If you want to have multi-host redundant storage at home (via e.g. minio or ceph), S3 is a pretty good protocol to provide it.

S3 is nice in the way it's not a file system so it can have relaxed semantics, while also providing secure access to individual files over HTTPS via URL signing.

Some people seem to be stuck in the idea that S3 means cloud hosting. Not sure if that was your view, but it's worth spelling out sometimes.

I just noticed https://lemmy.ml/u/giloronfoo@beehaw.org had proposed the same, but here's the same but with more words ;).

I would propose you try to split the data you have manually into logically separate parts, so that you could logically fit 0.8 TB on one drive, 0.4 TB on another, and maybe sets of 0.2TB+0.2TB on a third one. Then you'd have a script that uses traditional backup approaches with modern backup apps to back up the particular data set for the disk you have attached to the system. This approach will allow you to access painlessly modern "infinite increments" backups where you persist older versions of data without doing full and incremental backups separately. You should then write a script to ensure no important data is forgotten to be backed up and that there are no overlapping backups (except for data you want to back up twice?).

For example, you could have a physical drive with sticker "photos and music" on it to back up your ~/Photos and ~/Music.

At some point some of those splits might become too large to fit into its allocated storage, which would be additional manual maintenance. Apply foresight to avoid these situations :).

If that kind of separation is not possible, then I guess tar+multi volume splitting is one option, as suggested elsewhere.

What do you mean? Matrix supports E2EE.

Its not used with e2ee, is it though? At least it's not the default and I doubt it can even be enabled.

So what is the security flaw assuming we weren't using e2ee to begin with?

Unless you mean that the simple client should still provide other people that have non-simple clients URL previews, which would only be accomplished if the server generated them.

Yes, like RSS bots, bridges, webhook-bots etc all can produce links the recipient might want to see previews for.

Another thing is that e.g. spammers might choose to use a misleading preview. Though I suppose that's a minor point, probably server-side previews can be tricked as well.

What is the security/privacy flaw if the server does it? No point thinking a non-encrypted would be very secret in the first place.

I guess the idea is that this works with simpler clients as well. Other nessaging networks with initiator-side previews usually have single-provider clients, as far as I know.

Initiator-generated previews would be a nice feature, though, and they would work with e2ee.

I rather enjoy Tilix. It can tile a single tab without tmux and it can also give special handling to links matched from regexps. I use it to go from Python stacktraces to correct line in Emacs with just a click. It can also do Quake-like terminal, which I use alot.

The project is looking for maintainers, though, so it's possible at some point I need to start looking for alternatives..

It still loses to HgBa2Ca2Cu3O8+6 with Tc = 133–138 K at normal air pressure, though. (I assume it's normal air presure as the article doesn't say the pressure for it, while it refers to some others as high-pressure ones.)

Maybe LK-99 still has other benefits, such as not using mercury.