Slashdot Mirror
More About The .org Reassignment
Joel Rowbottom writes: "After ICANN 'awarded' ISOC with the running of .ORG in the Draft Staff Report, public comments regarding the process are starting to come out of the woodwork. Eric Brunner-Williams has commented on the flawed scoring and ICANN allegedly using the process to financially shore up ISOC and Afilias; the dotORG Foundation have posted some comments and questions (quote: 'we are perplexed by the Academic CIO Team's rating of
our bid's technology as marginal'); Carl Malamud has posted the IMS/ISC response; and Organic have posted a rather damning indictment of the process as well (disclaimer: I work for Organic Names). For the $27,000 it cost each bidder to 'participate' (and that's just the entry fee), we'd have expected a little more professionalism than just getting some 'free' t-shirts! Comment to ICANN today org-eval@icann.org and make a difference."
They keep complaining and whining about ICANN, why doesnt someone actually get their butt in gear and do something?
snowulf.com
If you have to pay $27.000 just to participate in something, you can be damn sure that you will not get anything apart from a free t-shirt.
After all those reassignments and reorganizations, will they let me keep my .org domain if I'm not a non-profit organization (I'm not a for profit organization either)?
Has it been decided yet? What if I paid for many years in advance?
Thanks.
-jfedor
The $27,000 dollar/free t-shirt issue is just a further slap in the face to the true non-profits who "bid". It's further evidence of the current corporate "non-profit" (except for the board members, they get profit!) domain structure being entirely corrupt and disfunctional. I hope people get used to typing IPs in the future, because eventually it's going to come tumbling down... But IPs are another problem entirely. Viva La Gopher!
s200.org - visit it (me), love it (me).
Is it just me that read their E-mail as evil-org@icann.org?
This is completely unprofessional. The Internet needs some guidance, but I don't see it coming from large corporations. I don't think an Internet run by the government is the best thing either. Any ideas people?
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
Who exactly oversees ICANN? To whom are they responsible? Anybody?
This is nothing compared to, for example, the UN's casual complicity in the massacres in Srebrenica a decade ago[1], but ICANN and the UN are the same kind of organization and inevitably you get the same result: A mess. This is authority without culpability.
God knows you can't trust the private sector any farther than you can throw them, but sooner or later swine like Enron at least go bankrupt. Of course, that's a bad thing when it happens, too: The immediate burden falls on innocents while Ken Lay walks away rich -- but at least Enron is gone. ICANN and the UN are here forever.
[1] Oh, but some poor jerk in the Dutch government resigned, so it's okay! They found somebody to blame! That means it's all fixed, right? At least from a public-relations standpoint, and that's what really matters. I'm sure the next-of-kin of the 10,000 dead feel much better now.
"Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive" -- hey, that's me!
riaa.org now belongs to some script kiddie.
http://www.riaa.org/storymain.htm
Anyone who cannot cope with mathematics is not fully human. At best he is a tolerable subhuman who has learned to we
Civilization is a fragile thing that starts from a high place, then falls and shatters. It's rebuilt higher than before, and then shatters with greater force each time.
What causes the falls? When the people who maintain the machinery of society discover their stewardship can be used for self enrichment. Like the organs of a dying man, shutting down one by one, the compartments of government stop serving the body of society, since their efforts are now
consumed towards enriching their corrupt stewards.
The shattered remains can then join the other failed societies in the history books, so future generations can have a detailed map of what is in store for them as well.
Boycott the .org reassignment: Slashdot's address is http://64.28.67.150/
Anyone who pays attention to this stuff has to know by now that ICANN is seriously flawed. What's it going to take for a large number of people (or just a few very recognizable and important ones) to ditch them and go with something like OpenNIC?
We really don't need ICANN. Get rid of it, please.
Ah fuck off.
You are a johnny come lately. You are an incompetant fuck with no sense of what the reality of the situation is, comenting from behind the iron curtain of anonymity.
Fusks like you are worthy of flames and scorn.
S = set of domain owners making profit.
intersect(S, complement(S)) = {}.
Or you can browse the whole ICANNWatch .org archive.
I have a blog.
