4 ms·
Thanks for giving us all the machine learning data. We no longer need your services.
by cwhiz 6y ago
Thanks for giving us all the machine learning data. We no longer need your services.
- abdullahkhalids 6y agoI would contend that the people who do pay for Google Photos are now potential customers of lots of the other apps, and hence can be advertised to as such.
- Heliosmaster 6y agoit sucks but.. yeah, that's how it works. And that is enabled by VC funded culture, where you have million of dollars invested in companies, which can then offer services at a loss investing in something else (market share, training data, etc.). Using smaller companies which charge honestly for the services they provide is probably more sustainable in the long term.
- derwiki 6y agoIn this case though, a smaller company might not be around forever. When you’re looking at storing important photos, the service you think will last longest may be best. (I use Flickr, Gphotos and an S3 bucket but I’m paranoid)
- ghaff 6y agoI use Flickr as well but I also back up in other ways, including locally. As I wrote on another thread, I'd never depend on a photo sharing site as my primary storage.
- mvexel 6y agoFlickr changed hands a couple times, almost went under and is still struggling to stay afloat. So you're right to be paranoid. I have been a paying Flickr Pro user since the beginning of time, but I don't feel that my photos are any 'safer' there than they would be on Google Photos. Also, Flickr has done an arguably nastier bait and switch when they announced the end of their unlimited free storage. At least Google seems to be willing to keep the photos already uploaded around. For now.
- awinder 6y ago> Using smaller companies which charge honestly for the services they provide is probably more sustainable in the long term. Smaller companies also commonly get acquired, shuttered, or become big companies in their own right. There's no panacea here. I think by the third or fourth time I was migrating from "the honesty priced option" the reality settled in that "honestly priced" is usually just an uninventive advertising moniker used for overpriced underdeveloped products.
- tiborsaas 6y agoBut users also benefit from it. You can search for the contents of the images in your private gallery.
- cwhiz 6y ago“private”
- rockengineer84 6y agohas Google ever made your data public?
- manquer 6y agoNot private doesn't mean public. Can google guarantee this data is not used to fuel their ad or other businesses in anyway ? Can they guarantee US Law Enforcement Agencies(LEA) will not have access without due process and informing you ? Can they guarantee LEAs from other countries will not given access to this data ?
- bobsoap 6y agoPrivate = only you, and no one else, not even Google.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- cwhiz 6y agoGoogle has had data leaks and hacks, yes. It’s not private unless you own it and control it. If you send it to Google it is unequivocally not private.
- minikites 6y agoWe benefit daily from all sorts of horrors, that's not a justification to keep doing horrors.
- 6y ago
- OscarTheGrinch 6y agoThe google AI will think cats rule the earth.
- rockengineer84 6y agothat kind of statement is harsh. what gives you a guarantee that any other paid service is not going to do this "machine learning" on your data. has Google ever made public your data?
- diggan 6y agoI think the point is if you charge upfront for storing peoples data under a certain price plan, you're less likely to change anything regarding the deal because you're in the business of storing peoples data. If you do bad, people will stop using the service, and you lose your business. You're more aligned with your users. Compare it to Google, where they can operate under a loss for a particular service (like Google Photos) in order to increase profits in a different market (like AI recognition tools). Once they are done with whatever they wanted to do, they can close down the service without much consequence, the business lives on.
- Markoff 6y agoWell they still want extra 15GB.