[HN Gopher] What I Use Instead of Google
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       What I Use Instead of Google
        
       Author : kmclean
       Score  : 258 points
       Date   : 2021-01-06 02:54 UTC (20 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (kiramclean.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (kiramclean.com)
        
       | yeuxardents wrote:
       | This is a business opportunity to provide services at a minimal
       | cost for people. Say 1$ per month per service.
       | 
       | Email - 1$
       | 
       | Calendar - 1$
       | 
       | Document Collab - 1$
       | 
       | Each addon a calculated minimalist approach to each. I still
       | recall what gmail was when it was invite only back in the early
       | aughts. I would still utilize that gmail client. I do NOT need
       | gmail as it is today. And I would certainly pay 1$ per month for
       | that service.
       | 
       | (E) For a minimal and basic interface, along with a low cost, I
       | and certainly others that I know who are tech illiterate, would
       | pay that low cost for simplicity + privacy.
        
         | abawany wrote:
         | Mailbox.org offers email, calendar, and some docs/storage
         | functionality for 2.5E/m .
        
           | sundarurfriend wrote:
           | Sounds like there's even a 1 EUR per month plan [1], with
           | smaller limits.
           | 
           | There's also Tutanota with a EUR12/year plan, offering a
           | little bit less but with end-to-end encrypted email and
           | calendars.
           | 
           | [1] https://mailbox.org/en/services#e-mail-account [2]
           | https://tutanota.com/pricing/
        
         | maximente wrote:
         | isn't this basically librem one? https://librem.one
        
         | oarsinsync wrote:
         | The pricing you're suggesting may not be commercially viable.
         | That there exists paid alternatives today at a higher price
         | point, when being sold as a dedicated service, suggests that
         | anyone providing these services for free is doing so at a loss.
         | 
         | They're likely able to do so because it entrenches their
         | existing profitable businesses. It's unlikely that $12/year per
         | account will be break-even, let alone profitable, as a
         | standalone business.
        
         | renewiltord wrote:
         | Yeah, these customers who care enough about this stuff will
         | also drop you if you make the slightest mistake. And with
         | $3/user/mo you don't have much margin.
         | 
         | You'll get wrecked. But there's good business in it if I'm
         | wrong. So I wish you good luck.
        
       | karlzt wrote:
       | Recommendations for good, helpful, non-toxic tools:
       | https://goodreports.com/
        
       | iou wrote:
       | An extra degoogling
       | 
       | Google Keep -> Joplin (https://joplinapp.org/)
       | 
       | I tried a lot of note taking apps and liked this one for its
       | simplicity (just markdown) and cross platform support. Then just
       | store sync it all either via boxcryptor or nextcloud.
        
         | XCSme wrote:
         | Thanks for the suggestion, I have been looking for a good note-
         | taking app forever, this looks interesting!
        
           | modeitsch wrote:
           | is there a way to import all my google keep notes ?
        
             | unilock wrote:
             | Personally, I went from Google Keep to Standard Notes to
             | NextCloud Notes, but the process is similar to go from
             | Standard Notes to Joplin.
             | 
             | There's instructions for how to transfer from Google Keep
             | to Standard Notes here[1]. Then, export from Standard Notes
             | via a "Decrypted" data archive[2], extract the plain text
             | files from the resulting archive (I don't recall the exact
             | path), rename them all from .txt to .md using zmv or a
             | similar pattern-based file renaming program, and import
             | them to Joplin as-is[3].
             | 
             | You'll lose formatting, unfortunately, and probably other
             | things like attachments and checkboxes -- I'm not entirely
             | sure, as I didn't use any of the more advanced features of
             | Google Keep.
             | 
             | There's also instructions to go from Standard Notes to
             | Joplin directly[4], bypassing plain text. That might
             | preserve formatting and such.
             | 
             | Your mileage may vary, as they say.
             | 
             | [1] https://standardnotes.org/help/35/how-can-i-import-my-
             | notes-... [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/StandardNotes/commen
             | ts/5sf0id/you_c... [3] https://joplinapp.org/#importing-
             | from-markdown-files [4]
             | https://programadorwebvalencia.com/migrate-notes-from-
             | standa...
        
       | comeonseriously wrote:
       | > Maps - Apple maps
       | 
       | HERE Maps is good.
        
         | zoomablemind wrote:
         | +1 HERE We Go, they also have an app and support the offline
         | maps. Very handy. Basically, Nokia Maps.
        
       | mattvot wrote:
       | I did something similar a few weeks ago and found that
       | https://rclone.org/ worked for me to automatically port Google
       | Photos data to a Nextcloud instance with WebDAV. That being said,
       | it cannot pull the original quality images, only the compressed
       | version.
        
         | vvanpo wrote:
         | Perkeep devs built a tool to grab the originals:
         | https://github.com/perkeep/gphotos-cdp#gphotos-cdp
        
           | skinkestek wrote:
           | I'm afraid Google will lock me out of my account if I use
           | anything like this?
        
             | jtbayly wrote:
             | Why?
        
       | vinni2 wrote:
       | Every time I try to get out of google they (my colleagues) pull
       | me back in. They share documents in google docs and google drive.
       | I have no choice but to keep my google account.
        
         | bdefore wrote:
         | Would they accept you using a work-related Google account?
        
           | vinni2 wrote:
           | They don't mind which gmail account I use. I work at a
           | university so we don't have gsuite. I guess it's a good idea
           | to use a separate account for this but I don't want to create
           | yet another google account.
        
           | firecall wrote:
           | I always make a "work" google account if the company isn't
           | already using GSuite.
           | 
           | Never use my own Gmail account for work. Or my own FB account
           | for that matter!
           | 
           | I don't need FB locking my account as it's connected to some
           | clients dodgy FB ads :-/
        
         | 0xbadcafebee wrote:
         | You can create a "Google account" using a non-Google e-mail
         | address. You still have access to all their services but you
         | don't have to use them for anything other than accessing
         | documents.
        
         | probably_wrong wrote:
         | "I'm sorry, I don't have a Google account (anymore?). Could you
         | share it in a different way?"
         | 
         | I have seen this work more than once.
        
         | rakoo wrote:
         | I personnally see work-related accounts as not mine. I'm in the
         | process of de-googling myself, but I don't mind my company
         | still using it that much because in the end it's not mine, and
         | they actually have read and agreed with the Terms of Use. None
         | of my personal info is reachable from my work email.
        
         | ricc wrote:
         | Keeping Google as a secondary/special purpose account should be
         | fine. I would personally consider that as "already gotten out
         | of Google".
        
         | hairofadog wrote:
         | Firefox Containers are extremely helpful in this regard. I put
         | off using them for a long time because i thought it would be a
         | hassle but it's super easy and keeps your work-related google
         | activity segregated from the rest of your digital life. It also
         | helps a lot with switching between google accounts; before I
         | used containers I was constantly fighting with Google's account
         | switcher, which more often than not just straight-up didn't
         | work (it would either act like I had switched accounts but I
         | hadn't, or it would put me into a sort of endless "which
         | account do you want to use / enter your password" loop.
        
           | WorldMaker wrote:
           | It's been really interesting to see the shift in ads and
           | other things across the entire web when I forced all of my
           | Google interactions to non-default containers. The amount of
           | painful ReCaptcha interactions I've had has gone way up, but
           | getting rid of a lot of the low quality "personalized" ads
           | generally seems worth it.
           | 
           | It was most useful for cleaning up the horror show that is
           | YouTube recommendations if random YouTube videos from
           | searches and chat recommendations don't get tracked to my
           | logged in account. There's still a ton of noise in the
           | recommendations engine and I will never trust auto-play
           | again, but I'm having to block and/or report fewer channels
           | and I don't automatically shudder just seeing the
           | recommendations column show up above the fold anymore (though
           | I still tend to prefer browser widths that drop
           | recommendations below the video I'm watching because what a
           | waste of space that is).
        
             | sundarurfriend wrote:
             | > The amount of painful ReCaptcha interactions
             | 
             | I've found that clicking the Headphone icon and
             | transcribing the few words makes this a much less annoying
             | experience (especially as a non-American [1]). It also
             | seems more forgiving of errors, though the audio is pretty
             | clear anyway.
             | 
             | [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25226805
        
               | WorldMaker wrote:
               | I have resorted to that more than once at this point. I
               | consider that part of the "painful" as I may not always
               | have speakers at the ready and/or at certain times of day
               | feel a need to take the time to plugin headphones so as
               | not to bother neighbors/etc. I also suspect given how
               | many bots have moved on to using that themselves that
               | those are going to get nastier and worse "soon" too.
        
