Intel Predicts Death Of WWW

Buy more chips by otisg · 2004-09-12 23:21 · Score: 5, Funny

Is he also, by any chance, suggesting a solution: buy more, newever, faster Intel chips!?

--
Simpy

Right up there with Gates by RedShoeRider · 2004-09-12 23:22 · Score: 4, Insightful

.....WWW is going to die, DVD's are a thing of the past....blah blah blah.

Yeah, and Beta's been "dead" for 20 years. But I still can go buy tapes for it.

--

Chris Knight is my hero.

Re:Right up there with Gates by binaryDigit · 2004-09-13 00:18 · Score: 4, Insightful

.....WWW is going to die, DVD's are a thing of the past....blah blah blah. Yeah, and Beta's been "dead" for 20 years. But I still can go buy tapes for it.

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".

Well... by spieters · 2004-09-12 23:23 · Score: 5, Informative

Don't bother to RTFA this time, the article's about as low on info as the summary.

--
Instant Karma's gonna get you Gonna look you right in the face -- John Lennon

Re:Well... by KilobyteKnight · 2004-09-12 23:50 · Score: 5, Insightful

Don't bother to RTFA this time, the article's about as low on info as the summary.

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.

--
When will Windows be ready for the desktop?
Re:Well... by Alsee · 2004-09-12 23:52 · Score: 5, Interesting

Last time Slashdot ran this story I did a little digging. I'm not sure of everything Intel has in mind, but part of their plan is to impose a Trusted Computing layer on top of the internet. "Security" "viruses" "authentication" blah blah blah. What it really amounts to is that if you do not "voluntarily" submit to Trusted Computing and turn over control of your computer you will be locked out.

Slashdot ran a story quite some time ago about Cisco Working to Block Viruses at the Router. 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.

-

--
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Re:Well... by Ranx · 2004-09-13 01:19 · Score: 5, Informative

Intel's press release about the same speech has a little bit more information, although nothing technical.

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20 040909corp.htm

Also interesting: a link to the open platform website:

http://www.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).

--

Me
Re:Well... by Skjellifetti · 2004-09-13 01:56 · Score: 4, Informative

Forbes once wrote an article about 64 bit computing where they defined a 64 bit machine as one that could address 64! bytes of memory. There writers and editors really don't have much of a clue about technology.

--
FreeSpeech.org

In other news by A1kmm · 2004-09-12 23:23 · Score: 4, Insightful

Intel predicts that it will be able to convince the world to abandon the unscalable approach of following standards, including upcoming standards like XForms and IPv6, and open P2P systems, and instead invent its own propietary system.

--
X-Has-Sig: yes

Swamped in dupes by BenjyD · 2004-09-12 23:23 · Score: 4, Informative

Dupes

... But blind posts are forever by walmass · 2004-09-12 23:24 · Score: 5, Funny

WWW may be dying, but repeating old stories is forever

Hurray, another XXXXX is dead story. by Biotech9 · 2004-09-12 23:24 · Score: 4, Funny

I'd love to see how much of the nets resources are taken up by spam mail, viruses, worms, and the like. I would imagine (although I am totally uneducated in the arena of 'tech') that if these problems were wrapped up for good, a whole lot of stress would be removed from the Internets shoulders.

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"

Dupe by Detritus · 2004-09-12 23:25 · Score: 4, Funny

Dupe, Dupe, Dupe, Dupe of URL
Dupe of URL.
Dupe of URL.

--
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat

That's not bad at all by gustgr · 2004-09-12 23:26 · Score: 4, Insightful

WWW may reach the same level Gopher is today, it is not so popular (mainstream) but it's contents can be very interesting if you perform some data mining (geekly speaking of course).

WWW must be maturing by BinBoy · 2004-09-12 23:26 · Score: 4, Insightful

The end of Usenet/NNTP has been predicted many times as well. It's a stage that every successful protocol eventually reaches. Our baby is growing up!

Death of the Internet by gowen · 2004-09-12 23:26 · Score: 5, Funny

Perhaps the internet will be killed by the fact that, with constant breeding of duplicated news stories, one will eventually reach critical mass and overwhelm all other information.

--
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.

Too late for Intel by News+for+nerds · 2004-09-12 23:26 · Score: 3, Funny

In Soviet Russia, WWW predicts Death Of Intel!

"Forbes is running a report saying that AMD's CTO claims that Intel's P4 is 'running up on some architectural limitations' that will eventually cause its downfall."

The Internet is Dying by Anonymous Coward · 2004-09-12 23:27 · Score: 5, Funny

It is official; Netcraft confirms: the Internet is dying

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] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [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

waste of time by Docrates · 2004-09-12 23:27 · Score: 4, Insightful

You know TFA is a load of crap when the excerpt is about the same size as the actual article...and half of the article's page is devoted to promoting some financial news service.

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.

--

There are two kinds of people in the world: Those with good memory.

Very Vague by Manip · 2004-09-12 23:29 · Score: 4, Insightful

It strikes me that this 'new internet over the existing one' is an extremely vague idea.

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 by leifbk · 2004-09-13 00:06 · Score: 5, Interesting

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.

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

--
I used to be a sceptic. These days, I'm not so certain.

the Internet is not the WWW by Anonymous Coward · 2004-09-12 23:31 · Score: 5, Insightful

Any article that confuses the Internet with the world wide web can't be taken seriously.

