Here’s a non-paywalled link to an article published in the Washington Post a few days ago. It’s great to see this kind of thing getting some mainstream attention. Young children have not made an informed decision about whether they want their photos posted online.
I recently found out about Circles and was hoping to migrate friends and family to it, but it’s just too much of a learning curve to get things set up.
But, how are they making their revenue?
they charge $3 per month for 10GB of storage
That looks cool, I hadn’t heard of Circles before. I want to check it out now. I’m curious if it somehow keeps your data private from the server owner. That feels like the missing feature in most federated, privacy-focused social networks.
Side note: looks like it’s made by Futo; I hadn’t realized they were working on something like that. I’ve been using another one of their apps, Grayjay for almost all of my mobile Youtube viewing lately. It works great.
If it is made by anyone associated with Grayjay then I’m out
I haven’t heard anything bad about Grayjay before; what’s the issue with it?
Non free software pretending to be foss. It pisses me off and it can’t possibly be better than third party clients.
https://gitlab.futo.org/videostreaming/grayjay it is a paid program that is why it is not allowed to fork from it atleast without approval .Altough you can use it without paying
Exactly, it is not Foss
I mean it is not foss ,but more open than the youtube client app
I read through their EULA the other day, and it seems everything is E2EE so only the recipients can see the data, but they do have access to some stuff such as last login, usernames, etc.
I have a few friends using it, and it’s nice once you get it going, but adding/ finding friends is a bit of a headache in my experience