Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh please. That ship has sailed. I'm marginally sympathetic to people who don't run JavaScript on their browsers for a variety of reasons, but they've deliberately opted out of the de facto modern web. JS is as fundamental to current design as CSS. If you turn it off, things might work, but almost no one is testing that setup, nor should they reasonably be expected to. This has zero to do with Adtech for 99.99% of us…
the recent google report claimed that less than 0.1% of users have javascript disabled ... like for every website, or just some, or? your PNG/GIF thing is nonsense (false equivalence, at least) and seems like deliberate attempt to insult > I'm marginally sympathetic you say that as if they've done some harm to you or anyone else. outside of these three words, you actually seem to see anyone doing this as completely i…
> you say that as if they've done some harm to you or anyone else.
I was literally responding to someone referring to themselves as "collateral damage" and saying I'm playing into "Big Adtech's playbook". I explained why they're wrong.
> the correct course of action is to act like they don't exist.
Unless someone is making a site that explicitly targets users unwilling or unable to execute JavaScript, like an alternative browser that disables it by default or such, mathematically, yes, that's the correct course of action.