Because most users think they need to be online just to read web documents, certain cellular companies in the US are raking in beaucoup bucks. Time is money, but I'd rather spend four hours of my time once and then not have to spend it again the rest of the year rather than waste $400 a year on a data plan.

I never tried looking for it. I just tried five minutes ago, but it turns out that a randomly chosen article from Cracked.com doesn't appear to contain the word "print" at all. I guess what my homemade reader does is prepare (and cache) a printable version of new articles. I'm also aware of other sites such as Ars Technica that charge per year for access to printable versions.

I expressed my dissatisfaction with the site's lazy loading practice on the site's forum. But despite my best attempt at being thorough and polite, I got modded down.

My point is that if you don't buy any Ubisoft products, then there's no way for you to get F'd by Ubisoft's policy. It's not like Ubisoft is a platform gatekeeper or anything.

Or do you assume the rest of us have already redd it?

(See also the corrected submission.)

On this particular site, I would prefer the images to load when I load the page and the comments to load when I follow the "View Comments" link. So I spent some time writing an RSS reader that implements this behavior, transforming the attribute that the lazy loading engine uses into the src= attribute and dropping elements outside the main article. But I'm an edge case; most people won't have the expertise for that option.

You still have the ballot box. Vote against Ubisoft with your euros, dollars, or whatever: stop buying Ubisoft games. Buy games in the same genre from their competitors and email your purchases (and reasoning) to Ubisoft support.

If a GPU can decode ATSC from a software-defined radio, then by all means let it.

It's a video game. The Start screen appeared in Xbox 360 before Windows 8.

I understand what you're talking about. But on the sites I read daily, lazy loading happens at least an order of magnitude more often than interrupted HTTP connections. And scrolling to the end is problematic for two reasons. First, because placeholders are zero height, the page reflows after each image loads. And second, if I scroll too far, the comment widget loads on each page, which causes the machine to spend Internet bandwidth on downloading, and CPU time on laying out, comments from other readers rather than downloading and laying out other articles.

Think of it this way: If you were distributing software for home users, how would you recover the cost of making and testing updates to correct security vulnerabilities? I'm interested in what you'd recommend other than charging for updates after several years.

Google Images search for windows 10 continuum brings up images such as this one from this page. It looks like a small chunk of a Windows 8 Start screen and part of a Windows 7 Start menu put together. I'm assuming that the appearance of the new Continuum start menu didn't change when Microsoft removed the option to use full-screen Start screen.

A. Why ought they to continue to be?
B. Why is it?

In the present case, Slashdot's home country is in the wrong region.

Usually I look at the first screenful of a document to see it is overwhelmingly more likely than not to have loaded. For most sites that don't use lazy loading, viewing the favicon and snippet of the <title> element in the browser's tab bar is enough. Or are you claiming that I ought to read the entire document before I read the document?

You mean like Tumblr or Blogspot or LiveJournal or just about any other blogging platform?

I thought the biggest complaint about Twitter was sockpuppetry. See Twitter use thirteen different characters.

But how long have you been able to PUSH START TO RICH with Fortran?