The experts by shoemakc · 2004-09-12 23:32 · 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

--
--an unbreakable toy is useful for breaking other toys--

No its true! by forgotten_my_nick · 2004-09-12 23:32 · Score: 3, Funny

I looked at the article and it had..

"Beware of the End of the World (Wide Web), " Says Intel

Clearly the " the start of the internet corruption. :-O

On a more serious note, the news story doesn't actually tell you anything except use Intel stuff.

WWW != Internet by lazybeam · 2004-09-12 23:35 · Score: 5, Insightful

I thought that the HTTP protocol was going to die? But no, they are talking about the Internet switches and routers being overloaded. And it will only get worse as more people use broadband - that means ISPs will have to upgrade their equipment! (shock! horror!) The WWW is going to break with all the """ codes in the article, too.

Gelsinger's solution is to build a new network over the current Internet,

The WWW is a network over the current Internet... Oh well

--
-- no sig for you. come back one year.

"InterWeb" by Scoria · 2004-09-12 23:35 · Score: 4, Informative

Article summary: FUD.

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.

--
Do you like German cars?

Re-architecture by el+americano · 2004-09-12 23:45 · Score: 5, Interesting

A worthless article to be sure, with no discussion of the web's architectural problems. (bad Slashdot) There is obviously more to the architectural problem than will be solved by IPv6, but allowing for IPv6 and higher capacity routers alone, I'm sure the web could go a long time with no other upgrade. I can only wonder how much money Intel will spend on convincing people that the web will die "sooner than you think." If it's anything like the $300 million they spent on telling people they have the best/only Wi-Fi solution, we'll be hearing this for a long time.

--
Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. -Groucho Marx

The web sucks by autopr0n · 2004-09-12 23:56 · Score: 4, Interesting

I really think the future lays in some sort of system that distributes server load to clients. sort of like an interactive bittorent.

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.

--
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.

Intel CEO Lyle Lanley, everyone! by adoarns · 2004-09-12 23:59 · 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.

--
Tenemus pyrobolos atqui jacimus cognitiones.

Pentel Predicts Death Of WWW by tommasz · 2004-09-13 00:03 · Score: 5, Funny

Pentel, the world's leading provider of 0.5mm mechanical pencils has predicted the World Wide Web cannot continue to function at its present level for much longer. Pentel is offering an alternative, called WSD, or Writing Stuff Down, that is virtually immune to scaling problems currently plaguing the Web. Industry experts have been slow to respond to this proposal but their responses are expected any day now, via another new technology called the Post Office.

Re:Dupe by 808140 · 2004-09-13 00:28 · Score: 4, Informative

No, I think it's meant to be to the tune of "Duke of Earl", which is much funnier, imho.

And here's the code that killed it... by D4C5CE · 2004-09-13 00:47 · Score: 4, Funny

Whoever wrote this may not have been stood up in front of a firing squad yet, but hopefully he's been sacked by now:

&#34;Beware of the End of the World (Wide Web),&#34; Says Intel

Yet bad HTML and childish language are the least of this blurb's problems - even the dot.com bubble in its heyday has probably never produced an article so full of vapor and devoid of the slightest piece of information at all:

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. Gelsinger's solution is to build a new network over the current Internet, that would monitor and direct traffic and better fight security threats or traffic surges.

So how does one sum up this little "gem"?
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?

However, Cisco controls most of the routers and switchers comprising the current web, and it may have other ideas.

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. by El+Camino+SS · 2004-09-13 00:56 · Score: 4, Insightful

Here is how the "trusted internet" will fail:

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.

Planetlab connection by FU_Fish · 2004-09-13 02:12 · Score: 4, Informative

As a user of both the WWW and Planetlab I can say that they are totally unrelated. The WWW is a source for finding/exchanging existing data. Planetlab is a testbed for new networking/computing technologies. Planetlab produces data, the WWW distributes data.

death of TCP/IP by peter303 · 2004-09-13 02:37 · Score: 3, Insightful

The ethernet (and mostly internet) protocol was predicted to die 30 years ago. People offered alternatives like ATM and MicroSofts early 90s protocol (failed attempted hijacking of the Net), but none really caught. A mediocre standard used by billions of computers perseveres.

If at first you think this may be evil... by D4C5CE · 2004-09-13 04:29 · Score: 4, Insightful

What it really amounts to is that if you do not "voluntarily" submit to Trusted Computing and turn over control of your computer you will be locked out.

Intel Outlines Strategy For Making The Internet Smarter, Safer, More Reliable And Useful
(...)
This would transform the Internet from a data transmission pipe into a vast platform for hosting a wide array of services available [add: for ________ $ / __ (+ your immortal soul where applicable)?, ed.] to the world's six billion inhabitants. Gelsinger referred to this approach as the ability to provide planetary-scale services.
(...)
we are confident that we now can begin deploying and testing revolutionary, planetary-scale commercial services that will change the way business is done on the Internet.
(...)
"A planetary-scale overlay of computational services would open the Internet up to a new era of innovation while complementing other Internet initiatives," Gelsinger added. "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."

Oh, glad it's only about World Domination! ;-)
Nothing scary there, just what almost every computer company strives for.
How reassuring...
SCNR

PlanetLab as an alternative for WWW? by InfiniteWisdom · 2004-09-13 07:49 · Score: 3, Informative

If Intel's CTO really said that its time for him to be fired. Except that he didn't. What he really said is this

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.

37 of 300 comments (clear)