Originally Posted by guice
If you think it over, you can see the bandwidth used wouldn't be that much more. It seems like a lot because of a few factors: a lot of users, and WM is doing a full scrape, short periods of time.
Now, add in this factor: if a user did all this by themselves, they'll be download every webpage they get through each link; ever JS file; ever image; every offsite reference. In reality, the two should be equal if not WM actually *saving* bandwidth. Saving simply because WM is dealing with text-only and not download images, js or css files in it's page scraping.
|
Yes but the pages that load also include ads that the revenue from is used to pay for the bandwidth. WM skips the ads, therefore cutting down on the revenue while increasing the cost of hosting by using bandwidth that does not have the advantage of being paid for by the advertising.
Ads skipped = $0, bandwidth used = $$$$, site go bye bye if it does not address the issue. Sites go bye bye WM goes bye bye because there is no where to leech the bandwidth from.
Yes it is THAT simple.