refactor

docs/main/internet_today/_category_.json

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+{
+    "label": "Internet is Broken",
+    "position": 2,
+    "link": {
+      "type": "generated-index",
+    }
+  }

docs/main/internet_today/ai.md

@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+---
+title: 'The Race For Intelligence'
+sidebar_position: 4
+---
+
+
+![](img/ai_agents_centralized.png)
+
+**Within 2 years we will no longer be using all those hundreds of apps, but we will be talking to AI driven agents.**
+
+### **The Role of AI in Our Lives**
+
+- Right now, humans interact with the internet mainly through apps on their phones, computers, and other devices.
+- In the near future (within 2 years), apps will fade into the background, and **AI-driven agents** will become the primary way we interact with technology. For example, instead of using multiple apps for messaging, shopping, or searching, you might simply ask an AI assistant to handle all those tasks through conversation.
+- These AI agents will be accessed using modern devices like phones, glasses, or even futuristic interfaces like brain implants (e.g., Neuralink).
+
+
+
+
+### **The Race for Intelligence**
+
+![](img/race_intelligence.png)
+
+
+The world is in a rapid phase of technological advancement, driven by innovations in AI, quantum computing, and biotechnology.
+
+**Key milestones in internet history:**
+
+- **1960s:** The internet started as a free and open platform, allowing people to share ideas, collaborate, and connect directly.
+- **2000–2024:** The internet has become increasingly controlled by large corporations. These companies dominate through data collection and commercial interests, compromising the internet’s original vision of freedom and openness.
+- **2025 and Beyond:** Large corporations are now racing to develop **Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)**—AI systems that can think and reason like humans. This raises concerns about centralization, control, and ethical use.
+
+### **A Vision for the Future**
+
+Instead of leaving the future of AI in the hands of a few powerful corporations, there is a push to create **Augmented Collective Intelligence.**
+
+- This concept envisions AI as a tool that empowers everyone, enabling collaboration and shared decision-making rather than monopolizing power.
+- The goal is to restore the internet’s original ideals of openness, privacy, and community-driven innovation.
+

docs/main/internet_today/centralization_risk.md

@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+---
+title: 'Centralization Risk'
+sidebar_position: 3
+---
+
+# Centralization Risk
+
+![](img/blocked.png)
+
+### Why Countries Need Their Own Infrastructure
+
+The internet is not just cables; it’s a combination of physical infrastructure (like data centers and servers), software, and services that enable global communication and access to information. When countries don’t have control over their own infrastructure, they become overly dependent on external, centralized providers, which is risky for several reasons:
+
+1. **Vulnerability to Political Decisions**
+   - Imagine a situation where a global service like Google decides to block access to certain countries due to political pressure or conflicts. Citizens, businesses, and governments in those regions would be instantly cut off from critical tools, data, and communication platforms.
+
+2. **Disruptions in Emergencies**
+   - If a natural disaster, conflict, or cyberattack occurs, centralized systems become single points of failure. Without local infrastructure, countries cannot ensure continuity of services for their citizens.
+
+3. **Loss of Sovereignty**
+   - Relying on foreign infrastructure means a country doesn’t have full control over its own data or communication. This compromises national security and privacy for both individuals and governments.
+
+---
+
+### Ukraine: A Real-Life Example of Infrastructure Targeting
+
+In the early stages of the war in Ukraine, one of the first targets was the country's data centers and communication infrastructure. Bombing these centers disrupted access to critical systems, cutting off communication and data services. This highlighted the vulnerability of relying on centralized or exposed infrastructure during conflicts.
+
+---
+
+### The Risks of Relying on Centralized Services Like Google or Microsoft
+
+1. **Single Point of Failure**
+
+Google and other tech giants operate as centralized hubs for many internet services, from search engines and email to cloud storage and apps.
+
+If these services were disrupted (due to cyberattacks, internal decisions, or geopolitical conflicts), millions or even billions of people would lose access to essential tools overnight.
+
+2. **Dependence on Foreign Entities**
+
+Many countries rely on Google’s infrastructure for businesses, education, and government operations. If access to these services were blocked, it would lead to economic and societal chaos.
+
+3. **Disaster in the Making**
+
+A world dependent on a handful of centralized providers is a fragile one. If one of these providers experiences a major failure, it can create a ripple effect that impacts global economies, healthcare systems, and daily life.

