3 ms·

> Out of curiosity, what's the benefit of replacing Google Docs with Dropbox? [...] the same drive that would have me ditch Google would also make me ditch Drop

> Out of curiosity, what's the benefit of replacing Google Docs with Dropbox? [...] the same drive that would have me ditch Google would also make me ditch Dropbox They're both for-profit US companies saving your data overseas, so yes, for your last point it doesn't matter much. However, there are two advantages: 1) You're giving your data to a company aiming to sell you storage space vs a company which tries to make money of selling your (meta-)data, where selling storage space is only a minor accounting item. This also gives clear priorities: Dropbox loosing or being caught selling your data is a big reputation hit to them [0], while for Google it would neither change their reputation nor their total revenue by much. 2) You're not putting your eggs in one basket. If you're all in on Google, loosing your account does kill your calendar, contacts, mail, storage (possibly with the backups you need right now) ... . Also, that one company has basically full access to your life. If you're using diversified services you're far less likely to suddenly loose access to multiple services [1] and those services only own a part of your data vs your whole life [2]. Concluding this, selfhosting surely is the superior solution. But if you must use external storage providers (i.e. as worst-case backup or due to lack of money/space for own servers), choosing Dropbox over Google has its advantages. [0] Yes, I'm aware it has happened. [1] Assuming 2FA and a reasonably secure mail service, of course. [2] One could argue that Google is going to guard your data with world-class engineers while the other services are probably less well equipped and therefore you have an increased risk of (at least!) parts of your data being leaked. That's personal risk management, though, and the consensus seems to be diversification.

jeffbee 6y ago
> selfhosting surely is the superior solution. You go on to partly refute this, but not strongly enough. Self-hosting is clearly inferior in major objective measures: availability, durability, and security. Unless you spend all of your time managing your personal storage solution, self-hosting will be far inferior in these respects, and probably also in cost if a true accounting of time is included.
- wizzwizz4 6y ago
  Not so. Availability: Raspberry Pi plus USB battery pack is more available than the Internet, since when my home power's down my Internet connection goes. Durability: Have you ever heard of a Raspberry Pi dying? Security: sudo apt install unattended-upgrades echo "0 4 * * * reboot" | sudo tee -a /etc/crontab And all the functionality's available through Nextcloud. It's easier to set up than a Facebook account, and easier to maintain than a Google account.
  - chongli 6y ago
    This is assuming you don’t leave home. If you travel a lot, self-hosting on your residential internet connection is not going to be a very good experience.
  - kodt 6y ago
    When your house burns down?
    - reaperducer 6y ago
      Your house is less likely to burn down than Google is to cancel a service you use.
- Sebb767 6y ago
  > Self-hosting is clearly inferior in major objective measures: availability, durability, and security. I'd not go as far. You can have your setup behind a VPN on a high port, go for distributed storage (for example at your home and at your parents) and be rather secure with a stable, auto-updated distribution. Cold backups could be an encrypted blob in a cloud or a tape somewhere. Now, of course this needs quite some upfront investment in time and money; without a solid setup, I fully agree that the cloud is superior (unless your prefer your data lost over read by the NSA). Other than that, it mostly boils down to risk management: A third-party hacker might have an easier time with your network than Google or Dropbox, but being script-kiddie save is not that hard [0], so it needs to be someone with time and skill. TLAs can't simply subpoena your data, so it might be harder for them - unless your home network is setup badly [1] or they're willing to possibly burn a zero-day. Your day-to-day ad agency is not going to lay hands on your data. It really boils down to what aspect you optimize for; given the grandparent, I assumed it to be privacy and therefore selfhosting to be probably better. But I should've been clearer on that :) [0] Yes, mistakes happen, but big corporations have also been hacked with trivial exploits, so let's call it even. [1] This also poses a danger to your login data, though, so the Cloud security team does not help either.

jeffbee 6y ago

> selfhosting surely is the superior solution. You go on to partly refute this, but not strongly enough. Self-hosting is clearly inferior in major objective measures: availability, durability, and security. Unless you spend all of your time managing your personal storage solution, self-hosting will be far inferior in these respects, and probably also in cost if a true accounting of time is included.

wizzwizz4 6y ago
Not so. Availability: Raspberry Pi plus USB battery pack is more available than the Internet, since when my home power's down my Internet connection goes. Durability: Have you ever heard of a Raspberry Pi dying? Security: sudo apt install unattended-upgrades echo "0 4 * * * reboot" | sudo tee -a /etc/crontab And all the functionality's available through Nextcloud. It's easier to set up than a Facebook account, and easier to maintain than a Google account.
- chongli 6y ago
  This is assuming you don’t leave home. If you travel a lot, self-hosting on your residential internet connection is not going to be a very good experience.
- kodt 6y ago
  When your house burns down?
  - reaperducer 6y ago
    Your house is less likely to burn down than Google is to cancel a service you use.
Sebb767 6y ago
> Self-hosting is clearly inferior in major objective measures: availability, durability, and security. I'd not go as far. You can have your setup behind a VPN on a high port, go for distributed storage (for example at your home and at your parents) and be rather secure with a stable, auto-updated distribution. Cold backups could be an encrypted blob in a cloud or a tape somewhere. Now, of course this needs quite some upfront investment in time and money; without a solid setup, I fully agree that the cloud is superior (unless your prefer your data lost over read by the NSA). Other than that, it mostly boils down to risk management: A third-party hacker might have an easier time with your network than Google or Dropbox, but being script-kiddie save is not that hard [0], so it needs to be someone with time and skill. TLAs can't simply subpoena your data, so it might be harder for them - unless your home network is setup badly [1] or they're willing to possibly burn a zero-day. Your day-to-day ad agency is not going to lay hands on your data. It really boils down to what aspect you optimize for; given the grandparent, I assumed it to be privacy and therefore selfhosting to be probably better. But I should've been clearer on that :) [0] Yes, mistakes happen, but big corporations have also been hacked with trivial exploits, so let's call it even. [1] This also poses a danger to your login data, though, so the Cloud security team does not help either.