Comments on: Stallman: Cloud computing is 'stupidity'

The Free Software Foundation founder says that the industry's latest trend ultimately will result in vendor lock-in and escalating costs for users.

[drhamad]

He's not wrong, but isn't that the POINT? By agreeing to spend a bit of money, and deal with a certain vendor, the functionality of your applications is greatly increased. They become smarter, they use less of your systems power, etc etc etc.

[umbrae]

Amen...

[MadLyb]

Stallman=Idiot.

But, I also believe Cloud Computing is more hype than reality, so I shudder, but agree with him.

[iBuzz]

It's a battle of convenience vs. freedom. Many people will trade freedom for convenience. And, that's why cloud computing is catching on.

But take a lesson from failed DRM strategies... if the convenience of a solution starts to suffer, people will demand their freedom back. Cloud computing will fail if frequent service outages occur, if people cannot access, view, or move their data the way they want, etc.

[mozmac]

While he harps at cloud computing and proprietary software, I would say Microsoft is meeting him in the middle. They are providing some great collaboration tools that give you the ability to run your own cloud. Their software running on your server, your information. Sure it'd be nice if it was free, open, whatever. But the reality is that open source won't offer something that complex and easy to use...the money isn't there. Everything likes to bash M$ (including me), but they are doing something right with their collaboration software.

[rcaisido]

I agree with the guy 100%

[alexisbellido]

I respect Stallman, he's done lots of things for the open source movement and many of the great companies online wouldn't exist if it not were for open source.

Somebody mentioned 0.25% market penetration for GNU/Linux, I'm not sure about those numbers but if he's right, if just 0.25% of GNU/Linux was enough to get so many online ventures running successfully then there's no doubt that something is quite right with open source.

Anyway, even if I'm an open source developer and user and respect what Stallman says this time I have to disagree. Cloud computing allows escalating far beyond what any individual or small company could handle. The privacy concerns are understandable and I think we'll start seeing ways of taking care of that but it seems to me that cloud computing has yet a long road ahead.

[tsprague1]

I agree with him. It is one thing to have a website, it is another thing to have all of your business information (sales lists, outgoing bills, projections, whiteboard discussions, etc.) online. These things should be kept in house and highly firewalled. The same goes for my personal computer. I don't want my desktop to be an extension of the internet. Why would I? The people who are promoting this are doing it simply to make money. As for losing your laptop? Backups, people, backups!

[Cheese McBeese]

I vote that this guy is a total idiot who can't even manage his own hair, let alone a computing strategy. Who says that the computing in the cloud has to be proprietary? Who says that you have to give up control? If he would open his mind, he would realize that the cloud is going to explode with LOTS of OPEN options. PCs and clients aren't going away, but the potential power that comes with the client/host combination will obsolete the client-only model, just like the PC obsoleted the host-only mainframe model. We're headed for a fertile middle ground with lots of opportunity. Time for this guy to retire.

Cloud computing IS inevitable, because it's cheaper and easier to maintain. Cheap always defeats paranoia, except for the zealots with bad hair cuts.

[molipix]

Stallman has got a point. Having a few big companies hold everyone's most important information is dangerous: Google knows your personal stuff, Youtube controls your freedom of speech (oh wait, Youtube is Google). But in reality, where would we be without Google Calendar's SMS reminders? What Stallman suggests sounds like a step backwards, I don't want the job of managing all my data myself. I think regulation is what's needed, these big companies have to be accountable to us somehow.

[yvan_t]

I agree that could computing is STUPIDITY REINVENTED. (in my own opinion)

When you use such services you kiss good bye your privacy.
What garanty you have angainst these company from looking at your informations.... none.
Also it provides another door for competitor/malevolent persons access to YOUR informations.

MORE, when you buy a software, you pay ONCE the license fee.

As for such cloud computing there is nothing that will prevent them from charging you a per usage or recurent fee that in long run will/may cost more that the purchase price of that single software copy.

[gudguy1a]

Very obvious with a lot of this being true - you are putting some or most of your infrastructure and data into someone else's hands. But, there are some cost savings where cloud computing is concerned...

However, I believe that cloud (or grid) computing may have more traction where cyber-security is concerned.

