[dimmke]

Seriously. When I look at the modern state of front-end development, it's actually fucking bonkers to me. Stuff like Lighthouse has caused people to reach for optimizations that are completely absurd.

This might make an arbitrary number go up in test suites, at the cost of massively increasing build complexity and reducing ease of working on the project all for very minimal if any improvement for the hypothetical end user (who will be subject to much greater forces out of the developer's control like their network speed)

I see so much stuff like this, then regularly see websites that are riddled with what I would consider to be very basic user interface and state management errors. It's absolutely infuriating.

[rglover]

Yup. Give people a number or stat to obsess over and they'll obsess over it (while ignoring the more meaningful work like stability and fixing real, user-facing bugs).

Over-obsession with KPIs/arbitrary numbers is one of the side-effects of managerial culture that badly needs to die.

[mediumsmart]

It’s just a few meaningful numbers like 0 accessibility errors, A+ for the securityheaders, flawless result on webkolls 5july net plus below 1 second loading time on pagespeed mobile. Once that has been achieved obsessing over stabilizing a flaky bloat pudding while patching over bugs aka features that annoy any user will have died.

[stevenpotts]

I know... to be fair, I did test this for my use cases on older phones with throttled slower connections and it did improve the UX but I get what you're saying, I think it also depends on your target audience, who cares if your site is poorly graded by Lighthouse if your user base has high end devices in places with great internet? not even google cares since the Core Web Vitals show up in green