• The bigger they get, the harder we fall: Thinking our way out of cloud crash
    17 replies, posted
[quote]"The complexity of interdependencies in the ecosystem, kind of as expected, is developing like crazy," he told The Reg recently. "In part that's driven by functionality, in part by efficiency and economics." Cloud services are getting bigger and serving more customers. Microsoft nearly doubled its number of cloud customers in the last 12 months alone. Amazon Web Services Q2 results saw a 70 per cent revenue hike to $2.4bn.[/quote] [quote]Meanwhile, the cloud engines thunder along, hoovering up large portions of the world's data – from our public tweets to our private moments. Let's hope no digital screws fall out of something important, eh?[/quote] source: [url]http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/07/29/bryan_ford_bigger_icebergs/[/url]
aaaaaand this is 50% of why I dont use the cloud, other 50% being itd take me too long to upload to it.
Only issue I see is the more efficiently you want to use those services the more investment (time and money) you need to make into those. Lambda functions on AWS are great but you need to design your code to work with them, so if anything were to happen to AWS it might take some time to retrofit your code back to conventional servers with load balancing. Its a risk you take. Take advantage of redundancy, reliability, availability and scale-ability at the cost of higher expenditure and commitment to AWS and disaster in the event of them not longer providing their services. To mitigate minor disasters they recommend you have services in multiple availability zones (obviously you pay more) so if there's an issue your service isn't interrupted in any meaningful way. Security enthusiasts still seek to proof their applications against 0 day attacks and exploits anyway. I guess if governments and banks are buying into it money and power will be thrown behind them to ensure it never goes down but it also concentrates all the power in the hands of the few (AWS and other providers)
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;50794618]Only issue I see is the more efficiently you want to use those services the more investment (time and money) you need to make into those. Lambda functions on AWS are great but you need to design your code to work with them, so if anything were to happen to AWS it might take some time to retrofit your code back to conventional servers with load balancing. Its a risk you take. Take advantage of redundancy, reliability, availability and scale-ability at the cost of higher expenditure and commitment to AWS and disaster in the event of them not longer providing their services. To mitigate minor disasters they recommend you have services in multiple availability zones (obviously you pay more) so if there's an issue your service isn't interrupted in any meaningful way. Security enthusiasts still seek to proof their applications against 0 day attacks and exploits anyway. I guess if governments and banks are buying into it money and power will be thrown behind them to ensure it never goes down but it also concentrates all the power in the hands of the new (AWS and other providers)[/QUOTE] I think the most interesting project in the space is Siacoin which is basically an economy for file storage and a decentralized replacement of Amazon Cloud Storage. A lot of people talk shit on it, but it definitely has some promise if you read the nitty-gritty.
[QUOTE=TestECull;50794617]aaaaaand this is 50% of why I dont use the cloud, other 50% being itd take me too long to upload to it.[/QUOTE] "The cloud" as consumers know it (uploading photos to Dropbox, iCloud, etc.) is a small drop in the ocean of what the cloud is really used for. Most big websites will use something like AWS or Azure, which offers scale-able resources. This means they only pay for the resources they actually need at the time. So sites like Reddit which experiences peaks in traffic at certain times will pay for more resources at those times. When it gets quiet, they'll save money by scaling down. All of this happens automatically. So you probably already use "the cloud" a lot more than you think :)
[QUOTE=Trumple;50796501]"The cloud" as consumers know it (uploading photos to Dropbox, iCloud, etc.) is a small drop in the ocean of what the cloud is really used for. Most big websites will use something like AWS or Azure, which offers scale-able resources. This means they only pay for the resources they actually need at the time. So sites like Reddit which experiences peaks in traffic at certain times will pay for more resources at those times. When it gets quiet, they'll save money by scaling down. All of this happens automatically. So you probably already use "the cloud" a lot more than you think :)[/QUOTE] That's not me using the cloud. That's those websites using the cloud.
[QUOTE=TestECull;50797974]That's not me using the cloud. That's those websites using the cloud.[/QUOTE] That's you using the cloud yo, whether or not it's through a website or personal storage
[QUOTE=TestECull;50797974]That's not me using the cloud. That's those websites using the cloud.[/QUOTE] Call it whatever you want - the point of the article is that these websites that you use rely on the cloud
Honestly, the only thing I use the ~the cloud~ for is Steam savegames and the things I've got on Dropbox. I could live without it, though it's a nice convinience.
doesnt facepunch itself use some form of cloud service, cloudflare?
[QUOTE=da space core;50799293]doesnt facepunch itself use some form of cloud service, cloudflare?[/QUOTE] Nope, it's a server in garry's basement, that's why it's so slow and goes down all the time [sp]not really[/sp] I use the cloud personally but when it comes to things like dropbox fuck that shit I host my own. Though, it's running on a VPS so it's still the cloud. huzzah. AWS and google and stuff seem really nice for businesses and other specific uses, since you can literally just spin up an instance on google to test something, do some calculations, etc. and it will literally just be a couple of pennies since they charge by the minute. I was thinking of using google for DNS at least.
[QUOTE=da space core;50799293]doesnt facepunch itself use some form of cloud service, cloudflare?[/QUOTE] IIRC Facepunch is [I]hosted[/I] on Amazon Elastic Beanstalk, with CloudFlare as further DDoS mitigation on the front-end.
[QUOTE=Trumple;50796501]"The cloud" as consumers know it (uploading photos to Dropbox, iCloud, etc.) is a small drop in the ocean of what the cloud is really used for. Most big websites will use something like AWS or Azure, which offers scale-able resources. This means they only pay for the resources they actually need at the time. So sites like Reddit which experiences peaks in traffic at certain times will pay for more resources at those times. When it gets quiet, they'll save money by scaling down. All of this happens automatically. So you probably already use "the cloud" a lot more than you think :)[/QUOTE] Can confirm, people use the cloud more than they are aware of
[QUOTE=TestECull;50797974]That's not me using the cloud. That's those websites using the cloud.[/QUOTE] I see you have a Steam account. So if Steam went down tomorrow and you had no way to access or play your games ever again, you'd be totally unaffected? Do you use a non-private E-mail service, like Gmail? That going down indefinitely would totally not be a problem for you, right?
Put all your files in an encrypted container with a secure password and you won't have anything to worry about backing it all up OTI.
"The cloud" is fucking terrible terminology. It's definition is ironically enough, too nebulous, and it leads to confusion with people thinking "the cloud" is this one big thing when it is exactly the opposite of that and it refers mostly about distributed systems and storage.
[QUOTE=Big Bang;50807597]"The cloud" is fucking terrible terminology. It's definition is ironically enough, too nebulous, and it leads to confusion with people thinking "the cloud" is this one big thing when it is exactly the opposite of that and it refers mostly about distributed systems and storage.[/QUOTE] the cloud is a new fancy terminology for the internet
[QUOTE=Map in a box;50807875]the cloud is a new fancy terminology for the internet[/QUOTE] We already went through this with "Web 2.0" 10 years ago, which was just a new term for sites that had user interaction. The Internet's history is full of nebulous terms.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.