SurDoc Cloud Backup Offers 100GB Of Free Storage With Focus On Privacy

Advertisement

Another day, another cloud storage service, or so it seems to be these days. With the increasing trend in mobile computing, consumers want their data always accessible to them no matter where they are, and the best way to do that is to upload or sync it to a cloud drive. And even for those who don’t need access to their data on the go, cloud storage is the way to ensure their data remains safe even in case their hard disk fails. There are countless options out there that let you do just that, but the cloud storage service we’ll be reviewing today differs by offering 100GB of cloud storage space for free, with paid plans available for even unlimited storage! The quintessential feature of SurDoc is to make automated cloud backups hassle-free, with a high focus on privacy using military-grade SSL encryption for your backups. Let’s learn more about it after the jump.

Free Online Cloud Storage _ Cloud Document Backup, Backup Software

SurDoc currently supports Windows, Mac and Android, though users can access their backed up files from any operating system via SurDoc’s web interface. Getting started is very simple; just download the application, launch it, and sign into your SurDoc account. If you’re a new user, you can quickly create an account by clicking the link in login window.

SurDoc Sign in

Almost all major online services these days offer you a way to sign up with your social media account so you don’t have to punch in details like email, name or password from scratch. SurDoc is no exception, and lets you sign up using your Facebook, Google, Yahoo, or Outlook account. Once you’re done with the signup process, make sure to verify your account via the confirmation email. Now type your userID and password in the SurDoc app to get started.

Sign up

The Windows application I took for spin offered me many different options to play with. The backup process itself is pretty easy to configure, thanks to the tool’s extremely user-friendly design. In fact, if you have used any other cloud storage service, you will instantly find yourself at home.

You can choose to backup almost any type of file and folder irrespective of its format; documents, images, HTML files can all be backed up in a jiffy. Just make sure to place the files in a single folder and then select that folder to be backed up. You can also set filters to synchronize specific file types only, such as JPEG, PNG, DOC, WAV etc. using the Filter tab. In addition to the backup process, the procedure to restore your backed up files from the cloud to any computer is pretty easy as well.

2013-12-21 13_42_45-

The backed up items can be accessed from the web interface, which is optimized to run well on both desktop and mobile browsers. Though Android users have the additional option of using the service via its dedicated app.

SurDoc_Web

SurDoc’s free account comes with 100GB cloud storage, while the paid subscription plans start at $2.50 per month for 100GB with some restrictions of the free account removed, or $8.33 per month for unlimited storage and all restrictions removed. More details are available at the website.

SurDoc Plans

In short, if you’re looking for a way to backup a large number of files to the cloud, SurDoc is a great option.

Visit SurDoc

Advertisement
  • I’m sorry, but my cynical American suspicion meter’s needle is pegged by this. Whenever’s something seems too good to be true (100GB of storage for free is a HUGE amount… almost too good to be true), it probably is.

    In this case, SurDoc’s Chinese connections are too huge a red flag. The Chinese are constantly trying to break-in to US corporate firewalls, and has devoted an entire military team doing it full-time, in shifts, around the clock. Additionally, one of its biggest phone makers, Huawei, is notorious for its cyber spying; and I could cite dozens of other similar examples.

    Were I wanting to see American secrets, I’d offer a whopping 100GB of free cloud backup space, too. In the process, I’d learn thousands and thousands of Americans’ commonly-used passwords, as well as the contents of their document and other files. With a little luck, someone whose files actually contain something important would be stored on my servers.

    It is no accident, I’ll bet, that only 5GB of the 100GB may be such as .ZIP files, which are inherently harder to crack-open through simple automated procedures because of their pseudo-encryption via the mere act of zipping, potentially compounded by password protection.

    No, sorry… not interested. No American should be. I wouldn’t put my personal or professional data on SurDoc’s servers — and especially not give it one of my commonly-used passwords (or certainly not one I’ve used anywhere else, or which could give hints thereto) — on a bet! Not even if it offered 100TB of free storage space!

    A little cynical discernment is in order: not merely called for, but SCREAMED for!

    My advice: Stay away.

    __________________________________
    Gregg L. DesElms
    Napa, California USA
    gregg at greggdeselms dot com

    Veritas nihil veretur nisi abscondi.
    Veritas nimium altercando amittitur.

    • Moreaki

      Be that as it may, do you even have 100GB worth of interesting data for any government? Right now, we shove it up NSA’s butt big time, so sharing some of the hard cracking effort done by those “secret” organizations — where ever they may roam and under which ever flag they sail — is only fair, wouldn’t you think? Being cynical and such. You don’t really need to use a backup service to offer most of your privacy in data to such organizations. The commonly used passwords of Americans have repeatedly been published in many places since the early 80’s (when accessing really interesting research data was still quite interesting), however passwords these days are of rather little concerns when it comes to accessing data. The question regarding breaching an individual’s privacy is often governed by economic reasoning of opportunity costs and capital investment.

      “Indeed in general I hold that there is nothing truer than happiness, and nothing happier and sweeter than truth.” — Leibnitz


      • MOREAKI WROTE: …do you even have 100GB worth of interesting data for any government?

