Impending Google Photos policy changes

[Basil Hendroff]

Disastrous news for the large percentage of more than billion users worldwide who have depended on Google Photos for free photo storage. Luckily for this community, we have TrueNAS storage and photo sync solutions like Nextcloud, Plex, Syncthing and Resilio Sync.

Updating Google Photos’ storage policy to build for the future

 

[jgreco]

And that's just another wonderful example of why the cloud is not some magic thing that will solve all your problems, it's just outsourcing your problem to someone whose motivations are unclear and whose obligation to you is a big fat goose egg..

 

[Basil Hendroff]

It bothers me that I'm so dependent on Gmail. If there's a Google policy change on their email offering, I'd be stuffed. As it is, I have privacy concerns with cloud-based email offerings.

 

[rvassar]

It bothers me that I'm so dependent on Gmail. If there's a Google policy change on their email offering, I'd be stuffed. As it is, I have privacy concerns with cloud-based email offerings.

This is why I run my own mail server. The $10/mo VPS is the cheap part though...

 

[JaimieV]

And that's just another wonderful example of why the cloud is not some magic thing that will solve all your problems, it's just outsourcing your problem to someone whose motivations are unclear and whose obligation to you is a big fat goose egg..

To be fair, it's the free tier that's being restricted. If you pay for storage you ... get what you pay for.
I always find it an amusing dissonance between folks spending $1000+ on a FreeNAS build (then more $00 on HDDs later) who wouldn't pay $2.99/month for 200gig of online storage.

I do both, of course. Online backups are *excellent* to have, on top of my local backups which will go up in flames if my house does.

 

[no_connection]

I don't see any problem? From what I see it's only the low quality (or google high quality) version of photos that is no longer unlimited.
I'm pretty sure the 30% food 40% selfie and 20% cat pictures could live somewhere else. Not like they are deleting everything.

 

[jgreco]

To be fair, it's the free tier that's being restricted

No. To be fair, the cloud has screwed people over and over, paying or free. It's fine if you don't think it is a problem, but some of us do think that it is a major problem.

 

[Heracles]

The "free' tier is not free at all. You pay it with your identity, which is a pretty high price to pay for almost anything. There are restrictions to what is possible to do by yourself and at the end, one must either put some trust in his providers or stop using IT completely. You can not make your own hardware, you can not make your own operating system, ...

Here, I chose Apple as the most trust-worthy provider. My hardware, OS, phone, tablet are all from Apple. Still, I run my own private cloud, I force all my activity through my personal VPN, I restrict all configs I can but at the end, I can not avoid them completely. Apple is the one who resisted governments the best, they put in place the best privacy mechanisms that others complain about because they are too efficient in their opinion and more. For sure there will be people who will chose not to trust them but here, that is my choice.

Microsoft is known to provide everything to governments. Google's policy says basically that everything you give them ownership of everything you put in their system (their ULA says that they can modify, display and more any way they wish...) Amazon would not provide me with all I need (no OS, no mobile solution, ...).

 

[HoneyBadger]

Here, I chose Apple as the most trust-worthy provider.

Well, this is a bit awkward.

Jeffrey Paul: Your Computer Isn't Yours

With regards to the title of the thread; I can't say I'm surprised. The other problem that isn't getting too much press is the fact that Google used this early "everything is free!" feature to bleed any smaller competitors dry and cause them to fold or be absorbed (from the consumer standpoint, it's hard to compete with "free storage" as a backup provider hopeful) and then after successfully killing off enough of the competition, starts charging money.

But coincidentally, you can still get that unlimited free service by buying a Pixel phone. Also sold by Google.

 

[Heracles]

Well, this is a bit awkward.

Jeffrey Paul: Your Computer Isn't Yours

With regards to the title of the thread; I can't say I'm surprised. The other problem that isn't getting too much press is the fact that Google used this early "everything is free!" feature to bleed any smaller competitors dry and cause them to fold or be absorbed (from the consumer standpoint, it's hard to compete with "free storage" as a backup provider hopeful) and then after successfully killing off enough of the competition, starts charging money.

But coincidentally, you can still get that unlimited free service by buying a Pixel phone. Also sold by Google.

Hey @HoneyBadger,

First, Apple is the one doing the less of this kind of activity.
Second, this is why I have an always On VPN back home, so they can not see when I am home or not, where I am, etc.
Third, I disable as much as I can about these, either from the device, OS or apps themselves, or using my infrastructure including PI-Hole and pfSense.

