←back to thread

451 points todsacerdoti | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0.413s | source
Show context
keeganpoppen ◴[] No.45058084[source]
i will say that though i am predisposed to appreciate and agree with an article like this, any sort of value proposition around "some users don't want javascript" just doesn't... hit for me. and, mind you: i am a card-carrying arch user and have spent more time messing with browser scripting and web crawling, and am more of a True Believer than most. it's just such a niche user preference that i think it should largely be simply ignored. yes, i would love the world to be better for the "noscript" universe, no, i don't think that any individual "grassroots" effort should stake itself on "no javascript" being any part of its utility. i think there are a million other reasons why CSS should win out that are more compelling than an appeal to what feels, extremely ironically, like a callback to the "but 10% of your users use IE6" days... all in all, yes: this is somewhat of a minor point wrt. to the article (which btw i think is great), but i am just calling the "trend", such as it is / has been, for what (i think) it is.
replies(5): >>45058205 #>>45058259 #>>45058381 #>>45058464 #>>45059079 #
rebane2001 ◴[] No.45058259[source]
fwiw, i've been using the internet with noscript and i find it perfectly usable

for any sites that do need js, i simply enable it for them from the extension, so it never gets in the way with sites i use regularly

it's pretty nice for performance/battery and security

have you ever tried living with noscript for over a week? i feel like your perspective could be a bit mislead, because i felt the exact same way as you before i started using noscript

disclaimer: i'm the author of the blogpost

replies(5): >>45058494 #>>45059123 #>>45059657 #>>45059996 #>>45060150 #
1. Mars008 ◴[] No.45058494[source]
Same here, I have noscript almost always on. The problem is some things don't work without JS. Google and Bing search, youtube, even duckduckgo in plane FireFox. The later works in Tor browser, that's what I'm usually using. I usually skip on most other things that require JS to drive blinking ads.
replies(3): >>45058763 #>>45059125 #>>45062003 #
2. ◴[] No.45058763[source]
3. typpilol ◴[] No.45059125[source]
Isn't the tor browser insanely slow though?
replies(1): >>45061248 #
4. Mars008 ◴[] No.45061248[source]
Not anymore. It's very usable when JS is not needed. I've seen more than 5MB/s Tor downloads. The good, or bad, thing is you don't control the exit point. You can only change it by resetting the circuit. Some websites are sensitive to user's location.
5. 1718627440 ◴[] No.45062003[source]
If duckduckgo bothers you, there is html.duckduckgo.com.