I recently wrote about duplicating iCloud Drive and iCloud Photos to a network-attached storage (NAS) system. This struck a nerve for folks who want to keep full-resolution backups of their Photos Library when they don’t have enough local storage. (That column was focused on not needing to keep your Mac powered up to handle these iCloud offline backups when the Mac was otherwise not in use.)

Readers wrote in or replied via social media with strategies and workarounds, as well as suggesting three software options that can let you sync iCloud Photos outside of Apple’s limitations. Meanwhile, a developer dropped a line to Jason about his new app, which can sync and archive iCloud Photos and files from iCloud Drive.

This feels like it shouldn’t work, but it does

Six Colors reader Mark has a rather elaborate process of keeping a local backup of his Photo Library without enabling full-resolution downloads for his primary account and startup volume.

He started by creating a Photos Backup macOS user. While logged into Photos Backup, he logged into his primary iCloud account, the same one he uses in his main macOS account. On that backup account, he set up an external 2 TB drive and, holding down Option while launching Photos, created his Photos Library on that drive.

He then used Photos > Settings > General to click Use as System Photo Library, which is required for iCloud Photos syncing. He also enabled Download Originals to this Mac in Photos > Settings > iCloud. Because he also has a Backblaze subscription, he enabled that service to back up his external 2 TB volume as an additional off-site protection.¹

This was all a one-time setup. Now, whenever he wants to perform his on-demand backups, Mark:

1. Attaches the 2 TB drive.
2. Logs into Photos Backup, which effectively starts the background syncing.
3. Uses Fast User Switching to return to his main account.

When he needs to leave his current location, he swaps back to the Photos Backup account, logs out of it (Apple Menu > Logout Account Name), unmounts the external volume, and he’s all set. I have not tested this, but Mark says it works, despite the complexity.²

Mark asked, “Am I crazy, or is this an OK solution?”

You’re not making an irrational decision, Mark! This is a perfectly reasonable way to achieve results with limited options.

The only failure point I can see is very unlikely:

• You’re on the road.
• You create, modify, or capture new images on devices you carry with you.
• Those devices are lost or destroyed after syncing.
• And your iCloud.com account becomes inaccessible, or the data stored there is corrupted.

Losing your device or having it damaged beyond recovery before syncing is a scenario you can’t avoid in the above method, anyway.

Image Capture and offloading

Reader Jonathan wrote in with a strategy he was using for media management because his family opted to pay for just 200 GB of iCloud+ storage. He also has a Backblaze subscription. Instead of keeping everything in the cloud, he would offload images from time to time:

Normally, I would log into iCloud on my Mac, go to Photos, and then download the latest files to my external hard drive that gets backed up to Backblaze. Is that the best method?

As we corresponded, I found that Jonathan was also curious about how he would copy files that were not downloaded locally if optimization were enabled.

I had not thought of this strategy, either, which can work:

• If optimization is off: You can move media from your Mac’s Photo Library at any time without preparation. The size of your library on your drive is within about 20% of the storage it takes up on iCloud.
• If optimization is on: You have to stay more on top of adding images and videos so you don’t accidentally fill up your iCloud storage.

To remove media from a Photos Library for an archiving operation like Jonathan employs:

1. Select the media in Photos for Mac.
2. Choose File > Export and one of the options described below.
3. Press Delete or choose Image > Delete Photos.³
4. This moves media to the Recently Deleted folder. After ensuring you have an additional backed-up copy, such as through Backblaze, Time Machine, or other methods, go to the Recently Deleted folder, click Delete All, and confirm deletion.

Which of the two Export submenu items should you opt for?

• Export X Photos: The export includes any modifications made in Photos and any metadata changes. The photo is converted to the format (Photo Kind) with any quality, color profile, and size options set. (Set to Full Size to preserve the original dimensions.)
• Export Unmodified Originals for X Photos: The original photo as imported or created will be exported, including in any supported RAW format, with all modifications ignored.

