this post was submitted on 29 Apr 2024
597 points (97.6% liked)

Technology

60016 readers
2696 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

but is well worth the effort in the end.

That's easily said when you don't have to supply the effort or pay the hosting bill.

[โ€“] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

takes enormous amounts of data and is hard

Seems like this was acknowledged, but a good point nonetheless (that's often overlooked).

I'm currently sitting on 4TB of data (that's largely movies and TV shows), running on 4-year-old hardware, with 3 local replicants, backed up to cloud.

My power and cloud costs are trivial - about 25 cents a day - that's less than $100/year (after hardware costs, which come out to about $150/year to continue with similar performance levels). My 4 year old "server" idles at about 20 watts. I can probably bring this down to perhaps 10w with a newer NUC or similar.

I could easily store everything my extended family produces (including cousins, about 50 people) with a similar setup. In fact, I'm working on just such a project - an SFF or NUC type device with sufficient.

Edit: autocorrect changed $100 to $10