Stallman: the JavaScript trap

I must agree, as much as I respect the guy it seems like RMS has lost relevance.

Saying "Utter non-sense" without giving any reason is not very convincing, and is not a welcome contribution to discussion. Whereas if you were to give at least an example of what doesn't make sense to you, then perhaps someone could explain it to you, or could point out a use case you haven't considered, or maybe your objection would trigger discussion about how to overcome the problem you point out, or perhaps you could convince people to work on other things instead.

I don't find the proposals nonsense, but because you haven't said precisely what you object to or why, it's hard for either of us to convince the other.

From the little you have said, you seem to be of the opinion that he is calling for web browsers that are unable to execute non-free non-trivial javascript, but that is not what the article says. (And even if this were one of the proposals of the article, the article makes other proposals that are useful to people who don't object to running non-free non-trivial javascript.)