Slashdot Mirror


ICANN Stacks Board with Non-Critical Appointees

Froomkin writes "ICANN's outgoing dissident Board member, Andy Mueller-Maguhn, has leaked the slate that ICANN's so-called NomCom (actually an appointments committee) has picked. The new public representatives are mostly a mix of incumbent ICANN Board directors who don't rock the boat, corporate executives, and ISOC members. Dissident Andy Mueller-Maguhn got replaced by a former member of the board of Deutsche Telekom. Dissident Karl Auerbach (who had to sue ICANN to get to see its documents) got replaced by the President of the U.S. Council for International Business. At least the Board Squatters are finally going to be history. Details at ICANNWatch." ICANN is an interesting study in how a ruling regime can usurp a democratic institution and turn it into an autarchy.

124 comments

  1. I've spent too much time at dot-bombs by JUSTONEMORELATTE · · Score: 4, Funny

    When I read the headline, I thought "non-critical appointees" was a buzzword for "the folks we're about to lay off."

    --

  2. and... by freedommatters · · Score: 1
    is anyone actually surprised?

    john
    Big Dubya Is Watching You

    1. Re:and... by Nogami_Saeko · · Score: 1

      No.

      Not surprised in the least.

      ICANN is a joke - nobody expects impartiality or informed decision-making to come out of it.

      IMHO, the only way to clean it up is for the entire board to be fired, and to start fresh with a brand new entity with a new constitution that prevents the sort of hijack that happened to ICANN.

      N.

      --
      "Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
  3. Autarchy? by Gizzmonic · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is that when the Autobots rule your board?

    --
    (-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
    1. Re:Autarchy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the take-home lesson is "Don't Piss Off Optimus Prime!"

    2. Re:Autarchy? by asscroft · · Score: 1

      No, that's what the automation team has done to our QA Organization.

      Meanwhile, Metricsuptheassology is what the management team has done to that same organization.

      It's nice.

      --
      because I have been enjoined by this Holy Office to abandon the false opinion which maintains that the Sun is the centre
    3. Re:Autarchy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    4. Re:Autarchy? by Furry+Ice · · Score: 1

      The more common synonym is autocracy.

    5. Re:Autarchy? by foxtrot · · Score: 1, Funny

      Is that when the Autobots rule your board?

      Oddly, given that the elected rulers turned on their electors and usurped power, it sounds more to me like they were Decepticons....

    6. Re:Autarchy? by RobKow · · Score: 1

      No, it isn't. Different word and doesn't mean what michael intended.

    7. Re:Autarchy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it is. Autarchy means either autocracy (as in "absolute sovreignty") or autarky (as in "economic isolation"). I think the former has the intended meaning.

    8. Re:Autarchy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Autarchy means self-sufficient. Any other meanings attached to it are based on ignorance.

      Etymology: German Autarkie, from Greek autarkeia, from autarkEs self-sufficient, from aut- + arkein to defend, suffice

      Like most government and economic types the original meaning has been changed over the years. It is like saying that Communism infers dictatorship which is absolutely not true.

      Michael should have just said dictatorship. Trying to sound more intelligent than you are usually has the effect of making you sound like an idiot.

    9. Re:Autarchy? by Horny+Smurf · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      If you were at the slashnet irc "interview" (if you can call it that, given the softball questions), Hemos let it slip out that they had to restrict some editors from deleting comments.

      Hmmm.... I wonder which one?

    10. Re:Autarchy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you have to reply in such a nasty condescending tone?

      Other than the non-ignorant definition you provided, there are several other meanings listed in the Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd ed.:

      autarchy:
      1. absolute sovereignty, despotism;
      2. self-government;
      3. variation of "autarky"
      autarky:
      3a. self-sufficiency.
      3b. a policy of economic self-sufficiency in a political unit.

      autocracy, though, in this context has the meaning "absolute government".

      The original poster's point that "autocracy" was a more common synonym is a good one, since the intended meaning of "autarchy" in this case is ambiguous. It was correct, but an uncommon usage. It could refer to "absolute sovreignty" or "self-sufficiency" (def 1 or 3), and usually to the latter.

    11. Re:Autarchy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and you get modded offtopic, further proof that moderation run by the unwashed masses doesn't work

    12. Re:Autarchy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well I'm sure it couldn't be anyone who's ever been addociated with the censorware project. That would be unthinkable.

    13. Re:Autarchy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So because something is more common it is correct? Well I ain't never heard of nothing so stupid. Quoting a dictionary is hardly a winning argument. As I pointed out dictionary publishers often add "new" definitions based on common usage. The addition does not make it correct.

      I happen to have an older dictionary (pre-internet) that has the following two definitions:

      autarchy - a national self-sufficiency in the production of all a country's needs. Derived from autos - self - and arkeein - to suffice.

      autocracy - government by a single absolute ruler. Derived from autos - self - and krateia - to rule.

