Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: RS Wood Newsgroups: comp.misc Subject: Re: Blocking web ads is 'as bad as Napster', says data firm Date: 10 Sep 2014 18:12:35 GMT Lines: 22 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: randy@therandymon.com X-Trace: individual.net U7mmUThtEOAjBgFjjMFv1Ad9dFASRPTT5TXH5dmxoYyqoaNLvk Cancel-Lock: sha1:hG+GrUmETo7gZylt2D8ZB2S17z8= User-Agent: slrn/1.0.1 (Linux) Xref: csiph.com comp.misc:4802 On 2014-09-09, Michael Black wrote: > On Tue, 9 Sep 2014, +++ATH0 wrote: > >> Rich wrote: > Just think, 20 years ago, there was concern for making webpages that > were readable by all. Now nobody cares (unless you don't have a > mainstream browser) and virtually nobody is talking about the bloat. > Nobody notices the slowness of webpages because most people now are > paying for high speed internet, you really don't notice that a page > might be bloated when it loads in an instance. > > Michael When I made my first web pages in 2000, a better-informed friend taught me to keep them below 35kB including images, given the time it takes to download them. I'm wondering if there are any webpages left that clock in at fewer than 35kb. Not many, surely. The 'big' news sites are horrendous, with dozens of scripts, calls to 3rd party advert sites, trackers, and the like. Huffington Post has a code-to-content ratio of 100:1 for most news articles.