We have a family computer running Windows 10. My kids use their Microsoft accounts to log in, so that I can use parental controls. I have a Microsoft account too, but is there any reason for me to log in with my Microsoft account instead of using a local account? I can use all the parental controls through a browser regardless of how I'm logged into Windows.  Or to put it another way, will the parental controls work the same if I log in using a local account, as long as the kids log in with their Microsoft accounts?
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?
I have a daytime raster of my study area. I have 20+ counters in the study area that count "stuff" with a timestamp. Using  I determined the type of ambient light for each collected data point.   What I'd like to do:   Add a grey/semi transparent overlay to reflect the ambient light (Dusk, Sunrise, day, sunset, and dark). The end goal: produce a time-based visualization of the data collection that highlights the time of the day. Or be able to produce a snapshot at a certain time with the proper shaded overlay. Think of this as this the image: How many different/unique $4$-letter arrangements are there of the letters in the word Mississauga?  I'm thinking we need permutations? I already tried finding each letter and still don't get it... any help?   So far I've broken it off to:-  $M=1$  $I=2$  $S=4$  $A=2$  $U=1$  $G=1$  However, I don't really know what to do next. I'm pretty sure the answer to this should be obvious - even to me ...  It's been a while I've been reading and attempting to construct simple electronic circuits. The supply almost always is either through a battery/cell, or AC duly rectified to DC.   I have the impression electronic circuits rarely ever work off an AC supply.    Is this impression correct? If yes, why is an electronic circuit rarely (if ever) powered/biased using straight AC? ColdFusion adding extra quotes when constructing database queries in strings I am coding in ColdFusion, but trying to stay in cfscript, so I have a function that allows me to pass in a query to run it with   &lt;cfquery blah >   #query# &lt;/cfquery>   Somehow though, when I construct my queries with sql = "SELECT * FROM a WHERE b='#c#'"  and pass it in, ColdFusion has replaced the single quotes with 2 single quotes.  so it becomes  WHERE b=''c'' in the final query.  I have tried creating the strings a lot of different ways, but I cannot get it to leave just one quote.  Even doing a string replace has no effect.   Any idea why this is happening?  It is ruining my hopes of living in cfscript for the duration of this project Is there a word for someone who won't think critically? Is there a word for someone who won't think through issues and instead comes to others hoping that they will think for them and solve problems for them?  A word that is more specific to a lack of critical thinking skills than "lazy"? Let $X$ be a random variable and let $g,f$ be real-valued, nondecreasing, and bounded.   Show that $\mathbb{E}[f(X)g(X)]\geq \mathbb{E}[f(X)]\mathbb{E}[g(X)]$  Having a hard time seeing where to start for some reasons, any hints?  I managed to write:  $\mathbb{E}[f(X)g(X)] = \frac{1}{4}\mathbb{E}[(f(X)+g(X))^2 - (f(X)-g(X))^2]$  But I'm not sure if this is in the right direction or not. If the dual spaces are isometrically isomorphic are the spaces isomorphic? Why doesn't calling a Python string method do anything unless you assign its output? Someone mentioned it in the IRC as the slicing problem. Story on quantum indeterminacy: protagonist has to “quantum select” a portable computer’s state I'm reading through a proof in my lecture notes:     Every convergent sequence of a metric space has a unique limit.   Suppose $\lim_{n \to \infty} x_n = l$ and $\lim_{n \to \infty} x_n = m.$ Then for every $\epsilon &gt; 0,$ there exists $N$ such that for every $n \geqslant N,$  $$d(l,m) \leqslant d(l,x_n) + d(x_n,m) &lt; \epsilon + \epsilon = 2 \epsilon. $$  So $(\star) \hspace{1mm} 0 \leqslant \frac{d(l,m)}{2} &lt; \epsilon \Longrightarrow \hspace{1mm} (\star^\prime) \hspace{1mm} \frac{d(l,m)}{2} =0 \Longrightarrow l = m.$  I can follow the proof up until the jump from $(\star)$ to $(\star^\prime)$. Why does $\frac{d(l,m)}{2}=0$? Why is $H(k\mathbin\Vert x)$ not a secure MAC construction? If $\mathbb f$ is analytic and bounded on the unit disc with zeros $a_n$ then $\sum_{n=1}^\infty \left(1-\lvert a_n\rvert\right) \lt \infty$ I'm going over old exam problems and I got stuck on this one. Suppose that $\mathbb{f}\colon \mathbb{D} \to \mathbb{C}$ is analytic and bounded. Let $\{a_n\}_{n=1}^\infty$ be the non-zero zeros of $\mathbb{f}$ in $\mathbb{D}$ counted according to multiplicity. Show that  $$ \sum_{n=1}^\infty \left( 1 - \left|a_n \right|\right)\lt\infty $$  I can understand that $\left|a_n \right|$ goes to $1$ since zeros are isolated, but it doesn't help showing the series is convergent. Any help will be appreciated! Can someone point me to a proof that the set of irrational numbers is uncountable? I know how to show that the set $\mathbb{Q}$ of rational numbers is countable, but how would you show that the irrationals are uncountable? Unbiased estimator for geometric distribution parameter p In my script, I have for loop over many cube objects (~1000) and the treatment is very slow. Looking more in details, I notice that in the same amount of loops:   if I use python operation or simple blender operation like  obj = bpy.data.objects[obj_name]   or   obj.select = True   it takes less than 0.08s (for all 1000 objects) but as soon as I start using blender operators like:  bpy.ops.object.select_pattern() # or bpy.ops.object.duplicate() # or bpy.ops.object.location_clear() # or bpy.ops.object.transform_apply() # etc.   then, the performance drops down deeply with more than 6s for the same amount of objects.   And, a last information, if I reduce the amount of objects from 1000 to 50, the same set of operations with bpy.ops is 0.03s - so extrapolating, it would be 0.6s for the 1000 objects and not 6s. It is as is with 1000 objects, we loose a factor 10 in speed in comparison than with 50 objects.  I tried reducing the complexity of my mesh changing the cubes in planes but it had no effect at whole on performance.  Is there something particular to know to improve these performance or a way to use the bpy.ops methods with better performances? Obviously, I am missing something important probably. "The following" vs. "Following" I wrote      "Following examples show ..."   and my colleague revised it as      "The following examples show ..."   Why do we need "the" here even though the examples have not been mentioned before? Let $a,b,c$ real numbers. Prove the inequality $|a-b| \leq |a-c| + |c-b|$. Prove that equality holds if and only if $a \leq c \leq b$ or $b \leq c \leq a$.   I've tried starting with just $a \leq c$ and using field properties to reconstruct the inequality, however I haven't been able to make it work. I also tried making the negatives positive and stripping the inequalities and making something happen but again I don't know if that's a proper rule and it didn't seem to get me anywhere. Installing to SDCard by default Invariance of a maximally entangled state under unitary operation $U \otimes U^\dagger$