing that you'll find.
Tire sizing is unnecessarily complicated. If you're still unsure after reading through these answers, consult with your local bike shop. They'll be able to tell you exactly what you have and what you need.


Is it safe to hold DSLR with hot shoe mounted top handle?

Question: This is similar to May I hold the DSLR in part by the hotshoe flash? but I'm asking about top handle. Is it safe to hold a camera that may weight more then 2kg with this? I have two lenses one is ~1.8kg and the other weight little big more than 2kg. If it matter I have Nikon d750 DSLR.
Comment: It's comparatively rare that a question starting with "Is it safe" will poll affirmatively, and safety is always relative to some risk metric.
Comment: @user92750 not sure about other questions like that but here the risk is to drop the camera with broken hot shoe. I think that risk is pretty real here.
Answer: Definitely don't try to support the camera by its hotshoe. It's not designed for it.
I don't think you should put anything at all on a hotshoe. Everything is so heavy and all the weight is pushing and pulling in all directions on that little joint.
Even if your hotshoe is designed to do that, that's an insanely bad holder. Your camera is hanging off the bottom with no protection. The handle is tiny and in a terrible position. The second you pick that up, you'll understand. You'll be holding all the weight of everything with your wrist and thumb. You want a big rounded handle so all the weight is distributed and balanced and you can hold it in different positions with both hands.
Here is a proper C shaped holder. See how the holder is taking all the load for everything? The camera is not only not being used as a holder but it has a nice big plate protecting it.
Comment: @clabacchio [Better?](https://i.stack.imgur.com/NZSNJ.jpg)
Comment: I'd also add that in general large lenses (EG Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-D ED) come with their own tripod collars. Using these allows you to mount the camera/lens at much better  balance point.  It also looks like the bottom rail in that C shaped holder can slide forward and back to adapt to different mounting points
Comment: That fourth, different battery is bothering me.
Comment: @John I'd have cranked it up by making all four different :)
Comment: Years ago we were remarketing a dSLR camera from a major manufacturer, and a government agency was buying them.  One of the system engineers was determining the loading on various attach points, and the bottom line was that the flash hot shoe started to deform with about a 8 oz load on it.  Vibration, G-forces, and other mechanical issues would likely cause failures.  But what impressed me was that effectively the hot shoe was good for about a 3oz load.


How can one use CDMA(code division multiple access) in individual communications

Question: Recently i have learnt that unlike GSM that is used in mobile handset for communication, cdma uses broad spectrum frequency ie.  the full available spectrum. Basically it is a form of spread spectrum. Do a user uses a unique code to  transmit the information and receiver uses the code to pick up thesignal ? Won't it will be difficult for one to pick up the complete signal if send over several discrete frequencies
Comment: @Tim_Stewart i thought that wireless networking was in the domain of superuser. I really apologize for a off topic question
Answer: You imagine that broad spectrum frequency is the frequency of the signal,
but that is not so. The frequency refers to how frequent one can find the data
of one communication in the data signal stream.
I quote from the paper
Basic note on Spread Spectrum CDMA signals:

In Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) systems
  all users transmit in the same bandwidth simultaneously.
  Communication systems following this concept are "spread spectrum systems".
  In this transmission technique, the frequency spectrum of a data-signal is spread
  using a code uncorrelated with that signal. As a result the bandwidth occupancy
  is much higher then required. The codes used for spreading have low cross-correlation
  values and are unique to every user. This is the reason that a
  receiver which has knowledge about the code of the intended transmitter,
  is capable of selecting the desired signal.

