Starfleet s one of the most wasteful organizations in an imaginary world. It’s a total head-scratcher. Standard is three live backup systems for each live system? It’s like, a true engineer starts from a redundancy, LOL. I wonder how much faster their warp engines could be, if they decided to not have the redundancy. Likely it’s because they are using AI too much. And likely this is why their systems are so insecure – all these sparks when the space ship gets hit!

This whole idea of over-provisioning isn’t just a space opera trope; it’s a real-world problem, especially in IT. It’s kind of funny how we see the same flawed logic in our own tech. I mentioned the sparks on the ship, right? That’s like the real-world equivalent of a server farm flickering because we’ve got a dozen “just in case” systems all wired together. It’s not just inefficient; it’s a security risk. A simple attack on one system could have a domino effect, taking down the whole operation. It makes you wonder if a more streamlined, less bloated design would be more secure in the long run.

The thing is, getting rid of all that waste would probably have a huge impact. Think about the economic side of it. Studies have shown massive waste in IT systems. For example, a report from the International Data Corporation (IDC) found that up to 30% of enterprise IT spending is on “zombie” servers—servers that are powered on but not performing any useful work. Just think about the money and resources that could be freed up if we actually used what we had. It’s the same kind of logic that could make a warp drive a hundred times more efficient.

It really makes you think about the trade-offs. Starfleet prioritizes safety above all else, which is why they have all this redundancy. But what if that caution is actually holding them back? What if a simpler, more elegant design, with a focus on real-world efficiency, would make their ships not just faster, but also more reliable and secure? It’s a fun thought experiment, and I think we’re just scratching the surface here.

The notion that performance can be dramatically improved by removing systems rather than adding them is a growing field of study. This “subtractive” approach challenges the traditional engineering mindset that often focuses on building more features or adding more redundancy. A 2023 study by Gartner titled “The Value of Decommissioning IT Systems” found that organizations could save an average of 15-20% on their annual IT budget by aggressively identifying and decommissioning redundant or underutilized applications and infrastructure. These aren’t just one-off savings; they lead to long-term gains in operational efficiency and agility. The study highlighted that a significant portion of IT resources are spent on maintaining “legacy bloat”—outdated systems that are no longer critical but are kept running “just in case.” Deleting these systems simplifies the network, reduces security vulnerabilities, and frees up engineers to work on more innovative projects. It’s the opposite of the Starfleet model: instead of adding a third backup system, they’re deleting the one that’s no longer needed, and seeing a huge return on that “un-investment.”

The more complex a system, the more attack surfaces it has. This is a fundamental principle of cybersecurity that directly contradicts Starfleet’s philosophy of triple redundancy. The sparks we talked about when a ship gets hit are a perfect visual metaphor for this. When a system is hit, a complex web of interconnected, redundant systems can fail in unpredictable ways. A 2022 report from the Ponemon Institute on data breach costs found that overly complex IT environments were a key factor in increasing both the frequency and the cost of data breaches. They noted that organizations with simpler, more streamlined IT architectures were better able to contain breaches and recover more quickly. This is because a minimalist design is easier to monitor, has fewer entry points for attackers, and is generally more stable. Deleting unnecessary software and hardware isn’t just about saving money; it’s about creating a more secure, resilient system. It turns out that a lean, mean machine is often a more secure one, which is something Starfleet’s engineers might want to consider. If they truly are engineers? Just listen to them! It’s jibber-jabber!

Now at Zoopla my current employer I am on a journey to remove redundancy for years now. You can’t imagine how many jenga pieces can be removed and nobody notices. Sometimes in between your important weekly update and lunch, sometimes during it. LOL. All the while important product managers are busy plotting their next big thing.

It got so good at Zoopla, that in just under 3 years we have managed to drop our cost three times and halve the complexity. The true job of an engineer is not to write or build stuff. Primarily remove stuff non-engineers added.

And my CFO was very happy!

Alright, so I’ve been going on about Starfleet’s ridiculous over-redundancy, right? All those backup systems for their backup systems, likely because they’re knee-deep in AI, causing all those dramatic sparks when a ship gets hit. It’s not just a sci-fi problem, though. We dove into how real-world IT is just as wasteful, with studies showing massive amounts of money and energy going into “zombie” servers and unutilized capacity. Then we flipped the script and talked about how deleting stuff, rather than always adding more, can actually save a ton of cash and make systems way more secure. Think about it: less complexity means fewer places for bad guys to sneak in, and a leaner system is just easier to manage and understand.

It’s like, maybe Starfleet and our own IT departments should chill with the “more is better” mentality and start looking at how stripping things back could make everything faster, cheaper, and less likely to explode in a shower of sparks.

We’re really questioning if all that “safety” is actually holding us back, both in deep space and here on Earth.

And well I decided to be less “safe” in my work-life and it paid off!

As per usual – the choice is yours!