Intel Predicts Death Of WWW 300
LostCluster writes "Forbes is running a report saying that Intel's CTO claims that the WWW is 'running up on some architectural limitations' that will eventually cause its downfall. He's pushing a project called PlanetLab that has Princeton, Cambridge, Hewlett-Packard and AT&T on board, but Cisco is notably absent from that team."
Buy more chips (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Buy more chips (Score:2, Funny)
Al Gore... The Failure (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Buy more chips (Score:2)
Here's the part of the article that states the problem:
At Intel's technical conference, CTO Patrick Gelsinger said the Internet will begin to collapse as millions of new computer users from developing nations begin to sign on."We're running up on some architectural limitations," Gelsinger was quoted as saying.
And the solution:
Gelsinger's solution is to build a new network over the current Internet, that would monitor and direct traffic and better fight se
Re:You bet (Score:3, Informative)
Right up there with Gates (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, and Beta's been "dead" for 20 years. But I still can go buy tapes for it.
Re:Right up there with Gates (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually the fact that you can still get your hands on Beta tapes is not relevant, heck, I can still get my hands on new 8" floppies. And actually, once hi-def dvd's start showing up, today's dvd's will be a thing of the past.
Better analogies would be doomsayers talk about "we need to develop optical technologies because magnetic media will hit a stone wall at 1GB", or "cpu's will max out about 500mhz, better use optical computing" or "ipv6 needs to be adopted to deal with the shrinking ip address pool".
Re:Right up there with Gates (Score:2)
I don't think so. The DVD is certainly "good enough" for movies. It's a major step compared to VHS (much better quality, but more important: no more rewinding, better scene selection, multiple language tracks, extras and better archievability) but a hi-def dvd is just "like DVD, only better" which is not really going to fly.
There are just too many DVD-players out there, it will take at least 10 years, probably mo
Re:Right up there with Gates (Score:2)
Getting beta decks is getting tougher and tougher. It's still highly used in the distribution industry as well.
There is a analogue/digital hybrid deck that is new and I believe around 5000. There are a surprising number of shops that specialize in rebuilding, parts and supplying rebuilt decks. 3/4 has mostly been phased out and I've seen piles of 3/4 decks piled up anytime I go to a broadcast shop.
Well... (Score:5, Informative)
WWW != Internet (Score:5, Insightful)
Gelsinger's solution is to build a new network over the current Internet,
The WWW is a network over the current Internet... Oh well
Re:Well... (Score:5, Insightful)
Complete lack of technical savvy is what I've come to expect from Forbes. They just don't get the SCO thing either. And in this article, they interchangably use the terms "World Wide Web" and "internet". Forbes is obviously the magazine for pointy haired bosses, I can't imagine anyone else taking it seriously.
Re:Well... (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/2
Also interesting: a link to the open platform website:
http://www.planet-lab.org/ [planet-lab.org]
Interesting quotes:
"Applications run on PlanetLab are decentralized, with pieces running on many machines spread across the global Internet. They can also self-organize to form their own networks, and include some form of application processing inside the network (instead of at the edges), adding new intelligence and capabilities to the Internet."
"It would provide a platform on which Web services can run and a way to connect grid computing sites and utility data centers. It sits above the new physical infrastructure supplied by Internet 2 and above the networking layer where IPv6 functions, adding a new stratum of higher-level functionality to the Internet."
Why it has to replace the current TCP/IP-infrastructure is still unclear (apart from selling more hardware).
Re:Well... (Score:2)
I'm not sure this is about replacing infrastructure as much as it is about monitoring traffic and maybe routing specific protocols and services across different paths and shutting down specific types of traffic if it looks like a DoS attack or worm activity. Maybe its something expanded on the QoS concept. I think its possible that all this still runs over IP and exi
Re:Well... (Score:5, Interesting)
Slashdot ran a story quite some time ago about Cisco Working to Block Viruses at the Router. [slashdot.org] The way they really work is they first scan that you are Trusted Computing Compliant, then they can scan exactly what software you are running, for example to ensure you are running the mandated firewall or anti-virus software or whatnot.
If you do not submit to Trusted Computing, or if you are not running the mandated software, then the router "quarantines" you until you come into compliance. In other words it denies you a network connection. Compliance is "voluntary", but you are blocked from the network until you comply.
