Slashdot Mirror
Who Owns Application Delivery Meta-Data In the Cloud?
Random Feature writes "The Cloud Computing Interoperability Forum (CCIF) is currently discussing cloud portability specifications. It seems crazy to define a standard before we even know who owns what in the cloud because you can only port what you own. For example, if you created a security or acceleration policy for your cloud computing-based app, is the policy yours or the provider's? Who owns meta-data in the cloud?" True portability between clouds seems to hang on the answer.
TROLL
Why, the "group of industry stakeholders" does. Sure you can port it from one to another, but you'll have to pay to leave your current provider to switch to another one...unless the other one gives them a kickback.
Under no circumstances do you own your data. You just license it.
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
The article was not very clear, plus Joyent was a lousy example to use. Joyent has big names associated with it, because it was started by many well-known independent developers, but it's actually pretty unreliable as far as most hosts are concerned.
Or you could leverage some synergistic paradigms or something.
Christ, is there a bee in the room or what?
The ownership of medical data is a huge problem with providers (even though HIPPA is out there). If you really press techs with start medical record providers, the attitude is simply that the data is theirs.
I'm a complete n00b when it comes to 'cloud computing', but given that the article (behind the 2nd link) starts out to explain that nobody's really sure what 'cloud computing' is just yet, I guess I can't help but shrug at that fact.
I did try to read through the thinly-veiled press release article, but at the end... I'm still unsure what the meta data is.
Say I have a 'cloud computing' app that is uhh.. a bouncing ball. Yes, it shows on the screen of the app user a bouncing ball. That'll do.
Now that app is mine. I can take it from one provider to another (assuming they run the same apps - I suppose a standard would have to define that).
Now let's say the provider has options to, say, limit access to that app to a certain IP range. Certainly that's meta-data, right? It's not inherent to the app, it's not crucial to the app's workings, it's just additional data related to the app. Is that data mine? I would certainly say so. I go into the provider's control panel, hit 'limit access', enter the IP addresses... I don't think they can claim that the data I entered is now suddenly the provider's to own, and taking that particular meta-data from that provider and to another provider (presuming they have a limit-by-ip thing) shouldn't be any trouble. Again, a standard may apply here for some common tasks/options and exporting this to a common file format (and I really don't care if that's plaintext, XML, a BLOB or whatever - as long as everybody can read/write them) so it can be imported by another provider would be nice.
But the article seems to be about a bunch of people -at the provider- having a peek at your app and making tweaks in their own 'cloud' to make your app be delivered faster, be delivered more securely, etc. I fail to see how -that- meta-data is yours to own. The 'cloud' isn't yours, the tweaks made to the cloud aren't yours, etc. So maybe you paid them to make those optimizations, great, so pay the people at the other provider to make changes too. That's one of the perils of changing providers / relying on their tweaks in any such business.
I don't think that not having that meta-data breaks portability, though - it just means your app may not be delivered as fast, or as securely.. your problem for choosing an inferior 'cloud computing' provider.
But, again, maybe one of those 'industry moguls' in the arena of cloud computing can explain what the problem actually seems to be.
Since there isn't a cloud it's all nonsense, there's a good old fashioned mainframe operator and a customer using the system the law and contracting models for those was laid down in the 70ies and just because the 3270 have given way to the AJAX enabled browser and everyone is talking community we don't have a different situation.
Stop treating the cloud as if it was something unknown and start realising how much it's just the successor to the mainframe and thing stats making sense.
Say I have a 'cloud computing' app that is uhh.. a bouncing ball. Yes, it shows on the screen of the app user a bouncing ball. That'll do.
I would prefer racing cars over bouncing ball.
Eclipse PDE and Me
I guess I was being sarcastic, but really ask yourself what did you agree to when you installed, or bought a monthly seat, or VLK? You agreed you sign your life away basically. But I see the discussion goes on who owns the meta-data for an app, I would have to say the security policy owns it. I shut your fucking port off, you no longer deliver your app. The rest doesn't matter. You don't like the provider, get lost.
team of lawyers
This is the most boring slashdot submission ive seen Zzzzz. So i've decided to jazz it up with a few emoticons..
^_^ japanese cartoon :) standard smiley (not very edgy any more)
>_> - - - - - c[_] guy staring at coffee mug
As meta data is derived from data does this mean that Brent Spiner it or just that in the Cloud, the Quadrant or the whole universe?
