What's new

Fear and Loathing of The Cloud

  • SNBForums Code of Conduct

    SNBForums is a community for everyone, no matter what their level of experience.

    Please be tolerant and patient of others, especially newcomers. We are all here to share and learn!

    The rules are simple: Be patient, be nice, be helpful or be gone!

The worst of these is the electrical utility industry bribing legislators to allow the utilities to force time-of-day and rate-tier pricing upon us. And we rate payers have to even pay for the wireless meters at our homes to enable all of this. Outrageous.
Wow, big brother able to cut you off without even lifting a finger. I'm sure they'll initially have some savings due to the 'more accurate billing'. But once that's over, it will be gouge time.

(But then someone will figure out how to hack the units and get power for free too, hehe...)
 
Wow, big brother able to cut you off without even lifting a finger. I'm sure they'll initially have some savings due to the 'more accurate billing'. But once that's over, it will be gouge time.

(But then someone will figure out how to hack the units and get power for free too, hehe...)

No, they don't want to cut-off service! They want to surcharge! $$$$$$$
 
No, they don't want to cut-off service! They want to surcharge! $$$$$$$
It seems a lot of companies are making a lot of money with 'surcharges' now (fuel surcharge, order surcharge, service surcharge, etc.), many tax-free. I'm sure this loophole will be plugged in the next few years, but until then I don't see it going away.
 
The original purpose of a cloud was for redundancy, availability and speed. You could always make your own cloud. Aerofs as a dropbox LAN only alternative for example. In order for something to be considered a cloud it means it needs a cluster of systems all doing the same thing.

In reference heres a joke about it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ntPxdWAWq8

There are many issues with a public cloud service such as privacy, security and even to ensure the service continue. If the service gets hacked than personal and private information can get out whereas some companies sell information.

Than again a lot of people dont have the skills and knowledge to set up their own services. Nowadays when you buy something they offer you cloud services with it.
 
while redundancy is good to have, it can easily be done in a way that does not compromise local functionality, e.g., a simple implementation is what netgear recently did with cloud services to manage their newer routers. Likely very few people use it because it is not as convenient as simply heading to the local router page, but it is an option for users and they give up no local functionality to get it, and if they kill that service, it will likely have no impact on the users as they can still access all of the options locally (and also remotely if they enable remote management, or use a VPN).

I would consider that a good implementation of cloud services, as basic users can use it without having to worry about a dynamic DNS, but nothing is given up, it is simply tacked onto what is already in place.

If the cloud were implemented like this with a product like dropcam, you would be able to head to the camera's local IP just like with any other IP camera, and view a live stream from it, or have a program such as zoneminder or sighthound, record footage locally, or have the camera automatically dump its footage to a NAS, with the addition of their current cloud services tacked on for the user to use if they want a simply way to remotely access the camera.

Even for users who lack the skills to manually configure their own servers, there are ways of simplifying the process, for example, setting up an openvpn server. There are a ton of steps involved (much of which is in a guide that tells you the commands to run. for a user who just wants to input a little bit of info ad simply have it all just work, one would think, if they can list all of these steps in a guide, why can't they just automate it?

well there are people who did just that, e.g., untangle turns that lengthy setup process into a 3-4 step process, as part of a wizard, and everything else is handled automatically while it generates a preconfigured installer.

With the ability for many tasks to be automated, it is possible to even have completely new computer users, perform fairly complex home network setups.

At the moment for most cloud products (e.g., some smart home products, cameras, access points), the companies simply take what would be the GUI front end, and move it from being run on the device its self, to being run on a remote server, at which point the company does everything they can to prevent you from gaining any kind of local control. So at the cost of reliability and longevity of the product, the company now makes them self the gatekeeper of continued use of your product, at the drop of a hat they can they can decide to charge you for continued use of the product they already paid you for, or turn it into a brick.

