4 ms·
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
by 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 agoTo 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 agoImages 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 agoIETF 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.