Because the month is bigger and provides more context on it’s own. You figure out the month first then place yourself within that scale.

Example:

“It’s May (immediately tells us the context of 31days, spring, etc.) It is the 30th, so there’s one day left in May”

Vs

“It’s the 30th (provides no context except that it’s not February). it’s may, so there’s one day left in May”

So both lead to the same conclusion, the first way just gives the limiting parameter/most context first.

Similar reasoning why the month is the primary separation on calendars.

Another example that follow this same principle, you tell time HH/mm to provide the larger context first, not mm/HH.

“nobody tells me what to do” - me when I look at a “ReadMe” file which perfectly explains the cause of the problem I end up having and having to try and fix

There is a vast difference between a community driven project like Debian taking small contributions from people who happen to be in Israel/incorporating some things from RedHat after lots of vetting and diluting and Fedora being a direct upstream testing ground for RedHat who are the primary contributors and maintainers.

No, this type of approach will not lead to you throwing your PC in the trash, it will simply lead to you being more aware of your software and how it functions,what it contributes to, and what contributes to it. Which is a good thing imo.

For example, I use LMDE. Yes, there are most definitely contributions from redhat in my machine. the difference is between

RedHat engineers -> Fedora.

And

RedHat engineers -> Fedora -> Upstream Project acceptance-> Debian -> LMDE.

I’m not saying you need to stop using Fedora. But everyone draws a line somewhere and I’m simply making my knowledge on this known for people who’s line may be in a similar place to mine.

It’s worth noting that fedora is heavily sponsored by RedHat (a subsidiary of IBM) and is the upstream testing ground for RHEL (Redhats commercial offering). RedHat also has close ties to Israels government and it’s military.

This is a huge dealbreaker for someone like me so I feel it’s necessary to mention.

Jokes on them, I just flat out lie in half my YouTube comments as I’ve assumed this sort of thing already existed.

Linux Mint Debian Edition.

You say not to suggest mint, but you most probably used an Ubuntu based Mint so that doesn’t count.

In America at least, “law enforcement” (Police, Ice, CBP) aren’t allowed to force you to enter your password, but they can just happen to hold your phone up to your finger/face to unlock it using biometrics.

I don’t believe it would. Perfection can, and insofar as perfection exists in our reality does, exist alongside perceived contradiction as contradiction exists in all things.

By nature of being outside of our universe they are not subject to the same constants/restraints or our same concepts of space and time.

But I’m not necessarily saying it’s a requirement. That’s just the line of thought I lean towards personally at this point.

But contradiction exists everywhere in our understanding of nature and the universe.

Interesting, I’ve never heard of that term but I am partial towards the Maliki madhab which is highly influenced by the Asha’ri and I see them listed there.

I’ll be sure to look into this later.

I am genuinely curious what these conflicting attributes are in your view.

But also, from a dialectical lens, contradiction exists in all things in our own observable reality, from the lowest levels of the concept of movement to the highest levels of the organization of human society. Why would a seeming contradiction be proof that God cannot exist?

I believe in God because I think its the best explanation for the existence of our universe with it’s laws. A being outside of our current space/time setting our universe into motion just makes sense to me.

How do you know that?

“adults either know or don’t know” then you immediately acknowledge there is room for ambiguity. Revealing that you worked backwards from the premise of “belief in God is childish”.

Why else would your example of a reasonable “adult” usage of believe be valid but not

“Hey man is there a god” “I believe so but I haven’t seen him personally”

In both examples there is a being/place beyond our current reach which we believe to be there, for whatever reasons, but are unable to confirm at the moment.

Ironically in your rush to call others childish you posted the most childish response here by assuming your understanding is the only valid one.

I’m the only one, sorry.