Only fools rely solely on "the cloud."

In article , MC
wrote:


Besides, it is irrelevant what the document was. Any physical document
(could easily have been an old shopping list) that has survived 800
years has lasted a lot longer than any digital document has, so far.

only because digital didn't exist 800 years ago.

Only time will tell how volatile digital storage actually is (or was,
if someone is reading this 800 years from now).

digital is not volatile.






the more copies there are, the closer to zero it is.

Never zero though

nothing is zero, not even for the magna carta.

one match and it's gone.

One hacker, one fire, one hurricane, one bomb, one press of the delete
button etc... and we have a corrupt data or no data at all.

in which case, you retrieve a copy from a backup. no big deal.

since a copy is 100% identical to what was deleted, nothing is lost.

if it's in the cloud, then that happens without you even noticing.

Whether it is analogue, digital or just plain primative, any type of
data/recording is prone to destruction in the right circumstance.

with digital, the 'right circumstances' are *very* unlikely, on the
order of total destruction of the planet.

In article , Ken Hart
wrote:

the physical copies have degraded and continue to degrade.

But the degradation has been slow, and will continue to be slow. The
Magna Carta is over 800 years old. The degradation has been "graceful",
not total. At some point in time, the original documents will have
degraded to dust in the wind (not to be confused with the 1977 song by
Kansas).

had it been digital there would be *no* degradation.

But it's been over 800 years, and the oldest known working
Seagate hard drive was made in 1983; let's see how well it works 800
years from now.

that doesn't matter.



digital does not degrade nor are there generational losses. every copy
is exactly the same as the original.

Digital memory does degrade. The moving parts in hard drives wear out.
The magnetic data on the disk proper degrades to the point where it
cannot be read reliably. The charges (binary data) on RAM/ROM chips
deteriorate. If the original can be read, it can be exactly copied.
Depending on the way the data is stored, a couple of 'decayed' bits may
be minor or fatal.

digital data does not degrade.

the *medium* on which it's stored might, but that just means using a
copy, which will be 100% bit for bit identical to the original.

replace the dead drive and it will automatically resync, and if it's a
raid, there won't even be any down time.

cloud services do that *for* you, and with data stored in multiple data
centers across the planet, you'll never notice a problem.

with physical items, there is only *one* original.

any 'backup' copy has at least a generation loss, possibly more, so
it's not actually a backup, plus it's a pain in the ass to make copies
so few people bother.

copies of analog vhs tapes looked like ****, and for a copy of a copy,
they were unwatchable. if the vcr ate the original tape while making a
copy, you're ****ed.

copies of digital video (or anything else) is indistinguishable from
the original because it's 100% bit for bit identical.



also, myspace never claimed it was a cloud backup service.

You know Tom Anderson personally?

he's everyone's friend.

On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 21:57:23 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Bill W
wrote:

On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 15:39:18 -0000 (UTC), arlen holder
wrote:

Hi Bill W,

FACT + LOGIC

THANK YOU Bill W for being an adult in:
a. First agreeing with obvious fact, and then, in
b. Asking for a logical assessment of that fact.

I can see that you can proceed to the stage of logical assessment of fact!

While nospam is a well-known Apple Apologist, the mere fact that you agreed
with and _comprehended_ the simple well-cited well-reported well-known
public facts, instantly _distinguishes_ you apart from the Apple Apologists
like nospam (who simply deny all facts outright that they don't like).
o What key trait distinguishes Apple Apologists from normal adults?

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!to...one/yyNyGsFKPl
Q

Normally, with Apple Apologists, they simply deny all facts out of hand
they don't like, which they do, I think, because by doing so, it prevents
any adult logical discussion of those facts (as witnessed by almost
everything nospam says).

The fact you, Bill, and most other adults would instantly agree with the
simple, trivial, and obvious fact that the photos were stolen from "the
cloud", allows us to _have_ an adult discourse, Bill W, where we can then
discuss the logical ramifications of that obvious public fact.

Here's my take on a logical assessment of the facts we agree upon.

FACT:
o The photos were "on" the cloud, and hence, were stolen "from" the cloud.
LOGIC:
o How should we store photos so that they are not stolen?

Since this is r.p.d, I will limit my discussion to photos, although I will
note that the subsequent post by nospam about a stolen Secret Service
laptop easily fits the _same_ logical assessment.

I don't claim to be an expert, so my answer to your logical question, Bill,
is what "I" would do if I "needed" to store my photos so that they were
accessible to me.

First off, Bill, you may note that I strive to store _nothing_ on the cloud!

I simply pass all my databases, encrypted if necessary, on my own LAN
o What are some key common databases you often SHARE between your desktop &
mobile devices?

