8 ms·

I like what I see on the site and in the comments here. Im looking forward to checking this out more maybe. Im kind of surprised that as a species we dont hav

by pkdpic 5y ago

I like what I see on the site and in the comments here. Im looking forward to checking this out more maybe. Im kind of surprised that as a species we dont have a conclusive ubiquitous solution to the foggy problem of digital photo storage / management. So many of my photos are just in drawers on old hard drives and phones. Anyway maybe its getting better. Or maybe Im just stupid.

distrill 5y ago
I understand the risks of this approach, but I just dumped everything into google photos and I'm very happy with how it's working for now. I do not miss the days of keeping track of those devices at all.
- girvo 5y ago
  I did the same, but with Apple Photos. I have a hard drive that holds an offline copy of the library too, which is nice.
- subpixel 5y ago
  The thing about Google photos that explodes my brain is that if I use albums to share with family members, Google prioritizes the use case of the recipients _joining_ the album and _adding_ my photos to their own albums. Google is trying to use me as a way to get my family members signed up for Google photos. Then my family is confused about where photos live, etc.
  - hunter2_ 5y ago
    Yeah, I made a Google Photos album to send a link to various potential contractors to show where I want some work done on my house, and since the Photos app for Android has the relevant URI registered, the link gets opened with it instead of just the browser, and the first thing the app does is a very prominent "join" CTA. Then the next person to view the album sees them as a member, gross. It works great incognito though, where the browser doesn't hand off links to any apps regardless of URI registration. Might try something like this instead.
    - subpixel 5y ago
      “Open this link in incognito mode” is a tall order for my family, much less a contractor.
      - hunter2_ 5y ago
        Oh yeah it's totally not happening. I'm going to play around with framing or reverse proxying it so the URL in the address bar isn't a registered one.
- pkulak 5y ago
  That was my solution since 2011, but just a few months ago I bought a nas that came with a Google Photos clone and moved everything over to that. Too scary knowing that Google can and will lock me out of my account at any time and forever.
jrm4 5y ago
The answer is simple, it's just kind of says an ugly thing about how computing has shifted; it's essentially the same reason e.g. the iPad didn't have a file manager. Interfaces got really good and slick at the same time it became profitable/useful to alienate people from their own data for profit.
- jdonaldson 5y ago
  Files have some drawbacks... they're difficult for multiple people to work on together (slides). They're often not easy to organize, and they're often not available where you want them.
  - pkdpic 5y ago
    Thats really interesting, I never thought about the fact that restrictive seeming mobile apps shift focus from local file storage to remote db file storage via apps.
  - tentacleuno 5y ago
    If you use something like Syncthing[0] (great, can recommend) you'll get them available exactly where you want them: on all your devices. The only real problem with it is conflicts, where one file is edited simultaneously on two devices. I think Dropbox has solved that (?), but I'd rather keep my data on my own computers.
    - jrm4 5y ago
      Syncthing handles conflicts about as elegantly as possible, I think?
      - tentacleuno 5y ago
        They do, but it's still a PITA when one comes up. It's great with KeepassXC database files because you can use the Merge databases function to manually merge the two databases (then delete the .sync-conflict).
  - 5y ago

by pkdpic 5y ago

distrill 5y ago

I understand the risks of this approach, but I just dumped everything into google photos and I'm very happy with how it's working for now. I do not miss the days of keeping track of those devices at all.

girvo 5y ago
I did the same, but with Apple Photos. I have a hard drive that holds an offline copy of the library too, which is nice.
subpixel 5y ago
The thing about Google photos that explodes my brain is that if I use albums to share with family members, Google prioritizes the use case of the recipients _joining_ the album and _adding_ my photos to their own albums. Google is trying to use me as a way to get my family members signed up for Google photos. Then my family is confused about where photos live, etc.
- hunter2_ 5y ago
  Yeah, I made a Google Photos album to send a link to various potential contractors to show where I want some work done on my house, and since the Photos app for Android has the relevant URI registered, the link gets opened with it instead of just the browser, and the first thing the app does is a very prominent "join" CTA. Then the next person to view the album sees them as a member, gross. It works great incognito though, where the browser doesn't hand off links to any apps regardless of URI registration. Might try something like this instead.
  - subpixel 5y ago
    “Open this link in incognito mode” is a tall order for my family, much less a contractor.
    - hunter2_ 5y ago
      Oh yeah it's totally not happening. I'm going to play around with framing or reverse proxying it so the URL in the address bar isn't a registered one.
pkulak 5y ago
That was my solution since 2011, but just a few months ago I bought a nas that came with a Google Photos clone and moved everything over to that. Too scary knowing that Google can and will lock me out of my account at any time and forever.

jrm4 5y ago

The answer is simple, it's just kind of says an ugly thing about how computing has shifted; it's essentially the same reason e.g. the iPad didn't have a file manager. Interfaces got really good and slick at the same time it became profitable/useful to alienate people from their own data for profit.

jdonaldson 5y ago
Files have some drawbacks... they're difficult for multiple people to work on together (slides). They're often not easy to organize, and they're often not available where you want them.
- pkdpic 5y ago
  Thats really interesting, I never thought about the fact that restrictive seeming mobile apps shift focus from local file storage to remote db file storage via apps.
- tentacleuno 5y ago
  If you use something like Syncthing[0] (great, can recommend) you'll get them available exactly where you want them: on all your devices. The only real problem with it is conflicts, where one file is edited simultaneously on two devices. I think Dropbox has solved that (?), but I'd rather keep my data on my own computers.
  - jrm4 5y ago
    Syncthing handles conflicts about as elegantly as possible, I think?
    - tentacleuno 5y ago
      They do, but it's still a PITA when one comes up. It's great with KeepassXC database files because you can use the Merge databases function to manually merge the two databases (then delete the .sync-conflict).
- 5y ago