Thanks for your comments. I truly appreciate them!
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Michael Butash <
michael@butash.net> wrote:
> Honestly it sounds like infrastructure/code problems on their side more
> than browser scripting, but different versions of browsers interpret things
> differently. I see big differences between milestone releases of
> chrome/chromium how certain webapps work differently, and a complicated
> "social networking" site is no different.
>
> Your issue sounds like a hung session that eventually timed out,
> reconnected, and got its resource finally. Bad/broken scripting (or
> server) causes odd timing events too with menus and other mouse-over events
> that sometimes I see not fully complete, even flicker. Load balancers
> cause this kind of errant display when dealing with non-stateful code, but
> largely depends on what framework and language they use for their content
> menus. I see lots of craziness like that with asp or any windows-y code in
> anything but ie.
>
> You don't "need" notscript, only your symptoms sound like when js *is*
> broken from it disallowing scripting by default. It won't help you here,
> but still good to have.
>
> Most sites want js actually, only im selective about what gets allowed.
> Keeps crazy scripting and tracking to a minimum when they truly add no
> value (to me).
>
> You'll see things like double-click, intellitxt, and various other
> parasitic sites that try to run scripts to track, advertise, and in other
> ways exploit local scripting for their business necessity. I find most
> times I only need to enable scripting on one site, the parent site, and
> leave the other 9 blocked to function. Sites like gawkers are terrible,
> requiring 4-5 domains just to function for content delivery. I avoid them
> as poorly designed and now annoying.
>
> This reduces the overall possibility someone will infect you with a
> drive-by script attack (rogue ad in facebook seems most common). Kept me
> virus free for duration of windoze use with noscript+firefox, but it
> reduces marketing nausea under linux as well using notscript+chrome.
>
> I use this as kind of a gauge how much a site is out to screw me. Sadly
> more do than don't. RSS is a good way to bypass it as well to get content
> off a site without direct scripting.
>
> -mb
>
>
>
>
> On 07/04/2012 08:34 AM, Michael Havens wrote:
>
>> Hmmmmm..... this is interesting. I git an email stating someone left me
>> a message and I followed the link and everything loaded correctly. It
>> must have taken a while to take effect (I guess). Anyways.... how will I
>> be able to tell if a site need JS?
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Michael Havens <bmike1@gmail.com
>> <mailto:bmike1@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> But it works with my ubuntu box but not on the mint laptop. (both
>> running chromium) Thanks for looking at the site.
>> Okay, so I installed the notscripts extension, set the password, and
>> restarted, and added hi5 to the white list.... but none of those
>> steps helped any.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 12:59 AM, Michael Butash <michael@butash.net
>> <mailto:michael@butash.net>> wrote:
>>
>> Noscript (firefox) or notscript (chrome equivalent) are
>> extensions, security, default denies scripts and breaks anything
>> remotely web2.0ish with good reason. Necessary evil, especially
>> if you use windoze. I use it mostly to deny advertisements or
>> other ill attempts at getting more script access than i wish to
>> give questionable vendors. Sites using them are questionable
>> enough to allow as it is.
>>
>> I'm thinking it's more crap scripting that doesn't work entirely
>> compatible with chrom(e|ium), ie errata/bug. I've seen some odd
>> scripting differences using chrome under windows or chromium
>> under linux on enterprise-y necessary crapware (ahem, cisco acs
>> and others) that I can't explain other than scripting
>> fixes/changes between versions trying to make sense of ambiguous
>> code.
>>
>> That *social* site looks as though it will test your scripting
>> to see what it can extract from your computer for user
>> information, expect compatibility issues outside of IE that it
>> would just otherwise use to mirror your hard disk to their
>> server. :)
>>
>> -mb
>>
> ------------------------------**---------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.**phoenix.az.us<PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us>
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.**us/mailman/listinfo/plug-**discuss<http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss>
>
--
:-)~MIKE~(-:
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)