NotHereToPlayGames
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by NotHereToPlayGames
-
That's supposed to be GOOD, isn't it ??? If a web site doesn't know that I'm human, then that web site doesn't have my fingerprint on file. I think this is the third time I've mentioned this, I NEVER ANSWER ARE-YOU-HUMAN CAPTCHAs.
-
"So what!" Your claim was that YouTube/Invidious was blocking based in CRC checks. Opera, Chrome, Chromium, Firefox, you name it, is not reporting their "nightly" CRCs to YouTube so that their users can use YouTube.
-
That's Opera. Chrome/Chromium does not have these signature files. Could also be why there are *hundreds*, literally!, of Chrome/Chromium Forks.
-
No clue. If I were to throw out my own Conspiracy Theory, it is because I *NEVER* answer "are you human" checks. *NEVER*. If a site has to bounce me through a check like that, I just move on to a different web site.
-
I'm not seeing the difference. Browsers do not have "file access permissions" to even their own .dll files as far as a remote server or web site running a CRC check. Would be a gigantic security vulnerability.
-
Consider the H#LL^SH NIGHTMARE that such a CRC-confirmation algorithm would entail !!! This new Conspiracy Theory injected by D.Draker claims a browser is being blocked because a CRC-check "failed". Under this paradigm, nobody could ever use "nightly" build web browsers, the server would have to update their CRC Lists every two to four weeks (we all know how often OFFICIAL browsers are updated), et cetera. Bottom Line = nobody is being blocked based on any CRC Check. Not happening. Not in this universe. Not in any Parallel Dimension. Simply not happening.
-
Fair enough. But that does NOT indicate that CRC checks are being performed on system files! That is something that would require advanced file access permissions ADDED to the browser. Browsers by default can not perform CRC checks on system files. I'm quite CERTAIN of that! "Until proven otherwise." And the onous (spelling) really is not on "me" on that one.
-
I can NOT confirm this. My UNMODIFIED OFFICIAL CHROME asks if I am human. So no, the site does not run without any verification. At that point, I close the page, I prefer to NEVER so much as ATTEMPT to answer these, that only lands you on a fingerprint database. edit: Correction - my UNMODIFIED OFFICIAL UNGOOGLED CHROMIUM asks if I am human. I can test Official Chrome and Official Edge at work, I do not have them here at home (at least not at the moment, I could add to a VM if needed).
-
Okay, that I believe. There is no conspiritorial CRC check on system files and nor are you claiming there to be. Define "doesn't work". Because even my Official Chrome requests an "are you human" test at allegro.pl. Personally, I "move on" whenever I get these. One only adds themself to fingerprint databases by solving them.
-
I shall entertain followup's to you and your provided details. Are you saying that allegro.pl *WORKS* with Chrome 122 and an UNTOUCHED kernel32? But does *NOT WORK* with the modifed kernel32? From my understanding with this new info, it would be extended kernels that are being blocked by YouTube/Invidious and not a CRC-checked Chrome 122 being blocked!
-
And no! You can NOT come back with yet another "You're welcome to provide explanation" BS redirects! The onous (spelling) is on YOU. You threw out a CONSPIRACY that YouTube/Invidious is somehow performing a "malicous CRC check", something that (to the best of my knowledge) CANNOT BE DONE !!! A web browser can NOT perform CRC checks on system files. This CONSPIRACY is on YOU to PROVE, not for any of us to "disprove". It is you that injected this CONSPIRACY. My FINAL two cents on the matter... Until you can PROVE this newfound CONSPIRACY as nothing more than something YOU MADE UP ALONG THE WAY. Sure, I would believe that YouTube/Invidious is possibly blocking CLEARLY FALSE AND MADE UP metrics like clienthints or something, but performing a CRC check on a system file? THAT I AM NOT "BUYING", my dear friend...
-
That would make sense. But how were any of us to know that "one bit of dll" was changed? I kind of still don't believe this and see it as a Conspiracy Theory since no screencap illustrates this claimed before-and-after scenario. From here, it just sounds like you are "making it all up as we go". Give me details on the "bit" that was changed in Chrome 122. I will test your theory by changing that "bit" here. Until then, I am moving on now, this is all just being "made up as we go" as far as I'm concerned.
-
You're welcome to provide sources. Because without any sources it just sounds like a gigantic Conspiracy Theory (which MSFN seems historically infamous for propagating). I have never heard of browsers performing CRC checks on file systems.
-
Wouldn't that make the BROWSER malicious? Not the web site that the browser is visiting? ie, I'm not sure if "server-side" can perform CRC checks on system files unless the browser itself is malicious?
-
Try a different video. Or, perhaps more imporantly, try at 4am local time. Or, maybe they do "know you" and want nothing to do with you. Waka waka waka.
-
I am aware. I get that same error at times. I'm not blocked at YouTube or Invidious. Are you running through a VPN? Some websites *deny* access to users on VPNs.
-
Are you being "dense" this morning on purpose? That screen does not "prove" being blocked! Does not prove being blocked at YouTube (which is what your post implies). Does not prove being blocked at Invidious. That "switch backend" notice pops up because the server-side is busy and needs you to "switch backend" so that your video can be served from another server.
