[floating-io]

While that is certainly true, the idea that they can so rapidly decimate your data without the possibility to restore is still terrifying if that's your only copy of that data.

They should have to hold it for at least 90 days. In my opinion, it should be more like six months to a year.

In my mind, it's exactly equivalent to a storage space destroying your car five days after you miss a payment. They effectively stole and destroyed the data when they should have been required to return it to the actual owner.

Of course, that's my opinion of how it should be. AFAIK, there is no real legal framework, and how it actually is is entirely up to your provider, which is one reason I never trust them.

[akerl_]

The post suggests that even if AWS’s policy had been to hold the data for a year, the same thing would have happened, because they deleted the data early due to operator error.

Similarly, a physical storage company can totally make a mistake and accidentally destroy your stuff if they mix up their bookkeeping, and your remedy is generally either to reach an amicable settlement with them or sue them for your damages.

[adastra22]

It sounds like it wasn’t OP’s data though, which is an important distinction.

[anonymars]

That's not the impression I got

> When AWS demanded this vanished payer validate himself, I pointed out that I already had my own Wise card on file—the same card I’d used to pay before the payer arrangement, kept active specifically in case the payer disconnected while I was traveling or offline

[nerdponx]

It was his, along with his clients' data.