For more detailed info, see
Wikipedia Code-division multiple access.
Comment: @Tim_Stewart: It's about hardware technology, and networking is in our domain. Many posts are in a gray area of relevance. What isn't pertinent is clear, but what is isn't that well-defined.
Comment: @Sreetamaghoshhazra: I don't think this question is advanced enough for [engineering.stackexchange.com](https://engineering.stackexchange.com/) and it won't fit into [android.stackexchange.com](https://android.stackexchange.com/), so you might just as well stay here.
Comment: @Tim_Stewart: This isn't Meta, so long discussions are out. But saying that a technology is out of bounds because it's not used in home computing is: (1) Needs proof, (2) Perhaps will change in the future, (3) May be an invalid argument, since we also have company people asking questions here about software & hardware and large networks.
Comment: Nothing about an encoding scheme say it has to be used in a particular licenced frequency band or communication medium. Furthermore, this question is about the fundamentals of CDMA and pertains to no specific implementation, not even strictly for cellular systems. The user wants to clarify that they understand something correctly; they aren't trying to start a pirate cell tower. I think it is completely fair to ask this question and you are being rude and unwelcoming to a new user.
Comment: @Tim_Stewart: Didn't know that.
Comment: @Andy, the fact is, it **was** off-topic for SU. it can be edited to be on-topic, feel free to help the OP if you would like. my posts were not meant to be rude. rules are rules, Harrymc has been around long enough to know this...
Comment: @Harrymc, took your suggestion seriously. Please join the discussion at https://meta.superuser.com/questions/13601/do-we-need-better-definitions-for-off-topic-questions-in-the-help-center
Comment: @andy, please feel free to join also.


Probability of system failure

Question: An electronic system has four components labeled as $1$, $2$, $3$, and $4$. The system has to be used during a given time period. The probability that component i will fail during that time period is $f_i$ for $i = 1,\dots, 4$. Failures of the components are physically independent of each other. A system failure occurs if component $1$ fails or if at least two of the other components fail. Specify an appropriate sample space and determine the probability of a system failure.
Answer: The sample space is a discrete set of $2^4$ possibilities.  To get the probability of failure it is simplest to just list the disjoint combinations that lead to failure.  These are 1 fails and the rest don't matter and 1 succeeds and any of the following occur: 2,3 fail and 4 succeeds; 2,4 fail and 3 succeeds; 3,4 fail and 2 succeeds; and 2,3,4 fail.  The probability of failure is then ${f_1+(1-f_1)(f_zf_3(1-f_4)+f_2f_4(1-f_3)+f_3f_4(1-f_2)+f_2f_3f_4)}$
${=f_1+(1-f_1)(f_2f_3+f_2f_4+f_3f_4-2f_2f_3f_4).}$
Then main point is insuring that there is no overlap when forming the sum of probabilities.  The second form for the answer is to simplify the arithmetic.

Probability of system failure


How to run heuristic evaluation

Question: While running a heuristic evaluation, is there a recommended number of tasks?
I'm struggling with the scoring part. Do I perform all tasks, take notes of the problems and then identify severity based on all problems from all 3 tasks?
Answer: In this very good article, from uxmastery, they suggest using 5 tasks: https://uxmastery.com/how-to-run-an-heuristic-evaluation/
But I think what really matters is how you rank the tasks, so you can really focus on the ones that are more critical.

How to run heuristic evaluation


convert mysql timestamp to mktime

Question: I have the following MySQL timestamp:
2009-06-23 16:21:48
How can I convert it to a format like mktime()?
Answer: There is a MySQL function unix_timestamp.  In your SQL query, instead of selecting the Datetime or Timestamp column directly, do this:
SELECT unix_timestamp(MyDatetimeColumn) FROM MyTable

Alternatively, if you have the string already, you could use the PHP function strtotime().
Comment: You probably want to alias the name too: SELECT UNIX_TIMESTAMP(MyDatetimeColumn) AS MyTimestampColumn
Comment: where should i preform the calculation in order to maximize efficiency? at the PHP or at the MySQL level?
Comment: The SQL implementation is probably faster because it doesn't have to parse a string.
Answer: ok,
I was wrestling with this for a week (longer but i took a break from it).
I have two specific fields in tables

creationDate > timestamp > current_timestamp
editDate > timestamp > current_timestamp

they were pulling out either dec 31 1969, or just nothing...
annoying...
very annoying
in mysql query i did:

                unix_timestamp(creationDate) AS creationDate
                unix_timestamp(editDate) AS editDate

in php convert i did:

