On 12/28/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 28/12/06, Anthony wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
On 12/28/06, Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/28/06, Anthony wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
You shouldn't buy another 300 servers in the first place.
What a great idea. When will you have your implementation of "distributed mediawiki" completed?
It's already completed. I just need you to transfer over the domain names.
whuh??? Project page?
Sorry, that was sarcasm :). Seriously though, I understand a distributed mediawiki wouldn't occur overnight, but that's no excuse to just throw up your hands and say "oh well, let's just put up ads and make millions".
Your post actually started me thinking on this. A Freenet (for encryption and to avoid a [[:en:trusted client]] problem) or BitTorrent (for convenient distribution with a program lots of people have) method of distributing Wikipedia. A peer-to-peer network with WMF as the only body supplying content files. The downsides that spring to mind are (a) doesn't work through any old web browser (this is a big one) (b) trusted client problem (how to ensure rogue clients don't redistribute corrupted content in our name).
I was thinking something a la freenet without the anonymity (which is what slows it down), and with digital signatures to ensure content doesn't get corrupted. Wikimedia servers would still have to do a tiny bit of work, basically sign stuff and boostrap the peer lists.
It could be built, and for a lot less than 1.5 million.
Anthony