NotHereToPlayGames

I would also claim (with no data to back it up, I do admit) that hackers and cybercriminals have ZERO interest in creating trojans and malware targeting XP. Why target x number of computers on XP when you can target y number of computers on 10 or 11? y > x Guess I also kinda see it this way. Hackers and cybercriminals aren't interested in breaking into my XP anyway. Yahoo data breach of 2017 - they hacked into Yahoo servers, not personal computers of the 3 billion accounts that were effected. LinkedIn data breach of 2021 - 700 million users effected, 700 million personal computers were not hacked into. Facebook data breach of 2019 - 533 million users effected (is it effected or affected?) Yahoo data breach of 2014 - 500 million users effected (and Yahoo clearly didn't learn anything because see above's 2017 data breach) Twitter data breach of 2018 - 330 million users effected LinkedIn data breach of 2012 - 165 million users (and again they didn't learn anything because see above's 2021 data breach) Equifax data breach of 2017 - 148 million users effected eBay data breach of 2014 - 145 million users effected Capital One Target Sears JC Penney Facebook data breach of 2018 - 87 million users effected (then 533 million a year later in above's 2019 data breach) Anthem Dropbox Tumblr Uber Home Depot Marriot Those seem to be the bigger ones. I don't deny that home computers get hacked into, but I think "click-happy" consumers installed the trojans themselves because they're not really "computer people", they just want to play solitaire and download screen savers.

i will have to politely disagree with @Bruninho regarding banking on XP. (Most banking systems and ATM machines still use XP, last I recall but have not researched recently.) Not sure why this has been such a "push" all of a sudden by Bruninho - I would love to see documented proof and not just hypotheticals. I agree to disagree and I'm just trying to present the flip-side. I would never in a thousand years have my DAD access his bank on XP - so I take Bruninho's side as far as DAD accessing his bank. But my DAD has never heard of MSFN.org and wouldn't have the interest to spend more than 30 seconds here. So advice herein is generally taylored to an entirely different audience. I personally would never visit my bank's web site on any smartphone! I view it from the network level. My XP connects to the bank via a wireless router and all wireless activity can be controlled and monitored "this side" of my router versus the "cable company side" of my router. I have zero problem whatsoever in providing each and every one of you with my IP Address (but I won't). Ping my router until your heart turns blue, you won't "see" my nine computers, just the "cable company side" of my router. Perhaps that's overstating, but connecting to my bank via wireless "inside my network" is a totally different beast then connecting to a bank on a smartphone with a hundred or so "games" and "apps". Then there are Privacy Disclaimers that nobody reads nor even "cares" if their Facebook app is "sharing" data with their banking app. Privacy Data is always "shared" by default and you have to jump through some serious hoola hoops to "opt out", if you even can "opt out".

Wish it would at least show a list of solved words. Not going to make this one of my daily visits - there's supposed to be 1000 words but I somehow solved it in 108 guesses.

Nah, not really, not in my opinion. Blame it on MOBILE PHONES. Web sites don't tend to design around the "desktop" anymore, it's all mobile phones. Haven't looked, but somewhere I'm sure there are statistics on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, et cetera and how many "phones" visit the site versus how many "desktops" visit the site.

I only used Firefox for a span of three MONTHS or so, this was back in the late 90s. I then found that tabbed-browsing GreenBrowser + Proxomitron + javascript "bookmarklets" added to the GreenBrowser "toolbar" gave me everything I needed and was more "secure" than the hype and propaganda that was pushing Firefox as "safe and secure". I was working for a company that only had roughly 300 office employees but those offices were only 15 to 25 people spanning multiple networked locations (Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Iowa, Texas, Alabama, Wisconsin, Mexico, Canada). We didn't have an "IT" department, per se. We had a "service desk" but it wasn't really called "IT". I was never fond of Firefox and our "service desk" did push it as "safe and secure". I LAUGHED MY BUTT OFF when I had stopped using it for six months to a year because my PLC DDE (Programmable Logic Controller Dynamic Data Exchange) [VisualBasic] interfaces did not display properly in Firefox. We had the Indiana, Wisconsin, and Alabama offices shut down for two days because of a virus that was found to originate in a cubicle three cubes down from me and was spread through his FIREFOX to everybody on the network! It didn't effect me but it was not because I was using a Trident-based "shell" (GreenBrowser), it was because I have never allowed javascript to run on ANY browser unless I specifically "whitelist" it. Blacklist by default, whitelist what has been vetted and verified as "safe".

