That said, it would definitely be nice to see non-minified versions of code we run in our browsers available as open source by the company serving it. It's not like it's a secret, just a pain to actually try to decipher.
Sourcemaps are great.
Dead-code stripping is still useful but you can do that without obfuscating.
See http://www.fastcompany.com/1825005/how-one-second-could-cost... and other similar articles.
> After that it's loaded from the browser cache!
Unless the resource changes, the UA's cache is cleared, the file is served with incorrect caching headers, the cache expiry time specified in the resource header is reached, the resource is loaded by a UA that doesn't cache...
2) There are many, many people in the world today who access the internet through what is effectively a 2G connection.
3) "...at the cost of obfuscation and more difficult debugging."
3a) Sometimes obfuscation is a desirable side-effect.
3b) Javascript source maps exist for a reason.
4) "And If it's cached, witch all main-steam browsers does..."
4a) It's almost as if you ignored the majority of the last sentence in my previous comment. :)
I was going to say that clicking a link is supposed to be a natural thing to do, while installing software requires some degree of trust in who you are downloading it from.
for every obfuscated app there are 200 sites that explain in detail what you want to do. and another 200 open source versions to implement or learn from.
I learned JavaScript by viewing other peoples source code, witch was as easy as right clicking and selecting view source.
Unless we want more people to disable JavaScript, we need to keep it open source and transparent!