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.

The comment I left t here no longer relevant because parent and child revised their comments after the fact. This is not a healthy way to have a discourse people.

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.

Who is out there wiping their ass with %100 ethanol?

Since you seem to be comfortable citing the codes, what about the space between those studs? I thought it had to be a little less than the 2 feet we seem to see here.

Don’t get it twisted. I’m not taking the question any more seriously than anyone else in this thread (including you).

The flaw in the logic of your plan didn’t require any serious analysis. If you think it did, then “Thanks for the compliment, I guess.”

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.

obligatory xkcd

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).

normal shirt buttons, which come off fairly regularly.

Maybe your technique isn’t sufficient and the posted method isn’t as “over the top” as you claim, but fundamental to not loosing buttons.

Classic Microsoft Business Strategy

• Embrace
• Extend
• Extinguish

You’ve got the critical thinking skills and empathy of a cop. How do the boots taste?

No no no. In this case it was a crime against the memory of that pig.

The line between perfect bacon and overcooked perhaps slightly burnt is a number of seconds.

This is the biggest reason I bake bacon. I can bake nearly a pound of bacon in the time it takes to make the rest of breakfast and seconds don’t make the difference between perfect and burnt. You can dial that shit in to the perfect level of crispiness.

Bacon spread out on a cooling rack set inside a sheet pan in a cold oven. Set to bake at 200°C or 400°F. After 20 minutes, check on it every 5 minutes until done to your liking. Thicker bacon takes longer obviously. Drain the grease and save for later cooking use.

Key lime juice also makes for a very interesting margarita.

What a convincing argument. I didn’t realize you had the authority to just decide.

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.