# Unlimited Photo Storage AT original resolutions for Amazon Prime members



## sanjosedave (Nov 4, 2014)

http://tcrn.ch/1t8AO5d


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 4, 2014)

I can just see me uploading multiple TB of images with my slow internet upload. At 1megabit /sec, it might take 2000 hours per TB to upload them  

Those that have gigabit speeds will do better, but they might run into network issues that slow them down.

I'm not knocking the free storage, it will be handy to be able to upload a few raw files and allow others access. Dropbox is pretty limited.

I'll try playing with it at some point.


----------



## jrista (Nov 4, 2014)

For me, the big question is, what is Amazon going to do with them? 


I ask, because Google has started using it's AutoAwesome, without consent, to modify photos and generate what they believe is the "best" version of a photo by automatically combining parts from multiple photos:


http://petapixel.com/2014/10/07/official-s-now-re-writing-history/


I haven't been a fan of Google since long before the NSA debacle, and I'm even less a fan of them now, because they pull that kind of crap (i.e. the creation of never-happened moments.)


If Amazon gets people to store massive volumes of photography on their servers...what are THEY going to do with it? I've learned there is always an ulterior motive, and it scares me how much people do NOT seem to value their privacy anymore... It's seriously dangerous, the proliferation of private moments, information, and data as what is now effectively "public domain"...


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Nov 5, 2014)

I haven't spent more than a few seconds skimming the info about this so far but I wonder how hard it would be to simply compress/encrypt the photos before uploading? (Good for a backup, but not for the intended cloud based photo sharing scenario that is intended.)


----------



## Valvebounce (Nov 5, 2014)

Hi Jon. 
How can you be so down on Google Auto Awsome, it has just sent me a load of awsomes, 1 jerky chunky moving image made from pictures taken minutes apart, thought it could improve crappy pictures taken from the plane of a beautiful sunset taken through 2 layers of Perspex and an ice crystal layer. 
I mean who wouldn't want another 10 minutes with the delete button?! ;D

#Sarcasm off#

Cheers, Graham.



jrista said:


> For me, the big question is, what is Amazon going to do with them?
> 
> 
> I ask, because Google has started using it's AutoAwesome, without consent, to modify photos and generate what they believe is the "best" version of a photo by automatically combining parts from multiple photos:
> ...


----------



## jrista (Nov 5, 2014)

Valvebounce said:


> Hi Jon.
> How can you be so down on Google Auto Awsome, it has just sent me a load of awsomes, 1 jerky chunky moving image made from pictures taken minutes apart, thought it could improve crappy pictures taken from the plane of a beautiful sunset taken through 2 layers of Perspex and an ice crystal layer.
> I mean who wouldn't want another 10 minutes with the delete button?! ;D
> 
> ...




Useless image creation aside, , I think technology like AutoAwesome is dangerous. As the guy who wrote the article I linked said, it's creating "moments" that never happened. What happens when it's no longer just an automated process? What happens when someone is guiding that process to create non-real images that can influence people? People are already gullible little saps these days...when someone starts misusing and abusing technology like AutoAwesome for, say, political agendas...


Dangerous technology. If people were on average more intelligent/less gullible, then I wouldn't be concerned...but man, ppls is dum!


----------



## Vivid Color (Nov 5, 2014)

I need to check into the details more, but Amazon's plan does sound promising. Does anyone else offer unlimited storage of full resolution files at this price?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 5, 2014)

jrista said:


> ... it's creating "moments" that never happened. What happens when it's no longer just an automated process? What happens when someone is guiding that process to create non-real images that can influence people?


----------



## ifp (Nov 5, 2014)

jrista said:


> Useless image creation aside, , I think technology like AutoAwesome is dangerous. As the guy who wrote the article I linked said, it's creating "moments" that never happened. What happens when it's no longer just an automated process? What happens when someone is guiding that process to create non-real images that can influence people? People are already gullible little saps these days...when someone starts misusing and abusing technology like AutoAwesome for, say, political agendas...
> 
> 
> Dangerous technology. If people were on average more intelligent/less gullible, then I wouldn't be concerned...but man, ppls is dum!



I just saw an article about a political campaign that got caught, having altered protest signs in a picture to match their political message. So... yeah. Already happens.


----------

