I know as tech people we're strong about using latest technologies and we like to think users are like us, but sadly, this is not the case. Actually, it really depends of your market.
"the web is no longer just text"
Although I can't deny that statement,I find it hard to convince myself that browsers can't read your page because no JS engines are running. I see it a little bit like emails.. yes, more recent clients give you a better interface or better features, but if I'm emailing someone who has a very old phone with very basic email support, I'm hoping that this person would still be able to read my message.
I'd love to see what would happen if HN turned JS-enabled only for a day.
I run noscript. If I encounter a site that's broken or useless for seemingly no reason (e.g. not an interactive thing like Google Maps), I often don't even whitelist; I just leave. Relatedly, I've stopped clicking on Photobucket or Blogspot links.
I kinda resent being expected to run your pile of arbitrary code just to render static text and images on my screen—something that worked just fine without JS twenty years ago.
While I admire your principled stand - you are in a dwindling minority so there isn't much reason to factor in people such as yourself when making technical decisions.
The SEO issue is a stronger argument but Googlebot now seems to be executing javascript in some cases so even that might cease to be an issue.
It's not just people like myself; it's people writing one-off scrapers, people writing new search engines or browsers (Google is not the entire universe), everyone when you forget a brace and break all of your JS, etc. The Web is not and has never been merely human beings sitting at a keyboard and using one of three known GUI browsers.
that's your choice, but don't pretend devs will change all their stack/development approach to take into account your refusal of using a technology that has been around for 15 years.
Only up to the point where they need to pay rent, buy food, pay taxes, or otherwise live their lives in the real world. When those things happen, those hypothetical developers will go running to a Bitcoin exchange to get their nation's currency (and they'll be pretty unhappy if there is a sudden, unexpected fluctuation in the price of Bitcoin).
Wait, nobody's even bringing up the fact that maybe the game developer didn't get the pass on merit alone? Yeah, the comment was rude (people are rude everywhere, always), but maybe he had a point.
> Everyone, just admit that the CEO's are paid for having contacts in the right places.
I haven't been able to fully shake the idea that our modern notions of wealth, money and currency are built on a type of social proof pyramid. But I can't quite articulate why. What do you think?
>53. If I had a choice of living in a society where I was materially much better off than I am now, but was among the poorest, or in one where I was the richest, but much worse off than I am now, I’d take the first option. | It’s absolute poverty you want to avoid, not relative poverty.
This is one of these situations where the first (pg's) choice is rationally better, but has also been shown to result in higher chances of low self-esteem and depression. It's very hard to shake off the feeling of being "among the lowest", even though in absolute terms you're perfectly well-off.
It's not not necessarily irrational, it just seems that way because the hypothetical is artificially simplified. In the real world, relative wealth imbalances lead to power imbalances, which have global ramifications.
This is the heart of the current American malaise. Americans don't feel wronged because their standard of living is so terrible (it's not). They feel wronged because they feel that the rich have leveraged their wealth in a way that captures a disproportionate share of new wealth creation--wealth their labor is ultimately responsible for creating.
The point pg is trying to make is that seeking relative material wealth with respect to others is akin to seeking pure status/power without having to do the work required to get it. It is all too easy to move to Costa Rica or wherever and live like a king for $10 a day.
While humans may, in general, side with you, I think it is sad that a favorable comparison with others could make one more happy than a healthy and poverty free life.
