An advantage of publishing my problems with wide circulation is that sometimes people will be very helpful in their comments and emails.1 Plenty of people kindly suggested alternatives and ways to correct the problems I was having and, after many days’ work, I think I am on better footing.

But first, it is my fault as a writer that it seems I did not differentiate clearly enough the two related issues I have experienced with iCloud Photos. The first problem is that it is very easy to get images into an iCloud-stored photo library, but extremely difficult to extract them. This issue is compounded by a lack of transparency and data verification. The second problem is that it is necessary to commit to a lifetime of storage if one uses a third-party cloud option.

The software suggestions I received are manifold. The first is a category comprising a bunch of self-hosted options, of which the most popular seems to be Immich. This would solve the problem of a long-term commitment to a third-party provider, but it requires me to be a hobbyist data centre technician and I cannot handle more things on my to-do list. Yes, I have looked at the documentation and it seems straightforward enough. No, I still do not want to take this on. Perhaps one day, but not now.

I am, in fact, happy to pay someone to deal with that for me. Apple should be doing a better job of it than I ever could. Its data centres, whether first-party or third-party, surely have redundancies upon redundancies, and a level of data validation I simply cannot compete with. My dispute with this is not about third-party storage per se. Rather, it is how shoddy an experience it is to move photos out of iCloud and, also, my inability to verify that everything is as safe and secure as it should be.

But I was pointed to two pieces of software I can use that made my life easier and got me onto more stable footing. The first is Parachute Backup (MacOS 15 or later), which created a backup of my entire iCloud photo library and, soon, will also be backing up everything else I have in iCloud, for good measure. This is good software; I like it a lot. But I will provide a couple of caveats up-front if you are attempting a similar strategy.

Most obviously, it will download everything, which means you need a disk big enough to hold a discrete copy of everything you store in iCloud. That could be expensive right now. I bought a 2 TB external Samsung SSD a few years ago for $400, and it is currently nearly $800 on Amazon. But I do hoard old hard disks and I found a 2 TB one I could clear up.

You are also going to need patience. Not only will it take time to download, depending on your internet connection and the amount of stuff you have in iCloud, Parachute does not have any built-in bandwidth controls from what I could see. I am sure I could have found a way to limit it, but I just let it run. It took five days.

But now I am pretty sure I have a local copy of everything in iCloud. This is the feeling I should get from having “download originals to this Mac” switched on — which I have for several years — but that is apparently not a reliable preference. Also, this copy of my photo library is meaningfully organized in a date-based directory tree instead of some abstruse collection of randomized folders.

The other piece of software to which I owe my newfound sense of calm is PowerPhotos. Despite being hands-down the most frequent software recommendation from readers, it never came up in my earlier searches. I guess I was not using the correct keywords. In any case, it is an excellent application. Because I did the full Parachute backup, I felt comfortable with PowerPhotos modifying my library and generally doing its thing. It lets me easily drag photos from my primary iCloud-connected library to my archive, and its duplicate image finder is way better than the one in Photos.

What that means is that I can now confidently maintain that archive photos library. It is not worth the increase in iCloud storage costs for me to carry all of my tens of thousands of photos everywhere I go. For me, it is definitely worth the cost of these two software licenses to have more control.

(Also, an extra nice thing about PowerPhotos is that it has been around for ages, and old versions of the software remain available for download. The latest ones do not work on my iMac, but 2.x versions do, and a license key unlocks them all the same.)

I am receiving nothing by pointing you to either of these applications. I paid for both myself. However, I heard from the new owner of Parachute shortly after I published my article with a license for each of the Mac and iOS versions. I do not usually accept codes and I bought my own license anyhow, so I asked if I could give those codes away. I only have one of each to give out and they are only valid for another couple of days, so shoot me an email and let me know which one you want. (Update: Both licenses have been claimed.)


