On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 15:24:28 -0500
Calvin Morrison <mutantturkey@...> wrote:

> On 16 December 2011 14:53, /dev/ammo42 <mickeytintincolle@...> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:37:39 -0800 (PST)
> > Darrell Anderson <humanreadable@...> wrote:
> >
> > > I hate JavaScript, the bane of the internet. Bandwidth hog and
> > > security nightmare.
> >
> yes, but that is life. you must adapt to the world around you.

If I believed that, I would be using Windows. :P

> JavaScript is a client-side language, it generates no bandwith in
> > itself. Some years ago I did local web pages with Javascript, and it is
> > actually quite useful to do Flash-less games and animations for example.
> >
> 
> Exactly! guys this isn't 1994 and people expect to use dynamic websites,
> Javascript isn't terrible and evil when used in good proportion

Used properly, Javascript can make a nice enhancement to a webpage, but
*requiring* it in order to use a page is usually just bad design--same as Flash.
(I make an exception for games and some types of complex cloud-hosted
applications, however.)  It's good for making user feedback more prompt,
and for certain types of visual effects that appeal to the sort of people who
leave it turned on, but in general, if it's used to do anything *important* (like
site navigation, or form validation or submission), that action should
also be possible without it.  The NOSCRIPT element is good for more than 
displaying stupid "we don't want to let you use our site" messages, and so is 
server-side code.