-
You have me confused with somebody else. I signed up here in 2019 after being a reader for a year, two tops. I never heard of MSFN prior to circa 7yrs ago.
-
Since Invidious was brought up - This is the userscript that I use if a YouTube video is being "problematic" on YouTube. I actually *prefer* the YouTube web site 90% of the time (but only because of adblockers, userstyles, and userscripts). For those 10% problem-times, a simple tap of the Esc key reloads the video at Invidious and defaults to highest resolution. // ==UserScript== // @name - YouTube 00 - Invidious Redirect // @version 1.2.1 // @include http://www.youtube.com/* // @include https://www.youtube.com/* // @run-at document-start // @grant none // ==/UserScript== document.addEventListener('keydown', function(event) { if (event.key === 'Escape') { var a = 0; setInterval(function () { if (a === 0 && window.location.href.indexOf('watch?') > -1 && window.location.href.indexOf('list=WL') < 0) { a = '//inv.nadeko.net/watch?' + window.parent.location.href.split('?')[1] + '&quality=dash&quality_dash=best'; window.location.replace(a); } }, 10); } });
-
Um, proof of what? I'm not blocked on YouTube. I'm not blocked on Invidious. I use Invidious and see that screen at times, just click one of the non-underlined backend links, keep switching backends until the video loads.
-
One or two of the "cache" folders (forget which ones as I am at work and not at the home computer) can include HUNDREDS of tiny files in Chrome/Chromium-based browsers. Use this flag - chrome://flags/#use-angle Set it do OpenGL or D3D9 and manually remove those HUNDREDS of tiny files. They will not be recreated with OpenGL or D3D9 (aside from three or four *TINY* index files which I *keep* [again, deleting a non-tracking tiny file just results in excessive read/write/erase disc drive activity].
-
Agreed! Reminder that I only use Supermium from inside a VirtualBox VM. I monitor the project and continue to have high hopes for Supermium. Though I am a bit skeptic that I will ever use it on my host OS [reminder, I'm on Win10]. Yes, my Supermium cache folders are "bigger" than my Ungoogled Chromium - but not "2/3 times" and not "disastrously high". Edge uses all of these cache folders also, I'm assuming you are aware. I should point out that some of the folders that have "cache" in their name are inconsequential and the end-user does not gain anything by preventing them. The test is to monitor their file/folder size. If the size is a couple hundred bytes, or even kilobytes, but the size is CONSTANT from NEW PROFILE, to never opened any web sites, to having several dozen tabs open, then KEEP AS IS, there's no "tracking". If a first-run "cache" file/folder is the same size and doesn't change after opening dozens upon dozens of tabs, then there is no "tracking". I *keep* them! Undo read/write/erase disc drive activity to just have the SMALL file recreated all the time.
-
Supermium uses all of those folders in the same way "as that of Chrome". But you should NOT have a "disastrously high" cache IF YOU HAVE SET THE DATA DELETION ON CLOSING THE BROWSER. Personally, your BEST route of CONTROL is to use a LOADER. Supermium does not ship with a LOADER and I myself do not use Supermium "as it ships". This is for every end-usser to LEARN and ADJUST. No different than any browser, as far as that goes. There are "nuances" with ANY browser that only those that USE will LEARN and tweak accordingly. If you really really really have a vested interest in using Supermium, then you would already be studying how to resolve such nuances. Bottom line, my Supermium/Chrome/Chromium cache is NOT "disastrously high" but that is also because I have taken steps to NOT RUN AS IT/THEY SHIP. I don't think it is the responsibility of the Supermium Developer to "also" create a "loader" - but speaking solely for myself, I would never use it without a "loader". To each their own...
-
You're doing something wrong. My cache clears at every session-close.
-
Listen, I'm a Centrist. I vote Left. I vote Right. I do *NOT* want EITHER of our two parties to be "extremists". So the way I see it, Elon is actually SAVING our Country! What we have going on in American Politics right now is nothing more than something like a Welfare Queen abusing "the system". Once that Welfare Queen LIES and CHEATS to get something for FREE, ALL HELL BREAKS LOSE WHEN 'THE SYSTEM' TAKES THAT FREE STUFF AWAY! All that Elon is "trying to do" is TAKE AWAY FREE STUFF FROM THOSE THAT HAVE LIED AND CHEATED FOR *DECADES* TO RECEIVE THAT FREE STUFF! The *PROBLEM* here is that while Elon is "clawing back" WASTE, FRAUD, AND ABUSE, and there is a SH%TLO@D of it in American Politics, is that Elon himself has been the RECIPIENT of waste, fraud, and abuse over the years !!! SpaceX and Tesla have both received *billions* in government contracts, loans, subsidies, and tax credits for DECADES. Let's "claw back" that WASTE also !!! But... One man's trash is another man's treasure. One man's meat is another man's poison. One man's loss is another man's gain. What is useless to one person is valuable to another person. There is no accounting for taste. What is rain for one is a parade for another. What is yuck for one is yum for another. To each his own. Different strokes for different folks. Your mileage may vary. PENDULUM POLITICS is the problem!