From 8b55057fae2c4d9e014ca375f83c4ce90170babe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: gorhill <rhill@raymondhill.net>
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 08:07:25 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Updated Dynamic filtering   examples (markdown)

---
 Dynamic-filtering---examples.md | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/Dynamic-filtering---examples.md b/Dynamic-filtering---examples.md
index 35df9d7..092d3e1 100644
--- a/Dynamic-filtering---examples.md
+++ b/Dynamic-filtering---examples.md
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ Dynamic filtering can be used to block much more aggressively than what would no
 
 Following are some examples of using dynamic filtering vs. not using dynamic filtering (i.e. relying solely on the static filter lists), with both scenarios using the default filter lists. The top row in each table shows the used bandwidth.
 
-<p align="center"><img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gorhill/uBlock/master/doc/img/dynamic-filtering-4.png" /><br><sup>3rd-party scripts and 3rd-party frames blocked by default.</sup></p>
+<p align="center"><img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gorhill/uBlock/master/doc/img/dynamic-filtering-4.png" /><br><sup>3rd-party scripts and 3rd-party frames blocked by default on all sites.</sup></p>
 
 I didn't report below the comparative results without a blocker, that would be a lot of noise detracting from the main topic here, but I provide a summary of what would have happened without µBlock with default filter lists. (That is with click-to-play enabled for plugins -- it would be much worst without this.)