Forum

> > Off Topic > How to get rid of anoying sites
Forums overviewOff Topic overviewLog in to reply

English How to get rid of anoying sites

44 replies
Page
To the start Previous 1 2 3 Next To the start

old How to get rid of anoying sites

lenz-_-
User Off Offline

Quote
Everyone knows those anoying sites wich makes you to klik atleast 200 times..
here are some BG sites wich are such flood and if you ever see them dont click:

www. therain .hit.bg
www. zaebavka .hit.bg

And if you actually get on the you can stop them immediatly with CtRL + Delete and a new window will open then click on the site on the new window and click end now then it will shut down the fuckin' site.

PS: never click on a link like:
vij.iako.hit.org or something with vij.iako (wich actually means see cool and you will se [on bulgarian] that it writes that someone have cracked you and he gets 1 point so never go on site like vij.iako)

old Re: How to get rid of anoying sites

jeepohahyo
User Off Offline

Quote
Use >Firefox + >NoScript.
It will block the JavaScript-Code of untruted sites (every site is by default untrusted until you allow the execution of JavaScript)

And therefore they can write as much window.alert() into their page as they want and it doesn't matter

And: With this solution you don't have to post every link with those sites becauser it works always.

old Re: How to get rid of anoying sites

Lee
Moderator Off Offline

Quote
problem is, it makes it difficult for us web designers to create sites for the ppl who are too paranoid to turn on Javascript, the way i see it, if you don't want to turn on JS, then don't expect much, (same with old browsers) and its made my life a lot easier, so my advice to you is, stay with Javascript, and don't be retarded enuf to click on sites like those -.-

old Re: How to get rid of anoying sites

bizzl
User Off Offline

Quote
leegao has written
problem is, it makes it difficult for us web designers to create sites for the ppl who are too paranoid to turn on Javascript, the way i see it, if you don't want to turn on JS, then don't expect much, (same with old browsers) and its made my life a lot easier, so my advice to you is, stay with Javascript, and don't be retarded enuf to click on sites like those -.-

Javascript is actually deprecated for site design, since there is no common implementation.
It's much harder to make a site with heavy javascript usage that works the same in Internet Explorer, Mozilla (Any), Konqueror, Safari and so on.

Besides, most stuff that people made with javascript is a lot easier to implement just using HTML and some CSS-Magic.

old Re: How to get rid of anoying sites

jeepohahyo
User Off Offline

Quote
The only use for JavaScript that I accept is for useful Ajax-Widgets like the playlists on Youtube.
And I don't like sites which want to disallow users to do things like copying texts and showing up a message like "Copyright by xy" just because I want to copy it to OOo to print it without the layout stuff.

This is the advantage of NoScript, if a site needs it, you turn it on with two clicks.

And if you say that it is too "difficult" to create a page without JS, you should rethink your priorities: Do you want that everyone can use your page or is the "effect" with Javascript more important? (I guess that there is not as much sophisticated Javascript on your page, btw: link?)

old Re: How to get rid of anoying sites

Lee
Moderator Off Offline

Quote
yes, go to my site and you will find that there's no javascript in the design, however, webdesign is not based solely on design, one of the many features that Websites today have require javascript to deliver dynamic content (AJAX), and how else would you manipulate DOM without Javascript (u cant -.-), all i'm saying is that almost non of the sites we see today is worrying about whether you have JS enabled or not, because they've stoped supporting those browsers (except for lynx, which many sites just have a totally new style for) and people shouldnt just turn off their Javascript b/c of a bunch of popups

Also, ive worried about cross compatibility with my site and i am willing to admit that I FRIGGIN WANNA KILL IE, but still i try my best to support 5.5 and up, i dont really think it's necessary to try to support browsers from the days of IE5 b/c the only way to advance the web to web2.0 or later is to drop those servers from the days of the <FONT> and <Tables id='design'> and embrace the future with XHTML/CSS and DHTML/JAVASCRIPT

old Re: How to get rid of anoying sites

jeepohahyo
User Off Offline

Quote
But not every website must be a Web2.0-Page...
I would rather stick with some plain old webpages, generated with CGI-Scripts or PHP and static at the client

But we are getting off topic, if you want to discuss send a PM to me

old Re: How to get rid of anoying sites

bizzl
User Off Offline

Quote
leegao has written
yes, go to my site and you will find that there's no javascript in the design, however, webdesign is not based solely on design, one of the many features that Websites today have require javascript to deliver dynamic content (AJAX),

