I have a question regarding cloud computing...

[Harry Flashman]

I know what it is; I certainly am aware that there is no such thing as a cloud of data out there in the air, but rather some very expensive purpose-built physical locations that would act as data stores and run software... But I just cannot see myself in any scenario where I give my data over to someone else to look after, or process it centrally. It seems like an echo of the old days where you dropped off film at a shop and were told to return a few days later to collect your prints. When you turn up, the staff are having a quiet laugh at some of the shots, and that one really great one of the chicken crossing the road has been copied an extra time and pocketted by Johnny Friends-in-the Press.

I have recently had an extended private discussion regarding Google interfering with pdf files sent via gmail (some form of tagging) and, as a consequence, the whole business of letting people look at my machines and run tests with my data to resolve any underlying issues, and it became clear that I was especially sensitive about letting a third party have access to or even look into my systems/data.

The fact that Adobe, during this discussion, announced its own cloud-based plans was a neat example of the Baader-Meinhof effect. But the question remains, in what universe would someone like me ever consider signing up to cloud-based services?

I have some custom written software that is entirely stable and has been helping me with my work for a reasonably long time. I also have custom built hardware and - incredibly, a custom built operating system for all this (long story; LISP-based coding - way beyond my league, but written by a friend as an academic project). My system stands alone and is super-safe. Of course I have back-up for the data and the system and the software. The back up is stored in a different place in a highly-rated fire-resistant safe. The writers and builders are all good friends (one is a relative), so I have lifetime support. In short, I am secure and, equally important, completely happy with what I can do. I will retire sooner rather than later and have no interest to shift to a new career. I do though have a vast library of original materials, and a not-that-small collection of memories as photographs.

Privacy and security are the major issues for me.

What if I had pictures of a girlfriend that my family knew nothing about? Long gone but a fact of my life. Would I under any circumstances wish to let this go off to a super-cooled building somewhere in a desert west of London? Time passes, events overtake even the best laid plans, and the data is lost, or the data is released...

Less colourful, I write - my manuscripts are gold dust to me. They will never be published in part or whole in any form without my express permission. Why would I even think about relinquishing some of the control I have at present?

Harry Flashman

 

[brianj]

Harry Flashman wrote:

I know what it is; I certainly am aware that there is no such thing as a cloud of data out there in the air, but rather some very expensive purpose-built physical locations that would act as data stores and run software... But I just cannot see myself in any scenario where I give my data over to someone else to look after, or process it centrally. It seems like an echo of the old days where you dropped off film at a shop and were told to return a few days later to collect your prints. When you turn up, the staff are having a quiet laugh at some of the shots, and that one really great one of the chicken crossing the road has been copied an extra time and pocketted by Johnny Friends-in-the Press.

I have recently had an extended private discussion regarding Google interfering with pdf files sent via gmail (some form of tagging) and, as a consequence, the whole business of letting people look at my machines and run tests with my data to resolve any underlying issues, and it became clear that I was especially sensitive about letting a third party have access to or even look into my systems/data.

The fact that Adobe, during this discussion, announced its own cloud-based plans was a neat example of the Baader-Meinhof effect. But the question remains, in what universe would someone like me ever consider signing up to cloud-based services?

I have some custom written software that is entirely stable and has been helping me with my work for a reasonably long time. I also have custom built hardware and - incredibly, a custom built operating system for all this (long story; LISP-based coding - way beyond my league, but written by a friend as an academic project). My system stands alone and is super-safe. Of course I have back-up for the data and the system and the software. The back up is stored in a different place in a highly-rated fire-resistant safe. The writers and builders are all good friends (one is a relative), so I have lifetime support. In short, I am secure and, equally important, completely happy with what I can do. I will retire sooner rather than later and have no interest to shift to a new career. I do though have a vast library of original materials, and a not-that-small collection of memories as photographs.

Privacy and security are the major issues for me.

What if I had pictures of a girlfriend that my family knew nothing about? Long gone but a fact of my life. Would I under any circumstances wish to let this go off to a super-cooled building somewhere in a desert west of London? Time passes, events overtake even the best laid plans, and the data is lost, or the data is released...

Less colourful, I write - my manuscripts are gold dust to me. They will never be published in part or whole in any form without my express permission. Why would I even think about relinquishing some of the control I have at present?

