Webomatica - Latest Comments in Protecting Your Data When Web 2.0 Sites Fail

Re: Protecting Your Data When Web 2.0 Sites Fail

David Airey — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 10:47:08 -0000

Like you, I'll still be using Google's services, even though a GMail security failure led to the theft of my domain name.

I've just learnt to be more security concious now, and appreciate how important a good host provider / domain name registrar can be.

Interesting post.

Re: Protecting Your Data When Web 2.0 Sites Fail

webomatica — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 17:51:33 -0000

Oh don't get me wrong, I'm certainly continuing to use Google. They do give the option of getting the data out to a large degree, which I'm glad to encourage.

And no it can't hurt to have data in many places - offline and online. As long as all those places play nice with the data and support open, standard file formats.

Re: Protecting Your Data When Web 2.0 Sites Fail

JC — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 17:12:22 -0000

Intersting point. I still think your data is more secure on a Google server than it is on your own hard drive. At least Google has redundant backup systems going at all times. Sure, I have Tume Machine. But in the event of a fire or Earthquake, I'm far more likely to lose my own data. Both my laptop and my backup drive could get swallowed in an instant.

Now with Facebook, or some of the other newer, less proven companies, I definitely wouldn't feel safe. But I do think Google, at least, isn't going anywhere. And its in their best financial interest to keep my data accessible as often as possible.

Still, I keep local copies of anything that's on the web as well. Can't hurt, right?