Reminds me of a few years back when our production floor "IT" guy was so h#ll-b#nt on "everybody must use Firefox" that he (intentionally?) left out a closing </div> tag in some manufacturing process lookup tables. It resulted in <tr> and <td> column widths only lining up properly in Firefox. Do not recall "why", but Firefox would render the columns correctly despite the missing </div> tag. I was using Ungoogled Chromium plus Stylus at the time and all I did was convert some display:flex entries to display:block and the column widths looked correct on my computer despite boycotting IT's "everybody must use Firefox". It was always fun to have the "IT" guy question why it looked correct without his beloved Firefox. The "IT" guy got away with that for about a year and a half or so. It was a college intern working for us one summer that "found" the missing </div> tag. To this day most of us in the Engineering Department are convinced that the "IT" guy was doing it intentionally because he was h#ll-b#nt on "everybody must use Firefox".

I don't understand the rules for that one, do the words change after so many guesses or something?

Not sure if there are any Wordle fans here. Fun daily brain excercise. Wordle (one word) -- https://www.nytimes.com/games/wordle/index.html Dordle (two words) -- https://zaratustra.itch.io/dordle Quordle (four words) -- https://www.quordle.com Octordle (eight words) -- https://octordle.com (this one has a widescreen mode but kinda squished too closely) And my favorite - Sedecordle (sixteen words) -- https://www.sedecordle.com But there's no widescreen mode and way too much scrolling. So below is my Stylus sheet for zero scrolling Before - After -

I wish we had a way to "opt-out" of the raccoon logo.

Kinda turned into a dead end as far as getting American Water to work with non-polyfill browser and palefill / chromefill / Babel / Proxomitron. Was still fun trying

Seems pretty stable to me. 360Chrome seems to have better process management on multi-core CPUs, MiniBrowser requires more background processes then 360Chrome. YouTube on MiniBrowser seems on-par with 360Chrome v13. I had lots of stutter on several YouTube videos that did not stutter in 360Chrome v11. Users that prefer 360Chrome v11 because it uses less resources than comparable browsers won't really gain much with MiniBrowser. Some of it's options are confusing - when you toggle the blue switch, the setting text changes and some text is confusing, do I hit the blue switch to activate what the text says before I hit the switch? Built-in Ad Blocker is "all or nothing" - would be nice to have an idea of what it considers an ad and what it does not consider an ad. Only real gain is it having a polyfill javascript engine but that only puts it on-par with 360Chrome v13 and v13.5. I do have a personal bias against any "XP" program that doesn't use a "real" title bar with XP-themed colors and icons, but that aside it does seem to work well. I would prefer a "portable" loader, but I could create that on my own - had it met other requirements, which it fails to do for my usage. I didn't really run it long enough for a long-term stability test and didn't load up an "unrealistic" number of YouTube tabs just to intentionally try to crash it.

It creates a "debug.log" file - [0409/214327.207:ERROR:directory_reader_win.cc(43)] FindFirstFile: The parameter is incorrect. (0x57) Might be related to it failing at fetching a dictionary (which could have been my system setup that prevented it, unsure).

Wasn't direct to me but since I run XP x64 I gave it a go and it's working I only tested .127 as it seems to be basically identical to .121.

Awesome! Thanks for the discovery!

