Quote:
Originally Posted by JeremyNicoll
Having only one doctor/dentist etc is usually not a problem (around these parts) if the dr/dentist is ill or on holiday, because they usually either have other professionals working at the same place, or some sort of contingency arrangement with a nearby practice.
Having a mail provider run by one person isn't a problem if they are ill for a day or two, if the system runs by itself unattended. But if that person eg goes into hospital for a month, or dies, what then?
Also, while I realise that all the services these people offer seem to be in the cloud (on AWS servers), and so in theory they could be based anywhere, where they are (or he is) matters. Only in their Terms of Service under "Applicable Law" did I find any clue - apparently United States federal law and the laws of the state of Delaware are significant.
|
I doubt anyone would place the importance of their emails above another human life, but for sake of argument, I think Purelymail would also have a contingency plan in place, and even if this weren't the case, I think it's much more of a problem if you have a toothache and your dentist has gone AWOL than if the guy who maintains your email service disappears, because the email service will (theoretically) remain functional for a while without human care, but without your dentist you've still got the toothache!
Obviously mail servers require upkeep, so in the worst case scenario where Scott disappears and no one knows about it, I'd say you'd have a month or two to move your mail.
I think the Dr. Strangelove scenario is far more likely: where someone at AWS goes rogue and begins maliciously taking out servers.
As for jurisdictions, I treat all email as insecure, so it's not so important. I don't think it's incumbent upon mail providers to offer protection from state-sponsored surveillance.