All Activity

I've no idea what people are talking about when they're talking about ads on YouTube. Regarding uBO's blacklist, non-issue as far as I'm concerned. If I want ABP's lists, then I'll use ABP. Don't see the point in feeding uBO with a list that contains crapload of ABP specific filters. If something useful is in there, it can be implemented in uBO's lists.

How does that invalidate the open-source components? There are distros out there that do not include binary blobs. Supermium's source code is here, it simply depends on closed-source Win7+ API emulator. Apparently Windows XP is so bad they have to emulate Windows 7+ (APIs) to make it run on XP. And even then it's far cry from the old XP compatible Chrome versions, which were higher quality releases with none of the bugs or deficiencies you see these days.

Months ago, I added the filters you describe to my uBlock Origin My Filters list, but only for it on BNavigator. I noticed the problem months ago, that YouTube would present the adblocker nag overlay despite uBlock Origin Legacy being used with filter lists that would normally filter that content on other browsers. The problem does not occur with any of the other @roytam1 browsers, including Iceape-UXP, which is, like BNavigator, a SeaMonkey derivative. Adding the given filters helps but is not without incontinences (page scrolling breaks (workaround is to put video in fullscreen and then restore) and video stop playing once after a second or few (workaround is to click the video or its play button to manually start playing the video)). Such is rather unfortunate. Out of all rouytam1's browsers, YouTube works best in BNavigator, notwithstanding the herein described issue.

I was trying to place the following text, between quotes, between the words "user" and "prior" of my previous post, but the forum would not allow it. Please treat the post as if it has the quoted information in the indicated place. The quoted information: "(which usually displays as white)"

No. My impression is that the issue is that the uBlock Origin Logger window is not being painted correctly (probably not being painted at all) upon a new instance of its showing, probably despite otherwise being rendered or loaded. While the window shows blank to the user prior to right-clicking the content area or resizing the window using its side grab functionality, its is still interact-able and otherwise works. Upon right-clicking the content area or resizing the window using its side grab functionality, the Logger window is repainted and its contents are visible to the user. Your driver configuration/hardware configuration might not be affected.

Double posting. Thus, deleted. Thanks to our forum editor! it's always a pleasure.

I use the flag --max-connections-per-host=15 on my very old and weak hardware, however, with Thorium under Windows XP. So far, it works great.

Someone already tried --max-connections-per-host=4 on weak hardware with Supermium?

Please make sure to take a couple of seconds to perform a simple search before posting. C++ source code file extension is .cc and .cpp, not ".bin", "binary", etc. FAQ for newbies. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1545080/c-code-file-extension-what-is-the-difference-between-cc-and-cpp

Senangmpo77 adalah situs slot77 paling gacor dengan server terbaik memberikan kemenangan degan menghadirkan permainan gampang menang. Dengan permainan gampang menang maka keuntungan besar pasti akan gampang didapatkan karena situs slot Senangmpo sering memberikan kemenangan besar.

Senangmpo77 merupakan situs slot online paling gacor di Indonesia yang memiliki permainan gampang menang dengan deposit termurah. Keuntungan besar hanya bisa didapatkan di situs slot gacor senangmpo yang selalu menghadirkan permainan gampang menang sehingga keuntungan sangat gampang didapatkan.

No, it needs to be C++ source code.

Yes, a good suggestion to block rumour spreaders.

I have the same problem. Firefox says all installer files from versions 1.0.0.999 and up contain a virus or malware. I'll give the benefit of the doubt and trust that it's a false positive.

@66cats, save your breath. Apply the ignore settings in the forum. They are not perfect but, well, es lo que hay, we say in Argentina.

Supermium source, and [at least] the binary of that .dll is, and always was, publicly available. Not sure how not publishing the source would affect people who wanted to support win32/needed an installer.

It would be odd to simply publish all of the source code of something which has *subscription mode* and paid Patreon versions, yes, I'm aware about the free github versions, too.

So that was the one that got famous? (forgive me, i'm a bit out of the loop when it comes to browser starter apps)

There was a leak, my first release wasn't protected with X-prot, so someone, someone I shared my app with, had hacked it and made another launcher app based on my knowledge, but it's nowhere near as good as the original, that person didn't know all secrets. Clearer now?

Probably the same people who started spreading rumors that Linux is open source. I'm having trouble reconciling how something shared with a small circle of friends could be thought of as famous. Horse-famous, maybe?

I never saw any links to it. I only saw someone at github asked win32 to publish the source code to that mysterious dll file, but no answer. Usually it's at github, these days.

When you ask a question on a public forum, it means anyone is free to answer. So I'm answering. Many people started spreading rumours (based on nothing, no one ever gave any links) about Supermium being fully open source, and some even started to believe that, all until someone finally figured out: Supermium needs a special dll without which it doesn't work at all, meaning it's all close source in the end, I mean the whole browser. What's so hard to understand or why are you having troubles to reconcile? https://www.deepl.com/translator

Huh? I'm asking Dixel if he's sure the source wasn't published (and not getting an answer). Also pointing out the question is not rhetorical &, not being a coder, i wouldn't know where to look. Not sure how i could've been more explicit. having trouble reconciling this with

Yesterday I downloaded an update for ie 5 that added 128 bit security. Maybe we can add protocols that way too? If we could add things like https like that it would already be a bit better to use.

If you're so sure, please give the link.