Why do the big marketing organizations offer free cloud storage anyway?

[Arlen G. Holder]

This question came up as a tangent to "cheap Android phones", which, by
their nature, don't offer much by way of internal storage.
o Looking for cheap Android phone.....
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/8-5aI_lSpHU>

A key question that arises from that discussion is:
Q: Why do the big marketing organizations offer free cloud storage anyway?

[lonelydad]

"Arlen G. Holder" <arling...@nospam.net> wrote in
news:qgqa3p$db1$1...@news.mixmin.net:

Basically, they want you to get set up with their free space, so that when
you realize you need more, you will be more likely to just rent it from
them than shop around for the best deal.

More than likelyl, they also get some consideration from their service host
for the number of different users they have.

[Cybe R. Wizard]

??? Seriously?

Because they get free access to your data, of course.
Additionally, they might get government funds to make constitutional
guarantees of privacy moot. After all, almost all of these companies
will knuckle under to any warrant offered up and besides, if you give
your data away there's no guarantees remaining that are valid..

--
Cybe R. Wizard

There is no cloud; there's only other peoples' computers.

[Flasherly]

On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 00:29:08 GMT, lonelydad <lonel...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>> Q: Why do the big marketing organizations offer free cloud storage
>> anyway?

With Microsoft, it was getting its ass kicked, didn't like it, over
*Droid operating systems: They then needed new and profitable
branches, after effectively telling Windows' users that they wouldn't
be holding their hands anymore, that Windows 10 was a secondary
consideration their answer, and solution, to the cloud: Like the
*Droids, Windows 10 is marketing you after you non-implicitly agree,
pay to buy the OS, on Microsoft licensing terms. And they did well
enough through branching into cloud services as a venture strategy.

If you're going to the trouble to store, encrypting personal data
exclusively on your own personal computer, then you're everything
about what cloud storage is not. You're not a free source or about
helping others to study and make money off you.

You speak in clear and concise terms subservient to cloud linguistics
and you'll be understood, which is what normal, take life should be
provided and engineered for -- what you may take for granted. Click
you fingers, and that's just what cloud services want to hear: An
Amazon Alexis voice logic branch response, operating from cloud
services, finely tuned for automation, will provide the correctly
reinforcement patterns you expect and want to hear. Speak loud and
clear with confidence, knowing your every wish will be granted from
the most of all possible options. Anything you want will be then
delivered to your doorstep by legions of low-paid workers, running
their own vehicles for Walmart or a local Amazon warehouse, after or
in all hours, before anybody else, now, in a private helicopter, from
an AI mechanism driving in bike lanes, least to exclude improvements
of a socially responsible way to replace any hassle of human
contingent or contact;- eventually they'll be fired en masse.

Clouds are about making your money talk in only one acceptable way,
while anything less, along with the rest of the bullshit, walks. It's
really all about you and you come first.

Hope that helps.

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 20:41:42 -0500, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:

> Because they get free access to your data, of course.

Yes, they get your data - but how do they BENEFIT from getting it?

Who are "they" anyway?

Googling....this is from 2015 so it may be dated...
o The 25 Most Valuable Cloud Computing Companies Are Worth Way More Than You'd Think
<https://www.businessinsider.com/25-most-valuable-cloud-companies-2015-1>

Oh oh ... when they say "cloud services", they mean other things, e.g.,
#1: Salesforce 36 billion, It offers cloud-based customer relationship
management and marketing software.

#2: LinkedIn: 28 billion, LinkedIn is a social network for business
professionals that offers cloud-based recruiting software.

#3: Workday: $15 billion, Workday offers cloud-based human resources and
finance software.
etc.

Changing that Google search a bit, we get:
o The Best Free Cloud Storage Services for Backup in 2019
<https://www.lifewire.com/free-cloud-storage-1356638>

SIDENOTE: Sometimes I wonder if they don't just CHANGE the title every
year, from
o The Best Free Cloud Storage Services for Backup in 2017
o The Best Free Cloud Storage Services for Backup in 2018
o The Best Free Cloud Storage Services for Backup in 2019
etc.

Anyway, they list as the top five:
1: Mega <https://mega.nz/>
2: pCloud <https://www.pcloud.com/>
3: MediaFire <https://www.mediafire.com/upgrade/>
4: DropBox <https://www.dropbox.com/individual/plans-comparison>
5: Box <https://account.box.com>

Hmmmm.... I'm surprised that Apple, Google, and Microsoft aren't there.
Looking forward...we FINALLY get to the big boys...
6: FlipDrive <https://www.flipdrive.com/site/pricing>
7: GoogleDrive <https://www.google.com/drive/>
8: OneDrive <https://onedrive.live.com/about/en-us/plans/>
9: YandexDisk <https://disk.yandex.com/>
10: Sync <https://www.sync.com/>

So that accounts for three of the four big boys, but where's Apple?
11: JumpShare <https://jumpshare.com/pricing>
12: MyDrive <https://www.mydrive.ch/>
13: Amazon Drive <https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/home>
14: TencentCloud <https://www.weiyun.com/>
15: Degoo <https://degoo.com/>

Hmmmmmm.... we have Amazon, DropBox, Microsoft, Google, but still no Apple.

Why would Apple not be represented in the top cloud storage solutions?
??: Apple iCloud <https://www.apple.com/icloud/>

[William Unruh]

On 2019-07-19, Arlen G. Holder <arling...@nospam.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 20:41:42 -0500, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
>
>> Because they get free access to your data, of course.
>
> Yes, they get your data - but how do they BENEFIT from getting it?

They sell it to whomever. Advertisers kwho want to know all about you.
Political parties who want to tailor their lies to your prejudices.
Governments who want to know what you think and do.

>
> Who are "they" anyway?

YOu were the one that asked.

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 20:40:55 -0000 (UTC), William Unruh wrote:

>> Yes, they get your data - but how do they BENEFIT from getting it?
>
> They sell it to whomever. Advertisers kwho want to know all about you.
> Political parties who want to tailor their lies to your prejudices.
> Governments who want to know what you think and do.

Is that really true William Unruh that they "sell your data"?

I think, as I recall, you're a professor of physics, as I recall, but I
might be wrong.

If you are, that means you can certainly follow complex equations.
Each term in a complex equation has specific meaning - which is important.

When you say they "sell your data", do you mean 'data' or 'meta data'?

The reason I ask is that they're quite different where, I don't think they
actually sell your data outright (except under subpoena), do they?

> > Who are "they" anyway?
> YOu were the one that asked.

I don't put ANY of my data on the cloud if I can help it.
So I'm asking about the OTHERS who DO put their data on the cloud - which
ones they use.

[123456789]

"Arlen G. Holder" wrote:

> I don't put ANY of my data on the cloud if I can help it.

But of course you CAN'T help it.

If you go to the doctor, use a credit card, pay taxes, etc,
your very personal data is already in the cloud...

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 23:57:52 -0000 (UTC)

"Arlen G. Holder" <arling...@nospam.net> wrote:

I assume that you know that what you said there was not in the least
akin to the question you originally asked.

In Message-ID: <qgqa3p$db1$1...@news.mixmin.net> you asked:
------------

"Q: Why do the big marketing organizations offer free cloud storage
anyway?"

------------

Shift goalposts much? What do you /REALLY/ want to know?

--
Cybe R. Wizard

Beliefs are the diluting ice cubes in the chilled chardonnay of
experience.
Zorg

[William Unruh]

On 2019-07-19, Arlen G. Holder <arling...@nospam.net> wrote:

No, you asked why some companies give away free cloud access.
You did NOT ask what others do.
Read their license which they force you to sign if you use their
services. Then decide if you actually believe that they follow that,
when there is absolutely no way in which you can test whether they
follow the terms they claim to follow.

Look at Accuweather now, which forces you to sign an agreement that they
can sell your information to advertisers in order to use their services.
At least they ar honest. I am not at all sure that many of the other
companies are honest.

If you are going to use cloud services, use encryption on all materials
you store there.

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 07:47:26 -0000 (UTC), William Unruh wrote:

> No, you asked why some companies give away free cloud access.
> You did NOT ask what others do.

When I said "cloud storage", I had meant the storage that "they" (Apple,
Google, Microsoft, DropBox) give away for free (and then charge for larger
amounts) to personal users.

Since I have Apple & Android & Microsoft products, I see them (Apple,
Google, Microsoft) offering me that "free" cloud storage, which I never
take them up on (since I store my personal data on my personal storage
devices).
o What are some key common databases you often SHARE between your desktop & mobile devices?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/ovnHGVriYsI/0frYPkC3AQAJ>

They don't make money off of me, that I know of, at least not purposefully,
although I admit I use Google Gmail which _does_ make money off of me I'm
sure.

For Android, I simply back up to the desktop (sometimes via the external sd
slot). For Apple, I don't use the utterly puny (worthless IMHO), 5GB iCloud
that Apple provides (which wouldn't fit even one twenty-fifth of a single
full data backup) and I turn off all the OneDrive requests from Microsoft,
(as backing up a desktop to external storage is about as simple as it
gets).

