2696
Firefox is the only way.
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2023
2696 points (100.0% liked)
Memes
45601 readers
1036 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I love it in theory… but it just broke so many websites I needed to use. And not always in obvious ways.
uBlock does this occasionally as well. Still worth it.
UBlock is much more reliable than no script in my experience. It’s also usually obvious when it breaks; no script sometimes isn’t obvious until you hit submit and notice none of what you typed actually got sent.
Then just put those sites on your trust list?
You can go through all the sites the initial HTTP request calls out to and decide which ones get a pass. This is how I ensure sites like gstatic, googletagmanager, etc. don't collect data even though the rest of the site works.
If that's too much, just open the flood gates for that site and trust everything there. At least it isn't just sending all your data out by DEFAULT.
You can use Wikiless, an alternative frontend for Wikipedia which doesn't have JavaScript, and LibRedirect.
I call bs. I am not experiencing that on mobile or desktop this behavior you're describing. NoScript does not break Wikipedia.
Yeah these days literally every website uses JavaScript in some format as modern reactive design is easier to do if you can execute client side code. Blocking JavaScript is a sledgehammer solution to the problem.
Same here. I used NoScript in the past and remembering whitelisting way too often so dumped it in the end. Now I just use uBlock with I think some built-in javascript block of known bad hosts.