There's also nothing wrong with wanting to know about it. So I applaud the creation of this extension.

Though he does go on to say:

> Ideally, the browsers "loading icon" should spin for those requests as well

On that point, I don't agree, since it would give the misleading appearance—at least to me—that the page wasn't even done with its initial rendering. But perhaps he is suggesting the standard loading icon should switch to a sort of unobtrusive network in/out indicator after the initial rendering. That I would like.

Author here.

> perhaps he is suggesting the standard loading icon should switch to a sort of unobtrusive network in/out indicator after the initial rendering

yes, that was what I implied, which is why I wrapped "\"loading icon\"" in quotes :) I agree though that the wording isn't very clear, my bad!

That's the attitude which leads to users who don't know anything, can't easily learn, and can be easily controlled and manipulated. Of course, that might be your intention, in which case my only appropriate reaction is "DO NOT WANT!"

It depends. There are situations when a user is heavily constrained by both data and charge (Amp hr) limits. In those situations, heavy background loading is a measurable source of headaches and annoyance.

And there is nothing wrong with blocking these transfers either.

It is the user's own computer and the user's own network subscription after all. User pays for these resources.

As for the software, users get to choose the software. They might prefer software that does not use so much bandwidth. And there's nothing wrong with that.