Jump to content

My Browser Builds (Part 3)


Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, msfntor said:

which advises me to go again with uMatrix...

Bingo!  I thought I tried to tell you that once also, lol.  I much prefer the OCD Approach that uMatrix gives, much tighter control then some simplistic "on/off" kindergarten stuff that uBlock offers.  Newbies like uBlock because it is "easy".  Advanced users prefer uMatrix because it has much tighter control.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


51 minutes ago, InterLinked said:

Shielding is a last resort.

So I can take off this baseball cap wrapped in aluminum foil?

 

ps - I haven't owned a cell phone in 20+ years!  And all I see around me are a bunch of dumb id10ts with 10-second attention spans.  If you want to witness the "dumbing down" of folks, take a look around you and monitor those that are "glued" to their cell phone and can't even set it down for 15 minutes without glancing over at it several times to see if any of their social media notifications have popped up.

Edited by NotHereToPlayGames
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

So I can take off this baseball cap wrapped in aluminum foil?

You would need to use an RF meter to measure the radiation before and after. There is no way to make an intelligent decision without actual data about the environment.

43 minutes ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

ps - I haven't owned a cell phone in 20+ years!  And all I see around me are a bunch of dumb id10ts with 10-second attention spans.  If you want to witness the "dumbing down" of folks, take a look around you and monitor those that are "glued" to their cell phone and can't even set it down for 15 minutes without glancing over at it several times to see if any of their social media notifications have popped up.

Not disagreeing there!

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Bingo!  I thought I tried to tell you that once also, lol.  I much prefer the OCD Approach that uMatrix gives, much tighter control then some simplistic "on/off" kindergarten stuff that uBlock offers.  Newbies like uBlock because it is "easy".  Advanced users prefer uMatrix because it has much tighter control.

Hmm.. Thank you very much - not only  for this: I've noexecute on AlwaysOff already! So no more DEP (but on "System" process have DEP always, see this in Process Hacker). 

After restart of Windows, RAM used: 281 MB (before:288 to 289 MB)... then after little time, RAM used: 278, 279, 278 - voilà, 10 MB of gain, saving of memory! 

Responsiveness of my Windows has increased again, surely! :cheerleader:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also just went with no DEP - AlwaysOff, and just resting idle (no real-time antivirus) the OS is only at CPU usage at most 2% ... so this is much better, indeed. Also did you try out the registry settings I posted in the 360 thread?

This is so fast now I can run the world ... not just the country ... the entire planet with this computer :D

Edited by XPerceniol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

So I can take off this baseball cap wrapped in aluminum foil?

 

ps - I haven't owned a cell phone in 20+ years!  And all I see around me are a bunch of dumb id10ts with 10-second attention spans.  If you want to witness the "dumbing down" of folks, take a look around you and monitor those that are "glued" to their cell phone and can't even set it down for 15 minutes without glancing over at it several times to see if any of their social media notifications have popped up.

I do have an old flip phone but I do see people have their heads buried down in their smart phones or walking around talking on their ear piece. No wonder people are getting run over and waling onto railroad tracks. Speaking of which ... lately somebody has been calling my phone breathing heavy. Could it be someone with asthma ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget to disable services that are not needed.

My XP config that I use in VM's only has 13 processes and 58 MB of RAM committed at startup per Task Manager once idle and statup time for the VM from XP Logo to full load is 6 seconds!  VirtualBox does take about 12 seconds to get to the XP Logo screen.

My "beast" has 29 processes but it has network and multi-monitor services/apps, printer spooler, mouse/keyboard services/apps, et cetera - but could probably be slimmed down below 29 processes.

I don't recall how many processes a "default" XP config tries to load - but I'm quite certain it is much more than 29.  Definitely much more than 13!

I use these -
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\Memory Management]
"DisablePagingExecutive"=dword:00000000
"LargeSystemCache"=dword:00000000

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\Memory Management\PrefetchParameters]
"EnablePrefetcher"=dword:00000000

I do not install SuperFetch therefore have no need to disable it in the registry.

I am not familiar with the EnableBootTrace setting so unsure if I should add that or not.

I also use both of the "NtfsDisableLastAccessUpdate"=dword:00000001 settings but I do not use either of the "NtfsDisable8dot3NameCreation"=dword:00000001 settings so unsure on those two.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, XPerceniol said:

I also just went with no DEP - AlwaysOff, and just resting idle (no real-time antivirus) the OS is only at CPU usage at most 2% ... so this is much better, indeed. Also did you try out the registry settings I posted in the 360 thread?

No antivirus here, nono!

I don't try for now the registry settings... wait a little, please..

What about your RAM used (in MB), before and after DEP deep abandon please? To see this in the tray, I use Core Temp 1.11 ...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

I don't recall how many processes a "default" XP config tries to load - but I'm quite certain it is much more than 29.  Definitely much more than 13!

