Ask HN: What's your backup solution? - <AUTHOR> Do you keep work and personal separate? Do you use multiple providers like iCloud/OneDrive/Dropbox/Google Drive or do you stick to one? Do you do any type of auto-sync folders?<p>What's your process like? I'm curious on what people to find the most automatic and reliable solution for typical day to day with photos, documents, and their work backups. (Thinking more along the lines of your own side projects or things that you're more in control of, less on the corporate side that have imposed solutions and is managed by a team). <comment><USER3> I own some land in rural TN, with a winterized trailer and access to spring water. that is backup water and shelter for minimal cost. A person/year of shelf-stable food (not fun, but indefinitely survivable) is about $1000. So if I am smart about it, and fall back gracefully, every $3k-$4k in savings is a year of "backup survival". I still need to make sure I have at least a year's worth of currency in a liquid form in case of infrastructure or banking collapse and ideally at least 6-months food dry-packed on site in case purchasing food while falling back is not viable.

just a reminder, there is a lot more to back up than your hard-drive.

<comment><USER4> If banking fails your dollars are going to be in a world of hurt. Do you invest in gold/silver, too?

Unrelated question, what part of TN is your unprotected, cash filled trailer in?

<comment><USER3> My general expectation is to the contrary. I think people underestimate how psychologically ingrained the dollar is into the american people. Money will still be worth something, maybe not as much as I like, but something. People have so much faith in the system, that everybody will be hedging against "when things get better".

Even then "failure of banking" does not have to be universal. Maybe my assets are frozen or other similar, localized issues.

In the grand scheme of things, gold is also likely to be difficult to liquidate. It does not really have any intrinsic value at this point.

As to where: On a hill, by a lake, surrounded by paranoid gulf war vets with lots of guns.

<comment><USER5> I would personally stockpile hard liquor if I wanted to hedge for a social collapse. Whiskey never goes bad, it's always useful and a few ounces can go a long way.

<comment><USER6> > _Whiskey never goes bad_

As long as you keep it sealed in an air-tight container and in complete darkness. Oxygen and/or light will trigger chemical processes that result in undesirable flavor changes.

Just a heads-up, speaking from experience and research :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm using Arq ([https://www.arqbackup.com/](https://www.arqbackup.com/)) with Google Cloud Storage. Arq is a stand alone backup program that supports a bunch of different storage providers. From their site:

> Amazon Cloud Drive, Amazon Web Services, Google Cloud Storage, Google Drive, > Dropbox, or OneDrive accounts, or your SFTP server or NAS.

It encrypts locally so I don't have to worry about the backup company reading my files.

I have 3 backups configured. One for "Documents" which backs up everyday. Another for Photos (which are stored locally on an external HD) and another for Music (which apparently everyone but me doesn't own music anymore and just uses Spotify) both of which I run manually once in a while. If I ever get a desktop again I'll make those automated.

I deleted my entire hard drive by accident 5 months ago so since that time I also started using Time Machine to an external drive. It starts nagging me every 10 days to plug it in.

Also use Google Photo's free service not as backup but just as access to my photos. Earlier this year I uploaded all 130k photos at their "free" resolution

I don't backup work. Work does that. Most of it is in git. Same with personal projects. It's all on github.

<comment><USER8> I really wish Arq would make a unix app. If so I would buy licenses for all my machines.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Work must always be separate from personal. Period. End of story.

I use Synology. I simply love it. I have RAID 6 which cuts down on the space I can use, but it gives me the peace of mind that I need, especially after one of my drives already died and I had to get it replaced. With RAID 6, I had no impact in speed whatsoever and 2 more drives would have to fail before I lost anything. Thanks to Amazon, I can get a new drive next day, so the chance of data loss is relatively small.

I also have an external USB connected to it that I will occasionally do full backups, every few months (my data doesn't change a huge amount).

Using a Synology plugin, I upload all my pics, encrypted, to Amazon Cloud for $60/year. I'm still figuring out if it's worth it to expand this to all my data, given that I don't completely trust how secure this is, and what it would look like if I did suffer a catastrophic data loss. I'm limited by time though.

</comment><comment><USER10> For my personal stuff I have a seafile server on a vps. I have 'full history' turned on, which essentially gives me snapshots of every uploaded change of every file, browsable by individual file or by date and time for the whole backup space.

For work stuff, I've been loving borg-backup. Others here have mentioned why it's superior. I agree. Once they get support for remote object stores like S3, it will be hands down the best backup solution: [https://github.com/borgbackup/borg/issues/102](https://github.com/borgbackup/borg/issues/102). Even though, there is a fuse layer for S3 that may work (haven't tried that yet).

</comment><comment><USER11> CrashPlan. Dirt cheap for unlimited storage for generational backups for 10 machines. Whole extended family fits in one subscription.

<comment><USER12> Tried restoring from it yet?

/r/datahoarders have a long list of horror stories about that. Admittedly, these guys operate in TBs, but the general feeling on the sub towards CrashPlan is to avoid it at all costs (no pun intended).

<comment><USER11> Yes, it has saved my behind several times.

My requirements are pretty simple: has to work well on windows + mac, has to be cloud based, have decent bandwidth, unlimited storage, unlimited retention, and has to and require no configuration of my own apart from selecting files and schedules.

I just haven't found anything with the level of polish that CrashPlan has in terms of UI and usability. To avoid having all eggs in one basket I try to keep at least a mirror of everything too, e.g. on a NAS.

I have been a DataHoarder kind of guy in the past (dabbled with my own backup scripts, etc.) but found that the chance of user error on my part is probably an order of magnitude greater than the risk of losing data any other way - <USER2> with user error there is always the risk that you also bork your backups. So I don't want any system that has any kind of complex configuration on my part.

Further, I don't want to separate the _storage_ from the _backup_ , simply because buying unlimited cloud storage is to expensive. I don't need fast random access storage, I need something cheap like glacier, but that quickly becomes comples. So I'm very happy to hide that complexity behind a cloud backup provider that gives unlimited retention and storage.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> For low-volume data (mostly configuration files) of my personal machines, I have been using tarsnap for a couple of months now. It has saved me once already when the µSD card holding the operating system on my home server gave up the ghost, so I consider it a good investment (it helps that tarsnap is pretty cheap thanks to deduplication).

For higher volume data (source code, mostly) I use a droplet at Digital Ocean and keep my data spread across several machines at home.

On my desktop, a Mac Mini, I use Time Machine with an external ~1.7 TB USB drive that I hook up every couple of days (roughly twice a week).

It is not the most sophisticated arrangement, but it works well enough as insurance in case a machine suddenly dies. It works less well against accidentally removing files, but I have cut myself into that particular finger often enough to finally learn my lesson. ;-) [The downside of this lesson is that I've become kind of a hoarder when it comes to files. But these days, disk space is cheap, so it is not that much of a problem.]

</comment><comment><USER14> Recently build myself a home box from Ebay parts. Two four core Xeons, 72gb DDR3 memory and six onboard SATA ports. Two 120gb SSDs running Proxmox on that for virtualisation and a 2tb drive for misc storage. Bought an LSI 9211 HBA with another eight SATA ports for fifty euros, which gets PCI passthrough'ed to a FreeNAS VM. Four cheap 2tb drives for the initial pool.

Another VM provides an instance of NextCloud locally and that's pretty much it. Works, feels secure enough and didn't cost more than 500€ total. A four disk Synology Home NAS with drives would cost more and offer significantly less.

As for online backup, being on satellite internet makes uploading pretty much anything too painful to even consider.

<comment><USER15> Yeah, I went the NAS route and now I think I should have built my own server instead, like you did. I ended up adding an Intel NUC (with Linux Debian) which does all the work and the NAS is used for storage only. The NAS runs an extremely stripped-down version of Linux which was not flexible enough for my needs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Arq ([https://www.arqbackup.com](https://www.arqbackup.com)) and AWS. As close to set it and forget it that you can get.

Process:

\- Local TimeMachine backups

\- Arq backup to AWS Glacier

<comment><USER17> Note that Arq with Glacier only is usually a mistake (as discovered by the poster below), since restores need to be requested and queued up, and take _hours_ to come back with the results. Restores are also very expensive.

As an Arq user who used Glacier previously, I much rather recommend using Google Cloud Storage:

* Nearline restore is instantaneous;

* Storage per month is >30% cheaper [1];

* Recovering data from GCS is super cheap; about 3% (!) of equivalent Glacier costs.

For the super paranoid, GCS also has more expensive multi-region buckets.

[1] [https://cloud.google.com/pricing/tco/storage- nearline](https://cloud.google.com/pricing/tco/storage-nearline)

<comment><USER18> Arq also supports Amazon Cloud Drive as a target, and if you're in the US, it's a flat $60 per year for unlimited storage.

<comment><USER17> There are some Terms of Service [1] items that might come and back and bite you (or not — who knows, they're a bit vague):

        The Service is offered in the United States. We may
        restrict access from other locations. There may be
        limits on the types of content you can store and
        share using the Service, such as file types we
        don't support, and on the number or type of devices
        you can use to access the Service.

The fact that they "may restrict access from other locations" could be a problem when you travel.

[1] [http://www.zdnet.com/article/is-amazons-online-storage- reall...](http://www.zdnet.com/article/is-amazons-online-storage-really- unlimited-read-the-fine-print/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Bup. [https://github.com/bup/bup](https://github.com/bup/bup)

Git + bloom filters + Python

I backup hundreds of thousands of user accounts at cloud.sagemath.com using it, plus my own data, etc. I've been using it for four years and haven't found anything better for my requirements.

<comment><USER20> When I examined the available backup schemes that are were built off of a content-addressible storage scheme, all of them had one shortcoming or another except for Borg. If I remember correctly, Bup's shortcoming is that it is git based and hence architected to be immutable, meaning that pruning old backups is hairy.

