sent from a disposable whonix qube
How tf do you people use the web with JavaScript disabled? Almost all websites stop working
this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2026
631 points (97.0% liked)
linuxmemes
32519 readers
901 users here now
Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
- Instance-wide TOS: https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
- Lemmy code of conduct: https://join-lemmy.org/docs/code_of_conduct.html
2. Be civil
- Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
- Do not harrass or attack users for any reason. This includes using blanket terms, like "every user of thing".
- Don't get baited into back-and-forth insults. We are not animals.
- Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
- Bigotry of any kind will not be tolerated. This is an LGBTQ+-friendly community -- if that is a problem for you, you should leave.
3. Post Linux-related content
- Including Unix and BSD.
- Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of
sudoin Windows. - No porn, no politics, no trolling or ragebaiting.
- Don't come looking for advice, this is not the right community.
4. No recent reposts
- Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, <loves / tolerates / hates> systemd, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.
5. 🇬🇧 Language/язык/Sprache
- This is primarily an English-speaking community. 🇬🇧🇦🇺🇺🇸
- Comments written in other languages are allowed.
- The substance of a post should be comprehensible for people who only speak English.
- Titles and post bodies written in other languages will be allowed, but only as long as the above rule is observed.
6. (NEW!) Regarding public figures
We all have our opinions, and certain public figures can be divisive. Keep in mind that this is a community for memes and light-hearted fun, not for airing grievances or leveling accusations. - Keep discussions polite and free of disparagement.
- We are never in possession of all of the facts. Defamatory comments will not be tolerated.
- Discussions that get too heated will be locked and offending comments removed.
Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Those are websites I don't want to use. As I've said in other comments, sites which break without javascript are what I consider broken sites. And I don't like to use broken sites.
Almost all websites stop working
Another way of saying this: Most websites are broken and not worth accessing.
Like, have you seen the web? Most sites suck. lol. The good ones don't bully/coerce me to change my behaviour.
I don't know man. This seems extreme. JavaScript is part of web standard, nearly all sites use it, including every single of my own site/project. I don't even consider people who have it disabled as I treat them same as bots.
Imagine saying "Windows is less secure than Linux, so I'm not going to make any of my apps work on windows". You'd get so many weird stares. It's like instead of dealing with it, learning how to be safer, etc, you're shutting out.
EDIT grammar
Okay, I'm going to reply to this message with my responses to various quoted comments from the big chain of comments which I can't directly access from this instance, due to defederation with certain instances. I'm not going to respond to literally every message, but I hope you all know that I do appreciate you for participating in this thread and being part of a really fun and interesting chain.
Thanks for all the comments and sorry for not responding until now. Since I can't upvote any of the comments in that chain, to all of you I provide lots of hearts: 🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷🩷
@OwOarchist@pawb.social Honestly, it’s bonkers that the standard, default approach for all mainstream browsers is to let every random website in the world run any arbitrary code it wants on your computer.
This, this, 1000 times this! That is exactly how I feel and was hoping to convey.
@OwOarchist@pawb.social Yeah, they usually attempt to sandbox it, but still. Sometimes sandboxes can be escaped. And sometimes the code can do significant harm while still inside its sandbox.
Yes, defense-in-depth includes minimizing threats rather than simply relying on protections. It shouldn't be necessary to lower one's shields constantly, and it's better to avoid doing so if possible, from a security & privacy perspective.
@cley_faye@lemmy.world Bugs exists. But JavaScript running in the browser have, theoretically, little access to anything. […]
The risk of allowing JavaScript on a website is more tied to the site data, or tracking. […]
It doesn’t mean every site needs JavaScript, but having this enabled by default is not that big of a security risk for the system. […]
This reminds me of an interesting phenomenon: Some security-oriented people praise the security of the surveillance-advertising corporation's browser engine (chromium), while proclaiming that gecko-based browsers (firefox) are unusable due to inferior security. Yet the main security threat I see is that fucking surveillance-advertising corporation which spreads unvetted and often malicious ads around the web without a care in the world.
Person A: "chromium-based browsers have superior security" Person B: "i use firefox-based browsers exclusively" Person A: "outrageous. it's got inferior security" Person B: "i don't allow scripts" Person A: "javascripts aren't a major security concern" Person B: "firefox with scripts denied is more secure than chromium with scripts allowed" Person A: "javascripts are required for the modern web" Person B: "untrue, as evidenced by the fact that i access the modern web with scripts denied"
checkmate ♟️
@rtxn@lemmy.world Sure, it’s bonkers for you, but an alternative browser that can’t immediately show a website that works perfectly well in Chrome wouldn’t get much of a user base.
I think the main point is about what is default. People have been and continue to be trained by the defaults (tyranny of the default), and in this case they are trained to expect sites to utilize scripts, which is (imo) unhealthy for society. It would be better if scripts were denied by default and the user could allow them per-site with a single click, similar to how sites will ask the user to allow notifications or location services which the user is able to allow or deny.
Sure, most users simply allow everything. But kids are curious and would be more likely to read and understand such things if presented with the options, and that could translate into a more-informed adult population with better security practices. And overall, I think that'd make for a healthier and happier society which doesn't continue to crumble into worse and worse outcomes.
If the default were to deny scripts, sites would have to at least look somewhat presentable without the scripts, so as to ask the user to enable them. And my hope is that people would prefer the sites that don't pester them for permissions.
@hirihit640@sh.itjust.works Just another piece of evidence that people care more about convenience than privacy, sadly. People aren’t willing to put up with a single broken website
Au contraire. Most people put up with broken sites all the time. The problem is that those people generally aren't aware that the sites are broken, because they're also unaware of the concept of allowing/denying javascripts. If they denied javascripts by default, they'd notice that most of the sites they access are actually broken sites. The ones that function without javascripts are the unbroken ones.
@chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world Most websites from when I was a kid did not need JavaScript. Heck, they didn’t even have any JavaScript on many of them! No CSS either, just HTML and images (which were very slow to load on dialup).
Simpler times
@Lev@europe.pub I hate javascript
Moi aussi
@OrganicMustard@lemmy.world There are protocols like gemini that only have text and files, no executing code.
I'll have to check that out one day.
JS disabled most of the times
i really wish raymond would restart umatrix.. it was the most flexible script blocker. noscript's 'per site' permissions takes far too many clicks to do (some of) what umatrix does from one toolbar icon drop-down.
Haven't used umatrix so can't really say anything
It was really nice but was eventually discontinued. ublock origin can do most of what umatrix could do, and NoScript is similarly useful. But it's also simple to just deny javascripts and call it a day. Whatever works.
Its not related to this but Tempermonkey amd scripts is insanely good experience.
view more: next ›