I&#x27;m curious why you say <i>&quot;when visiting a AMP-enabled web pages, the pages do not render at all&quot;</i>. I&#x27;m not seeing the same result. The first two &#x27;AMP&#x27; pages I tested loaded very quickly and were easily readable.<p>I use Firefox with NoScript, which is definitely blocking the JS from ampproject.org. I also use Privacy Badger and uBlock Origin (thanks btw) and I&#x27;m not having any trouble at all. Here are the figures for the two pages I&#x27;ve tested with so far:<p>1- Visiting <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ampproject.org&#x2F;how-it-works&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ampproject.org&#x2F;how-it-works&#x2F;</a> loads a perfectly readable page weighing 16.05kB in 40ms. It&#x27;s just one file, the HTML document.<p>2- Visiting The Verge&#x27;s demo page <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theverge.com&#x2F;platform&#x2F;amp&#x2F;2015&#x2F;10&#x2F;7&#x2F;9467149&#x2F;google-accelerated-mobile-pages-caching-preview" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theverge.com&#x2F;platform&#x2F;amp&#x2F;2015&#x2F;10&#x2F;7&#x2F;9467149&#x2F;googl...</a> also loads a single perfectly readable HTML document weighing 17.6kB in 184ms.<p>I&#x27;ve used NoScript for quite a while and while I don&#x27;t expect every page to work perfectly with it, the speed gains are incredible! AMP and NoScript aren&#x27;t directly comparable but they seem to be accomplishing the same thing for me. Only one of them is also blocking third-party tracking and delivering feather-light pages which nearly always render acceptably.<p>Can you please clarify whether you mean the pages are totally blank, or if they just don&#x27;t render the same as if you had allowed them to execute JS? (obviously if you globally block ampproject.org you can&#x27;t access even their index.html page but that&#x27;s not the info I&#x27;m after...)