-
Re:Well... (Score:2)
Re:Well... (Score:3, Informative)
PDF link [bsa.org] From the last two paragraphs on page 11 through page 14 is a transcript of Bush's Cyber Security advisor addressing a Gobal Technology Summit in Washington DC in 2001 and directly calling on ISP's to start making plans to make such a system mandatory as part of ISP terms of service. To fight viruses, to secure our National Information Infrastructure, to fight terrorists, to defend our way of life, to fight Osama b
Re:Well... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Well... (Score:2)
Re:Well... (Score:2)
In general, no.
Authentication is based on a random key locked inside each chip which you are forbidden to see. Every chip has a different key. That random key is signed by the manufacturer, and it is effectively impossible for you to forge that signature.
The only way to pass authentication is either to be a genuine and secure chip, or to physically dig that key value out of a tamper-resistant and self-destructing microchip. Not impossible, but you'd need a
Re:Well... (Score:2)
So I do a "man in the middle" attack on my own computer.
-- less is better.
Re:Well... (Score:3, Insightful)
What has been hogging IT resources for the last 2 years - viruses. So every single director of IT will definetly buy something that will instantly fix all their resourcing woes.
Intel, Symantec, etc, etc are all picking up on this and trying to sell products based on this. Do we trust the moral fibre of all of these companies with our freedom ? I think not.
Education is what people need, not products. I don't think people willfully leave their computers as Zombies.
On the other hand - if
Re:Well... (Score:2)
As much a grip as MS has on computers, I see many situations where this concept would NOT apply or be useful. What about your PS2, Xbox, your Fluke Linkrunner, various forms of Linux, various switches, Jetdirect cards, home routers, music station, airport, X10, Palm pilot, RF bar code scanners etc.. Or basically ANYTHING that get an IP address. How
If at first you think this may be evil... (Score:5, Insightful)
Nothing scary there, just what almost every computer company strives for.
How reassuring...
SCNR
Re:Well... (Score:2)
Re:Well... (Score:3, Informative)
Assuming have have that chip built in, then you just turn it on and "voluntarily" give up ownership of your own computer. While Cisco's router has you "quarantined", it likely is configured to give you access to the required files and website to seize control of your machine. From there it will probably handle all of the work of bringing
Re:Watch out for DMCA (Score:3, Insightful)
I've been putting quite a bit of thought into this, but actually no. Cracking the security on your Trusted Computer should technically not violate the DMCA. At east not the generic break itself. The DMCA specificly applies to circumventing the access control system specifically protecting someone else's specific copyrighted work. When you first receive/activate your Trusted Computer it is either protecting nothing, or only protecting your ow
Re:Well... (Score:5, Informative)
In other news (Score:5, Insightful)
No its true! (Score:3, Funny)
"Beware of the End of the World (Wide Web), " Says Intel
Clearly the " the start of the internet corruption.
On a more serious note, the news story doesn't actually tell you anything except use Intel stuff.
First time I see a story without comments (Score:2, Funny)
"The Internet will end when 1 million slashdotters click this link"
Swamped in dupes (Score:5, Informative)
... But blind posts are forever (Score:5, Funny)
Hurray, another XXXXX is dead story. (Score:5, Funny)
I'm also cynical enough to predict that intel are saying;
"The net is dying... AND WE HAVE THE SOLUTION! SIGN UP NOW FOR ONLY $5.99 TO GET A STARTER PACK"
Re:Hurray, another XXXXX is dead story. (Score:2)
The real point here... (Score:2)
May I suggest a small tombstone with "R.I.P." engraved on it? Perhaps a black armband?
Re:Hurray, another XXXXX is dead story. (Score:3, Insightful)
Dupe (Score:4, Funny)
Dupe of URL.
Dupe of URL.
Re:Dupe (Score:5, Informative)
That's not bad at all (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:That's not bad at all (Score:3, Interesting)
WWW must be maturing (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:WWW must be maturing (Score:2)
Drop "successful". If you use a shotgun, you're likely to make a few hits.
