Greenpeace v. Apple

Yesterday, Greenpeace released a report titled How Green Is Your Cloud. In the report, Greenpeace claimed that Apple’s North Carolina datacenter was using 100 megawatts of power, and it downplayed Apple’s 20 megawatt solar array and 5 megawatt biogas facilities at the datacenter.

This is probably no surprise, but Greenpeace’s estimates were wildly off-base. Apple released a statement gutting the claims:

Our data center in North Carolina will draw about 20 megawatts at full capacity, and we are on track to supply more than 60% of that power on-site from renewable sources including a solar farm and fuel cell installation which will each be the largest of their kind in the country. We believe this industry-leading project will make Maiden [North Carolina] the greenest data center ever built, and it will be joined next year by our new facility in Oregon running on 100% renewable energy.

So it appears that Greenpeace overstated the total power use at the facility by a factor of five.

Disclosure: I am long AAPL.

The Megaupload case (updated)

I am sure you heard that late this week the United States Department of Justice, with the cooperation of New Zealand authorities, shut down a very popular site called Megaupload. Megaupload was a “file locker” site, a category of cloud based service providers that allow users to upload files to the site for easy Internet access on multiple devices later. This type of site is not rare and includes sites like box.net, DropBox, Facebook and YouTube.

The DOJ claims that the operators of Megaupload paid users to upload copyrighted media for distribution to other Megaupload users, and that such uploads cost the media industry damages in excess of $500 Million.

But there are at least two important questions raised by the DOJ action. First, if the government is able to shut down a site unilaterally and without a prior judicial hearing why in the world is either SOPA or POPA necessary.  The law enforcement shutdown provided no opportunities for due process whatsoever, and immediately rendered inaccessible presumably thousands or hundreds of thousands of files uploaded by innocent users and stored on Megaupload that contained no intellectual property whatsoever. Were those users not entitled to a hearing before their data was seized?

Second, what stops government seizures of any sites that store user uploaded content?  Keep in mind that this type of situation is purely financial in that there were no claims of injury or possible injury to individuals. No violence was involved. If there is a claim that Party A stole and sold the property of Party B, isn’t that claim heard in court?

This action demonstrates quite clearly the dangers of legislation like SOPA. But it also shows that law enforcement acts precipitously in commercial disputes if they occur on the Internet. If I were YouTube, Dropbox or the others, I would be very concerned.

Robert Bennett has been hired to represent Megaupload, so it is likely that a strong defense will be mounted.

Update: Glenn Greenwald, writing at Salon, has much more on this point. Worth a full read.

… the U.S. Justice Department not only indicted the owners of one of the world’s largest websites, the file-sharing site Megaupload, but also seized and shut down that site, and also seized or froze millions of dollars of its assets — all based on the unproved accusations, set forth in an indictment, that the site deliberately aided copyright infringement.

In other words, many SOPA opponents were confused and even shocked when they learned that the very power they feared the most in that bill — the power of the U.S. Government to seize and shut down websites based solely on accusations, with no trial — is a power the U.S. Government already possesses and, obviously, is willing and able to exercise even against the world’s largest sites (they have this power thanks to the the 2008  PRO-IP Act pushed by the same industry servants in Congress behind SOPA as well as by forfeiture laws used to seize the property of accused-but-not-convicted drug dealers).

* * *

The U.S. really is a society that simply no longer believes in due process: once the defining feature of American freedom that is now scorned as some sort of fringe, radical, academic doctrine. That is not hyperbole. Supporters of both political parties endorse, or at least tolerate, all manner of government punishment without so much as the pretense of a trial, based solely on government accusation: imprisonment for life, renditions to other countries, even assassinations of their fellow citizens. Simply uttering the word Terrorist, without proving it, is sufficient. And now here is Megaupload being completely destroyed — its website shuttered, its assets seized, ongoing business rendered impossible — based solely on the unproven accusation of Piracy.

Patriot Act clouds cloud computing

Cloud computing is growing rapidly and it is already a big business. But, it turns out, US-based cloud computing companies are facing a grave threat from the Patriot Act. Foreign governments and cloud competitors are claiming that data stored on US clouds is subject to being turned over to the US government. Quelle suprise.

While no foreign governments have moved to block U.S. tech companies, authorities in the Netherlands as recently as September floated the idea of banning U.S.-based cloud firms from competing for government contracts. And Verveer said on a trip to Germany in October that technology firms based in that country were openly using the PATRIOT Act as a “marketing proposition” to raise questions about U.S. cloud firms.

It has created a high-stakes trade issue that’s become a top agenda item for U.S. firms already profiting in the cloud and for those eyeing the technology for the future. It also registers high on the list of international tech priorities for the White House because of the potential negative impact such fears could have on the U.S. cloud market.

iCloud is Windows killer

Robert X. Cringley argues that the real purpose of iCloud is to kill Windows for good. He may have a point.