Personally, I can't imagine _why_ people put their private files into cloud
storage - but the companies sure do push them on us - so they must be
making money somehow by offering that "free" cloud storage:
o Microsoft (15GB free, nominally)
o Google (15GB free, nominally)
o Apple (5GB free, nominally)
o DropBox (2GB free, nominally)
<https://www.lapopmag.com/articles/cloud-storage-comparison>

> Read their license which they force you to sign if you use their
> services. Then decide if you actually believe that they follow that,
> when there is absolutely no way in which you can test whether they
> follow the terms they claim to follow.

Everyone says that bullshit, Bill - but it's not practical for a bunch of
reasons, all of which you and everyone else already knows.
o The license terms are often many pages long
o They're filled to the brim with legalese
o Any one sentence in that legalese can be interpreted to be your 1st born
o And, as you noted, you have to believe them (which we know they lie)

> Look at Accuweather now, which forces you to sign an agreement that they
> can sell your information to advertisers in order to use their services.
> At least they ar honest. I am not at all sure that many of the other
> companies are honest.

These four companies are certainly making money on your "free" data.
o Microsoft
o Google
o Apple
o DropBox

The question is how.

> If you are going to use cloud services, use encryption on all materials
> you store there.

Hehheh... I've said that many times, where I suggest to the Apple users
that they should encrypt their files using any free multi-level encryption
such as those afforded by Veracrypt/Truecrypt containers - where nospam
constantly brazen claims (wrongly so) that Apple already provides
Veracrypt-style encrypted file containers natively (which is just dead
wrong on his part).

o Does the iTunes app store have any free disk encryption container software?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/ACvkdg_zvDI/tYfHGdpTBAAJ>

o Do people of reasonable technical ability store their private data on the Internet (if so, for what gain?)
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/E0TkTd-zLuk/q8-pjDRsBAAJ>

Personally, I avoid those "free" cloud services.

Worse, I feel only lazy people use them.
o Do people of reasonable technical ability store their private data on the Internet (if so, for what gain?)
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/E0TkTd-zLuk/fF1RRv51AwAJ>

Even my CALENDAR is stored locally.
o Does a free offline non-Internet calendar app exist for iOS that imports/exports ICS text files?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/OzUOmgJLmZs/Xzx9DMxnFAAJ>

So are my passwords stored locally.
o Do you have a working cross-platform PASSWD database for Windows, Linux, Mac, iOS, & Android on your home LAN?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/5Z15v7xP8so/nhvO3FXDDQAJ>

And I've since ditched my main Google Gmail account for non-Google ones.
o Let's document the best known current free REPLACEMENTS for Google "mail" account - so all benefit from our efforts
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/ZWYX6lCW0ck/lYYneXXkBAAJ>

In summary, I strive to keep my personal data off the cloud, but most
people, it seems, rampantly store their personal data on the cloud.

I'm simply asking the very basic question here of how they (Apple, Google,
Microsoft, DropBox) make money by giving you that "free" cloud storage for
your personal data.

[nospam]

In article <qgv8v1$t4h$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen G. Holder

<arling...@nospam.net> wrote:

> > If you are going to use cloud services, use encryption on all materials
> > you store there.
>
> Hehheh... I've said that many times, where I suggest to the Apple users
> that they should encrypt their files using any free multi-level encryption
> such as those afforded by Veracrypt/Truecrypt containers - where nospam
> constantly brazen claims (wrongly so) that Apple already provides
> Veracrypt-style encrypted file containers natively (which is just dead
> wrong on his part).

once again, you are lying.

i *never* said apple provides veracrypt-style containers.

other companies do not provide that either, including google.

what i said was that everything on ios devices is fully encrypted, as
is everything in icloud for that matter, which is *much* better than
what you propose.

not only that, but the usb port on ios devices is disabled while the
device is locked (other than for charging), making it impossible to
even access the encrypted data at all.

the only option is to take it apart and forensically examine the memory
chips, except that everything is encrypted, so that won't get very far.

that is *not* the case with android.

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 14:37:22 -0000 (UTC)

"Arlen G. Holder" <arling...@nospam.net> wrote:

> I'm simply asking the very basic question here of how they (Apple,
> Google, Microsoft, DropBox) make money by giving you that "free"
> cloud storage for your personal data.

Are you OK?

Twice before you've posted asking a question. Both first times you
asked a DIFFERENT question which you claimed to be the same one. Now
here you ask a new and completely different question, indicating
through context that it is the same question once again.

It isn't. You are conflating three individual questions and calling
them one.

Are you sure that you're all right? Off your meds? Bump your head?
Stroking out?

We're all concerned about you.

What has gone before:

----------------------
In Message-ID: <qgv8v1$t4h$1...@news.mixmin.net> you asked:

------------
... I'm asking about the OTHERS who DO put their data on the cloud -
which ones they use.
------------

In Message-ID: <qgqa3p$db1$1...@news.mixmin.net> you asked:
------------

"Q: Why do the big marketing organizations offer free cloud storage
anyway?"

------------
---------------------

--
Cybe R. Wizard

We lie loudest when we lie to ourselves.
Eric Hoffer

[nospam]

In article <20190720102234.2a356a06@WizardsTower>, Cybe R. Wizard

<cybe_r...@WizardsTower.invalid> wrote:

> On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 14:37:22 -0000 (UTC)
> "Arlen G. Holder" <arling...@nospam.net> wrote:
> > I'm simply asking the very basic question here of how they (Apple,
> > Google, Microsoft, DropBox) make money by giving you that "free"
> > cloud storage for your personal data.
>
> Are you OK?
>
> Twice before you've posted asking a question. Both first times you
> asked a DIFFERENT question which you claimed to be the same one. Now
> here you ask a new and completely different question, indicating
> through context that it is the same question once again.
>
> It isn't. You are conflating three individual questions and calling
> them one.
>
> Are you sure that you're all right? Off your meds? Bump your head?
> Stroking out?
>
> We're all concerned about you.

i'm not, and i'm sure many others aren't either.

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 11:34:06 -0400
nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

[Arlen}

> >
> > We're all concerned about you.
>
> i'm not, and i'm sure many others aren't either.

;-]

Sure, you are. It's just not a concern relating to good health or
happiness. (or even, possibly, life) It may even be anti-all that.

IOW, you have the same (or very similar) concerns as I.

--
Cybe R. Wizard

"There's no justice. There's only me."
Judge Dredd

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 11:02:34 -0400, nospam wrote:

> i *never* said apple provides veracrypt-style containers.

Hi nospam,

*Please act like an _adult_ for once*
o Children like you, nospam, are the epitome of what's bad about Usenet.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/ACvkdg_zvDI/59PJn5R9BAAJ>

On a large list such as this, I'm not dropping to your level of silly
childish fifth-grade games you and that other petty child Cybe(R) Wizard
_always_ play (as does Dan Purgert & Rudy Wieser, Char Jackson, Jolly
Roger, BK, Lewis, et al.).

o Does the iTunes app store have any free disk encryption container software?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/ACvkdg_zvDI/tYfHGdpTBAAJ>

You're all children who can't ever add any on-topic value so you play your
silly petty fifth-grade childish games ad infinitum. You play your silly
"goal post" games where you weasel every which way, given you're the
PERFECT epitome (as is Cybe(R) Wizard) of the canonical Usenet trolls.

*I REFERENCE my facts nospam - while you simply _fabricate_ everything*.

The proof you said it (many times) is in the very thread I referenced,
where even the other Apple lovers told you to STFU since you were clearly
playing your Apple Apologist games of fabricating wholly imaginary iOS
functionality that you KNOW doesn't exist (it never did).
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/ACvkdg_zvDI/3QpeWWlrBAAJ>
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/ACvkdg_zvDI/L2I6ZIx0BAAJ>
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/ACvkdg_zvDI/4Z_AnaV1BAAJ>
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/ACvkdg_zvDI/8mFN-qF6BAAJ>
<>

Here's where others told you to stop claiming imaginary Apple functionality:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/ACvkdg_zvDI/JC6IPep3BAAJ>
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/ACvkdg_zvDI/tZcIJq55BAAJ>

This is the proof, and I'm NOT responding to any more of the childish
drivel from the likes of you and the other well-known children on this ng.
o The real question is Why do Apple Apologists _hate_ facts about Apple products?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/boEv7_ePPQ0/ck2VBgaaCgAJ>

--
This is my one and only post in this thread to the childish petty posters
such as Cybe(R) Wizard and nospam and Dan Purgert and Wolf K and Char
Jackson, and Frank Slootweg, et al.

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 00:29:08 GMT, lonelydad wrote:

> Basically, they want you to get set up with their free space, so that when
> you realize you need more, you will be more likely to just rent it from
> them than shop around for the best deal.
>
> More than likelyl, they also get some consideration from their service host
> for the number of different users they have.

Hi lonelydad,

Your adult on-topic response is well appreciated, as the trolls are really
flying on this thread (since they have no on-topic value to add).

I think you're correct as I don't see them making much money off anything
else (although Google is big on meta data).

They likely make their money just like a grocery store makes money on "two
for one" sales, where they hope you'll buy more.

So far, yours is the only conclusion that passes logical scrutiny; but
let's await logical responses from others before we conclude that's how the
free cloud storage outfits make their money.