<comment><USER21> The new bup version can do pruning, FWIW (haven't tried to see how hairy it actually is).

bup does have a huge advantage of deduplicating multiple machine images that can backup simulatenously. With Borg, there is a lock held on the repository (only one machine at a time), and if multiple machines do use the same repository, they will need to download the indices (Slow compared to bup's bloom filter), or use sshfs etc (slow)

borg also has internal encryption. If only borg adopts bup's bloom filters and concurrent access, it will only have advantages...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I just spent some time this weekend rebuilding my backup routines. In short, I Borg [1] and multiple targets. For a local target at home, I use a RasPi with RAID1 [2]).

For company sync/backup, we use AeroFS [3].

[1] [https://borgbackup.readthedocs.io/en/stable/](https://borgbackup.readthedocs.io/en/stable/) [2] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13000024](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13000024) [3] [https://aerofs.com/](https://aerofs.com/)

</comment><comment><USER23> Tarsnap is my preferred backup provider for personal and work. Do be careful with the key. I also have a OneDrive.

Work stuff also goes on an LTO tape. I guess we are just traditionalists at heart.

</comment><comment><USER24> I use multiple Blackblaze accounts ([https://www.backblaze.com/](https://www.backblaze.com/)).

My requirements, and why I picked Blackblaze:

1) Work and personal data must be kept separate. (I use multiple Blackblaze accounts.)

2) Backups must be continuous and happen behind the scenes, I must never have to manually trigger a backup.

3) Must be able to restore not just a file, but a file on a specific date (Blackblaze keeps all changes for up to 30 days... wish it was longer but this hasn't caused me any issues yet).

4) Must be secure, encrypted, and support 2FA.

5) Must allow me to access my files from a different computer, or phone.

6) Must be simple enough that my parents can use it with minimal training (I've had my 65 year-old mother on Blackblaze for about a year now... no reason not to keep family safe too).

7) Must be affordable... Blackblaze is like $50 / year per account for unlimited data. It's 1/2 the price of Dropbox, and you don't have to mess with any silly simlinks that break when Apple pushes new software updates...

Bottom line, the people at Blackblaze set out to build a product that does backups right, and for me they are succeeding. I love their product.

<comment><USER25> _4) Must be secure, encrypted, and support 2FA._

Doesn't Backblaze require that you enter your password/keyphrase on their website to restore from an encrypted backup?

<comment><USER24> Password to get access to website, plus encryption key phrase on your local device to unlock your content.

[https://www.backblaze.com/backup- encryption.html](https://www.backblaze.com/backup-encryption.html)

[https://help.backblaze.com/hc/en- us/articles/217664798-Secur...](https://help.backblaze.com/hc/en- us/articles/217664798-Security-Question-Round-up-)

[https://help.backblaze.com/hc/en- us/articles/217664688-Can-y...](https://help.backblaze.com/hc/en- us/articles/217664688-Can-you-tell-me-more-about-the-encryption-Backblaze- uses-)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Encrypted rclone [1] to local external HDD and Amazon Cloud.

[1] [http://rclone.org](http://rclone.org)

<comment><USER27> Thanks for making me aware of the existence of rclone. I know what my next weekend project is. Getting a proper backup system set up. :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I have a 4 TB external USB hard drive split in two equal partitions. One is dedicated to Time Machine backups and the other has full-disk disk-image backups made by SuperDuper!. The partition with disk images on it also has installer files for programs that I can't redownload on a whim.

Since I can only hold a few disk images on a 2 TB drive, I copy these disk images to a ProLiant MicroServer with a raidz3 (I've since heard this is a bad idea compared to mirror sets) to give me access to older backups in case my external drive dies.

I also use Backblaze; it backs up everything on the iMac and the external drive.

The laptop pretty much doesn't get backed up, but I don't have much state on there that can't be recreated with `brew install` and `git clone`.

Dropbox syncs some things, but I use SyncThing for syncing large files between my iMac, MacBook, and Windows machine. I also use a second SyncThing shared folder to keep my 1Password vault in sync between my iMac and laptop.

<comment><USER29> > I also use Backblaze; it backs up everything on the iMac and the external > drive.

Be careful with that external drive. Backblaze deletes external drive backups if you don't sync them every 30 days [1]. I've lodged frustrated complaints with them over data loss but that is their current policy.

[1]: [https://help.backblaze.com/hc/en- us/articles/217664898-What-...](https://help.backblaze.com/hc/en- us/articles/217664898-What-happens-to-my-backups-when-I-m-away-or-on- vacation-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Tarsnap. I like knowing that cperciva is ensuring the security of my backups. ;-)

</comment><comment><USER31> I'm in the process of setting up a system. Anyone using Amazon Drive unlimited storage? [https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/home](https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/home)

I'd like to keep my laptop files backed up automatically.

<comment><USER32> I'm currently using Amazon's Cloud Drive for backups with Arq, see: [http://arqbackup.com/](http://arqbackup.com/) \- It's a pretty sweet deal, if it lasts, however no unlimited service is truly unlimited. For example Microsoft's OneDrive was also unlimited at first.

However, if you end up doing this, it's a pretty bad idea to use your account for anything else but backups. Especially Amazon's Cloud Drive. And I also can't speak for how durable the stored data is and it's a good idea if important data is backed up in two places.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Maybe this should be a separate ask HN: what restore solution worked best for you?

<comment><USER34> Backblaze. They ship you TB external hard drives with all your data for a fee, and refund the fee if you return the drives.

<comment><USER29> It would great if they would keep that level of convenience for external drives. Backblaze deleting external drive backups every 30 days [1] is maddening.

[1]: [https://help.backblaze.com/hc/en- us/articles/217664898-What-...](https://help.backblaze.com/hc/en- us/articles/217664898-What-happens-to-my-backups-when-I-m-away-or-on- vacation-)

<comment><USER34> Wow, I didn't know about that.... that's disappointing.

<comment><USER29> I'm pretty confident they make it intentionally hidden so you don't know until it affects you. For example, titling the FAQ "What happens to my backups when I'm away or on vacation?" vs "What is your external drive retention policy?"

<comment><USER35> I don't think it's hidden. Backblaze will warn you if it hasn't seen a drive in a few days, and right in that email is the heads up that the drive will be deleted. I thought it was also in the external drive management pane of the app. However if you just let Backblaze do its thing, and don't have warnings enabled, you might get got good.

<comment><USER29> Not the warnings themselves — the fact that your data is not retained on external drives in the onboarding and FAQ.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> I use borg for laptops and servers. I use syncthing for (android) phones and tablets to sync photos/videos to home server where they are then backed up by borg.

In the past, I have used rdiff-backup and tarsnap.

</comment><comment><USER37> I live nomadically and am often without a stable-fast internet connection. So my backup solution has been catered to what I feel makes the most sense to me (Of course always open to improvements!)

I have a 1TB Google Drive plan; this stores all of my photos - whether coming in from Google Photos (Uncompressed) on my phone, GoPro, etc. as well as pretty much any sort of documents - everything goes straight to Drive. Anything I deem sensitive I throw in an encrypted volume which is then synced.

As I run macOS, I use TimeMachine for Backups - I travel with a 500GB portable SSD and store TimeMachine on there regularly. This doesn't include GoogleDrive, or any other data.

If I'm traveling somewhere, I keep my drive and laptop separate in-case one is lost.

If my computer ever fails, is stolen, etc. then I should be able to purchase a new one, restore with TimeMachine, and then camp out in an area with fast internet to restore anything on GoogleDrive I'd like, and should be able to start working again immediately.

I know I have a single point of failure with only one TimeMachine backup; I'd like to improve that. However it's also not catastrophic if it's lost; just a pain in the butt as it'd take me time to get my environment back to the way I like it.

Recently with the stories of Google locking out their users - I'd like to setup a routine of storing 'Google Takeout' on some drives and throw those in storage as I know I have a lot of information in there.

</comment><comment><USER38> All of my machines get backed up to my Synology NAS. The NAS then syncs all the backups out to Amazon Drive. It's not "real" offsite backup, but it's good enough for what I'm doing. In addition, the NAS also syncs music, video, and images out to Amazon Drive separately so that we can view our media from anywhere without depending on our home internet connection.

</comment><comment><USER39> All machines in my household get backed up to a home-built NAS. It runs low power inexpensive hardware that's plenty fast, along w/Linux Mint + Samba to manage the file shares. I preferred this since I've used Linux most of my life - I prefer avoiding learning new systems when possible, which is why I'm not running something like FreeNas, Synology, etc.

</comment><comment><USER40> Local backup using Time Machine to a USB HDD plugged into an AirPort Extreme.

Offsite backup to Backblaze.

Photos are also back up on iCloud (paid) & Google Photos (free).

</comment><comment><USER15> A little Barebones PC (Intel NUC) used as a sync server, connected to a 9TB NAS (Thecus N4310 with 4X 3TB HDDs in RAID 5). I do not like the apps included in the NAS, that's why I use the NUC (with Linux) as the "brain" of the backup process, which is done by calling rsync through various cron jobs.

The NUC and the NAS are on their own subnet (with a router dedicated to them) and not accessible from the external network, however the NUC can access a shared folder on my PC which is where it takes the data from (and then it saves it to the NAS).

I do have online, cloud-based backup for less sensitive data, so I can access that while on the move. I use the cloud Drive offer from Mailbox.org (I also use Mailbox.org for mail/calendar/notes/address book).

Lately I'm thinking of replacing the online part with my own cloud server though. Probably I could run something like mail-in-a-box and NextCloud/OwnCloud on my own online VMs. But I'm too lazy and, at least for now, I trust Mailbox.org.

</comment><comment><USER41> Praying and LVM RAID1.

<comment><USER42> That's how real men do it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> Github for code and Google Drive for documents & photos. Google photos turned out as the best solution for photo syncing, sharing, simple editing (rotation with keybind) and unlimited free storage of pretty good quality photos. Google documents turned out as the most practical editor (cloud, sharing, all the basic editing commands). I am on the unix systems most of the time and I always find something missing in Pages or LibreOffice. If word was available on all systems I would probably use it together with dropbox, not because I prefer word, but because most of files I get are in word's format and if I have to change and help with something, its best to do it in word.

