Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Cloudy Future (Why are Microsoft, EMC, CA and others touting "The Cloud" as a breakthrough)
American Thinker ^ | 01/10/2011 | Andrew Thomas

Posted on 01/10/2011 8:19:05 AM PST by SeekAndFind

I've always considered my wife a little paranoid about her privacy.  Although she has never done anything illegal or immoral, she sometimes acts as though the world is out to get her.  To avoid leaving an electronic trail, she pays for everything in cash as much as possible and has, until recently, refrained from conducting any online financial transactions. 

I, on the other hand, have been somewhat cavalier about protecting my privacy, believing there is safety in numbers.  After all, out of some three hundred million folks in this country, what are the odds that I would be a target for something nefarious?  Cyberspace is just too vast and ubiquitous.  At least that's how I have perceived it up until now.

Then I read Friday's Wall Street Journal.  Inside was a full five page "Special Advertising Section" sponsored by a consortium of companies, including Microsoft.  Two articles were featured, "15 Ways the Cloud Will Change Our Lives" and "Creativity in the Cloud."  I am always skeptical of any advertising that tries to tell me how wonderful life will be once I use their product, but I become very concerned when they tell me that I will have no choice in the matter.  "The Cloud" is such a product that activates my spider sense.

Don't misunderstand my concerns.  I'm not a technophobe.  Technological advancements are greatly improving our lives every day.  But can we trust the people who control the technology?  Any technological breakthrough that is intended for the betterment of mankind can also be subverted for evil purposes.  I have been distrustful of Bill Gates ever since he proclaimed his desire to de-populate the world using vaccines.

Now Microsoft and other companies such as EMC and CA Technologies are touting "The Cloud" as a breakthrough that will change our lives forever (whether we like it or not).  Desktop computers are obsolete.  Internal data storage will no longer be needed, as all of your personal information will be accessed through a sea of hundreds of thousands of remote servers using a handheld i-pad or i-phone.  Data can be instantly assembled from multiple sources to develop a research project or a profile of you as an individual.  How could anything go wrong?

The Journal ad quotes John Hagel, co-chairman of the Deloitte Center for the Edge, Deloitte's Silicon Valley-based research center:

The need for guidance will spawn new companies that leverage the insights from the many footprints we leave online.  Now, for example, shopping sites might offer suggestions of movies or videos based on previous purchases.  The next level will be companies that make those suggestions based on not just your activity on one specific site, but across a range of places -- what you watch on web TV, on YouTube, and other sites....


If a company can capture all my online activity, as it occurs in real time, it can have an integrated view of me as an individual and suggest things I didn't even know I wanted to look at.

Although the ad focuses on many potential improvements to our lifestyles and well-being, there are a few disturbing ideas as well.  One of the articles mentions an experimental Cloud technology showcased at a recent trade show which promoted the concept of installing cameras in your bathroom mirror, "alerting doctors" of potential illnesses.

Here's a crazy thought:  What if our beneficent government wanted to gain control of "The Cloud" to more easily identify potential enemies of the state?  How farfetched is it to believe that the federal government won't eventually command this technology?   FCC chairman Julius Genachowski has already exerted regulatory influence over the internet with the implementation of "net neutrality" regulations.  This is just the first step, the "camel's nose under the tent", toward the goal of complete internet control.

Orwell knew the propensity for governments to desire the enslavement of their people, but he couldn't possibly imagine the technology that might so easily achieve it.  Will the concept of "government transparency" be twisted into a scenario in which a ruling class lives in the "clouds" over a completely transparent citizenry?

Or am I just catching my wife's paranoia?

Andrew Thomas blogs at darkangelpolitics.com



TOPICS: Business/Economy; Computers/Internet; Society
KEYWORDS: cloud; cloudcomputing
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last
To: SeekAndFind

Why chat?


21 posted on 01/10/2011 2:23:27 PM PST by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

RE: Yes, it does. And that’s not a good thing.

OK, this brings us to another question. What e-mail service can one use that does not store one’s private messages ?