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 18:26:41 -0700, 123456789 wrote:

> If you go to the doctor, use a credit card, pay taxes, etc,
> your very personal data is already in the cloud...

Hi 123456789,

Yours is an interesting and yet perfectly valid response to the question,
where I think we have a problem of definitions varying (and conflicting).
<https://i.postimg.cc/6Q9VZrMf/storage.jpg>

1. When I say cloud, I only mean "consumer cloud data storage".
2. However, when I googled, up came "B2B cloud services".
3. And your post seems to mean "any data storage on someone's server".
4. While others seem to infer that "cloud" === Internet, to them.

Given this confusion, I think I should henceforth not use the word "cloud"
alone, since it means at least four completely different things to people,
apparently.

For _this_ thread, when I use the word "cloud", I mean only the specific
type of *consumer oriented* personal data storage solutions offered by the
big three (or maybe the big five or half dozen):
o Google One vs. Dropbox, OneDrive, Box, Amazon, and iCloud in 2018
<https://www.cloudfuze.com/google-one-vs-dropbox-onedrive-box-amazon-and-icloud-in-2018/>

*CONSUMER CLOUD PROVIDERS* <https://i.postimg.cc/6Q9VZrMf/storage.jpg>
1. GoogleDrive aka GoogleOne (15GB)
2. Box (10GB)
3. AmazonDrive (5GB)
4. OneDrive (5GB)
5. iCloud (5GB)
6. DropBox (2GB)

As described in these "cloud storage" references I just skimmed:
o The best cloud storage provider: Dropbox, Google Drive, OneDrive & iCloud Drive compared
<https://www.techly.com.au/2019/02/18/best-cloud-storage-provider-dropbox-google-drive-onedrive-icloud-drive-compared/>

o OneDrive, Dropbox, Google Drive and Box: Which cloud storage service is right for you?
<https://www.cnet.com/how-to/onedrive-dropbox-google-drive-and-box-which-cloud-storage-service-is-right-for-you/>

o Cloud storage: How secure are Dropbox, OneDrive, Google Drive and iCloud?
<https://www.alphr.com/apple/1000326/cloud-storage-how-secure-are-dropbox-onedrive-google-drive-and-icloud>

o Best of The Big Three: Dropbox vs Google Drive vs Onedrive
<https://www.cloudwards.net/dropbox-vs-google-drive-vs-onedrive/>

o DROPBOX VS GOOGLE DRIVE VS ONEDRIVE VS ICLOUD VS AMAZON DRIVE
<https://5best.cloud/dropbox-vs-google-drive-vs-onedrive-vs-icloud-vs-amazon-drive/>

In summary, how do _they_ make their money by offering consumers a small
amount of free persponal data storage for _home_ Windows, Linux, iOS,
Android, and Mac users? <https://i.postimg.cc/6Q9VZrMf/storage.jpg>

Do they make their money mostly on what lonelydad described as upgrades for
consumers who need _more_ storage than what they provid for free?

If so, what rationale do people use for renting their data for the rest of
their lives, versus just storing the data on inexpensive removable drives
stored in a safe place?

[123456789]

Arlen G. Holder wrote:

> 123456789 wrote:

>>> I don't put ANY of my data on the cloud if I can help
>>> it.

>> If you go to the doctor, use a credit card, pay taxes,
>> etc, your very personal data is already in the
>> cloud...

> When I say cloud, I only mean "consumer cloud data
> storage"

It apparently makes you feel better to ignore those many
business/government servers containing your most personal
information. IMO you may have your head in the cloud (pun
intended).

It seems that every day I read something about another
government/business server (tax, doctor, credit card, etc.)
being hacked. Not to mention all the employees who have
access and can use your info nefariously.

So while I may be vulnerable using a consumer cloud service
(even though I encrypt and am only one account among
hundreds of millions-what are the chances...), my point
is that you are perhaps already as much (or more) vulnerable
than me using my (consumer) cloud account.

And since you use only in-home backup your data may also be
vulnerable to natural or criminal causes...

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 16:13:21 -0000 (UTC)

"Arlen G. Holder" <arling...@nospam.net> wrote:

> You play your silly
> "goal post" games where you weasel every which way, given you're the
> PERFECT epitome (as is Cybe(R) Wizard) of the canonical Usenet trolls.
>
> *I REFERENCE my facts nospam - while you simply _fabricate_
> everything*.

Why, then, do you completely refuse to reference this "fact" of yours:

Arelene Holdout said:
----------
"I have likely written over ten thousand tutorials, where at my last
company, I wrote over five thousand alone. On the Internet, I don't know
how many I have, but if you assume that I write one a day sometimes,
and at least one a week, I have many thousands "
----------

Shut me up about it merely by showing that searchable list or tutorials.
Hell, just show the list.

The instant that you show a viable list of TEN THOUSAND tutorials that
YOU have written I will shut up about it FOREVER, I guarantee and
promise.

***Be a man*** or 'fess up to being a liar, otherwise.

Failing to do either, you are just and only a liar. ...and not much of
a man, either.

Seriously, I've known several actual writers who produce copious
amounts of for-profit text and each and every one keeps a list of, not
only publications, all their written material. Aren't you a
serious writer? Where's your list?

C'mon, an honest man would either pony up that list gladly or accept
and admit to being a liar and having no list or any idea as to the
number written.

Which will it be, or are you also duplicitous and conniving?

My bet is on your being and exposing yourself to be a duplicitous and
conniving liar by once again NOT showing that linked list.

A lie of omission is just as much a lie as one of commission.

--
Cybe R. Wizard

"Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that
there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy with the proof."
J. K. Galbraith

[David Catterall]

On 20/07/19 16:34, nospam wrote:
> i'm not [concerned about Arlen Holder], and i'm sure many others aren't either.

When he starts a thread, I wait to see how long it is before he refers
to `adult' and `childish' things.

I find it an odd way to analyse data or people -- but I'm 66 years old
and the issue was `live' for me way back in 1971.

David

[Dan Purgert]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Which means you were there when those crazies landed on the moon 50
years ago. go humanity!

(too bad we've not really done it much since...)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAl0za14ACgkQjhHd8xJ5
ooG6Ggf9F6VFtSPvcJ84AHC+xkdXFw37o/QyvuKG9TO46PYBN/3YFsmSnCmNNqdY
6C9Oz0NOI5DDu3ccxpLmcTCWPv8FSZqZas1oxg+bhyftLSoGYr1L2l7Rxygk7NDd
jEqyhgnfUrrwvfGLiIbxUXu2BWuOtmWculo974bPhzW+5jMs7CmKa+p0OcyAuzcd
TceF5U+VOzPpLN92Vt4cMZ3x7Sg2q+sg/q+nmolIWZ9Jr/S//pMUTYHVtouy6MLD
3YnXQCKV6fYzwx1EumsA3n++/VExAjNp4ELXkaCY+x6MJBhvNuhPbdiknImhxcKJ
PW16ebvxZOQGNLStof9USvi0rrAiyw==
=9j6b
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 10:45:50 -0700, 123456789 wrote:

> It apparently makes you feel better to ignore those many
> business/government servers containing your most personal
> information. IMO you may have your head in the cloud (pun
> intended).

Hi 123456789,
WTF?
Just because _this_ thread is about personal cloud services, doesn't mean
it makes me feel better to not talk about completely different topics.

It just means I'm trying to stay on topic.
There are PLENTY of other topics suggesting we store NOTHING on the net
o More reasons to store NOTHING on the Internet: Facebook exposes hundreds of millions of user login/passwords IN CLEARTEXT since 2012!
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/xLludXWVYgQ/bWjJxIPuAwAJ>

> It seems that every day I read something about another
> government/business server (tax, doctor, credit card, etc.)
> being hacked. Not to mention all the employees who have
> access and can use your info nefariously.

Yup. I post them as separate threads when I find them, for example...
o Yet more proof Apple doesn't test software sufficiently (this time not only from Facebook but also from Expedia, Hollister and Hotels.com)
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/8HfdPOQVNVk/dtPTyTltCgAJ>

> So while I may be vulnerable using a consumer cloud service
> (even though I encrypt and am only one account among
> hundreds of millions-what are the chances...), my point
> is that you are perhaps already as much (or more) vulnerable
> than me using my (consumer) cloud account.

We've covered, in detail, the lack of PRIVACY on ANY platform:
o What is the factual truth about PRIVACY differences or similarities between the Android & iOS mobile phone ecosystems?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/MiZixhidmOs/GKOcH9eUAAAJ>

> And since you use only in-home backup your data may also be
> vulnerable to natural or criminal causes...

We've covered that topic, in gory detail, in the past also:

o Do people of reasonable technical ability store their private data on the Internet (if so, for what gain?)
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/E0TkTd-zLuk/fF1RRv51AwAJ>

The difference is that THIS THREAD is asking a simple question:
Q: How do the big six make their money on personal cloud storage?

[Boris T.]

