• EABOD25@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    105
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    2 months ago

    Here’s something that I think about that’s weird. With onedrive, if you don’t pay the subscription fee, they hold your files hostages until you do. That’s called a business model, but when people hold their files hostage it’s called ransomware. Weird how that works isn’t it?

    • glimse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 months ago

      Why is that weird? With self-storage companies, if you don’t pay the rental fee, they hold your stored items until you do. That’s calles a business model, but if someone breaks into my house and steals my items, that’s called theft. It’s not weird how that works because one involves signing a contract and you have say in the other.

      • EABOD25@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Ok. So let’s say you’re doing some heavy shopping and you’re struggling with it. Items are falling all over the place, you can’t keep it all in your hands, and you’re scared you’re going to lose an item. I walk up to you and say "Hey if you pay this miniscule amount, I’ll help you out and hold on to the items for you. I could use my one hand to help you for free, but if you want both hands, then it costs you, but the items are still yours. You have proprietary right to the items, but if you start to pay, and then don’t pay this one time, then I’m going to hold on to all the things I have in this one hand. Nothing is going to happen to the stuff. I’m not going to take ownership, I’m not going to resell it because I have looked at what you have and have gotten the exact same purchases. Just going to keep it so it so you can’t have it until you pay me.

        How much sense does that make as a business model? Especially with companies that are getting plenty of money from other divisions where the service would be sustainable, but they just won’t. Just need to get more and more money.

        In essence, capitalism already controls what you do with your personal data, we should all be upset about that.

        And with your storage argument, they should absolutely give you a window to remove your belongings before they lock it. I know way too many storage places that will lock your unit the day after your payment date was without notification because they can get quick cash if they auction units off, so most storage places don’t want the individual to pay as long as the rest do pay. Their favorite thing to do is put payment dates on Thursdays. That way by Friday when the person doesn’t pay, they can lock it, and it’s inaccessible until Monday. That is some petty shit that businesses pull. The whole “civilized” system is set up to work against people with money problems. I won’t go into detail of what I mean anymore than I already have, but all you really did was point out 2 problems to try and find a comparison against one.

        The biggest crooks I know of in my experience is cloud-share server owners, tow truck companies, and storage units

        • glimse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          That is a very convoluted analogy that implies there is a difference between the files on the drive when there isn’t. It might as well be one big file.

          You do get a window…the 30 days since your last payment

          I think they’re all crooks but I don’t think blocking access to a service when you stop paying is crooked behavior

        • papalonian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          In your grocery example, is your argument that the person should just stand around the store, offering to hold people’s stuff with no compensation, and no fallback if compensation is withheld? I was expecting the “holding person’s” terms to become unreasonable but everything sounds just about right.

    • Romkslrqusz@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’ve never seen this be the case.

      For the most part, the files still exist in the local filesystem unless one uses the “free up space” function to unload files to the cloud.

      Where users have ended a subscription, they have become unable to add content to the cloud storage, which is to be expected. I’ve never been unable to download a file, it effectively goes into read-only mode.

      • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        I mean, if I was running a cloud provider I’d delete all your shit the instant you stopped paying me. So them providing the option for you to get your files by renewing your subscription is more than generous. Storage space costs money.

        • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          You’d just burn yourself doing that though.

          So long as you still have the data there’s a very strong probability the subscriber is going to renew in order to access their data.

          Once you delete the data the subscriber is probably going to change to another provider that doesn’t delete things.

        • EABOD25@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’d rather have your business model because I at least know my data isn’t going to be used for reasons that I didn’t agree to. However that’s just an opinion I have on cloud function and storage