      It does not say that the two are synonyms. Now do you understand? They have two different roots and two different meanings.

    14. Re:Autarchy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have one more comment. Words that are synonymous are not necessarily interchangeable. A synonym is a word that has "the same or nearly the same meaning in some or all senses." Despite what your high school English teacher told you the Thesaurus is not your friend. If there is a more accurate word then you should use it.

  4. autarchy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you mean an autocracy?

    1. Re:autarchy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, autarchy works. Dictionary.com is your friend.

  5. Well ... he quit. by sulli · · Score: 3, Informative
    From Andy's comment at ICANN Watch:

    [PS. Someone, I don't know who, nominated me for a Board seat, but I wrote in to say I did not wish to be considered.]

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
    1. Re:Well ... he quit. by Froomkin · · Score: 2

      No that was me, Froomkin, not Andy. Andy applied to continue but was rejected.

      --

      I have a blog.

    2. Re:Well ... he quit. by sulli · · Score: 1

      Ah. My bad. Thanks for the clarification (and edit).

      --

      sulli
      RTFJ.
  6. Just curious... by Archfeld · · Score: 4, Interesting

    where exactly does ICANN derive its' authority from ? Do they have any enforement powers or do they just suggest things ?

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
    1. Re:Just curious... by Spazmania · · Score: 4, Informative

      where exactly does ICANN derive its' authority from

      The United States Department of Commerce

      http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/ican n- memorandum.htm

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
  7. Re:Slashdotted...no karma repost by Zathrus · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    First off, the article isn't /.'d.

    Next, nice troll there at the bottom. Hey moderators! Read before you moderate!

    I'd particularly welcome blow jobs from readers who are acquainted with any of the newly selected Board members.

  8. NomCom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NonCom ?= Nominal Committee

  9. Who's left? by Chalst · · Score: 1

    I've rather lost track of ICANN politics over the past year. Who's left on the ICANN board who can be trusted to act in the public interest?

    1. Re:Who's left? by z_gringo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Vinton Cerf

      --
      -- -- Warning. Do not stare directly at the sun.
    2. Re:Who's left? by QuMa · · Score: 1

      Ehm, no, he passed to the dark side too. Sorry.

  10. Pretty obvious there was never going to be a vote by PSaltyDS · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The nature of the "Nominations" is summed up in the statement [Quote] After careful deliberation, the Nominating Committee reached consensus on the following slates of Nominees, each of whom has agreed to accept the responsibility of the role. They will assume their duties during the ICANN meeting in Montreal. [/Quote]

    The "Nominees" have already accepted their posts and "will assume their duties" (or else?).

    Sigarette: A short sig.

    --
    Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. - Geek's corollary to Clarke's law
  11. Hard to resist... by SmirkingRevenge · · Score: 3, Funny

    ICANNABELIEVEIT!

  12. SOP by retto · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't see how this could be a surprise because isn't this type of behaviour standard now for any kind of governing body in business? I thought that one of the major complaints about most modern board of directors is that they have long stopped operating in the public, or even their own company's or organization's, interests?

  13. The choices suck. by macshune · · Score: 1, Troll

    How can a bunch of rich-ass business aristocrats help promote a system that is used by peasants?


    Would you test a dog's receptiveness to dogfood on a cat?


    Would you do market research for 2 Fast 2 Furious at a Senior's Home?

    1. Re:The choices suck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would you do market research for 2 Fast 2 Furious at a Senior's Home?

      Sure I would. Just think of the marketing potential:

      "6 out of 10 Seniors died of shock watching this movie!"*

      The kids would love it.

      * We didn't say it was good, just that they died watching.

  14. Re:Slashdotted...no karma repost by asscroft · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    +1 funny!

    --
    because I have been enjoined by this Holy Office to abandon the false opinion which maintains that the Sun is the centre
  15. Aww! To Hell with ICANN! by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm going to make my own Internet! With hookers! And Gambling!

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:Aww! To Hell with ICANN! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Screw the Internet, I'll be with the hookers and gambling.

    2. Re:Aww! To Hell with ICANN! by Lord_Slepnir · · Score: 3, Funny

      That sounds like a good idea! Only without the internet part!

  16. Case studies... by jhouserizer · · Score: 5, Funny

    ICANN is an interesting study in how a ruling regime can usurp a democratic institution and turn it into an autarchy.

    Thanks! ...I've been looking for some real-life examples of how to achieve this!

    1. Re:Case studies... by terrified · · Score: 0

      For another interesting study, see the United States government, particularly the past general election, and the one forthcoming.

  17. Me too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was thinking the same thing but more like âoered-shirted engineers weâ(TM)ve never seen on previous episodes.â

  18. Their authority comes from everyone by Sloppy · · Score: 4, Insightful
    They get their authority defacto from the people who choose to use the servers that they control. Does the resolver that you use, use their root servers? Then you're voting for ICANN.

