I have many fears as a mother. My kindergarten-age
daughter recently learned a game on the school bus called “Truth or Force”. My
youngest refuses to eat almost anything but Kraft Mac & Cheese. Added to
the list this year, alongside outside influences and health concerns, is the
possibility that my daughters could inadvertently lock me out of my digital
life.
اضافة اعلان
That is what happened to a mother in Colorado whose
nine-year-old son used her old smartphone to stream himself naked on YouTube,
and a father in San Francisco whose Google account was disabled and deleted because
he took naked photos of his toddler for the doctor.
I reported on their experiences for The New York Times, and as I
talked to these parents, who were stunned and bereft at the loss of their
emails, photos, videos, contacts, and important documents spanning decades, I
realized I was similarly at risk.
I am “cloud-complacent,” keeping my most important digital
information not on a hard drive at home but in the huge digital basement
provided via technology companies’ servers. Google gives all users 15 gigabytes
free, one-quarter of what comes standard on an Android phone, and I have not
managed to max it out in 18 years of using the company’s many services.
I did fill up Apple’s free 5GB, so I now pay $9.99 a month for
additional iCloud storage space. Meta has no max; like scrolling on Instagram,
the allowed space is infinite.
If I were suddenly cut off from any of these services, the data
loss would be professionally and personally devastating.
As a child of the 1980s, I used to have physical constraints on
how many photos, journals, VHS tapes, and notes passed in seventh grade that I
could reasonably keep. But the immense expanse and relatively cheap rent of the
so-called cloud has made me a data hoarder. Heading into 2023, I set out to
excavate everything I was storing on every service, and find somewhere to save
it that I had control over. As I grappled with all the gigabytes, my concern
morphed from losing it all to figuring out what was actually worth saving.
Data harvestingI find nearly 100 photos from one November night 15 years ago,
out with my family at a Tampa Bay Lightning game when my sisters and I were
home for the holidays. We were tailgating with a mini-keg of Heineken. My dad
is posing by the car, making a funny face at the ridiculousness of a parking
garage party. Then, we were posing in the stadium with the hockey rink in the
background, toasting with a stranger we sat next to. Had we bonded with him
during an especially close third period? The metadata in the Google Photos JPG
file did not say.
The photos transported me back to a tremendously fun evening
that I had all but forgotten. Yet I wondered how there could be so many photos
from just one night. How do I decide which to keep and which to get rid of?
This kind of data explosion is a result of economics, said
Brewster Kahle, founder of the Internet Archive, a nonprofit group based in San
Francisco that saves copies of websites and digitizes books and television
shows. Taking a photo used to be expensive because it involved film that needed
to be developed.
“It cost a dollar every time you hit a shutter,” Kahle said.
“That’s no longer the case so we hit the shutter all the time and keep way, way
too much.”
I had captured the 2007 evening in Tampa, Florida,
pre-smartphone on a digital Canon camera that had a relatively small memory
card that I regularly emptied into Google Photos. I found more than 4,000 other
photos there, along with 10 gigabytes of data from Blogger, Gmail, Google Chat,
and Google Search, when I requested a copy of the data in my account using a
Google tool called Takeout.
I just pressed a button and a couple of days later got my data
in a three-file chunk, which was great, although some of it, including all my
emails, was not human-readable. Instead, it came in a form that needed to be
uploaded to another service or Google account.
According to a company spokesperson, 50 million people a year
use Takeout to download their data from 80 Google products, with 400 billion
files exported in 2021. These people may have had plans to move to a different
service, simply wanted their own copy or were preserving what they had on
Google before deleting it from the company’s servers.
Takeout was created in 2011 by a group of Google engineers who
called themselves the Data Liberation Front. Brian Fitzpatrick, a former Google
employee in Chicago who led the team, said he thought it was important that the
company’s users had an easy “off ramp” to leave Google and take their data
elsewhere. But Fitzpatrick said he worried that when people stored their
digital belongings on a company’s server, they “don’t think about it or care
about it”.
Some of my data landlords were more accommodating than others.
Twitter,
Facebook, and Instagram offered Takeout-like tools, while Apple had a
more complicated data transfer process that involved voluminous instructions
and a USB cable.
The amount of data I eventually pulled down was staggering,
including more than 30,000 photos, 2,000 videos, 22,000 Twitter posts, 57,000
emails, 15,000 pages of old Google chats and 16,000 pages of Google searches
going back to 2011.
The missingThe trove of data brought forgotten episodes of my life back in
vivid color. A blurry photo of my best friend’s husband with a tiny baby
strapped to his chest, standing in front of a wall-size Beetle juice an face,
made me recall a long-ago outing to a Tim Burton exhibit at a museum in Los
Angeles.
I do not remember what I learned about the gothic filmmaker, but
I do remember my friends’ horror when their weeks-old son, now 11, had a
blowout and they had to beg a comically oversize diaper from a stranger.
The granularity of what was in my digital archive accentuated
the parts of my life that were missing entirely: emails from college in a
university-provided account that I hadn’t thought to migrate; photos and videos
I took on an Android phone that I backed up to an external hard drive that has
since disappeared; and stories I had written in journalism school for publications
that no longer exist. They were as lost to me as the confessional journal I
once left in the seatback of a plane. The idea that information, once
digitized, will stick around forever is flawed.