Both companies [Apple and Google] will be grabbing for data [in the cloud], leaving Microsoft alone to defend a desktop that will soon cease to exist.

And what happens once all our data is in that iCloud, is there any easy way to get it back out? Nope. It’s in there forever and we are captive customers — trapped more completely than Microsoft ever imagined.

Apple and Google will compete like crazy for our data because once they have it we’ll be their customers forever.

Lady GaGa + Amazon = Fail

So, if you act today, you can buy Lady GaGa’s new album, Born This Way [+digital booklet], for only $.99. Great deal.

But the crush of purchasers could not be handled successfully by Amazon. Many people have actually received less than the entire album. A huge backlash has followed and Amazon has not yet offered an explanation. Amazon, it is assumed, will [eventually] make good on the offer.

This was an effort on the part of Amazon to introduce users to its new cloud-based music service in advance of the expected launch of a new music/cloud service from Apple sometime in the next month or so. And the top selling album right now on iTunes is the GaGa album, even though the price is $11.99. Try again Amazon. You sold a huge number of albums at a presumably huge loss to generate great PR and you failed. Keep in mind that Amazon had a huge data center collapse only weeks ago.

And Lady Gaga is not untainted herself.

Unfortunately for Lady Gaga, the technical problems have resulted in an average rating of only 3 stars for her album as customers use the review section to vent their frustrations. As one customer complained: “I’m not disappointed that something went wrong, stuff happens. I’m REALLY disappointed that Amazon makes it VERY hard to find out where to complain or contact them.” True: it is hard as hell to find a phone number to call.

Another customer griped: “I’ve been waiting nearly two hours, and have not even been able to download one single song. Every download attempt fails and when I retry, it ‘waits’ forever and fails again…too bad for Lady Gaga that she ends up with lousy ratings because you have rotten tech help…the rating I gave WOULD have been a five, but the aggravation lowered it by half.”

Lady Gaga’s marketing team must be frothing at the mouth right now. It’s likely that Amazon is taking the $13 loss in the first place, but add to that potential legal problems with Lady Gaga’s representatives, who are surely unhappy about the fact that Gaga’s new album has been essentially labeled a dud, and Amazon could have a big headache up ahead.

Amazon’s cloud service

Amazon has launched a new cloud service allowing 5 gigabytes of storage free. It also comes with a music player that allows you to stream your music to any Internet-connected computer or Android device. Looks like a nice product.

But, as usual, before uploading your music or other data, you may want to read the Terms of Service.  Among the interesting items are these:

  • You must ensure that you have all the necessary rights in Your Files that permit you to use the Service without infringing the rights of any copyright owners, violating any applicable laws or violating the terms of any license or agreement to which you are bound.
  • You give us the right to access, retain, use and disclose your account information and Your Files: to provide you with technical support and address technical issues; to investigate compliance with the terms of this Agreement, enforce the terms of this Agreement and protect the Service and its users from fraud or security threats; or as we determine is necessary to provide the Service or comply with applicable law.
  • We do not guarantee that Your Files will not be subject to misappropriation, loss or damage and we will not be liable if they are. You’re responsible for maintaining appropriate security, protection and backup of Your Files.

One of the major benefits of a system like this is that you do not need to manage your own backup of your files stored online. However, the terms above seem to indicate that (i) there is and will be no way to encrypt the files you store in this cloud and (ii) Amazon could turn over all your files to anyone they want to examine them for wrongful behaviour.

Consider yourself warned.

Risks of “cloud” computing (updated x2)

cartoon-clouds

So, cloud computing has been a trendy meme for the last few years. The basic idea is that your digital data lives on computer servers connected to the Internet. This collection of servers is the “cloud.”  The upside of such an approach is that your data is managed by someone else and you merely access it via any device you choose, such as a personal computer or your smartphone. You don’t even need to back up if your data is on a cloud managed properly. And you can store gigabytes of data without upgrades to your local hard drives.  Services like Yahoo Mail and Google Docs are examples of cloud computing.

But here is the hitch. What if the Internet is down? What if you are somewhere with no data connection? And, even worse, what happens if there is a serious problem with the servers that make up the cloud? Well, a huge number of users are about to find out.

Lightning_strikes_hill_january_2007

Users of Sidekicks, a smartphone/personal data device made by Danger (now owned by Microsoft) and running on T-Mobile’s network, are being notified that all their data is likely lost because of server problems at Danger/Microsoft.  Besides server failure, it also appears (unbelievably) that Danger/Microsoft does not have backup of their users’ data.

This is a epic fail (and a huge cautionary tale) for cloud computing.

Update: T-Mobile is allowing their angry users to cancel their contracts without penalty and they are at least temporarily halting sales of all Sidekicks. That is certainly the least they can do. What is Microsoft offering to do? Nada.

Update 2: It is now being claimed that the data loss was due to internal sabotage at Microsoft. This story keeps getting more strange.