deletion – Securely deleting Volume Shadow Service (VSS) in Windows 10

Suppose that VSS is enabled and snapshots exist. If I run a program to wipe the free disk space on my drive, would this delete the VSS snapshots? It might do since the program works by filling up the drive by creating a growing file, and once the file gets really large, Windows might delete the VSS copies due to lack of space. Is this right?

opengl – How to fix shadow not casted to terrain when rendering using default and terrain shader (depth shader included)?

Given that I have the TerrainShader class and DefaultShader class. Also a FBO (Frame Buffer Object) shadow map

The TerrainShader has all the terrain, light, shadow related calculations. While the DefaultShader has the generic objects light, shadow related calculations.

I have successfully cast a directional shadow map when I only use DefaultShader alone with random cube objects and a plane. Now the problem was when I move or use a terrain instead of TerrainShader, the shadow is not cast in the terrain.

Question: Am I using the FBO the correct way or I am doing it wrong.

Solution Idea (Not yet applied)

  • Merge terrain and default shader as one and create a flag if object or terrain will be rendered? (Still not sure if this is correct.)

Pseudocode (Current successful implementation)

  • Create shadow map fbo
  • Create default shader
  • Create depth shader
  • bind shadow map fbo
  • clear depth
  • render cubes & plane using depth shader (mvp)
  • unbind shadow map fb
  • clear color and depth
  • render cubes & plane using default shader

Pseudocode (with Terrain shadow not cast to terrain)

  • Create shadow map fbo
  • Create default shader
  • Create terrain shader
  • Create depth shader
  • bind shadow map fbo
  • clear depth
  • render cubes & plane using depth shader (mvp) and exclude terrain
  • unbind shadow map fb
  • clear color and depth
  • render cubes using default shader
  • render terrain using terrain shader

dnd 5e – Can a living shadow be dissipated with light?

Nothing happens.

The living shadow is not a creature. It doesn’t have hit points or an armor class, and most importantly, it always persists and there are no end conditions listed in its description:

The shadow you cast is animate and ever-present, even when lighting conditions would otherwise prevent it.

There isn’t much else to say here, there is just nothing in the gift description that gives any indication that firing a crossbow bolt at it, enchanted or otherwise, will do anything.

dnd 5e – Can a living shadow be dissapated with light?

Nothing happens.

The living shadow is not a creature. It doesn’t have hit points or an armor class, and most importantly, it always persists and there are no end conditions listed in its description:

The shadow you cast is animate and ever-present, even when lighting conditions would otherwise prevent it.

There isn’t much else to say here, there is just nothing in the gift description that gives any indication that firing a crossbow bolt at it, enchanted or otherwise, will do anything.

opengl – How to move the shadow map with the camera?

I implemented a directional light and a shadow map for that light based on learnopengl.com tutorials. And it is working great, but I would like to move the shadow map with camera/player, so I have shadows all over the scene.

What I am trying to do is update the “look at” matrix every frame, based in the camera position, but is not working properly. Here is relevant peace of code, witch I am using to update the shadow map position:

    glm::mat4 lightProjection = glm::ortho(-20.0f, 20.0f, -20.0f, 20.0f, 1.0f, 7.5f);
    glm::mat4 lightView = glm::lookAt(light.position + camera.position, camera.position, glm::vec3(0.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f));

With the light at position x: -1.0f y: 4.0f z: -1.0f:

enter image description here

Saving a isolate prop image with shadow to png

Interesting.

I come from a 3D rendering background besides photography. So I am used to think as separated layers. My approach would be:

  • Cut the object in one image without the shadow.

  • Depending on the background, using all the image with shadow as a separate layer. Probably convert it to grayscale if the background is not neutral white.

We can go several ways for the shadows.

  1. Using this grayscale image with a blending mode multiply and using it below the object layer.
    This is faster but only if you work with a layered method.

enter image description here

  1. Using this image as a transparency mask for a total black layer. You need to invert the image. This second option is the one that can give you a single PNG with shadows included.

enter image description here

You can play with the levels of this mask and the curves, to adjust the intensity of the shadow and to clean the background.

You probably need to paint a bit on the borders of this mask so it does not show behind the clipped object.

enter image description here


An additional explanation for The comment about the mask.

