upvote
I would say you didn't get quite the right lesson from the fourth one. Rewritable devices are fine, but have (at least) one backup completely unplugged while you update another backup.
reply
>I did have backuos, but only only floppy and they didn't cover everything.

This made me remember the time during the 90s when I lost all my BASIC programs due to a hard disk crash, and seeing me sitting sad, my mother handed me a bunch of floppies and asked me to see if they contain something useful.

And turned out that it had all the programs! I took the backups and forgot about that. Apparently that is one of the hard things with backups. You need to track them...

reply
> a change to their terms surrounding "lifetime" unlikely noted storage

I had a similar experience with a Chinese cloud storage provider. They didn't even give a convenient way to export the data. And the client throttled download to like 100KB/s. I luckily was able to parallel download by running the client on several VMs...

> An errant script deleted the source content, but I'd also deleted the existing backup to free up space for the new backup.

Sounds like the backup workflow is fundamentally flawed... But I also have the fear that the backup program with root privileges can go off the rails... So I keep my backup job as simple as just running restic with some systemd restrictions.

reply
OneDrive...

So much fail in one single product.

reply
It is made by Microsoft, the experts in this domain.
reply
>I've been weary of using rewritable media for some time now as a consequence

I briefly considered using bluray disks as a backup for my photos and other critical docs. But getting a decent bluray burner seems not so easy these days with most production winding down. Next best thing looks like the "object lock" feature on object store services that prevents deleting objects for a certain time.

reply
I pretty much instantly wrote off physical media because I know I won't reliably move it to a separate location. If I'm going to have backups, I want ones that are not within fire/flood range of my computer.

In terms of preventing "oops" moments, I'm mainly relying on software (restic) for that, where I trust that (A) backups always append data rather than replacing and (B) it's logic works for marking which data to purge based on rules is accurate. [0]

[0] https://restic.readthedocs.io/en/stable/060_forget.html#remo...

reply
You want to make sure the append only is enforced by the hosting provider rather than duplicity. Your backups should be resistant to having an attacker on the system who can run arbitrary commands with duplicity.
reply
I bought a tape library for my backups, but that's probably an overkill.

On the other hand, LTO-5 drives are now pretty affordable. And each tape cartridge holds around 2Tb of data for about $20.

reply
Wait really ? That's a huge change from last time I looked. How much did this setup cost you?
reply
I kinda overdid it with a tape library (40 tapes capacity, LTO-9), but I'm using it for my company's AI model backups. _That_ setup was about $12k.

I had a smaller setup before, with a simple external LTO-5 drive. Used drives are now are about $300, and you can probably find them cheaper. And LTO-5 is the minimum realistic version, it's the first one that supports LTFS and it has reasonable tape capacity.

reply
> Next best thing looks like the "object lock" feature on object store services that prevents deleting objects for a certain time.

Lol, no. "As of today we are closed. Goodbye."

Especially considering what giving even a two weeks now considered "generous".

reply
This is for backups. The threat here is that random ware uses your backup script to delete/encrypt the backups too. With object lock the api key the script has can only add data.

The probability that the object store goes out of business at the exact time your own copy dies is insignificant.

reply
No object lock API would help you if the business where you rent the service is going out of... business. With all your data - and you are without.

Or even fancier - just changing the price for the egress.

reply
That only matters if it happens literally at the same time as a failure of your primary storage. If they increase the price you can just close your account and move the backup to another service.

The probability of a hard drive failure or ransomware at the same time as backblaze or aws going out of business is pretty much not worth thinking about.

The probability of an attacker using the api key in your backup script to destroy the backups is far more possible.

reply
For digital media we really need a good stable archival storage solution. Nothing on the market right now for ordinary people.
reply
There's plenty of backup services and cloud solutions. The article mentions Borg and Restic, others like Backblaze are more consumer friendly. Which needs do you have that aren't met by any of these tools?
reply
> backup services and cloud solutions

online backup should not be your primary method of backup, you're one billing, identity theft, financial issue, or health issue away from getting your backup nuked

do you have PBS clout? if not good luck https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2026/08/pbs-s...

reply
Online only is fine as an actual backup, presuming you have the primary in your control.

It shouldn’t be the only copy of the data that exists.

reply
Since we’re talking about it: anyone backing up their iCloud photos? If so, how?
reply
It's not iCloud Photos, in my case it's Google Photos. But I keep a copy of all my photos in a self-hosted instance of Immich [1], which I then back up to a Hetzner Storage Box using Backrest [2].

So I end up with 3 copies of all my photos, on 3 different providers (I mean... 2 different providers plus my homelab disk).

[1] https://immich.app/ [2] https://github.com/garethgeorge/backrest

reply
When I was using Ubuntu, I would plug my phone into my laptop and run this small script: https://gist.github.com/wheelercj/8cce112fc8ee55fd4858847a52...

It's mainly just rsync. When the phone was plugged in, the photos were accessible at a path like "/run/user/1000/gvfs/gphoto2:host=Apple_Inc._iPhone_abc123/".

Now I use Time Machine, but I still need to check whether it includes iCloud photos.

reply
Does this include all the image metadata and who knows what else?
reply
While I haven't tested for that myself, the script should keep pretty much everything including image metadata. I just made a small change so that it also keeps extended attributes in case any image-related metadata is there.

The script currently requires changing one or two folder paths at the top (more details in the script).

reply
I self-host Immich, and run the iPhone app to back up my photos. I used this guide [0] for the initial import.

