zlacker

>>abused+(OP)
I must say, I don't understand the disable JS movement. I browse with JS on, and uBlock Origin to block ads. It's rare that I have any javascript-related problems in my web browsing. On the other hand, I definitely use a number of sites that rely on javascript for useful purposes.

If you're worried about tracking, you can block ads and tracking scripts without disabling javascript. If you're worried about viruses, well, all I can say there is that in my experience and understanding, if you keep your browser updated, the odds of getting a virus via browser JS are exceedingly low. Doubly so if you're not frequenting sketchy sites.

I don't know, it seems to me like advice from a time before security was a priority for browser makers, and high-quality ad blockers existed. At this point, I really don't see the value.

>>tempes+rp
The idea that some remote server needs my processing power to display images and text is so ridiculous because it has become normal. These things don't need my processing power, nor do they have a right to it by default.

I browse the web with JS disabled by default. If I encounter a site that has trouble with that, I enable it for that site until I can determine if it is worth leaving it enabled, which usually means at some point I'll be back there again and need it on.

For the most part, it is a superior experience to what I was seeing before with just an ad blocker. The most noticeable thing about it is probably how many images simply don't load because developers lean on JS for loading and scaling them.