You can also make life easier on yourself by springing for PowerPhotos 3 ($40), a robust Photos Library management app. It can move items between libraries, split and merge libraries, and much more. The operation above would be far simpler: just hold down the Command key and drag the media from one library to another within the app.⁴

Jonathan has used Image Capture in the past to copy media from his iPhone to the external drive, although he had optimization turned on for the phone, so he wasn’t sure if he was copying full-resolution images or low-resolution thumbnails.

Apple will never copy low-resolution images through sharing or copying from the Photos app or using Image Capture. However, with optimization enabled, Image Capture shows only images and videos that are downloaded to that device. On my iPhone, for instance, Image Capture showed about 7,000 items available for copying; my Photos Library has nearly 70,000.

I command you to download and sync

There are four software solutions—two fully developed apps, two Python command-line packages—to back up an iCloud-linked Photos Library, even when optimization is enabled. Each has unique elements, including one of the Python tools working via a web connection. (I have not tried any of these packages or apps yet! And using Python for this is definitely on the edge of my personal geekiness level.) I also shout out Carbon Copy Cloner for iCloud Drive backups.

Here are the details. The three Mac apps are:

Photos Backup Anywhere (App Store, $10): Allows simple background backup of the Photos Library to any local destination, including NAS. The app temporarily downloads any newly synced images that aren’t stored locally. (Referral via reader Ted)

Parachute Backup (App Store, $5): A slightly more elaborate background Mac tool that lets you choose to backup either or both the Photos Library, including iCloud-stored images and iCloud Drive. (Newly released, referral via the developer, Eric Mann)

Carbon Copy Cloner ($50): If you’re looking just for iCloud Drive file backups, CCC can download iCloud-stored files and then dismiss the local copy after backup—usually. There are oceans of provisos, as Bombich Software explains in this support note.

If you’re into command lines, installing packages, reading documentation, and tweaking results, you may find that either of the two options above will let you back up or create different kinds of archived copies that hit the sweet spot for you:

iCloud Photos Downloader: Adam Bodner pointed me on Mastodon to iCloud Photos Downloader, a Python-based system that lets you perform various syncing and download operations, including copying media out of your library and then deleting it from iCloud Photos. The app communicates with Apple’s servers directly via a web connection. I’m not sure how they have made this all work, but it apparently does!⁵

OSXPhotos: Another Python-based option, also from a Mastodon colleague, comes via geraint, who pointed me to OSXPhotos. Rather than talking to iCloud.com, OSXPhotos routes its requests through the Photos app. However, it also has a remarkable range of capabilities, including detecting if an optimized image is in place and forcing a download with the correct options selected.

[Got a question for the column? You can email glenn@sixcolors.com or use /glenn in our subscriber-only Discord community.]

Devin Davies has a new app out, and it’s fantastic.

Cassette is in the App Store now. I was delighted when I saw it in TestFlight; I suspect the $7.99 to unlock all of its features will fly out of your hands.

Most people, after suffering consequences for a bad decision, will alter their future behavior to avoid a similar negative outcome. That's just common sense. But many social circles have that one friend who never seems to learn from those consequences, repeatedly self-sabotaging themselves with the same bad decisions. When it comes to especially destructive behaviors, like addictions, the consequences can be severe or downright tragic.

Why do they do this? Researchers at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) in Sydney, Australia, suggest that the core issue is that such people don't seem able to make a causal connection between their choices/behavior and the bad outcome, according to a new paper published in the journal Nature Communications Psychology. Nor are they able to integrate new knowledge into their decision-making process effectively to get better results. The results could lead to the development of new intervention strategies for gambling, drug, and alcohol addictions.

In 2023, UNSW neuroscientist Philip Jean-Richard-Dit-Bressel and colleagues designed an experimental video game to explore the issue of why certain people keep making the same bad choices despite suffering some form of punishment as a result. Participants played the interactive online game by clicking on one of two planets to "trade" with them; choosing the correct planet resulted in earning points.

For each click in two three-minute rounds, there was a 50 percent chance of choosing the correct planet and being rewarded with points. Then the researchers introduced a new element: clicking on one of the two planets would result in a pirate spaceship attacking 20 percent of the time and "stealing" one-fifth of a player's points. Selecting the other planet would result in a neutral spaceship 20 percent of the time, which did not attack or steal points.

