Quote:
Originally Posted by LucasCorso
Hi yagiz. It's only my opinion that cloud computing can't be good for people, that's all. What's happening if somebody "in charge of the cloud" decides that books shall be changed, addapted, to reflect a new situation? Just an example of why I'm against it. I'm not sure if my personal ways of using emails, instant messaging etc., have something to do with this idea.
But anyway, this isn't a forum to discuss stuff like this, and sorry if my post looked too negative.
|
I'm not real sure about Google's proposal, but in concept 'cloud computing' would mean nobody has sole control over the 'cloud'.
Of course there are two ways around that, one common to conspiracy theorists that some 'council' or oligarchy has control. Except for the conspiracy part, that's pretty much true-almost all of the 'cloud' is on major corporate, educational, or governmental systems-so if they ever do decide to conspire then cloud computing users are dead meat-but if that were to happen then I suspect most of us would be dead meat anyway. What keeps us free is that they don't conspire (or, most of the time, even cooperate very well).
And the other way around it is what I suspect is the case with Google, but will need to wait until it's implemented to see. That's where PR says 'cloud computing' but actuality is 'computing on hardware we own & control'. (I suppose you could argue that with enough servers Google could own their own cloud-and maybe they do. God knows they've got the money to do that. And if they do then I'll agree with you-don't want access to my library dependent on Google's goodwill.)