        MY RESPONSE: In high school, you learned the difference between quality and quantity, right? How much “interesting data” do you think it takes in order for the breach of it to become a problem? Everything I could possibly need to clean-out your bank account may be contained in a text file of fewer than 100 bytes (100 characters)… which is a fraction of the 100GB of storage in question that’s so small that the first significant digit of its percentage is several positions to the right of the decimal point. The contents of a single file may contain everything needed to cause an entire lifetime of ruin. That you make the quantity argument cogently attests to your cluelessness regarding this matter.

        Another key problem with the assertion of your question (some questions are really just statements with question marks at the end, as is the case with yours) is how it so nicely borders on and dovetails with the classic right-winged, conservative, (Insani)Tea-Party-esque, Republican privacy-rights-ignoring argument that if you have nothing to hide, then what’s the problem with your privacy being violated? It’s a ridiculous and nonsensical argument which fundamentally fails every logical litmus test, including that of every US federal court jurisdiction, and the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). As it turns out, I have somewhat MORE than 100GB of data which would be interestesting to any number of governments; but that’s not the point. The point is that even if I didn’t, I have the right to keep it private and known only to me. Your Republican slip is showing.

        The third (but far from the final) key problem with your assertion as masked by your having torturously put it in the form of a question is the problem of fiduciary responsibility… a foreign concept, I realize, for most bereft-of-integrity Republicans. No matter how much of the 100GB of storage might be occupied by my own private data; and no matter how much such cluelessness as yours might ignorantly and wrongly suggest, as you below suggest, that privacy is an illusion and so there’s no point in our trying to maintain it (yet another classic bit of Republican apologia to justify violating it), if only one tiny bit of what’s on my computer that’s backed-up to SurDoc’s 100GB of storage space contains the private data of others entrusted to my care, then I’ve violated my fiduciary responsibility. With such a glaring lack of understanding of the importance — nay, imperative — of that, I sure hope that nothing you do in life requires fiduciary sensibility… or even integrity, since you seem to have neither.

        MOREAKI WROTE: Right now, we shove it up NSA’s butt big time, so sharing some of the hard cracking effort done by those “secret” organizations — where ever they may roam and under which ever flag they sail — is only fair, wouldn’t you think? Being cynical and such.

        MY RESPONSE: Assuming I completely understand it (since precisely how you worded it contains some inherent ambiguity), I don’t even know where to BEGIN with such ridiculousness! Because the NSA misbehaves, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander? Please tell me that’s not what you’re saying. Mygod.

        MOREAKI WROTE: You don’t really need to use a backup service to offer most of your privacy in data to such organizations. The commonly used passwords of Americans have repeatedly been published in many places since the early 80’s (when accessing really interesting research data was still quite interesting), however passwords these days are of rather little concerns when it comes to accessing data.

        MY RESPONSE: I’ve been an IT professional involved in all manner of high-tech pursuits for pushing 40 years. Your now knowing that, do you really think that at least MY password strategy in life suffers from such infirmity? Moreover (and far worse), your suggestion, then, is that everyone just give-up? Have you fallen on your head too many times in life, fortheloveofgod? Er… oh, yeah… you’re a Republican. That explains it. Nothing should be private as far as you guys are concened.

        MOREAKI WROTE: The question regarding breaching an individual’s privacy is often governed by economic reasoning of opportunity costs and capital investment.

        MY RESPONSE: Agreed, though not for the reason you just wrote… more on that in a moment. Nevertheless, that observation and point of yours is the whole reason I earler suggested that no one should make it easier and cheaper for the Chinese government to look at their private data by delivering it up to it through the use of SurDoc; and hence, further, what I meant by my observation (and what I concomitatntly suggest it means) that SurDoc limits to only 5% of its whopping 100GB of “free” (if you don’t consider the less-easily-quantifiable cost of having your privacy violated) storage what it calls “special” files (such as executables and .ZIP files) which are not easily opened and read by automated means. By making 95% of the 100GB usable by only files which are easily opened and read by automated (and, therefore, least costly) means, SurDoc is making flesh your very posit. What part of that was not painfully clear in my earlier words?

        However, as I’m coming to realize is normative about what you write, there’s a larger issue suggested by it: your classic Republican apologia that privacy concerns are largely non-issues because the cost of violating privacy usually dictates that most won’t bother to do it. That, of course, is ridiculous, as evidenced by that most who engage in it are pimply-faced 14-year-olds who do it for sport, to prove their hacking skills and impress their hacker friends on hacker websites. What you don’t know about security would fill a book.

        How curious, in light of your words’ evidencing a glaring lack of rational thinking, that your “signature” quotes Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz, a 17th century rationalist. Then again, he spoke from both sides of his mouth regarding that (and most Republicans do, too, it’s worthy of note), considering his leaning more, in reality, toward a kind of scholasticism which values prior definitions and first principles over empirical evidence…

        …pretty much as you’ve done, here. No surprise, then, I guess.

        If you’re wondering why my overall response, here, seems irritated and perhaps a little unkind, it began with the insufferable arrogance of your inherently insulting “do you even have 100GB worth of interesting data for any government?” At that point, it was gloves off.

        Then, again, I tend to be naturally pretty gloves off whenever it’s clear that I’m dealing with a clueless, privacy-ignoring, civil-rights-diminishing, willing-to-harm-people-with-their-policies Republican.

