4 ms·
Making js essential is not that hard, right? Just "display: none" on the root element, which is removed by js :) More sophisticated options can been found in o
by nuccy 4y ago
Making js essential is not that hard, right? Just "display: none" on the root element, which is removed by js :)
More sophisticated options can been found in other comments.
- nuccy 4y agoThe other kind of problem is if the website is not really proxied but rather dumped, patched and re-served. In such case the only option (if JavaScript frontend redirect doesn't work) is blocking by IP the dumping server. To identify IPs, as pointed in the root comment of this thread, you can create a one-pixel link to a dummy page, which dumping software would visit, but a human wouldn't. So you will see who visited that specific page and block those IPs for good.
- michaelmior 4y agoI would think you'd want to be careful about search engines with that approach. Assuming the OP wants their site indexed, you could end up unintentionally blocking crawlers.
- michaelmior 4y agoForcing all users of your website to use JavaScript to get around a scammer is pretty heavy-handed.
- kelnos 4y agoPresumably OP would only have to do this for a limited time, until the scammer gives up and moves on to an easier target. It's not the best, but I don't think it's as bad as you say.
- krater23 4y agoShow me one website that today really works without javascript.
- jethro_tell 4y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com https://news.ycombinator.com
- c22 4y agoI've been surfing without javascript since 2015. Most websites continue to work fine without it (though some aesthetic breakage is pretty standard). About 25% of sites become unusable, usually due to some poorly implemented cookie consent popup. I don't feel like I'm missing out on anything by simply refusing to patronize these sites. I will selectively turn JS on in some specific cases where dynamic content is required to deliver the value prop.
- michaelmior 4y ago> Most websites continue to work fine without it > About 25% of sites become unusable These two statements seem pretty contradictory. 75% feels like a low threshold for "most."
- c22 4y agoMost is more than half.
- michaelmior 4y agoIn casual conversation, I would never interpret most as being solely more than half. However, it seems like perhaps most people agree with you :) https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/55920/is-most-equivalent-to-a-majority-of https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/55920/is-most-eq...
- c22 4y agoIn my entirely casual understanding of English most means the set that has more members than any other. When the comparison is binary (sites that work vs sites that don't) then "more than half" is both necessary and sufficient as a definition. When comparing more than two options most could be significantly less than half (e.g. if I have two red balls, and one ball each of blue, purple, green, orange, pink, and yellow, then the color I have the most of is red, despite representing only one quarter of the total balls.) That said, any attribute attaining more than half of the pie must be most.
- psychphysic 4y agoJust explain why in a way that vanishes with JS enabled. Like other have said it'll not need to be used for long.
- ranger_danger 4y agomost websites these days already use javascript, and all modern browsers already support it. unless you're some really niche turbonerd website, nobody is going to notice or care...
- tofuahdude 4y agoTail wagging the dog is never a good answer.
- klyrs 4y agoIt's trivial to strip that "display: none" out, too.
- brazzledazzle 4y agoYea if they're already rewriting content to serve ads (likely since they're probably not doing this for altruistic reasons) you're just putting off the inevitable. While blocking or captcha'ing source IPs is also a cat and mouse game it's much more effective for a longer period of time.