4 ms·

I was expecting the solution to be mirror your generated pages on IPFS (https://ipfs.io https://ipfs.io), so they just don't go away at all (as long as someone

I was expecting the solution to be mirror your generated pages on IPFS (https://ipfs.io https://ipfs.io), so they just don't go away at all (as long as someone has them pinned). The proposed solution set seems extremely convoluted and don't actually solve the issue.

jtbayly 7y ago
That’s quite the caveat, and speaking as somebody who has attempted it, you’ve introduced quite a bit of complexity. The whole point is that complexity militates against keeping it online. Keeping it simple, the author’s theory seems to go, is the single most effective way to make something likely to be able to be available long term. I think he’s probably right.
- carlosdp 7y ago
  None of what he wrote mitigates the case where he no longer maintains his site and stops paying for the server, which is the very reason all those links he mentioned were dead (defunct websites/hosts).
  - jtbayly 7y ago
    But if you kept it simple in the first place, you can easily do the work necessary to keep it online, and are thus more likely to do it. The moment you have to struggle with NPM dependencies to switch hosts, it’s all over. If all you have is a bit of html, no problem.
  - chippy 7y ago
    The article was about not having to maintain a site for non techies like us. WE can happily maintain a range of things, but a chemistry doctoral student will hit a hurdle and may give up. Paying for a server - mentioned in the article about the provider changing access. its all about hurdles.
- ssivark 7y ago
  You might keep the content format mighty simple, but keep in mind that the hosting and delivery mechanism consisting of http/html are extremely demanding. In particular, your website's availability is fundamentally limited by the uptime of your host machine (which you are only leasing) and its HTTP server and network. If you forget to renew the lease on your host machine, or there is some mishap by the service provider, your website will vanish without a trace -- even if it happened to have a high rate of visitors.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

jtbayly 7y ago

That’s quite the caveat, and speaking as somebody who has attempted it, you’ve introduced quite a bit of complexity. The whole point is that complexity militates against keeping it online. Keeping it simple, the author’s theory seems to go, is the single most effective way to make something likely to be able to be available long term. I think he’s probably right.

carlosdp 7y ago
None of what he wrote mitigates the case where he no longer maintains his site and stops paying for the server, which is the very reason all those links he mentioned were dead (defunct websites/hosts).
- jtbayly 7y ago
  But if you kept it simple in the first place, you can easily do the work necessary to keep it online, and are thus more likely to do it. The moment you have to struggle with NPM dependencies to switch hosts, it’s all over. If all you have is a bit of html, no problem.
- chippy 7y ago
  The article was about not having to maintain a site for non techies like us. WE can happily maintain a range of things, but a chemistry doctoral student will hit a hurdle and may give up. Paying for a server - mentioned in the article about the provider changing access. its all about hurdles.
ssivark 7y ago
You might keep the content format mighty simple, but keep in mind that the hosting and delivery mechanism consisting of http/html are extremely demanding. In particular, your website's availability is fundamentally limited by the uptime of your host machine (which you are only leasing) and its HTTP server and network. If you forget to renew the lease on your host machine, or there is some mishap by the service provider, your website will vanish without a trace -- even if it happened to have a high rate of visitors.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]