Many firms cannot afford to have overlapping layers of defense in depth. Cloud computing, where the cloud (if the host / provider can line up multiple malware vendors) "should" have a much larger database of malware from around the world - with real time mitigation dissemination.
This is still in its infancy but seems to have promise.

No one firm (nor even two firms) can now detect and stop all Zero-Day attacks. It is time for some of these vendors to collaborate even better than before.
I only wish ISPs would get their acts together and work on this - cloud computing (security related), to help out those folks at home who don't even have a working / updated set of anti-malware on their computer.

Thx,
Patrick (Info Security)

[daves_done]

"Very obvious with a lot of this being true - you are putting some or most of your infrastructure and data into someone else's hands. But, there are some cost savings where cloud computing is concerned... "

That's all well and good, but to be SOX or HIPAA compliant you'll have to incur some cost. The problems arise when you get into data validation. If you have a server whose location you may not be certain of w/o a member/representative of your company how can you develop any sort of data backup and validation system? "Cloud computing" may gain some initial traction with regular home users, but I can't see anything but problems for businesses.

Although, with the short sightedness of most business' today (especially in the banking/investment services industries) they may convert the majority of their resources over to the "Cloud" and then come real close to going under when data falls into the wrong hands and they get the bejesus sued out of them.

[daves_done]

"No one firm (nor even two firms) can now detect and stop all Zero-Day attacks."

Agreed.

"It is time for some of these vendors to collaborate even better than before. "

Here's hoping but I won't hold my breath.

"I only wish ISPs would get their acts together and work on this - cloud computing (security related), to help out those folks at home who don't even have a working / updated set of anti-malware on their computer. "

All the security tools the average home user needs are freely available whether they are FOSS offerings or just simply freeware. IIf they are lazy and gripe at having to do this, I recommend they consider switching to MAC or Linux which have much less security concerns and are way more stable.

[MuleHeadJoe]

Wow. Stallman may not be perfect, but he's more right than wrong. Every one of the "pro-cloud-computing" posts here are obvious trolls, firstly by personally attacking the man (how can someone who promotes ownership and privacy be a "socialist"?!?! That's completely contradictory.) and secondly by declaring the subject as apparently above reproach. I saw not a single word of reason, logic, or technical data to support the "pro" side contention.

I concur with Stallman that externally basing your computing services is one of the surest ways to ensure you will fail as a business. There is no true security in outsourced and offshored services (which is exactly what "cloud computing" really is), since hundreds if not thousands of strangers with absolutely no stake in your business are handling your private data. Oops, I exposed your customer lists to the internet ... oh well, I don't care. Oops, I accidentally deleted you database backups, my bad. I know about this stuff first hand ... I work for one of the worlds biggest outsourcers.

Cloud computing is popular amongst the non-digerati business folk because they are computer illiterate for the most part. Really, how stupid can you be to think it's a good idea to outsource and/or offshore a key component of your business? What's the point of being in business if you contract out all your business functions? For those MBAs out there that are too stupid to notice ... IT is just as much a core function of Business as accounting & HR and everything else that is needed just to make a business run.

But of course, in this day and age, separating the "business" from the actual work of being in business is probably a heaven sent solution to the uncomfortable issues of having to actually be responsible for the functioning of the business. CEO's wouldn't have to worry about signing off on the books if they can reasonably claim they didn't have direct control over the books. From my perspective, it's just another scheme for the scumbags at the top of the ladder to milk companies dry and walk away unscathed when they go belly up. And the "pro-cloud-computing" crowd is part of the problem. :-)

[daves_done]

CEO's must sign off on the books if they are to remain compliant with SOX. Plus with all this data stored on a server whose location may not even really be known how are backups and data validation going to be performed? HIPAA compliance should also be fun. I guess the "Cloud" proponents will be lobbying congress soon.

[TheL0grus]

What kind of Ill informed "idiot" calls Stallman or Open Source software "Socialist"? Just like a "Government for the people by the people" is socialist. "His idealistic notion of software freedom is nice, but it doesn't translate into reality." Are you on drugs or have no experience in the IT industry? How many MultiBillion dollar companies thrive on and support software freedom? Google, Sun, IBM, Novell, Cisco, Oracle......... Even MS uses Open Source they just don't publicize it. Where do you think they got the blue print to address TCP/IP, DNS, AD, DHCP from?
I don't fully agree with the man on many things but this kind of response is either just as knee jerk reactionary tripe spawned from FUD or just rampant cluelessness.

