Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

3

heckthepolice wrote (edited )

That's a really good point about Javascript making things more difficult for disable people. Our society's entire discourse surrounding technology always comes from a really privileged position where we pretty much assume that everyone can afford multiple internet-enabled devices (computer, smartphone, and often others), has reliable internet access in the first place, and is able-bodied and neurotypical, and I myself am guilty of that (I think it's telling that I hadn't even considered the ableist implications of ubiquitous javascript until you mentioned it), and so our technology tends to be really bad at accessibility.

edit: u/emma pointed out that screenreaders actually can handle JavaScript quite well, so it's not necessarily bad for accessibility. They know a lot more about screenreaders and web design than I do, so I'm gonna trust them on this one

You cannot track people easily using static sites.

Yeah, I think you solved it. Though I do still think there's something to the "having javascript is now just assumed" aspect of it as well, since even websites that aren't run by corporations trying to spy on us often include unnecessary javascript.

3

Volt wrote (edited )

You cannot track people easily using static sites.

But you can. DoubleClick was able to do this before Web 2.0 happened with tracking pixels. Where there's a will there's a way.

My point here is – blame capitalism.

3

2145 wrote

You can to some degree, but Javascript allows you to tell how long someone stays on a page, how far they scroll, and all kinds of other invasive details.