What should individual researchers do as standard laboratory practice?

A subsidiary question under Q-0008. The researcher-level half of the recommendation regime is the only half that does not require institutional or funder coordination — it requires only the researcher's decision to make a small number of operations part of standard workflow.

The answer is R6 (C-0045): maintain at least one local clone and one content-addressed copy of every research dataset. Use Git for code; use BitTorrent, IPFS, or Git large-file storage for data; use Signal-style end-to-end encryption where the data is sensitive. Treat the clone and the content-addressed copy as non-optional components of the research workflow.

The GitHub-Iran 2019 episode (E-0009) demonstrates the operational difference: developers who maintained local clones retained every commit, branch, and line of code; developers who relied on GitHub-hosted access lost their work to a single jurisdictional decision. The recommendation is operationally trivial at the laboratory level (git clone and ipfs add are commands, not capital projects) and architecturally decisive at the institutional level (every researcher's local environment becomes an independent failure-domain copy of every dataset they work with).

R6 is implementable today.