ewx: (Default)
Richard Kettlewell ([personal profile] ewx) wrote2007-01-25 01:12 pm
Entry tags:

[identity profile] rochvelleth.livejournal.com 2007-01-25 06:19 pm (UTC)(link)
I'm not sure if having a hard copy of irreplacable data would count as a back-up to most people, but it does to me[1] ;) My Part II thesis now only exists as a hard copy due to computer death.

Is irreplacable still irreplacable if it was unique but you don't really care that you lost it? Just out of interest :)

[1] But yes, I'm a techless artsy type who's compiling PhD data by hand anyway. In fact, the most irreplaceable things I have are photos (meticulously backed up on CDs) and stories (not backed up, but usually swimming in cyberspace somewhere retrievable).
ext_8103: (Default)

[identity profile] ewx.livejournal.com 2007-01-25 09:18 pm (UTC)(link)
I think irreplaceable normally carries an implication that you'd care about losing it.
ext_8103: (Default)

[identity profile] ewx.livejournal.com 2007-01-25 09:22 pm (UTC)(link)
Oh, and a backup is anything that is adequate to its user(s) as a substitute for the original. I have 2-300MB of mail, and a printout wouldn't be adequate, because I wouldn't want to type it back in and it wouldn't be searchable on paper; but my addresses file is only about 1000 lines long, and typing it back in would be acceptable if that was the only way.