The result was a very distinct split between those who figured out the game and stopped trading with the planet that produced the pirate spaceship, and those who did not. None of the participants enjoyed losing points to the attacking space pirates, but the researchers found that those who didn't change their playing strategy just couldn't make the connection between their behavior and the negative outcome.

The team identified three distinct behavioral phenotypes as a result of their experiments, representing the varying sensitivity of people to the adverse consequences (punishment) of their actions. Sensitives easily make the connection between their choices and the outcomes and can adapt their behavior to gain rewards and avoid punishment. Those who fail to make the link are either Unawares—people who, once given further information or clues, can re-evaluate and change their behavior—and Compulsives, i.e., people who still persist in making bad decisions despite suffering consequences.

Expanding the pool

This latest study builds on that earlier work, using a variation of the same experimental online game: After a few rounds, the researchers told all the subjects which planet was linked to which ship and also which ship triggered the point losses. "We never directly tell them what the best strategy is; we just reveal how each action leads to particular cues and 'attack' (the point-loss outcome)," Jean-Richard-dit-Bressel told Ars. "The reason being our studies have reliably shown all behavioral phenotypes, including Compulsives, are valuing cues and outcomes normally—and are totally aware of cue-attack relationships."

They also expanded the pool of participants beyond the Australian psychology students who were subjects in the 2023 study, sampling a general population from 24 countries of different ages, backgrounds, and experiences. And the researchers conducted six-month follow-ups in which subjects played the same game and were asked afterward whether they thought their choices and strategies were optimal.

The resulting phenotype breakdown was roughly similar to that of the 2023 study using just Australian students. About 26 percent were Sensitives, compared to 35 percent in the earlier study; 47 percent were Unawares, compared to 41 percent in 2023; and 27 percent were Compulsives, compared to 23 percent in the prior work. Those behavioral profiles remained unchanged even six months later. And the poor choices of the Compulsives could not be attributed simply to bad habits. The follow-up interviews showed that Compulsives were well aware of why they made their choices.

"The thing they seemed to specifically struggle with is seeing the link between their actions and its consequences," said Jean-Richard-dit-Bressel. "Basically, lots of people (our Unaware and Compulsive phenotypes) don't readily learn how their actions are the problem. They fail to recognize their agency over things they are highly motivated to avoid. So we give them the piece of the puzzle they seemed to be missing. Correspondingly, simply telling people how their actions lead to negative outcomes completely changes the behavior of most poor avoiders (Unawares), but not all (Compulsives)."

The researchers admit it's a bit perplexing that so many Compulsives still persisted in making bad choices, even after receiving new information. Is it that Compulsives simply don't believe what the researchers have told them?

"There's maybe a little of that going on," said Jean-Richard-dit-Bressel. "We ask them which actions they thought led to attacks and how they value each action, and they do strongly update their beliefs/valuations after the information reveal but not as much as the Unawares. So, Compulsives are a little less on board about the relative values of actions than other phenotypes. But we've shown this still doesn't fully account for how poorly they continue to avoid."

Better interventions needed

That's something the scientists are keen to explore further. "We showed Compulsives are very aware of how they're behaving, and also think their behavior is optimal—even though it really wasn't," said Jean-Richard-Dit-Bressel. "This suggested a key failure point is between recognizing the relative values of actions and forming a corresponding behavioral strategy."

Compulsives, in other words, exhibit deficits in cognitive-behavioral integration. "It's like they're thinking, 'Yeah, sure, Action A is good, Action B is bad... instead of a 50-50 split, I'll do 60-40,'" said Jean-Richard-dit-Bressel. "They really should be going cold turkey and doing 100-0. An implication of the trajectory analysis we did is that no amount of action belief updating would get them to behave optimally. We need a way to improve how those beliefs translate to perceptions of what's optimal."

