How to find app properies in 20:04
gnome-desktop-item-edit: command not found on Ubuntu 19.10 and later even with the 'gnome-panel' package installed
Warning or confirmation on new tag creation In retrospect of this , I would like to ask the community how they feel about a warning or confirmation (or just special highlighting) on new tag creation.  Everybody hates stock "are you sure?" confirmation, but a lot of tags get created by mistake (and then used ad nauseam).   For example, I think I might have created the  tag by accident. Assuming the right tag was , there would be two tags for c# 4.0, until they are made synonyms. With a warning, some accidental tags could be prevented. Equation left margin I have equations inside an environment which has a larger left-margin than the main text (analogous to an enumerate/itemize environment, implemented with the changepage package's adjustwidth environment). Just as equations in enumerate/itemize behave, the equations are centered with respect to the entire text, rather than just the width of the container environment. I want the latter behavior.  I'm trying to accomplish this by wrapping all display-math in minipages. Namely, I'm modifying the mathdisplay environment in amsmath.sty as follows:  \makeatletter \let\oldmd\mathdisplay \def\mathdisplay#1{%   \newline   \begin{minipage}{\textwidth-\@totalleftmargin}%     \oldmd{#1}% } \let\oldendmd\endmathdisplay \def\endmathdisplay#1{%   \oldendmd{#1}%   \end{minipage} } \makeatother   This is almost working, but there are some issues with spacing which I don't understand how to fix. Here's how the the normal \[ ... \] and numbered \begin{equation} ... \end{equation} look with the above modification:      My main confusion is why the numbered version is behaving so differently from the unnumbered. But all in all I want to fix this so that the spacing above and below is even as it usually is. Any help is appreciated, thanks.  Edit: Here's a compilable example:  \documentclass{amsart}  \usepackage{lipsum} \usepackage{calc} \usepackage{changepage}  \makeatletter \let\oldmd\mathdisplay \def\mathdisplay#1{%   \newline   \begin{minipage}{\textwidth-\@totalleftmargin}%     \oldmd{#1}% } \let\oldendmd\endmathdisplay \def\endmathdisplay#1{%   \oldendmd{#1}%   \end{minipage} } \makeatother  \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}  \begin{document}  \lipsum[1]  \begin{adjustwidth}{20pt}{} \lipsum[2] \[ x \mapsto \hom(-,x) \]  \lipsum[3] \begin{equation}   y \mapsto \hom(y,-) \end{equation} \lipsum[4] \end{adjustwidth}  \lipsum[5]  \end{document} Enable or check Chatter Feed Tracking programatically I have a late 2013 27" iMac running  Yosemite, and it randomly shuts off every now and then. I tried everything Reset SMC. Diagnostics, reformat Macintosh HD but still occurs and running out of options. if a complex function $f$ is real-differentiable, then $f$ or $\overline{f}$ are complex-differentiable This is an exercise from Remmert's Theory of Complex functions.  Let $D\subset \mathbb{C}$ be a domain and $f:D\rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ a real-differentiable function. Assume that the following limit exists:  $ \mathrm{lim}_{h\rightarrow 0} \left|  \frac{f(c+h) - f(c)}{h}   \right|.$  Show that either $f$ or $\overline{f}$ is complex-differentiable.  I've tried showing that $\frac{\partial f}{\partial \overline{z}} = 0$ or $\frac{\partial \overline{f}}{\partial z} = 0$ by using the fact that there exist continuous functions $g$ and $h$ such that in $D$ one can write   $f(z) = f(c) + (z-c)g(z) + (\overline{z} - \overline{c})h(z)$   and that  $g(c)= f_{z}(c)$ and $h(c) = f_{\overline{z}}$ and then plugging this into the limit above. Does this approach works and I just can´t see how to do it? Can someone give a hint or a guideline solution to this? Could not find class How to wrap lines correctly inside algorithmic I am having problems displaying algorithms. The wrapping is really ugly and I can't, for the life of me, find a fix that doesn't involve manually tweaking the hell out of everything, to the point that I might as well scrap the crappy algorithm packages and write everything out in TeX.  Is there any way to properly indent the following  \documentclass{article} \usepackage{algorithm} \usepackage{algpseudocode} \begin{document} \begin{algorithm}    \caption{My pseudo code.} \begin{algorithmic}[1]    \While{this line is sooooooooooo long and boring and too much for algorithmic to handle}       \State look at this state, this state is just too long for algorithmic to display it properly        \While{again this line is sooooooooooo long and boring and too much for algorithmic too handle}          \State look at this state again, this state is just too long for algorithmic to handle, I'm just going to switch to Word       \EndWhile    \EndWhile \end{algorithmic} \end{algorithm} \end{document}​     so that the output is similar to What is the difference between correlation, causation and prediction? Suppose we have a set of events $\Omega$, containing events $A$ and $B$. My econometrics professor tried to distinguish the following three terms today.    Causation --- $A$ causes $B$ if the occurrence of $A$ always leads to another specific outcome $B$. For example, clapping my hands causes a sound to be emitted.  Prediction --- $A$ predicts $B$ if on average, $B$ is the expected outcome from $A$ occurring. In other words, whereas causality is deterministic, prediction is probabilistic. For example, studying for a test would predict doing well on the exam. But there's no guarantee.   Correlation --- $A$ and $B$ are correlated if when one occurs the other does too. But there may be some hidden variable causing both.    Are these distinctions meaningful? Or did he make these terms up?   My Questions   What is the difference between causation and correlation?  