       | executesorder66 wrote:
       | I've been looking for something like sync.com but free and
       | opensource. Does such a thing exist?
       | 
       | I'm planning on setting up my own nextcloud server, and they also
       | have their own file manager system (Nextcloud Files), which is
       | great for keeping files in sync across devices.
       | 
       | And although it's nice to edit a text file that's stored on a
       | cloud server from any of your devices, I want to be able to use
       | more powerful desktop applications to edit/organize other files.
       | e.g. beets for music, digikam for bulk organizing the directory
       | structure of my photos. Darktable for editing photos.
       | 
       | Does anyone know of a workflow that lets me do all the
       | organizing/editing on a desktop, but still keep it all in sync
       | with my other devices via a cloud server?
        
         | cik wrote:
         | I use your workflow - but back (some of) my data up in O365. On
         | linux, I use insync (closed source) to sync my O365 as needed.
         | Insync allows me to select (within a folder) what sub-folders
         | to mirror. It's pretty perfect.
        
         | comex wrote:
         | If you're just looking for personal sync (as opposed to
         | collaboration), Syncthing [1] is a common recommendation,
         | though personally I've had better luck with Unison [2].
         | 
         | [1] https://syncthing.net
         | 
         | [2] https://www.cis.upenn.edu/~bcpierce/unison/
        
           | wtmt wrote:
           | Could you please expand on why or how you had better luck
           | with Unison and why syncthing wasn't adequate?
        
           | executesorder66 wrote:
           | Thanks, I already use syncthing for some stuff, and it's
           | great.
           | 
           | However I should clarify: One of the reasons I want to move
           | my data to a cloud server is that I am running out of space
           | for more hard drives on my PC.
           | 
           | So syncthing will work for editing stuff on my local and
           | syncing the changes with my cloud server. But I don't want to
           | store all my data on cloud _and_ on my local PC. I want
           | something where it is usually stored on the cloud server, but
           | where I can bulk edit/organize the data selectively on my
           | local machine.
        
             | depingus wrote:
             | I use OneDrive for work. The desktop app has "Files-On-
             | Demand" (enabled by default). It keeps everything in the
             | cloud until you click on a file. Then it downloads a local
             | copy and keeps it in sync with the cloud. You can also
             | manually designate files to "Always keep on this device" or
             | "Free up space". You can take space saving even further
             | with Storage Sense in Windows 10. It can delete local
             | copies of files that haven't been used for a designated
             | amount of time (Never by default).
             | 
             | Is Microsoft better than Google? Probably not. I don't know
             | of any open source or self hosted solution this robust. You
             | might want to consider getting a NAS; which lets you mount
             | a network share on your local PC and use your normal file
             | manager.
        
             | wtmt wrote:
             | Do you have local (non-cloud) backups? If yes, that's
             | great, but otherwise I wouldn't recommend a cloud-only (or
             | a single backup) approach to storing important data.
        
               | executesorder66 wrote:
               | I currently have backups on some external drives.
               | 
               | But I plan on also doing backups with blackblaze or
               | somewhere similar.
               | 
               | My plan for the cloud server is just to have a central
               | place to access all my (and my wife's) files from any
               | device. But then my problem is, as I mentioned earlier,
               | how do I bulk edit/organize those files using desktop
               | software?
        
               | rakoo wrote:
               | It feels like you're looking for something like git-annex
               | (https://git-annex.branchable.com/). I've never used it
               | but read a bit about it, here's how you would use it:
               | 
               | - Install git-annex on your cloud
               | 
               | - Tell git-annex that you have a remote there
               | 
               | - Do your stuff on your local drive, push to the cloud
               | when it's done
               | 
               | - If some of the files are not needed locally, tell git-
               | annex to drop them from your local drive. git-annex knows
               | that there is another copy in a safe storage
               | 
               | - If you want to work on some files you don't have, ask
               | git-annex to transfer them to you.
               | 
               | The manual steps might be a bit tedious, so git-annex
               | also has an assistant mode that is a good-enough copy of
               | dropbox (https://git-annex.branchable.com/assistant/).
               | See the archival walkthrough, that seems to fit your use
               | case (https://git-annex.branchable.com/assistant/)
               | 
               | (I have more or less the same need, but haven't committed
               | to doing it just yet)
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | marci wrote:
               | SSHFS?
               | 
               | https://www.digitalocean.com/community/tutorials/how-to-
               | use-...
        
             | vin047 wrote:
             | I've been looking for something similar too. I've no
             | experience with either, but currently eyeing Seafile
             | https://www.seafile.com/en/home/ or OwnCloud
             | https://owncloud.com. OwnCloud seems perfect, but quite
             | pricey for a cloud-provided instance. Seafile looks good,
             | but there's no cloud provided option unfortunately (i'd
             | rather not self-host).
        
       | wtmt wrote:
       | > Maps - Apple maps
       | 
       | If Apple were a different company, it would've made maps
       | available for use on web browsers and non-Apple devices. That
       | could also help in a more rapid improvement of maps as opposed to
       | the mostly-useless state it's been in (except for a few countries
       | and regions in certain countries that Apple likes and works more
       | on).
       | 
       | > and still a little YouTube (anonymously in a Firefox container)
       | 
       | If a Firefox Container is an option, then I'd rather prefer
       | Startpage to DDG for search. Most of the time, I end up
       | performing the search on DDG at least twice (the second time with
       | a bang command to go to Startpage or Google) or I have a
       | heuristic that DDG won't help and just go to the other search
       | engines.
       | 
       | > DNS - Cloudflare DNS
       | 
       | Others to consider are Quad9 (9.9.9.9) and NextDNS (if you want
       | ad and tracker blocking lists to be configured at the DNS level,
       | sorta like a Pi-Hole, but on the cloud).
       | 
       | > I feel like I've won a lot by doing all this. I own my data
       | now, so Google can't arbitrarily take it away from me, which
       | gives me peace of mind. I'm no longer part of their ad ecosystem,
       | being tracked all around the internet and having my attention
       | sold to the highest bidder.
       | 
       | The "Google can't arbitrarily take it away" is a good argument,
       | but "I'm no longer part of their ad ecosystem, being tracked all
       | around the internet" requires a lot more effort than just
       | avoiding using google.com, youtube.com, gmail.com, etc. I'm not
       | saying that the current transitions are useless, but that there's
       | more to it.
        
         | kmclean wrote:
         | > requires a lot more effort than just avoiding using
         | google.com, youtube.com, gmail.com, etc.
         | 
         | Yeah this is fair! I don't want to give the impression that
         | this is all it takes to get Google to stop stalking you. But I
         | do think it at least helps. I found a lot of the chatter in the
         | de-googling community to a bit purist and defeatist at times,
         | but maybe I went too far the other way, here. I want to
         | encourage people to do the same without thinking it's all
         | hopeless or doesn't make any impact because Google's gonna get
         | you one way or another, but I also don't want to paint an
         | unrealistic picture, as if this is all it takes to wash our
         | hands of Google's reach.
         | 
         | I updated the post to reflect this.
        
         | LUmBULtERA wrote:
         | I would probably use Apple Maps more if I could download maps
         | for offline use as I can with Google Maps.
        
         | dopu wrote:
         | I never use the DDG results when looking for something. People
         | on here will sometimes say that the results are as good as
         | Google, but it's just not true in my experience. I would switch
         | completely to Startpage, but I value the !bang feature too
         | much. So for general searches, everything is prefaced with !sp.
         | It's just muscle memory now.
        
           | fpoling wrote:
           | I have found runnaroo gives often nice results especially on
           | technical topics. Combining with DDG removed the need to use
           | Google.
        
         | rayrag wrote:
         | > If Apple were a different company, it would've made maps
         | available for use on web browsers and non-Apple devices. That
         | could also help in a more rapid improvement of maps as opposed
         | to the mostly-useless state it's been in (except for a few
         | countries and regions in certain countries that Apple likes and
         | works more on).
         | 
         | Try https://satellites.pro/plan/world_map# - you can switch
         | between Apple Maps, OSM, Mapbox, Google Maps, Yandex and Esri
        
           | seszett wrote:
           | I wonder how they do that, that doesn't look like a use case
           | that Apple is OK with.
           | 
           | But anyway, I didn't realise how bad Apple Maps was. It's
           | miles away from OSM and even from Google Maps, at least in
           | the places I looked up in France (so not like in remote areas
           | of Mali or the Amazon forest).
        
