youngalfred

I read the title and for some reason thought you’d mean that the whole screen is black except for the cursor, which would let the what ever was under it shine through.
Sort of like when a fps has a torch only level.
That’d be interesting!

In case anyone is interested, there’s a powertoy called file locksmith that will show what’s using it and let you kill it: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/powertoys/file-locksmith

Did he just spend the first half of the article explaining why ‘copilot in excel’ (not agent mode) wasn’t designed for calculation tasks, them finishes with complaining that on benchmarks it fails 80% of the time?

The 54% accuracy of agent mode should be called out, not the low accuracy of the thing that wasn’t designed for it.

I feel like you could set the clock to birds here sometimes - Wake up = all the little birds, lorikeets

Lunchtime= plovers, as people navigate around them

Arvo= cockies and corellas

Evening = not a bird, but fruit bats

Random time during the middle of the night= the blood curdling scream of the curlews.

I loved the leather back on my g4

Australia being a famous axis power

that sound

Ramirez!

Windows+L

Of course I read it, and investigated the source. The issue is with the title the article chose.

The title is ‘internet’, implying a network of networks. The title wasn’t ‘new record in data transmission speed’.

The actual source: www.nict.go.jp

Not really an ‘internet’ world speed record, but really a wired data transmission record if I’m reading correctly.

Choice to do what?

These are their two points:

Private servers are not always a viable alternative option for players as the protections we put in place to secure players’ data, remove illegal content, and combat unsafe community content would not exist and would leave rights holders liable. In addition, many titles are designed from the ground-up to be online-only; in effect, these proposals would curtail developer choice by making these video games prohibitively expensive to create.

I feel like the first is fair enough at the moment, but with accompanying laws it could be resolved. Eg once a developer enacts an end of life plan, their legal culpability is removed. Plus give the right tools for moderation and the community can take care of it.

Second is just a cop out I think. “Many titles are designed from the ground up to be online only” - that’s the whole point. It’s not retroactive, so you don’t need to redesign an existing game. But going forward you would need to plan for the eventual end of life. Developers have chimed in that it can be done.

6 million customers?
How many could there be that aren’t affected? We only have 27 million people total right now.

I love how they went into so much detail about why the old numbers would be accurate, then proceed to say they can ‘safely’ say that windows has lost 400 million users over a sentence on a blog stating windows has ‘over a billion users’.

No source for the blog post. Here it is: windows blog

Note that the number has been updated, and at the bottom they state that that figure has been updated.

The original text said ‘over a billion’. 1.4 billion is over a billion.