docs/main/internet_today/compare_electricity.md

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+---
+title: 'Something to think about.'
+sidebar_position: 1
+---
+# Something to think about.'
+
+## Would a country do this?
+
+![](img/electricity.png)
+
+Imagine this: Would it make sense to rely on electricity that’s generated far away, on the other side of the world? You’d need a super expensive cable to bring it to you, and if that cable breaks, you’d lose power completely. No country would ever choose to do this because it’s costly, inefficient, and risky.
+
+
+## Why is +70% of the world doing it for the Internet?
+
+![](img/we_are_doing_it_for_internet.png)
+
+
+
+Now think about the internet. That’s exactly what most of the world is doing! Over 70% of the world depends on internet infrastructure that’s far away, requiring expensive cables and systems to bring it to users. Here’s why this doesn’t make sense:
+
+1. **It’s Too Expensive**  
+   Using distant infrastructure means you’re paying not only for the internet service itself but also for the costly cables and systems to deliver it. This makes it much more expensive than building local infrastructure.
+
+2. **It’s Vulnerable**  
+   A single cable or system can fail because of natural disasters, accidents, or even sabotage. If that happens, millions of people could lose access to the internet.
+
+3. **It Compromises Control**  
+   Relying on systems controlled by other countries or big companies means you have less independence. They control your access to the internet and your data.
+
+4. **It’s Inefficient**  
+   Just like it’s smarter to generate electricity close to where it’s used, it’s also better to host internet services closer to the people using them. This makes things faster, cheaper, and more reliable.
+
+---
+
+Instead of relying on faraway systems, we should build local, decentralized internet infrastructure. It’s safer, more affordable, and gives people more control over their digital lives.

docs/main/internet_today/conclusion.md

@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+---
+title: 'Conclusion'
+sidebar_position: 10
+---
+
+![](img/conclusion.png)
+
+Only 50% of world has decent access to Internet, let's recap the issues.
+
+### **1. Centralization Risks**
+
+- **Dependence on Few Entities:** Countries and individuals heavily rely on centralized providers like Google, Amazon, and Microsoft for critical services, creating vulnerabilities to disruptions, geopolitical conflicts, and external control over data and infrastructure.
+- **Loss of Sovereignty:** Centralized data centers and infrastructure compromise autonomy, leaving nations and organizations at the mercy of foreign entities and global policies.
+- **Fragility:** The current centralized model leads to single points of failure, where disruptions can have widespread economic and societal impacts.
+
+---
+
+### **2. Internet Inefficiency**
+- **Long-Distance Data Transfer:** Much of the world depends on internet infrastructure located far away, requiring data to travel unnecessarily long distances, increasing costs and reducing reliability.
+- **Underutilized Hardware:** Modern computing systems fail to efficiently utilize hardware advancements due to inefficiencies like excessive context switching, leading to wasted resources and performance bottlenecks.
+
+---
+
+### **3. Economic and Structural Challenges**
+- **GDP Negative Impact:** Developing nations face economic disadvantages due to the internet's structure. Revenue is lost to global platforms (e.g., booking sites, advertising), creating economic leakage and dependency.
+- **Infrastructure Costs:** Developing countries disproportionately bear the cost of accessing global internet infrastructure without reaping proportional benefits.
+
+---
+
+### **4. Technological and Architectural Flaws**
+
+![](img/problem_overview.png)
+- **Outdated Protocols:** TCP/IP, the foundational internet protocol, was not designed for modern needs like dynamic networks, security, and session management, leading to inefficiencies and vulnerabilities.
+- **Layer Complexity:** The current "onion-like" stack of layers in cloud and internet architecture adds unnecessary complexity and fragility, masking core problems rather than addressing them.
+
+
+---
+
+### **5. Not to forget less than 50% of world has decent internet.**
+
+![alt text](img/fortune.png)
+
+And we should not forget the internet is only available to 50% of the world

