Tim:
> Sensible to me is websites continue to work, with the minimal of
> tracking being possible. Sensible to others is no tracking, and some
> sites will fail to work. And to yet others, still, sites work
> without errors or users having to make decisions about using the
> sites.
jd1008:
Well Tim,
You run your browsing just to make it "work"!!!
Not me!!!
I at least do my due diligence to achieve some degree of thwarting
unwanted things coming from ads, cookies, javascripts and popups.
I think I had previously mentioned having flashblock and noscript
installed...
I'm not particularly worried about using the internet, regarding
malcontent (pun intended), most of that is targeting the failings of
Windows. I do try to cut down on the annoyances of flashy graphics
until I actually want to see them, continual page reloads, etc., and
cutting down on things that database you (whether to spam you or just
target you with ads). One thing I haven't mentioned in this thread is
running my own DNS server which blackholes certain annoying domains, so
their content never appears, and traffic back to them can't happen.
But, like I over-simplified, I try to keep sites working, rather than
break them down in a completely paranoid manner.
If a site does not work, then I simply dump it, and never visit it
again.
Bit of a knee jerk reaction. I do poke a bit to see if a failing site
simply was temporarily out of order, or that temporarily allowing some
third party content will get it working (e.g. playing a video clip in a
page). But if it seems a pain to use, I tend to move on.
For years I just couldn't see why anybody would bother looking at a
twitter page. Never mind the dumb things said on them, the pages always
looked so mangled, and never worked right. I had forgotten that I'd
blackholed the domain that their pictures came from.
--
tim@localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp
Linux 3.15.10-201.fc20.i686 #1 SMP Wed Aug 27 21:33:30 UTC 2014 i686
All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is no point trying
to privately email me, I will only read messages posted to the public lists.
George Orwell's '1984' was supposed to be a warning against tyranny, not
a set of instructions for supposedly democratic governments.