An example of this on the software side, is the game Diablo 3, At part of DRM, they decided to shift part of the game onto remote servers, thus user experiences were made worst from frequent server issues, congestion, and a whole host of other issues, in addition to the fact that the servers will not be around forever. Once the company is done with the game, and decides to end of life it, or go out of business, then the game will cease to function.
 
At the moment for most cloud products (e.g., some smart home products, cameras, access points), the companies simply take what would be the GUI front end, and move it from being run on the device its self, to being run on a remote server, at which point the company does everything they can to prevent you from gaining any kind of local control. So at the cost of reliability and longevity of the product, the company now makes them self the gatekeeper of continued use of your product, at the drop of a hat they can they can decide to charge you for continued use of the product they already paid you for, or turn it into a brick.

An example of this on the software side, is the game Diablo 3, At part of DRM, they decided to shift part of the game onto remote servers, thus user experiences were made worst from frequent server issues, congestion, and a whole host of other issues, in addition to the fact that the servers will not be around forever. Once the company is done with the game, and decides to end of life it, or go out of business, then the game will cease to function.
But the counterpoint to this is that the companies are getting demand for such services from the consumer because of the magic word 'cloud' as a popular buzzword. What to do? Ignore the demand that they can cash in on, and fall behind during the fad? Nope, can't do that either.
 
If you upload private information to a cloud type storage server, or email server, I urge you to put it in an encrypted ZIP file, or equivalent such as SafeHouse software or TrueCrypt, that you create and only you know the encryption key/password. This protects you from an employee/consultant at the cloud service from using their re-encryption keys to access your info. In the US and other countries, the service providers re-encrypt upon receipt of your data (after SSL decryption at their site). The re-encrypted data allows "trusted" employees/subcontractors to respond to a court order for legal intercept. But that's also a rogue employee vulnerability. And it's happened many times.
 
If you upload private information to a cloud type storage server, or email server, I urge you to put it in an encrypted ZIP file, or equivalent such as SafeHouse software or TrueCrypt, that you create and only you know the encryption key/password. This protects you from an employee/consultant at the cloud service from using their re-encryption keys to access your info. In the US and other countries, the service providers re-encrypt upon receipt of your data (after SSL decryption at their site). The re-encrypted data allows "trusted" employees/subcontractors to respond to a court order for legal intercept. But that's also a rogue employee vulnerability. And it's happened many times.
This was the biggest concern in enterprise and corporate until the big players came into the provider space to mitigate the liability. If Amazon or Microsoft had a corporate breech, the customer would have a big pot to cash in on, so they also make sure it doesn't happen.

But this can be the case with smaller providers, and has always been a possible issue since the advent of web hosting over 20+ years ago.
 
But the counterpoint to this is that the companies are getting demand for such services from the consumer because of the magic word 'cloud' as a popular buzzword. What to do? Ignore the demand that they can cash in on, and fall behind during the fad? Nope, can't do that either.

They can do both, allow cloud services as well as the local access. This way, the users who want whatever benefits the cloud offers, can have them, without losing local offline access and redundancy. This has only up sides for the customer, though it will make it harder to engage in underhanded business practices such as taking advantage if customers wanting to continue the use of that expensive item they purchased, and thus may be more willing bend over when the deal is altered out of their favor.
 
Last edited:
"The Cloud" is, to me, a word that means marketing still works and people would rather believe in vaguely defined buzzwords than think with clarity.

Timeshare systems were popular in the beginning of computers. You logged on through a terminal at work and the mainframe somewhere else in another town did the work. You used a direct line or a 300 baud modem. Time shares still exist today with ADP payroll and others that don't come to mind quickly. Basically, it was, and still is, remote computing where the processor is somewhere other than where you are.

You can support your own time share by hosting a remotely accessed drive or a nanny cam.

It just doesn't sound as easy to sell when you call "the cloud" a time share.

Look, Google is a time share and a "cloud system".