I don't really have anything else to backup. What do you guys have on your systems to require complete system backup?

<comment><USER28> I have all kinds of dotfiles I'd hate to recreate from scratch. Mostly application configuration stored in ~/Library or /usr/local.

<comment><USER44> github works well for dotfiles.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> Personal (family) stuff - I have a 3TB NAS in a RAID1 configuration at home that my wife and I save our photos and videos to. We also back up our personal documents and such there. We are not super-prolific in terms of media creation, so currently I think we only have about 200GB worth of files. About 3 times a year, I make a copy of the drive and store it in a safety deposit box at our bank (e.g. in case the house burns down). I just don't like the idea of our entire set of family photos and videos in the cloud.

Work - I'm a consultant/freelancer, so for some things I rely on the client's backup systems and for things that are more my own responsibility, I rely mostly on cloud version control (github, bitbucket), as my work artifacts are mostly code.

</comment><comment><USER46> Anything even remotely important gets printed out on paper. Even source code. I was burned once when one of my computers died and my NAS died while trying to recall the backup.

On a semi-related note, I find it easier to read printed code and mark changes than to stare at the screen.

<comment><USER47> So do you print the source again after every change? And what happens to the then obsolete paper with the previous version? (or do they get version numbers?)

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> Backblaze. Set it up and forget about it. I've done a handful of recoveries and it's never failed.

I also have dropbox and sync most of my code to bitbucket/github, but I don't really consider that "backup" even if I can sometimes use it as such.

</comment><comment><USER49> I use rsync, mostly to backup from LVM snapshots over SSH to either rsync --link-dest snapshots or ZFS snapshots.

[https://gitlab.paivola.fi/tech/pvl- backup](https://gitlab.paivola.fi/tech/pvl-backup)

<comment><USER50> Do you also keep your zfs snapshots around?

(they're a lot more efficient than lvm snapshots. One machine I use took snapshots every half hour, and we accidentally filled it up with >3000 snapshots before anyone noticed that the reaper script for old snapshots wasn't running :-P . No performance degradation!)

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> Currently setting up rclone+duplicity -> rsync.net

rsync.net partly because I want a solution whereby if an attacker ever gains access to our credentials, they could not wipe all of our backups, a la [http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608076/data- center/murder-...](http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608076/data- center/murder-in-the-amazon-cloud.html) . Most other backup stories do not survive that type of threat.

rclone because it allows consolidation of various cloud data (sending that to rsync.net in case they ever get damanaged/wiped).

work+personal separate of course.

</comment><comment><USER52> For home: Synology NAS backing up to glacier weekly. It doesn't get a lot of use, so it's very cost effective.

For work: projects on gitlab.com and servers (all Linux-based servers) I use Backup Ninja. Backup Ninja is really just a front-end for several other packages, making it easy to setup backups via SSH on a remote server.

Databases are backed up locally, then everything is backed up to a remote server using rdiff. I can have 30 or 60 days of backups for a relatively small cost. The backups go to a 2TB server hosted by another cloud provider, which is more space than I need.

</comment><comment><USER17> Arq [1] with Google Cloud Storage here, scheduled nightly. See my other comments about pricing: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13000979](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13000979).

Arq supports multiple sources and targets. When a source is an external hard disk that is only occasionally plugged in, Arq does the sensible thing and backs up the disk when it's plugged in, but otherwise leaves it alone.

[1] [https://www.arqbackup.com](https://www.arqbackup.com)

</comment><comment><USER53> I used to use backblaze, but their client would take up too much space - i've commented on here about it before being very buggy. So i switched to amazon cloud and have been syncing files that way.

</comment><comment><USER54> I have three backup systems.

My main backup is a local harddrive formatted with btrfs. I have a script in cron.daily that runs rsync then makes a btrfs snapshot.

In addition to that, I run crashplan to back up my computer to the cloud. In some sense, this is actually my main backup because I trust them far more than I trust my own backup system, but it is not as convenient to restore from than a local drive (but still quiete convenient).

I also keep have a two small hard-drives in a safety deposit box. These drives are exact mirrors of each other and tested/updated once a year.

</comment><comment><USER55> Work: A 1TB external enclosure. That's more for "oh shit my work laptop's SSD failed" backup. The real work is done on Bitbucket and a Google Apps account. I do not manage the servers.

Home: My home server has a 4TB main backup drive and a 2TB redundant drive (easily downloaded "safe" stuff, like steam, origin, gog backups). The 4TB drive is synced to 3 other 4TB external drives that I swap between home, work, and my parent's house (100+ miles away).

All encrypted of course, whether it's Bitlocker or LUKS.

</comment><comment><USER56> I can't promise this won't eat your lunch and pee on the floor but I've added a Ceph backed to preserve:[https://github.com/cholcombe973/preserve](https://github.com/cholcombe973/preserve) I'll be adding integration tests with checksums to verify integrity this week. If anyone wants to build another backend I'd be happy to merge it.

</comment><comment><USER57> Github for my contracts.

My music collection sits on a server hooked up to my stereo. I had the disks in RAID-Z1, but when one of the disks pulled a Seagate I accidentally made the disks striped vedvs. To back this up, I boot up a rackmount server with larger disks in RAID-Z1 and use rsync.

This is the only data that I really care about preserving. I found this out through changing my operating system a lot and having my laptop stolen.

<comment><USER58> I gleefully deleted my music collection after being back in the USA and able to use Spotify. Having access to a astounding quantity of music without having to maintain a library is so, so freeing.

<comment><USER59> There's a lot of music that isn't available on Spotify. You also lose access to that "astounding quantity of music" as soon as you stop paying your monthly fee.

<comment><USER58> Don't use scare quotes it's rude.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER60> Cloudberry Backup (closed source, proprietary, 30USD) with Backblaze B2 (0.005/GB/month). Once it is setup it runs in the background and just does its thing. I just migrated from Cloudberry/Glacier to Cloudberry/B2 and dont see any reason for using Glacier any more. Data is locally encrypted.

<comment><USER29> Just curious to hear a little more about your choice of B2 over Glacier or S3. I haven't seen much written about it yet. Do retention policies work with B2?

</comment></comment><comment><USER61> 1\. I have a synology which acts as central store for everything. 2\. Everything on synology (except for videos) gets backed up to crashplan. 3\. Once every few months I backup synology to my 5TB external drive.

I hate to loose any file even if its not important :) I still have files from the floppy disk era.

</comment><comment><USER62> I backup my main system to Backblaze, and then back it up to an external drive every month or so. That external drive gets plugged into my laptop and the files get copied there. Yeah, I have Dropbox, but I also have a music collection that's a bit too big.

</comment><comment><USER63> For my personal systems, I use rsnapshot to make incremental copies on a nightly basis into another internal SSD used only for backup. Because I only use SSD, the whole thing runs under a minute. Then monthly this gets it copied into an USB external HDD.

</comment><comment><USER64> I have a synology box with a pair of drives in RAID 1. That's not bad, but if something happens to that or my places goes on fire, well, I'll lose it all.

So I need a remote backup solution for it. I haven't found anything cheap and satisfactory yet...

</comment><comment><USER65> Daily Duplicity snapshots that sync to S3, plus hourly snapshots via Back In Time to an internal drive, plus an occasional manual rsync to a portable USB drive off-site.

Probably overkill, but if one backup method ever has a flaw I'm still fine.

<comment><USER66> > Probably overkill,

Yeah.. I was about to say. LOL. Have you even been in a situation where you had to restore?

<comment><USER65> Yes, I regularly test the backups by restoring a random directory to my desktop and then opening a few random files to test. For things like photos which don't change (as opposed to a document which may have been edited) I'll do a quick spot-check of file hashes as well.

I'm picky about backups and have never had an issue where files were permanently lost. I'm to the point now where if I'm not sure I want a file I'll go ahead and delete it, and then if I need it later I restore from the Back In Time snapshot.

Storage is dirt cheap, so spend the time up front getting your backup 'idiot proof' and automatic and it's totally worth it in the long term.

<comment><USER66> Storage is indeed cheap. I've just had a hard time figuring out how to set everything up and validate it. Thank you for the detailed explanation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER67> Locally: QNAP NAS which accepts Time Machine backups from Apple computers. The NAS also runs a Linux container with SpiderOak on it for any NAS-only data and critical time machine backups. Endpoints also have SpiderOak.

</comment><comment><USER68> A combination of a NAS, Crashplan (I may be switching to BackBlaze) and occasionally burning critical data to BluRay discs for cold storage.

On my work desktop I also do incremental Acronis images and Windows File History on local drives.

<comment><USER69> Why do you want to switch from Crashplan to Backblaze?

<comment><USER68> I have become less and less of a fan of the software over time.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER70> Personal: cloud server (it's quite expensive, like 40€/month but it's the best I could find) with rsync without --delete

Pro: backuppc (used at a "large" scale without issues) or snapshots on big fileservers

</comment><comment><USER71> I use aws-cli tools. I create buckets on S3 and then use a simple script:

        aws s3 sync <source> s3://<bucket-name> --delete

If needed, put this in a cron and you are good to go

</comment><comment><USER72> GitHub and Google Drive are enough for me really. I don't backup what isn't important and subscribe to services for consuming music/movies/tv so I only have a small amount to store.

</comment><comment><USER73> Dropbox + spideroak.

Dropbox for non sensitive stuff and spideroak for complete PC backup.

</comment><comment><USER74> Time Machine + Backblaze.

</comment><comment><USER75> Everything personal (local drives, Google Drive, Dropbox) goes to my Synology NAS, NAS is backed up weekly to S3. The best thing in Synology is that it solves this out-of-the box.

<comment><USER75> Oh and forgot, that server stuff is backed up to another server with rdiff- backup. Some years ago this was the quickest solution and until now never had any issues with it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER76> Dropbox for most stuff. External HDD for manual image backups.