        __________________________________
        Gregg L. DesElms
        Napa, California USA
        gregg at greggdeselms dot com

        Veritas nihil veretur nisi abscondi.
        Veritas nimium altercando amittitur.

    • NoReligion

      Oh nooez the chinez will steal my documents? What will I every do?

      So if a company has a Chinese connection we shouldn’t use their services? Well we might as well stop shopping… everywhere.

      Funny you should claim that the Chinese would steal your data when you have no evidence of that and when the NSA has been proven to steal data from everyone, even other countries. It has been proven that they are a criminal organization, they have committed treason. Not a single piece of evidence suggesting this company has any connection to the Chinese government. Its all pointless speculation with you, isn’t it?

      So you go on with your conspiracy theory’s and I’ll enjoy my 100GB of free storage 🙂

      • TO: NoReligion

        It’s always entertaining to read the easy-to-write-in-anonymity words of the cowardly who hide behind pseudonyms and online handles. I, on the other hand, post everything under my real and full name, and was so doing on the Internet even in the early ’80s… a dozen years before its worldwide web component came into being. I, unlike you, stand responsible for my words both online and off. I leave to you to figure out which of us the world will find more inherently credible.

        Knowing that I must stand responsible for my words in all aspects of my life, do you really think I would be so irresponsible as to suggest something with no basis, whatsoever? Develop some research skills. It’s all there, if you first know how to dig and, second, know how to interpret what you find. Based on what you consider “research” in your various hatred-of-Christians-as-sport postings, I’m dubious.

        So, here, let me give you at least the tiny beginnings of a hint, just to get you started.

        h t t p : / / b i t . l y / 1 g Q Q u c I (a PDF file; remove the spaces)

        I won’t hold my breath for that you’ll know what to do with it, though.

        Remember, as you learn things (assuming you even do), not to project onto the Chinese your having-lived-in-a-free-country values and enculturation; and the seeming logical (to you, at least) flow of relationships that said values impose upon your intuition, and therefore cause you to be misled (as you’ve already demonstrated you are) with respect to a country that disappears those whom it considers a threat, and must be publicly shamed into treating its people with simple human both dignity and decency.

        Enjoy your 100GB of free storage, indeed. When you find yourself second-guessing putting anything on it that you wouldn’t want the Chinese government to read, think of me. You won’t admit it, of course, but you, me and God will all know.

        __________________________________
        Gregg L. DesElms
        Napa, California USA
        gregg at greggdeselms dot com

        Veritas nihil veretur nisi abscondi.
        Veritas nimium altercando amittitur.

        • KJ

          So here you are criticising this service over privacy concerns only to hold someone in contempt because they value their privacy.

          I’m sorry, but credibility is established with what you say and do right now, not with irrelevant bluster about what you might have done in the past. It is certainly not helping your credibility that you resort to ad hominem and posturing to try to make your point.

          Now I do happen to believe that no government in the world is particularly trustworthy when it comes to information gathering and I may even agree with a few of your sentiments, but that does not excuse your behaviour here.

          • KJ WROTE: So here you are criticising this service over privacy concerns only to hold someone in contempt because they value their privacy.

            MY RESPONSE: What a tortured analysis. All privacy is not created equal; and my calling-out was (and remains) about who’s likely to be more credible based on who stands up and is counted by his real identity, and who cowardly hides behind a handle… sort of like you, too, are doing. I simply leave to the reader to figure it out.

            KJ WROTE: I’m sorry, but credibility is established with what you say and do right now, not with irrelevant bluster about what you might have done in the past. It is certainly not helping your credibility that you resort to ad hominem and posturing to try to make your point.

            MY RESPONSE: Your assessment of my credibility, here, is what’s irrelevant; and the ad hominem began with NoReligion’s words, not mine. Hold him responsible for that, and you’ll then, and only then, have my attention.

            KJ WROTE: Now I do happen to believe that no government in the world is particularly trustworthy when it comes to information gathering and I may even agree with a few of your sentiments, but that does not excuse your behaviour here.

            MY RESPONSE: I’m sorry… did I somehow convey that I thought any “excuse” was needed? Nothing I’ve here written needs to be excused. I stand by every word. The part of it to which you refer with which you may agree (or disagree, for that matter… either way is fine) is that upon which you should be concentrating and/or commenting. Please don’t waste your time, or mine, on form-over-content concerns. If you have a point which speaks to the points, then make it. Otherwise, how I make mine is mine, alone, to decide.

            __________________________________
            Gregg L. DesElms
            Napa, California USA
            gregg at greggdeselms dot com

            Veritas nihil veretur nisi abscondi.
            Veritas nimium altercando amittitur.

        • NoReligion

          Best hypocrisy ever. You’re making groundless claims that a county with connections to china (?) is going to invade your privacy. Yet you call me out for valuing my privacy, you’re nuts.

          On top of that every company nowadays makes money by invading your privacy. Its what has happened with modern technology. Though to suggest that we shouldn’t use an amazing service just because of the possibility of them invading your privacy, is utterly idiotic.

          And if your data is “stolen” (so spooky) it will likely be by the NSA, which is literally spying on everyone.

