Develop Reference

Can I open the OS native emoji picker in a web page?

I know there are lots of javascript plugins and libraries to allow users to pick emojis for text inputs, but windows and mac already have native emoji pickers (⊞ Win. or CTRL⌘Space), Is there a way for me to open these native emoji pickers when a user clicks in a text field instead of installing plugins in my website?
I already tried emulate button key press, but it didn't work at all.

Short answer is no.
In order to access any OS feature from javascript, you need a corresponding browser API to support.
AFAIK, there isn't an API for that. There's a discussion here which suggests adding <input emoji /> to standard but seems no traction gained.
Edit: Below is my original answer, revised. Comments pointed out I was focusing on the wrong aspect of the question, I totally agree.
However, the OP obviously has some wrong idea about what you can do in javascript to leverage browser ability. So I think it's still worth clarification.
You can't send arbitrary emulated keyboard event from js and hoping the OS will respond. Were it possible, it'd be a severe security issue on browser's part. Imagine open a website and it fires a series of keyboard event to your OS and wipes out your desktop (totally feasible through shortcuts).
You need to understand the runtime env inside the browser is basically isolated from the one of native OS. Whatever OS feature that's accessible to your javascript is totally up for browser vendors to decide. For security reason, they are super careful in making these decisions.
Also, make a distinction on "what browser can do", and "what browser allows you to do in js". Seeing Chrome has an "Emoji & Symbols" context menu item, doesn't necessarily mean it decides to grant you the same ability in js.
To further clarify why the emulated keyboard event is fundamentally different from the native one, I include a graph here. The blue arrow is how emulated keyboard event flows. The farthest place it can reach is the browser's internal event bus. It never got a chance to reach the OS event bus, so no way to notify native emoji picker.

Retrieve CTRL + F Keyword

I'm trying to understand how many users click CTRL+F with jquery script but I want to go deeper and understand which keyword they put into the browser box dialog (or which is highligthed in the web page).
I don't find anything right now.
Anyone can help me on which type of code I have to set up to bring this information? Is it possible or not?
Thanks!

You can't do that, or at least with client side JavaScript. That would be invading users privacy and possibly a security loop-hole in the browsers implementation and even if available it would be patched up very quickly.
Listening for keystrokes won't work as suggested in the comments because as soon as the user is typing into the find dialogue, the typing is happening outside of the pages focus.
Conculsion: There is no way to implement such functionality and interact with the browsers native functionality unless exposed by the browsers API.

Hide website from users browser history

I am about to begin work on an information and support services website for victims of domestic and sexual abuse. Naturally, the user's visit to this website is sensitive and the repercussions of their abuser finding out that they have could be devastating. Therefore, I am seeking a way to keep the user's visit as discreet as possible.
I cannot assume the technical knowledge of each user and there are likely to be users of a wide variety of languages. Also, there is the possibility they will need to exit the site quickly (I have the solution for this) and perhaps may not be able to return to the computer before being discovered. So, while the most obvious solution is to have a page educating users on how to clear their browsing history - this may not be the most foolproof method in practice. Because of all the variables in play, a blanket solution would be the best solution.
So far, I can think of two solutions to this but am hitting a wall with both:
Firstly, simply not have the website recorded in the browsers' search history. From what I have read this is going to be problematic between browsers if not impossible to implement.
The second would be to have a landing page at an innocuous domain name that wouldn't draw suspicion and then have a button that automatically loaded the website through a Private or Incognito browser (I could simply write instructions, 'Right Click on the Button and Select 'Open in an Incognito Browser' - but I am searching for a more foolproof solution if possible).
While some incarnation of the second solution seems more plausible - I need to consider that abusers searching through browser history is a possibility and therefore, the first solution is the most desirable.
Any ideas on either of these two methods or anything more ideas you have would be most welcomed.

You cannot modify the browser history using JavaScript.
You can alter the stack of recently visited pages, but it only affect the previous/next page buttons.
Best thing I can think of : advise people visiting the website to use private browsing mode and clean the history themselves.

Navigation Like Bar on Multiple Websites

I'm currently developing an online learning tool in which users can post links to websites and other users can come along and like or dislike them (adding 1 or deducting 1 to its rating)
At present I'm currently using javascript to create a bookmarklet that once clicked pops up a bar in which users can like or dislike the URL. As expected there are many problems with using this technique; most notable the hassle of having to add the specific javascript into a bookmark.
What I need is a better solution to displaying the like/dislike bar. I was thinking browser extension but that would involve having to code multiple extensions for each different browser. I also considered loading the link within an iframe embedded in the page but iframes are depreciated so I didn't really want to use them.
Wnat I'm wondering is if anyone has any better ideas as to how to display the like bar on the given URLs without users having to go through complicated or annoying installation processes.
Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated!
Thanks

