$ sudo aptitude purge ~ngnome ~nunity xubuntu-desktop+ $ for i in gconf gtk; do mv ~/.$i{,.old}; done
Those two commands ought to take care of most of it. If you still have trouble, run $(aptitude purge ~ngtk) and then install the xubuntu-desktop package again.
Hey, maybe you've already made up your mind, but my advice is: just don't.
Really, why do Sunday morning classes need wifi? So the teens can watch a YouTube video? Just download it onto a flash drive--then you won't have to worry about slow or down connections. Or do you want people surfing on the iPhones even more, instead of paying attention?
If they really must have wifi at times, then my advice is: Give the password to church staff and class teachers who need it, and tell them not to share it. Undoubtedly someone will share it with a friend or relative eventually, so change it once a month.
Sometimes the best answer is really: "You know, we don't even need to do this at all."
Who knows. And who cares. It doesn't matter. "I thought of it first" or "You wouldn't have thought of it" are not valid reasons for granting exclusive rights to an idea.
Context is (or should be) irrelevant also. A formula is a formula, regardless of the field in which it's applied. Math does not deserve patent protection; one reason is that it is discovered, not created.
False. The GPL does not "expect" users to contribute anything. The GPL requires that parties who modify and redistribute the code make their modifications available.
"Deserve" is such a strong word. How about this: Employees deserve to be paid by their employers the amount they agreed upon. "Content producers" do not "deserve" anything from anyone. They are no more entitled to payment than "pirates" are entitled to "creative works."
(Yes, I use a lot of quotation marks there, because these words have been appropriated from the language and redefined by the cartels in order to villify people who rebel against their evil, monopolistic, greedy practices.)
This is the problem: people think it's all about money. It's much bigger than that. It's about our culture and our society. We all have a stake in IP rights. "They" claim "their" "property" is being "stolen". Well I claim that they are holding our culture for ransom. That is a much deeper problem, and it should be more important to all of us than a few percentage points of billion-dollar profits.
Yes, the studios and record labels are all greedy bastards, but they're the ones who do have an actual stake in IP rights. When you're making a living based on how well your art is received, then let's talk.
This is the problem: people think it's all about money. It's much bigger than that. It's about our culture and our society. We all have a stake in IP rights. "They" claim "their" "property" is being "stolen". Well I claim that they are holding our culture for ransom. That is a much deeper problem, and it should be more important to all of us than a few percentage points of billion-dollar profits.
Forgive my ignorance, but doesn't refactoring have greater potential to introduce bugs and regressions? Doing that continuously sounds like a bad idea to me, in general. You'd never get a stable, dependable codebase.
Man, you really don't have a clue what you're talking about. An aircraft could wipe out the boat from so far away the boat could hardly see it. What makes you think a cheap speedboat will have passive IR countermeasures? It's a stinking suicide speedboat. And what makes you think IR-guided missiles are the only or even best way to take one out? Ever heard of Hellfire missiles? Or one or two rounds from a 20 or 30 mm gun and it and its drivers are toast. FCSes on helicopters make aiming like a video game. It's like point-and-click-and-kill.
Their skidoos would be sitting ducks before they got within firing range. Aircraft would detect and engage them from a long ways out. Then surface ships would tear up stragglers with deck guns and missiles. A half-second burst from a 25mm gun or one shot from a 5-inch gun and poof, no more Jihadski. If any Iranian missiles were launched, there'd be very few for shipboard defenses to deal with.
Kamikaze prop planes have got to be a joke. Those would be the easiest threats to handle. Hawkeyes and ships would detect them on radar from a hundred miles away. Hornets would wipe them out of the sky with ease, like shooting fish in a barrel.
Of course, the bottom line is, an act of war by Iran would result in the utter destruction of Iran's entire military, and likely it's government too. And the rest of the world would support U.S. action. It would be suicide for Iran. Their government may be evil and stupid, but they are all about self-preservation.
I think in principle it's wrong to send emails from a no-reply address. How is a person supposed to tell the sender if his automated mailer is spamming him, or sending wrong data, or has formatting errors, or is being used by an attacker, etc? It's just like robocalling, where you pick up the phone and can't talk to a real person to tell them THEY HAVE THE WRONG NUMBER THAT SOME IDIOT MISTYPED INTO A DATABASE YEARS AGO THAT'S BEEN PROPAGATED FROM ONE COLLECTION AGENCY TO THE NEXT, unless you wait on hold for 10 minutes of your life at 7 am on a Saturday, and then have to convince some jerk that you're not some deadbeat named Darryl Hurndin. !!!
