I once had to help a relative sue a bank who had closed his account after he refused to answer their very intrusive questions (they wanted to know details about distant relatives living in another country). They also refused to return his money (tens of thousands) and refused to explain why. No amount of complaining or escalating made any difference, although we did manage to get a nice recording of an employee saying that he thought the bank was in the wrong.
It took me issuing court proceedings, plus several more months of negotiating with their lawyer, before they finally settled out of court. Even then they tried to not pay the court fee, and they tried to get us to sign an NDA (I refused to budge on both). Altogether, it took 6 months to get the money.
Similar to how people in this thread are talking about mitigating reliance on cloud providers (e.g. with offline backups), I now do not trust any bank. I avoid being in a position where any one bank can ruin my life. That means having multiple accounts and spreading my money around.
Luckily for me I have a legal background so when a corp (big or small) does this sort of thing to me I don't hesitate to sue them. In almost all cases this causes them to "wake up" and start taking your issue seriously, in a way that the front line customer support reps never do. I recommend this to the author of the original post.
It baffles me how much this community is opposed to Bitcoin (and fails to delimit it from the rest of the crypto-scams on going) when, for me, it is existential. When you go through 1-2 experiences of bank-freezing and you realize your life is literally at stake here, the abstract debates about energy consumption or speculative bubbles feel like they come from completely misinformed individuals.
It's like watching someone on a rail track arguing not knowing what is about to hit them.
It's my understanding that banks really don't want your money once they've closed an account, they want you to take it back.
Bigger banks, at least in the US, usually do this.
iCloud literally encourages users to opt for storing originals only in the cloud. It's marketed as such, it nags you about this every now and then, and iCloud is the preinstalled default cloud storage on every iPhone. Consider non-techies dealing with this too.
Convenience is a hell of a drug.
Concerning all those 'bricked' devices it would be really nice to get some more details concerning the 'block'.
Can you use your iPhone to call someone, can you use your MacBook overall? Login, use Apple Passwords(!), looking at photos within photos app and so on...
Or are all those devices completely locked?
If they’re shared, surely someone else can still access them?
My question was why one can't back up one's data though. I'm even more confused now that I know it refers to Pages/Keynote/etc. since those have always been file-based so far as I've seen from classmates who used it. Surely even Apple allows downloading your documents and spreadsheets from whatever storage front-end their live editing server uses?
To me this is the biggest problem. Just like a bank can decide to close your account at any time, it's reasonable that Apple (or any business) could do the same. But they can't keep your stuff.
You can say "don't be naive and assume your cloud data is safe", but in today's world that's like saying "don't keep your money in a bank". The reason I pay for iCloud storage is because it's supposed to be safe (safer than my local HDD going bust or getting lost).
While I agree that entering a dark alley shouldn't result in ill effects, if ill effects happen in said dark alley it is still worth the discussion to remind people to stay out of dark alleys in today's day and age (or until the root problem, whatever it is, is improved).
Pretending that it is OK to enter dark alleys and forcing blame elsewhere will continue to have people unwittingly enter dark alleys.
This is not a dark alley. It's the main street. It's the world we live in. iPhone has more than half the market share in the US and well over a billion users worldwide. Moreover, Apple, Google, and Microsoft collectively monopolize consumer operating systems on both mobile and desktop. Try going into a retail store and buying a computing device that is not running iOS, Android, macOS, or Windows. That's the reality for most people.
The dark alleys are the non-mainstream options that hardly anyone knows about.
I don't know why some people have made "convenience" into a dirty word. Almost everything we do is for convenience. You could live in a remote log cabin with no electricity and grow/hunt your own food, separating yourself from most of society, but that wouldn't be convenient or pleasant.
Individual consumers have very little power over the market. There's a collective action problem, which is why governments and regulation exist... or should exist. The way I see it, the root problem is a massive failure by (corrupt) governments to protect consumer rights.
Perhaps the root problem is that we've blown too far past Dunbar's number to be able to deal with the societies we live in. All of these systems we've contrived to mitigate the trust problem are full of holes.
As for convenience, that carries a tradeoff. All of the technology and all of the revolutions we've had (agricultural, industrial, information technology) have come with these tradeoffs. Even the log cabin has downsides compared to the nomadic hunter-gatherer lifestyle.
I think the US government did start that way. Maybe not "corrupt" as such, but the United States was founded by plutocrats and was clearly designed to protect the minority of plutocrats against mass democracy.
> Even the log cabin has downsides compared to the nomadic hunter-gatherer lifestyle.
Yes, but I'd say the nomadic hunter-gatherer lifestyle has even greater downsides, and our current state of convenience is in many ways a vast improvement over the precarious existence of our distant ancestors.
The real solution is to have a neutral, efficient and formal process under supervision of regulators to have such case escalated and handled.
I already see all the tech-bros coming: “you see it was not an issue, they reinstated the account after you posted” while ignoring there are silent victims.
One can express a need for regulation while also being aghast that people are still falling for the cloud scam, despite the overwhelming evidence that it is indeed a scam.
A trillion dollar company with premium hardware and software that has more than 50% smartphone share in US and is used by 1.5 billion people worldwide is not "know to be a thief".
Your rant is essentially a crazy hobo stashing cash under his mattress and calling anyone using a bank idiot.
Most people don’t save enough to handle an emergency, even if they have the cash flow for it. Most people don’t do basic, cheap preparation for a natural or manmade disaster. Most people don’t do at least minimal planning to make life easier for their families and loved ones if they are incapacitated or die, until very late in life. Most people are indeed idiots.
Not only does no one read it but it seems like they are intentionally designed to be difficult to read.
They are written by lawyers for lawyers, not for common people to read.
Of course, that doesn't help in the US with its vicious Supreme Court endorsing the most blatant abuses under cover of binding aritration.
There should be laws to protect people, instead of blaming victims.
This leaves you with just about zero cloud storage solutions that you can use.
Yes, yes, you can rsync your files to your NAS. Now explain that to your non tech-savvy neighbors.
We really need laws for this sort of thing. They should have included it in the DMA for gatekeepers.