Diversity confuses some people

Today I visited Amazon to read a few of the latest comments about my latest publishing venture, a Fire TV channel.

Like many of the big-league channels on Amazon Fire TV, my ratings are 3 stars.  Don’t ask me how or why really.  It could be because I don’t have allot of the Bruce Willis movies or other Hollywood studio films that (some) folks expect to see on TV for free.

Maybe it’s for more abstract reasons:  My Movies Plus channel is free, and people just don’t believe that anything good is free.  Or the fact that Movies Plus doesn’t have any advertising…and people like to have commercial-breaks so that they may get a snack while watching TV.

Okay, so I admit my “abstract” examples are not abstract, they’re just plain dumb.

This brings me to “Diversity.”  Maybe people just don’t get it, or they don’t want to accept it.  When I read a comment today that was simply stated: “Hate it.”  I said to myself…What’s to hate?  There’s over a dozen genres/categories on my channel that offer over two hundred programs to choose from.

For example, there’s Slow TV programming that is designed to help you relax, like the 2 hour fireplace video…My “Slow TV” shows are yours to watch for free, when the same content is offered for $2 or more elsewhere on Fire TV.  And there’s Boxing Matches that are typically a PPV event.  Yes, Boxing would cost you a few bucks to watch on ANY platform, but it’s here free if you choose to watch it.

In addition to the special programming on Movies Plus, there are TV shows and Movies of all Genres, including award winning 3D animation shorts like “Doroga.”  And there are new, Indpependently produced Science Fiction movies, Horror films, Action, Drama, Comedy programs…Plus Classics like “Virus,” and the film-purist’s delight “Phantom Carriage.”

And there’s some of the best documentary movies found anywhere, like the infamous “Yes Men,” and the topical/world-changing movie “Billions In Change.”  And I have to mention my sub-genres and categories that highlight the work of Darkstone Entertainment (Plan 9, Skeleton Key, etc.)  Plus of course there’s Music, Lifestyle stuff like Yoga, and News programs by DW.  Ohh, and one more off the wall category: Fan Films by Star Trek, Star Wars, and Warcraft filmmakers.

So my question is…How can anyone “hate” so many different TV shows and Movie programs?  I mean, you cannot…you simply cannot “hate” all of the material on a mult-genre channel like mine, so therefore how can anyone leave a comment that they  “hate” an entire Channel.

I guess, if you are not comfortable with Diversity or the expression of independent viewpoints…then maybe you can “hate” an entire channel like mine.

And there you have it, congrats to me — because I managed to write an entire article voicing my opinion of someone else without writing angry or meaningless one-word expressions of how I feel about folks who think the way a “hater” thinks.

Doh!  Haters, I hate that 😉

-Dean Lachiusa


Down River and In the River

Recently I posted two new videos on the Movies Plus Fire TV channel.  Purely by coincidence, the titles are “Down River” a feature film about soldiers behind enemy lines, and “In the River,” a music video that generates support for the American Indians who suffer from the oppression brought on by the scheduled construction of an Oil Pipeline on Indian land threatening their water-table and the Missouri River.

Aalex-downriver second part of the coincidence is the fact that the producers of these videos have similar names.  Alex Raye Pimentel is responsible for the Future of Film production “Down River.”

And Raye Zaragoza is the beautiful talent behind “The River” music video.

And guess what?  I think it’s fair to say they also have something in common when it comes to their content.  Because both of them have produced wonderul content  that is relevant to what’s happening to nearly everyone everywhere.

Their production quality is excellent, and the response that they are getting is outstanding.


Raye and Raye are getting great response on their websites and social media.  Meanwhile, on Movies Plus things will only get better…

  • In September of 2016, the first video to load on my Fire TV channel is the “welcome to Movies Plus” introduction.  This video had over 50,000 views last month.september-stats-4-one-video
  • A few weeks later (from October 1 to October 16) Movies Plus had 175,000 hits in the U.K.  And U.S. statistics look similar.
  • At the time of this writing (October 26th) Amazon reported that  65,295 people have subscribed to Movies Plus.

So, as you can see we’re growing.  So…….if you know of a filmmaker who would like to have their movie broadcast to our audience of indie-lovers on Amazon Fire TV, then I hope that you tell them about Movies Plus.  It’s free to for a filmmaker to use, and it’s free for anyone to watch.