  1. Open your image, and make it a new layer.

  2. Add a layer mask

  3. Alt+click on it, and paste the image again inside. You have now a transparent image based on the information on the image. But the information is backwards, you need to invert it in order to work.

Apply this method to a black plate as described in the steps above.

enter image description here

Your shadow layer should look like this:
enter image description here

I have not masked the red dot layer, I only did the shadow part.

dnd 5e – Can a Monk use their Shadow Step ability while grappling?

Specifically, I’m wondering if a Way of Shadow Monk can use Shadow Step, while being the controlling creature in a grapple, in order to move the target of the grapple.

Secondly, is the 60′ range of Shadow Step affected by the halved speed caused by grappling?

In other words, can a Monk (1) run in, (2) grapple a creature, and (3) teleport away while bringing the creature with them.

It seems like it to me, but I’m somewhat unsure. These are some points I’ve considered:


Grappled

The condition ends if an effect removes the grappled creature from the grappler

(PHB 290)


Shadow Step

(..) as a bonus action, you can teleport up to 60 feet to an unoccupied space that you can see…

(PHB 80)


Moving a grappled creature: When you move, you can drag or carry the grappled creature with you, but your speed is halved, unless the creature is 2 or more sizes smaller than you.

(PHB 195)

html – Why would you ever use the shadow DOM if you can’t apply global styles?

How can you expect to create re-usable components with the shadow DOM and also be expected to give it a separate style? How can anyone be able to share components with each other if that person can’t apply a style on top? I would never use anyone else’s components if they aren’t using my css library..

Side suggestion, <slot> should be useable in light dom with custom components.

How to turn off cursor shadow which squares shadow is following my cursor in ubuntu 20.04

When I move the cursor there is a shadow following my cursor

this is the image

nonstandard analysis – Legitimacy of the shadow map serving as a field homomorphism for a specific hyperfinite field formed of a union of hyperfine lattices

I’m hoping to get some comment on the legitimacy of my approach to creating a hyperfinite ring formed of a union of modular groups in order to obtain a field homomorphism from this hyperfinite space to the real numbers. As nonstandard analysis isn’t my area I feel I’m at risk of accidentally making mortal error and so I’m looking for constructive advice regarding the legitimacy of my approach.

As I said I’m looking to construct a hyperfinite space that can serve as an approximation for the reals as a field in the sense that the shadow (standard) map serves a field homomorphism between this space and $mathbb{R}$. As motivation for how I’ve tried to go about this consider taking the following set

$$
{ }^{star} mathbb{Z}_{omega}:=left{k in{ }^{star} mathbb{Z} mid-leftlceil frac{omega-1}{2} leq k leqleftlfloorfrac{omega-1}{2}rightrfloorright}right.
$$

where $omega:=omega_{mathrm{uv}} omega_{mathrm{ir}}$ for some positive $omega_{mathrm{uv}}, omega_{mathrm{ir}} in{ }^{star}mathbb{Z}$ We can define a hyperfinite abelian group with 0 as the unit with the group operation

$$
a+_{omega} b:=left{begin{array}{ll}
a+b & text { if }-leftlceilfrac{omega-1}{2}rightrceil leq a+b leqleftlfloorfrac{omega-1}{2}rightrfloor \
a+b-omega & text { if }leftlfloorfrac{omega-1}{2}rightrfloor<a+b \
a+b+omega & text { if } a+b<-leftlceilfrac{omega-1}{2}rightrceil
end{array}right.
$$

We can go further and define a ring via
$$
a cdot_{omega} b:=left{begin{array}{ll}
a cdot b & text { if }-leftlceilfrac{omega-1}{2}rightrceil leq a cdot b leqleftlfloorfrac{omega-1}{2}rightrfloor \
a cdot b-k omega & text { if }leftlfloorfrac{omega-1}{2}rightrfloor+(k-1) omega<a cdot b leqleftlfloorfrac{omega-1}{2}rightrfloor+k omega \
a cdot b+k omega & text { if }-leftlceilfrac{omega-1}{2}rightrceil-k omega leq a cdot b<-leftlceilfrac{omega-1}{2}rightrceil-(k-1) omega
end{array}right.
$$

where the ring $left({ }^{star} mathbb{Z}_{omega},+_{omega}, 0, cdot omega, 1right)$ is a field if $omega$ is prime.