          Get your facts straight before you open that bullshit throwing machine.

          • NORELIGION WROTE: You’re making groundless claims that a county with connections to china (?) is going to invade your privacy. Yet you call me out for valuing my privacy, you’re nuts.

            MY RESPONSE: Ooooh. Ouch. Your not having the courage to use your real name when you take pot shots at people is not about your privacy. It’s about your cowardice. And your comparing that to legitimate privacy concerns related to one handing-over one’s data to a company which goes out of its way to insist it’s an “American” company, but which has servers in China, and a founder with roots as deep in Chinese politics and governmental operation as is possible are two very different things.

            NORELIGION WROTE: On top of that every company nowadays makes money by invading your privacy. Its what has happened with modern technology.

            MY RESPONSE: And so, then, that somehow deprives me of my right to hate and rail against it? To call others’ attention to it? To not go gently into… yadda, yadda, yadda? That sounds dangerously like a Republican argument.

            NORELIGION WROTE: Though to suggest that we shouldn’t use an amazing service just because of the possibility of them invading your privacy, is utterly idiotic.

            MY RESPONSE: If it really were “an amazing service,” then perhaps you’d be right. Not using a service which, agreed, at least seems amazing, but which is likely to be privacy violating because that’s what the Chinese do (you seem to keep wanting to just ignore that) is just facially prudent. Given that, suggesting that so doing is idiotic is what’s idiotic.

            NORELIGION WROTE: And if your data is “stolen” (so spooky) it will likely be by the NSA, which is literally spying on everyone.

            MY RESPONSE: Any child who’s ever been tricked by a bully into doing something which ultimately hurt or embarrassed him/her will instantly recognize such as your “so spooky” taunt which disrespectfully dismisses reasonable concern and attempts to disabuse the prudent of it… as taunting bullies do. I had your number 50 years ago, in grade school. I’ve only gotten better at spotting it a half century later.

            Additionally, what the NSA has done (and I agree it’s bad; and I believe that at least the whistle blowing part of what Snowden did was heroic) has not one single thing to do with this argument…

            …that is unless you’re making the facially nonsensical (and childish, which is beginning not to surprise me, in your case) point that because the NSA violates people’s privacy, then it’s okay for China to do it… sort of what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Please tell me that that’s not what you’re doing. There’s already so little to respect.

            NORELIGION WROTE: Get your facts straight before you open that bullshit throwing machine.

            MY RESPONSE: Oh, yeah… THAT’s what the reader is going to assess that I’m doing, here. And my facts, trust me, are straight. China (and most other countries, too) correctly asses that data is the new battlefront. That’s the near entirety of what the whole NSA thing is about. China has already shown itself to be willing to use what would, in the US, be private business (but what, in China, is just a misdirection and actual arm of the government) to gather information clandestinely. You’re not paying attention.

            Get a clue.

            _________________________________

            Gregg L. DesElms
            Napa, California USA
            gregg at greggdeselms dot com

            Veritas nihil veretur nisi abscondi.
            Veritas nimium altercando amittitur.

            • NoReligion

              Obviously misinformed conspiracy nut is misinformed.

              Its obvious you don’t know the first thing you’re talking about.

              But please continue on this tangent, its incredibly fun to watch your insanity unfurl. 😀

              • NORELIGION WROTE: Obviously misinformed conspiracy nut is misinformed.

                MY RESPONSE: Hmm. No redundancy, there. It seems your exasperation is making him repeat yourself. Get a grip.

                NORELIGION WROTE: Its obvious you don’t know the first thing you’re talking about.

                MY RESPONSE: An assertion belayed by that I get paid $250/hour for it. Do your own math.

                NORELIGION WROTE: But please continue on this tangent…

                MY RESPONSE: You actually know what “tangent” means, right? There’s nothing tangential about what we’ve been discussing other than your (and others’) trying to justify China’s spying by that the US’s NSA does it as well. They’re unrelated issues; and the NSA’s doing it doesn’t make right China’s doing it. Only those with no real understanding of the issues — nor a rational argument to make about them — would cite one to justify the other.

                NORELIGION WROTE: …its incredibly fun to watch your insanity unfurl. 😀

                MY RESPONSE: It’s “it’s,” not “its.” And, ah, yes… the classic “you’re nuts” dismissal, commonly employed by the left-with-nothing-else-to-say. I have no concern, at all, about how the rational reader will judge us both. I stand by every word I’ve here (and pretty much everywhere else in life, come to think about it) written; and, unlike you, I do so using my real both on- and offline identity…

                …which speaks volumes about both my credibility, and your cowardice.

                So… wanna’ argue about God, now, atheist? Having been seminary trained, and having seen the sources you tend to cite during such arguments which you consider credible, I’m more-than confident I can topple you in that arena, as well.

                In the meantime, Google an article by atheist Tibor Krausz published in mid-October on the “Killing the Buddha” website entitled “Atheists: A Rant,” to get a tiny glimpse into the fundamental mean-spiritedness of your kind of unprovoked lashing-out against religion just for its sake. As a liberal/progressive Christian, I, too, despise the Bible (and Q’uran, too) thumpers. But they, along with extremists in every faith tradition, are the problem, not religion, itself. Get a clue ab out that, too.