  1. It also means some other people will be spectacularly unhelpful. Here is a free tip: if your immediate reaction to someone having a problem with a service they are using as marketed is to blame them, consider whether you are actually being a smug jerk. (Ten points to you if you figure out which comment, specifically, encouraged me to write this footnote.) ↥︎

Mathew Ingram wrote, for Be Giant, an interesting profile of Gander and other digital sovereignty efforts in Canada and the E.U., which I think is an evenhanded exploration of the excitement and pitfalls. For example, Gander’s founder Ben Waldman notes the de facto requirement to use U.S.-based payment systems on iOS:

There have been some major hurdles along the way, he concedes, which helps explain why Gander didn’t meet its initial goal of launching last October. One challenge was the idea of verifying users. It was suggested that they be asked to send a toonie to the company via the Interac network, but there was a risk that Apple might not approve the new app if payments were made outside its App Store. So the current plan is to have users verify their identity using Interac or Canada Post, both of which allow you to do so without sending your personal information over the internet.

I am not anti-U.S., but I am in favour of identifying singular dependencies.

Stanley Pignal, the Economist (here is a gift link from someone, somewhere):

Here is an uncomfortable truth for hand-wringing policymakers in Paris, Berlin and beyond: Europe’s dependency on America Inc is in no small part Europe’s own fault. Decades of over-regulating the old continent’s economy left businesses there unable to compete with American firms, which went on to trounce European ones even in their own backyards. What Europeans could not build quickly for themselves, due to a thicket of regulations, they often imported just as quickly from abroad. That forcing businesses to jump through endless regulatory hoops would put a burden on Europeans was always understood: meeting ambitious green targets, protecting privacy, preventing bank meltdowns or achieving other necessary goals was always going to carry a cost. But the extent to which it also left Europeans in hock to foreigners — for now mostly America, but also increasingly China—has only belatedly become clear.

This is by no means a new argument; it is one the Economist makes constantly, including in a similar article two months ago, and Pignal in a previous column in October. Yet it is worth considering, nevertheless, that too much regulatory oversight has hampered Europe’s ability to compete with the United States. This is a possibility.

I find it telling, however, that Pignal cannot cite a specific example of this. Each paragraph contains an example of some regulation — limitations on the extractive economics of credit card interchange fees, environmental policies, and so on — and they all seem pretty reasonable. Pignal’s closing paragraph is all about how much he agrees with regulating A.I. and antitrust. But the limp conclusion is that it is the combination of sensible policies that has left Europe in an uncompetitive position with the comparatively lax regulatory environment of the U.S., where the highest court has repeatedly ruled against the authority of regulatory agencies.

It is unclear what E.U. regulators ought to do with Pignal’s feedback. It seems very easy to say there are too many regulations and too much red tape. It seems much more difficult to explain which part of the environment, human and animal safety, customer rights, privacy, or good business behaviour must be sacrificed in the name of international competition.

A strange thing happened last May: the U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s FOIA page, which had previously contained a generous list of released documents, was censored. When I asked the agency what was up with that, they told me the site was “currently under construction in order to enhance and streamline the user experience”, with “temporary downtime of certain pages and content”. It turns out that was nonsense, hence my use of “censored” above.

Jason Leopold, in his “FOIA Files” newsletter at Bloomberg:

But an ODNI official told FOIA Files that the removal of the FOIA page was not connected to the Tren de Aragua intelligence assessment released to Harper. Instead, the website overhaul was prompted after another agency flagged a document released during the Biden administration that the official claimed had been improperly posted to ODNI’s FOIA reading room. (The official would not describe the document or say if it was retroactively classified.)

The emails I obtained, which have been partially redacted, reference a “document,” the title of which was blacked out, that sparked ODNI’s aggressive response.

If there was a single erroneously released document, it surely would not necessitate the removal of so many documents. One of the few ones remaining in the reading room is, oddly enough, the partially redacted email exchange (PDF) released to Leopold in which Madeline Meeker asks for the page to be “completely scrubbed”. No request logs have been posted since January 2025 under the “most transparent administration in history”.

Aäron Loupatty, BNR (in Dutch, as interpreted by Safari’s translation feature):

Because Canadian media have taken it out so big, Youp now says he is changing course. “This came out of nowhere for us. It is clear what it has brought about. If I had known earlier that this was a problem, I would have adjusted the content accordingly.’ Contrary to what the universities claim, Youp says there is no coordinated network that wants to fuel separatist sentiments in Alberta. According to him, many of the videos are created precisely because channels look away from each other, but there is no collaboration there.

“Youp” is Youp Licher, who was originally identified by CBC News. I have no reason to disbelieve him in claiming that this is simply a financial play, and not a deliberate effort to meddle in Alberta politics.

