Coexist

Coexist
Showing posts with label FUD. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FUD. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 6, 2019

My Facebook Feed is Annoying Me


I keep my mouth shut about a lot of things that show up in my feed, but I'm feeling opinionated and feel the need to express it so here goes. It's completely okay if you disagree, I can be friends with people that don't agree with me. I don't really want to argue though, I'm more or less venting,
GMO food products are safe. They have saved millions from starvation and there is no evidence that GMO foods currently available are dangerous. Avoiding all GMO foods because there might be one developed that is unhealthy at some point would be like automatically avoiding all medications despite a need for them.
Essential oils are a marketing and profit-driven situation and they don't work as advertised.
Homeopathy isn't science. Any healing obtained is probably something that would have happened anyway or caused by the power of the mind, AKA the placebo effect. You may as well just drink water and convince yourself it's a cure because watering down active ingredients until there isn't enough of them to do the job is basically the same thing.
Multi-level marketing might work for you or somebody you know, but it won't work for me. I have to much social anxiety to be successful with sales or building down-lines. There have been multiple instances of companies making loads of money off the backs of participants by pushing motivational material and events at high costs without providing them with any direct or needed benefit to their business. Companies and key individuals made loads of money off of speaking events and motivational material sales but weren't really drawing in money from actual effective multi-level marketing. It was a sham. Any of you Amway folks remember Quixtar? That was a spectacular failure for people trying to build businesses online.
I have said it before and I'll say it again. I don't believe that gluten sensitivity even exists and I don't think it's the absence or reduction of gluten in your new diet that made you feel better. It was more likely the overall reduction of refined carbs and sugars that did the trick. Celiac disease is real, and certain wheat type allergies are very real but rare. Eliminating gluten from your diet if you have an actual allergy problem or have Celiac disease makes sense, but the rest of you have been swept up by a marketing fad fueled by book authors and food manufacturers that just want your money.
Vaccines are safe and absolutely necessary. Anti-vaxxers are effectively Pro-Plague. The study that started their whole movement was a fraud to begin with but that hasn't stopped them. Some lessons in basic high school chemistry should be enough to disprove most of the claims of dangerous chemicals in vaccines. Vaccines are medications and of course, there are instances where they are not safe or appropriate for certain people. There aren't enough problems for enough people for people to be avoiding all vaccines all the time though. Some people don't react well to specific blood pressure or heart medications. It doesn't mean that everyone should avoid all blood pressure and heart medications all the time. Pro Plaguers drive me nuts.

Thursday, September 7, 2017

Personality testing doesn't work.

Borrowed from Wikipedia

The Myers Brigg test is junk pseudoscience cooked up by unqualified individuals and its adoption almost worldwide by corporations and experts that should know better is appalling. Personality testing in general has not been proven to be accurate or effective. Personality is not static and people can't be lumped into arbitrary categories. Please consider the sources below:


Polygraph testing is a lie.

Image borrowed from sketchport.com

I'll just leave this here. Polygraph testing is junk pseudoscience. Governments, corporations, and police organizations should stop using it. Read the sources below and consider them if ever asked to undergo a polygraph.

Saturday, May 7, 2016

Invisible Illness

I am one of those people with illness and disability that isn't all that visible by just looking at me. It isn't my fault but I'm treated like it is.First I get the "You don't look sick" comments. Others try to blame my weight, Then they try to blame me for the diabetes until they find out it's type 1. Some assume that I am doing it to myself and that I am currently engaged in bad habits to cause my problems. I'm not, and that is just rude.

Wikipedia has this to say on invisible illness:
Invisible disabilities are chronic illnesses and conditions that significantly impair normal activities of daily living. In the United States, 96% of people with chronic medical conditions show no outward signs of their illness, and 10% experience symptoms that are considered disabling

I have gotten weight loss lectures and the managing type 2 diabetes speeches from people that don't bother to get the whole story more times than I count. Doctors and nurses that stop reading my chart at my weight and diabetes are the worse offenders. They don't realize I'm type 1 and they don't look at the rest of the history before talking to me. They think they have their answer because I'm a fat diabetic and just proceed to the lectures. They don't ask questions and find out that I'm active and eating healthy before they judge and lecture.
.
Others are prior co-workers or friends that pipe in with advice when they don't get it. They only know what they see in pop culture and news health reports by ignorant reporters. The colloquial attitudes that dictate diabetes is all the same and caused by eating sugar is what they believe. Here is a clue, I was sick before I was fat, and type 1 isn't the same as 2. It is not preventable or caused by lifestyle issues. Your dietary advice isn't going to cure me and I already exercise more than you.

