I'm trying to archive a web page on FarceBook using archive.is, using a mobile browser and a cell network connection. So far it's taken at least half an hour and it's still going. WTF?!
All I want to see is the text and maybe the images FFS. #MakeJavaScriptOptional!
(1/?)
@alcinnz
> I get the impression in trying kill they turned the web into Flash.
An over-complex inscrutable hard-to-secure system pushing DRM on us
Modern JavaScript includes all the evils of Flash, except being forced to knowingly install a proprietary plugin in your browser. Now almost every website *is* a proprietary plugin, installed in your browser without your knowledge.
"The web used to be a wonderful way to share information.
Web apps and mandatory JavaScript have turned it into the worst app store.
It is time to separate the WWWonderful from the WWWorst practices."
lxo@gnusocial.jp
When modern web browsers encounter a website served only over HTTP (not HTTPS), they stonewall the person browsing with an error page. I really wish that they'd just browse the page with JavaScript off, and give an error message saying so.
Bonus points for extracting at least the text, links, and images, from sites that depend on JS to display those. But really, people shouldn't ever make sites like that, what I call "j-sites"
(1/2)
I accidentally archived a copy of the 404 error page on GritHub;
As it processed, I was marvelling at the amount of JavaScript my browser has to load, just to tell me GritHub can't find the page I'm looking for.
CR(APP)IFICATION? so bitcoin.com went from this (the ability to read an article without any javascript):
https://web.archive.org/web/20230323222309/https://news.bitcoin.com/operation-chokepoint-bitcoin-advocates-discuss-us-governments-alleged-mission-to-eliminate-crypto-access/
....to this ("You need to enable JavaScript to run this app."):
https://web.archive.org/web/20240927085107/https://news.bitcoin.com/operation-chokepoint-bitcoin-advocates-discuss-us-governments-alleged-mission-to-eliminate-crypto-access/
Big thanks to the world's archive @internetarchive
#waste #crAppification #makeJavascriptOptional #bitcoin #operationChokepoint @sun
IMHO there ought to robust privacy laws, in every jurisdiction, that ban this kind of rampant DataFarming. Am I the only person who continues to be shocked by the fact that this kind of practice not only considered acceptable by the industry, but normal?!?
Stefan Korn is not wrong that public service website need to be simple static sites. Which can be accessed by voice assistants just as easily as web browsers without JavaScript (#MakeJavaScriptOptional!).
He's just wrong that they're not already designed that way.
He either doesn't know about NZ government website standards like Web Accessibility Standard 1.1;
https://digital.govt.nz/standards-and-guidance/
... or he's hoping that you don't.
(2/?)
This video sums up your frustration quite nicely @paddyduke;
https://peertube.nz/w/ocxpCzSfdLTVDZ2aVdo47v
I highly recommend the #NoScript add-on. Not only does it filter out a lot of this garbage, which depends on running JavaScript from third-party domains, it allows stops a lot of tracking that goes on in the background.
Before I discovered NS, my laptops used to routinely crash. Brought down by the ludicrous amount of memory used, by all the JS running in the browser tabs I had open.
@brewsterkahle
> defacement of our website via JS library
I sympathise with the good folks at archive.org, who do a fantastic and underappreciated job, and I don't mean to kick them while they're down.
But...
Using scripts in your website that your web team haven't audited, either directly or as part of a rabbithole of JS dependencies, opens you up to exactly this kind of shitfuckery.
Yet another good reason to #MakeJavaScriptOptional!
A button on a website only need to be a graphic with a link. One of the simplest uses of HTML. If I had a dollar for every time that clicking a button on a website required me to run JavaScript from a third-party domain (often one controlled by Goggle or another DataFarmer), I'd have a very generous funding pool for a campaign to...
Any web devs out there interested in mucking in on some #MakeJavaScriptOptional projects?
What I have in mind is making a shortlist of existing j-sites (JavaScript sites) that do something vaguely useful for the visitor, but try to pull scripts from at least a dozen third-party domains in the process. Then rebuild them as interactive websites (HTML/CSS). Using browser scripts only when absolutely necessary, and serving them only from the primary domain name.
(1/2)
Imagine you subscribe to a newsletter from a community group. But in order to get it, a courier has to come to your house with it in a box, massively increasing the resource cost compared to posting it.
You can't just accept the box at the door though. The courier has to come into your house and follow some instructions, and so do a bunch of other people who work for companies totally unrelated to the community group you want the newsletter for.
This is a jsite.
Yet another jsite (JavaScript site) in place of a website, ie a set of online documents formatted using the latest specs for HTTP/ CSS3 etc. Utterly broken when used in a web browser, which is (checks notes) exactly the thing it's designed to be used with.
*Unless* you allow JS to run on your computer from not only the domain name of the site itself (borderline), but also from no less than 9 other web domains, and probably more.
(1/?)
"While we've done our best to make the core functionality of this site accessible without JavaScript, it will work better with it enabled. Please consider turning it on!"
This is *so* much better than the blank pages some websites serve if my web browser requests a HTML/CSS only page, or the mysterious pronouncements from one-page brochureware sites that;
"this app does not work without JavaScript"
i completely forgot to login using bloat, my new partner in internet crime think. :p
@mahryekuh
> websites that also work on browsers NOT Google Chrome
... with graceful fallback when the client can't run JavaScript.
> Forcing anyone to use Google's glorified spyware is not cool
It's like we learned nothing from the dominance of MS Internet Exploiter in the 90s.
Does anyone know of a tool webmasters can use to check scripts they intend to deploy on their website, to see if they load scripts from any third-party domains?
I know they can use #NoScript to retrospectively check once the site is on a test server. But it would be even better if they could check scripts while they're deciding whether or not to spend time incorporating them into their site design.
@migurski
> What Progressive Web Apps Can Do Today is a great demo of all the stuff possible right now in a web browser
Does all this depend on a spaghetti of badly-engineered, memory-leaking JavaScript? Or can it be done with pure HTML/CSS?
Seriously web developers, do you really need to pull third-party JavaScript from a Goggle-controlled domain (gstatic.com) just to make a 'Submit' button work?
#KoFi joins the JS hall of shame;
https://ko-fi.com/Account/Login
