No, I meant the instance itself. The server. The one who runs lemmy.ca is here in Canada with me.
It's like when playing a game; You choose servers closet to you for the lowest ping time.
The other reason I neglected to mention was I like to support local. 😎
It makes a difference for a game, but it's not really significant for a website.
The server load and resources will have a much bigger impact on performances than geographic proximity.
And you spread that server load by selecting different servers. While what you're saying is technically true, in a practical sense if everyone picked a more local server that would be one way to achieve what you're saying.
No because the population is not even close to being uniformly distributed geographically.
you don't need a uniform distribution. if the server distribution mirrors the population distribution (and why wouldn't it?), that will still achieve the desired effect.
No, I meant the instance itself. The server. The one who runs lemmy.ca is here in Canada with me.
It's like when playing a game; You choose servers closet to you for the lowest ping time.
The other reason I neglected to mention was I like to support local. 😎
It makes a difference for a game, but it's not really significant for a website.
The server load and resources will have a much bigger impact on performances than geographic proximity.
And you spread that server load by selecting different servers. While what you're saying is technically true, in a practical sense if everyone picked a more local server that would be one way to achieve what you're saying.
No because the population is not even close to being uniformly distributed geographically.
you don't need a uniform distribution. if the server distribution mirrors the population distribution (and why wouldn't it?), that will still achieve the desired effect.