RecluseRamble

I guess that's far more unbreakable than what we have. But anyway, several three letter agencies will fight this (again) tooth and nails.

Could you imagine what the world would be like if we let their like lead our countries?

Well, iOS could just do it like every other OS that don't restore deleted data by installing an update.

If that is your whole point, you didn't approach it right as you can see with all the downvotes.

You seemingly argued against RAID which was invented for data availability and performance. While it's true, that RAID alone is no backup solution, having just a single drive is more hassle when it fails, so running multiple drives in a RAID allows for better handling despite the higher probability of having to swap a drive.

Another point you did not consider: larger drives have more sectors that can fail. While I have no data for this, a 32 TB drive is unlikely to have the same rate of failure as a 16 TB one - the larger drive will be more likely to fail (not as likely as one of two drives failing though).

I'm claiming that these 32TB drives will reduce your risk of losing data than by raiding 2 16TB drives, given the same failure rate.

Assuming the probability of failure is the same, you're right, running two drives doubles the risk of a drive failing.

However, if your single 32 TB drive fails, all data is gone and you have to rely on backup. If one of the 16 TB drives fails, you replace it and the RAID restores the data with much less hassle.

Both 16 TB drives failing at once is negligible (however, the RAID controller might).

It seems you never had a HDD die on you.

And yet I recently was told my some nutjob "he's the most decent man".

What's "boomer shooter" supposed to mean? According to Wikipedia definitions, baby boomers were 29-47 years old when Doom was released - hardly the target audience.

Based on this article and the linked one it looks like the ex Nouveau maintainer Ben Skeggs (single-handedly?) fixes Nvidia Linux support?! A truly heroic deed of true.

Also Ethereum is extremely inefficient compared to conventional tech (like just a database). All you need is to realize that complete trustlessness is impossible to understand that a distributed ledger has no problem to solve. And that's why there is no practical application after all these years.

No, it's not useful as a cash substitute because of its hilarious inefficiency.

You don't need to go crypto to get there though

You never do. Its only use case is a payment system for online crime. And even for that many criminals prefer gift cards because it's such a hassle to explain crypto-tokens to your victims.