That only covers the "encryption" part of SSL/TLS.
If there is any incentive to fake your content (e.g. for phishing or other attacks, or even simply spreading false information), you'll also want the "authenticity" part of TLS for preventing middlemen from arbitrarily changing content.
Comments
You don't need "SSL" (TLS, https, etc.) to serve static, uncontroversial content
That only covers the "encryption" part of SSL/TLS.
If there is any incentive to fake your content (e.g. for phishing or other attacks, or even simply spreading false information), you'll also want the "authenticity" part of TLS for preventing middlemen from arbitrarily changing content.
That's absolutely untrue. For example a man in the middle could intercept and modify the page.
https://www.troyhunt.com/heres-why-your-static-website-needs...
This was a good article, I concede the point.
With Let's Encrypt you really have no reason not too though. And what's not controversial in one country may be in another.