On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 13:21:46 -0500, "Cybe R. Wizard"
<cybe_r...@WizardsTower.invalid> wrote:

>On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 16:13:21 -0000 (UTC)
>"Arlen G. Holder" <arling...@nospam.net> wrote:
>
>> You play your silly
>> "goal post" games where you weasel every which way, given you're the
>> PERFECT epitome (as is Cybe(R) Wizard) of the canonical Usenet trolls.
>>
>> *I REFERENCE my facts nospam - while you simply _fabricate_
>> everything*.
>
>Why, then, do you completely refuse to reference this "fact" of yours:
>
>Arelene Holdout said:
>----------
>"I have likely written over ten thousand tutorials, where at my last
>company, I wrote over five thousand alone. On the Internet, I don't know
>how many I have, but if you assume that I write one a day sometimes,
>and at least one a week, I have many thousands "
>----------
>
>Shut me up about it merely by showing that searchable list or tutorials.
>Hell, just show the list.
>
>The instant that you show a viable list of TEN THOUSAND tutorials that
>YOU have written I will shut up about it FOREVER, I guarantee and
>promise.

You're aiming too low. Surely it's up above 11,000 by now, after all
these months. Maybe even 12,000. After all, he claimed to be cranking
them out at a furious pace.

--
Townsend

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 20:14:41 +0100, David Catterall wrote:

> When he starts a thread, I wait to see how long it is before he refers
> to `adult' and `childish' things.
>
> I find it an odd way to analyse data or people -- but I'm 66 years old
> and the issue was `live' for me way back in 1971.

Hi David,
People are what they are - which you can't blame me for what THEY are.
o Whether they own the brain of an adult or a child is up to THEM.

Don't blame me for simply pointing out what they write, which is that
a. They can't ever post anything of adult technical value, and,
b. They can't possibly post anything on topic to the thread.

I've been on Usenet for decades, as have most of the old men here.
There are mostly adults (95%) but many children (see vetted list below).

You have not made the list of well-known children - who are incapable of
posting on-topic information of adult value; but your post was clearly
devoid of any adult value whatsoever - and certainly not on topic.

Are you a child, David?
o *Can you possibly add ANY adult on-topic value, David?*

The fact you have NOT added any on-topic value is clear - but whether or
not you own the mind of a child will be determined by whether you CAN
possibly add adult on-topic value to any technical conversation, David.

Can you possibly add adult on-topic technical value, David?
o It's not me who determines that - your own words will prove it or not.

We'll see based on your ability to do two simple adult things:
1. Stay on topic, and,
2. Add technical value to the topic.

Here's a simple CHALLENGE to you, David:
Q: Can you do post to this very thread ANYTHING of adult on-topic value?

--
o Alan Baker <nu...@ness.biz>
o Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com>
o Andreas Rutishauser <and...@macandreas.ch>
o B...@Onramp.net
o Beedle <Bee...@dont-email.me>
o Carlos E.R. <robin_...@es.invalid>
o Char Jackson <no...@none.invalid>
o Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
o "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r...@WizardsTower.invalid> (always a child)
o Dan Purgert <d...@djph.net> (sometimes, but only rarely posts as an adult)
o Davoud <st...@sky.net>
o Diesel <m...@privacy.net> (aka Dustin Cook)
o Elden <use...@moondog.org>
o Elfin <elfi...@gmail.com> (aka Lloyd, aka Lloyd Parsons)
o Fox's Mercantile <jda...@att.net> Jeff
o *Hemidactylus* <ecph...@allspamis.invalid>
o Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> (mostly is an adult but often a child)
o joe <no...@domain.invalid> (rarely, but sometimes posts as an adult would)
o Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch>
o Johan <JH...@nospam.invalid>
o John Doe <alway...@message.header>
o John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net>
o John-Del <ohg...@gmail.com>
o Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com>
o Ken Hart <kwh...@frontier.com>
o Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies>
o Lloyd <elfi...@gmail.com> (aka "Elfin")
o Lloyd Parsons <lloy...@gmail.com> (aka "Elfin")
o Meanie <M...@gmail.com>
o nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> (bullshits more than anyone on Usenet)
o Nil <redn...@REMOVETHIScomcast.net>
o "pf...@aol.com" <peterw...@gmail.com> Peter Wieck, Melrose Park, PA
o Rene Lamontagne <rla...@shaw.ca> (always posts as a child would post)
o "R.Wieser" <add...@not.available> (aka Rudy Wieser) (always a child)
o Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>
o she...@outlook.com
o Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> (aka Michael Glasser, troll's troll)
o Tim Streater <timst...@greenbee.net>
o Wade Garrett <wa...@cooler.net>
o Wolf K <wol...@sympatico.ca> (always posts as a child)
o Your Name <Your...@YourISP.com>
o et al.

[p-0''0-h the cat (coder)]

Damn, Shadow is going to be pissed.

Again.

Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.

--
p-0.0-h the cat

Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker, Resident evil, Monkey Boy,
Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath,
the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll, troll infâme,
the OVERCAT [The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers], lowlife troll,
shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple, sociopath, kook,
smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile, snittish scumbag,
liar, total ******* retard, shill, pooh-seur, scouringerer, jumped up chav,
punk ass dole whore troll, no nothing innumerate religious maniac,
lycanthropic schizotypal lesbian, the most complete ignoid, joker, and furball.

NewsGroups Numbrer One Terrorist

Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery.
By Appointment to God Frank-Lin.

Signature integrity check
md5 Checksum: be0b2a8c486d83ce7db9a459b26c4896

I mark any message from »Q« the troll as stinky

[David Catterall]

On 20/07/19 22:07, Arlen G. Holder wrote:

> whether or
> not you own the mind of a child will be determined by whether you CAN
> possibly add adult on-topic value to any technical conversation, David.

There is no psychological or educational basis for that hypothesis.

However, the fact that you are trying to place /me/ in the zone of your
contrived adult-or-child(ish) dichotomy means that your universe has a
degree of consistency, if nothing else.

This is my last response in this thread, but I will continue to observe you.

David

[Dan Purgert]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Boris T wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 13:21:46 -0500, "Cybe R. Wizard"
><cybe_r...@WizardsTower.invalid> wrote:

>> [...]

>>The instant that you show a viable list of TEN THOUSAND tutorials that
>>YOU have written I will shut up about it FOREVER, I guarantee and
>>promise.
>
> You're aiming too low. Surely it's up above 11,000 by now, after all
> these months. Maybe even 12,000. After all, he claimed to be cranking
> them out at a furious pace.

I think you're both off by an order of magnitude by now.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAl0zzFEACgkQjhHd8xJ5
ooHqywf+K4XtnkmJA1QqkYWyw/VKpZ/PWYZAWnzZGUjEUbVX8ZOgXdSDH++dJVu5
Hy14QsoGKWGA7wg7EVA6nd1XBcGNKAyOjwnb6OvOChvcrfRWVVHhF65c4zT+7ZM/
sKCiYtm50ixT04LGtRh/k+8ddRBm7Tlk0V8NWiw+GMNRvAu0/7n7OuQwAwYa2GMG
qRx4ckCsiu+ZxCOA8gFeKVLWKWBJAFoBWJU7rNYLEzc5VV8o8E7bjog78dcYB6yb
V+jMuiWI9Gn1Hi+y1hK7OjRp0lV63avI8dAg0ZGCXRo9WA3WgfQMKnAaAsFflQcG
2b0TTQ0vdcYuqrbar0dkYKrG8tIEew==
=G8d8

[Arlen G. Holder]

On 21 Jul 2019 00:08:35 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

> And for critical data, it's encrypted with a key that only exists on the
> owner's device itself. Not even Apple employees can access that data.

Hi Jolly Roger,

Both you and nospam only know the bullshit Apple Marketing feeds you.
o Neither of you have ANY CONCEPT of what an encrypted file container does.

HINT: Encrypted file containers work on _all_ 5 consumer platforms.
HINT: Encrypted file containers can be uploaded to cloud storage.
HINT: Encrypted file containers can be saved on networked storage.
HINT: Encrypted file containers can be opened & edited on _any_ platform.
HINT: Encrypted file containers use freeware on all 5 consumer platforms.
HINT: Encrypted file containers can have a hidden container inside.
HINT: Encrypted file containers can be any size you want to make them.
etc.

REFERENCE:
o <https://www.veracrypt.fr/en/Beginner%27s%20Tutorial.html>

The only thing Jolly Roger & nospam know is what Apple MARKETING feeds them

[123456789]

Arlen G. Holder wrote:
> 123456789 wrote:

>> A good in-house fire (or earthquake) might defeat that
>> strategy.

> MARKETING plays to your fear; not to your logic.

Off site data protection is just good sense. No marketing
necessary.

> I live in the HIGHEST fire danger zone and the HIGHEST
> earthquake danger zone in the state of California - and
> I'm not worried in the least about my data storage

Even if your in-house data survives the fire you may lose
physical access to it for a time (perhaps months?). My cloud
data is accessible (almost) anyplace, anytime, and on any
device.

> What's the chance your cloud data will be hacked? Nearly
> 100%

Since you have no link I will ASSume that % is a your GUESS.

My GUESS is that my cloud account being only one out of the
hundreds of millions of accounts that my provider
services my chances of (un-targeted) hacking is more near to
zero.

