Slashdot Mirror
Google Docs To Host Any File Type
ezabi writes "According to a post on the official Google blog, in the coming weeks Google Docs will offer to host all file types with a limit of 250 MB, which as they say is larger than the current limit for email attachments. This will have its consequences: paid file sharing will die, more shared pirated material, newer vulnerabilities and malware distribution channels..."
Is the summary a troll or just an attempt at sarcasm?
There are plenty of free filesharing sites, and 250mb is pretty paltry by their standards, not to mention the fact that Google has pretty decent standards for who it lets have an account. Given the amount of information they have on everyone, it's the last site you want to know if you're doing something illegal.
Unless I guess you count .gov domains.
> host all file types with a limit of 250 MB,
Can we just use split to store larger files ?
split -a 5 -b 250000000 bigfile
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
What does it matter if the documents are encrypted? Paid file sharing dying would be a good thing, people shouldn't have to pay to share what is theirs. The only downside I see is increased vulnerabilities.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
The headline and summary has to attract eyeballs, more eyeballs, more posts, more activity more ads being viewed, more income.
I believe Miranda Hart's christmas special had a parody on a BBC prog, "Can twitter kill you". Reporter going around with ever more suggestive overvoice "do you know that right now your child is dying from twitter in this school", Worried Mom: "This isn't my child's school".
Simply stating that you can now store 250mb on your google account in a single file (wonder what the total limit will be) is amazing. Some HD maker must have had a very nice christmas.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I'm not sure if you've noticed: rampant file sharers think EVERYTHING should be free. At least for them.
Boggle.
It is so sad to get these reminders of just what a bunch of ignorant people fill the Net like counterplex.
Let's just refresh everyone's memory of searchable Google Voice:
* Google implemented search for Google Voice for people who decided to make their stuff public
* Dumbasses in the media tried to spin it as some sort of privacy violation
* Articles came out stating why the idiots babbling about privacy violation were spewing garbage since the only Google Voice stuff being indexed was stuff people decided to make public
* Same dumbasses in the media came out with 'yeah, but...I still want to be mad at Google followup articles'
Idiots like counterplex obviously just read the sensational headlines and parrot them as their own 'insight' into future stories.
Knowing Google, I'm sure they have actually thought about the repercussions of allowing all types of documents to be hosted/uploaded, or paving the way for mal/spy/shitware and alike or piracy. As much as everyone is going to look at the negatives, I"m sure Google has developed some sort of scalable trolling application to look for patterns or heuristics for that type of thing. After all, is Google not the king of the hill when it comes to data mining, pilfering, trends, habits, popularity of all of us already?
As usual, you can make things as public as you want. After all, they are on-line. If you want to keep them for yourself... keep them in your computer, not "in the cloud".
Google offers e-mail, is it public? and can you search through it?
Google offers picture albums (Picasa). Are they public? Can you make them private and unlisted?
Google already offers google docs. The same thing, you can make them private or public.
Google voicemail messages were public, because users configured they settings to make them public. Why would this case be different?
I'm not sure if you've noticed: rampant file sharers think EVERYTHING should be free. At least for them.
Wrong. Rampant file sharers pay good money for hardware that enables them to share their free software and content.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
Then install an FTP server on your home connection and share away. You can even get a second connection so that you still have usable internet.
Sharing your own content is trivial and can be free (for small values of $cost). Sharing your content with the world in a useful way will be very expensive.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
I know very few people who use USB keychain drives for this kind of thing. I teach physics lab courses, and when students need to bring home a spreadsheets or something, they just email it to themselves. I don't think the size limit is the main reason they don't use flash drives. One reason is that they don't know in advance that they're going to need one. The other is that email is less of a hassle.
If you're getting up into the amounts of data that can't go in an email attachment, then you probably need a full-fledged file synchronization utility like unison anyway. Unison is smart about recognizing data that haven't changed, and it also takes away the hassle and confusion that people experience with trying to keep straight all the different versions of files they have when they try to use a keychain drive for this. If you don't have a decent tool like this, then mirroring large amounts of data is likely to be slow, labor-intensive, and error-prone. TFA says:
Presumably the "Premier Edition" part means you'll have to pay. So for the majority of applications where you have this much data, Google will give you convenience or zero cost, but not both.
One exception I can think of is that this could be a nice, convenient way to make off-site backups of a certain amount of personal data (that novel you've been writing, ...) in case of fire or earthquake.
Find free books.
I'm not sure if you've noticed: rampant file sharers think EVERYTHING should be free. At least for them.
Wrong. Rampant file sharers pay good money for hardware that enables them to share their free software and content.
Ah, let me make that statement a bit more accurate...
Rampant file sharers pay good money for hardware that enables them to share their stolen software and pirated content.
The average torrent junkie doesn't buy 8TB of disk and upgraded bandwidth plans because they really like sharing Linux ISOs...Please.
Rampant file sharers pay good money for hardware that enables them to share their stolen software and pirated content.
Your software was stolen? Are you sure you didn't just misplace it? Scan your drives again to make sure it's really gone.
The average torrent junkie doesn't buy 8TB of disk and upgraded bandwidth plans because they really like sharing Linux ISOs...Please.
I can see it now. ACTA paragraph 666 - no person shall possess more than 640kb of storage without a license. That, after all, is enough for anybody.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
I never really trusted putting any of my documents online at all.
Not unless I;
Putting documents online is putting them in a public space. You only do that if you want them to be available.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
Perhaps those p2p users could simply purchase those movies that they wish to have. Or, even, get a Netflix account. But I suppose that 'Fighting the Man' has a better ring to it.
I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
I imagine when someone makes a post about "stolen" copyrighted materials, this is what shows up on your computer:
Semantic defense squad to the rescue! We have a situation we need to derail with a meaningless argument immediately.