                But, alas, now I digress. Sorry. We should stay on topic, here; and the topic, most simply stated, is that no one who hasn’t fallen on his/her head too many times in life should voluntarily serve-up all of his/her private data to a cloud backup company with provable, high-level ties to China…

                …a government which is engaging, full-time, in data espionage and warfare — aimed primarily at the United States — at not only the military level, but also via its ties to and control of seemingly private companies like SurDoc. Such as you need to stop projecting onto such entities your western value system and enculturation. There is nothing in China — and I mean NOTHING — which Beijing does not control. Nothing.

                SurDoc is an American company, at least by registration… that’s true. And it has servers physicaly located in the US… that’s also true. So, why, then, does SurDoc need servers physically located in China, as well?

                It’s certainly not because bandwidth is better, faster, cheaper or in larger quantities than in the US; or that Chinese data centers are better and/or more reliable; or even that those geo-located on China’s side of the planet are better served by data centers physically located in Beijing. Why, Terramark’s Miami “Nap of the Americas data center, alone, verily dwarfs and far more cost-effectively outperforms nearly the entirety of not only Bejing’s data serving capabilities, but most of China’s as well.

                In fact, any just one of Peak10’s US data centers — or even just the single NAC.NET data center in Parsippany, NJ — may make similar claims. So, then, why does the allegedly US-based SurDoc need a data center physically located in China…

                …where it may mirror, in real time, every last byte of the data that Americans store on SurDoc’s US servers; and where it’s immune from US law, and open to Chinese governmental inspection at any moment (more likely also in real time; in fact, Chinese military likely run it), without warrant?

                Hmm?

                And just exactly how separate from the Chinese government do you mistakenly believe is the barely-able-to-speak English, 41-year-old SurDoc CEO Donglin (Alex) Wang? Hmm? Did you even bother to look at his history and ties in the aforementioned PDF file to which I herein linked?

                He fancies himself the creator of a cross-platform (portable) document format that’s superior to Adobe’s PDF, which would, today, he insists, be the world standard had Adobe not beat him to market with its PDF just two years before Wang’s format was ready…

                …as if the rest of the world would have embraced a Chinese product of that type back then…

                …or even now, were it not for the work of the Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS) (in which Wang has been a shaker and mover from the outset; and of the Chinese branch of which Wang is chair) and its Unstructured Operation Markup Language (UOML), of which Wang claims to be the chief architect.

                He also takes much of the credit for the development of the Chinese document encryption and DRM-enabling DoCbase technology, claiming some 34 patents related to both it and OASIS’s UOML, the vast majority of which fly in the face of the intended openness of the very UOML technology that Wang’s allegedly promoting.

                Riddled with controversy is OASIS’s “Royalty Free on Limited Terms,” and “Royalty Free on RAND (reasonable and non-discriminatory) Terms” methodologies which, unlike W3C’s (which requires participants to offer royalty-free licenses to anyone using the resulting standard), allows publication of standards requiring licensing fee payments to patent holders, the use of which would effectively eliminate the possibility of free/open source implementations of said standards, contrary to virtually everything that such as Wang have promised all along. Add to that the growing-louder-by-the-day complaints of those familiar with OASIS’s OpenDocument (pursuant to ISO/IEC 26300) spec that OASIS, in classic Chinese governmental fashion, routinely stonewalls complaints by SC34 countries about defects in the spec, and their inability to access it to effect corrective action…

                …ironc, that, considering that Wang, himself, made similar both accusations and complaints about the OpenOffice OOXML spec, even submitting a paper about it to its 2008 international conference.

                This sort of slight-of-hand by Wang, et al, would appear to be par for the course, given his Sursen company’s long history of copyright violations; one of the most recent and public of which was the 2007 suit by seven of China’s most revered (and all of them award-winning) authors (Li Mingsheng, Zhang Kangkang, Zhang Ping, Lu Yuegang, Wang Hongjia, Qiu Huadong and Xu Kunlian) against the Sursen-owned DU8.COM website. Said website is hosted in the very Sursen-owned Beijing data center in which SurDoc’s Chinese servers are located; and the complaint alleges that not only did Sursen offer the copyrighted works for sale on its site, but it also distributed them on CD both without the authors’ permission, and without compensating them.

                Trust me when I tell you that that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Some six years later, sait suit has neither been resolved, or heard from again… at the hands of the Chinese government which, of course, controls the courts. Again, don’t project onto China your western notions of how things are supposed to work. It’s a country with a long history of human rights violations; and which makes same flesh by such as routinely disappearing those who deign to speak-out against it.

                Go ahead: fiind the Hunan Province entrepreneur who applied, just before the 2008 Olympics in Beijing, for a permit to demand greater participation of citizens in political processes, and to denounce rampant official corruption and abuses of power. Both he and his both friend and legal advocate from Fujian applied for protest permits; and both were escorted from the building and put into an unmarked Buick by several men, never to be seen again.

                That sort of thing happens EVERY SINGLE DAY in China. At least a dozen others — including two elderly women, aged 77 and 79 — who applied for such protest permits were not only denied, but were taken into custody and then imprisoned, and forced to work in “re-education” camps.