Harry Flashman

Not many people live in such a clandestine world as you do, the young generation will adopt anything that's thrown at them as long as it is trendy and raises their self esteem. So the cloud is not suitable for you and never will be, but millions will use it with gay abandon in the future, and we will hear about all their woes on some currant affairs news program on TV.

I can't see myself using it either.

Brian

 

[Dennis]

Harry Flashman wrote:

But I just cannot see myself in any scenario where I give my data over to someone else to look after, or process it centrally. It seems like an echo of the old days where you dropped off film at a shop and were told to return a few days later to collect your prints.

I can certainly understand the privacy aspect. Between that and lousy bandwidth, I'm not terribly interested in cloud computing. But I have made use of it and can see why some would make better use of it. I have an account on smugmug. I keep meaning to set up Lightroom so that as I import photos, I upload them to smugmug. JPEG only, but any backup is better than none. (I don't backup offsite, but at home I do ... many people don't). I've printed photo books. If they were to burn up or get damaged, they're online, ready to be printed again. Backup is one reason for cloud storage. Then there's sharing. Sharing with other people or sharing across devices. With data in the cloud, you can work on photos or projects (photo books) on your desktop, laptop, tablet, at home or remotely. You can share files with friends, family, clients, coworkers.

The fact that Adobe, during this discussion, announced its own cloud-based plans was a neat example of the Baader-Meinhof effect. But the question remains, in what universe would someone like me ever consider signing up to cloud-based services?

If you have no need to work on your files from different locations, share files that can be worked on by other people, you may have little reason for cloud services from Adobe. Then again, the CC suite is aimed at professionals and most development geared around their needs.

Here's something I wonder ... right now I have 40,000 files in Lightroom. If I find the time to edit those, I could likely get that below 20,000. (I've done first passes and typically keep no more than 1/2 of what I shot). That's in 10 years. I won't shoot so much once my daughter is out of the house, so say I double that, and then shoot less in my later years (maybe I'll travel more ?) Now I've got tens of thousands of raw files on my computer along with edits in a Lightroom database. And then I die. If my wife is still alive, she's not going to mess around on the computer. That leaves my daughter. And maybe some friends and other family; townspeople. How would anyone ever realize any value from my photos ? In a database on my computer ? In print form (a collection of books) ? Online ? (I'd have to have arranged for subscription fees to be paid up). Even if my daughter were to sit down at my computer and go through images, she'd have to learn the software, figure out what the heck she wants to do with them ... and assuming she found time to go through that many images, she most likely wouldn't spend time sharing them. Meanwhile, existing sharing sites aren't quite as flexible as I might like for leaving behind a "legacy" where ideally, my Lightroom catalog (or everything I was willing to share) could be uploaded complete with tagging and labeling and collections so that people could search for photos that interest them.

- Dennis

 

[brianj]

Dennis wrote:

Here's something I wonder ... right now I have 40,000 files in Lightroom. If I find the time to edit those, I could likely get that below 20,000. (I've done first passes and typically keep no more than 1/2 of what I shot). That's in 10 years. I won't shoot so much once my daughter is out of the house, so say I double that, and then shoot less in my later years (maybe I'll travel more ?) Now I've got tens of thousands of raw files on my computer along with edits in a Lightroom database. And then I die. If my wife is still alive, she's not going to mess around on the computer. That leaves my daughter. And maybe some friends and other family; townspeople. How would anyone ever realize any value from my photos ? In a database on my computer ? In print form (a collection of books) ? Online ? (I'd have to have arranged for subscription fees to be paid up). Even if my daughter were to sit down at my computer and go through images, she'd have to learn the software, figure out what the heck she wants to do with them ... and assuming she found time to go through that many images, she most likely wouldn't spend time sharing them. Meanwhile, existing sharing sites aren't quite as flexible as I might like for leaving behind a "legacy" where ideally, my Lightroom catalog (or everything I was willing to share) could be uploaded complete with tagging and labeling and collections so that people could search for photos that interest them.

- Dennis

I have already seen a near equivalent of this happen when my grandfather died, he had quite a collection of photos taken using film of the family members through the years and many other things. Family members came along and scooped up any albums of family members they knew and distributed those accordingly, all the rest was thrown out.

That is why to this day I believe the only photos of mine that might be saved for future generations is the ones I have printed and put into albums in a hope that at least those few of the hundred thousand I have taken might be passed on. No one is going to look in some ancient database or in any clouds, that's even if they knew how to.

