I'm So Glad I Don't Use the Cloud.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Cloud hacked.

 

Cheap storage, cheap result.

 

For less than $200 you can get an external HDD and store a lot of stuff on it.  Mine is 1 TB and I have a second one that contains archives that is 300 GB.  Connected over USB ports which is fast enough for archives.

[hym 358]

Which unfortunately does nothing to ensure that your data can be accessed from multiple locations if you need that.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

True, but if I need to, I can unplug my disk and take it with me.  Mobile computing is going to be the curse of this century.

[LexusInfernus 908]

It not like your external harddrive is that much safer. It can easily be broken into once its plugged into your computer. 

 

That aside, cloud computing has more useful applications than just data storage. 

[timmie 988]

I only use the cloud to store stuff for university (which I also store on a physical drive), no 'sensitive information'.

[Duke87 1,070]

The fundamental problem I have with cloud computing is that I would be surrendering control of my files to an entity other than myself. If I keep things on my own hard drive, and keep my own backups, then I have control over it and I will not lose much of anything unless I am careless or directly attacked. But if I pay Acme Cloud, inc. a monthly fee to store my data, there is ultimately nothing to stop them from deleting any or all of my files at any time if they deem fit, or to stop them from sharing those files with anyone else... intentionally or accidentally. For me to not have possession and control of my own files is simply unacceptable.

 

I know from experience that content on the internet is all too perishable... the only sure fire way to preserve it is to download and save it.

[lhrob 213]

Which unfortunately does nothing to ensure that your data can be accessed from multiple locations if you need that.

 

Why would anyone need to access their personal data from multiple locations?  The only data that should need to be accessed from different locations is that which pertains to work.  And then it's your company's responsibility to safeguard it.  If it's your own company, then there are these nifty little things called flash usb drives, which you can carry around with you in your pocket, and they can hold up to 128GB worth of data.

 

It not like your external harddrive is that much safer. It can easily be broken into once its plugged into your computer. 

 

Your external drive is considerably much safer.  For one thing, you don't have to be connected to the internet when you plug the external drive into your computer.  You can keep the external drive locked away in a fireproof safe when not in use, and you don't risk the cloud company losing your data.  See below...

 

But if I pay Acme Cloud, inc. a monthly fee to store my data, there is ultimately nothing to stop them from deleting any or all of my files at any time if they deem fit, or to stop them from sharing those files with anyone else... intentionally or accidentally. For me to not have possession and control of my own files is simply unacceptable.

 

I totally agree.  And it was a couple of years ago when a man's online photo storage account was deleted by the company.  http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2379212,00.asp  As an amateur photographer, I would NEVER EVER in a million years store my photos online.

[hym 358]

Which unfortunately does nothing to ensure that your data can be accessed from multiple locations if you need that.

 

Why would anyone need to access their personal data from multiple locations?  The only data that should need to be accessed from different locations is that which pertains to work.  And then it's your company's responsibility to safeguard it.  If it's your own company, then there are these nifty little things called flash usb drives, which you can carry around with you in your pocket, and they can hold up to 128GB worth of data.

 

That works well so long as you are always near a computer that you can use.  That is absolutely useless if you get a random request for a file and you are absolutely nowhere near a computer.  On the flip side, if you have the file stored in the cloud and are armed with a smartphone, you can very likely download the file and email it to the person in need, possibly saving the day.

 

The value of cloud storage is entirely dependent on how one uses it.  Use it poorly and expect negative results.  Use it well and odds are good it will benefit you.

[LexusInfernus 908]

Actually with things like games having cloud can be quite useful. I move a lot between two locations, so when I play games in location one, I can store them on a cloud and go to location two and continue playing. That is much easier than storing the new save files on a flash drive and copy them to my second computer. 

 

Furthermore, cloud does allow you to run programs on it, so you can get much much more raw computer power without actually having to spend millions on building your own super computer. 

[Cyclone Boom 17,031]

Generally, cloud storage is a reliable and secure way to store data. But relying on one backup method is never sufficient. If using cloud storage, at least two other mediums should be used -- such as an external HDD, CD or USB drive. Data stored in any format is always subject to potential loss or theft. This gives peace of mind in the event of one set being lost.

One of the main advantages of cloud storage is its accessibility. Data can be accessed from anywhere with an internet connection, on multiple devices. The main problem is the cost of bandwidth. It can be a very time consuming process to upload data, especially when dealing with media files, such as high definition videos. Depending on your ISP, there may be caps on monthly data usage. Exceeding these caps may incur extra charges (again, plan type varies between ISP). Also, the time it takes to upload / download data can vary between country and location.

In the end, you usually get what you pay for. A reputable company should store your data in accordance with the Data Protection Act. Many companies are now switching to cloud computing, as it's much cheaper than hosting data on their own internal servers. Also, this reduces maintenance and IT costs. In the unlikely event that your home / workplace encounters a fire, the cloud backups will remain untouched.