> What's the chance your house will burn down? Nearly 0%

Agreed. But I still carry homeowners insurance...

> MARKETING plays to your fear; not to your logic.

I think logic is more my reason for my cloud data backup and
marketing just happens to agree with me in this case... ;)

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 13:21:46 -0500, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:

> The instant that you show a viable list of TEN THOUSAND tutorials that
> YOU have written I will shut up about it FOREVER, I guarantee and
> promise.

Hi Cybe(r) Wizard,

10,001
o Windows Tutorial to annotate & print family calendar at home on 8.5x11 paper (please improve for all to benefit)
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.comp.freeware/RA3bLfsgtFg>

Usenet is a potluck, where most people add on-topic technical value.
o However, you can only shit on the Potluck as your added value.

*For you, Cybe(r) Wizard, Usenet is merely a tool for your amusement.*

This is my only response to your idiotic childish tirade, since you pulled
the comment out of context, in that I wrote THOUSANDS at my company (where
you conveniently omit that key detail) and that I've been writing tutorials
for about two decades on Usenet under various nyms (many of which I've
already dug up for you while you have never dug up even a _single_
tutorial).

I realize, Cybe(r) Wizard that you own the brain of a child
o Hence, I realize that you can NEVER add on-topic technical value

I realize that your childish brain can NEVER add adult value.
o All you can do is play your silly childish games wholly out of context

This one time I'm going to stoop way way way down to your level, Cybe.
o This post, from me, is at the level that you, a child, can comprehend.

Here is a new tutorial I posted today,
o Windows Tutorial to annotate & print family calendar at home on 8.5x11 paper (please improve for all to benefit)
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.comp.freeware/RA3bLfsgtFg>

Name a _single_ helpful tutorial you've written, Cybe(r) Wizard?
o HINT: You can _only_ play silly childish semantic games out of context.

You are a child, Cybe(r) Wizard.
o You have never even _once_ contributed adult on-topic value to Usenet.

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Sun, 21 Jul 2019 09:13:51 -0700, 123456789 wrote:

> Off site data protection is just good sense. No marketing
> necessary.

Hi 123456789,

Be advised - I'm going to be blunt with you below
o *Since the point is that there's NO ADVANTAGE to your solution.*

What amazes me is how you people seem to turn your brains completely off
o Which is why you and people like you love to use the cloud (I posit).

See this thread, which posits that the dumber someone appears to be,
the more they tend to love to store their private data on the cloud:

o Do people of reasonable technical ability store their private data on the Internet (if so, for what gain?)

<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/mBIZ-8jGdmk/aLDJkSJQAAAJ>

What amazes me is the utter lack of sensible logic in what you suggest.
o Does it NOT occur to you that the cloud storage WILL be hacked?

How can you people who turn your brains off in order to use the cloud
ALWAYS fail to realize that storing an encrypted drive in a safe deposit
box (or any other safe location) is utterly trivial?

(IMHO) There are ZERO advantages to storing your personal data on the
cloud, that any intelligent adult can't figure out simply by storing their
personal data intelligently, OFF the cloud.

If _you_ can figure out an advantage - then let me know
o As nothing you suggest is any better than what I already wrote

And, in fact, everything you propose is far worse.

> Even if your in-house data survives the fire you may lose
> physical access to it for a time (perhaps months?). My cloud
> data is accessible (almost) anyplace, anytime, and on any
> device.

See above.

Name _any_ advantage the cloud has over the suggested offline solution.
o Name just one.

> Since you have no link I will ASSume that % is a your GUESS.

Yup.
o Chance of your storage being hacked is just about 100% (IMHO).
o Chance of your safe deposit box being hacked is far lower (IMHO).
o Chance of your copy at home being hacked is even lower still (IMHO).

If you need "instant access" to your data when there ISN'T a fire or
earthquake, the logic is so simple that even you can figure it out, which
is to maintain an offline encrypted copy at home - and - then - at your
convenience, drop off an encrypted copy at the local bank for safekeeping.

This is where encrypted file containers excel, by the way:
o Best freeware for portable encrypted file containers
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/cas1QJ_j2uI/4Uut0HGrBgAJ>

> My GUESS is that my cloud account being only one out of the
> hundreds of millions of accounts that my provider
> services my chances of (un-targeted) hacking is more near to
> zero.

Do you claim that ANY of the main half dozen personal cloud storage
companies have NOT been hit by hackers (today & forever in the future)?

And what is your claim for those same sites, for zero-day vulnerabilities
that you're completely unaware of today, and forever in the future?

>> What's the chance your house will burn down? Nearly 0%
>
> Agreed. But I still carry homeowners insurance...

I don't.
o I don't have earthquake insurance (too expensive)
o I only have fire insurance (not anything else whatsoever).

Same with my cars:
o I don't insure the car for damage
o I only insure for liability

You insure only that which you can't afford to replace.

You're using the "cloud storage" for "insurance".
o I get that.

My argument is that you're using faulty logic.
o All I ask of anyone - are facts - and then sentient logic.

*ADVANTAGES of PERSONAL CLOUD STORAGE*
o Convenient (you can turn your brain off completely in fact)
o Fast (it's always there - for you - and for the hackers)
o Available (it's available when you're on the road).
o Insurance (it's still there even after your house burns down).

*DISADVANTAGES of PERSONAL CLOUD STORAGE*
o It will be hacked - (my assessment & that of others)

*ADVANTAGE of LOCAL ENCRYPTED PERSONAL CONTAINER STORAGE*
o Convenient (but you need to be intelligent about it)
o Fast (it's always there - at home - and on your mobile device)
o Available (it's available on your mobile when you're on the road).
o Insurance (it's still there even after your house burns down).

*DISADVANTAGES of LOCAL ENCRYPTED PERSONAL CONTAINER STORAGE*
o You have to put your brain in gear to come up with a plan

>> MARKETING plays to your fear; not to your logic.
>
> I think logic is more my reason for my cloud data backup and
> marketing just happens to agree with me in this case... ;)

Let's talk logic since logic and facts are what I'm about.

Advantage of cloud storage _must_ be huge to the big six, right?
o What is that advantage?

As far as anyone can tell, what has been _proposed_ is:
a. They mine your data (which is a bad thing for you)
b. They want to rent you back your data (which is a bad thing for you)

Hmmmm... what ELSE is the reason _they_ give you personal storage?

[123456789]

Arlen G. Holder wrote:
> 123456789 wrote:

>> Off site data protection is just good sense.

> See this thread...https://groups.google.com/...

You must be getting pretty desperate when you cite Google
Groups.

> Does it NOT occur to you that the cloud storage WILL be
> hacked?

I don't doubt that someone's cloud account may get hacked.
IMO the odds are hundreds of millions to one that mine
will. But just in case, I also encrypt the sensitive stuff.

> storing an encrypted drive in a safe deposit box (or any
> other safe location) is utterly trivial?

Safe deposit box drive storage can't be instantly updated
and can't be instantly accessed (most) anytime, anywhere,
and on any device.

> (IMHO) There are ZERO advantages to storing your
> personal data on the cloud,

IMHO? Opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one. But I
thought you only dealt in facts...

> Name _any_ advantage the cloud has over the suggested

> offline solution. Name just one.

One? How about that cloud data can be instantly
accessed/updated from (most) anywhere you happen to be.
That could be handy if your house is under hundreds of tons
of concrete from a recent earthquake and you haven't been to
the bank in awhile to update the hard drive.

> If you need "instant access" to your data when there

> ISN'T a fire or earthquake... maintain an offline

> encrypted copy at home - and - then - at your
> convenience, drop off an encrypted copy at the local
> bank for safekeeping.

Having to drive to the bank does not sound that convenient
to me. Convenience is updating my cloud drive from my phone
while a 1000 miles from home.

> Do you claim that ANY of the main half dozen personal
> cloud storage companies have NOT been hit by hackers
> (today & forever in the future)?

No.

> And what is your claim for those same sites, for
> zero-day vulnerabilities that you're completely unaware
> of today, and forever in the future?

No claims. And I doubt the hackers would like my easy
listening music collection anyway.

> I only have [home] fire insurance (not anything else
> whatsoever).

Not a problem if you have few assets that can be lost in a
liability lawsuit.

> o I don't insure the car for damage only insure for
> liability

So why not liability for your house?

> You're using the "cloud storage" for "insurance".

And convenience.

> It will be hacked [cloud] - (my assessment & that of
> others)

Of course. And a house in your county will be burglarized.
But the chances are good it won't be yours. So you feel
secure (I think) in storing your stuff there.

> Let's talk logic since logic and facts are what I'm
> about.

You seem to have a lot of IMHOs in this post for being a
fact man...

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Sun, 21 Jul 2019 14:32:58 -0700, 123456789 wrote:

> You must be getting pretty desperate when you cite Google
> Groups.

Hi 123456789,

You just lost all credibility if you really think Usenet is Google Groups.
o You apparently simply bought too many childish arguments this week.

And, all your arguments are driven by unrealistic FEAR - not actual logic.
o The MARKETING of the cloud storage solutions has easily won your brain.

> I don't doubt that someone's cloud account may get hacked.

