3 ms·

sigh, yet another site which needlessly doesn't work without JavaScript. It's a pity, because the article itself is great.

by wtbob 11y ago

obstinate 11y ago
This ship sailed years ago. Kinda time to get over it.
andrewschleifer 11y ago
The content is mostly there, it's just covered up. Using the inspector tools to delete the div with id 'loading' will reveal stuff.
mordrax 11y ago
I don't get it, the first time I heard this, I thought it was some big joke, but there really are ppl with js turned off? In 2015? Don't you need it to sign into anything... like HN? Or post a comment.
- probably_wrong 11y ago
  Precisely, because it is 2015, people like me have turned off js and enable it selectively. Why? Because of all the security implications of letting a website run whatever it wants on your computer. It also breaks some of the tracking, which is a nice bonus.
- sbierwagen 11y ago
  HN doesn't depend on any clientside JS.
  - mordrax 11y ago
    you're right and that's pretty cool, looks like everything's statically served, simple html
    - MaulingMonkey 11y ago
      Well, generated server-side at least.
- coin 11y ago
  The web is so much faster with JavaScript disabled. JS has become the new Flash in terms of web page performance. Is JS really needed for what is primarily text based content?
- mordrax 11y ago
  I don't know guys... spent the last 15 minutes with js turned off, github didn't work (graphs don't load), meteor/atmosphere/any single page app doesn't work, ebay didn't work, i'm not a fb fan but i'm pretty sure that wouldn't work, staticice worked, but half of the merchants on it didn't. alot of the blog sites HN links to were ok, however, comments are the gold nuggets and alot of them depends on pulling in cloud services via js.. It was kind of cool to see google work in a limited fashion... But that's 15 minutes of my life I won't get back, and alot more if I was to start whitelisting sites (which at this rate, would be every site I visit) and wearing a tin foil on my head, just saying... (<-- light hearted joke for the too religious :)
- wtbob 11y ago
  I have it turned off in my main browser with NoScript, and then selectively turned on for sites I frequently use (like HN) with poor usability without it (like HN). It's actually surprising how many actually require it though. I prefer to use emacs-w3m, and thus not get distracted with images or anything else. But no, JavaScript is not required to sign in (that's what HTTP Basic and Digest authentication are for), nor to post comments (that's what the HTTP POST method is for); both capabilities are available to a non-JavaScript browser.
thesteamboat 11y ago
In firefox I just went View > Page Style > No Style and everything was fine

sigh, yet another site which needlessly doesn't work without JavaScript. It's a pity, because the article itself is great.

by wtbob 11y ago

sigh, yet another site which needlessly doesn't work without JavaScript. It's a pity, because the article itself is great.

obstinate 11y ago

This ship sailed years ago. Kinda time to get over it.

andrewschleifer 11y ago

The content is mostly there, it's just covered up. Using the inspector tools to delete the div with id 'loading' will reveal stuff.

mordrax 11y ago

I don't get it, the first time I heard this, I thought it was some big joke, but there really are ppl with js turned off? In 2015? Don't you need it to sign into anything... like HN? Or post a comment.

probably_wrong 11y ago
Precisely, because it is 2015, people like me have turned off js and enable it selectively. Why? Because of all the security implications of letting a website run whatever it wants on your computer. It also breaks some of the tracking, which is a nice bonus.
sbierwagen 11y ago
HN doesn't depend on any clientside JS.
- mordrax 11y ago
  you're right and that's pretty cool, looks like everything's statically served, simple html
  - MaulingMonkey 11y ago
    Well, generated server-side at least.
coin 11y ago
The web is so much faster with JavaScript disabled. JS has become the new Flash in terms of web page performance. Is JS really needed for what is primarily text based content?
mordrax 11y ago
I don't know guys... spent the last 15 minutes with js turned off, github didn't work (graphs don't load), meteor/atmosphere/any single page app doesn't work, ebay didn't work, i'm not a fb fan but i'm pretty sure that wouldn't work, staticice worked, but half of the merchants on it didn't. alot of the blog sites HN links to were ok, however, comments are the gold nuggets and alot of them depends on pulling in cloud services via js.. It was kind of cool to see google work in a limited fashion... But that's 15 minutes of my life I won't get back, and alot more if I was to start whitelisting sites (which at this rate, would be every site I visit) and wearing a tin foil on my head, just saying... (<-- light hearted joke for the too religious :)
wtbob 11y ago
I have it turned off in my main browser with NoScript, and then selectively turned on for sites I frequently use (like HN) with poor usability without it (like HN). It's actually surprising how many actually require it though. I prefer to use emacs-w3m, and thus not get distracted with images or anything else. But no, JavaScript is not required to sign in (that's what HTTP Basic and Digest authentication are for), nor to post comments (that's what the HTTP POST method is for); both capabilities are available to a non-JavaScript browser.

thesteamboat 11y ago

In firefox I just went View > Page Style > No Style and everything was fine