deleted by creator

Go right back to the time of the Crusades, in the Rhineland massacres Christians were killing Jewish people and looting their homes.

Around the year 800, many Saxons were killed, tortured or forcibly baptised on the orders of Charlemagne, which German paganism could hardly cope with. Every religion has its violent phase.

Religion is the sole reason why Israel even exists and why Muslims hate the Jews.

Religion was a bad idea.

These days, things have greatly improved.

Websites will never change their URLs today.

My RSS reader (Newsblur) lets me do that too, to some extent.

• Stopped using reddit, went here instead.
• Intensified my Mastodon usage, winding down my Twitter activity.
• Started using my own mail server for more than just a few tests.
• Changed search engines a few times (I’ll probably stick with Kagi now).
• Reduced my subscriptions and cleaned up my RSS feeds.
• Stopped doomscrolling (I subscribed to a weekly paper newspaper instead).
• Started using Ulysses for writing. Works very well.

Touché.

Virtually every website out there today uses Javascript.

Most of those work without it.

Lemmy uses Javascript.

Lemmy is one of several ActivityPub-capable applications. You do not need to use Lemmy inside a web browser in order to participate here. In fact, you don’t even need to use a web browser.

The Web generally does not function without Javascript today.

I disagree. Some websites (with lazy developers) work less well without JavaScript. You’ll gain less annoyances (no JS = no pop-ups and no sophisticated anti-adblock techniques), more speed, less energy consumption, less potential security risks. You’ll lose… not really much. “Web applications” (usually worse, slower and less reliable than installed software), a couple of websites which are very focused on providing effects over contents - sounds like a fair deal to me, but again, YMMV.

Yes, there will never be absolute security. If it runs on a computer, it most likely has security flaws.

Are you advocating for some form of isolation? If so, what?

Kernel sandboxing. I mean, breaking out of browser “sandboxes” is a game these days.

Any site you browse to – including those not labeled as such – could well expose you to that vulnerability.

Which is why using the web without JavaScript is a security measurement which I strongly recommend to enable. Sure, many sites will be “less interactive” then, but I’m afraid that it is the only solution. For the usually: rather small number of websites which you absolutely need to use with JavaScript enabled (do you, really?), a separate browser inside a container (or VM) would be a good option. I admit that this is not the most comfortable setup, but I really prefer to be safe than sorry. YMMV, but you asked.

I don’t think that “fun” should be the only relevant aspect, especially not with network-facing applications managing personal data.

Compared to native platforms.

Yes, because browser sandboxes will NEVER be as secure as kernel sandboxes.

“PWAs” are still less efficient than native apps. There are many disadvantages - and one advantage (“it’s easy to make one”).

If there’s one thing that everyone could have learned from the Snowden papers, that one thing is that you aren’t “paranoid”.

Exposing your hardware over JavaScript sounds dangerous to me, to be honest. But well, I’m sure that nothing bad could ever happen.

we are far away from the slow platforms with limited controls of the ol’ days.

Web browsers are still much slower than your kernel.

When exactly has “large companies do that” become a good reason instead of a warning?

Yet, it is a very not-really-good idea to run stuff on a web browser. Web browsers are a notoriously insecure, slow platform with controls (“Back”, “Reload”, …) which are not optimized to run applications.

edit: I did not expect that the “modern web” crowd would now come here to berate (and downvote) me for the sacrilege of not unconditionally considering web browsers to be the very best piece of software for every purpose. My fault, sorry. I’m out of here, this is pointless.

Sure.

Einschränkungen einzelner Grundrechte

Ich glaube, irgendwer versteht das Wort “Grundrechte” nicht, und ich bin mir nicht ganz sicher, wer es ist, tippe aber auf die Regierung.