Now consider the ‘scaled’ version of this structure
$$frac{1}{omega_{mathrm{uv}}} star mathbb{Z}_{omega}=left{frac{k}{omega_{mathrm{uv}}} mid k in star mathbb{Z},-left(frac{omega-1}{2}rightrceil leq k leqleftlfloorfrac{omega-1}{2}rightrfloorright}$$

Now we take the shadow of this

$$
operatorname{shd}left(left(frac{1}{omega_{mathrm{uv}}}^{star} mathbb{Z}_{omega}right)_{mathrm{fin}}right)=left{operatorname{shd}left(frac{k}{omega_{mathrm{uv}}}right) mid k in{mathrm{Z}} text { s.t. }-left(frac{omega-1}{2}right) leq k leq mid frac{omega-1}{2}rightrfloor text { and } frac{k}{omega_{mathrm{uv}}} text { is finite }} subseteq mathbb{R}
$$

Finite elements are closed under the additive group structure of shd $left(left(frac{1}{omega_{mathrm{uv}}} star mathbb{Z}_{omega}right)_{mathrm{fin}}right)$ and taking the standard part is linear with respect to said additive group structure: this means that $left(left(frac{1}{omega_{text {uv }}} star mathbb{Z}_{omega}right)_{text {fin }},+_{omega}, 0right)$ is an abelian group.

Importantly for my purposes if I choose $omega_{mathrm{uv}}$ and $omega_{mathrm{ir}}$ to be ‘infinite’ then I believe I get the following

$$text { shd }:left(left(frac{1}{omega_{mathrm{uv}}} star mathbb{Z}_{omega}right)_{text {fin }},+_{omega}, 0right) longrightarrow(mathbb{R},+, 0)$$
as the range of the modulus is now up to an infinite number as is the scaling.

Now this approach will fail for a ring because we will want to write
$$
frac{h}{omega_{mathrm{uv}}} cdot_{omega} frac{k}{omega_{mathrm{uv}}}=frac{h cdot_{omega} k}{omega_{mathrm{uv}}}
$$

but we see that what we have is
$$
frac{h}{omega_{mathrm{uv}}} cdot omega frac{k}{omega_{mathrm{uv}}}=frac{h cdot_{omega} k}{omega_{mathrm{uv}}^{2}}
$$

which isn’t in our space.

My solution is to do the following and it is the legitimacy of this which I would like to get some opinions on.

Consider this union of lattices of the type we just discussed:

$$bigcup_{n in star mathbb{Z}_{kappa}} frac{1}{omega_{mathrm{uv}}^{n}}^{star} Z_{omega omega_{mathrm{uv}}^{n-1}}$$
where $kappa$ is an ‘infinite’ hyperinteger and
$$
left.frac{1}{omega_{mathrm{uv}}^{n}}^{star} mathbb{Z}_{omega}=left{frac{k}{omega_{mathrm{uv}}^{n}}left|k in{star} mathbb{Z},-left(frac{omega omega_{mathrm{uv}}^{n-1}-1}{2}rightrceil leq k leqright| frac{omega omega_{mathrm{uv}}^{n-1}-1}{2}rightrfloorright}$$

Now this union of lattices of greater and lesser fineness means that the multiplication problem described above is dealt with though perhaps at the cost of the curious choice of the following being the case:
$$
acdot_{omega}b = frac{acdot_{omega}b}{omega^{kappa}}
$$

Note how we have division defined here as we can take the usual modular inverse $i n v_{omega_{u v}}(p)$ and for any

$y=frac{q}{omega_{u v}^{n}}$ we will have $tilde{y}=omega_{u v}^{n} cdot_{omega} operatorname{inv}_{omega_{u v}^{n}}(p)$
$$
y tilde{y}=frac{q cdot_{omega} omega_{u v}^{n} cdot_{omega} i n v_{omega_{u v}^{n}}(q)}{omega_{u v}^{n}}=1
$$

Now the meat of my question: Is this a legitimate field homomorphism?
$$
operatorname{shd}:left(left(frac{1}{omega_{mathrm{uv}}} star mathbb{Z}_{omega}right)_{fin},+_{omega}, 0, cdot omega, 1right) longrightarrow(mathbb{R},+, 0, cdot, 1)
$$

where multiplication and addition are defined as specified here.