this post was submitted on 25 May 2026
35 points (94.9% liked)

Selfhosted

60093 readers
859 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts here are to be centered around self-hosting. Please ensure it is clear in your post how it relates to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or git here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require your active participation in selfhosting or related communities, or the post will be removed. No more than 10% of your posts or comments may be self-promotional, or your post will be removed. F/LOSS Exception: If your post is about a project that is completely open source & can be self-hosted in full without payment, your post is exempt from this rule as long as you continue to engage in comments.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I currently have a secondary pool (with raidz2) that I was originally going to use for my important documents, such as storage for Paperless-ngx, as raidz offers corruption detection and repair. The pool is encrypted.

However, I'm concerned about rebuild times (it's a pool of 4 22TB drives). Is btrfs a better choice for this use case, or should I just go with raidz like I originally planned?

Edit: I should have mentioned that I already have 4-3-2 backups configured - I'm primarily interested in the "self-healing" aspect of ZFS so that I don't have to recover from backups unless necessary, and to resolve corruption on the fly without me having to notice that a file is corrupt.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Why was this upvoted? It's AI slop giving definitions for acronyms that aren't in this thread and not even related to backups.

[–] Zeoic@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It isn't AI, you can take a look at the source code for it from the url it provides. Obviously the detection needs some tweaking, but extra acronyms in the list doesn’t really hurt anything when the other half are relevant.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Detection is completely broken because it finds terms that aren't anywhere in the thread, even as substrings.

AI isn't just LLM.

[–] Zeoic@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It wasnt even LLMs until the public took the term and changed it lol. Unless you are calling every algorithim ever made AI these days, this isnt AI.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Chess programs were AI. Expert systems which were regular logic were AI. Lisp was an AI language. Chat bots were AI.

This is a bot which makes it a type of AI and it's really inaccurate.

[–] Zeoic@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

uhm, no? Literally none of that was considered AI. Even chatbots, people weren't calling them AI until LLMs came around and were stuck in them. Lisp is a language USED for AI research, that doesn't make it AI itself.

This bot is most definitely not even close to what people consider AI

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

https://www.chessprogramming.org/Artificial_Intelligence

" the term 'artificial intelligence' was coined by John McCarthy in the proposal for the 1956 Dartmouth Conference [4] . In its beginning, Computer Chess was called the Drosophila of Artificial Intelligence. "

Expert Systems:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expert_system "In artificial intelligence (AI), an expert system is a computer system emulating the decision-making ability of a human expert.[1] "

Chatbots in AI:

https://liacademy.co.uk/the-story-of-eliza-the-ai-that-fooled-the-world/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Goostman

Lisp is a language USED for AI research, that doesn’t make it AI itself. "Lisp was an AI language."

I didn't say Lisp was AI. I said it was a language used for AI.

[–] meltedcheese@c.im 1 points 1 month ago

@Blue_Morpho @selfhosted Thanks for posting this. Some interesting articles that I didn’t know about. The Wikipedia article on expert systems needs some work. Apart from editing, the content is fine but incomplete, and the citations are not the best. I may take a crack at contributing, or I might take a nap. The 80s-90s were my prime years as a developer of intelligent systems, including but not limited to knowledge based expert systems. One of the most successful AI tools I co-invented was SHINE, still in use today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHINE/_Expert/_System

[–] meltedcheese@c.im 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

@Zeoic You are both correct. Chess was chosen as an early problem domain for work on first-order logic-based programming. That certainly was considered AI. People really interested in chess later abandoned logic programming in favor of brute-force, highly parallel special purpose hardware. That was not AI.

“Expert systems” (I hate that term) are application area of “Pattern-Directed Inference Systems” (PDIS). Rule-based systems are just one type of PDIS. For example, “Constraint Satisfaction” is another powerful AI technique often used in resource optimization and scheduling systems.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

You are both correct That certainly was considered AI.

Notice my use of past tense as well as Zeoic use of past tense. I said chess was AI as you stated. Zeoic denied that chess was ever AI.

[–] homik@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

At least this time it has a few terms that people might not know. Usually it just spasms obvious trivialities.