It is interesting conjecture that “The” Internet is doomed. I agree that “The Current State” of the Internet will be different tomorrow and if we declare every variation of what the Internet looked like in the past as being dead then I would urge that the Internet already died and will do so every day into the future as a new one emerges.

The language, or protocols, of the Internet will continually change and the infrastructure that drives it will change along with its owners and the cost and economics for access with change along with it. The Internet has gone from a generic name for the interconnection of a bunch of defense and research networks into really the concept of an interconnected global economy. Should one part of the Internet have better network performance, or should content move to no longer being free doesn’t change the underlying definition of an Internet.

The success of the Internet has been due to its ubiquity and its ability to change with the times. The protocols and devices of an IP network designed to protect against physical failure has grown into something that is adjusting with the times. It is only fitting that in year of Darwin’s 200th anniversary that we have the ability to watch the evolution of an organism (the Internet) that isn’t even biological before our eyes. The Internet has become something beyond any singular definition and new protocols, just like your favorite websites, will come and go and many will not survive. This is the Internet’s strength, not weakness.

Researchers may try and define where the Internet should go but it doesn’t mean the Internet will go that direction. Sometimes the death of one pathway forward has unintentional benefits. SMTP as a protocol for email is fraught with problems and has led to SPAM clogging the Internet yet my son spends more time on instant messenger systems without even the concept of SPAM and I don’t think he would think the Internet died if SMTP went away and I think many wouldn’t care. That’s evolution at its best.

As you might imagine, I don’t believe the Internet can die since you can’t define it nor prevent anything new you create from being percieved as still the Internet. And if Google wants to isolate themselves from the rest of us (which I doubt) they only have thier own history to look back and think about whether we miss Altavista today.

When we have a virus like the flu infecting the country, we don’t let it spread and lie in wait at hospitals for the sick to show up, we try and stay ahead of it and keep the population healthy and infected.  Likewise, when gangs grow and get out of hand, we don’t wait for their attacks, we try and introduce youth counselors, come up with better activities for them to do like midnight basketball and re-introduce them back into society as productive members.  So while we wait for operating system vendors to patch holes and users to buy and update security products many botnets are growing to the tens of millions in size.  So why is that that we avoid one of the most efficient means to restore a civilized Internet?  If we can understand how the botnets work, and what systems a botnet has exploited based upon a vulnerability, why can we not simply spread the antidote in much the same way? Years ago doctors introduced the concept of kids playing tag to pass germs to build up immune systems, isn’t this the Internet equivalent?

A recent BBC team used a botnet for some research and the backlash was large (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/7932816.stm). To some this sounds like becoming part of the problem and just another way to make the problems worse.  As I sit here and watch the threats on the Internet over the last decade, I can’t help but see a trend that shows it getting worse at the speed of innovation by the malcontents and the anti-virus, anti-spyware, anti-whatever is next software distribution to clients has already ensured a war for supremacy is raging on.  Last time I checked, those who didn’t realize their systems were getting infecting haven’t been spending much time to fix it, just like those whom are happy being social renegades don’t spend a lot of time pro-actively reforming.  At some point, we need to reach out more than just suggesting that broadband customers download free anti-virus. 

Too bold for us to consider?  Will this always be the demise of the security?  Is there a better way?