docs/main/internet_today/gdp_negative.md

@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+---
+title: GDP Negative
+sidebar_position: 5
+---
+
+# Internet is GDP Negative
+
+![](img/gdp_negative.png)
+
+
+The concept of "Internet GDP negative" in this context highlights the economic disadvantages countries face when relying heavily on the centralized as located in wealthier nations. 
+
+> **A feasibility study done for Tanzania shows a yearly lost of 10 Billion USD per year.**
+
+### 1. **Loss of Revenue from Booking Sites**
+   - Platforms like global booking and e-commerce websites often charge high commission fees, which results in local businesses losing a significant portion of their revenue.
+   - **Impact:** Instead of money circulating within the local economy, it is extracted and transferred to the countries where these platforms are headquartered.
+   - **For a small country like Zanzibar the impact of centralized booking sites means a loss of 200m USD per year**
+
+### 2. **Loss of Advertising and Marketing Dollars**
+   - Companies within countries purchase online advertisements primarily on platforms like Google, Facebook, and others. These platforms are headquartered in a handful of nations, meaning most of the advertising revenue flows out.
+   - **Impact:** Local businesses indirectly fund foreign economies instead of building up domestic digital marketing ecosystems.
+
+### 3. **Data Dependency**
+   - User data from most countries is stored and processed in foreign data centers. This creates dependency on a few nations for internet services and data storage.
+   - **Impact:** The local economy loses the opportunity to benefit from data-driven industries (e.g., AI, analytics). Furthermore, countries become vulnerable to foreign policy changes, data access restrictions, or breaches.
+
+### 4. **Loss of Sovereignty and Influence**
+   - When internet infrastructure and critical data storage are external, nations lose control over how their citizens’ data is managed and utilized.
+   - **Impact:** This reduces the ability to enforce regulations, build influence, or compete globally in the digital space.
+
+### 5. **Infrastructure Costs and Dependency**
+   - Sea cables and external server access are essential for internet connectivity, but these are often controlled by a few companies or nations.
+   - **Impact:** Developing countries pay disproportionately for infrastructure access and maintenance without gaining ownership or influence over it.
+
+### 6. **Economic Leakage**
+   - Payments for cloud services, digital tools, and other online services are made to companies based overseas.
+   - **Impact:** Funds that could be used to build local internet ecosystems instead boost the economies of tech giants.
+
+### 7. **Inability to Drive Local Innovation**
+   - Centralized control of data and reliance on external internet infrastructure limit opportunities for local startups to thrive.
+   - **Impact:** Countries lose out on developing their digital economies and creating jobs in the tech industry.
+
+### 8. **Digital Divide**
+   - Developing nations often pay more for connectivity while receiving slower or less reliable services compared to developed nations.
+   - **Impact:** This perpetuates inequality in access to opportunities, education, and innovation.
+
+These factors combined mean that many nations are effectively "Internet GDP negative"—paying more into the global internet economy than they gain. 
+
+
+

