I’m all for holding companies that have supported dangerous regimes to account. However, when it comes to data management, totalitarian regimes rarely indicate

I’m all for holding companies that have supported dangerous regimes to account. However, when it comes to data management, totalitarian regimes rarely indicate inadequate implementation. IBM’s role in Germany in the 40s was horrific, but it proved their ideas of tabulations and files were promising. Just like with rocketry, there were many valuable things to learn that defined the rest of the XXth century. The FSB likely has a lot of crimes to atone for. Still, suppose one of their specialists publishes something on data management or how to manage hundreds of sock-puppet social media accounts. In that case, I’d be tempted to listen and learn from a likely expert—unless you suspect that they think this article is not sincere and meant as a distraction from actual good practices. Similarly, the CIA has done very problematic things, but the people who worked in the disguise department have a creative take on changing your appearance. I’m unsure when I would have to do that, but I’m always curious about how data is stored efficiently. And yes, like the FSB, the NSA has opinions about that, and those are typically well-informed. Was their practice constitutional? Seemingly not, IANAL. But do they have good insights into caching video files at scale? Definitely.