4 ms·

So that is 3400 Terrabytes of data in a year for 2 billion users. I used the number 2 billion because it's approximately the number of people on Facebook. Not

So that is 3400 Terrabytes of data in a year for 2 billion users. I used the number 2 billion because it's approximately the number of people on Facebook. Not vetted, just for a quick calculation.

ksec 5y ago
It is 3400 Terrabytes of Data per day for 2 Billion users. Or 1241 Petabyte, 1.241 Exabyte per year. No wonder why HDD maker are happy.
- hidden-spyder 5y ago
  Oh, yeah! You're right. In between trying to convert from MBs to TBs, I forgot that I was looking at the day scale, not year. 1.2 Exabytes a year is a lot.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - sudhirj 5y ago
    It’s 12 AWS Snowmobiles, which are container trucks full of hard drives. A corporation that generates that much data probably has more container trucks of furniture.
- buran77 5y ago
  I don't think they factor in compression here. It's likely the 1.7MB they're talking about is raw data. Google's location history for example can be compressed down to very manageable single digit percentages even with fast compression. Edit. I'm talking about Grab, the "transportation, e-commerce, payments, and financial services" company in the article, which sounds like it collects little if any multimedia from users. Also thinking more of data the company generates from the user (usage history, metadata and collection), not what the user generates and uploads. The 1.7MB figure can't really be extrapolated for a Facebook-like data set (or worse, YouTube). Social networks have a lot of mostly multimedia content created and uploaded by the user, and lower volume of company generated content like location tracking and lists of interactions.
  - GordonS 5y ago
    Isn't it also likely that a lot of that "raw" data is comprised of JPEGs (which are already compressed)?
  - pwdisswordfish0 5y ago
    If it’s raw data and not simply actual disk use divided by users, I would guess the savings from compression likely pale in comparison to metadata such as indices, backups and other overhead.
yosito 5y ago
Is there any reason to believe that Facebook is collecting the same amount of data as Grab?
- boomboomsubban 5y ago
  It's reasonable to assume they're collecting a comparable amount. Even if Facebook collected half as much, 1700 terabytes per day is still a lot.

So that is 3400 Terrabytes of data in a year for 2 billion users. I used the number 2 billion because it's approximately the number of people on Facebook. Not vetted, just for a quick calculation.

ksec 5y ago

It is 3400 Terrabytes of Data per day for 2 Billion users. Or 1241 Petabyte, 1.241 Exabyte per year. No wonder why HDD maker are happy.

hidden-spyder 5y ago
Oh, yeah! You're right. In between trying to convert from MBs to TBs, I forgot that I was looking at the day scale, not year. 1.2 Exabytes a year is a lot.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- sudhirj 5y ago
  It’s 12 AWS Snowmobiles, which are container trucks full of hard drives. A corporation that generates that much data probably has more container trucks of furniture.
buran77 5y ago
I don't think they factor in compression here. It's likely the 1.7MB they're talking about is raw data. Google's location history for example can be compressed down to very manageable single digit percentages even with fast compression. Edit. I'm talking about Grab, the "transportation, e-commerce, payments, and financial services" company in the article, which sounds like it collects little if any multimedia from users. Also thinking more of data the company generates from the user (usage history, metadata and collection), not what the user generates and uploads. The 1.7MB figure can't really be extrapolated for a Facebook-like data set (or worse, YouTube). Social networks have a lot of mostly multimedia content created and uploaded by the user, and lower volume of company generated content like location tracking and lists of interactions.
- GordonS 5y ago
  Isn't it also likely that a lot of that "raw" data is comprised of JPEGs (which are already compressed)?
- pwdisswordfish0 5y ago
  If it’s raw data and not simply actual disk use divided by users, I would guess the savings from compression likely pale in comparison to metadata such as indices, backups and other overhead.

yosito 5y ago

Is there any reason to believe that Facebook is collecting the same amount of data as Grab?

boomboomsubban 5y ago
It's reasonable to assume they're collecting a comparable amount. Even if Facebook collected half as much, 1700 terabytes per day is still a lot.