Lets say i run several wordpress websites, some fairly static and some woocommerce.
How possible (if possible) would it be to offload all those assets, images, icons, media etc through some kind of Autonomi for wordpress plugin?
It could potentially save a lot on server costs (I use Krystal hosting - and the cost of storage goes up every month)
My developer and I would like to use autonomi, I know there’s no compute or whatever term it is, but surely if I could offload all that data to autonomi for a one off cost through a plugin, isn’t that a killer app? Can somebody help me build it? Am I making sense?
I think what you need is for the client to load some js that can access the network for those resources. This could be done through a custom WP plugin. I’m not sure the js tools exist yet though.
WordPress plugins are usually written in PHP (as is WP) so this is doable on the server, or much simpler would be to run a instance of AntTP on one of your servers and load resources via that.
None of those solutions will solve the bandwidth issue though which is probably where you are incurring costs.
To solve that the clients need to talk directly to Autonomi, in which case you might as well host your static sites there (eg import into Publii) but then your users will need a client app like the AutonomiDweb App. I doubt you are ready for that, but it would be great to try this route and see how well it works. So more about Autonomi than your business.
Yeah, I think something could be done to facilitate this.
Using AntTP, you could allow the client browser to download the files directly over HTTP. However, there are some decision points in how/where AntTP is running.
As any instance of AntTP can be used to download the files, it can either be 1. new AntTP gateway server you host, or 2. antsnest or 3. a local instance for each user.
For 1, it would mean you still need to pay for the bandwidth, but as the files would be immutable, they could be aggressively cached (more so than usual).
For 2, I doubt @Southside would be pleased! (although, maybe there is a business model there too… you pay to cover bandwidth fees, etc.)
For 3, it would mean you didn’t have to pay for bandwidth or file hosting. However, it means each user needs a local instance of AntTP to download the files directly.
So, I’d suggest 1 or 3. If you could give incentives for 3, that would be healthy for your bandwidth costs and the decentralisation of the network.
You also have some nuanced decisions around whether to upload each asset separately, part of a public archive or part of a tarchive, etc. The latter may reduce upload costs and improve download speeds, at the cost of some convenience.
I think I’m just going to wait till there’s a better ecosystem. Who know somebody else might build something similar. I just though I’d throw the idea out there.
It looks like waaay to much work and black magic to me
Are you wanting a plug in that streams autonomi files from your server? that’s not advisable as each asset will take a lot of time to download unless you cache it, which would still incur storage fees.
a Javascript plug in sounds plausible, but would require your users to install it to see any of your sites. Do you want to pursue this?
it looks like the Javascript bindings are only for servers, not browsers, so this approach would end up similar to antp, where caching is encouraged for immutable data.
Is the browser plug in what you were looking for? or something else?
No, javascript (or typescript) can be run client-side, so also the client would make the connection to the autonomi network. Basicly you could have a www site with only one file on your server (javascript library and link to a html file on autonomi network), everything else could be loaded directly from autonomi to the www client. This would apply to read-only data.
I prompted chatgpt with this “Write a typescript or javascript code for a www browser to load files directly from autonomi network. Rust code is here (git repo) .
short answer: use AntTP
Chatgpt also created a short code to use AntTP.
But it also gives a hint that WASM support is under development and when it is ready you should be able to call it directly from typescript.
(although, maybe there is a business model there too… you pay to cover bandwidth fees, etc.)
