[Foundation-l] discussion about banning external hotlinking

[Dan Rosenthal]

Correction-- per Tim Starling on Meta, the portion that we pay for (and is
not donated) comes to around $300,000, making the savings much closer to
$3,000-4,000 i.e. even more meaningless.

-Dan

On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 2:57 AM, Dan Rosenthal <swatjester at gmail.com> wrote:

> I fail to see the benefit of this trade off when compared to the extreme
> negative publicity we'd get for it.  The 2007 finances report says we spent
> approximately $389,000 on internet hosting.
> 1.5-2% of that is around 6,000 dollars a year.
>
> You couldn't hope to buy off the negative publicity we'd get from this for
> a $6,000 a year savings.
>
> -Dan
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 2:44 AM, Joe Szilagyi <szilagyi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Just a heads up that there is a discussion to see if disabling all
>> "hotlinking" of images and media from external sites is a good idea, here:
>>
>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:Babel#Proposal_to_disable_hotlinking
>>
>> Tim Starling posted some statistics that indicate 1% to 2.5% of all
>> requests
>> are from outside sites leaching WMF bandwidth resources. In theory this
>> could save the WMF 1% to 2.5% or more of it's bandwidth costs.
>>
>> - Joe
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Dan Rosenthal
>



-- 
Dan Rosenthal