JavaScript: Difference between revisions

Line 12:

==Consumer-impact summary==

*'''Forced requirement''': Many webpages (and even entire websites), force the user to keep JS enabled. In 2026, considering the advancements in HTML and CSS technology, there is ~~''no technical~~ reason'' why ~~any~~ website (~~other than~~ real-time simulations and low-latency gaming) would ''ever'' need JS. The only valid justification are [[wikipedia:Legacy_code|legacy code-bases]], ~~since~~ those are impractical to migrate to no-JS solutions~~. That is, newer web-sites have no reason to use JS, let alone mandate it~~.

*'''Forced requirement''': Many webpages (and even entire websites), force the user to keep JS enabled, otherwise they break or deliberately refuse to work. In 2026, considering the advancements in HTML and CSS technology, there is minimal reason why an average website (excluding real-time simulations and low-latency gaming) would ''ever'' need JS. The only valid justification are [[wikipedia:Legacy_code|legacy code-bases]], as those are impractical to migrate to no-JS solutions.

*'''Excessive tracking''': JS is much more capable than HTML and CSS '''combined''' to track user behavior, because of its first-class access to [https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API user-agent (UA) APIs]. JS can communicate with almost any server (only limited by [[wikipedia:Cross-origin_resource_sharing|CORS]]) at any time (limited by connection availability), using a plethora of protocols. JS can get hardware information and compute a [[Device fingerprint|fingerprint of the device]], user, or both.

*[[Personalized Ads|'''Targeted ads''']]: JS makes it harder for [[Ad block|ad-blockers]] to block ads, since it can be used to make overly-dynamic ads. The data collected by malicious JS makes it trivial to serve personalized ads, even across unrelated sites.

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 ==Consumer-impact summary==
-*'''Forced requirement''': Many webpages (and even entire websites), force the user to keep JS enabled. In 2026, considering the advancements in HTML and CSS technology, there is ''no technical reason'' why any website (other than real-time simulations and low-latency gaming) would ''ever'' need JS. The only valid justification are [[wikipedia:Legacy_code|legacy code-bases]], since those are impractical to migrate to no-JS solutions. That is, newer web-sites have no reason to use JS, let alone mandate it.
+*'''Forced requirement''': Many webpages (and even entire websites), force the user to keep JS enabled, otherwise they break or deliberately refuse to work. In 2026, considering the advancements in HTML and CSS technology, there is minimal reason why an average website (excluding real-time simulations and low-latency gaming) would ''ever'' need JS. The only valid justification are [[wikipedia:Legacy_code|legacy code-bases]], as those are impractical to migrate to no-JS solutions.
 *'''Excessive tracking''': JS is much more capable than HTML and CSS '''combined''' to track user behavior, because of its first-class access to [https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API user-agent (UA) APIs]. JS can communicate with almost any server (only limited by [[wikipedia:Cross-origin_resource_sharing|CORS]]) at any time (limited by connection availability), using a plethora of protocols. JS can get hardware information and compute a [[Device fingerprint|fingerprint of the device]], user, or both.
 *[[Personalized Ads|'''Targeted ads''']]: JS makes it harder for [[Ad block|ad-blockers]] to block ads, since it can be used to make overly-dynamic ads. The data collected by malicious JS makes it trivial to serve personalized ads, even across unrelated sites.