This person seems like the type who thinks Deus Ex is a documentary rather than fiction. :V

i don't really want to interrupt the tin foil hat party here :p, but that bit got me curious ... i always get annoyed when websites load their scripts from all over the internet instead of from their server. Never thought there could be a performance reason* for that. Naively I would think that establishing a new connection to another server would cost more time? But then, all this fancy asynchronous, dynamic web2.0 stuff is just black sourcery to me :)

* apart from the obvious reason if your server can't cope with the traffic and you shift part of your website to some cdn service

Why is there more crap on this website and what's with all the insulting overly trusting morons in this thread?

Yeah, it seems to me that whenever I encounter a slowdown while loading a web page it's due to delayed content from third party providers.

Such insolence!

Let's play a game of commas!
What's with all the insulting, overly trusting morons!?
What's with all the insulting overly trusting, morons!?
What's with all the insulting overly, trusting morons!?

My favorite interpretation is where Spectre is having this inner battle where he wants to prevent others from insulting overly trusting people, but then also calls these overly trusting people morons.

Well, since JS is single-threaded, assync stuff basically allows to do several things at once. It's not necessarily faster in every instance, but the bigger the site, the more it has to do, the more benefit you get.

Here's an example, let's say we made a site that needs to load a hundred images and also make a bunch XMLHttpRequest type calls. Normally it would load the images and THEN do the requests. Now, these requests might take a while, and the user (who already sat through the loading of images) is now forced to also sit and wait for the completion of the requests.

What we could so instead, is make the requests asynchronous. For instance we can put them inside a promise. That way we make the requests and forget about them — no need to wait for them to complete. Now we can load the images. All the while the requests are being worked on. Now the images are done and we go back and check if the promise is resolved? If so, we just grab whatever data was returned and keep on building the page. Depending on a number of factors this could save seconds if not minutes (in worst cases.)

Indie games are OK, as long as they are without DRM.
Galaxy is OK, as long as it is only optional.
Games in development are also OK.

OK, I can accept 'games with DRM' is not the best phrase for this case. Here is another one, more appropriate for the current case:
What's next GOG, start displaying ads on gog.com?
+1000

If someone does not care about tracking, he or she usually also don't care about DRM. Hence, no reason to shop on GOG, there are many other places on the Web where you can buy games.

I don't understand how people can be this paranoid but still not use tor.

Quite correct. Why should I use GOG, when they are forcing me to share data with third parties?

What you said, we can block third party sites we don't like? Great idea. Try blocking requests to any third-party content and see what you can do on GOG. Pretty much nothing.

---

And also, funny how TOR is mentioned in a thread, where we discuss a site fully loaded with JavaScript, and where blocking JavaScript means the site would simply not work. There is no sense to use TOR on such sites.

That's not the point. Of course you can use javascript, flash, etc. over tor - but you DON'T want to. I'm rather surprised tor is mentioned several times, while people don't really seem to understand that it's not the solution and actually quite a bad idea.

Can you elaborate on why it's not a solution and why it's a bad idea?

Because any client-side software running on your browser can bypass the tunnel entirely. Of course, I have suggested TOR as a way of bypassing sending protocol headers to GOG...

I mean... Feel free not to, I'm pretty sure optimizing the site to not use Javascript would prove more costly to GOG than just cutting off a part of customer base.

There wouldn't be, if javascript communicated with other sites. Which... Admittedly it does iirc, for the twitter and facebook plugins.

The answer is here:
https://www.torproject.org/docs/faq.html.en#TBBJavaScriptEnabled

The last line summarizes it well: feel free to leave JavaScript on or off depending on your security, anonymity, and usability priorities.

I have a solution:

1. Buy a squirrel
2. Have it chew through the cable

Alternatively, if buying a squirrel is not anonymous enough

1. Chew through the cable yourself

Thus the computer in question will be completely protected from network attacks, ads, viruses, datamining, and unholy internet radiation.