http://www.scripting.com/stories/2010/02/14/googleDidSomethingSeriousl.html
twitter+facebook+google are all US. companies and governments are increasingly relying on those companies, and users are relying more and more on those media for basic communication. What do you think will happen if the US declares war on your country? Will you even be able to react?
Data souvereignity
http://www.stuff.co.nz/3331115/Facebook-users-easy-prey
http://www.gamesbrief.com/2010/02/how-dont-be-evil-leads-to-guantanamo-bay/
http://whentwitterisdown.com/
Here is another in my list of growing reasons why I think Ubuntu is going bad: net books won’t have OpenOffice installed anymore. Instead, documents shall open with Google Docs in the future.
There are of course arguments in favour of this: we are talking about net books, so it seems sensible to make use of “the cloud” to be able to keep the requirements on local resources low. Also, network-based applications open up unprecedent possibilities for collaboration, and Google has unquestionably created some smart products.
However, despite all the hype, I think people are failing to see beyond the initial excitement. I fear that there’ll be many instances of “oh had I known better” in the future. And Ubuntu is basically suggesting — even forcing you — to go along (if you have a net book that is). I wonder if they asked their users.
The decision just seems like a horrible move:
-
there is no physical security in the cloud, the only layer protecting your data is a password. This can be quite fatal, as exemplified by the case of Twitter.
-
it sounds a bit feeble, but who can guarantee that the data will be available for as long as you need them? The likelihood of Google going down is small, but I consider the likelihood of Google abusing its position (and the dependence it creates/advocates) to be on the rise. Maybe Sergej and his moral commitments can keep the company on track for a while, but what happens when the founders finally pass on the hat? Recall that the company is already run by Eric Schmidt, who believes that privacy is not something people should rely on, and money making desires, and greed, don’t mix well with idealist promises and consumer interests.
-
while we’re on privacy and trust issues, are you just going to believe Google won’t ever use these data in ways you wouldn’t want them to? Keep in mind that once something’s out in the cloud, you cannot purge it anymore as it might linger on backup media forever. Currently, Google just (makes money while it) serves you advertising that is likely to be more interesting to you, because it is selected based on the context you provide. This seems like something you want, but which of the users knows what else is planned, or already going on?
-
network access is becoming more and more ubiquitous, but there will still be outages. Do you want to depend on highly complex and fallible hardware, and the skill and availability of engineers maintaining the infrastructure, just to be able to access, use, and manipulate your data when you want to?
I am aware that we’re talking about the default Ubuntu installation, and that users who want will still be able to install local applications to replace the network-based ones. However, Ubuntu’s market position is, I think, largely a result of making selection decisions for users (who didn’t want to choose one of 30 software packages for a task). As such, the decision that was made for the upcoming Ubuntu release is likely going to be accepted unchallenged by most of their users.
I consider this irresponsible, and probably not in the interest of their users. But it’s likely that there’s a direct financial benefit for Ubuntu (or Canonical) with this move. As I said before, money just doesn’t mix well with consumer interests, but money is more exciting for some people.
