The problem is too much reliances on frameworks and add on libraries.

Developers will import an entire framework that for the benefit of a single feature. It's mind blowing to look at the amount of js includes for seemingly simple sites.

Stackoverflow answers that direct you to import a library or framework should be banned in most cases.

I will often have to scroll past several answers that say to import a library before finding a simple and functional answer that uses only a few lines of code down near the bottom. Which in my eyes is the real answer. I often wonder if there's a behind the scenes effort on SO to promote certain includes.

The entire ecosystem of some languages / implementations relies on this far too heavily.

We are seeing some of the consequences other than just bloated systems from this style of coding with malicious node packages.

Vanilla CSS is the other end of the spectrum, but the problem is there is apparently nothing between hand-crafted CSS and a full front-end framework. People, like me, who are not good at design will choose the convenience of the latter over going through the tedium of the former, even if we don't really want to.

There is no design in/for the web without html+css, is there?

Edit: by removing 3rd parties from your project you remove a lot of overhead and current and future risk. But be warned: Maybe your company sells exactly that for a good margin and you ruin the business model.

> There is no design in/for the web without html+css, is there?

Only as much as there's no programming without assembly language.

It is really sad that you are forced to do things that you believe you are not capable of doing and refuse to do.

When did I ever say I was not capable of doing it? It's really sad the way you push your mindset on others.

Maybe they are, but that bloat is just some static files that are sent to the user as far as the web server is concerned. They should have no practical impact on the battery life of the server.

There are JS sites that render on the server as well, but that's not the bloat you mean.

Sure, most clients may already be adequately provisioned, but only because so many websites with bloated Javascript have forced their hand...

...and if those static files make 100 API calls as soon as they land?

Of course it's hard to debate whether JS, Java or PHP is most inefficient in that regard.

Was here on HN several times, sadly still the case.

Keeping the Web simple keeps it awesome. "

Websites have become significantly more complex in the last two decades.

The “new” Reddit is also a good example. Even ignoring all the user-hostile functionality changes, the actual experience is still slower and less reliable.

Same for Twitter. Maybe it's intentional to move users into the app, where ads are more likely to be actually seen (e.g. Many web users have ad blockers) and in app purchases are frictionless.

I ended up going back to the official app which I think is nice, but also feel nice about financially supporting an indie developer who does a nice third party client for a (generally) awesome community.

Take for instance news sites or blogs: When I read news article, what I want is mostly (there are some great interactive infographics, but those are tiny minority) text and few images, that are static.

And it's not like that as a consumer I get anything extra. The text and images are still static, for the most part. Except that now its makes 20 separate requests to load it all up. Hell, pages are usually even less dynamic, after comments fell out of favor.

What increased is number of extra stuff, that is mostly focused on selling me stuff, tracking every metrics possible, and trying to figure out somne clickbait I would click next for extra engagement.

But that's not content, content has largely stayed the same.

I believe what's happening is a broader trend in the industry of building engineering playgrounds and doing engineering purely for engineering's sake to benefit one's career - a positive feedback loop where not participating puts developers at a disadvantage as they won't gain over-engineering skills that companies now require (they require them because their developers or managers want them for the same reason).

Browsing with js disabled is fast, pages load quickly, almost no trackers and there are "old" or "text" versions of sites still available... old.reddit, old.twitter or nitter instances...

Heck, even google has one...

To be honest, I just use dillo browser most of the time. Small, speedy and safer then most...

Edit: typo.

Reloading the page is like 20MB as well. Great when you’re tethered to your phone.

https://handmade.network/manifesto

CSS animations too , especially the ones that use infinite.

Without context, this statement is misleading at best and downright false at worst. You’re right that splitting up a single request into multiple would incur a small performance penalty, but you also generally gain other advantages like more localized caching and the ability to conditionally skip requests. In the long run, those advantages may actually make your app significantly more efficient. But without discussing details like this, it’s pointless to make wild assumptions about performance.

That said, if you ever actually profile things you will find the overhead per request is actually quite high. There is a clear tendency to request far to little data at a time.

Infinite scrolling could be annoying with animations though, I grant you that.