Google Photos Unlimited Storage

People are concerned about privacy.

>>61573299
But why don't just use it as a screenshot and non private backup dump?

/g/ always complains how they can't back up their GBs huge 4chan folders

>>61573288
can hiroshimoot just make a couple google accounts to take the load off the 4chan servers and save a ton of money at the same time?

File: 2think.png (67KB, 256x236px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 256x236px

>>61573322
considering this has over a billion users they probably wouldn't even notice..

File: am.png (9KB, 800x380px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 800x380px

>>61573322
Amazon S3 or Google Cloud Storage would probably be better for that kind of thing, given their extensive API support.

https://aws.amazon.com/s3/

https://cloud.google.com/storage/

>>61573394
Renting cloud infrastructure seems a bit overkill, even for your average r/datahorder

But this GPhotos thing (with minor compression) is free.

I would fill their servers with trash just for fun lol

File: 1493641394920.jpg (49KB, 402x604px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 402x604px

>>61573288
I don't know it just constantly pops into my head.
Many people on /g/ hate Google a lot and laugh when they saw people abusing the Google Drive Unlimited with literally Petabytes

File: 12d.png (443KB, 907x475px) Image search: [Google]

443KB, 907x475px

>>61573288
>>61573313
When I download images using Clover, Google Photos actually goes out of its way to offer me to back it up. A popup notification comes up asking me if I want to save the folder. After that, it will automatically back up every image I download to that folder for free.

>>61573288
It turns all your photos to compressed .jpegs. Only as a last resort.

File: Google photos original vs compressed.png (748KB, 1000x500px) Image search: [Google]

748KB, 1000x500px

>>61573740
As a last resort it's not all too bad desu

>>61573740
It's better to have something when your HDD going to die. (which is tomorrow)
I know a lot of people who lost all the photos because they kept them on DESCTOP and then HDD is kill or they lost in reinstall of windows.

>>61573779
shilling for quality loss

>>61573788
I'm not shilling it, i'm just a bit surprised it's not compressed to hell because it's unlimited

I imagine some guys just store terabytes there and Google has yet to complain or ban anyone

>>61573740
And they are not jpeg's but some cool compression codec used by noone but them, webp.
Jpegs are converted from webp for you to use when you download a photo.

>>61573827
I'd rather have webp's, they support transparency and animation.

>>61573288
>>61573288
>Why don't we abuse this to death?
>conversion

Could you just encode all your data in huge png files in a fairly compression-resistant, robust way and save encrypted data there?

>>61573873
I guess so.
Depends on what you're storing there, but as far as I know there aren't any known cases of someone getting banned from Google Photos

>>61573322
>>61573394
they have different deals for commercial users

>>61573394
Would rather use backblaze business as aws and google jew you heavily on the pricing

>>61573779
>it's not all too bad desu
>posting a small res image

>>61573322
Quick. Somebody make a chinese cartoon board hosted on a google photo account. See how long it stays up.
>We'll need a logo.

>>61573288
Yesterday i backed-up 4000 memes, 150hq wide screen wallpapers, 200 mobile wallpapers and set my meme folder on auto backup hbu

>>61573288
Thanks for submitting even more data for the botnet
-googlel engineers

>>61573788
There is an option to store full quality images but you have to pay money which seems reasonable if you don't want to compromise

>>61574046
>corrupting botnet with 2TB of porn
kék

>>61574014
Seriously, what would stop us from doing this?

>>61575119
Time maybe?, I'm all in for this but at the same time who wants to use their entire broadband for uploading weird porn to gogel?, at the end their servers must be big asf, at best I could upload 200gb of porn and it would take me days

>>61573288
so if i compress my music folder and name it coolpicture.png can i upload it to google photos and keep it there?

Also, flikr allows to upload unlimited uncompressed photos don't they?

File: 1499302689936.png (174KB, 416x396px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 416x396px

>you can upload anime mkv on that
>you can watch anime mkv from cloud
>you can never loose your anime mkv

>>61575210
Last time I checked up to 1TB
I'm tempted to fill this

>>61575191
If /g/ would get together with their fiber connections and data hoarders maybe we could spam them down

I don't know, /g/ did pretty much nothing lately besides Nyaa, would be fun desu

>>61575201
surewhynot.png

>>61573288
Nice try google. I won't contribute to your AI research

File: 1489926498801.jpg (51KB, 948x960px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 948x960px

>>61576987
>mfw contribute porn to research so AI will be a secret porn god

>>61575082
We could mistag a bunch of dom porn as romantic. Normies would google romantic gifts and they'd see ads for straitjackets.

