I have JavaScript disabled by default, so when I see something like that, I assume some style element relies on JavaScript to run correctly. I usually put up with it for the feeling of security I get, but if it is designed to do that I can't say I like it.
Hey, quick question for you. I've got a version of Chrome with JS and plugins disabled that I use for not entirely trusted links. Do you know if there are still some exploits we're vulnerable to, especially on Win? I think I remember hearing a while back that it isn't foolproof.
Can't say for sure that anything is completely secure. JS is just one of those things that's easy to defend against, and it plugs a major attack vector. It also kills many tracking techniques. I also have a hosts file that blacklists known virus/shock/advertising sites, as well as ad blockers and "antisocial" plugins that remove Facebook "like" and other social media sharing buttons (which can aggregate your browsing history and connect it with your social profile).
If you're very paranoid, you can set up a sandbox VM for risky sites. Just make a good stable image and reload it every day in case you picked up anything bad.
Maybe you should give them the link to this discussion. They'll learn that we're not on their site to be amazed by the fact they know basic html and we'd prefer our articles more readable.
Why is it that I always see this posted when talking about fixed banners? I've never had one break my page-down key? I know there's something I'm missing, what is it?
Probably that when you page-down (eg spacebar on FF) the paging doesn't take in to account the fixed position element and so you miss out on that section of content
1
2
3
[4========]
4 is hidden by a fixed footer. When it pages up the next page is:
5
6
7
[8========]
and you've missed out on all the section 4 and 8 content.
So it's rather the facility of skipping by screenfuls of content rather than the key itself.