Hi, i know that im not in the right place, but can someone help me find some ellaraine content ? Thank you

>>36998 Are you able to figure out the urls for this public set of nikki? https://2004-01.adultbabysource.com/ab_tour02.htm

>>37376 As discussed above the stuff from 2004 is in a separate paywalled area that isnt part of the normal members area.

Any video of girl humping teddy bear ?

>>36724 >YUhSMGNITTZMeTloWkhWc2RHSmhZbmx6YjNWeVkyVXVZMjl0TDIxbGJXSmxjbk12TWpBd09Tc3ZibUYxWjJoMGVWOWhMWG91YUhSdA== > Nice Work! Any chance you could pull this off with the XtremeDiaper site as well?

anyone know if theabdaycare jff has been ripped?

Does anyone have the clips of Aaliyah taylor dominating a male slave with diapers; they involved cages, enemas and marshmellow peggings

I'm a little drunk and reminiscing and I was just thinking about how I wish I was autistic enough, motivated enough, or smart enough to archive absolutely everything I ever could in this fetish ever since I got my first computer. I'm 33 now and I have a ~2TB collection of stuff I've saved over the years but there's so much good stuff that's just fucking dust in the wind now. And it gets harder to find good content or legacy content as the internet becomes more commodified and homogenized in the modern day. Especially now since we're probably not too far away from AI being able to learn and replicate quality content in the future but there will be less and less good content to train it on with all the legacy stuff disappearing. Artists I used to like who only ever made a handful of pics I have no way of tracking down now. Content I used to like but used to think it would always be available on one site or another is gone now. The absolute dream would be if all the content that had been made over the years had been archived and tagged so that basically whatever you could think of could be found as long as it had already been made, and then that would encourage people to make more content. Can you imagine what getting into the fetish as a newbie would be like if everything from before the era of OnlyFans and social media was easily available and searchable? It would feel like finding a whole new world. Sorry for the ramble.

>>38892 > I have a ~2TB collection of stuff I've saved over the years Stop blue balling us. Post a magnet link and start seeding already.

>>38892 btw guys if you like these pics and you love girls humiliating themselves in diapers you really need to check out diapereddoe on tumblr (formally floatiecronwythingz) some top tier content on there

>>38898 agree. shes mega cute.

>>38897 I don't really torrent anymore but I probably will share my collection someday if I figure out some way I can just post it somewhere and then forget about it. I always kinda figured I'd do that if I had to move in with my girlfriend so even if she doesn't like that it can live on. My current girlfriend doesn't seem to have a problem with me looking at porn though. >>38898 Agreed. Sucks she got chubby but she's still absolutely adorable and degenerate.

i've got about 35 gigs of diaper porn i'm gonna purge. what's the best way to upload that for everyone? not all of it is rare, but it's a curated collection and contains some c4s stuff that i bought and haven't seen anywhere else.

>>38935 Shes a cute level of dumb baby chub. The kind of chubbiness you get from being forced to drink endless bottles of formula and only being allowed to crawl around your playpen for exercise

>>38938 torrents are always best

>>38938 When are you going to share it? Also anyone have photosets from AE?

>>38942 go larp somewhere else you fucking retard

>>35761 Highly recommend stashapp for this. We need more people from the community on there. I've started cataloging some of my videos on there but it's slow work. It makes viewing and organizing content so much better, tbough

With the news that AB Source is closing down, did anyone have any luck in finding more links? I'm desperate for more Fiona content till it inevitably gets nuked

>>37046 I did exactly this. Instead of using your onboard SATA port, get a SAS-HBA card. I use one of the card from LSI. 1 card can support 8 SATA disks, more if you can use an extender.

>>37336 Looking for that one too!

>>50044 You can get sas cards that accept more drives and less drives. 4i cards can do 4, 8i do 8, etc. You can even get expanders that only require power to add even more cards. I have pretty much everything that was leaked earlier from AB source, but would love more.

