Trust corporate America to take something as simple as loading a text article into a digital “experience”. What the hell even is that? (Its marketing jargon for ads, I know). Talk about a circle jerk around the marketing table though.
There should be a name for that… experiencification? We get that in the UK too – where investors take an ordinary service and try to turn it into an ‘experience’ to justify charging more. Stuff like mini-golf where you literally just want to pay them to loan the gear and nothing more.
Enshittification, which is turning a free or reasonable cost thing into a money pit while also making the software worse to use.
Please sir, you aren’t enjoying your experience
I’m calling the cops, he’ll enjoy the experience.
i get shit like that frequently because scripts don’t run here unless whitelisted. usually either the content requires scripts to show itself, or blocked ads are blocking the rest of the page load, or both.
it’s at this point where i scoop-up the headline and drag it over to the ddg search box in the browser toolbar and find a different source. there almost always is.
I’m terrified of the day that some company starts partly copying articles and changing key details after the first plagiarized paragraph. I will be royally fucked when that day comes
Isn’t that why people stopped using archive.is and co?
The experience is detecting your ad blocker and filling your page with a dickover.
Jim has to put his pants on please wait a second
You’re experiencing late stage capitalism. Thank an oligarch today!!
I demand we bring back the little construction worker gif for these scenarios.
I seriously and unironically believe whatever web developer has the gall, the temerity to imply that a news article in plain fucking text is an “Experience™”, and then fuck up loading that plain text, something webpages have been able to do flawlessly since the invention of the web, should be taken out back and shot.
It’s kind of your problem if your connection can’t handle 14 GB of trackers and ads, pleb.
Web developer here. Theres no say for us in this matter, best-case a tech lead says its not supported by the current tech-stack, but in any other case its management and marketing that decides what features get added to the site, we just build it.
Best we can do to fight back is make the experience terrible for users or even better just unprofitable.
Your disgust is valid. But the developer generally has no gall, and no agency. The corporation tells them to pack and monetize the clickthroughs like feeding puppies into a sausage machine. The developer never thought that would be the job.
In fact, every time you don’t see something like this, it’s because some developer said, “Enough, I won’t do this,” putting their job (and their next rent payment) on the line. I lost two jobs that way.
Don’t let them divide us. The fascist oligarchs are the villains.
Being fapped at. That is the experience
Seems like everyone else missed what the article was.
ads
link to article the little bit i see there seems intresting
Reader mode is a godsend for this crap.
Google’s AMP was supposed to stop this, but they never could get around the conflict of interest between “our search engine experience is improved by prioritizing fast loading results” and “our ad business needs websites to carry a ton of ads,” ended up carving in enough exceptions and an anti-AMP backlash that they pretty much walked away from the whole thing.
Google? Walking away from a project it starts? Who could have seen this.
Anyways good riddance let’s all walk away from Google 👍
AMP could have been that, but the greedy bastards at google had to make it about themselves and tried to forcibly host/steal the content from everyone else. Also it forcibly added a banner ad for google on every AMP page.
AMP was two different things.
- Google defined a standard that was an approved subset of html/css/js designed to load quickly on mobile screens, with none of the extra cruft that slows down sites as experienced by phone users.
- Google also agreed to host AMP-compliant pages on their own ultra-fast servers. Many smaller sites, especially local news stations and local newspapers, agreed to offload the extra work by allowing Google to host their content. Those hosted pages had a whole system of referring back to the canonical URL on the actual outlet’s own website (and the desktop version of the page), and had little things referring to the AMP project.
I was 100% on board with #1, but #2 was controversial and created a lot of the conflicts of interest that tore the whole thing apart. Google spun off the AMP project as an open governance model, and then it was taken over by the OpenJS foundation.
In the end, the performance gap between mobile devices and desktops narrowed, and at this point most people’s phones and mobile browsers can load pages just as quickly as a laptop, so the purpose of the project itself is less important to the actual web as it exists today.
The NBC logo kinda looks like the final outcome of the passengers “experience”.
Now bend over for your “s’experience” and like it.
Probably downloading couple of megabytes of JS in the BG to track you and serve you more targeted ads. Or could be some kind of anti-bot, human verification thing.
