dread
Ethan MarcotteYou’d think “it’s easier for many phones to render PUBG than modern websites” would be an industry-wide wake-up call, but. https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/modern-web-bloat-means-some-entry-level-phones-cant-run-simple-web-pages-and-load-times-are-high-for-pcs-some-sites-run-worse-than-pubg
Florian Schroiff 
@beep luckily Tom’s Hardware only clocks in at 13,5mb on a desktop browser.
medium rare bird@beep but actually this is working as intended so it isn't
nrk@beep this thing -> https://upstash.com/ consumes 50mb+ heap size on startup , to display a static landing page.
For youtube, it is consistently 100mb+, for google, it is again 50mb.
IAG
Jes - Hedgehog Edition @iagondiscord @nrk9819 @beep I can play Wii and PS2 games. I can play fortnite AND watch YouTube at the same time on 2 screens
Yet some websites take a while to load.
Yet some websites take a while to load.
<- 100% gay-flavored ฅ^•ﻌ•^ฅ@nrk9819 fyi, heap size ≠ amount of downloaded data to render the page
@mystie the argument is neither about data transferred either, it is about "performance" and "resource consumption", as related to the original post. I'm fully aware that heap size has nothing to do with files downloaded to render the page. But the gist of my comment remains the same, rendering a static page shouldn't consume 50mb+ heap memory. In a ideal scenario, a static page should be statically generated, not client rendered.
sarah tonin 
@SRAZKVT "static" means consisting of static files that can be pre-generated and served to the client without processing per request. Static in case of websites doesn't mean devoid of interactive/animated components like a slideshow.
FoolishOwl@beep I've been wrestling with the idea of setting up a personal website, mostly as an exercise in setting up a workflow with git and MkDocs and so on. And the more I'd try to imagine doing it, the less enthusiasm I have for it.
And right now I'm thinking, what's the point of trying to do it "professionally", when the "professional" model is just obviously extremely bad?
@beep In recent years I've been in a couple of socialist groups that over-rely on the same software tools and practices for supporting them that prevail in the tech industry. It's understandable, but I think it's important to understand that many of these tools and practices have assumptions about social structure built into them and it's important to question them.
@foolishowl My goodness, I regret I have but one star to give this *extremely good* post 🏆💕
There are so many unacknowledged biases built into the tools we use. We have to acknowledge them if we ever want to stop disenfranchising people.
Eliot Lash@foolishowl @beep Yeah, for my personal website I've been trying to make it less bloated. I used self-hosted WordPress for many years but got tired of the hosting costs going up and constant upgrades. A few years ago I migrated the whole thing to Jekyll/GitHub Pages and I've been pretty happy with this as the site is now static and hosting is free. I can't do anything beyond simple edits using my phone or support comments/ActivityPub, but overall it's worth it to me.
SeanAt one point I had a comments system running on a statically rendered Hugo site on GitHub pages, but Heroku, which I was using to power it, sunset their free tier. My immediate reaction was pleasure to not support comments any more.
CSDUMMI@foolishowl @beep don't be discouraged. The reason it's called bloat is because it is unnecessary for the site to function.
If you want a site that looks professional, it shouldn't and doesn't have to contain bloat.
Jawaka@csdummi @foolishowl @beep You could easily argue that if a site is bloated then it is the opposite of professional.
@foolishowl I absolutely hear you. Personally, I’d love to hear *why* someone might exercise thought and restraint with how they built their portfolio; but for the broader industry, the incentives feel pretty thoroughly broken.
(I hope you do make your personal website, though!)
@beep just remember that a lot of people only have access to dial up or DSL and that could take up to half an hour to load.
bimmer HAS MOVED@beep K.I.S.S. - the bane of execs, project owners, and UX designers across the board
Syphist 
@beep God, this is awful and sad.
Derrick Everett@beep There is no possible excuse for a web page to have content larger than 1 GByte. One factor in this situation is web designers going mad with javascript.
Tom Walker@beep This is very noticeable even on a standard recent (not low-end) phone if you switch between a 3D game and a web page: the game might get 60fps while the web page seems to be reaching about 5.
jake@beep I feel like the amount of ads on that site make this post drown in its own irony.
Lowlife's inane ramblings 🦜☠
Tony Yarusso@beep This very article had three different auto-playing videos, an animation, a comments section, and dozens of pictures for other articles and ads.
@TonyYarusso It may surprise you to learn that I, too, looked at that article before posting
Alexia 
@beep proud to say my blog is 3.5kb for the layout and CSS + 7.91kb for the Ko-Fi button, totaling 11,41kb
:)
Sun Microdevil Pte Ltd@beep Funny how if opened without an adblocker, this page loads over 24 MiB of data 
Yora@beep Some of us can remember the days when half the time taken when building a site was spent squeezing every last extra kilobyte out of the code and graphics. It's funny to think that it's nearly a quarter of a century since I escaped from the Web biz.
Tim Ward ⭐🇪🇺🔶 #FBPE@beep And of course that is a vast web page with multiple video advertisements ...
Sara Joy 
@beep there's a big old cloud of irony over this of course - but - I'm glad such a big famous old and also bloaty website is running a story like this. More awareness, yes yes.
@sarajw Same, on all fronts.
Charlie> "As the testing above shows, some of the most brutally intensive websites include ... and basically every major social media platform."
I take exception to that. Mastodon loads pretty damn quickly, and it's the only social media site _I_ use daily.
But yes, that article is pretty accurate, and most large players will respond "just use our mobile app instead" (with the unspoken part being 'so we can track and sell literally everything you do, visit, and say')
Max@beep I appreciate the additional layer of irony that this Tom’s Hardware article has like 30 MBs+ of advertising filling the page and scrolling too fast crashed my mobile safari tab. Not just telling this news but showing it by example.
Adam Beer (old account)@beep @flori @petelawler @TonyYarusso @TimWardCam @radpanda @sarajw @max
I dunno what y'all are talking about 
. For me this article's page downloads 839.11kB initially (of which 51.54kB is images—a lot less than I expected!), rising to 1.06MB in total once I scroll down and let everything lazy-load.
(cough #UBlockOrigin cough)
(cc @koakuma)
@beep After a bit of searching, Flarum seems like a great alternative. This page downloads 959.98kB on initial load (and roughly half of that is fonts that only get used for a few symbols). As I scroll down, there are two animated GIFs weighing in at over 2MB each, and if we subtract those, the entire 117-message page clocks in at 1.69MB.
John Harris@beep
Ha ha, ironically Tom's Hardware put a request to send me notifications at the bottom of that page, which I couldn't dismiss because of a hovering Kaiser Permanente ad over it that I also couldn't close.
@renkotsuban
Ha ha, ironically Tom's Hardware put a request to send me notifications at the bottom of that page, which I couldn't dismiss because of a hovering Kaiser Permanente ad over it that I also couldn't close.
@renkotsuban
R. L. Dane 
Normalize disabling JS JIT and WASM.