With the site's own CSS :
Without the site's own CSS :
Which, in your own estimation, is the better deal ?i
Both get the same 1280x768 viewport. The web 2.0 version manages to get three lines in there. The sane version gets five. The web 2.0 version elides the status, method and protocol. Because the less information you get the better, right ?
That's what web 2.0 really is all about, isn't it ? Making stupid people feel less inadequate for their stupidity, making the clueless less capable to notice their cluelessness. Making everything "feel" better and appear "nicer", right ?
Now go away.———
It's been there for half a decade, that link. They can't quite bring themselves to out and say it, "We've made this look retarded because we're whores for peer pressure. If you'd still like a page that doesn't utterly suck, click here. Sorry we're such pussies, please still like us anyway!", but you know that's exactly what it is.
* Oh, yeah, I forgot to mention : web 2.0 destroys an acre of virgin forest every time you click on some retarded gawker "media property", to pay for all the extra CPU cycles needed. [↩]