It's like ding-song ditching. It just ain't right.
Email is a medium. Forcing a person to go out of band to a web site to contact the party sending him email is fundamentally wrong. It's like making a person drive to a business and walk in the door to tell them to stop calling him on the phone.
Afraid of spam at your autoresponder's address? Use auto generated reply-to addresses that only accept mail from the address they were used to contact. Use SpamAssassin. Use Gmail.
But don't be irresponsible and rude by using noreply addresses.
I'm not sure what you mean by that. If you believe that God's plan included sending Jesus to redeem the world from sin, then you should believe that God's plan does include Christianity. If you mean that no one is perfect, so no one perfectly practices God's plan, I won't argue with that--but that's not the point. If you mean that Jesus himself didn't call it "Christianity," that's not the point either.
The point is that we have God's word, and He gives us wisdom when we ask for it, so we can do our best to understand God's plan and to follow it, even if we don't do it perfectly.
As I just wrote in another response, a few hundred years extrapolated to thousands or millions of years doesn't conclusively prove anything. It's fine to consider it, but don't call the extrapolated results facts.
The scales are not equivalent. Using data from the 1800s doesn't mean that your models can accurately be extrapolated to thousands and millions of years ago. Not to mention that all the people from whom those records come are long since dead.
There's nothing wrong with making inferences and extrapolations. The problem arises when people claim it proves anything conclusively, that such inferences are facts. That's dishonest--it's neither scientific nor logical. It suggests either foolishness, ignorance, or an agenda other than truth.
Hm, I thought "science" was about provable results from repeatable experiments, not making guesses about things that supposedly happened millions of years ago.
That's an interesting idea. Doesn't make much sense though. Where are you getting this stuff? ÂAnd which Scriptures are you referring to? Oh, and which Roman government? If you're going to spout conspiracy theories you should at least be specific.
And before you say "faith," consider that this is the same answer given by those following the versions you claim are distorted.
Such an answer would really be saying that one had faith in oneself, rather than faith in God. And I know that I am full of error, so I don't lean on faith in myself.
It's impossible for humans to approach anything without any bias; we are all products of our upbringing and culture, and we all "see through tinted lenses."
This is why we don't rely on ourselves but the word of God, i.e. Scripture. One should do one's best to follow God's commands as found in Scripture--not men's commands. It doesn't matter what we think or what we want; rather, what matters is what God thinks and what God wants.
We are so blessed in this day and age to have Scripture freely available to all. We need not be beholden to anyone's interpretation of Scripture but our own, as guided by the wisdom which God gives freely to all who ask. I have faith in the word of God--not in any particular person's interpretation of it. It is therefore our duty to study and understand it as best we can.
However, given human fallibility, our salvation rests not on our having perfect understanding of Scripture, but our faith in Christ.
I don't claim to have perfect understanding of Scripture. I don't claim to practice my life completely according to God's plan, without distortion. I am trying to follow Jesus--sometimes without as much effort as I should give. Though I am no longer a sinner according to Scripture, I am not yet perfect, and I do still sin.
Thankfully, God is merciful, and the blood of Christ continually cleanses me of all unrighteousness. You see, that is what God's plan boils down to. It remains simply for people to lay claim to his gift of salvation and redemption.
The problem with "Christianity" is that people want to do what they want to do, and they want to hear what they want to hear, and they want to let others do the thinking for them. There are many false teachers who distort the truth. What's sad is that the word of God is often judged by the words and actions of those who claim to be following it, whether they really are or not.
The solution is to return to Scripture and learn what God wants. God never planned for hierarchical church organizations and the like; the head of the church is Christ, and Scripture is to be our guide.
Christianity was not created as a control mechanism to give people at the top power and wealth. You're thinking of Catholicism. They are not the same thing. Of course, the Catholic church claims to be the authorized Christian religion, and has done many things while claiming to act in God's name--but their claiming things does not make such things true. The Christianity that Jesus proclaimed is not like that at all. Catholicism is a human distortion of God's plan--the same could be said for other "versions" of Christianity.
Slashdot Mirror
$ sudo aptitude purge ~ngnome ~nunity xubuntu-desktop+
$ for i in gconf gtk; do mv ~/.$i{,.old}; done
Those two commands ought to take care of most of it. If you still have trouble, run $(aptitude purge ~ngtk) and then install the xubuntu-desktop package again.
Really, reinstalling from scratch?
Hey, maybe you've already made up your mind, but my advice is: just don't.
