Inspiring! The page looks great and it brings me back to the 1990s web (in a good way). Although I gotta say, I think the criticism of 100% uptime is an ideol

Inspiring! The page looks great and it brings me back to the 1990s web (in a good way). Although I gotta say, I think the criticism of 100% uptime is an ideological position, letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. In this case having their website always up would give it wider reach, and presumably convince more people to reduce their energy usage, which is the goal. But I can appreciate those who practice what they preach. If the authors are here, you can further optimize your page. For images I was able to reduce image-weight by 494 bytes, using lossless optimization, with optipng. For the html, using zopfli to compress the page, I squeezed out another 3020 bytes. And although I didn't fix it up, the html code includes unnecessary remnants from pre-html5 like closing P tags, lots of end slashes, etc. I'd bet you could save a few KB (before compression) by removing it. In all these are over 3514 bytes you don't need to read from disk, cache, encrypt, and send over the network using your 1-2.5W webserver. For cryptography, you can save some cycles using ECDSA instead of RSA, and prioritizing aes-128-gcm over aes-256-gcm. And what about ChaCha? To me it seems logically inconsistent to spend extra cycles protecting this read-only low-energy site powered exclusively by solar. 128-bits are enough; in practice you only need to worry about side channels, not key length. Just as an aside, on the topic of webpage optimization, here are some of my favorite tools: zopfli, pngquant, optipng, jhead, cwebp. And here are some excellent resources: * https://webpagetest.org/ * https://webspeedtest.cloudinary.com/ * https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/ Then when you're done, check for html errors with * https://html5.validator.nu/ * https://validator.w3.org/