3 ms·

iOS doesn't allow other cloud photo services to upload in the background except via flaky hacks, so the choice for iPhone users is really between iCloud Photos

iOS doesn't allow other cloud photo services to upload in the background except via flaky hacks, so the choice for iPhone users is really between iCloud Photos and crippled alternatives.

anonuser123456 5y ago
This is the tradeoff of the Apple ecosystem. For most users the trade off is a no-brainer because they don't care about the theoretical concerns that, in expectation, do not apply to them. I mean, what is the probability of this technology causing an innocent user harm? 1/1,000,000 ? 1/10,000,000? 1/100,000,000?
- amznthrwaway 5y ago
  All evidence is that the chance of harm is literally zero. This stuff is used to scan pics on every photo hosting service already, and there’s no known instances of a life ruined over a hash collision. Every one of the harm narratives comes from a slippery slope fallacy.
- skoskie 5y ago
  According to Apple, 1/1 Trillion chance of a false report per year. So the chance for a single photo to be incorrectly matched is much higher. But by setting a threshold at ~30 images before triggering a manual review, they get the odds extremely low. My bet is that error threshold will remain a constant for them. As tech gets better, they will reduce the threshold accordingly to maintain that error rate. In five years, I’m guessing they will only need three images to trigger a review.
ajh13 5y ago
I use NextCloud which syncs my photos from my iPhone to my in-home server. Then I use borgbackup to encrypt my photos/videos and send them to a cloud provider. All of it is automated and wasn't too much of a hassle to setup.
- matthewdgreen 5y ago
  iCloud does more than just uploading. It enables transparent sync and offloading of photos. This means if your device has limited storage, iCloud Photos can shunt photo data out to the cloud while maintaining a local representation of the photo's existence. These iCloud features are "baked into" the APIs that apps use to integrate with the system photo library, e.g.: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/photokit/phasset#1656308 https://developer.apple.com/documentation/photokit/phasset#1... You can come up with third party solutions that accomplish some portion of this use case (photo backup) but you'll never be able to accomplish what Apple does with iCloud Photos unless Apple opens its APIs.
  - shuckles 5y ago
    A third party could implement the PHAsset abstraction over their own implementation of a photo library action sheet and the file provider APIs. It wouldn’t get you to feature parity, but the major differences are but minor frictions if your privacy threat model involves nation state adversaries. It is not possible to write an app on iOS that has permanent, transparent background network and runtime access, and it’s also not clear allowing such apps would be a privacy benefit for users at large. Apple already makes exceptions to this for certain apps (e.g. it seems like my Verizon Wireless app has background runtime). Are you suggesting that Apple should nominate a few photo services receive the same exception?
    - lern_too_spel 5y ago
      It's a benefit for users at large because they get to use services that provide more benefits (like Google Photos search and automatic video creation), services with more privacy (like self-hosted photo services), or services that are cheaper (like Amazon Photos). Android has demonstrated that there is no need to whitelist this. This is purely a lock-in play for Apple.
    - matthewdgreen 5y ago
      I’m unclear if you’re saying that one can implement a new access mechanism to Apple’s default photo library (the one managed by the Photos app and that the camera saves to by default) or if you’re suggesting that I need to design my own alternative photo album. If the latter, then “but minor frictions” seems… unreasonable. Not sure what nation state adversaries have to do with a simple question about photo library access.

iOS doesn't allow other cloud photo services to upload in the background except via flaky hacks, so the choice for iPhone users is really between iCloud Photos and crippled alternatives.

anonuser123456 5y ago

This is the tradeoff of the Apple ecosystem. For most users the trade off is a no-brainer because they don't care about the theoretical concerns that, in expectation, do not apply to them. I mean, what is the probability of this technology causing an innocent user harm? 1/1,000,000 ? 1/10,000,000? 1/100,000,000?

amznthrwaway 5y ago
All evidence is that the chance of harm is literally zero. This stuff is used to scan pics on every photo hosting service already, and there’s no known instances of a life ruined over a hash collision. Every one of the harm narratives comes from a slippery slope fallacy.
skoskie 5y ago
According to Apple, 1/1 Trillion chance of a false report per year. So the chance for a single photo to be incorrectly matched is much higher. But by setting a threshold at ~30 images before triggering a manual review, they get the odds extremely low. My bet is that error threshold will remain a constant for them. As tech gets better, they will reduce the threshold accordingly to maintain that error rate. In five years, I’m guessing they will only need three images to trigger a review.

ajh13 5y ago

I use NextCloud which syncs my photos from my iPhone to my in-home server. Then I use borgbackup to encrypt my photos/videos and send them to a cloud provider. All of it is automated and wasn't too much of a hassle to setup.

matthewdgreen 5y ago
iCloud does more than just uploading. It enables transparent sync and offloading of photos. This means if your device has limited storage, iCloud Photos can shunt photo data out to the cloud while maintaining a local representation of the photo's existence. These iCloud features are "baked into" the APIs that apps use to integrate with the system photo library, e.g.: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/photokit/phasset#1656308 https://developer.apple.com/documentation/photokit/phasset#1... You can come up with third party solutions that accomplish some portion of this use case (photo backup) but you'll never be able to accomplish what Apple does with iCloud Photos unless Apple opens its APIs.
- shuckles 5y ago
  A third party could implement the PHAsset abstraction over their own implementation of a photo library action sheet and the file provider APIs. It wouldn’t get you to feature parity, but the major differences are but minor frictions if your privacy threat model involves nation state adversaries. It is not possible to write an app on iOS that has permanent, transparent background network and runtime access, and it’s also not clear allowing such apps would be a privacy benefit for users at large. Apple already makes exceptions to this for certain apps (e.g. it seems like my Verizon Wireless app has background runtime). Are you suggesting that Apple should nominate a few photo services receive the same exception?
  - lern_too_spel 5y ago
    It's a benefit for users at large because they get to use services that provide more benefits (like Google Photos search and automatic video creation), services with more privacy (like self-hosted photo services), or services that are cheaper (like Amazon Photos). Android has demonstrated that there is no need to whitelist this. This is purely a lock-in play for Apple.
  - matthewdgreen 5y ago
    I’m unclear if you’re saying that one can implement a new access mechanism to Apple’s default photo library (the one managed by the Photos app and that the camera saves to by default) or if you’re suggesting that I need to design my own alternative photo album. If the latter, then “but minor frictions” seems… unreasonable. Not sure what nation state adversaries have to do with a simple question about photo library access.