> it just relies on well structured accessible content.
Honest question: how much of this is left? What popular sites are still accessible this way? HN might be the only site I visit frequently where browsing with no js/css has any hope of working.
Try it and see. I block a ton by default[1]; most sites are just fine without it.
I get that some people have low tolerances for things not being perfect. CNN stories without JS usually have a pile of empty images at the top, for instance. But that is probably fixable; I just haven't bothered to figure out which bit of JS to allow for that.
Usability depends on your tolerance for imperfections vs. your tolerance for being observed.
[1] Current setup uses JS Blocker 5, uBlock, an aggressive cookie manager and my home proxy, which does a ton of things, many of which I don't even remember at this point.
Check surfraw (by Assange), you can actually access a surprising amount of resources using sr and lynx from a terminal. Text only, but still makes internet pretty useful.
I browse HN using w3m, from which I'm commenting right now. It works on probably 80% of the links I attempt to visit. In many cases it works better than a graphical browser: I only see article text, and for reasons I haven't investigated I often seem to be ignored by paywalls. I never see subscription nagboxes or ads.
Sometimes I have to search forward for the title to skip the load of garbage that precedes the article text.
Honest question: how much of this is left? What popular sites are still accessible this way? HN might be the only site I visit frequently where browsing with no js/css has any hope of working.