Almost everyone I know uses either -— Yahoo, Gmail, Hotmail ( Microsoft’s service ), AOL or Earthlink ( I believe that about covers most of the non-company/non-work e-mail services out there ).

Even ISP’s like Verizon store your e-mail messages on their servers so that you can access them anywhere in the world there is an internet connection.

If one does not like their private messages being stored in the servers of these Internet giants, what’s the better alternative for e-mail?


22 posted on 01/10/2011 2:57:33 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
OK, this brings us to another question. What e-mail service can one use that does not store one’s private messages? Almost everyone I know uses either -— Yahoo, Gmail, Hotmail ( Microsoft’s service ), AOL or Earthlink ( I believe that about covers most of the non-company/non-work e-mail services out there ).

Is that a serious question or are you trying to slip a fast one past me and hope I don't notice?? I'm asking that sincerely. OK, assuming you REALLY see no distinction there, here's my response. With POP based mail, the server only retains the messages till you download them, assuming you have your client configured to tell the server to delete messages on downloading. (Yes, I do realize there are some online services that only pretend to delete them so you can undelete them later, and yes, that is a problem but makes, more than invalidates my point) My client looks for new messages every two minutes, so as long as I have at least one machine up and running, there's always less than two minutes worth of emails on the servers, which it should be obvious to you is far less of a vulnerability than a complete historical archive of every email you ever sent or received.

And no, I'm not obtuse enough to leave them there so I can see them from multiple machines. I maintain my own backup and synchronize all of them on my end. Why, oh why, would I expose myself to a vulnerability I don't need to? If it saves even one problem, isn't it worth doing it right? {/liberal mode}

Lastly, NO, I'm very, very slightly perturbed about even that two minutes worth of retention, but just because I don't have the alternative all designed shouldn't stop me from announcing the shortcomings of the system as I see them. If the guy who invented the automobile didn't know people were ready for an alternative to horse and buggy, would he have bothered?

23 posted on 01/10/2011 3:12:59 PM PST by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

RE: Yes, I do realize there are some online services that only pretend to delete them so you can undelete them later, and yes, that is a problem but makes, more than invalidates my point


Well, that is and was my point of concern. I am at this point in time, UNCERTAIN if we can even trust online services. Maybe we can, but how sure are we?

So, in theory, your e-mail gets deleted from their server, in practice... maybe, maybe not.

In essence you are still TRUSTING these companies with your data.


24 posted on 01/10/2011 4:22:51 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
This is certain to turn out well...


Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

25 posted on 01/10/2011 4:27:22 PM PST by The Comedian (Puzzling puzzle pieces precisely proliferating panoramically.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

What if the government could turn off all your credit cards - and notify grocery stores not to sell food to you? They’ll have that ability - and soon. Fighting totalitarian control freaks of either party has NEVER been more important than now... we won’t get a second chance.


26 posted on 01/10/2011 5:28:00 PM PST by GOPJ (When liberals are FORCED to pay for Rush Limbaugh's show, I'll be happy to pay for NPR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

You are not paranoid if they really ARE out to get you!


27 posted on 01/10/2011 5:38:52 PM PST by RipSawyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Comedian

You might be right...

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/defense-cloud-computing-06387/

However, in reality Skynet never would take over because it would canceled after falling a few years behind schedule and being way over budget.


28 posted on 01/10/2011 5:59:20 PM PST by Eyes Unclouded ("The word bipartisan means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." -George Carlin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Eyes Unclouded
However, in reality Skynet never would take over because it would canceled after falling a few years behind schedule and being way over budget.

Unless it ran accounts receivable and the project management server, and you never knew a thing until Judgment Day...


Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

29 posted on 01/10/2011 6:12:37 PM PST by The Comedian (Puzzling puzzle pieces precisely proliferating panoramically.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Yeah, I know, and I don’t like it. However, it seems like less of a risk than keeping it intentionally. Plus it would seem you’re on far firmer legal ground if they compromise your data because they kept it when they said they weren’t going to.