The cloud == just another word for time shared system
 
Last edited:
They can do both, allow cloud services as well as the local access. This way, the users who want whatever benefits the cloud offers, can have them, without losing local offline access and redundancy. This has only up sides for the customer, though it will make it harder to engage in underhanded business practices such as taking advantage if customers wanting to continue the use of that expensive item they purchased, and thus may be more willing bend over when the deal is altered out of their favor.
I agree that this would be the best approach. Too bad most companies don't do it because they have to focus on one system or the other. Not everyone can budget for two parallel access systems.
"The Cloud" is, to me, a word that means marketing still works and people would rather believe in vaguely defined buzzwords than think with clarity.

Timeshare systems were popular in the beginning of computers. You logged on through a terminal at work and the mainframe somewhere else in another town did the work. You used a direct line or a 300 baud modem. Time shares still exist today with ADP payroll and others that don't come to mind quickly. Basically, it was, and still is, remote computing where the processor is somewhere other than where you are.

You can support your own time share by hosting a remotely accessed drive or a nanny cam.

It just doesn't sound as easy to sell when you call "the cloud" a time share.

Look, Google is a time share and a "cloud system".

The cloud == just another word for time shared system
And it's also synonymous with 'hosting'. Files on a hosted file server--cloud file server, etc. Same tech wrapped in shiny new buzzwords. Oh how stupid the consumer can be...
 
With Amazon Web Services and Microsoft's Office 365, and so on, it seems to me that we're going back to what we had in the '60s - enslaved to the data center / mainframe dogs. Escaping this WAS the reason the term PC means what it does.
 
With Amazon Web Services and Microsoft's Office 365, and so on, it seems to me that we're going back to what we had in the '60s - enslaved to the data center / mainframe dogs. Escaping this WAS the reason the term PC means what it does.
Ebbs and flows. I think it will go back and forth between client/server and the desktop until the final arrangement which meets in the middle.

I remember in the late 1990s when every corporate publication was predicting client/server was going to come back in a big way, but no one knew it would be the Internet.
 
With Amazon Web Services and Microsoft's Office 365, and so on, it seems to me that we're going back to what we had in the '60s - enslaved to the data center / mainframe dogs. Escaping this WAS the reason the term PC means what it does.

Heaven forfend. You are likening Microsoft Azure to some brittle mainframe green screen or batch coders of yesteryear, all of whom resided in some other room you couldn't see unless they were in a glass room in the middle of the office. Well, come to think about it, the analogy is still pretty close.

Going in another direction ... When I see AWS or Azure being hyped by someone who is trying to sell it or when I see an ad for either, I still, with all of my experience, am not sure what they are selling.

All their adds, idiotically appear (to me) to be selling vague cloud services with indecipherable pricing lists if you dig in elsewhere. They aren't selling time shares, they aren't selling remote servers, they aren't selling web sites .... they're selling something that is usually both vague and incomprehensible in description. Basically, you already have to know what it is in order to understand the ads. Then Microsoft has the audacity to claim Azure is key to Microsoft's future. They're advertising to an obscure minority and complaining to everyone else about how they need to grow their business. Talk about dumb.

Don't even get me started about how no "cloud service" can ever expect to be more than a tiny niche product paid for out of discretionary income (not ever a necessity) without universal high speed affordable internet with essentially no data caps except for the most egregious users. Even if someone snapped their fingers making everyone clearly understand what AWS and/or Azure offered, few have the bandwidth to use it to potential.
 
Last edited:
Even if someone snapped their fingers making everyone clearly understand what AWS and/or Azure offered, few have the bandwidth to use it to potential.
And this is a big factor that no one really thinks of. Yes, you can put everything 'in the cloud', but how are you going to access that at LAN speeds? Oh, that's right, you need to upgrade your LAN connection to something 100x more expensive. Hmmm...so now what's cheaper? In-house or cloud? I think in-house wins again.
 

Latest threads

Sign Up For SNBForums Daily Digest

Get an update of what's new every day delivered to your mailbox. Sign up here!
Top