As you pointed out, there are three possible solutions:
1. Websites embed your code voluntarily
This happens with very populare social bookmarking tools only.
Your small service (no pun intented) won't get the market share that people will run after you, so you can forget it.
2. A browser extension
The major players do that: Alexa, Google, Yahoo all provide their own browser extension.
The big advantage is that it gives the best user experience.
It has several downsides:
You need to provide one extension for each browser on each operating system
The user needs to install it, sometimes requiring admin rights. Not all users have that
You probably don't have the man power to develop them
3. A bookmarklet
Works cross browsers
Written in a language you already know (Javascript)
Easy to "install"
There just are no other options for you than to use the bookmarklet.
You should use a script that takes your javascript and packs it into a bookmark. Doing that by hand every time you change something is too chumbersome and you lose joy.

Is it worth it to code different functionality for users with javascript disabled?

I'm currently building a project and I would like to make use of some simple javascript - I know some people have it disabled to prevent XSS and other things. Should I...
a) Use the simple javascript, those users with it disabled are missing out
b) Don't use the simple javascript, users with it enabled have to click a little more
c) Code both javascript-enabled and javascript-disabled functionality
I'm not really sure as the web is always changing, what do you recommend?

Degrade gracefully - make sure the site works without JavaScript, then add bells and whistles for those with JavaScript enabled.

Everyone else has committed good comments, but there are a few other considerations to make.
Sometimes the javascript will be hosted on a different domain, and be prone to timeout.
Sometimes that domain may become inacessible, while your site remains accessible. Its not good to have your site completely stack itself in this scenario.
For this reason, "blocking" scripts ( ie: document write inline ) like that present in google's tracker, should be avoided, or at very least, should go as late in the page as possible so the page renders whether or not the domain is timing out requests or not.
If you happen to be serving JS from a broken/malicious server, by intent or by accident, one can halt page rendering simply by having a script that serves that javascript which just calls "sleep(forever)" once its sent all the headers.
Some People Use NoScript
Like the above problem, sometimes the clients environment may block certain script sources, be it the users choosing, or other reasons ( ie: browser security satisfactions, odd antivirus/anti-malware apps ). The most popular and controllable instance of this is NoScript, and I myself paranoidly block some of the popular tracking/advertising services with it ( some proxy servers will do this too ).
However, if a site is not well designed, the failing of one script to load still executes code that was dependant on that script being present, which yeilds errors and stops everything working.
My recommendation is :
Use Firebug
Use NoScript and block out everything --> See Site still works
Enable core site scripts that you cant' do without for anything --> See site still works and firebug doesn't whine.
Enable 3rd party stuff --> See site still works and firebug doesn't whine.
There are a lot of other complications that can crop up, but satisfying the above 2 should solve most of them. Just assume that, for whatever reason, one or more resources that comprise a page are viable to spontaneously disappear ( they do, all the time ), and you want the page to "survive" this problem as amicably as possible. For the problems that may persist for < 10 seconds, its not so bad, refresh the page and its fixed, but if its a problem that can occur, and severley hamper usability for an hour or more at a time.
In essence, instead of thinking "oh, theres the edge case users that don't have javascript", try thinking more a long the lines of "its really easy to have something go wrong, and have ALL of our users with broken javascript. Ouch! Lets try make it so we dont' really hose ourself when that does happen"
( I've seen IE updates get rolled out and hose javascript for that entire browser until the people whom wrote the scripts find a workaround. Losing all your IE customers is not a good thing )
:set sarcasm
:set ignoreSpelling
:set iq=76
Don't worry, its only a 5% Niché Market
Nobody cares about targeting Niché markets right? All those funny propeller heads running lynx in their geeky stupid linoox cpus, spending all their time on the intarwebs surfing because they have nothing better to do with their life or money? the crazy security paranoid nerds disabling javascript left and right because they don't like it?
Nobody wants them as your primary customer now do they?
Niché markets. Pfft. Who cares!
:set nosarcasm

Consider your audience
"Degrade gracefully" is generally the best answer. But lots of sites now depend on JS - especially AJAX.
Consider your audience. If your site is aimed at extremely tech-savvy people, the chances of them not having javascript are small, and you can notify them to turn it on if necessary.
If your audience may access your site with mobile devices, don't assume they have JavaScript, and don't even assume they support CSS properly. Aim to degrade gracefully all the way down to bare HTML.

I've learned a lot from my question: What's With Those Do-Not-Use Javascript People
Go with Ajax and Web 2.0. It's the way the web is going and it's wonderful. Isn't Stackoverflow great to be on? It's not quite as nice with your Javascript turned off.
Once you have your site ready, but before you let it go live, test it with Javascript off, and just add whatever you feel you need to make your site appear and function to them. You only need to add what you feel is essential.
Remember, except for visually impared people using screen readers, the others have chosen to turn javascript off. They can also choose to trust your site and turn javascript on for your site if they want to use all the functionality you have. It really is their choice.

