Just got off the phone with one of our network guys, it sounds like our credentials are not being attached to the actual call for the JS file from Google. Since the credentials are not there, the proxy servers are rejecting the call. Apparently there have been issues in the past in terms of NSFW content coming from Google and there were quite a few grievances from employees/unions/etc. and this had to be done.

The network tech is going to try to allow calls to ajax.googleapis.com to go through and I should be able to test this a bit later...

With the recent change with the jQuery files to load from Google (Jeff tweeted about the change yesterday as the jQuery files were the biggest bottleneck the site had), all of the sites in the SO family will not work for me (and quite a few others) while at work. I believe that my employer has blocked these files from loading from google. I'm not sure on the justifications behind the block and it will take a while to work through getting that to work.

Is there a way to try to load the google and if the files still isn't loaded to use the functionality that was there before?

This is most likely a feature-request since I know that it was intended to load from Google, but I'm tagging as a bug since it won't work for me.

I can read posts, add posts/answers... I cannot vote, comment, or do anything else where the jQuery components are used like the rich text box editing

Comments Responses:
@Cletus - That is a great question... But as stated above, it'll take some time to sort through and then the politics of unblocking once blocked....

@Chris - Gave that a shot, but it did not work. I confirmed the IE was able to load the file correctly as well as FF, but it would not load the file as if it were coming from Google for the SO sites.

Answer Responses:
@Jeff - I've started the process. You are preaching to the choir...

  • Here's the solution, stackoverflow.com/questions/1014203/… . Whether or not it gets implemented is beyond me. Also interesting is that Jarrod edited it yesterday, coincidence!? Jul 27, 2009 at 15:18
  • This sure seems like a feature to me! I kid, I kid... Jul 27, 2009 at 15:22
  • Why does your employer block Google's jquery?
    – cletus
    Jul 27, 2009 at 15:23
  • 2
    That explains why I had to change my NoScript settings.
    – mmyers
    Jul 27, 2009 at 15:38
  • 3
    I'm not sure if this will work, but could you set your hosts file up so that the api.google.com points to and serve it up from there?
    – Chris S
    Jul 27, 2009 at 18:23
  • 2
    ajax.googleapis.com that should be
    – Chris S
    Jul 27, 2009 at 18:24
  • ..and obviously you'd need a web server locally
    – Chris S
    Jul 27, 2009 at 18:24
  • I just completed the webfilter change request process with a government agency. Just be clear they were not 'blocking' google, they were blocking ajax.googleapis.com. I bet if this was hosted on the google.com domain it wouldn't even be an issue.
    – Brian
    Oct 23, 2009 at 17:30
  • 4
    maybe you need to look at careers.stackoverflow.com .... Mar 7, 2010 at 21:45

2 Answers 2


We looked at this, but unfortunately the fallback from failure-to-load-JQuery is quite difficult, as we can no longer use the standard JQuery ready event -- which we use all over the place.

In all honesty, unless this is a really prevalent problem, you're better off trying to get google unblocked.

(Also: who blocks Google? That is a little crazy.)

  • 36
    Iran blocks Google. And Ahmadinejad is a little crazy.
    – Eric
    Jul 27, 2009 at 17:43
  • 1
    @Jeff Atwood: Why not use a lighter library such as Mootools? Jul 27, 2009 at 18:36
  • 1
    A large ISP I now of blocked S3 internally a while back. Since it was a large contributor of non work related downloads. Jul 27, 2009 at 18:47
  • 3
    @Andrew I always thought that mootools was significantly heavier than jQuery.
    – Macha
    Jul 27, 2009 at 22:20
  • @Macha: If you includes all the modules, of course it is. But it's the same for jQuery and its plugins. Jul 28, 2009 at 0:32
  • 10
    I think it's a bit too late to switch to mootools... Jul 28, 2009 at 15:00
  • 1
    Could it be possible to implement voting with a standard post to another page? Adding this option would help in this case.
    – perbert
    Jul 28, 2009 at 15:24
  • 1
    @Andrew, the point in switching? Everything works nicely with jQuery! (other than this recent Google thing)
    – JIP
    Aug 1, 2009 at 21:14
  • 4
    The problem is not jQuery. The problem is Google, and that Jeff doesn't host jQuery locally on SO in order to save bandwidth. The solution is therefore not switching to Mootools, but hosting jQuery on SO, either with a fallback or not. Oct 1, 2009 at 12:24
  • 3
    who blocks Google? That is a little crazy. — the upcoming IE9 might block it out of the box when its Tracking Protection is enabled. See Can't ask a question when IE Tracking Protection is enabled.
    – Arjan
    Feb 21, 2011 at 8:14
  • 2
    @Jeff, neither do I, but still FYI: Microsoft's "Web Tracking Protection" has been accepted by W3C for further discussion: [...] proposes to address information gathering by third parties on the Web through two different mechanisms: A filter that blocks download of third-party content (as is done, for example, through scripts and iframes in HTML), and a global "Do Not Track User Preference". This might be a very prominent/advertised user setting for the upcoming IE9.
    – Arjan
    Feb 28, 2011 at 15:59
  • 5
    @JeffAtwood China blocks Google including googleapis.com, but Baidu.com indexes SO. And logging into a VPN just to get that sweet sweet SO content is pretty annoying, especially since China randomly blocks VPNs through-out the day. China's mobile phone industry is exploding and already surpassing the US. I'd like to see SO continue to be a worldwide developer resource/authority. Please fix this.
    – Robert
    Jun 3, 2015 at 5:20
  • 3
    @JeffAtwood who blocks Google? Any privacy-aware human being that does not want to be tracked across the web, I daresay.
    – fbmd
    Jan 2, 2018 at 18:54
  • 3
    @fbmd Indeed, ten years after the answer was posted, it seems a little crazy not to block Google.
    – Pavel
    Feb 2, 2019 at 19:58
  • 1
    SE sites are INTENTIONALLY allowing google to track users activity thanks to this. "who blocks Google? That is a little crazy" @JeffAtwood do you still believe in your statement? Aug 7, 2019 at 6:26

Maybe switch to Microsoft CDN?


I think there are less corporate offices that would block microsoft...

  • 2
    worth giving a try, as a lot of the questions are about microsoft problem, why not get microsoft to provided some of the band width. (Provided it is a quick as google.) Sep 24, 2009 at 9:37
  • I guess IE9 would not block Microsoft either. (In IE9, Tracking Protection might block Google's CDN; see Can't ask a question when IE Tracking Protection is enabled.)
    – Arjan
    Feb 21, 2011 at 8:16

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .