in reply to Larger profile pic than 80KB?

I notice that vroom explicitly stated the limit would be 80kb in his announcement of the feature, Home Node Image. He did not give a justification. I presume it was some combination of (a) keeping database consumption to a reasonable limit (80kb is by itself larger than the maximum size of a textual node); and (b) a guideline that an avatar or profile pic shouldn't need to be large, perhaps based on (c) not overburdening the download bandwidth of users. These all seem reasonable to me.

Note that the limitation is only imposed at upload time; the database field storing the image data is actually limited to 16Mb, so we could theoretically put a larger image in the database than 80kb. Feel free to submit your reasonable supplications to the gods via /msg. :-)

Also, if monks would like to argue that the limit should be something higher than 80kb, please discuss here. Thanks!

Today's latest and greatest software contains tomorrow's zero day exploits.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Larger profile pic than 80KB?
by Fletch (Bishop) on Oct 03, 2023 at 00:56 UTC

    Anecdotally no one should ever need more than 640k . . .

    The cake is a lie.
    The cake is a lie.
    The cake is a lie.

Re^2: Larger profile pic than 80KB?
by stevieb (Canon) on Oct 03, 2023 at 08:57 UTC

    Thank you jdporter for this responsive professional answer. It does satisfy everything.

    Update: I like the secret being kept that those privy to this thread can dump a few MB behind the scenes without anyone else knowing, so no changes to the default are requested here ;)

      PS - So far, this has never been done. All of the user images currently in the db are under 80kb.