You have to understand the US government will come and arrest every person at Backblaze if we try to fight your battle for you, and we'll lose anyway, which won't help you serve up your illegal content to millions of people. Look, if you want to host illegal content to millions of people, go do it from some other hosting provider. On the other hand we have B2 (the other product line), and in some configurations of B2 the content is literally publicly served as a website, and you can get 10 GBytes free, and we WILL take down content that is not encrypted, being served to others, and is infringing on copyrights.
#Backblaze raises subscription pricing backup download#
The Computer Backup product is encrypted on your client computer, we can't read it, we don't want to read it, and you cannot share files from one of our backups (because again, they are encrypted, and you need your username/password/2factor to download the files), and is a mirror of what is on your local computer, and we've never taken down a single file for copyright issues in our 15 years of operation from "Computer Backup". And these two product lines are both stored on the same type of storage, but they are PROFOUNDLY different products. INSIDE the Terms of Service there are little blurbs that apply to different products.
We have one Terms of Service that applies to everything, so it isn't complicated and you can find it in one location. > how do they know it's copyrighted? Or know what it is period?īackblaze has two different product lines: 1) Computer Backup, and 2) Backblaze B2 which is "object storage" much like Amazon S3. Really encourages you that they do try to eat the costs when possible.ĭisclaimer: I work at Backblaze so you should double check anything I say. So that's definitely an area where they would have been forgiven for charging more (specifically computing hashes which does take compute resources) but managed to keep prices down. On the enterprise cloud storage front they've also recently added a lot of features to bring them into S3 parity that they held off on because they said it would be too expensive to offer but now offer for the same price as before. (And probably average out my massive usage haha) I now give my parents a backblaze subscription every Christmas as a stocking stuffer because it's so easy to use and let's me just say "did you check backblaze" when they call in a panic over a file going missing. I'm both part of the reason prices are creeping up and have never had a bad experience on the home giant ass backup or their enterprise cloud solutions. They've never throttled me or pressures me in any way to reduce my backups. That's why I just picked up a one-year extension with Backblaze at the current pricing. An insurance policy can replace my house, but neither ZFS nor my homeowner's insurance can replace my data if my house no longer exists. I currently live in a place that occasionally gets tornados and floods. Sure, I have a RAID on my network that all of my local machines backup to automatically, so if there's a hardware failure or garden variety data loss, I'll look there first, but none of that is a replacement for a remote backup. ZFS is fine, but nothing about it is inherently not geographically here in the way that a remote backup service is, so when a wildfire or flood or tornado destroys your home, ZFS can't help you restore your family photos unless it's part of a bigger system, whereas Backblaze can.įor my part, I've been using Backblaze for years. Unless you skipped a few other pieces to your setup, I don't see how ZFS is in any way a replacement for a remote backup system like Backblaze. I will gladly continue paying $0.Īnd I've been using pi-hole for years.
0 kommentar(er)