Putting the fork down and losing weight isn't going to cure my destroyed back that has been through 3 surgeries and is getting worse because I had to have a disc removed., It isn't going to fix my leg after multiple surgeries for a muscle infection. It isn't going to cure the anxiety or depression I have struggled with since I was a skinny active child. It isn't going to cure the fibromyalgia, the wrecked left knee, the degenerative disc disease, the congestive heart failure caused by antibiotics, or the congenital conditions I have. It wont reverse Type 1 Diabetes. I put the damn fork down and got off my butt a long time ago. It helps, but I'm still sick.

These people need to stop judging. I track log and control everything I eat and I am in the gym 3 to 5 times a week when I'm not in a hospital bed. I doubt they could say the same.

Next time you encounter somebody with invisible illness or disability don't judge. It doesn't matter if they look fine, they are not. They didn't do it to themselves so spare the lectures and comments. Have some respect for a change.

Sunday, April 24, 2016

Your kids are not being taught New Math. It's called Common Core.



A portion (about two paragraphs) of this is taken from a Facebook status update I did today, but I thought it would be good material so I'm using it here as well.

Please stop circulating memes complaining about New Math. Unless your children  are in their mid fifties or early sixties they haven't been exposed to New Math in school. Kids in public school in much of the USA are being taught Common Core Math, not New Math which is actually quite old.

A lot of people are confusing Common Core Math with New Math. I see parents decrying New Math online when what they are actually talking about is Common Core. New Math was tried and failed in the 1960's. Anybody that attended school in the 1970's or later probably wasn't being subjected to New Math and our kids aren't being taught it now. You can't effect change in a program if you don't even know what it is called folks!

That said, Common Core Math is garbage and needs to be tossed. Most parents, even the ones that remember the needed math don't do well helping a child with Common Core, and it confuses the kids as well. Kids often get marked down even with the right answer because they didn't arrive at it using the obtuse methods being taught. Please do more than complain on Facebook about it! Read up a little on it, get your facts in order, and contact your teachers, principals, and school boards. Let them know how you feel and back your argument up with solid facts.

There are 42 states plus the District of Columbia using Common Core Math, The states of Oklahoma, Texas, Virginia, Alaska, Nebraska, Indiana, and South Carolina have the good sense not to adopt this ridiculous method of teaching.

Monday, April 4, 2016

Stallman vs. Reality


The trouble with Richard Stallman's arguments they are based on ideals without accounting for the reality of how people need or even want to use software and information. Stallman has been at the same tired old argument of what he views to be freedom in regards to software for decades and still doesn't seem to understand that his ideals for free software do a lot to restrict the freedoms of users and developers.

The reason why Windows, OS X, and proprietary software titles are so popular because they enable most people to do the things they want to do. That's the end of the debate really, and that is why Stallman frequently finds himself tilting at windmills. Most people don't and wouldn't benefit from the kind of freedom he is defending.

Most people would be at a severe disadvantage if they migrated to a completely free operating system and completely free software for that system. They wouldn't be able to do much of what they want to do without learning to develop software themselves. At the very least they would be facing a substantial learning curve in using their computer in a different way then they are accustomed to.

This kind of freedom is Stallman preaches is meaningless when it's freedom people either don't need or are unlikely to take advantage of. Sure, to a hacker or developer that wants the right to alter and redistribute any part of a system they see fit it is great, but how many people really fall into that category?

The truth is that many developers don't even take advantage of that kind of freedom. Most people wont ever need or want access to alter almost all of an operating system or program. Most people just want it to work. How many computer users actually want or need the abiltiy to hack the entire system?

Stallman's complete freedom argument is  almost completely pointless when faced with the reality of people users that don't need or benefit from it.  People have had years and years to migrate to completely free GNU/Linux systems and overwhelmingly, they choose Winows, OS X, Android, Ubuntu, etc...

Stallman is an extremist defending principles which for most users are completely useless. They don't need to hack their systems and they don't want to and they shouldn't have to.  There is nothing wrong if people want to buy software and let professionals handle the details when need be. There is nothing wrong with free software and people that want to do it themselves either, but expecting all software to fall in the latter category is silly. Especially since all users don't.

Ubuntu isn't a solution to Windows 10 privacy concerns.


