3 ms·

> Beginning on June 11, 2018, you’ll need to enable billing with a credit card and have a valid API key for all projects. This will give you the ability to scal

> Beginning on June 11, 2018, you’ll need to enable billing with a credit card and have a valid API key for all projects. This will give you the ability to scale easily with less downtime and fewer performance issues. In addition, we’re simplifying our 18 individual APIs into three products: Maps, Routes, and Places. > Also, in June 2016 we announced that we would stop supporting keyless usage, meaning any request that doesn’t include an API key or Client ID. This will go into effect on June 11th, and keyless access will no longer be supported. At that time, keyless calls to the Maps JavaScript API and Street View API will return low-resolution maps watermarked with “for development purposes only.” Keyless calls to any of the following APIs will return an error: Maps Static API (including Static Street View), Directions API, Distance Matrix API, Geocoding API, Geolocation API, Places API, Roads API, and Time Zone API. https://cloud.google.com/maps-platform/user-guide/ https://cloud.google.com/maps-platform/user-guide/

canada_dry 8y ago
The only silver lining is that www.openstreetmap.org (OSM) will hopefully get more love. Since google admits that 98% of current users will continue to incur 0 cost this is simply a blatant way of getting a real name associated with their user data.
- jedberg 8y ago
  Why does everyone always assume the worst? > this is simply a blatant way of getting a real name associated with their user data Or maybe it's a way to control access to their systems in a more reasonable and auditable way, and prevent some abuse too.
  - tj89 8y ago
    don't forget they are raising their prices a ton as well
  - theDoug 8y ago
    Any service priced $free or not tied to a credit card tends to see people play at incredibly dumb levels of abuse. Within a month of Gmail going public I remember people already trying to string accounts together as a makeshift multi-GB FTP store. Disclosure: I work in Google Cloud, not on this
    - jedberg 8y ago
      Yup. As someone who ran a free service for many years, it’s amazing how creative the abusers can be.
    - derivagral 8y ago
      For what it is worth, I had a fun college project for a class doing exactly this ("distributed filesystem".) Back before github and dropbox took off, anyway.
      - tonto 8y ago
        Seems like many college os(?) classes tested making FUSE FS systems
  - ageofwant 8y ago
    Not assuming the worst has gotten us to the current state of personal exposure to entities whose core welfare concerns does not align with or extend those of an individual. Not assuming the worst as default will only make matters worse. Even if Google has very good and honest intentions with gathering this information at this time, you have to assume the inevitability of that changing in future, either under duress of corporate existence or being compelled by larger more powerful actors. Have I read the above 5 years ago I would have rolled my eyes at yet another privacy nut raving on the internets.
  - gmiller123456 8y ago
    > Why does everyone always assume the worst? If the worst isn't part of the strategy, they should explicitly forbid themselves from doing the worst in their Terms of Service. Or at least publicly advertised in a legally enforceable manner. The fact that they don't is pretty good red flag that they either are doing it or want to leave the door open to doing it later.
- ceejayoz 8y ago
  > Since google admits that 98% of current users will continue to incur 0 cost this is simply a blatant way of getting a real name associated with their user data. I'd imagine it's more a way to make sure the remaining 2% don't just spin up a new account every time they hit a limit.

canada_dry 8y ago

The only silver lining is that www.openstreetmap.org (OSM) will hopefully get more love. Since google admits that 98% of current users will continue to incur 0 cost this is simply a blatant way of getting a real name associated with their user data.

jedberg 8y ago
Why does everyone always assume the worst? > this is simply a blatant way of getting a real name associated with their user data Or maybe it's a way to control access to their systems in a more reasonable and auditable way, and prevent some abuse too.
- tj89 8y ago
  don't forget they are raising their prices a ton as well
- theDoug 8y ago
  Any service priced $free or not tied to a credit card tends to see people play at incredibly dumb levels of abuse. Within a month of Gmail going public I remember people already trying to string accounts together as a makeshift multi-GB FTP store. Disclosure: I work in Google Cloud, not on this
  - jedberg 8y ago
    Yup. As someone who ran a free service for many years, it’s amazing how creative the abusers can be.
  - derivagral 8y ago
    For what it is worth, I had a fun college project for a class doing exactly this ("distributed filesystem".) Back before github and dropbox took off, anyway.
    - tonto 8y ago
      Seems like many college os(?) classes tested making FUSE FS systems
- ageofwant 8y ago
  Not assuming the worst has gotten us to the current state of personal exposure to entities whose core welfare concerns does not align with or extend those of an individual. Not assuming the worst as default will only make matters worse. Even if Google has very good and honest intentions with gathering this information at this time, you have to assume the inevitability of that changing in future, either under duress of corporate existence or being compelled by larger more powerful actors. Have I read the above 5 years ago I would have rolled my eyes at yet another privacy nut raving on the internets.
- gmiller123456 8y ago
  > Why does everyone always assume the worst? If the worst isn't part of the strategy, they should explicitly forbid themselves from doing the worst in their Terms of Service. Or at least publicly advertised in a legally enforceable manner. The fact that they don't is pretty good red flag that they either are doing it or want to leave the door open to doing it later.
ceejayoz 8y ago
> Since google admits that 98% of current users will continue to incur 0 cost this is simply a blatant way of getting a real name associated with their user data. I'd imagine it's more a way to make sure the remaining 2% don't just spin up a new account every time they hit a limit.