5 ms·

I think you would miss out on about 90% of what the web has to offer if you simply disable Javascript. A bit like saying you should never use a bank or credit

I think you would miss out on about 90% of what the web has to offer if you simply disable Javascript. A bit like saying you should never use a bank or credit cards and do everything with cash. Javascript is one of the most popular programming languages these days. This forum is full of programmers, so it's not surprising you get downvoted for recommending that people disable Javascript.

edgyquant 7y ago
I use noscript but I end up with most of the big sites whitelisted anyway (still prevents a lot of bloat.)
amazing_stories 7y ago
Downvotes or not, it is the way. I'm a programmer and I use uMatrix to whitelist only the JavaScript necessary to get the content I want. The Web is user adverse. I'll gladly miss out on that 90% of the Web, most of it is garbage. The average user generally only visits a few sites anyway.
- chrismmay 7y ago
  The Web can be a dangerous place, much like the rest of the world. Never heard of uMatrix before. It looks interesting. Thanks.
- mrspeaker 7y ago
  Yep - same: I'm one of the biggest JavaScript fans there are, and there's no way I'm letting any-old schmo run code on my computer just because I visited their web site! I use no script and Privacy Badger... these days it has to be something pretty exceptional to make me temporarily whitelist. If a page is blank, or just says "this app needs javascript to run", then it's insta-close: so not only am I not running javascript, I get a productivity boost too!
TravHatesMe 7y ago
In my opinion that is a bad reason to downvote someone. He/She is entitled to their opinion. Their comment drove discussion, I enjoyed reading your response and I like your analogy of cash vs. card. The downvoting on HN breeds conformism, to me that is both unappealing and unoriginal. People should consider all perspectives and form their own opinions. Edited to remove reddit comparison.
- chrismmay 7y ago
  I agree with you. I think the down-voting that goes on here is basically group-speak censorship and creates an echo-chamber. Tyranny of the majority...
- scarface74 7y ago
  It’s being downvoted not because people love being tracked but it is technically not feasible to use much of the modern web without JS. That’s about as helpful as saying the best way to avoid being tracked is by not using the web.
  - TravHatesMe 7y ago
    so if I say something that is technically infeasible, I should be downvoted? How about instead somebody informs me that what I stated is infeasible with some supporting facts? That will educate me and the rest of HN. So, since you say disabling JS is infeasible.. to what extent? What websites work with JS disabled, what might I miss out on? Is it possible to compromise, perhaps a browser can be configured to whitelist certain JS APIs? Perhaps we create a JS-lite standard? I don't know. Let's talk about it though. I like that kind of discussion. It is worth noting that I have always had JS enabled, but I would like to hear the opinions and perspectives of everyone.
    - scarface74 7y ago
      These days front end frameworks are the hotness where all of your rendering is done on the front end calling backend JSON APIs. If you don’t accept JS, nothing renders.
astrobe_ 7y ago
> I think you would miss out on about 90% of what the web has to offer if you simply disable Javascript. I don't know, 80% of the web I'm interested in is text - like your comment - images and video. None of them require JS. Websites need JS more than I do, it seems.
3xblah 7y ago
It is true this forum is full of programmers. It is also true this forum is relatively "lightweight" and does not require Javascript to read and comment.
ttctciyf 7y ago
The article we're discussing would be part of that superior 10% then :) My experience as a noscript user of several years is that the time I lose to one-time delays as I mark some domains trusted is vastly outweighed by the time I save avoiding repeated distended pageload times from sites suffering from multi-domain js bloat. Usually, about 75-85% of js domains for a given page are delivering some peripheral service like tracking, advertising, or analytics, in my experience, and loading all these unessentials can represent significant performance loss as well as other detriments.
superkuh 7y ago
>A bit like saying you should never use a bank or credit cards and do everything with cash. Yes, it is. I try to never use my bank card and always pay for things (even big purchases) in cash. For online stuff I try to use Bitcoin as much as possible.

edgyquant 7y ago

I use noscript but I end up with most of the big sites whitelisted anyway (still prevents a lot of bloat.)

amazing_stories 7y ago

Downvotes or not, it is the way. I'm a programmer and I use uMatrix to whitelist only the JavaScript necessary to get the content I want. The Web is user adverse. I'll gladly miss out on that 90% of the Web, most of it is garbage. The average user generally only visits a few sites anyway.

chrismmay 7y ago
The Web can be a dangerous place, much like the rest of the world. Never heard of uMatrix before. It looks interesting. Thanks.
mrspeaker 7y ago
Yep - same: I'm one of the biggest JavaScript fans there are, and there's no way I'm letting any-old schmo run code on my computer just because I visited their web site! I use no script and Privacy Badger... these days it has to be something pretty exceptional to make me temporarily whitelist. If a page is blank, or just says "this app needs javascript to run", then it's insta-close: so not only am I not running javascript, I get a productivity boost too!

TravHatesMe 7y ago

In my opinion that is a bad reason to downvote someone. He/She is entitled to their opinion. Their comment drove discussion, I enjoyed reading your response and I like your analogy of cash vs. card. The downvoting on HN breeds conformism, to me that is both unappealing and unoriginal. People should consider all perspectives and form their own opinions. Edited to remove reddit comparison.

chrismmay 7y ago
I agree with you. I think the down-voting that goes on here is basically group-speak censorship and creates an echo-chamber. Tyranny of the majority...
scarface74 7y ago
It’s being downvoted not because people love being tracked but it is technically not feasible to use much of the modern web without JS. That’s about as helpful as saying the best way to avoid being tracked is by not using the web.
- TravHatesMe 7y ago
  so if I say something that is technically infeasible, I should be downvoted? How about instead somebody informs me that what I stated is infeasible with some supporting facts? That will educate me and the rest of HN. So, since you say disabling JS is infeasible.. to what extent? What websites work with JS disabled, what might I miss out on? Is it possible to compromise, perhaps a browser can be configured to whitelist certain JS APIs? Perhaps we create a JS-lite standard? I don't know. Let's talk about it though. I like that kind of discussion. It is worth noting that I have always had JS enabled, but I would like to hear the opinions and perspectives of everyone.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    These days front end frameworks are the hotness where all of your rendering is done on the front end calling backend JSON APIs. If you don’t accept JS, nothing renders.

astrobe_ 7y ago

> I think you would miss out on about 90% of what the web has to offer if you simply disable Javascript. I don't know, 80% of the web I'm interested in is text - like your comment - images and video. None of them require JS. Websites need JS more than I do, it seems.

3xblah 7y ago

It is true this forum is full of programmers. It is also true this forum is relatively "lightweight" and does not require Javascript to read and comment.

ttctciyf 7y ago

The article we're discussing would be part of that superior 10% then :) My experience as a noscript user of several years is that the time I lose to one-time delays as I mark some domains trusted is vastly outweighed by the time I save avoiding repeated distended pageload times from sites suffering from multi-domain js bloat. Usually, about 75-85% of js domains for a given page are delivering some peripheral service like tracking, advertising, or analytics, in my experience, and loading all these unessentials can represent significant performance loss as well as other detriments.

superkuh 7y ago

>A bit like saying you should never use a bank or credit cards and do everything with cash. Yes, it is. I try to never use my bank card and always pay for things (even big purchases) in cash. For online stuff I try to use Bitcoin as much as possible.