1. I accept that I am under the control of a higher power (Muppet).

Backup tape failure costs $38 billion

Personally, in a few dozen cases I can think of where I  know the people involved, I have never heard of a backup tape restoration actually working. Hey, I agree that in some rare circumstances they might work, I just haven't seen it.

Backup tapes give a false sense of security: "I can reformat this drive without double-checking if it is the right one because if I screw up, there are always the backup tapes."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070320/ap_on_re_us/lost_data

"While doing routine maintenance work, the technician accidentally deleted applicant information for an oil-funded account — one of Alaska residents' biggest perks — and mistakenly reformatted the backup drive, as well.

There was still hope, until the department discovered its third line of defense, backup tapes, were unreadable."
Permalink Practical Economist 
March 20th, 2007 1:11pm
Actually, the tape failure cost $220,000.  The accounts about which data was stored ON the tapes/media were worth $38 billion.  Stop being a dick.
Permalink Send private email muppet 
March 20th, 2007 1:14pm
The mistaken reformatting of the backup drive probably went like this:

Step one. Accidentally drop the database.
Step two. No problem, I will restore the live drive from the backup drive.
Step three. Fuck, I got the order wrong. Why the fuck does Restore A, B copy B to A and not B to A.
Step four. Restore from backup tape. Guaranteed to work b because we validate them everynight and the green LED light always comes on.
Step five. I guess that was a bad tape, good thing I havea box with 60 days worth of nightly backups.
Step six. All 60 tapes are bad? But they were verified correct each night!
Step seven. The tape drive manufacturer went out of business 5 years ago? And the bug in the firmware that always says it was verified was never fixed?
Step eight. Buy handgun. Write suicide note.
Permalink Practical Economist 
March 20th, 2007 1:15pm
AND

The data was re-entered manually (presumably from some sort of hardcopy report) by staff working overtime for several weeks.

Do your research.

Douche.
Permalink Send private email muppet 
March 20th, 2007 1:15pm
Like I just said over on Daddy's House, only a moron relys on tape w/out doing a partial restore of every tape, and a full restore every now and then.

To use the simplest example, I'm a moron, because we don't bother doing it...
Permalink Send private email Ward 
March 20th, 2007 1:16pm
+1 muppet.  BS OP headline.

Maybe it shoudl read Dell and Microsoft take 70k from Alasaka to fail at restoring deleted data

"The department is asking lawmakers to approve a supplemental budget request for $220,700 to cover the excess costs incurred during the six-week recovery effort, including about $128,400 in overtime and $71,800 for computer consultants."
Permalink  
March 20th, 2007 1:17pm
They restored the data in the end by pulling in the cardboard boxes in which they stored PAPER copies of all the data, and had people manually reenter all the data. You have to ask about all the companies that don't bother to keep paper copies of their databases.
Permalink Practical Economist 
March 20th, 2007 1:17pm
It wasn't a paper copy of the database.  It was the original documents sent in by tax papers that were used to create the database.  Read much?
Permalink  
March 20th, 2007 1:19pm
Interestingly I've never had any conflicts with muppet before, but he apparently has a history with me. This means he is one of the troll aliases on the board.
Permalink Practical Economist 
March 20th, 2007 1:19pm
How is that not a paper copy of the database? How would I not know they restored from paper without reading the article?
Permalink Practical Economist 
March 20th, 2007 1:19pm
"Interestingly I've never had any conflicts with muppet before, but he apparently has a history with me. This means he is one of the troll aliases on the board."

The fact that I think you're a douche for deliberately misreporting a story means that I must have some kind of history with you?

WOW.  What color is the sky where you live?  Narcissistic at all?
Permalink Send private email muppet 
March 20th, 2007 1:21pm
Ward, is this topic being covered at JoS? I didn't see it among any of the topics, what's the subject heading? I would not have posted it here if I knew it was being discussed over there.
Permalink Practical Economist 
March 20th, 2007 1:21pm
Not that Alaska thing, but some discussion of tape backup:

http://discuss.joelonsoftware.com/default.asp?joel.3.467491.13
Permalink Send private email Ward 
March 20th, 2007 1:22pm
Muppet, you are a very crude person. You call people 'dicks' and 'douches' and other names, just like a spoiled 5 year old. You also like to talk about your poo a lot, which is also quite infantile.

I would assume you are really a 10 yr old posting here except we've seen your photo. So I have no explanation. I guess you're just very immature.
Permalink Practical Economist 
March 20th, 2007 1:23pm
Thanks, Ward.
Permalink Practical Economist 
March 20th, 2007 1:24pm
Because what's immature is using impactful language to make a point, not deliberately misrepresenting facts to mislead people or make your thread on an internet forum seem more interesting at the expense of truth.

Cunt.
Permalink Send private email muppet 
March 20th, 2007 1:25pm
>and mistakenly reformatted the backup drive, as well.

