4 ms·
I'm finding it slightly ironic[0] that this site takes 162 MB RAM (according to hovering over the tab in chrome), scrolls incredibly slowly, and has hijacked th
by jawilson2 2y ago
I'm finding it slightly ironic[0] that this site takes 162 MB RAM (according to hovering over the tab in chrome), scrolls incredibly slowly, and has hijacked the right-click menu so I can't open links in a new tab.
I definitely agree with the content, though. I'm so glad I don't do webdev.
[0] I think this is actually correct usage of "ironic."
- MichaelZuo 2y agoYou could run Far Cry 1 on a 1920x1200p screen within 162 MB of RAM…
- Retr0id 2y agoMaybe I'm being saved by uBlock but I didn't notice any scroll hijacking or right-click interference. Edit: uBlock is blocking one analytics script and there are no other scripts on the page. Disabling uBlock doesn't seem to affect page behaviour.
- jawilson2 2y agoEntirely possible, I'm on a work-issued laptop and I can't install extensions, because raw-dogging the internet is safer than letting employees block ads.
- jeroenhd 2y agoI'm guessing you're on Edge if you're in that predicament; in that case you should check if you can set tracker blocking to "strict". It doesn't work completely like an ad blocker (it doesn't hide broken elements for instance) but that may block loads of unwanted content without needing permission to install addons.
- alwayslikethis 2y agoOn mine, it shows about 30 MB, which is less than this HN thread. I don't see the right-click hijacking either. Am I missing something?
- alpaca128 2y agoFirefox here reports 28MB RAM usage, it's very snappy and context menus work just fine, with or without adblocker enabled.
- Shadowed_ 2y agoFirefox 115, tab takes 9.3MB with adblock disabled and Enhanced Tracking protection also disabled. No problem with scrolling or right-clicking. Or any other kind of problem.