3 ms·

Interesting..How many sites work without javascript these days? Does google?

agreeablebut 6y ago
Plenty, and you get used to either toggling or enable the specific scripts that need to run.
Baeocystin 6y ago
More than you'd think, not as many as I'd hope. Easily 2/3rds of the ones I visit work, FWIW. Google works fine without javascript. Stunningly fast.
- oauea 6y ago
  > Google works fine without javascript. Stunningly fast. Until they block you for "suspicious behavior" after a few minutes of using it like that.
  - Baeocystin 6y ago
    Genuine question- has that happened to you?
    - oauea 6y ago
      Yes! It also happens when I am not logged in, or use a VPN (though that is understandable). But simply disabling javascript and clicking next a few times is usually enough to set off their blockages. Even when not using a VPN. It happens less if you only ever look at the first page.
      - Baeocystin 6y ago
        Interesting! Thanks for responding. I haven't had that happen to me yet, but I'm often using the same static IP I've had for years. Perhaps that keeps the trigger at bay.
      - wolco2 6y ago
        It makes sense the fingerprint you create with javascript can identify you easily. Without that google treats you as suspect.
  - nabeelms 6y ago
    DDG has a No Javascript based search.
- sundarurfriend 6y ago
  > Easily 2/3rds of the ones I visit work, FWIW. I started blocking JS a few weeks ago, and this has been my experience as well - a pleasant surprise. For a long time I thought that would be a step too far, that browsing would become so annoying and unpredictable because of it. Any annoyance from having to turn on JS for individual sites is easily outweighed by the number of annoyances I avoid - news websites are actually readable, blogs open with their content rather than with an in-your-face pop-up, and as a bonus, I pay attention to things like: how many 3rd party domains is it trying to connect to? does it require 3rd party JS to be enabled to function at all? did they even consider the possibility of disabled JS and bother to write a noscript message? Things like this translate to a measure of trustworthiness to me now, and I've been both horrified (by simple blogs trying to connect to 80+ domains) and pleasantly surprised (by complex-seeming websites that don't use 3rd party JS at all).
  - Moru 6y ago
    It's funny when the blocker says 99+ scripts blocked on a news site because it can't display more than two digits. Or when you end up with a black page because they didn't bother with a no-script version.

Plenty, and you get used to either toggling or enable the specific scripts that need to run.

More than you'd think, not as many as I'd hope. Easily 2/3rds of the ones I visit work, FWIW. Google works fine without javascript. Stunningly fast.

oauea 6y ago
> Google works fine without javascript. Stunningly fast. Until they block you for "suspicious behavior" after a few minutes of using it like that.
- Baeocystin 6y ago
  Genuine question- has that happened to you?
  - oauea 6y ago
    Yes! It also happens when I am not logged in, or use a VPN (though that is understandable). But simply disabling javascript and clicking next a few times is usually enough to set off their blockages. Even when not using a VPN. It happens less if you only ever look at the first page.
    - Baeocystin 6y ago
      Interesting! Thanks for responding. I haven't had that happen to me yet, but I'm often using the same static IP I've had for years. Perhaps that keeps the trigger at bay.
    - wolco2 6y ago
      It makes sense the fingerprint you create with javascript can identify you easily. Without that google treats you as suspect.
- nabeelms 6y ago
  DDG has a No Javascript based search.
sundarurfriend 6y ago
> Easily 2/3rds of the ones I visit work, FWIW. I started blocking JS a few weeks ago, and this has been my experience as well - a pleasant surprise. For a long time I thought that would be a step too far, that browsing would become so annoying and unpredictable because of it. Any annoyance from having to turn on JS for individual sites is easily outweighed by the number of annoyances I avoid - news websites are actually readable, blogs open with their content rather than with an in-your-face pop-up, and as a bonus, I pay attention to things like: how many 3rd party domains is it trying to connect to? does it require 3rd party JS to be enabled to function at all? did they even consider the possibility of disabled JS and bother to write a noscript message? Things like this translate to a measure of trustworthiness to me now, and I've been both horrified (by simple blogs trying to connect to 80+ domains) and pleasantly surprised (by complex-seeming websites that don't use 3rd party JS at all).
- Moru 6y ago
  It's funny when the blocker says 99+ scripts blocked on a news site because it can't display more than two digits. Or when you end up with a black page because they didn't bother with a no-script version.