This version makes files 2-4x larger than the original. You think engineers and devops like something inherently 2-4x more demanding of storage than it could b

This version makes files 2-4x larger than the original. You think engineers and devops like something inherently 2-4x more demanding of storage than it could be? You think CFOs like that? I've supported similar services, and people who think they're being clever, to exploit my FREE SERVICE to do things it was never intended to do, really piss me off. Here's an idea: ASK. Hey, Flickr, a free TB is awesome! Mind if we store arbitrary files on it? Yes, it's an attack. It's a classic predator-prey relationship. When you proposed that they prey could exert energy to defend the service, you were merely describing the next single step in that relationship. > The people who'll try to use it would be people who just want some cheap cloud-storage. ...and they won't pay, and they don't care who they hurt. Would you defend them, if they each made 100 Flickr accounts, just so they could get some more cheap cloud-storage? 1000? What if Amazon decided to implement their S3 storage on top of this free Flickr storage? Is your argument that there's nothing inherently wrong with exploiting people who offer you something... only if you REALLY, REALLY exploit it?