[LINK] Democrats launch anti-filtering site

[Craig Sanders]

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 09:23:35AM +0930, Glen Turner wrote:
> When the web was brouchure-ware I was in full agreement. But these days
> websites are more about two-way communication, and that leads to every
> page being customised for the viewer.  A good example would be the old
> static pages that used to contain comparisons of ISPs versus today's
> Whirlpool forums.

[ and Stil made pretty much the same point ]

yes, that's true. however, it's also true that most "pages" still
contain many common (and thus cachable) elements, including images, css
stylesheets, javascript, and so on. unfortunately, the kind of cretins
who think that cache-busting is a good idea are typically too ignorant
to exclude these cachable elements....even though it's easy to do.

> Having written that, websites that chop articles into "pages", try and
> download IMR's tracking software to my PC, hang whilst Google Analytics
> does its thing, or write web pages which can't be rendered until the last
> byte of HTML is parsed annoy the heck out of me.  Circling back to my point,
> that annoyance is because of the lessened user experience, not because of
> the number of bytes involved.

yep, paged articles annoy the hell out of me too - mostly because of the
delays involved in having to click and wait for every "page". some sites
have a "view as one page" button. and others have a "print" option which
can be used for that. i tend to just ignore sites that don't do that,
and only visit them very briefly if an interesting article is linked to
from somewhere else.


google analytics? no problem - mark as untrusted with NoScript. ditto
for IMR and other unwanted click-tracking spyware. they'll never bother
you again.


craig

-- 
craig sanders <cas at taz.net.au>