4 ms·

>If a web page requires 10 javascript files, the web browser needs to retrieve those 10 files before the page can finish loading. The author is _this close_ to

>If a web page requires 10 javascript files, the web browser needs to retrieve those 10 files before the page can finish loading. The author is _this close_ to realizing the problem. But no, we need Google to save us and release HTTP versions at the same rythm as their chrome releases so they can keep pushing 4MB of Javascript to serve ads on a shitty full-js website that could have been static.

rswail 5y ago
Replace "javascript" with "img" and the same applies. Has nothing to do with your theory that this is all a secret plot by Google to sell ads. It's more about why is a TCP connection so "heavy" compared to a QUIC/UDP connection that is providing similar reliability guarantees?
- johncolanduoni 5y ago
  To be fair, this is 100% part of a not-so-secret plot by Google to sell ads more efficiently by making web browser connections faster.
- ohgodplsno 5y ago
  > Replace "javascript" with "img" and the same applies. Absolutely not, images can be completely loaded in an async manner. Sure, you might have some content jump (unless you do your job and specify the image size ahead of time), but your content is still there. >Has nothing to do with your theory that this is all a secret plot by Google to sell ads. It's everything but secret, in the same way that AMP was a plot by Google to sell ads. Everything Google does is in the interest of collecting data and selling ads. Not a single one of their products doesn't have this in mind.
  - Dylan16807 5y ago
    Images are part of content.
- goodpoint 5y ago
  > secret plot by Google to sell ads Not secret at all. Google developed a whole technological stack including a browser to do that.
  - unmole 5y ago
    IETF QUIC is significantly different from gQUIC that Google developed. QUIC was standardized after a long period of discussions in an open forum. The primary author of the spec doesn't even work for Google anymore.

rswail 5y ago

Replace "javascript" with "img" and the same applies. Has nothing to do with your theory that this is all a secret plot by Google to sell ads. It's more about why is a TCP connection so "heavy" compared to a QUIC/UDP connection that is providing similar reliability guarantees?

johncolanduoni 5y ago
To be fair, this is 100% part of a not-so-secret plot by Google to sell ads more efficiently by making web browser connections faster.
ohgodplsno 5y ago
> Replace "javascript" with "img" and the same applies. Absolutely not, images can be completely loaded in an async manner. Sure, you might have some content jump (unless you do your job and specify the image size ahead of time), but your content is still there. >Has nothing to do with your theory that this is all a secret plot by Google to sell ads. It's everything but secret, in the same way that AMP was a plot by Google to sell ads. Everything Google does is in the interest of collecting data and selling ads. Not a single one of their products doesn't have this in mind.
- Dylan16807 5y ago
  Images are part of content.
goodpoint 5y ago
> secret plot by Google to sell ads Not secret at all. Google developed a whole technological stack including a browser to do that.
- unmole 5y ago
  IETF QUIC is significantly different from gQUIC that Google developed. QUIC was standardized after a long period of discussions in an open forum. The primary author of the spec doesn't even work for Google anymore.