One of the YouTube channels in question — the Canadian Reporter — has accumulated around 15.5 million total video views since it was created on May 1 last year. Using an approximate number of 44,000 daily views with Social Blade’s earnings estimator suggests a range of USD $3,960–$63,360 in annual revenue from ads alone. That is a huge range, to be sure, but even the lowest number is a successful side hustle for how little work actually goes into this stuff.

More traditional media organizations — BNR and CBC News being two examples — attempted to separate the business side of what they do from the news side. Paying writers based on clicks used to be a noteworthy exception, but then traffic bonuses became part of the compensation package at some outlets. It eventually paved the way for the YouTube-native model of almost entirely traffic-based compensation. Historically powerful human gatekeepers have been replaced by the singular platform of YouTube, which means anyone can make money and possibly a living if they have a large enough audience. A fandom parlays into other revenue streams, of course; Canadian Reporter sells paid subscriptions on YouTube from $1.50–$10.50 per month, and has a “Buy Me a Coffee” link in the bio albeit with just two subscribers.

In the way this new economy has pushed out the old, it is unfortunately fitting that one of the inadvertent faces of one of these channels is Matt Berry. Berry made an audition tape without knowing how it was going to be used because he had a profile on freelance talent site Upwork. But Berry is no long-term freelancer. He was, until 2021, the award-winning music director at X92.9, Calgary’s alternative rock station. I cannot find any comment from the station’s owner as to why he was among those laid off at the time, but it feels a little on-the-nose that a former broadcaster found his likeness being used without permission to market some clickbait A.I.-generated videos and boost someone else’s AdSense revenue.

(Thank you to reader Sanel for sending me this link.)

Eric Szeto, et al., CBC News:

CBC News identified three individuals in the Netherlands whose digital trail links them to accounts that hired actors to appear on the YouTube channels. Two of them attended the same online course that teaches customers how to create “faceless” YouTube channels that generate passive income for the creators, who remain in the shadows.

Turns out it was not a VPN connection after all.

O’Ryan Johnson, reporting for the Register at the end of March:

Oracle laid off thousands of employees on Tuesday as it ramps spending on AI infrastructure projects internally and with major technology partners.

[…]

Oracle employs about 162,000 people, with 58,000 of those in the US and approximately 104,000 internationally. If the rumored cuts of 30,000 are correct, it would amount to 18 percent of the company’s workforce.

Hugh Langley and Ashley Stewart, Business Insider:

Employees started receiving notifications early Tuesday. The cuts appear to have affected employees globally, but the full extent of the layoffs could not be immediately learned.

“After careful consideration of Oracle’s current business needs, we have made the decision to eliminate your role as part of a broader organizational change,” copies of the notification email viewed by Business Insider stated. “As a result, today is your last working day.”

This is possibly tens of thousands of people whose lives have been upended after getting an email. They had plans. Since those layoffs, Larry Ellison’s net worth has grown by about $45 billion.

Hannah Murphy, Financial Times:

Meta will cut 10 per cent of its staff next month, or about 8,000 jobs, as the social media platform reduces its workforce to offset chief executive Mark Zuckerberg’s AI spending spree.

[…]

Meta also said that it was no longer filling 6,000 positions that it had initially planned to hire for, according to several people familiar with the matter.

Not the 20% reported by Reuters last month, but a huge number nevertheless. This is in addition to a thousand people laid off in January and hundreds more in March. That is a lot of lives upended — a lot of people who relocated, made plans, bought houses, and made commitments they might no longer be able to fulfill — because Meta hired too aggressively, and is now running a “marvel of financial engineering” to build data centres.

Gabrielle Bruney, Places:

Benches aren’t just disappearing from large railroad stations, but also from subways, parks, plazas, sidewalks, and esplanades. Public transit systems in Philadelphia, Chicago, Anaheim, and New York City have lost benches, as have the entrance to Seattle’s Pike Place Market, a National Park plaza in Washington, D.C., a thoroughfare of San Francisco’s Tenderloin, a boulevard dedicated to Korean veterans in Nashville, and a tiny riverfront park in Janesville, Wisconsin. Some of these seats were replaced with armatures for perching or leaning, but most were not. There is no firm data on how many benches have been removed in total, nor when the trend precisely started. But anecdotal evidence suggests that in the past decade, across the United States, hundreds of places to sit in public have quietly disappeared.