Every cloud service will be hacked - IMHO.
o That's half the reason to NEVER store any personal data in cloud storage.

If you can claim that none of the big six will be hacked
o Then make that claim.

> IMO the odds are hundreds of millions to one that mine
> will. But just in case, I also encrypt the sensitive stuff.

What encryption tool do you use?
o I ask because I strongly suspect you're just making that up.

> Safe deposit box drive storage can't be instantly updated
> and can't be instantly accessed (most) anytime, anywhere,
> and on any device.

You completely missed the point - which was your own point.
o For heaven's sake, you were talking about FIRE & EARTHQUAKE.

Did you purchase too many arguments this week?
o For Fire & Earthquake - you don't need "instant" access to your data.

You just need your data.

> IMHO? Opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one. But I
> thought you only dealt in facts...

You're proving more and more you bought too many arguments this week.
o I listed *clearly* the known ADVANTAGES & DISADVANTAGES

The fact you have no adult response to that listing - is telling.

> One? How about that cloud data can be instantly
> accessed/updated from (most) anywhere you happen to be.

We already proved you can do that sans cloud storage, if you're intelligent

o What are some key common databases you often SHARE between your desktop & mobile devices?

<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/fbtSgT0AiP0/Bwb_tsmeBwAJ>

o Do you have a working cross-platform PASSWD database for Windows, Linux, Mac, iOS, & Android on your home LAN?

<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/iIjcGCYnm-E/HV1B82nlBwAJ>

o Do people of reasonable technical ability store their private data on the Internet (if so, for what gain?)

<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/mBIZ-8jGdmk/1mL3E8JlAAAJ>

o Do you have a working freeware automatic sync between Android & Windows?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/7aOWwoEwsZ0/3f5qTpwBAgAJ>

o Has anyone here ever set up a CalDAV server on Windows for use with Android CalDAV clients?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/52iSsFUQinE/AflgVrHVEAAJ>

IMHO, cloud storage suffers from these major flaws
o Your private data _will_ be hacked
o The less intelligent you are - the more you gravitate to cloud storage
o Cloud storage providers are making money off your ineptitude

> That could be handy if your house is under hundreds of tons
> of concrete from a recent earthquake and you haven't been to
> the bank in awhile to update the hard drive.

Your own argument instantly fails your own tests.

Two things are clear about your argument....
o It doesn't hold water - even against its own tests, and,
o Your only response to valid concerns is to assume a catastrophe

Notice - you're driven by unrealistic FEAR & not logic.

> Having to drive to the bank does not sound that convenient
> to me. Convenience is updating my cloud drive from my phone
> while a 1000 miles from home.

You completely whooshed on the adult arguments
o You drop to the level of a child, in the face of an adult discussion.

Let me spell out the simple logic for your brain to comprehend
1. The logic is that, for earthquakes, you store the disk off site
2. The logic is that, for instant access, you access your data instantly

What part of that adult logic didn't you comprehend yet?
o HINT: You think Usenet is Google Groups for Christs' sake.

You didn't even _read_ the references quoted!

BTW, I perfectly understand your logic for using cloud storage.
1. You are driven by FEAR - not by logic, and,
2. You gravitate to highly marketed cloud-storage solutions.

HINT: They market those solutions for a reason (and it's not you).

> No claims. And I doubt the hackers would like my easy
> listening music collection anyway.

Now you're just stammering like a child since the point is your personal
data, not your music collection. We already covered what we mean by
personal data (e.g., passwords, contacts, calendar, medical records, etc.),
but, of course, you think that any reference on Usenet is "Google Groups",
so all that adult logic was lost on you.

Why don't you look at just _one_ of the references we provided?

o What are some key common databases you often SHARE between your desktop & mobile devices?

<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/fbtSgT0AiP0/Bwb_tsmeBwAJ>

>> You're using the "cloud storage" for "insurance".
> And convenience.

You must realize I perfectly well understand why people like you gravitate
to highly marketed cloud storage solutions.

It takes intelligence & effort to come up with a working private solution.

> Of course. And a house in your county will be burglarized.
> But the chances are good it won't be yours. So you feel
> secure (I think) in storing your stuff there.

I don't harbor the same kind of debilitating FEAR that you harbor.
o Your unreasonable FEAR is why you gravitate to highly marketed solutions.

> You seem to have a lot of IMHOs in this post for being a
> fact man...

In summary:

You explained perfectly why you gravitate to highly marketed solutions
o You are driven by sheer fear - and - you turn your brain off.

The disadvantage of your approach is:
1. Your private data _will_ be hacked, and,
2. The big six are making money off people like you & your data.

The question is how.

[Jasen Betts]

On 2019-07-21, Arlen G. Holder <arling...@nospam.net> wrote:

Seeing as I am back on your shit list without cause, I see no reason
to continue any pretense of respect.

> Be advised - I'm going to be blunt with you below

Dude, you were never sharp.

--
When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Sun, 21 Jul 2019 20:01:55 -0000 (UTC)

"Arlen G. Holder" <arling...@nospam.net> wrote:

> On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 13:21:46 -0500, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
>
> > The instant that you show a viable list of TEN THOUSAND tutorials
> > that YOU have written I will shut up about it FOREVER, I guarantee
> > and promise.
>
> Hi Cybe(r) Wizard,
>
> 10,001

So, no, you can't show that list, just as I figured. It seems that
you /ARE/ a lying duplicitous conniver after all.

OK, there's no surprise there. We've all known it all along.

--
Cybe R. Wizard

My other computer is a HOLMES IV with the Mycroft OS
My other car is a Chandler MetalSmith Mark III
Cybe R. Wizard

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 08:26:02 -0000 (UTC)

"Arlen G. Holder" <arling...@nospam.net> wrote:

> IMHO

You've miss-initialized, "bumbling." You should have written, "IMBO."

"In <your> BUMBLING Opinion."

--
Cybe R. Wizard

"I have likely written over ten thousand tutorials, where at my last
company, I wrote over five thousand alone. On the Internet, I don't know
how many I have, but if you assume that I write one a day sometimes,
and at least one a week, I have many thousands "

lie by Arlen Holder

[sms]

On 7/21/2019 9:13 AM, 123456789 wrote:

>>> A good in-house fire (or earthquake) might defeat that strategy.
>
>> MARKETING plays to your fear; not to your logic.
>
> Off site data protection is just good sense. No marketing
> necessary.
>
>> I live in the HIGHEST fire danger zone and the HIGHEST earthquake
>> danger zone in the state of California - and I'm not worried in the
>> least about my data storage
>
> Even if your in-house data survives the fire you may lose
> physical access to it for a time (perhaps months?). My cloud
> data is accessible (almost) anyplace, anytime, and on any
> device.

In the fires in California, the "fireproof safes" were anything but! One
of these fires, Coffey Park, destroyed a residential neighborhood, after
jumping a six lane freeway, it was not up in a forest somewhere.

It's simple enough to encrypt files and then store them somewhere in the
cloud. You probably don't have a huge number of files that even require
encryption.

[123456789]

Arlen G. Holder wrote

> What encryption tool do you use?

FolderLatch

> For Fire & Earthquake - you don't need "instant" access
> to your data.

I use my cloud drive virtually every day and instant access
is important to me. That it would also survive a fire or
earthquake is a bonus.

> Do you have a working cross-platform PASSWD database for
> Windows, Linux, Mac, iOS, & Android on your home LAN?

Nope. At home I now mostly use this Chromebook that I'm
posting with, which is directly synced to my cloud
account. My W10 laptop and all my Android devices (tablets
and phone) are also synced. Changes made to any one are
reflected to all. Very convenient.

In case of a cloud failure (or screw up on my part) I also
keep a weekly dump to a local hard drive.

> You didn't even _read_ the references quoted!

Your referencing of Google Groups Usenet?? Snicker...

> IMHO, cloud storage suffers from these major flaws o Your
> private data _will_ be hacked o The less intelligent you
> are - the more you gravitate to cloud storage o Cloud
> storage providers are making money off your ineptitude

The majority of you posts continue to be opinion and insults
(snipped). Where's the beef...

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 08:36:11 -0700, 123456789 wrote:

Hi 123456789,

> FolderLatch

Thank you for acting like an adult in your response, where, long-time
readers will note, I always mirror the implied intent of the post whenever
I response (it's a classic technique taught in schools to use on bullies).

In addition to posting as an adult should, I thank you for stating what you
use, since most of us, AFAIK, used TrueCrypt for a very long time until
"something strange" happened, and we moved to VeraCrypt - where I go to the
trouble to provide the URLs so that others, reading this now and in the
future, can benefit from the added value:
o How to Create and Use a VeraCrypt Container
<https://www.veracrypt.fr/en/Beginner%27s%20Tutorial.html>

o How to Create and Use a TrueCrypt Container
<https://www.truecrypt71a.com/documentation/beginners-tutorial/>

Some may use BitLocker but I see that as a different use model:
o A beginner's guide to BitLocker, Windows' built-in encryption tool
<https://www.pcworld.com/article/2308725/a-beginners-guide-to-bitlocker-windows-built-in-encryption-tool.html>

I hadn't heard of "FolderLatch" so I'm glad you brought it up, as Usenet is
a Potluck where everyone brings whatever adult value they can share.

