7 ms·

> There are websites that genuinely need to run some code, like webmails, Not really, not if you think about it. Webmail doesn't need anything more than html(<

> There are websites that genuinely need to run some code, like webmails, Not really, not if you think about it. Webmail doesn't need anything more than html(<5)+css. > online trading platforms Ditto. > online games Honestly, I think running webgames in a super-sandboxed flash (or similar) runtime is the best thing to do. Again, no use for js on the web.

endless1234 9y ago
>Honestly, I think running webgames in a super-sandboxed flash (or similar) runtime is the best thing to do. Why is one ECMAScript sandbox (flash) so much better than another?
- dingo_bat 9y ago
  Because it came with an awesome IDE/editor.
send_computers 9y ago
Yeah lets all just use bash commands to browse the web, way more secure and sure you can get the information you need... oh wait wasn't that 20 years ago?
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  And it would still be possible if web standards didn't accrue so many capabilities that allowed people to treat them as a new medium of publishing color magazines (with invasive tracking as a cherry on the cake).
om2 9y ago
Built-in JavaScript has a better security track record than Flash and it’s ActionScript engine.
- dingo_bat 9y ago
  That's true, but probably only because writing games and animations in js is sooooooooooo much harder than doing the same in flash.
SquareWheel 9y ago
>Not really, not if you think about it. Webmail doesn't need anything more than html(<5)+css. Because redownloading the entire page every time you click a button is such a great experience...
- freeone3000 9y ago
  The page without the javascript? It likely would be, since that would be much smaller.
  - SquareWheel 9y ago
    That Javascript would already be cached and have no impact on further page loads. Clicking "star" and losing your half-typed message would be very impactful, though.

7 ms·

> There are websites that genuinely need to run some code, like webmails, Not really, not if you think about it. Webmail doesn't need anything more than html(<

by dingo_bat 9y ago

endless1234 9y ago
>Honestly, I think running webgames in a super-sandboxed flash (or similar) runtime is the best thing to do. Why is one ECMAScript sandbox (flash) so much better than another?
- dingo_bat 9y ago
  Because it came with an awesome IDE/editor.
send_computers 9y ago
Yeah lets all just use bash commands to browse the web, way more secure and sure you can get the information you need... oh wait wasn't that 20 years ago?
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  And it would still be possible if web standards didn't accrue so many capabilities that allowed people to treat them as a new medium of publishing color magazines (with invasive tracking as a cherry on the cake).
om2 9y ago
Built-in JavaScript has a better security track record than Flash and it’s ActionScript engine.
- dingo_bat 9y ago
  That's true, but probably only because writing games and animations in js is sooooooooooo much harder than doing the same in flash.
SquareWheel 9y ago
>Not really, not if you think about it. Webmail doesn't need anything more than html(<5)+css. Because redownloading the entire page every time you click a button is such a great experience...
- freeone3000 9y ago
  The page without the javascript? It likely would be, since that would be much smaller.
  - SquareWheel 9y ago
    That Javascript would already be cached and have no impact on further page loads. Clicking "star" and losing your half-typed message would be very impactful, though.