This is New York-centric and U.S.-heavy, but it is something I have also noticed around me, too. A bench is one of the few places you can sit and spend time for free. Their absence in so many public places is notable for what it says about who we consider part of the public.

Joanna Stern left the Wall Street Journal and is going independent with her new thing called New Things, and I like this overarching editorial question:

But while writing my new book, I AM NOT A ROBOT — where I used AI in as many parts of my life as possible for a year — I realized Is this a good product? isn’t the main question to ask anymore. The bigger question is: Who is this tech for? Wall Street? Greedy CEOs? AI agents? Actual humans? I want it to be for humans. And I want to cover it that way too: as a human living with it, using it, testing it and trying to make sense of what it’s doing to our lives.

After all, tech is not really about products and services; it never has been. It is what they do for us and what they — or the companies that created them — expect of us.

Charles Rusnell, the Tyee:

A network of 20 inauthentic YouTube accounts has racked up nearly 40 million views by peddling lies, grievance, division and narratives normalizing the prospect of Alberta’s secession and annexation by the United States.

“Because these channels offer no identifying information to real humans or organizations, nor ties to the secession movement in Alberta, we are flagging this phenomenon as a potential covert influence operation produced by unknown actors pursuing unclear objectives,” states a report released today by the Canadian Digital Media Research Network.

The authors of the report “cannot confirm this network’s origin or intent, and the available evidence is inconclusive on both counts”, but it is notable to me that the official X accounts of two of the most-viewed channels, the “Canadian Reporter” and “David Fraser”, say they are either based in or connected via the Netherlands App Store. This seems to me like the product of a VPN, but it is notable they did not even mask their origin and pretend to be in Canada.

This sucks. Our province is such a political catastrophe that we are being exploited from — probably — abroad and close to home. It is unclear to me how much of an effect the YouTube network identified by these researchers would have; many of the channels have video view counts of well under a hundred. And even though a few of these channels appear to be taking off, they are surely eclipsed by a home-grown industry of people who seem to pump out daily videos broadcasting their conspiracy theories and separatist fairytales. I easily found a bunch of separatism-promoting channels — “Fight for Canada”, “PJ the Belt”, “John Bolton”, and “Igor Ryltsev” — each with millions of total lifetime video views. They are loud and probably a minority, but they are probably more likely to tilt a referendum, and that is frightening.

Mathieu Pollet and Anouk Schlung, Politico:

Sensing a change in the air, Big Tech firms have wasted no time rolling out offerings meant to soothe — and cash in on — Europe’s unease.

Over the past year, U.S. hyperscalers have rushed to build products with EU-based governance structures and local operators, while doubling down on technical and legal safeguards. “Our industry, frankly, is doing a lot to address [the concerns] insofar as possible,” said Guido Lobrano, the director general for Europe of tech lobby ITI.

But critics have been dismissing their attempts as “sovereignty washing.” “Marketers realized it sells. Trump was a great salesman for this idea,” said Philippe Latombe, a centrist member of the French parliament.

The red alert push for digital sovereignty is really only about a year-and-a-half old, at most, and it is remarkable what E.U. countries have been able to achieve in that time. Yet it is a fraught and challenging operation, regardless. These big U.S.-based companies are deeply embedded into everything we do and a clean break was never going to be possible, in large part because it is not designed to be easy. That is not to say it is deliberately designed to be difficult — despite the consumer-level evidence offered by Amazon’s Prime cancellation procedure — only that there are few incentives to help users leave.

Katie Paul and Jeff Horwitz, Reuters:

Meta is installing new tracking software on U.S.-based employees’ computers to capture mouse movements, clicks and ​keystrokes for use in training its artificial intelligence models, part of a broad initiative to build AI agents that can perform work tasks autonomously, the company told staffers in internal memos seen by Reuters.

If this were happening at any other company, it would be an alarming violation of workers’ expectations. But since it is Meta, I am sure employees, even those who are captive, will be reassured by the pinky promise limited scope in using this information.

Jason Snell:

Oh, and Cook will apparently be taking one very specific job with him to the boardroom, according to the press release:

Cook will continue in his role as CEO through the summer as he works closely with Ternus on a smooth transition. As executive chairman, Cook will assist with certain aspects of the company, including engaging with policymakers around the world.