        $timestamp = $result_ar['creationDate'];
        $creationDate = date("Y-M-d (g:i:s a)", $timestamp)
                echo($creationDate);

        $editstamp = $result_ar['editDate'];
        $editDate = date("Y-M-d (g:i:s a)", $editstamp)
                echo($editDate);

this solved my problem for me returning

                2010-Jun-28 (5:33:39 pm)
                2010-Jun-28 (12:09:46 pm)

respectively.
I hope this helps someone out...
Answer: You could use the strtotime function.

convert mysql timestamp to mktime


Dealing with stochastic results of Machine Learning Models

Question: I'm building stock selection models, and pick top 5 and bottom 5 stocks. Given the variability in Stochastic gradient decent results, they keep changing. One way to get consistent results is to use the random seed, but I'm looking for if there a better way to deal with this. Also how would you interpret the results, i.e. One set of top 5 versus another set of Top 5 picks (3-4 of them are the same, but may differ in ranking). I'm running enough iterations to know this isn't an issue about convergence.
Answer: Have you tried to choose an arbitrary number of model, let say 20, each one having its own seed? Then you run your twenty models and use the median of your 20 results as signal. One advantage of that method is that you can also get a confidence estimate of your prediction thanks to the standard deviation of your 20 results.
Comment: is there a source you could cite?
Comment: @user23564 this technique is used in a paper published by a quant team from a major bank however I am not allowed to cite as the article is for clients only. Besides that I think it's intuitive enough...
Answer: Stochastic solutions are an unavoidable property of stochastic methods, in particular optimisation methods.  See for instance section 3 in A Review of Heuristic Optimization Methods in Econometrics.  In general, you cannot get rid of randomness; you
need to analyse it, by looking at and analysing distributions (e.g. of portfolios) instead of single numbers. See for instance An Empirical Analysis of Alternative Portfolio Selection Criteria (of which I am a coauthor).
Convergence means (at best) that the algorithm has stopped in a local
optimum. If you have multiple optima, the algorithm may
stop at different optima. Have you compared the
objective-functions values of repeated runs?  Even if
they are the same: it means that the algorithm, or more
specifically, your selection criterion (=objective
function) cannot differentiate between different
solutions.  Could you modify the model, e.g. add more
constraints?
Comment: when you mean constrains, would it be just in terms constrains of the hyperparameters? I wanted to ensure that I dont 'stop too early, so I had increased the model runs significantly with a good amount of variance in the initial guesses. I will run the model with different stopping criteria's as well, see how that affects the model.
Comment: No, I meant constraints in your model; such as diversification constraints. That might be helpful if your different solutions actually map to the same objective function value.
Answer: The best bet for you is to use Ensemble Learning, as someone experienced with Kaggle competitions, the best way to replicate good performance on Private Learderboard is to ensemble as many algorithms together. This includes intra and inter ensembling. Intra meaning ensembling same algorithms (e.g Xgboost) but with different tuning parameters. You can chose top 10 parameters by cross-validation results to intra-ensemble. Some participants also intra-ensemble different random seeds of same parameters, taking total number of models to more than 500! Second is inter-ensembling, in this you would ensemble different algorithms (e.g neural net, random forest and xgboost), the way you choose these algorithms is by looking at two things : 1) The cross-validation accuracy for each algorithm should be nearby, 2) The correlation in cross-validation predictions should not be more than 80-90%
Comment: I think interpretability will hardly there even if you use a single algorithm like Neural net or Xgboost or random forest, many of the popular ML algorithms aren't very interpretable, they are Black Box by nature, but that doesn't mean your investment strategy using them has to be blackbox, if you start with a good fundamental thesis for stock picking and use the ML algos as a tool rather than base framework, you should be good.
Comment: While this seems to be a good answer to the problem, I think it also introduces an additional complication of interpretability of the model. Any thoughts on that? I could see one using feature importance, to help a bit.