    It's democracy, but almost all the voters are apathetic.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    1. Re:Their authority comes from everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your correct. But it does not have to be that way. This seems like it would be a perfect project for GNU or FSF. They could create their own root name servers based upon a logical, open, free system rather than politics and bribes. There is no reason why people have to use the DNS that their ISP provides. Just redirect your configuration to the new system. The way to really get momentum behind this would be to abandon the relatively restrictive tld's and create and enforce tld's which would actually be useful for categorizing the general contents of the website. .kids for certified child safe websites. .oss for linux, bsd, open source type stuff.

  19. autocracy by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 1

    is the word you are looking for.

    1. Re:autocracy by Stradenko · · Score: 3, Informative

      Is it?

      autarchy
      n 1: economic independence as a national policy [syn: autarky]
      2: a political system governed by a single individual [syn: autocracy]
      [ant: democracy]

    2. Re:autocracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You will often find that secondary meanings are often added by dictionaries because a word has lost its original meaning and they are accepting the new meaning in addition to the correct one. It happens all the time. Read Bill Bryson's Dictionary of Troublesome Words. The trick is to go to the etymology of the word for the original meaning which in this case is self-sufficient.

    3. Re:autocracy by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      autarchy

      No, I think they've created a new systems that is "autocracy" + "anarchy" = "autarchy". Kudos to them for realizing a paradox.

  20. Well ... by SuperDuG · · Score: 4, Informative
    ... if you don't like it ... don't use it ...

    There are GREAT ALTERNATIVES

    OpenNIC has matured into a rather great truly democratic DNS Registry. I would highly recommend everyone support them. You can still support OpenNIC and have ICANN registeries, well everything except biz, but that's a whole nother can of worms ...

    --
    Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
    1. Re:Well ... by Picass0 · · Score: 1

      bookmark

    2. Re:Well ... by timeOday · · Score: 1
      "The world is dangerous not because of those who are evil; but because of those who do nothing" - Einstein
      I'd hardly call inventing nuclear weapons "nothing."
    3. Re:Well ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The world would be safer if those who did nothing to stop got off their asses.

  21. [LONG] My proposed solution from 1996 by davecb · · Score: 4, Interesting
    New International Top-Level Domains IAHC-Draft David Collier-Brown Category: Informational Private Person Expires June 2, 1997 December 1996 New International Top-Level Domains

    Status of this Memo

    This document is an IAHC-Draft. IAHC-Drafts are working documents invited by the Internet International Ad-Hoc Committee.

    IAHC-Drafts are draft documents and may be updated, replaced, or made obsolete by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use IAHC Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as ``work in progress.''

    Introduction

    This is a formal proposal and recommendation to the IAHC on the creation of new commercial TLD names and the selection of registries to carry out registration in them.

    Policies

    In this section, I set out the ends and restrictions on them in the form of policies which will inform the specific selections which follow.

    The Internet Society should not engage in trade. Instead it and its component committees should set policy and standardize technical and practical issues in areas subject to such policy.

    The management of registries should operate under common law. There is no need to make law, but only to arrange the operation of registries so that they may obey the laws of their jurisdictions, and have access to the lawful conflict resolution mechanisms of those jurisdictions.

    The selection of TLD names be compatible with trademark law. Where (sub)domain names are indistinguishable from trademarks, the same law should apply.

    Maximize the choices available to registries and their customers, the registrants. Leave as much as possible up to the organizations desiring domains as possible, specifically including what kind of domain to register in and therefor what risks and benefits they wish to accept and achieve.

    The selection of names and registries be compatible with previous proposals. Requests and offers made to the IANA in light of early proposals should be considered in the selection of TLD names and registries.

    The mechanisms should be patterned after traditional ones. This specifically includes successful policies from the trademark and copyright areas, such as providing public announcements and periods for objections to be made.

    Minimize rulemaking, now and in the future. Cease to be involved as soon as can reasonably be achieved. Specifically, do not create new bodies, but instead return day-to-day management of the namespace to IANA.

    Define end dates Similarly, rules employed to ease the creation of a system of registration in new TLDs should cease to apply once a system is in place.

    Customer's Selection of Domains

    Before setting out policies, it is advantageous to expand the principle of maximizing the choice of customers: that of to letting customers decide what TLDs they wish to be in, while setting ground rules so that have the opportunity to do so without harming others.

    This lets us see what results for the most affected community are, and broadly hints at what must be done to achieve useful results.

    So let us then consider the customers' desires in selecting a commercial TLD, given a broad choice of at least existing (``.com''), categorical (eg, ``.oil') and synonymous (eg, ``.biz'') TLDs.

    • A customer wishing to use a domain name that would cause trademark disputes (say, ``standard''), would register itself in a category where they either had or could obtain a trademark registration, (say, ``.oil'').