Intellectual property is a thing of the past. To consider this technology with that perspective is to take 10 steps backwards. A better question would be how representative is the sample that constitutes the cloud of various regional or national scales. To reach the most interested potential consumers would be to provide this usage data to companies providing services at these levels. To use such an archaic model in managing this type of technology would be highly ineffective. Business really needs to catch up how they structure their services to keep up with emerging technologies.
Seriously its like asking who owns a .BAT file. You guys need some real content. Try taking some more user submissions.
Why does anyone have to "own" data at all? Seriously, it's wholly unclear to me that the notion of data being something you can own even makes sense.
Data may be copyrighted under certain circumstances, of course, but that doesn't amount to ownership, and those circumstances are reasonably narrow, anyway - for example, there has to be a creative component involved, and of course, copyright is a means to achieve an end (namely, to ensure cultural progress), anyway.
The same goes for patents, trademarks, trade dress, trade secrets and so on: all of these have specific limitations, specific goals, and specific circumstances under which they can apply (or not apply).
Owning "application-delivery cloud-computing meta-data" seems tantamount to "owning" facts.
Who are these douchebags?
My name is Anne Umbongo. I am the widow of deposed African Dictator Umbongo Umbongo. Before he lost power my husband owned application delivery meta data in the cloud, which he acquired after a Russian businessman had an unfortunate accident. He intended to display it as a trophy outside his palace in his new capital of Umbongonia which he was building in the desert with funds from the UN, EU etc.
I will sell you application delivery meta data in the cloud for a good price!
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
Is it anything else than a supposedly sexy buzz word for what's essentially used to be "mainframe"+Internet?
the whole thing is quite literally a nebulous concept.
At the bottom of the
the fscking butler did it again!
Who cares who owns thingummyjig whatever-it-was in the cloud?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Um, while his first post was offtopic crap, this one isn't.
Please fix this, mods.
I'll quote the important part to make it easy for you:
But I see the discussion goes on who owns the meta-data for an app, I would have to say the security policy owns it. I shut your fucking port off, you no longer deliver your app. The rest doesn't matter. You don't like the provider, get lost.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Maybe it's just me, but I have no clue what 'the cloud' is.
I am scientifically inaccurate.
Seriously, are we talking about portability between services like Amazon Web Services and Google App Engine? Why? They offer different platforms, capabilities, and support different application spaces. (BTW, AWS rocks!)
On the other hand, I insist on a migration path off of a cloud service: not too much trouble with AWS because you install whatever you want on their servers, and you could lease alternative servers (but loose support for Simple Storage Service, Simple Queue Service, etc.). So yes, if you really buy into all of Amazon's infrastructure, moving to your own servers would be real work. That said, Amazon is a stable company and they keep reducing their prices.
I have worked through a Google App Engine tutorial by running their development kit locally, but I really don't have any practical experience with it. In principle, you could move a small web app from Google App Engine hosting to your own server, but you would obviously lose the instance scalability, and be running their data store in a one server emulation mode.
Micro$oft. All your data is belong to us. Please don't read the EULAs.
There's usually no inherent copyright (or other legal) interest in configuration of an ADC (application delivery controller) than there is in the configuration of the routers or switches that inhabit the very same network environment. (An exception to this would be script programming, but I've encountered very few copyright claims regarding ADC scripting.)
Now, if a customer doesn't have their own ADC but does have a vital interest in being able to our-live the relationship with their provider, obviously they should either:
Disclaimer: I work for an ADC manufacturer, although I have no relationship to a provider or customer.
This signature intentionally left unblank.
Whoever understands what the hell "Application Delivery Meta-Data in the Cloud" is, owns it.
why does anyone have to own that?
It's necessary to all interested parties. Why can't it be freely available to all who need it and secret from those who don't?
They're using their grammar skills there.
The Cloud is aptly named. I've read TFA and several levels of links from there and I'm no more informed than when I woke up this morning.
"Portability" is a concept, not a thing, so these folk need to explain what it is they want to port. "Metadata" isn't an answer. Metadata is data about data, so what data about what data about which phenomena are they talking about?
The other thing I'd like to know is, in what way is "the Cloud" distinct from a distributed server architecture, or what was once called a network application framework?