What is the difference between implicit and explicit definitions?

Question: B.Russell holds that certain classes of expressions are to be defined contextually, like definite descriptions or incomplete symbols in general, and some others are to be defined explicitly. What is the difference between the two types of definitions?
Answer: It reflects the difference between two types of knowledge, knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge by description. "We shall say that we have acquaintance with anything of which we are directly aware, without the intermediary of any process of inference or any knowledge of truths". Russell's notion of acquaintance is extremely narrow, he reduces it to indexicals "I", "this", "here" and possibly "now". Only these can define explicitly.
Everything else is known only by description, which is some so-and-so, and to know it is to know that it is so-and-so and that so-and-so exists. For a definite description this so-and-so also has to be unique. Russell even counts proper names as implicit descriptions. Definitions of descriptions are contextual, Russell does not directly define their meaning, but rather defines the meaning of sentences containing them:"This is the principle of the theory of denoting I wish to advocate: that denoting phrases never have any meaning in themselves, but that every proposition in whose verbal expression they occur has a meaning". For example "the present king of France" is rephrased in sentences as "there is an x, x is now a king of France, and if y is also now a king of France then y is x". Although "the present king of France" sounds like an object, in the rephrasing it is essentially dissolved into predicates, which is why Russell sometimes calls descriptions incomplete symbols.
See Knowledge by Acquaintance vs. Description and Russell On Denoting.
Answer: From the "formal" point of view, the basic difference is the following (ref to : Alfred North Whitehead & Bertrand Russell, Principia Mathematica to *56 (2nd ed - 1927) :
For an explicit definition, like the abbreviation [page 11] :

p ⊃ q . = . ¬p v q Df.

we can always replace the definiendum (the newly introduced symbol; in this case : ⊃) with its definies.
In the case of a contextual definition, like the incomplete symbol [see page 67] :

(ix)(φx)

we cannot "remove" them, but only the "contexts" where they occur :

all phrases (other than propositions) containing the word the (in the singular) are incomplete symbols: they have a meaning in use, but not in
  isolation. [...] It follows from the above that we must not attempt to define "(ix)(φx)" but must define the uses of this symbol, i.e. the propositions in whose symbolic expression it occurs.


How do I renew a USA drivers license if I am as US citizen living abroad with no state address (last address Texas)

Question: I have looked at the government websites (state.tx.us/DriverLicense/nonmilitaryrenewal.htm) and seen the requirements but as a US citizen who has passed their drivers test, why is there no standard US drivers license for those with no state affiliation?
Or even better an expat US drivers license..any info anyone?
Comment: AFAIK - (legally) you can't.  You need to be a resident of a particular state to get a license in that state.
Comment: Possible duplicate of [How to renew a US driver's license when living abroad](https://expatriates.stackexchange.com/questions/172/how-to-renew-a-us-drivers-license-when-living-abroad)
Comment: For what is it worth, I have heard of expats visiting the DMV while in Texas and renewing their license at that time. Did you ever hold a Texas DL?
Comment: @DavidSegonds - Texas requires 'Individuals who do not currently live in Texas but their true, permanent home (domicile) is in Texas'.  Unless your domicile is in Texas, you can't just stop in the DMV and obtain a license without misrepresenting your situation.
Comment: Welcome to expatriates.SE.  You're getting into a subject of State vs. Federal rights, which isn't really a subject for this site.
Answer: Driver licenses are to be used for driving a vehicle where you live. Therefore, there is no such thing as a US driver license that you can use in the country where you live.
Typically, you need to exchange whatever driver license you have for a local one and in some cases you may have to take the test again.
As indicated in the comments, unless you are domiciled in Texas, you cannot just stop at the DMV and obtain a license.
Once you obtain a license in the country you live in, you can generally use it to drive in the USA and exchange it for a USA driver license once you decide to return there.
Answer: I'm in the same boat mate. I'm a US citizen from Texas, but have been living in Japan for 12 years. My Texas driver's license is long expired and I cannot review it as I'm not a Texas resident. Basically it seems we need to get an international driver's license, not different than a foreign visitor.
Here is what Texas DMV told me by email last week:
You will need to present the following items:

