Library Music Themes
General Sharing & Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Fuzi on October 29, 2022, 01:52:32 PM
-
Hi there, as I am running out of space on my machine I am considering options for migrating 2T to a safe place. Either I purchase a hard drive and become liable for yet another piece of physical equipment, or I enslave myself to a cloud service… which of these do you reckon is best, and which cloud storage do you like best? Thank you and enjoy the weekend! 8]
-
Howdy ! I have a Mega.nz account and pay a small amount each month for storage. I believe it comes with 2TB of storage but to be fair, I use it mostly to share albums to users here on LMT. I am toying with the idea and upgrading and uploading all my collection to the cloud. It will be more secure than having it as physical data on a hard drive.
The only problem I see is if your circumstances change and you don’t pay, you lose your account and more importantly lose your music collection.
-
Good point Tony, providers can also change their pricing anytime. Also once you choose one you're likely to stick to it, else you spend 2-3 days moving files someplace else… kinda like moving house with the inevitable anxiety of losing items arghhh :)
-
I am strongly against Cloud services.
The reason why I have a large library of everything (music, photos, movies) is that I don't want to be dependant on anyone or anything. There are just too many things that might go wrong. I often hear: "Why do you have your HD movies in MP4????" and I tell them that Netflix removed shows and AppleTV removed movies... I still have them here, on my disk. Ready at my fingertips.
Imagine, someone files a complaint against your account due to you sharing these tracks. Gone.
Or the service simply terminates because they can. Gone.
Changes in the EULA. Unsecure.
Changes in the world (e.g. an embargo. See Russia). Unavailable.
The ISPs might have a problem. Unavailable.
Connections might be busy. Unreliable.
Connections might be slow (see the "KPM CDs thread"...). Annoying.
The servers might have a problem. Unavailable.
Servers in the U.S.A. and some random guy (e.g. Trump) changes laws/rules for forgein users like me from Germany - Gone/Unreliable.
Your bank payment bounces for your storage. Gone/Unavailable.
Who to talk to / who is responsible in case of trouble? Unsecure.
A local hard drive - mine is stored at my parent's house - connected via SATA is fast, reliable, nobody can take the stuff away. Fair enough, you have to pick it up, but you don't back up your stuff daily anyways. Well, at least I guess so.
If you use it to share on LMT, it's fantastic. I see that. I am also massively profitting from it. But as a backup solution, the only one, nope, never. I know the chances are low, but they are there. I am paying with cash for example. "Who does that in 2022?". Well, Wirecard terminals stopped working, then many POS terminals had an old certificate here in Germany, causing lots of trouble. Was an eye-opener.
EDIT: My cousin uses a RAID10 system for his backups. But I do not want to have a large case with several HDs/SSDs standing about. My 5 TByte WD does it :)
-
Given this modern age, a beautiful day the cloud service starts to analyze your files and decides that it breaks their terms of service and you will lose everything anyway.
Better off with physical media. Just make use of optimization of the virtual space and redundancy of the physical media.
I backup my stuff in the *.wim format. I just rename and drag the same changing music folder over and over to the same file. This format keeps a single copy of duplicate files no matter the current file structure or naming scheme while only preserving the changes and keeping the file on a manageable size. This is called deduplication. After this process the file can be even more compressed in other format.
Files active on the computer can also be deduplicated. I keep a folder of favorite albums and tracks alongside the main folder (I hate playlists). The folders look like duplicates but all the files are hardlinked to the original files so they are not occupying hard drive space. You don't need to keep track of what is original and what is a hardlinked copy. The last "copy" to be deleted from the system will be the original. Look out for Hardlinks and Symbolic links.
-
Backup on two harddrives. ;)
-
Thanks all for the great insights and I'll look into this aliasing business @Bronic
-
Cloud services have their uses (like sharing files), but for me I am in complete agreement with Psyclon and others above who keep it local and physical for exactly the same reasons they stated. And always back-up, so if one HD goes kaput (rare but it happens to the best of us), you have that safety net, get another HD and keep at least one back-up/mirror of your media. I always tell people, if it's worth keeping, it's worth backing up. :)
-
You need off-site backup. The dedicated cloud backup services are not going to block your music- that's a non-issue.
Backup … or lose your music.
-
Why do you take both extremes? Either on-site or giving away my data to a private, off-shore/foreign company?
I have a hard disk stored at my mom's house, as stated above. That is "off-site", but no cloud servers involved.
My parents are certainly not remote servers stored in the U.S. at a private company that has in the EULA ToS that they can shut down my account for whatever reason? And yes, they can remove your files, as they are not in your hands. Look at all the DMCA claims that kill links quickly.. Why would you backup towards anything that is not in your hands? That sounds grossly negligent.
-
Psyclon: >>"Why do you take both extremes? Either on-site or giving away my data to a private, off-shore/foreign company?"<<
Mostly because you're neither "giving away data" – nor dealing with a foreign company – if you choose not to. I use Backblaze. If you live in a country without native BU services, then you would need to do your due diligence, as everyone needs to these days, with large swathes of our digital lives.
>>"I have a hard disk stored at my mom's house, as stated above. That is 'off-site', but no cloud servers involved."<<
If this is both steady and frequent, then you're set. For most people, it will be neither.
>>"Look at all the DMCA claims that kill links quickly."<<
That has zero to do with private, personal backup.
>>"That sounds grossly negligent."<<
In my view, taking shortcuts with backup is what leads to problems, as we recently saw here.
-
A whopping-great external hard-disk would be the order of the day, for me at least. I've never really trusted cloud websites as they could, technically, cut you off from your archive at any time they like, by you not having quite adhered to some of their rules stringently. It shouldn't matter, but there's always that off-change that it might happen. I invested in a 6Tb hard-disk a number of years ago, which contains all kind of audio/visual archives. I have approximately 1Tb left on it. I want to try and archive that archive, (as in save everything into ZIP or RAR files), and keep them on a separate drive, just in case something happens to the main one, but that's proving to be an arduous and time-consuming task. Plus, the hard disk in question isn't really that big. The answer would be to get a bigger hard disk and transfer everything across, then use the old hard disk as the second archive. But, having looked at the external hard-disks on offer, (and picked myself up off the floor when I've seen the price tag), I can't see that happening any time soon.
-
TeraBox can have 1TB capacity space for free, which can be uploaded and downloaded. However, it may require a mobile phone number to register,
It seems that it can also be registered with Google or Facebook account.
-
If you want to buy a mobile hard disk, you must distinguish between SMR and PMR before you buy it. These are two kinds of mechanical mobile hard disks with different structures. SMR has a short life, poor stability and performance. Be sure to buy a vertical (PMR) traditional hard disk.
The manufacturer will not mark the structure of the hard disk specially, but the buyer needs to confirm it himself, because SMR is the product of the manufacturer cutting corners, in order to reduce the cost.
-
I'm with John_Fred re putting my trust (and entire music collection) in the hands of a cloud service. I have a 4TB hard drive which is half full and backed up on my Mac via Time Machine. In addition I periodically make a further back-up on another hard drive. I have full control over my music collection and with, effectively, two back-ups the only thing to knock it out would be an EMF for when the bomb drops. But then I'll revert to my wind-up gramophone and 78s!
-
Backup on two harddrives. ;)
This right here. That's exactly what I started doing ever since the major external crash I had in 2013 where I lost a ton of stuff that i'll never get back. I also agree with the cloud thing being a bad idea...that's never guaranteed to be a lifetime thing for the reasons someone already stated.
-
Backup on two harddrives. ;)
This right here. That's exactly what I started doing ever since the major external crash I had in 2013 where I lost a ton of stuff that i'll never get back. I also agree with the cloud thing being a bad idea...that's never guaranteed to be a lifetime thing for the reasons someone already stated.
Same here!
-
Two external drives, +backup to DVD, +cloud storage. That's my setup.
I just lost my second ext drive last month, the one I use for Time Machine. This prompted me to re-consider the cloud option as an extra level of security. And I'd like to thank kpmhill for his recommendations.
-
There seems to be a lot of misconceptions about cloud backup services.
None of the dedicated/personal cloud backup services are vulnerable to copyright takedowns, because they are not used for public-facing shares, like Mega, etc.
Dedicated cloud backup services are completely inaccessible for anyone who doesn't have the cryptographically-protected, personal credentials.
There are no "rules" to follow for what is stored. Your files are protected and private/inaccesible to other parties (usually incl. the backup company itself) as long as you pay for the service. If a backup company went out of business, that would be an issue, but you should have time to deal with that anyway, through your local backups, worst-case.
Also, you're never putting your entire trust in the hands of the backup company. By definition, all viable backup solutions have multiple components, that allow for failure of one backup mechanism, because you always have (at least) one complete fallback mechanism, within the window of vulnerability. Lacking that, you're not actually backed up.
Everyone will eventually find their personal backup solution (one hopes), but let's not spread bad information about supposed vulnerability of online backups.
-
The very definition of them being "online" (read as: Off-site) is a reason to put them far back in the list of options or als tertiary solutions. Because "on-line" means many men-in-the-middle situations. And even as KPMHILL above says, if the files are not accessible by copyright holders or investigators, there are still the terms of services. These are private companies. And I am very, VERY sure that no cloud service ever will give you a life-time, 100% guarantee that your files are accessible or that your account is there forever. And then? Sue them? "Sorry, read 14.1.2 - "We can close your account at our discretion without any further reason". You signed and agreed these terms. K, thanks, bye~~." These files are gone.
The "bad information" I brought up are all valid, everyday problems. Connectivity, accessibility, (un)responsibility of the company, iffy terms of service, man-in-the-middle (bank payments may bounce, tech support simply does not respond,...) laws and embargos... So many Damocle's Swords hovering over my files.. No, thanks. What is a cloud service doing? Giving me storage, with many catches. I can also buy storage (HDD, SD, thumb drives), with no catches.
For sharing, or for tertiary backup - good. I also stated that before. But that does not make all the drawbacks on cloud storage services go away.
-
The "bad information" I brought up are all valid, everyday problems.
