23 points

🤖 I’m a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:

Click here to see the summary

This isn’t a drive he purchased many months or years ago — it’s the supposedly safe replacement that Western Digital recently sent after his original wiped his data all by itself.

SanDisk issued a firmware fix for a variety of drives in late May, shortly after our story.

But data recovery services can be expensive, and Western Digital never offered Vjeran any the first time it left him out to dry.

Honestly, it feels like WD has been trying to sweep this under the rug while it tries to offload its remaining inventory at a deep discount — they’re still 66 percent off at Amazon, for example.

Unfortunately, the broken state of the internet means Western Digital doesn’t have to work very hard to keep selling these drives.

I’d also like to say shame on CNET, Cult of Mac and G/O Media’s The Inventory for writing deal posts about this drive that don’t warn their readers at all.

permalink
report
reply
9 points

Good bot

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Wow so the first one failed, then they relied on its replacement completely and blindly. It’s dumb shit like this that made me stop feeling bad for those who experience data loss.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

We had the same problem here in our company. Don’t use theirs drives.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

That’s a bit extreme. Don’t use ‘Extreme PRO Portable SSD’ units, but WD has some pretty reliable SSDs and if we boycott WD only Samsung is left…

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points
*

WD writing fake reviews?

There’s no way an actual human wrote such an extensive, detailed but overall dry of content as a review, unless they got it for free in exchange of an enthusiastic review

Edit: the article shows screenshots of clearly fake reviews on Amazon from “verified” buyers. This is what I’m referring to fake reviews

permalink
report
reply
5 points

AI generated article

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

The article is pretty human written.

It’s the Amazon reviews in the article being talked about.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

What the hell are you talking about? Consider reading the actual article before commenting something snarky. WD owns SanDisk, and this article is shitting all over them.

Here’s a short version if you can’t be bothered: It’s a follow-up to this article from May where they reported on a bug in SanDisk firmware that erased your data. WD claims to have fixed it with an update, but that appears to be false. The fact that these drives with a high failure rate are also being sold with a deep discount makes it seem like WD/SanDisk is just trying to get rid of defective hardware as quickly as possible while minimizing dollars lost, at the expense of your data.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

They were talking about the reviews featured in the article. Did you read it?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Ah, got it. Very unclear from your comment.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

In case anyone is in a similar situation, I can’t say enough good things about PhotoRec. It saved my ass more than once from hard drive recovery down to SD cards.

https://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/PhotoRec

Yeah, yeah, it’s command line only, but once you get your stuff back it’s worth learning!

permalink
report
reply
1 point

I second this. I luckily never needed it myself but I saved the stuff of a few people over the years and it’s not one of those annoying „free“ apps.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

And it is not only command line. PhotoRec has a gui, only testdisk doesn’t

permalink
report
parent
reply
69 points

NOTHING I have that is irreplaceable is on less than 2 drives nor are they ever connected at the same time. You’re just asking to lose files if you only save them on one drive.

permalink
report
reply
4 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Important for humans too… unfortunately we keep on making corrupted copies.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Himself and his invasion plans. Though I feel weird referring to it as ‘him’, I guess it’s his choice. AI rights.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

A bot WOULD have good backup routines…

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Until the backups don’t work.

Untested backups can hold all sorts of surprises.

Sadly, testing backups is a lot of work and is rarely done.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Deja Dup has a nice feature in that every once in a while is spawns and verifies that the backup is retrievable

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Not your problem… until the hosting provider publishes a press release about some recent fire or flooding in the data center that “only impacted less than 1% of our customers”… and you turn out to be among them.

For “super important” stuff, I keep closer to 10 copies spread around in different places. Normal stuff is 321, and everything else is temporary.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
53 points

If you have your data in one location, you have your data in zero locations.

The 3 2 1 of data retention is important

3 copies of your data

2 local

1 off-site

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

The 2 stands for on 2 different mediums. So HDD and tape for instance. Or HDD and SSD. Or SSD and DVDs. Whatever combo you choose that fits your needs. This (minimizes) the chance of loss of both.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I’d love to use tape but so far couldn’t bring myself to make the Jump cause of the upfront cost of the drive. Other than that it would sound great to have tapes of my digitized bluray collection so as if my nas should fail unrecoverably, I could simply setup a new one and copy back the data instead of having to digitize everything again.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I know a lot of people who put their single copy of files on USB drives “for safety”

But in the case of the article looks like it was video shot and saved directly from the camera (professional cameras like the blackmagic save directly on USB SSDs), so there wasn’t time to backup it

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

I know a lot of people who put their single copy of files on USB drives “for safety”

But in the case of the article looks like it was video shot and saved directly from the camera (professional cameras like the blackmagic save directly on USB SSDs), so there wasn’t time to backup it

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Looking at Blackmagic’s pro-level cameras, they support external USB storage and dual SD Cards and dual CFast cards.

So there’s certainly no requirement to use external USB storage.

But, they also say:

When shooting is complete you can simply move the external disk to your computer and start editing from the same disk, eliminating file copying!

Rather unfortunate advice.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@beehaw.org

Create post

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community’s icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

Community stats

  • 2.9K

    Monthly active users

  • 2.9K

    Posts

  • 54K

    Comments