Do you agree? >Unfortunately too many websites (and especially

>>57817220
Not a whole lot to disagree with. Web a shit in 2007+x

>>57817220
That's because 'webdevs' are stupid people

>>57817220
Why is Pale Moon designed for shitty PCs yet doesn't support XP?

You'd agree if you'd ever tried to use an alternate browser. You get every website telling you that your browser is out of date and they just shut down parts or the entirety of their website.
Government sites are big offenders here too.

This is all just the new breed of "This site works best with Netscape!"

Normies ruined the Internet like they ruin most things.

The Internet was meant to be anonymous but now Normies have 200+ photos of their lives and every single fucking website requires full name, dob, phone number, country of origin etc. to register when email is all you need for functionality.

It was supposed to be about the flow of information, but now it's about scripts, pop ups and adverts to manipulate the normie's brain and keep them engaged with HEAVY, but 'user-friendly' interface.

So why the fuck would they cater to your Pale Moon when you are just irrelevant in the sea of normies?

Their philosophy might be ads, data mining, profit - but it's not fucking inclusive functionality.

Things assuming things because of a certain unrelated thing rustles my jimmies. Like a site assuming I don't have javascript because I'm blocking their fucking ads. This shit is fucking terrible.

>>57817964
There are actually sites that do that?

>>57817513
/thread

The cause for the useragent switch is bad, but having the Firefox useragent is just as well because it means blending in by default.