Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud • Hacker News Board

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#91

Post by OzzyB » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 12:05 PM UTC

syshum wrote: post #44

evook wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost certainly Google Drive unlimited.

And this is how Google Drive Unlimited becomes Google Drive Limited... Like every other Unlimited service, because people like this abuse the shit out of it then when it inevitably dies they run around exclaiming "dont blame me brah they said it was unlimited...., shouldn't have called it unlimited"

It's okay, for everyone one like this, there's 1000's like me that pay for the service and use a fraction of it.

Think of it as we are all contributing to keeping this data safe and available.

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#92

Post by idbehold » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 12:06 PM UTC

dexterdog wrote: post #86

rnhmjoj wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, companies should think twice before selling unlimited plans. Maybe set a really high cap that's enough to cover 90% of the users but unlimited means unlimited.

90% would likely be covered by a TB or 2. That would not work for marketing.

Over a million megabytes of storage!

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#93

Post by naturalgradient » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 12:08 PM UTC

chazzeromus wrote: post #77

Probably not an amazing and erudite source as others have posted but there's this tweet: https://twitter.com/chancetherapper/status/88592122075935539... Soundcloud is here to stay

I dont understand. Is this supposed to imply this rapper will somehow invest and personally try to ensure soundcloud will survive?

Or did he call the CEO, the CEO told him 'Yes we will stay'? I mean what is he supposed to say?

'No, don't bother uploading new songs, we will run out of cash soon, thanks for the call'?

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#94

Post by beardicus » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 12:08 PM UTC

Steeeve wrote: post #85

If these kind of entities actually want to preserve resources, they shouldn't be generating a petabyte of bandwidth charges. Contact soundcloud and come to an agreement that will be responsible.

Archiveteam exists mostly because your suggested course of action rarely works.

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#95

Post by beardicus » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 12:13 PM UTC

philfrasty wrote: post #48

Just from a legal standpoint: isn't „...considers the SoundCloud service in danger...“ slander? Especially since the Internet Archive isn't a nobody (with maybe some inside information?). Just remembered cases like Deutsche Bank vs Leo Kirch which are legal nightmares.

Archive Team is not the Internet Archive, and the above quote is clearly opinion.

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#96

Post by empath75 » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 12:17 PM UTC

sk0g wrote: post #90

icebraining wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

indie stuff with no copyright There's no such thing, copyright is automatic, it applies as soon as the author puts the work in some tangible medium (like an hard drive).

Huh, didn't know that! So if I record and master a random riff, I technically have a copyright on it? To be fair, I was mostly talking about ones with a record label, where you might be hounded by a label with a lot of legal representation.

If you publish it. If you just sit on it, you don't. (At least not in the sense that you can get away with suing someone that publishes the same rift later)

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#97

Post by xenophonf » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 12:20 PM UTC

diggan wrote: post #78

unicornporn wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IPFS would not be considered suitable for digital preservation. Have a look at LOCKSS[1]. [1] https://www.lockss.org/

Interested in understanding why you think it's not suitable for digital preservation? Feels like something that uses content-addressing and a P2P network is perfect for digital preservation.

In a P2P network the availability/integrity of the archived material depends on storage nodes not under the direct control of the archivist. I might trust a P2P network for content re-distribution, but I wouldn't trust it for long term storage.

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#98

Post by ClassyJacket » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 12:28 PM UTC

syshum wrote: post #44

evook wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost certainly Google Drive unlimited.

And this is how Google Drive Unlimited becomes Google Drive Limited... Like every other Unlimited service, because people like this abuse the shit out of it then when it inevitably dies they run around exclaiming "dont blame me brah they said it was unlimited...., shouldn't have called it unlimited"

Well then they shouldn't have called it unlimited.

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#99

Post by sk0g » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 12:30 PM UTC

empath75 wrote: post #96

sk0g wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh, didn't know that! So if I record and master a random riff, I technically have a copyright on it? To be fair, I was mostly talking about ones with a record label, where you might be hounded by a label with a lot of legal representation.

If you publish it. If you just sit on it, you don't. (At least not in the sense that you can get away with suing someone that publishes the same rift later)

What would publish imply?

Would putting it on a private Google Drive work? What about a Drive that's searchable and anyone can have a listen, if they so desired?

Re: Archiveteam are backing up SoundCloud

#100

Post by wastedhours » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 12:32 PM UTC

dexterdog wrote: post #86

rnhmjoj wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, companies should think twice before selling unlimited plans. Maybe set a really high cap that's enough to cover 90% of the users but unlimited means unlimited.

90% would likely be covered by a TB or 2. That would not work for marketing.

What would work for marketing if you can't compete on the raw number game is framing the amount - like Apple did with "1000 songs in your pocket".

If you want to design a cap - Goog probably has an idea of the kinds of file people store (whether it's pics or docs or videos or sheets etc...), pick a number of those that's impressive and is just lower than what your 10% power users has, and then use that to influence the package size.

2TB of files can easily be turned into "half a million photos" or like their previous ad campaigns, show how it can store every photo from birth to university for your kid or something. Or a love letter every day from first date to goodbye.

If you can't compete on the number, don't compete on the number.