Margot Note, an archivist, said members of her profession
thought a lot about the accessibility of the medium on which data was stored,
given the challenge of recovering videos from older formats such as DVDs, VHS
tapes, and reel film. Note asks the kinds of questions most of us do not: Will
there be the right software or hardware to open all our digital files many
years from now? With something called “bit rot” — the degradation of a digital
file overtime — the files may not be in good shape.
Individuals and institutions think that when they digitize material
it will be safe, she said. “But digital files can be more fragile than physical
ones.”
Where to put itOnce I assembled my data Frankenstein, I had to decide where to
put it. More than a decade ago, pre-cloud complacency, I would regularly back
my stuff up to a hard drive that I probably bought at Best Buy. Digital
self-storage has gotten more complex as I discovered when I visited the
Data Hoarder subreddit. Posts there with technical advice for the best home setup
were jargon-filled to the point of incomprehension for a newbie. A sample post:
“Started with single bay Synology Nas and recently built a 16TB unRAID server on
a xeon 1230. Very happy with result.”
I felt as if I had landed on an alien planet, so I turned
instead to professional archivists and tech-savvy friends. They recommended two
$299 12-terabyte hard drives, one of which should have ample room for what I
have now and what I will create in the future, and another to mirror the first,
as well as a $249 NAS, or network-attached storage system, to connect to my
home router, so I could access the files remotely and monitor the health of the
drives.
Getting all your data and figuring out how to securely store it
is cumbersome, complicated and costly. There is a reason most people ignore all
their stuff in the cloud.
What to keepI noticed a philosophical divide among the archivists I spoke
with. Digital archivists were committed to keeping everything with
the mentality that you never know what you might want one day, while
professional archivists who worked with family and institutional collections
said it was important to pare down to make an archive manageable for people who
look at it in the future.
Bob Clark, the director of archives at the Rockefeller Archive
Center, said that the general rule of thumb in his profession was that less
than 5 percent of the material in a collection was worth saving. He faulted the
technology companies for offering too much storage space, eliminating the need
for deliberating over what we keep.
“They’ve made it so easy that they have turned us into
unintentional data hoarders,” he said.
The companies try, occasionally, to play the role of memory
miner, surfacing moments that they think should be meaningful, probably aiming
to increase my engagement with their platform or inspire brand loyalty. But
their algorithmic archivists inadvertently highlight the value of human
curation.
“I don’t think we can simply rely on the algorithms to help you
decide what’s important or not,” Clark said. “There need to be points of human
intervention and judgment involved.”
Paring it downRather than just keeping a full digital copy of everything, I
decided to take the archivists’ advice and pare it down somewhat, a process the
professionals call appraisal. An easy place to start was the screenshots: the
QR codes for flights long ago boarded, privacy agreements I had to click to use
an app, emails that were best forwarded to my husband via text and a message
from Words With Friends that “nutjob” was not an acceptable word.
There were some clear keepers: a selfie I took in Beijing with
artist Ai Weiwei in April 2015; a video of my eldest daughter’s first steps in
December 2017; and a shot of me on a camel in front of the Giza Pyramids in
2007, a photo I had purposely staged to recreate one we had on my childhood
refrigerator of my great-grandmother in the same place doing the same thing,
but with a disgruntled expression on her face.
Then there is the stuff I’m ambivalent about, like the many
photos with long-ago exes, which for now I’ll continue to hoard given that I’m
still on good terms with them and I’m not going to fill up 12 terabytes any
time soon.
There was also a lot of “data exhaust,” as security technologist
Matt Mitchell calls it, a polite term for the record of my life rendered in
Google searches, from a 2011 query for karaoke bars in Washington to a more
recent search for the closest Chuck E. Cheese. I will not keep those on my
personal hard drive, and I may take the step of deleting them from Google’s
servers, which the company makes possible, because their embarrassment
potential is higher than their archival value.
Mitchell said super hoarders should pare down, not to make
memories easier to find, but to eliminate data that could come back to bite
them.
“You need to let go because you can’t get hacked if there’s
nothing to hack,” said Mitchell, the founder of Crypto Harlem, a cybersecurity
education nonprofit. “It’s only when you’re storing too much that you run into
the worst of these problems.”
Inactive accountsRight now, it is cheap to hoard all this data in the cloud.
“The cost of storage long term continues to fall,” said George
Blood, who runs a business outside Philadelphia digitizing information from
obsolete media, creating 10 terabytes of data per day, on average. “They may
charge you more for the cost of the electricity — spinning the disk your data
is on — than the storage itself.”
Big technology companies do not often prompt people to minimize
their data footprints, until, that is, they near the end of their free storage
space. That is when companies force them to decide whether to move to the paid
plans. There are signs, though, that the companies do not want to hold on to
our data forever: Most have policies allowing them to delete accounts that are
inactive for a year or more.
Aware of the potential value of data left behind by those who
euphemistically go “inactive,” Apple recently introduced a legacy contact
feature, to designate a person who can access an Apple account after the
owner’s death. Google has long had a similar tool, prosaically called inactive
account manager. Facebook created legacy contacts in 2015 to look after
accounts that have been
memorialized.
And that really is the ultimate question around personal
archives: What becomes of them after we die? By keeping so much, more than we
want to sort through, which is almost certainly more than anyone else wants to
sort through on our behalf, we may leave behind less than previous generations
because our accounts will go inactive and be deleted. Our personal clouds may
grow so vast that no one will ever go through them, and all the bits and bytes
could end up just blowing away.
Read more Lifestyle
Jordan News