4 ms·

> Extensions required to make the web usable: > NoScript: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/noscript/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/add

by ponyous 11y ago

> Extensions required to make the web usable: > NoScript: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/noscript/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/noscript/ Can you elaborate, how does noscript makes web more usable?

Igglyboo 11y ago
AFAIK most people use Noscript for privacy/security reasons, there's no way it makes the web more usable considering how prevalent javascript is these days.
- baldfat 11y ago
  It certainly becomes less and less annoying after you use it for a few months. That way you only get annoyed by new sites. Used it for 6 months switched machines and didn't want to go through the learning curve again.
  - reagency 11y ago
    Can you copy over your settings file from old machine?
    - coldpie 11y ago
      I don't know the parent's particular circumstances, but NoScript has a whitelist import/export feature.
      - baldfat 11y ago
        OP forgot to do it since it was working well it was out of mind.
coldpie 11y ago
Sure. Lots of websites have really questionable javascript behavior, like replicating mobile behavior where dragging the mouse around makes you "swipe" between articles, or in-line image resizing (wikipedia), or auto-rotating image galleries, or shitty page-loading effects like fading text in, or breaking your scrollbar. NoScript eliminates that kind of garbage. In addition to this, there's the privacy benefits, lowering your page load time and CPU usage, and avoiding running arbitrary programs on your computer loaded off the internet, which is how GitHub was DDOSed last month. For an average, non-technical user, I wouldn't recommend NoScript. But if you're willing to put up with a little annoyance of allowing two or three domains now and then, it really makes a lot of webpages behave better.
- Arzh 11y ago
  except the fact that many sites use js to render anything so it makes most of the web unusable unless you turn it off.
  - coldpie 11y ago
    Yup, it's a trade-off. You have to view fading-in-text and put up with broken scrollbars; I have to click "Temporarily Allow" a couple times a day.
  - wtallis 11y ago
    NoScript also has surrogate scripts that replace what was blocked with a minimal script to un-break sites. It's usually used to fool a site with first-party scripts enabled into thinking that the third-party scripts loaded, too, but there are also scripts that allow a site to work without any of its scripts being enabled. The changelog currently show that they recently added a surrogate to allow some troublesome wordpress themes to work without scripting, and to allow the Microsoft support site to show article content without scripting.
    - Arzh 11y ago
      yeah but it is an unfortunate game of wackamole. I really wish I could turn off JS but when I did, I would always just end up with no other option.

by ponyous 11y ago

Igglyboo 11y ago

AFAIK most people use Noscript for privacy/security reasons, there's no way it makes the web more usable considering how prevalent javascript is these days.

baldfat 11y ago
It certainly becomes less and less annoying after you use it for a few months. That way you only get annoyed by new sites. Used it for 6 months switched machines and didn't want to go through the learning curve again.
- reagency 11y ago
  Can you copy over your settings file from old machine?
  - coldpie 11y ago
    I don't know the parent's particular circumstances, but NoScript has a whitelist import/export feature.
    - baldfat 11y ago
      OP forgot to do it since it was working well it was out of mind.

coldpie 11y ago

Sure. Lots of websites have really questionable javascript behavior, like replicating mobile behavior where dragging the mouse around makes you "swipe" between articles, or in-line image resizing (wikipedia), or auto-rotating image galleries, or shitty page-loading effects like fading text in, or breaking your scrollbar. NoScript eliminates that kind of garbage. In addition to this, there's the privacy benefits, lowering your page load time and CPU usage, and avoiding running arbitrary programs on your computer loaded off the internet, which is how GitHub was DDOSed last month. For an average, non-technical user, I wouldn't recommend NoScript. But if you're willing to put up with a little annoyance of allowing two or three domains now and then, it really makes a lot of webpages behave better.

Arzh 11y ago
except the fact that many sites use js to render anything so it makes most of the web unusable unless you turn it off.
- coldpie 11y ago
  Yup, it's a trade-off. You have to view fading-in-text and put up with broken scrollbars; I have to click "Temporarily Allow" a couple times a day.
- wtallis 11y ago
  NoScript also has surrogate scripts that replace what was blocked with a minimal script to un-break sites. It's usually used to fool a site with first-party scripts enabled into thinking that the third-party scripts loaded, too, but there are also scripts that allow a site to work without any of its scripts being enabled. The changelog currently show that they recently added a surrogate to allow some troublesome wordpress themes to work without scripting, and to allow the Microsoft support site to show article content without scripting.
  - Arzh 11y ago
    yeah but it is an unfortunate game of wackamole. I really wish I could turn off JS but when I did, I would always just end up with no other option.