5 ms·

I'm all for blocking surveillance but how tiring is it to block JavaScript as suggested and then watch the majority of the internet not work?

by gleenn 1y ago

pluc 1y ago
It really isn't. I've been blocking all JavaScript for years now, selectively allowing what is essential for sites to run or using a private session to allow more/investigate/discover. Most sites work fine without their 30 JS sources, just allowing what is hosted on their own domain. It takes a little effort, but it's a fair price to pay to have a sane Internet. The thing is - with everything - it's never easy to have strong principles. If it were, everyone would do it.
- roywiggins 1y ago
  It's certainly not that bad if you have uMatrix to do it with, but I haven't found a reasonable way to do it on mobile. uMatrix does work on Firefox Mobile but the UI is only semi functional.
  - baobun 1y ago
    NoScript + uBO is all right.
    - pluc 1y ago
      Yup that's what I use as well. With whatever the name of the extension that makes allowing cookies a whitelist thing too, and PrivacyBadger/Decentraleyes. Also, deleting everything when Firefox closes. It's a little annoying to re-login to everything every day, but again, they are banking on this inconvenience to fuck you over and I refuse to let them win. It becomes part of the routine easily enough.
  - bornfreddy 1y ago
    Not quite the same (I love uMatrix UI), but advanced mode in uBO is similar. It lacks filtering by data type (css, js, images, fonts,...) per domain, but it does resolve domains to their primary domain, revealing where they are hosted. A huge kudos to gorhill for both of these!
  - 1vuio0pswjnm7 1y ago
    uMatrix is fully-functional on Nightly. Using Firefox Add-Ons on a "smartphone" sucks because one has to access every Add-On interface via an Extensions menu. In that sense _all_ Add-Ons are only semi-functional. I use multiple layers: uMatrix + NetGuard + Nebulo "DNS Rules", at the least. Thus I have at least three opportunities where I can block lookups for and requests to Google domains.
    - DavideNL 1y ago
      Doesn’t uBlock Origin in advanced mode do the exact same thing as uMatrix?
      - 1vuio0pswjnm7 1y ago
        https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/wiki/Changes-from-HTTP-Switchboard https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/wiki/Changes-from-HTTP-Sw... https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Advanced-settings https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Advanced-settings Having tried both, IMHO they do not do exactly the same thing. One is pattern-based, the other is host-based. As such, one can use them together, simultaneously.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
      - pmontra 1y ago
        Maybe, but the UX is so terrible that I never figured out how to use uBO to replace uMatrix. I always use both: uBO for ads and DOM elements filtering and uMatrix for JavaScript, frames, cookies, anything in the columns of its UI. Basically uMatrix is so donor to use that anybody can use it. The equivalent uBO section is so complicated that I feel I need to take a master degree in that subject.
        zelphirkalt 1y ago
        You would be surprised how many people are completely overwhelmed by the choices uMatrix offers. Lots of people out there, that don't even know what a website can consist of, let alone what it means to block this or that, or have the awareness that they did block something, or the patience to properly unblock the minimum amount of shit necessary to use the website. For many people any effort at all makes them surrender to the global spyware.
- dylan604 1y ago
  That’s my default as well. Self hosted/1st party scripts can load, but 3rd party scripts are blocked. The vast majority of sites work this way. If a site doesn’t work because they must have a 3rd party script to work, I tend to just close the tab. I really don’t feel like it has caused me to miss anything. There’s usually 8 other sites with the same data in a slightly less hostile site
- palata 1y ago
  Do you selectively enable JavaScript for the whole site, or is there a way with uBO to only enable subparts of it?
  - culi 1y ago
    NoScript seems like the go-to addon https://noscript.net/ https://noscript.net/ It has pretty advanced features but also basic ones that allow you to block scripts by source
sureglymop 1y ago
It's easier than I thought. I just use uBlock Origin with everything blocked by default and then allow selectively.
Rapzid 1y ago
About as tiring as hearing about it all the time. Thank god it's a fringe topic these days but this article snuck it in. Probably the constant use of the word "surveillance" was an early tell haha.
heavyset_go 1y ago
Whitelisting JS has worked on my end for a while. I won't browse the Internet on my phone without it, everything loads instantly and any site that actually matters was whitelisted years ago.
anothernewdude 1y ago
The sites that don't work are usually the worst websites around - you end up not missing much. And if it's a store or whatever, you can unblock all js when you actually want to buy.
kevin_thibedeau 1y ago
StackOverflow switched over from spying with ajax.google.com to GTM in the past year or so. All for some pointless out of date jQuery code they could self-host. I wonder how much they're being paid to let Google collect user stats from their site.
goopypoop 1y ago
People who want you to run their scripts aren't really your friends
1vuio0pswjnm7 1y ago
Impossible to know because when I disable Javascript "the majority of the internet" works fine. As does a majority of the web. I read HN and every site submitted to HN using TCP clients and a text-only browser, that has no Javascript engine, to convert HTML to text. The keyword is "read". Javascript is not necessary for requesting or reading documents. Web developers may use it but that doesn't mean it is necessary for sending HTTP requests or reading HTML or JSON. If the web user is trying to do something else other than requesting and reading, then perhaps it might not "work".
- zelphirkalt 1y ago
  [dead]
qualeed 1y ago
Echoing others, I've used NoScript for years and at this point it is practically unnoticeable. Many sites work without (some, like random news & blogs, work better). When a site doesn't work, I make a choice between temporarily or permanently allowing it depending on how often I visit the site. It takes maybe 5 seconds and I typically only need to spend that 5 seconds once. As a reward, I enjoy a much better web experience.
michaelt 1y ago
It depends. If you're spending 99% of your time on your favourite websites that you've already tuned the blocking on? Barely a problem. On the other hand if your job involves going to lots of different vendors' websites - you'll find it pretty burdensome, because you might end up fiddling with the per-site settings 15+ times per day.
- dylan604 1y ago
  If I’m at work using a work provided computer, I don’t bother with the blocking. They are not tracking me as I do not do anything as me. I’m just some corporate stooge employee that has no similarity to me personally. My personal devices block everything I can get away with

