5 ms·
> It should use 5-50 megabytes of data per page load. Mandatory min of 5MB vs. current 10KB? I'm pretty sure I'm missing the logic here. I sometimes rely on a
by 18pfsmt 7y ago
> It should use 5-50 megabytes of data per page load.
Mandatory min of 5MB vs. current 10KB?
I'm pretty sure I'm missing the logic here. I sometimes rely on a satellite connection in my access, and I don't hold HN responsible for that fact.
I do agree that no anger is merited (nor sane).
- mikewhy 7y agoThe person you're replying to is most likely making a low-effort troll post on how large webapps tend to be now. Keep in mind that most of what's downloaded would be cached, and the response from an up / down vote would be considerably smaller than 10KB.
- snovv_crash 7y ago> would be cached For heavy users of the site, sure. For someone who has stopped by for the first time, well, good luck with customer acquisition is all I can say.
- madamelic 7y agoSomething tells me that YC isn't about acquiring users to have a unicorn exit of HackerNews.
- GoblinSlayer 7y agoShitting on users is bad no matter what site you make.
- thrwwyw3489 7y agoyou call it low-effort but in fact the person doesn't see it as obvious satire. It really does seem this is exactly how modern web app redesigns are done.
- lukas099 7y agoSarcasm
- 18pfsmt 7y agoNot only are we supposed to assume good faith comments on HN, reddit-type snark is looked down upon for a reason. Per HN guidelines, 'don't talk shit you wouldn't say in person.' There is so much ridiculous rhetoric on HN these days, satire is difficult to discern. Edit: Re-reading the original comment in its entirety, rather than focusing on numbers, I guess it's obvious satire. I naively assumed that's not the convention on HN.