People just don't always grasp the big picture. People that see RAID as a backup strategy are only looking at 'hard drive failure' as potential scenario. The same for machine replication. They are only trying to prevent against what happens if 'the machine dies.' As long as they realize that this doesn't protect against, "I accidentally deleted the files," then it's all good.
In a previous job I had a so-called system administrator laugh at my paranoia when I suggested that his awesome backup system -- protecting the equivalent of several dozen person-years of scientific data, millions of dollars' worth -- wouldn't protect us against a fire in the building. Or, for that matter, a thief who liked to steal computer hardware.
Job security note for sysadmins: When someone suggests a disaster scenario, don't open your response with a laugh.
Well, you know that you're talking to someone that doesn't plan for the future when, "What happens if the building burns down?" is responded to with, "You're just being paranoid." I guess the appropriate response would be to point out that using his logic tons of taxpayer money could be saved by nixing the fire departments (and tons of corporate money could be saved by not paying for fire protection -- alarms, detectors, escapes, etc).