It doesn’t take a magnifying glass to read between those lines. Cook is keeping one of the stickiest jobs he’s had to do the last decade for himself, for now: connecting with the representatives of various governments in ways that advantage Apple, whether that’s easing China’s worries about Apple’s focus on diversifying its supply chain, or convincing the Trump administration that Apple is investing in the U.S. while also needing tariff relief. Not only does Cook have the personal connections there, but it’s a messy business that perhaps Ternus is best insulated from — for now.

The Tim Cook story at Apple is an almost poetic arc. Upon arrival, he fundamentally overhauled the way its products would be made, primarily by moving manufacturing to Japan, Taiwan, and China. This groundwork is what allowed him to transform the company when he arrived as CEO, growing it into a global behemoth and working within China to create the best and most precise electronics manufacturing chain anywhere. And that became a problem for him. The Chinese government was able to use that as leverage, and the tie-up became politically untenable in the United States, too. Cook’s precise supply chain management directly led to his appeasement of strongmen.

With today’s news, we can settle a score. In November, four reporters for the Financial Times wrote that Apple was “stepping up its succession planning efforts, as it prepares for Tim Cook to step down as chief executive as soon as next year”:

An announcement early in the year would give its new leadership team time to settle in ahead of its big annual keynote events, its developer conference in June and its iPhone launch in September, the people said.

Then, in his Bloomberg newsletter a week later, Mark Gurman reported:

[…] Based on everything I’ve learned in recent weeks, I don’t believe a departure by the middle of next year is likely. In fact, I would be shocked if Cook steps down in the time frame outlined by the FT. Some people have speculated that the story was a “test balloon” orchestrated by Apple or someone close to Cook to prepare Wall Street for a change, but that isn’t the case either. I believe the story was simply false.

There are correct elements in both stories: the Times accurately reported that Apple was “preparing for its longtime leader to step down as early as next year”, while Gurman was ultimately right to claim Cook would not leave by midyear. Gurman also had the scoop that John Ternus was the CEO-in-waiting. But, in spirit, I would argue the Times story was more correct than Gurman’s response, which continued:

Yes, Apple will eventually have a new leader. And, yes, it’s probably Ternus. But unless there is some unexpected event that forces Cook to step down sooner than planned, that moment is not at hand. […]

While “as soon as next year” gives the paper a lot of room — anything can happen “as soon as next year” — its sources correctly assessed Tim Cook’s time as CEO was ending. And, despite Gurman responding to the report as though it were “imminent” event, the word does not appear once in the Times’ story. The Times was not running a “test balloon” and the story certainly was not false.

Hamilton Nolan:

Anyhow, today, Palantir has gone mildly viral by posting on Twitter, “Because we get asked a lot. The Technological Republic, in brief.” Followed by 22 bullet points that sum up the book’s arguments. At last, a version of the book that tech people can read! The instant reaction to this bullet point list among non-tech people was “Wow, this is some fascist shit.” Which is true. But I want to make an even more rudimentary point that is, I think, a very important piece of context: This is not a coherent set of arguments at all. It is not a philosophy. It is not a set of intelligible ethics. Rather, it is a list of angry reactions to being yelled at — given a somber voice and dressed up as some sort of wondrous work of intellect.

One of the “popular highlights”, sourced from Kindle users, on the book’s Amazon page is the phrase “[t]he result is a culture in which those responsible for making our most consequential decisions — in any number of public domains, including government, industry, and academia — are often unsure of what their own beliefs are, or more fundamentally if they have any firm or authentic beliefs at all”. But does Karp or, by extension, Palantir?

Last week, Wired published a pretty terrible piece from John Semley, which was given the headline “The Fanfare Around the Band Geese Actually Was a Psyop”. It is purportedly an investigation into the way a particular marketing company manages to make its musician clients popular, but what it actually becomes is a puff piece for that marketing company, albeit accidentally.

Ryan Broderick:

The blowback against WIRED’s report has been pretty immense. McLamb had to put out a statement on X, writing “It’s important to me to say that I do not consider Geese to be a ‘psy-op’ and [told WIRED] as much.” Music critic Anthony Fantano wrote on X, “One of the most stupid, irresponsible, and vapid headlines/pieces I’ve read from wired. Shame.” And journalist Max Read wrote on Bluesky, “Guys whose job it is to sell astroturfed viral marketing campaigns really love to tell people that their astroturfed viral marketing campaigns are extremely effective.” Which is exactly the problem here.

