3 ms·
My point was more on the quality of the article. The article's point is a valid one, if you can find it. To constructively disagree, though: I keep backups.
by skwirl 11y ago
My point was more on the quality of the article. The article's point is a valid one, if you can find it.
To constructively disagree, though: I keep backups. I have a Synology NAS device that I really like. But for your average person, I have to wonder - are their digital photos really safer on their laptop than they are on Facebook? Facebook is a fairly stable company. Laptops are lost, stolen, and damaged all the time. Files are accidentally deleted. People get viruses. People forget the password to their full drive encryption. When Facebook does bite the dust, it's hard to imagine that data just disappearing - it's incredibly valuable, and in the worst case, someone would buy it just to sell it back to people. Not ideal, but it isn't lost, and you had free storage for several years anyway.
- Domenic_S 11y agoThink about the future too though. Facebook strips exif and may have resized/recompressed your images. 20 years from now when we can do more super cool things with that data, the data won't exist in your FB photos. Tangentially related, this is why I shoot RAW. Not because it might give me better pictures today, but because it WILL give me better pictures in 5-10-20 years. You can take a RAW today that was shot 5 years ago and pull detail that was impossible to pull when it was shot, and that ability will only improve.
- matthewmcg 11y agoIdeally, you'd want to keep RAW + JPEG. I'd be worried about reading some of the more obscure camera RAW formats in the far future. JPEG seems like a good backup (at the cost of the data loss you mentioned).
- Domenic_S 11y agoYep, sometimes I convert to DNG for that reason, but that seems like pushing the problem out...
- throwawayaway 11y agoSafer on laptop vs. forgetting the password for facebook. By making a technically inept strawman, it's reduced to an argument of which is more idiot proof. The problem with idiot proof is that there's always a better idiot out there. The argument here by the 'anti cloud' side is 'why not both?'. To argue for one side or the other exclusively is pointless.