I want to allow scripts on sites, not just web pages. Many web site functions simply do not work (such as search) when NoScript is active. So I don't use NoScript. Adblock and other protections make the web less annoying and safe without NoScript's inadequate design.
NoScript is a great idea, but has a flawed design that makes it unusable for the serious WWW user. The developers clearly have let their paranoia get the better of them, without thinking about a decent user model.
allowing web sites
allowing web sites
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:40.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/40.0
Re: allowing web sites
Moving to Ragnarök and locking because you're not looking for help and this nothing to do with FlashGot anyway.
(I'm not sure what your point is to say "I don't like NoScript so I don't use it" on a board that hosts the NoScript support forum...)
If anyone who actually is looking for advice to make NS work for them hits this thread in a search, try Allow Scripts Globally. NoScript's protection goes well beyond script blocking, and you can still choose to blacklist individual sites; you're better off doing this than disabling or uninstalling NoScript.
(I'm not sure what your point is to say "I don't like NoScript so I don't use it" on a board that hosts the NoScript support forum...)
If anyone who actually is looking for advice to make NS work for them hits this thread in a search, try Allow Scripts Globally. NoScript's protection goes well beyond script blocking, and you can still choose to blacklist individual sites; you're better off doing this than disabling or uninstalling NoScript.
*Always* check the changelogs BEFORE updating that important software!
-
Re: allowing web sites
I don't understand this statement. Is it saying that you want to allow scripts, not just web pages? That doesn't make sense, because the two aren't in the same category. Is it saying that you want to allow sites, not just pages? That doesn't make sense either, because NoScript *is* based on sites (domains) rather than specific pages.Guest wrote:I want to allow scripts on sites, not just web pages.
Until you mark domains as trusted, yeah...because if the site chose to implement searching in a way that requires JavaScript, then enabling their search function requires giving them a significant degree of trust. You can do that, if you choose, by clicking 'Allow site.com' on the menu.Many web site functions simply do not work (such as search) when NoScript is active.
True, you can use that alongside NoScriptAdblock and other protections make the web less annoying
Nope, you don't get safety from ABP, the attacker can simply bypass itand safe
You'd have to make a more specific allegation before it would mean anything.without NoScript's inadequate design.
I agreeNoScript is a great idea
Which you haven't describedbut has a flawed design
Just the opposite. Serious users can handle it. Those who aren't serious, who give up at the first trivial hurdle of telling NS to trust a site - those are the ones who can't use it.that makes it unusable for the serious WWW user.
The developer (singular) has made NoScript highly customizable, and the fact that it handles the horrible mess that is a modern website *at all* is a symptom of the quality of his work.The developers clearly have let their paranoia get the better of them, without thinking about a decent user model.
======
Thrawn
------------
Religion is not the opium of the masses. Daily life is the opium of the masses.
True religion, which dares to acknowledge death and challenge the way we live, is an attempt to wake up.
Thrawn
------------
Religion is not the opium of the masses. Daily life is the opium of the masses.
True religion, which dares to acknowledge death and challenge the way we live, is an attempt to wake up.
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:40.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/40.0