Talk:Cloud computing/Archive 1: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 02:34, 27 January 2010

Revision as of 02:36, 12 February 2010

Line 1,529:

[e-mail] <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/117.254.142.205|117.254.142.205]] ([[User talk:117.254.142.205|talk]]) 07:16, 27 December 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Criticism Section Removed ==

I added a criticism section to the [[cloud computing]] page a couple months ago. It was removed by [[User talk:Samj]]:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cloud_computing&diff=327762799&oldid=327762662

His reason for removal didn't make sense to me so I started a topic on his talk page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SamJohnston#Explain_removal

I am not making any progress. I just keep getting new and unsupported criticisms while my questions about his previous criticisms go unanswered. I want to fix the criticism section and repost it, but this is very difficult in the absence of any good feedback. Should I undo his removal? Should I escalate this to some one? Please advise. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/64.142.40.6|64.142.40.6]] ([[User talk:64.142.40.6|talk]]) 17:56, 21 December 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

: Quoting the {{tl|criticism-section}} template:

<blockquote>''This article's Criticism or Controversy section(s) may mean the article does not present a neutral point of view of the subject. It may be better to integrate the material in those sections into the article as a whole.''</blockquote>

: Criticism sections tend to end up being coatracks for soundbytes that add little value and are often misrepresentative; valid criticisms should be integrated into the appropriate part(s) of the article. The three [in]famous quotes you've provided are individual opinions and misrepresent the positions of the free software community, Forrester and Oracle, and the primary criticism (a "seemingly broad and vague definition") is weak in comparison to the real issues around security, privacy, liability, etc. - "client/server" applies to virtually everything we do with computers these days but you don't see people bitching about its' definition now, do you? I've copied the section below for you to integrate into the relevant section(s) but I would suggest focusing on the issues rather than individuals' opinions. -- <u style="text-decoration:none; font-family: papyrus;">[[User:SamJohnston|samj]] <small>_{<font color="maroon">[[User talk:Samj|in]]</font>}^{<font color="green">[[Special:Contributions/SamJohnston|out]]</font>}</small></u> 02:02, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

<blockquote>''Critics of cloud computing cite its seemingly broad and vague definition. Oracle CEO Larry Ellison observes that cloud computing has been defined as "everything that we currently do" <ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FacYAI6DY0 Larry Ellison - What The Hell Is Cloud Computing?]</ref><ref>[http://news.cnet.com/8301-13953_3-10052188-80.html Oracle's Ellison nails cloud computing]</ref>. Forrester VP Frank Gillett expresses similar criticism <ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7wv1i8ubng Cloud Computing is Hyped and Overblown, Forrester's]</ref>. Many technologies that have been branded as "cloud computing" have existed for a long time before the "cloud" label came into existence. Examples include databases<ref>[http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/10/voice-recognition-gets-cloudy-will-soon-rival-humans.ars Voice recognition gets "cloudy," but is it the "new touch"?]</ref>, load balanced on-demand web hosting services <ref name="rackspacecloud.com">[http://www.rackspacecloud.com/cloud_hosting_products The Rackspace Cloud™ Hosting Products]</ref>, network storage<ref name="rackspacecloud.com"/><ref>[http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/11/04/cloud.computing.hunt/index.html A trip into the secret, online 'cloud']</ref>, real time online services <ref>[http://blogs.idc.com/ie/?p=422 Defining “Cloud Services” – an IDC update]</ref>, hosted services in general <ref>[http://searchcloudcomputing.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid201_gci1287881,00.html What is cloud computing?]</ref>, etc.''</blockquote>

:: "***tend*** to end up being coatracks," "***may*** mean the article does not present a neutral point of view," "***may*** be better to integrate the material." Please address the issues. How is this particular criticism section a coatrack? How is it not neutral? Why is it better to integrate this material? Don't just profile and discriminate against all criticism sections without addressing the actual information contained within this specific criticism section.

:: "I would suggest focusing on the issues rather than individuals' opinions." Good advice. In this case the issue is that cloud computing has been defined as everything that we currently do. This fact is supported by the two industry CEOs that I cited. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/64.142.40.6|64.142.40.6]] ([[User talk:64.142.40.6|talk]]) 19:37, 31 December 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

::: By "tend to end up being coatracks" I mean "has in the past for this specific article". We rapidly end up with a sprawling mass of everything negative that's ever been said about the subject rather than a coherent discussion of each of the issues in turn. If you want to discuss privacy then create or extend a privacy section and describe the pros and cons; information is outside of your control (-ve) but doesn't get carted around on USB keys etc. (+ve). Regarding the definition, what we have is accurate and need not be precise - client/server was not precise and nobody cared. -- <u style="text-decoration:none; font-family: papyrus;">[[User:SamJohnston|samj]] <small>_{<font color="maroon">[[User talk:Samj|in]]</font>}^{<font color="green">[[Special:Contributions/SamJohnston|out]]</font>}</small></u> 19:29, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

:::: Re: "We rapidly end up with a sprawling mass of everything negative that's ever been said about the subject." And that is justification for removal? That's like me removing the entire cloud computing page because it breeds controversy and disagreement. Proponents may disagree with the critics, but that's no reason to nuke the whole thing. In fact, neutrality demands opposing viewpoints, does it not? Also, it's not hard to label the entire rest of the cloud computing article as a sprawling mass... it's a massive topic with tons of applications, not that this is necessarily a bad thing. [[Special:Contributions/64.142.40.6|64.142.40.6]] ([[User talk:64.142.40.6|talk]]) 20:45, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

:::: Re: "If you want to discuss privacy then create or extend a privacy section and describe the pros and cons." Good advice. I want to discuss criticism of cloud computing in general. A new criticism section seems the most appropriate since that discussion doesn't fit in any one subtopic. If any new information is posted to the criticism section which is more appropriately placed in an existing section then it's easy to move it. [[Special:Contributions/64.142.40.6|64.142.40.6]] ([[User talk:64.142.40.6|talk]]) 20:45, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

:::: Re: