I think there's a bigger point you're missing. > almost universally, the web version is safer to use. Nobody should be installing Facebook, Twitter, or Reddit

I think there's a bigger point you're missing. > almost universally, the web version is safer to use. Nobody should be installing Facebook, Twitter, or Reddit on their phone. Not only is this true, this would be even more true without JavaScript—if those sites were still usable, which they definitely could be, they just choose not to be. (Well, maybe except Facebook Live, but that could be an optional standalone app.) > you can already do that on the web today. You can already turn off Javascript. Of course, this isn't really true, precisely because so many websites that could function fine without JS (including things like news sites that should just be static content!) instead choose not to. Which of course is the real problem with yellowapple's idea. Lots of services cripple their mobile website and push you to install their app instead; if we removed JS from the Web, everyone who could would just start doing the same on desktop too, right? Upstarts trying to maximize growth probably will work great on the Web, but as they get more established they'll start pushing people more and more towards their native apps, and existing established players will do that from Day 1 (of the new, JS-less world), including everyone mentioned so far—Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, GitHub, major news sites, because people will deal with the one-time friction of installing the app in order to access the network or content.