I would replace ‘vanishing’ with ‘evaporating’ in the headline.

It is ambiguous – my first thought was that a record redshift had been measured.

I was hoping we had spotted planet X entering it's far orbit!

Link to the paper: http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hvi/uploads/science_paper/file_...

Story on Hubblesite: http://hubblesite.org/news_release/news/2018-52

That's exactly what I think happens to Pandora after the end of Avatar.

I mean, kind of, yeah.

>In only a few billion years, half the planet may be gone.

Is that really record speed?

PSA: That site brought my Debian VM to its knees. Two cores at >90%, 3GB RAM, and swap at a few hundred MB, and growing fast. This is with Firefox 60.3.0esr(64-bit). Had to kill the process and swapoff/swapon.

After setting "Minimize Memory Usage" at "about:memory",[0] it still does it. Albeit more slowly.

So maybe I need to lose Quantum.

0) https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1223605

I'm on a similar system, albeit running on hardware as opposed to a VM. Browsing with uBlock Origin I have no problems on that site in Firefox. I did not try in a different browser, nor did I try to disable uBlock.

OK, it's some useless script that phys.org runs.[0]

If I create a custom NoScript rule, which blocks scripts (and webgl, which I block by default) phys.org sites render just fine.

But damn, I am curious what scripts phys.org is running that use so much RAM. Maybe it's a DoS against ad-blockers ;)

0) https://mozilla.logbot.info/firefox/20180907

Thanks.

So how much RAM did it use?

I mean, it's a simple page, with two images that seem relatively small. But whatever, I guess that I'll complain to Mozilla.

Edit: Pingdom test: https://tools.pingdom.com/#59ed8b2e32400000

The total size is just 1.5MB, and I see nothing obvious that should break Firefox Quantum.

So can someone help me out with this?

The site renders fine with Midori. And the images are <100kB. So what could be eating over 3GB of RAM in Firefox?