...For all the evils of ICANN, they do have a point. Yes, they artificially keep the pool of available websites limited by limiting the number of TLDs. Yes, the process is corrupt, they are evil, and should all burn in hell. But, by the same token, all the proposed "solutions" that involved p2p root servers, unlimited TLDs, etc - as I see it, that would be the quickest way to "break" the internet - make it a big, nonfunctioning mess.
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
Transfer it over to joker.com because they don't care if you use fake contact info and it only costs around 12 euros per year. Its the choice of spammers everywhere.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
No kidding.
The entire internet is overrun with these ninnies to boot. Clueless fuckwads with ghants and flow charts and all manner of cheap uberBabble to help keep their puny little jobs doing sweet fuck all with technology they don't understand one iota.
Sad, and it'll get far worse before it gets better.
How could anything good come out of ICANN's involvement in any-fucking-thing?
-- Karma whore? You betcha. --
What prevents somebody from starting their own TLD and just claiming it for use? Are there laws? Trust issues? Or is it just that everyone's DNS server would filter out/be incompatable with it? With all this trouble that ICANN('T?) seems to cause, I guess my real question is, who needs them?
I'm not too familiar with the technicalities of the whole domain thing...can someone elaborate?
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
Thank you.
..How did ICANN actually come to be in the position they are in? How was this authority bestowed upon them? (Sorry, I don't know the full history of all this)
Since googles crawls the web constantly and IP addresses are semi permanent, can't google actually replace the DNS system? All they need to mark is the IP address and point to that in the search answer.
"Piter, too, is dead."
I thought that was a joke as the site should be www.riaa.com....but they both have the same thing. Incredible.
Why is anyone surprised that the process was rigged? This isn't Florida, guys. ICANN doesn't even make a pretense of being representative. This is not new, and it is no shock that ICANN has gone crony.
Remove the caps and hold to a mirror.
"How could anything good come out of ICANN's involvement in any-fucking-thing?"
Well, rosen and valenti could have a meeting with the icann board, during which a tsunami could wipe them all out in one shot...that would be good.
I can dream, can't I?
Thank you for your time.
Please come again.
So what you're saying, basically, is that anyone who disagrees with you deserves to die. Nice attitude.
ICANN could have gone with dotORG, only to find the principal operators of the registry losing interest over the next few years and handing the system over to college freshmen to run.
.ORG domain space, and they probably (emphasis on probably) have some sort of say in changes in the main people behind the registry. I see this problem as a nonissue, myself.
IIRC, ICANN still keeps a fairly high level of oversight over any group that owns a domain registry. I would highly doubt that they would hand over a perpetual contract to anyone over the
Want Slashdot headlines on your site? Try SlashHead
I disagree that operations run by not-for-profit organizations are inherently inferior to those run by commercial entities. It is my belief that the best non-print news source in the US is NPR - National Public Radio, which is run by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, a non-profit corporation.
.org registrations will still require dues/fees, this indicates a huge amount of money that must be spent. In addition, there is generally a lot more attention paid to *where* that money goes in a non-profit organization. So, it is highly unlikely that they will just get a bunch of "college freshmen" to run the operation--they need to show expenditures, and that would mean hiring many skilled workers.
The reason that not-for-profits *usually* do not have the stability of for-profit companies is that they have a small source of revenue--donations or membership dues. In this case, both the company and the organization would be receiving the same amount of money through registration fees. So they would have plenty of money to use for infrastructure and for scaling their hardware to meet increased demand.
Some of the best work is done by organizations or companies for whom what they're doing is more important than how much money they are making. For-profit entities are more likely to cut staff, or cut corners to ensure profits. On the other hand, non-profits are *required* to spend all the money they take in during a year.
Assuming that
And finally, if this poster thinks that corporations (especially nice big corporations) are necessarily stable s/he has had his/her head up his/her butt for the past few months!
Karma: Chevy Kavalierma.
Want to get your document through the IETF process? Well, the IETF is going to need to scale. In order to do that, they're probably going to need money. And where will that money come from? How about those of us who benefit from their standards? Are we talking beaceaup bucks? Probably not, but I could certainly think of worse places for the money to go.