Data on the cloud is usually backed up automatically by the service provider. Of course, there's always an element of trust involved here. Since it's their servers, they could essentially do what they like with your data. Although hacking is always possible, so is physical theft. The chance of this happening can be reduced by using secure encryption and security methods. Of course, it's much easier for a hacker to obtain your account login details, than to directly access your cloud backups.

Although it's been around for a while, cloud computing is a rapidly developing technology. As global internet speeds are improving, it will become much easier to use and manage cloud stored data. But this doesn't mean it should be relied on, as a primary data storage medium.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

And yet, everyone thinks that outsourcing is bad, especially for production jobs.  Cloud computing to some anonymous server is yet another form, and probably more pernicious, than all the others.  And look how the sheep get on the bandwagon, even though their day job has been outsourced to some cloud off-shore.  No question about it, outsourcing has come to your living room.  And you are complicit in this invasion of privacy, to make matters worse. 

 

It is as bad as playing a DRM game where all the data is kept on the server and paying a fee for the game, but you have no control over the content on the server.  This is an extreme case, but what happens if the game company discontinues the server?

 

BIG BROTHER IS SNEAKING UP ON YOU!

[Duke87 1,070]

 

That works well so long as you are always near a computer that you can use.  That is absolutely useless if you get a random request for a file and you are absolutely nowhere near a computer.  On the flip side, if you have the file stored in the cloud and are armed with a smartphone, you can very likely download the file and email it to the person in need, possibly saving the day.

 

If I am out and about and someone wants a file from me, it can wait until I am back in the office. I do not use email or any other computer function for work when I am out in the field or off duty. I firmly believe in focusing on the task at hand, and I will not drop what I am doing to handle some unrelated request. I have found that the more I allow myself to get distracted and attempt to multitask, the less I get done. So I don't do it.

 

It is as bad as playing a DRM game where all the data is kept on the server and paying a fee for the game, but you have no control over the content on the server.  This is an extreme case, but what happens if the game company discontinues the server?

 

Then you, the player, are SOL. Of course, that is exactly what the game makers want - complete control over everything related to the game. It's a power grab.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Ah, now you see why I do not use a mobile device of any kind. 

 

Call it paranoid if you like, but look at not only the convenience and any of the good things, but also the bad things that happen on the networks.  Pfui.  A new hotbed of criminal and anti-social behaviour.  I liked the Internet when it was called ARPAnet and was essentially private between industry and the university world.  It has become a bit of a primrose path to Hades these days.

 

Sure I use it, but not very much.  Mostly for this site and e-mail.

 

As for electronic leashes, it is not worth the surprises:

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2013/03/01/bc-rogers-roaming.html?cmp=rss

 

Well, yes, it was his own fault, but that does not excuse the provider who must be just jumping for joy with this new high-value account.  This is a 'freedom' I can do without and so I do.

[Easy Bakes 253]

"The Cloud" is just a made up name anyway, every thing is still stored on server  drives, you just have 24/7 access to  your data

[Cobraroll 138]

If I'm not mistaken, Dropbox also stores the files locally on your computer. That means, even if the servers go bust, you still have a local folder with all the latest files your computer had access to. You can take your computer offline and change and edit files, and Dropbox will update them the next time it gets a connection to the Internet.

 

But if the files get overwritten on the server, then you're in for a bad time. The only way to save your files then, would be starting a connected device in offline mode, pray that it hasn't been that long since it updated Dropbox, and copypaste whatever versions of your files you have in your Dropbox into an offline folder.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Access 24/7?  What if there is a power outage at the site and their generators are out of fuel?  I've seen that happen on a 24/7 site and the site manager nearly got the can tied to him.

 

One of the 24/7 sites I had (an airline) had a power system that consisted of three jet engines on the roof of the data centre.  One was on line, one was on standby, and the other was in maintenance.  The ultimate fall back was the power grid.  I expect airlines know more than somewhat about maintaining jet engines, and they most certainly had a lot of jet fuel around.  They also had dual shadowing mainframes.

 

What kind of guarantee do these "cloud" outfits have?

[hym 358]

Access 24/7?  What if there is a power outage at the site and their generators are out of fuel?  I've seen that happen on a 24/7 site and the site manager nearly got the can tied to him.

 

One of the 24/7 sites I had (an airline) had a power system that consisted of three jet engines on the roof of the data centre.  One was on line, one was on standby, and the other was in maintenance.  The ultimate fall back was the power grid.  I expect airlines know more than somewhat about maintaining jet engines, and they most certainly had a lot of jet fuel around.  They also had dual shadowing mainframes.

 

What kind of guarantee do these "cloud" outfits have?