Here are some extracts from Google's privacy policy and End User Agreement :
We also collect the content you create, upload, or receive from others when using our services. This includes things like email you write and receive, photos and videos you save, docs and spreadsheets you create, and comments you make on YouTube videos.

We collect information about the apps, browsers, and devices you use to access Google services

The information we collect includes unique identifiers, browser type and settings, device type and settings, operating system, mobile network information including carrier name and phone number, and application version number. We also collect information about the interaction of your apps, browsers, and devices with our services, including IP address, crash reports, system activity, and the date, time, and referrer URL of your request.

If you’re using an Android device with Google apps, your device periodically contacts Google servers to provide information about your device and connection to our services. This information includes things like your device type, carrier name, crash reports, and which apps you've installed.

The activity information we collect may include:

• Terms you search for
• Videos you watch
• Views and interactions with content and ads
• Voice and audio information when you use audio features
• Purchase activity
• People with whom you communicate or share content
• Activity on third-party sites and apps that use our services

We use the information we collect in existing services to help us develop new ones


This license allows Google to:

• host, reproduce, distribute, communicate, and use your content — for example, to save your content on our systems and make it accessible from anywhere you go
• publish, publicly perform, or publicly display your content, if you’ve made it visible to others
• modify and create derivative works based on your content, such as reformatting or translating it
• sublicense these rights to:
  • other users to allow the services to work as designed, such as enabling you to share photos with people you choose
  • our contractors who’ve signed agreements with us that are consistent with these terms, only for the limited purposes described in the Purpose section below

I will stop here because there is so much more... So Yes, there are some callbacks home even in Apple's products. Still, because one must be end up exposed to at least one provider, Apple is the one I chose as the most trust worthy, lightyears ahead of Google and Microsoft.

 

[no_connection]

Second, this is why I have an always On VPN back home, so they can not see when I am home or not, where I am, etc.

Are you using WiFi? If so they know where you are. Also is that always on VPN done at router or device?

 

[Heracles]

Are you using WiFi?

Nope ; I stays on LTE because public WiFi are so slow and overloaded. They are not reliable at all. LTE is million time better.

Also is that always on VPN done at router or device?

Well.. Both... A VPN has 2 points : the client and the server. The VPN Gateway server is my pfSense and both my iPhone and iPad are the clients.

Again, Yes, as the designer and builder of the device and OS, they can do things that I can not prevent. The question is not if it is possible for Apple to do such things. The question is how much trust can I put in Apple when compared to others or the consequence of not using technologies at all anymore. My conclusion is that Apple is million time better than Microsoft who provides everything to governments on a silver plate and pledge others to do as much. Apple is also a million time better than Google who requires you to let them do whatever they wish with whatever touches their infrastructure.

 

[JaimieV]

No. To be fair, the cloud has screwed people over and over, paying or free. It's fine if you don't think it is a problem, but some of us do think that it is a major problem.

You missed the "you get what you pay for". That's not just important, it's vital to understand when choosing your cloud provider.

You also conflated someone else saying it's not a problem. It's a *massive* problem.

"The Cloud" is just computers that someone else administers. The quality is variable due to that. Large corporate policy changes - like this one of Google's - will almost always be oriented towards getting the freeloaders to cost them less, or start paying.

As someone who's managed (and signed off the invoices for) many petabytes of commercial data storage in AWS, I'd trust them more than pretty much any in-house provider.

 

[jgreco]

You missed the "you get what you pay for".

I did not.

That's not just important, it's vital to understand when choosing your cloud provider.

Well, you generally don't get what you pay for, assuming you pay. And of course the freeloaders have to wonder what Faustian bargain is being made, but generally they don't question it.

You also conflated someone else saying it's not a problem. It's a *massive* problem.

I think you missed my point.

"The Cloud" is just computers that someone else administers. The quality is variable due to that. Large corporate policy changes - like this one of Google's - will almost always be oriented towards getting the freeloaders to cost them less, or start paying.

It's not just the quality issue. It's also the competence, security, whether or not there's a workable business plan, etc. There have definitely been well funded "pay-to-play" cloud products that have just up and quit one day, no warning, no recourse.

As someone who's managed (and signed off the invoices for) many petabytes of commercial data storage in AWS, I'd trust them more than pretty much any in-house provider.

Wow, that's kinda terrifying.