I'd never heard of the massacre myself -- obviously I don't pay enough attention to world news.
In any case, for those who want to know more about what happened, here are some links:
The Rohde to Srebrenica
Women of Srebrenica
US Congressional Hearing
Karma: Chevy Kavalierma.
The reason that not-for-profits *usually* do not have the stability of for-profit companies is that they have a small source of revenue
Please do compare this to for profit companies, where by if they do not get at least at 10% increase in PROFITS each year the shit hits the fan and their ass ends up bought out. (yah yah an CGIR3_ but still. . .
Not for profit organizations do what they do and get it done, for profit organizations begin to cut corners the second they see their bottom line either being HURT or even just not increasing.
I mean hell look at verisign, they have stooped all the way down to illegal tactics in order to keep their profits from going all the way kerplunk, yah sure nice commercial entity there. . . . and the sad thing is that ANY corporation will sink to the same levels through the sheer pressures of capitalism.
Good for making money, sure, but for running something that the public as a whole depends on for information and knowledge? Hell no, get some people in there who will keep on doing their job no matter what the stock market / investors / board of directors say. Note that above all three groups are interlinked. . . . one goes to shit and bye bye goes the rest of them.
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
I'm willing to be my wireless, the guy on the left voted "I live with my parents."
-jbn
first, an aside...
Untrue. Corporations will sink to this level through the immorality and lack of accountability of the people that run them. Capitalism does not imply immorality. The two are completely unrelated concepts.
Second, a quick point, non-profits need less revenue because they strictly cover their economic costs. Level of profit or revenue does not imply anything about the quality of service. Anyway, it's irrelevant in this case since presumably the initial demand and revenue for either non-profits or for-profits will be the same.
Last, some opinions on who should run dot-org:
Again, not quite true. The only things intrinsically linked in our market economy are buyers and sellers. One produces a good or service, the other consumes it. So in this case, it shouldn't really matter who provides the service in question (management of the dot-org registry), so long as they are able to provide said service to consumers.
Now, their policies will dictate what kind of service they provide, which is where we see advantages for choosing non-profits. Non-profits have no use for additional revenue once they have satisfied their economic costs (much in the way a firm running in a perfectly competetive market will operate at zero economic profit). This provides non-profits with the incentives to do two things:
If you are familiar with the applications, you'll notice that this is the position of the IMS/ISC proposal. This is probably one of the most important points, besides technical implementation (which IMS/ISC also seems very strong on; heck, they run a root server, maintain BIND and DHCP, and have the grit to make all their code Open Source and publically accountable). This point of where the money goes is important because when the money starts going toward corporate pockets and non-profit programs, you can bet you won't see your better service, lower prices, and lower barriers to entry in the future.
Two additional points:
http://websolr.com — fast, hassle-free search, powered by Apache Solr
http://support.open-rsc.org
.org thing?
Or use OpenNIC (but you wont get as many tlds)
But whatever you do dump ICANNs root zone and while you're atit dump BIND and run DJBDNS lest you be compelely mired in the 80s.
http://slash.dot anybody? Or are you really stuck on this
Need Mercedes parts ?
This wouldn't even be an issue if they simply eliminated the coveted top level domain naming system.
Quite simply, this is nothing more than a spectrum auction or a broadcast license; they're both a permit to print money.
There really is no longer any technical reason for top level domain naming. It's time to seek the abolishment of this arcane method of managing hostnames to IP address.
ICANN has a Momorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the US Department of Commerce (DoC) National Telelcomunications Infrastructure Administration (NTIA).
And yes, they ARE idiots.
Need Mercedes parts ?
Google knows their place in the DNS. But they aren't willing to make a move yet. Keep in mind the guy that legitimized the alt newsgroups is now director of engineering there.
You could do worse than write to google and ask them to do something.
Need Mercedes parts ?
Oy. Tall order to fill in this timeline in only a few paragraphs, but since I was there here goes.
.EDU now) and when plans for a 4th meeting to do a wrap up and define what the new company would be to replace IANA, he tanked the whole process.
