Leaderboard

Here is another test version, using the PR fork with EJS support (also works on Vista). Instead of Deno, Windows 7 (and Vista) users can install QuickJS.

Just tested on Vista seems to work well

Well, it is nitpicking at this point (on may part); but it still would not prevent Global Governance. You can still run different petri dishes under different rules, and be under the same umbrella of Governance. You can even have stand-offs and wars between them. It would probably work way better, than moving everything to the exact same culture of rule (Open Global Governance). There is a/some history of aristocrats and rulers fearing their own public, more than an invasion. As terrible as it may seem, there is a sound logic to sending males to battle other males (a less powerful public, during times of native unrest [especially if wishing to implement radical change]). While this it is really unlikely to have been the case "extremely" often, you can bet it has been used as a kind of population control; acts of straight out genocide being more documented. America has a pretty strong heritage of having running the Brits out. But, in reality, there is documentation of sizable British forces still being present there, after America won its independence; not long present, but enough to raise questions for some. While I won't say the whole thing was a sham (not nearly well enough informed to deny or support it) you can see the "liberation" of America being a pretty huge selling point, to get plenty of folks risking everything to develop an undeveloped territory. A large quantity of people failed, in the process of developing America. People seeking freedom of religion, freedom to develop experimental utopias, and other enamored by escaping the oppression of their native lands. There is a good chunk of that freedom that has since been revoked. For example, many delighted in the idea of allodial titles; a privileged mostly enjoyed by kings. As the government developed, this type of ownership ideal really kinda disappeared, and is now similar to what is available in many other countries today. This is "JUST" an example; so please, no one run with it as some kind of conspiracy theory. But it does show how blood and bullets could be considered cheap, when your philosophy is that you own it all anyway. What is harder to own, is the beliefs of the people. But, there is a large amount of documentation showing that great progress and success has been had there, for a very very long time. That aside, thank you for reminding me about "Checkpoint Charlie". I had fun distracting myself by digging into different aspects of it; as is available on the web, anyway. I could really easily agree with you about "Open Globalized Governance", as opposed to just the idea of a "Functional Globalized Governance". The latter likely only to be entertained speculatively (by the public), while for former being something likely quite obvious to the inhabitants thereof.

Never noticed the replies to this. Thanks, guys. I used Memtest86+ ranges and added (beginning adjusted for first bad logged address [xxxx000] and end for last bad logged address [xxxxfff] ) it to SYSTEM.INI > [386enh] > EMMExclude=xxxx000-xxxxFFF I see that I have a reduced total amount of ram, listed under properties. It is equivalent to the quantity listed in EMMExclude= Memtest86+ placed the bad memory at about 50mb thru to 65mb. If in Dos only, I use XMSDSK (not at top of memory), create a 75mb ram disk, and then ignore it. I initially thought EMMExclude has something to do with reserved UMB regions. Much latter, when exploring this machine again, I knew better. Anyway, that is what I have done. If you have any corrections, advice, or warnings, I'm all ears. EDIT: I had to use HIMEMX, as HIMEM.SYS complains about the detected bad memory; and prevents the loading of Windows.

I don't know where you've got the information about the latest release of DreamMail Pro from. On its homepage https://www.cy-email.com/, the latest offered version is 6.7.1.8 from 22.02.2025 which is listed as XP-compatible. In any case, there is no version 7.

Thanks for reporting! TBH, I didn't expect any further root certificate updates via CAupdater 1.0 or Certificate Updater 1.6. Great news!

I already wrote about this general.config.sandbox_enabled preference in terms of the Nuchi-Sporif script loading method and other ones:

I thought the general.config.sandbox_enabled preference is the one to be enabled if the user wants to use the sandbox feature.

@feodor2 When creating UC.JS scripts, I noticed that some Vanilla JavaScript commands behave differently in single-process mode compared to multi-process mode. When starting the browser, loading new tabs or windows, accessing elements via document.getElementById() and especially via document.querySelector() needs much more time in multi-process mode than in single-process mode. Is there any explanation for this? Is this by default or rather a Mypal 68 specific behaviour? When, for example, starting the browser with the about:addons page, it takes nearly 8 seconds after DOM is loaded to be able to access an element in multi-process mode via document.querySelector() . In single-process mode, it can be accessed directly. This is very strange and does not make the multi-process mode particularly attractive.

@feodor2 First of all, thanks for all your efforts! Especially for restoring the compatibility with the legacy Custom Buttons extension in Mypal 68.14.6b. At the moment, I am testing this new release and found several issues. Mypal 68.14.6b - The loading and scrolling websites issue in multi-process mode Unfortunately, I have to report that loading websites and scrolling them from top to bottom is seriously broken in my fresh installation with a fresh profile (untouched) when running Mypal 68.14.6b in multi-process mode. If scrolling to the top of this MSFN page, for example, leads to a blue window without content. Here is a screenshot: I didn't notice any corresponding errors in the browser console. I have installed the browser versions 68.14.4b, 68.14.5b and, since today, the browser version, 68.14.6b under Windows XP. The website loading and scrolling issue does not occur in version 68.14.4b or in version 68.14.5b. That means the issue started as of your new release 68.14.6b. And the general.smoothScroll preference is of course set to true which is the default value. So, this issue seems to be a more general one in multi-process mode and does not only happen if the general.smoothScroll preference is set to false. P.S.: After some more tests, I noticed that the website loading and scrolling issue doesn't seem to occur in your new release 68.14.6b when running the browser in single-process mode. In this mode, the loading and scrolling of this MSFN website here is very fast and error-free. It therefore appears to be primarily a multi-process mode issue. Maybe, this information is useful for you. At least I do hope so. Cheers, AstroSkipper

I assume you rather have a problem with a Windows XP SP3 essential security update since you didn't specify which update you are referring to. This, however, means that no one can help you.

The programme LegacyUpdate has been updated and is now available in version 1.10. Here can be found the corresponding changelog: https://github.com/LegacyUpdate/LegacyUpdate/releases/tag/v1.10.0.0 I'll also update my original post as soon as possible. Cheers, AstroSkipper

Since you replied to @ItCoder, I assume that you are using his proxy server method for restoring MU/AU. Your image shows the error code 0x8024400A which is listed as SUS_E_PT_SOAPCLIENT_PARSE - failed in parsing response. This error can also be found in your uploaded WindowsUpdate.log. A very short research led to the following: The error 0x8024400A often occurs in connection with a Windows Server Update Services (WSUS). The reason for this may be that the WSUS configuration was not carried out correctly or the settings were not distributed correctly via the global group policy. Check the following registry key: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\WindowsUpdate Additionally, you can use the WSUSClientDiagTool tool for checking your WSUS settings. BTW, I personally have never been using @ItCoder's proxy server method. Therefore, I can't say more about it. Cheers, AstroSkipper