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc...GVriYsI/0frYPk
C3AQAJ

You'll note that means that *I keep my CALENDER & CONTACTS off the cloud*:
o Can we come up with a free, ad free, cloud-free calendaring system that
works with Windows and Linux and mobile devices?
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.os.linux/ydQ9sG-8Y08/pBRXk7UEEgAJ

And *I keep my data (including pictures) off the cloud*:
o Does the iTunes app store have any free disk encryption container
software?

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc...dg_zvDI/tYfHGd
pTBAAJ

Notice that I would do (essentially) what the Secret Service did with the
stolen laptop that nospam speaks about.

If I was forced at gun point to put my naked pictures on the cloud like
those actresses did, I would simply slide them into my encryption
container, using the strong encryption passwords provided by my encryption
software.

As you're well aware, encryption container software is free on all
platforms other than on iOS, so you can tests them out at any time.
o Best freeware for portable encrypted file containers

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp...uI/4Uut0HGrBgA
J

Here's my argument, in a nutshell, based on a logical assessment of fact:
1. Personally, I strive to store nothing on the cloud
2. But it's work to do that (see my threads referencing the effort)
3. There's no good reason (IMHO) to store Calendar data on the cloud
4. There's no good reason (IMHO) to store Contact data on the cloud
5. There's no good reason (IMHO) to store passwd data on the cloud
6. The main thing left (IMHO) is storing PERSONAL data on the cloud.
7. For personal data, I'd use encrypted containers to store on the cloud.
Note: That's (essentially) what the Secret Service did with that laptop.

Notice that encrypted container software is free on all platforms other
than on iOS, so the barrier to adoption is very low. You can maintain the
master encrypted container on any platform, and then pass it about to the
other platforms. Or you can merge into any encrypted container, so that
there is no single master copy, but working copies as needed.

HINT: I use encrypted containers all the time and have been doing so for as
long as I can remember, where it's a time-honored sensible approach (IMHO).

You are using a lot of words to say very little.

and that's one of his shorter rants.

I use true/vera
crypt, and I see no reason you could not store a TC container on
iCloud. I just don't understand the point you are trying to make.

neither does he.

No
place is 100% safe storage, especially for careless people. It really
sounds like you are just bashing Apple - a company I have no real
interest in right now, when they are no riskier than anyone else. We
are all free to store wherever we want, by whatever method we want.
The smart ones will do some research, and store with multiple
locations/methods that meet their minimum comfort level. That's really
all you can do. You just live with the level of risk you choose,
balanced with the effort level you choose. Why all the words?

because: troll.

Yeah, all of the traits are there. I've seen him on another group, and
it was just as bad.

On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 21:31:12 -0500, Bill W wrote:

Yeah, all of the traits are there. I've seen him on another group, and
it was just as bad.

Hi Bill W,

FACT + LOGIC

I used adult sentient logic to answer your question.
o You responded with childish insults, Bill.

You added _zero_ on-topic technical value to this thread, Bill.
o That's a fact.

Then you asked a question about what working solution I'd propose, Bill.
o I answered that technical question in detail, Bill.

My suggestion is to use a cross platform solution that works on ALL
devices.
o It also works on your private LAN; or on the cloud.

Your response, in return, was insults.
o And, when I mentioned cross platform, all you can think of, is Apple?

WTF Bill?

What's your logical thought process Bill? (Do you think logically?)
o Nothing you've written contains any logical thought process, Bill.

Nothing.

What on earth does Apple have to do with the answer to the question?
o It's as if you know absolutely nothing that Apple didn't feed you.

Please remember in your response two salient facts before insulting:
1. You provided 0 added value (actually negative value with your insults)
2. At least I provided a general purpose working cross platform solution.

I used adult sentient logic to answer your question.
o You responded with childish insults, Bill.

On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 21:57:23 -0400, nospam wrote:

because: troll.

The point of this thread, presumably, is
o Storing data on/off the cloud

I proposed a simple free cross-platform working solution which works
o With all platforms on the cloud or off the cloud (Your choice)

*Your suggestion is to do EXACTLY what Google/Apple want you to do*
A. Specifically your suggestion REQUIRES storing private data on the cloud

Who is the troll here, nospam?
o You suggest absolutely NOTHING that Google/Apple haven't told you to use.

Hence, you added _zero_ value, nospam.
o That's a fact.

On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 18:54:44 -0500, Bill W wrote:

You are using a lot of words to say very little.

Hi Bill W.

I try to be VERY HELPFUL; it's my nature to fully answer a question.
o As requested, I'll try to be succinct.

