From d4342a737c31d40d63ae8ffe7a0db03acd5f29de Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: q1800 <95879668+q1800@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2022 21:58:04 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] Minor fix

---
 Doesn't-uBlock-Origin-add-overhead-to-page-load?.md | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Doesn't-uBlock-Origin-add-overhead-to-page-load?.md b/Doesn't-uBlock-Origin-add-overhead-to-page-load?.md
index 9f94ea5..2d94066 100644
--- a/Doesn't-uBlock-Origin-add-overhead-to-page-load?.md
+++ b/Doesn't-uBlock-Origin-add-overhead-to-page-load?.md
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
-**TL;DR:** if you worry about uBO's added overhead for non-bloated sites, just [disable cosmetic filtering](./Per-site-switches#no-cosmetic-filtering) on a per-site basis, it is the optimal approach: this will keep you protected security- and privacy-wise (as far as your filters/rules allow) while minimizing the added overhead.
+**TL;DR:** if you worry about uBlock Origin (uBO)'s added overhead for non-bloated sites, just [disable cosmetic filtering](./Per-site-switches#no-cosmetic-filtering) on a per-site basis, it is the optimal approach: this will keep you protected security- and privacy-wise (as far as your filters/rules allow) while minimizing the added overhead.
 
 ***
 
-Yes, uBlock Origin (uBO) adds overhead to page load. It's impossible for a content blocker to add zero CPU cycles and/or memory overhead.
+Yes, uBO adds overhead to page load. It's impossible for a content blocker to add zero CPU cycles and/or memory overhead.
 
 **However**, for most web pages nowadays, that extra overhead is paid back many times from all the blocked resources which won't consume CPU cycles and memory.