When a ysoki is holding items in his cheek pouches, can others tell if they have something in there?

The rules on ysoki cheek pouches are rather vague on whether objects held inside them are actually concealed. It seems possible that someone else would be able to determine that the ysoki was concealing something either by visible bulge or by the impact the object has on the ysoki’s speech. Is there any published Starfinder source that addresses this question? If not, is there anything about rodent biology that suggests a good ruling?

Something weird going on with my algorithm?

I wrote an algorithm for data analysis using the CERN ROOT framework. It takes in three files of sorted UNIX timestamps from a single year, and pairs them up in the closest triplets, where each file contributes a triplet, and each triplet is unique. I know there are some more "well known" algorithms for accomplishing this, however this algorithm completes the task much faster, clocking in at about 20 minutes on my machine, as compared to many, many hours for some of the other algorithms I’ve tried. When complete, the algorithm plots the triplets (of the form {a,b,c]) on a 2-dimensional histogram, where the horizontal axis is a-b, and the vertical axis is a-c.

Problem is, it seems to be acting very weird. Namely, when I feed the algorithm one file of real data (these are timestamps generated by an experiment) and two files of completely random data, I get these weird diagonal lines: https://filebin.net/spbswnhkfy8xdkp8/random_plot.pdf?t=48f2yhjq. When I feed the algorithm three files of real data, a single diagonal line through the middle (and two more lines, running horizontally and vertically) appears if I use enough bins. Any idea what’s going on with my algorithm?

void unbiasedAnalysis(){  TNtupleD *D  = new TNtupleD("D","D","x:y");  ROOT::RDataFrame statn1("D", "./pathtodata"); ROOT::RDataFrame statn2("D", "./pathtodata"); ROOT::RDataFrame statn3("D", "./pathtodata");  vector<double> vec_1, vec_2, vec_3; statn1.Foreach([&](double tstamp){ vec_1.push_back(tstamp); },{"UNIX"}); statn2.Foreach([&](double tstamp){ vec_2.push_back(tstamp); },{"UNIX"}); statn3.Foreach([&](double tstamp){ vec_3.push_back(tstamp); },{"UNIX"});  vector<vector<double>> pairs; for(auto tstamp : vec_1){      double first,second;      //get iterator pointing to closest element greater than or equal to     auto geq = std::lower_bound(vec_2.begin(), vec_2.end(), tstamp);     //get iterator pointing to nearest element less than     auto leq = geq - 1;      double foo = tstamp - *geq;     double bar = tstamp - *leq;      //compare iterators, save the closest      if(dabs(foo) <  dabs(bar)){ first = *geq; }     else { first = *leq; }         //repeat     geq = std::lower_bound(vec_3.begin(), vec_3.end(), tstamp);     leq = geq - 1;      foo = tstamp - *geq;     bar = tstamp - *leq;      if(dabs(foo) < dabs(bar)){ second = *geq; }     else { second = *leq; }      //add to pairs     pairs.push_back({tstamp, first, second, (tstamp-first), (tstamp-second), std::min((tstamp-first), (tstamp-second))});  }  //sort vector of vectors by size of smallest difference std::sort(pairs.begin(), pairs.end(),     [](const vector<double>& A, const vector<double>& B){         return A[5] < B[5]; });  std::set<double> cache;  ROOT::EnableImplicitMT();  for(auto pair : pairs){     //if not in cache, add to TNtuple     if(cache.find(pair[1]) == cache.end() && cache.find(pair[2]) == cache.end()){              D->Fill(pair[3],pair[4]);          //add to cache         cache.insert(pair[1]); cache.insert(pair[2]);     } }  D->Draw("x:y>>htemp(100,-0.02,0.02,100,-0.02,0.02)","","colz"); 


Does sslstrip have to do something with Bettercap’s certificate?

I am trying to perform a MITM attack using bettercap against a website that doesn’t have the HSTS security policy implemented at all.

When I try the following command: bettercap -T AddressIpoftheTarget -X --proxy --https-proxy, it works fine. Bettercap succeeds in injecting his own self-signed certificate to the web browser. The browser shows the "Not Secure" warning, and lets me accept the invalid certificate by proceeding to the website in an unsecure way.

When I try this command: bettercap -T AddressIpoftheTarget -X --https-proxy it doesn’t work. I don’t understand why the --proxy is needed. Is it because it enables the sslstrip? How does sslstrip contribute in all of this during this scenario?

Something wrong with GSA ser

I tried to maximize from minimize but it does not. There is no effect with any mouse click. It is working but screen does not come. Check my live video. For performing any task, I need to execute END task using task manager and start again GSA ser then and only I can do work.

What are the mechanics for hiding something that is not yourself?

How can a cleric hide a living body? asked for cleric spells that would keep the body of an unconscious but live comrade unseen.

