No JS

How many here browse the internet with JS disabled entirely? I disable it whenever possible, as long as it doesn't break the site I'm trying to use entirely.

Attached: nojs.jpg (225x225, 11K)

I used to more often but it was such a pain in the ass for each new site to go through the whole "what causes this to break" whack a mole game.

I find it's a lot easier to use a separate browser for just random stuff so you can leave the javascript on and have another one that is less restrictive for sites you trust.

just you retard

>I disable it whenever possible, as long as it doesn't break the site I'm trying to use entirely.
Same. While unfortunately some websites _need_ JavaScript to work properly, a surprising amount of websites I visit regularly work work fine without any JavaScript whatsoever. They will sometimes lack some animations, but the actual content is still possible to read comfortably.

If a website works fine without JavaScript, you should disable it, you gain nothing from executing it.

I was really glad when uMatrix came along because it makes it so easy to have JS default blocked for everything, and only enable things selectively when you decide to. that granular whitelisting capability is what lets me run around with no JS on most sites most of the time.

I find I can often read the content even with JS blocked. Firefox's reader-mode button is surprisingly helpful with this, no matter how broken the formatting is, it just dumps it all in the bin and shows you the text.

>JS disabled entirely?
fucks the loading of many sites

>disabling js in 2019
have fun breaking literally any modern site

>you gain nothing
you gain the experience of viewing the site as it was meant to be viewed you schizo. better homes and gardens is not selling your information to the nsa. aliens are not taking you to space in your sleep.

No one gives a shit about viewing the site as it was meant to be viewed, as long as the content is accessible.
Besides, unless you only browse shit websites, quite a handful of websites look and feel the exact same even with JavaScript disabled. So yes, you literally gain nothing from executing it.

>>you gain the experience of viewing the site as it was meant to be viewed you schizo
Why the fuck would I want to view the site as they mean me to view it? They mean for the content to be hidden behind a dozen ads so that they can make three hundredths of a cent off of me. I don't want to see that bullshit.
>better homes and gardens is not selling your information to the nsa.
No, they're selling it to ad companies. Which is actually even worse, since ad companies will sell it to anyone else. Or give it to the NSA, if the NSA asks, or if the NSA cares enough to crack their almost-nonexistent security.

Attached: paranoid-schizophrenia-1.jpg (954x498, 53K)

Have you visited a news website recently? They're a clusterfuck of ads, and autoplaying videos. They're literally unuable without JS turned off.

This, used to have NoScript and it was fine for most sites but it was a daily experience that I'd land on a site where I'd have to enable two or three domains and all of a sudden fourteen more appeared and I'd have to guess which of those to enable to get the content finally to work.

>They're a clusterfuck of ads
Ublock Origin

>autoplaying videos
Firefox doesn't autoplay videos anymore by default

why would I install an addon when I can just enter aboutconfig and disable js entirely? Yoiu seem to be really booty blasted by the fact I don't run scripts. who hurt you?

Calm down, I'm not the person you were replying to (hadn't even read his comment, only read yours because it was just above mine).

my apologies to you, and your booty.

Fuck off glow nigger

in umatrix I use whitelist only mode but I have many javascript heavy sites (like google/youtube) with allow all enabled as figuring out the minimal ruleset that will work is a pain in the ass and prone tobreaking, before umatrix I used noscript which was much more of a pain in the ass but quickly teaches you to figure out the most significant domains to allow
late 00's and early 10's were the golden age of whitelisting js as many sites still supposed http only modes of browsing and the site that would break features without js were extremely rare, these days most sites want you to allow js to give you a menu or to load images on articles

Enjoy getting malware and wasting hours of your life on js loading.

There are three basic reasons for being paranoid:
1. You're schizo
2. You're affiliated with a government agency, deal with top secret information, and foreign agents are legit trying to get it from you
3. You know enough about computer security

This describes me with umatrix. But it's kinda intuitive and the the cloud upload is a deal breaker for me over (bloated) noscript and less intutitve scriptsafe

>mfw all these people who don't use noscript

Attached: Untitled.png (1096x954, 146K)

Paranoia is unreasonable. So, only #1 is paranoia. #2 and #3 are not paranoia.

That is when you go to a different site, you don't just stop blocking shit. That type of shit is a dead giveaway to a no-go zone.

Attached: 1559334093281.jpg (3024x4032, 1.21M)