This is apparently the canonical location for FolderLatch freeware:
o <http://folderlatch.com/>

One huge drawback that seems to be with FolderLatch (and BitLocker)
methodologies, is that it's not a cross-platform solution, which means, if
that's true, that you can't open/edit the encrypted container on all the
other common consumer platforms (e.g., Android, iOS, Mac, & Linux).
"Folder Latch is compatible for all Microsoft OS (Windows 9x, ME, 200x,
XP and Vista). With Folder Latch you can protect any folder up to 4 GB
(Folder/Files must have "Full permission" rights to avoid from protecting
other's folder."

While I don't see any advantage of FolderLatch over VeraCrypt, it's still
nice to know that it exists - so I appreciate that you posted that info,
since every post exposes people to criticism (which I know all too well).

The fact you supported your claim is important for your credibility so I
apologize for insinuating that you just made it up (which all too many
people on Usenet do all day, every day).

>> For Fire & Earthquake - you don't need "instant" access
>> to your data.
>
> I use my cloud drive virtually every day and instant access
> is important to me. That it would also survive a fire or
> earthquake is a bonus.

Bear in mind I fully and completely realize why most people naturally
gravitate to the highly marketed cloud personal-storage solutions.
a. It's easy because it's designed to work easily
b. It works from anywhere and everywhere
c. And, if needed, it survives your device being destroyed

The question in this thread is at what cost?

>
>> Do you have a working cross-platform PASSWD database for
>> Windows, Linux, Mac, iOS, & Android on your home LAN?
>
> Nope. At home I now mostly use this Chromebook that I'm
> posting with, which is directly synced to my cloud
> account. My W10 laptop and all my Android devices (tablets
> and phone) are also synced. Changes made to any one are
> reflected to all. Very convenient.

Thanks for hazarding your solution, where, Lord knows, I propose solutions
all the time, where I know full well that simply stating a solution is
risking criticism from other people.

I apologize if I criticized you too harshly in the prior post, as you got
me off on the wrong foot with the Google Groups claim on what Usenet was
all about (it seemed to be a reason for you to NOT read the references).

Speaking of references, I fully realize that coming up with our own working
password solution is MORE WORK AND EFFORT than simply using something
highly marketed such as LastPass, where this post, only moments ago,
underscores the fact that it takes intelligence & effort to come up with a
working password solution that does NOT use the Internet:
o *Do you SYNCHRONIZE keepass kdbx files between Windows & Android?*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.comp.freeware/Rw7OH-Wk-Dk>

Note that this questeion pertains to Linux also, but I find myself using
Linux less and less nowadays, save for emergencies when I need the full
power that Linux affords us (e.g., for Caldav calendar database servers).

> In case of a cloud failure (or screw up on my part) I also
> keep a weekly dump to a local hard drive.

I admit, I've screwed up quite a few times on backups, mostly from pulling
out the USB cable too soon and having to then recover all the files.

It's odd that mobile devices NEVER seem to have this problem that Windows
has with USB sticks - where I use the mobile device almost exactly as a USB
stick (use model wise), over MTP or over Linux (to use iOS as a USB stick).

>> You didn't even _read_ the references quoted!
>
> Your referencing of Google Groups Usenet?? Snicker...

I'll let that pass where I fully understand that you didn't realize that
Google Groups and Usenet are two completely different things - which a LOT
of people don't seem to realize.

Rest assured, I provided references in those Usenet posts since my
philosophy is that every post "should" add value to share to the Potluck
that is Usenet.

Google Groups just happens to be a way to archive these reference posts
o <http://tinyurl.com/comp-mobile-android>
o <http://tinyurl.com/misc-phone-mobile-iphone>
o <http://tinyurl.com/comp-mobile-ipad>
o <http://tinyurl.com/comp-sys-mac-system>
o <http://tinyurl.com/alt-os-linux>
o <http://tinyurl.com/alt-comp-freeware>
o <http://tinyurl.com/alt-comp-os-windows-10>
etc.

One major flaw is that Google doesn't archive Windows newsgroups well.
There's also narkive for the same purpose, but it has huge issues too:
o <http://comp.mobile.android.narkive.com>
o <http://misc.phone.mobile.iphone.narkive.com>
o <http://comp.mobile.ipad.narkive.com>
o <http://comp.sys.mac.system.narkive.com>
o <http://alt.os.linux.narkive.com>
o <http://alt.comp.freeware.narkive.com>
o <http://alt.comp.os.windows-10.narkive.com>
etc/

>> IMHO, cloud storage suffers from these major flaws o Your
>> private data _will_ be hacked o The less intelligent you
>> are - the more you gravitate to cloud storage o Cloud
>> storage providers are making money off your ineptitude
>
> The majority of you posts continue to be opinion and insults
> (snipped). Where's the beef...

Let's stay on topic 123456789,

There is no doubt the bix six highly market their personal cloud storage.
The question is HOW DO THEY MAKE THEIR MONEY?
*CONSUMER CLOUD PROVIDERS* <https://i.postimg.cc/6Q9VZrMf/storage.jpg>

1. GoogleDrive aka GoogleOne (15GB)
2. Box (10GB)
3. AmazonDrive (5GB)
4. OneDrive (5GB)
5. iCloud (5GB)
6. DropBox (2GB)

It seems, from the responses, they make their money two ways:
a. They sell your (meta?) data, and,
b. They upsell you (so that you rent your data back from them).

Does anyone disagree with that conclusion?
Does anyone have _better_ information on their sales model than that?

Why do the big marketing organizations offer free cloud storage anyway?
<https://i.postimg.cc/6Q9VZrMf/storage.jpg>

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:11:01 -0000 (UTC), Jasen Betts wrote:

> Seeing as I am back on your shit list without cause, I see no reason
> to continue any pretense of respect.

Hi Jasen Betts,

I like that you mirrored my implied intent, as that's a well established
technique for handling bullies - which - as you're aware - abound on
Usenet.

That inclusion of you in the list of worthless trolls is a list I maintain
separately in my Usenet folder - where - I don't revisit the list often.

If you post as an adult would, I'd be perfectly happy to remove you from
that list - as it's a fluid list - where - since we're all adults here -
there are no hard feelings.

For example, if Jolly Roger or Rene Lamantagne or, heaven forbid, Cybe(r)
Wizard were to, all of a sudden, post as adults do, I'd be _happy_ to
remove them from the list.

Remember, we've all been on Usenet for decades - so we have our own methods
of handling the cowardly bullies - where my methods are clear that I
confront them - but only in the thread that I author (leaving them free to
troll the hell out of Usenet otherwise - as I know the old adage as ell as
anyone to not feed them).

The list is merely my database for flagging their posts as not useful, so I
generally don't have to waste any of my valuable time reading what almost
always amounts to childish drivel of no on-topic value whatsoever.

For example, excluding your post above, here's a list of those who didn't
post a _single_ shred of on-topic value to this thread alone:
o From: "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r...@WizardsTower.invalid>
o From: Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com>
o From: "Boris T." <b...@lsd.invalid>
o From: Dan Purgert <d...@djph.net>
o From: David Catterall <djc...@eircom.net>
o From: "p-0''0-h the cat (coder)" <super...@fluffyunderbelly.invalid>

In the case of Dan Purgert, once in a while he actually acts like an adult,
but clearly he did not do so in this thread, as he added exactly zero
on-topic technical value - which is to say his posts were of negative
value. Pooh sometimes acts like an adult also. The rest never do.

Notice I simply point to what THEY write - which is why they hate me.
o They hate the truth about themselves (I simply point to what they write)

Also notice, if they troll other threads, I leave them alone.
o My strategy is to make their trolling "less fun" for them in MY threads.

Bear in mind, whenever ANY of these trolls infest a thread, it's ALREADY
ruined (they enjoy bringing a steaming pile of shit to the Usenet Potluck).

o Alan Baker <nu...@ness.biz>
o Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com>
o Andreas Rutishauser <and...@macandreas.ch>
o B...@Onramp.net
o Beedle <Bee...@dont-email.me>

o "Boris T." <b...@lsd.invalid> (a common troll)

o Carlos E.R. <robin_...@es.invalid>
o Char Jackson <no...@none.invalid>
o Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
o "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r...@WizardsTower.invalid> (always a child)

o Dan Purgert <d...@djph.net> (sometimes, but only rarely posts as an adult)
o David Catterall <djc...@eircom.net> (a common troll)

o Davoud <st...@sky.net>
o Diesel <m...@privacy.net> (aka Dustin Cook)
o Elden <use...@moondog.org>
o Elfin <elfi...@gmail.com> (aka Lloyd, aka Lloyd Parsons)
o Fox's Mercantile <jda...@att.net> Jeff

o John Gabriel <NoS...@nospam.net> (can only troll)
o *Hemidactylus* <ecph...@allspamis.invalid>

My strategy is to confront them ONLY on threads I care about.
o I don't feed them on threads that I don't care come to a conclusion

Overall, the strategy works (although trolls like Rene and Wolf insist on
proving their right to troll sometimes) in that when I come in with a new
nym, they are all over the thread like flies to shit - but - once they
figure out that I show them to be utter fools so easily and instantly -
they generally back off - since all they can do is "+1" the other trolls.