docs/main/internet_today/hadware_badly_used.md

@@ -0,0 +1,88 @@
+---
+title: 'Hardware Badly Used.'
+sidebar_position: 6
+---
+
+### The IT world fails to harness the full potential of computer hardware.
+
+![](img/hardware_comparison.png)
+
+
+While hardware advancements have surged forward, user experiences and features have often stagnated, failing to keep pace with these developments.
+
+The original Commodore 64, with only 64 KB of memory, was a remarkably capable machine for its time. In contrast, today's computers have 8 GB or more of memory, yet their capabilities have not necessarily improved proportionately.
+
+This highlights a regression in our ability to fully utilize computer hardware.
+
+We are committed to bridging this gap by optimizing our approach to hardware utilization, thereby unlocking its full potential. 
+
+## Why are servers so badly used?
+
+![](img/layers.png)
+
+Context switches occur when a computer's processor shifts from executing one task (or context) to another. While necessary for multitasking, too many context switches lead to inefficiency, as demonstrated in this diagram. Here's a simplified explanation:
+
+---
+
+### Why Context Switches Are a Problem:
+
+1. **What Are Context Switches?**
+
+- Imagine you're working on two tasks: reading a book and answering emails. Every time you switch between them, you lose time refocusing. Computers experience a similar "refocusing" delay when switching between tasks.
+
+2. **The Layered Architecture Causes Overhead**
+
+- Modern computing systems use many layers (e.g., applications, storage drivers, network layers) to get work done. Each layer requires the system to switch between different modes (user mode and kernel mode) and tasks.
+- For example:
+  - A web app might need to talk to a storage driver.
+  - This requires moving data through multiple layers (network, file system, etc.).
+  - Each layer adds a context switch.
+
+3. **Millions of Switches Per Second**
+
+- Each switch requires saving and loading the state of a process. This takes time and uses CPU power. When millions of context switches occur every second (as shown in the diagram), most of the computer’s capacity is spent switching rather than doing useful work.
+
+4. **Result: Wasted Resources**
+   
+- Sometimes up to 90% of the computer’s capacity can be lost because of this inefficiency.
+- Instead of performing tasks like running applications or processing data, the computer is stuck managing unnecessary complexity.
+
+
+### Simplified Analogy:
+
+Imagine driving on a highway where you have to stop and pay a toll at every intersection. You waste more time paying tolls than actually driving to your destination. Similarly, excessive context switches in modern systems cause the computer to "stop and pay tolls" constantly, leaving little time for real work.
+
+
+### How did we get here:
+
+![](img/eng_model_failing.png)
+
+### Context Switching Details 
+
+In the context of CPU scheduling in Linux (and in most modern operating systems), a context switch refers to the process of saving the state of a currently running process (such as its registers, program counter, and other relevant information) and loading the state of a different process to allow it to run. This switching of execution from one process to another is a fundamental aspect of multitasking operating systems, where multiple processes share the CPU's time.
+
+Here's how a context switch typically works in Linux:
+
+1. **Interrupt Handling**: When a higher-priority process needs to run or an event requiring immediate attention occurs (such as I/O completion), the CPU interrupts the currently running process.
+
+2. **Saving Context**: The operating system saves the state of the current process, including its registers, program counter, and other relevant data, into its process control block (PCB). This step ensures that when the process resumes execution later, it can continue from where it left off.
+
+3. **Scheduling Decision**: The operating system scheduler determines which process should run next based on scheduling algorithms and the priority of processes in the system.
+
+4. **Loading Context**: The operating system loads the state of the selected process from its PCB into the CPU, allowing it to execute. This includes restoring the process's registers, program counter, and other relevant data.
+
+5. **Execution**: The newly loaded process begins executing on the CPU.
+
+Context switches are essential for multitasking, but they come with overhead that can impact system performance:
+
+1. **Time Overhead**: Context switches require time to save and restore process states, as well as to perform scheduling decisions. This overhead adds up, especially in systems with many processes frequently switching contexts.
+
+2. **Cache Invalidation**: Each time a process is switched in, it may result in cache invalidation, where the CPU's cache needs to be refreshed with data from the new process's memory space. This can lead to cache misses and performance degradation.
+
+3. **Resource Contentions**: Context switches can exacerbate resource contention issues, especially in systems with limited CPU cores. If multiple processes are frequently contending for CPU time, the overhead of context switches can further delay process execution.
+
+4. **Fragmentation**: Frequent context switches can lead to memory fragmentation, as processes are loaded and unloaded into memory. This fragmentation can degrade system performance over time, as it becomes more challenging to find contiguous slice of memory for new processes.
+
+While context switches are necessary for multitasking, excessive context switching can indeed lead to a significant loss of execution power by introducing overhead and resource contention in the system. 
+
+Therefore, efficient scheduling algorithms and optimization techniques are crucial for minimizing the impact of context switches on system performance.

