Yup. I don't know what kind of mentality wants to punish users for rejecting ads. I guess you have to take the view that the ads are more important than the content.
But what does that say about the content? To me, it says that the content is worth even less than the ads I'm already deliberately blocking.
Many companies seem to put the company website under the control of marketing. That's OK, until the marketing department goes megalomaniac, and decides that all company operations amount to marketing. So much for the website.
> It exploits 30 vulnerabilities in a number of plugins and themes for this platform. If sites use outdated versions of such add-ons, lacking crucial fixes, the targeted webpages are injected with malicious JavaScripts. As a result, when users click on any area of an attacked page, they are redirected to other sites.
I've been a fan of the 'simply static' plugin for wordpress for a few years now. Basically, install wordpress on a server, make it accessible only to authorized users (vpn, acl, htauth, whatever works best for you), then have it deploy to an apache server or s3 bucket.
The WP designer feels at home. Has a simple deploy button. The pages load significantly faster.
Works well most of the time. Sometimes forms can be a bit tricky, but the sites I've deployed it with usually don't have many of them.
For tech-oriented people, yes, static site generators can be quite great.
For non-tech people? There's the reason why Wordpress is so popular: you can either use any of the tons of "hosted Wordpress" providers or throw it up on some cheap ass LAMP virtual server, hell even most providers' FTP space is usually enough. There are tons of themes, tons of plugins with integration to pretty much everywhere, and tons of anything from freelancers to huge media agencies to help you out.
Like it or not, Wordpress is the equivalent of English. Almost everyone relevant sans the French speaks it.
I think they added some detection to block archiving tools and as such some addons will break the site, or perhaps better wording on my part would be that the site will break some clients.
Even the Google-cached version.