Discord isn’t exactly known for generous file-sharing limits, still, the messaging app offered a 25MB limit to free users. The company has now updated its support page to reflect the upload limit for free users has been lowered to 10MB.

  • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    33
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    25 MB wasn’t even enough to send a single full res screenshot of my desktop.

    Its 2024 and we still lack the basic functionality of file sharing between peers without a corp dictator restricting and snooping.

    Not that the functionality does not exist (p2p, literally) but if my grandma cant receive the family pictures its not basic.

    EDIT: it is possible i am remembering this from when it was 8MB.

    Empty desktop is just a few kb but it was not that hard to open enough stuff to exceed 10MB

    Til that i have been sending screenshots of only half my screen for not reason

    • stealth_cookies@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      11 days ago

      That makes no sense. The 24MP RAW files from my camera at 25MB, no way a PNG or JPEG of a 4K (8MP) monitor are anywhere close to that big.

      • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 days ago

        I did some test, i was speaking from memory so not very accurate.

        it depends on whats on screen.

        Just desktop is 128kb but irl that rarely what i send to people.

        Just my game launcher will bump that up to 5MB

        But the 100% real experience i have is that is try to show someone a screenshot and i get a message that file size is to big so i have conditioned myself to only show the relevant half of my screen.

    • emax_gomax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 days ago

      I kinda wish we could go back to the world of people hosting their own servers and having subsets of their homedirs on ftp urls. Of course none of that is really approachable to a lot of a people :-(.

    • Kairos@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 days ago

      The issue is the absence of being able to port forward in a lot of places. UPNP exists on some networks but it’s usually disabled. But if we want actual peer to peer we’re going to need to implement some way to accept incoming connections EVERYWHERE.

      • Great Blue Heron@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        11 days ago

        Once an end-to-end, encrypted, connection is established between a pair of peers then anything can be sent through it. The establishment proces is generally facilitated by a server of some description so neither peer needs to allow inbound connections. (I’m a long, long way from being an expert on this and happy to be corrected - but this seems like network fundamentals?)

    • randombullet@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 days ago

      No way 3,840 × 2,160x2=16,588,800 pixels 16,588,800 x 10 bits = 165,888,000 bits

      165,888,000 bits / 8 bits/byte = 20,736,000 bytes

      • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 days ago

        See my edit.

        I am probably remembering this from when the limit was 8MB, which cant be that long ago i only own this monitor for a year.

    • dezmd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 days ago

      Reimplement the old WASTE client from the Nullsoft dude, this time with proper encryption and security and let’s call it a day.

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 days ago

      Not that the functionality does not exist (p2p, literally) but if my grandma cant receive the family pictures its not basic.

      What about encrypted messaging apps? Maybe your grandma can’t figure out Signal, but she could probably work out how to use WhatsApp (which uses the same encryption protocol) given how popular it is in some countries.

      • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 days ago

        Whatsapp is a product of Meta and files would still pass their proprietary servers. Let alone the metadata they collect. I refuse to use Facebook related products on principle. (Mostly stopped using google and microsoft products also)

        Singal can do actual p2p userdevice to userdevice. Only if thats not possible it will use temporary servers for storage. But i am actually against that, id prefer if the file would not send until a p2p connection is established.

        On paper the encryption of whatsapp is about as secure as Signal but can we trust Facebook to not implement a backdoor?. There open source llm-ai (llama) is by far the most intelligent model for its size. I plore people to ask what data Meta used to archive that result.