PDA

View Full Version : Jonathan Zittrain in the NYTimes


Lindsey
July 20th, 2009, 04:26 PM
His OpEd piece today issues caveats about life "in the cloud":

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/20/opinion/20zittrain.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

ktinkel
July 20th, 2009, 07:59 PM
His OpEd piece today issues caveats about life "in the cloud"Very interesting article. My peasant-brain recoils from cloud stuff anyway (I am more likely to print out anything important on Cranes Crest and take it to a security box at the bank).

But the questions he raises (and alludes to) are fascinating. In the end, do we want to rely on Amazon and Google? Not me, especially considering Amazon’s latest Kindle exploit.

There was another really interesting op-ed in the Times today as well: by A.E. Hotchner about the revision (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/20/opinion/20hotchner.html) of Hemingway’s A Moveable Feast.

ndebord
July 20th, 2009, 09:06 PM
Very interesting article. My peasant-brain recoils from cloud stuff anyway (I am more likely to print out anything important on Cranes Crest and take it to a security box at the bank).

But the questions he raises (and alludes to) are fascinating. In the end, do we want to rely on Amazon and Google? Not me, especially considering Amazon’s latest Kindle exploit.

There was another really interesting op-ed in the Times today as well: by A.E. Hotchner about the revision (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/20/opinion/20hotchner.html) of Hemingway’s A Moveable Feast.

kathleen,

In a similar vein, consider if you will the Google connection to Mozilla Corporation and Firefox 3.5. The very large anti-phising component/module in FF is a black and white list maintained and verified by Google itself. Questions have been raised about its willingness to police itself, e.g., as in putting Google domains on the blacklist or worse... putting bad Google domains on their white list.


FWIW.

ktinkel
July 21st, 2009, 01:28 PM
The very large anti-phising component/module in FF is a black and white list maintained and verified by Google itself. Questions have been raised about its willingness to police itself, e.g., as in putting Google domains on the blacklist or worse... putting bad Google domains on their white list.Sounds like a good question to me.

Judy G. Russell
July 22nd, 2009, 10:52 AM
Very interesting article. ... the questions he raises (and alludes to) are fascinating. In the end, do we want to rely on Amazon and Google? Not me, especially considering Amazon’s latest Kindle exploit.Exactly my sentiments. I just don't trust anybody more than I have to.

ktinkel
July 22nd, 2009, 11:28 AM
Exactly my sentiments. I just don't trust anybody more than I have to.Hmm. I actually trust quite a few people. But companies? Not so many. Their objectives rarely coincide with mine for more than a nanosecond!

fhaber
July 22nd, 2009, 02:32 PM
Google's comforting "don't be evil|do no evil" of seven or eight years ago has gotten them a lot of mileage. But as Google gets gigantic, and the non-evildoers get farther from the action....

Turned on basic cable recently? I expect to see Lions and Christians in Yankee Stadium any year now, or at least a good solid game of Rollerball.

Judy G. Russell
July 22nd, 2009, 07:52 PM
Google's comforting "don't be evil|do no evil" of seven or eight years ago has gotten them a lot of mileage. But as Google gets gigantic, and the non-evildoers get farther from the action....Exactly my concern. Any business that's that big has people on its staff whose motives are definitely not pure. And the degree of information they try to collect about me is not something I want in the hands of that sort.

Turned on basic cable recently? I expect to see Lions and Christians in Yankee Stadium any year now, or at least a good solid game of Rollerball.Lions 6, Christians 0...