Proof of identity Proof of social security
Proof of lawful status/U.S. Citizenship
Proof of Texas residency
Proof of completion of adult driver education (if applicable).

Additionally, you will need to provide the following information for the vehicle you use for the driving test:

Proof of current registration
Proof of current inspection
Proof of current liability insurance: it is not necessary for your name to be on the insurance policy, you just need to show proof that the vehicle itself is insured

Since I'm not a resident of Texas, or any other state, it's a deal breaker. So it seems we are no different than foreign visitors
http://www.usa.gov/Topics/Foreign_Visitors_Driving.shtml
Foreign Visitors Driving in the U.S.
Quick facts for foreign visitors about driving in the United States

An international driver's license must be obtained from your home country. This permit only verifies that you hold a valid license in your home country. It is your foreign driver's license that allows you to drive in the United States. Contact the authorities in your home country to get an international driving permit, as the United States does NOT issue international driver's licenses to foreign visitors.
If you obtain a valid international driver's license from your country of origin before you come to the U.S., you may rent a car and drive before you get your U.S. driver's license.
A U.S. driver's license is not a federal document, but it's a permit issued by one of the 50 states' motor vehicle departments. If you're going to reside in the U.S., it may take several months to obtain a U.S. driver's license.
Foreign visitors who become U.S. residents can only obtain a driver's license from the state in which they reside. Each state has its own driving rules and regulations. Check with your state's motor vehicles department to find out how to apply.
Once you receive your U.S. driver's license from a state motor vehicles department, you will be permitted to drive in all other U.S. states. The laws in each state vary from one to another. It is your responsibility to know and obey the laws of that state while driving.
The residency requirement for obtaining a U.S. driver's license varies with each state. Consult the motor vehicles department in your state for more information.
If you are a foreign student coming to the U.S. to study, contact the university or college you will attend, as most institutions provide students with driving information and most have websites.
The U.S. government has issued warnings about Internet vendors of worthless international driver's licenses. It is important to educate yourself about the dangers of these costly and illegal operations.
Comment: Some of the information you copied from your links was written for non-US citizens. And it seems like #7 could only ever apply to a non-US citizen. Did you misunderstand the question? It was about US citizens. Also, all but the first of your links appear broken to me.
Comment: Welcome to Expatriates! There's an "edit" link if you want to make changes to your answer.
Comment: I'm a US citizen myself, but I've been living in Japan for 12 years. As far as I understand, I can't get a driver's license in my previous home state of Texas as I'm no longer a resident there, or in any other state. Therefore I'm basically no different than a foreign visitor. Same as OP. My Texas drivers license is long expired and cannot be renewed. Texas DMV wrote told me I need to show proof of Texas residency, which I don't have.
Comment: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2003/01/idpfinal.shtm
Answer: You can, in some states, with a virtual address. For example, in Florida if you get a virtual address, then one can use that address for a bank account and credit card (e.g., HSBC or Simple online, and Paypal). These provide "proof of residency".
Then one has to visit Florida for with Passport, Social Security card, and old drivers' license (expired or not yet).
Yes, this requires one physically present themselves in the US (cannot be done from abroad), and it also requires a virtual address and bank accounts, etc., for proof of residency (but it doesn't take much money to do that).
Comment: In Texas, I needed more than just a virtual address, The proof of residency needed to show my name on a lease/rental agreement or utility bill.
Comment: @maxhodges the original question did not require a Texas locale, only that that was their last State residency. If one only needs to renew a drivers' license, one can do that in some states (not including Texas).
Answer: If you return to the US as a visitor, you drive with your country of residence's driver's license if that country is a party to the Multilateral Convention on International Road Traffic (1949). You may need to get an International Driver's License (IDL) if your foreign license is not in English, which is really just a translation of your foreign license. You can drive on your foreign license for a period of up to one year. However, if you become something other than a visitor, i.e. you start working, or otherwise become a resident of a particular state, you probably need to get a license from your new US state of residence.
Answer: You can have more than one residence. I live abroad, but use a friend's address as my US residence. My US credit cards, bank accounts and investment accounts all use my US address, and some also use my foreign address. As far as my former state is concerned, I still have a residence there, even if I don't live there. It's just not my primary residence.
Comment: Does your state charge income tax? The state may not care what address you give your bank, but if you tell the state you're a resident for your driver's license, they're probably going to expect you to pay income tax as a resident.
Answer: I had this problem a few years ago while working as a contractor in Iraq. My drivers license was from Washington State and to make things more complicated was I have a Commercial Drivers License with several endorsements. When I came back for 1 week in 2019 I needed to renew. Went to the DMV and when they asked my address I told them I could give them the mailing address for the base I worked on in Iraq. She just glared at me a bit. I said "I don't own property, but was born and raised locally, but I'm single... why would I rent a place that I don't live in"? Then I said that I have a local P.O. box that a friend checks for me while I'm away. My job is running heavy equipment and driving trucks for the military and a requirement is having my CDL current. Lot's of other single US expats work there as well. She asked about my parents address, "one is dead the other is in a nursing home" I replied. I finally said "I can give you my friends address, but you won't find me there". She just said "I'll pretend you didn't say that and proceeded to use my friends address".
I can't be the only person that has had to deal with this? There must be some way of holding a US license when doing work for the Department of Defense outside of the US, when having that license is critical to performing that job?
I asked the DMV employee "what do homeless people put down as an address, I see plenty of them driving and living in their cars"? Luckily I was able to use a friends address, even though that isn't really legal.