I can't lay hands on anything at Amazon. I can't force them to take any particular level of care, I can't independently evaluate their electronic or physical security, etc.

I am much more comfortable paying for the data center space, putting storage in, and replicating it. I understand all the ins and outs, and I get to control all the important factors. I am not dependent on a single vendor and I am not up sh** creek one day when AWS screws up my account or loses a bunch of storage through an accident. The problem with cloud services is that they're an attractive nuisance. The bad guys are looking for ways to subvert them, and they have a massive attack surface because they're a massive organization. I don't have to have a plan for what happens if I suddenly need to evacuate petabytes of data from a cloud provider that's given me 30 days notice. You might not realize it, but you'd need to be able to move data at 10Gbit/sec to evacuate three petabytes in a month. AWS does not give you the option to pull up to the data center in your truck and pull your NAS out. Us old timers have Andrew Tanenbaum to thank for "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway."

Most importantly, I don't have to pay AWS ripoff rates. Capex for 100TB of storage done my way is about $3K with maybe a 5 year lifespan, and rack and bandwidth is maybe $300/month opex, so maybe $350/month overall amortized cost. I'm sure that's well north of $1K/month on AWS.

 

[rvassar]

Wow, that's kinda terrifying.

Indeed... That's literally... "I'm paying AWS to paper over my inability to manage {IT staff, Real Estate, Capital Equipment, Office Space}..."

Most importantly, I don't have to pay AWS ripoff rates. Capex for 100TB of storage done my way is about $3K with maybe a 5 year lifespan, and rack and bandwidth is maybe $300/month opex, so maybe $350/month overall amortized cost. I'm sure that's well north of $1K/month on AWS.

You're paying too much for electricity, and need a better ISP.

 

[jgreco]

Indeed... That's literally... "I'm paying AWS to paper over my inability to manage {IT staff, Real Estate, Capital Equipment, Office Space}..."

Well, in fairness, in many cases those turn out to be additional costs. If you've already got that covered, then it can work out really well.

You're paying too much for electricity, and need a better ISP.

ISP? Carrier neutral data centers are the way to go, except that you tend to get billed for lots of stuff. However, you can choose to get transit from high-bandwidth low-cost networks like Hurricane Electric or Cogent, and peer with whomever you wish. ISP-based colo typically locks you into the vendor's transit and peering mix.

If you happen to be in the Bay Area, Hurricane Electric will be happy to rent you a full rack along with power and 1Gbit unmetered transit for something like $400/month. They are not "carrier neutral" but several IX's have presence there and they're happy to run cross-connects without MRC, which puts HE out there as one of the best deals I've seen for small networks.

 

[rvassar]

If you happen to be in the Bay Area, Hurricane Electric will be happy to rent you a full rack along with power and 1Gbit unmetered transit for something like $400/month. They are not "carrier neutral" but several IX's have presence there and they're happy to run cross-connects without MRC, which puts HE out there as one of the best deals I've seen for small networks.

Way out in the hinterlands suburb of Mordor... East of Austin, where they filmed "Second Hand Lions", "Idiocracy", etc...

You can have 1GbE un-metered, and 8.5 cents per Kwh... At... your... personal... residence...

 

[Basil Hendroff]

This is why I run my own mail server. The $10/mo VPS is the cheap part though...

Can you elaborate please? I'd like to know more. I've been looking at various open source mail servers such as Mailcow as alternatives to Gmail.

Nextcloud addresses most of my privacy concerns. It has a built-in calendar and contacts server; access to in-house cloud-based office suites such as OnlyOffice and Collabora; photo/video and file storage, and a host of plugins that extend its functionality. It has a mail client. It just needs to interface with an in-house mail server.

This just leaves Google Maps and Waze as the only Google dependencies that still remain for me. I'm not sure there are viable open source alternatives to these?

 

[jgreco]

You can have 1GbE un-metered, and 8.5 cents per Kwh... At... your... personal... residence...

So, fine, you suck and you know it. ;-)

Trying to build your own data center at home comes with some other challenges, though, at least if you're running more than a trite amount of gear. UPS backup, generator with automatic transfer switch, and cooling come immediately to mind, as does dealing with issues like network redundancy, because ISP end user circuits tend to be flaky ("the cable modem died again!").

 

[Jailer]

You can have 1GbE un-metered, and 8.5 cents per Kwh... At... your... personal... residence...

Yeah but the price you pay is living Austin.