The Myth of "Extreme Privacy" and Why It's Hurting Your Workflow
For years, the online privacy discussion has been dominated by a vocal minority advocating for radical solutions: "de-Google," abandon all big tech, and self-host everything. I cannot imagine that they really do what they suggest for others. In the past months / years i tried many recommendations but in the end I have come to the conclusion that this not works for me at all.
Here is a list of my opinions to what interested / puzzled me the most when I read these recommendations:
The Problem with the "All-or-Nothing" Mentality
Many so-called "privacy pros" on the internet push for solutions that sound good on paper but fall apart in real-world application:
Workflow Disruption: Big tech companies invest heavily in creating seamless, integrated ecosystems. Moving away from these often means a fragmented workflow, constant compatibility issues, and a significant hit to your productivity. As one might say, "the workflow becomes a mess."
Hidden Costs: While some open-source alternatives are free, many robust privacy-focused services come with subscription fees. Replacing multiple services can quickly add up, making it "expensive." I was tired of basic features like the calendar view or notifications being paywalled.
Maturity & Features: Many niche privacy tools simply lack the polish, advanced features, and extensive support found in mainstream offerings. They can feel more like "demos" than production-ready tools.
Integration Headaches: Getting different privacy tools from various providers to work together smoothly is a huge challenge. The convenience of a unified ecosystem is often overlooked. Many times you need a 3rd provider that integrates them together and often the feature is paid.
The Self-Hosting Illusion: You'll hear claims about "owning your files" and "having control" when self-hosting. However, this conveniently ignores the immense technical expertise required for setup, and more critically, the 24/7 security and maintenance burden. Big tech companies have dedicated teams and billions in resources to secure data; a single individual running a server from home simply cannot compete. It's a full-time job to keep a self-hosted server secure, updated, and online. I, self-host many services by myself, but nothing is critical to me. Not the end of the world if some of them breaks.
Misplaced Trust in Small Providers: Even more alarming is the recommendation to use email or other critical services hosted by a "one-person company." While perhaps cheaper and marketed as "privacy-oriented," these tiny operations often lack the redundancy, security infrastructure, and legal recourse that even established privacy companies provide, let alone tech giants. Betting your main email, which connects to banks and medical institutions, on such a provider is a huge risk.
In the end:
First, you need to identify what you want to protect, and then apply countermeasures. For example, discussing what you will have for dinner does not require the same level of protection as sending a photo of your ID card via email. (The latter is stupid idea at all.)
You can check:
What Im reading: https://instapaper.com/p/maymeow