There are few site that actually use AJAX.

leegao has written
and how else would you manipulate DOM without Javascript (u cant -.-)

Server side pregenerated code

leegao has written
Also, ive worried about cross compatibility with my site and i am willing to admit that I FRIGGIN WANNA KILL IE, but still i try my best to support 5.5 and up, i dont really think it's necessary to try to support browsers from the days of IE5 b/c the only way to advance the web to web2.0 or later

I'll tell you something: there is no such thing as web 2.0
That's something made up by marketing and press people.
The WorldWideWeb is a floating organism. You'll never be able to kill the old stuff totally. You just can try not to use deprecated tags.

leegao has written
is to drop those servers from the days of the <FONT> and <Tables id='design'> and embrace the future with XHTML/CSS and DHTML/JAVASCRIPT

Isn't DHTML HTML+CSS+JavaScript.
btw, most DHTML-Stuff sucks...

Dicker has written
But we are getting off topic, if you want to discuss send a PM to me

Sry taht I made this post. perhaps we should open a "javascript - pro/con" thread or something.

old Re: How to get rid of anoying sites

Lee
Moderator Off Offline

Quote
lol, oke, tho i still use PHP (without AJAX and with) i'm not sure about CGI, i don't think C or C++ is a popular web platform, anyways, i don't think anyone can really kill a site unless they bring it up with the hosting company or with ICANN to have their domain removed, but thats basically all you can do, and ICANN requires you to provide evidences and such and even then they might still not do it

old Re: How to get rid of anoying sites

bizzl
User Off Offline

Quote
Actually, CGI can pretty much be anything, including Pascal, C*, Python, D, PHP, Perl and even Bash and Basic
Most cgis are Perlscripts, and its still pretty popular.

Btw, even if you get the WWW to be "Web 2.0"-only there still will be static pages. Just in another net someone started because he got sick of the freaking shit made with dynamic webpages...

old Re: How to get rid of anoying sites

Lee
Moderator Off Offline

Quote
yeah, but the common CGI platform is perl or C, and even in some situations Python, still, its an old technology (even tho PHP is based off of it) and has many down sides

also, i don't see the advantage to truely static pages since you can't manipulate them or populate them with data, pure HTML isn't a pretty experience

old Re: How to get rid of anoying sites

bizzl
User Off Offline

Quote
leegao has written
yeah, but the common CGI platform is perl or C, and even in some situations Python, still, its an old technology (even tho PHP is based off of it) and has many down sides

which would be? Server side, meaning that you really need a server to make it work? That it needs to be compiled (C,D,Pascal) ?
Actually, CGI is good whenever your Server is a bit sluggish, since it's still faster in execution than PHP. There also some tricks possible in CGI that you can't do in PHP (heavy image manipulation, easy redefinition of functions, etc)

leegao has written
also, i don't see the advantage to truely static pages since you can't manipulate them or populate them with data, pure HTML isn't a pretty experience

Why the heck do you want to manipulate pages?
There are only few web services that need this. Anything else ist static (e.g. most homepage) or semi-static (most boards, shops and so on).
Manipulateable pages are only needed for personalizable Webservices, such as iGoogle or Webmailinterfaces (which can be very static, too).
For those sites you can enable Javascript (that's what NoScript is actually for)

And pure HTML+CSS can be very pleasing. I mean, look at this page (unrealsoftware). The only amount of javascript I found so far are the smilies and tag links left of the text area for posting.
Anything else is static (menus & product pages) or semi static (board, news)
And I know a pretty amount of pages which are pure static or semi static and really look wonderful compared to some pages using fancy javascript effects.

old Re: How to get rid of anoying sites

jeepohahyo
User Off Offline

Quote
This is what I meant with CGI and PHP. (It was not my intention to trigger a discussion about the (dis)advantages of CGI )

Pages can also change over the time without Javascript, like this board.

By the way it relies on the same server-side techniques as an ajax page (PHP with MySQL, but the scripts are less complex), but the page is just not dynamically reloaded. With ajax you would just save some bytes (navigation etc doesn't need to be transferred) but the experience would be the same.