             | AlotOfReading wrote:
             | It's pretty shocking. I checked near some Apple commuter
             | stations (where they presumably have employees living and
             | actively using the service / have access to good data) and
             | noticed it was missing entire parks and roads.
             | 
             | The situation on other countries is much worse though. Some
             | countries are missing entire islands. In Mongolia, they
             | don't have province (aimag) borders, and some provinces are
             | even missing labels for their capitals! Worse, there's
             | sparse recognition of district (sum) labels, but some of
             | them seem to have recognized the sum centers as distinct
             | towns, butchered the transliteration, and then marked them
             | before the aimag capital, as happened with "Hovsgol"
             | (Khovsgol), Dornogovi.
        
         | rconti wrote:
         | I finally got around to installing a PiHole, and it blew my
         | mind that the default behavior was to use an upstream resolver.
         | I had never imagined that the countless folks more privacy-
         | oriented than myself, would tolerate this.
         | 
         | After reading up on it, okay, I get that those upstream
         | forwarding resolvers will be faster due to being geographically
         | distributed and having a huge number of users (== very current
         | cache), but man. Seemed to be defeating half the point.
         | 
         | I'm using the supported Unbound config now, but.. still
         | surprised it's not the default.
        
           | throwaway0x00ff wrote:
           | It's more complicated than that: using unbound is basically
           | trusting your ISP with your DNS data (it's not encrypted so
           | it can MITM). Using an upstream resolver doesn't necessarily
           | mean you give up on privacy.
           | 
           | It may actually be more private to use a public resolver
           | (with DoT or DoH of course) that will know your IP address
           | but maybe not directly tie it to your identity (like an ISP
           | does). Also, imo they generally have better privacy policies
           | than ISPs (not that I trust those but still).
           | 
           | The next more private options include using DNS over Tor or
           | Oblivious DNS (https://blog.cloudflare.com/oblivious-dns/).
           | Those options are better for privacy, but I don't see them
           | are default (at least for now) as they imply some slowness
           | (Tor) or are more opinionated (ODNS).
           | 
           | Even after all that, your browser will leak the SNI header in
           | clear-text (eSNI isn't popular yet) so your ISP can still get
           | the precise name of the site you want to visit.
        
         | reaktivo wrote:
         | Apple Maps is available on the web, DDG uses it for it's own
         | maps
        
           | oauea wrote:
           | Where? I went to https://www.apple.com/maps/ and clicked
           | "Open Maps" but that just brings me straight back to that
           | same page with no map in sight, just a lot of pictures of
           | idevices.
        
             | hairofadog wrote:
             | "DDG" in the parent comment refers to DuckDuckGo, for
             | example https://duckduckgo.com/?q=New+York%2C+United+States
             | &t=iphone...
        
               | oauea wrote:
               | Yes I know what DuckDuckGo is. The comment also said:
               | 
               | > Apple Maps is available on the web
        
               | rrdharan wrote:
               | They're probably referring to
               | https://developer.apple.com/documentation/mapkitjs which
               | is what powers the DDG integration.
               | 
               | Anyway it is the case that the only way to browse Apple
               | Maps via the web (AFAICT) is via an integration like DDG:
               | https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/how-to-use-apple-maps-
               | right-in...
               | 
               | So yeah saying it is available on the web feels a bit
               | disingenuous, but it is, kind of, indirectly.
        
               | oauea wrote:
               | Ah, that is bizarre. But I've never understood Apple.
               | Thanks for explaining.
        
           | hairofadog wrote:
           | I was going to mention this too. However, to be fair to the
           | parent commenter, Apple Maps on the web is only a recent
           | development, it lacks a ton of the features of Google Maps on
           | the web, and its world-wide coverage isn't great. There's
           | also the fact that there's no direct web interface for it, so
           | if you were going to tell someone using a browser to "just
           | use Apple Maps", they would have to jump through some mental
           | hoops to find a way to do that.
           | 
           | All that said, I'm optimistic and hope they move in that
           | direction.
        
             | lights0123 wrote:
             | It looks like their only price tier is "free with your
             | Apple Developer subscription" or "contact us"--I wonder if
             | their terms allow you to use it with e.g. Mapbox GL JS 1,
             | which is much better than MapKit JS.
        
         | skinkestek wrote:
         | > If Apple were a different company, it would've made maps
         | available for use on web browsers and non-Apple devices.
         | 
         | I too actually want to use certain software from Apple, I just
         | refuse to use it on Mac as me and the Mac WM keep talking past
         | each other :-)
        
         | ivanche wrote:
         | > The "Google can't arbitrarily take it away" is a good
         | argument, but "I'm no longer part of their ad ecosystem, being
         | tracked all around the internet" requires a lot more effort
         | than just avoiding using google.com, youtube.com, gmail.com,
         | etc. I'm not saying that the current transitions are useless,
         | but that there's more to it.
         | 
         | This becomes much easier with uMatrix + uBlock Origin
         | extensions for Firefox!
        
         | yuribro wrote:
         | > If Apple were a different company, it would've made maps
         | available for use on web browsers and non-Apple devices. That
         | could also help in a more rapid improvement of maps as opposed
         | to the mostly-useless state it's been in (except for a few
         | countries and regions in certain countries that Apple likes and
         | works more on).
         | 
         | If apple would have done that (for Maps and other services),
         | how would it be different than Google?
         | 
         | Google offers these services for free to the end-user and
         | generates revenue from ads.
         | 
         | Apple is using these services to sell more hardware devices,
         | and generates revenue from there.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | t212 wrote:
         | Startpage is now owned by System1. It's an Adtech company. I
         | personally know some people who work/worked there and they do
         | not recommend using Startpage for privacy reasons anymore.
        
           | tomxor wrote:
           | I understand this, yet recently switched to startpage anyway
           | due to massive captcha fatigue... Startpage will block you
           | occasionally if you search at too high frequency, but it
           | never gives captcha and blocks _way_ _way_ less than google
           | presents captcha. Captcha has gradually rendered Google
           | completely unusable to me due to being stuck on mobile
           | internet or public wifi+VPN... both of which causes
           | continuous captcha unless you allow them to track you... it
           | 's basically a ransom - let us track you or no search for
           | you.
           | 
           | I like DDG, but for many things it's still not good enough.
        
       | ericholscher wrote:
       | We're trying to build a competitor to Google ads, targeted at
       | developers: https://www.ethicalads.io/
       | 
       | As developers we understand the most how privacy is violated
       | across the Internet. If we can't contribute to the change in the
       | ecosystem, we don't have much hope for the rest of the industry.
        
       | iou wrote:
       | > GoogleDNS -> CloudflareDNS
       | 
       | It's better for sure, just from trying a couple (OpenDns,
       | cloudflare, quad9) I really love the offering from nextDNS
       | 
       | https://nextdns.io
       | 
       | It somewhat smashes together the features of pi-hole and opendns
       | with the features like DoT or DoH as you get in cloudflare
        
         | buildbot wrote:
         | Seconding NextDNS, it's well worth the price for the features
         | and privacy. And not having to administer a piHole, which was
         | always slightly unstable for me.
        
       | dusted wrote:
       | I'm all for getting out of the cloud, but moving from one
       | company, to multiple other companies seems to have achieved
       | nothing but diversify and multiply the amount of terms you've had
       | to agree to (they will all tell you the same thing in the end: if
       | they block your account, or lose your data, it's your problem).
       | 
       | The only real solution is self-hosting[1], which is becoming a
       | bit difficult with email these days.
       | 
       | [1] No, a rented server in some datacenter is not self-hosting,
       | self-hosting is when you can walk into a room and point to the
       | box that stores your mail.
        
         | dusted wrote:
         | Down to -1 now, I take that as a clear sign that someone does
         | not want to think too much about just how bad our situation has
         | become :) (or they're trying to sell a SaaS and therefore need
         | me to be wrong), nice :)
        
           | eeZah7Ux wrote:
           | It's amazing how this place is called "Hacker" News and
           | downvotes opinions that are not mainstream enough or not
           | corporate-friendly enough.
           | 
           | You are right that self-hosting means that your data sits on
           | your devices, and this should be made possible to most users
           | without having to pay 3rd party services, buy domains, pay
           | for VPSes and learn to manage servers.
           | 
           | (edit: hah, the downvotes are coming already!)
        
         | oauea wrote:
         | > a rented server in some datacenter is not self-hosting
         | 
         | It is though. Don't be elitist.
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | I have wasted a lot of breath trying to convince people that
         | the right way to go is to have one physical data center, and
         | put all redundancy and edge networking in the cloud.
         | 
         | One of my fears is that as soon as you outsource hardware
         | maintenance, then employees who were good at this sort of thing
         | lose much of their value, either in their own head, or in the
         | group consensus. They start to wander off to work for other
         | companies, and you quickly lose critical mass. Once that
         | happens, the quality of advice you get for architectural
         | proposals degrades, and your number of stupid design mistakes
         | notches up considerably.
         | 
         | These people also provide a lot of your 'informed consumer'
         | qualities. They can explain why you shouldn't have to pay $1000
         | a month for a service.
         | 
         | I've seen this play out a couple of times. It's too slow to be
         | called a train wreck. It's like watching erosion take out
         | beautiful house. You can enjoy it for a while, but eventually
         | it starts to sag and then fall apart. Slowly at first and then
         | all at once.
        
