> 326 packages right now when doing a build. Seems large in general, but for a Rust project, not abnormal.
How many are third-party?
11 karma · joined January 16, 2022
How many are third-party?
Admittedly, I use Gnome. I have few requirements for a DE and most existing DEs meet my need[1]. Many in the Linux community hate Gnome (not sure what the short comings are). I use it mainly because it is the default in most cases.
But KDE is extremely ugly out of the box: the panel at the bottom. The window frames, the mouse pointer, the menues. It takes some work to make it reasonable.
What are the features that people actually use on KDE that are missing on Gnome (or require some work to get on Gnome)? I mostly see only the argument that KDE is "extremely customizable" compared to Gnome. I agree, but what is the actual customization that one does that make the difference, which are more work to achieve (or impossible) on Gnome? I am genuinely asking: I can live with ugly DE if I am missing something I don't know.
[1] my needs: ability to switch windows, ability to press super key to search for an app, ability to display time.
But that's my question: if there is no afterlife, why?
> Ethics matter.
> I don't believe there's any life after this one...
> I don't believe that faith is an out, or that you can apologize or donate your way out of past behaviors.
Why would it matter if there is no life after this one? If there is no life after this one, maybe you should just "get over it".
But even this doesn't matter. If all goes to dust, even the good we do or the love we share. If we do evil, or if we hate the strangers, it makes no difference. We might as well do that if it satisfies us.
Not the GP, but I suspect the GP meant that Aquinas's Summa and Aquinas's Contra (his major works) starts with discussing first whether there is a god.
> are any of those books a good read for someone
I am not Catholic. I wouldn't recommend Aquinas.
However, I would recommend "reasonable faith" book by William Craig. Or if you want his lectures to listen to, you can start from his lectures on the existence of God[1]
If you are talking about how can one believe in God in an "axiomatic" way, yet still be rational and warranted, I suggest Plantinga's "warranted Christian belief" or his more popular level book "Knowledge and Christian Belief".
[1] https://www.reasonablefaith.org/podcasts/defenders-podcast-s...
You people are sure allergic to anything religious.
The author's main point isn't that so he or she didn't support it. I don't think it's true, though he is an important figure in philosophy and theology still.
Should the author also first attempt to prove the existence of Aquinas? And that he was a monk? Before writing about him? Does he need to prove that Aquinas wrote the work the work usually attribute to him? Does he need to prove there is a god? Just to talk about Aquinas' view? But I agree his intro is a bit overestimating.
The downsides of email workflow that the author mentioned are (1) Having to setup mailing list, (2) setting the mail client, (3) friction in submitting a patch, which I assume the author is referring to setting git-send, (4) email is limited such as not being able to modify it, not being able to download the patch, and limitation around the plain-text, and the author doesn't hint into what limitation he is thinking of.
These are downsides of email workflow, and I do not think they are significant (except for 1, which could be done though a person's email address if the project is small). But the SSH workflow replaces them with similar issues such as (1) setting SSH server and maintaining it and the cost associated with it, (2) clients will need to maintain their identities though SSH, (4) replace email-replies with code comments (email-replies is better as you can do more than just text). (3) Here SSH workflow is better as it requires no work, but configuring git-send is a very small and usually 1-time change.
In most cases, the only mail client requirement is to be able to write plain text. Virtually all mail clients can do this with a simple checkbox. Only the maintainer will need ability to `git am' the patch from an email message, and this is indeed a downside of email workflow.
All in all, nothing wrong with more options, and I am sure SSH meets certain needs, but to me email-workflow and SSH compete in the same category and email-workflow is superior.
You are missing nothing. Absolutely nothing. As a vim user.
org-mode, is a bunch of features, unrelated sometimes, put together in the emacs eco-system that work well together, and work well in the emacs eco-system.
Org (and sometimes, with extensions) can handle scheduling, task management, document production, journals, literate programming, writing html emails, maintaining contacts info, building knowledge base, writing blog articles, etc.
If you are a vim user, you probably better off sticking with markdown for creating documents, and then using pandoc to convert them. You are probably better off sticking with task warrior for tasks. You are probably better off sticking with a calendar app for schedule, ... you get the picture.
But in emacs, org-mode is integrated so well in the eco-system that it makes it quite powerful. You can, while reading some code, take a note immediately, pointing to the region (which includes a hyperlink to the line, as well as copy of the content of the highlighted region) and store it in your todo list, with a scheduled time to review. It will appear in your agenda when you ask emacs to view your agenda.
In emacs, you can write a document (in org-mode format) and then include it in an email (within emacs), which is automatically converted into html when you send (or text, or both MIME.), ... you probably get this picture too. Org-mode provides a set of APIs that allows for automation and customization.
Because emacs has many usecases, and because org-mode meets many of these usecases, and because it integrates well, org-mode has found a special place in the emacs community.
But what I meant here is philosophy in the narrow sense. Religion includes revaluation, a discussion of theology. (again, not to say that philosophy and theology don't interact: they do. see philosophical theology).
The first (and rarely claimed as the reason) is the mark of the beast interpretation in Revelation. Interpreting much of Revelation is hard, whether the mark is metaphorical or actual, and what the mark is, and what the beast is, are all questions with not extremely clear answers.
The second, and by far the most claimed reason, is the use of fatal tissues in testing, developing, or producing the vaccine. Here, Christians consider supporting and taking this vaccine is similar to supporting abortion. In a similar way, one might think that buying products produced by child labor is supporting child labor, or that eating meat is supporting animal cruelty.
The same Christians who do not support covid vaccine for the second reason, might be fine with taking other vaccines, even if they were developed by aborted tissues. The main reason here is that it has been such a long time between the development and today that taking the vaccine is not a support of such behavior. Similarly, one today might use ride a volkswagon beetle without being considered a supporter of nazi, even though it was developed by the nazi.
Some Christians see that the vaccine is good despite of using fatal tissues, because they see that there is no alternative to preventing getting covid, and so it is permissible in this exceptional circumstance.
I hope this answers your question.
Just because the so called "leaders" believe COVID vaccine is good doesn't mean all religions permit taking COVID vaccine.