Talk:NoScript

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is not a forum for technical support of NoScript. Try NoScript home page for help and forums.

Extending useful life of a computer[edit]

I notice that a phrase in the 'Unintended benefits' section was removed, referring to NoScript extending the useful life of old hardware by lowering resource usage. This phrase was probably not a claim that the hardware actually lasts longer, but rather that otherwise-outmoded hardware can still perform at a usable speed due to the lower overheads. Perhaps it could be restored with a clearer wording? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carl.antuar (talkcontribs) 04:52, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Dubious?[edit]

Of course if you shut off all the scripting you lower resource uses. However, web developers continue to design sights which use extensive scripting for even the most mundane functions. Websites often will fail to function at all without their (often bloated) javascript "eye candy" (which is often tested in only a few browsers and may fail to load even if javascript is enabled because of assumptions about operating system, failure to recognize that there are dozens of browsers for nearly every operating system, including text-only browsers and screen readers/HTML-to-Braille needed by individual with limited vision. NoScript may have the same effect--rendering a website unreadable or unusable, albeit it consuming very few system resources. As long as website developers remain enamored with every script they can find on the web to add yet-another "gee-wiz" (or load yet another intrusive add) effect, eschewing normal (X)HTML, NoScript users will be faced with the choice of non-functioning websites v. having to decide on whether or not to let some script (which may be identified only by a shortened URI) from an obscure website run. So touting this as a feature, rather than a perennial pain in the butt is pretty shady. NoScript needs to provide some default whitelist options, provide some research/look-up about the blocked scripts (e.g. how many web sites use it, number of reported problems, what it does, etc.--all information which can be looked up by a user (who would rather be looking at the page they just tried to load rather than tracking down details of a handful of javascripts from just as many websites). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.1.89 (talk) 02:46, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

hum...[edit]

There's now version 2.7 since 26. Nov 2015 and has "Application Boundaries Enforcer"(ABE) and extended HTTPS-Management.

changelog — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.127.14.58 (talk) 21:35, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on NoScript. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:48, 1 April 2016 (UTC)