As other have said, it should "degrade gracefully".
In other works, it must work without Javascript (period). It doesn't have to work well. The folks who've disabled Javascript know the limitations that causes and have accepted them. But if you are trying to sell them something, it's important that they can still buy it.
On the site I'm designing, there's a javascript-based fly-out menu. With Javascript off, all the flyouts are always open. It doesn't look as cool as it would with JS, but it can still be used to navigate the site.

It depends on how much time you have to develop and maintain both solutions, and how much the non-javascript users are worth to you.
My e-commerce site relies heavily on javascript, and in over a year and a half, I've not received a single complaint.
In fact, I don't think I've seen a single visitor with javascript disabled in any of logs since I started.
That doesn't mean they're not out there. It just means that either (a) they're a tiny percentage, (b) they're not interested in what I'm selling, or (c) both of the above.

Code your web site with support for the bare minimum kind of browser. Then more people can use your site without frustration even if they don't have all the bells and whistles--like Flash, Javascript, and Java--enabled. It may not be practical to continue support for ancient browsers, say Netscape Navigator 4, because a user can be reasonably expected to keep their computer up-to-date. However, features like Javascript, Flash, and Java can be security holes in old or modern browsers, as well as being an annoyance.
Neither of my parents keep Javascript or Flash enabled because they've had too many experiences with them slowing down their already slow connection, crashing their browsers, or being more of an annoyance on sites that use it stupidly (which is a lot of them...) than a useful feature. It's just bad design if, for example, your form requires an AJAX call be made and you can't actually hit a submit button to send the form when Javascript is disabled.
My mother was recently quite frustrated to discover that she is now unable to click through eBay results pages because each one requires Javascript. The only way she can see the next page of results is to turn on Javascript or to show more results per page. Now what reason would there be for page links to require Javascript while the 'results per page' links are just plain links? They should all be plain old HTML links. Maybe Javascript could be used to add some whiz-bang to the navigation, but a user should not be punished with a bad interface for having Javascript disabled. It's stupid on eBay's part, and it causes undue hassle for their users.

I am one of those that uses 'No-Script.' And I can tell you that sites that use javascript and don't work without it enabled is extremely annoying, stackOverflow... No we don't expect it to be very fancy, if I upvote load a new page that says "Thank you."
We expect to be able to use the site with reasonable limitations, don't ever display a page that says JS must be enabled, though, even if the site is crap without it. And yes if your site convinces us to stay we will enable. A function that isn't in common use on the site can also require javascript.
Please note that your site should also look good with no JS or CSS, if nothing else it is good for Bots.
As others have pointed out some phones don't have JS, this is changing but another good reason to have reasonable non-JS. I suggest code with non-JS and add JS after the former works, there are good ways where JS can work with the non-JS layout.

It helps me in my implementations to think about it as "progressive enhancement" rather than graceful degradation. Degradation often leads you to figure out how to make it work w/o js after it is implemented, instead of making a baseline and enhancing with js.

It is essential to at least test your website is functional when JavaScript is turned off.
As orip says, degrading gracefully is very important. It should be vital that your page both looks nice and functions when JavaScript is disabled.

For a standard web site that is primarily intended for conveying information, degrade gracefully always.
For web applications:
When building a web application for a standard internet audience, I would keep the three following facts in mind:
95%-97% of potential users will have JavaScript enabled.
At times established users will need to access functionality when JavaScript is not available.
3%-5% of potential users will have JavaScript intentionally disabled.
Given fact one, if you believe that building a JavaScript reliant web application will deliver a superior user experience, then by all means do it. Doing so may help you accumulate users.
However, given fact two, you should always provide a means by which your users can access core functionality without JavaScript. Do you need to offer every single feature? Probably not. But a user should be able to get his or her work done. This will keep your users happy when they find themselves temporarily without JavaScript.
Given fact three, I would also provide an in depth tour as an attempt to entice these users to enable JavaScript.
As an aside, one of my most favorite web applications, Remember The Milk follows this approach. Also, Google's Calendar application is unusable without JavaScript. So JavaScript reliant web apps are on the rise and that trend is probably unstoppable. In my opinion this is a good thing.
(Do keep in mind that JavaScript make Accessbility a bigger problem than it is already. Please do make an effort to make your apps usable by those with disabilities.)

As said before, it depends on your target audience.
If I'm part of it, you want to make sure that your site works (if not ideally) on my phone, and that it gives me reason to turn Javascript on when I surf there with it off. Nobody expects full functionality with Javascript disabled, and anybody who uses their phone to access websites expects some issues, but you need to at least provide teasers. For a web store, make sure customers can see at least some merchandise anyway, even if they can't buy without Javascript.