      The customer would need to realize that there is a tradeoff: for some period web browsers wouldn't find them without user intervention.

    • A customer desiring visibility or broad categorization would use the existing ``.com'' (eg, american.com), knowing that they would have to accept the limited namespace there, and other problems.

      Those include, in the short term, the

    --
    davecb@spamcop.net
    1. Re:[LONG] My proposed solution from 1996 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only problem I see with this 'solution' of yours is that there isn't enough words in it. If you could maybe do something about that it would be beneficial to all parties.

      Thanks.

  22. The Corporate World Government by Accord+MT · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Despite the local laws in your "country" the major corporations and governments of the world have long since merged into a single governing body. A body over which 99.9% of you have no control or input. Whether it is through laws, treaties, contracts, customer statements or agreements, the message this massive organism sends you is clear: Obey "Us" or "We" will make your life miserable, through arrest, imprisonment, lawsuits, job loss, or simple threatening phone calls. These tactics are currently being used by your corporate lawmakers and property police to mold you into all-working, all-buying, mindless consumer-citizens. Your worth is measured by your ability and willingness to make the rich 0.1% richer and to keep electing them into their positions of power.

    Our corporate masters use their massive wealth and resources as leverage against the (mostly) powerless common people. "They" can out-spend, out-harass and, if necessary, out-live anyone who chooses not to follow the rules "They" make. Most real property in the world is owned by corporations and governments, not ordinary people. "They" have gone so far as to invent the concept of intellectual property, so that now "They" even own your thoughts and ideas. "Their" combined wealth is measured in the TRILLIONS of dollars, an order of magnitude most folks cannot even visualize, while your bank account is measured in the thousands, if your are lucky!

    Most of you hardly own enough to fit in the moving truck you use to race from job to job, in your desperate attempt to one day catch up with the neighbors. In reality neither you nor your neighbor makes even the slightest difference. Your combined lifetime income won't even come close to "Their" yearly revenue! The sum total of everything you own and will ever own is pocket change compared to the vast storehouses of wealth that make "Them" powerful. That house you own? Actually, the bank owns it. Even if you were lucky enough to have inherited it or somehow managed to pay it off, the land itself is owned by the government, and "They" can take it back whenever "They" want, or when you become an undesirable. Your car(s)? Owned by the bank. The music you listen to? "Theirs". Your thoughts and ideas? Owned by the corporation that employs you. Oh, and your employer also owns at least 50% of your time when you're not sleeping (and "They" will probably soon find a way to own your dreams).

    Most folks are slaves to their employment. Not to any specific employer, but to employment in general. Because of "Required Consumption Programs" such as property taxes and rent, electricity and phone "services", you ordinary people are forced to participate in the economy--forced into employment. "They" have gotten you to pay "Them" for the luxury of being slaves! Interchangeable slaves, that is. Think of your job. Chances are, it's something that can be done by anyone, and, more likely, something that doesn't even need to be done. You are a cog in the great global economic machine. Less than a cog. You're just one tooth in the gear. If you fail "They" will throw the whole gear out and find a new one to run into the ground. Be happy you're allowed to be your employer's slave.

    And happy you are, because if you aren't, you stop doing what is required: working and consuming. If you don't do what is required, "They" will make your lives miserable. Don't pay your taxes? You're a felon and you go to jail. Don't pay your electric bill? "They" will threaten you, sue you, and come to take what you own. Don't participate in the economy at all? You're a vagrant--an undesirable. You go to jail where you will be forced to make products that enrich a corporation anyway. You really have no choice but to conform! Be a happy sedate little worker-consumer! Give to "Them" "Their" share and yours too, and everything will be all right.

    It reminds me of feudal Europe. "Give us everything you own and we will protect you", or at least provide an illusion of protection. But deviate from

    1. Re:The Corporate World Government by retto · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think someone has been listening to their Rage Against The Machine MP3s while watching Fight Club again. Pronoun overload...

    2. Re:The Corporate World Government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the problem then. What's your solution?

  23. You know, it's just so hard to use Google.

    Two clicks away from Google's results? That's too much to ask!

    Hell, clicking these links is probably too much to ask.

    --

    --
    the strongest word is still the word "free"
  24. Board seat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Whenever I hear those two words together, I cannt help but think of a wooden outhouse seat.

    1. Re:Board seat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      And similar volumes of poo are generated on both!

    2. Re:Board seat by sjames · · Score: 1

      That's very true, but it's only a quasi outhouse.

      In a true outhouse, it all falls into a pit to be buried. In the case of a board seat, only some of the various types of poo gets buried (specifically, the kind that is also called evidence). The rest goes into a sort of complex plumbing system. Most companies have an engineering diagram of the plumbing, but they call it an 'org chart'

  25. Yeah... by BigMe · · Score: 2, Funny

    But what do they say? I'll refresh the page in a while. Thanks!