Notice, that childish "+1" stuff they did on _this_ thread?

Do you know why they do that?
o They have absolutely no adult value to add to _any_ technical topic.

They prove my point for me - I simply point to what they write.

Anyway, very few people post their strategy, as I do, where I mirror their
implied intent.

Since you seem to be offended that I pointed out your past mistakes, I will
REMOVE you from the list - where I will reserve the right to add you back
if you troll my threads in the future.

Note you're welcome to troll other threads - just don't troll mine please.
o You leave me alone - I leave you alone. Deal?

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 07:23:47 -0700, sms wrote:

> In the fires in California, the "fireproof safes" were anything but! One
> of these fires, Coffey Park, destroyed a residential neighborhood, after
> jumping a six lane freeway, it was not up in a forest somewhere.
>
> It's simple enough to encrypt files and then store them somewhere in the
> cloud. You probably don't have a huge number of files that even require
> encryption.

Hi Steve,
What data is so important that it MUST be preserved against catastrophe?

It seems from this thread, and from others on the Apple newsgroups, that
you're well aware, as am I, that the fire-proof safes are rated "by the
hour", where, we've both seen cases where they turned into mush in
California style fires.

Since I live in the highest fire danger (and earthquake) zone possible in
California, I wouldn't trust those safes with my data. You live nearby, but
perhaps not as rural as I am, nor, perhaps, as close to the fault line as I
am, but I would think, nonetheless, that you're in as much trouble as I am
when the stuff hits the fan in California.

*What data is so important that we MUST replace it after a catastrophe?*

Personally, I can't think of _any_ data that I can't replace that is so
super important, other than photos of the kids when they were kids, where,
if I really cared to, a safe deposit box would suffice.

What DATA is so important that it MUST be stored in cloud storage
(that you can't replace or rebuild if the rare catastrophe occurs)?

QUESTION:
o What data is so important that it MUST be preserved against catastrophe?

[p-0''0-h the cat (coder)]

On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 19:54:34 -0000 (UTC), "Arlen G. Holder"
<arling...@nospam.net> wrote:

>Thank you for acting like an adult in your response, where, long-time
>readers will note, I always mirror the implied intent of the post whenever
>I response (it's a classic technique taught in schools to use on bullies).

Cats never doubt our superiority over the opponent. Our illiberal nature
precludes us having any thoughts regarding rehabilitation of the
offender, we simply tease them a little, or a lot, and come the moment
when we tire of running the little mortified creatures ragged or we are
distracted by the elegance of a passing, swirling, wind born leaf, we
dispatch them, or not, as suits our capricious character.

[Shit the Cat]

On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 21:43:03 +0100, "p-0''0-h the cat (coder)"
<super...@fluffyunderbelly.invalid> wrote:

>On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 19:54:34 -0000 (UTC), "Arlen G. Holder"
><arling...@nospam.net> wrote:
>
>>Thank you for acting like an adult in your response, where, long-time
>>readers will note, I always mirror the implied intent of the post whenever
>>I response (it's a classic technique taught in schools to use on bullies).
>
>Cats never doubt our superiority over the opponent. Our illiberal nature
>precludes us having any thoughts regarding rehabilitation of the
>offender, we simply tease them a little, or a lot, and come the moment
>when we tire of running the little mortified creatures ragged or we are
>distracted by the elegance of a passing, swirling, wind born leaf, we
>dispatch them, or not, as suits our capricious character.

Naughty Pooh. Mirroring Arlen like that.

>Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.

--

Shit the cat
Webmeister in waiting
Copyright theft advisor
http://shitsworld.com

[p-0''0-h the cat (coder)]

On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 21:51:04 +0100, Shit the Cat
<super...@IPaddress.invalid> wrote:

>On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 21:43:03 +0100, "p-0''0-h the cat (coder)"
><super...@fluffyunderbelly.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 19:54:34 -0000 (UTC), "Arlen G. Holder"
>><arling...@nospam.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Thank you for acting like an adult in your response, where, long-time
>>>readers will note, I always mirror the implied intent of the post whenever
>>>I response (it's a classic technique taught in schools to use on bullies).
>>
>>Cats never doubt our superiority over the opponent. Our illiberal nature
>>precludes us having any thoughts regarding rehabilitation of the
>>offender, we simply tease them a little, or a lot, and come the moment
>>when we tire of running the little mortified creatures ragged or we are
>>distracted by the elegance of a passing, swirling, wind born leaf, we
>>dispatch them, or not, as suits our capricious character.
>
>Naughty Pooh. Mirroring Arlen like that.

Dear boy, I upped the tone from bathroom bargain basement to antique
surface silvered.

Class, it can't be taught. It's something one is born with.

>>Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.

Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.

--

[123456789]

Arlen G. Holder wrote:

> The question in this thread is at what cost [cloud
> drive]?

Two bucks a month for me.

> Google Groups and Usenet are two completely different
> things

Not entirely. Google Groups can be used for posting just
like a dedicated Usenet server. It just doesn't carry all
the Usenet groups. And we do see groupies using its services
here occasionally.

> Google Groups just happens to be a way to archive these
> reference posts

Yes, very handy as was Deja News before it. I just don't
consider Usenet posts as good reference material since
anyone can post any unverified claim. YMMV.

> They [cloud drive providers] upsell you (so that you rent

> your data back from them).

I pay for phone service, internet service, cable service,
electric service, etc. I don't see the difference in that
and paying for a cloud drive service.

> Does anyone have _better_ information on their sales
> model than that?

You make sales and selling a product sound dirty. But that's
how our free market system (US) works. I knew what I was
getting when I signed up and still think I'm getting a good
deal for my two bucks. I wish the rest of my services were
that cheap...

[Jasen Betts]

On 2019-07-22, Arlen G. Holder <arling...@nospam.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:11:01 -0000 (UTC), Jasen Betts wrote:
>
>> Seeing as I am back on your shit list without cause, I see no reason
>> to continue any pretense of respect.
>

> I like that you mirrored my implied intent, as that's a well established
> technique for handling bullies - which - as you're aware - abound on
> Usenet.

[much unred and deleted]
I am somewhat impressed by yor abiity to produce walls of text.
however the content is formulaic. if they seem uninteresting I
will skip large chunks.

> o You leave me alone - I leave you alone. Deal?

I will not enter a contract with a proven liar.

[Arlen Holder]

On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 12:18:35 -0800, Adam wrote:

> Thanks, I kept getting the "account action required" message about
> the email address that was entered. So, I went to "Settings" and
> searched for "account" and did a "Remove Account".
>
> Now, I get a message complaining about
> "Backup - Need to set the backup account".
>
> It just goes in circles. :-)

Hi Adam,

I don't get _any_ of that, but I can imagine that Google is desperate to
get you to give them all your data. :)

Both Google & Apple survive by convincing people to put their data on their
servers - which they then use to their advantage - and not to yours (IMHO).

Note the distinction between having a Google Account and setting the phone
_to_ a Google Account. You can have a Google Account _without_ setting the
phone operating system to that account.

For example, if you want, you can have a Google Account for email, but just
not get your email on the Android phone using the Gmail App; you can use
_any_ other Mail User Agent (MUA) other than Gmail though, such as K9Mail.

For Google Maps, there's no reason to need to log in, although, as I
mentioned, for a while (about a year) the Google Maps app required you to
log into it in order to download offline maps (but I think they fixed that
when I moved to Android 10 a few months ago).

For the YouTube App, you can do almost everything without logging into an
account, as I recall, except subscribing. But, if you use the freeware
NewPipe replacement for the crappy YouTube app, you can not only
anonymously subscribe to a YouTube channel, but you'll never see any
advertisements if you use the NewPipe App instead of the YouTube app (in my
humble opinion, only morons use the YouTube App because NewPipe is just
about the best there is on this planet for freeware to replace it).

For Google Play, as I recall, you need to log in to download APKs, but then
you can log out, or, you can do what I do which is use the free Aurora
Store scraper, which pulls the EXACT SAME APKs off the Google Play Store,
only anonymously (and with a far greater choice of filters, e.g., you can
filter out Google apps, or payware, or adware, or even any apps that use
the Google Services Framework, etc.).

Unlike with iOS, there's nothing you can't do on an Android phone without a
Google Account set up in the phone, where I should know as I use the phone
a lot, and I do not have a Google Account set up in the phone.

There are freeware calendars (I use Simple Mobile Tools) and freeware SMS
apps (I use PulseSMS) so you're not beholden to Google Apps in the least as
far as I know. (We should probably create a thread of all the one-to-one
replacements for Google Apps.)

I do my backup using the PC where I have terabytes of disk space, so I'm
not sure how Google does backups. But I'm sure there is a setting to turn
"sync" off somewhere in the operating system settings. For example, in my
"Accounts" section, at the bottom is a "Automatically sync data" slider
which is turned off.

I also have in my settings for "System", a "Backup" slider, which, as you
can imagine, is set to off.

We probably should author an entire thread on all the steps necessary to
set up an unrooted Android phone to zero Google apps. Sigh.