XPost: alt.windows7.general   
   From: G6JPG-255@255soft.uk   
      
   In message , Mayayana   
    writes:   
   >"J. P. Gilliver (John)"  wrote   
   >   
   >| I too have a hosts file, but I still sometimes see FF waiting for a site   
   >| that I've got blocked there (google-analytics being one I notice a lot);   
   >| I can only presume that's because some script that _is_ running is   
   >| trying to interrogate that site, and I have no control over that. (Any   
   >| thoughts, other than blocking _all_ scripts?)   
   >|   
   >   
   >    I don't know what goes on there. I just tried   
   >an experiment, loading numerous webpages, because   
   >I know I've seen the kind of thing you describe.   
   >All loaded almost instantly except one that showed   
   >it was calling fonts.googleapis.com for about 1   
   >second. I have that domain in my HOSTS file. So   
   >why did it try to reach that domain? I've seen the   
   >theory that the problem is using 127.0.0.1 and that   
   >127.0.0.0 is better, but I've never tried that.   
      
   I heard that, and used it for a while, with to be honest no difference   
   that I noticed. Then in another discussion on the subject, someone said   
   you can use 0 (just a single character) instead of 127.0.0.1/0, and I   
   am, and it seems to work fine. (Can't say I've noticed any positive   
   difference either, but it must at least infinitesimally speed the   
   loading and parsing of the hosts file.)   
   >   
   >  Or was it just that the status bar didn't update   
   >quickly? The page was loaded while it seemed to be   
   >waiting on Google. I don't know the explanation.   
      
   Could be.   
      
   >But I don't think I've ever seen it pause for more   
   >than about 1 second.   
   >   
   >   It can't be script because I block all script most   
   >of the time. (I use Pale Moon with all sorts of things   
   >disabled for most activity. I use FF with NoScript   
   >only when I need to allow interaction. That's not   
   >actually very often.)   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   It's very odd: when I read your post, the lines in it showed (in my   
   newsreader) as about the same length as the lines in the chunk of my   
   previous post that you quoted - but in this reply that I'm typing now,   
   my newsreader has broken your post into lines that are no more than   
   about two-thirds as long as they were. (But all fairly uniform - no   
   long-then-short - so I don't think it can be hard vs. soft returns; most   
   puzzling.)   
   --   
   J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf   
      
   And perhaps that's the scariest thing about the modern mob. In social media,   
   we haven't created a monster. We are the monster.   
   - Jonathan Holmes, RT 2015/3/28-4/3   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)