BattleScripts!

As I watch my browser fill with extensions which enhance web pages by adding scripts (Greasemonkey, Platypus, Cocomment, ), I wonder whether some sites may start fighting back. Perhaps Google may detect Platypus removing a text ad, and add a page script to re-insert the ad. Will scripts begin to battle, wage wars of privilege, namespace, obfuscation, and timing? Will the javascript sandbox become a bloody battlefield, littered with object literals, new troops parachuting in via JSON headers and asynchronous XML HTTP requests? Will the DOM tree be hung with broken and battered functions? I envision closures spawning closures, surveiling the digital landscape, emerging from their window.setTimeout bunkers to strike again...


Responses: 2 so far

  1. viperteq says:

    I think it would be messed up for Google, or any website for that matter, to do something like that. I think developers should design their sites how they want, with Standards and Accessibility in mind, but they should have some type of message acknowledging that visitors will likely do something that might hinder the viewing experience of the site. The message should say that while they respect the users rights to view a website in whatever fashion they please, users should understand that by doing so they may miss out on some functionality or other that is built into the site.

  2. Tim McCormack says:

    Sounds like a reasonable compromise.

    I know that Gmail was having a problem with one or another Greasemonkey scripts making too many requests on the server, and that they were trying to block the scripts, but that has since been worked out.