nosolace

  Location: New York City, USA
  Remote: Yes
  Willing to relocate: No
  Technologies: Python, C & C++, Rust; kernel module development; Verilog, Verilator, Vivado, Cadence Virtuoso; analog hardware
  Résumé/CV: https://khz.ac/cv.pdf
  Email: [email protected]

i'm nausicaä van west, and i'm a software, firmware, & hardware engineer; i've a background in solar power electronics, infosec (including classified work), circuit design, and a little bit of mechanical engineering & robotics. recent-ish grad (2024) but with more work experience than you would think. if you have electrical engineering work, send me an email!

iirc i address this in a footnote --- absence of SMART errors has very little predictive power, presence has slightly more but it depends which errors they are and how they accumulate

the reason RAID is not backup, aside from snapshotting, is colocated drives (same faulty machine, same flammable location, same malicious thunderhead) have a far higher chance of failing at the same time due to evnironmental effects --- hence the decision to have half the drives stored remotely. having a third copy, stored cold (blu-rays are a good idea) helps, but only if its failure is sufficiently independent af the others to make a real dent in the probabilities (e.g., a safe-deposit box or a friend's house, not where any of the drives are!)

definitely cribbed from tufte, with a few tweaks.

oh it's definitely a bit absurd, but i felt i needed a workout.... hence this post. multiple sites, hardware diversity, staggered upgrades, cold storage, are all really good ways to improve this, as they pull failure events closer to independence

the author is in fact reading this and will make some changes

edit: haven't managed to replicate the absurdly huge image; what version # & os are you on?

there is (now) a sample recording, for anyone interested.