Then use a 5W CPU and set the disks to spin down after inactivity. Your argument only holds if the disks are spinning 100% of the time, which is only true if you have an incompetent idiot setting up your power-sensitive NAS, or are actually using it 100% of the time.

You are wrong. Amazon is a greater risk because there are more known unknowns and unknown unknowns. They can build a cloud. If I build my own, I can specify the MTBF myself. I can spec higher or lower equipment. Same reason why building my own PC is a lower risk. Rather than unknown components, I can specify specific components. This modifies risk.

Your stupid assertion is that risk is the same if you can't prove the risk is different. By that standard, parachuting without a chute is no more risky than snorkeling in a 5 ft pool. Neither are well defined risks, so we must accept them as equal.

No, I don't believe in that religion. I'll stick to more traditional risk management practices.

Or, to put it in the framework of your wrong religion, the risk is that the outsourcing company is lying to you. That is an additional risk that will always make outsourcing more risky than insourcing. It's the lazy and incompetent managers that mutter "core competency" while outsourcing the vital portions of the company. And the piles of consultants who make money writing rigged reports recommending outsourcing. Liars cheats and thieves.

And you there, leading the charge.

You do realize that you can turn them off sometimes, right?

Total control doesn't mean perfection. He has total control. His actions control the fate and risks of the drives 100%. There is no risk outsourced to a 3rd party entity.

After Hiroshima, the Allies requested a surrender. Japan surrendered. The allies rejected the surrender (unacceptable terms). Nagasaki was nuked. Japan revised their terms of surrender. That one, still with terms, was accepted.

Which of those sentences are false? If none are false and they are in chronological order, the US committed mass murder to negotiate better terms of surrender.

For all those sites, I use 1234 or similar. Who cares if someone takes over my Slashdot account? It wouldn't help them do anything. So all my "post only" accounts (Medium and such) are easy. Forums get another. Anything with financial info (PayPal, Banks) has a unique password, and email is as secure as the banks.

Yeah, the kids locked my wife out of her iPhone. She put on a password, not thinking it through. The kids kept trying to get in past all the warnings and such, and not reading anything they were doing. It was only after it stopped letting them try to log in that they gave up. I didn't put a password on my phone because the version of Android I'm using makes 911 a 1-click when you are on the login screen. After having to say "sorry misdial" a few times (can't just hang up when you realize what happened, or the police come looking for you), I removed the password, so that 911 isn't a single click away.

And it made the torpedoes used in Pearl Harbor. If it were hit in 1942, it would have undoubtedly been a military target. But hitting a civilian manufacturing town (even if the civilians were manufacturing implements of war) just days before a surrender, and after talks of surrender had started makes Nagasaki more a terrorist act than Dresden, which was thought quite poorly of at the time (by both enemies and allies).

Hiroshima nuking killed about 20,000 troops. Nagasaki nuking killed less than 200 troops. Two orders of magnitude. The Nagasaki bomb wasn't intended to weaken the military's ability to fight, but was intended to weaken the public's will to fight. One is a military goal, the other terrorism.

You don't need anything in writing. A recorded call would be sufficient for a win. So the question is whether he could get the call recording from when he was lied to, causing the loss. That's more than enough for a win in court.

And due to REA and the USF, and the fact you didn't talk about not having electricity and phone, I will assume you have 3 of the 4 I mentioned, and are a lying little shit only talking about the one you don't have, and pretending that is somehow standard.

Yes, if you moved to Antarctica, you'd have few services. And yes, unincorporated Alaska has no services either. But middle-of-nowhere Alaska, if still an incorporated area, will likely have 4/4 for the services I mentioned. You'd have to deliberately avoid the services to end up somewhere they weren't.

He mentioned discrimination first. I just asked how far his discrimination went. Would you have preferred serving Atheists in the alley? A bill up for vote now in Indiana would allow exactly that (religious discrimination would be explicitly allowed by law).

And you seem to be assuming something about me. "you want to be treated special". Who us "you" and what special treatment did I ask for?

The next time, place the order before you buy. If they agree to it, sue them if they fail to honor their contract.

Yeah, like your ISP lays separate fiber for residential backhaul and business backhaul. Nope, it's all "converged" and QoS is (hopefully) used to separate the tiers.

Comcast lied and caused a loss. That's fraud (in civil, but not criminal court). He should sue Comcast for the price of the house. Chances are, they'll build whatever they have to to make the lawsuit go away. If he gets the "recorded for quality purposes"recording, it should be a slam-dunk.

So providers shouldn't provide services to black people, because they make poor customers when you make then eat in the alley?

Or phone and electric were built to serve all, even in a particular customer was served for a loss, so why do you think that Internet is less of a fundamental service than electricity or roads or water or phone?