Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2013 August 15

= August 15 =

self-funded operations
What are "self-funded operations" and are they a feature of gangstalking? Wiliamson (talk) 11:08, 15 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Could you define your terms a little more carefully? It's hard to understand what you're asking here.


 * "Gang stalking" seems to have a wide range of shades of meaning (Gang_stalking versus Urban Dictionary] for example)...and "self funded operations" could mean anything from a legitimate small business to gangland drug operations. SteveBaker (talk) 11:53, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Answer What features gangstalking is the large number of people taking part, who also appear to have the resources to rent properties quickly in the vicinity of the targeted individual. One of the "mysteries" of gangstalking is how such obviously expensive processes could be financed. When dealing with gangstalking you are not dealing with an individual but a gang. A gang engaged in criminal activities. Criminal gangs are known to fund themselves through self-funded operations. The trouble is there is very little known about this crime. I do not recall anything in the media about there ever being a prosecution of such a group, revealing their activities and how they fund themselves. Little is known. But gangstalkers lie and are criminals and like other criminals have no care about the innocence of their victims. It would follow that their criminal acts could extend not only to their targets but also to anybody else in the vicinity of their target. Assume that the target had no money, but someone in the targets vicinity had. They would then become the next target to fund the operation = self-funded operations. This is only a guess, a theory on my part. My question is, does anybody know, has anyone come up with the suggestion, or evidence to suggest that this might be the way gangstalking is funded? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.25.4.14 (talk) 10:11, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Our Stalking suggests gang stalking is frequently a myth or delusion. This would make sense since as you say, such operations as you describe them, make little sense. Criminals may occasionally engage in group stalking or mobbing for a variety of reasons but it seems unlikely they will go to the extreme of renting properties etc when they often could just as well beat the person up if they are really that serious. Nil Einne (talk) 23:52, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

More on gangstalking in books by Dr Sam Vaknin "Abuse by Proxy" & "Ambient Abuse & Gaslighting; also "The Invisible Crime" by Michael F Bell.

statement that Adam Clayton or Bono made after they kissed?
Can anyone find any reference on any statement that Adam Clayton or Bono made after they kissed during 360º Tour?  Miss Bono  [zootalk]  14:04, 15 August 2013 (UTC)


 * For Latin (including Cuban) lovers: You may be surprised to learn that the first ever reference to this obscure Irish band was penned by the late Willi S in his drama Julius Ceasar.  The protagonist, before succumbing to a spot of classical back stabbing, croaks rhetorically: "Et tu, Brute?", which neatly translates as "U2, Bruce?"
 * It was never clear to me why a dying person should be curious about a Woolloomoolloo academic´s opinion on Celtic warblers, however, de mortuis nil nisi Bono… --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 21:01, 15 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I had thought about the Brute and Et tu coincidence before, that's funny, thanks for pointing it out. What I didn't understand was the last sentence you wrote. something about dead people in Latin? This one: de mortuis nil nisi Bono.    Miss Bono  [zootalk]  12:38, 16 August 2013 (UTC)


 * De muertos nada sino bueno. μηδείς (talk) 20:35, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * μηδείς, tiene eso algo que ver con la pregunta? Puedes traducirlo al inglés?  Miss Bono  [zootalk]  20:36, 16 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Solo falta el verbo, "diga": "(No diga) nada de (los) muertos sino (lo) bueno." Yo no se que tiene eso que ver con tu pregunta.  Mejor que tu le preguntes a el que quiere decir. μηδείς (talk) 20:52, 16 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Otra vez, en ingles, por favor. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:21, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd rather let Cookatoo speak for himself than attribute something to his words in in misunderstanding. μηδείς (talk) 17:17, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't know either what Cookatoo was trying to say :(... I just wanted an answer :P  Miss Bono  [zootalk]  13:14, 19 August 2013 (UTC)


 * See Bruces' Philosophers Song and this. --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  21:54, 19 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Ohh Jack of Oz, I cannot see the video. What's in there??  Miss Bono  [zootalk]  19:44, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Bacon Number
Why he is the only actor who has a number. Why he is so important?  Miss Bono  [zootalk]  18:50, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * All the answers are here. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:52, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It probably helps that "Kevin Bacon" rhymes with, and has the same number of syllables as, the word "separation". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:18, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Short answer: it originated from a comment that Kevin Bacon made in an 1994 interview that he has either worked with everybody in Hollywood or someone who's worked with them. Zzyzx11 (talk) 17:07, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Unicode combining symbol for average-value 'overline'
Let $$\{x_1, x_2, ..., x_n\}$$ be a set of numbers, and let $$\bar x$$ denote the arithmetic mean of this set. In plain UTF-8 text, one can write either x̄ or x̅, that is, one can use either U+0304: COMBINING MACRON or U+0305: COMBINING OVERLINE. Which one is the most appropriate one (of course, I mean semantically)? I was pretty sure it was the overline, until I saw the Notation in probability and statistics article, stating


 * The arithmetic mean of a series of values x1, x2, ..., xn is often denoted by placing a macron or "bar" over the symbol, e.g. $$\bar{x}$$, pronounced "x bar".

--Andreas Rejbrand (talk) 19:36, 15 August 2013 (UTC)


 * My vote is still for overline. In LaTeX, we can \overline many characters, and that does have semantic value. The macron (or \bar) cannot do that. For instance $$ \overline{xy} \neq \bar{x}\bar{y}$$. At least, this is the convention that I was taught and follow. I also suspect that macron was just linked in the notation article simply because bar_(diacritic)is wrong, and the author didn't know about overbar and overline. In fact, the overbar article specifically mentions the probability notation. Even though macron is close enough to get the description across, the overbar we use to denote means is not a macron (i.e. it is has nothing to do with long vowel sounds in Greek, etc.) At the very least, a larger overline will be easier to read. But it will be hard to find sources on this, as every text book is typeset a little differently, especially in the pre-LaTeX days. In the modern era, most math journals are produced with LaTeX. My guess is that \overline is preferred for the reasons I describe above, but I'm sure you can find counter examples where \bar is used. SemanticMantis (talk) 20:41, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * And now I just went ahead and changed Notation in probability and statistics to say "...is often denoted by placing an "overbar" over the symbol" SemanticMantis (talk) 20:45, 15 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your comments. --Andreas Rejbrand (talk) 21:05, 15 August 2013 (UTC)