That does not seem paranoid to me?
I have had two simultaneous disks fail in a RAID-DP (NetApp's old terminology for something similar to a RAID6 or an [Open}ZFS RAIDz2). RAIDz3 seems extremely understandable to me given BER (Bit Error Rates) tend to go up the denser drives get, and drives are very dense these days.
(Open)ZFS also has some extremely helpful things such as resilvering, and in general, seems as if it is one of the best examples of keeping data integrity in realms where there are many things working against that in my experience.
Admittedly, I haven't really explored (Open)ZFS on Linux much, though I guess support has improved drastically in recent years? To the point where I think I read that TrueNAS (where I previously consulted back when they were known as iXSystems, though I was not there so long ago when they were still known as BSDi) tends to prefer Linux (TrueNAS "Core" I think is what they called it for a while?)? Kinda sad for me, since I dug working at iXSystems because of all the BSD folks.
Back when I was running larger storage systems on Linux, XFS seemed preferable (ZFS was not an option back then though) and my (mostly FreeBSD and TrueNAS) (Open)ZFS experiences are probably a bit out of date (2013ish was when I was deepest in such realms).
Btrfs seemed, to me at least: kinda sketchy? I dunno. ext4 seemed OK for Android and less critical systems for single users; yet for servers with lots of users and diskIO? XFS and I guess now (Open)ZFS would probably be my preferences.
The resource utilization of (Open)ZFS is nontrivial; also see: why DragonFlyBSD has gone into the realms of HAMMER(2) though I don't think DragonFlyBSD has nearly the number of users kicking the tires as FreeBSD or Linux have for fixing the sorts of bugs that (Open)ZFS has had fixed with Solaris and Illumos having done a lot of due diligence even earlier.
The expense and resource trade offs though? Not everyone can justify the expense of (Open)ZFS and RAIDz3 and ZILs and all that jazz. Even for those with a home NAS? Many humbler options are probably more than sufficient.
In contrast? I had an employer circa 2014ish which had an HA (High Availability) CARP (Common Address Redundancy Protocol) pair of TrueNAS systems each with 384TB of raw disks (though due to reasons beyond my control, configured in RAIDz2 rather than my preference of a RAIDz3) and it wasn't even that expensive (like, really; these days it would probably be much more affordable to have even denser storage in that much rack space, RAMpocalypse and all). Yet, when others' are footing the bill, it's "easy" to administer such things without having to worry about it so much. (And contrasted with Isilon [now EMC I think? Yuck], or NetApp, way cheaper though maybe without some of the perks of those more seasoned big NAS vendors [having a spare drive show up to my desk within a 4 hour window when I worked as an admin at a place that coughed up the $$,$$$.$$ for NetApps for example, that was glorious).
CC: @bob_zim@infosec.exchange @kbm0@mastodon.social