4 ms·
I just loaded up a nytimes[1] article too - and only weighed in at 1.0MB. For a 1000 word article. Subsequent reloads dropped it to ~1000KB. I don't think that'
by yathern 8y ago
I just loaded up a nytimes[1] article too - and only weighed in at 1.0MB. For a 1000 word article. Subsequent reloads dropped it to ~1000KB. I don't think that's too bad, considering there are images in there as well.
Now of course, I'm running an ad blocker. I assume the remaining MB that you noticed had come from advertising sources. In which case, bloat isn't the issue, ads are.
[1] - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/31/us/politics/facebook-political-campaign-midterms.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/31/us/politics/facebook-poli...
- cheezymoogle 8y agoAre you also running noscript? I'm running a DNS sinkhole and still get 3mb on reloads.
- iforgotpassword 8y agoThat distinction is nonsense. The ads are part of the page and are no more or less bloat then the rest of the useless junk that gets embedded. It's deliberately put there by the NY times, they don't end up there by accident.
- rhizome 8y agoweighed in at 1.0MB. For a 1000 word article. Subsequent reloads dropped it to ~1000KB. You really can't beat savings like that.
- welly 8y agoThat'll knock dollars... no, cents... no half-cents off his ISP bill!