darkroom – Developer has particles floating and testing strength of C-41 kit. Is it still good?

I have a question regarding the usability of C-41 chemicals. I had mixed a batch of Unicolor C-41 development powder kit in distilled water back in late Nov 2019. I had stored the chemicals in a complete;y black bottles with all dirt squeezed out and in refrigerator. So, until February 2020 I had developed 7 or 8 rolls of film (Fuji Superia HQ 200, Xtra 400, Fujicolor 200 & Ultramax 400) in this mix until now.

The developer had turned from light yellowish to pink color now. I guess that from the film dye though I give them a prewash, mainly the fuji films. I tried a film strip test and the results are shown in picture below: 1- Film cut from roll, 2- Dropped in developer, 3- Dropped in Blix. I noticed there are some particles in the developer. Does it mean it’s bad? Can I just vacuum filter it to remove the particles and keep using it? My Blix though seems to have no floating particles and is brownish red color. What is the longest duration you guys have used and store a C-41 kit? Oh and one thing I noticed is with a 4 piece of strip was that after dropping in developer for 4 mins and then in blix for 6.5 mins the film turned out green. I assume this is because the strip got exposed to light completely?

Since C-41 kits have started becoming pricey don’t just want to throw it away if it’s good. I might use this batch of chemicals only for non-important rolls since I wouldn’t need to worry a lot in case something goes seriously wrong. What do you guys think? BTW can the exhausted chemicals be discarded down the drain or they require special handling?

dnd 5e – Does a monk with Unarmored movement still have to make strength checks to “run”/”climb” a wall?

The description of Unarmored Movement:

Starting at 2nd level, your speed increases by 10 feet while you are not wearing armor or wielding a shield. This bonus increases when you reach certain monk levels, as shown in the Monk table.

At 9th level, you gain the ability to move along vertical surfaces and across liquids on your turn without falling during the move.

Essentially, the improved Unarmored Movement feature allows monks to treat a vertical surface as equivalent to a horizontal one for the duration of the move. So unless it’s icy or something and you’d need to make a check to move horizontally across such terrain, you wouldn’t need to make such a check when moving vertically across similar terrain.

However, as the feature states, the ability to avoid falling only applies during the move. You can not stop your movement to do anything while on the vertical surface unless there’s something else keeping you from falling. If you do stop… you fall.

So there’s no way to climb a 1000-foot wall without falling unless you have a very high walking speed.

architecture – How to defend reducing the strength of code review?

I don’t know how to argue for weaker code reviews, but I know to argue that code reviews aren’t being done properly.

Code reviews serve multiple purposes, skipping them simply because of time is silly. Don’t argue for that.

Code reviews are conversations, every comment should be responded to, otherwise you aren’t really having a conversation.

How one responds is an entirely separate issue. It’s not necessary and it absolutely should not be required, that the response is to change the code.

Just changing the code is wrong, changing it with an “Ok” is marginally acceptable. Agreeing with the comment is great. Agreeing while explaining that because of REASON is ok. Disagreeing because of REASON and saying you don’t want to make the change should be fine. Disagreeing with proof that the suggestion doesn’t work is great.

Who approves a pull request is an organizational process issue, there’s no developmental reason it has to be done by anyone in particular. Likewise there’s no developmental reason why it can’t be done by a specific person.

In short, I think you need to focus on the fact that a reviewer says-so is insufficient reason to make a change, it has to be a convincing argument. And then push, not for the right to skip the review, but that it be given a higher priority. Doing reviews should be considered part of the job, if someone isn’t giving their input, that should be considered the equivalent of refusing to write code.

dnd 5e – Is the armor artificer intended to add strength to thunder gauntlet attacks

You add your Intelligence Modifer, or Strength if you prefer.

The Armorer’s 3rd level Arcane Armor feature states:

Each model includes a special weapon. When you attack with that weapon, you can add your Intelligence modifier, instead of Strength or Dexterity, to the attack and damage rolls.

The thunder gauntlets are the special weapon referenced here.

Alternatively, you can still choose to use your Strength. Since the gauntlets count as a simple melee weapon, the rules for damage rolls state:

When attacking with a weapon, you add your ability modifier — the same modifier used for the attack roll — to the damage.

And the rules for melee weapon attack rolls state:

The ability modifier used for a melee weapon attack is Strength

encryption – How does collecting mouse movements increate cryptographic strength?

Excuse me if this is obvious, but while encrypting one of my disks, I got bored and read the text on the window.

enter image description here

And the question came to me, how the heck can I move a mouse in a way that a computer couldn’t reproduce?

To be more specific, what information does me moving my mouse provide that VeraCrypt couldn’t make itself? Further, How much do these mouse movements matter?

gm techniques – How does a low Strength stat translate into the narrative?

I’m having trouble with something. In a ADnD 2e campaign how should a low Strength translate into the narrative/roleplay of the campaign? It’s easy to figure out how high Strength would work when narrating or roleplaying, but I can’t quite figure out low Strength scores. I like to narrate what’s happening like a story with as much detail as I can to really paint a picture for the players. This is throwing a wrench into that.