</comment><comment><USER77> 1\. Daily: rsync snapshots to disk attached to Raspberry Pi (similar to rsnapshot)

2\. Periodically: duplicity to Oracle archive storage (7x cheaper than AWS Glacier - $0.001)

</comment><comment><USER78> Encrypted rclone [1] with multiple cascaded self-hosted peers.

[1] [http://rclone.org/](http://rclone.org/)

</comment><comment><USER79> A separate file server (QNap) that backups in CrashPlan, and to an external USB drive. Not ideal, but works.

I don't bring work back to home.

</comment><comment><USER80> Crashplan with user-specified encryption key.

</comment><comment><USER81> I use rsnapshot each night to an encrypted external drive. The drive gets swapped each week with one kept off-site.

</comment><comment><USER82> I definitely keep work and personal data separate. There are a number of legal and ethical reasons for this.

</comment><comment><USER83> rsync to btrfs volume, then take a snapshot. 2 LOC.

I do this to a pen drive on site and to a remote volume.

</comment><comment><USER84> I'd probably be what you'd call a digital nomad. I keep a Time Machine backup on a ruggedized external drive, and I use Backblaze. I've been very happy with Backblaze, if that's what you're asking about. Additionally, Google Drive and another external USB flash drive for a couple sensitive documents.

I don't work.

<comment><USER85> well you probably don't have that much to back up then:)

<comment><USER84> Heh, no. ;)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER86> Timemachine, Backblaze and a bit of Dropbox (particularly for syncing photos from phone)

</comment><comment><USER87> _Personal_ backups are done with Dropbox, which stores several EncFS collections.

</comment><comment><USER88> For the most part I keep work and home separate, although there is some overlap as I exclusively work from home. I have several backup processes:

First, I take automatic daily differential backup images of the primary hard drive on my main desktop. (This is a Windows machine, so I use Macrium Reflect.) Images are great because if your drive dies or gets corrupted, you drop in a new one, copy the image over, and are back up and running as quickly as possible.

For the same reason I take images of the volumes on my home Linux server. For this I take an LVM snapshot, mount it, create a tarball, then unmount and remove the snapshot. These are only done monthly because the process isn't incremental or differential, so takes longer, and the contents don't change as often anyway. It could be completely automated, but I just have a script that I run manually, because I like to do any updates that have the potential to break things while the snapshots are open for ease of rollback. (I have a monthly calendar reminder to do this along with quickly checking that my various other backups are running properly, and backing up my phone using Helium.)

I continuously mirror the user folder from my desktop (and my wife's computer) to a Samba share on the home server using FreeFileSync. (There are many different ways to sync files, but since the desktops are on windows, this was easiest.) Then I run Crashplan on the home server to do incremental cloud backups of all these files, both to deal with the worst case scenario of the house burning down, as well as to catch any files changed intra-day, not caught by the daily disc images.

Misc: Regarding the phone backup, my preference is to do a full disc image, for the same reason as on the computers - break your phone and you can replace it and be back where you started in no time. Unfortunately that requires rooting, and in Samsung Hell rooting permanently devalues your phone due to Knox insanity. So for now I back up those apps that allow it with Helium, a couple of high priority ones using their built-in backups, and grumble about how I should just root. I also usually only bother to do this every few months, since anything really important on the phone is in the cloud anyway.

Except photos. I run FolderSync on the phone to continually sync any new photos to my OwnCloud on the home server via WebDAV (from which they're backed up to Crashplan), as well as back to Google via their photos backup tool, but in "standard" res - not as a backup, but just so I have my full photo library accessible on my phone.

I also occasionally fire up Thunderbird to download email from Gmail. I use the web client exclusively, but like to keep a local copy of all my email on the off chance I'm ever somehow locked out. It's highly unlikely, but the peace of mind costs all of 5 seconds every couple months.

I think that's it. Sounds like a lot, but I set it up incrementally over time, and for the most part it all just works. If I were setting things up fresh, I'd probably save some time by paying for more Google storage or something rather than using OwnCloud, and by using the CrashPlan family plan rather than syncing everything to the home server then backing up from there. Regardless, I do believe it's good practice to double-check whatever you use for your backups, at least every couple months.

(This is all leaving aside the Tempest servers, which use various RAID, master/slave SQL, LVM snapshot backups of the same sort I do locally, and rsync to off-site storage.)

</comment><comment><USER89> Arq.

S3 and google drive.

<comment><USER90> +1 for Arq. I use the 1TB of storage I get with my Office 365 subscription to backup my Documents, keys, photos, and other volatile files. Everything else gets backed up to AWS Glacier.

</comment></comment><comment><USER91> Backblaze. Works great, $5 for unlimited space, covers everything.

</comment><comment><USER92> crashplan.com

Works on Windows, Mac and Linux, $150/yr gets you unlimited number of machines and unlimited storage, it keeps unlimited versions for recovery.

Also important - data sent to cloud encrypted.

</comment><comment><USER93> I use rsnaphot, with ssh to backup remote hosts/servers.

</comment><comment><USER94> Crashplan. Its awesome

<comment><USER95> We have Crashplan at work. Haven't needed to use it yet, but it gets out of the way and it seems like a good solution.

</comment></comment><comment><USER96> Bitbucket for work backup and spideroak for personal files.

</comment><comment><USER97> Two Time Capsules in separate buildings.

</comment><comment><USER98> Retired, so no need for work/personal separation, but I never did it before, but made sure that my company knew any work I did at home was going onto my general tape backups and was not going to be deleted any time soon after I left the company.

Nowadays: most important stuff, rsync.net, more than a bit expensive at 20 cents/GB/month, but their many other virtues and especially simplicity make up for it, including support of private git repoes. currently $9.60/month, that's a grandfathered price in that now the minimum you start with is larger.

Saved my email repository and a fair amount else when the Joplin 2011 tornado trashed the machine that it was on as well as my BackupPC discs which were in another room that suffered the only wall breach (my main system came through fine, and that near miss of losing everything else prompted me to start using tape again, LTO-4 was capacious and cheap enough by then, I'd long outgrown DAT).

Most of most important stuff with BackupPC to a 1GB USB 3.0 drive (would be all to a bigger drive, and will be when the next item changes state, but I'm economizing now).

Since my 2 2TB bulk drives are all over 5 years old now, they're getting nightly rsynced to a new 4 TB drive on my other system, which when one of them fails will physically replace both of them.

Backstopping all of that, a LTO-4 tape drive on my other system, tar incrementals every night, those tapes cycled every week from a pool of 5, then full backups every month, which are put off-site sometime during the month.

Now that I've got a serious Internet connection, if I was starting over, and didn't have the sunk costs of the LTO-4 tape drive system (drive, SAS controller, fast disk to feed it) and plenty of tapes, I'd probably do this level of backup to the cloud at a fairly raw level to S3, Glacier, GCS, or Backblaze.

<comment><USER29> > Now that I've got a serious Internet connection, if I was starting over, and > didn't have the sunk costs of the LTO-4 tape drive system (drive, SAS > controller, fast disk to feed it) and plenty of tapes, I'd probably do this > level of backup to the cloud at a fairly raw level to S3, Glacier, GCS, or > Backblaze.

Personal warning to anyone else attempting to create a multi-drive setup with Backblaze. Backblaze deletes external drive backups if you don't sync them every 30 days [1]. I've lodged frustrated complaints with them over data loss but that is their current policy.

[1]: [https://help.backblaze.com/hc/en- us/articles/217664898-What-...](https://help.backblaze.com/hc/en- us/articles/217664898-What-happens-to-my-backups-when-I-m-away-or-on- vacation-)

<comment><USER98> Errr, I mean their new low cost raw storage B2 Cloud Storage (now 0.001 cent/month more than Glacier [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13010949](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13010949)), not their total solutions for those not wanting to go to that sort of trouble/complexity/whatever.

(As someone who's been using tape drive backups since 1978, DECtape to start with, fortunately before I learned the -rf flags for rm ^_^, I'm not a conventional user.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER99> Gave up on cloud backups. Takes too long on onedrive. Dropbox too expensive.

For personal I now use easeus todo on Windows. Keep a backup hdd at work and at home.had

For work I let them take care of it. I connect to VM and it's all backed up.

</comment><comment><USER100> [http://obnam.org/](http://obnam.org/)

</comment><comment><USER101> My backup solution is #YOLO</comment>


NYTimes.com down for some users; paper suspects "external attack" - <AUTHOR> http://gigaom.com/2013/08/27/nytimes-com-is-down-again-at-least-for-some-users/

<comment><USER2> Perhaps more critically, twimg.com (and now Twitter, it seems) has also been compromised. Both share the MelbourneIT registrar.

$ whois -h whois.melbourneit.com twitter.com -> now owned by firstname.lastname@example.com (Syrian Electronic Army)

The name servers for the Times have been switching back-and-forth for a while. I've chronicled most of it at [https://twitter.com/semenko](https://twitter.com/semenko)

<comment> grey-area Ouch.

If twitter is compromised, sites serving twitter js (which is a lot of sites) are potentially compromised too. I've just checked and at least some widgets from twitter are down at present (all?), twimg.com is not responding.

DNS and registrars is a bit of a weak point at present in site security, as once they have that, they can serve users whatever they like. It would be even more damaging and hard to detect if they just tweaked content slightly for a few hours by adjusting some words in stories for some countries rather than hijacking sites.

<comment><USER2> Well, luckily, Twitter's domains & cert are added to the Chrome HSTS pins list, so Chrome should just serve a scary security error.

Looks like their WHOIS data has reverted to normal. Not sure the NS records ever changed (though the contact data did).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> In everything associated with the situation in Syria beware of the possibility of false-flag operations.

<comment><USER4> This hack appears to be genuine.

