Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

You've highlighted one of the many advantages to browsing with javascript off by default. I think at this point it should really only be used for must-have cases.


sort by: page size:

You're just added to a (very large pool) of people who browse with JS turned off. Turning JS off as a default is a common thing.

Another demonstration of why browsing with JS off by default is a good idea.

It's on by default because it is very useful. Just become some websites abuse the ability to run active content doesn't mean Javascript shouldn't be an integral part of the modern web. Browsers should allow the user to crack down on the abuse, but expecting sites to cater to people who disable Javascript is a bit far.

Not for me it isn't! The default state for JavaScript in my browser is off (has been for decades). The prizes I get for turning it off are these:

• Blindingly fast speeds. My web pages usually render about three times as quickly as they do with JS on (you get spoiled by this and cannot turn back - it's like a drug the difference in speed is so great).

• Ads and other screen dross are yesterday's business—even without ad blockers.

• With JavaScript off, privacy comes almost by default. Below, you'll see the test results I've just obtained from EFF's Panopticlick with JS off. Wonderful results aren't they.

• This post was done without JavaScript.

• The sites that I usually visit are either not heavy with or overloaded with JS scripts. Moreover, the kind of sites I'm interested in contain the types of material that no one cares about if you switch JS off.

• If sites don't let me in or screw me around then I'm out of there as fast as I can hit the backspace key. (There's more fish in the internet sea than I can ever visit in multiple lifetimes—so there's no need for me to stick around.)

• If you must need to use JavaScript, then this fact alone is already violating your privacy to some extent. I now know the types of sites you will most likely visit and also the kind of data that you're likely to consume or use. I can also make assumptions about you without even going any further.

I won't bother pushing the point further, as the cognoscenti who don't use JS already know they're ahead of the game. They also know that trying to get JS fanboys to kick the JS habit makes converting Apple users away from Apple look like child's play. (Who cares? Just let them wallow around in their JS-ridden environment. They're not going to be useful allies in the war on privacy anyway, or they'd already be in a JS-free environment.)

EFF's Panopticlick: https://panopticlick.eff.org/

  Browser Characteristic value
  User Agent                    Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040413
                                Debian/1.6-5
  HTTP_ACCEPT Headers           application/xml,application/xhtml+xml,text/html;q=0.9,text/plain;
                                q=0.8,image/png,*/*;q=0.5 gzip, deflate, br en-US,en;q=0.5
  Browser Plugin Details        no javascript
  Time Zone Offset              no javascript
  Time Zone                     no javascript
  Screen Size and Color Depth   no javascript
  System Fonts                  no javascript
  Are Cookies Enabled?          Yes
  Limited supercookie test      no javascript
  Hash of canvas fingerprint    no javascript
  Hash of WebGL fingerprint     no javascript
  WebGL Vendor & Renderer       no javascript
  DNT Header Enabled?           False
  Language                      no javascript
  Platform                      no javascript
  Touch Support                 no javascript
  Ad Blocker Used               no javascript
  AudioContext fingerprint      no javascript
  CPU Class                     no javascript
  Hardware Concurrency          no javascript
  Device Memory (GB             no javascript
Note: even the User Agent is wrong! The machine I'm using is actually an old Windows 7 laptop. Damn good privacy for just nuking JS I reckon.

For one, many people prefer to browse websites with javascript turned off. Aside from performance benefits, you turn off user tracking, flashy ads, autoplay videos, annoying popovers, etc.

Just out of curiosity, why do you browse with js turned off?

My default is to browse with JS turned off.

Yet another reason to browse with JS disabled by default.

:)

I browse with Javascript turned off because it cripples ads and reduces memory usage of my browser significantly.

I don't care what you think is necessary to serve a page of information. It almost certainly isn't. You have to earn the right to have javascript enabled or I'll just click away.


Heh :)

I don't browse with JS off, I only turn it off for sites that are a pain in the ass when it's on.


I've recently disabled javascript by default and now I only enable it for sites where I want it. My browsing experience has improved significantly.

Another reason to disable javascript by default.

It's not a hard sell, but it is certainly an inconvenience. I prefer to browse with javascript off by default and only enable it for sites that absolutely need it. I've had issues where sites using JS have caused a single core on my laptop to spin at 100% thus affecting battery life negatively.

the point is it makes enabling js slightly just a click more annoying, which force you to unconsciously use sites that work fine without.

you seen to spend time here, so you'd pay the security price and that's it.

not having js on by default is for the 95pct of domains you hit everyday to read a single paragraph and never return.


Why would you turn off JavaScript?

I keep JavaScript turned off by default. Then I turn it on for only a few sites of critical importance for me which would not function otherwise. And I don't feel I miss anything, most of the content I care about is still HTML and it should remain so. JavaScript is not needed to show me the text.

That way the chances for cross site sripting attacks are greatly reduced and the content appears much faster.


To extend the functionality of the browser.

What you say is true, so the question is why is it on and not off by default?

Does it imply that a webpage without Javascript is not useful?


I turn javascript off because it is mostly used to annoy me. Be it advertisements, be it tracking, be it lightbox-like things.

I use few "web 2.0" sites. If I need it, I turn it on per-site.


As someone who browses with js off by default (uMatrix rule) and has implemented a fancy drop-down using css rather than js[1], my current opinion is that it's better to display all menus expanded by default and then hide them if/when your js loads. It's less effort to write and, more importantly, browsing with js disabled means I want interactivity off. If I want the "full experience as intended", I'll enable js. I frequently do. But I browse without it by default because frequently that experience is a downgrade from just the raw (well, styled) content. Leaving the fancy stuff to js suits everyone best.

[1] please note the content on the page is outdated, this is just a prototype -- the drop-down below "PayPal": https://sdproto.gitlab.io/donate/

next

Legal | privacy