This is a terrible idea if it's your only backup, although having only a single copy of anything is equally terrible. What I typically recommend is a good, high quality External USB enclosure for an internal HDD. (Good ones are ~$50USD, cheap ones can be had for considerably less at your own risk.) Put a good mechanical HDD in the enclosure and store offline as "cold" storage when not in use. Everyone should have a second copy of anything they value, and that's where an HBA can be useful for your second copy. The reason I discourage this for primary backups is that if your power supply dies, it's not uncommon for it to take other components with it, and if your drives are toast because the PSU died, you've just lost your collection that would have been safe otherwise. Remember, if you have one, you have none. OP, your biggest problem is going to be creating a method to track content that is often mislabeled, in random resolutions, and in some cases, just different enough to not be a binary duplicate. (Case in point, I literally had one file pass PSNR/SSIM as identical when run backwards, but when run correctly one file was just slightly superior, which is how I could determine which one was a reencode.) Throw in a bunch of models with multiple names, and the problem becomes one of UUIDs and actually identifying what is and isn't a duplicate.

>>50299 Skip USB drives, they are a waste of time, for backup and just run 2 nas if you are that worried about failures. I don't have time to manually back up my shit. It's actually super uncommon for power supplies to take out a hard drive, even more uncommon when you have a good back plane. You will never beat the reliability of sas with fucking USB.

>>50301 FFS. Nerds and your obsession with buying computer shit that is obsolete in 3-5 years. Less than 290$ / year for 8TB on Mega. Loads other cloud services similar price or better. Pay for cloud backup service and use with local copy/archive. If you have problem with 300$/year: stop being autistic retard and get job. Also full diaper load of tools for finding duplicate video / image / sound / whatevs files. "MediaFileDuplicateFinder" first thing spat out of Bing.com when I look today does the job fine.

There is a site with it.... but full of popup ads. just open all links in a new tab to a void the ads and redirects. dp-vids DOT com

>>38892 >>38892 dont know if you're still around but would be keen on seeing a bit more of her stupid baby brain material, just her acting silly and horny would be really great

>>50301 I wouldn't even consider a NAS over standalone external USB backups outside of a small office environment, and even then I'd be reluctant to use them. They're just too expensive for shit quality components with crappy proprietary interfaces, and they fail way too frequently for what they're designed to do, which is to keep data readily available on "hot" storage. Even in a small office environment I'd probably discourage the use of a NAS and stick to external USB drives or push for a proper second hand server if the budget allowed. I actually just dealt with someone last year who thought they'd switch from externals to a NAS with a backup NAS synced to it. Both systems failed within a month of each other, and a third when they switched vendors failed two months after that. (Faulty power supply toasted the board and enough of the drives to kill the array in the first one while another faulty power supply toasted the board but not the array in the second. Warranty replaced the boxes, but not the hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of data on them. Third NAS from other vendor had the power supply go, board is theoretically good but my client didn't want to burn any more time or money on making it work.) In the end we used the warranty replacement on the NAS that didn't toast the drives to recover the data, and I basically set them up with a second hand server running linux and a series of external backup drives that are stored offsite and they haven't had an issue since. Manual backups are indeed a pain, but I've never lost a file with them. I can't say the same for automated backups, or for "hot" storage over "cold" storage. I've been using SAS for roughly 20 years, and USB for roughly 25 years. I've had more problems with backplanes failing than with enclosures holding "cold" data failing just by virtue of them being perpetually accessed. >>50306 What kind of fuckwit would pay $290/year for 8TB on Mega as their primary backup storage when they could pay roughly the same price for a 12TB enterprise hard drive and a decent external enclosure and save themselves $1160 over the course of five years, assuming they're insane enough to replace their drives as soon as the warranty is up? Oh wait, no one with a brain would do that because it's a waste of money you shithead! Hell, for what five years of MEGA or comparable services cost I could literally buy two enterprise level HDDs with more than DOUBLE the capacity of what I'd get from Mega, two high quality external enclosures, and STILL have $590 leftover to play with. Of course, judging by your inability to perform basic arithmetic, and your mediocre grasp of the English language, I'm guessing you somehow are able to pay for your MEGA subscription through your job as a checkout clerk or a fry cook. Tell me you're a retarded 47 year old incel who lives in his parent's basement without telling me you're a 47 year old incel who lives in his parent's basement. By the way, the insult you were looking for is "get A job," not "get job," but I'm sure you'll learn that eventually. For those of you who aren't autists like that idiot above, most so-called "duplicate finders" don't actually work the way that you want them too. Typically they'll tell you that a file is similar in some capacity, but they don't bother to discern if one is of a higher quality. (E.g. higher resolution, higher bitrate, different sample rate, different framerate, et. al.) Most also do a terrible job of actually telling you if the file they're recommending you keep is the one that you actually want to keep and not an inferior copy. I've found exactly one program that functions the way that I need it to, which is to tell me that the files are bit-level duplicates, in which case I can safely delete a redundant copy. Anything else requires manual inspection to determine if the difference is an actual difference, or is negligible. (E.g. File A has metadata that File B is missing, but PSNR/SSIM show that they're otherwise identical is a negligible difference, especially if the metadata is wrong. File A runs at 23.976fps while File B runs at 25fps on the other hand is a major difference, and is indicative of regional differences or a transcode of some sort.) >>50308 I've used it, it's not terrible but not great either. They have their own watermark crawl (often over the crawl of whatever site material was cheaply lifted from,) a thousand popups as you've pointed out and their video quality isn't that great. I'm pretty sure it tops out at 720p which looks like dogshit on a 4K screen, especially at the low bitrate they use. It doesn't help that a lot of their content is sourced from low bitrate encodes as several creators apparently have no idea how to either set a bitrate manually or use rate-factor based encoding at a level that doesn't look either chunky or smeary. (Seriously, if you're creating new content and you haven't figured out CRF 17/18, you shouldn't be allowed to sell your crap.)

