Haha, you got me there. So I guess you could more correctly say ‘a font with serif for titles only’.

Plain old static HTML is fine, and you can host it on a potato! Here are some design tips to keep it easy to read. None of them are objectively correct, and you are already doing some of them. They are just some suggestions as you move forward:

1. Don’t use dark-on-dark fonts. Use near-black on off-white or at least something high contrast.
2. Break up content using horizontal rules <hr> and various headers <h1 to h6> You can style both of them in css. This keeps things easy to find and read.
3. Generally, do not center-align text if it is more than one line. If you need to display blocks of text side-by-side, put each in a container then left-align the text within those containers.
4. Use a bigger font than you think is strictly necessary.
5. My preference is to use sans-serif fonts. Google makes some good free ones. Sometimes I’ll go back and make titles serif only.
6. Resize and compress your images. A bit higher resolution than you need but with lower quality is usually better than the reverse (for jpegs)

Yeah just jpeg. Always comes out perfectly legible.

Oh, it’s common in my country to use a smartphone to ‘scan’ documents by actually just taking a lousy photo of them. It’s so prevalent that when you tell someone to do a scan they usually do this instead.

I bought a cheap canon scanner for 50$ and it’s pretty perfect for legal documents. A little slow maybe. I use SANE, then do lossy compression too.

In rare situations I’d then post process the PDF to even worse quality using ghostscript, for example when a foreign visa application form requires a scan of a really long document, but doesn’t accept sizes over 2MB.

I use JPEGs in a PDF. They can be mediocre quality. Using an OK scanner makes a big difference. It’s good enough!

I’m required by law to keep physical paper copies for 35 years. So my parallel solution is a cursed filing cabinet, and several crates that describe the content of the filing cabinet. Its ugly, but saves me tons on data archiving, I guess?

Overall, I use “strange WiFi things” techniques for two useful things : audit security cameras, and foxhunting.

I use it to test wireless security cameras on my home network – to see if I can deauth them and/or force them to reconnect to spoofed access points. If it’s easy, then either the router or the cameras are being useless, and I upgrade/replace. Obviously WiFi security cameras can’t be made super secure, but if I know how good they are, I can conclude when they are ‘good enough’.

I only buy routers that support secure management frames, but I want to make sure that it actually works as it should. I test client networks too, with permission, and then plug security holes.

I also specifically disable secure management frames and deauth my cameras to see how they respond. If the system just ‘freezes’ without any warning being raised (and then resumes on reconnect), that is also a fail. Connection dropping must raise some form of alert.

Then for foxhunting, I build multiple antennas and listen to traffic. Then I use the RSSI to perform multilateralization on the signal to get a vector on their position. You can get 3-5m accuracy with some work. This is a neat but complicated way to build an indoor positioning system to track employees, corporate assets, and employees that you treat like corporate assets.

Also you can sometimes hack together WiFi ToF measurements but this is tricky and not widely supported.