Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
I have seen a lot of websites using download queues. Some of them make users wait for a few minutes, so they can display ads and promote a payment version of their service, but sites like Sourceforge uses a 5 second queue and even offers a direct link for the impatient.
What can Sourceforge gain from introducing this 5 second delay?
there is ads on sourceforge download pages
I think, in general it is 30% Bandwidth reduction and 70% Advertising Space
By making the user wait for only 5 seconds, the bandwidth is not affected this much.
However this fact applies better to hoster which have >30s delay.
From the advertisement point-of-view: Every second counts.
Sometimes it is enough to show a certain logo in order to make the consumer remind that one company.
Even two or three sentences can still be read completely within 5 seconds!
Imagine you'd just see a big yellow M, I bet you'd associate it with a well known fast-food company! ;)
Related
Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 12 months ago.
Improve this question
I am using Firebase Hosting and am following the usages regularly to see how many downloads occur per day as I'm using spark plan which has a data transfer limit of 360MB/day. But I couldn't understand how data transfer is measured and why it is not the right proportion. Visitor numbers and usages are below:
7th of March: 41 visitors, 339.5 MB
4th of March: 21 visitors, 79.5MB
What might be the reasons for that? How is it vary?
There could be many reasons for this. The first few that pop to mind:
The visitors on March 4 could have visited less of your site than the visitors on March 7.
The visitors on March 7 could have used browsers that (pre)load more parts of the site.
The visitors on March 4 could have been repeat visitors, who already had part of your site in their browser cache.
But as said, these are just a few of an incredibly large swath of possible reasons.
If you want to learn more about how users browse your site, I recommend either enabling analytics or (less intrusive) enable and check access logs and looking for patterns (which are also hugely diverse).
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I've played around with making web-scrapers in the past. I've used them to map all links out of a website and all pages in a website. However I realise 'in theory' I could release this system and let it follow link after link and map the entire internet. Of course the millions of pages that exist on the internet would take a lot longer to scrap than the small collection I'm used to... but how long?
On a typical machine, lets say 8GB Ram, i7 3Ghz, how many links would a machine be able to trawl through?
Map the entire internet? Not on your typical machine. The internet doubles in size about every five years so if your process takes more than five years it is never going to get to the end. #jdphenix calculates 79 years for the size of the internet as it is today so by the time your process ends you will have mapped approximately 0.003% of the internet as it will then be.
So how long on a typical machine? Infinite time. This is not a battle you can win without a serious amount of computing power.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I am writing a research on a service ranking algorithm, and I want to prove its performance and accuracy by running it on a public data. let's say apple store data, google play, expedia etc. Can I parse their data from HTML and use it in my research? or I would be performing illegal act (web scraping)?
And should i mention explicitly in my research that the data is used only for scientific reasons?
I've read about webscraping and the controversies about its illegality, but i did not find any article about if it's used for scientific purposes only.
Thanks in advance
There is nothing inherently illegal about web-scraping a site.
However, I would suggest that you pay attention to the particular site's "Terms of Use" to see if it is something which they expressly forbid. For example, the Expedia Terms of Use here http://www.expedia.ie/p/support/termsofuse outline:
you may not visit or make available the website or any part of the web
pages of the website by automatic means, such as by using crawlers or
shop bots to systematically retrieve or copy information or connect
the content of the website functionally to another website via links
*That being said, as long as you don't exert an unreasonable load on the site, or republish their content as your own, I don't expect you will run into any problems.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
I have been asked to design a website for a client as a "side job". I am trying to write up a statement of work for the project. In the past, I have done similar work, and often run into a situation where I believe the work is "done", but the client wants endless tweaks and changes. (As you know, websites are perpetually "under construction").
When you have requirements such as "Design a Home page, design a Contact Us page" how you define a page as "done"?
Don't put anything live, until they accept your work is complete. This should be enough of an incentive for them not to string you along, and allows them to have the quality website they require.
Ask the client to set up a requirements specification for version 1. When you met the requirements contained in this document is your job completed. Everything else belongs to the next version.
In the same situations, I tell my client "you want A, B, C and D. OK, sign here, and we are agreed that the end of application is A-D. Now if you wanted something more in future, it is not a part of our contract, so we'll deal with that in future and of course it has it's own price." This way you make them think before signing and lot's of things become clearer, and lots of needs show up suddenly, but in future they'll either pay more for more needs or won't talk any more :)
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
I have some software which we added an open common file format (.iwb) to. The government organisation that initiated that work has been cut in the cutbacks.
Now a not for profit organisation has taken up the mantle, however its going to cost and once you pay you are not allowed to reveal the "materials" you gain.
http://www.imsglobal.org/iwbcff/jointheIWBCFFIalliance.cfm
I understand people need to be paid but the whole not sharing thing makes it feel like its going against what a standard is meant for.
What's a good strategy:
Pay up and shut up (there might be plenty of closed standards
that work in this way)
Fork the standard to an organisation that will not require people to pay to read it
Drop the file format
Stay behind the curve and reverse engineer the files
Any standard that is not freely accessible is no standard at all but is instead a proprietary format. I'd say either:
petition them to open the standard up
Drop your support for it (and tell your customers why you have to)
Fork an earlier open version and create a free version of the standard
Paying for access to a standard sounds like a horrible idea because:
It encourages this behavior
It's likely to just be wasted money because others won't want to pay either, and a standard used by no one is not a standard.
Publish the last version you had access to.
Site that you support that version of the standard.