         | CobsterLock wrote:
         | Is getting your mail sent from your own e-mail server past the
         | GMail and Outlook spam filters trivial? I always hear about the
         | aggressive spam filters that these providers have which makes
         | it hard to set up your own server. Not saying it's not
         | possible, but I am assuming it is somewhat difficult to set up
         | and their is probably some maintenance that goes along with it.
         | So much so that paying for a provider makes sense. As long as
         | my subscription is the only revenue stream, I see no issue with
         | using a "cloud service" to run email for my custom domain.
         | 
         | I'm willing to be the other services have similar situations
         | where you might as well just pay someone to do it for you. $160
         | to not have to maintain a server room seems like a nice deal to
         | me.
        
         | skinkestek wrote:
         | > they will all tell you the same thing in the end: if they
         | block your account, or lose your data, it's your problem
         | 
         | Still there's a huge gap between "might do that according to
         | the contract" and "does so on a regular basis and is well known
         | to have no official way to appeal".
        
           | dusted wrote:
           | There's also a huge gap between the number of proton mail
           | users and gmail accounts, percentage-wise, it'd be
           | interesting to see how many percent of gmail/protonmail users
           | has problems and. I'm sure we will see the most silly
           | examples from gmail, we have to, because they have the most
           | users, and so the greatest chance of hitting strange edge-
           | cases.
           | 
           | And with edge-case, I don't meen technical ones only, but
           | also customer-support ones.. If you've got support for many
           | more people, then more people are going to have a bad
           | experience, and even more likely that someone has a rare (in
           | percent of total experiences) terrible one.
           | 
           | I'm the one entirely against any cloud stuff, I just don't
           | buy the argument that other providers are necessarily better.
           | The bigger you are, the more interactions you do with your
           | clients, the more likely that you will mess it up big-time
           | for some of them.
        
         | ajdude wrote:
         | This is ultimately what I ended up doing, with one caveat: I
         | have mailinabox running on a VPS in a local datacenter.
         | 
         | If my ISP wasn't so aggressive with sending mail, I would've
         | just self hosted on my own computer.
         | 
         | However, mailinabox also comes with nextcloud, and it works out
         | of the box with exchange activesync, allowing me to basically
         | mimic gmail's syncing of calendar/contacts/etc. I made the
         | switch about a year ago, it took registering two domains (one
         | for the actual mail server and one for <lastname>.com) and
         | paying for the VPS, plus all the overhead of initial
         | configuration, but it has been smooth sailing since. My email
         | is happily firstname@lastname.com to the public and
         | private@mailserver.tld for private stuff- it even supports the
         | firstne+string@lastname.com.
         | 
         | At the end of the day, this is probably the best someone can
         | reasonably do. Then it's just ddg and Apple Maps.
        
           | duffyjp wrote:
           | The fact you were able to register your lastname as a dotcom
           | is incredibly fortunate, especially if that was a recent
           | registration. Mine has been a marketing agency since 1995.
           | 
           | I ran my own business email for a while in a DigitalOcean
           | VPS, but it was a huge pain. I did it all by hand though, I
           | should give mailinabox a try.
        
             | bluGill wrote:
             | I got lastnamefarm.com there are plenty of variations on
             | that theme to go around. My last name is common enough that
             | if I had thought to get it in 1993 I would have sold it by
             | now anyway.
        
       | dmytton wrote:
       | Moving large numbers of files - like the 50k of Google Photos the
       | author mentions - can be done using https://rclone.org. Set up
       | Google Photos as a source and then use the copy command to move
       | it to a different location[1]. There are a lot of different
       | commands which work with many different cloud storage systems
       | e.g. sync everything one way locally to a backup, mount a FUSE
       | filesystem, do two-way sync, etc.
       | 
       | [1] https://rclone.org/commands/rclone_copy/
        
         | darkfirefly wrote:
         | If you want to save Google Photos, use Google Takeout to
         | download it. It allowed you to download all of your google-
         | related-data, including photos.
        
         | oarsinsync wrote:
         | Beware that using rclone with google photos may result in lower
         | quality images and missing metadata. Below is taken from the
         | rclone website:
         | 
         | Limitations
         | 
         | Downloading Images
         | 
         | When Images are downloaded this strips EXIF location (according
         | to the docs and my tests). This is a limitation of the Google
         | Photos API and is covered by bug #112096115.
         | 
         | The current google API does not allow photos to be downloaded
         | at original resolution. This is very important if you are, for
         | example, relying on "Google Photos" as a backup of your photos.
         | You will not be able to use rclone to redownload original
         | images. You could use 'google takeout' to recover the original
         | photos as a last resort Downloading Videos
         | 
         | When videos are downloaded they are downloaded in a really
         | compressed version of the video compared to downloading it via
         | the Google Photos web interface. This is covered by bug
         | #113672044.
         | 
         | Source: https://rclone.org/googlephotos/#limitations
        
         | budafish wrote:
         | As others have said Google Photos backup via RClone has some
         | caveats, mainly not downloading at original quality. Google
         | Takeout does solve this but but in weird hierarchies.
         | 
         | I stumbled on a new project which simulates a browser download
         | using a headless Chrome Developer tools session[0]. Looks
         | interesting, supports continuation and can be ran on a cron
         | job. Worth a look.
         | 
         | [0] https://github.com/perkeep/gphotos-cdp
        
           | weetniet wrote:
           | Also, see Jake Wharton's Docker GPhotos Sync [0] for a
           | containerized version of this tool. Unfortunately, this
           | method seems to be the easiest way to automate a backup at
           | full quality.
           | 
           | [0] https://github.com/JakeWharton/docker-gphotos-sync
        
           | mceachen wrote:
           | > Google Takeout does solve this but but in weird
           | hierarchies.
           | 
           | Surprisingly, the Takeout split archives can contain partial
           | contents for a given folder or album. If you extract
           | everything into a single merged root, you'll see both the
           | sidecars and images in the same directory.
           | 
           | If you're on macOS or Linux, you can do this by mounting the
           | tarballs with ratarmount and skip the extraction step.
           | Details and links here:
           | https://forum.photostructure.com/t/archive-file-format-
           | compr...
        
       | dhimes wrote:
       | Google's gotten weird. Yesterday I was doing some keyword
       | planning and got a negative (-) cpc and cost. I looked everywhere
       | to try to determine what that meant and didn't find anything.
       | 
       | They have online chat support, so I tried that. I got routed to a
       | sales rep who called me on the phone and who, after taking all my
       | information while basically ignoring my question, finally heard
       | me. She didn't know the answer.
       | 
       | She sent me a support link which was the same one that routed me
       | to her. I told her this and all she could say was she was sorry
       | and she couldn't help unless I was ready to launch a campaign.
       | 
       | I honestly don't think she knew anything. I'm suspicious that
       | these are indy workers getting routed prospects by Google. I
       | don't know. The whole thing was sleazy.
       | 
       | Years ago when I managed to get someone on the line she stayed
       | with me until my problem was solved. And this wasn't even a
       | problem (or maybe it was? wouldn't be the first bug I found on
       | their site). I was just asking a question.
        
         | modeitsch wrote:
         | I planned a google ad campaign with a 200 TOTAL budget. A
         | google representative helped me setting up the account, after 4
         | days she calls me back and said that my ad is doing very well,
         | And it's already holding at 800$. Till now google didn't give
         | me back my money with claiming that I don't have prof. They are
         | not willing to listen to there own phone systems recording's
         | because they know that I'm right. So basically WE ARE NOT THE
         | CUSTOMER WE ARE THE PRODUCT
        
           | RealStickman_ wrote:
           | How's the legality of recording a call if the other party
           | does that as well?
        
             | cj wrote:
             | If there's a message that says "This call may be
             | recorded..." then I would consider that to be adequate
             | consent for either party to record the call, not just 1
             | party.
             | 
             | But IANAL.
        
             | tjoff wrote:
             | In a lot of places it is legal to record a call as long as
             | one of the parties (that is yourself) is in on it.
             | 
             | That is, you can't record a call between two other people
             | but you can always record a call that yourself are
             | participating in.
        
               | teachrdan wrote:
               | Careful with this one. In the US, while most states "one
               | party notification states" and operate as you describe:
               | 
               | > Eleven (11) states require the consent of everybody
               | involved in a conversation or phone call before the
               | conversation can be recorded. Those states are:
               | California, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maryland,
               | Massachusetts, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire,
               | Pennsylvania and Washington.[0]
               | 
               | Recording without all parties' permission in these states
               | is at least a misdemeanor.
               | 
               | https://www.google.com/search?q=one+party+notification+st
               | ate...
        
               | RealStickman_ wrote:
               | I would think that the employees are aware their calls
               | are being recorded if the company announced that to me
               | beforehand. That should be permission enough for me to
               | record the call as well.
        
       | idownvoted wrote:
       | As an aside: As more and more techies repeatedly fail to decouple
       | their digital belongings from Google's infrastructure, it should
       | become clear how strong the lock-in effect of cloud services is
       | in general and in particular their proper UX.
       | 
       | EG.: one of gmails main selling points always was the ,,available
       | anywhere" web interface and its quick, and useful search.
        
       | mcwoods wrote:
       | Problem is on the phone side. There is a duopoly; Apple or
       | Google. Neither is great. We should be able to have control over
       | this, as it is increasingly being the way in which the majority
       | of the public have access to their information (photos, docs,
       | etc).
       | 
       | Same on the desktop we have MS, Apple.
       | 
       | Yes Linux (variations) are available on both, more so on desktop,
       | but not a real possibility for most consumes.
        
       | logicchains wrote:
       | I try to use Bing for all my searches (set it as the browser
       | default), but at least a third of the time I end up needing to
       | open Google and search there instead. Anyone got any tips for
       | getting better results out of Bing? It doesn't help that when I'm
       | using a VPN, searching for an English term often causes Bing to
       | deliver a bunch of results in the native language of the place
       | the VPN is located, rather than in English.
        
         | paulcarroty wrote:
         | Makes sense to try duckduckgo or startpage? My Bing using
         | experience was extremely bad for all non-tech, maybe except
         | sport.
        
           | sundarurfriend wrote:
           | > My Bing using experience was extremely bad for all non-tech
           | 
           | Do you mean it's good for tech searches? That would be good
           | news, because those are pretty much the only searches DDG
           | uniformly performs badly on, for me - the only searches where
           | I know that a `!g` would improve the results significantly.
           | Perhaps it should be a `!b` instead now, I'll try it out.
        
           | s5ma6n wrote:
           | I have the same bad experience with DDG and it is so slow. I
           | found Bing relatively better and it is constantly improving
           | with new features.
        
             | skinkestek wrote:
             | Maybe 2021 will be the year when I give Bing a real chance?
             | 
             | (I was simultaneously deeply impressed and worried last
             | year when a colleague of mine showed that Bing also returns
             | results from company intranets if they are set up correctly
             | and you are signed in to Bing with your work account.)
        
             | FabHK wrote:
             | DDG can be localised to a country in a drop-down menu on
             | the left above the results.
        
         | WorldMaker wrote:
         | If you sign in with a Microsoft Account, Bing does a bit better
         | at guessing which language/locality you want results in, and a
         | few other related things.
         | 
         | Of course, at that point you are just trading opt-out Google
         | tracking for opt-in Bing tracking, and that may defeat some of
         | the reasoning behind why you are using VPN for those searches.
         | I find Bing ads and Bing tracking far less problematic and
         | insidious than Google's, so it's an interesting trade off, for
         | sure. One interesting part of the trade off that Google doesn't
         | match (neither opt-out nor opt-in tracking) is "Microsoft
         | Rewards" where Bing gives you a small cut of tracked ad fees in
         | "rewards points" (like credit card/frequent flyer "mileage"
         | programs) that you can redeem for things like gift cards. Sure,
         | it's a cynical loyalty grab, but at least for me it shows that
         | Microsoft still prefers to be a product company at the end of
         | the day and is a little less likely to fall into the evil opt-
         | out only panopticon tracking ad direction that Google has.
         | Obviously other people's opinions vary, and many are loathe to
         | trust Microsoft, but it's an interesting trade-off to be aware
         | of.
        
         | crocodiletears wrote:
         | The quote and plus search operators are your friends for that
         | last third. I don't think Bing tailors its search results as
         | aggressively as Google does, so you sometimes have to be more
         | explicit with domain-specific searches.
        
       | Netcob wrote:
       | That little downtime recently that in some places looked like
       | Google had deleted my account got me quite a shock and made me
       | re-evaluate my dependence on Google too.
       | 
       | For anyone looking for a simple self-hosted file sync system I'd
       | recommend Seafile though. It has delta sync (like Dropbox) and
       | great performance. I finally switched to it after years of
       | increasing frustration with Nextcloud, which has none of these
       | things.
        
       | zan5hin wrote:
       | Instead of Google Analytics look at Matomo. Since you are self-
       | hosting Nextcloud, standing up a self-hosted Matomo instance
       | won't be difficult. https://matomo.org
        
       | cosmotic wrote:
       | If you have to use Chrome for selenium; use a docker container
       | https://hub.docker.com/r/selenium/standalone-chrome
        
         | kmclean wrote:
         | That's a good idea! I hadn't thought about using docker.
        
       | systemvoltage wrote:
       | Google is such an insane value. $5 you get GSuite, auth, drive,
       | chat, meet, and a bunch of things.
       | 
       | Folks that are privacy concious are equally deluded. It's
       | marketing and you're falling for it. ProtonMail doesn't have
       | stellar record for privacy (or any Swiss company in general).
       | There has been several discussions about this on HN, and
       | otherwise where many have compared email services and rated their
       | privacy claims. FastMail seems to be the worst of all. Migadu
       | seems to be good but an extremely bad value for your $.
       | 
       | Stick with Google. It's not fashionable but a bargain. You're
       | commodicized on the internet unless you run your own services.
       | Don't let any marketing fool you.
       | 
       | I'd rather be in iron clad hands of Google's engineering and
       | security practices than a 30 people company with no fricking clue
       | about security. This is often not part of the discussion.
        
         | throwaway9d0291 wrote:
         | > Folks that are privacy concious are equally deluded. It's
         | marketing and you're falling for it.
         | 
         | At the very least, if you use providers other than Google, you
         | can decentralize it. You can give one company your search
         | history and a different company your emails. Even if both
         | companies are equal to Google in terms of privacy, you still
         | end up with better overall privacy because tehy can't join the
         | two datasets.
         | 
         | > ProtonMail doesn't have stellar record for privacy (or any
         | Swiss company in general).
         | 
         | Can you back that up with some references? I live in
         | Switzerland and Swiss data protection law is certainly better
         | than American.
        
           | wtmt_arn wrote:
           | Crypto AG, Omnisec AG, etc. It seems to be common pattern for
           | spy agencies to "whitewash" their operations via a swiss
           | company, making them look neutral and wholesome and
           | trustworthy...
           | 
           | https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/second-swiss-firm-allegedly-
           | sol...
        
           | alfiedotwtf wrote:
           | I'm not sure why wtmt_arn's comment is dead... it's correct
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | wtmt wrote:
         | _> Google is such an insane value. $5 you get GSuite, auth,
         | drive, chat, meet, and a bunch of things.
         | 
         | ...
         | 
         | > Stick with Google. It's not fashionable but a bargain. You're
         | commodicized on the internet unless you run your own services.
         | Don't let any marketing fool you._
         | 
         | You also don't get any useful customer service for that $5. I
         | know companies that charge less but provide customer service.
         | So what you value isn't what others may value.
        
           | systemvoltage wrote:
           | That's one of the drawbacks of Google in general. I think if
           | you want to buy Ads and have a big account with them, perhaps
           | you can talk to a human.
        
             | skinkestek wrote:
             | Also if you are a big cloud customer.
             | 
             | I know, I consulted for one.
             | 
             | That said, it wasn't reliable.
             | 
             | One day: two sw engineers onsite, we recreated the problem,
             | they went back to yake care of it.
             | 
             | Another day: what seemed like a student from a third world
             | country on a very cheap helpdesk asking irrelevant
             | questions instead of reading the description.
             | 
             | Another day again: answer by "head of <something>"
             | acknowledging the issue and pointing to a fix coming <at
             | some specified time>, only IIRC the fix didn't arrive, at
             | least not at the time that person said.
        
         | ajnin wrote:
         | How much do you value your online life ? Put all your eggs in
         | one basket and you allow yourself to be locked away from it at
         | the whim of some unknown algorithm, with practically no
         | recourse. A strike on your account (maybe a Play Store upload
         | or some vague TOS violation) and you may be locked out of your
         | mail and the auth that you use for everything. You'll end up
         | adapting your behavior, consciously or not, to avoid angering
         | the giant. Spreading the risks, and taking back control, seems
         | the level-headed thing to do.
         | 
         | And the concept that there is only a single company in the
         | world that knows a thing about security seems deluded to me.
        