>>50356 LOL, anyone who has hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of data has backups and redundancy or they have sysadmins who need to be fired. I have been managing a data center for almost ~15 years and have never had a backplane go out. Tons of drives and power supplies, but that shit is all redundant so who cares. https://github.com/qarmin/czkawka is what I have been using for duplicates for a while. Just manually inspect the dupes it finds and you should be ok. It's not as good as commercial dedupe solutions but I'm not spending that much money for my fucking porn.

>>50358 I swear, you would think that first sentence you wrote was true, but unfortunately it's not. I worked with a place that had a few hundred TB worth of files, all of it valuable, most of it irreplaceable, and their idea of a "backup" was effectively "what's that?" Now this place was run by a very "special" CEO whose only real skill was getting employees, contractors, and even interns to ask "how the hell are we still in business," so I'll admit it's not what you'll typically see, but regrettably, it does exist. Under normal circumstances I would have recommended terminating the sysadmin (or sysadmins) responsible for this mess, but it didn't take long for me to realize that the sysadmin had no power whatsoever and was basically at the mercy of wildly incompetent management. Requests for everything from a backup server to offsite backups were typically laughed off as soon as budgets were put forward because of how cheap this place was. Don't even get me started on how they handled material that should have been encrypted and stored either offline or on an air-gapped server. Also, I should probably clarify what I mean when I refer to a "NAS." I'm not referring to data center level equipment, but rather to the cheap shit sold by companies like Synology, QNAP, Ugreen, and formerly Drobo--stuff that stupid people buy because they think it's affordable, which it is until they lose all of their data. I'll typically just use the term "server" to distinguish data center level gear from the aforementioned NAS systems. Consider yourself lucky that you've never had a backplane go out. I've seen a few fail over the years, and they're never a fun replacement. Power supplies and drives definitely go far more frequently though. (Drive failure? Must be a Thursday again.) Actually, now that I think about it, I've probably seen almost every server component imaginable fail at least once. ECC RAM? Check. NIC Card? Check. RAID card and/or port expanders? Pretty often. Backplane? Like it said it's not common, but I've seen it more than I've seen high quality USB enclosures fail. Power Supplies/Drives? Well duh, that's a common occurrence. CMOS battery? Not as common but yeah, dealt with that on a few occasions. Really rare failures like a power switch, and VGA port? Yep, dealt with those too. (Absolutely hated dealing with them too because they would always only even be discovered when there was already something else wrong with the server.) Motherboards and CPUs? Yep, they fall somewhere between power supplies/drives and RAID Cards/port multipliers in the frequency of failures. Obviously if you have access to new data center level equipment, then by all means use it, but I wrote my original recommendation for people who typically don't have the budget/experience for working with data center level gear, or who make the mistake of mixing data center gear with inferior "gaming PC" equipment. This is cute until it fails spectacularly because the stuff designed for gaming PCs isn't built to the same standard as the stuff designed for data centers, despite what manufacturers might claim. FWIW, typically I've found people (not corporate clients) tend to divide into four or five groups when it comes to backups/data archival 1. Those who have no backups and have never bothered to even consider them. They used to wield laptops, now they typically wield phones. 2. Those who only want/have cloud-based backups. This is cute until their gadget of choice fails and they're spending days waiting to recover their data because they don't have a fiber line and half of them don't even know what an ethernet cable is, let alone why they should be plugging one in and using it instead of WiFi. (This is also fun when the backup has never been tested, is more corrupt than not because it was made over the span of days on a shoddy WiFi connection, and -insert priceless file here- is lost as a result.) 3. Those who only want/have local, onsite backups. These people are just as bad as the Cloud-only people. Occasionally they'll have more than one drive's worth of data, but usually all of their stuff is stored on a single external HDD, and for some reason it's usually a 2.5" drive made by Seagate with an absurdly high failure rate. When it's not a single external HDD, it's a single PC with "redundancy" that completely ignores the fact that RAID/redundancy is not a backup. 4. Datahoarders who have some form of NAS or server holding "hot" data, offline external drive based backups of the NAS/server holding "cold" data, and a cloud-based backup of the same data for added redundancy. 