Hacker News Reader

Comment by josefresco | Hacker News Reader

How is using Arq+Nearline better than Backlaze (client and storage)? Not really "self hosted" if you're still dumping the data to a cloud provider. Even if you configure Arq to use your own "cloud" (cost of that notwithstanding) I don't think it's an overall net improvement.

View on HN

(I'm the developer behind Arq) With Arq you keep control of your stuff because it's encrypted before it leaves your computer. With Backblaze you can choose your own encryption key, but to restore your files you have to give them your key; they decrypt your files and leave them (unencrypted!) on their servers for you to download, which I think makes choosing your own encryption key pointless. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8169040 https://www.backblaze.com/backup-encryption.html

arq (which we love) + rsync.net = success.

We have a "HN readers" discount which is fairly substantial.

= success

rsync.net is 20x more expensive than Google Nearline ($0.20/GB).

Why would anyone choose to use it for Arq when Arq supports both?

While I personally don't mind Google having all my backup data, we must appreciate the fact that in this post-Snowden world some people will justifiably refuse to go with the big USA-corp players like Amazon or Google.

rsync.net just saying: "Hey, we're not Google or Amazon" is already a big selling point for some.

I encourage you to email us and ask about the HN readers discount.

Further, Amazon S3 is a better comparison, as far as pricing goes - we're fully live, online, random access storage - not nearline or weirdline like google/glacier.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com