Gizmodo 
Enter your username and password.
Tip your editors:
tips@gizmodo.com
Editorial Director:
Brian Lam | Email | Twitter
Editor:
Jason Chen
Email | AIM | Twitter
Features Editor:
Wilson Rothman
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
Email | AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan
Email | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci
Email | Twitter
Sean Fallon
Email | Twitter
Jack Loftus
Email | Twitter
John Herrman
Email | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Email
Chris Mascari
Email
Danny Allen
Email | Twitter
Rosa Golijan
Email | Twitter
Chris Jacob
Email
Columnist:
Brendan I. Koerner
Interns:
Don Nguyen
Email
Kyle VanHemert
Email
Comment Intern:
Nick Ellenoff | Email
Comment Account Questions:
Comments@gizmodo.com
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/20/09
Personally I don't see a need for cloud computing since I use a remote desktop connection and have access to all my apps and data from outside the home.
I also prefer to have all my data on my own hard disks.
(I don't use online email for anything serious, I don't use online photo or data sharing services, I don't social networks.)
I also prefer to minimize the ability of big business to monitor my habits (yes I know I can't eliminate data mining about me completely).
By moving fully to cloud computing you are laying your entire method of working, socializing, buying and communicating bare.
You are basically increasing the ability of corporations to analyse you even more than with "traditional" computing, because you are basically uploading just about everything to their servers.
So while cloud computing may have it's benefits, I think it should not be made to kill traditional computing.
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
But yeah, with what I've heard with netbooks running Windows 7 well (which I think is what you're saying?), you have another good, normal-OS option that seems to make this Chrome OS make even less sense.
11/19/09
When you look at Chrome as a tool that empowers Google Apps, this makes a lot of sense. From the end user's perspective, why not get all this crap off my machine, put in in the cloud and stop writing checks to Redmond? Well, security is one reason. Lack of ubiquitous connectivity is another, but that is rapidly disappearing.
A widely publicized intrusion is one way to crush Google's nascient efforts.
Bottom line is, Google doesn't need to recruit all of us, just enough of us to attract someone who will pay for our attention.
11/19/09
11/19/09
I'm not going to do any of these things. I think netbooks are stupid. I believe it is foolish to put senstive data in Google's cloud. About the closest I will get to Google is carry an Android device, and run several of the awesome and powerful apps that are available for it.
I was merely evaluating what Google is attempting to do with Chrome. I think they have a good chance at being at least partially successful, but not on my back.
Also, I am not a geek. I am here on a visitor's pass from Jalopnik.
#tips
11/19/09
Make the OS lightweight enough that it could go on just about any machine.
This way a person could buy a computer without the Microsoft tax (operating system stuffed with things most people never, ever use), which adds a lot of cost to buying a computer.
11/19/09
I think the biggest problem, however, is the lack of supporting infrastructure. I don't think people are going to pay to use a product that only works where there is free internet. Or, if it has built in WiMax, Verizon, or AT&T wireless, I don't think people will be willing to spend the $100 a month it will cost minimum to use the device anywhere.
Lastly, I doubt people will pay subscription costs to use software. If they made a hybrid where you could use an online and offline version, people might.
All in all, it's a highly problematic idea that faces some major hurdles if it's actually going to take off. The only place I could really see it working is on Android phones.
11/19/09
Today, the Chrome OS is built for Grandma to email and web browse.
Tomorrow, the Chrome OS may be operating our all-in-one phone, gps, mp3 player, video projector, gaming device, coffee maker, babysitter, teenager stalking devices. But, I doubt it. It is reliant on a network infrastructure and technology that just does not exist yet.
Who the hell knows. This is Google, after all, and this sucker may end up being the answer to every question we never asked. But, I doubt that, too.
11/19/09
AND: Mobile computing often does not allow for internet connectivity.
THEN: Chrome OS with no connectivity fails.
11/19/09
IF: Chrome OS allows for offline work with a Gears like system
AND: Offline work can be synced to the cloud at the next hotspot
THEN: Chrome OS works with or without connecticvity, assuming connectivity will resume at some point.
11/19/09
"How do I do all the illegal stuff that I do (e.g., music pirating and movie storage) if data is stored in the cloud, and I don't have access to hardware storage?"
Because you'd be half-a-fool to store your pirated music and porn collection in public.
Now, I'm sure there will be a web-app to access my shared folders, NAS, etc., on my "primary" networked machine, so maybe this question is rhetorical. But maybe not.
11/19/09
11/19/09
www.kickasstorrents.com
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/20/09
#tips
11/16/09
In fact I think the word human is the caveat here. We may stop being human in the biological sense but we don't stop being a person.
If any of that rambling makes sense. #thiscyborglife
11/14/09
Of course, this depends on the very definition of what a human is... #thiscyborglife
11/13/09
"More Human Than Human is our motto." -Tyrell (from Blade Runner)
11/13/09
11/14/09
11/14/09
11/13/09
to be human is to have sentience, reason, and language, and to reside in this universe. no animal or computer yet fits the bill. #thiscyborglife
11/13/09
If I replace almost my entire body, enabling my static personality/mind to live forever, and I still human? The possibility of Death may contribute to being "human".
11/13/09
***huge generalization coming up***
Assuming that the majority of Gizmodo readers are "dorks/nerds" ("dorks/nerds" being less physically blessed. Yes, huge generalization/sterotype), would a "Brad Pit" type be more inclined to attach his humanity to his physical body? #thiscyborglife
11/13/09
11/13/09
As such, I would say you're no longer human if you don't have all of the following:
Your original organic brain, and your original organic reproductive system. #thiscyborglife
11/13/09
11/13/09
aha, I knew someone like you might make a response like that.
This article is talking about replacing parts of our body with robotic components. Does your mother have a robotic uterus now? #thiscyborglife
11/14/09
11/14/09
But otherwise, no.