I'm starting to feel like no-javascript-guy is some type of HN novelty account. Seriously man, not a single person here cares that you don't use javascript. Move on.
I strongly disagree. Gnosis is being ridiculous here in complaining that something interactive needs code, but it's equally ridiculous for non-interactive pages to need javascript. I've seen pages with the entire content in the html, set to invisible, that needed javascript to turn the text black. That is shameful web development. It shouldn't take 10 billion clock cycles to make the page appear. Html, css, javascript, they each have their own jobs, and it's valid to complain when someone does it wrong.
But again, it's only valid to complain about/mock javascript on non-interactive pages like blogs.
> But again, it's only valid to complain about/mock javascript on non-interactive pages like blogs.
Which is a bit part of the point of this, it is an interactive page. Though again I'll disagree further and say it isn't valid at all to simply complain and mock. A reasonable discussion on usage of javascript, or browser-based applications would be worth having. Just saying "not gonna use it" isn't interesting.
Again, you're talking about javascript on application pages. I am perfectly fine with javascript on application pages. My only complaint is when there is no fallback on simple document pages.
"Gnosis is being ridiculous here in complaining that something interactive needs code"
You know, not everything that needs code needs to be run in a web browser.
Is it really so ridiculous of me to oppose opening my browser up to Javascript exploits and spying by the likes of GoogleAPI?
I'd be happy to run the game in any of the standalone, non-browser-based Interactive Fiction game engines like Frotz[1], Zoom[2], and Inform7[3] out there that this particular game might have been written in. And I would have had no problem playing it then.
Standalone engines are subject to fewer attacks from untrusted code, so they're probably easier to exploit than a browser. So I can't really agree with you on a security perspective. And incognito mode / using a separate browser profile / portable browser installs are all options to completely preserve privacy that are either as convenient or more convenient than installing an interactive fiction engine.
"Standalone engines are subject to fewer attacks from untrusted code, so they're probably easier to exploit than a browser."
Probably? This is purely speculative.
I'd be interested to see any actual exploits of Interactive Fiction engines. So far, they are a much less attractive target to malware authors than web browsers are. That alone makes me prefer them over web browsers, no matter what their theoretical vulnerabilities may be.
"incognito mode / using a separate browser profile / portable browser installs are all options to completely preserve privacy"
Users are often tracked by their IP addresses as well as OS and browser fingerprinting, which Javascript can facilitate. Try going to Panopticlick[1] with Javascript turned off and then with it turned on and see the difference.
"that are either as convenient or more convenient than installing an interactive fiction engine."
But I already have multiple Interactive Fiction engines installed, so using them is perfectly convenient for me. As for others, how many people do you think actually bother to use a separate browser profile or even "incognito mode"? Not a hell of a lot. And if they do, they might also do what I do and disable Javascript altogether.
>So far, they are a much less attractive target to malware authors than web browsers are. That alone makes me prefer them over web browsers, no matter what their theoretical vulnerabilities may be.
I sympathise but find it quite contrary that you prefer to download standalone engines over something sandboxed in the browser. Although I believe there is some unknown percentage of users who won't turn on Javascript for this game, I can only imagine that a vanishingly small percentage of those might take a stance similar to yours.
The other obvious flip-side of your argument is: Javascript has a much bigger potential audience than IF engines these days. That alone makes Javascript preferable to develop for. The security and privacy issues do not make enough of a dent in Javascript's userbase to make this a serious consideration for developers.
I never claimed that developers or the vast majority of users are going to suddenly abandon Javascript once they heard my oh-so-compelling argument against it.
In fact, I don't expect them to.
Most users are ignorant, technologically illiterate, blind to security issues, and lacking of any concern for their online privacy. Most developers aren't much better, and aim for the low-hanging fruit, without many scruples as far as respecting the privacy of their users goes.
No. Most of them aren't going to change. But that doesn't mean that I'm going to suddenly give in and start using Javascript myself. And though I be a lone voice crying in the wilderness, I'm going to stand up for what I know is right.
I care slightly, because it's such a very strange stance to have. I just can't understand this aversion to js. Do they want the browser to just display html forever? Go back to the way things were? Do they actually think that will happen? When the browser is _the_ application platform, what will they do?
The point is that it's valuable for game developers to realize that some people can't play a game that requires javascript. The comment helped facilitate that.
Everyone can plan a game that requires javascript. A vanishingly small number of people actually wont. Reading anything more into this single comment is silly.
From your comments you seem to actually be interested, so let me tell you about it from my neo-luddite POV.
I love games ( I actually _pay_ for games I like ). I also run with my browser fairly locked down. If you've made a game like this and want me to take more than 10 seconds on the web page, at the bare minimum have it load _something_ without scripts and without requesting anything from another domain ( this means jquery, google apis etc )
This game is a great example of one I wouldn't look at because it loads nothing until a request to googleapis is enabled and scripting is turned on. Perhaps it is overly judgemental on my part, but I assume that failing to provide _any_ level of graceful degradation in a design indicates a poor effort. It takes 5 minutes to add this to your landing page and will save you a tiny percentage of bounces.
tldr: make sure your landing page loads something. anything. Ideally a short message telling users what awesome things enabling the site scripting does for us.
I don't know if that's necessary here. How is someone supposed to get to this page without knowing it's a game? And if someone that turned off javascript doesn't expect that a game might need code, well, I'll have more fun laughing as the door hits them on the way out than I would having 0.1% more traffic.
(I would agree with you if there is some significant flow of visitors that don't already know it's a game, but not until then.)
Game developers should learn that Amish people exist, at which point they're aware that all computer-related things will have people who choose to not them. They'll also learn that it's not a big deal.
"he is instead annoyed by your post to announce your minor decision to the world"
Well, I'm annoyed by these other people's announcements of their minor decisions to play this game despite it being a threat to their security and privacy.
So, I don't agree with the mouthbreathing masses. It won't be the first nor the last time.
You know these same people would probably be exploited by some dancing baby app, punch the monkey game, or porn app which they fell all over themselves to install, and then announced to the world how great it is!
Yeah, I don't want to be hacked or tracked like the rest of these morons are. Sue me.
EDIT: Remember, your votes decide the type of discussion you'd like to be having in the future. So down vote me if you'd like to see more bullying on HN.
But again, it's only valid to complain about/mock javascript on non-interactive pages like blogs.