4 ms·
I've always used YesScript, it has a much simpler UI -> basically a single button which remembers if JS is on/off for a given site. It's always been puzzling to
by old-gregg 9y ago
I've always used YesScript, it has a much simpler UI -> basically a single button which remembers if JS is on/off for a given site. It's always been puzzling to me why YesScript is less popular... And yes, it's available for the latest FF as YesScript2 [1]
[1] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/yesscript2/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/yesscript2/
- TheDong 9y ago"YesScript" is significantly less secure and powerful. Most importantly, with NoScript I can block tracking and ad-related javascript while still running the page's first-party javascript. With yesscript, I don't get that granularity. Perhaps that's why it's less popular. I also believe that it came out later and thus hasn't had the time to gather such a following as noscript has (though who would use a worse version of noscript instead?)
- log69 9y agoHi, I'm the developer of YesScript2 and I've just released a new version with 3 state blocking that makes it even better alternative I believe because you have 3 options: 1) no blocking (grey icon) 2) half blocking (allowing internal scripts and blocking external, blue icon, so you can allow now first-party Javascript as you mentioned) and full blocking (blocking internal and external scripts too, red icon).