Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The girl in the second picture is a real sweetie. I know what she needs.namron711 said:
Boxlicker101 said:Both the link and the attachment were left alone.
Let's try something else. I am posting another pic, strictly hardcore porn.![]()
attachment and the hardcore
attachment have both been deleted while the link is undisturbed. It is also strictly soft core. Rev_Lovejoy said:Question?
Oh, I have a technical question for experienced posters.
Is it better to upload images to Lit in msgs, or to insert links to sites where images have already been uploaded? As far as time, capacity, bandwidth is concerned?
I mean, are Lit databases overflowing with all our old porn images?
Thanks,
The Right Rev
Rev_Lovejoy said:Well, I was thinking in terms of copying pics to a database like Imageshack or Shutterfly and linking to them here (although the Terms of Service of those sites forbid porn, they seem to ignore it) --
but it appears that Lit reorganized their databases around 2002, purged a lot of pics from old msgs, and now the pic attachment index ID into their database is only around 523,000 (for over 13 million msgs) --
at a max of 100,000 bytes per pic that's only 50 Gb --
search time is still reasonable, and so's quality --
Sooo, I'll just keep uploading attachments here, I guess **
If what you have divined is correct, Reverend, and I hope it is, why don't they eliminate pics on a first in, first out basis?Rev_Lovejoy said:We had a discussion here last summer about data base capacity and disappearing pics. The current number of stored attachments as indicated by the attachment index ID (i.e., https://forum.literotica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=579470 for Boxlicker's Roanna2.jpg) still only represents 58 Gb of stored pics, but the number of pics is growing awfully fast (15% in 4 months), so maybe Lit is cleaning up for technical reasons. They've done it before.
Very nice collection of tits, Lady. Welcome to the thread.Lady_Prowless said:id like to contribute...not mine but in my collection
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b81/ladywonka78/nipspuffer.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b81/ladywonka78/nips3.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b81/ladywonka78/nips2.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b81/ladywonka78/nips.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b81/ladywonka78/hotnips2.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b81/ladywonka78/puffynips.jpg
^^^^^very nice^^^^^
kwas1modem said:If what you have divined is correct, Reverend, and I hope it is, why don't they eliminate pics on a first in, first out basis?
Jim
I love that word)...soooooo delete from the beginning of threads - not from the most recent! There just doesn't seem to be a logic in this madness. Rev_Lovejoy said:We had a discussion here last summer about data base capacity and disappearing pics. The current number of stored attachments as indicated by the attachment index ID (i.e., https://forum.literotica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=579470 for Boxlicker's Roanna2.jpg) still only represents 58 Gb of stored pics, but the number of pics is growing awfully fast (15% in 4 months), so maybe Lit is cleaning up for technical reasons. They've done it before.