is "Everything" doing some mining?

In message , VanguardLH
writes:
[]
Its immediate search results require previous searching. Like Windows
own indexing, Search Everything has to build its own index. I suspect
it occasionally performs an update by scanning the drives to detect
anything that changed that its service might've not captured at the time
of change.

I assume the some tens of seconds Everything takes when I start it
(sometimes; I haven't figured when. Possibly only first time after a
reboot?) is it doing an index. I haven't really looked at what CPU it's
using during that time, or timed how long it takes - but, even though it
might actually be over a minute, it does end. Whereas this 24/25% CPU
seems _not_ to. (Obviously I haven't - consciously - let it run for
hours, though I think I've sometimes come back to the machine and found
it happening.) So if it can do a full index in a minute or so, then
settle down, what exactly is it _doing_ when it takes off like that?

Unless I missed it, I did not see an option of when to reindex in the
background.

Since I stopped (because it had gone into 25% CPU mode) and restarted it
near the beginning of this thread, it has now been running for over 20
hours, and is still behaving itself - 00 in task manager - although it
might have had a busy session while I was asleep. [I don't shut the
machine down.]
[]
If you are concerned about data mining, use a network monitor, like
wireshark, to check if the program is phoning home. Make sure to
disable its auto-update check to eliminate that network traffic. If you

I'm not - I really don't think voidtools are either mining bitcoins
(which I _think_ I wouldn't mind anyway) or data mining. It was just a
quick and not really thought-out reaction to seeing CPU usage suddenly
not being at idle level.
[]
DOES anyone else experience this sudden rise in CPU usage of Everything,
or - like several other funnies! - is it just me?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The thing about smut is it harms no one and it's rarely cruel. Besides, it's a
gleeful rejection of the dreary and the "correct".
- Alison Graham, RT 2014/10/25-31