         | junon wrote:
         | This is the most deluded and blatantly incorrect comment I've
         | seen on HackerNews to date.
        
         | skinkestek wrote:
         | You forgot how they'll also helpfully remove services that you
         | could otherwise end up spending your valuable time on:
         | 
         | - Reader, possibly to make room for Google+
         | 
         | - and then Google+
         | 
         | - etc
         | 
         | You also forgot how they'll ban you from accessing your own
         | paid account, and there won't even be a sham trial or even a
         | kangaroo court, just an automatic death sentence for your data.
         | 
         | Seriously: Google has _earned_ the distrust they are now
         | facing. They have dug this hole
         | 
         | - one shady tactic at a time
         | 
         | - one let down at a time
         | 
         | - one deal with China at a time
         | 
         | - etc
         | 
         | until even former fan boys like me become happy every time I
         | see Google in hot water.
         | 
         | @Googlers: nothing against most of you as individuals. Hope you
         | get well paid and good jobs when Google has to cut. (Except
         | those who think it is OK to use search as a playground for
         | wacky AI experiments, those who implement rules to punish
         | logged in Firefox users with Captchas etc :-)
        
         | pixxel wrote:
         | > ProtonMail doesn't have stellar record for privacy
         | 
         | Customer here. What have I missed?
        
         | ricardo81 wrote:
         | Saying folks that are privacy conscious 'deluded' is a bit of a
         | stretch as well as assuming their reasons for deciding.
         | 
         | You list a bunch of services Google provide for that $5 and
         | yes, no doubt you can extract good value if you want to use all
         | those things, and also don't mind relinquishing privacy for the
         | content you choose to put on there. FWIW Gsuite is more like
         | $7/m where I am.
         | 
         | For me personally, you can list those bunch of things and gmail
         | is the only really useful, day to day tool - mainly because
         | their spam filtering is better than most. Essentially that's
         | where the only value is, for me.
         | 
         | Also bear in mind Google's history of retiring products, hardly
         | 'iron clad' reliability.
         | 
         | For me, their lack of privacy ethos compounds the problem of
         | them having a monopoly on search, and to a large extent
         | information discovery. That, alongside their huge reach in how
         | they can gather information on people to aid advertising, via
         | Chrome, Android, DNS, analytics... that huge list. Sleep
         | walking into a society where a handful of large corps know
         | everything about you isn't necessary.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | iamacyborg wrote:
         | > Folks that are privacy concious are equally deluded.
         | 
         | This is the kind of nonsense comment that ends up being used as
         | the moral justification engineers need to build these privacy
         | invading services.
         | 
         | People are entitled to their own privacy, end of story.
        
         | benzoate wrote:
         | My reason for not using google services goes beyond privacy. I
         | also do not want to contribute to or reward Google's monopoly
         | practices
        
         | Nextgrid wrote:
         | Office 365 (or Microsoft 365 or whatever they want to call it
         | today) is also good value. ~$5/month gives you more or less the
         | same as Google where it comes to email/calendar and 1TB of
         | OneDrive cloud storage. It can go even cheaper at ~$2/month for
         | just basic email (on the "Kiosk" plan) if you don't need cloud
         | storage and just need hosted e-mail.
         | 
         | Regarding your counterpoint, I disagree. It's not about
         | ProtonMail claims of encryption or security or anything, it's
         | just that their business model is to be selling hosted e-mail
         | services and not advertising, and they have no incentive (nor
         | the technical expertise in-house) to read your e-mails for
         | advertising purposes. Furthermore, ProtonMail and all these
         | other services only get a part of your data, so even if they do
         | use your data nefariously, it's better for each one to misuse a
         | separate chunk of it than for one entity to have _all_ of it.
        
           | systemvoltage wrote:
           | > it's just that their business model is to be selling hosted
           | e-mail services
           | 
           | Does anyone know if pro/business accounts with Google GSuite
           | have better privacy than free accounts?
           | 
           | Another counterpoint to my original post is - you can call
           | someone at ProtonMail, can't do that with Google.
        
             | izacus wrote:
             | > Does anyone know if pro/business accounts with Google
             | GSuite have better privacy than free accounts?
             | 
             | Yes, the GSuite data is separated from non-GSuite and is
             | goverened by a different ToS. This includes this data not
             | being used for advertising, conforming to different
             | deletion requirements and more. Check out the GSuite ToS
             | for details, we looked into this awhile ago.
        
             | madhadron wrote:
             | > Does anyone know if pro/business accounts with Google
             | GSuite have better privacy than free accounts?
             | 
             | Yes. If you read the terms when you sign up to pay them
             | money for GSuite, it says that your data in not used for
             | advertising, targeting, or any other analytics. Basically
             | the minimum terms for a large organization to be willing to
             | entrust their internal data to Google.
        
             | Nextgrid wrote:
             | > Does anyone know if pro/business accounts with Google
             | GSuite have better privacy than free accounts?
             | 
             | Officially, I'm sure they claim that G-Suite data is not
             | used for any advertising purposes. However, just like I
             | wouldn't trust an alcoholic with guarding a warehouse full
             | of booze, I wouldn't trust this promise especially
             | considering they intentionally violate the GDPR with a
             | misleading, obnoxious and non-compliant consent form for EU
             | visitors.
             | 
             | Furthermore, even if we assume G-Suite data itself is not
             | used, what about general data collected by Google services?
             | For example, a lot of their properties have Google
             | Analytics included - does being logged in a G-Suite account
             | automatically opt you out? What about YouTube (when logging
             | into a G-Suite account you briefly get a redirect to
             | accounts.youtube.com presumably to set a session cookie)?
             | Etc. Given that Google is an advertising company, I can see
             | it being easy for them to collect data they shouldn't, even
             | because of an oversight (such as forgetting a "if
             | account.is_g_suite" check, or legacy code predating
             | G-Suite) as opposed to any malicious intent.
             | 
             | Not using Google means you don't have to interact with
             | Google _at all_ unless you explicitly want to and aren 't
             | exposed to any of the aforementioned risks.
        
               | cbradford wrote:
               | Agree. It is unlikely that google adheres to their ToS,
               | it is more profitable to violate them and if you get
               | caught do the usual "oops, our bad" like Facebook does
               | regularly.
        
         | rmuratov wrote:
         | What's so wrong with FastMail?
        
           | systemvoltage wrote:
           | Some info here: https://drewdevault.com/2020/06/19/Mail-
           | service-provider-rec...
           | 
           | There was another highly voted post on HN that compared all
           | services (except Migadu) just last month, I can't find it.
        
           | Klonoar wrote:
           | They're presumably concerned about FastMail being in/from
           | Australia.
           | 
           | The thing is, if you're concerned about a state agency, you
           | have bigger issues. If all you're after is "I don't want to
           | give Google my money", FastMail is pretty good - and to boot
           | they're one of the few with a still working push notification
           | certificate for Mac Mail.app users, I believe.
           | 
           | Email is a lost cause. Just choose the one that sucks the
           | least, and don't do important things on it.
        
             | cassianoleal wrote:
             | > don't do important things on it.
             | 
             | How do you accomplish that? In my experience every single
             | service on the internet relies on email for account
             | creation, password recovery and general identity
             | verification.
             | 
             | I'm not saying that's good, only that it's the current
             | state of affairs.
        
               | Klonoar wrote:
               | I'm rolling my eyes at your comment. Come on now, you
               | know what I meant.
               | 
               | Email is like getting mail in your postal box. It has no
               | real protections except for people saying "yeah, I won't
               | read your mail". Thus, if something is important enough,
               | don't use it for that.
               | 
               | If you really need to do something privately there are
               | better equipped avenues; if you're worried about
               | tracking, it doesn't matter because
               | 
               | - any service mailing you will try to track you
               | 
               | - if you email with anybody from Google/MSFT/etc, your
               | email is on their servers anyway.
               | 
               | It's a lost cause. It has been for some time. Keep a
               | strong password on it and 2FA and such, but otherwise,
               | it's not worth the time to care about.
        
               | bluGill wrote:
               | Right, so don't do important things on the internet. Good
               | advice in general.
        
         | melomal wrote:
         | Or people are just sick of being shown ads on everything
         | Google. Sure $5 you get X, Y, Z but you also get 000's of ads
         | pumped at you constantly. Even though you pay for that access
         | you are pretty much opening up all of your inboxes etc for
         | crawlers to scan for your likes, dislikes etc.
        
