61–70 of 229 posts
I guess 8 exabytes doesn't get the same number of clicks Edit: Not really trying to be facetious, but come on. Apple using a lot of storage at a lot of places isn't too surprising
I’m only here because I don’t understand why you would say 8 million terabytes instead of 8 exabytes.
Ironic arbitrage, Apple sells it for X, pays google for Y. The absolute state of things.
You aren't just buying dumb storage though. Its a whole service and tools to utilize the service. What Apple and Google are selling are different products. A fruit salad is different to what the fruit store sells and receives a higher price.
I guess 8 exabytes doesn't get the same number of clicks Edit: Not really trying to be facetious, but come on. Apple using a lot of storage at a lot of places isn't too surprising
I’m only here because I don’t understand why you would say 8 million terabytes instead of 8 exabytes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m only here because I don’t understand why you would say 8 million terabytes instead of 8 exabytes.
Same reason for we say 1000 km instead of 1 Mm, or Sun to Earth 150 M km instead of 150 Gm. Some units are usual in some contexts, some are not. In one word, habits.
Speak for yourself, I've been trying to popularise "1Mm" for years. Admittedly not with a huge amount of success.
> or Sun to Earth 150 M km instead of 150 Gm
Surely "1 AU" is the preferred form for this one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Highly doubt Google has access to any iCloud data other than an estimate of the immense size of the service. They do of course have access to the ciphertext and access to traffic patterns, in crypto threat models traffic analysis tells the adversary a wealth of information.
Like what? What's a practical vulnerability or leak?
It's not hard to imagine something business or government related in place of this of course. And do this analysis in aggregate and follow many people at once.
Apple could and for all we know possibly has implemented countermeasures for many of these cases, eg to make it hard to distinquish users from the mass of ciphertext.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like what? What's a practical vulnerability or leak?
Let's say Eve was working at Google with access to the ciphertext and io traffic, and was a jealous lover to a iPhone user Alice. They could be interested in profiling IM app usage, to know about size profile of content (pictures?) were stored at what times to know about Alice's activity profile when out of sight. They could also be interested in fingerprinting apps used so they could be matched to for example differ…
What about this is practical?
How much would you pay to store such amount data? 8TB hard drive is about 200 dollars nowadays, so this amount of data is about 200m dollars worthy of retail hard drives. Ofc the calculation is super inaccurate, which doesn't take redundancies into consideration, and discounted prices for someone like Google to purchase hardware, plus the discount for Apple as a big customer. But had the scale be comparable, in which…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unless you have encryption that is guaranteed to never be obsolete it ALWAYS matters where you store the data.
It does seem likely that Google will pay to store every bit of encrypted customer data that is currently stored forever because potentially decades from now it could be cracked and they could access all that amazing ancient private information.