Cheers, Dean Lachiusa

This little piggy stole my bandwidth

I love movies and television, and I enjoy watching when and where I want.  But lately I’ve been thinking: Does this in some way reflect negatively on me?  I mean, I’m not a bad person. But am I greedy or selfish for playing movies and TV shows on my Roku and Laptop PC, rather than on my big screen TV?

Maybe AT&T thinks so.  Because the other day I received a mailer entitled “Updates to Internet Usage Allowances.”  It says that AT&T will be increasing the U-verse Internet data allowances for many customers.  Okay, I’ve expected this because as consumer demands increase, so will the bandwidth delivered.  And we’ve all heard the rumors that companies like Comcast and Verizon are building bigger and better Internet delivery systems in order to meet customer demands.  But then the mailer states “…there’s a $10 charge for each 50GB of data you use over the allowance amount.”

This worries me.  Because I don’t consider myself a data-pig.  I do watch a good deal of video on my PC and my Roku, but I don’t download large movies, and I don’t require full HD when I stream.  And therein lies “the catch.”

When I stream on Hulu or a site like Crackle, I cannot control the exact quality of the content I watch.  In Hulu, I am allowed to select their settings “gear” and choose a low or medium setting – but I have no idea how much bandwidth this uses.  I’d like to select SD or Widescreen SD because I know this would use much less “Internet Data” than true HD.  And in most cases the resolution is just fine for me.   Why?

Television resolution is Relative.  In most cases you cannot see the difference between 720P or Full-HD or Ultra HD.)

I’d have to line up two TV’s next to each other and broadcast the same video in order to appreciate the difference in the details.  You think you need Full-HD or the 4k Ultra HD.  The TV manufactures have been pushing bigger and bigger TV sets on us, and insisting that the Big Screen TV or “10-foot experience” can only be appreciated with a 1920 x 1080 quality video.  And of course to support your Internet TV, you should expect to use large amounts of Internet bandwidth to get the true HD experience – if you can tell the difference that is.  And that’s going to get expensive.

So who is going to pay to deliver HDTV quality video to me?  Is it AT&T’s responsibility to deliver Internet-bandwidth that will support the demands of my PC and Roku while not charging for these upgraded services?

In other words: I’ve been talking with Netflix, Roku and other Connected TV uses for months now about a conflict of interest which is:

How and why would Comcast, AT&T and others want to make TV and Movie programming available to you over the Internet when they already deliver it to you via their Cable/Fiber-Optic/SAT to your TV?

Somethings gotta give, and I’m afraid the folks out there who thought that they could enjoy Full-HD via their Internet connection on a PC and especially on TV’s like the Roku 4K Ultra HDTV or Samsung Smart TV are in for a price hike.

Roku 4 requires a 15mbps connection, but they don’t talk about how much data you will use to enjoy Full-HD on your TV.  And like I say, if you watch a television program on your PC via Hulu or another service you might be able to select a low or medium resolution, but you won’t know how much data you are using.  For the AT&T customer, 50GB’s goes very fast and I don’t want to spend 10 bucks just to watch Sharknado.

What can we do?  I for one try to encourage people to set their connected TV (Apple TV, Roku, Fire TV) to the SD setting.  Not all Set Top Boxes have this feature, so I bought the low end Roku 1.  It has component (RCA) plugs.  I use these plugs instead of the HD port , and I setup my television in the Standard Definition (4×3) mode.  I also went into my Roku’s display setting and selected SD (4×3.)  For programs like Star Trek, I get a 4×3 display.  And somehow, my set up still delivers a widescreen picture when a film is formatted to support it.  It requires much less data for SD than HD.

If you muRoku4st have HD, then Roku’s most expensive model 4 is $129 and it promises to up-rez 720HD videos to a full HD 1920×1080 experience.  But I cannot recommend this as a way to save Internet data use, because for one, the unit requires a very strong Internet connection of 15mbps, and that tells me it’s demanding a large amount of bandwidth (data.)

Have I been able to insure that my Roku settings are really saving me money?  Not yet, AT&T won’t allow me to monitor my data usage until May 23rd!  Haa!  There’s always a catch.





Copyright is free speech

05-02-16 From CreativeFuture.org

By Robin Sax

This article originally appeared on Psychology Today.

