Yeah but you’d need to do it for *everything* that’s affected, which is a lot.

Forced updates are bad if they bork you system, sure. If you know what you are doing it’s also mostly fine to skip a few. But the truth of the matter is that 95% of users wouldn’t ever update their system if they didn’t have to. Then half of them infect their system with ransomware and the other half get to join a huge botnet.

We’ve had that before and I wouldn’t want to go back. A few bored systems because of updates are probably preferable to at least as many lost to malware, where data is often unrecoverable.

The problem is that the all those apps installed as dependencies will get marked as unused and removed with the next --autoremove (which you should probably do regularly to clean up old kernels.

The real fix would be to mark all those apps as explicitly installed, but I don’t use apt-based distros regularly so idk how.

Distrobox would like a word, or so I’ve heard. Haven’t had to use it yet, as the AUR has pretty much everything.

We’re not talking about the religion though, we’re talking about the man, Jesus. He existed, and the historically verifiable facts stand.

The man wouldn’t even be historically notable if not for the religion. For all intents and purposes, he is the religion, the main cornerstone that set Christianity apart from Judaism.

And I’m not sure what you mean by “the religion.”

The subset of Christian denominations for which the statements make sense.

This one? https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=red+hat+cult

I really don’t get it.

The most important claims about him are obviously the supernatural ones. “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” and all. Everything about the religion hinges on them being true.

What do you have against redhat.com?

So the snowflakes have reached the banning words stage now, have they?

Not fixed but a couple of predefined sizes it will pick the next size down from.

Well it’s “just” a name. Obviously people going by that name are bonds to have existed. But arguing that “He” existed while at the same time saying most things about “Him” are false doesn’t really have any meaning. It’s not the same person as described in writing, when most descriptions don’t apply.