I will give qubes-whonix a shot, you have convinced me!
There are certain functionalities that cannot be done without JavaScript. In my perfect world either no one would abuse JavaScript with ads and other shitty design choices, or at least I’d have an easier time with toggling it off/on. For now I’m leaving JavaScript on because it’s simply far too inconvenient otherwise. Browsers are pretty good about preventing actual harm if you have UBO installed though.
Out of curiosity, what harm are you concerned about JavaScript doing with an ad blocker and while loading sites within a container? That seems extreme to me.
I will give qubes-whonix a shot, you have convinced me!
You definitely shouldn’t rush into Qubes OS. If you’re seriously interested, I’d recommend checking out videos and reading about it so you can understand it a little deeper.
Out of curiosity, what harm are you concerned about JavaScript doing with an ad blocker and while loading sites within a container? That seems extreme to me.
Besides that fact that javascripts can be used to track and profile users, they also make the user experience of sites worse. I love static pages. Sites that require javascripts are the polar opposite of that. Useless blur effects and other “features” can cause pages to be significantly slower than static pages, and I absolutely hate it. I should be able to scroll smoothly and click buttons once the page has loaded, and I should be able to keep pages cached indefinitely. With javascripts, scrolling can often be laggy, buttons can appear and disappear in odd ways, and pages can be automatically reloaded without my consent, causing lots of frustrations. I cannot understand how anyone prefers browsing the web with javascripts. They are a fucking cancer, like 99% of the time.
RE: js, you’re talking about the web as if it should only ever be what it was first conceived of: documents. In reality now it’s used for full on software applications. It’s not just used for animations and polish (and the shitty things you mention specifically), it’s also used for dynamically updating the UI. A world you speak of would mean much worse order forms, paperwork for doctors, etc. I mean you do you, but you can’t just not acknowledge that dynamic updates of a UI are better than filling out a long form then getting back “invalid data, you selected this and entered that, start over”. It’s literally useful.
The tracking concerns are mostly mitigated by vpns, ad blockers, and private browser features. I understand there are many flaws and issues I’m glossing over, but for the most part, the average person can just use those things, then opt to close the tab of a horrible website like you’re describing.
tldr; you may prefer static documents, but modern society is built on forms and other types of vital apps, which would inevitably be worse without javascript.
I did web Dev when that was how sites worked, and they worked fine. No, it was never live updating, but the errors could be corrected and resubmitted just fine. I don’t use QubeOS but this post has me intrigued.
In reality now it’s used for full on software applications.
I think software applications are better made as actual applications instead of browser-based web-apps.
it’s also used for dynamically updating the UI.
It might seem useful on the surface but is prone to the same sorts of breakage and annoyances I was talking about.
A world you speak of would mean much worse order forms, paperwork for doctors, etc. I mean you do you, but you can’t just not acknowledge that dynamic updates of a UI are better than filling out a long form then getting back “invalid data, you selected this and entered that, start over”.
That’s an interesting example, because that’s happened to both of my parents within the past few months from two different healthcare-related sites. The javascript elements frustrated them more than me, since they didn’t understand why certain things weren’t working, and I had to figure it out for them. And there were a few times when we had to start over due to the sites being poorly made.
That’s really what I see in this reliance on javascripts, corner-cutting which causes problems. Properly-configured sites work better, and the ones reliant on javascript tend not to be.
I would prefer static order forms so that I can have the entire form and fill it out before submitting, while retaining a copy so that if there were issues I could more quickly and efficiently resubmit with the corrections.
Some people might prefer the dynamically updating UI stuff, but except for live chats I can’t see a good use for it that static pages can’t do better. And I think live chats are better in non-web apps which support end-to-end encryption anyway.
The tracking concerns are mostly mitigated by vpns, ad blockers, and private browser features.
