Just started getting this now. Hopefully it’s some A/B testing that they’ll stop doing, but I’m not holding my breath

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    345 hours ago

    I know this may come off as a surprise: but I imagine that requiring JS in 2024 isn’t a big deal to most people.

    Now of course Lemmy skews more into that small crowd.

    I don’t blame any website for requiring JS for full functionality in 2024.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      9
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      All of the people replying to this saying you shouldn’t need JS are totally unaware how modern web development works.

      Yes, you could do many sites without JS, but the entire workforce for web development is trained with JS frameworks. To do otherwise would slow development time down significantly, not allow for certain functionality to exist (functionality you would 100% be unhappy was missing).

      Its not a question of possibility, its a question of feasibility.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        51 hour ago

        My question is if it wasn’t required before and is required now, what changed? It’s not like Google has added a killer feature recently - this is almost certainly related to those shitty AI answers that are forcing your actual search results even further down the page than they were already.

        • @auzy
          link
          English
          21 hour ago

          Even things like lazy loading and such require js though

          A lot of features might not be obvious honestly

          If you’re interested though, you could check the source which should be able to tell you immediately what they use it for

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -24 hours ago

        It’s far more than that. Even on a basic search page. Ever expanded the ‘Peaplo also ask’ section, for example? It loads more results based on your scroll position or interaction.
        There’s loads of little things like this, you may just not notice or care about it - which is another discussion.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            03 hours ago

            That’s not up to you, or any of us.
            Not maintaining non-js version makes sense for the business, considering how few people are affected.

            All we can do is move away to something better.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              0
              edit-2
              3 hours ago

              Thank you for deciding what was better for us, we would have been so wrong without you. /s

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      205 hours ago

      For full functionality sure. For basic functionality no. Searching on Google is basic functionality I’d say.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        54 hours ago

        Not really. Showing ads and gobbling up data is Google Search’s core functionality, and JS is indispensible for that.

    • @stoly
      link
      English
      54 hours ago

      You should still be able to use something like Lynx to browse and search. There’s no reason to block basic functionality except that you can and don’t care.