 

The major cloud services are not run by amateurs.  Google operates its Drive service off the same data centers it uses to power your search results, and short of a natural disaster or intentional sabotage, these facilities are pretty much impossible to take offline.  Microsoft operates in a similar fashion.  Furthermore, considering at least some of these services are also being marketed to the government and enterprise users, I would suspect that they probably have better data security measures than the average user.  The one major disadvantage that these companies have is visibility; average users gain a lot of their security through the fact that they are basically unknown and likely low value targets.

 

When both the NSA and the DoD admit that the future of the American workforce is going to be more mobile and centered around the cloud, that is a compelling argument that a trend has been started that we are very likely unable to stop at this point.  The NSA's explanation for the switch in thinking: "There is a growing expectation among Americans that they will be able to conduct their work almost anywhere, and we don't want to lose access to the brightest minds of the upcoming generation simply because they don't want to work in an office all day, every day."  The DoD's explanation was even blunter:  "You either adapt to new technology or be killed by it."

[Duke87 1,070]

As for electronic leashes, it is not worth the surprises:

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2013/03/01/bc-rogers-roaming.html?cmp=rss

 

Well, yes, it was his own fault, but that does not excuse the provider who must be just jumping for joy with this new high-value account.  This is a 'freedom' I can do without and so I do.

 

Data roaming is a ridiculous racket. All cell companies charge you an arm and a leg to use even just a little bit of data when you leave the country. And while it does cost them more to borrow another provider's equipment to serve your phone, the costs do not come anywhere near justifying the prices. It is pure profiteering and they get away with it because if you are in another country there is no way to avoid it other than turning data off. The fact that Rogers is willing to accept $500 from the guy after they initially charged him $22,000 is telling. They are still making a profit if he pays $500.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

No question that the Romans had it right -- "Caveat emptor",  {Let the buyer beware.}

[blade2k5 1,523]

It not like your external harddrive is that much safer. It can easily be broken into once its plugged into your computer. 

 

That aside, cloud computing has more useful applications than just data storage. 

 

 

Only if you have it plugged in while the internet is connected to the PC.  I always disconnect the internet before connecting my ExHD to my computer.  It can't be broken into if it's not connected when using the internet.

 

As for cost, you can't beat paying a one-time $49.99 for a 2-TB external harddrive vs. paying a monthly/annual fee for other storage methods on the 'net.  

[LexusInfernus 908]

Only if you have it plugged in while the internet is connected to the PC.  I always disconnect the internet before connecting my ExHD to my computer.  It can't be broken into if it's not connected when using the internet.

 

As for cost, you can't beat paying a one-time $49.99 for a 2-TB external harddrive vs. paying a monthly/annual fee for other storage methods on the 'net.  

And if your HD breaks all your data is gone, while on Cloud they probably have a backup. Also, not everyone can disconnect from the internet every time they need to access their external HD. 

[blade2k5 1,523]

Only if you have it plugged in while the internet is connected to the PC.  I always disconnect the internet before connecting my ExHD to my computer.  It can't be broken into if it's not connected when using the internet.

 

As for cost, you can't beat paying a one-time $49.99 for a 2-TB external harddrive vs. paying a monthly/annual fee for other storage methods on the 'net.  

And if your HD breaks all your data is gone, while on Cloud they probably have a backup. Also, not everyone can disconnect from the internet every time they need to access their external HD. 

 

Which is why I also have other ways of backing up my files, like burning the files onto data disks which are stored in a safe place.

[LexusInfernus 908]

 

Only if you have it plugged in while the internet is connected to the PC.  I always disconnect the internet before connecting my ExHD to my computer.  It can't be broken into if it's not connected when using the internet.

 

As for cost, you can't beat paying a one-time $49.99 for a 2-TB external harddrive vs. paying a monthly/annual fee for other storage methods on the 'net.  

And if your HD breaks all your data is gone, while on Cloud they probably have a backup. Also, not everyone can disconnect from the internet every time they need to access their external HD. 

 

Which is why I also have other ways of backing up my files, like burning the files onto data disks which are stored in a safe place.

Which is a viable alternative if you are an individual who only has limited amounts of things to back up. Now imagine if you are a big multinational company with billions of files. No way you can effectively back all of that up on physical mediums or use a bunch of external HD's. 

[AIX 270]

I use "The Cloud" (specifically iCloud and Google Drive) for non-critical daily things such as phone contacts, casual photos, school assignments - stuff that it would not be the end of the world if the cloud made them go *poof* (I do have local backups at home). Probably no more than a mere 10ish GiB.

 

For the bulk of my data, it is all stored on local drives. With 3 TiB of total data and counting, backing up to clouds or CDs would make my head spin. This data includes my cities, media (music and video), writings, my books, etc etc etc.