Good luck with your sorting.

Brian

 

[Dennis]

brianj wrote:
I have already seen a near equivalent of this happen when my grandfather died, he had quite a collection of photos taken using film of the family members through the years and many other things. Family members came along and scooped up any albums of family members they knew and distributed those accordingly, all the rest was thrown out.
That is why to this day I believe the only photos of mine that might be saved for future generations is the ones I have printed and put into albums in a hope that at least those few of the hundred thousand I have taken might be passed on. No one is going to look in some ancient database or in any clouds, that's even if they knew how to.

Good luck with your sorting.

Brian

Thanks Brian, that illustrates my concern perfectly. And it makes sense that the easier you make it for the people left behind, the more likely it is that they'll save and view your pictures. Books are probably the best way, but I can't help but think that my daughter could make use of files with at least the "best" pictures. (I have photo albums from my childhood and have had to scan in some pictures to share with my brother and have also scanned in a few pictures of my mother to try my hand at digital restoration).

But you're right - the printed photos are most likely to be enjoyed because they're accessible and they've been edited down to a manageable level. After that, digital files might be saved and possibly used, but probably again only if they've been edited down to a manageable level. Well, I (hopefully) have a few decades to think about it. If not, then someone will be stuck with a mess

Actually, one thing I have in the back of my mind is that as my daughter grows older and as a result, I stop having opportunities to take photos of some of her friends (typically children of our friends) I'll put together collections of pictures I've accumulated and "hand them over". I few friends in particular, I have probably a hundred or more really good photos - photos that I'd like to have if I were the parent.

So maybe you're right - maybe cloud storage doesn't really help here.

- Dennis

 

[Kokopelli_Rocks]

I know your question is more general about cloud computing, but since most seem to be confused by Adobe's use of the term I will give my view on Adobe's use of the term. Adobe's "creative cloud" is really a new fancy way to provide them copy protection for their software. Instead of a dongle like some used for a while Adobe is just using the "cloud" to enforce their license agreement and making you pay monthly for the privilege.

Cloud means many things to many people and the term is very overloaded. Cloud computer comes in many forms, from having your servers hosted by a cloud provider like Amazon, or having your email system hosted by companies like Google or MS, to using the cloud for backup services for your data. Popular now is to host files in the cloud that you can then share with others. So many different ideas for using the cloud are available or being developed right now it is pretty hard to define "cloud".

 

[wchutt]

Harry,

The Cloud trades control for convenience. People and organizations happen to find the ability to share information and store it off-site more important than the risks you mention. There is no right or wrong risk decision. Different people weight the benefits and disadvantages differently.

It is possible to encrypt data files stored in the Cloud. With one of the lesser know Cloud services, SpiderOak, all data is automatically encrypted. Also some Cloud users, mostly companies, use their own encryption schemes for their data in the Cloud. They do this because they save money compared to operating their own IT resources for off-site data storage and sharing.

Finally, I assume you use off-site physical storage and back up for your important, private work. Some people use bank safet depost vaults. They visit them regularly to swap HD storage.

 

[Harry Flashman]

Yep, I keep discs and drives in a safe - a pretty big one (fridge-sized) with a very good fire rating. What I also have is a lot of hard copy for documents - I hadn't really thought about it much but, as some have mentioned already, if I were to leave this mortal coil, it would be the printed materials that are easiest to sort through.

 

[pavi1]

While you may not like it, in not too many years from now most computers will no longer have storage or at most very little. You will access your software and data from the "cloud". Everywhere you go on the planet your software and data will be available. I would not be surprised if even windows is monthly subscription.

At work our tax and accounting software is currently available both ways. We use the numer one software in the accounting industry. The vendor is currently offering their complete suite cloud based including data storage. we are betting sooner than later we will be using the web base application. No more servers with daily backups, no more transporting data from office to safe on a daily basis, no more shutting down 50 employees for software updates. It is the future for most, like it our not us old guys are dying out and will not be a part of the future.

 

[brianj]

Dennis wrote:
Actually, one thing I have in the back of my mind is that as my daughter grows older and as a result, I stop having opportunities to take photos of some of her friends (typically children of our friends) I'll put together collections of pictures I've accumulated and "hand them over". I few friends in particular, I have probably a hundred or more really good photos - photos that I'd like to have if I were the parent.

