"Cloud computing" make me cringe.
-
I agreed that data has been stored on servers. The "Cloud" I'm referring to are those that like Google, Amazon or MS Azure where everything is off loaded to third party to house and manage. Snowden kept pop into my head where we can make technologies safeguard intrusions, but that system admin who has complete control and can access everything on the farm, which I'm not ready to trust him.
Leng Vang wrote:
but that system admin who has complete control and can access everything on the farm, which I'm not ready to trust him.
Point well taken.
-
It's just another tool in our arsenal. ... and like all "new" technology tools, it becomes the new "new" thing. Market analysts and CIO's drink the Kool Aid and go in to rapture, consultants jump on the gravy train and our worlds become a little more chaotic for a while. Linux was going to be the end of MS, Netflix was going to be the end of movie theatres, ... way to many examples to list, but you get the drift. After a while there's a collective shaking of heads, sense is (somewhat) restored and we get on with doing what we do. We might even find the new tool appropriately useful and start using it. ... and, of course, if it isn't new, give it a new, catchy name!
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
-
Yeah, trusty politician. Obama just open a new legislation to allow government access private data, if approved, it makes me cringe even more about cloud computing.
Leng Vang wrote:
Obama just open a new legislation to allow government access private data
A Dutch proverb tells you to trust your host as much as he trusts you. Cringing is not good enough. Once you realize the danger, you'll loose some sleep. What companies decide to do is up to them; little is really lost if a company ceases to exist. Decide for yourself if you want to give away information - in the wrong time, your life could depend on a FaceBook post.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
Companies and government entities all thinking or gone to the cloud, but it gives me an uneasy feeling, perhaps fear of privacy breach, whenever I hear cloud computing. I can trust the security technology but I just don't trust the people handling my data. It must be just me.
-
Like details of cops and so? I doubt that...
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
-
And don't store any of those "private" selfies with your data.
I guess I'm just the caring, sharing type. :-D
-
Streaming services are doing a pretty darn good job of reducing traditional movie theatre traffic.
No movie theatres have closed in this area!
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
-
Leng Vang wrote:
It must be just me.
Nope. I can't think of a better way to do things than to hand all your data over to the lowest bidder to look after, to backup, to not steal, and to protect from everybody else. It's like the world is trying to go back to the "mainframe" model that we worked so hard to get away from when the PC became main-stream...
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
OriginalGriff wrote:
I can't think of a better way to do things than to hand all your data over to the lowest bidder to look after, to backup, to not steal, and to protect from everybody else.
I once made myself unpopular with management when they were announcing some data entry outsourcing to another country. I asked, "How will we know our data is safe?" They said, "It will be spelled out in the contracts." I asked, "Under whose country will the contract be enforced?" They had no answer. Cloud could have the same problem.
Psychosis at 10 Film at 11 Those who do not remember the past, are doomed to repeat it. Those who do not remember the past, cannot build upon it.
-
Companies and government entities all thinking or gone to the cloud, but it gives me an uneasy feeling, perhaps fear of privacy breach, whenever I hear cloud computing. I can trust the security technology but I just don't trust the people handling my data. It must be just me.
and no one has yet mentioned the rules that where passed in congress in the US and what they allow the FBI to do? hmmmm :-) Just have a little bit of a Google, oh and look up the entire story behind why many users didn't get their servers back in the kim.com raid. It's rather interesting. ;-)
-
Leng Vang wrote:
It must be just me.
Nope. I can't think of a better way to do things than to hand all your data over to the lowest bidder to look after, to backup, to not steal, and to protect from everybody else. It's like the world is trying to go back to the "mainframe" model that we worked so hard to get away from when the PC became main-stream...
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
OriginalGriff wrote:
It's like the world is trying to go back to the "mainframe" model that we worked so hard to get away from when the PC became main-stream
I spy with my little eye: an IBM conspiracy.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
Companies and government entities all thinking or gone to the cloud, but it gives me an uneasy feeling, perhaps fear of privacy breach, whenever I hear cloud computing. I can trust the security technology but I just don't trust the people handling my data. It must be just me.
Hehe. Totally agree. These people are someone you'll never meet IRL. Even if they are scrutinizing your life day by day.
-
People have been saving data on servers since the beginning of servers. Cloud is a fancy term for servers/server farms. So, you have been at risk since day one.
Slacker007 wrote:
Cloud is a fancy term for servers/server farms.
Not exactly. Cloud is a fancy term for virtualization. The difference between a cloud and "just a bunch of servers" is similar to the difference between RAID or VFS and "just a bunch of disks". In a "non-cloud" data centre computing services are bound to specific physical hardware--you have a physical box that is a file server, another box that does email, another to run the website and so forth. You could consolidate these all on a single physical box but there would be scalability issues as well as stability, as the various services could interfere with the operations of others--there is a lack of isolation. "Cloudy" data centres take the concept of RAID or virtual file systems in storage and extend that to the server level. Just like where you have one file system that spans multiple disks and the data could be on any one (or more) of the physical drives, in the cloud you can have a virtual machine or container that handles the delivery of services within its own isolated environment that could be stored or executed in any physical location. The benefits in efficiency and reliability and control over resources can be enormous. Now that said, I hate the term "Cloud"--it is a buzzword for a modern approach to something that has actually been done since the mainframe days. I also think that the larger "public cloud" services are ruining the internet. Actually all very large services damage the internet. Facebook is ruining the internet by centralizing social media for example. I think there is a problem with companies avoiding responsibility by farming out their IT to Google, Microsoft and so on. Yes, for a small business, farming this out is justified. For a company employing hundreds or more it is irresponsible. Go ahead and leverage virtualization, but don't lock yourself into Google or Microsoft or whatever service and ignore plans to bring it in house, or at least co-locate somewhere within your control. If too many people pass their responsibility to too few of these big public services it is a recipe for disaster.
-
Slacker007 wrote:
Cloud is a fancy term for servers/server farms.
Not exactly. Cloud is a fancy term for virtualization. The difference between a cloud and "just a bunch of servers" is similar to the difference between RAID or VFS and "just a bunch of disks". In a "non-cloud" data centre computing services are bound to specific physical hardware--you have a physical box that is a file server, another box that does email, another to run the website and so forth. You could consolidate these all on a single physical box but there would be scalability issues as well as stability, as the various services could interfere with the operations of others--there is a lack of isolation. "Cloudy" data centres take the concept of RAID or virtual file systems in storage and extend that to the server level. Just like where you have one file system that spans multiple disks and the data could be on any one (or more) of the physical drives, in the cloud you can have a virtual machine or container that handles the delivery of services within its own isolated environment that could be stored or executed in any physical location. The benefits in efficiency and reliability and control over resources can be enormous. Now that said, I hate the term "Cloud"--it is a buzzword for a modern approach to something that has actually been done since the mainframe days. I also think that the larger "public cloud" services are ruining the internet. Actually all very large services damage the internet. Facebook is ruining the internet by centralizing social media for example. I think there is a problem with companies avoiding responsibility by farming out their IT to Google, Microsoft and so on. Yes, for a small business, farming this out is justified. For a company employing hundreds or more it is irresponsible. Go ahead and leverage virtualization, but don't lock yourself into Google or Microsoft or whatever service and ignore plans to bring it in house, or at least co-locate somewhere within your control. If too many people pass their responsibility to too few of these big public services it is a recipe for disaster.
Good to know and thanks for the education. I bookmarked this because it is a good explanation. :thumbsup:
-
No movie theatres have closed in this area!
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
