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

Google Promises Unlimited Storage; Cancels; Tells Journalist Life's Work Deleted

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 692 posts

Re: Google Promises Unlimited Storage; Cancels; Tells Journalist Life's Work Deleted

#131

Post by cedilla »

tky wrote: post #56

It appears that he had a Workspace account which offered “unlimited” storage for a time, predicated on the account type being multiuser businesses or education, with a per-seat fee. Google phased out the unlimited storage awhile ago (over a year) after people discovered a loophole where paying for one account still provided unlimited storage. Predictable abuse followed (see /r/datahoarders). While I’m sympathetic to…

Google offered "as much storage as you need" for the Workspace account, without attaching a condition on a required number of seats. It's not a loophole if a customer takes them up on the offer.

I'm usually sympathetic with businesses who failed to appreciate how much power very few power users really have, but this is Google we're talking about. Their sales and legal department is larger than 90% of tech companies. This was their mistake and their mistake only.

Re: Google Promises Unlimited Storage; Cancels; Tells Journalist Life's Work Deleted

#132

Post by cassac »

azemetre wrote: post #92
andrewmutz wrote: post #51

The actual headline is slightly less inflammatory: "Google Promises Unlimited Cloud Storage; Then Cancels Plan; Then Tells Journalist His Life’s Work Will Be Deleted Without Enough Time To Transfer The Data" The facts of the article are even less inflammatory. The journalist uploaded 237.22 TB of video to his google drive when the "unlimited" plan existed. When google phased out the unlimited plan, he's not paying fo…

Why is this the journalist’s fault? Don’t offer an unlimited plan if you don’t want people using it. I have to think the only reason why the journalist hasn’t sued Google for breach of contract is fear of more retribution from Google. Imagine getting banned from YouTube, not appearing in search queries, or not having access to your gmail after winning in small claims court. It’s disgusting and shows why big tech need…

Just like “unlimited vacation.” Whenever someone says it you know there is something going on and you aren’t going to like it.

Re: Google Promises Unlimited Storage; Cancels; Tells Journalist Life's Work Deleted

#133

Post by rightbyte »

throwawaaarrgh wrote: post #89
dacryn wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the problem is that many people dont use it as a backup. In a backup scenario, you are immune to these things, because you still have your primary copy. It's annoying yes, but in a backup you can always afford to lose the backup with no problem. But many people treat these solutions as an extension of their hard drive. A physical analogy is putting your books into a Shurguard/self storage. Thats not a backup, that's…

Putting your files in a different provider is technically not a backup, it's a copy. A backup means data durability minimum requirements that most cloud file hosting does not provide without a business-level subscription. Even then it may not be replicated outside a region and not use cold storage. The distinction is important if you want to rely on more than luck to keep your data safe.

Oh come on it is a backup. Any two copies is one backup.

Re: Google Promises Unlimited Storage; Cancels; Tells Journalist Life's Work Deleted

#136

Post by jsnell »

Nicksil wrote: post #109
E39M5S62 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"a lot of money" and "a long time" are subjective.

>"a lot of money" and "a long time" are subjective. You've missed the point. It's the fact that this guy did pay for the services.

As far as I can tell, they did not pay for an "unlimited storage forever" service. They paid for an "unlimited storage this month for $X" service. Eventually Google stopped offering that deal, and he continued storing his data as if the payments for data storage in the past would entitle him to store the data indefinitely into the future as well.

Re: Google Promises Unlimited Storage; Cancels; Tells Journalist Life's Work Deleted

#137

Post by boringg »

Nicksil wrote: post #126
boringg wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crisis (!?) is a bit dramatic. Google response isn't correct but everyone here has there hands a bit dirty. Storing 237 Tb on an unlimited server - the individual clearly knew they were taking advantage of a system and probably should have been ready for some kind of remedy.

>the individual clearly knew they were taking advantage of a system Why do you think this?

[flagged]

Re: Google Promises Unlimited Storage; Cancels; Tells Journalist Life's Work Deleted

#138

Post by terminous »

boringg wrote: post #117
frognumber wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The actual headline is slightly less inflammatory: "Google Promises Unlimited Cloud Storage; Then Cancels Plan; Then Tells Journalist His Life’s Work Will Be Deleted Without Enough Time To Transfer The Data" Correct. 7 days is not enough time to stream >200TB of data, let alone find a place to stream it to. This puts a human being in a crisis position. He doesn't need to just find someone willing to store his data.…

Crisis (!?) is a bit dramatic. Google response isn't correct but everyone here has there hands a bit dirty. Storing 237 Tb on an unlimited server - the individual clearly knew they were taking advantage of a system and probably should have been ready for some kind of remedy.

> taking advantage

No. 100% wrong. If you advertise and sell "unlimited" then you should deliver unlimited. If you don't build in acceptable use limits into the contract, then that's your fault, not the customer's.

Re: Google Promises Unlimited Storage; Cancels; Tells Journalist Life's Work Deleted

#139

Post by rkagerer »

that_guy_iain wrote: post #104
andrewmutz wrote: post #51

The actual headline is slightly less inflammatory: "Google Promises Unlimited Cloud Storage; Then Cancels Plan; Then Tells Journalist His Life’s Work Will Be Deleted Without Enough Time To Transfer The Data" The facts of the article are even less inflammatory. The journalist uploaded 237.22 TB of video to his google drive when the "unlimited" plan existed. When google phased out the unlimited plan, he's not paying fo…

> The actual headline is slightly less inflammatory: "Google Promises Unlimited Cloud Storage; Then Cancels Plan; Then Tells Journalist His Life’s Work Will Be Deleted Without Enough Time To Transfer The Data" You just expanded it. It's still basically the same. > It would cost the guy $5000 a month to store his data on S3 and he doesn't want to pay that, so he now needs to find someone to bear the cost of storing hi…

Unlimited means unlimited. Too often what gets lost in the phrase "edge case" is that there's a human being on the other end. They should do the decent thing and work with him and anyone else storing more data than can be practically downloaded to come up with a workaround or extension. Imagine if your bank closed your account and forfeited your money because they couldn't dole it out to you fast enough.

Re: Google Promises Unlimited Storage; Cancels; Tells Journalist Life's Work Deleted

#140

Post by bachmeier »

andrewmutz wrote: post #51

The actual headline is slightly less inflammatory: "Google Promises Unlimited Cloud Storage; Then Cancels Plan; Then Tells Journalist His Life’s Work Will Be Deleted Without Enough Time To Transfer The Data" The facts of the article are even less inflammatory. The journalist uploaded 237.22 TB of video to his google drive when the "unlimited" plan existed. When google phased out the unlimited plan, he's not paying fo…

> When google phased out the unlimited plan, he's not paying for a non-unlimited plan

Sure, but you're missing the main point of the story, which is the seven days they gave him to download everything.

> It would cost the guy $5000 a month to store his data on S3

According to the S3 Glacier pricing I see, it would be less than $900/month. It would cost less than a $5000 one-time payment to buy enough USB storage for the full 237 TB.

> and he doesn't want to pay that

No, the story doesn't say that.

Post reply on HN