«

The Old Sourdough wrote:

> Shhhh. Don't confuse him with facts.

<g> I'll bet he saw it in a Mythbusters episode...

--
-bts
-Four wheels carry the body; two wheels move the soul

On 6/22/10 9:51 PM, in article ,
"Ctrl€/Alt€/Del€" <Ctrl?/Alt?/Del??@Ctrl?/Alt?/Del??.net> wrote:

> # [Google Inc]
> 127.0.0.1 domains.googlesyndication.com #[Parking Service]
> 127.0.0.1 pagead2.googlesyndication.com #[Google AdWords]
> 127.0.0.1 adservices.google.com
> 127.0.0.1 video-stats.video.google.com
> # 127.0.0.1 ssl.google-analytics.com #[disabled = Firefox issues]
> 127.0.0.1 www.google-analytics.com #[Google Analytics]
> 127.0.0.1 4.afs.googleadservices.com
> 127.0.0.1 feedads.googleadservices.com
> 127.0.0.1 imageads.googleadservices.com #[Tracking.Cookie]
> 127.0.0.1 pagead2.googleadservices.com
> 127.0.0.1 partner.googleadservices.com
> 127.0.0.1 www.googleadservices.com

I would remove these if you are going to be using a Google App software or
service.


--Â*
Best Regards,Â*Keith
http://home.comcast.net/~kilowattradio/

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 11:33:35 -0700, Keith <>
wrote:

>On 6/22/10 9:51 PM, in article ,
>"Ctrl€/Alt€/Del€" <Ctrl?/Alt?/Del??@Ctrl?/Alt?/Del??.net> wrote:
>
>> # [Google Inc]
>> 127.0.0.1 domains.googlesyndication.com #[Parking Service]
>> 127.0.0.1 pagead2.googlesyndication.com #[Google AdWords]
>> 127.0.0.1 adservices.google.com
>> 127.0.0.1 video-stats.video.google.com
>> # 127.0.0.1 ssl.google-analytics.com #[disabled = Firefox issues]
>> 127.0.0.1 www.google-analytics.com #[Google Analytics]
>> 127.0.0.1 4.afs.googleadservices.com
>> 127.0.0.1 feedads.googleadservices.com
>> 127.0.0.1 imageads.googleadservices.com #[Tracking.Cookie]
>> 127.0.0.1 pagead2.googleadservices.com
>> 127.0.0.1 partner.googleadservices.com
>> 127.0.0.1 www.googleadservices.com
>
>I would remove these if you are going to be using a Google App software or
>service.
>
>
>--*
>Best Regards,*Keith
>http://home.comcast.net/~kilowattradio/


Thanks for the advice, Keith.

I realize I could remove all of them but, was looking for the single
culprit. I may just go through each Google entry one by one until I can
zero in on the one causing the issue.

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 08:15:15 -0600, §ñühw¤£f <> wrote:

>Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤ wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 22:19:58 -0500, richard <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 23:51:06 -0500, Ctrl?/Alt?/Del? wrote:
>>>
>>>> The hosts file located here:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm
>>>>
>>>> blocks Google Street View and all that is visible is a black
>> screen.
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone have an idea of which entry may be the culprit?
>>>>
>>>> And for the newbies, don't go "A Clicking" the links listed below.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Process of elimination.
>>>Delete 10 items at a time. When street view shows up, you know it's
>> in that
>>>block.
>>
>> Snutard says you can't delete them and even if you could, it wouldn't
>> work.
>>
>> LOL.
>
>No, pinhead. "Dont" means "not necessary".
>You're projecting your own lackluster problem solving skills onto me.
>
>No wonder you havent sussed this one out yet.
>Besides, you gormless cuntflap, the swervers are LISTED in that link to
>a forum thread I ALREADY GAVE YOU.
>
>LULZ!

Yet, you have no answer and you didn't find the answer on the page you
linked or you would have listed it here.

List the entry that makes Google Maps go black or go back to sitting on
your shampoo bottle while informing posters that entries aren't to be
removed from a hosts file.

In the meantime, while you aren't being the normal sphincter sucking
trollop that you most assuredly are in real life, tell us all again how
you really know the answer but simply choose not to reveal it.

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 08:11:57 -0600, §ñühw¤£f <> wrote:

>Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤ wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 22:18:36 -0700, Evan Platt
>> <evan@*******************************> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 23:07:10 -0500, richard <>
>>>wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>Hey Evan, this smartboy says you can't remove an entry from a
>> standard text
>>>>file.
>>>
>>>Where did he say that? Nowhere I see in the text you quoted.
>>
>> It was implied,
>
>No. With computers its an either or state. I said "yu dont".
>Not "yu *cant".
>
>You're so ****ing-stupid you dont know wtf putting ; or # does at the
>beginning of a line if the file is a SCRIPT.
>

And why in the **** would anyone but a snarl toothed nut cupper, such as
yourself, simply not remove an entry that was causing them problems on a
page that they visit?

Don't give any more computer related advice.

You need to stick to answering the questions that appear on this board
relating to how to make coffee or why do leaves fall off of trees,
etc...

Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤ wrote:

> And why in the **** would anyone but a snarl toothed nut cupper, such
> as yourself, simply not remove an entry that was causing them
> problems on a page that they visit?

It would be better to comment out the entry (with #) plus add a note as
to *why* .. so you have some inkling six months from now.

Further, you should keep a separate note of it/them so the next time
this file is issued, you can "disable them again."

--
-bts
-Four wheels carry the body; two wheels move the soul

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:49:19 -0400, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
<> wrote:

>Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤ wrote:
>
>> And why in the **** would anyone but a snarl toothed nut cupper, such
>> as yourself, simply not remove an entry that was causing them
>> problems on a page that they visit?
>
>It would be better to comment out the entry (with #) plus add a note as
>to *why* .. so you have some inkling six months from now.
>
>Further, you should keep a separate note of it/them so the next time
>this file is issued, you can "disable them again."

Why would that be better. I am not above realizing that I am wrong and
will admit it if so. But, if an entry is causing issues, why not simply
remove it?

Why do I still want it listed but not actively blocking an address? If
you comment it out, it has the same effect as deleting it doesn't it?

If I comment an entry out, my computer can still possibly be damaged by
not having that protection just the same as if I were to remove it.

Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤ wrote:

> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:
>> Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤ wrote:
>>
>>> And why in the **** would anyone but a snarl toothed nut cupper,
>>> such as yourself, simply not remove an entry that was causing them
>>> problems on a page that they visit?
>>
>> It would be better to comment out the entry (with #) plus add a note
>> as to *why* .. so you have some inkling six months from now.
>>
>> Further, you should keep a separate note of it/them so the next time
>> this file is issued, you can "disable them again."
>
> Why would that be better. I am not above realizing that I am wrong
> and will admit it if so. But, if an entry is causing issues, why not
> simply remove it?

So you have a record of it, as I said above. If (once removed), you
realize you should reblock the domain, all you need to do is remove the
comment mark.

> Why do I still want it listed but not actively blocking an address?
> If you comment it out, it has the same effect as deleting it doesn't
> it?

Functionally, yes it is the same. But you no longer have a record of it.
And .. next month or whenever .. the MVPS issues a new version, it will
have the domain back in the file. That's why I said (for you folks using
someone else's file) to keep an independent record of what you changed.

> If I comment an entry out, my computer can still possibly be damaged
> by not having that protection just the same as if I were to remove
> it.

Is that a question?

--
-bts
-Four wheels carry the body; two wheels move the soul

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:26:37 -0600, §ñühw¤£f <> wrote:

>Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤ wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 08:15:15 -0600, §ñühw¤£f <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤ wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 22:19:58 -0500, richard <>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 23:51:06 -0500, Ctrl?/Alt?/Del? wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The hosts file located here:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm
>>>>>>
>>>>>> blocks Google Street View and all that is visible is a black
>>>> screen.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does anyone have an idea of which entry may be the culprit?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And for the newbies, don't go "A Clicking" the links listed
>> below.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Process of elimination.
>>>>>Delete 10 items at a time. When street view shows up, you know it's
>>>> in that
>>>>>block.
>>>>
>>>> Snutard says you can't delete them and even if you could, it
>> wouldn't
>>>> work.
>>>>
>>>> LOL.
>>>
>>>No, pinhead. "Dont" means "not necessary".
>>>You're projecting your own lackluster problem solving skills onto me.
>>>
>>>No wonder you havent sussed this one out yet.
>>>Besides, you gormless cuntflap, the swervers are LISTED in that link
>> to
>>>a forum thread I ALREADY GAVE YOU.
>>>
>>>LULZ!
>>
>> Yet, you have no answer and you didn't find the answer on the page you
>> linked or you would have listed it here.
>>
>> List the entry that makes Google Maps go black or go back to sitting
>> on
>> your shampoo bottle while informing posters that entries aren't to be
>> removed from a hosts file.
>>
>> In the meantime, while you aren't being the normal sphincter sucking
>> trollop that you most assuredly are in real life, tell us all again
>> how
>> you really know the answer but simply choose not to reveal it.
>>
>>
>Grep it yurself, tardlette.
>Your past ****wittery gave me ample reason to dangle the prescious in
>front of your drooling, gaping, odiferous and thourougly toothless maw
>knowing full well that you'd simply knee-jerk reject the info without
>serious consideration.
>I didnt *hide* the answer from you, you decided to be your usual
>prickish small minded self and failed to see the relevant info.
>
>Live in ignorance, bitch.

In other words, you have no idea which specific entry is causing the
issue and rather than admit that, you are going to go with the "I know
but you don't, nah-na-na-nah-na" bit.

This, to a still-born pillow biter, is much preferable to simply not
attempting to answer a question that you don't have an answer for.

The rancid, regurgitated **** that was your mother did the world a
disservice when she shat you out.

On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 08:04:07 -0600, §ñühw¤£f wrote:


> Send in the WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMbulance, you ****ing crybaby.

Much as you don't answer questions that you still respond to, when
someone responds in like to your bizarre rantings, you fold up like one
of your hookers legs when the payment isn't right.

What a silly clown you have turned out to be. Frankly, you are not far
above the demented level of a Platt-like stalker.