I use true/veracrypt, and I see no reason you could not store a TC container on
iCloud.

That's EXACTLY what I suggested, Bill.
o Encrypted file containers work on all platforms, Bill; *and on the net*!

I just don't understand the point you are trying to make.

You just said it, Bill.
o Encrypted file containers work on _all_ platforms, Bill; and on the net!

No place is 100% safe storage, especially for careless people.

Encrypted file containers are "safer" than cleartext data, Bill.
o They're safer while on your Android,iOS,Win,Linux,Mac; or on the net.

It really sounds like you are just bashing Apple - a company I have no real
interest in right now, when they are no riskier than anyone else.

What part of cross platform on "ALL PLATFORMS" did you whoosh on Bill?
o *It sounds like _you_ have a problem with only thinking Apple; not me.*

We are all free to store wherever we want, by whatever method we want.

WTF, Bill?
o What deeply psychological issue of yours brought that statement up?

The smart ones will do some research, and store with multiple
locations/methods that meet their minimum comfort level.

HINT:
o Encrypted file containers work on _all_ platforms; and on the net.

That's really all you can do. You just live with the level of risk you choose,
balanced with the effort level you choose. Why all the words?

Encrypted file containers work on _all_ platforms, and on the net, Bill.

On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 16:55:38 -0400, nospam wrote:

your medical information is already on the internet, so that doctors
can access it and almost always, can also be accessed by the patient
from a web browser and/or smartphone app.

You didn't answer the question, nospam.
o Without any sensible answer from you, we can assume you're full of ****.

Your method of storing pesonal files REQUIRES putting them on the net.
o That's EXACTLY what Apple/Google Marketing WANT you to do.

So it's no surprise the _only_ method you know of, nospam
o Is the one method that both Apple & Google WANT you to use.

Everything you say, nospam, is a page out of their Marketing playbook.

On 20/03/2019 01:57, nospam wrote:
In article , MC
wrote:


Besides, it is irrelevant what the document was. Any physical document
(could easily have been an old shopping list) that has survived 800
years has lasted a lot longer than any digital document has, so far.

only because digital didn't exist 800 years ago.

Only time will tell how volatile digital storage actually is (or was,
if someone is reading this 800 years from now).

digital is not volatile.


I think it needs to be thought of in terms of access and retrieval. Say
all digital data created is available in 800 years. Issues related to
finding, reading and interpreting will be key.

And I'd guess the results would be far less useful than equivalent print
copies available today.


--
Cheers, Rob

On 18/03/2019 18:37, nospam wrote:
In article , Alan Browne
wrote:


it's far more likely that any physical media you own will fail or lost
due to fire/flood/theft/etc., versus a cloud service. it's not possible
for anyone to match the uptime and reliability and geographical
diversification of a cloud service without spending a *lot* of money.

And yet I've been doing that for decades and the cost keeps going down
and the redundancy goes up. None of it in the cloud at all.

it's nowhere near as reliable as the cloud, some of which offer 11 9s
of reliability.

I use Dropbox and Apple Cloud as conveniences, never as backup.

meanwhile, many people use those as a backup, along with amazon,
google, microsoft and many others.

the key is never to have only one copy of anything.


Isn't that the key, with the proviso that both copies are kept somewhere
reasonably secure and integrity checked?

Obsessing about the failure of something quite reliable is not a good
use of time IMO.

--
Cheers, Rob

In article ,
Whisky-dave wrote:

But at least I have some control of that, myspace didn't seem to have
much
control over what it stores they didn't even have a backup.

you have control no matter what.

Not after it's been delete or deamed missing.

even then.

I don't have control of myspace, and niether does myspace.

you have full control over your data.

western digital doesn't have control over your data if you choose to
put it on a western digital drive. same for seagate or any other drive
maker.

those who put a *copy* of their data at myspace don't give a flying
**** that anything was lost because it was just a copy.

Depends how people see the word copy.
Most thought that once on-line it will always be there.

such people will learn the hard way why doing that is stupid.

hopefully they'll unbderstand that relying on any outside service can go tits
up.

same as any inside service.

hard drives fail, some fairly often. seagate 1.5tb and 3tb drives were
notoriously unreliable.

some might even change their ways going forward, but most won't.
they'll just blame the service.

So who's fault is it that myspace data has been deleted, it's hardly the
users fault.

it's the user's fault that they had only *one* copy.

had the user had another copy, then they would not have lost *anything*.

in fact, it's *more* likely that a user would have lost data had they
kept it on a single hard drive in their house.

the chances of a single hard drive running non-stop for 15+ years
without failing is *very* low.

myspace turned out to be *more* reliable than a hard drive, with one
failure in 15+ years.