Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

IMGZ – Paid image sharing

imgz.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 409 posts

Re: IMGZ – Paid image sharing

#371

Post by gilrain »

user-the-name wrote: post #338
rexreed wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your credit card data is stolen, you can reverse the charges and in the worst case get a new card, canceling the old one. You will be made whole very quickly. If your data is stolen, you have very little recourse. Honestly of all the things to be worried about, stolen credit card details is probably one of the least of my concerns. Besides, he's using a payment service where he doesn't even see the credit card det…

What personal data are you putting on an image hosting service?

…images.

You surely aren’t this dense, so I assume you don’t think photos of where you’ve been and who you’re with is personal?

Re: IMGZ – Paid image sharing

#372

Post by 6510 »

stavros wrote: post #316
saimiam wrote: post #314

Imgz's pricing page made me wonder - if someone stops paying their dues for their imgz account, is it legal to auction off their photos 'as-is'? I feel this would be similar to all those "storage wars" type shows where people buy a storage unit on auction after a preliminary look-see. @stavros - if legal, put this in your ToS. "Clear your dues or else..."

Hahah, that's a great idea! Maybe I should start auctioning off sealed accounts, and you see what photos are in there when you buy it.

Turn their photos into a social network with likes, "friends", comments and re-imgz

Re: IMGZ – Paid image sharing

#373

Post by jrochkind1 »

stavros wrote: post #298
jrochkind1 wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly I feel like you're being very dishonest about your commitment to providing no support, you've provided all kinds of support already.

Ah but I didn't commit to providing no support, I didn't commit to provide support. Support is provided at-will!

Do you think this fear of commitment comes from your early family life? Feel free to lie back on the couch if you'd be more comfortable.

Re: IMGZ – Paid image sharing

#374

Post by stavros »

6510 wrote: post #372
stavros wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hahah, that's a great idea! Maybe I should start auctioning off sealed accounts, and you see what photos are in there when you buy it.

Turn their photos into a social network with likes, "friends", comments and re-imgz

I can call it Imgzur.

Re: IMGZ – Paid image sharing

#375

Post by user-the-name »

gilrain wrote: post #371
user-the-name wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What personal data are you putting on an image hosting service?

…images. You surely aren’t this dense, so I assume you don’t think photos of where you’ve been and who you’re with is personal?

I mean, if I put them on an image sharing service, they probably aren't that private.

Re: IMGZ – Paid image sharing

#376

Post by jrochkind1 »

statico wrote: post #63
romwell wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I've been hoping for an Imgur replacement for simple, hosted image sharing. If you are willing to pay for things, then any good old web host + FTP are your friends.

That sounds like a lot of work. Why not just push my screenshots to good ol' NNTP?

That sounds really out-dated. Why not put the screenshots on a blockchain?

Re: IMGZ – Paid image sharing

#377

Post by jrochkind1 »

dd444fgdfg wrote: post #246
TeMPOraL wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conform to influence. OBEY. I was going to upload a nice screencap from a 1988 movie They Live to IMGZ and link it here, but it turns out my trial expired so no link for you.

Obey propaganda :D actually, conform to influence doesn't mean that. It means, to influence a group you need to be part of the group. To be part of the group, you need to first conform to the group.

It's actually a very pithy phrase, because it's exactly the "message" of the product as art, reversed.

Stavros would prefer not to conform, and doesn't care if that means he doesn't influence.

Although... ironically he is probably one of the more influential HN posters. Now, profitable, I dunno, do you really mean "conform [in order] to profit", does "influence" just mean "exploit" [in the economic sense. mostly] now?

Can we conceive of someone who would rather not conform and in fact would rather not exploit?

Re: IMGZ – Paid image sharing

#378

Post by yarcob »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #358
yarcob wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I understand that postgres is pretty decent at storing large binary data though? Storing large files in PostgreSQL is possible, but I would advise against it. PostgreSQL uses a technique called TOAST to store large objects. If you store something in a bytea column, it'll first be compressed (either deflate or a new algorithm that I forgot the name). Then it will be split into 8KB chunks (page size) and stored toget…

Thanks for info! What about binary large objects instead of bytea? Size/speed of backups is a good point to consider.

I've never used PostgreSQLs large objects. You have to use this awkward API to use them, they aren't stored efficiently either, and as far as I can tell it's just a legacy feature that nobody has bothered to deprecate yet.

In my opinion the only neat thing about large objects is that you can edit files with a posix-like API in a database transaction, but I can't think of a scenario where that would actually be useful.

Re: IMGZ – Paid image sharing

#380

Post by Arnt »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #359
Arnt wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Postgres is indeed good at that. I know from experience. If you want to commit ten things every second all week, don't transfer so much data in a single transaction that you hold any important locks for half a minute. And if you use replication, test while replicating. If the blobs you store are small enough to not disturb your commit rate, then pg's drawbacks are IMO smaller than those of the alternatives, particula…

Thanks for info! So you've stored images in the db in production and had it work out fine? I don't want to commit ten things a second. It would be a pretty read-heavy write-light load. Sounds like that would avoid one path of riskiness at least.

Yes, exactly.

Many people answer a question like this: "How good is postgres at storing big blobs, relative to small things?" Postgres is indeed worse at storing large things. However, I think the most interesting question is something along these lines: "What's best, storing everything in Postgres and accepting that inefficiency for the big blobs, or implementing transactions, replication and/or backup with a part of the data in Postgres and the big blobs elsewhere?"

I'm awfully fond of having working backups, and postgres' performance problems with the blobs haven't been big enough that I've really noticed.

Post reply on HN