I'm a Programmer. That's one level above Software Engineer and one level below Engineer.
The word cloud in this context is a stupid buzz word that we can all do without.
I agree -- we could use a little less hype. But, this sentence alone:
just because the 3270 have given way to the AJAX enabled browser and everyone is talking community we don't have a different situation.
Actually, that really does.
A dumb terminal, or even a relatively smart terminal, is nowhere near the capabilities of a programmable modern browser. And that's before you factor in things like Google Gears, allowing you to take the same application offline.
So, technically, it is better.
Then there's the fact that you'd be foolish not to provide an API -- in fact, a good REST API will probably be easy to develop both web/AJAX and other clients. I somehow doubt that your application running on an IBM mainframe would be exposing services to other mainframes, perhaps even selling access.
As Mark Twain said, history doesn't repeat itself. It rhymes.
start realising how much it's just the successor to the mainframe and thing stats making sense.
What does that have to do with the context of this article, by the way? Or are you saying there's something in how mainframes answered the question of "ownership" that we should be considering?
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Read your TOS for the site. I would expect anything you develop is yours, but that's the risk of outsourcing stuff you probably should run yourself -- the "cloud" provider could claim ownership over everything.
And, independent from actual terms of service or contract, also realize anything you don't have on-site, you don't necessarily have. Companies DO fold, or just decide "hey this service isn't profitable, it's now shut down", or have unbelievable lack of backups.
There've been examples recently... not actual "cloud" services (or maybe they are, the term is so vague...) but examples that you should have a copy of your data...
1) Company split in two, the two halves bickered so much over who actually owned the data that they could not put it online so the "owners" could get a copy. It's still on disks and tape somewhere but is good as gone.
2) I forget the site, but some site with like 80,000 users closed recently because, after *8* years, they had not made ONE backup.. death through disk crash.
3) Several of the free web site services closed with little to no notice. No you cannot get your site back.
Just for 3 examples.
I did not read all previous posts, but, wOw!!?? Everyone who is concerned about the incidence of identity theft, and or fraud, and or the use of YOUR own personal information by an unauthorized person or organization who uses that information against you, or in such a manner that the result of their use\manipulation of YOUR data hurts you or your desires and or goals, especially financially, knows that we should secure all information not intentionally placed by YOU into the public domain, including its metadata. Because the information about YOU can be used both -for- and -against- YOU, and FOR someone elses benefit at YOUR expense, those individuals or organizations that you share your information with need to be accountable for the -use- and security of YOUR information to ensure that it is not used in any manner not consistent with your desires when you shared it with them for YOUR benefit. â"You do not, usually, intend that when you fill-in the required blanks to get a free offering over the internet, a white paper or something, that your information is OR CAN BE then sold to or obtained by any one else FOR THEIR BENEFIT, or to your detriment. I believe that ultimately we can and will accomplish this, however, -waiting for technology to solve this- is not, and can not, get us there. If we want to experience this in our lifetime, each user has to take responsibility for the steps necessary to ensure this, with all of the data s\he comes into contact with. Basically, the purposes for -computing in the cloud- would be for lower costs or for greater\easier access, or both. We havent yet secured the information in our own house, why does anyone think we can do it any better in the cloud? Determining ownership of information and\or its meta-data -in the cloud- would enable finger-pointing when the inevitable happens, but since we know its going to happen with the current user-enabled approach to data security, does it make any difference who we point the finger at? -Just rereading the title as I am posting I see the title is "...application delivery meta-data..." which is not the same thing as document meta-data; it would be the meta-data created as a result of the delivery of the application to you through the cloud. hmmmm -lemme think about the consequences of others learning that you are computing in the cloud . . . hmmm . . .they would know that it is much harder for you to claim that the information\data that you have or are offering is confidential, or authentic, or available.
My .02. carry on
cjacobs001
I'm pretty sure that ceiling cat owns everything in the cloud.
I do not really care where the app sits, my computer, your computer, their computer on the ground or in the clouds but I really care about "my data". If the metadata belongs to the app provider they are a "joint owner" of my data - ouch. I am happy to pay license fees to whoever provides the app I am using at the time but I want to keep my data separate from the app. Portable data is the way to go after all it will be around a lot longer than the app - users need to require that the apps they use can export ISO 8000-110:2008 quality data.