Kjella
Death of the Internet (Score:5, Funny)
Publicity (Score:2, Insightful)
Too late for Intel (Score:3, Funny)
The Internet is Dying (Score:5, Funny)
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered the Internet community when IDC confirmed that the Internet market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that the Internet has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. the Internet is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin [amdest.com] [amdest.com] to predict the Internet's future. The hand writing is on the wall: the Internet faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for the Internet because the Internet is dying. Things are looking very bad for the Internet. As many of us are already aware, the Internet continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
All major surveys show that the Internet has steadily declined in market share. the Internet is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If the Internet is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. the Internet continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, the Internet is dead.
Fact: the Internet is dying
Re:The Internet is Dying (Score:2, Funny)
It is official; Netcraft confirms: the Internet is dying
Are you sure? I seem to have trouble bringing up www.netcraft.com...
waste of time (Score:5, Insightful)
This is, by far, one of the worst news posts EVER on slashdot.
In fact, do go to the article and witness the historic event.
Re:waste of time (Score:2)
Very Vague (Score:5, Insightful)
At least to me, they have not said what the problems are to begin with and further more have not said how they are going to address each one.
All this tells us is 'X Corp is working on an unknown problem with an unknown solution'.
Adding a network on the existing one doesn't sound like a great solution either because it uses the apparently flied infrastructure to construct a method to make that structure more stable..? Sounds like building on sand to me..
Re:Very Vague (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem, from a financial point of view, is of course that it isn't that easy to make money off the Internet as a lot of investors may have thought. TFA suggests as much when it's said that "the Internet will begin to collapse as millions of new computer users from developing nations begin to sign on." My guess is that most of those new users from developing nations hardly have the potential to generate profit remotely in proportion to their consumed bandwidth. So the Internet as a means to stockpile return on investment may well soon be a thing of the past.
And that probably sums up Forbes' interest in the case.
However, as long as the infrastructure of the 'net mainly consist of rather cheap hardware and essentially free software, I can't foresee the imminent death of what we really love about it: The free exchange of information around the globe. It's not the death of the Internet, then, it's rather a full turn of the circle back to Tim's vision. And good riddance to the money hoarders.
--
defenestrare necesse est
Re:Very Vague (Score:2)
I think this is bad economic thinking. First, the deployment of bandwidth in developing countries for equivalent technologies will be cheaper because of the lower costs of living.
Secondly, there are a wide range of last-mile options available now that were not widely available as the web ramped-up in the US (such as wireless). Technology has al
Re:Very Vague (Score:2)
True, but it's because they keep thinking of the Internet as a product in itself instead of as an enhancement or adjunct to more traditional businesses. It makes as much sense of Forbes to say the phone system is dying because companies, other than telcos, haven't found a way to make money from it.
standard business practice (Score:2, Informative)
The history is filled with these types of marketing schemes. In the 1930s there was a product called Listerine, made to treat throat infections. A guy called Gerald Lambert made a marketing scheme, "inventing" a problem ("bad breath") and offered the solution (his product), the birth of mouthwash products.
Ref: http://chnm.gmu.edu/features/sidelights/whoinvente dbo.html [gmu.edu]
Internet 2 (Score:2, Interesting)
the Internet is not the WWW (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:the Internet is not the WWW (Score:2, Insightful)
On the other hand I think it's even worse when they say on TV that some scientist "has invented a computer" that does X - when they really mean someone wrote a software that does X.
Re:the Internet is not the WWW (Score:2)
Reporters, especially TV reporters, are the worst. I once heard a TV reporter refer to "emailing over the web". Obviously popular webmail services confuse the issue a lot. But if the reporters can't get technology right, it makes me wonder about what else they're fudging or getting flat-out wrong. Politics? Economics? Foreign affairs? Scary stuff when you consider that the general population depends on the media to inform them about important and interesting matters.
Re:the Internet is not the WWW (Score:2)
Re:the Internet is not the WWW (Score:2, Redundant)
The experts (Score:5, Funny)
Well god bless them. I remember the day vividly when my shiney new Pentium 3 arrived, and i was finally able to browse the internet.
And why hardware limitation exactly are they refering to; heat from your cpu exhaust instantly melting through your patch cable?
-Chris
"InterWeb" (Score:5, Informative)
However, it is somewhat humorous that the writer often substitutes "World Wide Web" for "Internet." Considering that the number of estimated Internet users increased from 38,000,000 at the end of 1994 to 604,000,000 in 2004, I am somewhat incredulous to the belief that our current architecture is incapable of accommodating expansion. It may not be inexpensive, but it is possible.
