Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Novell (NOVL) dirt cheap, good buy? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frederick Smart who wrote (34851)	11/14/2000 12:25:45 PM
From: PJ Strifas	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42771

Someone's going to do alot of things - fortunately one thing I've learned is there is no single right way to do many things in life :) I do not believe a system as you seem to explain it will be the best system possible. I understand you obsession with fragmenting control which at times clouds your judgement. I also think you need to brush up on your vocabulary some when it comes to discussing the technology. I think I understand what you mean but again, maybe I don't. You need to DEFINE "fragmenting/slicing/dicing" here. All of these describe a state where the "whole" is now in pieces and by your description, placed in disparate systems. So how do you maintain your information? You have to track and manage and connect to EACH and every piece of it to maintain that information. So what you're telling is someone is out there re-inventing the wheel? Anyway - here are the inherent problems I see with fragmenting data: 1) What happens when the system on which a piece of your data is destroyed. You have not lost that data. You can "trust" another entity all you want but no system is perfect and basically at this level, it becomes a matter of trusting their system not the people. With the data lost, you have to either recreate it or live without it. 2) Connecting and maintain all of these "fragments" creates another problem all by itself. One of the biggest issues with managing a Directory that is distributed and replicated is the overhead in both those processes. Novell has several "guidelines" in how to accomplish specific goals such as performance, fault tolerance and accessibility. You may want to believe new technological advances can be made to overcome these - that is a great perspective but not any guarantee to happen or work. If 1 million people took their personal information "fragmented" it throughout the Internet...the overhead of managing all those "1000s of pieces of a digital Fred" combined with the other 999,999 people managing their 1000s of pieces of themselves would be enormous! Don't you get it? It would create a problem to solve that can be AVOIDED! You need to open your eyes and your mind to some aspects of the technology which limit your thoughts. Just because something is stored "centrally" does not mean it's it under anyone else's "control"! Get off the control aspect and solve the problems people REALLY want solved - usability, security, fault tolerance and performance. This control stuff is political BULL. Here's an analogy: I bank with ABC Banking. I have a local branch office where I do most of my retail banking. I deposit money with them which they store CENTRALLY. It's still MY money not theirs. Now I can go to ANY ATM machine and get some of my money. In your scenario, fragmenting my money would be like storing some money at ATM #1 and some at ATM #22 and even more at ATM #1983. Do you start to see what I'm talking about? The information can be stored in a central repository or online storage vault. You can use any device to access it anytime, anywhere! Also, you can create relationships with other entities to allow them to access information as well (just as my employeer deposits my pay into my bank acct). You often talk about "servicing" others - well, why did you drop that from your thoughts? Why not have central vaults where personal directories can be stored and dare I say replicated throughout the Internet (a la ICS). So going back to my analogy: I have a Personal Directory that I store on PublicSphere.com hosting service. They offer me some diskspace and other services such as backup, 24x7x365 access and replication to their dispersed datacenters for a fee....I control what information is stored and shared with whom. All the service does is provide storage and access! How is that "CONTROLLING MY DATA"? Anyway - you will STILL NEED TO HAVE A "MASTER" COPY or one copy of your personal information that stores EVERYTHING about you. Where will that version reside in your system? If it's on your local PC, how will you access that information when you are NOT at your PC? How will you make your PC accessible to the world? Why expose your private PC to the internet continously since there is no such thing as securing it completely which is the entire reason for a Personal Directory in the FIRST place! Great theories Fred - glad to see you're thinking through it all :) Regards, Peter J Strifas