In that case, please cite a couple real-world examples for your claims.
I’ll wait.
-
I seem to remember a similar discussion a while ago (which probably went down the drain in the crash last September).
I usually avoid the argument from authority, but here it may be appropriate for once. I am a computer scientist specialising in the areas of reliability, safety and accident prevention in connection with computer-controlled technical systems. Think of electric power steerings, aircraft control, power stations, robots, medical equipment, databases and the like. That said ...
Never rely on "cloud" services safeguarding your data. Ever.
The notion that these services will not disappoint you -- for whatever reason: an attack, incompetence, change of management or when they simply fold -- is, ermmm ...
Cute. Let's say it's cute.
This does not mean one should not use cloud services at all. They can be very useful in certain scenarios. But using them as a safety measure for personal data, without additional local measures (see below), must be discouraged.
Every day, companies lose vital data through internet-based attacks. This includes big corporations and governmental agencies. Frequently, large sums of money are paid by management to regain possession of their data, if they are not lost altogether. Companies are going out of business because of it. We do not usually hear about these incidents in the news because they do not become known or are not reported. They only become known to the public if they cannot be kept under wraps.
So, these are the examples. Their number is legion.
What can be done instead, or additionally?
(1) Always use a local RAID with redundance for your important data. Do not use single hard drives. If you do, your data are as good as gone. It may happen in five years or it may happen tomorrow. It is remarkable how many people still use nothing but single discs for their data. They are going to regret it. I did.
(2) If possible, have an additional backup (which can be on single drives because you already have a RAID).
(3) Do not use DVDs or -- worse -- CDs as a backup solution. They degrade quickly, are slow to read from and still slower to write to, and they are also much more expensive than hard drives.
(4) For editable documents use a versioning system, with the repository located on the RAID. I recommend Subversion (on Windows it can be used together with TortoiseSVN for greater convenience). There is also Git, but if you aren't a software developer you will not need the additional complexity.
Only after you've observed points 1 to 3 should you be considering cloud services as a fallback. Not before. Avoid "free" or very cheap offers. Read the terms and conditions attentively.
What does my own desktop system (at home) look like?
-- I have a standard desktop computer with two internal SSD, one for the operating system, one for data. It is necessary that the OS should reside on its own drive, in this way the data are not affected if the OS fucks up, I cannot access the drive anymore and need to make a clean install. IMPORTANT: Windows needs to be told to move the standard folders (Desktop, Documents, Pictures, Videos etc) to the data drive, otherwise they will remain on the OS drive, which is bad. Some programs, Outlook for example, also need to be explicitly configured so that their database is on the data drive. Programs themselves are installed on the OS drive (usually called C: if it's Windows).
-- I use a NAS that is configured as RAID 5 for data storage and is connected through WLAN via the router to the computer. With 4 x 4TB discs this gives me about 11 TB of storage space that is immune to the failure of one disc. The NAS is inaccessible from the internet except for the manufacturer to update the operating system from time to time.
-- I bought four discs of the same model at four different shops. In this way the likelihood of getting discs that were produced on the same day, by the same people, using the same machine -- potentially making the same mistakes -- is reduced, which in turn reduces the likelihood of them failing together. RAID 5 cannot tolerate the simultaneous failure of two discs. In the future, I will probably switch to a RAID 6 system. RAID 6 does tolerate the failure of two discs but is also more expensive. Before the RAID 5 system I had a NAS with RAID 1 and two discs, which was cheaper. This is a good entry level for RAID beginners I think.
-- Important folders (Desktop, Documents, Pictures, but not Downloads) on the data drive are configured as working copies of the repository on the NAS. If I have edited something, say, a Word document or a PDF, I simply commit it to the repository. In this way, it's safely stored in the RAID, and I still have a working copy on the internal data drive that in effect is the backup.
-- The main music storage is on the NAS, and there is a dedicated external HDD, directly connected to the computer with USB, that backs up my music. Whenver I have new music I put it on the NAS and then run Robocopy to mirror the audio folders there to the HDD backup. Usually I play music from the backup, not from the NAS.
-- Videos and other less important files that I rarely need only reside on the NAS, I do not back them up. Files that I do not mind to lose at all remain just on the internal drives of the computer.
I hope these explanations are perspicuous. If something has remained unclear, don't hesitate to ask.
-
Never rely on "cloud" services safeguarding your data. Ever.
You're making a fundamental conceptual error.
The general philosophy/raison d'être of backup is that you don't "rely" on one particular system … for anything. And the idea that cloud services must always disappoint … is risible.
You *are* correct in saying that "Every day, companies lose vital data through internet-based attacks." What you're missing is that these attacks also target local/enterprise-hosted storage, just as they might target 3rd-party storage online. In fact, more often. You don’t see script kiddies going after AWS or Azure, and you can’t buy pre-packaged ransomware exploits for them either. There's nothing magically secure about local storage — especially when it's maintained by non-professionals.
I don't see you mentioning off-site backup, either. Perhaps I missed something. I think the idea that one's physical facility is not subject to fire, flood, theft, etc. would have to be, to use your term … “cute.”