5. People who are sort of the "not datahoarder" subset of the group above. They'll have redundant backups, they may even have geographical backups, but they're typically only using two out of three of the systems the people in group four are using. (That is, they may have external drives and cloud backups but no NAS, or a NAS and external drives, but no cloud backups, or any other permutation thereof.) I may have to give czkawka a try just so I have an alternative in case my current duplicate finder ever disappears or nosdives in quality for some reason. (Realistically it shouldn't, it's widely used and has been around for almost three decades, but that doesn't guarantee that things won't change one day.) This should be obvious, but I bought my current duplicate finder to inspect all of my files, not just my porn. I often deal with a high quantity of extremely large video files, and I need to know that the copies are absolute bit-level duplicates, not similar files, not almost bit-level duplicates, but 100% identical bit-level duplicates. (The tool I'm using actually has some advantages over traditional methods like comparing MD5 checksums in terms of speed/accuracy too, which is one of the main reasons I like it.) These files typically are part of projects with a fast turnaround time so there's no time to make proxies of them, much less wait days for them to upload to cloud storage where they wouldn't be editable anyway. They have to be dealt with locally and dealt with fast. Once the projects are completed they get moved into "offline" storage which gets backed up physically and geographically. If I find myself having to access one of these projects at least once a year or more, then they wind up also going into cloud storage, and while I don't list it as a line item, I add the cost of that cloud storage to the client's overall bill for the project. Anyway, I'm pretty sure the main point of this thread wasn't actually about storing our collections as we've been discussing, but rather about building some sort of database/archive/index of diaper porn. If I'm indeed understanding OP's question correctly, than the second paragraph of >>50299 and your czkawka recommendation are still the most relevant portion of this thread. Presumably the OP's goal isn't to host content, but rather to serve as "the Mr. Skin of Diaper Porn" and the "Google of Diaper Porn" if you will. What the OP needs is some sort of UUID for every piece of diaper porn in existence, (or at least every one he could reasonably track,) and a way to link that UUID to the various sites that hold that content. >>25688 has lots of good suggestions as well. The biggest issue I see with 25688's suggestion for creating file hashes to verify that the files being linked to a piece of content's UUID are indeed the same is the fact that most of the paysites have very slight differences in their files, which are just different enough to result in a different set of hashes/checksums. If you run PSNR/SSIM on the files you'll wind up with results of "infinity" indicating that the actual data is the same, but something inside of the container is somehow different. This is already ignoring models/studios who have the same clip available in different file formats, resolutions, and quality options on multiple sites for the moment by the way, and only focusing on files where there's supposedly "one version to rule them all" on every site. For example, let's pretend that a model named "Hot Diapers" exists and she puts out a video named "Hot Diapers Pisses in Sexy Diapers." We can give our hypothetical model "Hot Diapers" a UUID to identify her as a model, that's easy. We can give our hypothetical video "Hot Diapers Pisses in Sexy Diapers" a UUID that links it to the "Hot Diapers" model's UUID, and everything is still good. Where we run into an issue is with identifying the best quality version of the video, which is the one that people would probably want. We could list that this hypothetical model's hypothetical video is on C4S, JFF, and MV, possibly list other sites it pops up on as well, but recommending the "best quality" version is going to be the tough part. We could rule out JFF based on their mandatory watermarking alone, and probably rule out most of the other sites the thing pops up on. The problem is going to be confirming that the version on C4S and the version on MV are the same video, especially when ABDL models will give their videos just slightly different names depending on the site they're uploading too, and when there's some container-level difference that requires PSNR/SSIM scans to verify that the actual audio and video content is the same in both files despite mismatched checksums. Oh, and just for fun, since OP mentioned "maybe experiment with AI upscaling," let's pretend that some horny bastard took the original file of "Hot Diapers Pisses in Sexy Diapers," upscaled it from 4K to 8K (or 1080p to 4K,) and now there's a 4K version floating around somewhere that looks better than the original. Do we now list this as the "best quality" file and denote the original version as "original" with a link to the original page on C4S/MV, or do we list the "original" file as "best quality" and then the better looking upscaled file as "AI Upscaled." Do we treat AI upscaled files differently than older vids that have downscaled releases in 1080p, 720p, and 480p, or even older releases that came in 480p and 240p varieties? Also, how do we deal with creators who are no longer active, made some really hot stuff, but have now nuked their C4S/JFF/MV/etc. pages? Do we list them and instead of having a set of "Get it on C4S/JFF/MV/etc." links simply list it as "unavailable," or do we try to at least provide some sort of link to someone who might still be hosting it somewhere? (E.g. "No longer available from C4S/JFF/MV/etc., get it from torrent link/file sharing site link/etc., or stream it on -insert porn streaming site here-" instead.) I'd be in favor of the latter, but that would assume that someone still had the content in question, and that it was accessible without jumping through hoops.

