this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2026
82 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

83893 readers
4196 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://infosec.pub/post/45169245

DB = Dropbox, OD = Onedrive

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 2 hours ago (5 children)

That's not surprising with all of the data hoarders abusing the unlimited backups to store hundreds of terabytes.

I'm asking as a genuine question, where or how should people backup large datastores? Also what counts as too large? I've heard Backblaze doesn't cover NAS so i wouldn't be able to backup my 2TB zfs RAID, but like is that too much?

I want to do 3-2-1 for my homelab to preserve all pictures in my immich and the backups of my LXCs and VMs, but I'm just not sure how to go about it, and I was considering archives of those files + backblaze...

[–] ruuster13@lemmy.zip 33 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

How is that abuse? "Unlimited" is a pretty audacious plan to offer. Maybe Backblaze shouldn't offer something impossible.

[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 57 minutes ago (1 children)

The software only allows local drives to be backed up, but some people use workarounds to make it backup a large NAS or server.

[–] ruuster13@lemmy.zip 5 points 43 minutes ago

But that's not who is being targeted with the changes Backblaze has made. By silently excluding sync folders, they're casting a wide net and hoping it will catch those who use workarounds. It might, but in the process it reveals their comfort with deceptive business practices and harms users of the backup service who are not using workarounds.

Are they boosting their AI business in anticipation of breaking encryption and then training their models on everyone's data? That's what I would assume of a company I no longer trust.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 10 points 1 hour ago

Yeah, screw those people. I can't think of a single other reason a profit driven company would cut corners while storage prices rise due to AI companies.

[–] Goferking0@ttrpg.network 3 points 1 hour ago

Hard to say thats it if just having 2TB uploaded is enough to be considered in the top.

Especially if they've already started ignoring other cloud files in people's backups

[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, a few hundred outliers can really ruin it. People: have some self awareness and don’t be a douchebag.

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 1 points 4 minutes ago

You’re talking to the crowd where if it can be done, it should be done, and bragged about. Sadly.