docs/main/internet_today/internet_basics.md

@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+---
+title: 'More than cables'
+sidebar_position: 2
+---
+
+# Internet is more than the cables.
+
+
+
+![](img/3layers.png)
+
+**The Internet is made up of 3 layers:**
+
+1. Compute, AI & Storage: this is where applications are being served from. Currently this system is highly centralized and runs from large data centers (see below).
+
+2. Network: this is the ability for information to travel and it can be wireless, via cables (fiber) or satellite links etc. Currently information needs to travel very far and for most countries very little information is stored locally. A handful of companies own more than 80% of the current Internet's network capacity. 
+
+3. Applications: currently applications are hosted in huge data centers using the compute and storage as provided. This system is too centralized and therefore very vulnerable.
+
+We are providing a more optimized solution for the first 2 layers and allows everyone else to build on top.
+
+## The role of Internet Cables.
+
+Digital information mainly travels over large fiber backbone links as pictured here.
+
+![](img/internet_cables.png)
+
+The Internet as we know it has significantly diverged from its original intent. If 2 people in e.g. Zanzibar (an Island in Africa) use Zoom with each other then the information will travel from Zanzibar to a large European datacenter where the Zoom servers are being hosted and back again.
+
+This leads to very inneficient behavior, slower performance, less reliability and a cost which is higher than what it should be.
+
+![](img/absurd.png)
+
+
+## The role of datacenters.
+
+![](img/this_is_our_internet.png)
+
+The internet applications stacks are replicated many times for the various applications we use, each requiring its own full infrastructure. This approach is unsustainable and inefficient.
+
+## Issues with Autonomy and Sovereignty
+
+Our current internet model compromises autonomy and sovereignty. Most data is stored in large data centers controlled by a few major corporations, effectively turning users into products.
+

