On 6/11/2023 8:32 PM, ...winston wrote:
Graham J wrote:
...winston wrote:
[snip]
Sorry, didn't sufficiently clarify my last response.
The url doesn't load at my end in SeaMonkey(spinning icon)
The link opens (for me) in Firefox, Edge and Chroome
Link fails here with SeaMonky, Chrome, and Firefox. Don't have Edge here. Tried IE11 - Popup appears saying McAfee does not support IE11.
Enable JavaScript in Firefox or Chrome or Edge
Edge is included in Windows 10(assumed present at your end since this is the Win10 group).
JavaScript settings:
Firefox
- setting found in about:config
Chrome
- Settings/Privacy and Security
Edge
- Settings/Cookie and site permissions
But let's not be disingenuous about this.
OK, some people block Javascript by using Adblock
or other such add-ons. A person knowledgeable enough
to add such things, likely has some inkling they are fiddling
with Javascript. Javascript provides lots of features
to make the adverts, annoying.
If the site would even deliver the .js files, you would
recognize them as being somehow different from the .htm files.
I've never bothered to adjust Javascript (in a browser).
However, I can be greeted with various error messages
suggesting I've been naughty anyway. I've never tested
AdBlock here. Neither have I bothered to turn off cookies
(because, I just delete the cookie file), yet I've been accused
of "not having enabled cookies", when the message is erroneous
and things like DOM storage are not to the web codes liking.
A lot of the time, the Javascript is looking for "features".
It sniffs to see if certain constructs are supported.
As far as I'm concerned, the monkeys who write this code,
they search the Ecmascript standard, for the most obscure
new feature invented (no matter how useful), then insist
that support for it, be in the browser.
In this way, they can "insist" that only the latest versions
of browsers work. However, I also suspect they filter
the useragent, so a candidate such as Pale Moon cannot "pass".
This means the sniffling/whiffling we see on entering a
web page, is all about abusing the users sensibilities,
rather than simple communication. If they didn't do these
"checks", I bet the code would run.
The information in this case, could have been presented
with the simplest text file possible. There is nothing of
actual value on the page, no clever animations.
*******
As an example, a certain game demo showed up for download on
the web one day.
Loaded the demo, started it. Immediately greeted by "your kernel
is too old". I was on Win2K SP4 fully updated at the time. OK,
so someone thinks I'm going to buy WinXP to try a demo I have
no interest in buying. But someone had a problem with the demo,
so I was loading it for a look-see.
There is a binary edit for the game demo. Insert two NOP instructions
in place of a conditional jump, just after the DirectX3D routine
that checks for a kernel version. With the kernel check disabled,
the game loads. The demo level, plays all the way to the end.
No artifacts whatsoever can be seen. Game is smooth.
Which shows you the value of "sniffling/whiffling" checks.
They are seldom honest, and are just customer abuse.
Paul
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