Aside from that, the article contains no other information. A substantial percentage of the article body is actually dedicated to FinancialWire and StreetSignals.
Re:"InterWeb" (Score:2)
Though perhaps that's where all those failed companies in the late nineties went when the Internet killed them.
Re:"InterWeb" (Score:2)
That, and maybe put more caching servers in place.
Corporate boardroom conversation (Score:3, Interesting)
The good news? We've just landed a top notch PR firm to help sell our message that we must upgrade and overhaul the whole infrastructure. We'll be monitoring the impact of this message over the next several months. If successful, we expect to see profit levels soar again within 3 years."
Re-architecture (Score:5, Interesting)
WWW predicts... (Score:2, Funny)
h.
terrorism link? (Score:3, Funny)
What?? (Score:2, Funny)
The web sucks (Score:5, Interesting)
A lot of things that are done these days over the web are extremely simple and could be done on the client side, but can overwhelm a server when it needs to be done for thousands or millions of people. And bandwidth still isn't free.
Re:The web sucks (Score:2)
Smart caching(of the 'end result website). Purgin the cach ever-so-often and doing so efficiently and reliably(not the bogged-down Tempor
Intel CEO Lyle Lanley, everyone! (Score:5, Interesting)
The Web was not created by companies like Intel. It wasn't created by companies at all, only in some cases co-opted by them.
When companies like Intel pitch these wide-ranging changes, it comes over like some seedy traveling salesman pitching a monorail.
If we want to make changes to the web, we will.
The scary part is that he's right (Score:3, Funny)
PlanetLab? Not RTFA, I suppose that's to make a new planet for us?
Thanks, Intel!
Pentel Predicts Death Of WWW (Score:5, Funny)
Bah, who cares what they say. (Score:2)
They basically say something like "640k is enough for everyone" except that a few months down the road when market forces start acting, who are the ones playing the catch up game now?
I'd say we'd all be happily surfing the WWW in our subterran bunkers in 2038 when Intel is no more..
A little piece... (Score:2, Funny)
Forbes = msft shills, tech/investment idiots (Score:2)
Forbes is absolutely worthless. I'm amazed anybody considers forbes worth anything.
the ./ dupe stories alone ... (Score:2)
... are bringing it to its knees ...
running up on some architectural limitations (Score:2)
Lets reinvent the web and have someone own it, and we all pay them! yes please! here is my credit-card number.
1337H4X0R696969696
Proper information at Intel's pages (Score:2)
http://www.intel.com/research/exploratory/plane
I'm going to punish Intel for this... (Score:2)
And here's the code that killed it... (Score:5, Funny)
As "Erm, vaguely, something, some day"?!
An while they are at it, how about defining the out-of-context "collapse" and "some architectural limitations" for this article to have any meaning whatsoever?
OMG. Aren't we all just stunned by the writer's clarity, precision and thorough understanding of all things technical...
If there's an "anti-Pulitzer", a prize for the worst misachievements in journalism, Forbes&FinancialWire may just have given us a very promising "Candidate of the Year".
I've got the gameplan for the new internet. (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Claim that the internet, with the advent of widespread broadband, is going to crash. Cause the herd to panic. Bypass your IT manager. Put it right in Forbes and Fortune 500. Make them demand it from the top down.
2. Speak of adding a new functionality (like a new and improved clippy) and then slide in DRM to prevent "hackers" from getting into your machine. This of course, will never prevent hackers. All it will do is make the hackers get into the BIOS level of your computer when you allow a shell at that level.
3. Roll out "trusted computing." Pretty soon, your computer won't trust you to let you do what you want on it. You will feel a sudden twinge as millions of Joe Users will cry out in agony, and then suddenly, silence.
4. Geeks will find and work with corporations that are not on trusted computing. They will be fine. They will know where to get the useful mobos and processors. Their side of the internet will not change at all, ever.
5. One generation of "Joe User" will find that all of the interesting things that made owning a computer are now blocked and will become frustrated. They will blame the computer instead of the architecture. "My Dell won't let me do what I want!" Gateway, Dell, and other Windows syncophants will start going belly up in the slimmest of markets after they drove all of the profit out of the business. IBM will be fine with Linux for the business market. Comcast will hemmorage profits when people can't get to what they really want, and then suddenly turn on all of the other companies. AT&T will suck it up, those losing more traction in the real world as usual.