I am a lawyer and I love movies.  You may be thinking, “Of course. That makes sense – what else does an attorney do to unwind?” While I do love zoning out watching other people’s lives unfold via movies, these two parts of my life have become connected in a manner I never would have imagined just a few years ago.

Complex conversations about the value of movies (and other creative works) in the digital age are rendered even more complicated when arguments arise over copyright and free speech.


Did I just put those two words in the same sentence? I hesitate to write “copyright” and “free speech” too close together for fear that I might unwittingly contribute to the work of those who attempt to confuse the two.

First, let’s get this out of the way: Piracy is not free speech. I repeat PIRACY is not free speech. As a matter of fact, piracy, plainly speaking, is illegal. It is a crime. Therefore, attempts to eliminate the for-profit digital theft of creative works is not an attack on free speech; it is prudent crime prevention.

When I first heard about CreativeFuture, I was inspired by the organization’s efforts to fend off the widespread theft of creative work via the internet. But I was equally compelled by their mission to combat the notion that this effort was in some way anti-technology, or even more far-fetched, anti-free speech.

These issues – and others – convinced me to become a member of CreativeFuture’s Leadership Committee. Part of my own mission is to help clear up some of the misinformation that, ironically, tends to proliferate best on the internet, where speech is so free that fact and fantasy commingle with an elegance that can render reality indistinguishable from opinion.

This brings me to another blunt fact: Those who want you to believe that the fight against piracy impinges on the right to free speech are doing so on purpose.

Some organizations, such as the Google-supported Electronic Frontier Foundation, take every opportunity to defend piracy at all costs and call any attempts to protect copyright a threat to free speech – even when those attempts include voluntary agreements between trusted stakeholders.

It is no secret that Google treats copyright as a nuisance. Time and again, the tech monolith lobbies Washington and foreign governments to water down existing law or to block any new initiatives designed to help curb rampant digital theft of copyrighted works.

They also criticize (directly and through organizations they underwrite) the various voluntary industry initiatives that can help take the profit out of piracy.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the U.S. Constitution was drafted with the intention to “…promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” This applies as much to an app as it does to a song. If this sounds like an assault on free speech, you need to get your head out of your (patented) virtual reality helmet.

The U.S. Supreme Court has written: “It should not be forgotten that the Framers intended copyright itself to be an engine of free expression.” (Harper & Row Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises, 471 U.S. 539, 1985.) In the same decision, the Court stated: “…copyright supplies the economic incentive to create and disseminate ideas.”

Somehow, groups like the EFF always ignore the essential idea/expression distinction inherent in copyright law. The whole purpose of the First Amendment is to protect the ability to convey ideas no matter how objectionable those ideas may be to government or society. The First Amendment isn’t about trying to guarantee people’s ability to copy the particular fixed, creative expression of others. What free speech interests are protected or maintained by the wholesale infringement of full copyrighted works (e.g., piracy)?

We live in exciting times. The digital age has promised us a virtual utopia where information is freely available to all. Yes, there are bad actors that stifle free speech online and governments that censor the internet to eliminate thought or action that undermines regimes. Activism is noble and needed, especially in times of great change, to act as a check against overreach and injustice. But activists become victims if they are armed with misinformation. And make no mistake about it – calling the protection of copyrighted works a threat to free speech is misinformation.

If you agree with me and appreciate this argument, feel free to steal it. Share it on your preferred social media channels and spread the word. As its author, I grant you permission. See? That wasn’t so difficult, now was it?

The FB commentary followed:

Liza Moon

Liza Moon may i quote you on that? and if so. as owner of an often pirated property ( google the word “daredoll”, – we are the fully clothed options – the current pirate on spankbang sells our work for higher prices than we do?

Like · Reply · 2 · May 2 at 8:49pm


Dean Lach
3 Replies
Ted Folke

Ted Folke When Hollywood and the music industry have been robbing artists for decades, this strikes me as a bit disingenous. American copyright laws are out of date – please see Lawrence Lessig for more!:)

Like · Reply · 1 · 22 hrs


Jonathan Boose

Jonathan Boose Lessig is a tool of Big Tech, which has been doing more to rob artists than Hollywood or the Music Industry ever did.

Like · Reply · 1 · 19 hrs


John Kawakami

John Kawakami Copyright is increasingly obsolete because the technology of speech has changed. With computers, you make perfect digital copies. (It’s harder to make them imperfect!) With the internet, you have the ability to track all downloads, of a work, and with decryption or digital rights management, the ability track all uses of a work.

