There is a blog post calling out someone's faults (privacy, security, etc), some basic misinformation and a plug for his service as being better.
I make lots of posts about security and cryptography. I happen to think that Tarsnap does things right; if I didn't, I would have Tarsnap do things differently.
I usually decide to blog about something based on (a) whether I think it's interesting, and (b) whether I think people will learn from it. (There are exceptions like calling out jungledisk for not fixing weaknesses in their cryptography, but those are rare.) The question "will this give me a chance to advertise Tarsnap" doesn't come into it -- for one thing, the vast majority of my readers are already aware of Tarsnap.
I make lots of posts about security and cryptography. I happen to think that Tarsnap does things right; if I didn't, I would have Tarsnap do things differently.
I usually decide to blog about something based on (a) whether I think it's interesting, and (b) whether I think people will learn from it. (There are exceptions like calling out jungledisk for not fixing weaknesses in their cryptography, but those are rare.) The question "will this give me a chance to advertise Tarsnap" doesn't come into it -- for one thing, the vast majority of my readers are already aware of Tarsnap.