7 ms·
Would like to read this, but I just get a blank page with Javascript disabled. Looks like I can't even archive the page - https://archive.fo/kLTbo https://archi
by oil25 7y ago
Would like to read this, but I just get a blank page with Javascript disabled. Looks like I can't even archive the page - https://archive.fo/kLTbo https://archive.fo/kLTbo. Looking at the page source code, it's completely unreadable - just a single line with a bunch of third party scripts and trackers. Disappointment over what the Web has become ensues.
- a13n 7y agoThat's really weird that the internet doesn't work with JavaScript disabled in 2019.
- paulryanrogers 7y agoNo need for the patronizing tone. Some block JS for the same reason others block ads: security and faster load times. Is it really too much to ask for a single <NoScript> tag on the home page explaining what the service is and why JS is necessary?
- dymk 7y agoYeah, I think it's a bit much to ask every single website on the internet that uses JavaScript to add a tag for the incredibly small demographic that is NoScript users.
- komali2 7y agohttps://gds.blog.gov.uk/2013/10/21/how-many-people-are-missing-out-on-javascript-enhancement/ https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2013/10/21/how-many-people-are-missi... 1%. Of all people. Except... maybe your content is targeting exactly the kind of people to wander around the internet with Javascript disabled, and then they're suddenly a much larger slice of your potential audience. Writing articles on engineering, I imagine, already increases that slice. Anything related to security, I imagine another increase. People that participate in Indie Hacking Projects.... another big slice. Anyway, why not just make it a part of that big ol blob of meta tags we all copy over to every index.html we write anyway? Including the magical bit of viewport meta to make pages look good on mobile?
- komali2 7y agoI understand why you feel justified in this tone, because it would be absurd to assume a web application could work without Javascript in 2019. But like... a static blog post? Why bother with JS at all? It seems like creating more work that necessary, bloating downloads, increasing load speed, and for no reason blocking out people with JS disabled (so like, not just people using Firefox with plugins, but people that browse from emacs or whatever... which seems weird, except those are exactly the kind of people that are also technologists building 20k side projects). Also makes accessibility harder than necessary.
- a13n 7y agoIndie Hackers is so much more than just a site with static content. There are user accounts and voting and commenting, just for starters. The market of people who disable JS is minuscule and very likely not worth the effort to serve. If you choose to disable a core web technology, then you should expect that many sites will not work for you.
- RHSeeger 7y ago> If you choose to disable a core web technology, then you should expect that many sites will not work for you. If you choose to disable a core web technology, then you should expect that many users will not work with you.
- carlosdp 7y agoPart of the point before was that it's actually not many though...
- beat 7y agoAnd since browsing the web via emacs is a huge market encompassing possibly upwards of .001% of all web traffic...
- komali2 7y agoOr more if we're talking about the slice of the market that are of the type to be interested in indie hacking projects... aka exactly the sort of people that want a editor they can hack on, or whatever.
- tracker1 7y agoI'm working on several applications that only support browsers with ES2017 (async) and above... That said, for mostly static content, there's very little excuse not to do server renders. I mean this stuff isn't new, and dynamic bits can be attached after render. Hell, most of the interaction beyond the text content I'd be fine with. One thing that REALLY bugs me, is blocking usage of analytics systems that you cannot access a site without it. Makes the site unusable if the analytics are blocked or otherwise fail to load. I keep JS on, but will be damned if I shut of uBlock.
- dang 7y agoPlease don't be snarky. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- a13n 7y agoYes sir, sorry Dan. Does saying a website doesn't work with JS disabled count as flamebait? This feels like a flamewar to me.
- dang 7y agoPeople interpret these terms differently but you're at least in the right ballpark. At minimum it's a generic tangent, and those always lead to tedious, predictable discussions, and often flamewars. That's why the guidelines bundle the two: "Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents."
- jasonvorhe 7y agoThen enable JavaScript.
- rtkwe 7y ago"I disabled one of the core technologies of the modern web and it breaks things."
- Avery3R 7y ago"Just download 8 megabytes of javascript and wait 10 seconds for a page that's mainly made up of static content and should be under ~1mb and load instantly"
- andai 7y agoIt's mostly text, isn't it? So more like 10kb.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- pjc50 7y agoThe page load took a second, on a desktop tethered to 4G. Chrome says "1.6MB transferred, 6.7MB resources" presumably because Google Analytics was a cache hit. Much of that is obfuscated-looking Ember containing some SVG and JSON inlined. A ctrl-R only loads about 20kb but still takes about half a second to render.
- dymk 7y agoThe page loaded in about a second for me
- jskilledmycat 7y agowoe is you
- jdironman 7y agoArchive site I believe is down for maintenance at the moment.
- sp332 7y agoThe site does have an odd architecture. I can't even find the article text in one of the downloaded files. Kinda looks like they serialized a large JS object into a string inside one of the JS files, wonder if it's in there. In addition to being un-archivable, it's probably also impossible to use with a screen reader. Edit: ok I don't really know anything about screen readers. I just miss graceful degradation being a priority of web design.
- dymk 7y agoThe DOM of the loaded page clearly has the article content in it (just right click -> inspect), and is visible to a screen reader.
- komali2 7y agoPop a screenreader on for yourself and see - I just tried and it read the "empty" ember-div div and then stopped. If I have my eyes closed, I have no way of knowing content rendered 20 seconds after it finished (when the text content finally loaded).
- CraneWorm 7y agoI have it enabled and the only thing that loads is a fluff quote and nothing else.
- bluedino 7y agoI had the same problem trying to access the site with Lynx.
- beat 7y agoI'm curious how you managed to post a comment about it on HN with Javascript disabled. Is it even possible to post here without using Javascript? (Maybe it is, I dunno.)
- neonate 7y agoI just disabled Javascript in Safari. Does this work?
- mcintyre1994 7y agoWhy wouldn't it be? It's just HTML forms - with a server-side action.
- beat 7y agoI was going to say "Without Ajax?", but when replying, realized that HN creates a reply page, so you're right... html forms should be sufficient. It's not trying to do inline comments on a live page.
- vbsteven 7y agoIt's not about hardline blocking javascript and never running a single line of code. I run NoScript (probably similar to the parent) and block all javascript by default because I don't want anyone else executing code on my machine unless I say so. I selectively enable only the JS that is required. For HN that means enabling one file with about 150 lines of surprisingly clear code. I had the same experience as the parent in that I could not read anything unless I enabled a ton of files and once the content became readable it was stuttering all the time while scrolling. In 2019, on a beefy 8 core machine with 32GB of memory.
- pmoriarty 7y agoYes, it is possible to post a comment (or submit an article, or do just about anything else) on HN without Javascript enabled. This reply is an example. I'm using emacs-w3m to post it, and emacs-w3m does not understand Javascript. I virtually always use HN without Javascript. It works great.
- 7y ago
- xwdv 7y agoWant to build your own side business and save the web at the same time? Every time you come across these sites offer to convert their site to a fully static page.