Works just fine without javascript for me
Yeah, know.
Yeah,
NoScript allows you to allow or block scripts per domain.
Useful tip: using NoScript, you can enable facebook.com and the site works perfectly, but if you disable facebook.net, it eliminates nearly every bit of facebook junk on other sites.
I need that in US measurements. How many furlongs to a hogshead?
Well, that might have been funny if you werenât using English units for length and volume and trying to apply them to acceleration.
but is it usable with all the red? and I want to know how to draw such a cool overlay without JS
Same sort of thing happens with Privacy Badger, in which allowing a tracker reveals others that it either blocks them entirely or their cookies. Usually I try to identify the one which blocks the thing I want to watch or listen to, but in those cases, I just resort to temporary disabling it.
Iâm assuming that what scripts NoScript doesnât cover in âall scriptsâ ended up in the âuntrustedâ blacklist. As for other reasons, there have been situations where I found that a rule in HTTPS Everywhere essentially broke a site, but encounters with that are few and the EFF are usually good at updating the rule set.
Fuck sketchy ad networks, corporate vampires and black hats, man. Weâve juuuust recovered from the âjavascript == popupsâ era, and can finally make fun-to-code, fun-to-use user interfaces. I hope ad blockers are able to go mainstream with an easy switch for âblock everything sketchy, whitelist everything fun and convenientâ that prevent a second dark age of UI. Sure, not every Tom-Dick-and-Harry site needs jquery UI drag and drop, but client-side animation and interactivity can make complex ideas/interfaces more grokkable and tactile.
#notallscripts
Itâs a buck three eighty to say your Inuit penny dollar. Hope that helps.
How do I stop the latest firefox releases breaking extensions that I rely on for the sake of my mental health?
Iâm speaking specifically to CDNs for things like JQuery, etc, that could be hosted locally but which it makes more sense to link from a CDN, so your browser caches it once for all the different sites that need to use it. Functional libraries without which the site will not work, much of the time.
Convince your extension author not to rely on features that theyâve been told not to use?
I donât know, really. None of the extensions I use (uBlock Origin, Privacy Badger, others) break with every release. In fact, Iâve only had one extension break, at all, in the last year or year and a half and thatâs one that hasnât been updated in three years so something finally broke it.
And thats another crashed space probe.
The author is me, and the feature I have been told not to use is not having the extension verified and signed by Mozilla. Itâs a bit excessive for something that is for my personal use only.
Oh, so you arenât complaining about things âbreaking.â Youâre complaining about ânew signing requirements.â
If it is for personal use, right now, you can turn off the signature requirements in about:config on your personal Firefox.
As to why it is being required, that has been hashed to death in various places but basically you can thank malware, search hijackers, and other bad actors. Mozilla decided that, like Chrome, some review was necessary for addons for the hundreds of millions of people that will just click on anything and install it.
And this is why we canât have nice things.
Adblock has settings to globally allow ânon-intrusiveâ ads, and you can whitelist any site.