For example, characters can end up with an effective Strength of 5 if they get hit by a ray of enfeeblement spell. Though the spell says what this means for game mechanics it states “Your DM will determine any other effects appropriate to the affected creature.” and I’ve got no idea what sort of effects it may have. I know, according to the Player’s Handbook, that a Strength of 5 offers only a ten pound weight allowance with a twenty-five pounds Maximum Press so a fighter would likely end up dropping their weapon and shield but what about the armour they’re wearing or the other stuff they may be carrying? They can’t just drop that stuff so, what, can they just not move or something? What would a character with a Strength of 5 be capable of? How should a DM or Player portray such a character?

What would a character with a Strength of 1 be capable of? From a narrative stand-point, not just a mechanical one.

dnd 5e – For a basic unarmed strike, is only the proficiency bonus included in the attack roll, or is the Strength modifier also added?

The Player’s Handbook, Chapter 9, states about attack rolls:

The ability modifier used for a melee weapon attack is Strength

A bit later on it also states about melee attacks:

Instead of using a weapon to make a melee weapon attack, you can use
an unarmed strike: a punch, kick, head-butt, or similar forceful blow
(none of which count as weapons). On a hit, an unarmed strike deals
bludgeoning damage equal to 1 + your Strength modifier. You are
proficient with your unarmed strikes.

I’m not sure whether an unarmed strike is considered a “melee weapon attack.”

For a basic unarmed strike (i.e. no Monk, Tavern Brawler or anything else that enhances unarmed strikes), is only the proficiency bonus added to the attack roll, or is the Strength modifier also added?

Clearly the Strength modifier is added to the damage, but I’m asking about the attack roll.

cryptography – Are there any formal tests to estimate encryption strength?

So I’m trying to design/make my own encryption algorithm and I believe it to be ok. I’m not saying it’s extra secure but I know it’s not useless so, what I was wondering is if there are any specific tests I can carry out in order to try and get a better representation of how secure my algorithm is.

Here is some data from tests that I have carried out:

  • Repeated blocks of data are different from each other
  • 1-bit change in password will completely change the result
  • 1-bit change in input text completely changes the output
  • even if you encrypt the same file with the same password you will get a different output each time because each encryption gets a different random salt
  • when tested over a large number of files matching bytes in both encrypted and unencrypted file that matched in the same place was 0.3% random is about 0.34% other encryptions get about 0.28-0.29%

here I have tried to layout the mode of operation for my algorithm. I believe it to be closest related to a PCBC mode of operation but there are some differences in the way I have laid mine out

Mode of Operation

cryptography – if using more two or more encryption algorithms together how do we compute the strength of the final encryption?

if using more two or more encryption algorithms together how do we compute the strength of the final encryption?

And how would the application on quantum computers

the first two tables I believe to be true/correct – is that correct?

the third table where we combine two encryptions together – can we calculate the key length? and bits of encryption? is it correct?

thank you…

in the 3rd table

the bits are just added – is that correct?

let’s say

encryption | Key length | bits of encryption
AES-128    | 128        | 128

now if we do add two of them together (combine using cascade encryption)

AES-128 + AES-128 = 256 Key length ? | 256 bits of encryption ?

is that correct?

or what is the correct answer for

AES-128 + AES-128 = ___ Key length ? | ___ bits of encryption ?

thank you …

table for encryption

dnd 5e – Are the Storm Giant’s strength scores in the Monster Manual wrong?

Storm Giants are Huge creatures, not Medium.

The encumbrance rules neglect the size of a creature when calculating if it is encumbered or heavily encumbered. While this is true, the maximum capacity of a Storm Giant is not the same that a human would have given it a Strength score of 29.

Quoting the rules on lifting and carrying (Player’s Handbook, page 176):

Carrying Capacity. Your carrying capacity is your Strength score multiplied by 15. This is the weight (in pounds) that you can carry, (…).

(…)

Size and Strength. Larger creatures can bear more weight, whereas Tiny creatures can carry less. For each size category above Medium, double the creature’s carrying capacity and the amount it can push, drag, or lift. (…)

The rules on creature size categories are on page 191 of the Player’s Handbook:

$begin{array}{|l|c|}
hline
textbf{Size} & textbf{Space} \
hline
text{Tiny} & 2,frac{1}{2},text{by},2,frac{1}{2},text{ft.} \
text{Small} & 5,text{by},5,text{ft.} \
text{Medium} & 5,text{by},5,text{ft.} \
text{Large} & 10,text{by},10,text{ft.} \
text{Huge} & 15,text{by},15,text{ft.} \
text{Gargantuan} & 20,text{by},20,text{ft. or larger} \
hline
end{array}
$

Huge size is two size categories above Medium size; therefore, the maximum weight a storm giant could lift is not 435 lbs., but four times that (i.e. 435 lbs., doubled twice): a total of 1,740 lbs.


Remember that the Encumbrance rules are a variant rule and are meant to apply to playable races (Small- to Medium-sized creatures). The DM is free to adjust those values to be doubled for each size above Medium to keep it plausible to be used for larger creatures, to mirror the increase in carrying capacity for larger sizes.

Also, they are monsters. The rules for players do not necessarily apply the same way for NPCs.