[http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/24/tech/syrian-electronic- arm...](http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/24/tech/syrian-electronic- army/index.html)

<comment><USER3> I'm not claiming the hack isn't genuine.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> We are now publishing at a backup site: [http://news.nytco.com](http://news.nytco.com)

</comment><comment><USER6> Why the heck are both Twitter and the New York Times using a in the context small Australian registrar? (MelbourneIT)

edit: looks like MelbourneIT do DNS for a ton of big names. really really weird.

<comment><USER7> I'm wondering this, too. Does MelbourneIT have some sort of service or reputation that makes it attractive to large companies like Twitter or NYTimes?

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> "Syrian Electronic Army claims to have taken control of Twitter.com domain registration"

[http://www.cnbc.com/id/100988772](http://www.cnbc.com/id/100988772)

Tweet with some info regarding Twitter & NYT:

[https://twitter.com/jaesonschultz/status/372456943312330753](https://twitter.com/jaesonschultz/status/372456943312330753)

</comment><comment><USER9> OpenDNS blocked the Syrian domains and updated its DNS resolvers to omit them:

[https://twitter.com/davidu/status/372482424313110529](https://twitter.com/davidu/status/372482424313110529)

Verify at:

[http://www.opendns.com/support/cache/](http://www.opendns.com/support/cache/)

</comment><comment><USER10> nameservers changed at registrar, gltd reports accordingly.

nytimes.com. 172800 IN NS ns27.boxsecured.com. nytimes.com. 172800 IN NS ns28.boxsecured.com. ;; Received 114 bytes from 188.8.131.52#53(22.214.171.124) in 17 ms

<comment><USER11> OK, then, the key question is: which registrar are they using and how do that registrar's security get compromised?

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> NS records pointing to Syrian Electronic Army - [http://viewdns.info/dnsrecord/?domain=nytimes.com](http://viewdns.info/dnsrecord/?domain=nytimes.com)

</comment><comment><USER13> You can still get to the New York Times by going to their IP address: [http://188.8.131.52/](http://184.108.40.206/)

</comment><comment><USER14> Hacked by the SEA

<comment><USER14> I alternately get the message "Hacked by the SEA" (to my dismay I've been informed this is the Syrian Electronic Army, not the Symbionese Electronic Army...), or a redirect to [http://www.boxsecured.com/high_cpu.html](http://www.boxsecured.com/high_cpu.html) \- a 404 error saying hi_cpu.html is not found.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> NYTimes DNS has been hyjacked to redirect to SEA Blog (Syrian Electronic Army). Here I mirror the front page and some of the linked content from the English version of the page. You can see the page yourself by using FireFox or another browser besides Chrome that allows you to accept non-standard and mismatched certs. The JavaScript doesn't appear to be malicious, but I'm not an expert.

_ * Latest News *

Syrian Electronic Army Facebook Page | Number : 220 After the Facebook management shut down the page number 219 The new page link : [https://www.facebook.com/SEA.Official.220](https://www.facebook.com/SEA.Official.220) .. Read More...

Syria Tube is a page on the social network Facebook

it was created in 4/4/2011 in order to publish all the videos of what happening

in Syria and the right news about Syria

The new page link after the Facebook management closed the main page:

[https://www.facebook.com/Syria.Tube.Official](https://www.facebook.com/Syria.Tube.Official)

[https://www.facebook.com/SEA.Official.220](https://www.facebook.com/SEA.Official.220)

_ * Latest Hacks *

Time, CNN and WashingtonPost Websites Hacked

The Syrian Electronic Army hacked today into Outbrain service and take control of admin panel. The security breach affects CNN, Washington Post, Time and more high profile websites. Outbrain is a content recommendation service whose widget offers to help internet publishers incre.. Read More...

Time, CNN and WashingtonPost Websites Hacked Publish date: 2013-08-15 17:10:34 | Views number: 1559

The Syrian Electronic Army hacked today into Outbrain service and take control of admin panel. The security breach affects CNN, Washington Post, Time and more high profile websites.

Outbrain is a content recommendation service whose widget offers to help internet publishers increase web traffic at their websites. It does so by presenting them with links to articles and other content.

The admin panel of Outbrain is hosted in the local server. However, the SEA hackers managed to login into the panel with the help of VPN and access panel.

Zone-H Mirrors : [http://www.zone-h.org/mirror/id/20533795](http://www.zone-h.org/mirror/id/20533795)

[http://www.zone-h.org/mirror/id/20533808](http://www.zone-h.org/mirror/id/20533808)

ScreenShots of the Outbrain Administration Pa

_ * Media *

Syrian state television claims that a pro-government group has hacked into two social messaging networks and seized records of local users.

Such a hack could expose Syrian rebels and other activists who depend on the networks to publicize army crackdowns on their hometowns and communicate with each other. Landlines and cell phones are believed to be tapped in Syria.

State TV says the social networking site Tango was hacked on Sunday by the Syrian Electronic Army.

The Syrian Electronic Army is a shadowy group that supports President Bashar Assad's regime.

There was no immediate comment from Tango.

Syrian media says another network -- Truecaller -- also was hacked last week.

Truecaller said in a statement posted on their website that it had been the target of a cyber-attack.

Source: Fox News

Some website's talked too about the attack:

[http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/07/21/pro-assad-group- hack...](http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/07/21/pro-assad-group-hacks- messaging-networks-syrian-state-television-says/?test=latestnews)

[http://news.softpedia.com/news/Syrian-Electronic-Army- Hacks-...](http://news.softpedia.com/news/Syrian-Electronic-Army-Hacks-Mobile- Messaging-Service-Tango-369644.shtml)

[http://www.idigitaltimes.co.uk/articles/492642/20130720/syri...](http://www.idigitaltimes.co.uk/articles/492642/20130720/syrian- electronic-army-hacks-tango-messaging-application.htm)

[http://hackread.com/mobile-messaging-service-tango-hacked- by...](http://hackread.com/mobile-messaging-service-tango-hacked-by-syrian- electronic-army/)

[http://thehackernews.com/2013/07/Tango-messenger-hacked- Syri...](http://thehackernews.com/2013/07/Tango-messenger-hacked-Syrian- Electronic-Army.html)

[http://threatpost.com/sea-hacks-messaging-app-tango- steals-u...](http://threatpost.com/sea-hacks-messaging-app-tango-steals-user- information)

_ * Leaks *

Office of Qatar Emir's mother forces ISP to block SEALeaks website from Google searches/Qatari DNS

Office of Emir's mother forces ISP to block SEA | Leakks website from Google searches/Qatari DNS And here is the reply of the ISP: The Syrian Electronic Army obtained the emails after it hacked into Moza mail system .. Read More... SEA Publishes Turkish Ministry of Interior Emails and Passwords

Latest Hacks | Media | Leaks | Mobile Version

From The Pictures Library ::

From The Videos Library :: SEA gave a visit to Social Flow Website/Accounts

Office of Qatar Emir's mother forces ISP to block SEALeaks website from Google searches/Qatari DNS

[image of email] [http://i.imgur.com/gFJQX4W.png](http://i.imgur.com/gFJQX4W.png)

Publish date: 2013-06-29 16:00:20 | Views number: 4862

Office of Emir's mother forces ISP to block SEA | Leakks website from Google searches/Qatari DNS

And here is the reply of the ISP: [image content broken]

_ * Battalions *

Vict0r Battalion | The Shadow Battalion | Th3Pr0 Battalion

[http://blog.thepro.sy/](http://blog.thepro.sy/) | [https://www.facebook.com/SEA.Vict0r.2?_fb_noscript=1](https://www.facebook.com/SEA.Vict0r.2?_fb_noscript=1)

_ * Martyrs *

Martyr Mohammed Qabbani

Martyr Mohammed Qabbani

Martyr Lorans Barakat

_ * About SEA *

The Spark of the Launch

The SEA created in 2011 when the Arab media and Western started bias in favor of terrorist groups that have killed civilians, the Syrian Arab Army and the destruction of private and public property, was the Arab media and western form a cover for the continuation of these groups, their actions through the blackout on terrorism in Syria and paste all charges Army Syrian and charged with murder and sabotage... Read More

The Mechanism | The Funding | The Vision</comment>


Wunderkit - <AUTHOR> http://get.wunderkit.com/

<comment><USER2> I can read. these pictures are not worth 1000 words, and make me reluctant to spend the time to watch the video.</comment>


Harvard Classics Book Download - <AUTHOR> https://www.myharvardclassics.com/categories/20120212 <comment><USER3> Or in any format you like here: [https://archive.org/details/Harvard- Classics](https://archive.org/details/Harvard-Classics) or [https://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Harvard_Classics_(Bookshelf)](https://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Harvard_Classics_\(Bookshelf\))

EDIT: added Project Gutenberg link.

<comment><USER4> Slight self promotion, but Standard Ebooks has a few of the classics, and a few more of the classic fiction available as nicely formatted and accessible PD ebooks (epub, Kobo variant epub, and Kindle formats for each):

\- The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin: [https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/benjamin-franklin/the- auto...](https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/benjamin-franklin/the- autobiography-of-benjamin-franklin)

\- Meditations by Marcus Aurelius: [https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/marcus- aurelius/meditation...](https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/marcus- aurelius/meditations/george-long)

\- Don Quixote by Cervantes: [https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/miguel-de- cervantes-saaved...](https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/miguel-de-cervantes- saavedra/don-quixote/john-ormsby)

\- Pride and Predudice by Jane Austen: [https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/jane-austen/pride-and- prej...](https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/jane-austen/pride-and-prejudice)

\- Vanity Fair by William Thackeray: [https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/william-makepeace- thackera...](https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/william-makepeace- thackeray/vanity-fair)

\- David Copperfield by Charles Dickens: [https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/charles-dickens/david- copp...](https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/charles-dickens/david-copperfield)

\- Washington Irving collection: [https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/washington-irving/the- sket...](https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/washington-irving/the-sketch-book- of-geoffrey-crayon-gent)

\- Father Goriot by Balzac: [https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/honore-de- balzac/father-go...](https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/honore-de- balzac/father-goriot/ellen-marriage)

\- The Sorrows of Young Werther by Goethe: [https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/j-w-von-goethe/the- sorrows...](https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/j-w-von-goethe/the-sorrows-of- young-werther/r-d-boylan)

\- Crime and Punishment by Dostoyevsky: [https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/fyodor-dostoevsky/crime- an...](https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/fyodor-dostoevsky/crime-and- punishment/constance-garnett)

These are nearly always taken from the Gutenberg source transcriptions, but tidied up typographically and marked up using modern technologies. If you notice any problems with any of these we'll happily take PRs!

