[Drew]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&u=/ap/20040327/ap_on_re_us/un_overseeing_the_net_1&printer=1

If the UN takes over we can say by by to interent freedom as we know it...

[Rictor]

You mean, they'de be worse than the way the US is handling things? Forcing ISPs to build backdoors in their networks, monitoring email, charging webmasters with terrorism?

Yeah, those stinky Europeans are bound to ruin it.

_____

Just so we're clear, I am not in favour of the UN controlling the Internet. I am in favour of no one controlling the Internet.,

[Bobboau]

you know I was going to be slightly in favor of keeping it the way it is, but rictor just reminded me about that ****, and now, I'm saying the US government should only have juristiction over the servers in it's teritories.
/*votes in favor of international commision to run the Internet*/

[mikhael]

Actually, this is one case where I agree with Drew. The UN needs to keep its filthy hands of the Internet. People want the UN to control the internet, they're welcome to fund and build their own system and link it together and do whatever they want.

AS screwy as America's stewardship of the internet has been, its our project. We paid for it. We built it. We let other people play in our sandbox, but its still ours. We've done a damned good job taking care of our toy, all things considered, especially given its origins. We could have done a better job, sure, but we could have done a far, far, FAR worse job.

If the rest of the world doesn't like it, well, they know how to configure the routers to route around us.

[Nico]

Originally posted by mikhael
Actually, this is one case where I agree with Drew. The UN needs to keep its filthy hands of the Internet. People want the UN to control the internet, they're welcome to fund and build their own system and link it together and do whatever they want.

AS screwy as America's stewardship of the internet has been, its our project. We paid for it. We built it. We let other people play in our sandbox, but its still ours
 

Well sorry to break your sweet dreams, but no, it isn't yours anymore
Let say we cut all connections to the USA, coz they're so proud of "their" baby and think it belongs to them. The rest of the world would still have a fully working internet, with everything bare US websites. I agree, not having them is a big hole allright ( no HLP anymore ). On the other hand, you'd get only US websites. No ****ing anything else. I let you think on who would lose in the process.
The internet doesn't belong to anybody anymore.

[phreak]

but HLP is running off servers in california and so is google.  your life will become meaningless

[Ghostavo]

Google isn't that good you know... you could always visit another portal.

And we could always start another forum.











(god, please don't kill me)

[Knight Templar]

I think Jesus will kill you instead. I hear he's a fan of Freespace these days.

[Rictor]

What Venom said. Now, just imagine I said that same thing, only more eloquently, Cause I'm the King of Words I am.

King of Words....

[Nico]

Originally posted by PhReAk
but HLP is running off servers in california and so is google.  your life will become meaningless

afaik, google has servers in the UE now. No way it could go that fast here w/o them anyway.
And that aside, maybe w/o HLP I'd get a life

[an0n]

Why not just centralise all the country-level domains in each respective country then spread the '.com's and such across thingies that're cloned in like 15 different countries but centrally drawn from the ICANN master thingy.

That way, if ICANN starts getting bullied by the US, everyone else can just cut them outta the loop. And it'd let countries with restricted internet (like China) have better control over what people could and could not access.

Simple.

[Nico]

And logical.
I guess that's the problem, you can't ask for simple and logical stuff from politicians.

[an0n]

This is exactly why I like dictatorships. It eliminates the need for politics.

[Xelion]

Groups Debate U.N. Control of Internet
Most believed an international body had no right to regulate the content of Web sites, a concern for countries like China and North Korea

I think regulating internet content should be only limited to illegal issues (eg. underage pornography, information that is directed at a particular person(s) that is a threat, software, general copyright violations, other stuff like that)

At the same time I also believe this technology (the internet) should be kept maintained in safe places, for example you don't want to have an ICANN office in a war zone, or were the governments been overthrown, you want it somewhere were u know its going to stay online.

Personally the US should continue to maintain control until a separate coalition can form an international organisation that is ready to take over. The UN is too preoccupied with other concerns, they are trying to do too much, they are so not ready .

Although juristiction over country domains (eg. .au, .us, .uk, etc) should be the country's responsibility but ICANN should still have powers to assign new or shut down misused ones.

[an0n]

ICANN shouldn't have the ability to do anything. Because it opens it up for abuse.

Each country should have control over it's own extension and top-level domains should only be shut down if ICANN finds they're being used for universally outlawed things like child porn.

[aldo_14]

If anyone is to have control over the internet, it should be the UN.... as a free information tool, it's too powerful to place in the hands of the one country.  

But i think the internet should remain unlegislated - i.e. a free trade zone for information.  I think the likes of the UN does have a role, however, in allowing cross-border prosecution of the owners of illegal websites - be it paedophilia or spammers (for example).

The internet has gone way beyond the control of the US, anyways.... and you don't see the US holding control of the worlds road laws because Henry Ford pioneered the mass-produced car, do you?

[Drew]

Originally posted by Nico


Well sorry to break your sweet dreams, but no, it isn't yours anymore
Let say we cut all connections to the USA, coz they're so proud of "their" baby and think it belongs to them. The rest of the world would still have a fully working internet, with everything bare US websites. I agree, not having them is a big hole allright ( no HLP anymore ). On the other hand, you'd get only US websites. No ****ing anything else. I let you think on who would lose in the process.
The internet doesn't belong to anybody anymore.

you idiot, *all* the DNS servers are in america. If america was cut off, you would have no DNS servers which means when you would type somthing into your adress bar it would be sending to nowere which means you would get no were.

a couple years ago a hacker group DoSed the DNS servers. It shut like %75 percent of them down. The internet activity around the world slowwed to a crawl as the remaining few DNS servers tried to keep up with requests from worldwide.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Drew


you idiot, *all* the DNS servers are in america.

Nope.

There are at least 3 or the 13 root-level DNS' located outside the US - the I server in Stockholm, the K server in London and the M server in Tokyo.  I don't have a complete list - it's a bugger searching google for the keywords - but these are just the 13 ultra lowest level DNS'.

EDIT ; it's 3 apparently

[Drew]

Originally posted by aldo_14
If anyone is to have control over the internet, it should be the UN.... as a free information tool, it's too powerful to place in the hands of the one country.  

Its our invention. We keep it. (Just like the nuclear bomb was our invention. We kept it, we didnt turn over those over to the UN, thank goodness.) Just like when the government in France makes somthing big, there not gonna want to give it away to some other country or organization. Dont ***** the US cuz they have controls to somthing everybody else wants. Give a case of US abuse of the internet widespread.  So far, we havnt caused any problems.


yeah but when theres a story on the news about a kid who bought a gun on the internet, then went out and shot somone, then watch all the legitimt gun sites get put into regulation.

[Drew]

Originally posted by aldo_14


Wrong.

There are at least 3 or the 13 root-level DNS' located outside the US - the I server in Stockholm, the K server in London and the M server in Tokyo.  I don't have a complete list - it's a bugger searching google for the keywords - but any 15 minute search would have revealed this.......

aye, sry.

BUt still, when those hackers DoSd the DNS servers *here* the world was effected....