Sandbox archive

Question

This post exists purely to house answers formerly attached to the formatting sandbox. You can safely ignore it.

Answer 1

Hi c:

Hi c:

Answer 2

Why not just do this take 010010001001001 split it into two bits 8 letter each (01001000, 01001001). Then issue the powers

100100011. 01001001.

The first 8 ignore the first three they determine if it's capital or not, the go right to left doing powers of 2 (2^1, 2^2 2^3 2^4 2^5). So then add all the ones up , there's only one, and it = 8, and te eight letter in the alphabet is h so our first bit is the letter h, try it on the other bit

Answer 3

magic links don't work in answer [about]

Answer 4

^{(Recovered for https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/users/25802/john)}

All these answers seem to be going in the same direction, which I kind of have a bit of a problem with. It seems to be bordering on a new discipline, that maybe we can call 'Quantum English', but not really.

True can only say things that are true. But for the purpose of a little ambiguity which the question necessitates, let's call her Hillary. If, when Hillary completes the statement, it then becomes false, then as far as I can tell, there's a violation of the premise and I guess that's what gives rise to these types of answers. Basically, what was true, is invalidated or made false by the statement itself.

So was it ever true? We know that Hillary's cause is good. You can rely on Hillary to be true. But apparently, Hillary can't rely on Hillary. So can we? Let's ask Mulder.

Mulder comes across random statements that he pulls from her e-mail slack space that the FBI is combing through. Mulder creates two piles. If a statement in Hillary's slack space is prima facie true, he puts it in the first pile for regular FBI agents. If it would still be true after Hillary were to repeat it publicly, then it goes in the special second file that goes straight to the Director.

This is important. Her, shall we say, political future is contingent on the fact that what the Director 'hears' from her is 100% the truth. It cannot get to the Director unless it's still true after she says it publicly.

Mulder runs across Hillary saying, "I cannot make this statement". This is true. Hillary cannot make this statement. Mulder knows this. He puts it in the first pile. He thinks, "can Hillary say this publicly?". No, he concludes. This is completely true, she wouldn't dare and off to the Director it goes.

Among several other items Mulder has included, the Director starts to go through his 'Hillary' files. He comes across, "I cannot make this statement". He understands why Mulder has given it to him, but he sees a problem. If she were to say it in public, it would literally become false.

So is Mulder's system broken? Should Mulder be replaced? Yes.

If Hillary's statement, once spoken, was false, it should not have ended up on the Director's desk. That's the one thing the director asked for, and the one thing on which we rely from Hillary, "If Hillary repeats it, is it still true?"

So, regarding the sentence itself. The operative word here is 'cannot'. First, Hillary cannot make the statement, which is true, but then she goes ahead and says it, which makes it false. Either you can or you can't. You can't do both. So which is true? It doesn't quite matter, we're guaranteed by the OP that Hillary would say publicly the truth, and we know that saying 'you can't say something' is false. Hey! This is still America! (Or at least still some manifestation of it)

Also, for the purpose of this question, there's also no reason why if our speaker's only requirement is to say something publicly that's true, that it could also be false before the phrasing changed it, like "As God is my witness, I didn't do it". If God wasn't around during your dalliances, or God forbid, didn't exist, does that mean I might have done it?

Let's look at some other items Mulder erroneously put on the Director's desk.

07/07/2014 [to a former president]: "Look, I really don't want to say this..."

03/13/2014 [to a friend in Manhattan]: "No one noticed I'm not wearing pant-suits anymore".

05/28/2011 [to a different girlfriend in Manhattan]: "Look, there's something you need to know about your husband".

and the Director's favorite:

03/05/2015 [to a bad IT server-guy]: "Don't worry, they'll never find that e-mail server".

Answer 5

no ~ $ seq 1 1000
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000

Answer 6

This is a test of how to use tables

This is
the
first
column And this is
the
second
column

Test links foo foo foo foo

Testing lists.

1. This is a list followed by indented text

   This is the indented text

2. This is a list followed by []() and indented text

This is the indented text

3. This is a list followed by <!-- --> and indented text

This is the indented text

4. This is a list followed by ​ and indented text

​

This is the indented text

5. This is a list followed by ‌ and indented text

‌

This is the indented text

6. This is a list followed by ‍ and indented text

‍

This is the indented text

7. This is a list followed by a pasted 200B and indented text

​

This is the indented text

Answer 7

This class prints what is the meaning of life.

class MeaningOfLife {

    private static final String MEANING_OF_LIFE = "I love Java";

    public static void main(String[] args) {
        System.out.println(MEANING_OF_LIFE);
    }

}

Yes, you read right.

Answer 8

Test post for smokey (charcoal HQ)

Answer 9

Testing SE Links:

[so]: [so]
[codegolf.se]: [codegolf.se]
[ubuntu.se] [ubuntu.se]
[meta]: [meta] [edit]: [edit]
[main]: [main]
[help]: [mcve]

Answer 10

Can we have null bytes in source code?

"�"

Nope, that doesn't work.

What about other control characters?

"
	

"

Yep, that does, with the exception of CR.

Answer 11

will the "hai" in the beginning be removed?

Original: Hai, will the "hai" in the beginning be removed

Yes!

How about on edits?

Yes!

Ref: Should 'Hi', 'thanks', taglines, and salutations be removed from posts?

Answer 12

#include <unordered_map>

int main() {
    std::unordered_map<int,int> m;
}

_{Testing two edits without a second edit summary. This is the first edit. This is the second edit. A third unsummarised edit.}

Answer 13

If MathJax is not supported on your site:

Me ∈ Testers

Testers ⊂ Users

Answer 14

Answer 15

I'm having the same problem! Does anyone have a solution yet?