I realize that there are real privacy concerns and that some people have their own perfectly valid reasons for disabling search and advertising functions in software. This article isn't directed at them. I am speaking to the nut-jobs out there that believe in every software conspiracy they read online and mistakenly think living under a rock is possible let alone a good move. I have seen a lot of these types declare their intentions to jump ship over Windows 10 start using Linux.

If you have decided to wear a tin foil hat and succumb to all the FUD over Windows 10 you may be considering a jump to Ubuntu.

If you’re new to Linux or to Ubuntu,you may not realize that Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly on privacy concerns and that Linux isn't a magic cure all for your paranoia. You might be shocked to learn that just like Microsoft Windows, you have to actually lift a finger and make some changes if you are concerned.

If you are over the top paranoid about privacy and don't use any cloud services you may want to disable online search from the dash. Anything you type in the dash could be recorded and sent to Canonical for use by Canonical and its partners. Now obviously it is anonymous data used for improving services and or advertising, but those in the tin foil hat brigade will argue otherwise. There is nothing nefarious or evil about it and the practice is clearly spelled out in the licensing agreement, but per usual there are nutty bloggers out there that confuse a practice allowed by a licensing agreement with actual coded software behavior or actual practices of the company. There is a difference between a license provision that allows for data collection and a huge nefarious plot to watch your every move and tattle to authorities, but people write up whatever gets them advertising revenue, not what actually happens.

Canonical, in a purely evil attempt to actually bring in funding and OMG, support further development, added shopping suggestions for Amazon to the dash. If you are convinced that you are being forced to shop at Amazon.com every time you use the dash you may want to disable the feature. From a terminal, type: sudo apt-get remove unity-webapps-common.

What I have mentioned here are just the top two privacy concerns using Ubuntu. There is a list as long as what you can compile for Windows 10 and just like with Windows 10 it is all easily mitigated with a little bit of education and some simple configuration. There are many good reasons to use Linux, Windows 10 privacy concerns isn't one of them.

Thursday, March 24, 2016

THE AD BLOCKING CONTROVERSY. IS IT DEFENSE OR PIRACY?

THE AD BLOCKING CONTROVERSY. IS IT DEFENSE OR PIRACY?

 BY 
Edited and posted March 24th, 2016 to nytegeek.blog.com by John Beaulieu

Most legitimate web sites don’t use the types of ads that we all know and hate. Animated ads with loud sounds and distracting motions, Pop-ups/unders, and other sorts of intrusive advertising that interrupt people are the reason many have turned to ad blocking extensions. Ads that are so intrusive that they actually disrupt the intended use of a website don’t help anyone. Often the types of sites that use intrusive and or misleading ads of a questionable nature to begin with. Web sites that provide or aid in the ability to obtain copy righted material for free are often an example of the type of site that still resorts to this type of advertising. Anything from fake download buttons, pop-ups, misleading leaks, phising attempts, or even advertising links that if selected install malware. At any rate not running flash or java plugins would easily mitigate this without ad blocking in most cases.
But what about ad blocking on legitimate sites? What about sites that get most of their revenue with a few well placed banner ads that don’t disrupt the content or use of the site? Some will claim that since they never click on ads that the site doesn’t lose any money on them when they use an ad blocker. This isn’t necessarily true. Most sites are payed per view, not payed per click-through. If you block the ads from displaying you are effectively taking money out of the site owner’s pocket without even realizing it. The site still has to pay for the content, hardware, bandwidth, power, and an Internet connection. Delivering content to a reader is not cheap or free. If you block ads on a site the site doesn’t have that income to cover the cost of your use.
The piracy argument is that ad blocking allows the reader to obtain content for “free” without paying the price which is loading the ads. The difference between this and traditional piracy is that traditional piracy is using a software product or obtaining content that is meant to be paid for with money directly for free. Some people believe that viewing content on-line with an ad blocker is fine because it is “free” anyway. They don’t view the ads as a price for the content.
Regardless of how you see it there is an undeniable truth about the effect of ad blocking on legitimate sites. The sites are denied income needed to provide the content that people with ad blockers are reading or viewing. In some cases that means that site owners feel forced to create ways to squeeze more revenue out of ads and this can have a negative impact on people viewing the sites without an ad blocker.
On the other hand ad blockers may contribute to the site in other ways even if they are a net loss when it comes to viewing content and not viewing ads. They may post content like comments, links, and other content that can generate traffic to the site. They may share content on social networking sites and generate more traffic and content as a result. These are necessary for advertising to fund a site, so if any of the new traffic is from people that don’t block ads it is a plus.
The key to this dilemma may be in educating both site owners and site users. Site owners should learn about the types of advertising schemes that have fueled the ad blocking epidemic. They shouldn’t resort to intrusive, misleading, and or over the top methods of advertising to fund their sites. There are WordPress plug-ins that can be used to communicate with ad blockers. You can educate them about white-listing or ask them to turn their blockers off.  People probably aren’t going to turn their ad-blockers off, but if they can be persuaded to white-list non-offensive sites it would help.
Unfortunately there is not an easy fix for the situation. Ad blocking falls in an ethical and legal gray area without any clear answers. Ad blocking cant be defined as traditional piracy. It is still relatively new in the arena of socially acceptable practices and it hasn’t been tested under current law enough to be defined as a legal or as an unlawful practice. The only thing that is clear is that this issue will continue to become more important and divisive with time. There are many differing opinions on the matter and many of us are still on the fence about the whole mess.
For people that want to visit sites that use intrusive ads I understand the utility of an ad-blocker. I would suggest that these people take a few steps to make things better for everyone involved. First of all, learn how to white-list the sites that aren’t intrusive that you wish to visit instead of taking a shotgun block everything approach. Secondly, disable both Java and Flash in your browser. You likely do not need them and you will be a whole lot more secure when visiting sites that use intrusive advertising. Thirdly, practice “Intelligent Computing”. Don’t click on, download or run anything suspicious. My fourth and final bit of advice is to use a real time anti-virus suite if you are surfing from Windows. It is your last defense when “intelligent Computing” isn’t enough.

