3 ms·
1) Many websites are not news sites. In fact, I'd guess the vast majority. So this point doesn't feel relevant. 2) Sometimes things might be useful to people o
by notJim 6y ago
1) Many websites are not news sites. In fact, I'd guess the vast majority. So this point doesn't feel relevant.
2) Sometimes things might be useful to people other than you. The world doesn't exist to cater to your needs, and referring to things that aren't exactly what you want as cancerous is childish.
- Aeolun 6y agoIn response to your second point, please tell me who benefits from the 20mb of cruft loaded when accessing the page? Aside from the marketing monkeys that put it all there in the first place?
- jimmaswell 6y agoThe reader who gets to read the page for free in exchange for that marketing cruft being there.
- jevgeni 6y agoPer definition the reader gets less value than the marketing monkeys.
- arcturus17 6y agoBecause you should be comparing the aggregate of all readers versus the content publisher. Also, what’s with calling people monkeys? I’m sure many coders here produce stuff that is as questionable in value as what ad executives do. People need to put food on the table and it’s abhorrent to think of yourself better than an another person because you build data pipelines in Scala that the universe doesn’t give a shit about.
- jimmaswell 6y agoBoth sides of a transaction value the thing they get more than the thing they give.
- notJim 6y agoAnd the writers and editors and other staff members whose salaries are paid by that stuff.