Slashdot Mirror
Will the U.S. Lose Control of the Internet?
MattSparkes writes "The first UN-sponsored Internet Governance Forum (IGF) meeting is taking place next week in Athens, which aims to 'contribute to a better understanding of how the internet can be used to its full potential.' It is likely that several countries will object to the US monopoly on Internet governance, as they did at the last meeting, where the US cited fears of a loss of freedom of speech as the reason for retaining power. Other topics to be discussed include online security, access for non-English users and spam."
They blocked the .xxx domain, which is unfortunate, but it was part of a stupid concept to begin with.
Just imagine what China, Iran, etc. would do with control?
Online security, access for non-English users and spam? Yeah, right. Other topics to be discussed include spying on the US, countering United Nations efforts, hacking for military secrets, laundering money, limiting access to information (such as news, especially from the West), and whitewashing history ("June 4th Incident, 1989? Never heard of it!".)
This kind of issue highlights the importance of "soft power". For those of you who have never heard the phase, it basically means the power you get from people trusting you, and from having moral authority.
As you might have guessed, it is out of favour with the current administration, who prefer military "hard power". Previously, the USA could have said to the rest of the world "trust us to manage the Internet" and much of the world would have gone "ummm, ok!". Now the USA has lost much of its soft power, it makes it much harder, and "hard power" doesn't work well in this kind of situation!
If the U.S. keeps control, eventually the corporatocracy will kill off everything.
What are you referring to, exactly?
What have 'they' done thus far to impede the internet?
Last time I checked, I can still download illegal files, go to any website on the web, and e-mail anybody in the world.
Sure, some things may end up with me in the FBI's hot-seat, but that has nothing to do with corporations.
It is likely that several countries will object to the US monopoly on Internet governance
WHAT governance? The sections of the network owned by people or businesses in the US are governed by THEIR OWNERS. Germany can outlaw swastika's and regulate their own country's infastructure, and the US can regulate theirs. That's what made the internet the powerhouse it is today--give people incentive to build infastructure by giving them control over it.
THE ONLY reason to give power to others is so they can assert control over US-OWNED NETWORKS. If they're pissed because some companies ban foreign traffic, tough bananas. Go ahead and ban US citizenry from using your network, if you think you can take the financial hit.
Nice try, UN.
When the US economic power slows, and the EU (or whatever group) has more power, maybe then will the tables turn and it will be the US complaining about lack of power online. Until then, deal with it.
Latewire
access for non-English
Read: Requirements for language translations on web-sites.
online security
Lets have people register to run a web-site! That way we can track things better and "protect" children! And no more defending the Nazis if you want to after the French and Germans get into this.
spam
No more sending email unless it's through state-approved servers.
Yeah, this is gonna be great... We're from the government, and we're here to help!
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
- Charles Darwin
the freedom of speech will gain a lot.
Considering that it is the middle eastern and Chinese governments that are pushing hardest for this I would say that this is exactly opposite to what will actually occur.
I can envision the comments already. Rednecks spouting their crap while moronic hippies spew their BS, both of them thinking they're somehow "right". .com as a first choice and everything else as sub-standard.
You know what, if a country wants to do as they please with their part of the internet, all they have to do is update a couple of DNS servers. As simple as that. In fact, I'm already looking into using an alternative DNS root.
NO debating is needed. NO decision needs to be taken. All those who want a non-USA-regulated net have to do is START using the internet the way they like, simply disregarding USA rules. And, well, be ready to be cut off from any USA network, if the USA were so inclined. What's that you say, your citizens won't like it? Tough luck buddy, that's the price of freedom. It goes both ways.
On a side note, maybe it's time we did away with non-national TLDs. But that can only be done when people stop treating
Global warming is a cube.
No court in America is going to allow Bush to hold you as an enemy combatant for suing him over Internet policy.
Not that I think that the Administration would go that far, but I feel it's necessary to point out that without habeas corpus, you can be seized and you have no ability to challenge the ruling; it doesn't matter that no court would ever affirm your arrest, because you'll never be able to get in front of a court.
I'm a lawyer, but not yours. I wouldn't represent someone who thinks taking legal advice from Slashdot is a good idea.
Have you seen the news today? Journalists fall victim to ethnic and sectarian violence, US troops carry out more unlawful arrests. Oh, and you've dropped even further down the Press Freedom Index. Far from "higher standards than the rest of the world"; there are over fifty countries with freer speech than the USA.
Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
It's clear that you don't like the President, and that's fine with me. I don't either, but with the noted exception of the
I disagree with you about the US screwing up good ideas. I think it's more like that the US comes up with a good idea, and then smart folks in other places take it to places that we haven't thought of. Still, the example of the auto, chip, and other manufacturing industries is not as simple as all of that. The US has higher manufacturing costs than other countries do; namely in the form of higher wages and benefits for their employees. Certainly this is not true in all cases, I'm looking more toward Asian competition rather than European competition in those industries. That's how the US beat Europe back 100+ years ago during the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. It was cheaper and easier to make stuff here than in Europe. My guess is that will change when folks there start earning wages closer to those that we do here, and won't that be better for everybody!
It sounds like you don't like the US very much. That's cool, and I don't agree with folks who say you should get out of the country then. No, dissent is necessary. People who are not happy with things help those who are by giving them the reason to question what they value. Questioning is good. Without it, we'd still have bad things that I need not list out. I agree with you that more change is needed, even as I disagree with you that the US is big and bad.
- Mike
Once you've lost your temper, you've lost the argument - Me
Well in response to to someone's post about what makes the US more capable than another country to be "in charge" of the internet, my response would be "experience and ownership."
Exactly what is the problem that needs to be solved here? Maybe I should expand the number of sites I visit on a daily basis, but I don't think I've ever been blocked from visiting anything that I wanted to look at. Hell, I don't think I've ever even been blocked from things I DIDN'T want to look at. I fail to see why the current management needs to be ousted or even given this much bullshit in it's general course of business.
I'd like to know where this would lead? I'm assuming that it's really the commercial aspect of the internet they are after control over. Perhaps a UN mandated internet tax of some sort, or even better, an online commerce tax mandated by the UN. Certainly we can't say that the Academic aspects of the internet are wholly owned by the US Government, as it's (unless i'm mistaken) pretty much a multi-naitonal group of researcheres and universities sharing information, who could just go ahead and build their own network anyways.
At best, this is just another attempt by a useless neutered organization to grab at power (and money/tax revenue) it dosn't have. At worst, it's a consortium of poorer and/or angry countries picking on the US for all that we have. It kinda makes me think of those arguments where people say "The United States has xx% of the resources but only has x% of the population," and then proceed to ramble about how it's not fair, and we owe it to the world to be their resource providers for free.
Get real. Build your own network or shut up and be thankful we let you be a part of ours.