[thro1]

First JS now AI: "a wall between". Both JS and AI are for context loosers (you can't have memex). Clue: you don't need JS - but advertisers do, you had to use it because browsers were broken and are kept broken ( https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/zIg2K... etc.). Faster JS engine is irrevelant, but extensions as we had before in Firefox, sacrified for that and Google money, wasn't.

[7bit]

It's absolutely false that JS only serves advertisers. JS is absolutely crucial for simple things like date pickers or popovers, or replacing parts of the page without reloading the entire thing.

It's also absolutely ridiculous to think that faster JS engines are irrepevant.

[DangitBobby]

There is no point in trying to convince users of this website that JS is useful. They will remain fundamentally opposed because they don't like the bloat and abuse. They turn a deaf ear to the fact that users demand certain functionality that is only possible via JavaScript.

[thro1]

And why is that ?

(.. because they can't do it with Style (lossless) or something else and that's because browsers are kept broken mostly (so it's not possible at all or without strings attached) or they don't know how - neither why they can't find no other ways and how the one only left for them disables any other uses than some programmer (that just happened to be there for a moment without any reflection) vision, neither think about it ?

Yes, there are cases when JS shine - but the rest are just patches.. that need patches.. if anyone follow.

Yes, it keep some ecosystem alive and good for business - but it's not the interface a thing to take away my focus, neither one more level, "AI", doing any different. )

[DangitBobby]

Yeah this is pretty much exactly the take I'm talking about. People who use JavaScript do so without thinking because they are thoughtless morons, making sites harder to use for the tech elite. They create more work because the site will break soon, which is good for business.

[7bit]

You are right. But that's still a completely different argument than JS is never needed.

[DangitBobby]

Ok.

[thro1]

> JS is absolutely crucial for simple things like [..] replacing parts of the page without reloading the entire thing.

not at all

- but you couldn't just.. use iframes because of IE 5.5 bug of ignoring their z-index and displaying always on top of everything - so: either JS to fix that by rewriting content to normal DIV, or the lowest common denominator for all browsers: XMLHttpRequest from.. Microsoft - mind, they had no clue about WWW at that moment - and were promoting Active Desktop and ActiveX technologies which had different purpose - XMLHttpRequest wiht all that mess came out from there.. ( https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions//ms53750... ).

> date pickers or popovers

- simple example: https://www.opensubtitles.org/ with

JS disabled: movietitle TAB E [english] Enter - done.

JS enabled: movietitle TAB and.. react for nothing but.. SPACE or.. ENTER to open, now you can scroll with arrows (can't just press E WTF!? ), select with SPACE, press TAB ENTER - nothing, TAB ENTER and you hit.. an advert ! (fanfares) (there is no way to enter SEARCH with keyboard really ??) - what for ?

(BTW check that one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39329385 )

[7bit]

LOL

iframes don't even come close to what you do with XHTML

Popovers are something completely different that only NOW come to HTML 5.

[thro1]

iframes ARE part of XHTML and The Web ( -> w3.org ). JS isn't - but it's making that wall..

( ..in big part by empowering young, unexperienced or resume driven developers when making The Web painful to use - if I would like it, how you could call that relation other than.. SM ? )

[thro1]

(first check the facts - if you downvote, whoever argue with the facts.. )