  26. Obligatory Bender Followup by Hamstaus · · Score: 1

    In fact... forget the Internet!

    --
    I moderate "-1, Fool"
    1. Re:Obligatory Bender Followup by Lord_Slepnir · · Score: 2

      I deeply apologize to you. My misquoted followup got all the karma points, while your correct finishing quote got none. If i could, i'd give you all of those karma points. *note, for once, i'm NOT being sarcastic*

  27. MOD PARENT UP by Stiletto · · Score: 0, Offtopic


    I think some of you are going to burn in meta-moderation...

  28. EU by sjanich · · Score: 0, Troll
    ICANN is an interesting study in how a ruling regime can usurp a democratic institution and turn it into an autarchy.

    Think of it as a preview of how the EU will work under their forthcoming constitution.

  29. not alternatives, moron by dh003i · · Score: 1, Troll

    OpenNIC is not an alternative. An alternative means it does something different.

    True, OpenNIC operates much different than ICANN.

    However, OpenNIC has decided to be consistent with ICANN (aside from .biz, where ICANN hypocritically introduced inconsistencies). If ICANN steals fuck-you-ICANN-motherfuckers.com from an ICANN-critic and gives it to an ICANN-supporter, OpenNIC will not do anything about that. They will not have that domain name assigned to it's rightful owner.

    OpenNIC should disparge from ICANN when ICANN has done the wrong thing (which is almost 99% of the time, when there is a domain name dispute).

    1. Re:not alternatives, moron by SuperDuG · · Score: 1
      alÂterÂnaÂtive (Ãl-tÃrn-tv, l-)
      n.
      1. The choice between two mutually exclusive possibilities.
      2. A situation presenting such a choice.
      Either of these possibilities. See Synonyms at choice.

      Usage: Problem. One of a number of things from which one must be chosen.
      An alternative to Coke is Pepsi. You have the gaul to call me ... a moron?

      Damn I keep vowing to not feed the trolls ...

      --
      Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
    2. Re:not alternatives, moron by dh003i · · Score: 1

      Try reading your own definition. MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE POSSIBILITIES.

      OpenNIC is in no way an alternative to ICANN. It is a supplement. It does not offer alternate domain-name resolution for some of ICANN's controversial decisions (e.g., Nissan).

      For it to be an alternative, it would have to actively assign at least some things (besides .biz) differently from ICANN (e.g., do right what ICANN did wrong, which means never giving in to corporate interests on those domains).

    3. Re:not alternatives, moron by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Apparently the "choice" is between Coke and a Pepsi can full of Coke.

    4. Re:not alternatives, moron by asdfghjklqwertyuiop · · Score: 1

      If ICANN steals fuck-you-ICANN-motherfuckers.com from an ICANN-critic and gives it to an ICANN-supporter, OpenNIC will not do anything about that. They will not have that domain name assigned to it's rightful owner.

      And how on earth would Opennic do anything about it, considering their root delegates .com to icann's nameserver?

    5. Re:not alternatives, moron by dh003i · · Score: 1

      Simple. By having their root delegate .com to their own fucking nameserver, and making it differ from ICANN's when the people democratically want it to differ.

    6. Re:not alternatives, moron by asdfghjklqwertyuiop · · Score: 1

      Simple. By having their root delegate .com to their own fucking nameserver, and making it differ from ICANN's when the people democratically want it to differ.

      Well, then they would have to maintain a copy of the entire .com zone in their own fucking name servers, keep it in sync with icann's fucking nameservers and apply their differences. Now even if they could obtain a copy of .com and all the other icann TLDs somehow (I believe they stopped making copies of the tld zones publicly available on ftp.internic.net years ago blaming spam), having a different version of those TLDs kind of destroys the feature of opennic being a superset of icann and thus backward compatible. I suspect a lot of opennic users use opennic relying on the backwards compatibility.

    7. Re:not alternatives, moron by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      You know, if you consider this such a trivial-yet-valuable task, you might want to consider doing it yourself, and making your nameserver available to others intead of bitching about the volunteer work at OpenNIC.

    8. Re:not alternatives, moron by dh003i · · Score: 1

      Irrelevant of whether or not I consider it a valuable task, OpenNIC is not an alternative, so stop butchering the English language. It is a supplement.

      An easier thing to do would simply be to follow some of the important domain-name resolution controversies, and contradict ICANN on them within OpenNIC's DNS, and then refer the rest of the .com, .edu, .net, etc to ICANN.

    9. Re:not alternatives, moron by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Read my post. I'm not sure where you got the idea that I was arguing that OpenNIC was an alternative, or that I was "butchering" English, but it certainly wasn't from actually reading what I wrote.

      Given how irrelevant your post is to what I wrote, I can only assume that you responded to the wrong comment.