That's exactly what I did with a lot of old slides of our two children as babies and going to school, I digitised the slides then PP them and had them printed onto paper, then assembled two books, one of my daughters photos for her and another for my son. They seemed quite amazed with the albums and it was fun doing it.

Brian

 

[Henry Falkner]

Cloud computing is actually old hat. We had this with terminals connected to a main frame. What you saw on your screen was information from somewhere else, processed somwehere else. The 'main frame' could be anywhere. All that is different now is that there may be more than one 'server', most likely not even in the country that you live in.

What bothers me about cloud computing is that if my internet connection is down, I cannot do any work nor access 'my' data.

If the software I work with resided on my 'C' disk, and my data is stored on two separate external disks, with some regular maintenance I will always be able to do some work, and as long as I don't engage in activities deemed dangerous to my fellow citizens, my data will remain private.

What you increasingly see is 'services' (like Facebook) that stipulate, once you have intrusted YOUR stuff to THEM, it becomes THEIR stuff. Yes, I am on Facebook, but I do little on it, because I gossip less than they do on what is laughingly called 'News'.

Henry

 

[William Carson]

pavi1 wrote:

While you may not like it, in not too many years from now most computers will no longer have storage or at most very little. You will access your software and data from the "cloud". Everywhere you go on the planet your software and data will be available. I would not be surprised if even windows is monthly subscription.

At work our tax and accounting software is currently available both ways. We use the numer one software in the accounting industry. The vendor is currently offering their complete suite cloud based including data storage. we are betting sooner than later we will be using the web base application. No more servers with daily backups, no more transporting data from office to safe on a daily basis, no more shutting down 50 employees for software updates. It is the future for most, like it our not us old guys are dying out and will not be a part of the future.

 

[William Carson]

What bothers me about cloud computing is that if my internet connection is down, I cannot do any work nor access 'my' data.

What you increasingly see is 'services' (like Facebook) that stipulate, once you have intrusted YOUR stuff to THEM, it becomes THEIR stuff. Yes, I am on Facebook, but I do little on it, because I gossip less than they do on what is laughingly called 'News'.

Henry

This discussion of cloud computing is bringing up issues of information access that is increasingly controlled by large financial - government interests. Already, 'news' has become nothing more than either entertainment. or controlled stories. I don't know where this is going to end up but it doesn't seem anywhere good.

 

[LarsDalsbo]

It does seem like a lot of people are a bit too skeptical, or at least does not fully understand the cloud concept, and use cloud computing and cloud storage as two parts of the same thing. Cloud storage is as the name says, file-storing "in the cloud", at central servers outside your local computer. Cloud computing on the other hand is when you actually use the central servers to run the applications (like for instance Photoshop).

There are few, if any programs on the more complicated end of the scale, that really run in the cloud. If you take Adobe's cloud move as has been a popular topic to discuss these days, nothing actually runs in the cloud. All of the programs, that be Photoshop, After Effects, InDesign, Premiere etc., run as before on your local computer. File saving and such will also be the same, locally. You would not lose access to the software just because you do not have an internet connection, well, at least if you are connected every 30. day (no subscription plan) or every 99. day (1 year subscription). The only thing Adobe will use the cloud for is licenses and limited file storage, and probably some other social integrations and such. And of course they will not have to handle physical copies of their software anymore.

As the internet is today it is too slow, too many places to have real cloud computing. The user experience would be awful for the ones doing work in Photoshop on a slow connection. Another thing is the shear processing power it would demand of Adobe (as example) to run all their applications on their own servers for millions of users. Many places do have the connection speed, but the response time might be too slow, again, what you do with your keyboard/mouse etc., would lag behind on the screen.

 

[Daisy AU]

Harry Flashman wrote:

I know what it is; I certainly am aware that there is no such thing as a cloud of data out there in the air, but rather some very expensive purpose-built physical locations that would act as data stores and run software... But I just cannot see myself in any scenario where I give my data over to someone else to look after, or process it centrally. It seems like an echo of the old days where you dropped off film at a shop and were told to return a few days later to collect your prints. When you turn up, the staff are having a quiet laugh at some of the shots, and that one really great one of the chicken crossing the road has been copied an extra time and pocketted by Johnny Friends-in-the Press.

I have recently had an extended private discussion regarding Google interfering with pdf files sent via gmail (some form of tagging) and, as a consequence, the whole business of letting people look at my machines and run tests with my data to resolve any underlying issues, and it became clear that I was especially sensitive about letting a third party have access to or even look into my systems/data.