On the one side, you have a space where intellectual property can’t really exist – it’s a property that quickly becomes a public good, part of a commons.

On the other side, you have a space where intellectual property has more “private-property-like” qualities than it ever did when it was published as books or analog recordings. It’s actually invading your privacy; it’s property that can probe into your private life more than the government can (unless they get permission from the courts). Intellectual property becomes a kind of wedge that can drive privacy-invading contracts into your life.

There are different ways around this polarization. CC is one way – it preserves copyright by adapting it to the new reality of perfect digital copies and the internet. (And, Lessig is not a tool – he’s a moderate liberal reformer.) DRM with extensive “sharing” features is another way, because it incorporates “internet-like” features into the privatized surveillance system. This is in the tradition of neoliberal privatization of public space, analogous to things like shopping malls.


Mark Grady

Mark Grady John, are you kidding me? Why shouldn’t someone who spends weeks or years working on a book or film have rights associated with that work? This “public good” argument is a silly one. It reminds me of the people who want to legalize pot, so they can use it. There is only one reason people are fighting intellectual property laws – because they want something for nothing.

Like · Reply · 1 · 17 hrs · Edited


John Kawakami

John Kawakami I’m not advocating for piracy. I’m just saying the world has changed fundamentally and we need to work with it. My general feeling is that the privatized spaces need some regulations to protect privacy because drm is totally invasive. I think they ineSee More

Like · Reply · 12 hrs · Edited


Dean Lach

Dean Lach Mark Grady right on

Dean Lach
Dean LachUggh, regarding hollywood robbing artists, etc etc, this is the kind of rational that we’re talking about. Really, if we all take the law in our own hands, and use subjecture to justify theft, then were will we be? In mean, I love the idea of a Star Trek dystopian future wherein we don’t apply ownership to stuff…but it’s not time yet — the Universe isn’t ready.
=Dean with the “permission of CreativeFuture.org

Should I let the web take my film 4 a ride?

Recently someone asked me if Youtube’s TOS would protect their videos from being ripped. Here’s the answer, excerpted from a Facebook conversation:

It’s sad but Youtube won’t give you any license that protects you like a copyright registration or a WGA registered script.

I suppose, if you upload your work and use the advance settings to establish date, then (maybe, just maybe) you could claim proof of authorship (if) you ended up in court or filed a piracy claim using the Youtube Content ID system.

[Bill M] is correct about the need to “register” your copyright. I think it’s 35 bucks for the PA form, and the last time I did it, they allowed me to upload a digital copy of my movie – therefore saving shipping costs, and completing the process quicker than snail mail.

Regarding [Alex, who uses a youtube-download software to save videos to his PC.]   He’s right, there’s plenty of programs that will grab video from streaming sites like Youtube. 

But heck,  if you’re looking for saturation, then you might not care because posting your videos online gets your stuff out there. If you want to stop folks from stealing, then you could place your movies on my Roku and Fire TV channels, and at least this makes it harder to “leach” the content digitally — but of course that won’t stop a Cam’d version.

Another Facebook commenter mentioned that people make a living grabbing video and then re-posting it as their own on Youtube.  This absolutely happens, and it’s a dang shame that we (sometimes) can’t trust Youtube with out content.  Unless that is, we swing a large bat like the Hollywood Studios who choose to stream their content via Youtube’s Partner program.

Here’s an example.  A film buddy of mine used a small section of Night of the Living Dead in a promotional video.  But Youtube flagged it for copyright infringement.  What…How, he asked me? 

As it turns out, Youtube gave a company the right to file a Content ID claim for Night of the Living Dead.  When this happens, it allows that company to grab all the ad-revenue that is associated with EVERY post on Youtube that contains some NOTLD content. That’s allot of videos – thousands in fact.  Check it if you like.  And in case you didn’t know…NOTLD has been Public Domain for over 40 years. (I think it was The Orchard that is the one that is monetizing Notld and other orphan films.)

Thanks for reading, I hope this Facebook conversation – gone Blog is something that is coherent enough for you to make use of.


The things we do for love

It’s been over 50 years since the band Spirit released “Taurus” which is a short orchestrated introductory musical piece.  For over 7 years now, the Randy California estate owners have been involved in a law suit that names Led Zeppelin’s Stairway to heaven as music that was derived from the Spirit tune.

I’ve read dozens of comments on Youtube and other sites, and Led Zeppelin lovers seem to get very angry over this.  Spirit lovers don’t say much.  I can understand why they don’t because I love the old Spirit music and I’m lucky to have several of the old LP’s.  Spirit is mellow, it’s moving, most of their music is a sophisticated mixture of Rock N’ Roll and Jazz elements, and all of it is in a sense – Spiritual.

Don’t get me wrong, I like Zeppelin, but I also have read about numerous similar law-suits involving Zeppelin.

Does this mean they stole Spirits work?


Actually, I really don’t think Zeppelin stole their music.  And if they did anything more than be inspired, well I guess the courts will decide if a writing credit or money will be the fix.  Before I lose your patience…I’ll post the best comparison I could find on Youtube herein in a just Four Chords or so…

But first, I have to say that I think the reason this lawsuit is happening is simply to give Randy California credit.  Credit for being a great writer who is sometimes lost and forgotten in a sea of top forty favorites and classic oldies like Led Zeppelin.

It’s my opinion that sandy-toed Californian’s who were part of Randy California’s laid back lifestyle cherish the memories. And I’m guessing that they want Randy to be respected and loved for his accomplishments.  And so…the reasons for the legal action.

Okay, now for a video/musical clip, this one unfortunately has an opinionated title by the author.  Sorry I can’t control Youtube.  I’ll try to find a better video comparison.

How I fixed my PC after Win 10 Hijacked it

I was going to call this article “I reserved windows 10 and it killed my Windows 7 pc.” because after Microsoft offered me a free upgrade to Windows 10, my PC started using nearly 100 percent of my CPU. Memory use was super high, and Internet Surfing was almost impossible…everything was acting strangely.

I’m posting this article 10 days after I repaired my PC and I think I can say that my PC is free of the evil GWX.exe (aka Get Windows 10) software that hijacked my PC.

Next is a disclaimer for the following is a story about how I fixed my PC. It’s not a suggestion or a recommendation or a guideline. So if you continue, then USE AT YOUR OWN RISK.

I have the basic knowledge to navigate a pc, I used tools like “windows update” on my Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit laptop. I also use Task Manager, and Control Panel.

My PC might has a built in Recovery/Restore feature. It did not work for me. I tried several ways of fixing my PC. First I tried a partial restore. This preserved my after market software but replaced Windows to an earlier condition. I continued to have CPU problems and memory problems no matter how many times I turned off Services via my Task Manager.

Next I tried a Restore via the PC’s built in Recover Disk. Mistake again! My PC still ran weirdly.

So, I remembered I had my old recovery DVD’s saved in box from some 5 years ago, and this put my PC back to it’s original state, with old default software and no buggy “Get Windows Now” crapola on my PC.

Here’s what I did, pretty much step by step.

I saved all the files that I could trust. And I figured I might lose some software and end up reinstalling. In most cases I have replacement discs, but for my Video Editing software, I recall inputting an unlock or licence “key.” So contacted them and they later allowed me to reinstall via download to my clean PC.

For my pc, I wanted to be sure that no stinking little bit of Microsoft software was residing anywhere, and this for me includes:
Silverlight, Microsoft Office, and their partners in crime: Google, Google Browser extensions, Adobe and Adobe Flash, Shockwave, AIR, etc. These are all software’s that at one time or another might rely on having a Microsoft Service Pack. And SP’s may or may not have the evil Microsoft 10 “GWX.EXE” or other Get Windows 10 Nagware. I do not trust Service Pack 2 at all. And I do not trust the Internet Explorer upgrades either, because at an earlier fix-attempt I made the mistake of upgrading my IE from 8 to IE 11, and the dang PC went wonko once again.

Okay, back to what I did: I unlplugged External Flash and Hard drives. I left the mouse and fan.

I put my original recovery DVD’s (the discs that I had made when I first bought the PC) in the pc and I followed the prompts. During the recovery process, I didn’t turn on the WiFi option, but I did leave the Ethernic conection plugged in because I figured that eventually the PC will need to install drivers and stuff.

I have a driver disk, BUT I allowed the installation to use my NIC connection to update the latest drivers, and this worked for me but I have to admit it was a little risky.