<comment><USER5> Thanks for Standard; it really adds a missing piece to the landscape.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> POSIX one-liner to download all PDFs:

      $ curl -s https://www.myharvardclassics.com/categories/20120212 \
        | grep "downloads.*download" | sed -e 's/href/\n&/g' \
        | sed 's/.*\(http:.*download\)/\1/g' | grep " - " \
        | grep -v target | sed 's/"> - / /g' | sed 's/<.*//g' \
        | while read link rest; do \
            if [ "${i}" = "" ]; then i=1; fi; \
            wget -O "Harvard Classics - Volume $(printf '%02d' ${i}) - ${rest}.pdf" "${link}"; \
            i=$(( i + 1 )); \
          done

<comment><USER7> For anyone that wants to download the books, I strongly recommend downloading the PDF archive on Archive.org because the image scans within the PDFs are of much higher quality. [https://archive.org/details/Harvard- Classics](https://archive.org/details/Harvard-Classics)

<comment><USER6> Nice. The `du -ch *pdf` for myharvardclassics.com is 439M, and this higher quality zip is 975MB.

      $ wget "https://archive.org/compress/Harvard-Classics/formats=TEXT%20PDF&file=/Harvard-Classics.zip"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> It is great that these books are available for download. However, the quality of a translation is hugely important. Even translations that were considered great at the time may be turgid and off-putting to a contemporary ear. And the problem is that you might try, for example, Dante from this list, hate it, and miss out on what may have been a life-altering reading experience. My advice, if you want to read some of the great classics, is to (a) look at reviews; and (b) compare paragraphs from different translations.

</comment><comment><USER9> Whenever this subject comes up, I feel the need to point out St. John's College's undergraduate liberal arts program: [https://www.sjc.edu/academic- programs](https://www.sjc.edu/academic-programs)

<comment><USER10> I assume you are implying it is based on the Harvard Classics? I guess they wouldn't explicitly advertise it as such.

<comment> barry-cotter They are pointing out that it's based on Great Books, the Western Canon. There will be some disagreement on which minor works are part of the canon but very little on major works. Plato, Homer, Augustine, Ibn Sina (Avicenna), Cicero, Goethe, Dante, Shakespeare

<comment><USER11> Props for using the proper name of Ibn Sina!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> So how does one go about reading such classics? Any tips? I often get distracted by the arcane language of many translations and go for a modern translation, preferably annotated. Even when the English seems pretty readable (say, Shakespeare) it's obvious I miss quite a lot in comprehension.

<comment><USER13> Open the first page, and continue through the rest. This might seem like a flippant answer, but I've always hated companion texts which try to read specific meanings into primary texts. I much prefer just to engage with the original, and make what I can of it. I figure I might miss some things, but I can also have my own perspective.

<comment><USER14> I understand where you're coming from, but for most people the brute force approach to reading original texts without sufficient background deprives them of many layers of understanding that makes a text rewarding to read.

And because most readers are centuries removed form the original context of the text, a direct reading also skews their interpretation significantly because most will read it through their own 21st century lens (this is how chronological bias seeps in).

Companion texts (or commentaries) might seem like crutches or training wheels because they only present one interpretive option (which could reflect a commentary author's biases).

The remedy is use more than one commentary, not necessarily to discard all commentaries. Critical thinkers do this instinctively anyway -- for instance, we click on multiple Google News links to figure out what's going on.

Commentaries help a modern reader to get to speed on the historical context and thinking that was present during that era, which in turn helps them to formulate their own (more informed) thoughts. One _could_ try to piece together this material by inferring stuff from the text, but chances are one would be wrong about the details and one would have to consult secondary or tertiary materials anyway.

In Chaim Potok's "The Chosen" (fiction), there's a Hasidic character named Danny Saunders who was a prodigy, praised by all for his intelligence. He had an eidetic memory and great ability for analysis, but found himself stumped when reading original texts in psychology. He studies German in order to read Freud, but he gets stuck on the fact German words can be understood in many different ways, when he only wants to find the ONE way.

He has a breakthrough when he realizes that Freud's works need to be _studied_ , not _read_. His epiphany led to him studying Freud using Talmudic methods (with multiple commentaries), arguing with it, etc. and finally, the text yields to him.

TLDR: when a text stumps you, try reading it with multiple commentaries.

<comment><USER11> What you are describing is what must be done when one embarks on a project of literary study.

If you just want a story, which is what almost all readers actually read for, just read it as it is, and if doesn't make any sense you are perfectly entitled to think it was a shitty book.

Frankly I think a (fiction) book must always be able to be read as-is, unsupported by outside means, else it is no longer a book.

(You hear that Greg Egan?! You wrote a really bad text book or a pretty good fiction book with pointless homework included every now and then.)

<comment><USER15> In 500 years, Star Trek will require a watcher's guide and come with a bundle of commentaries. Footnotes about 20th century culture will crawl across the bottom of the screen like subtitles. There will be a saying that, "by the time you are experienced enough to play Wesley you will be too old for him." Children will be expected to bubble in standardized Star Trek tests.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> "The Five Foot Shelf". Those were once a common set of books. They'd show up in used bookstores. Back when there were bookstores.

<comment><USER17> You mean, now all the bookstores are used? ;)

Shouldn't it be "used-book stores"?

<comment><USER18> Nope. Used Bookstores is correct.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Most readable one is also the one most mystifying included: Two Years before the Mast.

I actually bought this collection on ebay years ago for like 10 dollars. It's really a great example of not being able to buy the time along with the books. They mostly collect dust. "Mmm, Sacred Writings..."

</comment><comment><USER20> Would this be a good set from which to gain some insight into the evolution of the market economy in the southern colonies?

</comment><comment><USER21> They look great, alas they're all pdf so text size is fixed :(

<comment><USER22> What would you recommend? epub? Something else?

<comment><USER23> Epub is a great format if you're not just embedding images. It's pretty braindead, so generating it is easy, as is converting it to any other standard you need. Most ereaders can parse it.

However, if you have the LaTeX source, then you can both convert to whatever, and have no information loss. But you do usually have to render it to something else.

<comment><USER10> Where does one find LaTeX source for published books?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> ZipEpub

[https://archive.org/details/HarvardClassicsEpub](https://archive.org/details/HarvardClassicsEpub)

<comment><USER25> I downloaded them, unzipped, and opened a few. They're pretty badly formatted, especially the title pages. And none of the volumes I looked at had any table of contents.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> I have been experimenting with the idea of reading some classics in the languages they were written in - Greek, Latin, French, etc., and I am still wondering if the experience is worth the effort (of learning a language), especially given the availability of many excellent English translations.

<comment><USER27> The difficulty is that your language ability needs to be at such a high level that you'd lose more nuance from a translation than you would from lack of vocabulary etc when reading the original. In my opinion it's worth it for poetry but prose less so.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Gist for downloading the guide in text format for easier consumption: [https://gist.github.com/mutaphore/e8f2d9fec119288215b186d7dc...](https://gist.github.com/mutaphore/e8f2d9fec119288215b186d7dcdd3113)

</comment><comment><USER29> This is fantastic. My only gripe here is that I don't see Herodotus or Thucydides listed, which I would consider very important prerequisites to some of the other books, especially Plutarch.

</comment><comment><USER25> Is this resource new, or has it been available for a while?

</comment><comment><USER30> Would Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius generally make it onto a complete classics list, or is it because of Stoicism's recent resurgence in popularity?

<comment><USER31> I guess it depends on how 'complete' a list you're looking for, but the Loeb Classics library included Aurelius in 1916 and Epictetus in 1925. They were not in any way forgotten or thought of as minor.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> My parent's got a set of these in the 60's, leather bound with gold leaf printing on the covers and page trims. I had them assessed a few years ago, and they are worth a small mint. Then my evil sister got them and they are gone.

</comment><comment><USER33> Which books would you recommend to read from these?

<comment><USER34> Here [1] is a list (extracted from volume 50 apparently) of suggested excerpts. Supposedly, if you spend just 15 minutes a day reading these, you will become well educated in just a year. Note: I have not tried this.

[1] [https://www.myharvardclassics.com/categories/20120612_1](https://www.myharvardclassics.com/categories/20120612_1)

<comment><USER35> Note, some of them require signing in.

I wonder how well this list would work as a mailing list.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> the reading guide at the bottom is quite nice. It has a daily recommended 15minute snippet.

</comment><comment><USER37> What a great link for starting off the long weekend!

Great idea!

</comment><comment><USER38> [https://personalmba.com/](https://personalmba.com/) is also good for entrepreneurs

</comment><comment><USER39> I tried to read through this once. I couldn't get beyond: "Volume 1 - <USER2> Franklin" because I found Benny Frank to be an insufferable nerd hah. It sort of ruined the perception that grade school gave me of him.

<comment><USER40> When people talk about a culture of "anti-intellectualism", this is what they're talking about.

<comment><USER39> That's not true. He was just sort of a jerk. Maybe I should have said he was a nerd that was also an insufferable person. :)

Did you read it?

<comment><USER40> Yes, I've read it multiple times - it's incredibly short yet filled with a lot of wisdom. I highly suggest you give it a second look.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Solomid React Boilerplate - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/solomidnet/react-webpack-boilerplate <comment><AUTHOR> At SoloMid, we decided to open source a simple, most up to date, beginner- friendly React boilerplate. There are more comprehensive boilerplates out there (e.g. gh/react-boilerplate/react-boilerplate), however this is the boilerplate that worked for us and includes the most basic needs for a scalable web app.</comment>


Aren't more white people than black people killed by police? Yes, but no - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/07/11/arent-more-white-people-than-black-people-killed-by-police-yes-but-no?utm_term=.6968a4ebd9f9 <comment><USER2> More manipulation through bad statistics. You can't evenly divide by the population ratio to get a meaningful number. Law abiding citizens have fewer police interactions than criminals and criminals are disproportionately African American.

