On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 7:46 PM, Matthew Johnson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mjj29@debian.org">mjj29@debian.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div>On Sun Sep 05 21:28, bertagaz wrote:<br>
> I think the cloud concept as you define it is too large, and melting<br>
> unrelated things, which doesn't help to understand what we are talking<br>
> about.<br></div></blockquote><div><br>(replying to bertagaz here)<br><br>
I may be a bit odd, but the only definition of "the cloud" that makes
sense to me, is "the machines that are always on and have fixed,
route-able IP addresses". Machines may be virtual or not, but those are
the properties that put them "in the cloud" as opposed to someone's
living room, a company's internal network, or a wifi-enabled coffee
shop.<br><br>We will want to use "the cloud" for all sorts of things. We just want to do it on our own terms. :-)<br>
<br>
If you only meant that you don't want the FreedomBox to be a Facebook
and Flickr client.. then I might be tempted to agree. On the other hand,
that is exactly what the Diaspora guys are doing, to make sure people
actually want to use their stuff. It's a good strategy.<br clear="all"></div></div><br>-- <br>Bjarni R. Einarsson<br><br><a href="http://beanstalks-project.net/">http://beanstalks-project.net/</a><br><a href="http://bre.klaki.net/">http://bre.klaki.net/</a><br>