PureContent: Difference between revisions
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
Dedicated protocols would likely be the most efficient ones, when it comes to minimising costs of running the central site. | Dedicated protocols would likely be the most efficient ones, when it comes to minimising costs of running the central site. | ||
The central site would be obliged to provide regular dumps, | The central site would be obliged to provide regular dumps, so that it could be replaced, if users vote to do so. | ||
Revision as of 15:12, 8 February 2014
Synopsis
A central site would handle content, but would not distribute it massively as HTML. Instead, a streamlined "pure content" would be provided to a number of web servers, which would "skin" the content with whatever they would like. The servers might compete with their skins, but they might also put ads if they would wish. Anyway, it would be the users, which would decide which web server to choose.
In this way, the cost of running the central server would be reduced, and the main cost - bandwidth and HTML generation, would be distributed to the community.
Technology
Dedicated protocols would likely be the most efficient ones, when it comes to minimising costs of running the central site.
The central site would be obliged to provide regular dumps, so that it could be replaced, if users vote to do so.