Hi,
Yes, James' pricing doesn't match the actual cost.
We do not need to check all images uploaded to Commons, only the suspicious
ones (small images without EXIF data).
If we check 2,000 images a day (more than enough IMO), that would cost $7 a
day, so $210 a month.
Regards,
Yann
Le mar. 18 juin 2019 à 01:11, James Salsman <jsalsman(a)gmail.com> a écrit :
Google has been offering reverse image search as part
of their vision API:
https://cloud.google.com/vision/docs/internet-detection
The pricing is $3.50 per 1,000 queries for up to 5,000,000 queries per
month:
https://cloud.google.com/vision/pricing
Above that quantity "Contact Google for more information":
https://cloud.google.com/contact/
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 8:23 AM James Forrester
<jforrester(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 06:28, Yann Forget <yannfo(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> It has been suggested many times to ask Google for an access to their
API
> for searching images,
> so that we could have a bot tagging copyright violations (no free
access
> for automated search).
> That would the single best improvement in Wikimedia Commons workflow
for
years.
And it would benefit all Wikipedia projects, big or small.
Yann,
As you should remember, we asked Google for API access to their reverse
image search system, years ago (maybe 2013?). They said that there isn't
such an API any more (they killed it off in ~2012, I think), and that
they
wouldn't make a custom one for us. The only
commercial alternative we
found
at the time would have cost us approximately
US$3m a month at upload
frequency for Commons then, and when contacted said they wouldn't do any
discounts for Wikimedia. Obviously, this is far too much for the
Foundation's budget (it would be even more now), and an inappropriate way
to spend donor funds. Providing the service in-house would involve
building
a search index of the entire Internet's
(generally non-free) images and
media, which would cost a fortune and is totally incompatible with the
mission of the movement. This was relayed out to Commons volunteers at
the
time, I'm pretty sure.
Obviously Google might have changed their mind, though it seems
unlikely. I
imagine that Google engineers and product owners
don't follow this list,
so
it's unlikely that they will re-create the
API without being asked
directly.
J.
--
*James D. Forrester* (he/him <http://pronoun.is/he> or they/themself
<http://pronoun.is/they/.../themself>)
Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>