I hate to roll up statistics by race because it should never be used to judge an _individual_ of that race, but this is what the mass media and BLM are forcing us to do. The reality is that there is no statistical evidence that one race is being targeted in police killings more than another.</comment>


Why do fewer than 1% of startups have a full-time UX designer on staff? - <AUTHOR> http://52weeksofux.com/post/890289075/startuxs?

<comment><USER2> "UX is about defining the problem that needs to be solved (the why), defining the types of people who need it to be solved (the who), and defining the way in which it should be solved to be relevant to those people (the how). Yet as a rule, startups are being built on the what."

Or, it could be that the why, who, and how are ALSO being handled by the founders, and not delegated to an expensive employee who can only define the why, who and how, but can't actually build any of the solution (the what).

</comment><comment><USER3> UX design can't be scaled up beyond a single individual very effectively, so it has to be a founder responsibility.

</comment><comment><USER4> _UX is about defining the problem that needs to be solved (the why), defining the types of people who need it to be solved (the who), and defining the way in which it should be solved to be relevant to those people (the how)._

To me that defines "entrepreneurs", not "user experience designers". If this user experience designer is really doing all of that, then they should turn their why/who/how combination into a formal business plan and just get the funding required to hire an engineer to build out their vision, rather than whining about why they and their ilk are not getting hired by startups.

(edit: reading jt2190's post again, I realize that my comment actually ended up going in the same direction and is therefore largely redundant, but I figure it doesn't hurt to leave the different wording)</comment>


Liberating software - interview with Richard Stallman - <AUTHOR> http://rt.com/programs/spotlight/liberating-software-richard-stallman/ <comment><USER2> If Richard Stallman, has changed the name of "Free Software Foundation" to "Software Freedom Foundation", He could have saved 2 years of his lifetime, not having to explain "free as in freedom, not free as in beer".

<comment><USER3> The issue isn't so much with the Foundation as with "Free Software" in general. It wouldn't make sense to call Firefox a "Software Freedom" project, but calling it "Free Software" does makes sense (just in too many ways at the same time).

<comment><USER4> "The Software Freedom Foundation encourages (and participates in) the creation of Liberated Software"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> "On the one side are companies that sell programs to make money. On the other are people who believe software must be totally free."

Even before interviewing Richard Stallman, the journalist still didn't understand the difference between free/libre and free/gratis.

Maybe one day, the FSF will give up trying to force people to use the word "free" the way they insist it must be used. That "free software" is gratis is a very common misconception. Stallman could do a thousand interviews, continually correcting this misconception, or he could realise that the FSF's name itself is spreading it.

<comment><USER6> "Even before interviewing Richard Stallman, the journalist still didn't understand the difference between free/libre and free/gratis."

The problem is that "free/gratis" and "free/libre" are intertwined. If you sell an app to a user that is under the GNU license, they have the right to re-compile and re-release it for free (and it's allowed under the license).

I've tried to charge for software under the GNU license. The type of people that use it generally expect it free as in beer. If it isn't, you get hate mail and someone will eventually release their own free version (which is an exact copy of the the paid edition) to compete with yours. You will slowly lose all of your sales and traffic unless you also release it for free.

<comment><USER7> Why would you expect to do one thing once and then resource to virtually cost- free copying to get money from it? If people won't pay for it is because they feel is not worth to pay. Indeed if I can get something for free I'm not so much inclined to pay for it.

If you keep developing it and charge for access to a privileged access to updates, I'm sure you're sales will keep up. If you're updates are worth it, that is.

<comment><USER6> "Why would you expect to do one thing once and then resource to virtually cost-free copying to get money from it? If people won't pay for it is because they feel is not worth to pay. Indeed if I can get something for free I'm not so much inclined to pay for it."

People won't pay for it because all of my hard work and updates are immediately shared, for free, by someone that bought it once (allowable by the GNU license). You aren't allowed to restrict the user in the form of a proprietary license.

"f you keep developing it and charge for access to a privileged access to updates, I'm sure you're sales will keep up. If you're updates are worth it, that is."

As long as you are using the GNU license, these changes can be shared for free.

This is why services are the way of the future. No piracy, updates are easy, and you also get to charge a monthly fee.

<comment><USER7> Well, I don't know if you're aware of it, but you just repeated what I replied to you with a different phrasing.

<comment><USER8> A service is completely different. For one, you are not giving out any source code. If you do give out all your service source code under the GPL, you still have the same problem. If a single person buys it, they can then continually release a free version of it with the source provided.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Agreed with a lot of what he was saying about corporations controlling government and society. SOPA seems like a good example of that.

<comment><USER10> I have to play devil's advocate here because what you said is interesting.

Why do we not want corporations in control? Does using their software give them real control? How so and how much?

Now once you've answered those questions you then must ask yourself, if the creators of the software used by government agencies has the ability to control those agencies then who _should_ be "in control"?

If only free software was used like Stallman wants then we're just shifting control from one group to another. What's to say that Stallman and the FSF can and will only do good?

Make no mistake here, even though Linux and other free software is driven by the community that doesn't mean there aren't cases where a single developer works alone and releases something as GPL. In addition, while you can always add to a free project the developer has final say of what makes it in and what to leave out. You can put out your own version but if you don't have enough clout then it's unlikely your better version gets used. If Linux was used in government then Stallman has control. If they use Red Hat then they have control. I think Red Hat is an interesting example because while they're free they can still be just as manipulative as any large corporation if they wanted to.

Doesn't it make sense that if you don't want anyone to be "in control" of government agencies through the use of certain software then those agencies would need to roll their own at every level. In the end we're all beholden to the developer whether the software is free or proprietary.

<comment><USER3> For any open source project, the developer only has a final say on the _name_. If you disagree with what somebody is doing, you are _always_ free to take the code and change what you like. If Linux is used in the government, _the government_ has control: if they want they could, oh, write their own access control and security system for it. And then release it as open source. But that's patently ridiculous, right?

The whole point of Free Software is that you are _not_ beholden to the developer--you are always free to modify the code yourself or hire somebody else to do it. The government could even maintain their own distro and do everything the way they want. With proprietary software, there are two issues: they are not allowed to modify it _legally_ and it is not practical because you only have a binary.

In fact, the whole point of the GPL is to ensure that not only the original developer does not have absolute control over the source, but that other developers can't do so either.

<comment><USER10> I get that completely but one of my major points was that because people are writing the software you'll always run into some problem. People by mature have their views which can creep into software. They also make mistakes which could creep in too. And even though a large community submits code to a single project, the project's creator has final say of what makes the final version.

Now, all the points about these issues being mitigated and possibly eradicated are totally right on. What I'm saying though is that this freedom is only truly an advantage if you take advantage of it. Someone who uses free software but doesn't inspect the source, modify it to their liking, and generally just trusts it might as well have gone the proprietary route. That freedom it gives you is essemtially useless unless you're exercising it to your advantage. Granted, I'll give you that you can pretty much trust most major free software but all I'm saying is that you never know, you could have a back door or spyware in the free stuff and won't know it unless you check. Just because it's free doesn't mean it's safe. I'm wondering how many people are using free software to avoid these pitfalls but never look under the hood and just take the developer's word for it that it's secure. "It's FOSS so it _must_ be secure, right?" is how many may think.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> There was a question in the video which i found interesting (and which i think was not answered in the video)... if the source code of a program is publicly available, then won't an attacker have an easy time in finding vulnerabilities? By making only the binary available, isn't this risk being eliminated? (I don't know much about this, so was just wondering whether there is a good explanation for why this is true or not...)

</comment><comment><USER7> If you've seen other interviews with RMS, this is pretty much one more, a good one to be fair.

Spoiler alert!

Best part of the interview: Journalist: Are you married? RMS: No, I'm not. Journalist: Well, I am, I don't want to be free.

</comment><comment><USER10> Stallman repeats two idea that are intentionally misleading. He says that proprietary software controls the user instead of the user controlling the software. This is not true and it really depends on what "features" you are comfortable with having in programs you buy. Stallman likes to say iTunes is a jail but to him that feature is restrictive while to others it's simply convenient. If I buy a copy of Windows or Office or iWork I _do_ control the software. I'm able to control the input and output. It certainly has limitations but depending upon what knd of user I am I may not care to extend the application or modify it or learn how to do so. If I really wanted those "free" abilities then I'll choose free software but Stallman assumes we all want to be free as it relates to software. Not everyone does.

The other idea I'd disagree with is how he says free (as in liberty) software can be sold. In theory it certainly can have a price tag but when the source is just out in the open there's no incentive to use the paid version as someone will certainly put out some slightly modified free (gratis) version. That's the bulk of why proprietary software exists in the first place.

One more thing that irked me was that Stallman implies that only proprietary software makers will put malicious code in their products. Really? So everyone who's on board the Free Software Movement has only good will towards man and would never dare try to harm another user for their own ends?

In the end I think Stallman makes some good points but unfortunately he ends up sounding like an ideologue and at times even a conspiracy theorist. That turns me off. If he's all about freedom then he should also accept that we have the freedom to choose free or proprietary these days and there are people who choose no free software because we don't mind being tied to a certain ecosystem. I love my Mac and I so far, while Lion does treat me like an idiot at times, don't mind the "restrictions" at all. In fact I barely notice them because they're just not important to me. That's my choice, the same choice everyone else has. I also have a Linux box which I love for different reasons. In the end I'm able to have it both says and I think everyone does.

