That reminds me of the thinking during the 90’s and early 00’s that everyone somehow must want 10 browser toolbars that spam them with ads all the time.
An example from the late 90s might be the idea that people wanted intro animations and music on web sites, heh.
However, when you're on YouTube you don't want the site to suggest videos you're not interested in (or Amazon, products).
When you're on a blog, you don't want "related articles" to list articles you've already read.
Etc. Etc.
I don't know if people want this--in part because they don't even realize these features exist--but I'm sure the opposite can be annoying.
It also depends how modern techniques are used, but arguining that we have to go back to static HTML because it's better doesn't make sense to me.
On the performance side, Hacker News still takes 100MB of memory in Chrome, so...
(clientside that is; serverside it would be dynamic but Chrome should not be bothered, it is, but that is another story)
In all seriousness, we need waaay fewer layers of dynamic abstraction than actually get employed to solve most problems.
People want and expect websites to be very close to web applications that react to who you are, what actions you take on the page and a myriad of other factors.
That's just not possible with static HTML.