• Jarmer@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    129
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    so many people left reddit and fled to discord. So sad. Discord was ALWAYS going to enshittify itself to death, but okay people.

  • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    99
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m surprised they didn’t put a time limit on the storage since they are not a file hosting platform.

      • lemmyingly@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 months ago

        I find it weird that they upload content to their own servers even when you provide them with an external link.

    • Sudomeapizza@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I know there’s been several news items regarding file changes to links within discord, like Link Expiration, file size increase for free users, and all i found from a quick search was this reddit post talking about how their file wasnt deleted, but the link directs to discord saying “This content is no longer available.”

      I don’t know how long it is, but to wether or not it was removed by discord, or file expired, im not sure

  • Dave.@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    83
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Dammit now I have to reduce the block size of my discord-based cold storage filesystem.

    • pup_atlas@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      69
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t see this as enshittification. It’s a real thing that’s happening, but raw storage is expensive. They pay for it directly. Unlike artificially limiting features that are “free” to them, this genuinely isn’t, it’s not even really super discounted for them on the backend. They’re likely just paying for a series of S3 buckets.

      • Count042@lemmy.ml
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        54
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I’m a sys admin/devops engineer, and yes, storage is far more expensive then people realize.

        This is the very definition of enshittification.

        EDIT: To those downvoting:

        Do you actually know what the definition of enshittification is? Apparently not.

        Enshittification (alternately, crapification and platform decay) is a pattern in which online products and services decline in quality. Initially, vendors create high-quality offerings to attract users, then they degrade those offerings to better serve business customers, and finally degrade their services to users and business customers to maximize profits for shareholders.

        It doesn’t matter that the cost of storage is a real thing. They gave things of value away for free to grow their user base and to try and capture network effects. Now that they think they have that they are taking away ( or decreasing ) the free stuff of value they gave away.

        The fact that storage has value is literally an important part of enshitification.

        It wouldn’t be enshitification if they gave away free stuff that wasn’t valuable.

        • tyler@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          2 months ago

          It’s not enshittification because it literally doesn’t follow the second part of your own definition. Needing to change your offerings because your internal prices increase is normal business. Enshittification literally is from companies offering stuff to entice users and then they realize they have nothing else to offer to businesses, so they remove features in order to sell them to businesses or to increase ads.

          • pup_atlas@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            This was my core point. I don’t consider a business raising prices or gating features as a direct result of those features increasing their cost as “enshittification”. Stickers being paid, custom emojis, etc, that doesn’t cost Discord anything to provide, making that paid is enshittification; But if the feature itself costs the business actual money to provide, does everyone just expect them to eat that cost forever, in a lot of cases for absolutely no revenue from the users?

            Calling out businesses for not giving stuff that costs them money away for free just, doesn’t fundamentally make sense to me. Why is it just expected of Discord that they pay to store all your large files? A lot of “freemium” services like GMail recoup some of that money by mining your email for data that it can sell to advertisers, or eating the cost in an attempt to lock you into an ecosystem where you’ll spend money. Storing files on Discord is neither of those things.

            Don’t get me wrong, a lot of services are enshittifying, and making their services worse so you spend more money with them— but adjusting your quotas and pricing to reflect your real world cost of business is not that. To frame it as though you are entitled to free compute and resources from companies that don’t owe you anything comes off as just that, entitled. The cloud isn’t free. If you want to use a service, you should pay for it if you can.

      • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        2 months ago

        Except not, this is what social media is supposed to do, allow people to upload things to share. They’ve done perfectly well for all these years on it, it’s not some new crazy problem. It’s existing functionality they are removing, that’s on them.

        • tyler@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Discord isn’t social media. What is with everyone just referring to every tech company product as “social media”!?

          • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I use discord to keep up with what my friends are doing, look at pictures that they post, etc. We used to use Facebook for the same thing back when it was The Facebook and required a university email address and didn’t have ads. How is that not social media?

        • pup_atlas@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Discord isn’t a social media. With platforms like facebook, you’re still paying for all your storage, just not with money. There’s ads all over the platform, and all your content is data mined to be sold to advertisers. Discord doesn’t data mine (to my knowledge) OR run ads. Would you prefer a higher limit at the cost of having ads all over the interface? The AWS bill has to get paid somehow, nothing is free.

      • Butterpaderp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Based on all of the changes discord has made over the past few years, its absolutely enshittification

      • zaph@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        2 months ago

        Just like YouTube. They need the ad revenue to keep all those videos saved to their servers. It’s only natural you watch a 30 second ad every 10 seconds. It isn’t enshittification because it’s a real thing that’s happening, and raw storage is expensive. They pay for it directly.

    • willya@lemmyf.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s a real issue. It’s amazing they allow it like it is now.

  • Jessica@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Well that didn’t last very long. It was 8 MB for like six years and then it just went to 25 MB maybe a year ago and now we’re back down to 10 MB.

    I’m surprised they aren’t offsetting the cost by selling all our data to language learning models like everyone else is

    • tetris11@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I’m surprised they aren’t offsetting the cost by selling all our data to language learning models like everyone else is

      Hah. Hahaha. Hahahahahahaahahahahahaha. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

      • Jessica@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Just to be clear, I 100% think they are selling our data. What I meant was I’m surprised they’re concerned about the size of the uploads when they could just be selling the uploaded data.

        • Lucy :3@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 months ago

          I am using png. Level 0 compression tho and in 4k (3840*2160), sometimes even 4k + 2*1440p (2560*1440), but it’s already too large with just my main 4k monitor.

            • Lucy :3@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              Because it was never a problem. It’s a little bit faster for encoding and decoding, and no service ever had problems with the file size. Especially not my selfhosted stuff. Every service, except discord. As I now have resorted to using Vencord or just uploading most media to Nextcloud, I don’t have that many issues with it anymore, anyway.

              • NekuSoul@lemmy.nekusoul.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                2 months ago

                It’s a little bit faster for encoding and decoding

                On the other hand, the time spent uploading/downloading much smaller files probably more than makes up for that, although even that difference might get pretty small with modern internet connections.

                • Lucy :3@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Especially in times where using WiFi is faster than ethernet, because my network ports are only gigabit.

              • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Because it was never a problem.

                But you literally started this thread because it’s a problem. And then you spent more time defending your bad choice on a Lemmy discussion than you will ever save in your entire life decompressing PNGs.

            • Lucy :3@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              Yes. But in theory it’s still a performance hit, and as I have enough local storage (and typically use services with high limits), and I’m too lazy to change grims config just for discord, I never changed it and used Vencord instead.

                • Lucy :3@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Because even though it saves over 29 MB, it also takes more than 20 times as long. And that’s just on my laptop, 1920x1080 + 2*1680x1050. On my PC it’s even worse.

                  I have thousands of GB of high speed storage, Gigabit internet, but only a Ryzen 5 2600 and a i5-1145G7.

          • tetris11@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            2 months ago

            PNG started out as ZIP(BMP) and hasn’t gotten that much better. Use JPEG. The pixels you lose are not worth crying about

            • B0rax@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              ·
              2 months ago

              JPEG for graphics like screenshots is not very efficient. For stuff like that, png is simply superior. (But not with compression 0)

              PNG is not good for photos though.

              • tetris11@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                why though? The graphics represented in the screen are already squashed and scaled, so you wouldn’t be preserving their quality in any case. If you’re worried about text, JPEG should still be able to handle it under high quality settings

                • B0rax@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  We can ask the same the other way around: why do you want to use jpg if it results in a bigger size and worse quality than png?

            • lemmyingly@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              2 months ago

              Or they could just compression for their PNGs. PNG is a lossless format so they’ll only lose a fraction of a second during creation.

            • Lucy :3@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              I use 4k because I like seeing a lot of stuff at the same time in good quality.
              I make screenshots of my whole screen to share all the stuff in the highest detail.
              Using jpeg would result in literally unreadable pictures.

              • VOwOxel@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Depends on the Quality setting and version of jpeg. Even the original jpeg, on high quality, will result in little to no data loss. IIRC, Jpeg can even do lossless, with the only caveat being that it doesn’t save alpha channels (but screenshots don’t need to have transparency, anyway). Newer versions of jpeg, such as jpeg-2000 (and the much less broadly supported jpeg-XL) have much better compression and provide higher image quality at lower file size.

                “jpegification” or “Deep-frying” only really occurs with the original jpeg at low quality settings.

    • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’m surprised they aren’t offsetting the cost by selling all our data to language learning models like everyone else is

      aren’t they doing it? but at least by looking at how much they like locking out people until they give out their phone number, I suspect they are not collecting it without having further use for it

    • y0kai@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      “by selling all our data to language learning models like everyone else is”

      I imagine China is using it for free since Tencent owns a 38% stake.

    • gencha@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      They increased to 25 to encourage media uploads to train their own models with. They now have collected enough metrics to realize, most valuable content is below 10MB. Now they are optimizing. They won’t lose anything valuable to them and the users who are impacted might even buy Nitro now. Win-win for them

      • Jessica@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        It might have only even been like six months. It was in the little change log pop up during one of the updates at some point

  • davel@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    Storage (and transfer and processing) has only ever gotten cheaper, but okay.

    • linearchaos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Sure it’s getting cheaper, but is it getting cheaper faster than their need for it?

      I’ve always expected their business model was unsustainable probably only able to manage through venture capital and growth.

      There’s hardly even any competition, their free product is substantial. Even fully funding a server is barely enough to cover a bare metal node.

      This is just the introduction to cost savings. As they wade into market saturation, and still need to provide growth in numbers they’ll need to pinch the free users into paying and pinch the paying users into paying enough to fully fund the service. Of course it won’t stop there…

      Edit: FFS dictation can’t ‘their’ it’s way out of a wet paper bag.

    • Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yes but are your storage Managers doing anything? Going on long lunches and racking up bar tabs? Expensing escorts?

    • MerchantsOfMisery@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Until a viable alternative is presented, I doubt Discord will die anytime soon. Part of the problem is people have a hard time accepting that even if you make the best meal in town, you’ve gotta get people to step inside before they’ll try it. To an extent, this does involve winning a popularity contest of sorts if you want Discord to die.

      I think often times folks are torn between enjoying a space/app as is, and making compromises to attract a larger group. IMO Linux has the same issue and that’s part of why die hard fanboys get so aggressively defensive when this is brought up.

      It’s the software equivalent of being the bitter "nice guy" that simultaneously wants to attract a girlfriend (users) but is kind of an asshole to women. You might think you don’t stink but please wear deodorant.

      • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yeah i also don’t think it’s dying hence the plea. But thing is, i don’t want alternative. I want this shit to die so i never want to see “join our discord” spammed absolutely everywhere when i want to get some info on anything.

        • MerchantsOfMisery@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Signal isn’t an alternative to Discord. I use both and they’re used very differently. Group movie watching for example is pretty easy on Discord.

          Digg had users and people jumped ship to Reddit because it was better.

  • MerchantsOfMisery@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    2 months ago

    If Discord was open source, I actually would not mind paying a fee for it. Fixed or reccurring, ideally the former. But that’s never happening. And forget buying that Nitro thing.

      • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Revolt looks close, but it isn’t self hosted so it is worthless. Revolt will eventually become what discord is if it got big enough.

        I am tired of changing services, I want off this clown carousel of:

        new product - gains popularity - enshitification

        • dnzm@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Same here, so unless something is fully open source, self hostable and preferably federating, I’m not picking it up.

    • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      A smaller size limit on what amounts to free file hosting isn’t exactly enshittification. Servers and hard drives aren’t free.

  • pedz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    I am fortunate enough to know how to set up VMs and use Linux, so I run my own IRC server with a web interface (TheLounge). I can set the upload limit to what I want and settled for 100MB. This way my friends and I are not at the mercy of some proprietary software.

    I do pay for a dedicated server that I also use to host my games’ servers and also a mumble server, but it’s so worth it, just to have control over our stuff.

  • graphene@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    They decreased it?? People always complain about max file sizes being too small.

    Also, how is telegram able to offer 2 GB per file and 4 GB on premium? In comparison, that seems astronomical!

    • nossaquesapao@lemmy.eco.br
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I believe telegram manages that with severe upload and download speed limits, but Telegram has always been a bit shady, hasn’t it? Who knows how they financially support all that.

      • Joe Cool@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        About 500MBit/s on Telegram Desktop. They currently have 10 million paying subscribers out of ~950 million users.

      • graphene@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Telegrams billionaire founder claims that he is bankrolling the thing with his personal wealth. I’m pretty sure he also claimed at one point that the average user cost them $6 per year, or something along those lines.

  • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Maybe they should just delete their data every month. Holding 1 20mb file or 2 10mb files aren’t much different