But let us reword your position for a moment to point out the folly (currently at least) in its usefulness.

Here in my home country, if I desired a hamburger I happen to know from experience that most restaurants will have such a thing to sell to me. Ignoring jokes about McDonalds not having real food for just a moment, I know they are the most common place around to find a hamburger at.

Then you come along and (correctly, but uselessly) point out that the laws of physics do not rule out the possibility of finding a hamburger sitting around in some random persons back yard, and so such places should all be equally searched as well.

Yet if you or I were to travel to a country we have never been to before and happened to desire a hamburger, we would search out a restaurant knowing the chance of finding a hamburger there, even without ever having visited a restaurant in that country before.

No one is actually arguing that it wouldn't be possible to find a hamburger in a random persons backyard (although many would argue if it would be a good idea to eat it :P ) but from experience we know the odds of finding one in such a place are much much lower than compared to a restaurant.

Likewise, we know life on earth is more likely to be found in water than not.
That doesn't mean there is NO life outside of the water at all, just that the odds of finding it in water are higher than finding it elsewhere.

Again, no one is actually arguing that water is required for life in general, only that our sample of one shows a much higher chance of finding it, and our sample size of one is all we have to formulate characteristics to actually look for and detect.

So looking for life in water, that is similar to life on earth, is what we have the best description of (as crappy as it may be) and so the best chance of actually detecting, and our one sample shows it as the highest likelihood of occurring in water.

This is why we look for water and use the characteristics of life we have to match on - because it gives the best chance of success.

As our samples of majorly differing life forms increases and our characteristics to match on increase, we will have better odds of success looking elsewhere.

But with our current knowledge and technical level, it makes no sense to search for hamburgers in random back yards when we can search in restaurants first.

You always aim for the low hanging fruit first, then move on to the harder to reach fruit after.
You have to learn to walk before you can run.
Insert additional cheesy proverbs here (especially if they make good hamburger toppings! sorry, I think I'm hungry)

Just because searching for life as we know it in water is the first step does not exclude all the other harder to detect steps, it only delays them until later, hopefully to a time we are better equipped to do so both with technology and our knowledge.

It's also worth pointing out that no one is actually forcing you to look in the most common places for the things we know how to detect - you are free to look anywhere you like for things you can't describe, if you so wish.
It's just that your odds of success are so drastically lower, even compared to the already seemingly low chances in finding life in water on another world, that few people would be willing to throw money at you for the task.

And that, put simply, is why we look for water on other worlds in our search for life.

The problem with only using "how I feel" as a measurement while ignoring scientific measurements of the effects is that human senses are pretty horrible and are often wrong.

Back in my day this was taught and demonstrated in public education (seems not to be the case anymore) and can be proven with a very simple experiment: the old warm and cold bowl of water trick.

Line up three bowls on the counter. Fill one half way with cold water and another half way with hot (to the touch, not burning) water. Put one hand in each for a few minutes.
Then mix the two bowls of water together in the last bowl to get warm water, and put both your hands together in that bowl.

The hand previously in the cold water will feel hot, and the hand previously in the hot water will feel cold, both at the same time and in the same bowl of water.
Your senses are completely lying to you. One bowl of water can't be two different temperatures at the same time.

Only our intellect is capable of recognizing the contradiction in the data from your senses to indicate neither can't be correct.

Only impartial scientific measurement can give you accurate data that is correct, combined again with our intellect to let us override data from our senses with measured data.

This isn't to say our senses aren't important or don't matter at all, only that our senses are just the first step in obtaining knowledge. All three (senses, intellect, and measurements) are required.

Please don't rely on one without the others, as that only serves to make your knowledge dubious, and draw into question any and all future knowledge based on that one incorrect fact.

First one, then the other.

Rats, I knew I should have checked with a lawyer before opening my Joe's Barber Shop and Scabies Quartet franchise!

Apparently so. People tell me all the time I have a unique smell that cannot be appreciated!

I've seen it twice (outside of documentation, as you say)
Once while learning how to code finder extensions in pascal - poorly.
Another when the MB wasn't in a case and I accidentally dropped a couple HD screws out of my hand directly onto the MB.

Obviously both cases were my own doing and 'my fault', but I remember being pretty proud at the time seeing something so rare most people didn't know what that icon even meant.

I don't remember OS 9 too well, but wasn't the spinning beach ball a new introduction of OS X 10.0? Along with most of the candy style widgets?
In OS 8 I clearly remember the only 'wait' cursor was the wrist watch that always said 3 PM, and had no color in it.

But I admit it was some time ago now

Cable Co Exec: *Hands over envelope of cash* You my nigga?

Representative: It certainly appears so.

