Opinion ‘Mother of Internet’ Radia Perlman argues for centralized infrastructure - Inventor of the spanning tree protocol gets heretical about blockchain, crypto, and why the broken internet is a blessing in disguise


Laura Dobberstein

Internet pioneer Radia Perlman has argued in favor of centralized infrastructure, while speaking at the International Symposium on Blockchain Advancements in Singapore on Friday.

Perlman said that conventional wisdom poses centralised systems as “bad” and decentralized as “good,” however decentralized entities are inherently problematic in multiple ways.

“Blockchain as a buzzword started as the technology behind Bitcoin. People made money on Bitcoin and the more hyped it was, the more start-ups leveraged the hype to claim their product has something to do with Blockchain” explained Perlman. “If you hear so much hype, eventually you assume well, it must be incredibly important.”

“I think pianos are wonderful, but I wouldn't use them for mass transportation. Everything has a purpose,” added the inventor of the spanning-tree protocol (STP).

Perlman said the purpose of Bitcoin’s blockchain was to evade governing organizations like countries or banks, and while those systems can at times be corrupt, they also have their uses.

“Centralized means one organization is in charge. It usually does mean that there are multiple servers so it doesn’t mean single point of failure. And usually means that the data is stored in lots of places, so your data is not going to get lost. And especially if your data is stored in a public cloud,” said Perlman.

The author and academic added that other added benefits are its clear who to blame when things go wrong and most applications require “adult supervision,” or someone to answer for the system’s problems.

“Now if you're using Bitcoin I'm not sure what you would buy with Bitcoin, probably something like a hitman. And if he doesn't kill, who could you complain to? How do you get your money back? So most of the time, centralized is exactly what you want,” she further reasoned.

In conversation with The Register after her presentation, Perlman said blockchain is more of a marketing term than an actual technology, a fad of the moment in its existing form that might have elements that play out in the future, but in essence isn't much different to a database and is often harder to use.

“I'm amazed that I am involved in this at all, because most of my thoughts are really anti blockchain,” Perlman told The Reg “I sort of don't think it's a fundamental technology that you should be focused on.”

Perlman’s spanning tree algorithm was published in 1985 and is fundamental to the operation of network bridges, and ultimately paved the way for the modern Ethernet to transform into a protocol that can handle large clouds.

She is often referred to as the “mother of the internet,” a title she tends to laugh off.

Perlman told The Reg if she hadn’t written the algorithm, someone else would have, although she feels quite certain it wouldn’t have been done as simply or elegantly because she believes her superpower lies in simplicity and pragmatism.

So how does the "mother of the internet" feel about the network of networks she helped to enable?

“If you'd asked me that question 10 years ago, I would have waxed rhapsodic about how miraculously it was transforming society,” she told The Register. “But these days, I think it's the end of civilization.”

Perlman described AI algorithms that lead to polarizing rabbit holes of content as among the top dystopian characteristics of the internet. Worse than that, it allows disaffected extremists to connect with one another.

“If there's only 50 terrorists in the country, it's no big deal, unless they can all find each other easily,” said Perlman.

“I don’t see any way out of this,” she told The Register., then added that fixing the internet is something now up to the next generation.

“Sometimes when I'm giving a talk at a university, and I talk about all this doom and gloom stuff, then I smile, and I say but you're all students. If I were to say that we solved all the problems in the world, what would you have to do? So aren't you grateful to us that we gave you such a broken thing?” ®



 
Funny enough, the real failure of most cryptocurrencies can be blamed on centralization. Bitconnect, FTT, Celsius, Save the Kids Token, and many more featured a central body fucking around. Investors failed to do their due diligence, and the operators obfuscated their involvement. Bitcoin is still around. Nearly every single actually transparent, decentralized thing on the internet is still around. Centralization won't fix anything, demanding transparency will.
 
“If there's only 50 terrorists in the country, it's no big deal, unless they can all find each other easily,” said Perlman.