What might be the underlying cause of this persistent bad decision-making? "We don't know, but the fact most people have the same profile at retest suggests this is a kind of trait: a stable cognitive-behavioral tendency," said Jean-Richard-dit-Bressel. "It could be related to genetics, but we don't have the data for that. We know there are environmental factors that contribute to the Compulsive profile: It's significantly more likely to emerge if the Action→Punisher relationship is infrequent, i.e., people will be poor avoiders and ignore helpful information if punishment probability is low, even if the punishment is severe. But this would be a case of trait-x-environment interactions. My neuroscientist side would love to explore what's going on in the brain and map what contributes to adaptive vs maladaptive decision-making."

This could help drive more effective public health messaging, which is typically focused on providing factual information about the risks of compulsive behaviors, whether we're talking about smoking, drinking, eating disorders, or gambling, for instance. The results of this study clearly demonstrate that for Compulsives, information is not sufficient to change their self-sabotaging behavior. One of Jean-Richard-dit-Bressel's lab members is now investigating better interventions for different profiles of decision-making, particularly for Compulsives.

"We definitely haven't cracked the case yet," said Jean-Richard-dit-Bressel. "There's a body of work that says early over late information intervention might do the trick, but we've shown Compulsives in low probability punishment scenarios are impervious to early information. If the issue is they can't infer the winning strategy with Action→Punisher, maybe explicitly outlining the winning strategy will make more of a difference. Or maybe some potent combination of prompts. We have ideas, but the proof will be in the pudding."

Then again, "It could be the case that no amount/type of information will be enough to really sway 'that friend,' and that something far more involved would be needed," he said. "But most people will have a least some response to helpful information, so my suggestion in the absence of a full answer is to just be a good friend and give that friend the info/advice they seem to need to hear (again). It won't go the distance for everyone, but it's cheap and you'd be surprised at how many people need what seems obvious pointed out to them."

Nature Communications Psychology, 2025. DOI: 10.1038/s44271-025-00284-9 (About DOIs).

Read full article

Comments

Marko Zivkovic (via Ric Ford, Reddit):

Apple announced its plans for a new opt-in Apple Intelligence training program. In essence, users can let Apple use content from their iPhone to train AI models. The training itself happens entirely on-device, and it incorporates a privacy-preserving method known as Differential Privacy.

The opt out seems to be via the Share iPhone & Watch Analytics button, which is the iOS equivalent of the Mac button that Mysk demonstrated Apple doesn’t actually honor.

In a social media post, developer Joachim outlined a new section of Apple's privacy notice in the Feedback application. When uploading an attachment as part of a bug report, such as a sysdiagnose file, users now need to give Apple consent to use the uploaded content for AI training.

Joachim Kurz:

After a long time, I filed another bug report using Feedback Assistant because the bug was bad enough that it’s worth the effort of writing it all down.

When uploading a sysdiagnose (or probably any other attachments) you get the usual privacy notice that there is likely a lot of private and other sensitive info in those log files. It’s not a great feeling but it is what it is with diagnostic data and I mostly trust the folks at Apple to treat it with respect and I trust the Logging system to redact the most serious bits.

However, when filing a feedback today a noticed a new addition to the privacy notice:

“By submitting, you […] agree that Apple may use your submission to [train] Apple Intelligence models and other machine learning models.”

WTF? No! I don’t want that. It’s extremely shitty behavior to a) even ask me this in this context where I entrust you with my sensitive data to help you fix your shit to b) hide it in the other privacy messaging stuff and to c) not give me any way to opt out except for not filing a bug report.

I could understand if the plan were for Apple to train some kind of internal AI model to help them triage bugs. Some developers might still have a problem with this because they don’t want their private data leaking out of the context of their particular bug. But when Apple says Apple Intelligence models that sure sounds like training the general models that will be available to the general public.

They probably have something in the terms of service that allows them to retroactively do this for previously submitted bugs, going back decades. Really, the only solution for keeping your data private is not to share data—even for internal use by the Privacy Company—that you don’t want to be shared. That is, only submit sysdiagnoses from a clean test Mac.

