The implied problem you aren't understanding is scope. Restoring your machines functionality and determining that if you do blank the universe breaks IS AN ACTUAL SOLUTION TO YOUR PROBLEM that is in scope and highly efficient. The company probably doesn't pay you to piddle fuck around nor does it pay the IT guy to make your piddle fucking around work out.

Fucking THANK. YOU.

This is exactly what I'm talking about, we don't get hired so that we can accommodate some bullshit that an individual user just thinks they need. We are hired to keep your machine working in the capacity that your job requires it to work. Nowhere in our job description does it say that we have to be your little errand boy making your fuck-ass decisions function in our environment.

The company paid me to do exactly the actions I did before the system restore, which I had to redo after the system restore, and then I had to continue debugging and fixing the issue myself. Your cost analysis is fair in some cases, but it doesn't really apply here. It wasn't a "undo the changes so they can get back to work" situation, it was a "fix the issue so they can continue working" situation.

Also, restoring the machine to a previous state was not a fix for my issue. I wasn't in a position where I did not have access, nor was I in one where I couldn't revert the changes myself (even without the system restore). This was a lazy/incompetent tech, who finished their ticket and went home for the day having done nothing but inconvenience me even more, and cause me to spend even more time on the issue.

I only wish this was the only interaction I've ever had with IT where they proved to be more trouble than it's worth, but sadly that's not the case.