What we need to teach them is the democratic voting for a new queen instead of exploiting the workers, by hanging on to their dated imperialist dogma, which perpetuates the economic and social differences in their society. One queen laying eggs and give birth to everyone is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate of the masses, not from some mass egg-laying ceremony.
No.1 Apparently not present on uBlock Origin, which makes it not a problem for me (though it’s shite that they are doing it anyway). I don’t use YouTube that often anyways.
No.2 You are not loosing a lot - it’s most likely some crappy video about a guy slipping on a banana peel or some shit like this - 99.9% you are not missing on much :D
See as much as I dislike the company, I can see how it would make sense from a business and logic point of view. They are paying for the servers and, to some extent and form, for the content, and by using any ad blocking content you sabotage their earnings from this platform. I’m surprised they are not blocking browsers with said plugins, but that would cause a major uproar. But then again, not much competition around…
fr, i didn’t use for the longest time because a 5 seconds ad before every video and some on the side never bothered me much, it was when it started being 2 UNSKIPABBLE ADS BEFORE EVERY VIDEO, PLUS MID ROLL ADS that I couldn’t deal with it anymore
Sure, the money has to come from somewhere, but, no ad server has ever managed to fully eradicate malware from the ads they serve and some sites have so much of the page covered in ads that the site simply isn’t navigable without an ad blocker. The first is on the ad server companies, but the second one is just stupid. I will simply never trust ad servers anymore after having seen computers destroyed by ad-delivered malware, including one of my own. Even if the websites themselves go back to a more restrained and reasonable number of ads, I will never turn my ad blocker off for simple safety reasons.
I’ve seen you a bit on a few of these posts, always defending these companies’ behavior. I tend to disagree with your stance. While I do understand that the infrastructure behind the sites I use is not free (trust me, I run some sites myself and my pitiful little things are expensive), I also do not think punishing users for adblock is justified. Neither is scraping as much data as can be gathered for further sale. Advertising can be very intrusive anymore and data collection from sites is no different. It’s not that the sites want to make money; it’s their insistence that the user is the product. Just pay walling the service would be much less scummy and unjustifiable than this nonsense.
Man, what are you talking about? YouTube has always been slow. It got even worse when they forced everyone to use dash playback, and that was over a decade ago.
Listen here my dude my brain is still stuck to the time when YouTube allowed you to make a fancy fully customized channel page which was later culled go make way for the bland mobile friendly interface ᕕ( ᐛ )ᕗ
I hate it too and don’t deny it’s happening but I hate that phrase. It’s so crass and juvenile and seeing it repeated ad nauseam has shed any critical meaning it had.
I don’t agree completely - there are a lot of things that are possible without JavaScript, which are improved either due to better UX or improved safety through JS.
Easy examples for better UX is anything to do with forms and multi-step processes. Getting validation errors while typing is massively better than getting them on submit, and it’s easy to store temporary edit states locally to prevent data re-entry. This especially goes for offline-first applications.
IMO more importantly, local JS is always preferable to server-side logic when possible, since it means your data never leaves your browser. Imagine a JSON formatter that processes data server-side - you can never be sure what they are doing with your data! Compared to that local JS is incredibly portable (every platform has a browser) and isn’t reliant on anything else. I build my utility apps both in the usual bundler way, and as single files - meaning I can offer my app as a single HTML file you can download and use however you want.
Of course the security benefits aren’t perfect - it’s always possible data is still sent somewhere. I really hope that one day we’ll get an API that allows a website to limit further network connections to specific URLs. This would give users of such applications real peace of mind.
When all I want to do is read content, no JS is needed. That has been a solved problem for decades. UX is problematic because now you have these huge PC screens and comparatively tiny mobile screens to account for. Most developers go for mobile first and completely ignore the rest, so you have loads of sites that are needlessly displayed like slow powerpoint presentations, autoscrolling to the next anchor because that’s “good UX” somehow.
Form validation with JS goes back decades and no one in their right minds relies entirely on frontend validation. It’s great because it can be immediate, but it’s easier to sidestep either by accident or on purpose. Since a lot of forms nowadays are “autogenerated” from their respective UI libraries, they come with a lot of unnecessary cruft.
meaning I can offer my app as a single HTML file you can download and use however you want
I sure hope that doesn’t need a “local server” of any sort to work. It’s one of the things that baffles me the most, javascript that only works with a npm server to connect to. I also hope it’s not bundled as an electron app, what’s the point of having an entire chrome browser bundled just to run a single page?
When all I want to do is read content, no JS is needed.
I didn’t say otherwise.
UX is problematic because now you have these huge PC screens and comparatively tiny mobile screens to account for. Most developers go for mobile first and completely ignore the rest, so you have loads of sites that are needlessly displayed like slow powerpoint presentations, autoscrolling to the next anchor because that’s “good UX” somehow.
Okay? I’m not sure what you’re arguing against. Some websites have bad UX, and that means the technology used to implement that bad UX is in itself bad?
Form validation with JS goes back decades and no one in their right minds relies entirely on frontend validation.
I didn’t say anyone should rely entirely on frontend validation.
It’s great because it can be immediate, but it’s easier to sidestep either by accident or on purpose. Since a lot of forms nowadays are “autogenerated” from their respective UI libraries, they come with a lot of unnecessary cruft.
Again, what exactly are you arguing for or against? You said “don’t use JavaScript when you don’t need it”. You don’t need frontend validation, it’s a nice to have, but it would be incredibly stupid to say “this form is way better without frontend validation”.
I sure hope that doesn’t need a “local server” of any sort to work. It’s one of the things that baffles me the most, javascript that only works with a npm server to connect to. I also hope it’s not bundled as an electron app, what’s the point of having an entire chrome browser bundled just to run a single page?
No, the single HTML file I’m talking about doesn’t require a server or Electron or anything besides a browser. What are you on about?
You either seem to be willfully misunderstanding me, or you’re projecting a bunch of random webdev grievances onto me. Why?
I just started a personal blog as my small contribution to combat Dead Internet Theory. I’m not going to link it here because I don’t want to doxx myself
Yea, the creation of sites like neocities is such a fun return to oldweb and the joys of relearning html and creating a static site. And tools like Jekyll for generating and maintaining your own blog are great
memes
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.