6 ms·

Hmm. It just shows me a blank page, like about:blank, only it uses 112% CPU. That doesn't seem very useful. Oh, I see: looking in the console is an infinity

Hmm. It just shows me a blank page, like about:blank, only it uses 112% CPU. That doesn't seem very useful. Oh, I see: looking in the console is an infinity of error messages, mostly "Error handling response: Error: Failed to read the 'localStorage' property from 'Window': Access is denied for this document." Yeah: yet another page that can't load correctly with cookies disabled—only this one also manages to drain my battery. Look: I am sure your page is very pretty, but if you can't even manage to write code that fails gracefully in this very simple and common scenario, I don't think I trust you to not have made mistakes with more serious consequences.

dndvr 4y ago
- not that common a scenario - this uses localStorage which is similar to cookies but not the same thing - for a site that extolls 'all the data is saved in your browser', how should it cope with a browser with storage disabled? - How do you log in to HN with cookies disabled?
- cpcallen 4y ago
  Disabling cookies quite naturally disabled local storage as well, since localStorage can be used to identify and track a user as surely as a cookie can, at least if they have JavaScript enabled. I selectively enable cookies on websites that I wish to remember me as required. The vast majority of websites are perfectly capable of loading and operating without cookies / localStorage (though more recently a lot of them will keep popping up annoying cookie banners on every page load, since they can't remember I asked them not to use cookies if I don't let them set a cookie to remember that fact, ironically enough). There are numerous sites that are not _useful_ without cookies, but even the majority of those detect that cookies are disabled and explain that they are required, and most of the rest do something broken but basically understandable like generating a XSRF-detected error or redirecting one back to the login page over and over again. Even the small minority that fail to do anything at all and just sit there showing a blank page are at least harmless. Doing nothing useful _and_ using >100% CPU would therefore seem to entail either an unusually high level of incompetence, a wanton disregard for good practice (i.e. graceful degradation) or outright malice. I'll choose to apply Hanlon's razor and assume it's the former until proven otherwise.
  - ilyt 4y ago
    ...how else the website that is start page is supposed to remember what you have set it up ? You sound like someone that rode on bald tires for a year, finally crashed into a wall, then started to sue manufacturer because "car didn't told me to change them"
    - gardenhedge 4y ago
      That is an unreasonable comparison.
      - ilyt 4y ago
        Man enabled feature that will break anything with persistence Man used site that uses persistence. Man compares the thing is broken How it is not unreasonable ?

dndvr 4y ago

- not that common a scenario - this uses localStorage which is similar to cookies but not the same thing - for a site that extolls 'all the data is saved in your browser', how should it cope with a browser with storage disabled? - How do you log in to HN with cookies disabled?

cpcallen 4y ago
Disabling cookies quite naturally disabled local storage as well, since localStorage can be used to identify and track a user as surely as a cookie can, at least if they have JavaScript enabled. I selectively enable cookies on websites that I wish to remember me as required. The vast majority of websites are perfectly capable of loading and operating without cookies / localStorage (though more recently a lot of them will keep popping up annoying cookie banners on every page load, since they can't remember I asked them not to use cookies if I don't let them set a cookie to remember that fact, ironically enough). There are numerous sites that are not _useful_ without cookies, but even the majority of those detect that cookies are disabled and explain that they are required, and most of the rest do something broken but basically understandable like generating a XSRF-detected error or redirecting one back to the login page over and over again. Even the small minority that fail to do anything at all and just sit there showing a blank page are at least harmless. Doing nothing useful _and_ using >100% CPU would therefore seem to entail either an unusually high level of incompetence, a wanton disregard for good practice (i.e. graceful degradation) or outright malice. I'll choose to apply Hanlon's razor and assume it's the former until proven otherwise.
- ilyt 4y ago
  ...how else the website that is start page is supposed to remember what you have set it up ? You sound like someone that rode on bald tires for a year, finally crashed into a wall, then started to sue manufacturer because "car didn't told me to change them"
  - gardenhedge 4y ago
    That is an unreasonable comparison.
    - ilyt 4y ago
      Man enabled feature that will break anything with persistence Man used site that uses persistence. Man compares the thing is broken How it is not unreasonable ?