I still test and validate my websites with Netscape 2.x and up.

Any Browser can be a reality.

If I had my billion dollars I would fund a modern intentionally crippled hypertext browser with hard limits on programmability and style complexity.

It sounds like you are describing Gemini. https://gemini.circumlunar.space/

Gemini is on the other extreme (except for requiring the crypto complexity that comes with TLS). I would prefer something that still lets people express themselves creatively like the early web did. Personally, I think even newer CSS is fine even if more complex than it could be if re-designed - the problem is mostly JS and million different APIs that come with that as well as the expectation that that the browser will be able to execute that JS insanely fast.

Some browsers you may want to try, which support only HTML and CSS:

Dillo

Links

NetSurf

Why not just bring back the 486?

A shame that you would waste your money on a browser that nobody would use.

I would. I already use FF mainly under a locked-down profile for mere reading. (I use another profile for madatory interactive sites like banking and stuff).

Others like me would. And resource-constrained devices. An eco-system of low-tech sites could emerge with a label signaling them as simple and virtuous.

So you basically want gemini? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemini_(protocol)

Interesting. But I meant only using a subset of current web stack, and insist on low resource.

The issue I have with Gemini is that it discards 25+ years of established domain knowledge and existing software for something which does not provide any additional functionality over what today's software already offers.