3 ms·
It sort of does. Not in a strict semantic sense, but I don't think any user of a service that says it stores stuff "locally" expects it to upload that to somewh
by SahAssar 3y ago
It sort of does. Not in a strict semantic sense, but I don't think any user of a service that says it stores stuff "locally" expects it to upload that to somewhere else without explicit consent.
It sounds like your interpretation is like if I said "our data is stored on our servers" but that actually meant "our data is stored on our servers, but also on AWS, GCP, Azure, Alibaba and shared with FSB, CIA, CCP, and the public and other parties (including but not limited to the Royal Bhutan Police)".
That would be true, but misleading to the point of being meaningless or (hopefully) potentially criminal.
- willsmith72 3y agoI guess, but local-first is a huge movement which means exactly "data is stored locally" AND usually "data is synced to the cloud" Just saying it's not a novel concept if that's what they're doing (I couldn't tell from the article)
- SahAssar 3y agoThere is a huge difference between "document history is stored locally" and "works offline". The local-first movement might sometimes talk about privacy and offline availability in the same breath, but those are very different concerns and if someones says "data is stored locally" then I assume they should check both the privacy and offline boxes but with a huge "I might loose all my data" caveat. If it still uploads my data to some cloud then I would not describe it as "document history is stored locally".