Okay, my PC boots up to windows nice and clean and ready to use. So far it worked for me.

The first thing I did: I selected to turn off the Windows auto updates to “never check for windows updates.”

Next, I uninstalled stuff that would typically ask to be updated. Like Norton, Ebay, etc. I used the control panel whenever a software did not have it’s own uninstall feature.
I never touch anything that is a Microsoft .NET or KB, or my PC mfr’s Registration or Identity Card. Although I have to admit in previous fix attempts I did uninstall KB updates. Those attempts did not work, that’s why I’m going all the way back to my original PC status.
I left my “ACER UPDATE service” too because it’s never haunted me. Mostly, I just like getting rid of things that I can later add on if I really want to.

I removed McAffe. I hate this software, I find that it is slow and demanding. And it doesn’t want to entirely remove. So, after using Uninstall for it, like every uninstall — I did a restart. Then I found online a tool called MCPR. It’s McAffe’s own removal tool, called the McAffe ESD package. I used it. It seemed to work, but I have to say that I don’t go screwing around with the Registry, DLL’s and code deep inside my computer.  So I can’t really say if there’s a line of McAffe code laying dormant somewhere.

Then I went to uninstall Windows Office, on my PC it’s a 60 day trial. I got rid of the main software first, and it removed but gave me a funky message saying something about a registration error. (I never signed up in the first place.) Then I uninstalled the “sync” pack, “registration” and finally the “compatibility” portion.

I then uninstalled Silverlight.

And I removed the Google browser bar and adobe Flash / shockwave and a bunch of software by Sobe, ebay, games, and even the Acer “my win locker.” I removed anything like Norton online that sync’s online.

Now regarding Windows Essentials.

I clicked on it, and it offered a CHANGE rather than an Uninstall option. I guess that’s because it has several Software packages. I chose to uninstall the writer, and messenger — but I did not check the box next to photo/movie. I did not uninstall the PHOTO and MOVIE MAKER. To the best of my knowledge they have yet to ask to be updated on my ole’ PC. I uninstalled the sync, and upload.

Now, I want a new web Browser. I used my old IE 8 web browser to find a new one. I WILL NOT UPDATE IT! Did I tell ya, I’ve done this recovery thing several times now….I tried to update IE 8 to 11, and from experience I can tell ya, it seemed to destroy all the work that I performed. (I later unpinned IE from my task bar to avoid using it. I did not attempt to uninstall IE because I’m guessing it’s tied to the operating system.)
I did try to download Chrome and Opera but they needed Microsoft’s Service Pack II on my 64bit pc, and I will not update my PC with that Service Pack. So I downloaded Firefox. I did NOT install Flash this time.

A FIREFOX note: FLASH broke the latest Firefox on my Windows 7…Earlier, I tried it and it was constantly crashing, at one point I went into the “Add On” area, to the “plugins” where I found Flash Options.  I de-selected the funky box, and restarted Firefox. This was supposedly a fix, but it didn’t work. Firefox still crashed, ran slow etc. It really frak’d my Firefox the last time I tried to do this. So, I try to do without Flash on the new Firefox in my Windows 7 64 bit.

After I installed Firefox, I set the “use as a default” browser option, and resisted the temptation to sign up and sync. I also had to open up Firefox and it’s Options section, then Advanced and I deselected “enable health report” and “crash reporter.”

I did not go browsing outside of Google without Anti-Virus software. I’ve heard Windows Defender isn’t enough, so I searched for Windows Security Essentials. This is the free Microsoft Anti-Virus for my version of windows. I have no trouble with it. I leave mine to auto update Virus definitions. I recall the PC asking me to Turn ON Windows Firewall – I did this.

After the install it wanted to scan my pc. But I instead took the time to go back into Windows Update — I made sure that it is still checked to NEVER Install Updates. The mfr/microsoft doesn’t recommend this for security reasons.  But I plan to do this update manually in the future. Hopefully Microsoft will turn off their GWX marketing campaign.

I now have a basic PC. In Task manager I see about 1-30 percent CPU use, and almost no Memory use too. I hope to never have to see GWX.exe listed here ever again.

In the future, when I install new software I will uncheck prompts to put stuff on the Browser Bar, Give Feedback or Crash Reports, or Sync devices/files, or Auto Update. And of course I’m a safe browser. I stick to sites like WordPress!

Dean Lachiusa