Why are you protecting against the server never seeing plaintext data? In case the server is compromised? If the server is compromised, then so is your JS!
The difference between traditional compilers, chips on motherboards, and so on and so forth, are that you aren't downloading and using a fresh copy every time.
If it were possible to securely store some JavaScript in your browser (trust-on-first-use), or otherwise verify that the JS hadn't changed since the last time you used it, and if that JS weren't accessible from the DOM, and if that JS were well-written and used standard practices and had been reviewed by cryptographers, then maybe it would be OK to use.
The difference between traditional compilers, chips on motherboards, and so on and so forth, are that you aren't downloading and using a fresh copy every time.
If it were possible to securely store some JavaScript in your browser (trust-on-first-use), or otherwise verify that the JS hadn't changed since the last time you used it, and if that JS weren't accessible from the DOM, and if that JS were well-written and used standard practices and had been reviewed by cryptographers, then maybe it would be OK to use.
...But then again, you've just reinvented SSL.