On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Craig Kovatch wrote:
> Well, computing started as centralized (with terminals connected to a
> server), but that method was abandoned because of lack of bandwidth,
> connection reliability, etc.
I'm going to have to go out on a limb and disagree with this. Gandalf, a
company near and dear to my heart (being Canadian and all), failed when
Ethernet came along, which had both more bandwith and less reliability
than their (non-PSTN) modems.
> ...moving back to centralization, but at least technologically,
> I don't think that's necessarily a step backwards. Privacy and
> security-wise...it's a toss-up.
I'd quite disagree. There's no question that centralization of data is
worse for security; it makes for a much bigger target, and at least one
more entity than necessary with access to the data.
But I think we're going to stay with less private, centralized data for
a while. It's just too convenient. And when even people at risk of going
to jail for years or decades will chose convenience over security (think
of gangsters using telephones), what will your average joe do?
cjs
--
Curt Sampson <cjs@cynic.net> +81 90 7737 2974
Mobile sites and software consulting: http://www.starling-software.com
Received on Sun Jan 21 11:07:19 2007