           | higerordermap wrote:
           | GSuite subscription excludes you from most of it, to be fair.
        
         | robenkleene wrote:
         | This comment should not be this highly rated on Hacker News.
         | The entire content of this comment is: I read a bunch of stuff
         | somewhere that said all these alternative companies are bad.
         | 
         | There are no links to sources, there's no evidence presented,
         | there's nothing to dispute. There's no substance to this
         | comment.
         | 
         | Hacker News has a bias towards Google because Google offers a
         | bunch of services for free that are useful to HN's audience, so
         | HN users would rather not have reasons _not_ to use Google
         | services, which is why comments like this get upvoted, despite
         | their lack of substance.
        
           | croissants wrote:
           | > Hacker News has a bias towards Google
           | 
           | There are multiple threads every single week that get
           | hundreds of upvotes for criticizing Google. I think Hacker
           | News is heterogeneous enough on this that "bias towards
           | Google" is an overstatement.
        
             | robenkleene wrote:
             | Fair point. I can't edit the comment anymore, but if I
             | could I'd say _some_ HN users are bias.
        
       | cbradford wrote:
       | Here is a similar write up on how to exit google
       | 
       | http://www.scorchedweb.com/uncategorized/exit-the-goolag/
        
       | jerheinze wrote:
       | Using YouTube with Firefox Containers is in no way anonymous.
       | Instead try to use it with the Tor Browser (also checkout the
       | Invidious project).
        
         | paulcarroty wrote:
         | No way, Google constantly blocks TOR with tons of their
         | captcha.
        
           | jerheinze wrote:
           | That's why I mentioned the Invidious project which is a
           | YouTube frontend. Also solving the ReCaptcha is for most of
           | us not an insurmountable task, it's definitely worth the cost
           | if you want some real privacy.
        
       | nurusr12211 wrote:
       | I prefer using the best technology over endless virtue signaling.
        
         | Dirlewanger wrote:
         | Ok, Google.
        
         | spamuel wrote:
         | I'd take a technology hit to break from Google, but the
         | McMorality of the author was certainly nauseating.
        
         | nine_k wrote:
         | Research prototypes are usually very haphazard and have a ton
         | of rough edges.
         | 
         | But this is how you try making something new to eventually
         | work, and maybe even become the polished "best available".
        
           | nurusr12211 wrote:
           | These articles are not about supporting a new or better
           | product. It's always around virtue signaling because google =
           | bad... she says it right there in the second paragraph.
        
         | Hitton wrote:
         | I don't care about virtue signalling, best technology is
         | worthless when google's legendarily horrendous customer
         | service/algorithms can screw you at any moment. So for me:
         | GMail, GDrive, GCP, etc. are too risky; even though I use
         | Firefox because of its customizability I could use
         | Chrome(based) browser; GMaps and Youtube are fine; I use
         | neither Google's nor Cloudflare's DNS, they have too much of my
         | data as it is anyway and frankly speed difference between DNS
         | providers is negligible; only time I don't act completely
         | rationally is good ol' search - because I'm worried about
         | google's monopoly I try to use/support an alternative.
        
       | FabHK wrote:
       | Good recommendations. To minimize Youtube tracking, I use the
       | fantastic `youtube-dl` to get the movie (or only audio) locally,
       | then keep it or discard it as the case may be.
        
         | tmpUserA wrote:
         | As far as I understand, to track users, website use : IP,
         | Cookie/LocalStorage, Fingerprinting.
         | 
         | I wonder if youtube-dl really helps ? It doesn't change the IP,
         | you can refuse/clear cookies in your browser, and for
         | fingerprinting, isn't scraping via youtube-dl make you even
         | more unique among other regular browser users ?
        
       | JAlexoid wrote:
       | Moving to Apple Maps is basically stabbing yourself in the face.
       | 
       | OSM would be a better solution.
       | 
       | If only an email service as good as Gmail existed anywhere on
       | this planet :(
        
         | bribri wrote:
         | I'm running Amazon WorkMail for $5 a month under my own domain.
         | It's very bare bones but it does what I need.
        
         | klodolph wrote:
         | When was the last time you used Apple Maps?
        
         | zingplex wrote:
         | Isn't OSM a major data source for Apple Maps?
         | 
         | Edit: I checked, the OSM wiki actually has a page about it [1]
         | 
         | [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Apple
        
         | oarsinsync wrote:
         | > Moving to Apple Maps is basically stabbing yourself in the
         | face.
         | 
         | After doing some basic A/B testing (checking Google Maps, Waze
         | and Apple Maps for routing guidance) and establishing that
         | Apple Maps has been giving me earlier arrival times through
         | different routing guidance (and actually delivering on that
         | earlier arrival time, by means of actually using it), I've
         | determined that's less likely to be true, _if_ you 're in a
         | city that has been refreshed recently.
         | 
         | Combined with the (potentially anti-competitive) use of private
         | APIs on both the iPhone and Apple Watch, enabling the phone
         | lockscreen to always display routing guidance, and the watch to
         | provide haptic feedback for routing guidance, Apple Maps has
         | become a superior experience as far as driving goes.
         | 
         | This is all _if_ you 're already a sucker in their eco-system,
         | and happen to live in a city they care about, which I am.
         | 
         | EDIT: At the same time..
         | 
         | > Moving to Apple Maps is basically stabbing yourself in the
         | face.
         | 
         | If you're taking this from the perspective of moving from one
         | megacorp to another, rather than quality of service, then yes,
         | there's basically no difference here. Apple today is claiming
         | to care, in a similar manner to Google's old mission statement
         | of "dont be evil". Apple have been pretty clear that their
         | interest in your privacy only extends as far as lip service
         | goes, given the lack of E2E encryption on iCloud storage for
         | the majority of your data.
         | 
         | 2 decades ago Google was "don't be evil" and here we are today.
         | Where do we think Apple will be in a decade or two from now?
         | 
         | So yes, in that respect, don't stab yourself in the face, and
         | don't use any megacorp products.
        
           | cageface wrote:
           | We techies like to believe that we can find technical
           | solutions to these problems but I think this is misguided.
           | Even for a very technical user completely untangling yourself
           | from FAANG is a lot of work and a massive inconvenience. And
           | if this kind of privacy is really only available to a small
           | technical elite then how much good is it anyway? Privacy is
           | only really valuable when it's accessible to everyone.
           | 
           | Respect for user privacy is going to have to come from
           | regulation.
        
         | Nextgrid wrote:
         | > If only an email service as good as Gmail existed anywhere on
         | this planet
         | 
         | Office 365, which is Microsoft Exchange under the hood?
        
         | jlelse wrote:
         | I use Here WeGo for maps and I'm quite happy with it.
        
       | blisterpeanuts wrote:
       | When it comes to technology, people prefer one-stop shopping.
       | Google's email, mapping, mobile OS, search, calendars, video,
       | photos are all free and best-of-class or at least good enough to
       | be satisfactory to 80% of the people, who think they're getting a
       | bargain even as they put more and more of their personal
       | information in Google's hands.
       | 
       | It seems as though there's no way to break this voluntary-
       | monopoly. Waze came along with brilliant innovations like BLE
       | devices monitoring traffic in underpasses etc. (my company makes
       | some of the devices they use) and finding best alternative
       | routes, and an innovative UX, so Google simply bought them,
       | problem solved.
       | 
       | There's a whole menagerie of alternatives to Youtube, but they're
       | like ants next to an elephant. And of course, Youtube itself was
       | bought by Google; they've advanced it technically, but it was
       | better in the old days, less censorship and better remuneration
       | for creators.
       | 
       | Like a lot of other techies, I've switched to DDG for searches
       | and I don't really miss Google search. Probably I use !g about
       | once or twice a month.
       | 
       | It seems to me there's lots of opportunities to improve on
       | Google's offerings; Apple seems uninterested in competing head-
       | to-head aside from its mobile phone OS, but there are still
       | innovations out there waiting to be discovered. Perhaps some here
       | will be among those future billionaires, giving us better
       | alternatives to The Goog which in my opinion has gotten a little
       | too big for its britches.
        
         | swiftcoder wrote:
         | > Apple seems uninterested in competing head-to-head aside from
         | its mobile phone OS,
         | 
         | I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple keep nibbling at Google's
         | software business as it transitions more fully to an added-
         | value services model. Little moves like Apple Music on android,
         | Apple TV+ on Android-based TVs... One could see a similar play
         | occurring with fitness, books, and maybe even maps in the
         | services-centric Apple future.
        
       | rurban wrote:
       | Re Firefox vs Chrome: On Fedora chrome is unusable with newer
       | video formats, you have to use Firefox. Which is better in all
       | aspects.
        
