So firstly, I agree - browsers should default to https not http if the protocol is not specified. It's a pain that they do http because it means I have to open

So firstly, I agree - browsers should default to https not http if the protocol is not specified. It's a pain that they do http because it means I have to open port 80 and issue a redirect. That in itself is no big deal, since I usually have port 80 open anyway (for LetsEncrypt support.) That said, you raise a point I see a lot - your site is too "plain" to need https. Personally I think this argument is outdated. The key issue with plain sites being HTTP is that -additional- content can be injected into them. In others people might be reading text, or seeing images, that are not what you built. Advertising, sure. ISPs have fine that, but that's the least problem. What about injecting a political endorsement? What about altering any links to include (not your) affiliate id? Once you start thinking about the value of HTTP sites in this way you start to appreciate the many ways unencrypted sites can be exploited. Back in the day "amateur" meant better (because the creator had time to do it right) not worse. Being "professional" was code for "you get what you pay for, no more than that". I encourage all "hobbyist" Web producers to embrace that, to make it excellent, rather than to simply treat it as a "waste of time".