Really, why do Sunday morning classes need wifi? So the teens can watch a YouTube video? Just download it onto a flash drive--then you won't have to worry about slow or down connections. Or do you want people surfing on the iPhones even more, instead of paying attention?
If they really must have wifi at times, then my advice is: Give the password to church staff and class teachers who need it, and tell them not to share it. Undoubtedly someone will share it with a friend or relative eventually, so change it once a month.
Sometimes the best answer is really: "You know, we don't even need to do this at all."
Who knows. And who cares. It doesn't matter. "I thought of it first" or "You wouldn't have thought of it" are not valid reasons for granting exclusive rights to an idea.
Context is (or should be) irrelevant also. A formula is a formula, regardless of the field in which it's applied. Math does not deserve patent protection; one reason is that it is discovered, not created.
Patents are evil.
[alternate universe needed]
Here: https://www.google.com/search?q=usb+flashlight
False. The GPL does not "expect" users to contribute anything. The GPL requires that parties who modify and redistribute the code make their modifications available.
People deserve to get paid for their work.
"Deserve" is such a strong word. How about this: Employees deserve to be paid by their employers the amount they agreed upon. "Content producers" do not "deserve" anything from anyone. They are no more entitled to payment than "pirates" are entitled to "creative works."
(Yes, I use a lot of quotation marks there, because these words have been appropriated from the language and redefined by the cartels in order to villify people who rebel against their evil, monopolistic, greedy practices.)
This is the problem: people think it's all about money. It's much bigger than that. It's about our culture and our society. We all have a stake in IP rights. "They" claim "their" "property" is being "stolen". Well I claim that they are holding our culture for ransom. That is a much deeper problem, and it should be more important to all of us than a few percentage points of billion-dollar profits.
Yes, the studios and record labels are all greedy bastards, but they're the ones who do have an actual stake in IP rights. When you're making a living based on how well your art is received, then let's talk.
This is the problem: people think it's all about money. It's much bigger than that. It's about our culture and our society. We all have a stake in IP rights. "They" claim "their" "property" is being "stolen". Well I claim that they are holding our culture for ransom. That is a much deeper problem, and it should be more important to all of us than a few percentage points of billion-dollar profits.
Forgive my ignorance, but doesn't refactoring have greater potential to introduce bugs and regressions? Doing that continuously sounds like a bad idea to me, in general. You'd never get a stable, dependable codebase.
Are Google and Amazon small fries?
P.S. The NYSE runs Linux, and it's bigger than NASDAQ or the LSE.
Where did you get that definition? I found these:
a person who authorizes another to act in his or her behalf, as a voter in a district represented by an elected official.
a resident of a constituency, esp one entitled to vote
"that appoints or elects a representative to a body" (1714), and as a noun, "one who appoints or elects a representative."
A Representative should not allow a corporation to authorize her to act on its behalf. She is elected by voters in her district.
Your hypothetical examples are silly because, unlike his example, yours are not murder.
Man, you really don't have a clue what you're talking about. An aircraft could wipe out the boat from so far away the boat could hardly see it. What makes you think a cheap speedboat will have passive IR countermeasures? It's a stinking suicide speedboat. And what makes you think IR-guided missiles are the only or even best way to take one out? Ever heard of Hellfire missiles? Or one or two rounds from a 20 or 30 mm gun and it and its drivers are toast. FCSes on helicopters make aiming like a video game. It's like point-and-click-and-kill.
The SOH is 21 miles wide at its narrowest point.
Their skidoos would be sitting ducks before they got within firing range. Aircraft would detect and engage them from a long ways out. Then surface ships would tear up stragglers with deck guns and missiles. A half-second burst from a 25mm gun or one shot from a 5-inch gun and poof, no more Jihadski. If any Iranian missiles were launched, there'd be very few for shipboard defenses to deal with.
Kamikaze prop planes have got to be a joke. Those would be the easiest threats to handle. Hawkeyes and ships would detect them on radar from a hundred miles away. Hornets would wipe them out of the sky with ease, like shooting fish in a barrel.
Of course, the bottom line is, an act of war by Iran would result in the utter destruction of Iran's entire military, and likely it's government too. And the rest of the world would support U.S. action. It would be suicide for Iran. Their government may be evil and stupid, but they are all about self-preservation.
