Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The 49MB web page

thatshubham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 389 posts

Re: The 49MB web page

#351

Post by jmye »

sublinear wrote: post #210
jmye wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose I understand why devs who don’t know how to say no, or work with stakeholders, are terrified of AI. What value do you have, at this point, when you’re unwilling to or incapable of pushing back on bad ideas?

You'd have to define a "bad idea" much more precisely and in the context of that particular business. Developers often do push back and warn against ideas that have too many compromises, but cannot outright say no just because of that. There are too many other people involved. You seem to think that any one person/group has/wants/should have full control when deemed necessary. That doesn't make sense unless either th…

* I want to be clear, I'm using "you" in the general sense - apologies if it reads as accusatory.

If you lack the ability to say no to objectively bad ideas, you have very little value as a developer. Anyone can code a feature just because someone said to code it (Claude builds trivial objects for me every day when I know what I want but can't remember the specific syntax or pattern to do it). It takes actual skill and expertise to both recognize bad ideas, and convince people they're bad ideas.

> You seem to think that any one person/group has/wants/should have full control when deemed necessary.

No, I think subject matter experts should function as experts and should have decision-making power within their scope of expertise - if they're unable to convince others, then they are ineffective and should be replaced by SMEs who are effective.

I don't understand why you think a committee approach and implementation of bad ideas, regardless of what the experts in the room think, is an optimal business pattern.

Re: The 49MB web page

#352

Post by drnick1 »

int_19h wrote: post #251
drnick1 wrote: post #123

It's almost criminal that the article does not mention network-wide DNS blocklists as an obvious solution to this problem. I stop nearly 100% of ads in their tracks using the Hagezi ultimate list, and run uBlock on desktop for cosmetic filtering and YouTube. I should really run some to tests to figure out how much lighter the load on my link is thanks to the filter. I also manually added some additional domains (most…

It does indeed work pretty well today, but they have already developed ways to circumvent it. For example, serving ads from the same domain as the main page.

AFAIK, YouTube has been doing that for years and uBlock has consistently adapted. It's also easier for Google to do that since it owns the ad network and doesn't need to verify ad prints are legitimate and not inflated by the third party that displays them.

Re: The 49MB web page

#354

Post by albedoa »

sayamqazi wrote: post #214
albedoa wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Let’s demand to reimplement every single standard widget in a way that has 50% odds of being accessible, has bugs, doesn’t work correctly with autofill most of the time, and adds 600kB of code per widget. You're describing the web developers again. (Or, if UX has the power to demand this from software engineering, then the problem is not the UX designers.)

I as a developer cannot refuse to not build as-is what was signed off by product manager in figma. Recently had to put so many huge blurs that there was screen tearing like effect whenver you srcolled a table. AND No i was not allowed to use prebake-blurs because they wouldnt resize "responsively"

Yes. If the UX group has the power to compel you to do what you describe through a PM, without any involvement from or consideration for the warnings of you or your managers, then the problem is not "UX dEsIgNeRs".

Re: The 49MB web page

#355

Post by reaperducer »

jkestner wrote: post #72
Aurornis wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Surely news outlets like the NYT must realize that savvy web surfers like yours truly when encountering "difficult" news sites—those behind firewalls and or with megabytes of JavaScript bloat—will just go elsewhere or load pages without JavaScript. They know this. They also know that web surfers like you would never actually buy a subscription and you have an ad blocker running to deny any revenue generation opport…

> They also know that web surfers like you would never actually buy a subscription I subscribe, and yet they still bombard me with ads. Fuck that. One reason I don’t use apps is that I can’t block ads.

I subscribe, and yet they still bombard me with ads. Fuck that.

Dead trees FTW.

I'm lucky enough to live somewhere that gets dead trees for NYT, WSJ, local rag, and more. I value news, so I pay for it, and it's still less than I spend on coffee each month.

The best part: The newspaper ends. No everscroll zombie addiction.

Re: The 49MB web page

#356

Post by reaperducer »

hilbert42 wrote: post #127
appreciatorBus wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Surely news outlets like the NYT must realize that savvy web surfers like yours truly when encountering "difficult" news sites—those behind firewalls and or with megabytes of JavaScript bloat—will just go elsewhere or load pages without JavaScript. No. "savvy" web surfers are a rounding error in global audience terms. Vast majorities of web users, whether paying subscribers to a site like NYT or not, have no idea w…

"…but no one at the NYT is losing any sleep over people like us." Likely not, but they are over their lost revenues. The profitability of newspapers and magazines has been slashed to ribbons over the past couple of decades and internet revenues hardly nudge the graphs. Internet beneficiaries are all new players, Google et al.

Likely not, but they are over their lost revenues.

NYT's revenue and subscription base are both increasing quite well.

Ad revenue was up 20%, and profit was up 26% in Q4. Revenue was over $700,000,000. 12,300,000 people pay for the New York Times.

Re: The 49MB web page

#357

Post by Eisenstein »

WarmWash wrote: post #350
Eisenstein wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A business is not entitled to make people look at their ads. If they offer something in a publicly accessible place and they get ad eyeballs, good for them. If they don't, sucks for them. If they don't like it there are plenty of other markets they can do business in.

You're not entitled to any webpage except your own...

If they want to charge users with ad-blockers under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act for unauthorized access for viewing non-protected pages then they should do that. Otherwise, you are wrong.

Re: The 49MB web page

#358

Post by deepforest »

anthk wrote: post #120
PunchyHamster wrote: post #20

Our developers managed to run around 750MB per website open once. They have put in ticket with ops that the server is slow and could we look at it. So we looked. Every single video on a page with long video list pre-loaded a part of it. The single reason the site didn't ran like shit for them is coz office had direct fiber to out datacenter few blocks away. We really shouldn't allow web developers more than 128kbit o…

I used the text web ( https://text.npr.org and the like) thru Lyx. Also, Usenet, Gopher, Gemini, some 16 KBPS opus streams, everything under 2.7 KBPS when my phone data plan was throttled and I was using it in tethering mode. Tons of sites did work, but Gopher://magical.fish ran really fast. Bitlbee saved (and still saves) my ass with tons of the protocols available via IRC using nearly nil data to connect. Also you…

Thank you for very interesting post)

>I used the text web (https://text.npr.org and the like) thru Lyx

maybe you mean Linx or Links insted Lyx?

Re: The 49MB web page

#359

Post by gugod »

Bloated websites like this frustrated me especially when I have to use them from time to time. Oddly to me if they have never noticed donward trend of any engagement metrics, while removing any random section would seem to be helpful already.

Re: The 49MB web page

#360

Post by dzonga »

for anyone making sites - today don't be lazy - even if you need ads on your site there's a couple of server side setups which are just api calls and you just insert into the html without the javascript bloat

example 'sponsored listings' on amazon.

plenty of ad-networks that provide that 'native' experience

Post reply on HN