5 ms·

This always seemed like the next logical step for me, and I'm surprised it wasn't implemented in various browsers earlier on.

by Drakim 15y ago

rplnt 15y ago
Probably because it has so many drawbacks. Disabling it by default is really bad decision if you ask me. Still a great feature though.
gcp 15y ago
Going off and fetching stuff that the user hasn't explicitly requested yet is icky. For example, you connect your laptop onto your employers network, and want to look up several things about face detection. You start typing "face" and each time Chrome goes off and fetches your Facebook page. You get fired for repeatedly visiting Facebook at work. Thanks, Chrome!
- Drakim 15y ago
  I can see your argument, but I'm having a hard time grasping the "Thanks, Chome!" comment as if they were the ones who fired you. Obviously if your workplace fires you for this they are in error for using inaccurate data.
  - gcp 15y ago
    What "inaccurate data"? You visited Facebook repeatedly, there's no arguing against that. You might not have wished to, but who's fault is that?
    - jonknee 15y ago
      You didn't visit Facebook repeatedly and if you get fired for that you have an excellent legal case. You're loading things from Facebook on a very high percentage of websites, so if you were really going to get fired for HTTP requests to Facebook, it would have already happened a long time ago.
      - jaredsohn 15y ago
        >you have an excellent legal case. Not if you're "at-will".
      - mc32 15y ago
        Not necessarily. If it's a portable device, they may be able to take it home (practically the default, if you're issued a laptop). Employer at that point (in the home) cannot prevent you from visiting any such site as you're doing it on your time. I suppose they could have a clause preventing you from visiting FB (or any other site) at any time from a work-provided device, but that's unlikely.
GFischer 15y ago
There were various Firefox plugins that implemented something like that, and they've been heavily criticized for the additional cost to the websites. One I used was called Fasterfox. "Prefetching is considered an aggressive practice when it's initiated by the client, and plug-ins like Fasterfox have been widely criticized for supporting it" http://books.google.com.uy/books?id=DyVgAez6yg8C&pg=PA296&lpg=PA296&dq=fasterfox+criticism&source=bl&ots=n2arp5etMs&sig=XTHJ6_f-sXpYO_GX7s5k9THtRWw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=O7szT56nGeX40gGn2uzDAg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=fasterfox%20criticism&f=false http://books.google.com.uy/books?id=DyVgAez6yg8C&pg=PA29...
- finnw 15y ago
  There is also a local proxy server (cannot remember the name but it has been around since the late 90s) that can do the same for any browser. Last time I looked at it, it was not intelligent and would preload every .html link on the page, plus any .css or .js they referred to.

This always seemed like the next logical step for me, and I'm surprised it wasn't implemented in various browsers earlier on.

by Drakim 15y ago

This always seemed like the next logical step for me, and I'm surprised it wasn't implemented in various browsers earlier on.

rplnt 15y ago

Probably because it has so many drawbacks. Disabling it by default is really bad decision if you ask me. Still a great feature though.

gcp 15y ago

Going off and fetching stuff that the user hasn't explicitly requested yet is icky. For example, you connect your laptop onto your employers network, and want to look up several things about face detection. You start typing "face" and each time Chrome goes off and fetches your Facebook page. You get fired for repeatedly visiting Facebook at work. Thanks, Chrome!

Drakim 15y ago
I can see your argument, but I'm having a hard time grasping the "Thanks, Chome!" comment as if they were the ones who fired you. Obviously if your workplace fires you for this they are in error for using inaccurate data.
- gcp 15y ago
  What "inaccurate data"? You visited Facebook repeatedly, there's no arguing against that. You might not have wished to, but who's fault is that?
  - jonknee 15y ago
    You didn't visit Facebook repeatedly and if you get fired for that you have an excellent legal case. You're loading things from Facebook on a very high percentage of websites, so if you were really going to get fired for HTTP requests to Facebook, it would have already happened a long time ago.
    - jaredsohn 15y ago
      >you have an excellent legal case. Not if you're "at-will".
    - mc32 15y ago
      Not necessarily. If it's a portable device, they may be able to take it home (practically the default, if you're issued a laptop). Employer at that point (in the home) cannot prevent you from visiting any such site as you're doing it on your time. I suppose they could have a clause preventing you from visiting FB (or any other site) at any time from a work-provided device, but that's unlikely.

GFischer 15y ago

There were various Firefox plugins that implemented something like that, and they've been heavily criticized for the additional cost to the websites. One I used was called Fasterfox. "Prefetching is considered an aggressive practice when it's initiated by the client, and plug-ins like Fasterfox have been widely criticized for supporting it" http://books.google.com.uy/books?id=DyVgAez6yg8C&pg=PA296&lpg=PA296&dq=fasterfox+criticism&source=bl&ots=n2arp5etMs&sig=XTHJ6_f-sXpYO_GX7s5k9THtRWw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=O7szT56nGeX40gGn2uzDAg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=fasterfox%20criticism&f=false http://books.google.com.uy/books?id=DyVgAez6yg8C&pg=PA29...

finnw 15y ago
There is also a local proxy server (cannot remember the name but it has been around since the late 90s) that can do the same for any browser. Last time I looked at it, it was not intelligent and would preload every .html link on the page, plus any .css or .js they referred to.