I don't think that number is going anywhere but down, no matter how many of your hacker friends are running noScript.
Sure you can argue you're losing x% of your possible conversions due to needing JS but you cannot quantify what percentage you gain by having a distinctly more fluid/exciting website or the cost of the features/polish you don't do because you're developing handling for no-js scenarios. Personally I'm a fan of graceful degradation in all but the most appish sites but at this point no-js is almost as edge-case as no-css.
I wasn't trying to imply that that a site had to accommodate disabled javascript, Sites should handle it gracefully though. It doesn't take that much effort to at least add something like <noscript>This site requires javascript.</noscript>.
BTW, I just revisited it and they fixed the previous problem. Earlier, if you clicked one of the js links you would get text page of raw html.
The most recent number I can find is 2008 and that's at 5% with a downward trend: http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
Or ~2% in 2007 at http://visualrevenue.com/blog/2007/08/eu-and-us-javascript-d...
I don't think that number is going anywhere but down, no matter how many of your hacker friends are running noScript.
Sure you can argue you're losing x% of your possible conversions due to needing JS but you cannot quantify what percentage you gain by having a distinctly more fluid/exciting website or the cost of the features/polish you don't do because you're developing handling for no-js scenarios. Personally I'm a fan of graceful degradation in all but the most appish sites but at this point no-js is almost as edge-case as no-css.