> If I'm just reading static text on a web page, theres'a absolutely no reason why I should need javascript to just read it.

100% true if the site is privately funded. In most other cases JS is required for ad integration and analytics.

I don't like it, but I understand that funding is required and ads are the simplest way to get there without getting into the whole micro-payment and paid subscription mess.

Forcing people to run JavaScript does not guarantee that Analytics or Ads will run as these might get blocked by DNS, Extensions or even the browser itself. I understand the need for them but I don't think it excuses the need to run JavaScript to see text. By the way Hacker News has ads on their main page and the website works perfectly without JavaScript, and even better with it enabled! IMO the job of JavaScript is to enhance the UX, not render the webpage. With modern tooling such as NextJS and Svelte Kit it's possible to code everything in JS (without duplicating logic between backend and frontend) and still have some stuff work without JavaScript, even better when using something like Remix.

> Forcing people to run JavaScript does not guarantee that Analytics or Ads will run as these might get blocked by DNS, Extensions or even the browser itself.

True for power users on PCs, but keep in mind that many users use smartphones [0] and tablets nowadays to access websites. The possibilities to block analytics and ads are severely limited on these devices.

JS is also sometimes used to "protect" content from scraping by bots (I cannot comment on how effective this is is, but I've seen it a lot). Again, I agree that JS shouldn't be used like this, but sadly it is.

[0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/277125/share-of-website-...

Firefox on Android has uBlock Origin available.