There's another, indirect benefit to blocking JavaScript.
Over time I have noticed a strong correlation between sites which don't work right without JS and low-quality content which I regret having spent time reading.
Most of the time I encounter one of these sites I now just close the tab and move on with a clear conscience.
"Over time I have noticed a strong correlation between sites which don't work right without JS and low-quality content...."
Absolutely true, I can't agree with you more. I've reached the stage where if I land on a site and its main content is blocked if JavaScript is disabled then my conditioned reflex kicks in and I'm off the site within milliseconds.
Rarely is this a problem with sites that I frequent (and I too don't have time to waste reading low quality content).
There are stacks and stacks of them here on HN that are of excellent quality - I use HN as my 'quality' filter (and I reckon I'm not alone).
Moreover, if one doesn't run JS like me then it's dead easy to avoid problematic sites as HN lists them (Twitter, etc. - and it doesn't take long to get to know the main offenders, thus avoid them).
:-)
BTW, I agree with you it is hard to find good sites these days but eventually most really good sites appear here on HN. Do what I do, when you come across them bookmark them.
A pedantic note that follows from this particular thread: HackerNews’s search capabilities are powered by Algolia and require JavaScript to work (turn off all JS and the HN branded Algolia page will not load). The reason I bring this up is that even good websites sometimes lean on free or free-ish services to provide extra functionality (such as calendars, discussion boards, issue tracking, or search) without realizing that such functionality may be a back door to letting JS in and any tracking/privacy-erosion that could follow from it.
Right, HN does use JavaScript for certain functions, search etc. Now, if you read the second paragraph of my first post I've got such cases covered.
OK, here's the scenario: I log on to HN with JavaScript disabled, do all the things I do, read articles, submit posts all without JS. At some point I want to search HN so I hit the 'toggle JS' button on my browser, it then goes from red to green to tell me JS is now active. I then refresh the page and start searching HN. When I've finished I hit the JS toggle and the button goes back to red - JS is now kaput.
I really can't think of anything simpler - JS is off until I really need it and when I do it's immediately available without digging deep down into menus etc.
I'd add HN uses JS as it was originally intended and does so responsibly. I have nothing against JS per se, the problem comes from websites that abuse webpages and thus the user by sending megabytes of JS gumph and so on.
Running without JS and only turning it on when really necessary I reckon is a reasonable compromise.
It's true, there are some decent sites out there which use JS legitimately to add features. And there are some sites which require JS without really needing to, but still have good content and do not have unnecessary annoyances and performance problems.
Lucky for me, I can toggle on JavaScript for them individually and continue with my general policy.
The thing with WWW is links, the web. So https://news.ycombinator.com is a good starter. From there, yes, you could end up on twitter.com for example but it would be worthwhile.
“…you could end up on twitter.com for example but it would be worthwhile.”
Unpopular opinion: I never click on twitter links anymore. It’s almost never worth it.
IMHO, 140/280/N character limits are a way to cheapen discourse. I think there is something to be said for the “density” of text: text that offers very little to think about (less dense) is vacuous but encouraged by a character limit; yet, text that is compressed into a character limit either packs too much info into a short space that requires more discourse to properly get a thought across or elides too much from the text, making it less accurate/meaningful/important. Or worse: people chain posts into long 1/907, 2/907, 3/907… trains that should be blog posts rather than requiring some other application to string the thread together.
Of course the other reason (more central to this discussion) never to click on a twitter link is that JS and an account login is required now to read the posts past a certain point. If that makes me an old man yelling at a cloud, so be it, but aren’t there better ways to handle online public discourse without sacrificing people’s privacy and security?
"Unpopular opinion: I never click on twitter links anymore. It’s almost never worth it."
It's not unpopular with me, I agree with you completely. I was never a Twitter fan but when they forced the use of JS that was the end of it (you'll note I used Twitter as an example in one of my earlier posts).
You're right about sacrificing people’s privacy and security, as I said in another post 'I'm forever amazed at the trust the average person has in these vulnerability-ridden flaky systems'.
Similar here. When I am searching for something and a website wont show it unless I enable JS on that website, then usually it is the case, that after enabling JS to see the content, I realize, that the website's content is worth nothing and that I activated JS for naught, regretting to have spent time on that website.
Over time I have noticed a strong correlation between sites which don't work right without JS and low-quality content which I regret having spent time reading.
Most of the time I encounter one of these sites I now just close the tab and move on with a clear conscience.