>>50356 >>50411 >all the free time to write that get job

>>50414 As much as I do not have the desire to read all of that autistic rambling I'm fairly confident that person has a job in the tech industry because typing all of that and not having a job would be the biggest embarrassment known to man. I'm with you, but come up with a better insult lol

>>50421 tbh i was just scrolling and i thought 'get job' was funny

>>50424 It's funny for sure. I was just saying. The dude is clearly educated. But, I can smell his body odor from my chair.

>>50411 > don't have a fiber line Its 2025. What kind of shithole places are people at which don't have a fibre connection or at least 5G yet? And even in shitholes like Niger or Yemen or Idaho you can get >200meg over Starlink. Worst case on slow connection and you're pulling tens of TB down from cloud it takes at most a week to pull it all down again. Strangely I find myself agreeing with the fry-cook autistic guy above who says don't buy NAS and shove it in cloud. For the sake of a few hundred dollars a year to avoid turning my house into a mini data centre, avoiding having to set it all up, update it, keep it powered all the time, etc. etc. seems good trade off. Plus the tool he recommended slaps. Worked really well on my collection after I installed the .NET stuff.

>>44121 Thanks for the stashapp recommendation. It makes viewing all the stuff pretty easy. Only question, does anybody know if there is a stash-box instance with Metadata for all the ABDL porn? This would be so helpful to identify all the strangly named photos and videos that are sometimes in the share here.