I'd say there's a decent chance ot the "Call 1-800-PIE-EYED" defense attorney set having a grand time with this one:
Link to story
Nutshell version: Server holding the state's DUI evidence has been down since July 5 and probably won't be back up until early August. Other servers were affected too, but their data has already been restored from backup. Folks are questioning why there is no backup for this one, but officials insist the data is in tact. Meanwhile, trials are being postponed.
That's nice, but here's a side issue that's interesting to me:
Meanwhile, neither prosecutors nor defense attorneys can access test results and videos that date to 1991.
"The implied consent server has hundreds of thousands of files and videos," he said. "It's not like we can just flip a switch and it can come back up. It takes some time."
So, a lowly state government can keep contact data as far back as 22 years ago--including "hundreds of thousands of files and videos"--on a single server, but some say that the NSA and federal government don't have the resources or technology to store phone call data?
I'd submit that, while the phone data would obviously represent far larger volume, speech-to-text software makes it a snap to store the data as text, which can in turn be compressed at a fairly impressive ratio for ease of storage on a farm of servers that each feature plenty of room for data storage.
If this seems unreasonable, consider the following facts:
Your average GD user has ready access to speech-to-text solutions.
Your average GD user has ready access to compression software--in some cases freeware--easily capable achieving space savings of 85%.
Your average GD user has ready access to mass data storage devices, now measured in terabytes.
However, the average GD user lacks the legal authority to listen in on everyone else's phone conversations.
It's just meta-data brah.
It's to keep you safe from ter-rists man.
Why do you love ter-rists?
Why do you hate 'Merica?