This has the be the weirdest requirement I've heard from someone who wants to read a blogpost on someones website. Why it matters if it's behind a CDN or not?

Problem is that the person hasn't handled even a small amount of usage load before, even the cheapest instance from DigitalOcean + NGINX can handle most loads you throw at it if configured properly for static content, which it almost is by default when you install it.

A single $5 Digital Ocean droplet should be able to handle tens of thousands requests a second without any CDN or load balancing.

Why though? It works for me, the page didn't struggle at all. I've seen all sorts of single hosts on underpowered machines handling the extra load just fine, as long as it didn't require much server-side (static websites). Take the solar-powered server from lowtechmagazine for instance.

It might be a conscious decision to support a decentralized web. We can't just host everything on the servers of Big Tech and act surprised when an outage takes down a huge chunk of the web.

> http://archive.today/bi8UU

thanks @htunnicliff

HN: Centralization is the purest form of evil, you should self-host everything!

Also HN: If you don't put your site behind a CDN I won't even bother reading it because I will lose interest during the 90+ seconds it takes to load.

(And yes I know that these posts are not usually made by the same people, but it still amuses me to see posts with such radically differing views on the front page at the same time)

Using the internet is a showstopper?

These days its harder and harder to know whether someone is actually complaining or if they are being sarcastic.

Well congratulations, you are the one person in the world who bothered to go dig into the network before opening the page and save him one millisecond of CPU time.