docs/main/internet_today/internet_risk.md

@@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
+---
+title: 'Internet Protocol Is Broken'
+sidebar_position: 6
+---
+
+The foundational protocols of the internet, TCP/IP (Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol), were created in the 1970s to connect a few academic and military computers. While they served their initial purpose, they were never designed for the complex, global, and interconnected world we live in today. Even IPv6, which addresses some scalability issues, does not solve the fundamental design flaws. 
+
+
+### How the Internet is Broken Due to TCP/IP Design
+
+The internet, as we know it today, is built on an outdated foundation that was designed for simpler times. Decades ago, TCP/IP was created to connect a handful of computers for research and military purposes. It worked well back then, but it’s no longer enough to handle the complexities of our modern, globally interconnected world. Unless we address its flaws, the internet will struggle to keep up—and could ultimately fail us.
+
+One major issue is that the internet has no way of "remembering" conversations. For example, when you watch a video or make a video call, your device creates a session—a temporary connection with another server. If this session is interrupted, the entire connection breaks, and you must start over. TCP/IP wasn’t designed to manage sessions, making it unreliable for modern apps and services that depend on continuous communication.
+
+Another problem is the internet’s complexity. The way it works involves layers of technology stacked on top of each other—apps, storage systems, networks, and more. These layers often don’t communicate efficiently, wasting resources and making everything slower, more expensive, and harder to fix. This complexity also makes the internet fragile, as small issues can cascade into larger failures.
+
+Security is another area where TCP/IP falls short. It wasn’t designed with cybersecurity in mind, which is why we rely on add-ons like firewalls, VPNs, and encryption. But these tools are essentially patches over a flawed system, and they add even more complexity, making the internet less robust and more vulnerable to attacks.
+
+Modern services and devices have also outgrown the static design of TCP/IP. The system assumes that servers and devices stay in fixed locations, but today’s internet is dynamic. Cloud services, mobile devices, and apps often move across networks. This static model creates inefficiencies and slows down the system.
+
+Adding to the problem is the internet’s dependence on a few centralized services, such as Google, Amazon, and Microsoft. These companies control much of the infrastructure we rely on for communication, storage, and services. If one of them fails—or if access is blocked due to political conflicts—entire regions could lose critical internet functions. This centralization makes the system fragile and leaves users vulnerable.
+
+> The stakes are high. The internet is essential for communication, education, business, and so much more. Yet its foundation is crumbling under modern demands. Without major changes, we’ll see more frequent failures, slower services, and increased vulnerabilities. In extreme cases, parts of the internet could break entirely.
+
+To fix this, we need a smarter, more resilient approach. Decentralized networks can distribute resources and reduce our dependence on a few central providers. Emerging technologies like RINA (Recursive Inter-Network Architecture) offer a simplified, more secure, and more efficient alternative to TCP/IP. These systems are designed to handle the needs of the modern internet, with built-in reliability, smarter communication, and security at their core.
+
+> The bottom line is clear: the internet’s outdated foundation is holding us back. If we want the internet to remain reliable and serve future generations, we must address these issues now. A decentralized, secure, and modernized internet isn’t just a technical upgrade—it’s a necessity for our connected world.
+
+
+## Tech brief (only for the experts)
+
+
+### 1. **Lack of Session Management**
+- **TCP/IP’s Shortcomings:**
+  - TCP/IP lacks true session management. A session represents an ongoing communication between two entities (e.g., a user browsing a website). If the connection is interrupted (e.g., due to a network outage or device change), the session is lost, and applications must restart or recover manually.
+  - This flaw creates inefficiencies in modern applications that require reliable, continuous communication, such as video calls, gaming, or IoT devices.
+
+- **Why It Matters:**
+  - Every time a session breaks, applications have to rebuild connections at a higher level (e.g., re-authenticate or restart a video call). This is inefficient and increases complexity, making the internet fragile and less resilient.
+
+
+---
+
+### 2. **Layer Violations**
+
+- **The Problem:**
+  - TCP/IP combines different functionalities into a single stack, leading to inefficiencies. For example:
+    - Routing decisions happen at the IP layer.
+    - Reliable data transfer happens at the TCP layer.
+  - However, these layers are not isolated and often interfere with each other, creating unnecessary overhead.
+
+- **Impact:**
+  - Modern networks require additional layers (e.g., firewalls, VPNs, NATs) to patch these issues, making the architecture increasingly complex and brittle.
+
+---
+
+### 3. **No Built-In Security**
+- **TCP/IP Design Flaw:**
+  - Security was not a priority when TCP/IP was designed. The protocols do not inherently protect against common threats like spoofing, hijacking, or denial of service.
+  - IPv6 introduces some improvements, such as built-in IPsec, but these are optional and often not used, leaving the same vulnerabilities.
+
+- **Impact:**
+  - Every modern application must implement its own security mechanisms (e.g., HTTPS, VPNs), leading to duplicated efforts and inconsistent protections.
+
+---
+
+### 4. **Scalability Issues**
+
+- **IPv4 vs. IPv6:**
+  - IPv4, with its 32-bit addressing, exhausted available addresses, leading to NAT (Network Address Translation) as a workaround. This introduced complexity and broke the end-to-end connectivity principle of the internet.
+  - IPv6, with 128-bit addressing, solves the address exhaustion problem but does not address underlying issues like routing table explosion or inefficiencies in the protocol stack.
+
+- **Routing Problems:**
+  - The lack of built-in session and naming management makes routing inefficient. Large routing tables and decentralized updates slow down the internet and make it harder to scale.
+
+---
+
+### 5. **No Support for Application-Centric Networking**
+- **TCP/IP’s Assumption:**
+  - The protocol assumes communication happens between fixed endpoints (e.g., IP addresses). Modern applications, however, focus on data and services rather than specific endpoints. For example:
+    - Cloud applications may move across data centers.
+    - Mobile devices frequently change networks.
+  - TCP/IP’s static model is incompatible with this dynamic, service-oriented world.
+
+- **Impact:**
+  - Workarounds like DNS (Domain Name System) and CDNs (Content Delivery Networks) add layers of complexity, but they’re still built on a flawed foundation.
+
+---
+
+### RINA: A Better Alternative
+
+The **Recursive Inter-Network Architecture (RINA)** proposes a solution to the flaws of TCP/IP by rethinking the internet's architecture. Here’s how RINA addresses these issues:
+
+1. **Unified Layering:**
+   - Unlike TCP/IP, which has rigid and distinct layers, RINA uses recursive layers. Each layer provides the same functionalities (e.g., routing, security, session management), simplifying the architecture.
+
+2. **Built-In Session Management:**
+   - RINA natively supports session management, ensuring continuity and reliability for modern applications, even in the face of interruptions.
+
+3. **Application-Centric Networking:**
+   - RINA treats applications as first-class citizens, focusing on the services they need rather than rigid endpoint communication. This aligns with the dynamic nature of modern networks.
+
+4. **Improved Security:**
+   - Security is integral to RINA, with mechanisms for authentication, confidentiality, and integrity built into every layer.
+
+5. **Simplified Routing and Scaling:**
+   - RINA reduces the size and complexity of routing tables, making the network easier to scale and manage.
+
+- **Source:**
+  - [RINA Leaflet](https://www.open-root.eu/IMG/pdf/rina-leaflet_20191115_en.pdf)
+
+---
+
+### More info
+
+more info [https://www.open-root.eu/IMG/pdf/rina-leaflet_20191115_en.pdf](https://www.open-root.eu/IMG/pdf/rina-leaflet_20191115_en.pdf)