I did a similar thing at my last job - I accidentally formatted a backup disk while restoring a drive image. The backup disk and the drive I was reformatting and trying to restore the image to were labelled 0 and 1 - so the error wasn't difficult to make.

I restored 100% of the files, however, using off the shelf software.
Permalink Colm 
March 20th, 2007 2:08pm
Hmm, I happened on that earlier...

It cost each of the residents that were to receive money from that account .30 some odd cents or something.

You know, at that rate, it would cost more to mail a letter of complaint. Not that big of a screw up. I bet bigger screw ups happen that we never hear about. Stuff like Joshua.
Permalink JoC 
March 20th, 2007 3:41pm
I noticed those numbers and they are interesting. $200,000 restoration cost / .30 cents each = 667 thousand people affected.

Now the ENTIRE POPULATION OF THE STATE OF ALASKA IS 626,932. ( http://www.50states.com/alaska.htm )

So there are more royalty checks going out than there are men women and children in the state, including illegal immigrants.

Something smells off about this to me.
Permalink Practical Economist 
March 20th, 2007 4:39pm
Here's another interesting factoid:

$38,000,000,000 in oil royalties divided by the state population of 626,932 = $60,612.63 in royalties for every man woman and child, including illegal aliens, in the entire state.

That's a fuck lot more than the average total income for everybody in the state.

Lots of people sitting in crappy shacks with no prospects in that state, no health care, poor diet, little hope for the future.

Where is the money really going?
Permalink Practical Economist 
March 20th, 2007 4:43pm
Per capita personal income for Alaska: $31,027.

Total personal income for all working people in Alaska: $19,659,927,000.

source: http://www.city-data.com/states/Alaska-Income.html


Cost of living in Alaska: #n among all 50 states.

(Feel free to guess n.)
Permalink Practical Economist 
March 20th, 2007 4:48pm
The ten most expensive cities to live in in the entire United States:

Juneau, Alaska
Fairbanks, Alaska
Kodiak, Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska

and six other cities.

Cost of housing? Expect to pay $241,000 for a house in Juneau or Anchorage. That's the average, and for that amount, you don't get a hell of a lot.
Permalink Practical Economist 
March 20th, 2007 4:53pm
OK, it turns out that every man woman and child in Alaska DOES get a check from this fund each year. It is called the "Permanent Fund Dividend".

Read up here:

https://www.pfd.state.ak.us/

Out of the $60,612 per person the fund had to distribute in 2006, after the government has deducted it's 'operating expenses', the amount each person received was $1106.96.
Permalink Practical Economist 
March 20th, 2007 5:08pm
"each year"

I don't think it is $38bln/yr. It is $38bln period.

Revenue was about $4bln total for '06... almost 3x what it was 3-4 yrs before that.
Permalink JoC 
March 20th, 2007 5:18pm
I don't follow that. How could it be total? Total of what exactly? The money is royalty income paid to the state for the right to mine and drill, that is income that comes in every year.
Permalink Practical Economist 
March 20th, 2007 6:12pm
...and is presumably accumulated in some account. The figures above probably aren't that royalty income, they were just oil revenue figures for Alaska.

It would seem a bit out of whack if they are receiving yearly royalties that are almost 10 times the total annual oil revenue.
Permalink JoC 
March 21st, 2007 9:58am
The article says the account for which the data was lost is 'worth $38 billion'.

OK, so other sources say that oil revenue in alaska greatly exceeds income from all other sources combined. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/08/29/MNGLGEEKSF1.DTL

And the total oil revenue for 2004 was $1.65 billion, on one state page, but another says it was $2.3B.

Apparently this is how much the state itself gets from the oil companies because "The state's Department of Revenue predicts that revenues from oil production will fall from $2.3 billion in 2004 to $1.3 billion in 2015, but state expenditures will continue to rise".

How much the oil companies are selling the oil from is not clear...

Let's see, 2 million barrels a day at a single oil field Prudhoe Bay is 700 million barrels a year, or 35 billion gallons, which is worth about 100 billion dollars. And that is just ONE oil field, there are hundreds of oil fields in Alaska, so maybe the oil companies pull 2-3 trillion dollars in oil out of Alaska per for, for which the state is so excited to collect only $1 billion in royalty revenue.

It would make far more sense for us to nationalize oil resources, and eliminate the federal income tax with the proceeds.
Permalink Practical Economist 
March 21st, 2007 12:23pm
There've been some scandals in the past decade about how BIA/Interior managed to "lose" records of oil/mineral leases on indian reservations and short change the tribes to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars.

Tony Hillerman used some of this as background plot for Sinister Pig.
Permalink Peter 
March 21st, 2007 5:32pm
OK, and I see that that is a book. Interesting. It seems to me, looking at these numbers roughly, that there is stuff going on here that's not being acknowledged.

I think the Iraqis are finding out firsthand about the whole native american experience.
Permalink Practical Economist 
March 21st, 2007 6:27pm

This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.

Other topics: March, 2007 Other topics: March, 2007 Recent topics Recent topics