[LINK] The Naivete of Cloud-Using Organisations

[Roger Clarke]

> On Friday, 13 December 2024 7:52:13 AM AEDT Roger Clarke wrote:
>  >> Organisations that choose to be dependent on remote services could 
> be expected to have fallback arrangements designed, trialled and at the 
> ready. These might take the form of alternative cloud suppliers.

On 14/12/2024 11:43, David wrote
> And those organisations should also take care to ensure there's no 
> common factor in their choice of suppliers.  It could be embarrassing 
> if, having paid lots to keep the alternative going for years on end, it 
> turned out that both cloud suppliers failed because they shared the same 
> comms outage, database bug, malware intrusion, political upheaval, or 
> whatever.  And that's a level of detail which is almost impossible to 
> identify.

Without checking, I think my work back then did indeed omit to mention 
common dependencies, hidden-single-points-of-failure, or suchlike.


> I don't think there's any answer to that conundrum, even in principle.  
> Organisational size & complexity is the issue.  The bigger they are, the 
> harder they fall.  So to speak...

Hmmm, metaphors get awkward, don't they.  'Cloudfall'?

At various times I've used 'computing clouds on the horizon', 'cloudy 
future' and 'cloudburst', even 'stormclouds', 'nimbus'.

I'm sure 'pyrocumulus' could be applicable at some stage too.

'cloutages' maybe?  'fog', 'mist', 'pall', 'mare's tales', ...


Sorry, but it's been a hard year and I need a break.


-- 
Roger Clarke                            mailto:Roger.Clarke at xamax.com.au
T: +61 2 6288 6916   http://www.xamax.com.au  http://www.rogerclarke.com

Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd      78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA 

Visiting Professorial Fellow                          UNSW Law & Justice
Visiting Professor in Computer Science    Australian National University