What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Adam Lambert sings the 2012 theme song, “Time for Miracles” view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Watch the Adam Lambert music video for the 2012 theme song. See 2012, in theaters Nov 13
54 Comments
- qualish, on 11/14/2007, -0/+17Why would I be "glad to know that Flickr staffers have spent the past weeks placing bets on the exact date and time for passing the milestone"?
- lockfist, on 11/14/2007, -0/+14It should be noted that Yahoo has been porting Yahoo Photos to Flickr last week so I am curious if this is included in the total or not.
- MikeonTV, on 11/14/2007, -1/+14So what does Facebook have? I'm sure it tops two billion.
- Goodbyeworld, on 11/14/2007, -0/+10Man, and to think I was proud when I uploaded my 100th picture.
- planckstudios, on 11/14/2007, -3/+12Why don't they work on getting the damn site to respond faster instead of placing bets on dumb *****.
- andrewcsayer, on 11/14/2007, -3/+122 billion girls - one cup
- aliguana, on 11/14/2007, -0/+8yeah, but there's photos, and there's photos. I'd rather see 100 photos from Flickr than 1000 from Facebook.
- inactive, on 11/14/2007, -0/+6I am torn between two jokes:
1. Flikr really needs an IMAGES section!
or
2. Half of them have been submitted to Digg. - spinningobo, on 11/14/2007, -0/+6Congratulations!
- chaparyan, on 11/14/2007, -0/+6only if this was your picture:
http://flickr.com/photos/88646149@N00/2000000000/ - Dokument, on 11/14/2007, -0/+4psssh, everyone knows its just icecream.....
- ocellnuri, on 11/14/2007, -0/+3It depends on the licensing that users grant for each photo.
- jotate, on 11/14/2007, -0/+3A lot of ***** photos? I didn't think they allowed those kinds of pictures on flickr...
- andrgo, on 11/14/2007, -0/+3I like Flickr because it's so handy for reaching out to many more people than you typically would.
But I think they're going to have to dump the whole "Pro" account thing and just make everything free because I'm sure they'll be outraced sooner or later. - Firehed, on 11/14/2007, -0/+3Almost every photographer and their photographer mother, sure. For just throwing up random crap, Imageshack and Photobucket seem far more common. Facebook, of course, is home to every bad picture ever taken by a drunken student - which is quite a few.
- romeyinfc, on 11/14/2007, -0/+3Not only that, but the pictures on Facebook are resized to a barely passable screen resolution, with no way to extend the photos. I understand this drives a lot of traffic to their site, but could you imagine how much Facebook could monetize the ability to order prints of your friend's photo album?
- jpt62089, on 11/14/2007, -0/+3If I did my math correctly and assuming each photo is 2MB (They have multiple sizes of each photo and some originals exceed 2MB)
That would be ~62.5 TB - davidcg, on 11/14/2007, -0/+2It would take you over 60 years to view them all. (1 second per photo)
- inactive, on 11/14/2007, -0/+2http://flickr.com/photos/88646149@N00/2000000000/
Hey! That's just down the road from my office. - aliguana, on 11/14/2007, -0/+2you'd be glad to know that you're not the only person wondering why they would be glad to know this. Glad... try saying it 10 times. Strange word.
- drjekelmrhyde, on 11/14/2007, -0/+2make it free
- Touchdown, on 11/14/2007, -0/+1The website that got me hooked on using tags
- krusader3z, on 11/14/2007, -0/+1Facebook allows users to order prints.
- madtiger, on 11/14/2007, -0/+1Um, so they are about two BILLION behind photobucket?
- Ex986Driver, on 11/14/2007, -0/+1Yahoo's service just shutdown and dumped all of the photos on to them. I wonder if they are counting those.
- mojaam, on 11/14/2007, -0/+1Wait till youtube reach that number in videos.
- editthis, on 11/14/2007, -0/+1oops that was me. heavy weekend.