Now look at Youtube or Google Video or [insert any video site]: When you toggle the comments or something, the site could also be reloaded (like here) but the video would be interrupted and restartet due to the reload. Here does the use of ajax make sense.
But at this site you have nothing but text and it doesn't matter if you reload the whole page. Therefore ajax is not needed
edited 1×, last 10.07.07 11:48:20 am

old Re: How to get rid of anoying sites

Lee
Moderator Off Offline

Quote
oke, this is the way my sites work

PHP - Handles requests from the client and does something useful (display a file or executing sql commands) and returns somehting meaningful to the client

JAVASCRIPT - Used to insert the response into the document and later to do what ever is needed with them (I don't rely on on JS for most of the things, but i can't live without them for the fact that i use them for css hacks too)

CSS - Styling and nothing else

HTML - Only the markup for the skeleton, nothing else

so my site basically uses 300+ lines of CSS and 20 lines of HTML and a few line of JS to handle server responses (this is the MVC Model)

The problem with reloading is that you have to careful to save everything you saved in a session

yep, i also knw a lot of pages that are static, even some with no JS at all, but disabling JS will mean that you won't get the most out of some of the best sites these days (livemarks for example) who utilizes JS not only for ajax but also for Data manipulations (JSON) and Effects

oke, CGI is faster since you've already compiled it, the problem with it is that you'll have to recompile each time you edit it which can be a pain in the butt, which is why i prefer using scripting languages

old Re: How to get rid of anoying sites

bizzl
User Off Offline

Quote
leegao has written
JAVASCRIPT - Used to insert the response into the document and later to do what ever is needed with them

I have no idea what you do that you need JavaScript for output.
I can do anything I want via PHP, no user side scripting needed

leegao has written
(I don't rely on on JS for most of the things, but i can't live without them for the fact that i use them for css hacks too)

I hope you know that CSS-Hacks via JavaScript are absolutly deprecated

leegao has written
so my site basically uses 300+ lines of CSS and 20 lines of HTML and a few line of JS to handle server responses (this is the MVC Model)

Would you enlighten me what shall be what?
I can't really figure from your description what shall be the controller, what the model and what the view (I have to use MVC rather often, only in Java though)

leegao has written
yep, i also knw a lot of pages that are static, even some with no JS at all, but disabling JS will mean that you won't get the most out of some of the best sites these days (livemarks for example) who utilizes JS not only for ajax but also for Data manipulations (JSON) and Effects

That's why NoScript has a white list.
You can disable JavaScript for the whole net, except livemark, gmail, igoogle, amazon, youtube, and any other site that really needs JavaScript to work.

leegao has written
oke, CGI is faster since you've already compiled it, the problem with it is that you'll have to recompile each time you edit it which can be a pain in the butt, which is why i prefer using scripting languages

Me mostly too, but you get used to it, believe me...

old Re: How to get rid of anoying sites

Lee
Moderator Off Offline

Quote
Javascript's basically used to manipulate the output, the server can do that but i think it should be JS's job since the server's only responsible to send the information requested and will also reduce the stress on the server

i use IE7 (Dean Edward's thing) to make it easier to design for IE (theres still some complications) which is a set of Javascript library (and a few php script called from withing the lib)

Model is the HTML (only for markup, no presentational values)
View is CSS
Controller is the PHP and JS scripts

the whitelist might be a posibility untill you find your self updating the whitelist constently each time you visit a site that requires Javascript

I don't think i'm gonna start using CGI since PHP is cached so it won't significantly effect the time

old Re: How to get rid of anoying sites

bizzl
User Off Offline

Quote
leegao has written
Javascript's basically used to manipulate the output, the server can do that but i think it should be JS's job since the server's only responsible to send the information requested

Servers are responsible to manage, prepare and send the data.
Building output via PHP is part of data preparation. Or why do you think does it have so much fancy functions for strings and databases

leegao has written
and will also reduce the stress on the server

PHP isn't much of a server stressing.
Sending much stuff (such as whole javascript libraries and many pictures) is much more stress.

leegao has written
Model is the HTML (only for markup, no presentational values)
View is CSS
Controller is the PHP and JS scripts

This is as much MVC as a writing everything in Brainfuck
View must be HTML+CSS can be View, and both JavaScript and PHP can provide own Models and Controller (no Controller for PHP).

leegao has written
the whitelist might be a posibility untill you find your self updating the whitelist constently each time you visit a site that requires Javascript

That's not as much work as you think.
And I really only need to add one or two pages a week (for constant usage)
To the start Previous 1 2 3 Next To the start
Log in to replyOff Topic overviewForums overview