docs/main/internet_today/onion_analogy.md

@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+---
+title: Painkillers
+sidebar_position: 7
+---
+
+![](img/onion.png)
+
+# The Onion Analogy
+
+Most cloud & internet stacks can be compared to an onion, where each layer represents an additional component or service added to address a problem in the system. However, like peeling an onion, as you dig deeper, you often find that these layers are not solving the core issues but merely masking symptoms, leading to a complex and often fragile structure.
+
+**Quick Fixes and Additions**
+
+- **Problem:** When an issue arises, such as performance bottlenecks or security vulnerabilities, organizations often add another tool, service, or layer to the cloud stack to mitigate the issue.
+- **Analogy:** This is akin to applying a bandage or taking a painkiller when you feel pain. The immediate discomfort might be alleviated, but the underlying problem remains untouched.
+
+
+### Painkiller Approach: Treating Symptoms, Not Causes
+
+This onion-like structure represents a "painkiller approach" to cloud management, where immediate issues are addressed with quick fixes rather than tackling the underlying problems. Over time, this approach leads to several challenges:
+
+- **Cyber Pandemic** The Cyber Pandemic is real, added these layers leads to weak security.
+- **Increased Complexity:** Each new layer adds complexity, making the system harder to understand and maintain.
+- **Higher Costs:** More layers often mean more resources, licenses, and management overhead, increasing operational costs.
+- **Reduced Agility:** The more complex the stack, the harder it is to make changes or adapt to new requirements, reducing the system’s overall agility.
+- **Fragility:** A stack built on temporary fixes is more prone to failures because the core issues are not resolved, making the system brittle.