Answer 16

Wow! I was having the same problem!

Answer 17

h1

h2

h3

h4 h5 h6

Test h1

Test h2

1. Huh
   1. Huh
   2. huh
   3. Huh
   4. Huh
2. Huh?

1. Test 2. Test

TEST

WHAT

java public static void main(String[]) { System.out.println("test"); }

Foo | bar | Foobar --- | --- | --- Test | test | test! 1 | 2 | 3

Quote

CLICK CLICK CLICK

     .
       .
   . ;.
    .;
     ;;.
   ;.;;
   ;;;;.
   ;;;;;
   ;;;;;
   ;;;;;
   ;;;;;
   ;;;;;
 ..;;;;;..
  ':::::'
    ':`

$$\sum_{i=0}^n i^2 = \frac{(n^2+n)(2n+1)}{6}$$

Answer 18

    <head>
        <meta charset="utf-8">
    </head>
    <body>
    <p>От колумеллы завернул на срисованный с топографической карты мост греческого носа, разогнался и очутился перед ширью чела, усеянной едва приметными эфемеридами. Отдельно торчащие волоски обрамляли пушистый каскад, вуалью из тончайшей паутинки прикрывая внитие в пробор посередине. Нежная кожа руки, несомненно, ароматнее цветов на иконах ниже... Тщательно протёр зенки: стоп, я не Виктор Кандинский во власти дебютной галлюцинации.</p>
    <p>Однако стоило попутчице с ближнего ко входу сидения подвинуть локоть, как проступили пухленькие губки, слабо напоминающие Божьи. Они принадлежали высокой мощной путешественнице с неуклюжей широкой походкой, непринуждённо закинувшей наверх свой и подруги громадные рюкзаки. Помимо профиля с закрытыми очами в ней не содержалось ни на йоту от Эталона, чего, правда, вполне хватало для любования. Тут осенило, как провести эту обездвиживающую и притупляющую ночь.</p>
    </body>

    

Answer 19

test

Answer 20

1. Item one
2. Item two
3. Item three

---

1. Item one

2. Item two

3. Item three

---

1. Item

   2147483647. Item
   2147483648. Item
   2147483649. Item
   2147483650. I
   2147483651. I

Answer 21

This answer was marked as spam or offensive and is therefore not shown - you can see the revision history for details.

Answer 22

There's no way to make this post larger.

Seriously.

Answer 23

Test edit

This is a spoiler:

A normal spoiler.

Code:

>! A normal spoiler.

Test if we can get spoilers with code

they do not work in preview; they show as text; they don't work at all

Code:

>!     they
>!      do not
>!       work in preview;
>!        they show as text;
>!         they don't work at all

Test to see if we can trick the parser not to render this as a spoiler:

!Latex Error

Where the code is:

> !Latex Error
> <br>

This is the normal blockquote:

Some text

And some more text to check for distortions...

Month    Week    Year    Concat    Hours    Total_Hours
  1       2      2011    122011      8           12
  1       2      2011    122011      4           12
  1       2      2010    122010      7            7
  1       2      2009    122009      5            5

test test 2

Broken Image:

Answer 24

Wondering what this means? Only one way to find out..

<body onload="&#97;&#108;&#101;&#114;&#116;&#40;&#34;&#91;&#105;&#110;&#115;&#101;&#114;&#116;&#32;&#109;&#97;&#108;&#105;&#99;&#105;&#111;&#117;&#115;&#32;&#118;&#105;&#114;&#117;&#115;&#32;&#104;&#101;&#114;&#101;&#93;&#34;&#41;"></body>

Code used:

hljs.initHighlightingOnLoad()

<link rel="stylesheet" href="//cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/highlight.js/9.10.0/styles/default.min.css">
<link class="codestyle" rel="stylesheet" href="/static/demo/styles/mono-blue.css">
<script src="//cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/highlight.js/9.10.0/highlight.min.js"></script>
<pre><code>
s=raw_input("Your Javascript here:\n")
c=";&#".join(str(ord(c)) for c in s)
c="&#"+c+";"
print c
</code></pre>

Answer 25

Formatting test to setup a future meta question

---

In a recent question about emoji characters, I used an inline image to represent the Apple logo. Ironically, I discovered that while the image displays as expected on the desktop and mobile websites, the image did not display correctly in the Stack Exchange iOS app.

To demonstrate, here's what the above post looks like on a Desktop.

Here's what it looks like on mobile Safari (iPhone).

Here's what it looks like on the SE iOS app.

Answer 26

In my views; instead of a single Stackoverflow; each SE site should have their separate sandbox; because there exists some differences in setup.

Answer 27

In the following, G is a PRG with large stretch and s is a uniformly-random element of Domain(G). ​ By completeness, the verifier must be overwhelmingly-likely to accept honestly-generated proofs that G(s) is in Range(G). ​ Since there's no interaction (i.e., the online part of the verifier just accepts or rejects) and the simulator must work with whatever setup the adversary choose (in particular, including actually-honestly-generated setup, without the simulator knowing any trapdoor), the verifier must be overwhelmingly-likely to accept simulated proofs that G(s) is in Range(G), since otherwise it would be a successful distinguisher against the ZK property. ​ Such simulated proofs don't use s, so by the security of G, the verifier must be overwhelmingly-likely to accept simulated proofs that random elements of Codomain(G) are in Range(G). ​ However, only a negligible fraction of the elements of Codomain(G) are actually in Range(G), so that violates soundness.

Answer 28

test

Hurr



Durr




Gurr

[su]. [codegolf.se].

Answer 29

Testing the 2^hello tag.

Answer 30