of what? that you don't need a separate mobile site (or js) to show a most basic wall of text?
open up amazon.com or walmart.com and see how your justification holds up. certainly, there are simple layouts with sparse content that can be made responsive easily (blogs, image portfolios, etc) but this is a far cry from proof that a broad statement is at all applicable.
Most sites only need to show just that. And fail miserably at it.
>open up amazon.com or walmart.com and see how your justification holds up.
90% of sites are content based, not Amazon or Walmart. And even then could do with a much simpler layout.
> One that couldn't easily be changed, either, because everyone's clients relied on the exact structure of the markup for screen scraping.
This doesn't seem like that hard a problem. Presumably the robots all sent their own distinct UA strings (as scrapers only get written to imitate browser UA strings if you ban non-browser UA strings.) So why not just filter your logs to find all the known scrapers, serve anything with those exact UA strings "legacy" table-based responses, and serve everyone else the new layout?
Hackers they may be, web developers they are not.
http://i.imgur.com/K6ov1pv.png
What does it look like for you? You might want to let hn@ycombinator.com know.
Actually reading text is not the worst part (though if I want to zoom at all then stuff scrolls off the page, since it won't reflow on iOS when you zoom, and browsing becomes miserable then.) The worst part is trying to interact with the site on mobile. I basically just don't do it.
I use Firefox but it is the same with Safari.
Nope. That was true about a year ago, but not anymore. Facebook UI on a desktop is horrible. Try using it with 1024px wide screen - most apps/games aren't fully visible because they give 760px to the canvas and the rest of their UI is not responsive - so either the ad space on the right or the content (app/game) has to suffer.