[tempguy9999]

I didn't complain, I asked why. It may well be down to my rather abrasive style, in which case I'd apologise and try to be less so next time.

Or it may be down to me being factually wrong, which I also need to know cos how else does one learn.

Or maybe someone doesn't like what I said which is very much another thing. But I wasn't complaining.

[CJefferson]

I didn't downvote you, but your post did annoy me. This is an interesting article about HTTP/2.

Yes, we know people should make smaller web pages with less javascript and ads, and we could all install a bunch of plugins to achieve that, but multiple replies like yours do seem to appear on every single post that has anything to do with network traffic, and don't really contribute (in my opinion) to the discussion at hand.

[tempguy9999]

> I didn't downvote you, but your post did annoy me. This is an interesting article about HTTP/2.

Thanks, that's a nice, constructive criticism and I appreciate it. My post was in retrospect not exactly a piece of precision, so let me try again if I may...

I recently worked on a "big data" project that wasn't. It was a car crash because the "big data" conponents were thrown together with a very expensive cluster (>£100,000) of machines. The end result crawled because the lead programmer didn't gave a clue. I am pretty sure I could have got minimum 100X the performance for ~5% of the price.

When I'm asked to optimise something (a common request) I first ask, is this doing the right thing - is this really a technical problem at all? Can we just not do it? Followed by, what are you doing that makes this so much less than the theoretical max performance?

(Edit: the point was the big data components (apache spark, mesos etc) weren't necessary because we didn't have big data at all, and performance was dire because he didn't know how to use those components)

What we have here is a social problem of web devs simply not understanding their job, combined with the problem of advertisers who I loathe but seem to be a product of many user's desire to not pay a single penny upfront. Both of these are non-tech problems. This article is pushing a tech solution, but should it, really?

I don't think being abrasive was a good move by me, but you say "...should make smaller web pages with less javascript and ads [and my post doesn't]really contribute (in my opinion) to the discussion at hand" but I think it does. I think it central, actually. Or what problem is this new protocol solving?

[CJefferson]

The protocol is solving a real world problem. They are trying to apply a technological solution to a real world problem.

Many problems could be solved if we could just make every Web developer and company in the whole world take size / data security / accessibility more seriously, but human history suggests that ain't happening, without in practice introducing laws.

[jandrese]

Or someone just didn't like your comment and downvoted it. There's no test you have to pass to be a moderator. Nobody comes back later and checks your work. Some people may even have agendas with their voting.

Downvotes are inevitable when you start making comments regularly, don't worry about them too much. It's all fake Internet points in the end.

[tempguy9999]

Yep, there's a bit of fishiness going on here, it's not just my stuff that's being consistently getting downvotes.

I guess I'm being that guy who just won't let things go, so thanks for the reminder to chill out, upvoted!