usability – Onboardings and wizards – should I show the steps of the process?

So I need to design onboarding screens for a credit card company. I started to look around on different onboardings and collect ideas from different products such as Lemonade, Forward, Grammarly etc.

I noticed that instead of showing the upcoming steps, there’s only a bar indicates the progress.

What’s the logic behind it? I always thought that indicating the exact number of steps is essential information for the user.

What do you think? In which cases showing steps is a must? Do you have any articles or researches on this topic?

Thanks <3

enter image description here
enter image description here

wp query – meta_query order by date present -> future then show null

Thanks for taking the time to read this. I’ve been struggling with a meta_query for an events site I’m working on.

I have used ACF to create a field for date start and date end, but not all events will have a date.

What I’m trying to achieve, is when you go to the archive or tax view, the first thing you see are the posts that have a date assigned, in order from today’s date into the future. Then after those dated events have been output, to cycle through all empty date posts.

So far I have the below in my functions.php file. This kind of works, but in the wrong order. So the correct events that are dated are output and in the right order. But only after the null valued items have output. I thought that may be because of the ordering in the arrays themselves, so moved the date ordered array to the end. That had no effect.

$query->set( 'post_type', 'courses' );
$query->set( 'meta_query', array(
    'relation' => 'OR',
        'key'        => '_course_date_from',
        'compare'    => '=',
        'value'      => '',
        'key'     => '_course_date_from',
        'compare' => '>=',
        'value'   => date('Ymd'),
) );
$query->set( 'orderby', 'meta_value title' );
$query->set( 'order', 'ASC' );

Thanks for your time. Ben.

geometry – Line $K$ is parallel to line $U$, and line $L$ intersects line $K$ at point $P$. Show $L nparallel U$.

Working on the book: Lang, Serge & Murrow, Gene. “Geometry – Second Edition” (p. 18)

  1. In Figure 1.11, line $K$ is parallel to line $U$, and line $L$ intersects line $K$ at point $P$. What can you conclude about lines $L$ and $U$? Why?

enter image description here

PAR 2. Given a line $L$ and a point $P$, there is one and only one line
passing through $P$, parallel to $L$.

Conclusion: $L nparallel U$

Proof (using Fitch-style natural deduction):

I will assume $L mathbb{parallel} U$ and reach a contradiction.

defAe#1{qquadmathbf{forall E} : #1 \}
defAi#1{qquadmathbf{forall I} : #1 \}
defEe#1{qquadmathbf{exists E} : #1 \}
defEi#1{qquadmathbf{exists I} : #1 \}
defR#1{qquadmathbf{R} : #1 \}
defci#1{qquadmathbf{land I} : #1 \}
defce#1{qquadmathbf{land E} : #1 \}
defoi#1{qquadmathbf{lor I} : #1 \}
defoe#1{qquadmathbf{lor E} : #1 \}
defii#1{qquadmathbf{to I} : #1 \}
defie#1{qquadmathbf{to E} : #1 \}
defbe#1{qquadmathbf{leftrightarrow E} : #1 \}
defbi#1{qquadmathbf{leftrightarrow I} : #1 \}
defqe#1{qquadmathbf{=E} : #1 \}
defne#1{qquadmathbf{neg E} : #1 \}
defni#1{qquadmathbf{neg I} : #1 \}
defIP#1{qquadmathbf{IP} : #1 \}
defx#1{qquadmathbf{X} : #1 \}
defDNE#1{qquadmathbf{DNE} : #1 \}

fitch{1.,K parallel U\
2.,K neq L\
3.,P in L land P in K\
4.,exists!l(Pin l land l parallel U) qquad text{(PAR 2)}
fitch{5.,L parallel U}{
fitch{6.,P in l_0 land l parallel U}{
m.,L nparallel U

The point of this proof is showing that is not possible that there are two lines parallel to line $U$ passing through point $P$. I have a problem on line 6 when I need to make a substitution instance of PAR 2. The variable used (where I wrote $l_0$) need to be “fresh”, i.e. not appear in any undischarged assumptions.

How can I overcome that problem and continue the proof ?

