4 ms·
> You can distribute less popular websites with more used ones to avoid losing it? So long as this distributed protocol has the concept of individual files, th
by baby_souffle 2y ago
> You can distribute less popular websites with more used ones to avoid losing it?
So long as this distributed protocol has the concept of individual files, there _will_ be clients out there that allow the user to select `popular-site.archive.tar.gz` and not `less-popular.tar.gz` for download.
And what one person doesn't download... they can't seed back.
Distributed stuff is really good for low cost, high scale distribution of in-demand content. It's _terrible_ for long term reliability/availability, though.
- armada651 2y agoThat is fundamentally the problem, no one wants to donate storage to host stuff they're not interested in.
- mrguyorama 2y agoMore concretely, nobody wants to donate anything. They just want it to exist. Charity has never been a functional solution to normal coordination problems. We have centuries of evidence of this.