The seemingly sudden popularity of Geese in the past year-ish is not that surprising because it was not actually that meteoric. The band was playing festivals five years ago; the record it released last year, “Getting Killed”, was the band’s fourth. To call it a “psyop”, as Wired’s headline writer decided, is so inaccurate it is basically a lie.

Jaron Schneider, PetaPixel:

Thirteen years ago, I sat in an amphitheater in Los Angeles as Adobe announced that it would be shifting from Creative Suite to Creative Cloud. I remember being skeptical, but I was also willing to give Adobe the benefit of the doubt. After all, it created a beloved line of tools.

[…]

I was giving Adobe every benefit of the doubt, because I wanted to see this work. I think it’s important to recognize why I felt that way and what has changed in the last five years.

This follows the critical takes from Macworld and AppleInsider about Apple’s App Store policies as an industry voice pushing back on corporate behaviour. I have no idea if articles like these raise alarm bells for executives and decision-makers — but they should.

I have a quibble with Schneider’s article:

Adobe’s product is largely blameless. The product is, for the most part, not just good — it’s great. The promises Adobe made 13 years ago have been largely upheld from a product perspective. But it’s not enough to just make a good product, especially when you’re catering to artists.

I think Adobe has actually shipped worse products as a result of this strategy — and, for once, I will avoid making it all about bugs, of which there are many. Adobe’s applications are more capable than they ever have been, but they are also often worse for professionals in actual use as a direct result of the company’s software-as-a-service model. Nearly every application contains upsells or supposedly helpful alerts that are actually ads for other Adobe services. These promotions are particularly aggressive in pushing artificial intelligence tools. Even software as relatively simple as Acrobat cannot help but promote its ability to summarize a two-page document, and then suggest you store it with Adobe’s cloud service instead of sending it as an attachment.

This stuff gets in the way of professionals trying to do their job. Adobe was pressured into adding a “Quiet Mode” in Photoshop to hide most of these things, but not all of them, and only in Photoshop. It only underscores how much Adobe views its software as something it gives people permission to use, instead of tools it makes to help people get their work done.

William Gallagher and Mike Wuerthele, AppleInsider:

After we reported less than four days ago about the fraudulent apps, Apple got back to us. They repeated the same talking points that they always do when an app gets pulled after it steals money from users, or some other nefarious deed.

And, as always, it’s information surrounding the issues that we are not allowed to quote, and not allowed to say who said it to us.

We have always adhered to those terms, even when others have not, or others were allowed to quote and gave a named Apple PR source. We did do an email search on the verbatim quotes we got in the last few days, looking for repetition over the last 10 years at AppleInsider on what they said to us.

Essentially the same email was sent to us 29 times over the last decade. The emails used verbatim quotes 17 times over that timespan.

Whether App Store scams are “getting far, far worse and more prevalent”, as Gallagher and Wuerthele claim without evidence, is immaterial to whether apps like Freecash and a fraudulent version of Ledger Live should have gotten past what Apple claims are a “thorough review” of “the highest standards for privacy, security, and content”. These specific apps needed to be caught; Freecash was caught by Wired months before Apple decided to remove it.

Gallagher and Wuerthele make some good arguments in this piece. Yet it also comes across as an admission that AppleInsider has done its part in its professional relationship with Apple. Its writers ran anonymous quotes, paraphrased key information delivered on background, and favouring Apple’s view or delivering it uncritically. I am not saying AppleInsider is shilling for Apple, but I do think, as an Apple-specific news site, there is a mutually beneficial relationship it recognizes to some extent. They get comments from the company’s selective communications staff and previews of embargoed reports. Perhaps this is a coincidental stance. I am glad it is recognizing it has been receiving the same carefully worded statement for years, at least.

Tom Babin, of the excellent Shifter channel on YouTube, shared a very clever trick of using Shortcuts with an NFC chip — perhaps using a hotel keycard you forgot to return — to launch Strava or Komoot. I am terrible at remembering to track typical rides like my commute so I set this up and tucked the card into my wallet. Perhaps that will help.