But this blogspot website works fine without javascript. Also, for the ones that do not, it is easy to dump any blogger (blogspot) website to "basic text" using netcat, etc. No javascript needed.
The problem must be in the blocker you are using or something else.
imo, blockers that work via the browser are not the optimal way to retrieve basic text.
You are still using a massive browser which you do not need to retrieve a page of basic text, which can easily be accomplished by a smaller, more simple program.
Using a small tcp client like netcat and saving the page to a (temporary) file is one way to do it.
If you then want to view the basic text by opening the file in a large, complex, ad-sponsored, web browser that is optimized for running javascript and automatically connecting to third party servers, you can do that.
Or you could use something simpler. You have a choice.
Are there any technical or other non-closed-garden-monopoly reasons why Apple requires that all iOS apps be written using a bloated Apple IDE that only runs on Apple computers?
Why did they have this "integration" in the first place?
User can "frictionlessly" upload personal data to some website but transferring data to some private location like say an SD card is not something any user would want?
Why is it these companies make the sensible things difficult if not impossible to do. While they make the unwise things like pushing personal data to some kids website (who called other users "dumb fucks" for sending him personal data).
Today people complain about excessive tweeting. Yes, it made sense for Apple to believe iOS users would want/need to share every stupid thought with the world media but not to be able to send private messages directly to other users without using Apple as a middelman.
But I guess they have learned a thing or two in 10 versions.
User: I have some private messages stored on my phone.
Apple: Really? Where?
User: In the filesystem.
Apple: If your phone is jailbroken we cannot help you.
User: But it is not jailbroken.
Apple: Only Apple and authorized apps can write to the filesystem. This is for your safety. Send the messages to us for storage and we will make them totally private.
User: No thanks. How do I move these messages to offline storage?
Apple: iCloud allows you to move the messages to other devices, etc. You do not need a filesystem. iCloud can serve all your needs.
User: Why can't I use WiFi Direct?
Apple: You can use Airdrop.
User: But that only works with other Apple computers.
Apple: Correct.
User: So how do I get my files from an Apple device to a non-Apple one?
Apple: You can use iCloud.
User: So Apple gets a copy of all my messages first and stores them on the internet?
Apple: Correct. And your privacy is our top priority.
Not all computers are Intel or AMD and not all Intel or AMD computers have the "features" to which you refer.
Even more, nothing requires these computers to be connected to the untrusted network. ME requires an internet connection.
The message encrypted on the user-controlled computer can be moved to the "mobile phone" via a wired local network, serial link or removable media. Is such transfer to and from the device made difficult by the way these mobile phones are constructed and configured? Yes, and probably this is intentional. Companies want user data and the way they get it is by encouraging users to store data in the "cloud".
Most importantly, these Intel and AMD based computers are not the only computers capable of encrypting messages.
If ME scares you then do not use computers that have it.
If you have computers with ME then disconnect them from the internet and get a computer without ME for your internet needs.
This message was typed on a computer that does not have ME, would not be considered "desktop" and would probably not qualify as "modern". It makes no difference. No problems encypting messages on it.
With true end-to-end encryption there is no need for a middleman.
Each user
1. encrypts her data at the source i.e. on her own computer and
2. sends the encrypted blob over the untrusted network, or so-called "dumb pipes".
Hardware company that makes the users computer tries to dictate whether and how #1 can be done.
Not necessary.
The software for doing #1 does need to be open source.
On mobile, does such software even exist?
And even if it does, is a mobile phone really the users computer? It is an effectively locked enclosure with several computers controlled by third parties.
The way to do secure mobile messaging would be to encrypt the message on a computer the user controls, then move the message to the "mobile phone" and then send to the untrusted network.
Alternatively, do not use a mobile phone for messaging if worried about others have access to the messages. Wait for a pocket sized portable computer that can be tinkered with. No baseband, etc.
But this blogspot website works fine without javascript. Also, for the ones that do not, it is easy to dump any blogger (blogspot) website to "basic text" using netcat, etc. No javascript needed.
The problem must be in the blocker you are using or something else.
imo, blockers that work via the browser are not the optimal way to retrieve basic text.
You are still using a massive browser which you do not need to retrieve a page of basic text, which can easily be accomplished by a smaller, more simple program.
Using a small tcp client like netcat and saving the page to a (temporary) file is one way to do it.
If you then want to view the basic text by opening the file in a large, complex, ad-sponsored, web browser that is optimized for running javascript and automatically connecting to third party servers, you can do that.
Or you could use something simpler. You have a choice.