An anonymous reader writes "The world has an every increasing amount of cached content. Using this content are power-sipping devices partially gimped by their hungry WiFi and 3G/4G chipsets. These devices also use flash memory, which many times is slow and / or has limited reads / writes. These comments on a scale of quantity are harming us due to illogical standards on the web.
OperaMini and other cached content browsers take pride in being fast and efficient. Data is expensive, and yet we increase our consumption for no reason by downloading CSS, JS, and HTML comments. This content is cached by many services including Archive.org, Google Cache, and even CloudFlare. The kicker is that there is no reason outside of manually viewing source to ever see this data.
In these times of going "green" and improving efficiency, the answer may be costing us cache and cash. Rendered or not the comments inflate rewrites, browser cache, and RAM usage in addition to the obvious bandwidth issues. There is simply no logical reason why this isn't done manually on "View Source" to fill in the text between the comment constructs.
If the issue is simply parsing / ignoring on-demand or in RAM, why is it saved to disk or even sent from the server without a request? This isn't simply a matter of blaming webmasters that use CMSs, this is an issue that can be handled by both server and client. To allow this waste while the number of internet devices continues to skyrocket, is an injustice done to global finance, the environment, and your page-load times."