I currently have a secondary pool (with raidz2) that I was originally going to use for my important documents, such as storage for Paperless-ngx, as raidz offers corruption detection and repair. The pool is encrypted.
However, I’m concerned about rebuild times (it’s a pool of 4 22TB drives). Is btrfs a better choice for this use case, or should I just go with raidz like I originally planned?
Edit: I should have mentioned that I already have 4-3-2 backups configured - I’m primarily interested in the “self-healing” aspect of ZFS so that I don’t have to recover from backups unless necessary, and to resolve corruption on the fly without me having to notice that a file is corrupt.
It wasnt even LLMs until the public took the term and changed it lol. Unless you are calling every algorithim ever made AI these days, this isnt AI.
Chess programs were AI. Expert systems which were regular logic were AI. Lisp was an AI language. Chat bots were AI.
This is a bot which makes it a type of AI and it’s really inaccurate.
uhm, no? Literally none of that was considered AI. Even chatbots, people weren’t calling them AI until LLMs came around and were stuck in them. Lisp is a language USED for AI research, that doesn’t make it AI itself.
This bot is most definitely not even close to what people consider AI
@Zeoic You are both correct. Chess was chosen as an early problem domain for work on first-order logic-based programming. That certainly was considered AI. People really interested in chess later abandoned logic programming in favor of brute-force, highly parallel special purpose hardware. That was not AI.
“Expert systems” (I hate that term) are application area of “Pattern-Directed Inference Systems” (PDIS). Rule-based systems are just one type of PDIS. For example, “Constraint Satisfaction” is another powerful AI technique often used in resource optimization and scheduling systems.
Notice my use of past tense as well as Zeoic use of past tense. I said chess was AI as you stated. Zeoic denied that chess was ever AI.