It'll just be an excuse for Chrome to use even more memory. I mean for heaven's sake! I just checked and Chrome is using 3GB of RAM. I've only got 18 tabs open, and none of them is the daily mail. OK, I just opened the daily mail website (out of sheer curiosity) and Chrome gobbled up 400MB of RAM! 400! for one crappy website. Mind you, Firefox uses the same.
My point is that if one website requires that much space, no wonder we have more and more RAM installed in a computer. 4GB is too low now. 8GB is 'normal' and 16GB is reserved for heavy workers, or even 32GB to cope with all eventualities. And to manage that much RAM we need faster and faster processors and faster hard disks to store it all when needed. The computer industry self-perpetuates this conveyor-belt of continuous speed improvements when it's probably not necessary a lot of the time. If we don't find some way of recycling the materials that go into tech, we won't be able to build it any longer. If we need nearly half a gig of RAM (and its associated processing) to display one web site, then we really are being wasteful. I just realised that it's probably the stupid ads more than the website content itself.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
