Click 75kb picture

>click 75kb picture
>takes 20 seconds to open
>is.Sup Forums

Other urls found in this thread:

pastebin.com/raw/vfhBBm5n#.user.js
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

thanks Hiroshima

The botnet must scan and process any and all of your doings before you may experience any results.

>is.Sup Forums
Hasn't happened yet.

kill yourself

Well it hasn't. All my pics still open from 4cdn.

Yeah that server is ass

so who and what gets sent where?

I live Southeast US, and I'm a Comcuck. Does this make a difference?

just i.4cdn for me
computer cucks BTFO

I was just about to make a thread. What the fuck is up with that lately? It's like 1/4 of pictures take over 20 seconds to pop up. It usually seems to be the more interesting photos worth clicking on too. WHAT THE FUCK.

Yes it has

i guess because i am in pennsylvania and have time warner/spectrum.

view this webm

ironically Sup Forums does it the most for me. Sup Forums is also bad.

I'm in Pennsylvania on Comcast and about half of all images come from is.Sup Forums.org and are slow as fuck

You're wercome!

You can replace is.Sup Forums by i.4cdn and it'll work fine.
Is there a way to automatically do this thought ?

i dont know. i made the thread so someone would call me a faggot and tell me how to do it.

that's good bait
let's wait then

Opened seamlessly in VLC thanks pajeet :^)

it will probably be some browser extension i will never install

I don't know shit about scripts but couldn't we do that with Greasemonkey or something ?

Hiroshima is trying to save bandwidth. He's hoping you get bored of waiting and leave and then he doesn't have to serve the picture.

>he doesn't have to serve the picture.
That will be deleted soon enough. Sup Forums literally don't host anything compared to imgur.

>external program excuses dysfunctional software

Thanks T-Mobile unlimited data speed throttling

I get that from every connection and for every image. Every board. Slow as fuck. Maybe they are really having financial problems?

But then again, Moot didn't have to throttle the servers.

something like this. my script is a mess and i ain't posting the whole thing so you'll have to figure out when to call this (on page load, update button pressed, etc.)
function fixShittyImageServer() {

var replies = document.getElementsByClassName("postContainer");
for(var i = 0; i < replies.length; i++) {

// Fix incorrect link for images
var fLink = replies[i].querySelector(".fileText a");
var embedLink = replies[i].querySelector(".fileThumb");
if (fLink != undefined)
fLink.href = fLink.href.replace("is.Sup Forums.org", "i.4cdn.org");
if (embedLink != undefined)
embedLink.href = embedLink.href.replace("is.Sup Forums.org", "i.4cdn.org");

}
}

That's awesome, thanks a lot.

Current Users: 205,131
Active Content: 758 GB

I'm sure someone is a better stats nerd than me, but taking this current page as an example for a rough Fermi analysis:

rep 25 / img 4 / post 14 / pages 1
8,45 KB (8,649 bytes)
4 images (17,777 bytes)
26.426 KB page

ignoring caching and zipping, of course, and let's say the average user reloads one page's worth per minute (takes time to read through all the posts, and refreshing doesn't add much in data size) also they obviously open pictures, but we'll get to that later - so assume 25 KB per user per minute (probably higher though)... Assuming 200,000 users (I don't know the peak times, but it's now late afternoon to evening in the US on a sunday, so this is probably a high peak) so, 5,000,000 KB per minute, or 300 GB per hour, which is 2400 gigabit, or 0,666... Gb/s, which *sounds* very reasonable

However, this is just for loading a single page. The biggest hogs are, of course, the images. In fact, regular page traffic is negligible compared to loading a single image (easily half a meg)

Again, using this page for reference: the 5 images are, combined, 3495 KB, or 4MB in size. I have no idea how to extrapolate how many images actually get fully loaded and how many times, so let's just go with "1/4th of them" and use the same page as before.

now it became one megabyte per user per minute, or 12000 GB per hour - 12 TB per hour

This actually sounds somewhat reasonable (assuming this is a peak moment). For comparison: in 2012 imgur used 6.25 TB per hour, and it wasn't as popular back then as Sup Forums is today. But it's probably off by a factor or so, so it's not very useful. Still, let's press on and assume "10 TB per hour at peak times" That means ~ 20 Gb/s. i.4cdn has 5 servers (assuming no regional DNS stuff) so 4 Gb/s per server - reasonable. Ballpark estimate: $1000 per server, or $60000 per year for the lot. Without adjusting for all sorts of things (from the peak moments to the CDN).

What were the statistics a year ago? Two years?

If memory serves, everything was snappy back then.

Sup Forums X replaces is.Sup Forums.org with i.4cdn.org automatically.

Just saying.

it seems to be working. /wsg/ is going smooth so far. we''ll see....

>no trip mod
fucking saged

Here's one I wrote, including support for thread updating:
pastebin.com/raw/vfhBBm5n#.user.js

// ==UserScript==
// @name Rewrite is.Sup Forums.org links
// @namespace 76217905864509578956895
// @include *://boards.Sup Forums.org/*
// @version 1
// @grant none
// ==/UserScript==

function fix(n) {
[...n.querySelectorAll('a[href^="//is.Sup Forums.org/"]')].forEach(a => a.hostname = 'i.4cdn.org');
}
fix(document);
new MutationObserver(function (ms) {
ms.forEach(function(m) {
[...m.addedNodes].forEach(fix);
});
}).observe(document.querySelector('.thread'), {childList: true});

no, you're just getting cucked so he can display more ads