Tuesday, December 22, 2015

Supplements


On a more personal note I would like to say something about supplements. I have a myriad of complex and serious health issues. Friends, family, and strangers frequently try to advise that I use various supplements to be healthy. I usually try to politely dodge or ignore this kind of advice for a few simple reasons:


  • Supplements do not go through the same process with the FDA as medications. 
  • Unless a doctor prescribes one they are better left alone. 
  • In many cases, such as vitamin supplements, it is a waste of money and just creates expensive urine. 
  • In other cases, such as medicinal supplements, it is easy to dose wrong or take something that interferes with other medications. 
  • People confuse the word supplement with natural and they confuse the word natural with safe. 
  • A chemical is a chemical is a chemical. 
  • If you are going to use a medicinal supplement it is no different than using a prescription drug when it comes to the precautions that should be taken.

That said, there are supplements I use that are a net gain for my health. They have been suggested and or prescribed by a doctor. Supplements for all intents and purposes are drugs and should be treated in the same manner. I don't think there is anything wrong with using them as part of a routine to maintain health, I just believe it is better to consult somebody with the proper education on the matter before taking them.

Tuesday, December 1, 2015

Not So bad After All



I think I was a little hard on the show ,"Adam Ruins Everything" in a previous post. After watching a few more episodes and following some of the sources cited I believe it to be of more educational value than I had initially thought. I still think people that got their news from "The Daily Show" with John Stuart or mistook "Penn & Teller: Bullshit!" as a valid documentary are ridiculous, but I can't honestly put  "Adam Ruins Everything" in the same category after a second look.

I think person that clued me into the show by using it as a reference to support ridiculous claims is what threw me off. This person had also tried to claim that security such as antivirus & firewalls only give the illusion of security, that they don't actually do anything. He of course tried to use an episode of "Adam Ruins Everything" to back this ignorant idea up.

The episode the person was referring to was "Adam Ruins Security" and it is the second of 7 episodes thus far. I watched it and saw it touched on some internet related security issues but it didn't support the arguments. At first I viewed the show's reasoning to be reductive but that wasn't really the issue. It didn't support his claims because it didn't address them, not because the subject matter was faulty or biased. It did briefly touch on online security in certain matters like banking, but not on antivirus or firewall software.

I have found the series as a whole to amusing and informative thus far. Much of what has been covered are things that I and some of my friends have known and talked about for several years. it is nice to see the information getting out there. It is sad that I was almost derailed from it by somebody not intelligent enough to understand the it.

Friday, November 20, 2015

Being careful isn't really being careful without antivirus okay?


