788
submitted 5 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

The revived No JS Club celebrates websites that don't use Javascript, the powerful but sometimes overused code that's been bloating the web and crashing tabs since 1995. The No CSS Club goes a step further and forbids even a scrap of styling beyond the browser defaults. And there is even the No HTML Club, where you're not even allowed to use HTML. Plain text websites!

The modern web is the pure incarnation of evil. When Satan has a 1v1 with his manager, he confers with the modern web. If Satan is Sauron, then the modern web is Melkor [1]. Every horror that you can imagine is because of the modern web. Modern web is not an existential risk (X-risk), but is an astronomic suffering risk (S-risk) [2]. It is the duty of each and every man, woman, and child to revolt against it. If you're not working on returning civilization to ooga-booga, you're a bad person.

A compromise with the clubs is called for. A hypertext brutalism that uses the raw materials of the web to functional, honest ends while allowing web technologies to support clarity, legibility and accessibility. Compare this notion to the web brutalism of recent times, which started off in similar vein but soon became a self-subverting aesthetic: sites using 2.4MB frameworks to add text-shadow: 40px 40px 0px hotpink to 400kb Helvetica webfonts that were already on your computer.

I also like the idea of implementing "hypotext" as an inversion of hypertext. This would somehow avoid the failure modes of extending the structure of text by failing in other ways that are more fun. But I'm in two minds about whether that would be just a toy (e.g. references banished to metadata, i.e. footnotes are the hypertext) or something more conceptual that uses references to collapse the structure of text rather than extend it (e.g. links are includes and going near them spaghettifies your brain). The term is already in use in a structuralist sense, which is to say there are 2 million words of French I have to read first if I want to get away with any of this.

Republished Under Creative Commons Terms. Boing Boing Original Article.

(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] [email protected] 5 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Someone ask them how they make their ascii art without those technologies. (I'm interested)

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

Maybe we could have No-JS and No-Client-Storage (which would include cookies) headers added to HTTP. Browsers could potentially display an icon showing this to users on the address bar.

Theoretically, browsers could even stop from the JS engine from being started for the site in the first place. Though I wouldn't be surprised if the engine is too tied into the code of modern browsers for that to work.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

A Content-Security-Policy with script-src 'none' should already allow for that . no js can be loaded like that

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago

BBSes are back!

[-] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago

I always loved text stuff. The old rogue games were awesome.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I love this.

I thought I was being "bare-bones" when I remade my website with PHP & XML (no framework or database). What would they think about a python app that delivers plaintext or html? Is that still kosher for the no-js gang? Or does it have to be static files?

[-] [email protected] 5 points 5 days ago

I’d be down with the no-html crowd if they made one exception to allow anchor tags. A web without links sounds not so usable.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago

I wish web browsers had markdown support. At least for basics like links, headers, bold, etc.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago

I think everyone can agree the no-html club is insane. Why not just a reduced version, so you can actually do stuff like links?

[-] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I think because in 10 or so years, there might be a new standard that breaks the site again. Or makes it unusable.

TXT walkthroughs are still used for a reason. Its much harder to break txt files over decades.

All that is assuming someone still wants to read your txt but that is besides the point.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Anyone using basic HTML elements from the first HTML spec would still be supported in 99+% of cases today. HTML has added lots, and removed very, very, very little.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago

Blink tag! Blink tag! Blink tag!

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

This. Text files are great for so many reasons! Hard to construct something malicious, too, so pretty great for uploads.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2025
788 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

72137 readers
3104 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS