Technology

59605 readers

3446 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

915

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 (www.techdirt.com)

submitted 11 months ago by cyrano@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/technology@lemmy.world

164 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] papertowels@lemmy.one 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Two years? Users were informed the plan ended 2 years ago. Google grandfathered them in until now. If that's not enough time I don't know what is.

Like I said, the article says they were only told it would be put in read only mode.

Can you share a source that shows Google told them "we will delete your data in two years"?

they terminated the plan for EVERYBODY and moved to explicit storage limits. In other words, exactly what you're advocating.

Good point. I would then argue that what we have now is in fact the nicer thing, because we've established it's more consumer friendly.

Google sucks, but in this case what exactly did they do wrong?

Based on the article, the only sunsetting notice given to users was that their accounts will be put into read only mode. They should've provided an explicit timeline, instead giving one weeks notice for data deletion out of the blue.

You'd think they'd learned a lesson about being explicit given the exit from unlimited plans...

[–] wahming@monyet.cc 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Meh. I'm not really trying to defend Google here, I think both sides are shitty in this situation. Again, my initial point was merely that this is a tragedy of the commons issue, and the reason we no longer have (nearly) unlimited plans is because some users decided to knowingly push the limits and abuse it to the extent that the plans had to change.

[–] papertowels@lemmy.one 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I would say that it sounds like the reason we no longer have nearly is that Google advertised it as something it wasn't - unlimited.

If they said "nearly unlimited" and "we'll start throttling your upload speed after x TB, they very much could've kept this going.

My understanding of tragedy of the commons is much more applicable to scenarios that aren't in a single parties control. Things like pollution, global warming, etc.

Things like "you said it was unlimited, but didn't account for folks taking you up on that offer" is just false/misleading advertising, or bad product planning.

I, too, can offer unlimited resources as long as folks don't take me up on the offer. However by doing so I will lose credibility.