> a few extra ms of latency on a request That's not what it is, though. The graph embedded in the article shows HTTP/3 delivering content 1.5x-2x faster than

> a few extra ms of latency on a request That's not what it is, though. The graph embedded in the article shows HTTP/3 delivering content 1.5x-2x faster than HTTP/2, with differences in the hundreds of ms. Sure, that's not latency, but consider that HTTP/3 can do fewer round-trips. RTs are often what kill you. Whether or not this is a good trade off for the negatives you mention is still arguable, but you seem to be unfairly minimizing HTTP/3's benefits.