Just installed a default config XP x86 SP3 VM and I'm showing 20 processes (two are tied to VirtualBox) and 88-91 MB RAM committed at startup.

The 29 processes previously posted is XP x64 so not a fair comparison.  The previously posted 13 processes is x86 SP3.

I think default processes for Win7 is in the 40s and for Win10 is in the 60s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I understand (or misunderstand) it:

 

Disable the DOS 8.3 naming convention to save system resources.

 

Windows XP uses two different names for each and every file on your system. One is the name that you see in explorer and in the command prompt, and the other is an MSDOS compatible 8.3 (8 character title followed by a '.' Then three more characters to indicate the type of file) name. If you are intending to run DOS only software, or connect to pre-Windows 95 computers, you will need this second set of names. If not, you are simply wasting resources. To disable the 8.3 naming convention:

Open REGEDIT

Navigate to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Control\FileSystem

Change the value of the NtfsDisable8dot3NameCreation key to '1

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, msfntor said:

No antivirus here, nono!

I don't try for now the registry settings... wait a little, please..

What about your RAM used (in MB), before and after DEP deep abandon please? To see this in the tray, I use Core Temp 1.11 ...

I downloaded Core Temp and will report back tomorrow in the AM. Sorry, my mind is mush and I'm ready to get into my superman pajamas. Was that TMI ...:blushing:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you send me the modified PMPlayer XPI?

I don't really care about the content of BitChute in general. Just happened to receive a link to one particular video. I was hoping that the solution would increase compatibility with multiple websites, which this PMPlayer module seems to offer.

I doubt that microwaves can affect the human body at the level that they don't burn out fragile electronics specifically tuned for those wavelengths. Perhaps if you have metal implants. But controversial technology unrelated to web browsing is offtopic in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, j7n said:

I doubt that microwaves can affect the human body at the level that they don't burn out fragile electronics specifically tuned for those wavelengths.

Well, this is a view that has been proven wrong by 50 years+ of science and research. You seem to believe that only thermal effects exist, but there are plenty of established non-thermal effects.

The FCC would agree with you, and they got sued and lost this year over their outdated guidelines.

6 minutes ago, j7n said:

Perhaps if you have metal implants.

Perhaps if you have cells in your body... is more like it. All life on earth is affected, especially things like bees, birds, trees, etc.

Beyond the scope of what can be put here, but you should do some research and look at the literature. Sounds like you have catching up to do.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oops, I did it again! :blushing: I tossed out an off-hand comment that I didn't like the content at BitChute.com, and derailed the whole thread!

My apologies, but one statement made above deserves a rebuttal, as it seems to have started a bit of a panic here, and sounds suspiciously like it came from EMFScientist.org:

12 hours ago, InterLinked said:

Non-ionizing radiation has been proven, time and time again, to have non-thermal biological health effects. Most leading scientists on this issue today say it should be reclassified from 2B to a Class 1 carcinogen, same as smoking. The science is pretty damning at this point, and scientists are pretty concerned about 5G.

Uh, no. Some scientists (at EMFScientist.org) are pretty concerned about 5G (as they were earlier about WiFi, Bluetooth, cell phones, microwave ovens, overhead power lines - shall I go on?), but the consensus of "most leading scientists" is that 5G, like all those other technologies, poses a minimal, if any, hazard to our health. Those interested can read a good article (from 2019, when 5G technology was first emerging) about the controversy here: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/5g-is-coming/

Quote

Currently the only proven biological effect of exposure to EMF, even at 5G frequencies, is slight tissue heating. There are many other effects hinted at in the research, but none have been reliably replicated and therefore are not established. Further, many of the biological effects are simply looking at changes in markers of biological activity. They don’t show actual hazard, just the potential for hazard if we make a chain of assumptions about what the markers mean.

For example, EMF has been shown to increase oxidative stress. But does this result in actual biological harm, or does the body simply adjust and reach a new homeostasis without harm? Oxidative stress is a normal consequence of metabolism, and organisms already have powerful antioxidants to deal with it.

The majority of scientists, including organizations and regulatory bodies like the National Cancer Institute, the FDA, and the EPA, look at this research and conclude that the hazard is minimal and the current safety limits are adequate.

(Emphasis added.) You're free to disagree, of course; but this will be my final word on this topic. If you try to troll me, I'll just plonk you.

Hopefully most of you will relax a little bit about your new 5G phones now, and remove your tinfoil hats. :rolleyes:

11 hours ago, IXOYE said:

I have no problem with the PMPlayer module after having modified install.rdf.

Neither do I (and thanks for suggesting PMPlayer)! The problem wasn't modifying install.rdf - that was easy - it was getting the PMPlayer.xpi file in the first place, since you must get it from one of two Web sites deliberately configured to make that task difficult, or compile it yourself!

Edited by Mathwiz
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share



×
×
  • Create New...