meroliph

I'm pretty sure there are other search engines that would still be available.

Of course it can, given how many useful open source solutions are available nowadays.

Considering the total cost of 6000$ for a single server, you would be dropping 12k from the get-go for two servers (though you should really lease over a 12 month period if you can't afford it) and then you need to add colo costs for the machines, which can be around 300-400$ per machine in a single unit colocation environment, depending on your location. This brings us to 21600$ in the first year for two machines colocated in separate datacenters, without any sysadmin costs;

The article states S3 would cost 60,000$ per year, and this doesn't include any bandwidth costs, whereas the colocation setup would include some decent bandwidth per month. Over time, it's easy to see how a lot of money can be saved.

Also, S3 is designed for 99.99% availability, but they only guarantee 99.9% through SLA, which isn't extremely spectacular. Hitting 99.9% isn't particularly hard if you have a sys admin worth his salt to set things up right, and with your own solution you can have more direct access to the file system as well as the ability to adhere to any regulations.

Building your own storage can provide the same redundancy and reliability. You can still use a CDN as well.

Got J.R.R. Tolkien, pleasantly surprised.

I'm not entirely too sure how good EyeNetra is compared to the equipment found in your optometrist's office, as well as how accurate it is.

> Or, is it simply that people don't choose random, long passwords?

That's always part of the problem.

The same assumed fate?

So I get huge speeds, virtually no i/o wait and when I delete something I can be sure it's gone forever? The only problem left to solve is huge capacities for these devices at relatively affordable prices.

32GB per node and only two SATA drives in RAID-1? Sounds like IO wait might be pretty high on nodes that are filled up.

Since UK2 doesn't really have a CDN product themselves, as they resell HighWinds and Level3, their interest is a bit lower as opposed to SoftLayer which has million dollar contracts signed with InterNAP for connectivity and DC space, which also sells content delivery.

My guess is it's not really about kicking out the competition but mostly the fact that they can't realistically offer the said bandwidth for the advertised price, which is far too low for a quality network blend.

It's wrong to assume that Comcast does not send a lot of upstream traffic. They actually sell IP transit at relatively small prices.

This doesn't really work all the time, as some of them are skimming through the description for this sort of stuff.

If it really needs to scale: AWS EC2

For DNS: Dnsmadeeasy.

For low latency content delivery: Akamai

For dirt cheap makeshift content delivery: several servers from 478east

For servers that need lots of RAM(>24GB) on the cheap: webnx

I found that a small apartment in NY was around 2500 or more, and in roughly the same area airbnb had something for 1800, plus the whole social experience if you're into that.