3 ms·
I enable JS for sites I feel are valueable for me. The first impression is always without JS. If navigation-buttons dont work without JS - I just leave.
by dorgo 11y ago
I enable JS for sites I feel are valueable for me. The first impression is always without JS. If navigation-buttons dont work without JS - I just leave.
- oldmanjay 11y agoif you self-select into the group that isn't cared about, then do you expect your leaving to be cared about? i ask only because i'm puzzled as to the purpose of your reply.
- dorgo 11y agoI am too small a group to be cared about. But in my opinion only poor designed websites use JS for layout or navigation. And the way back to the search-engine is always just one mouse gesture away. JS = code written by someone with not neccessarily my best interests in mind running on my computer.
- sumedh 11y agoHonest question - What are you trying to prove by not enabling JS by default?
- bottled_poe 11y agoAside from the fact that JavaScript is often poorly written, I generally don't want untrusted code running on my computer.
- Qantourisc 11y agoI think it's a matter of prevent: links to facebook, linked-in, and god knows what other service; and possibly save some bandwith, cpu time and ram.
- aw3c2 11y agoI doubt she tries to prove anything. It is probably rather the peace of mind of not having ads stabbing in your eyes, subscribe popups appearing as you scroll, things wiggling around, images fading up in a popup instead of loading directly, protection against exploits and saving bandwidth just to name a few benefits.