Thank you - so it‘s just less redundant than e.g. Backblaze (I assume). That‘s an important distinction. See, I‘m not a fan of using buzzwords to describe anything in more detail. „Cloud“, „AI“, „Big Data“, „NoSQL“ etc. is (sometimes) fine to get non technical people interested, but useless to say anything meaningful about a system IMO.

I can't find any guarantee on reliability for Backblaze, their SLA ( https://www.backblaze.com/company/sla.html ) has

"Backblaze will make commercially reasonable efforts to ensure that B2 Cloud Storage is available and able to successfully process requests during at minimum 99.9% of each calendar month. "

Can I ask, what makes that setup "not cloud" vs Amazon S3? Amazon doesn't make public their hardware setup, merely that they offer various "9s" of reliability against data loss.

What if, for arguments sake, Amazon's secret setup is exactly the same as Hertzner hardware wise, with Amazon merely putting a number against the reliability that setup offers?

> Can I ask, what makes that setup "not cloud" vs Amazon S3?

"The data is not mirrored onto other servers." says it all.

It's like renting some shared space on a dedicated server with auto-monitoring.