You can criticize free (as in beer) stuff, but if you want free (as in freedom) stuff, you should create/build/host it on your own or under the umbrella of free licenses (e.g. GPL, creative commons, etc.).
You can't have it built and run by any profit-oriented corporation and then expect that you can use it freely (as in freedom).
Those are the rules and they are known since centuries. No exception.
Absolutely right: If you don't pay, you are not the customer, but the product. And you do not have any rights; you actually wave them when uploading any content.
BTW: Today you can easily host the content on your own Web site - it's very easy.
If you relativize "good" and "evil", you end of having nothing.
For the evil the good is evil.
This is absolutely wrong. My wife's Math books last semester were $400 more for the text book over the e-book version. That paid for our new iPad.
OK, now we know the difference. How is this possible? Did the textbooks cost $800 and by using the electronic versions you got 50% off - or did you pirate textbooks that cost otherwise $400?
And, what I also do not understand: I also studied Math and Physics; textbooks cost some money, but $400 per semester is quite a lot.
Actually when somebody is paying by the hour instead for the work done, you can bet that the hour is not too productive.
In many cases maybe your data is even more secure in a cloud than on your own servers, especially if you choose your 'cloud' carefully (outside of your country/jurisdiction).
The real threats to your data are your own employees and your government. The outside 'hackers' come as a very distant third.
Actually the real thread comes from the government, where the cloud provider resides. If you are running a corporation in Europe, it is probably illegal to use US based cloud providers (even, if your data stays on their European servers) for anything that contains user or employee data - and this is thanks to the Patriot Act or similar, which gives the US government the right to inspect all all accounts and their data of an US provider. And this is illegal to (most) European countries law. And since this is illegal and the European company knows this fact, the European firm can get itself in trouble, when using cloud serviced from a US provider.
Somehow the whole story is a deja vu. Remember, how encryption could not get exported from the US market? This created lots of opportunities for encryption software vendors outside of the USA. I am just looking for the global (minus USA) cloud providers to pop up and making loads of money by just replicating existing cloud models and running them in a different jurisdiction.
Fully agreed. As long as most cloud providers are US companies (or other global companies with a strong US presence) and the Patriot Act (and similar) exist, there is no way that a non-US corporation could even think about using their services for any sensitive data. Of course, for Web hosting (without user logging) a cloud service is optimal.
Non-global providers might be a solution, but then you also lose the big advantage of having your cloud services replicated near to the locations where they are used.
Did the college teach hardware theory, engineering, compiler theory (assembly language, tokenisers, parsers, code optimization, operating systems)?
He made his Ph.D. in the design of programming languages. I think the point is: Richie was a real computer scientist and had a very solid background from his studies and work in one of the best laboratories. And this is completely different from learning a programming language in school.
Dennis Ritchie didn't learn C in college.
No, he created it.
OK, I'm a reactor operator for a nuclear reactor [...]
In my opinion, Fukushima was a success. [...]
Ok, unfair quotation. But still, I am afraid...
No.
France needs to import energy for peak times during winter.
This happens, if you keep the electricity price (artificially) low and even put subventions on electrical heaters. Obviously, the nuclear power industry in France is very pleased by this (not by having to import, but by having strong reasons to deny any possibility of generating less electricity).
The only alternative is coal. Nucular and coal is all there is. And coal is worse. Coal ash has more radioactive emissions than nucular plants, and arsenic and landslides too. There is no geothermal. Don't look at geothermal.
In Europe I believe the backup plan is buying more natural gas from Russia.
Normal, as the majority of uranium comes from Kazakhstan.
I assure you that you do not want to be flying on Ryanair...
Wrong conclusion. Better would be to get more teachers and better educated teachers - and yes, you would need to pay them. And no, private schools are not the solution.
My custom made GPS navigation unit in my car with my wife's voice
Two can Live as Cheaply as One for Half as Long. -- Howard Kandel
