does Steemit edit the files we have uploaded?
I just noticed that (as far as I can tell) ALL image files I have ever uploaded to Steemit - which is about 1000 - have been edited without my permission.
When uploaded, the file size limit was 1.0 mb. There was no image pixel limit, as long as the file size was under a megabyte.
Now, any image file that had a width larger than 640 pixels appears to have been modified. Images have been resized so their width is a tiny 640 pixels, with a corresponding reduction to the image height.
Here's a file I added to the blockchain last July, back when Bitcoin was $8000 USD:
Can you understand this image, after the edit? It was much more clear before, even at full screen. (Right-click and 'view image' to see it at 640p instead of stretched to 800p on your feed.)
Even if you CAN see it clearly enough, any change in a file I uploaded bothers me. I intended that image to appear a certain way. I chose those pixels carefully. Then somebody came along and changed them, making small text hard to read, making facial expressions different, changing nuances the file's owner may not have wanted changed. I paid the costs of adding the data to the blockchain. What justification does anyone have for changing it?
One of the big selling features of blockchain technology (and Steemit) was that once a file is added to the blockchain, it is permanent. Is that still true? Is there a way I can access the original files?
In all, this doesn't give much of a sense of "your content is safe on the blockchain" feel. Maybe it's not a huge deal to some people who work mainly in text or video, but to photographers and image crafters like myself, it is.
And it's also the principle. How can files be edited without the owner's permission? (Or, are we not really the owners of our content, much like the way FaceBook works?)
Thanks for any clarification you can provide - pun intended, despite the disturbing nature of this topic.
DRutter
Indeed @zedikaredirect is correct.
The Steem blockchain only stores text. You did not pay the price to store a picture on the Steem blockchain. That price would be very high. You only stored the link that points to a centralized server. That is where the picture gets saved.
There are many places to store the picture. Busy and Steempeak have their own servers. They are a bit slower but maybe they don't modify the pictures. You could also use already established services like imgur.com or even Google Drive.
When it comes down to it, the max size of an entire block on the Steem blockchain is 65KB. There is no room to even store a picture. It is possible, but someone would have to create a custom script that linked all the information across multiple full blocks just to display a single picture. I won't lie: I've considered doing it just for fun.
https://steemit.com/steemdev/@edicted/65-kb-max-length-post-keywords-javascript-steem-api
Take this post for example. I filled an entire block with 65KB worth of text.
Heh, that post is pretty cool.
It seems after almost 2 years I'm still figuring out what the Steem blockchain actually is, and isn't, and what Steemit actually is, and isn't, what parts overlap, and where there are holes.
I love so much about this whole thing, but so much of it seems like it's moving slowly.
I feel like several dozen of my best posts are now much harder to read, and/or basically pointless. Some can be re-done using smaller images or another image host, but I wasn't anticipating having to do that.
And stuff just like this keeps happening, over and over, every few weeks there's another downgrade or side-step.
Look into IPFS.
Will do.
It's all a little much for a simple content-creator. IMO we need to be making it as easy as possible for people with content, to bring it to the blockchain. Barriers between the blockchain and quality unique content must be found and removed. Some content creators (fine art producers for example) might not have any programming background. I do understand html and I've been using PCs since they became available in the 80s, so I'm fairly computer savvy.
I guarantee there are other image crafters out there who don't like their pixels being changed or moved. It's not right. Files should never be changed without the artist's consent, not even for whatever excuse is being tossed around this time ("it's getting too expensive to continue the blockchain unless we turn all your photos into thumbnails and limit your posts with Resource Credits".)
Realistically, there should be somewhere in the internet people with quality unique images can go, without having to learn any new code or procedures, and upload their images reliably, without having them altered later. I swear, we nearly had that back in 2003 or so, but it never actually happened. Here we are living in the distant future of 2019 now, and we still can't upload small JPGs anywhere without having them become somebody else's property, or being edited without your permission.
The blockchain's proponents promise much more than it delivers.
"Keep waiting". Nah, done waiting. I know the technology exists and is being withheld for political and economic reasons.
But as a computer layman, all I can do is hope the promises someday finally start coming true.
Until then I'll certainly research InterPlanetary File System :)
I don't think there is a conspiracy and the technology is being withheld. Lots of people are working on this problem. The reason I mentioned IPFS is that once you upload something to it (say an image at a specific size), it cannot be altered (it's immutable).
The issue is the cost of storage and bandwidth when you're talking about images and video. Somebody has to pay for it. Even in the case of IPFS. That's why DTube videos disappear after awhile. If you want to make sure your DTube videos never go offline, you're going to have to "pin" them on your own IPFS node (or pay someone else to do pin them).
Putting large blobs of data on a blockchain is a bad idea as it would make the blockchain costly to transmit and store (which is something that leads to centralization). Better to simply have pointers (e.g.: IPFS hashes) to the content stored elsewhere.
Thanks for the explanation.
I understand that there are real costs to do with data storage and transfer. I'm sure that, unregulated, a total open system would result in certain people and groups abusing free data storage and/or transfer.
I think we'll be able to overcome a lot of the costs, but considering scaling, it may always be better not to have certain blobs of data on a blockchain.
I'm happy there are many eyes and minds on it all. Simple content creators like myself have to at some point just trust that the tech experts are doing what's best.
Speaking of content creators, I really think we have to keep it easy and convenient for them to provide their content. He/she(s) who figures out how to make the content-creators happy, will be able to make everything else work. A steady flow of exceptional unique content that people want to consume is a powerful and valuable thing. If we succeed here, that's what we'll have, and I guess I'm proactively protective of it. Like I said, I'm happy it's open source, so I don't have to be paranoid that anyone might try and manipulate or co-opt this powerful and valuable thing we're all putting ourselves into.
All those glorious macro photos of cannabis trichomes!!?! :(
Here's a typical class photo sized down to 640p.
Which one's your kid? Kinda hard to tell....
It's 2005, shouldn't we be able to do better by now?
At least no facial recognition software would ever be an issue.... :/
Hey drutter, several people complained about this, it kind of depends of where people browse steemit.
As a first rough explanation (not solution), the text is stored on the blockchain, the images are hosted on IPFS (steemimages?), the link is of dynamic from what i understand, because i was able to edit the size in the adress bar (not on yours tough), so the file is actually uploaded as original but shown differently according to the format on adress or where it is viewed.
At least i believe it's like this, hopefully someone will update us if there was some changes.
Thanks for complaining ;)
They'd better not! We're upset enough as it is that the platforms to upload videos like @Dtube erase your videos after about a month.
I think the files still exist, it's just that it becomes exceedingly difficult to stream them, but yeah. At first it was "free, awesome, uncensored" and now it's "not free, different than you thought, censored".
I'm confident that soon (hopefully) somewhere will become available for us content-creators, where we not only don't have to pay to share our content, but they don't resize our files or censor us either. It's gotta be just around the corner!
Only text is saved to the blockchain. Images are linked to Steemit, Inc. servers, by my understanding.
The blockchain is only text, wow, I didn't even know that.
So perhaps it's an issue with Steemit then. I wonder if they announced this anywhere? Ugh :(
You may find something in the FAQ on steemit.com.