I am jaded enough to think that this is to manufacture consent or essentially letting doge have access to information through backups.
The first thing someone should think of when they think of backups is recovery, but the second thing to think of right after is the security risks associated with backups.
You don’t have contact information in your profile, so I have to say this publicly: thank you for your thoughtful posts. I have thoroughly enjoyed and appreciated them in recent times. Your perspective is unique and IMO well thought out. Thanks for sharing.
This isn't jaded, this is a realistic conclusion to draw based on everything we have witnessed and are experiencing. This is almost certainly happening.
I seem to recall some 'best effort' backup requirements are based on feasibility/etc of your tools. Changing tools could have significant 'legal requirement' impacts.
I don't remember specifics but you have to backup to the level of a reasonable budget. Theoretically using the same budget to move from cheap archival medium to more expense could reduce backup history/backup detail levels while still meeting the legal requirements (if I remember correctly).
You jest but there is some ironic truth in your suggestion. Be careful, they are watching and might take your advice. Can not restore from backup? No problem. Department implodes and reduces burn rate even further.
https://archive.today/KOH4E
I am jaded enough to think that this is to manufacture consent or essentially letting doge have access to information through backups.
The first thing someone should think of when they think of backups is recovery, but the second thing to think of right after is the security risks associated with backups.
You don’t have contact information in your profile, so I have to say this publicly: thank you for your thoughtful posts. I have thoroughly enjoyed and appreciated them in recent times. Your perspective is unique and IMO well thought out. Thanks for sharing.
This isn't jaded, this is a realistic conclusion to draw based on everything we have witnessed and are experiencing. This is almost certainly happening.
I seem to recall some 'best effort' backup requirements are based on feasibility/etc of your tools. Changing tools could have significant 'legal requirement' impacts.
I don't remember specifics but you have to backup to the level of a reasonable budget. Theoretically using the same budget to move from cheap archival medium to more expense could reduce backup history/backup detail levels while still meeting the legal requirements (if I remember correctly).
They should just stop making backups. That'd "save" a ton of money!
You jest but there is some ironic truth in your suggestion. Be careful, they are watching and might take your advice. Can not restore from backup? No problem. Department implodes and reduces burn rate even further.
A whole million dollars a year! That'll fix the budget!