Can you prevent being automatically added to gchat groups upon being invited?

I have been invited to a group chat that I don’t want to be in. I left the group and then was re-invited. The invitations automatically bring me into the group, complete with pop-up notifications and all.

I don’t want to block the people inviting me to the group since they are acquaintances and friends that I routinely gchat with individually, but I would prefer to have a say in whether or not I join the group. Is there a way to prevent auto-joining all groups I’m invited to?

I don’t want to be forcefully pulled into a group chat and have the notifications popping up for a conversation I don’t even have any interest in.

How can I set up USPS Shipping to have options given only if a certain amount of items are being checked out?

How can I set up USPS Shipping to have options given only if a certain amount of items are being checked out?

I’m using USPS for shipping and I want it to use a small flat rate box if there are lets say 5 items in the cart. Then, if there are more than 5 it would only give the option of medium flat rate box. Then finally, more than 10 a large flat rate box. How could I set the USPS shipping on magento to do this?

I’m on base Magento 2.3

What is being set with Micro Focus Adjustment?

An autofocus system is system based on a feedback loop, where the AF sensor error reading if fed back to the lens focus motor. Being a closed loop, then theoretically there should be no focusing errors (at least when lighting is good enough).

So I was wondering, what is the source for this kind of error that requires MFA different for each lens?

The one reason I could think of is that the AF sensor is not perfectly aligned with the image sensor – a thing that will create a constant misfocus. But then, this probably needs to be constant for all lenses.

Whet exactly is being calibrated with MFA? Is is it the AF sensor position, the image sensor, control loop gain, etc.?

Enable Two-factor authentication without being logged into an iOS/macOS device

The Apple ID I use for my developer account is separate from my personal Apple ID. All my devices are signed in with my personal Apple ID.

I was trying to set up Xcode on my machine, and when I went to sign in to my developer account, it told me I had to set up Two-factor authentication.

Upon going to the Apple website to do so, however, it told me I had to be logged in to the account from an iOS or macOS device to set it up, which I am not. So how can I use Two-factor authentication (presumably via a trusted phone number) with my developer Apple ID without being logged in to that Apple ID on a iOS/macOS device?

How do you justify more code being written by following clean code practices?

I’ve been following some of the practices recommended in Robert Martin’s “Clean Code” book, especially the ones that apply to the type of software I work with and the ones that make sense to me (I don’t follow it as dogma).

One side effect I’ve noticed, however, is that the “clean” code I write, is more code than if I didn’t follow some practices. The specific practices that lead to this are:

  • Encapsulating conditionals

So instead of

if(contact.email != null && contact.emails.contains('@')

I could write a small method like this

private Boolean isEmailValid(String email){...} 
  • Replacing an inline comment with another private method, so that the method name describes itself rather than having an inline comment on top of it
  • A class should only have one reason to change

And a few others. The point being, that what could be a method of 30 lines, ends up being a class, because of the tiny methods that replace comments and encapsulate conditionals, etc. When you realize you have so many methods, then it “makes sense” to put all the functionality into one class, when really it should’ve been a method.

I’m aware that any practice taken to the extreme can be harmful.

The concrete question I’m looking an answer for is:

Is this an acceptable byproduct of writing clean code? If so, what are some arguments I can use to justify the fact that more LOC have been written?

The organization is not concerned specifically about more LOC, but more LOC can result in very big classes (that again, could be replaced with a long method without a bunch of use-once helper functions for readability sake).

When you see a class that is big enough, it gives the impression that the class is busy enough, and that its responsibility has been concluded. You could, therefore, end up creating more classes to achieve other pieces of functionality. The result is then a lot of classes, all doing “one thing” with the aid of many small helper methods.

THIS is the specific concern…those classes could be a single class that still achieves “one thing”, without the aid of many small methods. It could be a single class with maybe 3 or 4 methods and some comments.

What does apache return when a GET comes in for a file that’s in the process of being replaced?

I can’t find the answer on google and this seems pretty difficult to test with certainty. So, I am really hoping that someone out there just knows what actually happens.

What happens if a GET comes in for a file at the exact moment the file is being replaced? (EDIT: The file is being replaced by ant’s <copy> task.)

Is this transparently handled by some filesystem locking, and apache simply waits for replacement to complete before returning the replacement file? Does it return the pre-replacement file? Or does it return the file in its intermediary state?

This particular instance is Apache/2.4.7 on Ubuntu-14.04.

Solution for “ghost touches” – Procedure to disable a small portion of the screen from being sensitive to touch?

