agreed. This sounds like some Jobs/Apple RDF nonsense where the user has drank the kool-aid.
1) I hope the/. community has not lost ALL perspective on the use of keeping their vast sums of information private.
2) currently, google services are not as good as the software I am already using (and when my web connection goes down I do not care)
For the user: 1) I do not want to be tracked across my entire internet experience [including my email...] 2) I do not want my information resold to everyone [especially when you are combining it with 1 above] 3) I do not want my experience to be painful: install nonsense all over, slow down my browser, resize-popup/under, loud noise/alerts..., shake/vibrate...
[I can handle some of the above to varying degrees but I think we can all agree that some ads go beyond what they should]
For the server: 1) The web world has become about free content [and it is incredibly hard to compete with free], so that is the most common business model and depending on the market the ONLY viable business model. If we are not willing to accept it then we will not get sites that we use and LOVE [hello/. anyone] 2) Content servers do have costs [data center, bandwidth, salary...] and they should be able to recoup this and hopefully make a profit provided they actually provide a useful service
Of course the topic goes much deeper than this. However, as a user are you willing to pay for/. or are you willing to view some of their ads. And/. are you going to misuse your users trust with in proper ad models or will you try to provide useful ads with minimal privacy and experience issues.
Nice: 1) remote availability: files online to transfer or get access when out and about 2) remote backup
Sucks: 1) expensive: I can get a 500GB drive from frys for $100 2) privacy: do I really want google to know even more about me; yes send me more ads; yes turn over my files when the feds come for it [you better encrypt it] 3) reliability:
A) GMail goes down so I assume I will not always have access to these files [I cannot put important files there and expect to access them as needed]
B) My connection goes down (mine does) 4) Hassle: syncing between files 5) Secure: come on you know people are going to try to get at this 6) Speed: depends on scenario, but in general this would be torturous
Doesn't Dell, Apple... do this already?
I do not trust Google [or any other company] and their services that much. RAID and portable storage may not be utopia but work for me.
Slashdot Mirror
agreed. This sounds like some Jobs/Apple RDF nonsense where the user has drank the kool-aid. 1) I hope the /. community has not lost ALL perspective on the use of keeping their vast sums of information private.
2) currently, google services are not as good as the software I am already using (and when my web connection goes down I do not care)
For me I think there needs to be a middle ground.
/. anyone]
/. or are you willing to view some of their ads. And /. are you going to misuse your users trust with in proper ad models or will you try to provide useful ads with minimal privacy and experience issues.
For the user:
1) I do not want to be tracked across my entire internet experience [including my email...]
2) I do not want my information resold to everyone [especially when you are combining it with 1 above]
3) I do not want my experience to be painful: install nonsense all over, slow down my browser, resize-popup/under, loud noise/alerts..., shake/vibrate...
[I can handle some of the above to varying degrees but I think we can all agree that some ads go beyond what they should]
For the server:
1) The web world has become about free content [and it is incredibly hard to compete with free], so that is the most common business model and depending on the market the ONLY viable business model. If we are not willing to accept it then we will not get sites that we use and LOVE [hello
2) Content servers do have costs [data center, bandwidth, salary...] and they should be able to recoup this and hopefully make a profit provided they actually provide a useful service
Of course the topic goes much deeper than this. However, as a user are you willing to pay for
Sucks wins
Nice:
1) remote availability: files online to transfer or get access when out and about
2) remote backup
Sucks:
1) expensive: I can get a 500GB drive from frys for $100
2) privacy: do I really want google to know even more about me; yes send me more ads; yes turn over my files when the feds come for it [you better encrypt it]
3) reliability:
A) GMail goes down so I assume I will not always have access to these files [I cannot put important files there and expect to access them as needed]
B) My connection goes down (mine does)
4) Hassle: syncing between files
5) Secure: come on you know people are going to try to get at this
6) Speed: depends on scenario, but in general this would be torturous
Doesn't Dell, Apple... do this already?
I do not trust Google [or any other company] and their services that much.
RAID and portable storage may not be utopia but work for me.