Talk:NoScript/Archives/2020
This is an archive of past discussions about NoScript. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Extending useful life of a computer
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 (talk • contribs) 04:52, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Dubious?
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)
Remove old NoScript Anywhere images
NoScript Anywhere is the older Android web extension that is no longer maintained. The normal NoScript extension works just fine so these screenshots are obsolete.Jawz101 (talk) 18:05, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Language neutrality
Some object to the term "whitelisting". --Mortense (talk) 14:13, 10 June 2020 (UTC)