Honestly it just seems like a beginner's weekend idea rather than something useful. If I squint, I can almost pretend I'm insulted that my browser/Javascript h

Honestly it just seems like a beginner's weekend idea rather than something useful. If I squint, I can almost pretend I'm insulted that my browser/Javascript had to render the Markdown instead of their server doing it. I can't see how their infrastructure is making any real savings by doing this. There are usually more reasons to just cache the HTML next to the input Markdown. e.g. You can then make money breaking changes to the transformation without breaking old posts. Not to mention it now kinda pointlessly needs Javascript to do something trivial. Unlike what seems to be the prevailing opinion on HN, I'm quite pro-Javascript and pro-SPA. I never saw the need to damn webpages to server-rendered HTML just because it's the only client/server system with the quirk of being able to send markup from the server. But this sending Markdown over the wire with a 24kB Markdown script + `<script>$('post').markdown()</script>` is just cheeky. ;) Does it really matter though? Nah.