JS is like a disease where it does not need to be. I would honestly welcome an Internet alternative that was all web 1.0 (with up-to-date security updates and methods). There’s good uses for it in interactive websites that provide cloud services, but most of it is fud and breaks the whole notion of HTTP GET URLs you can just share and cache.
Comment on Google now requires JavaScript
m_f@midwest.social 1 month agoA lot of the web is powered by JS, but much less of it needs to be. Here’s a couple of sites that are part of a trend to not unnecessarily introduce it:
The negative implications for Google requiring JS is that they will use it to track everything possible about you that they can, even down to how you move your cursor, or how much battery you have left on your phone in order to jack up prices, or any other number of shitty things.
TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee 1 month ago
celsiustimeline@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
Booo! I knew I made the right decision switching to DDG.
Chingzilla@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Htmx does use javascript under the hood, but just makes it so the developer can use html markdown for more a more interactive environment that’s driven sever side. So the initial page load should render, but UI elements might not work as intended.
htmx is more a move back to REST as it was originally defined (aka not json backend).
m_f@midwest.social 1 month ago
They’re also working with browser developers to push htmx into web standards, so that hopefully soon you won’t even need htmx/JS/etc, it’ll just be what your browser does by default
ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 1 month ago
Jesus Christ no.
As a web developer, nooooooo.