The most useful and efficient private browsing feature is the ability to disable javascripts. Using vpns and ad-blockers protects against very specific vectors of surveillance, while javascripts allow a diverse set of surveillance capabilities, so blocking them protects against several forms of surveillance. And with more people disabling javascripts, we all blend together better.
you may prefer static documents, but modern society is built on forms and other types of vital apps, which would inevitably be worse without javascript.
Modern society is also built on ignorance, conformity, and exploitation, all of which make javascript-based sites more dangerous and prone to issues. It’s the easy answer thrown at every problem, like “a.i.” and is similarly dangerous.
So you’re saying all of this as though “on the surface” is all I’ve ever considered and have never tried to do what you claim to be the only acceptable way to do things. It is only your opinion that dynamic UI elements aren’t worth it. They particularly help with forms. Conditional data in forms aren’t something I just made up, it’s a legit use case. Again I’ve tried your way and I lasted less than a day. Very poor experience.
I was talking about my own experiences. We can agree to disagree on what is a better user experience, as it’s inherently subjective. I can’t think of a site I’ve come across that was made better by javascripts, from my own perspective and experiences. I have always been let down and frustrated by such sites and always relieved to find static sites.
It is only your opinion that dynamic UI elements aren’t worth it.
Yes. And for all of the reasons I’ve given, I stand by my opinions on javascripts. You’re free to disagree. I wasn’t trying to convince anyone, just sharing my experiences and opinions on them.
Sorry if I came across as dismissive of your experiences and opinions.
I tried using the web again last night with a browser extension that toggles off JavaScript. Out of like 8 websites I tried to use, literally all of them were broken.
So it’s not even just convenience. It’s that practically no one is building websites to work without JavaScript. I think that sucks, but I cannot change it by just avoiding most websites in defiance.
I don’t know what websites you’re using that still work without JavaScript, but they’re in the minority from what I can tell.
practically no one is building websites to work without JavaScript. I think that sucks
I legitimately believe that most websites suck, and that is one of the reasons. If I enable javascript. I still find that the vast majority of sites suck.
I cannot change it by just avoiding most websites in defiance.
We cannot change much in this world. I don’t believe that I’m changing things by avoiding these sites which I don’t like. I can hope that more people will realize the same things I do and join me in avoiding such sites, but without numbers there’s nothing to be gained except personal comfort in the moment.
I don’t know what websites you’re using that still work without JavaScript, but they’re in the minority from what I can tell.
Well yeah, cuz (imo) most sites suck, lol. But even though they’re in the minority (like me, lol), there are lots of good sites which work very well without javascripts, like distrowatch, duckduckgo, feditrends, invidious, lemmy (for the most part), librey, mbin, redlib, rimgo, searxng, wikipedia, and lots of smaller niche sites. Lots of news sites are also pretty accessible, especially the ones that work with firefox reader mode. So, that list covers multiple options for search engines, fediverse platforms, mainstream social media frontends, wikipedia (and various other wikis on totally different sites), and lots of news & informational sites.
Some sites that don’t work quite as well are able to be fixed by simply switching from from “Basic Page Style” to “No Page Style” with Alt+vYN (Menu -> View -> Page Style -> No Page Style). Lots of sites which appear totally blank can be fixed with that method. Granted, they don’t look so good, but the information is accessible. But that’s an example of a not-so-good site which is helped by disallowing javascipts and correcting the page. The truly good sites don’t require fucking with them like that.
So anyway, yeah. idk. I don’t see the issue. The sites which don’t work are the sites I have no interest in using. Allowing javascripts doesn’t tend to make them better in my view. And I think the stuff that legitimately needs scripts are better accessed as standalone apps (like matrix and other instant messengers which support end-to-end encryption). I think it’s better to use FOSS apps which have been reviewed by OS maintainers and others than to blindly allow sites to execute scripts through a browser.
But again, this is all just my perspective, my own experiences and opinions shaped from them. We each walk our own paths and have our own wants and needs, along with our own likes and dislikes. I just hope I’m able to be better understood by others who otherwise would have no idea why I and some others have chosen this path for ourselves.