I'm all for blocking surveillance but how tiring is it to block JavaScript as suggested and then watch the majority of the internet not work?

by gleenn 1y ago

I'm all for blocking surveillance but how tiring is it to block JavaScript as suggested and then watch the majority of the internet not work?

pluc 1y ago

It really isn't. I've been blocking all JavaScript for years now, selectively allowing what is essential for sites to run or using a private session to allow more/investigate/discover. Most sites work fine without their 30 JS sources, just allowing what is hosted on their own domain. It takes a little effort, but it's a fair price to pay to have a sane Internet. The thing is - with everything - it's never easy to have strong principles. If it were, everyone would do it.

roywiggins 1y ago
It's certainly not that bad if you have uMatrix to do it with, but I haven't found a reasonable way to do it on mobile. uMatrix does work on Firefox Mobile but the UI is only semi functional.
- baobun 1y ago
  NoScript + uBO is all right.
  - pluc 1y ago
    Yup that's what I use as well. With whatever the name of the extension that makes allowing cookies a whitelist thing too, and PrivacyBadger/Decentraleyes. Also, deleting everything when Firefox closes. It's a little annoying to re-login to everything every day, but again, they are banking on this inconvenience to fuck you over and I refuse to let them win. It becomes part of the routine easily enough.
- bornfreddy 1y ago
  Not quite the same (I love uMatrix UI), but advanced mode in uBO is similar. It lacks filtering by data type (css, js, images, fonts,...) per domain, but it does resolve domains to their primary domain, revealing where they are hosted. A huge kudos to gorhill for both of these!
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 1y ago
  uMatrix is fully-functional on Nightly. Using Firefox Add-Ons on a "smartphone" sucks because one has to access every Add-On interface via an Extensions menu. In that sense _all_ Add-Ons are only semi-functional. I use multiple layers: uMatrix + NetGuard + Nebulo "DNS Rules", at the least. Thus I have at least three opportunities where I can block lookups for and requests to Google domains.
  - DavideNL 1y ago
    Doesn’t uBlock Origin in advanced mode do the exact same thing as uMatrix?
    - 1vuio0pswjnm7 1y ago
      https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/wiki/Changes-from-HTTP-Switchboard https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/wiki/Changes-from-HTTP-Sw... https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Advanced-settings https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Advanced-settings Having tried both, IMHO they do not do exactly the same thing. One is pattern-based, the other is host-based. As such, one can use them together, simultaneously.
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
    - pmontra 1y ago
      Maybe, but the UX is so terrible that I never figured out how to use uBO to replace uMatrix. I always use both: uBO for ads and DOM elements filtering and uMatrix for JavaScript, frames, cookies, anything in the columns of its UI. Basically uMatrix is so donor to use that anybody can use it. The equivalent uBO section is so complicated that I feel I need to take a master degree in that subject.
      - zelphirkalt 1y ago
        You would be surprised how many people are completely overwhelmed by the choices uMatrix offers. Lots of people out there, that don't even know what a website can consist of, let alone what it means to block this or that, or have the awareness that they did block something, or the patience to properly unblock the minimum amount of shit necessary to use the website. For many people any effort at all makes them surrender to the global spyware.