30 posted on 01/10/2011 7:38:20 PM PST by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

Actually, off-site backups are a good idea, if you can put them in a physical location that is safe from others’ getting their hands on them. It’s online backups that are a crazy idea. I’m amazed that Rush Limbaugh advertises for Carbonite.


31 posted on 01/10/2011 8:59:20 PM PST by TruthSetsUFree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TruthSetsUFree

Well, sure. When I said “off-site storage” I meant live storage, which would be online by definition. Physically secured and possibly encrypted backups stored off-site certainly a good idea. Well, yes, El Rushbo is on crack for advertising that, but anyone who thinks being a political commentator makes him authoritative on computer security deserves whatever happens to them.


32 posted on 01/10/2011 9:23:12 PM PST by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
What e-mail service can one use that does not store one’s private messages ?

I host my own. It's not difficult. There are various free email servers out there (Zimbra, for instance). A couple of setting changes at your domain parking spot, a couple of additional holes through your firewall, and you're up and running.

33 posted on 01/11/2011 5:19:20 AM PST by Egon (The difference between Theory and Practice: In Theory, there is no difference.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: rarestia
Cloud computing should not be confused with virtualization technology. The two are worlds apart.

Yes and no. In many instances the latter is what enables the former.

To me the funniest thing about the 'cloud' is how similar it is to the old mainframe world.

34 posted on 01/11/2011 6:23:27 AM PST by zeugma (Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: zeugma

I’m most amused by the fact that we went from “dumb” thin-client terminals back in the early 90s to desktop PCs, and now we’re going back to thin-clients.

I believe MS is even considering a web-only OS that will boot (presumably using PXE) to the “Cloud” and provide all of your computing needs over the wire.

I can’t wait until someone tries to run Crysis 2 through the “Cloud.” I spent $1500 on a gaming desktop with the latest and greatest hardware, and while a ProLiant-class server or BladeSystem will run those games without issue, you put a few thousand “Cloud” desktops trying to run it, you’ll not only blow out the platform’s I/O abilities, the latency will be astronomical.

“Cloud” computing is for grams and gramps checking email and Skype-ing. Gaming will continue to need dedicated local hardware.


35 posted on 01/11/2011 6:28:47 AM PST by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: rarestia
“Cloud” computing is for grams and gramps checking email and Skype-ing. Gaming will continue to need dedicated local hardware.

Yup. Definitely not a gamer's game.

I finally got around to upgrading my desktop last year after 9 years of nursing it along. I'm sure as hell not giving up my 8 cores!

I can see how client-server will work for many applications, but I'm also quite sure that people have no idea how transparent it will make them.

36 posted on 01/11/2011 1:48:12 PM PST by zeugma (Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: zeugma
VMs of half a dozen different clients and configurations from one well-equiped workstation.

I am curious about product keys. For instance, if you virtualize an XP install, how is the licensing handled? Thanks.

37 posted on 01/11/2011 5:13:37 PM PST by sand88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: sand88
I am curious about product keys. For instance, if you virtualize an XP install, how is the licensing handled? Thanks.

I'm sure it depends upon the product. Most of the VMs I build are Unix/Linux so I don't have to deal with that stuff. I don't worry about the windows licensing as we have a corporate deal where Microsoft gets to rape our senior IT executives annually so we have corporate-wide licenses for installs of just about anything I would need to install.

38 posted on 01/12/2011 7:23:22 AM PST by zeugma (Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

I would never trust Carbonite or others not to have a backdoor key even if they did advertise encryption.

You want online backup? If it’s not much, get some cheap basic hosting with a decent capacity, enable SFTP on it, and have a script encrypt and SFTP your backups to that server. Who cares if they give it up to the police?


39 posted on 01/12/2011 10:19:57 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

Exactly. That’s what I was going to say. Store files that you encrypt before uploading. I’d actually prefer to be in physical possession of the files, but that’s a compromise I might be willing to go for.


40 posted on 01/12/2011 11:08:35 AM PST by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson