4 ms·
it 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 off
by Heliosmaster 6y ago
it 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.