When they say things like this, remember they consider "saying bad things about george floyd" to be something like terrorism-adjacent.
 
“If there's only 50 terrorists in the country, it's no big deal, unless they can all find each other easily,” said Perlman.

When they say things like this, remember they consider "saying bad things about george floyd" to be something like terrorism-adjacent.
It does feel so sinister how they trot out these people to denounce their own creations, just because the people they don't like can use them. Either out of spite or because they have been conviced they have personally unleashed some form of harm on society and feel deep guilt. Somebody should remind them, that people from other country's don't all think like the faggots in San Fran. That terrorist line is such bullshit and emotional manipulation of the reader. Terrorists had 0 trouble blowing up buildings and killing before the internet was even mainstream and easy to use. Death of the author is used in literature for this, i don't blame the man who invented the printing press, for Mein Kampf.
It is hard to say why she even was talking about his. decentralization is the main topic. It hardly has anything to do with the term. She is complaining about consumer rights as it pertains to hiring bitcoin hitmen. And because there is not central body to receive those complaints decentralization bad.:story:
That is a funny prospect to even think about. She goes on to conclude that there always needs to be a internet jannie. But it it seems that the bitcoin scamming has got her humps up because of the word blockchain.
What she fails to think about is how something that is decentralized cannot be full controlled. That her way of thinking would change in a micro second, if the people she hated ever got hold of the system she wants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BobbyBriggs69420
I am now of the belief that whenever you say things about how much better and smarter you are than everyone else, you need to post it with your face.
1670375325938.png
Ideas are best presented anonymously so they have to stand on their own merit, but if you're putting yourself forth as a leader then I would hope you have enough self control to put down the twinkies.
 
“Now if you're using Bitcoin I'm not sure what you would buy with Bitcoin, probably something like a hitman. And if he doesn't kill, who could you complain to? How do you get your money back? So most of the time, centralized is exactly what you want,” she further reasoned.

Or you know, when the government comes and takes your money from your bank account, as they've done so often lately, or Paypal just simply steals your money, or a foreign government takes you off of SWIFT and thus locks you out of your finances because your country happened to go to war regardless of your input, or payment processors won't let you send money to your favorite fruit farming forum, and the list goes on. Decentralized currency, like Bitcoin is vital in a world where centralized banking has utterly and horribly failed.
 
or a foreign government takes you off of SWIFT and thus locks you out of your finances because your country happened to go to war regardless of your input
This is wrong. Cryptocurrency is of no help whatsoever, it was scams all the way down. Everyone who advertized money transfers through cryptocurrency gradually increased the waiting period, accumulated a sizable sum of transfers "in progress" and ran off with the money.
 
This is wrong. Cryptocurrency is of no help whatsoever, it was scams all the way down. Everyone who advertized money transfers through cryptocurrency gradually increased the waiting period, accumulated a sizable sum of transfers "in progress" and ran off with the money.
In some instances, sure, but there are plenty of legitimate business all around the world that accept crypto payments as well as regular centralized payments. Had those crypto methods been in place prior and more widely adopted, there'd be less opportunists and vultures overall in instances of large upheaval that were only possible because of over reliance on SWIFT and the like.

Being upset at crypto because of scammers is like blaming Trojan for your crazy ex that poked holes in the condoms.
 
I am now of the belief that whenever you say things about how much better and smarter you are than everyone else, you need to post it with your face.
View attachment 4016343
Ideas are best presented anonymously so they have to stand on their own merit, but if you're putting yourself forth as a leader then I would hope you have enough self control to put down the twinkies.
When did Gabe Newell troon out?
 
I am now of the belief that whenever you say things about how much better and smarter you are than everyone else, you need to post it with your face.
View attachment 4016343
Ideas are best presented anonymously so they have to stand on their own merit, but if you're putting yourself forth as a leader then I would hope you have enough self control to put down the twinkies.
Same face and gestures as (((Rachel))) Levine 🤔
 
Back