I use ublock origin with scripts and large media blocked by default (which makes sites load faster, like AMP is supposed to as well). For some sites, depending

I use ublock origin with scripts and large media blocked by default (which makes sites load faster, like AMP is supposed to as well). For some sites, depending on their purpose, it would be unreasonable to expect them to not use JavaScript. For example https://www.openstreetmap.org https://www.openstreetmap.org (where the scripts are even free/libre). In such a case, it is easy to (permanently) unblock scripts and large media in ublock origin, but it would not be fair for a search engine to deprioritise a map site for that reason, would it? Also, most news sites pull in massive pile of JS, but they still work when it's blocked. Yet, even some blogs can fail to show any text when JS is blocked. So I feel the issue is not so much about JS alone, more about graceful degradation. Because surely it's fine to have add a bunch of non-existential JS? Salon has a Monero miner on their site[0], but works fine without it being loaded. [0]: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/02/salon-to-ad-blockers-can-we-use-your-browser-to-mine-cryptocurrency/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/02/salon...