Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #4915

Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea

Show all headers | View raw

Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
> Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>> In article <FFMZh+gZtKnIvllfI6s+Dsz7@dont-email.me>, Rich
>> <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> > http://mortoray.com/2014/09/15/blocking-javascript-seems-like-a-good-idea/
>> > 
>> >    My fancy new website is broken due to a script blocking
>> >    extension. I found this out when I showed a friend the Radial
>> >    Blitz website. He complained that something was lacking. He
>> >    turned on screen sharing to show me and sure enough my large
>> >    screenshot slider was nowhere to be seen.
>> > 
>> >    Turns out a script blocking extension was causing the problem.
>> >    Obviously I didn't expect the slide show to function, but I
>> >    expected at least a static image. The theme designer likely
>> >    never even considered that somebody would have JavaScript
>> >    disabled. Should they, or is JavaScript a critical web
>> >    technology?
>> > 
>> >    I don't think it's useful to argue for JavaScript, it's features
>> >    are well known and I find it invaluable. Instead I'd like to
>> >    consider why somebody would disable it. To my own chagrin, my
>> >    list seems to support their position.
> 
>> In my email client, I disable any javascript an email may contain
>> when displaying that email. My email client doesn't run without
>> javascript enabled but I do at least give a polite message to users
>> to that effect, if they try to run with it disabled in the browser.
> 
> My email client is mutt, so there is no need to disable javascript,
> because text mode email clients do not know anything about html
> formatted emails to even begin to think about javascript.

Mine too, been using mutt for 10 or 15 years now. As an aside, I never
understood why people were deceived by scam emails, a glance at the
route path on any suspicious email should be a quick verification.
Then I tried looking at the email headers in MS Outhouse; it opened a
text box that displayed just a couple of header lines, no wonder MS
users get suckered by scam emails. I guess MS considers its users too
dumb to view email headers.

Back to comp.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-15 10:18 +0000
  Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-09-15 11:30 +0100
    Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-15 10:34 +0000
      Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Jerry Peters <jerry@example.invalid> - 2014-09-15 20:27 +0000
        Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-15 22:23 +0000
  Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-09-15 14:32 +0100
    Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-15 22:27 +0000
      Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2014-09-16 04:26 -0300
        Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-16 10:08 +0000
      Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-09-16 14:34 -0400
      Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Jerry Peters <jerry@example.invalid> - 2014-09-16 20:12 +0000
        Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2014-09-18 15:39 -0300
          Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-09-18 20:25 +0100
            Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-09-18 23:41 +0300
            Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-09-19 12:56 +0200
              Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-09-19 12:57 +0100
              Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2014-09-19 15:50 -0300
                Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-09-19 21:57 +0100
          Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-18 23:32 +0000
            Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-09-19 16:37 +0000
              Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-09-19 20:19 +0200
    Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Underactive Moth <underactivemoth@gmail.com> - 2014-09-16 08:21 +0000
      Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-09-16 10:10 +0000
      Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-09-16 13:57 +0100
  Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2014-09-15 14:24 +0000
    Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2014-09-15 14:37 -0300
      Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Jerry Peters <jerry@example.invalid> - 2014-09-15 20:20 +0000
        Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2014-09-16 04:14 -0300
  Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-09-19 07:40 +0000
    Re: Blocking JavaScript seems like a good idea Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-09-20 02:42 +0200

csiph-web