For me cloud computing looks like another securitisation folly. And new research out of the University of Melbourne that shows that the current high speed broadband growth is unsustainable makes me think I am on the right track.
To date all I have heard is the positive side of the cloud computing story.
The main argument is that Cloud computing is going to cost us less because of centralisation. For example when we run software as a service, instead of as individual programs on our computers, we will no longer have to worry about the costs involved with updating the software. It will all happen centrally. Moreover we will be able to share servers with others – the old economies of scale argument.
While I accept these arguments I disbelieve the thesis that cloud computing will be cheaper in the “long run” and when all “externalities” are included.
Cloud computing involves an evolutionary step – evolution implies an increase in complexity and increased complexity costs more. The fact that it appears to be costing less tells me that the people who are adding up the costs have either done their sums incorrectly or they have excluded some costs.
So what costs could they have excluded?
Let me take a guess. I reckon that as cloud computing takes off, we will suddenly see costs increasing faster than people expected. There will also be additional costs that they never thought about. And finally, they have excluded the costs of fixing the problem if, and when, there is a big collapse.
Cloud computing is like securitisation in that it increases vulnerability and risk to the recipient – it doesn’t reduce it. If something goes wrong in the cloud, everyone connected to that cloud goes down. System resilience declines as centralisation increases. And something like a collapse of a computer system will harm more than just the isolated computer system – as computers become more embedded in everyday processes the potential for an “isolated” computer crash to have an impact on systems that were perceived to be “unrelated” increases.
I wonder if security costs have been considered effectivily. My thoughts are that as the volume of traffic in the “cloud” increases it will become increasingly vulnerable to being corrupted by a virus. This is especially true because of the “virtualisation” that much of the cloud is based on. With information flowing in and out of clouds from everywhere, there will have to be some virus check on the data . My intuition tells me that the relationship between this cost and traffic volume will be non linear and that for this reason costs will end up much higher than predicted.
Has the analysis included all the direct and indirect infrastructure that will be required to make cloud computing a reality or has this been takes as pre-existing? It looks like their may have been some false assumptions made about the ability of the existing infrastructure to deliver the bandwidth required for cloud computing. Research by scientists at the University of Melbourne say that the growth of the high speed broadband, on which the whole of cloud computing us dependant, is unsustainable. The only way for it to work is if more money is put into the infrastructure and use more energy.
This research, which shows that the growth in demand for high speed broadband services could make services slower, is to be presented at a Symposium on Sustainability and the Internet this week.
The university’s Dr Kerry Hinton says it shows the growth of the internet is not sustainable.
“We’ll find that the network will actually grind to a halt, the reason being that the machines at the core of the internet that actually route the packets through the network, they can chew up more and more energy,” he said.
“We’re getting to the stage that the amount of energy they consume is so great that we can’t get the power into them and we can’t get the power out of these machines.
“If we plan carefully and start thinking ahead and making sure the technology we use is becoming more energy efficient, so we make the internet more sustainable, then we should be okay.
“But the key message is if we don’t plan ahead and start thinking what does this mean, and we continually roll out more and more services through the internet, that’s when the trouble will start.”
Beware of gods bearing false promises. The moral of the story is that if something is more complex it will cost more. Joseph Tainter did a study of the collapse of 24 complex societies. These societies all collapsed for the same reason. They all reached a point where their demand for energy outstripped their capacity to supply it. We forget that economic progress is a function of per capita energy use. Every time these societies hit a new problem they solved it with a solution that was more complex that the problem. This drove the energy demand up.
How sustainable is our economic infrastructure? We have built a whole system on the basis of cheap energy from fossil fuels. What will happen when the price of energy increases? How much of what we do will be sustainable or even the best way to do something?