Are "causes" always deterministic? Powering down the display in XP with a command Is there a command to power down the display in Windows XP? That is, a command that causes the video card to stop sending a signal to the monitor until input is received, much as power management does after a time. How can a file size be zero? Just something I ran into and couldn't think of a proper explanation. If I create an empty *.txt file on my PC and then look at its size, it shows 0. But how is that possible? I mean even if the file itself is empty, it still must have some size, just to store its own name. How can this be explained? (Non OS specific) Why does holding something up cost energy while no work is being done? I read the definition of  as  $$W ~=~ \vec{F} \cdot \vec{d}$$  $$\text{ Work  =  (Force) $\cdot$ (Distance)}.$$ If a book is there on the table, no work is done as no distance is covered. If I hold up a book in my hand and my arm is stretched, if no work is being done, where is my energy going? Before marking this post duplicate or voting to get it closed (the reason for which I simply don't get just because it is a grammar forum after all! If I am seeking recommendation for a book that means I will be coming back someday to the same site for my doubts also provided I get a not so harsh reply!), please read this and help this MBA aspirant.   A little about myself and my research so far. I am a very critical reader of English Grammar and the kind of person who aims at perfection.  Currently, I am keen on taking on English grammar again after a certain gap. Well, I am aiming for MBA, so preparing for entrance exams for the same.  I bought the religiously followed Wren and Martin and started studying it chapter by chapter. I was surprised when I read the pronouns chapter. I studied all the rules given and then started practising but it came as surprise when I found when many of the attempted questions were wrong. The reason simply being the rules for those specific sentences were not given.   For example:     We scored as many goals as they/them?    According to me, the answer should be they, but it's them according to the solution manual. Worse still, the solution manual offers no explanation for this.  So after a chat with my teachers I was suggested to follow the blogs of grammarians and look for any rules for the sentences that have contradictory answers!  I did so and was clarified by  post of pronouns, Rule 5.  Then I saw a book by the same author. I was momentarily happy. It was Momentarily because the reviews on Amazon were too bad about this book. After reading a couple of forums about the book I found a common statement saying that no grammar book is exhaustive.  So, it's okay for me to have more than one. And my simple question is what will be a good and almost exhaustive (if not fully exhaustive) book of English grammar to help get through the subtle usages of English in my management entrances  which is crisp and to the point and yet covers all important rules and syntax, and most importantly having practice tests at the end with solutions and explanations? I've upgraded from 4.4.0 to 4.4.8 and then 4.5.2 on Ubuntu 16.04 LTS 64-bit, and it's still happening.   At 4.5.2 it's even more frequent, and mainly in Chrome (haven't tried firefox or opera just yet). Every time I open a new web page. Any way to fix that, or is it a bug?  00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation HD Graphics 5500 (rev 09) 04:00.0 Display controller: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD/ATI] Venus XTX [Radeon HD 8890M / R9 M275X/M375X] (rev 81)   Cheers. writing js objects to files (including methods) in nodejs? How to cut a mesh by specifying the angle For some tests in R, there is a lower limit on the  calculations of $2.22 \cdot 10^{-16}$. I'm not sure why it's this number, if there is a good reason for it or if it's just arbitrary. A lot of other stats packages just go to 0.0001, so this is a much higher level of precision. But I haven't seen too many papers reporting $p &lt; 2.22\cdot 10^{-16}$ or $p = 2.22\cdot 10^{-16}$.   Is it a common/best practice to report this computed value or is it more typical to report something else (like p &lt; 0.000000000000001)? I don't see the gear button next to the Sign in button at the login screen. I have Nvidia drivers installed (for Nvidia 730 GT card). Ubuntu boots into Xorg as seen from the terminal with echo $XDG_SESSION_TYPE which outputs x11.  How do I switch to Wayland? Proving that $(3n)!$ is divisible by $n! \times (n + 1)! \times (n + 2)!$ if $n$ is greater than 2 Clarification for non-answers One of my flags for "non-answer" was declined and I was wondering if I misunderstood what "non-answer" means. I saw someone post an answer that was just a block of code, with nothing in it that was even the slightest related to the question, it was just a random block of code with no explanation. Should I have not used the "not an answer" tag even though the description explicitly says that it should be used when answers "do not attempt to answer the question"? Variablity in cv.glmnet results I am using cv.glmnet to find predictors. The setup I use is as follows:  lassoResults&lt;-cv.glmnet(x=countDiffs,y=responseDiffs,alpha=1,nfolds=cvfold) bestlambda&lt;-lassoResults$lambda.min  results&lt;-predict(lassoResults,s=bestlambda,type="coefficients")  choicePred&lt;-rownames(results)[which(results !=0)]   To make sure the results are reproducible I set.seed(1). The results are highly variable. I ran the exact same code 100 times to see how variable the results were. In the 98/100 runs had one particular predictor always selected (sometimes just on its own); other predictors were selected (co-efficient was non-zero) usually 50/100 times.  So it tells me that each time the cross-validation is running it's going to probably select a different best lambda, because of the initial randomization of the folds matter. Others have seen this problem () but there isn't a suggested solution.  I am thinking that maybe that one which shows up 98/100 is probably pretty highly correlated to all the others? The results do stabilize if I just run LOOCV ($\text{fold-size} = n$), but I am curious why they are so variable when $\text{nfold} &lt; n$.