So I ordered a cheap Chinese phone (umidigi) as a secondary device and the unit I got, out of the box, was afflicted with a faulty display. Troubleshooting it I have diagnosed the problem precisely:

  • There is an intermittent false touch input occurring in the bottom right, very far bottom right part only of the screen
  • Lowering the brightness appears to minimize the presence of the false input
  • Is likely to require disassembly of the device to remedy the issue

I alerted the seller I bought the phone from, and they’re sending me a new unit pronto, and told me to just keep this one. Yay.

So, Id like to eventually permanently resolve this phones issue and open it up myself, but in the meantime I’d like to get some use out of it. But, with the ghost touch using the phone with anything other than a Bluetooth mouse is maddening.

The area effected is at the very, very bottom of the phone and may occupy 15px or so at most. I attempted to use a few apps, one called ‘Partial Screen’ and some others like Screen Shift. However, the adjustments to the display only result in cosmetic changes and do not desensitize the adjusted portion of the screen to touch input and thus the false input creating problems.

Can anyone point me to a procedure, adb input or otherwise, that could ensure that some specified portion of the touch screen will not respect any touch input?

Thanks.

PC reading Android phone shows directory in it’s PREVIOUS location prior to being moved

MTP (Miserable Transfer Protocol) failed once again.

After moving a directory to a different path, it is still on the same path as before according to MTP.

I already tried re-plugging the USB port and reading it from a different computer. Same result.

Why is MTP so bogus that it shows a moved folder on it’s previous path?

Software Catalog is Being Loaded and wont Load

Ok im running Debian 9 with Gnome 3.30.2 Kali GNU/Linux Rolling and im trying to open the software store so i can apply the tweak tool and edit my desktop for right clicks so i am able to use the whisker menu but everytime i open the software store it says Software Catalog is Being Loaded and wont Load. Ive tried these lines in the command:

root@localhost:/home/smittywerbenjagermanjensen# sudo yum remove PackageKit sudo: yum: command not found root@localhost:/home/smittywerbenjagermanjensen# apt purge PackageKit Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree        Reading state information... Done E: Unable to locate package PackageKit  root@localhost:/home/smittywerbenjagermanjensen# sudo systemctl status packagekit ● packagekit.service - PackageKit Daemon    Loaded: loaded (/lib/systemd/system/packagekit.service; static; vendor prese    Active: inactive (dead)  Mar 17 15:41:01 localhost systemd[1]: Starting PackageKit Daemon... Mar 17 15:41:01 localhost PackageKit[3208]: daemon start Mar 17 15:41:01 localhost systemd[1]: Started PackageKit Daemon. Mar 17 15:44:33 localhost PackageKit[3208]: resolve transaction /162_abaedbec f Mar 17 15:45:14 localhost PackageKit[3208]: resolve transaction /163_beecaeeb f Mar 17 15:45:23 localhost PackageKit[3208]: resolve transaction /164_babdedae f Mar 17 15:45:26 localhost PackageKit[3208]: resolve transaction /165_aadacccc f Mar 17 15:50:31 localhost PackageKit[3208]: daemon quit Mar 17 15:50:31 localhost systemd[1]: packagekit.service: Main process exited,  Mar 17 15:50:31 localhost systemd[1]: packagekit.service: Succeeded. lines 1-14/14 (END)  root@localhost:/home/smittywerbenjagermanjensen# sudo rm -rf /var/cache/PackageKit/ 

TO NO AVAIL IM STUMPED PLEASE SOMEONE HELP

On a sufficient condition for being a prime ideal

Consider the ideal $ I$ in $ \mathbb{C}[z_{1},\ldots,z_{m}]$ generated by $ \{p_{1},\ldots,p_{t}\}$ , where $ t\leq m$ and $ p_{1},\ldots,p_{t}$ intersects completely i.e. the map $ (p_{1},\ldots,p_{t}):\mathbb{C}^{m}\mapsto\mathbb{C}^{t}$ is a submersion $ \forall w\in Z(I)$ . If furthermore, we assume that $ Z(I)$ is connected, then is it true that $ I$ is prime?

I am not sure how complete intersection influences the condition. For example, if we relax the condition $ Z(I)$ being connected and consider the ideal $ <\{z_{1}z_{2},z_{1}+z_{2}-1\}>$ in $ \mathbb{C}[z_{1},z_{2}],$ then $ z_{1},z_{2}\notin I$ , which means $ I$ is not prime. But I am unable to find counterexamples that fits both the conditions and still not a prime ideal.

Also, note that complete intersection forces $ \{p_{1},\ldots,p_{t}\}$ to be a minimal generator of $ I$ .