                As long as we’re on the 2008 Beijing Olympics, do you not remember the fake birth certificats that the Chinese government proffered to the International Olympic Committee when China’s gymnasts were alleged to have been too young to compete?

                And/or do you know nothing of Chinese contemporary artist, photographer, sculpturer, architect and, yes, dissident, Ai Weiwei, who did the bird’s nest design (but now regrets having so done) of the Olympic stadium in Beijing? And in preparation for the building of which stadium, have you never heard about the literally thousands of buildings — many of them historic hutongs — demolished, and persons displaced with no either compensation or rehousing? Have you never heard of Weiwei’s own beautiful and freshly-built studio bulldozed to the ground by the Chinese government simply as punishment for his dissidence; his openly and highly-critical statements about the his government’s blatant human rights violations? Do you have any idea how close Weiwei came to being disappeared, himself, after his April 2011 arrest at the Beijing Capital International Aport? Were it not for his international fame and the groundswell of support during the 81 days he was held in jail, he would never have been released; and even though he was, he was nevertheless charged with financial crimes from which he will never, in his life, recover.

                You actually TRUST a government like that? One that is in the news yet again, this very week, because of its hiding in Hong Kong of the identity of the Russian and Malaysian owners of the very website where most of the 40 million credit card numbers gleaned from the Target security reach were (and still are being) sold?

                Need I go on? (I can, you know, for days, listing Chinese governmental atrosities). How can you have been alive for more than even only 10 years and not know of that country’s outrageousness?

                Wang was hand-picked by the Chinese government some nearly 28 years ago to receive, at government expense, the best technical education that his country could provide after he distinguished himself, back then, as something of a software genius. He graduated at age only 19 in 1992 (after a college education fully paid for by the Chinese government) from Nankai University in Tianjin, which is well-known as a recuiting ground for Chinese spies and governmental operatives (just as the US’s Johns Hopkins University’s facilities in Washington, DC are similarly famed for recruiting CIA agents).

                Fully funded by the Chinese government, Wang’s Sursen company grew from nothing, seemingly overnight, to become the largest (the sole, actually) digitizer and encrypter of Chinese “e-Gov” governmental documents. Only after perfecting that was he allowed to expand his operations so Sursen’s services could be offered to private enterprise, through which he was allowed (by the Chinese government) to grow Sursen to allegedly have some 40,000 worldwide enterprise customers (those close to the company guesstimate that the number is only about one-fourth that), and some allegedly 10 million individual customers (those same experts believe it’s closer to one-third that number… both of which experts guesstimations attest to Wang’s marginal propensity to lie).

                Through those operations, the Chinese government is well known (at least among security experts) to be accessing literally billions of private, allegedly encrypted (but by using technology to which it, through Wang, has the key) both personal and business documents from around the world. Further, through Wang’s becoming influential in OASIS and its UOML, the Chinese government is well placed to have the keys to the decrypting kingdom of what could become the electronic document standard that, if China has its way, replaces Adobe’s PDF formatting standard, or XEROX’s document management standards, and even W3C’s guarenteed-openness standards.

                From Wang’s writings and speeches, we know that he embraces and espouses the wisdom of the economies of scale which only unmanned automation can provide for encrypting and decrypting massive amounts of information…

                …hence my noticing (and fully understanding, when others, here, apparently could not) the relevance of SurDoc’s allowing only 5% of its 100GB of allegedly “free” cloud storage space, per customer, to “special” files (such as executables and .ZIP files which cannot be easily opened and viewed except through human intervention if they’re password protected), and 95% of it earmarked for Microsoft Office style document and spreadsheet and database and presentation files which can easily be opened, regardless how they’re password protected, through unmanned automation.

                And I could go on… and on… and on… and on.

                So, then… hey… just lookee there, NoReligion… at my “insanity unfurl[ing].” How ’bout next time you accuse someone of not knowing the first thing he’s talking about, you make extra sure that you know the first thing YOU’RE talking about… hmm? How ’bout you do that.

                So… seriously… wanna’ argue about God, now? Do you think I’d come to the table any less prepared? Hmm?

                [sigh] Sheesh. [shakes head in disbelief] Atheists… can’t live WITH ’em, can’t KILL ’em. [grin]

                __________________________________
                Gregg L. DesElms
                Napa, California USA
                gregg at greggdeselms dot com

                Veritas nihil veretur nisi abscondi.
                Veritas nimium altercando amittitur.

                • NoReligion

                  This is hilarious, lol. Your insanity cannot be overstated.

                  “oh nooz, the Chinese, they will steal your homework”

                  No one wants your 4th grade science report (duh).

                  Please either accept that you need desperate help, or move your insanity elsewhere. It would be better for everyone.

                  • So, then, I was right: TLDR, eh?

                    __________________________________
                    Gregg L. DesElms
                    Napa, California USA
                    gregg at greggdeselms dot com

                    Veritas nihil veretur nisi abscondi.
                    Veritas nimium altercando amittitur.

                    • NoReligion

                      Nah, it was more like, your insanity might be contagious.

                      This has been fun watching your sub come to your own crazy juices, but I have an actual life to get to. The last word is yours, I know how much it means to you 🙂

  • Guest

    What a fxxking joke that only Chinese are hackers but not the the fxxking Americans!

