Obligatory Dilbert

So, they can't afford a few grand for proper backups, but they can afford six (or seven) figures in legal fees?

That probably makes sense to them.

We're witnessing how it works, with a single copy of critical backups in the hands of a third party that is now defunct. Which is to say, it works . . . poorly.

The legal fees to get a usable copy of their backups is going to cost them orders of magnitude more than keeping proper backups would have. But apparently, their main plan was to use cinnamon flavored unicorn farts for backups.

What an idiotic thing to say. No one with any real IT experience could possibly keep a straight face if you said that to them.

Having a local backup is part of the 3-2-1 process that is proven, for decades, to be the right way. If your IT people don't keep multiple backups in at least two separate locations, they're incompetent and shouldn't be trusted with a pencil sharpener.

Having one backup of critical data in the hands of a third party is a single point of failure that isn't under your control.

Yeah, the cloud service is at fault for their failure, but whoever at the station who decided on a single point of failure is far, far more at fault for making a stupid, incompetent, lazy decision to rely on something that any competent IT person would (and probably did) tell them isn't, and inherently can't be reliable enough for the task.

Contracts only help if both parties still exist. If one doesn't, it gets complicated, with many lawyers involved.

And only damn fool only has one copy of important data.

This would be an awesome problem to have. My local AI enthusiast hardware is three years old and currently worth 4x what I paid for it at the time. At least when shit becomes worthless you can afford to buy better shit and get more value out of it.

Personally don't see hardware requirements moving all that much. Much of it as I predicted three years ago is in large sparse models with limited numbers of active parameters. I can run everything I would want to run except K3 with good enough performance for my purposes. It is the sheer volume of RAM rather than compute or even memory bandwidth that seems to be the ascending limiting factor.

This problem needs to be solved by references, ask AI, people, is this program safe before installing.

Why stop at social media? Ban the internet altogether, its unsafe! Also force children to wear helmets at all times and make them wear bubble wrap clothes.

Google is now adding more rules to make sideloading more difficult while Apple never provided a way to sideload an app in the first place. People need to be able to build and load their own apps without permission from the OS manufacturer, a phone is a computer with specialized hardware, we do have ability to build and run apps on our own hardware.

Was he there when they determined the head of the Executive branch can't impose tariffs? I'm pretty sure he was.

It's rare to find a judge that has no idea how the laws or court orders work AND doesn't know how IT works.
Just kidding. No it isn't. You can't order a company to do that, even in the case of a civil action pending.

You can get this kind of basic image recognition on $20 ARM boards from China. I've got a rock3a (older, barely capable compared to whats available now) board cluster that does this kind of image recognition for my cameras. rpi3 level stuff. That it was nvidia just speaks to what is available.

Sure, let's discuss that. You've got a handful of methods historically:

- GPS/GLONASS/Starlink - can be jammed.
- Wire - inaccurate, not suitable for OTH guided missiles
- Pigeon - inaccurate and expensive
- Radar - can be jammed
- IR/laser - line of sight/requires IR signatures
- inertia - inaccurate, expensive.

There's nothing which really compares to "AI" in capability or accuracy. It's the only option which can't be jammed directly short of active EMP and provides the required/desired accuracy.

That's kind of been the bread and butter for cloud providers - "data velocity". They say: keep all your stuff on our cloud, it'll be safe forever, you don't need to worry about it.

A single copy is zero copies and 2 is 1. This is overlooked on all clouds, on the basis that 3 copies on a cloud provider is still 1 copy.

This kind of oversight failure has ended many companies when they've had DR scenarios. I know of 2 that had to close shop because the egress cost of all their data from AWS was larger than insurance would pay out, and the cash difference was significant.

In most cases, it makes more sense to keep 2 local copies (different storage) than 2 cloud copies, for this reason alone.