Open Source: Software for the people by the people.

TheL0grus

[TheL0grus]

What kind of Ill informed "idiot" calls Stallman or Open Source software "Socialist"? Just like a "Government for the people by the people" is socialist. "His idealistic notion of software freedom is nice, but it doesn't translate into reality." Are you on drugs or have no experience in the IT industry? How many MultiBillion dollar companies thrive on and support software freedom? Google, Sun, IBM, Novell, Cisco, Oracle......... Even MS uses Open Source they just don't publicize it. Where do you think they got the blue print to address TCP/IP, DNS, AD, DHCP from?
I don't fully agree with the man on many things but this kind of response is either just as knee jerk reactionary tripe spawned from FUD or just rampant cluelessness.

Open Source: Software for the people by the people.

TheL0grus

[megustansalchichas]

here's an example of cloud computing: yahoo photos used to be on yahoo. then they discontinued it. they gave fair warning, but after that your pictures were toast. moral of the story: cloud computing ain't free -there's always the cost of having to monitor what is where, and how quickly to get it back if your cloud evaporates. don't forget: time is money

[wybow]

First of all I think Stallman is to be respected, as he did and does great things. Secondly I think he is wrong on this issue. I had face to face discussions about this with him at a conference in Barcelona, and where I think the problem lies is that he only sees freedom as individualistic freedom. SaaS software should be free as in Affero GPLed, then collective freedom can exist, and users can do an exodus to a different provider/server if they want, and take their data and software with them. A bit like how democratic communities can provide freedom, and people are free to migrate to a different country and take their posessions/business with them if they want. Software as a service should be software in service of, not software bounding users to the app like serfs... For our initiative for a Free Web see: http://foundation.logilogi.org/

[ophirko]

Stallman is one of the brightest people on earth. We owe him a lot of the software running today around the globe.However,he is only partially right in this case.
There are services like "IT Structures" and "Amazon EC2" that enable running almost any application in the cloud. I don't see cloud computing as contrast to Free Software. Actually it is the opposite. The ability to run any software for ten cents per hour makes it really free.
Think of it as the ultimate distribution network. In the old days anyone could write a book, but publishing it was next to impossible, Than came the internet and changed all the distribution mechanism.
With Free Software anyone can write the code, but distributing it only delivers the source , not what it is really meant to do - run. With cloud computing both the source and the action can be delivered.
It's true the custom platforms might limit the innovation, but cloud portability is bound to come up.

[CoffeeGroupUSA]

I make a pretty good home-brewed Amber Bock, if I do say so myself. That said, I trust my bartender not to spit in the glass when I order up a proprietary glass.

[architect0001]

Cloud Computing is extremely powerful when leveraged for business and social applications. The white-space or areas where no technology exists for inter-linking large and small web and software applications is being coupled together by a new shift in business intelligence called SaaS (Software as a Service) and PaaS (Platform as a Service).

With so much to see and learn and contribute to the emerging model of Computing in the Cloud, there is no wonder why there is so much diversity and opinion to viability, true cost savings on infrastructure and start-to-market uptime and opportunities for bottom line growth for developers, business unit owners, and new internet entrepreneurs alike.

Take Cloud Computing to the edge of your corporate network, and from there you will see the applications and data feed systems which augment the growth and pliability of your continually growing internet offering(s).

At Nubifer.com we leverage all technologies as a data point including the consumation in real time of Google Gadget Feeds, Feed Burner Servers, Private and Public Cloud offerings, Open ID Managers and Systems, open protocols and support Machine Languages and Human Languages via VerbalScript.com Business Command Syntax.

By being a web 2.0+ Cloud Computing platform and provider of services to Tier 1 and Tier 2 Computing platforms like Google Applications, Salesforce, Windows Azure, IBM, Intuit and Adobe Online Nubifer *(which in Latin means bringing the clouds) stands to benefit with untold assets in data, partnerships and machine resources.

The question to ask yourself now, is where will Cloud Computing be as a much more mature service in 2010, 2014 and so forth.

[paoconnell]

Architect0001:
I think that if I were to ever consider storing data in a "cloud" for some business, I would make sure that the cloud was completely under the physical control of that business. Anything less would be a security risk.