I have noticed a trend among gamers and people that work in computer security related fields. There are always a few of them in every encounter that insist that they don’t need antivirus protection. They say they are careful or that it degrades performance. Regardless of how careful a person is online antivirus protection is a must with Windows. People that subscribe to the “Being Careful is Enough” myth think that malware only comes from downloading suspicious files, running software that isn’t patched, visiting the wrong web-sites, or using Java or Flash in your web browser. Malware is clearly spread in all these ways, but it is also spread in ways that require little more than a network connection and the use of software over said network.
Security vulnerabilities are found in web browsers, plug-ins and pretty much any application used online all the time. New ones are frequently found faster than they can be patched. There are hackers that find these vulnerabilities and sell them to organized crime groups. Web servers are hacked and used to distribute malware through vulnerabilities. That means the simple act of visiting a website can infect your computer. This can happen even if you only visit trusted sites. Your trusted sites could easily become the next target for an attack. You wouldn't know until after the fact.
Being careful is still a must. An antivirus package wont catch everything but it is your last defense when simply being careful isn’t enough. Most antivirus scanners include other types of malware these days, be sure to use one that does. There are several free options that score well on independent laboratory testing.

As for gamers that argue that antivirus degrades system performance, this used to be true with certain products and older hardware but really isn't the case today. Computers are much faster and antivirus products are not bloated like they once were.

Thursday, November 19, 2015

Snowden has it Wrong about Adblockers



Edward Snowden says that it is our duty to use an adblocker. I think he is making a preposterous claim to be honest, but not because I disagree with the intended result. Adblockers can be used for security purposes, but are hardly necessary.

Using an adblocker to block everything instead of removing flash or Java (not to be confused with JavaScript) is a lazy approach that isn't good for the economic health of content providers. A better approach is to disable java script and flash or maybe just flash because security benefits from disabling JavaScript are dubious at best. Much of the modern web wont display or work properly with JavaScript disabled so if you feel the need to disable it maybe you shouldn't be online to begin with. Flash is another matter. Kill it with fire. There are better standards replacing flash and unless you absolutely have to use it for work or educational purposes it should be avoided.

The bottom line is that it is better to disable the services being exploited than to just block all advertising. Most legitimate web sites don’t use intrusive advertising such as animated ads with loud sounds and Pop-ups/unders. If you want to avoid malware and exploits stop using plugins, run a real-time antivirus and be more careful. Use of an adblocker is fine, just take some time to disable plugins like flash that pose security risks and whitelist sites that aren't intrusive with advertising. Content isn't free and if you wont pay for it by viewing a few non-intrusive ads it will disappear or get put behind a paywall.


Windows 10 Start Menu - Now with Ads!


After the November 12th update to Windows 10, code-named "Threshold 2" you may have noticed that the start menu now includes app advertisements.

The Start menu may show you occasional recommendations of apps you could install when you open it. This is yet another feature that clutters the new and improved Start Menu for Windows 10 users. I'm guessing Microsoft is trying to encourage Windows 10 users to install and use more apps from the Store. 

While cross platform apps are kind of cool and getting the word out may be important, I'm not sure this is the way to go about things. Microsoft needs to do more to encourage developers to port their apps over from Android and iOS to for their mobile devices before they try pushing us to use apps from their store on the PC.

This isn't really that big of a deal, but I'm sure there will be bloggers that are either victims of FUD or just want to capitalize on it posting all kinds of nonsense on the subject. You know the type. The ones convinced that Microsoft is spying on our every move and ratting us out for our downloads.

Don't break out your foil hat. This isn't a conspiracy. You can easily disable these ads, if you don't appreciate them. Go to Settings > Personalization > Start. Just disable the “Occasionally show suggestions in Start” option.

Sunday, November 8, 2015

Enough with the paranoid ignorance. There is NO keylogger in Windows 10.


What is with the ridiculous amount of people posting claims online that Windows 10 has a keylogger? Are people simultaneously really so very paranoid and ignorant?

Windows 10 doesn't have a keylogger. Certainly not in the malware sense. People are paranoid. They read something a blogger posted about the EULA online and draw wild conclusions about what Windows is doing. They read pseudo-news reports that touch on licensing terms but don't contain any examples, explanations, or evidence of these things happening at a software level. Claims about disabling software, disabling access to torrent sites, and keyloggers being built into Windows should be ignored and possibly ridiculed. I won't be breaking out a tin foil hat anytime soon. Microsoft isn't keeping a secret list of your downloads to sell to anti-piracy groups or law enforcement and they aren't recording your keystrokes and reading your e-mail.

