but if you hear a Canadian say “miles per hour”, it also means km/h

Tell me you’re joking.

Police, this guy right here.

Those were all absolutely massive flowers. These men were freaking giants.

The post. The email in the screenshot.

I call bullshit. I hate Microsoft as much as the next guy, but this seems fake to me.

Edit: I initially assumed OP created the fake email deliberately for ragebait. But most other people are assuming OP thinks (or thought) this email was real, meaning it’s a scam email and OP’s friend might be actively falling for the scam. I now agree with this interpretation. Sorry my initial comments were a bit rude.

What, you think this isn’t real experience? It absolutely is. She’s a true master!

I think (not 100% sure) that UEFI is a replacement for BIOS. All modern computers use UEFI.

People still colloquially call it “BIOS” because it serves a similar purpose, but there is a technical difference.

0/5 stars. We stayed here for an infinite amount of time over the holiday. Every 10 minutes the staff moved us to a different room! We didn’t even get a chance to unpack our infinite luggage.

This is a fever dream.

Where’s the original post?

The worst part is it wasn’t a tradition at all. XT-22 was just an asshole.

That’s interesting. I’ll have to read up on that. You’re right, I am thinking about boolean algebra.

In the mean time though, I’ll note that Boolean algebra on Wikipedia also refers to this operation, so I’m not alone:

Material conditional

The first operation, x → y, or Cxy, is called material implication. If x is true, then the result of expression x → y is taken to be that of y (e.g. if x is true and y is false, then x → y is also false). But if x is false, then the value of y can be ignored; however, the operation must return some Boolean value and there are only two choices. So by definition, x → y is true when x is false (relevance logic rejects this definition, by viewing an implication with a false premise as something other than either true or false).

It also uses the second interpretation that I mentioned in my earlier comment (4 above this one), with true being default, rather than the one we’ve been discussing.

The comment you replied to is my response to this. It’s the only boolean operation that works this way. All the others are straightforward.

Yeah, that kinda works but I don’t like it. See my reply to the other comment.

Yup, that’s my interpretation too. It just doesn’t sit well with all the other operators.

All the others are phrased as direct questions about the values of A and B:

• A AND B = “Are A and B both true?”
• A OR B = “Are either A or B true, or both?”
• A NAND B = “Is (A AND B) not true?”
• A IMPLIES B = “Is it possible, hypothetically speaking, for it to be the case that A implies B, given the current actual values of A and B?”

You see the issue?

Edit: looking online, some people see it as: “If A is true, take the value of B.” A implies that you should take the value of B. But if A is false, you shouldn’t take the value of B, instead you should use the default value which is inexplicably defined to be true for this operation.

This is slightly more satisfying but I still don’t like it. The implication (ha) that true is the default value for a boolean doesn’t sit right with me. I don’t even feel comfortable with a boolean having a default value, let alone it being true instead of false which would be more natural.

Edit 2: fixed a brain fart for A NAND B

I never got why “implies” is called that. How does the phrase “A implies B” relate to the output’s truth table?

I have my own “head canon” to remember it but I’ll share it later, want to hear someone else’s first.

Even your title isn’t the true beginning. Before the terminal, there was just a printer. Teletype, was it?

I desperately want to know if this is:

1. A toy factory actually finding a creative use for excess stock of the doll head
2. A creative parent fixing their child’s toy
3. Just a joke for a meme

I followed a number of guides to try to get it to work. Including doing that. No dice.

I still think it’s probably user error on my part, but I’m still shocked there was no command to effectively “force run an unattended upgrade now” to test that it works correctly.

The OP did it in the wrong order. First do update to refresh, then do upgrade to install.