IBM plots global-scale shared computer to host entire internet as application

Well, it sure looks like IBM is keeping all its supercomputing bases covered these days, with it not only working on a chip-sized supercomputer, but a global-scale shared computer that'd be capable of "hosting the entire internet as an application." That latter word comes in the form of a white paper ambitiously dubbed "Project Kittyhawk" (we're guessing they found "Project Mulitvac" a little too obvious), which aims to explore the construction and implications of such a massive scale computer. That apparently wouldn't be a SETI or Folding@home-style shared computer consisting of everyday PCs, however, with it instead relying on IBM's petaflopping Blue Gene/P as a common platform, which would effectively be able to run any web-scale application you could throw at it. Of course, none of that has moved very far beyond the page just yet, so you can rest easy that there's still no supercomputer out there that's capable of bringing the entire internet to the halt on a whim, at least that we know of.

[Via Slashdot]

[Flashpoint @ Feb 8th 2008 12:03PM]

BUT...can it host DOOM?

[Jeremy K. @ Feb 8th 2008 12:05PM]

Yes, yes it can. ug...

[MMalecky @ Feb 8th 2008 12:07PM]

So, let me get this straight...

This computer could actually turn the internet into a "big dump truck?" No more tubes?

[kev @ Feb 8th 2008 12:30PM]

Ted Stevens is going to throw a hissy fit...

[kevjohn @ Feb 8th 2008 12:13PM]

If they need some help hosting the whole damn 'net, I've got a Commodore 128 at my parent's house collecting dust on a basement shelf that they can use.

[John @ Feb 8th 2008 12:14PM]

Project Skynet was a little too obvious also.

[Karl HacksWell @ Feb 8th 2008 12:17PM]

I always said if anyone ever saw the entire contents of the net they would probably die. Or just be in a mental institution.

[Chebwa @ Feb 8th 2008 2:34PM]

As soon as they caught a glimpse of tubgirl, goatse, and the cup ladies all at the same time during their viewing, it would all be over for them.

[Dan S. @ Feb 8th 2008 12:19PM]

Too bad IBM already created a computer named "Deep Thought", as that would have been a perfect moniker here.

[lucasvfr @ Feb 8th 2008 1:24PM]

well, any on could go mad from 4chan archives, but the entire net would be pretty boring...

[Toadlet @ Feb 8th 2008 12:20PM]

You don't need supercomputers to take down the internet, just a few well-placed ship anchors.

[Rayman @ Feb 8th 2008 12:25PM]

Single point of failure...

[OneLove @ Feb 8th 2008 12:26PM]

call of duty 4 server!! 1 million player (per team) deathmatch!! unlimited ammo!! multiple airstrike and helicopter support!! Barrett heaven!

[DonatoM3 @ Feb 8th 2008 1:09PM]

So wait does this mean we can let the countries actually fight out World War III on their computers instead of actually having it?

[Chebwa @ Feb 8th 2008 4:25PM]

Or we could just calculate the winners and then execute the losers. Trek style.

[vicM @ Feb 8th 2008 12:28PM]

a Nazi puter?

[zfurie @ Feb 8th 2008 12:31PM]

They are really late with the Monolith with this one.

So when is NASA launching this to Saturn?

[William @ Feb 8th 2008 12:36PM]

It could only be better if that Named it HAL, and it decided to hold the Internet hostage as it breaks into "Daisy, Daisy..."

[DC @ Feb 8th 2008 7:28PM]

Monolith? Looks more like a high-falutin' outhouse to me.

[RijilV @ Feb 8th 2008 9:38PM]

You do know of course that "HAL" was inspired by IBM (shift IBM one letter to the left, you get HAL)

[Hiro11 @ Feb 8th 2008 12:49PM]

I'd like to make obvious comments about "Kittyhawk gains conciousness", "learning at a geometric rate", "hemi-metal polyalloy", "it's in your nature to destroy yourselves" etc, but I'm not going to.

Oh wait.

[Sarah Connor @ Feb 8th 2008 1:10PM]

I smell Skynet all over again....

[feffrey @ Feb 8th 2008 1:17PM]

yay isaac asimov reference!