 

The cloud is a tool just like any other. Use it irresponsibly and so shall you reap the consequences.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

 

 

Only if you have it plugged in while the internet is connected to the PC.  I always disconnect the internet before connecting my ExHD to my computer.  It can't be broken into if it's not connected when using the internet.

 

As for cost, you can't beat paying a one-time $49.99 for a 2-TB external harddrive vs. paying a monthly/annual fee for other storage methods on the 'net.  

And if your HD breaks all your data is gone, while on Cloud they probably have a backup. Also, not everyone can disconnect from the internet every time they need to access their external HD. 

 

Which is why I also have other ways of backing up my files, like burning the files onto data disks which are stored in a safe place.

Which is a viable alternative if you are an individual who only has limited amounts of things to back up. Now imagine if you are a big multinational company with billions of files. No way you can effectively back all of that up on physical mediums or use a bunch of external HD's. 

An outfit of this size would never, ever backup critical data anywhere out of its sight.  Such companies and governments (I hope) keep backups on cartridge tapes or optical media stored in an off-site vault.  If you've not seen a big system, one of the features is a cartridge read/write device that can auto-feed cartridges from a hopper.  These are recorded at very high density (33,000 bits per inch the last time I looked), and may be made read only by simply snapping out the write tab.  Physical storage methods are often used in data critical backup scenarios.  Those dinky toys available to the home user have no real counterpart in large systems.

[hym 358]

An outfit of this size would never, ever backup critical data anywhere out of its sight.  Such companies and governments (I hope) keep backups on cartridge tapes or optical media stored in an off-site vault.  If you've not seen a big system, one of the features is a cartridge read/write device that can auto-feed cartridges from a hopper.  These are recorded at very high density (33,000 bits per inch the last time I looked), and may be made read only by simply snapping out the write tab.  Physical storage methods are often used in data critical backup scenarios.  Those dinky toys available to the home user have no real counterpart in large systems.

 

Backup systems vary widely by the type data in question.  One of the agencies of the federal government maintains some document reading systems from over half a century ago simply so that government records in that format can still be read.  The federal government used to send documents to records depository libraries on microfilm, but that is now being done via digital means (and the libraries are looking to convert all that microfilm to digital records).

 

As for the "tape vs disk" issue however, all of the data archive implementations I have seen or had explained to me all utilize disk solutions.  Even in cases were tape drives traditionally excel (like sequential data recording).

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Main problem with disks is that they are finite.  A set of tapes is not.  If you have enough cartridges you can go on forever, automatically.  I've never seen a disk pack that could mount itself.

 

One of the neater archiving systems is in Multics R12 which thinks everything is a memory page.  As pages get called less frequently they migrate to slower media and eventually wind up on magnetic tape.  The system keeps a complete index, however, and if you suddenly call for a page that has been archived to tape, a mount request goes to the console operator.  Unless the stuff has migrated out of the computer library on the same floor, the mount can happen in about 10 minutes or less, and the requested page moved to memory.  If the page has been moved to the off-site archive, the user is told when to expect his page.  This system was designed in 1958 as part of MIT's Project Mac (Man and Computer) and was running the last time I saw it in about 1970.  Still alive, I think, at the University of Calgary.  Very old GE hardware, massive stuff from the 1960s and 1970s.

[hym 358]

Main problem with disks is that they are finite.  A set of tapes is not.  If you have enough cartridges you can go on forever, automatically.  I've never seen a disk pack that could mount itself.

 

What exactly do you mean by that?  I may be interpreting it incorrectly, but from what I'm getting out of it, this sounds like declaring that DVD is inferior to VHS on grounds that you can't rewind a DVD like you can with a VHS cassette.  It's different technology that doesn't have the limitations of its predecessor(s).

[blade2k5 1,523]

 

 

Only if you have it plugged in while the internet is connected to the PC.  I always disconnect the internet before connecting my ExHD to my computer.  It can't be broken into if it's not connected when using the internet.

 

As for cost, you can't beat paying a one-time $49.99 for a 2-TB external harddrive vs. paying a monthly/annual fee for other storage methods on the 'net.  

And if your HD breaks all your data is gone, while on Cloud they probably have a backup. Also, not everyone can disconnect from the internet every time they need to access their external HD. 

 

Which is why I also have other ways of backing up my files, like burning the files onto data disks which are stored in a safe place.

Which is a viable alternative if you are an individual who only has limited amounts of things to back up. Now imagine if you are a big multinational company with billions of files. No way you can effectively back all of that up on physical mediums or use a bunch of external HD's. 

 

I wasn't referring to corporations and how they store their info,  I was talking about personal use.

[LexusInfernus 908]

The same principle holds true for individuals with a lot of data. The more data, the less useful it is to use physical back up methods. At some point that simply becomes to expensive and time consuming.