The National Science Foundation originally had a competition to administed names (domains) and numbers (IPs) and three companies won the award and ran it together: AT&T Ran "DS" directory services, Government Solutions ran "RS" registrations services and General Atomics ran "IS". I forget what IS stood for. RS was "the nic" and took it over from SRI; IS was supposed to create 50 additional NICS.
GA flaked out and GS took their job over and renamed itself Network Solutions.
In 1994 an article appeared in Wired where some clown registered Mcdonalds.com and tried to sell it to Burger King. From that day on the face of the domain name landscape was inexorably changed. Registration volume shot up expoentially and latency went from 3 days to 11 weeks at the peak.
The NSF was paying for all this and while they didn't mind subsidizing research and educational use of the network they were not gonna pay for deoderant.com and the like so they asked the FNCAC what to do. They recommended the NSF tell NSI to charge for domains. They did and everybody got pissed off.
The domain-policy@internic.net mailing list went asymtotic and the "new domain people" split off to the "newdom" mailing list; Postel was one of them and he made up 3 drafts, each successively worsr; the second one had a tithe to none other than ISOC and the third one crated IAHC.
In July of 98 (?) the US Guvmins shut down IAHC as being just too damn silly and began a series of interagency task force meetins (that an ex NSF staffer refers to as "the turkey farm") and Commerce kept saying they had all the answers so everybody giggles and said "Ok, run with it".
In 1999 ni Becky Burr's office, Kathy Kleniman and Mikky Barry suggested some conferences around the world to measure consensus. Rather than debate the contentious points, they were to find where there was consensus. Thus the IFWP meetings were born: one in Virginia, one in Geneva, one in Singaport. Ira Magaziner was at each one (although only on video tape in Singapore) and at each one stated "this is in your peoples hands. Postel himself told me at the Geneva conference that it was "all up to them" (pointing at the conference room) now.
Mike Roberts was on the steering committee for this represennnnting EDUCAUSe (who run
At this time Ira had been running around with ROger Cochetti of IBM (now a Verisgn VP) picking a board and Joe Sims (now an ICANN attorney) wrote up bylaws and together these lot presented NTIA with a proposal.
Two ther proposals were offered: the Boston Working Group, what was left of IFWP and ORSC.
The NTIA picked the Magaziner/Cochetti/Sims plan and that's the ICANN we have today.
You can see all the early history at http://newdom.faq although you may need to visit http://support.open-rsc.org to see this domain. But it's all there. And it's ugly.
See also http://lists.ifwp.org, altough the CIX who ran this before it fell into my lap loast all the early archives.
Need Mercedes parts ?
So I'd almost call this post a troll, but it has a point -- that maybe commercial types would do a better job.
However, you're missing one thing -- the informal group of volunteers and engineers that produced and have kept much of the administrative side of the Internet going for thirty years now *are* the open source/volunteer types that you're bashing so much. As a matter of fact, the commercial types are the untested ones, not the volunteer engineers.
May we never see th
While I have my email client open, I'm gonna send a message to billg@microsoft.com :
Dear Bill,
I would really appreciate it if you would stop those deceptive business practices.
P.S. Also, please stop being a monopoly.
Sincerely Yours,
Alexander Dumbass
"What thou shalt not, I shalt did!" -Bart Simpson
honestly, did anyone here expect anything else? in its entire history, ICANN has been nothing but a catastrophic failure. in fact, so much that I wouldn't be surprised if there were some intention behind it. not that I knew which one, but I just don't believe anymore that someone with honest intentions could screw up so royally - not once or twice, but in a row.
looks a lot like DMCA to me. while the whole geekdom agrees that DMCA is the worst law ever, just last year congress published an essay saying, essentially, that they were very pleased and it worked exactly as advertised.
ICANN probably works exactly as intended, too. that's where I'd start to look if I could bring myself to care anymore.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
I paid $27,000 to 'participate' and all I got was this lousy t-shirt.
So, aside from the usual (yet, richly deserved) ICANN bashing, WTF does this mean to me as an owner of a dot-ourgh domain?
Got a 404. They can't spell: They have a news article from the Deseret News, but it's misspelled "Desert". Tried to e-mail them, but their ColdFusion is misconfigured.