6. The industry will dump DRM and trusted computing while it is still hot, because basically, there won't be any purchases, and people have to sell computers to pay the bills. Word will get out to the common person, quickly, and they will sit on the shelves and rot.
Why do I think it will happen just like this?
The whole "trusted drinking" thing worked so well during prohibition. A group of Holy rollers thought that banning things or preventing them would stop bad activity. All prohibition did was make "bad" activity more expensive... and much more aggressive and organized. These "trusted computing" twits are insane. If they think that it is going to work, they're nuts. Go ahead and delay Longhorn or whatever. Simply put, it ain't going to work. Look, if geeks need to get their chips from Burma, or Morrocco, or wherever, rest assured that they will find a way.
and adding another layer on top (Score:2)
Stupid idiot...
It's just an excuse... (Score:2)
Re:It's just an excuse... (Score:2)
Let me see what killed Unix and like so the Net (Score:3, Insightful)
A bunch of companies have different solutions which disrupt the opriginal standards based model and the Internet dies.
I might accept the idea but it does not belong to Intel, Princeton, AT&T, nor Cambridge. It belongs in the bucket with all the other ideas that eventually get implemented. Otherwise the Net will be just like television.
Let's see: (Score:2, Funny)
2) Y2K will end life as we know it.
3) WWW now officially dead. Close your browser.
I guess that sums it up. Forgive me if I don't hold my breath.
"No support for quote marks" (Score:2, Funny)
"The WWW has never shown that it can consistantly produce the quotation marks we need
when we need, and for this reason it needs to go back to the drawing board", said an unnamed source with the Forbes web design team.
Planetlab connection (Score:5, Informative)
What the hell? (Score:2, Informative)
Yet, when we look at the article: It's a vision apparently shared by Cisco (NASDAQ: CSCO), Hewlett-Packard (NYSE: HPQ) and AT&T Corp. (NYSE: T), all of whom are working feverishly, either together or apart to save the World Wide Web, which Intel and others see as becoming so overloaded it will eventually break.
in other news, the processor will be dead... (Score:2)
*rolls eyes*
death of TCP/IP (Score:4, Insightful)
It will never happen (Score:3, Interesting)
The entire idea is asinine. To paraphrase who many simply call the inventor:
-- Sir Tim Berners-LeeBetter ideas? (Score:2, Insightful)
I was there (Score:3, Interesting)
First, they are talking about layering another level of obfuscation on top of the net as a fix for the underlying problems. Rather than dealing with the problems, they ignore them, and make a shiny thing. Wow, that's architecture for you!
Next, with the innovation fom HP lately, and the fact that they are going commercial with it rather than open and standards based, it is doomed to be a niche idea at best. As one questioner afterwards pointed out, the internet was built on open ideas. This is looking to go the opposite way. NEXT!
Vint Cerf was cool though. They said there would be a special guest, but to my horror, they only meant Vint. No telletubbies in bondage gear this year. I can only hope for spring 2005 IDF....
I plan to rant about this on the Inq as soon as I recover from last week.
-Charlie
PlanetLab = mobile code. Again (Score:3, Interesting)
As an operational model, this fails. Either the system gets take over by hostile code, or there's some central adminstration that controls who runs what. (This last is the 3G cell phone services model. It's not working.)
This is one of those ideas, like "push technology" and "micropayments", which fail because the people who benefit are separate from those who absorb the costs. Only in a monopoly situation can that work.
PlanetLab as an alternative for WWW? (Score:4, Informative)
Planetlab isn't an alternative to anything. Its not even a network really. Its a research testbed, for people who want to evaluate their protocols on more realistic network conditions than the LAN in their labs. Its a good tool to help design the next generation Internet, but Plantlab in itself isn't going to do anything.
I know this because I happen to be one of the people who does network research on Planetlab, and one of those 429 happens to sit on a table across the room from me right now.
Re:WWW Is Dying (Score:2)
MSFT wants to control the web, and is trying to build tech into longhorn to accomplish that. Embrace, Extend, Extinugish. Now Billy G is going after the world.
How to Kill MSFT, Kill x86. as a side affect Intel dies as well. Damn, now those brilliant engineers can actually build a better processor.