Quick shots: e-commerce musings
Amazon.com does something smart! Not that that’s a huge surprise…
As I mentioned in an earlier post, I really want this utterly swell “I Still Want My Flying Car” t-shirt. As well, of course, as my damn flying car.
Not pictured: a flying car I can actually buy
Having a fairly reasonable appreciation of which I’m likely to get first, if not at all (hope springs, and comes not unsprung) I was pleased when Amazon added a new and very shrewd feature: one which enabled me to link to the shirt on my Wish List even though Ammie doesn’t sell it.
How smart is that? Umm, real. Unlike some entities trying to do business these days, Amazon has realized openness sells. Specifically: the point to allowing users to make (and what’s really valuable, manage) wish lists, is manifestly to encourage others to buy them presents from Amazon.com. They make it very quick and convenient to do so, and I really like it when my friends post these lists, and encourage you all to do so if you haven’t yet.
So why would Amazon let you link to completely separate vendors? Well, just for starters, let’s look at a totally random sample wish list: mine. (How’s that for an almost subtle plug?) Notice that everything else on the list is available through Amazon. (Quickly and conveniently. Just thought I’d mention that again. Reinforce the message and all.)
Granted, that’s so far; and I’ll undoubtedly add other off-site items to the list. But clearly this capability creates additional value for users, and hence is likely to attract more eyes to Amazon.
And that’s a good thing for all concerned.
Next: from the Department of DRM Sucks: Google Music is shutting down, and taking its customers’ ability to make future use of the music they purchased with it. They’re shutting down the DRM servers, meaning if you need to buy a new computer, or reload your operating system - I know: in the real world, no one ever has to do either of these, right? - you can’t listen to the tunes you’ve bought from their store.
Amazon come just gave its users more use. Google Music gives its customers the finger.
To me this is fraud and nothing but. If you’re representing that you’re selling something, then sell it. This music-distro model is rental, not purchase. When Google Music, and similar DRM users, represent what they’re doing as selling content or services, they’re just lying.
This is the model the big music and movie conglomerates are insanely eager to foist off on us all: pay for every single use. When consumers reject it - as they almost always, and clamorously, do - then they try to make use of The Power of Government to Do Good to ram it down our throats at gunpoint.
And from our Web 2.0 Blows Department: on July 8, Google’s Documents and Spreadsheets service went offline for 45 minutes. Data wasn’t lost - but if you had yours up there, and badly needed access to it: tough.
Similarly, last Sunday the Amazon S3 online data-storage service tanked for about eight hours.
Now, this doesn’t really mean, my love for hyperbole notwithstanding, that either Google’s or Amazon’s online services are bad or worthless, nor even Web 2.0, Cloud Computing, or even the Web 2.0 concept itself blows. It means Web 2.0 is overhyped; it means there are significant risks involved; and it means that, while I’m sure Amazon and Google are working their butts off to solve these problems, there’ll be others.
Basically: if your data is backed-up off-site, it’s out of your control. And it might be unavailable to you. If you need it right then, even short-term inaccessibility can prove disastrous. And while again, no data apepars to have been lost in either incident, that’s another possibility, which, whatever the hypesters tell us, will always remain in play.
After all, isn’t perpetual lockout - or even irremediable mass data corruption - just a single disgruntled employee away?
Think that’s far-fetched - mere “security theater”? Permit me to present to you our:
Department of Disgruntled IT Worker Revenge: you may’ve seen this already: network admin Terry Childs locked the city of San Francisco out of its own FiberWAN network. While I thought I’d read that he’d surrendered to terrorism by giving the continuing criminal conspiracy doing business as the SF city government the passwords to unlock their system, I can’t seem to confirm that.
I’m not necessarily buying Childs as a hero. He’s most likely just another of the narcissistic nerds who’s doing their best to enable the Total Oppression State for ego and pizza and WoW subscription money and nothing better. The shrieks of outrage from the statists are certainly gratifying, I’ll admit.
Anyway, regardless of the outcome, or the rights and wrongs and ins and out of the situation, the real thing to take away from this: this isn’t the first time this (or some similar IT sabotage) has happened, and it won’t be the last. Often such incidents are hushed up, whether they strike (at least nominally) private concerns or overtly governmental operations.
There are irreducible risks in relying on other people to protect you or anything you value, including your data. Again, it doesn’t mean you shouldn’t, say, use Web 2.0. It’s just that it’s probably always going to be a bad idea to put all your eggs in that basket.
Or any other one.
Tags: Amazon.com, disgruntled IT employee, DRM sucks, e-commerce, Web 2.0, Wish List