You were always only a few clicks away from some program that look liked it hadn’t been updated since Windows 95.
That remains true for 10 and 11 too. For a quick trip back to 1995, just do something that you probably haven’t done this millennium, change your mouse pointer. Instant nostalgia. Device manager in general hasn’t changed much either.
I wouldn’t even count that against them, working functionality shouldn’t be changed without good reason, except that it exposes how much windows is a patch job on a fundamentally flawed design. If it were a boat or car, it would be more Bondo than metal at this point. Why are these dialogs so stuck in the past? Shouldn’t it be a simple matter to have them use the latest design elements to at least look consistent, even if the functionality hasn’t changed a bit.
The question is rude in this context. It’s not rude to completely ignore rude questions.
Your rationalization sounds like some self centered manipulative bullying bullshit.
Not the parent commentor, but I do something very similar with Tasker. Whenever my phone disconnects from one of a list of Bluetooth connections (like my watch or my car) or even if it just gets a solid jolt to the accelerometers, it goes into lockdown mode. This means the screen gets locked and biometrics can no longer be used to unlock it, requiring the entering of a PIN code to unlock.
2fa: No issues, as I can easily migrate to a different device.
How exactly? This ability would seem to negate any benefit or security of multi-factor authentication.
Not true at all. If your light is red at any time that you are in the intersection (that would be any place past the stop bar, and the crosswalk is always past the stop bar) you are running the light and breaking the law. If you’re blocking the crosswalk, you’re blocking the intersection. You are absolutely not allowed to “finish it freely at any pace even if the red is in.” If you see your light turn red at any point after you’ve crossed the stop bar, you’ve run the light, broken the law, and endangered everyone else.
Is your abuse of the ellipsis and dashes supposed to be ironic? Isn’t that a LLM tell?
I’m not even sure what the (‘phrase’) construct is even meant to imply, but it’s wild. Your abuse of punctuation in general feels like a machine trying to convince us it’s human or a machine transcribing a human’s stream of consciousness.
It’s been the Microsoft Business plan since practically the beginning.
No, the question was “How do you [prove that your from the future]?” You laid out a scheme, which you are likely not capable of doing, especially because you missed the bit about the terrifying complexity of that particular proof.
Wiles’ demonstration of Fermat’s simply stated proposition is more than a hundred pages of complex math involving such esoteric concepts as Selmer groups, Hecke algebras, elliptic curves, modular forms, Euler systems and Galois representations. 350 Years Later, Fermat’s Last Theorem Finally Proved
It didn’t come together like a granny knot, which I understand to be just a square knot with the orientation of one half flipped. The knot I learned wrapped the free end around the base of a loop and pulling a section of that free end through it to create another loop. It was unbalanced for the same reasons as a granny knot though and probably very similar.
The knot I tie now is basically a square knot where the “top” half is formed from two loops. Admittedly the knot I tie now, would have been much more difficult for toddler fingers than the knot I learned as that toddler.
Bunny ears or a variant thereof is usually more stable anyway. I taught myself a new better way to tie my shoes at 30 something. Now I no longer need to double knot themand they always come undone easily by pulling the ends. Previously, knotting them the way my parents taught, my knots always came undone and the loops didn’t lay flat on either side (getting skewed to up and down my foot/leg).
Classic Microsoft Business Strategy
Key lime juice also makes for a very interesting margarita.
It’s an optical illusion. By definition their isn’t generally anything YOU would call erroneous about any optical illusion, I’d guess. The fact that the text is difficult bordering on impossible to read at some angles is the perceptual error. Stop ignoring obvious interpretations to support your pedantic trolling.
That’s an unhelpfully restrictive definition of illusion that is itself illusory. An illusion is also:
A sensation originated by some external object, but so modified as in any way to lead to an erroneous perception; as when the rolling of a wagon is mistaken for thunder.
The text is hidden or revealed through a change in perspective. That is the illusion.
Kink shaming is the real mental illness.
Batman
Nothing in either comment speaks about pain either, just screams. I only posted the wikipedia link because it referenced the numerous articles about this well established phenomenon. I didn’t realize I was defending a doctoral thesis here. Y’all are fucking toxic.