[jackvalentine]

> when it inevitably dies they run around exclaiming "dont blame me brah they said it was unlimited...., shouldn't have called it unlimited"

Well... yeah? If you let people advertise 'unlimited' but they can't actually deliver, you end up with a kind of market for lemons situation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons

[throwaway2048]

Reposting my comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14716912

-----------------------------

There is a strongly utilitarian argument to not allowing such false statements.

It devalues the products of people that aren't bullshitting you. Say with fake-unlimited the "real limit" is 4TB before they start terminating you, but a different provider provides 5TB of capacity.

Because the former is allowed to outright lie, there is no way for the latter to effectively communicate that they are in fact offering a better product, instead they too have to make a bullshit "fake unlimited" claim to compete. Now because nobody has to actually back their claims with anything, they are infact massively incentivised to cut the "real storage" limits, because it will cut their costs, and they can still keep making the same claims.

Its a market for lemons[1] race to the bottom, and everyone loses, producer and consumer because scamming liars cannot be reliably assessed beforehand. So consumers lose faith in the entire market segment, and providers offering actual legitimate services become unsustainable.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons

-----------------------------

If you allow sellers to lie about information-opaque things like this, you drive the entire market to a shittier equilibrium, it should absolutely not be allowed.

[tinus_hn]

It's like you go to a restaurant that offers unlimited refills and they don't allow you to keep refilling your cup while you're throwing the drinks onto the floor. False advertising!

[jackvalentine]

I think you quite clearly know the difference between the two situations. Don't debase yourself.

[syshum]

Except for the fact that when Google, Amazon and the rest talk about "unlimited" they are referring to unlimited PERSONAL storage of data you create as a person, this would include backups of your personal computer, photos, important documents,etc

Not backing up SoundCloud or the entire Internet for $5 a month

[mynewtb]

I would love to have my own personal backup of SoundCloud. It's like having a huge library at home, only not limited by physical space.

[delinka]

>... only not limited by physical space.

Well, it still kinda is - the physical drives have to live somewhere... ;-)

[pavel_lishin]

I didn't create my tax documents, I didn't create the professionally shot photos of my kid, and it's arguable whether it was truly I that created KSP game save files. I definitely didn't create a lot of the work documents that end up living there, either.

[Veratyr]

> they are referring to unlimited PERSONAL

Actually Google only offers unlimited to business and education accounts, so they're absolutely not referring to personal data.

[syshum]

Jesus H Christ..

People are too f'in litteral, first

Unlimited === Store everything every created

PERSONAL in the context of the discussion would include documents created by a person in general course of business, my point is very clearly and only pedantic trolls do not understand the meaning of point I was attempting to address.

Business use would be for the business that signed up for the service, not for storing an entire copy of SoundCloud

[Veratyr]

> Business use would be for the business that signed up for the service, not for storing an entire copy of SoundCloud

What if that business is Soundcloud? As far as I can tell, Google places no limits on business users, numerical or otherwise.

[supercoder]

This is such a cool idea. Going to backup Soundcloud myself tomorrow !

[dexterdog]

So I can backup my computer every day, encrypt the blob and upload it?