5 ms·
From a TechCrunch article published yesterday, following an interview with John Borthwick: "According to Borthwick, it would have cost “hundreds of thousands p
by ceslami 14y ago
From a TechCrunch article published yesterday, following an interview with John Borthwick:
"According to Borthwick, it would have cost “hundreds of thousands per month” to keep the site running on its old platform. Even though the site was state-of-the-art just a few years ago, most of the infrastructure would be considered legacy technology by a modern startup."
That's why. SF Weekly, and the author Keith Plocek, obviously did not reach out to Betaworks before running this article.
- alttab 14y agoWould it not have been possible to "cement" those pages into static HTML and throw them up on a CDN? The only thing "digg" about Digg now is the domain name. Why they bought that and then threw out the baby with the bathwater is beyond me.
- cookiecaper 14y agoFor what it's worth something like this is still probably possible. I'd be shocked if any sensible person would get access to Digg's dataset only to delete it immediately thereafter. While they've replaced the site with something else to get the ball rolling, I don't get the impression that they're crass and/or ignorant enough to just destroy the whole thing, so we may yet see an archive of the old Digg. Also, I think the old Digg demonstrated that it didn't really care much about the data anyway.
- geon 14y agoConsidering all the popular reposts on Reddit, they could use the database of already submitted Digg content to populate the daily stream of links when not much else is happening.
- craigvn 14y agoBecause the baby was dead.
- johnbellone 14y agoOh please. Take one guy and have him, at the very least, back port user accounts into the new system. There's absolutely no reason why you cannot write an ETL job once you have your new database structure ready to go. Sure its more work, but we're also talking about an Internet property that at one point was a goldmine.