- Linh, on 11/14/2007, -0/+1it is free. you just have limits. $25/yr is pretty reasonable for whatever unlimited storage means.
- chaparyan, on 11/14/2007, -1/+2neither does my mother
- ers35, on 11/14/2007, -0/+1Two billion uploads per hour? Can you validate these claims?
- ZenMojo, on 11/14/2007, -3/+4I opened an account and uploaded files on Sunday. I wonder if I was the 2 billionth.
- m487396, on 11/14/2007, -0/+1And only 1 billion of them are kittens.
- Familyguykiller, on 11/14/2007, -0/+1nice flickr rocks.
- zaii7, on 11/14/2007, -1/+2go banana
- rheaume, on 11/14/2007, -0/+1Dude, Im eating
...was eating... - Firehed, on 11/14/2007, -0/+1That's absolutely nothing for a decent-sized company. I'm pretty sure Amazon and Wal-Mart have about fifty times that (yes, around three exabytes) in CRM data. I can't remember their exact numbers, but a couple years back I'm pretty sure each had crossed the 2EB mark or so.
- Firehed, on 11/14/2007, -1/+2Yay session timeout.
Anyways, 2 megabytes * 2 000 000 000 = 3 814.69727 terabytes. So your math was awful. And Google makes the same flaw as operating systems and uses binary bytes when decimal bytes are specified - in this case, resulting in a difference of nearly 200 terabytes. Holy *****... we really need to fix that before we hit drives in that size range.
And I skipped a unit. EB should have been PB. - banmaster, on 11/14/2007, -0/+0That one BIG ASS cup!!
- GruntGrunt, on 11/14/2007, -1/+1I published the same story without seeing his up already >< The article I saw it in said Facebook had about 4.1 Billion photos.
- inactive, on 11/14/2007, -1/+1tinypic probably has 1 trillion pics stored in their servers
- vendull, on 11/14/2007, -1/+1so does flickr
- jackgh, on 11/14/2007, -0/+0Who cares...not like it wasn't gonna happen sooner or later...
- tuaninside, on 11/14/2007, -0/+0there should be a Cup for the 2 billionth picture, though.
- pelline, on 11/15/2007, -0/+02 billion, I'm responsable for about 10 of those :-)
- superKduper, on 11/14/2007, -2/+1Of all the TWO BILLION Photos on Flickr, I think this one is the best http://www.flickr.com/photos/tppllc/420158020/
- interad, on 11/14/2007, -2/+0I think Mark Z claims Facebook has the most photos of any site on the Web ... probably accurate
- infiniti370, on 11/14/2007, -2/+0I had my Yahoo! picture account for about 8 years and uploaded about 8,000 photos to Yahoo! photos over the last several years. Anyone who used Yahoo! photos knows earlier this year Yahoo! photos was shut down and you had to move all your photos or they would be lost. Yahoo! recommended everyone move their pics to Flicker (also owned my Yahoo!). They advertised Flicker as being free...WELL ITS NOT! I got an email saying my "trial" version of of Flicker is up and I need to pay $24.99 to keep using Flicker. Otherwise Flicker will only allow me to view the last 200 pictures uploaded. WHAT A RIP OFF! I could have transferred my photos to an actual free site but instead I believed Yahoo! and now I'll be charged to use Flicker. I tried moving the pics from flicker to another site but downloading and saving 8,000 pics to my computer and then uploading 8,000 pics to another site would take countless hours. IT SUX THAT YAHOO! TRICKED US INTO USING FLICKER AND NOW THEY ARE TRYING TO RIP US OFF!
- Firehed, on 11/14/2007, -4/+2They DO make that claim, and it's absolutely accurate. They have about two billion uploads an hour.
- Jrepass, on 11/14/2007, -4/+2I surprised that it took so long. Almost everyone and their mother uses Flickr.
- slickbird, on 11/14/2007, -4/+0It was only a matter of time.
-
Show 51 - 54 of 54 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is