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 <jsals...@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 > <jforres...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 06:28, Yann Forget <yan...@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@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@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@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> -- Jai Jagat 2020 Grand March Coordination Team https://www.jaijagat2020.org/ +91-74 34 93 33 58 (also WhatsApp) _______________________________________________ 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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
