114
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2025
114 points (98.3% liked)
Technology
39254 readers
626 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
It's mostly fluff kept for sentimental value. Worst case scenario (complete data loss) would be annoying, but I can deal with it.
That's one of the two things the 3-2-1 rule of thumb doesn't address - depending on the value of the data, you need more backups, or the backup might be overkill. (The other is what you're talking with smeg about, the reliability of each storage device in question.)
I do have an internal hard disk drive (coincidentally 2TB)*; theoretically I could store a third copy of the backup there, it's just ~15GiB of data anyway. However:
diff
of the most important bits of the data, bit rot is not an issueThat makes the benefit of a potential new backup in the HDD fairly low, in comparison with the bother (i.e. labour and opportunity cost) of keeping yet another backup.
*I don't recall how much I paid for it, but checking local hardware sites a new one would be 475 reals. Or roughly 75 euros... meh, if buying a new HDD might as well use it to increase my LAN.