On 01/29/2018 09:58 PM, juan wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 16:48:47 -0500 Steve Kinney <admin@pilobilus.net> wrote:
People have superstitious beliefs about most of the things they know exist but don't understand. They know Javascript exists but they do not know how it works, therefore it must be either Good or Evil. In this frame of reference, Evil would be the "most correct" answer, because Javascript does get used for Evil purposes like diverting users' web browsers to hostile sites, inflicting unwanted porn ads
LMAO - evil porn - spoken like a true christian eh
I said "unwanted," not "evil." The quality of the porn featured in pop-up, pop-under, etc. web spam is fairly awful. Intentionally or not, they seem to be marketing to folks who have never seen a real live naked person or had sex. I'm sure that any of the thousands of hot Russian chicks in my spam filter who want to marry me (or just fuck) would be waaaay more better.
In more rational terms, Javascript is neither Good nor Evil, it's just software that web browsers download from websites and run automatically.
Of course JS by itself is just one of dozens of very shitty scripting languages yet the way JS is used in the 'web 2.0' is 'evil'.
Ding! My point exactly...
Most often Javascript qualifies as "junk software", eating system resources and annoying website visitors for no reason other than fashion. Javascript that enables browsers to present interactive maps, online games etc. would qualify as Good.
not really - it would be better if you used well defined clients for that sort of thing.
Maybe so, but that's not where the market went...
The most widely distributed Javascript code in the world is the Google Analytics tracker; this code qualifies as Evil, since most users do NOT want their browsing habits to be under total surveillance, and doubly so because most users have no idea it exists.
Calling a website that teaches people how to AVOID most user surveillance and profiling on the networks Evil because it uses Javascript seems a bit silly to me.
if you are referring to me, I didn't say that detox site was 'evil', I said and repeat it is a joke.
Hell, even the majority of sites that use javashit extensively display most of their content even when javashit is disabled.
Not referring to you, just the overall tone of folks who really really hate Javascript. I consider JS a nuisance that occasionally does something useful, and use filters to block about 90% of it.
The site teachers users about Javascript and how to control it, along with lots of other privacy and security information and tools. As a net result, users gain a LOT more control over their privacy and security situation relative to the Internet.
Would the Data Detox Kit be a "better" website without Javascript? I think so. Its designers think otherwise. They probably base their position on an assessment that they way /they/ use Javascript makes the site more convenient for most end users, leading to more public uptake of the privacy and security tools and information provided.
bullshit
The Great Unwashed Publick ain't going to study network security, but I think many can benefit from the kind of information presented at Data Detox. :o)