I've been trying to ask the following question on the Microsoft Q&A site [1]:

I'm updating a WPF application that's written in C#. My development environment is Visual Studio 2023. The application currently uses .NET Framework 4.6.1, but I'm hoping to upgrade to a more modern version of .NET as part of the update.

The application uses a 32-bit COM dll, which I've called "DataTest" in the code below. This has been registered with regsvr32 and appears on the list of available COM objects in my project. When added to the "References" section, a DLL named "Interop.DataTest.dll" is created in my \obj directory, as expected.

The DLL exposes a single object, "CDataTest", with various properties and methods. I instantiate it as follows:

   using System;
   using DataTest;
   namespace MyNameSpace.DataTest
   {
       /// <summary>
       /// Wrapper for DataTest CDataTest object
       /// </summary>
       public class DataTest
       {
           private readonly CDataTest _dataTest;
           public DataTest()
           {
               _DataTest = new CDataTest();
           }
       }
   }

This works correctly when I build the application in "x86" or "All CPUs" mode. However, I now need to access a new 64-bit DLL, so I need to build the application in "x64" mode. When I do so, I get the following exception when instantiating CDataTest:

   System.Runtime.InteropServices.COMException (0x80040154): Retrieving the COM class factory for component with CLSID {[GUID]} failed due to the following error: 80040154 Class not registered (Exception from HRESULT: 0x80040154 (REGDB_E_CLASSNOTREG)).

"GUID" is the GUID of the CDataTest object. Following the advice in another question on this site, I've added the following keys to my registry:

   HKLM\Software\Classes\CLSID\{GUID}
   HKLM\Software\Classes\AppID\{GUID}

The first key contains only a REG_SZ value "AppID" which is set to the GUID, the second key contains only an empty REG_SZ value "DllSurrogate". However, this hasn't fixed the issue. A 64-bit version of "DataTest" or a 32-bit version of the new DLL are not available.

However, when I try and post it, I get a message "This question has been deleted due to a violation of our Code of Conduct". I have two questions for Wikipedia:

1. Does anyone have any idea why the question above violates Microsoft's Code of Conduct? I don't see any obvious Scunthorpe problem.
2. Can anyone help with the underlying DLL issue?

Thanks. ~2025-37950-70 (talk) 18:13, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To answer the second part of my question:

1. Create a new GUID using your favourite text editor (I used the one in Visual Studio). APP_GUID in the code below.
2. In Regedit, find HKLM\Software\WOW6432Node\Classes\CLSID\{GUID}.
3. Add a value "AppID" to this key, and set it to {APP_GUID}.
4. Create the key HKLM\Software\WOW6432Node\Classes\AppID\{APP_GUID}.
5. Set the (Default) value of this key to the DLL name (in my case, "DataTest.dll").
6. Create a new REG_SZ value "DllSurrogate" for this key, leaving the value empty.
7. Create the key HKLM\Software\WOW6432Node\Classes\AppID\DataTest.dll (or whatever your DLL name is).
8. In this key, create the REG_SZ value "AppID", and set it to {APP_GUID}.

~2025-37950-70 (talk) 13:38, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Example here

Would it not make more sense for police departments to release the actual footage instead of just filming a computer screen with the footage playing instead? Is CCTV files really that hard to access Trade (talk) 05:39, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They may be closed proprietary systems without any easy means to export the file in a common format.

Additionally for security concerns, they may not even have I/O ports to reduce the risk of someone tampering with existing footage or introducing malware. cmɢʟee τaʟκ (please add {{ping|cmglee}} to your reply) 11:45, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A reason may be that this may be easier; the police department may not have the software or expertise to convert the format from what has been called a "maze of formats".^[2]  ​‑‑Lambiam 16:41, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am using a Dell desktop computer running Windows 11. If I click that I want to print a page, I am commonly given the options of Save to PDF, Canon D570 (the printer that I have connected to the computer), Microsoft Print to PDF, and OneNote (Desktop). If I want a PDF, rather than paper, what is the difference between Save to PDF and Microsoft Print to PDF? Robert McClenon (talk) 20:20, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Applications like Word, Excel etc. have their own feature implementation to save the document as PDF. The Print to PDF is like a print driver that any application can use to print the document as PDF instead of a real printer. 05:54, 16 December 2025 (UTC) manya (talk) 05:54, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They are just two different virtual printer drivers that have a similar function but slightly different features. For example, on my computer, "Save to PDF" gives a choice of 10 paper sizes, while "Microsoft Print to PDF" gives 54 paper sizes. Any software can provide such a function and add it to the printer selection list. On my computer, I have Quicken installed, and there is consequently yet a third PDF selection in the menu, "Quicken PDF Printer" (which supports 149 paper sizes). There is probably little difference in the result if you choose "Save to PDF" or "Microsoft Print to PDF" unless you need a specific paper size not supported by the former. CodeTalker (talk) 21:27, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is an extra difference. Save to PDF maintains metadata, like links. Print to PDF acts like a printer. You can't have embedded links printed on paper, so those are lost. I like to say that Print to PDF flattens the document. ~2025-41612-53 (talk) 15:47, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When I try to go to https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/ I get "403 ERROR The request could not be satisfied. Request blocked. We can't connect to the server for this app or website at this time. There might be too much traffic or a configuration error. Try again later, or contact the app or website owner. If you provide content to customers through CloudFront, you can find steps to troubleshoot and help prevent this error by reviewing the CloudFront documentation. Generated by cloudfront (CloudFront)"

Is it blocked for everybody? Thanks, DuncanHill (talk) 14:43, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is really bizarre. I've been having the above problem for a few days. As I posted the above I also emailed the Science Museum. Within a couple of minutes I was able to access the site! I've only had the automatic email "we'll get back to you someday" reply. DuncanHill (talk) 14:47, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I got this error a couple of days ago, and I'm still getting it. Just to be sure, I clicked the 'Collection' link on the main SMG webpage. Instant 403, no delay while it waited for a non-existent reply or anything. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 15:25, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just had a reply, telling me to update my browser, clear cookies, delete history, the boilerplate website problem reply. But for me the problem cleared without doing any of that. It was almost immediately after emailing the info@ sciencemuseum . ac . uk address that it cleared. Suggest you try the same! DuncanHill (talk) 15:38, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that worked for me. Thank you. Now I need to remember why I needed it... -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 16:04, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Premise: question for information purposes only! Second premise: there is an app for iOS and Android that allows you to connect to WiFi networks all over the world. Question: if someone uses this app to insult or make baseless accusations, can it be traced back to the device? And with the device data, to the owner (for example ip>mac address associated with the ip>sim number associated with the mac address>data of the sim owner)? —~2025-42184-79 (talk) 20:55, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog

Different entities will have different parts of this information. The Wifi and firewall operator will have the mac / port/ IP pairing in their logs. A phone manufacture will have mac/device information. A telephone company will have phone number /sim information. Companies you register with like Google will have a phone number and device info, and location info. For a minor offence, no one will bother putting all this information together. But if a serious crime is perpetrated, the police will gather information to assemble the whole picture. Political parties and intelligence agencies will be collecting information and could well know who you are when you abuse someone with your phone, but only if you are of sufficient interest to them will you be targeted for individual action. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:38, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For reasons I do not understand, it seems that Facebook has marked me as a spammer. Now almost all of my postings in groups require admin approval as potential spam, which of course causes most of them to be lost forever. Facebook does not give support for problems like these. Is there any way I can contact them meaningfully? --KnightMove (talk) 16:50, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]