It’s just a very confusing thing to claim, that’s all. If 90%+ of the web doesn’t work with js off then you’re either predetermining that you just won’t use 90% of the web. You’ve decided that ahead of time, so you cannot really say “these sites suck” because you haven’t even been able to use them. If you had said “I try not to use JavaScript dependent sites” that makes sense. But the way you’re presenting it, you don’t have any trouble and just use most sites. Which I happen to know is not possible.
I will give qubes-whonix a shot, you have convinced me!
There are certain functionalities that cannot be done without JavaScript. In my perfect world either no one would abuse JavaScript with ads and other shitty design choices, or at least I’d have an easier time with toggling it off/on. For now I’m leaving JavaScript on because it’s simply far too inconvenient otherwise. Browsers are pretty good about preventing actual harm if you have UBO installed though.
Out of curiosity, what harm are you concerned about JavaScript doing with an ad blocker and while loading sites within a container? That seems extreme to me.
You definitely shouldn’t rush into Qubes OS. If you’re seriously interested, I’d recommend checking out videos and reading about it so you can understand it a little deeper.
Besides that fact that javascripts can be used to track and profile users, they also make the user experience of sites worse. I love static pages. Sites that require javascripts are the polar opposite of that. Useless blur effects and other “features” can cause pages to be significantly slower than static pages, and I absolutely hate it. I should be able to scroll smoothly and click buttons once the page has loaded, and I should be able to keep pages cached indefinitely. With javascripts, scrolling can often be laggy, buttons can appear and disappear in odd ways, and pages can be automatically reloaded without my consent, causing lots of frustrations. I cannot understand how anyone prefers browsing the web with javascripts. They are a fucking cancer, like 99% of the time.
I hear you on qubes.
RE: js, you’re talking about the web as if it should only ever be what it was first conceived of: documents. In reality now it’s used for full on software applications. It’s not just used for animations and polish (and the shitty things you mention specifically), it’s also used for dynamically updating the UI. A world you speak of would mean much worse order forms, paperwork for doctors, etc. I mean you do you, but you can’t just not acknowledge that dynamic updates of a UI are better than filling out a long form then getting back “invalid data, you selected this and entered that, start over”. It’s literally useful.
The tracking concerns are mostly mitigated by vpns, ad blockers, and private browser features. I understand there are many flaws and issues I’m glossing over, but for the most part, the average person can just use those things, then opt to close the tab of a horrible website like you’re describing.
tldr; you may prefer static documents, but modern society is built on forms and other types of vital apps, which would inevitably be worse without javascript.
I did web Dev when that was how sites worked, and they worked fine. No, it was never live updating, but the errors could be corrected and resubmitted just fine. I don’t use QubeOS but this post has me intrigued.
I think software applications are better made as actual applications instead of browser-based web-apps.
It might seem useful on the surface but is prone to the same sorts of breakage and annoyances I was talking about.
That’s an interesting example, because that’s happened to both of my parents within the past few months from two different healthcare-related sites. The javascript elements frustrated them more than me, since they didn’t understand why certain things weren’t working, and I had to figure it out for them. And there were a few times when we had to start over due to the sites being poorly made.
That’s really what I see in this reliance on javascripts, corner-cutting which causes problems. Properly-configured sites work better, and the ones reliant on javascript tend not to be.
I would prefer static order forms so that I can have the entire form and fill it out before submitting, while retaining a copy so that if there were issues I could more quickly and efficiently resubmit with the corrections.
Some people might prefer the dynamically updating UI stuff, but except for live chats I can’t see a good use for it that static pages can’t do better. And I think live chats are better in non-web apps which support end-to-end encryption anyway.
The most useful and efficient private browsing feature is the ability to disable javascripts. Using vpns and ad-blockers protects against very specific vectors of surveillance, while javascripts allow a diverse set of surveillance capabilities, so blocking them protects against several forms of surveillance. And with more people disabling javascripts, we all blend together better.
