Even when I visit nosslsearch.google.com I ultimately get redirected to https://www.google.com. Why is this? (I'm not signed in to google, and I'm entering these in the urlbar, not the search plugins.)  I've tried Firefox 23 on both Ubuntu 12.04 and Windows 7, with the same results. I've also tried Chrome on Windows 7 with the same result. I've tried using Firefox in safe mode with all addons disabled, and clean profiles and clean installs of Firefox.   Surely the purpose of the nosslsearch site is to allow non-HTTPS searches, but using the firefox console, I see that it first redirects me to http://www.google.com which subsequently just redirects me to https://www.google.com. Why is it doing this?  (I need non-HTTPS search as HTTPS are blocked)
Chrome's default search engine is .  How we can force chrome to use  without https?  I need a solution that allows proxies to rewrite my URLs, but https currently makes this impossible...
Unable to install "": snap "" has "install-snap" change in progress I just finished the installation of the Ubuntu 18.04, but whenever I try to install any application from Ubuntu Software the same error occurs (for example "vlc"):     unable to install "vlc": snap "vlc" has "install-snap" change in progress   I hope somebody can tell me what I've done wrong. My dad has an old Sears KS-2 + 50mm f/1.7, which from a bit of research seems to use a Pentax K-mount.  I've looked around a bit and found a , which says it supports af-confirmation, and costs ~$30 US.  Has anyone tried using an adapter ring like this, and if so, would you recommend doing so?  I am perfectly happy with shooting manual, but I'm curious about the quality of older lenses.  I'm assuming that if I use older primes the optical quality will be fine, and it looks like the build quality of the older lenses is much better that similarly priced new lenses. Let $f:G\to K$ be a surjective group homomorphism and $H$ be a subgroup of $G$ satisfying $N_G(H)=H$. Then $N_K(f(H))=f(H)$. I'm trying to prove or disprove it. perhaps, this proposition is true. But, how can we prove it? Edit: I thought it is true because WIKI said it is true without proof A hard problem on exponential integration Suppose $a : [0 , 1] \to \Bbb R$ is an infinitely smooth function. For $\lambda\ge1$, define $$F(\lambda) := \lambda \int_0^1 e^{\lambda t} a(t) \, dt.$$ If $\sup_{\lambda\ge1}|F(\lambda)|\lt\infty$, then $a$ is the identically zero function. Below are the some results I have derived:   Derivatives of any order of $a$ vanishes at $t = 1.$ For any $\delta\lt1$, $a(t)$ has a zero in the open interval $(\delta , 1).$  The same is true for all the derivatives of $a(t)$. This tells us that the $n^\text{th}$ derivative of $a$ has infinitely many distinct zeros for all natural $n$. If $a$ is analytic, then I can show that $a(t)\equiv 0.$ If $a(t)\ge0$ on $[0 , 1]$, then it is obvious that $a\equiv 0.$   I would appreciate any hint.  Actually $(1)$ and $(3)$ follows from $(2)$. For $(2)$, suppose that $a(1)\gt0$ (the case that $a(1)\lt0$ can be argued in the same way as the following), then there exists $\delta\lt1$ such that $a(t)$ is strictly positive on $I = [1-\delta , 1]$. Then write $F(\lambda) = \lambda\int_0^{1-\delta}e^{\lambda t}a(t)dt + \lambda\int_{1-\delta}^1e^{\lambda t}a(t)dt$. Now there exists $c\gt0$ such that $a(t)&gt;c$ on $I$ since $I$ is compact, so that the second term is bounded below by $c (e^{\lambda}-e^{\lambda(1-\delta)})$. But the first term is only $O(e^{\lambda(1-\delta)})$, so this contradicts the fact that $F(\lambda)$ is bounded. Morever, using the same idea and integration by parts, one can see that $n^{th}$ derivative of $a$ must vanish at $1$. I have a bash script which must call another bash script which varies per-user in order to get some configuration information, like so:  somescript:  #!/bin/bash ${HOME}/.ssconfig echo "Hello, ${VARIABLE}!"   ~/.ssconfig  #!/bin/bash VARIABLE=world   Which, instead of giving me Hello, world! as expected, gives me Hello, ! How can I pass variables up from a script to the one that called it? When creating accounts on Windows 10, you get a choice between "Your family" and "Other users".  If you choose "Your family" you are forced to use a Microsoft account to sign in. There are various reasons why one wouldn't want to do that, such as too much sharing of private information with Microsoft, etc.  If you choose "Other users" you can create regular accounts just fine. However, if you need to setup time limits for some accounts, it is impossible to do so. It is a feature exclusive to "Your family". Not all time-restricted users I want to create are my family, and not everyone is okay with sharing their info with Microsoft.  