cron job -> tar gz -> s3cmd -> s3
Their cheap, very reliable, and fast. What else can I ask for.How about faster, cheaper, and more flexible? If you back up the same or overlapping sets of files, tarsnap's snapshotting functionality will probably result in it using less bandwidth (and thus end up being cheaper) than a raw tar | gzip | s3 approach.
But for my purposes as personal data backup, I just wouldn't see a speed or price difference of that type of efficiency.
You can read about my horrible experience with Mozy (and the horrible experiences of hundreds of commenters) here: http://wonko.com/post/it_turns_out_mozy_isnt_so_hot_after_al...
Thanks everyone!
I also use Dropbox for a certain subset of my documents, so that adds another layer of backups w/ partial rollback as well.
Online backups are good, but an external SCSI enclosure costs at most $40 + the cost of an internal drive, which is cheaper, and allows faster recovery.
In addition to their own backup agent; they support rsync, scp, sftp, ftp, rdiff-backup, Unison, duplicity, svn+ssh, WebDAV and any other combination or concoction you can come up with.
Plus, they have a ToS agreement that can't be beat: http://www.rsync.net/resources/notices/tos.html
runs from cron, archives files and mysql databases (and more), encrypts with gpg and uploads to amazon s3
I just backup on DVDs every 3-4 months, the folders that change over that period.
I don't keep anything immediately replacable (like media).