Cable Co Exec: The night of the fight, you may feel a slight sting. That's pride fucking with you. Fuck pride. Pride only hurts. You fight through that shit.
Because a year from now, when you're kicking it in the Caribbean, you'll say to yourself: I was right

Representative: I have no problem with that.

Cable Co Exec: In the vote, your ass goes down. Say it.

Representative: In the vote, my ass goes down.

Well since you offered, could you make your paypal payment to me about $6000 USD for a mid-range server?
Or since you're being so generous offering to pay for servers for us, how about a nice even $10000 and I'll get one of those newfangled blade systems!

Three days ago the Systemd-UpdateAgainstYourWillD automatically installed SystemD-AiD, which is a requirement to even boot the kernel because it was deemed no human being ever has or ever could be capable of the overwhelming task of "run some programs", which of course includes programs written by humans.

Two days ago there were promises SystemD-AiD would also gain enough intelligence to read corrupted syslogs, while insulting your petty human intelligence via way of SystemD-FortuneD, and injecting them into all outbound emails sent from your username via SystemD-SpammerD.
It was also rumored to soon be capable of washing your dishes, since no init system wants to start dirty programs or use plastic fork()'s.

Yesterday they canceled the dish washing patch based mainly on a usenet poll where "fuck systemd!!!" was interpreted by a similar AI as voting against the feature, thus canceling the patch due to overwhelming demand.

*Puts on grumpy old old old man voice*

When I grew up, there were only THREE planets in our solar system: Earth, Mars, and Mercury.
Both Jupiter and Venus are stars not planets.

Nothing beyond the thing you call the asteroid belt exists, and of course the asteroid belt is really just the outer shell of our universe with the other stars painted on it.

No mystical Pluto object could possibly exists beyond the edge of the universe!

Now get off my lawn with that talking about how things used to be :P

Err, wut?

I manage around 150 Win7 machines at work, and have 4 of them at home, and never once seen the behavior you are describing.

Are you sure there isn't more involved with recreating that? Have you seen this on more than one Win7 computer?

When I use explorer to delete a file, it is removed from the file list and placed in the recycle bin folder for that drive, just as has been the case for some time now.

If explorer is open to a remote file server it still removes the file from the list when deleted, just skipping the recycle bin part of things.
(Not to mention my complaint about a confirmation prompt being there when the recycle bin is used and so recovery is possible, and NO confirmation when deleting on a file share despite no recovery of the file being possible by default, which always seemed bas-ackward to me)
But you didn't mention browsing to a remote file share, the default explorer will open to your homedir or drive root typically on your system drive.

Well to be completely fair, there are a TON of very nice features being put in Win10, on top of a ton of things fixed that they broke in Win8.

No GUI requirement similar to the choice of installing xorg (I believe introduced in server 2012?), a powershell version of apt-get using the windows tailored chocolatey package format, fixed the stupidest of GUI changes from Win8 such as no desktop by default and whatever they call the app tiles thing, improved filesystem and network file sharing (the latter bringing a HUGE speed boost, both being more parallelized), etc.

They are trying out a different (and IMHO better) upgrade path, and hopefully all that is claimed about the new IE will come true which will finally begin closing the huge gap between it and pretty much any other browser.

Sure there is still plenty of time between now and release day to drop the ball on for anything above, but I dare say direction under their new CEO has been pretty damn positive so far, and leaps and bounds better than when under Balmer (though I admit that is a pretty low bar anyway)

As someone who hates Windows mainly due to being forced to support it and its bullshit for the past 20 years, even I am quite impressed with the changes between Win7 and Win10, and don't have much to complain about. We will see if that still holds true after release of course.

But I can't help but agree, a lot of the serious problems are being or have been addressed.

We only complain about the icons and lack of theme support to fix them because Microsoft asked us, petty as that may seem.

Except even in GEoS from the seventies with a not-quite-8-bit color pallet was still capable of showing the differences between each type of GUI widget, and between widget and non-widget.

Win8/10 (and iOS7+, and Unity) fail to differentiate buttons from drop-down menus from checkboxes from radio buttons from text input fields.
You can only tell widget from non-widget by the different square of color, which can and does happen frequently between different areas in a non-widget background image as well.

It more reminds me of those "item hide and seek" point-and-click games where you mainly just click on everything in the image until the game tells you everything has been found.

Even over here in the wild west, plumbers, electricians, doctors, nannies and nurses all need to be licensed.
Lawyers do too.
Only painters and interior decorators on GPs list don't need licenses here.

Perhaps by "nanny" they meant "babysitter"? Baby sitters need no license, and many do call baby sitters a "nanny" despite the medical qualifications needed for the official title.
Not that such a mistake would make the GP any more correct of course.

Please to be explaining how a United States Citizen is classified as "foreign entities" in your mind?