    • Guest wrote: What a fxxking joke that only Chinese are hackers but not the the fxxking Americans!

      MY RESPONSE: No one said that only Chinese are hackers. There were, and remain, more hackers in the US than in any other country. You missed the most salient part of my point…

      …that China’s hacking is government sponsored. Yes, the US spies, too, as the Edward Snowden and NSA debacle clearly illustrates; but information gleaned from US governmental spying does not end-up being used to commercially benefit any private parties, as information gleaned from Chinese spying does. Remember that while Huawei is a private company, the line between it and the Chinese government is virtually non-existent; and it is the Chinese government that is behind such things as, for example, the problem of counterfeit wine showing-up in European and American auction houses.

      The NSA is not a commercially criminal enterprise. The Chinese government is.

      __________________________________
      Gregg L. DesElms
      Napa, California USA
      gregg at greggdeselms dot com

      Veritas nihil veretur nisi abscondi.
      Veritas nimium altercando amittitur.

      • Arno

        Except it has been shown that all of the major technology companies sell user data to the NSA. US corporations are just as much puppets of their government as Chinese corporations.

        • ARNO WROTE: Except it has been shown that all of the major technology companies sell user data to the NSA. US corporations are just as much puppets of their government as Chinese corporations.

          MY RESPONSE: That is categorically untrue. You have misread and/or misheard/misviewed (and so now, clearly, misunderstand) the recent NSA-related news stories; as well as you’ve missed the precision with which I wrote what I’ve here written. Moreover, you clearly fail to understand the US system, either because you live in the US, but never bothered; or you don’t live in the US, and so are misinformed/propagandized.

          These are areas in which I have extraordinary expertise. If you’re going to deign to debate me, come prepared, and bother to actually be good at it. What you’ve written, here, to which I’m now responding, is reckless, misinformed, and tacit evidence of your sloppiness of thought.

          __________________________________

          Gregg L. DesElms
          Napa, California USA
          gregg at greggdeselms dot com

          Veritas nihil veretur nisi abscondi.
          Veritas nimium altercando amittitur.

          • KJ

            Obviously you aren’t nearly as informed as you think you are. Go read up on PRISM and how the NSA paid some of the largest technology companies millions to institute the very programme which has given the United States government convenient access to user data.

            Only after the information regarding PRISM became public did those companies attempt to initiate their ostentatious “transparency” policies. Had that information never been divulged, you can bet that they wouldn’t have uttered a word and would have remained content on selling out their users.

            • KJ WROTE: Obviously you aren’t nearly as informed as you think you are.

              MY RESPONSE: Read precisely what Arno alleged… precisely. What he alleged, precisely as written, is categorically untrue. Period. Moreover, it has nothing to do with what the comments beneath the article at the top of the page are supposed to be about. We’re getting off-topic.

              KJ WROTE: Go read up on PRISM and how the NSA paid some of the largest technology companies millions to institute the very programme which has given the United States government convenient access to user data. Only after the information regarding PRISM became public did those companies attempt to initiate their ostentatious “transparency” policies. Had that information never been divulged, you can bet that they wouldn’t have uttered a word and would have remained content on selling out their users.

              MY RESPONE: Oh, fortheloveofgod, do you really think I don’t know everything there is to know about PRISM? C’mon! You have a simplistic both view and understanding of what, precisely, was the pressure on such as AT&T, for example, who early (in post 9/11 years) agreed to allow the NSA access to its systems. Once you fully understand the kind of power that the Patriot Act gave to the Hitleresquely-named “Department of Homeland Security,” and the secret courts issuing warrants without anyone having the power to move to quash, then and only then can you fully grasp the degree to which no company had a choice; making the money payoff/blood money… conscience money… money to make it look like a civil transaction and not the agreement under duress that it was.

              I’m not saying the corporations’ hands were clean. Far from it. A pox on all their houses! I’m simply saying that not a single one of them wanted to be subjected to accusations of treason such as Snowden has endured; but now that he has, and said corporations are seeing that he’s getting public support and calls are being made to reign-in the NSA, it’s finally easy for them to make their “ostentatious transparency” policies, and to call for the NSA’s reduction in power, influence and the ability to bully.

              The thing is, though, that the NSA has not one single thing to do with what we’re talking about, here, and that’s whether or not it’s wise to entrust one’s data to the Chinese. Whether or not the NSA is a bunch o’ schmucks is an entirely different and unrelated matter.

              __________________________________
              Gregg L. DesElms
              Napa, California USA
              gregg at greggdeselms dot com

              Veritas nihil veretur nisi abscondi.
              Veritas nimium altercando amittitur.

      • spudbot89

        And Gregg i agree with you totally. Sure all goverments spie it’s how it work’s. But the Chinese do it for reason’s we do not. Why just give them what they are looking for. We Americans and other countries have almost sold are soul’s to there cheap products in are greed. They want Private tech and info from are corporations not just Military info goverment info. We seem to have go nutt’s if are goverment collects info of any type. but they rob us blind every chance they get .They Make knock offs or steal the data for military purpose . Its amazing alone how some of there Military equipment alone look like knock offs from are own.

