Free Software Alternative to AWS?
Hey, I'm just wondering if anyone can recommend a good free-software alternative to Amazon Web Services? I did a quick DuckDuckGo, which turned up this list here, which looks promising (it says 'open source', but most appear to be free software):
http://101.datascience.community/2013/06/07/open-source-alternatives-to-aws/
Does anyone have any experience of using any of these services?
Ideally, I'd like to find one that would be suitable for hosting a Java-based web server for a web-based libre game.
Thanks! :-)
Sorry, this is the link:
http://101.datascience.community/2013/06/07/open-source-alternatives-to-aws/
(Damn, I'm always doing that!)
I think that this question must be clarified.
What do you mean for free alternatives to AWS?
AWS is a service not a software.
With the question you mean software that you would self host and use as similar to AWS services?
Or a similar service as AWS?
If the second I don't think that anything but self-hosted solutions can fully be compliant with the free software definition.
Hi! Yes, I mean the latter - an external service similar to AWS, where I could rent access to cloud computing hardware for hosting a website or web application.
You don't think any of the options on the page I linked are fully compatible with free software? Why is that?
https://fsfe.org/contribute/promopics/thereisnocloud-bluecolor-preview.png
If the standard you're going for is that the software that the "other person's computer" is using is free software then AWS probably meets that - because we can imagine Amazon using lots and lots of free software internally . But it doesn't matter to you because you never got a copy of it, can never use it, can never change it, etc. OpenStack is free software too. That RackSpace might use a copy (although I understand that their copy has been modified so you're not actually running vanilla OpenStack anymore) ends up being similar doesn't it? Because there's a company running some free software that they don't share (because their modifications -- while free for them because they made them -- never leave RackSpace.)
So you're looking for one that's free software for who? The company that is running it? For you? If it's the latter, you should run it yourself. Because you can never modify the copy of OpenStack that someone else is using on their computers (because, remember that picture: there is no cloud.) And maybe listen to https://ftp.gnu.org/video/lp2010-sat-rms+awards.ogv
Hi jxself, I find your response interesting. So, you're saying the concept of 'cloud computing' is fundamentally incompatible with free software, because we don't have control of software that is running on another person's computer?
But, I often see web-based e-mail services, such as Disroot mail, recommended on here. Clearly, those servers are running on someone else's hardware, which we don't have control over. As is this forum and any other web site I browse to. If we can't trust anything that is running on someone else's computer, then we shouldn't be using the internet at all! ;-)
I thought the concept of using a service that someone else is providing is ok, even if they are not using 100% free software themselves? Because that's an ethical issue for them and not for me?
(I didn't watch the video yet, as I'm at work. But I will watch it later)
name at domain wrote:
> Hi jxself, I find your response interesting. So, you're saying the concept
> of 'cloud computing' is fundamentally incompatible with free software,
> because we don't have control of software that is running on another
> person's computer?
I find the FSFE graphic to be far too vague to be informative except to
those who are already aware of the complex tradeoffs involved. I find
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html is a
better way to explain the issue. In other words, for the computer owner,
running a free software service is valuable because their software freedom
is worth respecting. For a service customer, one should always be aware
that any data they host somewhere else is available to that computer's
owner. But the implications of that are unclear to the novice.
There are times when not having full control is okay: if you're
distributing copies of something you want everyone to be able to get
verbatim (such as uploads to archive.org typically are), hosting the data
somewhere else might be right and proper regardless of what software the
remote side is using. It's up to the computer owner if they want to host
the service on free software, and one hopes they'll choose to do so because
their software freedom should be respected.
> You don't think any of the options on the page I linked are fully compatible with free software? Why is that?
Well, I cannot really answer to this. This would be a good question to Stallman in one of his talk.
I am a translator!
>DuckDuckGo seems also hosted on Amazon servers
Is that the search engine that **promises** privacy? :P