Hacker News Reader

Comment by susam | Hacker News Reader

How accurate is this list? I see it mentions that visiting https://danluu.com/ downloads only 9.1 kB but when I actually visit this website with Google Chrome, in the Developer Tools' Network tab, I see that a total of 21.7 kB is transferred.

  Name          Status  Type      Size
  ------------  ------  --------  --------
  danluu.com    200     document    2.5 kB
  analytics.js  200     script     18.9 kB
  collect       200     xhr          67 B
  favicon.ico   404     text/html   266 B

Shameless plug: I maintain a lightweight home page myself at https://susam.in/ and I try to keep it as lean as possible without compromising on some custom formatting I care about. So far I have got the transfer size down to less than 6 kB.

View on HN

Nice page. I only miss Firefox reader mode on these simple pages (for my preffered font size, and dark mode). I wonder if it's possible to hint to the browser that it should be available, even if the mark-up is simple?

Ah, the late 90s and early 00s when we still had user.css (in a meaningful sense).

There's a way to force reader mode. Add "about:reader?url=" before your URL.

Thank you. But no easy way to force the button/option to appear for visitors, as the author of the page?

If you just want the button on all websites, get firefox to privide that option for you. No need to push that onto websites.

There are vestiges of user.css like the Style sheet option in Safari. [1] I do wish they were better supported, and that user styles automatically had priority over webpage styles.

[1]: https://support.apple.com/guide/safari/advanced-ibrw1075/mac

6 kB fits in the initial congestion window (first round trip) for TCP. [1]

Does an analogous window exist for QUIC and HTTP/3?

[1]: https://hpbn.co/building-blocks-of-tcp/#cwnd-growth

> Initial congestion window: 10 segments (10 x 1460 bytes ~= 14kb)

Yes, my goal (very hard to do sometimes) is to fit all of HTML + Push CSS within 14kb

Are you not using an ad blocker? danluu.com has google-analytics, which is a very large script.

Please use uBlock Origin.

I don't think an ad blocker should be assumed when calculating the size of a web page.

It would depend on precisely what you're measuring. If you're concerned about page loading speeds, then resources that don't block rendering or functionality (like, I assume, a proper GA integration) might not be worth considering. But if you're worried about, say, bandwidth usage, then of course you'd want to count everything.

This is true, although any resources loaded introduce CPU overhead, which can be non-negligible, especially on mobile.

I do use uBlock Origin in general. However, I disabled it while verifying if the download size claimed in this post is accurate.

Ad blockers already don't work. They're largely useless. If you use one these days, you already know why.

I don't know why. Can you explain?

Because of the large and rapidly-increasing number of sites that just refuse to work if you are running an ad blocker, unless you manually disable it first.

I think I can count on my fingers the number of instances of this that I've seen in my many years of using an ad blocker, and I don't even remember the last time it happened. To claim that some tiny percentage of websites doing this makes ad blockers "useless" is completely ridiculous.

Can you link any site that doesn't work? It is easy enough to try and get past anti-adblock with uBlock Origin.

Try uBlock Origin. Don't use stuff like 'Adblock Plus/Pro'.

they are LARGELY useful... they do what they say on the tin, at least unless you visit some super agressive site which uses anti-adblock, but, then again you can conf up an anti-anti-adblock ;)

5c hint: a little bit of padding and max-width on your content would make it far more readable!

Your page looks very nice, I almost want to duplicate my own website into a format that's just a list of links and titles.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com