Modern society is also built on ignorance, conformity, and exploitation, all of which make javascript-based sites more dangerous and prone to issues. It’s the easy answer thrown at every problem, like “a.i.” and is similarly dangerous.
So you’re saying all of this as though “on the surface” is all I’ve ever considered and have never tried to do what you claim to be the only acceptable way to do things. It is only your opinion that dynamic UI elements aren’t worth it. They particularly help with forms. Conditional data in forms aren’t something I just made up, it’s a legit use case. Again I’ve tried your way and I lasted less than a day. Very poor experience.
I was talking about my own experiences. We can agree to disagree on what is a better user experience, as it’s inherently subjective. I can’t think of a site I’ve come across that was made better by javascripts, from my own perspective and experiences. I have always been let down and frustrated by such sites and always relieved to find static sites.
Yes. And for all of the reasons I’ve given, I stand by my opinions on javascripts. You’re free to disagree. I wasn’t trying to convince anyone, just sharing my experiences and opinions on them.
Sorry if I came across as dismissive of your experiences and opinions.
I tried using the web again last night with a browser extension that toggles off JavaScript. Out of like 8 websites I tried to use, literally all of them were broken.
So it’s not even just convenience. It’s that practically no one is building websites to work without JavaScript. I think that sucks, but I cannot change it by just avoiding most websites in defiance.
I don’t know what websites you’re using that still work without JavaScript, but they’re in the minority from what I can tell.
I legitimately believe that most websites suck, and that is one of the reasons. If I enable javascript. I still find that the vast majority of sites suck.
We cannot change much in this world. I don’t believe that I’m changing things by avoiding these sites which I don’t like. I can hope that more people will realize the same things I do and join me in avoiding such sites, but without numbers there’s nothing to be gained except personal comfort in the moment.
Well yeah, cuz (imo) most sites suck, lol. But even though they’re in the minority (like me, lol), there are lots of good sites which work very well without javascripts, like distrowatch, duckduckgo, feditrends, invidious, lemmy (for the most part), librey, mbin, redlib, rimgo, searxng, wikipedia, and lots of smaller niche sites. Lots of news sites are also pretty accessible, especially the ones that work with firefox reader mode. So, that list covers multiple options for search engines, fediverse platforms, mainstream social media frontends, wikipedia (and various other wikis on totally different sites), and lots of news & informational sites.
Some sites that don’t work quite as well are able to be fixed by simply switching from from “Basic Page Style” to “No Page Style” with
Alt+vYN(Menu -> View -> Page Style -> No Page Style). Lots of sites which appear totally blank can be fixed with that method. Granted, they don’t look so good, but the information is accessible. But that’s an example of a not-so-good site which is helped by disallowing javascipts and correcting the page. The truly good sites don’t require fucking with them like that.So anyway, yeah. idk. I don’t see the issue. The sites which don’t work are the sites I have no interest in using. Allowing javascripts doesn’t tend to make them better in my view. And I think the stuff that legitimately needs scripts are better accessed as standalone apps (like matrix and other instant messengers which support end-to-end encryption). I think it’s better to use FOSS apps which have been reviewed by OS maintainers and others than to blindly allow sites to execute scripts through a browser.
But again, this is all just my perspective, my own experiences and opinions shaped from them. We each walk our own paths and have our own wants and needs, along with our own likes and dislikes. I just hope I’m able to be better understood by others who otherwise would have no idea why I and some others have chosen this path for ourselves.
(also, sorry if my walls of text are annoying.)
It’s just a very confusing thing to claim, that’s all. If 90%+ of the web doesn’t work with js off then you’re either predetermining that you just won’t use 90% of the web. You’ve decided that ahead of time, so you cannot really say “these sites suck” because you haven’t even been able to use them. If you had said “I try not to use JavaScript dependent sites” that makes sense. But the way you’re presenting it, you don’t have any trouble and just use most sites. Which I happen to know is not possible.
I understand, I just felt you were stating things as if they’re objectively true. Maybe I missed something. Have a good rest of your day.