    10. Re:not alternatives, moron by dh003i · · Score: 1

      ... if you don't like it ... don't use it ...

      There are GREAT ALTERNATIVES


      The entire threat started from the phrase "GREAT ALTERNATIVES"...I pointed out that there are no alternatives.

    11. Re:not alternatives, moron by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Exactly. And not one of the phrases you just quoted appeared in anything I said, nor did I write supporting any of the points you attacked me for supporting.

      In other words, as I said, you responded to the wrong post.

  30. democracy2autarchy by 4of12 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Thanks! ...I've been looking for some real-life examples of how to achieve this!

    democracy2autarchy is a closed source software project, but it has been having some success, enough to be lucrative.

    I've tried to install it myself but can't get past the point of needing libmoney.a

    --
    "Provided by the management for your protection."
    1. Re:democracy2autarchy by Dominic_Mazzoni · · Score: 1
      democracy2autarchy is a closed source software project, but it has been having some success, enough to be lucrative.

      I've tried to install it myself but can't get past the point of needing libmoney.a
      cd gnucash-1.8.4
      ./configure --enable-libmoney-compatability-mode
      make
      sudo make install
  31. ICANN Stacks Board - ICANNCEIVABLE! by Myriad · · Score: 3, Funny
    ICANN Stacks Board with Non-Critical Appointees

    ICANNABELIEVEIT!

    Shouldn't it be ICANNCEIVABLE?

    But I'm not sure if that word means what I think it means.

    Blockwars: a realtime, multiplayer game. Go!

    --
    "They do not preach that their god will rouse them, a little before the Nuts work loose." Kipling, 'The Sons of Martha'
  32. How icann works by dozer · · Score: 4, Funny
    icann is a strange group. The following transcript offers some insight into their inner workings.


    TRANSCRIPT

    It's really weird that they approve useless domains like .aero and .coop, yet they don't create two of the most needed domains: .kids and .xxx!
    1. Re:How icann works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's really weird that they approve useless domains like .aero and .coop

      Maybe they meant it to be .coup as an alternative to .gov

    2. Re:How icann works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's really weird that they approve useless domains like .aero and .coop, yet they don't create two of the most needed domains: .kids and .xxx! .coop? Do bird enthusiasts really need their own domain?

      Mod Summary:
      +1 Heh.
      -1 Awful pun.

    3. Re:How icann works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about -1 Redundant? They already made a chicken joke in the linked transcript, you anonymous fucking shit.

    4. Re:How icann works by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      I agree about the useless domains (politics), but wildly disagree about your attempt to segregate content based on DNS.

      As many folks have stated, this means that a worldwide judge of content, aribitor of morality, must exist. It breaks the hierarchical model of DNS (granted, the new TLDs (which I don't like) did so as well).

  33. Re:autocracy [off-topic] by Stradenko · · Score: 1

    If word usage has become so deprecated that a secondary-definition is the one in primary use (as in the case of a word that has "lost its original meaning"), it seems to me that the secondary definition is more accurate in modern language, which a dictionary (unless you're looking at a classical language dictionary) should be describing.
    Merriam Webster describes language as "the words, their pronunciation, and the methods of combining them used and understood by a community"
    Thus any dictionary that defines a word in a way that is different from how a majority of people understand that word is inaccurate (outdated).

    But, etymologies from Merriam-Webster:
    Main Entry: 2autarchy
    Function: noun
    Inflected Form(s): plural -chies
    Etymology: Greek autarchia, from aut- + -archia -archy
    Date: 1665
    : absolute sovereignty : AUTOCRACY

    Main Entry: 1auÂtarÂchy
    Pronunciation: 'o-"tÃr-kE
    Function: noun
    Etymology: by alteration
    Date: 1617
    : AUTARKY

  34. Give em the finger... by Lord+Prox · · Score: 1

    is anyone actually surprised? Nope. Not at all. But you don't have to play there game, (well you do still kinda, but you can at least play it on better terms) with OpenNIC. (Yes i'm plugging OpenNIC again so mod me down) Kinda like an Open Source ICANN replacment. It's not a seamless replacment and you have to use their DNS (naturally) but it does work.

    You can use one of their TLD's like
    .geek
    .glue
    .indy
    .null
    .oss
    .parody

    Or start your own (OK that is work, but at least it can be done.) and everything is done in a democratic and open fassion.

    set your DNS to... 66.227.42.140 and click here to see what is there.

    Remember the more people that use the system the better it gets.

  35. Noble effort, but still the wrong direction by Fastolfe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We need to start getting people away from using DNS as a locator service. DNS is meant (mainly) to apply convenient names to IP addresses, not so that my mom can guess "www.example.com" when she wants to know something about "example".