The fact that Adobe, during this discussion, announced its own cloud-based plans was a neat example of the Baader-Meinhof effect. But the question remains, in what universe would someone like me ever consider signing up to cloud-based services?

I have some custom written software that is entirely stable and has been helping me with my work for a reasonably long time. I also have custom built hardware and - incredibly, a custom built operating system for all this (long story; LISP-based coding - way beyond my league, but written by a friend as an academic project). My system stands alone and is super-safe. Of course I have back-up for the data and the system and the software. The back up is stored in a different place in a highly-rated fire-resistant safe. The writers and builders are all good friends (one is a relative), so I have lifetime support. In short, I am secure and, equally important, completely happy with what I can do. I will retire sooner rather than later and have no interest to shift to a new career. I do though have a vast library of original materials, and a not-that-small collection of memories as photographs.

Privacy and security are the major issues for me.

What if I had pictures of a girlfriend that my family knew nothing about? Long gone but a fact of my life. Would I under any circumstances wish to let this go off to a super-cooled building somewhere in a desert west of London? Time passes, events overtake even the best laid plans, and the data is lost, or the data is released...

Less colourful, I write - my manuscripts are gold dust to me. They will never be published in part or whole in any form without my express permission. Why would I even think about relinquishing some of the control I have at present?

Harry Flashman

I'm not using cloud nor will I ever. However, some people operate using several devices from several locations, hence having files/software in the cloud makes it easily accessible from their different locations and platforms. I can see the benefit for some things, but I will not store sensitive/private material on the cloud. Back up hard-drives are it for me.

 

[alanr0]

William Carson wrote:

There are two issues with 'cloud storage'. One is government access. The last few years have shown how much of a joke is it to believe in any talk of due process or legal guarentees of individual rights. The other is the entire cloud storage depends on satellite communication which could be destroyed very quickly with a large solar flare. There are also human intentional acts which could take out a good percentage of satellites in international conflicts. There are positives though as it is a good backup in case of a local situation of a house fire or theft or hard drive failure.

Do you know why they rely on satellite communications? Wouldn't optical fibre be a better option, with lower latency and higher capacity. Clients of cloud services might use satellite if they are in remote locations or for route redundancy, but fibre seems a better option where it is available.

Cheers

 

[BIJ001]

brianj wrote:
No one is going to look in some ancient database

As my dear father passed away I had top realize that a part of the disks he left to us were not readable any more or only partially readable.

















--
Iván József Balázs
(Hungary)

 

[brianj]

BIJ001 wrote:

brianj wrote:
No one is going to look in some ancient database

As my dear father passed away I had top realize that a part of the disks he left to us were not readable any more or only partially readable.

That's sad, but quite common for old diskc and CDs, at least you were technical enough to have a go at trying to save the files, most people would toss them out.

Brian

 

[Draek]

Harry Flashman wrote:

I know what it is; I certainly am aware that there is no such thing as a cloud of data out there in the air, but rather some very expensive purpose-built physical locations that would act as data stores and run software... But I just cannot see myself in any scenario where I give my data over to someone else to look after, or process it centrally. It seems like an echo of the old days where you dropped off film at a shop and were told to return a few days later to collect your prints. When you turn up, the staff are having a quiet laugh at some of the shots, and that one really great one of the chicken crossing the road has been copied an extra time and pocketted by Johnny Friends-in-the Press.

And yet you use DPR instead of corresponding with each of us through encrypted snail mail.

Think about that a few minutes, and the answers to your questions shall become clear.

Oh, and I'm not a professional security consultant, but if the computer you describe is connected to the 'net, it ain't that secure to begin with. Starting with the fact that, well, Google, Adobe et al do actually hire security consultants to design their systems, so hacking them is much harder than doing likewise to you---and while you'd probably argue nobody would be interested in hacking you, the same applies to people caring about your data past the five seconds it'll take them to see it doesn't contain credit card numbers or bank information.

 

[BIJ001]

> but quite common for old diskc and CD

Some were from 2004, his stay in Rome at the Hungarian Academy. When in Rome, do as the Romans do that time: not having a laptop with him, he let his memory cards contents written to optical disks in photo shops. He died in 2010 (less then 2 months before his 80th birthday) and there were problems with some of his disks.