So, is there a way to setup login time limits for the "Other users" type of accounts? What is the cardinality of the set of all topologies on $\mathbb{R}$? This was  on Quora. I thought about it a little bit but didn't make much progress beyond some obvious upper and lower bounds. The answer probably depends on AC and perhaps also GCH or other axioms. A quick search also failed to provide answers. How to maintain a file's 'last modified' date? Why a subspace of a vector space is useful From :   (formal) showing great care and effort in your work synonym: diligent  (formal) working very hard and taking great care that everything is done as well as it can be synonym: diligent  (formal) showing care and effort in your work or duties  These definitions look alike. What they have in common is that these words mean to take care and to put effort into your work. All words are formal. None of these seems to be a proper term in a specific field, e.g. medical, law. I also looked at  to get more details. This adds the connotation of steady and earnest to diligent and unremitting attention and persistent application to assiduous. But in the end, these additional information are again describing an equal thing, i.e., continuously doing your work. The entry on sedulous doesn't add any more content; it refers to diligent and again describes the word with perseverance. From this point (checking dictionaries only), I don't see any difference at all. I continued with a corpora search. From : Diligent is most used in combination with work, effort, research, study but also student, people.  She's a diligent student. His diligent research identified the value of ...  Assiduous is also most used with work, effort, research but not with student, people. Merriam-Webster's Learner's Dictionary entry on  lists student as example though.  He's assiduous in his work. With assiduous attention to detail ...  Sedulous is most used, um, to little results.  has even less content. Merriam-Webster's example is, once again, a student. So, diligent is used most often, followed by assiduous and sedulous is quite rare. All words are formal. All words seem to be usable as an attribute to a person (e.g., student) but also specifying the intense care and effort on work, e.g., a research. I don't see any significant difference in these words, besides frequency. When is a student diligent, assiduous or sedulous? And when is a research diligent, assiduous or sedulous? Or simply: What are the subtle distinctions which aren't represented by dictionaries? Globally disable "include online search results" Looping through files with spaces in the names? I wrote the following script to diff the outputs of two directores with all the same files in them as such:  #!/bin/bash  for file in `find . -name "*.csv"`   do      echo "file = $file";      diff $file /some/other/path/$file;      read char; done   I know there are other ways to achieve this.  Curiously though, this script fails when the files have spaces in them.  How can I deal with this?  Example output of find:  ./zQuery - abc - Do Not Prompt for Date.csv Questions with many upvotes should not be closable I see a lot of good, well-writen and constructive questions (that are probably not only good for me) closed, by various reasons which I fail to digest, so I propose the idea that questions with n upvotes should not be closable.  This would be in my opinion very much in the spirit of "", and unless I'm wrong, it would be beneficial for the users to choose by themselves whether the site should have or not x question. The ones which are low quality never get many upvotes anyway.  The only cons I can think of are... DB space? And at a minimum there's the pro of more popular pages with more ads (for the admins), and questions people like (for the users).  I'm also counting for , in the lines of Google's "", but questions  are more like what I'm aiming at (probably that question has not many upvotes for this though). SQL Query; Admin Log System; Foreign Keys; Retriving multiple rows form different tables at once Table A (users)  id     | name   | ip 52433    Yashas   1.1.1.1 512      Admin    5.6.7.8   Table B (admin_record)  id    | admin | time    | date    | reason | action  52433   512     2312352   1213213   Test     WARN   id is FOREIGN key  Table B keeps a log of all actions an administrator takes on his users. And the table A stores the account information of the users &amp; administrators.  I am trying to display a list of actions taken by a administrators on a user.   I want to write a query which gets me all the rows of table B where id = fixed number.  