“My expectations were reduced to zero when I was 21. Everything since then has been a bonus." ~ Stephen Hawking

As of now, my American Water billpay web site is the only site I have to visit that requires a polyfill javascript engine. Consumer choice always has a choice, if your weather forecast web site stops working because you prefer XP and a non-polyfill web browser, you can always find a different weather forecast web site. But I can't do that with American Water, I have to use their web site But I don't have to use "all" of their web site - I only need to log in, see how much I owe, then log out. I make the payment from my checking account access, not the billpay web site. So... The login web page plus the landing page after you log in is 225 unique .js files. (This in-and-of-itself is just plain stupid!). I can ignore the login web page, I can log in fine without polyfill. The landing page after you log in is what does not work without polyfill - and that page has 157 unique .js files (one or two of these is actually injected by my Proxomitron config). I've been able to eliminate 127 of those 157 .js files - I can view the landing page, my balance due, the due date, and can log off. So one of these 30 remaining .js files is my culprit (minus the one or two injected by Proxomitron). Fingers still crossed, I would love to get this web site to no longer require a "modern" web browser! This has been a learning experience, that's for sure. American Water has a .js file for disputing your bill, a .js file to report a duplicate bill, a .js file for adjusting your bill, a .js file to disconnect or reconnect service, a .js file for a hardship loan if you can't pay your bill due to Covid, at least three .js files for water quality concerns, several .js files for viewing .pdf files as if our browser doesn't already know how to view them, paperless billing .js files, autopay .js files, change of address or moving .js files, time zone .js files, mailing address .js files, .zip .js files, high usage or water leak detected .js files, delinquent payment .js files, delinquent dispute balance .js files, print-preview .js files, conservation tips .js files, cash payment location .js files, et cetera. It's like every department within American Water is responsible for their own departmental need .js files. What a nightmare - none of them are "needed" as far as I'm concerned. I just want to know how much I owe and when it is due!

Noted, thanks. My saga - I've stumbled into a rather surprising find. American Water's billpay web site has this .js -- https://mywaterv2.amwater.com/main-ui/solutions/enhancedportal/js/googleAnalytics.js?=@2.3.2.3-RELEASE-1648758222340 They're using a GOOGLE ANALYTICS script that they saved to their own domain and the billpay sites will not work if you block this GOOGLE ANALYTICS script.

Pretty much what I expected. Will make the browser interface EXTREMELY difficult to use. 12-character "words" compressed to 6-character "abbreviations". 8 compressed to 4. 16 compressed to 8. I didn't dive deep enough to get that far, but deep enough to know I would not like using a browser with "abbreviations" all over the place.

I could not get this to work with Tampermonkey v4.13 and 360Chrome v11. I had to also go into the userscript's settings tab and set "Run only in top frame" to NO. But this would only get "half" of GitHub to work, the file descriptions and dates would fill in but the button to the left of the green Code button would not. @InterLinked's chromefill does work as an extension, but I would prefer for it to work via Tampermonkey.

I think I'm on to something. My weekend mission is attempting to get American Water web site to work in 360Chrome v11 by using @UCyborg polyfill tricks. American Water serves 14 million people spanning 46 US States - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Water_Works Total US population is 332.4 million so directly affecting 14 million might not sound like much, especially since I can only assume that most pay their bill via PHONE and not "web brower" via desktop or laptop computer.

How were you able to narrow down https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/winuser/nf-winuser-createwindowexa issues to the index-docs.js file in particular? Or was it a process of elimination and fairly easy with only having one global sub-folder .js and one scripts sub-folder .js? How would one narrow down a web site with 225 .js files?

Well, unless it's that lib/main.js portion, just changing the polyfills .js didn't get me anywhere. Javascript console appears to be narrowing it down for me - to one or several of 109 "enhanced portal" .js files out of 179 "enhanced portal" .js files, and that's out of a total of 225 .js files altogether - just to pay my water bill !

How did you determine if this step is required or not? As I may have to add this to "chromefill" since I'm trying this on 360Chrome v11 and you are using something Mozilla-based.

Babel doesn't seem to do anything. Is there supposed to be a corrected .js in the right column? Disregard, I think I got it.