P.D.: rules of inference can be found in Appendix C of this book:

pr.probability – Show that the adjoint of this Markov semigroup eventually preserves a Wasserstein space

Let $E$ be a separable $mathbb R$-Banach space, $mathcal M_1$ denote the set of probability measures on $(E,mathcal B(E))$, $(kappa_t)_{tge0}$ be a Markov semigroup on $(E,mathcal B(E))$ and $rho$ be a metric on $E$ with $$(mukappa_totimesdelta_0)rhole cint v^{lambda(t)}:{rm d}mutag1$$ for all $tge0$ and $muinmathcal M_1$ for some $cge0$, some continuous $v:Eto(1,infty)$ and some nonincreasing $lambda:(0,infty)to(0,1)$ with $lambda(t)xrightarrow{ttoinfty}0$.

Let $$mathcal S^1:={muinmathcal M_1:exists yin E:(muotimesdelta_y)rho<infty}$$ denote the Wasserstein space associated to $rho$. Are we able to conclude that, if $(kappa_t)_{tge0}$ has an invariant measure, it must belong to $mathcal S^1$?

My idea is to show that there is a $t_0ge0$ such that the adjoint$^1$ $kappa_t^ast$ maps $mathcal M_1$ to $mathcal S^1$ for all $tge t_0$.

I’m only able to prove something weaker: Let $muinmathcal M_1$. By the monotone convergence theorem, $$(mukappa_totimesdelta_0)rhoxrightarrow{ttoinfty}ctag2.$$ So, there is a $t_0ge0$ such that $(mukappa_totimesdelta_0)rho<infty$, but since this $t_0$ clearly depends on $mu$, I’m not sure if this is sufficient for the desired conclusion.

$^1$ $kappa_t^astmu:=mukappa_t$.

turing machines – How to show that these two disjoint sets $A$ and $B$ exist

I came across this problem which asks to show the existence of two disjoint Turing-recognizable sets $A$ and $B$ such that no decidable set $C$ can separate them…

In this case, a set $C$ is said to separate $A$ and $B$ if $A subseteq C$ and $B subseteq overline{C}$ … If only $A$ is Turing-recognizable, then we could easily set $A$ to be $A_{TM}$ and $B$ as $overline{A_{TM}}$. However, in this case both $A$ and $B$ are Turing-recognizable …. I think that $A$ and $B$ should be constructed using diagonalization, but could not think of a way to do it … Any help ?

c# – How to hide and show 2 different prefabs?

I’m making a tower defense game in unity, and one of the features is to upgrade the units you placed. I’ve got the showing of the first turret prefab, but when I go to show the upgraded one, the first hides like normal, but the second one doesn’t show like it should.

some code I think is relevant to this issue.

if (CanPlaceInfantry())
            // 3
            infantry = (GameObject)
                Instantiate(infantryPrefab, transform.position, Quaternion.identity);
            // 4
            AudioSource audioSource = gameObject.GetComponent<AudioSource>();

            gameManager.Gold -= infantry.GetComponent<InfantryData>().CurrentLevel.cost;

        } else if (CanUpgradeInfantry())
            AudioSource audioSource = gameObject.GetComponent<AudioSource>();

    private bool CanUpgradeInfantry()
        if (infantry != null)
            InfantryData infantryData = infantry.GetComponent<InfantryData>();
            InfantryLevel nextLevel = infantryData.GetNextLevel();
            if (nextLevel != null)
                return gameManager.Gold >= nextLevel.cost;
        return false;
public void IncreaseLevel()
        int currentLevelIndex = levels.IndexOf(currentLevel);
        if (currentLevelIndex < levels.Count - 1)
            CurrentLevel = levels(currentLevelIndex + 1);

how can show a custom text or page to special country IP’s that banned by CSF or another tools


I banned special countries on my server by CSF firewall,

exist ways that can show a text or redirect to a page?

for example ” you are can not visit this site by this location, if you are using VPN please turn off and try again “

I want do this by this CSF, if this action does not exist on CSF, please intro tools that I can do this goal,


Show backlink in free hosting. Worth it?


I am running a free hosting platform and it’s currently comepletely whitelabel (no backlinks, custom domain, nameservers of choice, etc.) but have been thinking about displaying a small backlink in the corner of the screen like most free providers do.

Now my question is: Is it worth it? Do I lose more users by removing the whitelabel feature than getting new ones or the other way?

I had the idea of not forcing it, but rewarding the user for showing it, but that would mean checking every user who has it, if it’s really displaying.

What are your thoughts on this?

Thanks in advance