Here is what I want to display:  "Administrator1 [Name]" took action on "User Name" for "[Note]" on XX/XX/XXXX. "Administrator2 [Name]" took action on "User Name" for "[Note]" on XX/XX/XXXX. "Administrator3 [Name]" took action on "User Name" for "[Note]" on XX/XX/XXXX.   All I have is the user's id using which I need to obtain all the entries in the log along with the administrator names. I need to obtain the admin's name, users name and all the contents of table B related to a particular user in one single query. If possible, I want the to change the field name(not literally change, but want the SQL server to send the data with new field names to separate admin name &amp; user name) of the admin's name to admin_name and user's name as . I mean something like this  SELECT users.name AS admin_name WHERE users.id = %i  AND SELECT users.name AS user_name WHERE users.id = %i   (the query isn't correct,it us just an example to show what I am trying)  Progress so far:   SELECT player.name, player.ip, admin.name, record.date, record.time, record.action, record.reason FROM admin_record AS record JOIN users AS player ON player.id = record.id JOIN users AS admin ON admin.id = record.admin WHERE player.id=%i   where admin_record is table B &amp; users is table A. so someone tells me i need to call a few people.  they send me a vCard called contacts.vcf.  i import it.  i open my phone app and start to dial, but wait...i don't know their names.  How do i look up a recent vCard on my phone?  How do i know who's contact i've been sent?  when i navigate to a .vcf file, i can't open it.  all i can do is import it.  polaris office won't import/open it.  is there an android txt editor i can use to peruse a vCard?  yours truly, Confused by vCards Note 3, kit kat Browsing folders with more than 100000 images How do you end with a single quote followed by a double quote? How to avoid the 'not properly formatted as code' alert Best way for a 'forgot password' implementation? I am currently reading about the interactions between light and matter, but I keep coming across conflicting explanations.  My initial understanding (using classical electrodynamics) was that light (EM) waves do not actually travel through glass. Instead, they are absorbed by the atoms and/or electrons within the glass, which then emit new EM waves. The new EM waves emitted by the energised particles make up the forward-radiation, which is the light observed from the opposite side of the glass. So it appears as if light is travelling through the glass, but it's actually being absorbed and then re-emitted with (mostly) the same properties.  The article  by Chad Orzel, based on a related SE question, confirms the above:      To understand the propagation of a wave through a medium, you can   think of each component of the medium– atoms, in the case of a glass   block– as being set into motion by the incoming wave, and then acting   as a point source of its own waves.   But an answer to a different but related question,  conflicts with the above:     the electrons in glass are tightly bound to atoms so they are not free   to move like the electrons in a metal and therefore they do not absorb   the photons.   I know the above is referring to the quantum electrodynamics understanding, but I think it still conflicts as it claims that EM waves are not absorbed by the electrons in glass because they are too tightly bound to their atoms.  Also, the  provides a small explanation of the mechanics behind refraction within glass, which kind of conflicts with both of the above:     In the case of dielectrics such as glass, the electric field of the   light acts on the electrons in the material, and the moving electrons   generate fields and become new radiators. The refracted light in the   glass is the combination of the forward radiation of the electrons and   the incident light. The reflected light is the combination of the   backward radiation of all of the electrons.   From my understanding, the above claims that some of the light is absorbed and re-emitted by the electrons (which conflicts with the linked answer), and that the rest of the incident light travels through the glass (makes up the rest of the refracted light) (which I think conflicts with the linked article, claiming the light is absorbed (although the article doesn't technically state whether all of the light is absorbed and re-emitted, so maybe that's where I'm going wrong(?))  I'm sure this is my misunderstanding, so I would be very grateful if you could clear it up for me:  When a light wave is incident on a sheet of glass, do the particles that make up the glass absorb the waves and re-emit them in the forward direction? Or do the light waves manage to travel through the glass, without being absorbed and then exit the glass?