dylan604 1y ago
That’s my default as well. Self hosted/1st party scripts can load, but 3rd party scripts are blocked. The vast majority of sites work this way. If a site doesn’t work because they must have a 3rd party script to work, I tend to just close the tab. I really don’t feel like it has caused me to miss anything. There’s usually 8 other sites with the same data in a slightly less hostile site
palata 1y ago
Do you selectively enable JavaScript for the whole site, or is there a way with uBO to only enable subparts of it?
- culi 1y ago
  NoScript seems like the go-to addon https://noscript.net/ https://noscript.net/ It has pretty advanced features but also basic ones that allow you to block scripts by source

sureglymop 1y ago

It's easier than I thought. I just use uBlock Origin with everything blocked by default and then allow selectively.

Rapzid 1y ago

About as tiring as hearing about it all the time. Thank god it's a fringe topic these days but this article snuck it in. Probably the constant use of the word "surveillance" was an early tell haha.

heavyset_go 1y ago

Whitelisting JS has worked on my end for a while. I won't browse the Internet on my phone without it, everything loads instantly and any site that actually matters was whitelisted years ago.

anothernewdude 1y ago

The sites that don't work are usually the worst websites around - you end up not missing much. And if it's a store or whatever, you can unblock all js when you actually want to buy.

kevin_thibedeau 1y ago

StackOverflow switched over from spying with ajax.google.com to GTM in the past year or so. All for some pointless out of date jQuery code they could self-host. I wonder how much they're being paid to let Google collect user stats from their site.

goopypoop 1y ago

People who want you to run their scripts aren't really your friends

1vuio0pswjnm7 1y ago

Impossible to know because when I disable Javascript "the majority of the internet" works fine. As does a majority of the web. I read HN and every site submitted to HN using TCP clients and a text-only browser, that has no Javascript engine, to convert HTML to text. The keyword is "read". Javascript is not necessary for requesting or reading documents. Web developers may use it but that doesn't mean it is necessary for sending HTTP requests or reading HTML or JSON. If the web user is trying to do something else other than requesting and reading, then perhaps it might not "work".

zelphirkalt 1y ago
[dead]

qualeed 1y ago

Echoing others, I've used NoScript for years and at this point it is practically unnoticeable. Many sites work without (some, like random news & blogs, work better). When a site doesn't work, I make a choice between temporarily or permanently allowing it depending on how often I visit the site. It takes maybe 5 seconds and I typically only need to spend that 5 seconds once. As a reward, I enjoy a much better web experience.

michaelt 1y ago

It depends. If you're spending 99% of your time on your favourite websites that you've already tuned the blocking on? Barely a problem. On the other hand if your job involves going to lots of different vendors' websites - you'll find it pretty burdensome, because you might end up fiddling with the per-site settings 15+ times per day.

dylan604 1y ago
If I’m at work using a work provided computer, I don’t bother with the blocking. They are not tracking me as I do not do anything as me. I’m just some corporate stooge employee that has no similarity to me personally. My personal devices block everything I can get away with