Figure photography - where to share photos?

Question: Our photography group recently held a figure photography session, with a nude model. We want to share our photos, but don't want to fall foul of strict site rules regarding nudity. Normally I'd use Picasa, but after trawling through their FAQ I found that they explicitly forbid nudity. Where's the best place to share (tasteful) nude shots?
Comment: Modelmayhem.com
Answer: Flickr allows nudes as long as you change the image's "safety level" so kiddos and people at work don't get them popping up on a search; you're perfectly within the ToS. You can also make groups and galleries private if you'd rather limit who can see the photos and/or comment on them...
Answer: photo.net allows them in public galleries. There are a lot of good pros there that show excellent work in all categories, including nudes.
There paying and free memberships. The free membership limits the gallery size and number of uploads.
Answer: You're allowed to host them on SmugMug as long as it's a non-public gallery (Note: I am affiliated w/said site :))
Answer:
DeviantArt
Flickr
ModelMayhem
1x
500px
jpgmag
(.com to all the    above)
eroticsignature.ning.com
Answer: In addition to SmugMug being a great host they also are involved with DGrin which has a Go Figure Forum that is a good place to get comments that are constructive.
You also can try SmugMug for a 14 day trial if you want.
Comment: is this allowed? disclosure of affiliation with a suggested website seems reasonable, but coupons seems to stretch into propaganda realm, no? It's very nice to offer discounts, but sort of..."wrong"?
Comment: I have removed the link.
Answer: If you want a very high quality gallery site, where artistic nudes are very appreciated, 1x.com is a great option. Warning: their standards are SUpER high!
Comment: But 1x isn't a photo sharing site, you have to actually submit and be accepted (unless that has changed), which is not what the OP is asking for.
Answer: I have a friend who switched from Flickr to DeviantArt after shooting at a fetish photography workshop. DeviantArt allows nude images, but requires the viewers to have an account so they can change their settings to view adult-rated material. (This works even when both the poster and the viewer have free accounts only).
This friend then stayed with DeviantArt for all kinds of photography and stopped using Flickr, because he said that on DeviantArt, there is a higher chance of random people seeing his pictures and offering constructive critique. So I suppose it can be a good option.
Answer: I agree with DeviantArt being a good option for sharing your pictures (although I'm personally tired of seeing  mostly nude photos there). The good thing with it is that the settings are personal for each user, that is you can allow nudity and mature contents pictures to appear on your page, or you can choose to hide them. Thus a lot of people can see your image if they have the proper settings, even if like me, their primary interest is not nude photos. I sometimes find photos that I like on my main page, although I would never search for nude photos on my own.
Answer:
Normally I'd use Picasa, but after trawling through their FAQ I found
  that they explicitly forbid nudity.