>>61575225
it's compressed

File: puzzlegame.txt.xz.png (6KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 320x240px

Yeah man, sounds like a good idea

>>61573873

You could use steganography to pack slices of an encrypted container into many photos. The container could easily be reassembled later. They'd never find out, guaranteed.

>>61573873
Yes.
if you make it structured enough, you could make it look like actual pictures instead of encoded data.

Most Google projects have a noise analysis system behind them.
It occasionally scans uploaded shit and calculates a noise average.
If it is above a certain threshold, a human operator is sent it to analyse it to see if it is just stegged data or whatever.

A good idea you could do is store data only in limited channels and have a channel contain an actual picture.
So say use the alpha channel to contain an actual image of some sort, but use red, green and blue to store your data.

>>61575201
Nope. It will scan the file and see the compression containers header, and simply drop it.
You need to encode the container in to the image structure. You can do it various ways, some simple encoding bit(s) straight to one pixel, some heavily analysis based that encodes the data over multiple-pixels.

>>61578597
>Most Google projects have a noise analysis system behind them.
Source?

>>61573288
The thing is that it's not unlimited if you take high-resoluation photos with your phone.
Call me a sucker for sentiment, but I really don't like the idea of forever losing the quality of my personal vacation photos.

>>61578597
>If it is above a certain threshold, a human operator is sent it to analyse it to see if it is just stegged data or whatever.

Holy shit this sounds scary

>>61578619
There was a blog post about it a while ago.
Fuck if I remember it I'd post it.
I only remember it because it was talking about people using Youtube to encode data for storage and stuff like that and actions to prevent it.

It got improved recently because they rolled out TensorFlow. They are able to scan considerably more files, not only scan for abuse, but classify them with a fair degree of accuracy as well.
Fucking machine learning man. Shits scary now.
They likely don't even need human operators to check shit, they likely don't even care, kill it and let the person uploading complain. (like they do with DMCA takedowns these days)

>>61573827
>but some cool compression codec used by noone but them, webp

False. It's PNGs and JPEGs 16 megapixels or less than size in size. It makes PNGs and JPEGs that are greater than 16 megapixels and resizes them to 16 megapixel JPEGs.

No, it does not turn PNGs below the 16 megapixels limit into JPEG when you go to export them (for free).

>>61578623
>my phone is 21 megapixels but they all look liek shit
>fuck off you aint getting my photos

>>61573288
storage is not a fucking problem, is the people downloading/uploading data to a server, bandwidth is the shit that costs a lot of money.

>>61578641
You didn't think Jewgle was just gonna let you upload a 1Gb high entropy container just because you slapped a .png extension on it did you?

File: 1416_Color_Sensitivity.jpg (388KB, 1488x971px) Image search: [Google]

388KB, 1488x971px

Here's an example on Youtube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbIBPlg7Uo4
Given this is a once off example, this is likely why it remains.
If an account was FILLED with shit like this, it would absolutely be terminated.

So adding some very deliberate structure to it would lower the entropy quite a bit.
Mind you, I'm not sure Photo would work with alpha channel. Not tested it.
Use the blue-channel for structured data and red-green for data.
Actually, use green. It's more important in human vision and is the one optimized most in lossy compression. (well, more yellow, hence YCbCr)
Red and blue being opposite sides would also make it less noisy overall.

>>61575119
>google detects illegal image
>shuts down account and calls cops

>>61573779
both look like shit

What's stopping someone from putting an entire drive backup on this?
Read the raw data off the drive, encrypt and chop up into managable gb-sized pictures of random pixels, upload and done.
Sounds possible

File: 1476053606205.gif (893KB, 612x433px) Image search: [Google]

893KB, 612x433px

>>61573288
Because I don't need unlimited space and I don't need unlimited space in exchange for my privacy.

>>61573779
what's the point of compressing shit. You're just getting more shit

>>61573288
1. Encrypt data you want to store
2. Turn encrypted data into 1024x1024px bmp images (3 bytes per pixel × 1024 rows × 1024 cols = 3MiB of storage per image (that's better than a floppy disk!)
3. Upload the bmps to Google Photos
4. Profit