x1024

It wasn't really faster. The OP actually touched on that point, but let me repeat it without ambiguity:

An actual parser for the complex use-cases requires some custom code and isn't covered by what Kimono does.

What Kimono does can trivially be achieved by writing 15 lines of python (after importing httplib2 + BeautifulSoup). Which is even reusable.

The only real use-case they had was the visual interface, so that "non-programmers can do it. No code required, etc. etc." Heh. As if that ever did, or ever could work.

Because then it would seem that modern app developers are actually competent, and that's not the author's intent.

Looking at the other posts in the blog, it's definitely Go biased. Not that it's necessarily a bad thing.

But it's making some seriously tenuous assumptions about "modern app developers". It's almost "Goofus & Gallant" levels of hyperbole.

You say that, but much has changed in the past 10 years. If it truly were "up to enterprises", we wouldn't be using Git in the first place.

Oh, the classic "HR" response. "We're very busy here".

Well, if they truly have "more imporant things to do than address community ire", then this also means that they agree to take the community's ire.

Duh... who would take us? Have you seen us?

If we listen to you, it would seem that SC is both blameless, and - in fact - not in trouble at all.

And that's all fine and well. It sounds plausible. But it seems like every company is "blameless, and things are actually going peachy... but we still need more funding". And at that point the whole thing starts to become unraveled.

Yes, that's what we want to criticize.

Just like how we're now writing about Twitter's 'amazing turnaround' after only 10 years of losing money. Oh, wait...

And then they fall 40% in a single day. That's why it's called "bursting"

Companies that don't satisfy their investors' expectations... they often resort to moves of desperation. And those moves are more often than not anti-consumer and even anti-business.

Yeah, but they used "React.js, because we're cool, please think we're cool". Which is different from just "react.js".

Just look at how incompetently the site was redesigned: https://github.com/reddit/reddit-mobile/issues/247

45 seconds load time...

There's also the tiny buttons(obviously not mobile-first, even if it is a mobile-only redesign).

And of course, the poster child of "we are doing complex JS stuff, but still think that JS is for kids, so we didn't bother learning how to actually do it". I'm talking about the infamous "We built a single-page-app, but it doesn't always work right, and the back button is kind of broken, and it sometimes treats scrolling over a thing as clicking on that thing".

That sounds like just begging to be put on a list, though :)

Your logic involves quite a few jumps to conclusions that aren't remotely proven by the contents of the paper.

  function gs() { open http://www.google.com/search?q="$*" ;}

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10966210 "So difficult, definitely requires installing 100MB of libraries and package managers."

Are we still pretending that it's impossible to write portable shell code? Ok, then.

Maybe it is in the general case, but this... really isn't "the general case".

Why is this written in Go and not Shell? Why isn't this just one file?

Here is how such tools should really be done: https://github.com/rupa/z

I'm just sitting here - popcorn-in-the-microwave - waiting for those people to start a fuss about it.

Sadly, you are wrong. 4 years of computer usage is not nearly enough to be prepared to be a programmer.

Depends, do you want it to actually work?

That is true, but it doesn't mean they should be given a job they don't have the skills for. Or would you like to have "Affirmative Action" doctors?

Why would you think that? You believe there is less than 4 years of material in all of CS?

Every page weighs 4+MB, because the page-specific content on the page weighs more than 4MB. There's almost 1MB of "CSS + JS + HTML", but about 4MB of video.

It should "be optimized for mobile". 4MB per page is anything but. If you visit 100 pages per day, you'd need a 12GB data plan.

"This kills the 3G data plan". At least with "the optimized for mobile" version, preloading should not happen. And it definitely shouldn't happen twice for the same video.

Rule number 1: "Free" isn't.

And "Place a CDN in front of it" has been an available solution for... what, more than a decade?

If your site has meaningful traffic from multiple continents, you can spend the $10/mo it takes to add a CDN to it.

(The article said to "try any page from The Guardian with '/amp' to test its performance")

Oh my: http://tools.pingdom.com/fpt/#!/bniZiH/https://www.theguardi...

"Such mobile performance, wow". 4 megabytes of video(Preloading two different videos. Why?), maybe 10 different domains, downloading JS before downloading images...

And this is the showcase for AMP.

It's almost as if "there is no silver bullet" for web performance, and "actual programming skill" is still a requirement.

There is a difference between AMP and non-AMP, yes: http://tools.pingdom.com/fpt/#!/bAnV7C/https://www.theguardi...

But at this point in time, it seems that installing an ad blocker has about the same impact as "conceding to view a crippled AMP-redesign of the page that doesn't even have navigation".

Maybe, but at least the lack of "search" is critical.

If the callback were optional, the API call would've been completely fine IMHO.

Thank you. I did, in fact, misunderstand.