The Internet Is 'Built Wrong'

An anonymous reader writes "API Lead at Twitter, Alex Payne, writes today that the Internet was 'built wrong,' and continues to be accepted as an inferior system, due to a software engineering philosophy called Worse Is Better. 'We now know, for example, that IPv4 won't scale to the projected size of the future Internet. We know too that near-universal deployment of technologies with inadequate security and trust models, like SMTP, can mean millions if not billions lost to electronic crime, defensive measures, and reduced productivity,' says Payne, who calls for a 'content-centric approach to networking.' Payne doesn't mention, however, that his own system, Twitter, was built wrong and is consistently down."

Comments

"Content centric"?

[KDR_11k]

Does that translate to "owned by the big media cartels"?

Re:"Content centric"?

[OrangeTide]

My buzzword filter prevented that term from reaching my conscious mind.

Re:"Content centric"?

[maxume]

Your unconscious mind is a hell of a typist.

Re:"Content centric"?

[Firehed]

Well, given that Twitter really only took off because of it's API (which is XML-based), you could say that it really is taking off, especially with how many other user-content-driven sites have APIs. Beats the hell out of page scraping, anyways.

The problem is that serving straight-up XML with an XSLT is rather flaky cross-browser (especially on mobile devices), and adds a level of confusion that not only isn't necessary in 99% of websites but is best piped through a semi-regulated system. Twitter is an awful example as they still don't have a business model (or even a revenue stream at all AFAIK), but providing premium access to certain sections of an API or an increased request limit is certainly a valid way to monetize a service like Twitter, and that will quickly fall apart if were to serve straight-up XML.

Other than cross-browser standards support and a couple of quirky CSS attributes, there's really nothing wrong with separating the content and presentation with the systems that are widely in use today. They also allow users to override the presentation with their own stylesheet. Sure, you'd generally have to do it on a site-by-site basis as there's neither a <content> or <menu> tag (but rather divs and lists with IDs set, with no cross-site consistency at all), but implementing that kind of system effectively would be beyond a nightmare. I suppose you could link out to a semantic XML version of a page via a meta tag like how we currently handle RSS feeds (could just be another xmlns attribute for this kind of thing, though you could get most of the info off of a full rss feed anyways), but there are so few people that would want to override the default presentation of a site (and even fewer who would be bothered to do so) that it just doesn't make any sense, especially as there's currently no monetary incentive to do so.

Re:"Content centric"?

[i.of.the.storm]

"How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?"

That really is one of the great mysteries of slashdot.

*Brain Asplodes*

[SatanicPuppy]

Okay, so a guy who works for Twitter a crash prone, non-scaling application, says that the internet is "built wrong", where one of the examples of wrong is scaling. He goes on to list a few specific apps that he thinks are good example of "wrong" like IP4 and SMTP, which won out against better designed (but strangely unmentioned) alternatives because of wacky market stuff, which, again, not described.

No one who knows anything about the Internet would say that it was perfect. It's not even close. There are a lot of places where unholy cludges exist and are perpetuated because it's a lot easier to live with them than it is to try and change everything that depends on them. Things like, for example, Twitter.

Sure there were alternatives, but they were all either patent-encumbered, or hard to deploy, or too complex to easily develop for. They died. It's called competition. TCP/IP and SMTP came out the other side, and grew into cornerstones of the largest network this world has ever known, in a shockingly short period of time. No, not perfect, but pretty damn good none-the-less.

It's very easy to sit back today and say, "Wow it could have been so much better!" But that is armchair crap at the best of times...I'd sneer if Vint Cerf said it. Coming from someone who demonstrably can't do better, and can't even be bothered to champion a specific alternative...That's as pointless and lacking in content as most of the crap that comes through his crappily coded service.

Re:*Brain Asplodes*

[OrangeTide]

It's not Twitter's fault, it's the Internet's!

Re:*Brain Asplodes*

[j_166]

"There are a lot of places where unholy cludges exist and are perpetuated because it's a lot easier to live with them than it is to try and change everything that depends on them."

You're telling me. I personally witnessed a critical point that 75% of all internet data passes through in an unnamed very large University that is powered by a goddamned lobster on a treadmill! If Pinchy ever gives up the ghost, we are all well and truly FCKed.

Re:*Brain Asplodes*

[SatanicPuppy]

Me and the Twitter guy have something in common: if we were great minds, we'd be out doing great things, not sitting around with the belief that our opinions matter.

I don't have his hubris, thinking that his laughable Twitter credentials put him in some sort of position where he is qualified to pontificate on the sad state of the internets, but I'm not so deluded as to think my sniping at his idiocy is in any way deep or meaningful.

So let me get this straight...

[$RANDOMLUSER]

HTTP and JavaScript on TCP/IP over IPV4 is "not the best it could be"?

Wow, I'm fascinated by your ideas and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

How to fix Twitter

[TimHunter]

The only thing wrong with Twitter is that it has too many users. The way to fix it is to stop using it.

Re:This coming from someone at twitter

[Anonymous Coward]

This story should be tagged "failwhale."

Re:SO much of it is wrong

[bersl2]

Code

It's code centric. It shouldn't be. It should be design centric. Then we could dump all these expensive programmers and get some work done.

Computers are code-centric. If you can't handle it, GTFO.

rough consensus and running code

[Mr. Slippery]

"We reject: kings, presidents and voting. We believe in: rough consensus and running code." - David D. Clark, former chair of the IAB

You get to say the internet was "built wrong" as soon as we see your "better" idea run.

Remind me never to work for Twitter

[the_duke_of_hazzard]

This guy sounds like the kind of twat who joins our company, bitches about how badly everything's been written, then leaves behind a load of shitty unmaintainable code that's "really clever". And somehow he's in charge at Twitter? Christ.

Re:posting link to unrelated penny arcade comic

[Shaitan Apistos]

1. You don't get modded up by asking.

My entire modding strategy revolves around searching for the phrase "I know I am going to be modded xxxx for this, but.." and then meeting their expectations.

Re:posting link to unrelated penny arcade comic

[Anonymous Coward]

wow, and here i've conscientiously avoided those trite phrases. i know i'd be modded insightful for this, but unfortunately, ac...

Re:Electronic evolution

[Target Practice]

Web 1.0

NO! Dammit! I refuse to let you retroactively coin a phrase for an era in which all of the damned rabid PHP weasels had no part!

You can have your blogosphere, twitter, all those lame-ass social networking sites that do nothing for the good of mankind; but I have to draw the line when you reach into the past and blaspheme the good old days of gopher, FTP, and just reading the web page for the content and not the blinking god damned gnome game!

It was NOT web 1.0. It was an era of purity of information and good porn the likes of which will never grace your browser again!

Now, take your PHP for weasels book and get off my lawn!