    DNS is inappropriate for this because it does not allow two parties with a legitimate interest in the same label to share it, except through the confusion of additional TLDs. Two parties could have a perfectly legal claim to a label that they now have to battle out in courts. A better solution would be to create a directory on top of DNS to map these real-world names to DNS domains. Put all of the trademark and IP crap you want into regulating this directory, but leave it out of DNS.

    LDAP or X.500 could do this nicely, with the added benefit of allowing distinguished names to include information about the locality (thus legal jurisdiction). This limits the scope of an IP conflict to the jurisdiction in question.

    If I want to load the home page for Example Widgets, I should just need to hunt for the common name "Example Widgets", pick the match that makes the most sense (assuming more than one match is found), and have my lookup return a DNS domain name. My browser would consult DNS for a SRV record associated with that domain, find a host providing HTTP services for it, and request the home page from that host. At no point should my mom ever need to be exposed to a hostname (or a URL for that matter).

    My two cents, anyway.

    1. Re:Noble effort, but still the wrong direction by MegaHamsterX · · Score: 1

      I was looking for this comment before I posted, you hit the nail on the head except for one thing, we already have a solution to the problem, it's a search engine.

      The only thing we really need is IPv6 to complete the cake, why would you have a dynamic address with IPv6, although I know they'll do it, I see no real reason for it.

      If ICANN screws around enough a solution will be found for them, the record industry found out the hard way and I believe a P2P nameresolver with some sort of public/private key might be the best way around them.

      A cheesy hack could be fashioned for MS products and a nice opensource version for Linux and FreeBSD. The key to making it work is it being free and open with published standards (well I'd try to milk the MS crowd).

      I've been bashing this idea around in my head, I'm just having a bitch of a time implementing it. The removal of any central authority creates some problems, I was thinking of a circle of trust for resolution, you simply follow the circle to a known reliable authoritative nameserver for 100% resolution or a cached copy somewhere for a less reliable reply. We just need a suffix so we can cleanly overlay it on the current system, and it needs to be something that would be anti-competitive for ICANN to pounce on, maybe .666 :-)

    2. Re:Noble effort, but still the wrong direction by Fastolfe · · Score: 1

      I would agree with you, except search engines carry no authority. You could easily manipulate your own pages and things to make search engines "think" that your pages are more relevant for a given topic (or company name) than the company itself.

      An authoritative search engine might be a good place to start worrying about trademark and service marks, though.

      You still need that central authority if you need the ability for your labels to carry IP weight, but these labels must be scoped within political boundaries for that to be feasible.

      DNS could actually still function in that capacity through the elimination of the GTLDs, and enforcement of location-specific hierarchies.

      Some of these ideas are covered in a small paper I wrote last year at http://fastolfe.net/features/directory-service/.

    3. Re:Noble effort, but still the wrong direction by pod · · Score: 1
      If I want to load the home page for Example Widgets, I should just need to hunt for the common name "Example Widgets", pick the match that makes the most sense (assuming more than one match is found), and have my lookup return a DNS domain name.

      But then you have the search engine problem. Which results go on top? Do you pay to get better placement? Is there a click-through counter to determine most popular picks? Random order? You don't want this method to be useless, and then have to build yet another service on top of this.

      --
      "Hot lesbian witches! It's fucking genius!"
    4. Re:Noble effort, but still the wrong direction by Fastolfe · · Score: 1

      A directory is a search engine for proper names. There will be a finite number of organizations doing business as "Example Widgets". If the scope of my search is nation-wide, and two or three hits come up with "Example Widgets" incorporated in a few local markets, then I guess I need to do some more research to identify which one I want. Additional fields in the record would allow me to determine which Example Widgets is the one I am searching for, such as the home city.

      There isn't a "placement" issue because these aren't really content hits. I'm not searching for a product here and getting a list of organizations that provide that product. I'm searching for an organization. If I choose the wrong one because I don't have enough information to pick between the matches, I'm probably not going to end up where I want to be. This is different than a company trying to be at the top of search rankings because it wishes to get the business of someone doing the search. In that case, I'm searching for the provider of a service. In the case where this directory is most useful, I am searching for a specific organization.

      Similarly, a more traditional (but still regulated) search engine would allow me to actually search for product names or other service marks, and have that associated with the organization that owns it (perhaps with a URL). In this case as well, certain marks may be scoped to certain markets (countries?). Similar "placement" rules would have to apply for those rare situations. This could be as simple as a multi-column display with each column containing some 'sort by' mechanics. This isn't any different from any other directory browser we use today.

      Together, the two options above would satisfy the 'locator' abuse of DNS, where I need to find a specific company, and assume a 'www' and a 'dot-com' to get there, as well as the 'product search' abuse of DNS, where I need to find a specific product, and assume a 'www' and a 'dot-com' to get there as well. With those qualities removed from DNS, nearly all intellectual property weight is removed and DNS can become a simple hierarchical label again.