A keylogger is software or even a hardware device that logs every key you press on your keyboard. It captures everything you type with the intent of finding personal messages, passwords, credit card numbers, and other data. I suppose if you are incredibly paranoid and use the strictest possible terms to define things you could call anything that captures characters a keylogger, but you wouldn't be right. By that definition your keyboard and your word processor would be keyloggers. 

The "Inking & Typing" function is what many bloggers are in an uproar over.  A keylogger records everything you type and the data is identifiable as yours. The correct term for what is erroneously being a called a keylogger in Windows 10 is "Text Analyses Engine" and it has a completely different function then a keylogger does This isn't a keylogger.

Microsoft isn't collecting personal or identifiable data via "Inking & Typing". Anonymous data  is gathered for product improvement. This data is used to improve the handwriting visual translation engine, to improve the user dictionary, language library and spell check functions in Windows. The data is put through rigorous, multi-pass scrubs to ensure it does not collect sensitive or identifiable fields (e.g., no email addresses, passwords, alpha-numerical data, etc.) according to Microsoft. They also say that the data is broken into very small bits and stripped of sequence data so it cannot be put back together or identified. Data samplings collected are limited; Microsoft isn't capturing all your keystrokes, nor are they reading your email or collecting banking info.

Don't succumb to FUD. If you are worried change your privacy settings. It is easy enough to do.

Saturday, November 7, 2015

It's Entertainment, Wait it's Opinion, No it's on TV so it must be news right?


A user at a forum I help moderate frustrated me today with a bit of ignorance. This person made the claim that most of the security features that we try so hard to put in place are useless in regards to computers and the internet. This person further claimed that security such as antivirus & firewalls only give the illusion of security, that they don't actually do anything. The claims were based on watching one episode of "Adam Ruins Everything". This was the only source cited for the argument.

This is of course an extreme over simplification of things on the part of the poster. A well secured, properly configured, and well monitored computer system does have a a measure of real security. It isn't just an illusion. It isn't an easy or simple thing to break into most systems. It takes a measure of knowledge and skill that the general public usually does not possess.

"Adam Ruins Everything" is hosted by a comedian and is slightly educational but mostly sketch comedy. Getting internet security or network administration information from it is almost as silly as all those people that got their news from "The Daily Show" with John Stuart. It isn't very accurate in many cases and is more about opinion and laughs than reality. The angle they put on everything is designed to get ratings from a specific demographic more than it is to disseminate any real facts.

The episode the poster was referring to was "Adam Ruins Security" and it is the second of 7 episodes thus far. It isn't internet security specific or even on topic for this thread the poster was commenting in at all. The episode was clearly just a ratings grab and not a useful commentary or documentary of security. At best it is highly editorial work that doesn't give a complete picture on the arguments presented. The increasing trend to treat editorials, comedy shows, reality shows, or any combination of the three as news or documentary sources is alarming.

Penn & Teller had a show a ways back titled "Penn & Teller: Bullshit!" that was clearly motivated by their own political views that many people either took to be factual or confused with legitimate documentary programming. "Adam Ruins Everything" isn't quite as bad but it's close.

Wednesday, November 4, 2015

Registry Cleaners are Snakeoil!


Please don't use registry cleaners or registry cleaning functions in other utilities! Extra registry entries do not slow your computer down! There is no need to shrink your registry! There are hundreds of thousands of entries in your registry. Windows isn't slowed down or even affected by registry keys left over by uninstalled programs. Individual registry entries are small. You could remove several thousand entries and not affect the size of it or how long it takes windows to access information in it. Back in the days of Windows 95, tiny amounts of memory, and slower hard drives, a smaller registry could have made a fractional difference in performance. That isn't the case today. There simply are not any legitimate benchmarks showing a performance boost from cleaning the registry on modern machines. This is a left over practice from older technology. It is another one of those PC performance myths that just wont seem to die.

If you are using computer that is 10 or even 15 years old and you have an original Windows installation that has had several thousand of programs installed and uninstalled over the last 10 or 15 years you might benefit from a smaller registry size. This computer would also need to have a fairly small amount of RAM for it to matter.

Removing or changing an incorrect registry value is certainly something that should be done if the key value is causing problems installing or running something. I have never relied on a registry cleaner to do this this however. I don't like using a shotgun approach on a problem if a precision instrument is available. If I knew enough to diagnose it as a registry issue I usually knew how find and correct it manually. For example, I have had to make registry changes to get software to run in wine and I have also had to make registry changes in the manual removal of certain types of malware. As a general tip for speeding a computer up however registry cleaning programs are useless.