Yeah I guess it probably makes more sense when it’s my business… Maybe not if you’re an employee at some corporate randomly hosting backups of your dog photos.

I have a 120TB unraid server at home, and a 40TB unraid server at work. Both use 2 x parity disks.

The critical work stuff backs up to home, and the critical home stuff backs up to work.

The media is disposable.

Both servers then back up to Crashplan on separate accounts - work uses the Australian server on a business account, home used the US server on a personal account.

I figure I should be safe unless Australia and the US are nuked simultaneously… At which point my data integrity is probably not the most pressing issue.

Who cares why they did it?

It proves they can and do alter the “archived” website, so it’s usefulness as a source is completely gone.

I’d be happier if Firefox received more support. A relatively equal duopoly of browsers is preferable IMO to 80% market share for one, and the remaining 20% broken up amongst half a dozen competing alternatives.

Lot of developer power out there that would be better spent improving what’s mostly already there (Firefox) rather than starting multiple different projects from scratch again. People will burn up any energy and spare time they had to help without even seeing a new browser render it’s first HELL WORLD

My Facebook feed looks nothing like that, nor most of the (exaggerated?) complaints in the replies.

Mine is full of content from people I know, local community groups, and pages I follow.

If I scroll long enough to run out of actual local/ subscribed content it will start feeding me other stuff, but it’s usually at least somewhat relevant. If it’s not I just hit the X to say not interested and usually take the opportunity to get off the damn thing for a while.

Facebook does a lot of stupid crap but these sort of lazy observations smack of some nerd pandering to the cool kids about how lame their parents are to get some acceptance or something equality as cringe.