I had the same problem on Google+. Then I decided to create a photo blog on Tumblr:
https://www.tumblr.com/docs/en/nsfw
Here's a sample created by a professional photographer, Andre Brito:
http://nude-abrito.tumblr.com/
Answer: I use http://www.bitpine.com love it! but these are other alternatives :
<code>Bitpine
DeviantArt
Flickr
ModelMayhem
1x
500px
</code>
there are plenty out there google can help too :)
Answer: The best website I recommend is http://www.imageshot.eu. You can create private or public albums and classified by categories, this great. greetings
Comment: Why is that? Are you affiliated with this site?
Comment: Why do you recommend it over other sites?  And what is its policy on nudity?
Comment: They definitely allow nudes, it's basically a post your own porn site... Technically, though, it answers the question.


How to clean a grimy old bike frame?

Question: It's a 1950s eatons glider , used to be my great uncles. Sat in the garage since the 80s and now it's mine. Finally. Haha , but the paint just won't clean up. I've tried soap and water with a toothbrush , spray nine, that's all I got lol any tips ? I want to bring it back to as close to perfect as possible , already did the chrome up and it looks great , the banana seat is great as well, just the paint left
Comment: I have had good luck with a "Mr. Clean Magic Eraser".  I spray the frame with the foaming bathroom cleaner, then scrub it the Eraser Pad. So far I haven't damaged any paint or aluminum.
Comment: What about Car polish? A Cutting compound might be needed.
Comment: I would suspect fully disassembling the bike and greasing or replacing old parts, should be a priority. Plus a frame is easiest to clean when stripped.
Answer: How exactly to clean it depends on the type of dirt, so try to figure that out first.
If it's just regular dust, possibly mixed with moisture and some grease/oil to make it sticky, regular household cleaners should work well. Try to get something mildly (!) abrasive, such as a metal cleaner (used for cleaning stainless steel metal sinks) with a mild abrasive component.
The dirt could also actually be a different paint (maybe someone tried to repaint the frame at some point?). That will be a lot more tricky. Solvents would likely remove the original paint too; here your only option is probably to gently work with sandpaper.
Finally, there are special erasers for cleaning hard surfaces. They look and work similarly to pencil erasers, but are harder, to clean away stuff that is difficult to remove. They should be available at stores for household goods, or at hardware stores.

Note: Do not use oven cleaner - it is meant to be used on enameled surfaces, and will strip off paint (it is actually a fairly decent paint remover).
Thanks to andy256 for this warning.
Comment: Absolutely definitely do **not** use oven cleaner! Any oven cleaner I have encountered is strongly caustic - it's designed for cleaning burned-on food spills off enamel. It will strip the paint of the bike frame.
Comment: @andy256: Thanks for the note, didn't know that. Edited.

How to clean a grimy old bike frame?