      Lastly, more traditional search engines would be able to associate generic product terms with more specific products that may satisfy the requirement you're hunting for. We don't care at that point how those are presented or ordered. Traditional search engines or global product catalogs have those issues covered.

  36. Re:Pretty obvious there was never going to be a vo by Fnkmaster · · Score: 1
    "Nominees, assume the position..."


    "Thank you sir, may I have another term?"

  37. Re:autocracy [off-topic] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder how these things happen. Does somebody important just screw up a word and it suddenly catches on? I wonder how many Bush-isms will end up making their way into the dictionary.

  38. you don't like this? by alizard · · Score: 1
    Write to the Secretary of Commerce and your Congresscritter asking just why we are still funding ICANN?

    What do they produce that's worth paying for either by taxpayers or domain holders or registries?

    If they are not accountable to the users and they aren't accountable to the national TLDs, it is time they are held accountable by the taxpayers.

    The Internet and the root servers worked just fine without this bureaucracy and it'll work just fine after the last person leaves the ICANN office s and turns off the lights.

  39. Apocalypse Now by Benwick · · Score: 1

    ICANN is an interesting study in how a ruling regime can usurp a democratic institution and turn it into an [autocracy].

    Shit, how many examples of this do we need? Does anyone remember the year 2000 anymore? Is it just me, or has the entire USA gone completely stark raving bonkers?

    Sincerely,
    The Angriest Liberal in the World
    http://www.ucomics.com/rallcom/2003/06/14/

  40. Not just DNS by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    ICANN does more than just DNS -- they also determine well-known ports and break up the IP space. Well-known ports used to be easy to move away from, but massive (stupid) deployment of corporate firewalls has resulted in it being difficult to move away from existing WKP, because they're the only holes in firewalls. Furthermore, there's a lot of routers out there with hard-coded stuff related to non-routeable addresses.

    1. Re:Not just DNS by kelnos · · Score: 1

      i thought IANA took care of the well-known ports list. or are they a subset of/controlled by ICANN?

      --
      Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.
    2. Re:Not just DNS by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Yes and yes.

  41. Bankers and Businesswoman?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From theregister.co.uk : http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/31260.html

    Short-term Board members (26 June 2003 - Annual meeting 2003)

    * Masanobu Katoh: Already an ICANN director. Fujitsu lawyer. Specialises in intellectual property

    * Veni Markovski: ICANN insider. Chair of Internet Society, Bulgaria. [Also gets voted in again automatically until 2006 - see below]
    * Hualin Qian: Helped introduce Chinese Internet system. [Also gets voted in again automatically until 2006 - see below]

    Medium-term Board members (26 June 2003 - Annual meeting 2004)

    * Ivan Moura Campos: Already an ICANN director. Heads the board for Brazil's domain

    * Vinton Cerf: Already an ICANN director. In fact ICANN chairman

    * Tricia Drakes: Chair of ISOC England. Banker

    Long-term Board members (26 June 2003 - Annual meeting 2005)

    * Thomas Niles: ICANN insider. US diplomat

    * Njeri Rionge: Kenyan businesswoman from marketing background

    Real long-term Board members (Annual meeting 2003 - Annual meeting 2006)

    * Hagen Hultzsch: Ex-Deutsche Telekom top shot

    * Veni Markovski: ICANN insider. Chair of Internet Society, Bulgaria

    * Hualin Qian: Helped introduce Chinese Internet system

    GNSO Council members

    * Amadeu Abril i Abril (until 2004): ICANN insider. There from the very beginning

    * Demi Getschko (until 2005): ICANN well-known. Works closely with ICANN director and fellow nominee Ivan Moura Campos

    * Alick Wilson (until 2005): New Zealand IT consultant. On NZ IT Association board

    Interim At Large Advisory Committee

    # Roberto Gaetano (until 2004): ICANN insider. Ex-IBM

    # Kenneth Hamma (until 2004): Museum curator. Proposed dismissed .museum TLD

    # Sunday Folayan (until 2005): Nigerian businessman. Mainstay of Nigerian Internet Group.

    # Tommi Matsumoto (until 2005): Japanese and Asia-Pacific Net representative

    # Tadao Takahashi (until 2005): ICANN insider. Chair of Internet Society, Brazil

    WTF!! Why have business woman / banker etc there? WTF they know about the net? how to make money out of it??

    Damn it!

  42. Democracy? by jethroT · · Score: 1
    ICANN is an interesting study in how a ruling regime can usurp a democratic institution and turn it into an [autocracy].

    Sorry, but ICANN was never a democratic institution. Only a minority of the Board members were elected by the internet community, everyone else was appointed by some US agency.

  43. d0h by dh003i · · Score: 1

    I apologize for being such an asshole. I just ASSumed that the person responding to my response was the original poster. My apologies.

  44. the solution is to create more problems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so we will forget about this one