About Cloud Computing – It was a quickwrite for a college essay writing seminar I went to, about a year ago and before I knew much about cloud computing. Exact retype.
I really love the idea of cloud computing. It’s versatile, fast, moderately stable, and scary. The moderate scariness comes from the idea of having your data spread out. It isn’t accessible from any one address, because it isn’t at any one address, little bits are all over the data center. This does, however, require a bit of intelligence on the part of the level3 cloud provider’s network.They have to be able to quickly and efficiently distribute computational commands and data, and return those coherently to the user in a timely fashion. But more Importantly, If anyone were to expect anything less than perfection, the entire system would fail, and we would return to the good-old single server-client architecture and and much efficiency would be lost. The main difference between cloud infrastructure and regular is grace. With a standard architecture, you throw more servers or bandwidth at your problem. With cloud computing, you merely make the system architecture more efficient.
End quickwrite.
As I’ve thought my previous post over, I figured I should update it without updating it. So I’m making a new one.
I realised there is something I should clarify, that only now makes sense to me, after thinking for a while on my original post. That fact is that it’s not the direct impersonality of of technology that makes me hate it, but that people depend on that impersonality. I spoke to my mother about the post and she had a few more things to offer that I think are well worth considering. The main point is that due to the growing impersonality of technology based communication, there is bound to be a counter-revolution at some point by people like me, who prefer to speak in a coffee shop rather than over text messaging or on the phone. By people who understand the value of time spent with other people over interacting with them in a conceptually abstract way and just hoping that their (physical) emotions are transmitted properly.
That sort of hope is nice to see, but it is often used with folly too, for most text based messages do not accurately communicate what the person feels, or what they’re doing, the beat red color of their face or the awkward way they’re shifting their weight indicating something is amiss.
But, let’s face it. People are lazy, and as long as they can communicate with people with as little effort given as possible, they will continue to ignore the obvious lack of conversational interaction they get by using technology to communicate.
I think if Lewis Mumford were still alive when this anti-technological communication revolution happens, he would be very proud; He may even write a new book about it if that were the case. He wrote the book series “The Myth of the Machine”, which is about America and what the factory line style industrialization has done to the quality of goods and services in our society. Indeed, he might make some comment about the lessening quality of our speech as well, but it’s purely speculation coming from me.
Long story short: The impersonality.
Let me tell you a story here, that will devolve into a rant.
I was supposed to meet someone tonight, to do a few things. The person called ahead of time, made sure the meeting was on and still rolling, and it was. Said they’d be here in 30 minutes. An hour and a half after that 30 minute time ended, I get a text message on my phone that doesn’t say sorry I couldn’t make it, or any sort of an apology at all. It just says “Can I come over and get that stuff tomorrow?” This is entirely unacceptable. The person didn’t even show up; an apology should have been the first thing out of their mouth(text-wise even). Now, the person’s lateness(or not showing up) isn’t the primary issue. The primary issue is the manner in which the message was delivered. If you are going to blow someone off, atleast have the guts to do it to their face or alternatively call them. Text messaging is not an acceptable way of relaying messages other than to get small little tidbits of information out to people quickly. Any sort of actually formal interaction should always be done in voice ( be that in person or in the form of a call ).
Departing to another note, though not altogether unrelated, is that of spelling and grammar in email messages. If you are sending a message to someone via email, please use the spellcheck function, and make some small attempt at grammar. If you do not, many people will immediately disregard your email, or discredit it before they even read it purely because of the feel of ignorance your email puts forth. Many will not admit to that, but it is true. Nearly everyone, on some varying level, will discredit an email based on how it is formulated. If it is nice, with proper spelling and grammar, it is quite likely to be heeded. If else, then else. If you’re reading this, then that is your fair warning if you haven’t had it already.