<comment><USER12> You have to realise that he looks at software from a developers point of view. To him using software includes the ability to extend it. I think to understand the essence of Stallmans point of view you have to realise that it is the nature of software to not just be used and provide human benefit by virtue of its existence but also to be read and understood. The next set of young hackers can today understand how to make an operating system because they can look through the implementation of a state of the art operating system. The more onerous parts of the GPL exist to protect this naive, delicate world view - one where code is perceived to be extensible art - one that is read, used and extended. I have to admit my bias - I dont agree with everything that Stallman says and does, but on the issue of the users right to read and extend code I strongly agree with him. My tribute to every software that I love and find magical is to read and understand how it works.

<comment><USER10> I'm looking at this from a developer's point of view too. I agree with Stallman on a lot of points. I dislike some of the malicious code he talks about and I also believe it is important to be able to view source. But we already have that without the FSF. This belief that all software should be free (as in liberty free) is unacceptable. We should be able to choose what happens to our work. There is a place in this world for both types of software. I love OS X. Now, it doesn't matter whether you like it or not too, what matters here is that I really don't think that the FOSS community could have built something as wonderful as that OS without the resources of a large company. Ubuntu is great and comes closest to being a real replacement for proprietary OSes but the design of the Mac and the whole ecosystem that Stallman hates is actually an incentive to choose it! I love the walled garden of the iTunes, app store, and Mac platform in general because it gives me everything I need. I don't cry about not being able to modify or see the code and Im happy to pay because I get a ton of value from it.

On the other hand I also have a Linux machine. I love switching distros frequently, using the free software that comes with it and being able to mod my system however I want.

My point is that eradicating proprietary software hurts people just as much as if we were to eradicate the FOSS movement. People choose their platform based on what they're able to do. Most users aren't programmers and prefer Windows or Mac over Linux because it's well known, easy, and gets the job done. I'm glad we have FOSS too though. Why can't the two coexist? Why is proprietary always evil? What's wrong with making money? As it stands we're living in an amazing time where we have the best of both worlds and both sides are playing to their strengths in the greatest of ways.

<comment><USER3> I don't see why you assume nothing as "wonderful" (which is a dubious perspective--I've used Mac OS quite a bit and it definitely _isn't_ wonderful) could not have been created by the open source community. Look, for example, at KDE 4.7. It is much better than Mac OS (or, more accurately, worth is subjective so your whole argument about "wonderful Mac OS" is silly) and is open source.

Most users who are not programmers don't prefer anything--they use whatever the nice salesman at Best Buy or their slightly tech-savvy relative got them to use. On top of that, both Windows and Mac are _infinitely_ more heavily marketed than Linux.

Proprietary software is always evil because it arbitrarily limits what you can do with something you've "bought". Almost everyone here hates DRM; proprietary software is basically software with DRM even if it isn't built in explicitly.

There is _nothing_ wrong with making money; that whole argument is a fallacy (a false dichotomy). Just because you let people modify and redistribute the source does not preclude your making money; I bet Apple would be raking in just as much cash even if you could (and hey, some people do already) run Mac OS on different hardware.

<comment><USER10> I never meant for my opinion to be taken as fact. I was just trying to illustrate part of my point.

Stallman and FSF people keep saying you can make money with free software but it's not realistic. I never said the FSF or Stallmam were opposed to making money either. Secrecy is what keeps proprietary software valuable. If paid software shipped with source you have already lost most of your sales after selling it just once. It would be great to be able to give people the ability to modify the software but that only works if everyone sticks to the honor system. The GPL requires that you be okay with redistribution. How can you make money when you agree to let your work be distributed in any way shape or form for free. I don't give a shit if you give me credit for the work. You can say Mickey Mouse coded it as long as you pay. That's how I see it.

I completely disagree with distribution. I think it's fine for people to distribute mods and patches but not the entire program. That completely undermines the developer.

I think the FSF is fighting for a just cause but the world just isn't ready for it yet. One mistake is to take a position that calls for the eradication of any software that isn't GPL basically. The other mistake is believing people will be honest. If I could trust every user to pay for a copy of my software and only distribute patches and bug fixes then I could happily get on board. But as long as free software means that people can (and "can" usually turns into "will") redistribute my work for free in its entirety and my work gives competitors a huge leg up then I cannot get behind free software as a viable business.

The support, upgrades, and patches business model doesn't lend itself to every program. It makes sense for Red Hat but would it makes sense for, say, TextMate? The world isn't ready. Free software is wonderful for software that costs nothing but not for the majority of businesses selling software.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Stallman conflates "charging money" with "being evil".

Charging money depends on some kind of friction, e.g., not providing source code, or releasing something so complex that you can charge for support, or releasing toy versions.

When I asked Stallman how I was going to make a living writing software if I gave my work away for free, all he said was "Well, I'm sure you can find a way." I wasn't reassured. I am, in fact, rather proud that people pay me for my work; it's a sign that it's worth something, and that I'm doing something right.

Charging money isn't evil, /evil/ is evil.

<comment><USER7> Err... no.

He associates evil with charging money for software but not letting the buyer having his basic owner rights. Being that the right to modify, use and redistribute.

Read this on the gnu website and understand how wrong you are: <http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html>

When asked that question he usually replies "if you can't make money by doing free software, maybe you can look for another job". One cannot blame him for putting his ethical principles in front of his professional interests. I, for one, think that's the way it should be.

In 2011 in hacker news we still have to clarify this... oh well...

<comment><USER10> Wait a minute now. Are those really a user's basic rights? Who is Stallmam to decide for both users and developers what our rights are? If users get those rights then developers have theirs taken from them.

This is unique to software and it isn't right. There's an underlying sense of entitlement to this that I don't agree with. No one is entitled to the right to modify my work and redistribute it. That completely undermines the developer and there's no incentive for people to innovate. It's a free for all where everyone rips everyone else off. This only works if everyone holds firm to Stallmam's beliefs.

If we want to talk about rights and freedom, how about the right for _everyone_ to choose. As it stands now we all can choose to make or use software that allows us to modify, extend, or distribute or we can choose to go proprietary. Both have their merits for both users and developers. These aren't really rights at all. Anything that takes freedom from one group and shifts it to another isn't freedom at all.

Stallman's entire ideology is built around a false choice. This shouldn't be free or proprietary, it should be free _and_ proprietary.

<comment><USER14> Stallman's ideology is actually fundamentally libertarian. The core principle of libertarianism is, "Your rights end where mine begin." It doesn't matter if you're a state, a corporation or another individual. Your rights end where mine begin.

Amongst the rights granted to each individual is the right to modify the tools that they use. You restricting my freedom to modify is as wrong (according to Stallman) as you restricting my freedom to move about.

<comment><USER15> I think "libertarian" is close but not quite right (unless you are coming from Chomsky's viewpoint, which is a niche within a niche, at least as far as US libertarian thinking is concerned).

If you take libertarianism to mean "allow anything that is consensual and does not involve externalities", then proprietary software as implemented today is totally fine. The user consents to an agreement that amounts to "I'll give you the output of my compiler, but I'm not going to give you the input. Also, you have to promise not to redistribute it."

Of course, setting up the details of that arrangement for every creative work would be a huge hassle, and copyright is an attempt (in my opinion a failed one) to streamline it. One way to envision copyright in a libertarian framework is a legal presupposition that when I tell you a "creative secret" (copyrighted work), you'll keep it secret (won't redistribute) unless I give you explicit permission (a license).

*Edit: to elaborate on why I think copyright is a failed streamlining of the above framework, I'll just give one example. If I broadcast my "creative secret" out loud (or over the EM spectrum) then I can't reasonably expect it to be secret. The people who listen to it and hear my "secret" have never formed a consensual agreement with me. Thus, copyright as it stands gets twisted into "you can't participate in public communications without promising to pretend that various things you hear are owned secrets"

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> > programmer-turned-philosopher Richard Stallman.

Oh boy. I guess if you have steadfast beliefs to the point that you can no longer keep yourself from sharing those every time you turn around, you become a philosopher.

RMS doesn't have a problem with software. He has a problem with capitalism. Stallman's approach to software is one to which I don't subscribe. Software is not something I see as needing liberation, like those of oppressed individuals in a society.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I would love to avoid some of the proprietary black boxes that I have to deal with in my job. However, I knew the situation going into it. Many times, I've not had the option of avoiding a black box.

That's a customer service and/or product problem, not an industry problem. If it's a problem that actually impedes innovation, I have a solution -- it's called the free market. We've never been in a better position to provide software solutions to problems not addressed by the market, and we can charge for them, give them away, do whatever we want. There is nothing holding us back in this scenario.

I find ironic his insistence that I cannot control software I create -- because no one should be allowed to control software -- is, in and of itself, controlling.

<comment><USER14> >I find ironic his insistence that I cannot control software I create -- because no one should be allowed to control software -- is, in and of itself, controlling.

Not really. Stallman is actually making a very libertarian point when he insists that users have the right to modify and redistribute software. He's saying, in essence, "Your rights end, where mine begin." To Stallman, every user has the right to modify and redistribute software, just like they have the right to modify and resell any other tool they use. As a software developer, you don't have the right to take away a user's software because they modify and resell it.

<comment><USER16> > To Stallman, every user has the right to modify and redistribute software, > just like they have the right to modify and resell any other tool they use.

I guess we should then be permitted to modify and resell a book, a movie, or anything else that's the output of one's thoughts?

If that's where the argument ended, I would simply say "well ok" and move on, but Stallman goes beyond that. He wants to dictate what terms I would put around any application I provide as a product, simply because it's in the realm of software. As if software is this magical land where I have no say in anything I produce.

Framing this industry as somehow different based on a simplistic parallel of hard goods = soft goods is disingenuous.</comment></comment></comment>


Contrasting native Erlang performance vs raw C vs C NIF functions - <AUTHOR> http://cs.mcgill.ca/~abeaul10/blog/3.html <comment><USER2> What about the popcnt intel intrinsic? [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11114017/whats-the- differ...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11114017/whats-the-difference- between-popcnt-and-mm-popcnt-u32)</comment>