p_ing

Please read the remainder of the thread. Context matters. Pedantry, not so much.

It's doubtful that there would be 1000 people dedicated to the scheduler, or that it would produce a better result than the 1 to 4 people that likely work or are tied to owning the scheduler.

That said, what deficiencies do you see in the scheduler with the current build of Windows?

In the US, you have the right to face your accuser. Since that's not possible with a camera, photo-based enforcement becomes a non-moving violation.

You can still point the finger at someone else when you get the ticket in the mail. Or just put a bunch of question marks in reply as it is on the State to prove their case, not for you to snitch on your own bad driving habits.

At least that is how it works in the state I live in.

There were too many people posting their 'innovative' local-only PDF websites so it was restricted to not-new accounts.

Discussion ongoing - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47861270

I don't see how this is a 'problem', but rather a tunable. And any decent OS has tunables. Would you rather not have this option?

Azure networking is Microsoft's own Linux: Azure Linux [0]. I don't know what they use for storage controllers.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azure_Linux

That’s not sufficient as you will still downclock.

Azure services run on [customized] Hyper-V, thus Windows Server.

Azure networking is Linux.

EDIT: Marvel at the NT4 style Task Manager [0].

[0] https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/windowsosplatform/a...

Outside of wartime, yes these are jobs programs. If we stop, we lose the know-how, man-power, and facilities. Starting back up becomes expensive, time consuming, and potentially impossible on the time scales required. That does not bode well for a war you're involved in.

Typical approach on an HV server is to disable C States, set power management to high, etc preventing x86 from downclocking. Keeping the CPU from seesawing can have big improvements.

But you’re not going to do that in a lab/personal machine, usually.

The author is wrong.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-22626-x

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2346620-we-now-know-why...

It's due to gas in the stool produced by gut microbes and is not a concern or representation of poor (or good) health.

It sucks, until I understood what it was -Author

> Every modern motherboard ships with a tiny cryptoprocessor

The majority of implementations for quite a few years now are fTPM, that is TPM on the CPU package rather than the motherboard.

Yet Another PDF Site (someone please unironically buy yapdfsite.com and make one of these)

There seems to be at least one AI-generated PDF offline processing only site per week posted to HN. Often free.

Actual title: Securing today for the quantum future: WARP client now supports post-quantum cryptography (PQC)

Only for personal accounts. Enterprise customers have a Frontier agent called Copilot Cowork via the M365 Copilot app.... copilot.

Excel Online was a component of WAC. It was an ASP.NET (and C++???) web application that used OAuth between SharePoint Server and Exchange Server.

So I mean yes, you viewed Excel docs through a webpage just like you do today via ODSP or OneDrive consumer. The backend is completely different in the cloud service, though.

Not sure why you'd state that. 'Correct' is a grammatically correct and complete sentence to your question.

Microsoft runs the model, not OAI.

Correct.

$200-something per user per year. Will vary based on license type and seat count.

No limits.

If you're concerned, you don't send it outside of the M365 boundary and presumably your admin has Purview Sensitivity Labels in place covering the document to prevent such activity.

Token expenditure isn't a concern for Copilot users. They don't see that form of cost model, just a flat monthly (or yearly) price for a user license.

Never did this. WAC was the original version (integrated with SharePoint Server). Everything was server-side.

Cheaper to get M365 Copilot licenses for the Claude models in Excel.

That's the nature of these add-ins. Modern Add-ins are all little XML frames with some JS or whatever. All processing occurs server-side, hosted by the add-in publisher.

This is counter to the old (security nightmare) COM model where processing could be local.

Your comment is recognized as low effort, but Copilot has been OAI models behind the scenes. For enterprise customers, quickly being replaced by Sonnet as a default.

Based on my discussion with DSEs, enterprises have not been impressed in the results of "Copilot", i.e. OAI models. MSFT has been replacing (or changing the default) to Claude across a variety of Copilot endpoints.

Microsoft has this built-in using Claude models (for M365 Copilot licensed users). I don't know why you'd use this as an M365 subscriber in an enterprise. I'm sure there's some edge cases, but MSFT has been moving away from OAI. Even Copilot Studio agents now default to Sonnet 4.6 and not GPT 5.