Thank you. Now a follow-up question: Are there any good authoring tools for HTML5 canvas animations that aren't pay-per-month? If so, which?

I was trying to avoid causing the XY problem by asking for tools to perform a step toward the wrong goal. Asking "What are usable authoring tools for animated SVG?" isn't helpful when animated SVG itself isn't a viable technology. So instead, I first asked for the right goal (what tech) and followed up by asking for the right step (what authoring tools). My question in full could have been phrased more formally as follows: "What is the most viable technology to replace SWF, and what are usable authoring tools for said technology whatever it might be?" What is the correct etiquette for asking a question contingent on another question?

You appear to claim that both WebGL and Flash are "a giant security hole [that] should be avoided like the plague". If this is true, then which technology should be used instead for two- and three-dimensional vector animation?

I have the feeling you're about to say "native code". The problem is that native code all too often ends up being made for a platform other than the ones you have available to you.

Edge Animate exists, but you can't buy it. You have to rent it on Creative Butt.

By emulating Flash Player 11.2 for Linux in a PC emulator perhaps?

Which means "the appropriate application for the urltype" needs to exist for the user's platform. Not everyone wants to have to make 14 different apps for 14 different platforms, not to mention that several platforms require a long and involved developer pre-approval process. For example, the Flash Lite player in Internet Channel was the only publicly available game development environment for Wii before that console was cracked.

So what tools would you recommend for building these without, say, having to type all the (x, y) coordinates into a script file? I haven't seen any animation stuff in Inkscape, unless there was some recent huge update of which I'm not aware.

Neither does HTML5 if you abuse onmouseover. The lack of hover is completely orthogonal to the SWF vs. HTML debate.

I go to get.webgl.org using Firefox 35.0.1 on a laptop with an Intel IGP and all I get is "Hmm. While your browser seems to support WebGL, it is disabled or unavailable. If possible, please ensure that you are running the latest drivers for your video card." Badgers, on the other hand, still plays perfectly.

In theory, I agree. But in practice, which "better, more secure platforms" for authoring and presenting vector animation on the web would you recommend? And how should we convince contributors to the aforementioned sites to remake their works using the new tech?

"Forcing" in what way? For me, only recently did Firefox start allowing the HTML5 player for videos that roll ads.

Probably because partner videos and claimed videos tend to use Flash even on PCs set to use HTML5.

Without Flash, what's the preferred way to deploy vector animations of the sort seen on Homestar Runner, Weebl's Stuff, Newgrounds, Dagobah, and Albino Blacksheep, without bloating them by a factor of 10 by rendering them to WebM?

That depends. Do you live in a country where Google's Music Key service is available?

Slashdot uses HTTPS for subscribers.

As for non-subscribers: Using HTTP advertisements in an HTTPS page won't work due to browsers' mixed content policy. This means Slashdot's HTTPS support is unlikely to be extended to non-subscribers until more major ad networks support HTTPS.