5 ms·
It cost mere 2 million (of their huge budget) to serve ALL of the pages from Wikimedia Foundation for 2017. It can't cost "that much" for someone to download W
by katastic 9y ago
It cost mere 2 million (of their huge budget) to serve ALL of the pages from Wikimedia Foundation for 2017.
It can't cost "that much" for someone to download Wikipedia pages. And if so, you can still buy a Wikipedia snapshot CD/DVD.
- But if Wikipedia is "too much" bandwidth (1) then what CAN you access on the internet? Why would you expect any utility from the internet at all, if a mostly text page is too much?
- Unlike Wikipedia taking on the world itself, Wikipedia should be LOBBYING people with even more money to do it for them. You know... building internet infrastructures. Think how bad our internet would be today if in 2005 they said, "Let's work on minimizing the bandwidth usage instead of complaining that our ISPs need to get faster." It's like someone who wants to get out of poverty by spending less. Yeah, that's great. But you want an easier way to get out of poverty? Make more money. Trust me, I know. We should be elevating internet quality (and incomes) around the world, not minimizing usage for one of the already tiniest bandwidth websites on the planet.
(1) BTW, there's also bandwidth reducing plugins for Chrome that have a 3rd-party convert them to black-and-white/low-res.
[edit] There's even an official Google plugin! (If you're okay having them basically store the contents every site you visit...)
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/data-saver/pfmgfdlgomnbgkofeojodiodmgpgmkac?hl=en https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/data-saver/pfmgfdl...
I don't recall the 3rd party one I used but it definitely worked when I tested it out. It might be this one, Bandwidth Hero:
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/bandwidth-hero-live-image/mmhippoadkhcflebgghophicgldbahdb?hl=en https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/bandwidth-hero-liv...
(Basically search "Bandwidth saver" in extensions.)
- mixmastamyk 9y agokatastic, I see many of your comments are dead, and they don't look like low quality as far as I can tell. Best guess is that the are a bit unkind to popular tech companies. Might wanna mail hn support?
- katastic 9y agoI just post my thoughts (and usually cite them). That ruffles feathers. To me, I treat, politics et al, the same way I would any other problem. You have evidence, you do what works and throw away what doesn't. And that seems to make a lot of people mad--because I don't pick a "side". But, you get used to it. One of the biggest posts that got me "in trouble" was daring to say Obama wasn't a controversy free president (omg? really?) even though I voted for him. Full of citations, like how he was the first president to assassinate a US citizen with a drone without congressional approval, or unprecedented wiretapping of journalists, or Fast and Furious selling weapons to Mexican drug cartels, etc. I used to be called a "sinner" by the right, now the left calls me a "bigot". The words are different, but the action is pretty much the same. That being said, I appreciate you noticing / appreciating my comments. Hope you have a great day.