       | 0x53 wrote:
       | I did something extremely similar:
       | https://mallocate.com/blog/removing-google/
        
       | powersnail wrote:
       | > I suspect means it [DDG] would be a perfectly fine replacement
       | for most people
       | 
       | I suspect otherwise. DDG is as good as Google in certain topics,
       | especially programming-related topics. But otherwise, not so
       | good. Sometimes, it feels like it simply has indexed less pages
       | than Google.
       | 
       | But I still use DDG as much as possible, only !g when the results
       | are unsatisfactory. I don't know how much it actually help DDG,
       | though, since it doesn't seem to get much better over the past
       | few years.
        
         | Retric wrote:
         | IMO, their general results are close enough my preference for
         | DDG's UI is a major factor. Where Google wins is better parsing
         | of math and conversions. ex: "37 * 5 gallons in liters"
        
         | matwood wrote:
         | As has been mentioned many times, the problem (if you want to
         | call it that) with DDG is that it does not personally tailor
         | results. Google is great at deciphering what I mean because it
         | has data on me. DDG doesn't have this data, so how I search
         | needed to be tweaked. I rarely have need for the g! anymore.
        
           | marlowe221 wrote:
           | I'm genuinely curious about this and would like to use Google
           | search less than I do now...
           | 
           | Would you mind sharing a few tips (or pointing me in the
           | direction of some tips) for better DDG searches?
           | 
           | I love the concept and philosophy of DDG but the search
           | results I get could definitely be better!
        
         | happymellon wrote:
         | Localisation as well. DDG lets me pick the UK but almost all
         | results are US centric.
        
         | AnthonyMouse wrote:
         | My experience is that DDG still isn't as good as Google
         | historically was, but Google itself has actually gotten worse,
         | to the point that they're now about the same.
         | 
         | The main problem seems to be that Google will no longer surface
         | anything that isn't on a major site, so even when you know that
         | the thing you're looking for exists, it can't find it.
         | Obviously this also implies that it's missing a ton of stuff
         | you didn't know existed but would have wanted to see.
        
           | kmclean wrote:
           | Yeah I agree.. DDG has limitations, but I find the first 2
           | pages of Google are almost entirely ads now (either literal
           | paid ads or posts full of ads and affiliate links). The whole
           | SEO racket has incentivized all the wrong kinds of
           | optimization.
        
           | kenhwang wrote:
           | That's what I noticed as well. I didn't switch over to DDG
           | because it was better, I did because Google just got much
           | worse and so cluttered with ads and knowledge blocks that
           | were wrong more often than not.
        
           | idiocrat wrote:
           | > Google will no longer surface anything that isn't on a
           | major site
           | 
           | I like this search engine very much. It has all the
           | "alternative" stuff.
           | 
           | https://wiby.me/
        
             | duffyjp wrote:
             | Wow, it's amazing how fast a website can be without 2MB of
             | silly Javascript frameworks. I did a search for "Weather"
             | and got a result for my local weather in ASCII form. This
             | is right up my alley.
        
         | sundarurfriend wrote:
         | > DDG is as good as Google in certain topics, especially
         | programming-related topics. But otherwise, not so good.
         | 
         | Interesting, my experience is exactly the opposite (as I
         | mentioned in another comment here). In general searches, DDG
         | and Google return about equally good results, with 10% of the
         | time DDG doing better and 10% of the time Google doing better.
         | With programming-related searches, Google is pretty much
         | guaranteed to return better results for me. Doing the Advent of
         | Code 2020 was the first time in months that I had to
         | consistently do `!g` re-searches, because DDG results were
         | significantly worse.
        
       | mgh2 wrote:
       | I will suggest a more balanced and practical approach:
       | 
       | All of Google's unethical practices are supported by its
       | advertising business, so the only replacement I will consider is
       | the search engine, but even here there are no good alternatives.
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25614705
        
       | mro_name wrote:
       | Chapeau, good move. Your honesty is impressive.
       | 
       | IMO paying money and thus enabling humane businesses to thrive is
       | key.
        
       | bluGill wrote:
       | Has anyone compared all the photo alternatives? I need a good
       | place to store my family photos and share with my wife.
       | 
       | Email and search are easy, email is standard so anyone can do the
       | same features more or less. Search has no lock-in so you can just
       | try whatever. Photos doesn't seems to be either, and I don't
       | personally want to invest the time to try them all.
        
         | kmclean wrote:
         | I'm curious about this, too.. I'm trying out a couple of
         | different ones now, but Google photos is pretty hard to beat,
         | especially its semantic searching. Also I know there are loads
         | of them I haven't tried yet.
        
       | uniqueid wrote:
       | The thing this article doesn't cover is that while you can (and
       | imo _should_ ) make all these changes, Google will _still_ track
       | much of what you do online.
       | 
       | The internet is rotten with linked media, amp pages, blogs, and
       | ads hosted on Google servers.
       | 
       | If you want off Google, you should use something like Pi-hole to
       | lessen that. Since it's DNS level only, I imagine even that won't
       | make you invisible to Google.
       | 
       | This was a great read, but Google has a million other ways to
       | collect data about you, against your will. That deserves a
       | mention.
        
         | kmclean wrote:
         | Yeah this is a fair point! I found the rhetoric in the de-
         | goggling community to be a bit purist and defeatist at times
         | and I'm more of a "better done than perfect" kind of person,
         | but I also don't want to be unrealistic about Google's reach or
         | suggest this is all it takes to escape it. I updated the post
         | to reflect these thoughts. Thanks for the thoughtful comment.
        
           | uniqueid wrote:
           | Cheers. I enjoyed reading your post. The amount of research
           | you put into it showed.
        
       | eating555 wrote:
       | I've checked Linode. Why it's price is much lower than others
       | like AWS, Azure or GCP? Because of some drawback?
        
         | import wrote:
         | Linode has a fixed price strategy and focused on being a VPS
         | provider.
        
         | 0xbadcafebee wrote:
         | Cloud providers like AWS are more expensive because what they
         | provide is a completely different set of services and
         | guarantees, so their value [and cost] is much higher.
         | 
         | There are actually much cheaper VPS providers than Linode.
         | Check out lowendbox.com for deals. I've had a Linode for years
         | and it's completely underwhelming for the cost. I'd try out
         | multiple different cheaper VPS providers instead, maybe even
         | use multiple for redundancy at the same cost as Linode.
        
         | bserge wrote:
         | It's the other way around, AWS/etc are more expensive. Linode
         | is just a VPS provider, and it's been great for me for the past
         | 6 years. There are cheaper alternatives, though.
        
         | itsnot2020 wrote:
         | Well their offering is much simpler than that of AWS, Azure or
         | GCP. I've been using them for over 5 years now without any
         | issues, it's often the case that you get what you pay for but
         | Linode do a very good job for their price point (yes they've
         | had their issues but so have Gandi, Digital Ocean, ... any
         | other competitor).
        
       | whoknew1122 wrote:
       | Interesting to see what others use. I'm a bit curious about using
       | CloudFlare's DNS though.
       | 
       | If you take a stand against Google's societal impact, why switch
       | to CloudFlare? CloudFlare's 'content neutral' stance enables a
       | lot of hate speech and other, more disgusting material.
       | 
       | It seems odd to have ethical concerns about Google, but not
       | CloudFlare.
        
         | kbelder wrote:
         | Because I think censoring hate speech can have a worse societal
         | impact than being a neutral host. CloudFlare is, from my
         | viewpoint, behaving more ethically.
        
         | kmclean wrote:
         | I haven't done as much research about CloudFlare. I generally
         | appreciate their views on privacy and the internet, but I have
         | heard some really sketchy things about the way they route
         | traffic and what you're describing sounds worrisome for sure!
         | 
         | I find it extremely hard to be an ethical consumer these days
         | and honestly just get burnt out learning about all the horrible
         | things people and companies with lots of money get away with,
         | so I need to pace myself and take it in manageable doses. I
         | will spend some time learning about Cloudflare this year.
        
         | glial wrote:
         | I am against censorship but also don't support companies who
         | actively promote hate speech via recommendations. I'm ok with
         | anyone having a blog but not OK with FB/Google creating
         | conspiracy theory rabbit holes to drive engagement. This is a
         | distinction I wish more people made.
        
       | johnmpage wrote:
       | Your list neglects a huge data vacuum, scooping up your personal
       | data: the Android OS on your phone, which Google develops. My
       | recommendation to replace: eOS by the eFoundation
       | (https://e.foundation/)
        
       | perryizgr8 wrote:
       | > Maps - Apple maps
       | 
       | I can't find Apple maps in the play store. Is there another
       | alternative?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-01-06 23:04 UTC)