[0]: https://github.com/immich-app/immich/discussions/21251

reply
I have a weird setup lol. I use a shared photos library with my partner (so that we have all family photos together) and have a MacBook Air that has Photos being download in raw quality and backups then via Time Machine on a Synology NAS. Plus, Synology photo sync on my iPhone (backing up on my NAS separately from Time Machine) AND Google Photos on my partner’s (syncing on Google Photos). Yes it’s horrible, just never had time to clean I up properly but I prefer to have them in multiple cloud locations and locally for now than optimise for having a clean setup.
reply
From iPhone into local machine through LocalSend or AirDrop, then your usual favorite backup pipeline.
reply
>I now shoot 2 cards simultaneously

A very lovely change over the last 8 years or so lol. I came up in film during the DSLR revolution. 5D2’s/7D’s/Rebels (i series) years.

8bit 420 nasty aliasing recording on single cards and praying baby. Magic lantern booted on those same SD’s!

reply
Magic Lantern was awesome. I still have raw video sequences I shot on a 5D mkiii
reply
Mainstream DSLRs with dual card slots came out 22 years ago.
reply
Sadly after 22 years, it's still considered a "high-end" feature. Even on $1600 Fujifilm x100vi, there is still single SD slot.
reply
I also have the same fuji. Digital cameras are still in the stone ages. I think Tony Northrup covered it well. Nothing has changed since digital cameras came to market, the workflow is still the same, copy files from a card to PC. They aren't connected to the internet, they don't have automatic syncing to cloud for backups or sharing, fuji doesn't even have a gps chip built in to store the location (only works if connected to a smartphone), they can't be locked via fingerprint scanner. It's all tech from 25 years ago.
reply
In some senses it's good. That feature list just says "use a smartphone then". No thank you. It's everything that a camera should not be.

GPS is useful, but not wifi. I don't need my camera becoming another IOT always online telemetry device. They're one of the few electronic devices built to last. Imagine needing fingerprint unlock on a camera, and for what? Prevent others from viewing your photos? Changing your settings? Also copy from card to pc is the best possible workflow. Imagine cameras like smartphone with no expandable storage.

Stop giving these people ideas! I am now very afraid they will listen to this guy since he actually has a follower base.

reply
> Also copy from card to pc is the best possible workflow

So turn off the camera, open the memory card slot cover which is flimsy 1mm prong, eject the card, insert it in the reader (if you have SD reader) or fiddle the microSD first from the convertor and then insert, copy, (insert microSD to SD convertor), open up slot cover, insert the card.

Surely beats just connecting the camera to the WiFi (which it does have anyway) and downloading through SMB. Suuure.

S9900 from 15 years ago had a built-in GPS receiver (and absolutely unneeded and never updated POI system). P1100 needs a smartphone for GPS for whatever reason - and app doesn't work 5 times from 5. But the latter is on me, I knew what I would get when I bought Nikon.

reply
why do you assume a functionality will obligatory be abused against the client?

pro camera manufacturers are not google or apple. Have we became that defeatist?

reply
Cameras had gps for a moment but they all dropped it because it sucks. GPS takes a long time to get a fix so unless you want to turn the camera on and sit for 5 minutes before taking the photo, it doesn’t work. Meanwhile an app on your phone can ping the current location to the camera for free. Your phone always has a location lock and it’s super power efficient at getting it.

And the rest of it is essentially features for a market that doesn’t exist. People buying cameras today don’t want to send straight to Facebook. They want to sort through raws, edit in Lightroom and then post from a laptop. The market for the features you want all moves to phones long ago.

Sony also has a bunch of the features you are asking for. It can connect to the internet and live sync files to an ftp server. It can even upload proxy videos so your editors can start work before you get back to copy the master copy over. Cameras are sold to prosumers and actual professionals now so the featureset reflects it.

reply
> People buying cameras today don’t want to send straight to Facebook.

Pretty sure that's the main point of Fuji camera, the output and built it filter is decent enough that you can upload to Social network without any editing.

reply
Windows OS is also stone age. There is no simple way to list all user data, or user edited system data for simple backup in readable format.

Btw X100F has Wi-Fi and automated file transfer to PC. But it is faster to transfer it via SD card.

reply
I would hope they have some feature for automatic backup to your phone over bluetooth or such today.
reply
Bluetooth is slow. The transport is 3Mbps at max, if you subtract all the headers from different layers, you may have like 1.5-2Mbps practical transfer speed.
reply
Sounds like the "or such" wins, but even with bluetooth speeds that means you're backing up 1-5 photos per minute and that helps a lot.
reply
And harm a lot too, you phone can't deep sleep since it has to wake up periodically to process data from bluetooth stack. Combined with slow transfer speed, that gonna eat your battery like nothing.
reply
Playing audio over bluetooth also wakes things periodically, but it uses almost no power. With a similarly competent design photo transfer should be very battery efficient.
reply
They do transfer, but it's not automatic.
reply
My Nikon ZF transfers to my phone through Nikon's SnapBridge app automatically.
reply
Oh, that's cool, kudos to Nikon, could be a good reason to switch over from Fuji.
reply
WiFi is a little faster I guess? In the primitive days people used the EyeFi.
reply
You would often not have wifi available, and you wouldn't want to have to type in wifi passwords to your camera all the time. But your phone will almost always be nearby and persistent bluetooth is easy.
reply
Wifi between your camera and the phone. Or your camera and a laptop in your bag or whatever...
reply
Problem is they have to disconnect from the current wifi ap to connect to the cameras ap which is inconvenient and means there can’t be a constant connection.

Wifi NAN could be used to solve this problem but I’ve not seen anything using it. Apple only just added support last year though.

reply