Sure the generally accepted 'right way' is constantly evolving, but progress is a always a good thing. I'm not sure about your other points, I see no reason wh

Sure the generally accepted 'right way' is constantly evolving, but progress is a always a good thing. I'm not sure about your other points, I see no reason why a responsive site should be 2x heaver in file size than its non-responsive equivalent, after all it's only a few more bytes of CSS. The increase you're seeing is probably more to do with large JS libraries and in the case of the linked article, many large images.