I considered Pass without Trace, since it targets creatures with no requirement that the creatures be conscious, but then realized that if the companion was unconscious, it could not make a Stealth check, so a +10 bonus to no roll is still no roll.

That got me thinking of the larger issue of hiding things that don’t get their own checks. Hiding a conscious character (as in preparing an ambush) would be the Help action, providing advantage on the other character’s Stealth roll. But what would you do to represent a character trying to hide something that didn’t get its own rolls?

  1. Is there an established mechanism for this? (I haven’t found any). Looking for something would be a Perception or Investigation, but what would this be contested against?

  2. I am thinking this would be a Survival check, possibly Sleight of Hand for anything small enough to fit in one hand but that might presuppose active observation while trying to hide it. Thoughts?

  3. What sort of conditions would be sufficient for giving the character hiding something a circumstances bonus (advantage)? One would be abundant time…so how long?

Do you lose concentration on a Readied spell when you use your reaction for something else?

The War Wizard gets the Durable Magic feature at 10th level which states:

[…] While you maintain concentration on a spell, you have a +2 bonus to AC and all saving throws.

The Ready action states:

[…] When the trigger occurs, you can either take your reaction right after the trigger finishes or ignore the trigger. Remember that you can take only one reaction per round.

When you ready a spell, you cast it as normal but hold its energy, which you release with your reaction when the trigger occurs. To be readied, a spell must have a casting time of 1 action, and holding onto the spell’s magic requires concentration. If your concentration is broken, the spell dissipates without taking effect. […]

Thus a War Wizard with a Readied spell would gain bonuses to their AC and saving throws. But what happens if the Wizard chooses to make an opportunity attack or use their reaction on something else? Do they maintain concentration on fire-bolt or do they drop concentration; Do they continue to benefit from Durable Magic or not?

The only thing I was able to find was that the Sage Advice Compendium document (pdf link) states the following (emphasis mine):

Q. I have a readied action. Can I stop readying to take an opportunity attack? Or is ready a full turn commitment?

A. If you have an action readied, you can make an opportunity attack, which causes you to stop readying.

Notably, this only addresses opportunity attacks and doesn’t give any justification, so part of my question is this: Is there support for the conclusion made in the Sage Advice Compendium anywhere in the rulebooks themselves?

Is there any official terminology about something like double quotes “” grammar?

In many programming language string is a token.

For example:

 token               ::= '"' string                        | nat   string              ::= string                        | '"'   nat                 ::= digit nat                        | ϵ 

This is a LL(1) grammar for some programming language’s toke grammar.

When parsing a string, there is no need to check follow set, because there is a " at the end of each string.

Comparing with nat, string is more easy to parse.

My question is

Is there any official terminology about this kind of grammar?


SSRS 2017 add datasource “Something went wrong”

when trying to add, view or change data source(s) in SSRS 2017 I get popup saying "Something went wrong, please try later".

Setup os SSRS is as follows:

three SSRS instances behind KEMP load balancer. Communication from clients to KEMP is done over SSL (port 443) and from kemp to SSRS instances over HTTP (port 80). rsreportserver.config file has this tags on all three SSRS servers, where SSRS.domain.com points to the KEMP virtual IP (for client access).

SSRS.domain.com https://SSRS.domain.com/reportserver

When I try to add, view or change data source(s) I get this error in RSPortal.log

ERROR: OData exception occurred: System.Net.WebException: Unable to connect to the remote server —> System.Net.Sockets.SocketException: No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it at System.Net.Sockets.Socket.DoConnect(EndPoint endPointSnapshot, SocketAddress socketAddress) at System.Net.ServicePoint.ConnectSocketInternal(Boolean connectFailure, Socket s4, Socket s6, Socket& socket, IPAddress& address, ConnectSocketState state, IAsyncResult asyncResult, Exception& exception) — End of inner exception stack trace — is the IP of the one of SSRS instances buth what baffles me is why is connection trying to be made using port 443 (TLS) when KEMP is configured to communicate with SSRS instances over port 80.

SSRS instances don’t have port 443 configured, only port 80.

Everything else works fine, only datasources are the problem.

SSRS version in question is 14.0.600.1109, native mode.

Any help would be appreciated.

What to do with players who have done something very stupid, but unwittingly?

I’m starting a new campaign. All fresh players.

In the first session I gave them a very shoddy, small barge, which I planned to have them trade for a ox-drawn carriage, as the ship itself didn’t have much life in it. The NPC that was going to trade this to them lowballed and offered 5 platinum pieces (50gp). The players, instead of objecting to this price, accepted. This, of course set them up to fail in the travelling aspect. I do feel bad punishing them for something they did not know of, but I don’t want to give them a sweet 16 and have a carriage magically appear.

How do I resolve a situation where players’ decisions prevent me from moving forward? How do I prevent situations like this happening in the future?