2 ms·

Instead of fixing the protocol, maybe the solution is to come up with a modern browser that doesn't support javascript at all. If there's widespread adoption o

by fouc 8y ago

Instead of fixing the protocol, maybe the solution is to come up with a modern browser that doesn't support javascript at all. If there's widespread adoption of such a browser, then that would change the trend. I think the USP could have to be something about "reading friendly" or "consistent reading experience" etc.

krapp 8y ago
It's already possible to block javascript in modern browsers, why do we need browsers that can't support javascript in any case? Javascript is just a general purpose programming language. It has uses besides tracking and advertising.
- planktonite 8y ago
  Because mother fucker JS sucks and it’s a huge security problem. Fuck JavaScript. You don’t need a Turing complete, garbage heap language to watch fucking YouTube. You don’t need it for 99 percent of shit on the web and the only time you need it is so some ass hole can make a shitty rube-Goldberg website with dumb functionality that nobody likes. And also because html only sucks. You need more than text and images to do most of the stuff that’s on the web. You need lots of stuff baked in like forums, form handling and whatever. If you had a browser/protocol that had image, text, video, forum, comment tree/collapsing, etc baked in rather than re-implemented by every fucking individual website in shitty horrible broken JS then it would be more secure, more uniform and higher performance. It would also have the astounding effect of lowering the complexity of browsers massively since they don’t have to do Js, which would mean we would have more than two fucking browsers and all those new browsers would compete with each other to best serve the interests of the users. As opposed to what we have now which is a bunch of fucking bullshit. Don’t you ever say “derp derp derp html” again you dumb mother fucker
pmlnr 8y ago
> a modern browser that doesn't support javascript Modern-ish: https://www.dillo.org/ https://www.dillo.org/ (it's very far from a lot of CSS features, but it works)

by fouc 8y ago

krapp 8y ago

It's already possible to block javascript in modern browsers, why do we need browsers that can't support javascript in any case? Javascript is just a general purpose programming language. It has uses besides tracking and advertising.

planktonite 8y ago
Because mother fucker JS sucks and it’s a huge security problem. Fuck JavaScript. You don’t need a Turing complete, garbage heap language to watch fucking YouTube. You don’t need it for 99 percent of shit on the web and the only time you need it is so some ass hole can make a shitty rube-Goldberg website with dumb functionality that nobody likes. And also because html only sucks. You need more than text and images to do most of the stuff that’s on the web. You need lots of stuff baked in like forums, form handling and whatever. If you had a browser/protocol that had image, text, video, forum, comment tree/collapsing, etc baked in rather than re-implemented by every fucking individual website in shitty horrible broken JS then it would be more secure, more uniform and higher performance. It would also have the astounding effect of lowering the complexity of browsers massively since they don’t have to do Js, which would mean we would have more than two fucking browsers and all those new browsers would compete with each other to best serve the interests of the users. As opposed to what we have now which is a bunch of fucking bullshit. Don’t you ever say “derp derp derp html” again you dumb mother fucker

pmlnr 8y ago

> a modern browser that doesn't support javascript Modern-ish: https://www.dillo.org/ https://www.dillo.org/ (it's very far from a lot of CSS features, but it works)