[teldinspam @ Feb 11th 2008 4:20PM]

Don't you mean Project Vacusuck?

[RoboDan @ Feb 8th 2008 2:05PM]

Not useful. Imagine the traffic! How many input/output fibre optic cables would you need!!!

Not only that, but a central location means extreme lack of security. Oops, someone set off an EMP - goodbye internats.

Furthermore, businesses and simple folk alike prefer their internet decentralized so that they can administer and own their own sites (not just rent). The internet is, and always will be, a bunch of computers connected to each other through other computers and software. Best thing to do is concentrate efforts on making it more universal, affordable, useful, and quicker.

[gimpbully @ Feb 8th 2008 6:57PM]

erm... BG/P uses 10Gb fibre.. tons of them, you can get a config w/ 128 connections per rack... IO is not a problem

[Gadgeteer @ Feb 9th 2008 2:43AM]

All jokes aside, I'm actually impressed that rather than just building it to see if can be done, they're "thinking" about it; A White paper which "aims to explore the construction and implications"

One tiny little problem IBM will have is that the Internet is growing at such a rate they'll probably never "capture" all of it, so how could they ever say they've achieved the first aim; of its construction?

As for the implications, what more could it do that can't already be done with sufficient bandwidth, data mining software, and a personal "super"-computer?

Things I think we should be considering;
• How to make the net more accessible; to young, old, disabled, poor.
• How to improve interface technologies.
• How to improve content>user protection (i.e. protecting children from accessing stuff that society believes they shouldn't yet see).
• Keeping it deregulated

[paul34 @ Feb 8th 2008 2:39PM]

INTERNET.EXE
Unknown Publisher

Are you sure you want to run this program?

[William @ Feb 8th 2008 3:47PM]

Stop 0x000056 (0x000045, 0x023005, 0x238594, 0x573837)

Internet.Exe is not Responding; All Global Commerce will now come to a screaming Halt.

If this is the First time you've seen this error, please reboot and hope to god it comes back up!

[ctgaffney @ Feb 8th 2008 2:42PM]

lol, its like the "Innernet" skit from Tim and Eric's Awesome Show where they have the internt on one disc.

[I.E @ Feb 8th 2008 2:59PM]

Finally, I'll be able to get to the end of the internet.

[Froggy @ Feb 8th 2008 3:22PM]

don't look over the edge. it's like looking into the heart of the Tardis.

[eldard @ Feb 8th 2008 5:31PM]

Right. And I assume others would want to create their own as well? Then we would just have a network of super servers. Same old. Same old.

I hereby dub thee Big Deluded.

Calling Mr. Spock...

[andres @ Feb 9th 2008 1:00AM]

wow, that would be the single largest porn collection in the world

[Adam @ Feb 9th 2008 10:55AM]

http://www.endoftheinternet.com/

there save yourself the time seaching.

[CanCar @ Feb 11th 2008 3:59PM]

Humans have a big influence on global warming. Although global warming is occurring by itself, humans are increasing the speed of global warming by putting gases like carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. www.isglobalwarmingreal.info

[ecobore @ Feb 11th 2008 7:27PM]

"Daisy, Daisy"

[y @ Feb 12th 2008 12:42PM]

the possibilities here are astounding.it would actually shrink traffic...alot! think of it in networking terms, you have several regional "clusters" for lack of a better term. these would only need to update everyso often, even several times an hour would dramatically cut bandwidth usage between clusters. the local region would only have to search locally for the content they want reducing inter-region traffic to email, text, and regional updates. from a defense standpoint several complete copies, in an "easily replacible" unit makes for a target of diminishing value. also from an offensive standpoint,clusters allow us to more easily pinpoint an attacker by region, foreign governments would no longer be able to indicriminately attack us through the internet. it would also allow us to quarintine attacks.

[AW @ Feb 12th 2008 7:19PM]

Not a single Mycroft Holmes IV reference. Sigh. One question... what would we all be doing for access? I'm thinking six billion cell phones with 3270 terminal emulation.

[AW @ Feb 12th 2008 7:26PM]

Actually, I think you're onto something there... this may be fulfillment of Thomas J. Watson's thinking that there would only be a market for six computers worldwide. He meant the end game for his company!