loading...

re: Should browsers still allow users to disable JavaScript? VIEW POST

FULL DISCUSSION
 

There are systems that aren't worth the effort to make them work without JS, but there's a lot of things out there using JS that really shouldn't be. Ads for example.

What HTML, JS, and browser developers need to be doing is adding more granularity so you can say: "I want to block ads from using JS", "I want to block automatic video playing", etc. things that are consistently abused on the internet. Also adding questions like "do you trust this website with access to your GPU" would be nice. That way the need for browser-wide blocking of JS is going to be significantly reduced.

Brave seems to be showing the way forward with this, unfortunately with it's almost non-existent extension library I can't yet switch to using it, and their built-in ad blocking is no where near as good as uBlock Origin and Privacy Badger combined.

With uBlock Origin when I just see an annoying element on a site I can just block it, and I find that incredibly important a feature. With uBlock Origin and Privacy Badger I can feel fairly safe using the internet with JS turned on.

If there's additional security layers forced on advertisers and other scum of the earth that don't care at all about the people they infect with their code, then I might tolerate the internet without blocking all ads too.

 

Also why people build simple homepages relying solely on client-side rendering with React and the like is beyond my capability to comprehend. I can understand having a few added things via JS, dialogs, and the like, but relying on JS to just render it is .. simply wrong.

Also if done properly with server-side rendering then that's ok too, but let's face it. People just say you can do server-side rendering with these things, but never do it.

 

I think because SSR is a bummer if you're not using JS on the server. A lot of frameworks don't support it, not easily at least. There's not that much documentation.

code of conduct - report abuse