I think in principle it's wrong to send emails from a no-reply address. How is a person supposed to tell the sender if his automated mailer is spamming him, or sending wrong data, or has formatting errors, or is being used by an attacker, etc? It's just like robocalling, where you pick up the phone and can't talk to a real person to tell them THEY HAVE THE WRONG NUMBER THAT SOME IDIOT MISTYPED INTO A DATABASE YEARS AGO THAT'S BEEN PROPAGATED FROM ONE COLLECTION AGENCY TO THE NEXT, unless you wait on hold for 10 minutes of your life at 7 am on a Saturday, and then have to convince some jerk that you're not some deadbeat named Darryl Hurndin. !!!
It's like ding-song ditching. It just ain't right.
Email is a medium. Forcing a person to go out of band to a web site to contact the party sending him email is fundamentally wrong. It's like making a person drive to a business and walk in the door to tell them to stop calling him on the phone.
Afraid of spam at your autoresponder's address? Use auto generated reply-to addresses that only accept mail from the address they were used to contact. Use SpamAssassin. Use Gmail.
But don't be irresponsible and rude by using noreply addresses.
Do you mean The Purpose-Driven Church?
I'm not sure what you mean by that. If you believe that God's plan included sending Jesus to redeem the world from sin, then you should believe that God's plan does include Christianity. If you mean that no one is perfect, so no one perfectly practices God's plan, I won't argue with that--but that's not the point. If you mean that Jesus himself didn't call it "Christianity," that's not the point either.
The point is that we have God's word, and He gives us wisdom when we ask for it, so we can do our best to understand God's plan and to follow it, even if we don't do it perfectly.
As I just wrote in another response, a few hundred years extrapolated to thousands or millions of years doesn't conclusively prove anything. It's fine to consider it, but don't call the extrapolated results facts.
The scales are not equivalent. Using data from the 1800s doesn't mean that your models can accurately be extrapolated to thousands and millions of years ago. Not to mention that all the people from whom those records come are long since dead.
There's nothing wrong with making inferences and extrapolations. The problem arises when people claim it proves anything conclusively, that such inferences are facts. That's dishonest--it's neither scientific nor logical. It suggests either foolishness, ignorance, or an agenda other than truth.
Hm, I thought "science" was about provable results from repeatable experiments, not making guesses about things that supposedly happened millions of years ago.
That's an interesting idea. Doesn't make much sense though. Where are you getting this stuff? ÂAnd which Scriptures are you referring to? Oh, and which Roman government? If you're going to spout conspiracy theories you should at least be specific.
...or it could be that. haha
Your logic has won me over!
And before you say "faith," consider that this is the same answer given by those following the versions you claim are distorted.
Such an answer would really be saying that one had faith in oneself, rather than faith in God. And I know that I am full of error, so I don't lean on faith in myself.
It's impossible for humans to approach anything without any bias; we are all products of our upbringing and culture, and we all "see through tinted lenses."
This is why we don't rely on ourselves but the word of God, i.e. Scripture. One should do one's best to follow God's commands as found in Scripture--not men's commands. It doesn't matter what we think or what we want; rather, what matters is what God thinks and what God wants.
We are so blessed in this day and age to have Scripture freely available to all. We need not be beholden to anyone's interpretation of Scripture but our own, as guided by the wisdom which God gives freely to all who ask. I have faith in the word of God--not in any particular person's interpretation of it. It is therefore our duty to study and understand it as best we can.
However, given human fallibility, our salvation rests not on our having perfect understanding of Scripture, but our faith in Christ.
I don't claim to have perfect understanding of Scripture. I don't claim to practice my life completely according to God's plan, without distortion. I am trying to follow Jesus--sometimes without as much effort as I should give. Though I am no longer a sinner according to Scripture, I am not yet perfect, and I do still sin.
Thankfully, God is merciful, and the blood of Christ continually cleanses me of all unrighteousness. You see, that is what God's plan boils down to. It remains simply for people to lay claim to his gift of salvation and redemption.
The problem with "Christianity" is that people want to do what they want to do, and they want to hear what they want to hear, and they want to let others do the thinking for them. There are many false teachers who distort the truth. What's sad is that the word of God is often judged by the words and actions of those who claim to be following it, whether they really are or not.
The solution is to return to Scripture and learn what God wants. God never planned for hierarchical church organizations and the like; the head of the church is Christ, and Scripture is to be our guide.
Christianity was not created as a control mechanism to give people at the top power and wealth. You're thinking of Catholicism. They are not the same thing. Of course, the Catholic church claims to be the authorized Christian religion, and has done many things while claiming to act in God's name--but their claiming things does not make such things true. The Christianity that Jesus proclaimed is not like that at all. Catholicism is a human distortion of God's plan--the same could be said for other "versions" of Christianity.