  • Bob Ramsey

    100 gigs of storage is not a huge amount at all these days. I can get a 4 terabyte drive for 270, which is less than 70/terabyte, so a whole 7 dollars per 100 gigs. And that’s just 5 seconds with google. With bulk purchases and shopping around, it is probably closer to $5 for that 100 gigs. Tops.

    Can probably shave the cost down even more by using older drives in mirrored or RAID 3 arrays. I wouldn’t expect anything fancy or uberredundant on a free account. You can get by with using really cheap 5000 RPM drives because your users are limited by their network upload speed.

    But even that isn’t the true cost, because most people won’t use that much space. Companies know that the majority of their users have far less than that.

    • Bob Ramsey wrote: 100 gigs of storage is not a huge amount at all these days.
      MY RESPONSE: Why do so many who post in places like this seem to have missed or flunked the lesson in elementary school wherein they learned to categorize? 100GB is a huge amount of CLOUD storage. What’s possible connectable to one’s local computer has not one single thing to do with anything on this webpage. Please don’t mix apples and oranges, and then use it to challenge others’ completely both reasonable and accurate assertions.

      Everything else you wrote completely ignores that we’re talking about CLOUD storage, here, not locally-attached drives. That said, you’re right about locally-attached drive space being inexpensive… though a RAID array is hardly what most individuals need. External, USB-attached, 2TB to 3TB drives of 5400 to 7200 RPM cost less than $100; the former, on sale, often less than $50. Though I — who still has, on hard drive, data from the 1980s, and a pushing-40-year IT career — have multiple such 2TB drives attached to my home server, most individuals could purchase just one for $69 to $89 and it would be all the external/backup storage they could possibly need in a lifetime.

      By using something like Tonido’s software, or OwnCloud; plus one’s own domain name and something like DynDNS (or any of a number of other similarly-interesting stragegies), one can have one’s own cloud, accessible from anywhere on the planet, at any time (as long as one’s home Internet connection is up, and one’s home electricity hasn’t failed), right on one’s desk… for as little as a grand total of only around a hundred bucks, one-time cost, including the 2TB hard drive.

      And I could go on and on. It needn’t be complicated; it should simply not be using SurDoc… in part, because of the Chinese connection.

      __________________________________
      Gregg L. DesElms
      Napa, California USA
      gregg at greggdeselms dot com

      Veritas nihil veretur nisi abscondi.
      Veritas nimium altercando amittitur.

      • Bob Ramsey

        You wrote:

        By using something like Tonido’s software, or OwnCloud; plus one’s own
        domain name and something like DynDNS (or any of a number of other
        similarly-interesting stragegies), one can have one’s own cloud,
        accessible from anywhere on the planet, at any time (as long as one’s
        home Internet connection is up, and one’s home electricity hasn’t
        failed), right on one’s desk… for as little as a grand total of only
        around a hundred bucks, one-time cost, including the 2TB hard drive.

        Exactly. And why you think this company or any other wouldn’t do exactly the same thing for the same price, I have no idea. No one is putting free accounts on the overly hyped and overly expensive server class drives with NAS or SAN. They are in it to make a buck, so for free accounts just keep slapping cheap, commodity drives into a raid 5 array that you can grow dynamically. When they become a paying customer you can move the files to something that’s backed up and a little more robust.

        But the whole thing is just a prettied up version of rsync.

        • Bob, I’m not sure what is your issue with me, here; or what you mean by your “why you think” statement. My only issue with you was your assertion that 100GB of storage is not a huge amount. Locally, no, it isn’t; but my point which could not have possibly been more clear was that 100GB is a huge amount if it’s cloud storage. Few, if any, providers are giving away 100GB of free storage. That was my point.

          For some reason, though, you just can’t stop trying to make a completely unrelated (and, therefore, irrelevant) point of how cheap is locally-attached storage. Yes, it is. I agree. I even cited how one could create one’s own cloud storage exceedingly cheaply because of it. We’re in agreement, here.

          Re-focus your attention, please, on the CLOUD storage aspect of this entire discussion. That’s what we’re all talking about, here; not locally-attached storage.

          __________________________________
          Gregg L. DesElms
          Napa, California USA
          gregg at greggdeselms dot com

          Veritas nihil veretur nisi abscondi.
          Veritas nimium altercando amittitur.

  • Jay Perches

    Thanks for the suggestion… I wonder why my speed connection goes down when I’d upload a file to SurDoc? I mean that while uploading a file to this specific site my downloading speed goes from 4.9 MB to 200 kb…!!!! (this does not happen with other services like MEGA or MediaFire) Thanks for your answers!!!

  • Dzulkifly Yusof

    SurDoc does not give you 100Gb of FREE space. It comes with a catch 90Gb of documents only and 10Gb of other files.After that it will not upload any other type of file e.g *.zip, *.tar. I would rather use the Chinese stoarge space (I have no SuperSecret files) justwant to off load my ROm files ,Rooting files that I have amassed over the years.

  • Paulo

    I’m trying to upload zip files to Surdoc(200MB each). When the progress bar indicates it’s finishing, it never ends. There’s something wrong with this service.
    Also, I tried to upload a 50MB zip file and a mkv file(100MB). It doesn’t complete and it’s not a problem with my browser since i used Opera, Firefox and Chrome.
    It only occurs in Surdoc.