|
It seems that they're doing it in the interest of reducing bandwidth for mobile users in general, and mobile users with old devices in particular.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
They already have fairly lean pages. Maybe they could adopt the strategy of simply using clearer, more direct language. Hire a good editor who will pare down the wording to bite-sized offerings that can be more easily swallowed.
Or invest in improving bandwidth, subsidising bandwidth costs for low income earners? I'm just wondering if they are trying to save people money (pay-per-byte) or make cheaper phones feel faster. If the latter then they have a ways to go with their Lighthouse score.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
They've achieved a 5%+ improvement in speed in regards to startup, long methods and stuff. So something that took 100ms now takes 95ms. They've also removed 32K JS, and presumably added a little to rewrite some of the missing functionality.
When I pick a random page on the Gov.uk site (travel warnings) I see 864Kb downloaded, so that 32K saved is 4% give or take.
Every little bit counts. Absolutely. But these are not "amazing" numbers. They are progressive numbers.
Now: how much did that work cost, and if they surveyed their users, what improvement in the service did the users experience?
ie. What's their return on their investment?
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I guess a 5% reduction in bandwidth is good for mobile users (who may not all have unlimited data plans), but you gotta wonder - how many of them visit a uk.gov web site for any reason. I'm betting not that many...
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
The US Department of Justice says it won’t subject “good-faith security research” to charges under anti-hacking laws, acknowledging long-standing concerns around the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). I think I know what my next defense will be
|
|
|
|
|
The DoJ needs to push Congress to make this decision into Law. Otherwise the next President could reverse it.
|
|
|
|
|
It'll be a bit harder than that. The juicy quotes in the article are not something written by the current administration's justice department; they're from last year's 6-3 Supreme Court decision in Van Buren v. United States.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
|
|
|
|
|
This paragraph from the article makes my point very, very clear:
Quote: The new DOJ policy attempts to allay fears about the CFAA’s broad and ambiguous scope following a 2021 Supreme Court ruling that encouraged reading the law more narrowly. The ruling warned that government prosecutors’ earlier interpretation risked criminalizing a “breathtaking amount of commonplace computer activity,” laying out several hypothetical examples that the DOJ now promises it won’t prosecute. That change is paired with a safe harbor for researchers carrying out “good-faith testing, investigation, and/or correction of a security flaw or vulnerability.” The new rules take effect immediately, replacing old guidelines issued in 2014.
First, SCOTUS blew it by not simply ruling the entire Law unconstitutional as being so vague on what a cybercrime is so it violates the 4th Amendment's "no unreasonable" modifier for searches and seizures. Second, the fact that the DOJ has changed the interpretation twice on how this Law is to be enforced points to the fact that the next administration could change it again, making it impossible for anyone to actually comply with this Law.
|
|
|
|
|
no, saying you 5.10 when your 5.9 1/2 on your dating profile is a crime
|
|
|
|
|
The Google search engine collects data on users who think they can be anonymous if they use a “private browsing” mode They must be new here
|
|
|
|
|
Private? Like the Texas power grid? Is that what they really want? <\tongue-in-cheek  >
|
|
|
|
|
The process of writing a television show typically involves a writers room and a lot of time, as humans figure out the plot and the dialogue that makes a show work. Then they came for the screenwriters and I did nothing as I was waiting for the next season of Stargate
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Bringing scriptwriting AI to the Google enterprise
Wrong show! 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
unless the source script includes "Teal'c raises eyebrow", its not going to generate a good response.
|
|
|
|
|
We’ve recently started a multiyear initiative to help you write more performant code faster and deliver long-term stability and compatibility. "Come together, right now, over me"
|
|
|
|
|
How soon is Unity soon?
That's why I'd like to know!
|
|
|
|
|
No-code programming is shaping everything from gaming to website development, and soon it’ll have a role in machine-learning too. That's it then. Close up your IDE, we're out of business.
|
|
|
|
|
This would explain the lousy quality of web-sites.
|
|
|
|
|
With 30% of them being Wordpress (at least that’s the number I heard), I think you could be right.
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: how nonprogrammers are building more of the world’s software
And it ![Elephant | [mastadon]](https://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/Images/elephant.gif) ing shows!
The crap I have to repack and deploy... don't get me started.
|
|
|
|
|
I hope everyone realises we're the craftsmen and women of the 17th century, hand-carving chairs and tables with fancy inlays and clever, nail- and glue-free joins.
IKEA is coming for us all.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Security researchers have demonstrated a new Bluetooth relay attack that can remotely unlock and operate some Tesla vehicles. Beware of hackers running at you with batons?
Sorry - "relay attack". All I could think of.
"Bluetooth Special Interest Group (SIG), an industry group that oversees the development of the Bluetooth standard, which acknowledged the issue but said that relay attacks were a known problem with Bluetooth" <- good job, fellows!
|
|
|
|
|
SlashData's 2022 State of the Developer Nation report takes a look at what technologies are piquing the interest of the world's programmers. "But to me it seems quite clear that's it's all just a little bit of history repeating."
|
|
|
|
|
I never took Rust coding! I have a pending task with it...
|
|
|
|
|
This article is full of fluff - useless. I'll skip any ZDNet articles.
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