Joachim Kurz:

Also, there is a lot of sensitive information in a sysdiagnose. Taking it and throwing it into a big pile of data and compute and hoping something useful comes out of it is not treating my data with the respect it deserves.

On the topic of Radar, also see this thread by Max Seelemann:

Apple’s disrespect for the time and energy going into developer bug reports is making me sad. 🙁

Reported a performance issue with a sample app a couple of months ago. Of course, no feedback.

And now, Beta 2, they just ask if it’s still present and a sysdiagnose. They could have just launched the sample themselves and would have seen that NOTHING has changed. My guess is that no single developer at Apple has ever seen the issue and they just randomly ask about this out of procedure? Depressing.

Der Teilweise:

My model of the radar world is that they tag reports like “Finder icon position” or “… performance” and the devs add tags to their commits. Whenever a release contains a commit where the tags match, you automatically get those “please verify” mails.

Like “if we touch a part of the code that is closely related to a report, just ask the reporter if we fixed it as a side effect.”

I doubt this is the case because I’ve had bugs that did get fixed but where I never got this e-mail, even though really rough tagging would have made my bugs match. Or maybe some percentage of bugs just never get tagged.

Peter Steinberger:

The best is when they personally reach out via DM and then you make them an example and you NEVER hear back.

My favorite is when they do write back once and say that you can ask for updates on the bug, and then each year you ask for an update and never ever hear anything again.

Previously:

• macOS Tahoe 26 Developer Beta 2
• Apple Turnaround
• Soured
• Private GitHub Data Lingers in Copilot Training
• Martin Pilkington, RIP
• Feedback Feedback
• AI Companies Ignoring Robots.txt
• Apple Intelligence Training
• Updated Adobe Terms of Use
• Slack AI Privacy
• Tumblr and WordPress to Sell Users’ Data to Train AI Tools
• Reddit AI Training Data and IPO
• Zoom ToS Allowed Training AI on User Content With No Opt Out
• GrammarlyGO Training on User Content With Questionable Opt Out
• ChatGPT Is Ingesting Corporate Secrets
• Lawsuits Over Apple Analytics Switch

Introducing AudioKit Synth One J6, Your New Go-To Synth

Remember AudioKit Synth One? Millions of downloads, beloved by musicians and educators everywhere. The dedicated volunteers behind AudioKit have done it again. After nearly three years of hard work, we’re excited to share Synth One J6, a pro-quality synth app for iPhone and iPad with mobile AUv3 support. And yes, it’s totally free.

Synth One J6 is not just an app. It’s a creative instrument inspired by iconic analog synthesizers, built by people who believe music belongs to everyone.

Powered by ethical machine learning, Synth One J6 delivers lush pads, deep basses, classic keys, and vibrant leads that feel truly alive.

No ads. No subscriptions. No hidden fees. Just an exceptional instrument, freely given to inspire creativity everywhere.

We built Synth One J6 for people who are often left out. Many students and aspiring artists have mobile devices through schools or other programs, but those devices cannot install paid apps. We wanted to change that. With Synth One J6, anyone can explore, learn, and create music right away.

The interface is intuitive and welcoming. Each function has a dedicated slider or knob, making it simple for beginners and deep enough for pros. You’ll find arpeggiators, sequencers, lush reverbs, tape delays, warm choruses, and over 400 inspiring presets created by talented sound designers worldwide.

Built by volunteers who deeply value music education and accessibility, this app ensures everyone, from classrooms to community programs, can start creating music instantly.

In blind listening tests, Synth One J6 matched the sound quality of expensive desktop plugins, with many musicians even preferring its tone. But the real win is getting professional music tools into hands that have never had access before.

Please help us share it. Tell a teacher. Tell a student. Tell anyone who’s dreamed of experiencing a vintage synthesizer but lacked the opportunity.

Together, we can make sure that creativity is not limited by money, location, or background.

Because music belongs to everyone.

LEARN MORE:

Official Synth One J6 Webpage

Download:

Synth One J6 isn’t “freemium” or loaded with annoying in-app purchases. You download it. You play it. You create. End of story.