i100.independent.co.uk is a fine example of a website which looks as if it ought to be half decent but is in fact completely and utterly shite.

It is run by The Independent newspaper, and it seems to contain potentially interesting articles about science and stuff. For instance, the inspiration of this rant was a tweet of theirs linking to an article about the Higgs boson. So I visited the link. Unfortunately, I am still entirely in the dark about whatever they had to say about the Higgs boson.


What it does do is this: it loads the following pointless shite, whose very existence is testament to the total incompetence of its so-called "designer":

<!DOCTYPE html> <html> <head> <meta http-equiv="refresh" content="1; ?js=false"> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, minimal-ui"> </head> <script> if(navigator.cookieEnabled){ var width = (window.innerWidth > 0) ? window.innerWidth : screen.width; var height = (window.innerHeight > 0) ? window.innerHeight : screen.height; document.cookie = "viewport_width=" + Math.min(width, height); document.location.reload(true); } else{ document.location.search = '?c=false'; } </script> <body> <!-- Browser feature check--> </body> </html>

Packet capture of attempt to visit i100.independent.co.uk website
Packet capture of attempt to visit i100.independent.co.uk website

And then having done that, it... loads the fucking shit again. And again. And again. Endlessly. That's all it ever fucking does. Actual content? Never fucking see it. Just an infinite loop reloading content-free dysfunctional bollocks that shouldn't even fucking exist.

"Browser feature check", for fuck's sake. You DON'T NEED a fucking "browser feature check". You just use standard features that you don't have to fucking worry about whether they're supported or not. Oh, so that means you can't do some bit of fancy-arsed crap? How my heart fucking bleeds for you. You'll just have to not bother doing it, then. And the website will be all the better for it.

Look at this very page. Does it have a "browser feature check"? Does it fuck. Does it work on your browser? Of course it fucking does. What is on it? Text and images, described by static HTML. What more does a webpage to describe the latest on the Higgs boson need? FUCK NOTHING.

And even worse than having a "browser feature check" at all is having one that DOESN'T FUCKING WORK. Fucksake you stupid cunting morons. If you had the brains God gave bastard geese in China you'd at least make sure that the worst-case consequence of having this pointless and unnecessary shite does not involve buggering anything up. You'd certainly make sure that there was no possible way in which it could fail so as to prevent the fucking content loading at all. But then if you had the brains God gave bastard geese in China you wouldn't put this stupid shite there in the first place.

Eventual result of attempting to visit i100.independent.co.uk website
Eventual result of attempting to visit i100.independent.co.uk website

I left a tab open attempting to load i100.independent.co.uk, not that I thought it would magically start working, but simply in the admittedly faint hope that the resulting spam in their server logs would be more effective in calling their attention to the problem than telling them about it by replying to their tweet (which they ignore) or hoping that they come across this page (which they more than likely won't). Chances are of course that having been sufficiently stupid to create this dysfunctional bollocks in the first place they will also be too stupid to realise that they are getting those log entries because it is dysfunctional bollocks. Still, it doesn't cost me anything so it's worth a shot. After it had been going for a few hours it returned a 503, so there may be another faint hope that that might raise an alert and draw their attention to it. Though I admit I'll probably see the moon flashing pink first.

I suppose the one possible consolation may be that if The Independent are so fucking unaware of how incompetent and useless their website "designers" are and so unmotivated to fire them for their total incompetence, it may indicate an ignorance of technical matters in general which results in their science writers turning out to be just as shit, in which case their site wouldn't be worth reading anyway. I don't know, of course, because it won't fucking load. But at least I can make myself feel better by thinking it.

Back to Crap Stuff

Back to Pigeon's Nest

Be kind to pigeons

Valid HTML 4.01!